I LOVE INTERNET EXPLORER!

Blkbam wrote:

Anyway I love IE.  It supports all of the pages I visit, it loads fast, I can switch from IE to WE without looking like I hit a webserver with no default page and thier upgrades (yes the FF people haven't figured out how to do this yet) don't break my previous plugins (this one either).

Those are the three reasons that you like IE over FF? Which page have you gone to that FF didn't support? When you tested IE load time vs. FF load time, what was the big difference (I see none, what version did you try?).

Also, when you switch between IE and Windows Explorer, do you enjoy the fact that it doesn't respect your folder settings? (e.g. it defaults to Icon view when Detail View is specified when using regular WE.)

What about advertising? Do you have any free plugin that let's you right-click on a banner or other ad and say "Block all images from *.doubleclick.*"?

Blkbam wrote:

So does a second monitor.

So then I guess that a 2nd monitor AND tabbed browsing is the most efficient. Does having just a 2nd monitor t help you with Taskbar clutter?

I have a 2nd monitor (and I use Firefox) and I can have two different research sessions going at once with all the pages on one subject opened in tabs on one screen and all the pages on another subject on another screen, yet there's still only 2 items on my taskbar.

Furthermore, I can have 16 pages open in a single process. Internet Explorer would be using 16 different processes.

Blkbam wrote:

FF has bugs but no one has found them yet.  The more it is used the more people will find in it.

Especially since the code is written by volunteers
But seriously, Firefox is full of bugs and more are introduced every day.  Here's a list of the more critical Firefox bugs (113 of them)

WayneB wrote:

Furthermore, I can have 16 pages open in a single process. Internet Explorer would be using 16 different processes.

That's not true. If you open new browser windows using CTRL-N in IE, the process will get reused.
Only if you open a new browser window by clicking the IE icon on the quicklaunch/start menu/desktop/whereever will a new process be created.

Ok..  look at it this way.

I agree with being able to conform to people with user agents designed to fit their specific needs, due to disability.  My pages are designed with those people in mind.  But I do not have a slightest clue wether or not my pages work properly on those said user agents, because I do not have them here to test my pages on.  

Devices for the deaf, for example, could simply be a regular computer, with all the right software.  IE is good enough for them, in my opinion.  As for sounds, they could be subtitled.  Subtitles should be available on all applications(marketing scheme? I want royalties.) 

Mobile phones....  they call it a phone for a reason.  Mobile phones featuring the "internet option" are gimmicks.  The reason the internet was implemented on the phone is to download cool, new, and annoying ringtones. 

Now they want phones to be able to do your homework for you?  What's next?  Your phone will start your(parents') car cuz you so busy yapping about how your parents don't let you go out often enough, while you insert the 50$ bill they just handed you in your pocket, and put on 3 inches of make up to impress someone who will walk away from you as soon as you give him that picture you just took in the bathroom, while you were changing into the plumber's crack jeans, and see through shirt that you saw on TV yesterday, and bought today with your mom's credit card?

You walk up to someone in 2013, with your "pocket office" installed...

"Check out my Printer/Copier/Phone/Fax/Internet Browser/Camera/GPS unit!  It fits indise my ear and it's hooked up to my contact lenses.  The paper comes out my *, and the camera lens is on the tip of my finger!"

Cool eh?

WTF!!..  Give it up.  Why conform to those people?  Cuz they spent 5k on a gadget they will think is obsolete in less than a month, only to buy a new one with a non-conforming user agent.

I do have IE and FF.  Sure tabbed browsing is nice..  I checked it out today.  But after only 5 minutes on the web with FF, I found errors on major websites.  Like overlapping columns. 



Furthermore, IE is designed to fit the Windows user.  Microsoft will do anything to keep it as innovative as possible, only if you get it with Windows(note: marketing scheme).  I still think they went OUT OF THEIR WAY to please the Mac users that prefer IE, because the Mac browser was "not quite as" conforming as IE.

I believe everyone with a computer has experienced the "Windows" operating system at least ONCE in their life.

People that say "My OS is(or is it "LOOKS") better than YOURS, but your browser is better than mine, so I wish your OS company made a browser for my OS." Are just now realizing the powers behind IE.

Why does Netscape, Opera and Firefox exist?  Because IE has been slacking in the conformity department. 

W3C exists because they want the entire world to experience the web the same way.

