Breaking: Internet Explorer 8.1 Eagle Eyes Leaked
Smashing Magazine tries to be at the forefront of new and exciting developments in the wide world of the web. You might have heard that we met with the IE 8 Chief Strategist in the past, so it should come as no surprise that we like to keep up with the latest events in the web browser industry.
Even with the successful recent release of Internet Explorer 8, in some underground circles there is already talk going around about the next version of Internet Explorer: IE 8.1, codenamed Eagle Eyes. Loaded with exclusive features such as a new JavaScript engine, support of WebSlices and full web standards support (CSS 3), IE 8.1 is speculated to debut in this summer.
In this article, we take a closer look at the new features of Internet Explorer 8.1, compare it with other browsers and share with you our first-hand experience with the browser. Overall the browser is faster, more flexible, more stable and also more secure and performs already much better than a recently released IE 8. One word sums up our experience with IE 8.1: Eagle Eyes is the browser that Internet Explorer should have brought on the market a long time ago – and now it’s finally here.
New Features and Notable Improvements
User Interface
The user interface of IE 8.1 didn’t change much; just some minor tweaks to make the web browser more in tune with the Microsoft Windows 7 OS theme.

Improved Security and Web Slices
One of the promising features of IE 8.1 is improvements in security measures and their revolutionary feature: Web Slices. The SmartScreen Filter and Cross Site Scripting (XSS) Filter now catches 96% of known Malware and Phishing sites as opposed to the 75% success rate in the current version of IE 8. Web Slices, the IE 8 feature that lets you keep track of changes to sites that you frequent, is noticeably quicker in letting you know that an update is made.

Firefox Extensions Support
Eagle Eyes’s most exciting (and highly anticipated by developers) feature is its wide support of Mozilla-based add-ons. Though IE 8.1 duly notes that not all plugins will work perfectly, we have tested four popular Firefox plugins (Firebug, Web Developer, Tab Mix Plus, and No-Script) and they worked flawlessly (some of the developers even claim that – in terms of performance – they work much better under IE 8.1 versus Firefox 3).

IE 8.1 performs better against the Acid 3 test
Our test with IE 8.1 shows that it performs very well against the Acid3 Test, a test that checks how well a web browser follows web standards. Simply put – in relative terms to other modern “web standards” browsers such as Firefox 3 and Safari – IE 8.1 kicks major butt in the Acid3 Test scoring 71 out of 100, passing with flying colors.

Sure, the Acid3 Test is a big deal. Microsoft is pulling out all the stops with IE 8.1. In our exploration, these are just some of the notable features of Eagle Eyes.
Fast JavaScript Engine
Internet Explorer has always been the leader of executing client-side scripts, but that didn’t stop Microsoft from continuing its thirst for excellence by including a completely new JavaScript engine called JSE, which stands for JavaScript Speedy Engine.

Microsoft’s Internet Explorer Development Team has teamed up with the Google Chrome Development Team to create JSE in a seemingly grand plan combat Mozilla Firefox’s growing market share. The result: a JavaScript engine that outperforms all modern browsers currently available on the market.
Overall, Internet Explorer 8.1 performs much faster, is more stable and offers users a better user experience. Dramatic speed improvements of the Javascript engine are visible and clearly outperforms other browsers.
Multiple Browser Rendering Engine Options
Apparently, the IE development Team recognized the strengths of the Gecko Layout Engine (used in Firefox) and the WebKit rendering engine. Because of their GNU LPL licensed code base, Microsoft was able to legally incorporate a variety of rendering engines for users (and web-developers) to select from.

In our exclusive interview with Mike Chelly, one of the senior developers of the IE development Team, we found out that Internet Explorer’s main priority during the development of the new browser was to make it much easier for developers to code and debug their sites:
Mike Chelly:
“One of our primary goals is to give developers an easier way to test and debug how their sites and web apps work in different browsers, from within one browser. [Pauses to answer a call from his iPhone] We know in the past that we’ve gotten a bad rap for IE’s layout engine so we’re making up for this by not only releasing a web browser that outperforms every browser currently out there in terms of web standards support, but also gives you the chance to use another open source browser rendering engine in case you find ours isn’t good enough or if you want to make testing convenient and do it all from within the Eagle Eyes.“
Server-side code decompiler
If you’ve ever wished to know how sites and web applications work, Eagle Eyes (the name is fitting in this context) will let you view the server-side source code of a web page. We didn’t explore this feature much, but from basic tests, the server-side code decompiler was able to tell us how the Mixx promotional algorithm worked.

