Jump to content

Internet Explorer 9 is final


Recommended Posts

When Microsoft announced that they would not support XP any longer, the outcry was enough to change their minds.

Microsoft realized there were still way to many XP machines that ain't that old ( 3 years old here with 2 machines as of this summer)....given the economy people are holding onto machines longer than they used too.

As long as they support IE 8 I've no problem with it and can understand if the versions are different enough where 9 won't run on a XP machine

Link to post
Share on other sites

I switched over to windows 7 with my new laptop, and recently had to utilize my old XP system. I have to say Windows 7 is so much more intuitive, and XP just seems so dated and klunky.

I was a die hard XP user too, and dreaded 7.

Now I hope to never have to go back

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ive been running Windows 7 x64 for close on 2 years now, got it free from MSDN when its was released and Ive never even considered going back to XP even for a second.

I think its a rather smart move of Microsoft to limit it to Windows 7 users, after all Windows XP is comming up to its 10th birthday soon...

As software goes that is the twilight of even die hard users.

Its only tight fistedness that keeps people from changing over, that and the fact people are to scared to make the change... there so used to XP they dont want to swap!!!

As far as reasons go not to swap thats just about the worst I can think of.

I mostly use Opera as opposed to firefix because it is technically a much better and faster browser, however I do use IE x64, I stopped using IE 8 x32 because it run so slowly, however version 9 seems to run much faster, even on flash heavy pages, but then my video cards do support the hardware acceleration using by IE9, something firefix nor Opera does

Same here,I used FFox & found it kept crashing too often,a lot of non-responsive scripts so I switched to Opera 11.Much better & faster.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have tested the IE-9 as it was available few weeks ago as a Release Candidate.

The only thing that is a real improvement over the old IE-8 is the DOWNLOAD MANAGER.

The rest is pure trash: I consider the new shape of the buttons on the right side of the upper bar in IE-9 only a wrong choice. They are too small and few visible.

The new IE-9 do not work with the old WIN XP?

Why this choice?

Only another demential act. The others browsers are compatibles with every operating system.

I see only a lot of confusion in the staff that develop the new versions of Internet Explorer.

PS... I try to remove the IE-9 RC and guess.... the operation is not straightforward as in Firefox or Chrome.

For the one thousand time they have made all complicated.

If you decide of to remove IE-9 is not sufficient to click UNINSTALL, after to have uninstalled the IE-9 is necessary to remove two others updates using the Control Panel.

Finally, after that I have successfully uninstalled IE-9 RC I have found a copy of IE-8 installed.

As to say, You do not like IE-9? Not Problems, there is ever the old IE-8 for You.

PS... the uninstall operation requires a REBOOT of the system...

The reboot is required only to let IE-8 reinstall herself automatically in the Computer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I have tested the IE-9 as it was available few weeks ago as a Release Candidate.

The only thing that is a real improvement over the old IE-8 is the DOWNLOAD MANAGER.

The rest is pure trash: I consider the new shape of the buttons on the right side of the upper bar in IE-9 only a wrong choice. They are too small and few visible.

The new IE-9 do not work with the old WIN XP?

Why this choice?

Only another demential act. The others browsers are compatibles with every operating system.

I see only a lot of confusion in the staff that develop the new versions of Internet Explorer.

Its actually quite the reverse.

They had a clear goal, to keep the uniform look of the browser and keep it in tune with the OS theme, something NONE of the other browsers do on any level

The only way to make any of them look like there part of the same system is to download another add-in.

I dont want my browser to look like its been lifted from another system, I want a uniform look to it, and IE does and always has done.

Ok sure the 32bit version was rather pants, but the 64bit version is a whole lot more stable and its addressing makes it more stable too.

IE9 looks like the OS is was designed for, and if you change the system theme then the browser follows suit.

And as to the RC, it does it like that because its installed and intergrated into the system properly.

Its called heuristics.

They have learnt over time that if you rip out root and branch a piece of software that can, does and has dependants and dependencies then its best to remove them too, or at least change the system to prevent instability after.

Something Apple could do with learning, their iTunes app is really rather a poor show as far as heuristics goes, the same goes for the others.

The reason there is no problem with firefox uninstall is because there is veery little which is dependent, there is few things that are, but the way they are implement their hooks means they will not be invoked if left behind once its removed.

Google Chrome is worse in many ways, as it leaves rather large pieces of other software installed.

Opera isnt so bad, it removes a lot of 3rd party hooks because they install into the Opera keys.

If you remove the executing apps, DLLs, keys and services you will not need to restart the system, there is a walkthrough on Technet and there was a more detailed white paper about it (with regard to developing apps and uninstall rountines) on MSDN, Visual Studio help isnt just about VS programming problems :jaw-dropping:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Its only tight fistedness that keeps people from changing over, that and the fact people are to scared to make the change... there so used to XP they dont want to swap!!!

That is not exactly true.

For businesses remaining with XP, it the only option if corporate software does not operate within Windows 7. Replacing such software can be an expensive exercise in both personnel training and procurement of licenses with downtime due to said training also an issue. Quite often there is no software equivalent available that can replace such legacy business systems.

I still run a utilities PC with XP SP3 installed simply for compatibility.

People also become comfortable within the requirements they set for the use of their PC. Why change over if there is no need to do so?

Edited by madmike
spelling mistake (typed on an XP PC!)
Link to post
Share on other sites
Its actually quite the reverse.

