No.2223
Edge is not IE. I mean I'm not sure what I expected from someone who just posts a link, but hey.
No.2224
>>2223Throwing the name away was just a PR move to hide their legacy.
No.2225
>>2224Sure but they are separate software. Completely different GUI on a different framework using a different engine. In fact the only two things they kept is 1) the big blue 'e' logo 2) their absolute bloody mental detachment from actual user demand.
No.2241
>>2225I've never seem confirmation of any of that. It may very well be still based on Trident. Well, not that it matters now, since it's going to become another Chromium derivative.
No.2254
Edge wasn't horrible. Wasn't perfect but still a decent default browser that works out of the box to load up email and simple soykaf. Kind of a bummer that they are selling out and essentially homogenizing the internet because YouTube doesn't like them.
No.2256
>>2254Yeah, diverse and open internet just lost one if it's most loyal proponent, bleah. More like they've got bitten by thier own game.
No.2257
I very recently worked on the Edge team, and one of the reasons we decided to end EdgeHTML was because Google kept making changes to its sites that broke other browsers, and we couldn't keep up. For example, they recently added a hidden empty div over YouTube videos that causes our hardware acceleration fast-path to bail (should now be fixed in Win10 Oct update). Prior to that, our fairly state-of-the-art video acceleration put us well ahead of Chrome on video playback time on battery, but almost the instant they broke things on YouTube, they started advertising Chrome's dominance over Edge on video-watching battery life.https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18697824Makes the story a whole lot interesting…