Website Skins
IE 8.1 allows you to keep a list of websites that you’d like to re-skin into one of the (currently) ten website templates that IE 8.1 comes with. When you next visit the site, it renders it into a prettier version by switching its stylesheets. This will allow IE 8.1 users to replace the design of an unreadable website to a template that is more viewable. In our test case, we used the Six Revisions website.
In its current state, this is what the ordinary Six Revisions website looks like:

We selected the “Mozkine” theme and this was the result:

Judging solely on this test case, it shows how useful this feature can be in making the web a prettier place.
Conclusion
Our test run of IE 8.1 shows that the developers of the Internet Explorer team have done a great job improving the browser’s rendering engine. IE 8.1 Eagle Eyes has a lot of potential to quickly become the browser of choice for many web-developers. We weren’t able to find out when exactly Microsoft is going to release the first public beta of the new browser, but some sources from the developer’s team claim that it will happen this summer.
It is safe to say that Internet Explorer 8.1. will be – based on our experience and superior expertise in this matter – dominating the browser market unless other browsers shape up and step up. We are hoping that IE 8.1 will be released soon, as we’ve been dreaming about it for a while now.
*Seriously Steve, was that restraining order necessary? I was only trying to give you a hug. In retrospect, I should’ve not done that naked.


Tim Holmes
March 31st, 2009 6:01 amIf only it was true :o(….. I am so very sad now, it all looked so promising… boohoo
Tim
Aaron Blakeley
March 31st, 2009 6:01 amMicrosoft should take note and make these changes. Does anyone have a mailing list for Microsoft developers. I am sure most of the email addresses end in gmail.com.
Jacob Gube
March 31st, 2009 6:04 am@Creamy CSS: Thanks! :)
Bogdan Pop
March 31st, 2009 6:06 amWebsite skins? Come on guys… That is more than lame. Based on how IE works I can imagine how using skins will ruin everything for you.
mikemike
March 31st, 2009 6:09 amDude, I was like “HOLY SHIT!”, and then I saw the server-side script deal, which is impossible – not that Microsoft making a good browser is possible either – and I was very disappointed :)
Shane
March 31st, 2009 6:12 amHA HA HA HA!!!!!!!! IE 8.1 FTW!!!! Nice one, Smashing!
cweave
March 31st, 2009 6:13 amIt would have been worthy to talk about compatibility mode in this post. I think for most web developers making the transition to supporting IE8 this is required knowledge.
Jon Hartmann
March 31st, 2009 6:16 amha ha, thats excellent… almost had me until the part about plugins :)
Romberto
March 31st, 2009 6:20 amWhahahahahaha, I can’t believe this is true story! if (this== true){ i am gonna eat IE6 raw }
heraclyde
March 31st, 2009 6:22 amClient-side server code decompiler… no shit ? it’s wild west on the web :) or is it like fifth dimension ?
MattS
March 31st, 2009 6:24 amFirefox addon support would be a killer feature really.
Simon Day
March 31st, 2009 6:25 amDammit, got me. I thought I’d died and gone to heaven when I read Firebug would work on it.
*Cue cartman voice*
“I hate you guys!”
LC
March 31st, 2009 6:26 amYeah you got me up to the firefox plugins :)
I think that’s because i wanted good css support so badly …
Cory
March 31st, 2009 6:29 amThanks for wasting my time reading the first half of this crap. Real professional, guys. This was not funny or even believable, since the second section was support for Firefox extensions — yeah, right.
Yorick Peterse
March 31st, 2009 6:30 amHaha, great April Fools’ joke, also love it that the JS chart states “Graph created with Microsoft Excel to show it’s software greatness” :P
Axel
March 31st, 2009 6:31 amsounds interesting!
