Why is Internet Explorer better?

[bulletrick]

Don't get me wrong, guys. I am a Firefox user and really love it. Sometimes, I am just thinking why others are still using IE and refuses to use Firefox.

There are already a lot of threads discussing why Firefox is better, maybe this thread would give IE lovers the chance to air their voices.

[fahad k]

The only reason people are still using IE is because it comes along with Windows plus I guess they arent aware of FF. :(

[dee-u]

Don't get me wrong, guys. I am a Firefox user and really love it. Sometimes, I am just thinking why others are still using IE and refuses to use Firefox.

There are already a lot of threads discussing why Firefox is better, maybe this thread would give IE lovers the chance to air their voices.

There has been discussions on this topic, have a search! :)

[nothingofvalue]

The majority of people who use a computer are not exactly computer literate and also are not really even looking for a new browser. Most of them are not even sure what a browser really is, they just know that they click on the little blue "e" in order to surf the net. As fahad pointed out, IE comes on there computer so they just use it. As far as they know, that is the only way to experience the internet.

[bulletrick]

There has been discussions on this topic, have a search! :)

Yep. But most of them are for Fox users to say why it is better. This thread is for IE users to say why IE is better.

Let them talk why IE is better.

For Fox users, if possible, please avoid posting the "goods" of Fox. Hehe. We already know them. I want to hear the "goods" of IE in the point-of-view of IE lovers.

[gigemboy]

nooooooooooooooooooo! not another one...

[bulletrick]

If there is already a thread by IE users saying the good side of IE, please give the link.

[Ideas Man]

Who cares, I use IE, and I CHOOSE to use IE. I am not going to be told what to do by a bunch of brainless Borg like "USE FIREFOX" people just because they have been put under the spell. For some people, IE is quite good, that's THEIR choice, what really ticks me off is the constant hammering of "use firefox", "IE suxors" etc. etc. whenever IE or any web browser is discussed, a bunch of people who act like the Borg and run under the notion that "Resistance is futile, you will be assimilated" crop up and don't shutup. Believe it or not, FIREFOX is NOT that good! It's over-hyped by people who have a hatred towards Microsoft, and the sheep who follow them. I will admit, there are features that are lacking in IE, but I don't go around whining whenever anyone says "I need help with IE" that they should be using firefox, these people make the browser look stupid, like they have NFI what they are on about, just constantly chanting the same lines over and over again.

So, ENOUGH IS ENOUGH, why, oh why over the internet do we have to have these ridiculous threads that end up turning into grounds to assimilate any free thinkers who either don't have firefox or even think a tad negative towards it?

[bulletrick]

Hey, I have a good idea. What if instead of just saying, "Use Firefox!", we should say, "If you are not happy with your browser, use Firefox!" :D

[Ideas Man]

Nah, I'd prefer it if it ceased altogether, it might have been alright when it first came out, but now it's just an annoying, thread hijacking thing.

[RobDog888]

IE 7 Beta 2 came out last week and it still isnt ready for release obviously but it now has alot of "features" that all those FF'ers were saying are the reason FF is better. So now the playing field is leveled as far as features are concerned.

If you want to do a Windows Update then you need to use IE, end of story unless you dont run windows. :D

[RobDog888]

I just had to. :D

http://people.freenet.de/grilkip5/39854-ie7_logo_artikel.jpg

[fahad k]

I want to hear the "goods" of IE in the point-of-view of IE lovers.
This thread wont last long unless RobDogg spams it.

:D

[Hack]

Moved to General Developer

One very large reason that people still use IE is because, in the work place, they are forced to. I'm employeed by one company and am doing onsite developement at another. Both are huge corporations, and both have set IE as the standard. In fact, the computers rolled out to employees are set up in such a way as no other browser is even possible to use.

Someone has already mentioned that fact the many computer users are not computer literate. So, if, because of their company's policy, they use IE at work, it would only seem natural to use it at home simply because they already know how it works.

IBM is the only company that I'm aware of that has made FireFox a standard. As long as companies continue to make IE a standard, most people will continue to use IE.

