5 ms·

"For a site like Google, I see no reason why Microsoft should have put it into compatibility mode- I have to assume that Google does testing on IE and any bugs

"For a site like Google, I see no reason why Microsoft should have put it into compatibility mode- I have to assume that Google does testing on IE and any bugs should have been addressed quickly by Google." Unfortunately, we see otherwise during our compat testing here at Microsoft on many occasions.

kumarm 13y ago
I guess you have no way to work with a major company like Google since you are such a small organization lacking resources.
- reybango 13y ago
  You're making an assumption that Microsoft are the blocker. Let's just say that it's a two-way street when it comes to communication.
  - 3825 13y ago
    Sorry, I try to err on the side of caution as well but there is no way to do that in this case. Microsoft is clearly at fault. Adding someone to a "compatibility list" is a unilateral action Microsoft took. If it works fine without being on compatibility mode, don't add it to your compatibility mode list.
    - reybango 13y ago
      If it had worked fine, it would never have been added in the first place. We don't add sites arbitrarily to the list. It's based on actual compat testing. Also every site on the list can request to be removed so if Google had tested in IE11 and discovered all was great, it's very easy for them to contact us to remove them from the list.
      - joshstrange 13y ago
        What about the quote from the article: > I'll tell you more guys. I've updated to windows 8.1 on my tablet a month ago through MSND subscription and Google search worked just fine. Looks like this problem appeared after public availability of Windows 8.1. So I believe it's something that Google or Microsoft should figure out. How could they have tested as they were not on the list until, what appears to be, the public release?
        reybango 13y ago
        Google's been on the list well before the public GA release of IE11 to ensure compatibility.
        kumarm 13y ago
        Does this mean microsoft never contacted anyone about compatibility list? To score some cheap points against a competitor you made your own product inferior. Good Luck with that attitude.
        reybango 13y ago
        Again you're full of assumptions. We're very proactive in our compat outreach and we've had numerous conversations with sites like Google. Sites like Google are VERY aware of the CV list & the modes they're rendering in; it's not a surprise to them. Don't assume we're doing something nefarious when it's not the case. We have nothing to gain (and a lot to lose) by breaking one of the top web properties, even if they're a competitor. Here's a more plausible scenario. Google may have made a change to their SERPs which didn't work great in the docmode that IE11 is rendering it in. Nothing intentional, nothing nefarious on either company's part. I think that's a more reasonable explanation than the concerns you're expressing.
        kumarm 13y ago
        You are not being consistent: [1] If it had worked fine, it would never have been added in the first place. [2] Sites like Google are VERY aware of the CV list & the modes they're rendering in; it's not a surprise to them. Those 2 together are suggesting Google knows problem all along and you have been working with them but they didn't fix the issue.

kumarm 13y ago

I guess you have no way to work with a major company like Google since you are such a small organization lacking resources.

reybango 13y ago
You're making an assumption that Microsoft are the blocker. Let's just say that it's a two-way street when it comes to communication.
- 3825 13y ago
  Sorry, I try to err on the side of caution as well but there is no way to do that in this case. Microsoft is clearly at fault. Adding someone to a "compatibility list" is a unilateral action Microsoft took. If it works fine without being on compatibility mode, don't add it to your compatibility mode list.
  - reybango 13y ago
    If it had worked fine, it would never have been added in the first place. We don't add sites arbitrarily to the list. It's based on actual compat testing. Also every site on the list can request to be removed so if Google had tested in IE11 and discovered all was great, it's very easy for them to contact us to remove them from the list.
    - joshstrange 13y ago
      What about the quote from the article: > I'll tell you more guys. I've updated to windows 8.1 on my tablet a month ago through MSND subscription and Google search worked just fine. Looks like this problem appeared after public availability of Windows 8.1. So I believe it's something that Google or Microsoft should figure out. How could they have tested as they were not on the list until, what appears to be, the public release?
      - reybango 13y ago
        Google's been on the list well before the public GA release of IE11 to ensure compatibility.
        kumarm 13y ago
        Does this mean microsoft never contacted anyone about compatibility list? To score some cheap points against a competitor you made your own product inferior. Good Luck with that attitude.
        reybango 13y ago
        Again you're full of assumptions. We're very proactive in our compat outreach and we've had numerous conversations with sites like Google. Sites like Google are VERY aware of the CV list & the modes they're rendering in; it's not a surprise to them. Don't assume we're doing something nefarious when it's not the case. We have nothing to gain (and a lot to lose) by breaking one of the top web properties, even if they're a competitor. Here's a more plausible scenario. Google may have made a change to their SERPs which didn't work great in the docmode that IE11 is rendering it in. Nothing intentional, nothing nefarious on either company's part. I think that's a more reasonable explanation than the concerns you're expressing.
        kumarm 13y ago
        You are not being consistent: [1] If it had worked fine, it would never have been added in the first place. [2] Sites like Google are VERY aware of the CV list & the modes they're rendering in; it's not a surprise to them. Those 2 together are suggesting Google knows problem all along and you have been working with them but they didn't fix the issue.