They had a clear goal, to keep the uniform look of the browser and keep it in tune with the OS theme, something NONE of the other browsers do on any level

The only way to make any of them look like there part of the same system is to download another add-in.

I dont want my browser to look like its been lifted from another system, I want a uniform look to it, and IE does and always has done.

Ok sure the 32bit version was rather pants, but the 64bit version is a whole lot more stable and its addressing makes it more stable too.

IE9 looks like the OS is was designed for, and if you change the system theme then the browser follows suit.

And as to the RC, it does it like that because its installed and intergrated into the system properly.

Its called heuristics.

They have learnt over time that if you rip out root and branch a piece of software that can, does and has dependants and dependencies then its best to remove them too, or at least change the system to prevent instability after.

Something Apple could do with learning, their iTunes app is really rather a poor show as far as heuristics goes, the same goes for the others.

The reason there is no problem with firefox uninstall is because there is veery little which is dependent, there is few things that are, but the way they are implement their hooks means they will not be invoked if left behind once its removed.

Google Chrome is worse in many ways, as it leaves rather large pieces of other software installed.

Opera isnt so bad, it removes a lot of 3rd party hooks because they install into the Opera keys.

If you remove the executing apps, DLLs, keys and services you will not need to restart the system, there is a walkthrough on Technet and there was a more detailed white paper about it (with regard to developing apps and uninstall rountines) on MSDN, Visual Studio help isnt just about VS programming problems ;)

The following is my personal opinion and I'd venture to say the opinion of many software developers. Microsoft is one of the worst, if not the worst. The buggiest of products, terrible support, outrageous pricing, exploitable code, and the consistently annoying, frustrating and expensive habit of one day supporting a product, and then the next saying they will no longer support it (this includes their own products too).

First you write the CSS and JavaScript and everything else - then you spend the next week fixing it so it'll work in IE. What about those damn activation windows around embedded Flash objects? I want to nun-chuck the person who decided to do that. And don't get me started on ActiveX. Explorer had 99% of the browser business at one point other than more competitive product available, there is a distinct reason the have lost so much business.

Browser Usage Statistics - Month by Month (http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp)

2011 Internet Explorer Firefox Chrome Safari Opera

February 26.5 % 42.4% 24.1% 4.1% 2.5%

January 26.6 % 42.8% 23.8% 4.0% 2.5%

Edited by Miccara
Link to post
Share on other sites
It's stupefying that in the year 2011 we're still talking about buggy browsers that may or may not work in Windows this or Windows that. I gotta say, I love Safari... It works.

I absolutely hate Safari on my ipad. Not sure there is a decent alternative though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll be trying the new IE9 when I get a chance, just to compare hardware acceleration with the rest of the browsers and eventually supplant IE8 on my win7 box if it goes well. Ever since hearing that Firefox was the most vulnerable browser to exploits in 2009, I've switched to using IE8 and Chrome.

Link to post
Share on other sites
That is not exactly true.

For businesses remaining with XP, it the only option if corporate software does not operate within Windows 7. Replacing such software can be an expensive exercise in both personnel training and procurement of licenses with downtime due to said training also an issue. Quite often there is no software equivalent available that can replace such legacy business systems.

I still run a utilities PC with XP SP3 installed simply for compatibility.

People also become comfortable within the requirements they set for the use of their PC. Why change over if there is no need to do so?

You whole post only proves my point about tightfistedness to be honest.

They dont want, or cant afford to pay a developer to develop software that will run in Win7.

The following is my personal opinion and I'd venture to say the opinion of many software developers. Microsoft is one of the worst, if not the worst. The buggiest of products, terrible support, outrageous pricing, exploitable code, and the consistently annoying, frustrating and expensive habit of one day supporting a product, and then the next saying they will no longer support it (this includes their own products too).

First you write the CSS and JavaScript and everything else - then you spend the next week fixing it so it'll work in IE. What about those damn activation windows around embedded Flash objects? I want to nun-chuck the person who decided to do that. And don't get me started on ActiveX. Explorer had 99% of the browser business at one point other than more competitive product available, there is a distinct reason the have lost so much business.

Browser Usage Statistics - Month by Month (http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp)

2011 Internet Explorer Firefox Chrome Safari Opera

February 26.5 % 42.4% 24.1% 4.1% 2.5%

January 26.6 % 42.8% 23.8% 4.0% 2.5%

The bugs are yours, the construct is theirs...

They provide the framework, the modules etc etc, they work fine, its the code we add that introduces the bugs.

Same with browser compatability. there are several tools, as Im sure you know, that will open your page in each browser, for you to see your work as you create it.

The situation is there are different browsers, that handle your code in different ways...

As that is the situation and you come in after its for you to adapt to it, rather than for it to adapt to you.

You can tune your site to be mostly compatable to a spercific browser or try and please them all (something I think you probably know isnt really possible), however when you code it it isnt the browser tthats the problem, it isnt the browser manufacturer either, its a lack of a single standard...

I mean how many times do you make your pages /strict? ... you already know if you do that it wont work in all browsers, which is again another choice you make.

What software of development framework are you talking about with regard to supporting it one day and dropping it the next (figuretivlly speaking of course)?

Its true they do develop new platforms often, and drop the old ones but it is part of a development path they have chosen, standing still on the same platform is an ill wind that blows nobody any good.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...