Coffeehouse Thread

56 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

I LOVE INTERNET EXPLORER!

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    Loadsgood

    <rant>
    Yes that right, you heard me. I LOVE INTERNET EXPLORER!

    I'm so bored of hearing "Improve this, improve that." When I think that IE is great as it is. I know it has a few security holes, but at least they're being found and then fixed. I bet you there are a lot of security holes in the other browsers that haven't been fixed.

    "I want tabbed browsing. Waa waa waa!" Well put this up your pipe and smoke it. Now do you want tabbed browsing?

    "I want a download manager. Waa waa waa!" Get over it, just go and search for Download manager on Google and download one of the millions of download managers. If IE did have a download manager, some EU guy would be suing them and forcing an unistall option (WMP anyone?)

    "I want IE to support standards. Waa waa waa!" The only thing that doesn't support standards is website programmers. IE makes standards. So all standards should support IE, not the other way around.

    So get over it people, either change browsers or shut the F*** up!!!!!!!!!
    </rant>

    Well that's my rant for the week. No, more like year.

  • User profile image
    manickernel

    I just like managed applications. But thanks for the link to tabbed issues.

    EDIT: While I was writing this, I just saw a advert on TV for Netscape as an "ISP" hookup. Hmmm.

  • User profile image
    Loadsgood

    An ad for Netscape? That's pretty suprising, but I guess you probably get a lot of those type of ads in America. I only see ads for Microsoft on SBS (a multicultural free-TV channel). Mind you I see like a million printer company ads (Canon, HP etc.) on the popular free-TV channels. But I have never seen a browser ad. Interesting...

  • User profile image
    thechris

    ""I want tabbed browsing. Waa waa waa!" Well put this up your pipe and smoke it. Now do you want tabbed browsing?"
    -in windows you can be tricked into installing software...  and yet people use it.  theres a LOT more spoofing targeted at MS (dialog look-alike ads) as well.  not sure this is the best example against IE as past IE holes didn't need to trick the user, they just took the info or installed apps to do it...

    ""I want a download manager. Waa waa waa!" Get over it, just go and search for Download manager on Google and download one of the millions of download managers. If IE did have a download manager, some EU guy would be suing them and forcing an unistall option (WMP anyone?)"
    -because having a lot of apps open is the best idea.  installing app-of-the-days is an invitation to spyware.

    WMP is too big brother ever since i saw the legal agreement for i think WMP7.  when i use windows i have my firewall block WMP and try to find alternatives to WMP.

    ""I want IE to support standards. Waa waa waa!" The only thing that doesn't support standards is website programmers. IE makes standards. So all standards should support IE, not the other way around."
    -IE sure doens't handel png right.  also:
    http://quanta.sourceforge.net/
    http://quanta.sourceforge.net/main2.php?contfile=exploder

    also, IE only makes de-facto standards, not including things like VBScript and JScript (javascript-like) and ASP i guess.  HTML, javascript, XML, XHTML, flash(ugh), and java aren't really IE-made standards.  perl/python and php definately aren't IE-made standards



    you left popup blocking off the list.  i assume you have a free popup blocker app installed as well?

    i use firefox -- it works on my computer (linux on x86), my server (linux on sparc64), and my workstation (windows 2000 on x86). 

  • User profile image
    Loadsgood

    No, my app isn't free - I use NIS '04 (Norton Internet Security 2004) for my popup blocking needs.

    I didn't include popup blocking in the list because IE already has a built in popup blocker (Service Pack 2 update for XP)

  • User profile image
    Tom Malone

    The one thing that really annoys me about your argument, is this whole ie makes standard approach. As ie is not standard complient, there is some really cool css stuff and png that ie users loose out on. I'm fed up of finding really nice css menus that won't work in ie, or having to test pngs in ie. If ie are going to make standards, define them make a document saying what tags can be used and where, get them as an iso standard, make them standards or use the standards we have.

    Except for the standards complience, i thing ie is a great browser, and most of the bad press is uncalled for.

  • User profile image
    Rossj

    Loadsgood wrote:
    I didn't include popup blocking in the list because IE already has a built in popup blocker (Service Pack 2 update for XP)


    I think you may have missed the bit where he said he was running W2K Wink
    But then you could always use the Google tool bar for this.

  • User profile image
    sbc

    Loadsgood wrote:
    <rant>
    "I want IE to support standards. Waa waa waa!" The only thing that doesn't support standards is website programmers. IE makes standards. So all standards should support IE, not the other way around.

    The problem with that is some of the so called standards are tied to the OS, like CSS filters. AFAIK these are interpreted by DirectX (which is part of Windows).
    That is why you get an independent organisation to develop standards - so any browser could implement them as they are platform independent.

    You will never get another browser that works the same way as Internet Explorer for Windows. Even IE for Mac works differently - so that shows even Microsoft can't do that.