[szlamany]

I am extremely computer literate ;)

I use IE because my customers use IE.

As a consultant it is my job to be an expert in the products my customers use - that's why I've been successful as a software developer owning my own software house since 1986.

I've got junior programmers that cannot stand the look of XP - set their PC's back to classic mode. What a huge mistake that is.

It doesn't matter what is better or what is worse - it's all about what is used by the majority of people.

[Hack]

I use IE because my customers use IE.
it's all about what is used by the majority of people.Amen and Amen :thumb:

[Invincible]

I've got junior programmers that cannot stand the look of XP - set their PC's back to classic mode. What a huge mistake that is.



Can you elaborate on why a choice of theme can be a huge mistake?

[bulletrick]

Can you elaborate on why a choice of theme can be a huge mistake?

Maybe because they are a consulting firm, they need to know what and how customers use their software.

Not using the default theme of XP can be a mistake because the system usage might have differences when using the classic style.

[szlamany]

Can you elaborate on why a choice of theme can be a huge mistake?Exactly as bulletrick said - you want to develop for the customer base - you want to know exactly what a color you select or a frame you make looks like to your customers.

You want MY COMPUTER where it belongs - you want the look and feel to match what you customers are using.

XP got all round and curvy - prior win's were all boxy and sharp. Subtle differences in the size of the task bar - these are real issues...

Retaining a connection to a nostalgic old version of something has absolutely no business-legs to stand on.

Getting used to OUTLOOK 2003 was difficult. WORD 2003 with the "reading panel" - that one I had to turn off because it destroys proper pagination - otherwise I would have left it turned on.

[penagate]

If you want to do a Windows Update then you need to use IE, end of story unless you dont run windows
Auto updates don't need any browser...

[szlamany]

Some of my clients use a product called MIND MANAGER - very nice graphical "project planning and tracking" tool.

I don't know what else it interfaces with - but it interfaces with OUTLOOK and IE. It's got toolbar buttons added right up top - easily can grab an e-mail or whatever from a standard-MS product and incorporate it into the "project plan".

There is a reason MS is the #1 company - it's all the thousands of ISV's and even bigger development shops that embrace these basic tools and utilize them so that there customers have a 100% integrated experience.

Linux? Why? FF? Why? Some google-version of OFFICE products? Why? There are so many applications needed by the users of the world, why decide to re-write OFFICE? What kind of business model is that? Investors too dumb to realize that in the long run all they did was fund some developers having a good time!

[Invincible]

Exactly as bulletrick said - you want to develop for the customer base - you want to know exactly what a color you select or a frame you make looks like to your customers.



But that is the same when you develop a web page. You check develop it checking it in your favorite browser. But when you get closer to the finish line you test it out in more browsers so you are sure it works in all of them. The same can be done with a theme too. After all, it is just a team. It is not like I am developing all my web pages checking them every other second in IE, just because 60% of my users use IE.

I think you are completly wrong when you call a choise of theme a huge mistake, as long as you make sure it works for everyone before release.

[szlamany]

I think you are completly wrong when you call a choise of theme a huge mistake, as long as you make sure it works for everyone before release.I'm not sure what size clients you have - but we have customers with 1000+ PC's over dozens of buildings - wan/lan - extreme size enterprise applications.

My statements are related to the experience I live.

Most of my customers IT departments lock down as much as possible - so that the clerks, administrators, teachers - whoever - using the system are having the exact same experience.

That's a real-world business requirement.

They have help-desk teams of 4 or 5 people to support these operations.

That requires a standard.

Hearing that IBM adopted FF still means they have a standard. They didn't say, oh let's just add another option for our users. They carefully considered the ROI of making this choice. I'm not in the minds of these people - I cannot imagine what made then go this way - but I'm sure the ROI was #1 consideration.

When I go over to one of my junior developers desks and they have a classic theme on - and I cannot find where RECENT DOCUMENTS are - then they have lessened the productivity of the office. That costs $$'s.