Microsoft is a member of W3C, yet they tend to do things their own way, thus the competition.

My ONLY wish is for IE7 to TOTALLY, not partially, conform with CSS3, XHTML 2.0 and XML 1.1 and THEN add their "we are different, therefore the best" extras.  After that, watch the other companies follow suit.

sneakyhybrid wrote:

My ONLY wish is for IE7 to TOTALLY, not partially, conform with CSS3, XHTML 2.0 and XML 1.1 and THEN add their "we are different, therefore the best" extras.  After that, watch the other companies follow suit.

Hear, hear.  FIRST embrace, THEN extend.  Only then can you extinguish.

Re: sneakyhybrid

I do have IE and FF.  Sure tabbed browsing is nice..  I checked it out today.  But after only 5 minutes on the web with FF, I found errors on major websites.  Like overlapping columns. 


...to name but one of HUNDEREDS

wake me when alternative browsers:

a) use IE's rendering engine
b) Pass 10% usage combined
c) Disappear entirely

jamie wrote:

Re: sneakyhybrid

I do have IE and FF.  Sure tabbed browsing is nice..  I checked it out today.  But after only 5 minutes on the web with FF, I found errors on major websites.  Like overlapping columns. 


...to name but one of HUNDEREDS

Any chance you guys could post a couple of URLs to these sites? That way we could post the URLs to the FF guys so they can fix it.

Cheers.

I've sent the URLs of my pages to bugzilla. Here's a link to one of the pages on dhtml animation.

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=234233

There seems to be a real difficulty getting dhtml to look as good in the moz browsers as it does in IE.

Its nice to know they are working on it, even if it is a problem that is several years old.

Brent.

bsilby wrote:

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=234233

There seems to be a real difficulty getting dhtml to look as good in the moz browsers as it does in IE.

In this case it does look like it's related to the Win32 implementation of Firefox.  My fave quote from the bug report

Bugzilla wrote:

> is it playable on Linux?

Only very marginally (with a bit of practice I managed to play for 5-6 minutes
or so before getting caught by the robot things).

I tried it in FF and it doesn't play well at all (and also eats all my CPU)
but on IE it's fine. Given that I love that game I guess I *do* have an excuse to keep IE around now.

Very cool game though I can see me playing that a lot tonight

I haven't heard any speech from the Safari/Opera users. Is this because those browsers are so bad that they bring up a lot of errors? Or is it because not many C^9ers use Saf/Op? If there is any Saf/Op users out there, speak up and tell us why Saf/Op is better than IE. Even though IE is still the best browser. And nothing will change that.

Loadsgood wrote:

I haven't heard any speech from the Safari/Opera users. Is this because those browsers are so bad that they bring up a lot of errors? Or is it because not many C^9ers use Saf/Op? If there is any Saf/Op users out there, speak up and tell us why Saf/Op is better than IE. Even though IE is still the best browser. And nothing will change that.

I use Safari at home (as well as FF).  I don't bother bringing it up because there's no point. Safari does not (and probably will not) run on Windows (although the rendering engine is based on the one used in KDE).  I use it on my Mac and I don't have trouble with any of the sites I visit (well apart from this one - hence FF).  Safari is also a lot younger than the other browsers, and a bit more accessible in terms of what people want. Check out http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/hyatt/ where the main Safari developer asks people what they want (and then gives it to them - on the whole).

Rossj wrote:

I tried it in FF and it doesn't play well at all (and also eats all my CPU)
but on IE it's fine. Given that I love that game I guess I *do* have an excuse to keep IE around now.

Very cool game though I can see me playing that a lot tonight

I'm glad you enjoy the game. I've written quite a few arcade style dhmtl games to date. It runs a bit more consistently in FF on Linux, but (as you've observed) it runs best in IE.

Someone mentioned Safari...my dhtml games run on the latest Safari (the earlier versions of Safari don't seem to accept the key events I use). They are a little slow in Safari, however. But I think that's just the Mac I was using. I've tried them on G4, but generally all dhtml stuff is slower on the mac--even with IE

Brent.

Why must a user be (presumably) above average in intelligence and/or technically gifted to use a freakn' browser? 

Willy Duitt wrote:

WayneB wrote: What about advertising? Do you have any free plugin that let's you right-click on a banner or other ad and say "Block all images from *.doubleclick.*"?

Yes, it's called the host file...

