Firefox 3.6 supports multiple file input. This new capability allows you to get several files as input at once, using standard technologies. This is a big improvement, since you used to be constrained to one file at a time, or needed to use a third party (proprietary) application. This will be particularly useful, for example, for photo uploads.

From multiple file input in Firefox 3.6. The post contains code examples and a link to a demo. You’ll need the beta version of Firefox 3.6 to take advantage.

Also see: Proposed File API specification

TraceMonkey, Resig explains, uses a computing technique known as trace trees (PDF) which adds just-in-time native code compilation to SpiderMonkey, Firefox’s current rendering engine.

What does this mean? As Resig explains:

It means that JavaScript is no longer confined by the previously-challenging resource of processing power. With this improvement it’s leap-frogged any sort of traditional and has gone head-to-head with computationally-powerful languages like C.

In other words, we’ll get JavaScript processing speeds that are Usain Bolt-on-crack fast, opening the door for more powerful JavaScript-powered applications.

Firefox’s announcement comes a few months after the WebKit team’s announcement of SquirrelFish, which will be the JavaScript engine used in Safari 4.

Resig and Brendan Eich also point out that these TraceMonkey improvements (and presumably SquirrelFish’s improvements) in conjunction with HTML 5‘s canvas element will mean we’ll see some slick JavaScript animation and game experiences, such as this one by Zachary Johnson.

The obvious roadblock to widespread adoption of all of this whiz-bangy JavaScript+<canvas> goodness is, of course, Internet Explorer. Internet Explorer 7 does not support the canvas element. Version 8 of the browser will not, although there is a workaround for IE7 available.

Still, without the dominant web browser on board — and conceivably not coming on board for at least a few years — the widespread use of JavaScript animations may not take off for some time.

Want to check see TraceMonkey in action? Download a nightly build of Firefox (codenamed Minefield), and in the about:config panel, set javascript.options.jit.content equal to true.

Also check out Mike Schroepfer’s screencast What can you do when your browser is 7 times faster?

About 6 years ago, I remember taking part in a conversation about preferred browsers on the Jane magazine message boards. IE 5.x was still king of the PC world. IE 6 was coming on strong. Netscape 4 was still widely used by universities. Netscape 6 was on its way.

Most of the respondents said they preferred Internet Explorer. Why? Because sites just “look right” and “work better” in Internet Explorer. My response at the time was simple: if a site doesn’t work in Netscape, it’s because the web developer didn’t know what (s)he was doing.

Of course, they didn’t care. They were far more into Sephora than HTML code quality. As far as they were concerned, Netscape was the problem. They didn’t blame crap code, or Microsoft for developing a browser that stomped harder than a Catalonian flamenco dancer all over the W3C specs and allowed ugly code to thrive. They blamed Netscape.

I was reminded of that conversation when I first read Microsoft’s recent announcement about Internet Explorer 8. After my initial D*MNF*CKINGBLOODYHELL!JUSTBREAKTHF*CKINGWEBALREADYMICROSOFT!WHATTHEF*CK? IAMTIREDOFYOURAGGEDYBASTARDSMAKINGMYDAYJOB1000TIMESHARDERTHANITNEEDSTOBEBECAUSEYOUCAN’T DEVELOPABROWSERTHATFOLLOWSAF*CKING10YEAROLDSPEC!!! reaction passed, I came to the following conclusion: this is the best approach to a bad situation.

Microsoft does not want to be where Netscape was. It’s a sad but true fact is that if a site breaks, the average web user — and, dare I say, average web developer — will blame the browser. Microsoft is too entrenched in corporate intranets and applications to let that happen. Doing so would cause a sh*tstorm of massive proportions for the company. From a business perspective, I understand.

And while I am also not happy about the default implementation (as Jeremy Keith explained Unless you explicitly declare that you want IE8 to behave as IE8, it will behave as IE7.), opting-in to web standards eliminates the need to revise existing code.

Yes, it’s potentially a nail in the coffin for progressive enhancement techniques. Yes, we’ll still have to do something special to cater to Microsoft browsers. Yes, this could freeze web development at the IE7 level for years to come. But I believe — and it pains me to say it given the hate-hate more relationship I have with Microsoft browsers — that Microsoft, given its position, had no other choice.

But putting pragmatic approaches and practical considerations aside, I think Ben Buchanan said it best:

If they’ve included a DOCTYPE, they’ve declared they want to render to standards. If they did that in ignorance, it’s time they started earning their money instead of letting Dreamweaver do their jobs.

Related: Internet Explorer 8 Round Up