Mozilla: IE9 is NOT a Modern Browser

Opera FTW!

the guy has a point. IE9 is an improvement over IE8, but it still lacks many features.

Maybe the IE team is aiming for Arachne, not Firefox (or Opera, or Konqueror, or Safari).

Microsoft's goal with IE's 2-7 was to take control over the internet using their own HTML "standards" and ActiveX. They got rid of Netscape and the AOL browser, but, safe to say, they failed. Now they've got 10 years worth of catchup to do, so its no wonder they aren't instantly at the level of their competitors.

We may never see a 100% HTML5 compliant browser, simply because they keep changing HTML5 too much (and in some cases it's still too generic: video tags can use whatever codec they want, making the video tag itself useless). But when they released IE8, Microsoft still had the gaul to say compliance was not their main goal. I'm not sure how you can call something a browser if its NOT complaint. It's just software that happens to connect to the internet, kinda like how you can get radio signals on your tooth fillings, but it doesn't make your dentist a ham-radio operator.

IE9 did better on tests that Microsoft recommends and Firefox does better on test that Mozilla recommends...... imagine that. Chrome is moving up, IE is moving down and Firefox is staying consistent in usage rankings, I think the users are showing which products they like better by which ones are being used more. After all people don't keep going back to the same restaurant if the food tastes bad. IE is number one so it must be doing something right.

Yeah it comes with every windows installation...

My mother used IE 'till I installed firefox on her pc a year or two ago.
If I hadn't she'd still be using ie, as do 99 percent of casual joe's whose pc knowledge is limited to facebook, email, msn and youtube and some crude google searching.

Using tabs and being able to drag her favorite bookmarks to the bar at the top blew her mind after coming from ie lol...
So even a novice can appreciate a different and better browser, too bad most don't even realise that there is a better alternative.

Kudos to FireFox for supporting more of the standard than IE does.

However, as a Web developer, I have to be very careful to use only the lowest common denominator, so that my product works for people who use IE as well as for people who use FireFox. Too bad about FireFox's extra features - I have to be very careful NOT to use them.

HTML5 isnt even complete yet, and anyone using it in production is probably of no use to the public.

I use FF because I don't like IE's user interface and I use IE because my FF crashes due to Flash 3-4 times a day.

We need someone to chime in and say Firefox is two years too late. No, really, all of Firefox 4's design changes were ripped straight out of Opera.

This is not surprising at all... To follow up on what a couple others have already commented on, any browser to claim it's become the true cutting-edge is laughable if it's not Opera, since virtually every single boasted-about feature to appear in other major browsers (be it FireFox, Chrome, I.E, or Safari) all appeared in Opera first. Tabs? Opera had 'em in 2000, before Firefox in 2002. Instanced tabs that Google hired a comic artist to brag about for Chrome? Opera had 'em first too. Ditto with being able to resume a closed or crashed session, or tab. Heck, it appears that Chrome and FireFox STILL don't have MDI tab support (letting you reduce tabs to have multiple displayed at once) something Opera's had for years. And Opera remains vastly faster than Firefox, Safari, OR IE, with only Chrome really able to keep up. (and Opera blows Chrome away at Javascript, too)

Wow. I think that FF feels a tad threatened. If you run your own tests on the very ones that FF use (such as javascript or the speed tests, IE9 beats FF3.6 and 4 Beta. I tested them all.

And I don't understand this "the W3C tests are no good". They develop the standard, right? Then they should be able to tell you what browser runs good.

IE can do that also. Since forever ago. I swear the majority of Firefox fans I run into say "it's better, it's better", but they never have anything concrete or else they regurgitate things they were told by some random internet personality.

The only people that I talk to that seem to have concrete reasons to use Firefox or Chrome are nerds like myself, and I like them since they have actual reasons and engage in intelligent discourse. Well, most of them. Some just hate MS with a passion because... well nobody really knows. Maybe they're standing in the way of Linux domination. *snort*

well what about....firefox 5!

