HardOCP News
[H] News
- Joined
- Dec 31, 1969
- Messages
- 0
This blog post on the official Microsoft Edge developer site lays out the steps Microsoft is taking to make its latest browser as safe as possibe.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Microsoft Edge: Building A Safer Browser
- Thread starter HardOCP News
- Start date
Thank you MS! I look forward to many more years of getting to charge people to remove crap that could of been avoided if they were using a browser that supported add-ons like ad block and no script. Also I do enjoy making jokes about your browser security. I was briefly concerned that the overhaul might ruin that.
D
Deleted member 108676
Guest
They should just stop. They're embarrassing themselves. Just like with Windows. This weekend I found a new level of hatred for 8.1.
Bring back Win 7.
Bring back Win 7.
dark_reign
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2005
- Messages
- 2,314
The name isn't bad but the new "E" logo is hideous.
Madoc
Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2006
- Messages
- 949
It's "safer" because the end-user has less control over things than ever before.
Control in the name of "safety" -- the same old song and dance.
Control in the name of "safety" -- the same old song and dance.
dyzophoria
Gawd
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2006
- Messages
- 946
Not really. It is a lot safer just because of the mere fact that they dropped active-x completely. There are a lot of new tech in the background, quite interesting.
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
Not sure what you mean. Edge will be able to support add-ins like Chrome and FF that won't be in the initial release though. And ActiveX control support is gone.
CreepyUncleGoogle
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2013
- Messages
- 6,871
I've been playing with Project Spartan (Edge...whatever) with the W10 preview for like a week or two and I really don't like the fact that it's a lot less configurable than IE. There's no way to do simple stuff like do per domain restrictions. Maybe they'll add that stuff back in the final versions, but as it stands right now, it's missing a lot of stuff and those missing things make it kinda feel like more of a regression toward less powerful browsers like Chrome rather than an improvement on IE. I know there's more behind the scenes and I'm talking like strictly user-level config junk.
Etherton
Will Bang for Poof
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2006
- Messages
- 6,996
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
Because of support for Windows specific features and needs. Windows runs on tablets and very low power devices for which traditional desktop browsers simply haven't been optimized for these things. Chrome for instance typically eats more power than IE and has very basic touch support.
Because they want it for themselves?
VonGriffin
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2013
- Messages
- 306
ehm IE has the largest browser market share
Semantics
2[H]4U
- Joined
- May 18, 2010
- Messages
- 2,811
You can also do things once you drop legacy support as well for businesses.
B00nie
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2012
- Messages
- 9,327
The new browser is already very safe since nothing works on it.
D
Deleted member 108676
Guest
Thats because it comes with literally every windows based system in the world.
ManofGod
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2007
- Messages
- 12,864
Seems to work ok. However, it is beta and I am only running it in a virtual machine at this time. (That is why it slows down on my installation.) Oh, and why would we bring back Windows 7 when it has not gone anywhere?
D
Deleted member 108676
Guest
lol. Oh man.
I don't want to live on this planet anymore.jpg
I don't want to live on this planet anymore.jpg
CreepyUncleGoogle
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2013
- Messages
- 6,871
I'm running W10 on hardware directly rather than through a VM and I can attest that it seems to have like no human-noticable performance difference between it and IE11 on Windows 7 on the same computer.
I'm not gonna waste my time benchmarking it or anything because of how little relevance browser benchmarks have in representing daily usage so while there might be some kinda change, that level of nitpicking seems dumb. It displays websites. Clicking links works. Whatever.
It needs more cool knobs and dials to change settings. That's really all that I think is missing.
Edge is almost an entirely new code base and not just a fork of the original IE, there are still a LOT of things that just simply haven't been added yet. There is still several months of development to go before any of this stuff is released. They only release it now as a sort of 'pre-beta' preview for what is currently being worked on.
Right now the focus seems to be on multi-platform compatibility and interoperability. Given what windows 10 is supposed to be, I personally would rather they get that right before they start adding all the bells and whistles. I do some development for clients on windows phone 8.1 and IE10 there is freakin horrible, I cant wait for people to start using W10 and Edge on the phone, should make my life a lot easier.
Being in the IT field, I just hate Internet Explorer with a passion. "Sorry we have to add that site to Compatibility mode", sorry let me reset IE and the advanced settings.
Chrome doesn't have a compatibility mode that I can think of, why??? Because every single site just effing works.
Chrome doesn't have a compatibility mode that I can think of, why??? Because every single site just effing works.
mastaBlasta
Gawd
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2011
- Messages
- 605
That's because chrome makes a herculean attempt at correcting bad web code. IE does it too but wants to label that as 'compatibility mode'.
We talk about standards this and standards that, but fact is that pretty much every site out there violates standards. HTML, CSS or Javascript - if a browser followed the latest standards strictly everything would be broken.
But browsers don't follow standards loosely. They guess and try out different things and it's actually quite amazing how well they render all the garbage that's thrown at them.
CreepyUncleGoogle
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2013
- Messages
- 6,871
That's a really good point! I didn't have any kind of illusion that the Project Spartan stuff we're able to play with now in the insider preview is a finished product. It isn't production ready yet, but does feel deceptively close so like you're saying, it makes sense that things are still not quite there yet. As it stands, I don't have any negative feelings about it in the long term because even the stuff that isn't there yet isn't a big deal and yes, I agree they need to get the core functionality working as well as possible before messing with configuration checkboxes or letting me pick what random folder I wanna use for my web cache.
Without all the old legacy cruft, and with security in mind from day one, this could be true. However, that's not how the typical reader is supposed to take that statement. It's possible it will be less secure than even IE as security researchers and hackers go at it, and that's not something you get from such a sunny statement.
Same reason they screwed up windows so much. They want to control what websites you go to and what you see, what you do, and of course, make money on every click. They really don't care what you want. The will tailor things so it SEEMS that they're improving everything, and in some cases they do, but it's never for YOUR benefit. They don't care about quality. Only money. It's always been that way, always will. It's the reason the code is so bloated, and windows hides so much of what gets started running in the background but you can't know what it is because they hide it from you. There was no need for Bing; there were other good search engines out there, no need to create another one, or spend millions trying to get everyone to switch. Only to get you to m$ and partners websites instead of others.
It's all about money. It's NEVER about what's good for the customer.