Srdjan P
March 31st, 2009 6:32 amI love how people do not read the whole thing. You had me until the graph. Also, I have to say that the timing is actually brilliant, since it’s close enough to April 1st that it can be a joke without it actually being on April 1st and therefore obvious.
Good job, Jacob.
Ben
March 31st, 2009 6:32 amI knew something was up when you said “full CSS3 support”. WAY too good to be true for IE.
Idan Smith
March 31st, 2009 6:34 amyou got me! =]
Anti-IE
March 31st, 2009 6:35 amLOL LOL and LOL
heyyyy how much are you paid for, smashing????
by the time ie can do all these things listed, other browsers will be able to support 3D simulation browsing already…….. hahahahaha
admin
March 31st, 2009 6:40 amrol :)
Nate
March 31st, 2009 6:44 amlol nice. You actually had me for a while. I was even believing the FF addon support. But the “server-side code decompiler” is where I started lol’ing.
Michael Mogill
March 31st, 2009 6:44 amNice one guys.. the 8.1 on the Browser Version picture was a weak photoshop. ;)
be3
March 31st, 2009 6:45 amDie IE! DIE!!! +)
Brad
March 31st, 2009 6:48 am@Nate
Yeah, that’s the one that really convinced me as well.
Beads
March 31st, 2009 6:57 amClicked as soon as I read ‘web standards support’ really ;)
In reality, what I’d like from a non-aprils-fooled IE 8.1 would be for it not to be rubbish. However, recent history (4, 5, 5.5, 6, 7, 8.. uh… actually most all of ‘em) dictates that I will probably be disappointed. Are my standards too high, or IEs too low? :)
Cynthia Clinton
March 31st, 2009 7:03 amYou guys suck! I was all happy that IE was going to offer the skins and the firefox extension capability. lol
Teddy Cheezy
March 31st, 2009 7:04 ameuhhhhhhh
this post made me believe just for 2 minutes that the IE is still a … pretty good browser ;
that was just before i realized that today is 31st march
the IE sucks
Chris B
March 31st, 2009 7:07 amI think the joke is on you SM for forgetting that there is 31 days in March.
Oxide
March 31st, 2009 7:10 amGot me. I’m still shaking!
r_jake
March 31st, 2009 7:24 amMy favourite is the Windows 7 theme
Extraordinare
March 31st, 2009 7:25 amFirefox rules..
fall3n
March 31st, 2009 7:25 amMS making something useful? Hah! Nice Acid test, looks uncannily similar to my FireFox screenshot. The day IE becomes a useful browser will be the day the world comes to an end.
claud
March 31st, 2009 7:26 amThis news is FAKE because all these features are already present in IE8.0.
Arun
March 31st, 2009 7:30 amHa ha! Good one. This fooled my boss, he actually believed it to be true!
Erwin
March 31st, 2009 7:32 amThe sad part of this joke is that we’re so used by now to MS releasing poorly designed software that we’d actually be surprised by a decent IE browser.
Krimog
March 31st, 2009 7:34 amGot me too.
The only thing that was weird is that it was not a new version. If it was IE 9.0, that would be even easier to believe.
What I hope now is that MS developers will see this page and will question themselves about what everyone wants concerning a navigator. They should look at the poll too.
Yorik
March 31st, 2009 7:36 amROTFL!!! Too excellent! Congrats!
Manko10
March 31st, 2009 7:38 amServer-side code decompiler? How should this work? Magic? :D
Good one, but where do you live? New Zealand? The Blog’s date is still the 31st.
Hezi
March 31st, 2009 7:39 amApril’s fools people!!!! LOL
sure i’ll absolutely going to download it!
Mark
March 31st, 2009 7:53 amLol, I love the tiny text under the graph :)
Evan
March 31st, 2009 7:59 amYou fooled me so badly lol…..
Server-side decomplier :P
Daniel
March 31st, 2009 8:00 amhaha, nice. i like the Server-side code decompiler.
Chris
March 31st, 2009 8:05 amI got stuck on the server side de-compiling which would present HUGE risks for security reasons.
