I doubt it will be greatly missed, seeing most people seem to use Chrome or Firefox these days.
 
http://www.cbsnews.com/ne...plorer-brand-farewell/

I don't see the hype that the article is trying to make.  So MS is coming out with a new browser with a new name.  Corporations will still use the new browser just as they've updated from v8 to v9.

That's actually good news.
 
IE has long since been so tightly integrated into the O/S filing system i.e Windows Explorer that IMHO is a security risk and a drag on the system , ya' know... having to empty/clean up dead temp files and such.... way too much file fat accumulation, too many associated 'free radicals' is not good.
 
A good browser should be lean as possible without compromising security of course. Few addons are great whereas most are probably collecting info and actually slowing the browser down.

I've been on Safari for years - way before I bought my first Mac actually.
Clean and simple, to me, anyway.

I have been using Firefox for years because of the plugs made for it though there are plugs for other browsers too. Now Firefox's popularity has been decreasing for some reason.

I pretty much stopped using IE when the back button stopped working, but I had no idea that it had fallen so far behind. The problem with no clear winner in the browser wars is, of course, that web designers have no way to figure out how to make their pages load on the "industry standard" browser. I agree, a change in name is not going to make a better browser, and, like Safari, a browser designed and maintained by the OS maker should have a leg up. Attempts to converge on an open standard HTML variant have been notoriously unsuccessful over the years, so most of us have had to be content with partially working world wide web, keeping a stable of browsers installed, and hoping (with little real evidence) that whoever was maintaining them would have the resources to fix the gaping security flaws that always seemed to crop up. 

I think the users were always the losers in the browser wars.  If all browsers were truly designed to standards, th3 differences would pretty much come down to uwability issues like appearance. I think I use firefox more out of habit than feeling it is better. There is something about giving Google another foot in the door of my life that feels off too.

slartabartfast
I pretty much stopped using IE when the back button stopped working, but I had no idea that it had fallen so far behind. The problem with no clear winner in the browser wars is, of course, that web designers have no way to figure out how to make their pages load on the "industry standard" browser.

 
If they cared about users, they wouldn't fill their pages with masses of badly written, completely unnecessary (from a user standpoint) code. My solution - any company that employs web designers should also employ someone whose only job is to smack the web designers upside the head when they do stupid things like add stuff that slows page loading to a crawl or adding stuff that breaks every other browser if it doesn't have a special version of code for that browser to show how "clever" they are.  Actually they probably should budget for a whole team of head smackers.
 

I agree, a change in name is not going to make a better browser, and, like Safari, a browser designed and maintained by the OS maker should have a leg up.

 
This is only true if the OS maker is completely incompetent with respect to implementing their networking layers. MS only built IE in for business reasons, not technical ones.
 

Attempts to converge on an open standard HTML variant have been notoriously unsuccessful over the years, so most of us have had to be content with partially working world wide web, keeping a stable of browsers installed, and hoping (with little real evidence) that whoever was maintaining them would have the resources to fix the gaping security flaws that always seemed to crop up. 

HTML works fine. There are occasionally some formatting differences, but they aren't generally dealbreakers.
 
It's the scripting, and scripting, and scripting, and scripting, and scripting, and scripting, and scripting that they insist on putting on every page. Does this particular page we're on really need all of these scripts?:
 
http://forum.cakewalk.com/js/lib/modernizr.js?v=5.1
 
http://forum.cakewalk.com/WebResource.axd?d=...
 
http://ajax.googleapis.co...ry/1.9.1/jquery.min.js
 
http://ajax.googleapis.co....10.2/jquery-ui.min.js
 
http://forum.cakewalk.com/ln.ashx?lang=en
 
http://forum.cakewalk.com...1_TSM&compress=...
 
http://forum.cakewalk.com/combinedJs.axd?key=...
 
http://forum.cakewalk.com/combinedJs.axd?key=...

http://ajax.googleapis.co...s/webfont/1/webfont.js
 
http://forum.cakewalk.com...ins/jquery.lavalamp.js
 
http://forum.cakewalk.com...query.lettering.min.js
 
http://forum.cakewalk.com/Javascript.ashx?_TSM_HiddenField_=RadScriptManager1_TSM&compress=...
 
http://www.google-analytics.com/analytics.js
 
http://px.owneriq.net/anst/s/cake.js
 
http://www.googleadservices.com/pagead/conversion.js
 
http://js-agent.newrelic.com/nr-593.min.js
 
 
Of course a number of those are marketing related, but many are not.

SongCraft
That's actually good news.
 
IE has long since been so tightly integrated into the O/S filing system i.e Windows Explorer that IMHO is a security risk and a drag on the system , ya' know... having to empty/clean up dead temp files and such.... way too much file fat accumulation, too many associated 'free radicals' is not good.
 
A good browser should be lean as possible without compromising security of course. Few addons are great whereas most are probably collecting info and actually slowing the browser down.

The same IE code (or 'pipework') will remain they will just call it 'windows' (this is confirmed).

In further news Apple is to be rebranded 'Decca'.

And knives will be replaced by cutting instruments.

It's just a refined engine with a different UI. I bet it's not a rewrite just marketing

I must be one of the few who have always liked Internet Explorer. But I am finding that if you don't have the latest versions there are problems with some websites. And the latest versions wont install on Vista. The PC I use for general internet use etc. is still Vista and I have been forced to use Firefox for a lot of sites.
 
I just don't like the look of Chrome. I open it up and its "where on earth is everything"  Mind you Firefox is going for that look too.