[penagate]

Linux? Why? FF? Why? Some google-version of OFFICE products? Why? There are so many applications needed by the users of the world, why decide to re-write OFFICE? What kind of business model is that? Investors too dumb to realize that in the long run all they did was fund some developers having a good time!
You have to realise, not everything is about the best way to make money. The three products you mentioned operate under a completely different business model to Microsoft. I could say they decided to "re-write" Office because Office is a bloated heap of crap, but that would not help very much. No, the three ones you listed just happen to be open source. People can learn from them, people can contribute to make them better, and anyone can use them for free. It is a community effort, not a way for some giant corporation to get richer; which, no matter how good or bad their products are, is all they stand for. I think you have misunderstood the very principle behind open source. The developers might have had a good time, they might not, but they did it for a clear reason.

[Hack]

You have to realise, not everything is about the best way to make money.It darn sure is if you are a commerical developer!

[penagate]

None of the products mentioned are commercial.

[Invincible]

I'm not sure what size clients you have - but we have customers with 1000+ PC's over dozens of buildings - wan/lan - extreme size enterprise applications.



We are 8000 people working here. We have costumers all over the world. Now you know.

An OS or theme or a language is just a tool. Nothing more, nothing less.

[szlamany]

FF becomes commercial to IBM when they adopt it...

LINUX become commercial when one of my school districts puts it into the network as a sort of gateway for outside users to TELNET into old mainframes...

As soon as you add a "tool" like this to your setup you support costs increase.

And it is all about money - what else can it be about? Cost of implementation and the return on that investment can drive a business out of business.

[szlamany]

We are 8000 people working here. We have costumers all over the world. Now you know.

An OS or theme or a language is just a tool. Nothing more, nothing less.With an organization that size don't you have an IT department that dictates certain aspects of what a user can do?

[tr333]

IBM is the only company that I'm aware of that has made FireFox a standard.
The French police have also moved to firefox (and possible Mozilla Thunderbird).

[Invincible]

With an organization that size don't you have an IT department that dictates certain aspects of what a user can do?


There is some apps that can't be used because because of security and bandwith problems, like P2P apps and games..:) but you are free to chose the OS you want. I have colleagues here who use Windows in many different flavours, Macs, many different Linux versions, *nix, FreeBSD, Solaris, and so on. Doesn't matter as long as they are all pulling in the same direction.

The IT department just turn off attacmhments and ZIPs and stuff like that every time there is a new Virus out there, and there is no fix for it yet. They are not there to block us but to protect us. Only the fantasy can stop us. ;)

[RobDog888]

Ok, I am awake now. :D

IE is not popular because of companies that "force" users to use it. IE is even popular with consulting firms like where I used to work. Only the boss used it and everyone else used IE, including the developers and IT support staff.

FF'ers like FF because it has more bells and whistles and that makes them think its better. Sure there are some rendering differences but the net is still predominantly IE. You cant say that everyone is forced to use it. Its avaliable for free just like FF so it could be that IE is more stable and has more of a history the FF. People trust IE as its written by MS and who else would know how better to take advantage of all Windows has to offer then MS?

[Invincible]

Ok, I am awake now. :D



IE is even popular with consulting firms like where I used to work. Only the boss used it and everyone else used IE,



Are you sure you are awake?

[Invincible]

....who else would know how better to take advantage of all Windows has to offer then MS?



Doesn't mean they know how to take advantage of the Internet...which IE is a proof of...;)

[Hack]

Ok, I am awake now. :D

IE is not popular because of companies that "force" Not popular with who?

95 to 99% of the non-IT people I know and/or work with could absolutely give a rats behind what they use as long as it gets them to where they want to go.

[RobDog888]

I am saying that even if "some" companies force a standard of IE that this is not why its popular. If that was true then why dont we see more companies force their employees to use FF? I dont think you will see too many companies doing that. Sure they will be a few but nothing signifigant.

Right, most users are basic users and dont care which is best only that they work.

[Hack]

Right, most users are basic users and dont care which is best only that they work.Bingo!!!!