Just what we need, another loudmouth at Mozilla. It makes sense that Mozilla would mention positive things about Mozilla and negative things about IE. Skewed and biased...but it is true that IE is still behind... even with the new release. Microsoft will play catchup though, as it is with its phone OS

that's nice but i would rather have heard it from another sourse who isn't already a year late with firefox4 which is still in beta and apparently has another month to go with testing if it's finished tomorrow, which it's not as it still has about 2 weeks worth of bugs and a big issue with flash not working.
he is right and i love firefox, but the green eyed monster reared it's uglyhead in attempt to save market share justbecause IE9 is done.

Could be true what Mozilla said about IE9...Do not forget that the original team of Mozilla made the original IE for microsoft,so their sources would be from a fairly efficient source...

Opera still scores the HIGHEST in almost all tests.

Tomshardware themselves have compared all the browsers. Use the search box at the top to locate the article.

IE9 got pwned by rouget

IE, Chrome, and Opera still don't have as good, intelligent ad blocking as Firefox. Chrome users don't even talk about your terrible Adblock. It still hides ads after half a second and can't block all video ads such as the ones in livestream. Opera can block ads through a url filter but only to a basic level.

A perfectly true point aevm....as depressing as it is. Just the mere existence of IE and the fact that people use it not knowing any better means that lots of developers have to either "dumb down" their sites or deal with different versions of their pages depending on what browser visitors are using.

I went on the html5 test site and a few other browser compatibility sites and indeed the IE9 release candidate got the worst score with a 130 or so. Firefox 4 beta and Google Chrome both got around 250!
Firefox remains my primary browser after trying out the lot and coming back to it. I love the speed of Chrome but one simple feature they have refused to add to Chrome ruins it for me to this day...NO Print Preview...WTF?! Yes you can use IE tab to cheat and get print preview in Chrome but the irony of using IE emulation inside Chrome is just too much to handle.

Another reason to avoid IE in my opinion: Compared with any other browser I've ever used....Internet Explorer continues to be the most targeted with browser hijackers and malware of varying degrees.
I tell my novice customers to avoid IE unless absolutely necessary for this reason alone. Basic users won't care about html5, CSS, or any of these new features for developers. But they DO want a browser that's relatively safe that won't trap them in a loop of dialog boxes trying to install malware and toolbars any time they have the misfortune of spelling a web address incorrectly.

Watch out for Mozilla though,it is not totally free of getting bugged either...I had an old HP pc & I had heaps of problems with IE6,IE7 & so on...I took the IE off & added the Mozilla Firefox browser,I forgot which version it was at that time...Although I used many versions & got updates...Anyway I still had problems,but not as bad...That HP pc was an XP Pro x32 operating system which I kept up to date with service packs for a long time until I ran out of life spans for the operating disc...I would only format when it became necessary to do so ( I used anti-virus & all )...My old HP pc was an LGA 478 socket pinset number model with the largest cpu being at 3.0 GHz & original was 2.8 GHz...

Right now at this moment I am using a new pc,but the parts are not up to date new...It is one of those AM2 motherboards that allows you to go to AM2+ cpu's & I am using IE9 with the operating system being XP Pro x32..I have had a little bit of problems with the pc so far,but it is not as bad as my past HP pc...I will chuck on mozilla firefox eventually,but that will be after checking this IE9's usefullness online with browser down & surfing around...

IE iss better in the activex section. In example every video surveilance system in the world works on Internet Explorer only, while Mozilla and the other dont work.
For Browsing i dont recomend IE

This just in: Company says their product is better than their competitors.

sounds to me like if you had that much trouble with a 3ghz pentium on xp 32 bit you weren't running enough ram, 512mb is the bare min i would run in xp (and i'd hate using the computer) 1gb is reasonable if you don't do a boatload of multitasking, but windows xp 32bit is best with 2gb of ram

Why is this idiot flaming IE? He should look at the pile of sh!t FF has been these past 18 months.

People in glass houses my friend.

Good call jimmysmitty. No rating system, but still +1

Honestly, this coming out of the guys that still push a nearly 2-year-old browser (Firefox 3.5) that starts up like molasses. The guys that is taking a whole year to develop their new version even though they tout their open-source nature as offering "faster development and patch times" than proprietary.

Something tells me that I won't be leaving my IE9.

the only good thing about ie9 is that it looks slicker and runs some benchmarks better, but it is not a browser i will use on a day to day basis.