    The whole point of standards is somewhere to aim for. It does not mean you can't define your own (after all innerHTML was a Microsoft invention, but was implemented by other browser as it is so useful).

    The things some people want are implemented by third parties (tabbed browsing with Maxthon), but some are not possible, unless Microsoft does them (CSS compliance, alpha transparent PNG's).

    If people can do this without being paid (i.e. Mozilla developers), why can't Microsoft? Perhaps they are, and we will see a new browser before Longhorn that has better standards support.

  • User profile image
    jamie

    sbc wrote:

    You will never get another browser that works the same way as Internet Explorer for Windows. Even IE for Mac works differently - so that shows even Microsoft can't do that.


    let's see what bosworth and beda come up with over at google..

  • User profile image
    sbc

    jamie wrote:
    sbc wrote:
    You will never get another browser that works the same way as Internet Explorer for Windows. Even IE for Mac works differently - so that shows even Microsoft can't do that.


    let's see what bosworth and beda come up with over at google..

    Would be interesting to see. If it was a browser it will not work like IE. Unless Microsoft opens up it's ActiveX, DirectX, Windows etc standards - so non-Microsoft software can work in the same way (even on non-Windows systems) - not going to happen though.

  • User profile image
    Minh

    Loadsgood wrote:
    <rant>
    ...
    So get over it people, either change browsers or shut the F*** up!!!!!!!!!
    ...

    Wow, that's pretty inflamatory language. I'm not sure I like how this forum has become. Please make it stop.

  • User profile image
    Shining Arcanine

    Loadsgood wrote:
    "I want IE to support standards. Waa waa waa!" The only thing that doesn't support standards is website programmers. IE makes standards. So all standards should support IE, not the other way around.


    Please post a link to where Microsoft completely documents its logical alternative and recently updated CSS specification that IE's illogical rendering engine completely supports.

    Seeing Microsoft's specification for the box model should be entertaining as there are are few bugs that can make it partially unusable.

    Tom Malone wrote:
    Except for the standards complience, i thing ie is a great browser, and most of the bad press is uncalled for.


    True but their frustation is understandable.

  • User profile image
    Shining Arcanine

    Minh wrote:
    Loadsgood wrote:<rant>
    ...
    So get over it people, either change browsers or shut the F*** up!!!!!!!!!
    ...

    Wow, that's pretty inflamatory language. I'm not sure I like how this forum has become. Please make it stop.


    I agree.

  • User profile image
    Minh

    Minh wrote:

    Wow, that's pretty inflamatory language. I'm not sure I like how this forum has become. Please make it stop.


    Of course, that's only said in jest. I certainly understand the frustration you get when being hammered consistently. Probably a symptom of a tough political season.

  • User profile image
    Loadsgood

    I'm from Australia and the person who I voted for did not become our new prime minister. But lets just hold on a bit, I haven't said what I said because of prepolitics.

    I made that comment because I was completely frustrated with the amount of users saying how bad IE is. So I have come and stepped in to defend the people who are trying really hard already to make a browser that can fill everyone's wants and needs.

    Oh and Minh? I don't see what you problem you have with the word 'from' Wink

  • User profile image
    phunky_avoc​ado

    FWIW, I used to use Popup-stopper (free edition), but since XP SP2 I find that there is no reason to use it.

    Loadsgood wrote:
    No, my app isn't free - I use NIS '04 (Norton Internet Security 2004) for my popup blocking needs.

    I didn't include popup blocking in the list because IE already has a built in popup blocker (Service Pack 2 update for XP)

  • User profile image
    phunky_avoc​ado

    I'm glad someone raised that point.  I think that most of the people who complain about IE's perceived lack of standards support are web designers and DHTML programmers and not web application developers.

    sbc wrote:

    <snip>
    The whole point of standards is somewhere to aim for. It does not mean you can't define your own (after all innerHTML was a Microsoft invention, but was implemented by other browser as it is so useful).

    The things some people want are implemented by third parties (tabbed browsing with Maxthon), but some are not possible, unless Microsoft does them (CSS compliance, alpha transparent PNG's).
    <snip>

  • User profile image
    Maurits

    phunky_avocado wrote:
    I'm glad someone raised that point.  I think that most of the people who complain about IE's perceived lack of standards support are web designers and DHTML programmers and not web application developers.


    I'm a web application developer and I find myself constantly irked by IE's uneven behavior.  The standards are designed to degrade nicely to different levels of support.

    I predict huge turmoil in the web development community when IE 7 (or Longhorn, or whatever it's called when it's released) comes out.  There will be a battle between IE-isms of today and IE-isms of the future.

    It's ironic that a bunch of rag-tag browsers developed by volunteers and diverse companies (Firefox, Safari, Konqueror...) work better together than do different versions of IE which were all made by the same company.  Standards support works.

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.