I was doing some reading on Firefox the other night. As I've mentioned in other threads, I think I'm going to download it and install on one of my PCs at home to check it out. While I was reading my wife came over and sat down and, like all wifes, wanted to know what I was doing.

I explained what I planned on doing and she asked me to explain to her, in terms she could understand, what benefits Firefox has over IE for a non-computer person. I couldn't give her any answers.

[RobDog888]

One additional point is that the bells and whistles also play a signifigant part in getting an IE user to switch to FF. Not a valid reason to me for a switch.

[penagate]

One additional point is that the bells and whistles also play a signifigant part in getting an IE user to switch to FF. Not a valid reason to me for a switch.
What bells and whistles?

[RobDog888]

The dumb FF extensions. FF'ers seem to love them more then the browser itself.

[ComputerJy]

The dumb FF extensions. FF'ers seem to love them more then the browser itself.
So...
What's wrong with that?

[Ideas Man]

The dumb FF extensions. FF'ers seem to love them more then the browser itself.
That's because without them, the browser is worse than anything else out there. I've always said, FF offers nothing IE doesn't, there have been ad blockers etc. out for IE for many, many years, hell, in 1999 I had an ad blocker for IE, and for some reason it's one of the biggest reasons people use FF. FF doesn't come with it, you need to extend it to do it, so on it's own, yet again it offers nothing extra.

The other is themes, now themes are quite stupid for a browser, they offer nothing of advantage except to try and make it look better than it is. Not many people constantly theme Windows, so why a browser? It doesn't make sense, all the 'strongest' points for firefox are completely moot because either a) none of them come standard, which is how it should be judged, and b) most of them are novelty extensions that might be good at first, but you slowly get sick to death of.

[penagate]

So you're saying IE doesn't come with ad blockers either? :)

That's the whole point of extensions. Fx provides the bare bones essentials and you can extend it as much as you like.

I don't see how you can be justified in saying it's "worse than anything else out there" without extensions. It does at least everything that IE does when both are in stock configuration. The rendering engine is one of the best, if not the best, at W3C standards support. Mozilla have a quicker turnaround time for fixes and releases. Honestly I cannot see why you would say IE is "better" overall. I'd love to know why anyone would pick IE but so far all the pro-IE or anti-Firefox arguments I have seen are opinions - no hard statements that spell out "THIS is why IE is better than Firefox".

I think Hack's made the best points so far, people don't like to change when they don't know why they should, people are forced to use IE in a workplace, and many people just don't care, after all, it's just a browser.

[Ideas Man]

That's the point, IE does that too, whether you choose to use them or not is up to you. And yes, I am saying it doesn't come with an adblocker, so what. If Microsoft was to include one, it would infuriate many companies to no end, some of which are their partners, and doing so would require ad companies to become more crafty in how they deliver their ads to circumvent the blocker.

I also never said IE was better overall, there are points about it I don't like, but I will not register to the idea that FF is some almighty lord the way many on the internet act about it. It's all about choice, and the problem isn't why do people use IE, it's why can't people who use firefox respect people's choices to use IE? If you say you choose IE, you like IE or anything positive towards IE, they sit there and bite your head off for doing so, then they insult your ideas and rave on and on and on and on and on about why you should be using FF that it's a joke.

[RobDog888]

So...
What's wrong with that?
Whats wrong? Well would you spend $10,000 on a paint job for your car or spend the same on repairing the engine so it runs strong and fast?

[penagate]

Fair enough. Likewise, I dislike it when people slag off things, or promote them, without any valid reasoning. People promote Firefox because it's still not all that widely known in the mainstream, it does have advantages, and yes it's another choice. If anyone does not respect someone's choice then they're taking it too seriously. It's not the end of the world :) In fact I'd say the wars between browsers actually help both of them improve, we're seeing new features and improvements come on to IE now because of pressure from other, newer browsers, and that's a good thing.

[Ideas Man]

Yeah, but there's a difference between promoting it, and bringing it up all the bloody time.