It can be said that the secure and safe use of Internet Explorer is in direct proportion to the intelect and knowledge of the user...

And it is my feeling that those whom are lacking in either intelect or knowledge should use an alternate browser... Not only to protect them from themselves but to also protect us from their stupidity for having their machines compromised...

Perhaps the answer lies in requiring the successful completion of a Internet Explorer Saftey Course much like the US's firearms safety course which is required in order to get a liscence to hunt (surf)... Afterall, I doubt anyone would knowingly give a loaded firearm to a child or imbecile (at least not without prior training of its safe use and inherent dangers)....

Viva: We must protect our children and imbeciles!!!

.....Willy

Willy Duitt wrote:

Yes, it's called the host file...

You:

1. Go to web page with crummy adverts.
2. Right click banner, click properties, highlight image src URL, copy.
3. Minimize browser, open Windows Explorer, navigate to C:\Windows\System32\Drivers\Etc\
4. Open hosts file with Notepad.
5. Insert new entry with 127.0.0.1 or 0.0.0.0, whatever.
6. Restore IE window, look at your page. Adverts are still there.
7. Refresh the page, Adverts are still there.
8. Finally, figure out that you must close all instances of IE for it to use the new hosts file.
9. Re-navigate to your page.

Me:

1. Go to web page with crummy adverts.
2. Right click banner, click Adblock Image.
3. Click OK on the resulting dialog. Image disappears immediately.

Furthermore, how do you block URL patterns like http://www.somesite.com/ads/* with the hosts file? (You can't.)

Willy Duitt wrote:

It can be said that the secure and safe use of Internet Explorer is in direct proportion to the intelect and knowledge of the user...

So what you're saying is that a C++/Win32/MFC/ATL programmer could use IE more securely than a house wife?

Hmmm, I guess that I would agree with that since to use IE more securely you probably would need to re-program it.

bsilby wrote:

I'm glad you enjoy the game. I've written quite a few arcade style dhmtl games to date. It runs a bit more consistently in FF on Linux, but (as you've observed) it runs best in IE.

It's also quite jerky on FF OSX. Not so jerky that I couldn't get to stage 7 (118450) first go

bsilby wrote:

Someone mentioned Safari...my dhtml games run on the latest Safari (the earlier versions of Safari don't seem to accept the key events I use). They are a little slow in Safari

More than acceptable on my G4 mac using Safari 1.2.3, 1.5 Ghz.  In fact quite fast indeed.  The score screen at the end of each stage though cuts off the number of lives I have.

Thought I would try in IE on my mac as well (never got around to deleting it) but the game slows down dramatically when I am collecting star thingies.  I do have audio here though on the IE version.

So on mac at least it looks like Safari is the best option if you have a reasonably specced mac (no comments please).

WayneB wrote:

Willy Duitt wrote:Yes, it's called the host file...

You:

1. Go to web page with crummy adverts.
2. Right click banner, click properties, highlight image src URL, copy.
3. Minimize browser, open Windows Explorer, navigate to C:\Windows\System32\Drivers\Etc\
4. Open hosts file with Notepad.
5. Insert new entry with 127.0.0.1 or 0.0.0.0, whatever.
6. Restore IE window, look at your page. Adverts are still there.
7. Refresh the page, Adverts are still there.
8. Finally, figure out that you must close all instances of IE for it to use the new hosts file.
9. Re-navigate to your page.

Me:

1. Go to web page with crummy adverts.
2. Right click banner, click Adblock Image.
3. Click OK on the resulting dialog. Image disappears immediately.

Furthermore, how do you block URL patterns like http://www.somesite.com/ads/* with the hosts file? (You can't.)

Much easier with Firefox. Plus you need to be admin to edit the hosts file. IE needs a better way of extending it. You need to be an administrator to do so (due to ActiveX). Firefox can be extended using XUL, so anyone could do so with notepad. For Windows, you will have to wait until Longhorn (unless part of XAML is backported). I hope Firefox can get at least 10% share of the market. It has advantages that Microsoft's IE doesn't - cross platform, open source, no vendor-tie in (due to being integrated into an OS), easily extensible, more secure (by obscurity some may say, but we will never know, unless it has a 40-50% market share), better standards support, portable (run's off usb flash disk), smaller (4.5MB download), faster (not for everyone though) and free (you need to buy Windows to get IE - XP SP2 if you want popup blocking).