Tommie
March 31st, 2009 8:05 amhaha damn it, had me going there.
stu
March 31st, 2009 8:06 amGod I hate this website
Christopher Mena
March 31st, 2009 8:07 amI freaked out at the style sheets option… GOOD ONE SMASHING! You guys rock.
mariuz
March 31st, 2009 8:12 amif they copy soo much from firefox or google chrome maybe they should start using the actual code from chrome or firefox and contribute back to the community
temoc
March 31st, 2009 8:14 amthe “Server-side code decompiler”, is not something like, wow, i can see the passwords to databases to many many sites of rookies developers who put them in php scripts?, it’s that a good idea?, i think it’s stupid, thank you microsoft for another one, and, if their os it’s bad fixed and too much expensive, how can i wait something good for this?
Dan
March 31st, 2009 8:14 amHaha you guys had me going for a minute, the Firefox extensions thing is impossible though, and the source code view thing gives it away.
1) Firefox extensions are built on top of Firefox’s framework. Even just porting a Firefox extension to another XUL-based application is hard work. Making extensions work on IE would be impossible, especially something like Tab Mix Plus, which majorly changes how the Firefox tab bar works and is very dependent on… well, the underlying tab bar being the Firefox one. Even small changes to Firefox will break extensions that use the features that were changed (hence why addons are disabled when you upgrade until they are patched).
2) There is no standard way to query a website for its PHP or ASP source code. The website must specifically choose to make a method available for download of its source, and for the most part many websites will not because they are “closed source” (Microsoft.com, for example, would never do it anymore than they would release the source for Windows).
3) IE6 and 7 score very poorly on JavaScript benchmarks. Although it is believable MS would skew their own benchmarks. The tiny text is good and I completely missed it.
4) IE would not let you use a competitor’s engine inside their own browser unless they completely switch to Webkit or whatever (I think there were legit rumors they planned to chuck Trident and do this in the future). There would also be licensing issues considering Gecko and Webkit are under some form of open source licences.
5) Website skins would not work since every website author will code their site differently. With an ideal design where HTML is used to store content and CSS for styling, multiple styles can be provided BY THE WEBSITE. However styling can be embedded in pages as legacy HTML tags (IE font tags) and HTML tables can be heavily used/abused to fix layouts. These would be impossible to adjust with a universal restyling engine. Even with an ideal page such an engine would have to be able to dynamically figure out what on the page is a header, what is content, etc. Failure rates would be high.
Right now Stylish is an extension for Firefox which can be used to change the look of webpages, but they are written to change INDIVIDUAL pages or sites, and are written for the specific page or site.
Not to mention MS wouldn’t include a Mozilla styling. :P
Sean
March 31st, 2009 8:16 am@ Mark: lol, I didn’t even notice that the first time around.
You had me jumping with glee, until I realized that a server-side code decompiler would reveal all my site’s secrets to hackers. Then wait… this is too good to be true.
Although, it’s not April Fool’s….
415s
March 31st, 2009 8:18 amActually I still hate Microsoft for releasing IE6.
But if they are able to take down IE6 to an acceptable limit (5% or less) I’m going to love them for their great newcome with IE8 and, of course, Windows 7.
Of course I’ve several doubts about the security of IE8 but I hope Microsoft learned of its mistakes.
toot
March 31st, 2009 8:19 amdamn, got me hook line and sinker.
Jake
March 31st, 2009 8:20 amI think the comments from the people who thought this was serious are just an entertaining as the article itself.
Tomillo
March 31st, 2009 8:22 amWe hate explorer…
TheChrisD
March 31st, 2009 8:24 amYou know, the start of it was actually looking promising, particularly as I use IE8 as my primary browser, and as part of web development. It really would have helped re-establish IE as a good browser.
Very bad call >:(
DKumar M.
March 31st, 2009 8:27 amVery good Jacob, Nice writing… Even for sometime i also think it all was real… but it isn’t… it’s so good to be true… anyway nice effort.
DKumar M.
Parker
March 31st, 2009 8:27 amsrc=”http://media.smashingmagazine.com/images/ie8-eagle-eyes/graph_js_performance.jpg”
alt=”Do not ask about what units or methodology was used. Just trust me.”
src=”http://media.smashingmagazine.com/images/ie8-eagle-eyes/mixx.jpg”
alt=”Screenshot of a social media site that isnt Digg so should I really bother writing an alt attribute?”