[RobDog888]

So if most people dont caare as they see it as just a browser then that is even more of a reason NOT to use FF. IdeasMan stated that after a while they will get tired of the toy extensions and its again nothing more then a basic browser. If your running Windows then why in the heck wouldnt you want to use a browser that is also written by the authors of Windows?

If you have a Ferrari and needed to get a replacement part would you want a china made part or the original Ferrari part? I know I owuld want the Ferrari part 100% of the time.

The browser wars are great but in moderation. It has brought about competition and that is where the consumer benefits from - new features, imporovements, and better performance.

[penagate]

Rob, by your logic, no-one would ever want to run Windows software that wasn't made by Microsoft, if there was a MS equivalent available.

Didn't MS go to court a while back over something along those very lines? :)

[Merri]

The dumb FF extensions. FF'ers seem to love them more then the browser itself.

Although that is generalizing too much: many users who just want a browser that works and does the job don't need extensions. I'm actually one of the users without any extensions. Firefox just annoys me far less than IE, I don't need to really think about the browser while I'm using it.


Oh, I think Finland broke 40% usage for Firefox a while ago. That means IE usage is well below 60%. And that means Firefox might be more mainstream browser than IE by the end of the year.

[RobDog888]

Rob, by your logic, no-one would ever want to run Windows software that wasn't made by Microsoft, if there was a MS equivalent available.

Didn't MS go to court a while back over something along those very lines? :)
:lol: Yup and I believe they won too.


@Merri: I hear what your saying but I just dont like it when all you ever hear about Ff is how many extensions it has or such. Your probably one of a very small few that try to focus on the meat of the browser and not its eye candy.

[Merri]

You just don't like some of the people who like Firefox, thus you rate the browser by that. I do that myself partly with Linux: although that is only a very minor reason, I have better reasonings for that as well (as some Linux fanboys seem to be very interested in trying to convert me). But in total, I think you push Firefox far too down based on the actually few users who like the candy and keep mentioning it all the time. That's the same what happened with IE in the past, though: it had more candy than Netscape, but eventually all the good things compared to Netscape made everyone use IE (although the fact "it came with the box" attitude helped Microsoft a good bit). Whichever way you look at it, there really is no real good reason to use IE compared to Firefox and Opera and the other modern browsers. In a way IE has become Netscape.

[tr333]

one of the main reasons why i prefer to not use IE is because of the tight integration with the OS. If there is a major security flaw with IE it can affect the whole system, while a flaw in a standalone browser has much less chance of being critical to the system. I also dislike the fact that ActiveX cannot be disabled in IE6 and below, since i consider it to be a major security risk for the "average user" that doesnt understand techno-speak. i heard that IE7 includes an option to disable ActiveX, which should be good. The only reason i have to use activeX over the internet is with WindowsUpdate. if windows had a built-in update mechanism similar to OSX, then there would be much less dependance on ActiveX.

[RobDog888]

Well only time can tell if IE will become Netscape but Netscape didnt keep up with the trends and fel behind market demands. At least IE is finally listening and coming out with the new version that will have the "candy" that is so desperately wanted.

[penagate]

Just use automatic updates.

And you can disable activeX in IE 6. CP -> Internet options -> Security -> Custom Level. No ActiveX or Javascript runs on my computer without me explicitly authorising it.

[tr333]

The dumb FF extensions. FF'ers seem to love them more then the browser itself.
when you have extensions such as WebDeveloper, Sage and BugMeNot i would not call them 'dumb'.


(I also notice that IE has zero (0%) support for the gopher protocol. :afrog: )

[tr333]

Just use automatic updates.
that only works for critical updates.

[RobDog888]

I think that post is being requoted the most on this page :)

I only mean that you FF'ers love the extensions more the the browser alone. I wouldnt buy a car solely based upon it having a really cool air freshener hanging from the rear view mirror.

[penagate]

that only works for critical updates.
Hmm. Didn't know that.

As for extensions, I couldn't give a toss personally. The web developing extensions are very useful but I'd still use Fx if it didn't have them because I find it a superior base platform.

