Internet Explorer 11 Features WebGL References & More

By | March 29, 2013 | 9 Comments


Internet Explorer 11 Features WebGL References & MoreA sign of what’s to come for both Windows 8.5 and Windows Phone 8.5.

Now here is a piece of good news to kick-start your weekend. According to the recent discovery by François Remy, who has Windows Blue installed on his machine, Internet Explorer 11 might support WebGL after all.

Now, before you get too excited, keep in mind that WebGL does not yet work, however, the interfaces are already defined, which implies that Microsoft at least put some effort into it. Whether or not they have abandoned the idea, we will have to wait and see.

Speaking of IE11 and new standards support, here is what else you can expect from it:

- Standardized CSS Flexbox syntax
- A new “Site issues” tag in developer tools
- Partial Fullscreen API support
- Zoom level exposure to JavaScript
- WeakMap and __proto__ support

Google Chrome & Firefox like changes:

- Navigator appName property has been modified to look more like Gecko and WebKit.
- Depreciated document.all property is now falsy just like on Gecko and Webkit.

Not bad for a start but we want more.


About (Author Profile)


Vygantas is a former web designer whose projects are used by companies such as AMD, NVIDIA and departed Westood Studios. Being passionate about software, Vygantas began his journalism career back in 2007 when he founded FavBrowser.com. Having said that, he is also an adrenaline junkie who enjoys good books, fitness activities and Forex trading.

  • BS-Harou

    Flexbox <3 … and I really wish for WebGL in IE. The spec might be terrible, but it is still cool technology :)

  • http://www.facebook.com/SideWinder24x7 James Waymire

    Fingers are crossed that WebGL makes it in, as a Developer of HTML5/JavaScript games, the lack of WebGL means large performance differences between IE and the rest. Especially since IE is the default browser engine used when launching HTML5/JavaScript apps on WindowsRT and Windows Phone.

  • TheNet Avenger

    It is sad to see ‘developers’ excited or wanting WebGL. It is a non-standard technology that on non-Windows 8 platforms is extremely dangerous for end users due to direct GPU access and driver/hardware flaws. (A WebGL based web site can LITERALLY use known issues with various GPUs that can cause them to physically fail, let alone execute code outside of the browser space/sandbox construct.)

    Instead of pushing WebGL, developers should push non-IE browser makers to get their graphical rendering ON PAR with IE9/10 so that W3C standard HTML5/CSS3 can be used for content that developers are resorting back to WebGL to use because of the horrible graphical performance in Chrome, Firefox, Safari, etc.

    (Bing IETestDrive, and notice that standard HTML5/CSS3 sample sites that are graphically heavy run anywhere from 10 to even 1000 times faster in IE, making WebGL irrelevant.)

    The W3C has rejected WebGL and has proposed GPU/Shader standards that are ‘safe’ which should be encouraged instead.

    If Microsoft came out with WebDirectX, the world would be up in arms and angry for a non-standard being pushed at developers. Yet they are all ok with WebGL.

    From the IE11 references, it appears that this may be WebGL support for the WinRT, which Windows can approve and manage to offer a limited version of OpenGL for development.

    If WebGL does make it into IE11′s browser construct, it will have little effect on Windows 8 because the OS already wraps and manages GPU calls. However, the irony is Android, Linux, iOS, and OS X are NOT protected and will become the new targets for malicious WebGL content that does get unfettered direct GPU access and code execution.

    • apád anyád

      “It is a non-standard technology”
      From the Khronos website: “WebGL is a cross-platform, royalty-free web standard

      “that can cause them to physically fail”
      AFAIK, no hardware can do this, bios (or something else) knocks them down down before overheating and sustaining damage.

      “developers should push non-IE browser makers to get their graphical
      rendering ON PAR with IE9/10 so that W3C standard HTML5/CSS3 can be used
      for content”
      I don’t see that much of a difference between IE10 and the Firefox/Chrome duo at HWA, if that’s what you meant by graphical rendering. True, IE might be the best, but it’s not that far ahead, nothing on the x10-1000 scale. IE has the smallest scores when it comes to HTML5 and CSS3 support. Also, supporting WebGL does not mean the browser developers do not work on other things too. You know, something called work sharing.

      “Bing IETestDrive, and notice that standard HTML5/CSS3 sample sites that
      are graphically heavy run anywhere from 10 to even 1000 times faster in
      IE, making WebGL irrelevant.”

      Up till now, every IE testpage used some kind of trick to bend the results, the last one was the with Penguins, I think. This shows an example, how much you can trust these results. Also, I doubt you have tried BananaBread or saw the video Epic and Mozilla released. WebGL isn’t that weak.

      “If Microsoft came out with WebDirectX [...]” …the world would complain about not being supported outside of Windows and not being open-source. Not being a standard would be the smallest problem among the three IMO.

      I hope some else will cover up the parts I missed, like what is sent to the GPU.

      Edit: some more stuff here.

    • atomic1fire

      I’m not so sure that css3 and html5 will ever get so fast that it’s basically the same as webgl.

      Structurally, I’m fairly certain Webgl and Css3 have different purposes.

      WebGL is essentially a 3d canvas tag. It works using javascript to interact with the graphics card.

      Every other browser maker has added support (though safari has it disabled by default)

      As far as security issues go, last I heard any issues were fixed in the specification. Plus you have activex and NSAPI plugins, and various other venues of attack, yet people still use java and flash.

      • Przemysław Lib

        3D in CSS3 is meant as transforms for 2D content.

        WebGL is about exposing 3D hw to the web page.

        It different universe (almost) ;)

    • Przemysław Lib

      WebGL is NOT a W3C standard.

      Its Khrnonos standard and they work in a way that 3D industry approve. So WebGL is standard. Anyone could join to create it, anyone could voice their opinion about it. It have open and free conformance test (just like one for JS), its proven to be working on any GPU with programmable shader pipeline (including one hiden behind DX).

      “Direct access to hardware” only boild down to ability to preform Denial of Service, and even that can be easily prevented by GPU vendors and OS vendors if they want, and those who support WebGL eg. every one, wants.

      “All non-Win8″

      Lie.

      AMD customers even on WinXP are secure! AMD have code that prevent DoS..

      Win8 have new GPU drivers model that guarantee safety.

      Linux is secure also.

      Do not know about OSX.

      Have not seen or heard any toubles on Android.

      So BIG FAT Lie here.

    • Guest

      Go away, troll. Your FUD against WebGL has failed miserably. Even MS had adopted WebGL support.

      WebGL is open standards and open standards always win against proprietary MS DirectX.

      DEAL WITH IT

  • Przemysław Lib

    Idea:

    Maybe this leak was not blessed one? And instead of leaking 1st April, it got out earlier?