ROFLMAO!
ihsanrama
March 31st, 2009 8:27 amApril Mob… hehe
Tim
March 31st, 2009 8:34 amIf it aint April 1, it’s not an april fools it’s just lame?
Luke
March 31st, 2009 8:35 amMICROSOFT IS DEAD TO ME! All their products are an absolute nightmare. One thing that makes me laugh, is that office 08 is actually so much easier to use on a MAC than on windows. How the hell did they screw that up!
nod
March 31st, 2009 8:50 am“Fast JavaScript Engine” that title made me realize.
what a joke, is smashing magazine an aussie website ? :p
Thomas Thomassen
March 31st, 2009 9:03 amA bit quick on the posting trigger there aren’t we? 1st April isn’t here yet.
Dave
March 31st, 2009 9:05 amIt took me an embarrassingly long time to catch on
Histrionic
March 31st, 2009 9:38 amI’m not sure how 71/100 on ACID3 “kicks major butt,” other than relative improvement to its own past versions. I’ve seen Safari 3.2.1 score 74/100 (with “LINKTEST FAILED”) and others mention 75/100. I’ve also seen Firefox 3.0.7 score 71/100 with no failure messages.
Sayeda
March 31st, 2009 10:05 amLOL! i really felt ashamed for being so behind with all this news :P although the poll made it seem like some sort of an unusual thing, I still fell for it.
that was good.
Shelley
March 31st, 2009 10:14 amI think the best part of this is all the people saying, “Hey, this isn’t April Fools yet!” just because it’s not April Fools where they are.
Uh, Internet? Time zones? Global access?
Narcissist, much?
The timing made this whole thing especially brilliant….
Israel
March 31st, 2009 10:15 amHa, Server-side code decompiler. Now that would be scary.
Mikhail Subach
March 31st, 2009 10:17 amGood work, guys! :)))
Gregg
March 31st, 2009 10:19 am@Israel you’re telling me!
I didn’t realize till this was a fake till I read the ss decompiler lol. I thought it was strange IE6 outperformed chrome & safari with its javascript engine.
good one Smashing.
Rodrigo
March 31st, 2009 10:30 amEverything, from a technical point of view, is feasible, except Server Side Decompiler… It was a really good joke until that.
Marie
March 31st, 2009 10:50 amI need a copy now so I can make all the websites I visit prettier with the new Website Skins feature!
Brad Neuberg
March 31st, 2009 10:57 amWhat about support for SVG and the Canvas tag? ;) April Fools!
Hollis Bartlett
March 31st, 2009 11:02 amMan, that had me going too, especially when seeing the server-side decompiler… I had loud security alarm bells going off in my head… Then I began to wonder how that would even be possible… Then the website skins part…Then I started reconsidering my career choices… Then I looked at the calendar and saw the comments. Good one!
Ian Lloyd
March 31st, 2009 11:20 amYou don’t need Eagle Eyes to spot this is a wind-up. Good one though :-)
Andrei Rinea
March 31st, 2009 11:25 amServer side decompiler… yeah right… I’d like one like the reflector so I can decompile it in ASP.NET (C#) and not PHP :))))))))
Radeksonic
March 31st, 2009 11:26 amI’ll never download IE, so also not Eagel Eye.
If IE becomes the only webbrowser in the world, I’ll cut my internet connection with a knife.
Simon
March 31st, 2009 11:33 amuh.. im not too sure all the info in this article is correct. Its almost the opposite of what i’ve read previously..
xxdesmus
March 31st, 2009 11:40 amdamn you guys, I was genuinely excited that IE might actually not suck. Alas, I was wrong.
Oncle Tom
March 31st, 2009 12:04 pmOMG: it’s already available as the Ubuntu package ms-internet-explorer8!
Francois Botha
March 31st, 2009 12:12 pmHey dudes… Stop whining. It’s already April in some countries. Oh wait… you’re right. There’s absolutely nothing outside the States.
Jason
March 31st, 2009 12:18 pmHaha, funny. What gave it away was the non-rounded corners for the navigation in the first smashingmagazine screenshot yet you went onto say it supported CSS3! Nearly had me!
Jason
March 31st, 2009 12:35 pmYeah, ok. I laughed out loud (briefly) and then was kinda angry and disappointed. I was (ignorance is bliss) getting seriously excited with the prospect of those (albeit impossible to implement) features.
Seriously though, I would be almost as happy if I never had to think about, or deal with IE 6 ever, ever, ever again.
Kev Jaques
March 31st, 2009 12:39 pmHeh, Over 100 comments since I saw this, Loved the bit with the decompiler, I think we probably all wanted this review to be kind of true considering the previous versions of IE have been somewhat lacking ;)
daniel
March 31st, 2009 1:03 pmhaha :D i beleved it at first but the “Server-side code decompiler”? lol!
Hoopz
March 31st, 2009 1:05 pmWould’ve been more convincing if you hadn’t used MS Sans Serif for the fake text in your screenshots, when the other text is Tahoma.
Andrei Rinea
March 31st, 2009 1:05 pm@Daniel, the same here: It all seemed possible until the “server-side decompiler”. And the code decompiled is so lame, it gives all away :P
Anton
March 31st, 2009 1:08 pmlol excellent
Gonzalo
March 31st, 2009 1:11 pmHahah this was very funny indeed :)
docdave
March 31st, 2009 1:21 pmLOL. You got me; up until the Javascript engine. Sounded too fake, numbers did not make sense.
Pete
March 31st, 2009 1:22 pmdamn, you had me going there lol good one!
Hackerandy
March 31st, 2009 1:23 pmI analyzed your Firefoxaddonsupportpicture with JPEGSnoop:
*** Searching Compression Signatures ***
Signature: 01C26040DB5181BA3B5CD7A813FAD209
Signature (Rotated): 01C26040DB5181BA3B5CD7A813FAD209
File Offset: 0 bytes
Chroma subsampling: 1×1
EXIF Make/Model: NONE
EXIF Makernotes: NONE
EXIF Software: NONE
Searching Compression Signatures: (3327 built-in, 0 user(*) )
EXIF.Make / Software EXIF.Model Quality Subsamp Match?
————————- ———————————– —————- ————–
SW :[Adobe Photoshop ] [Save For Web 060]
NOTE: Photoshop IRB detected
Based on the analysis of compression characteristics and EXIF metadata:
ASSESSMENT: Class 1 – Image is processed/edited
————————————————————————————
Good Joke
Andy
David
March 31st, 2009 1:30 pmMarch Fools Day – for those who just can’t wait the extra 12 hours.
hehehe
March 31st, 2009 1:33 pmHahaha, server side decompiler rofl
Thomas Thomassen
March 31st, 2009 1:54 pmStill… the post date is 31. March.
Dave
March 31st, 2009 1:58 pmAnd with this news, I’m blocking ALL IE users from my site. Why? Because Microsoft just doesn’t get it. You do NOT catch up by spitting out product after product of JUNK that serves no purpose but to rip off what other people have already perfected. They need to just give up on the browser wars. They’ve lost. It’s OVER. IE is a miserable failure, and always will be.
Matthew
March 31st, 2009 2:01 pmServer-side code decompiler is unnerving, our code is our IP will this work for localhost and remote sites? this could be a security nightmare.
Paul
March 31st, 2009 2:04 pmI guess the most amusing thing about the article, is the Acid3 claim. Midori browser already gets 100 of 100 on the test. Though, it should be noted, the test is supposed to load and render SMOOTHLY. Midori and any other browser that has ever achieved 100 pauses momentarily before completing the test. Yeah, 100 of 100, but not perfectly smoothly. Oh well, nothing’s perfect. Midori is close enough, for the time being.
Jacob G.
March 31st, 2009 2:06 pm@Hackerandy: You had to do all of that to determine that this is a joke? :)
Ricardo
March 31st, 2009 2:29 pmHold on just a big fat minute.
You compare a PRE-beta IE8.1 with the current version of Safari in the ACID3 test? Why not compare it to Safari 4, available to anyone & everyone at Apple’s web site? It scores a perfect 100 on ACID3.
Also, Microsoft should be comparing its IE betas to Safari 4 in their speed tests. Safari 4 will blow it’s doors off.
C’mon people, try to be fair.