[RobDog888]

Hmm. Didn't know that.

As for extensions, I couldn't give a toss personally. The web developing extensions are very useful but I'd still use Fx if it didn't have them because I find it a superior base platform.
And that should be the sole reason to ever use, buy or promote a product that you trust and believe in. :)

[Merri]

Well only time can tell if IE will become Netscape but Netscape didnt keep up with the trends and fel behind market demands.

Netscape fell because they didn't have the resources (money) to keep up with Microsoft in development. That pushed Netscape to consider open source and thus Mozilla was created. They started working on Gecko which is superior to Trident (IE's rendering engine). Netscape's biggers failure was with the rendering engine that just wan't up to the par with IE, not to mention the other general browser features.

Now the same applies to IE. IE has almost all the same problems Netscape had when it fell. The new version is still too far away and when IE7 comes out we're almost ready for Firefox 2 and maybe Opera 10... which then are two-three major versions away from the level IE7 is targetting to at the moment (by overall comparison). IE's market share keeps going down and it might go too low before IE7 is out; a lot will depend on the final IE7. But I just don't see a successful future for IE7, atleast not to the level IE did with Netscape. The other browsers just are good enough to fight back and keep their existing users.



Edit: As additional note, I think no browser should get too big marketshare on the Internet. I'd worry if Firefox went over 80%. That won't happen (atleast it is very unlikely), but when there are more browsers out there, web developers understand their responsibility better and we get better sites that work on all browsers.

[Ideas Man]

(I also notice that IE has zero (0%) support for the gopher protocol. :afrog: )

What kind of argument is that? Who or what actually uses gopher? I've never seen anything in all my time on the internet specifically require it, it's dead, hence why in IE7, it's removed, it's a redundant protocol.

[tr333]

What kind of argument is that? Who or what actually uses gopher? I've never seen anything in all my time on the internet specifically require it, it's dead, hence why in IE7, it's removed, it's a redundant protocol.
it wasnt meant to be an argument. (notice the frog...)

[tr333]

I think that post is being requoted the most on this page :)

I only mean that you FF'ers love the extensions more the the browser alone. I wouldnt buy a car solely based upon it having a really cool air freshener hanging from the rear view mirror.
on my mac, i dont use the included browser (safari) but instead choose to use another (Camino) because it has a better rendering engine. (even though safari has passed acid2).

[ComputerJy]

That's because without them, the browser is worse than anything else out there. I've always said, FF offers nothing IE doesn't, there have been ad blockers etc. out for IE for many, many years, hell, in 1999 I had an ad blocker for IE, and for some reason it's one of the biggest reasons people use FF
Ad Blocker isn't same as popup blocker
I use IE frequently and I can tell you there are no AdBlockers for IE

[Hack]

I use IE frequently and I can tell you there are no AdBlockers for IEAin't that the truth, but, like with most things that are annoying in life, you learn to deal with it so it becomes only a fairly minor issue.

[ComputerJy]

I mean come on
If microsoft started HTML we'd be buying tags for our pages

[Ideas Man]

Yes there is an ad blocker, or at least there was. I can't recall what it was called, but it had a little yellow circle with a plus and a minus sign for it's icon, the problem was, website developers ultimately got around it and it became useless.

Please understand, firefox has not invented anything new really, it's all on borrowed ideas/themes, hell, the rendering engine isn't even unique, it's NETSCAPE's engine, w/o that, it wouldn't even exist. Tabs did NOT originate in firefox, I'd seen them way before in things like the MSDN Library had (and still does) have them, VS.NET had them, opera had them, firefox is nothing special, and just because firefox came and these extensions came with them, doesn't mean there was no prior work.

[ComputerJy]

Nobody said FF invented tabs, it's just an open source web-browser that enables you to create extensions to improve usability

[ComputerJy]

Whats wrong? Well would you spend $10,000 on a paint job for your car or spend the same on repairing the engine so it runs strong and fast?

How about getting both for free?!
FF is free, most of extensions and themes are free...Why wouldn't I!!

[Ideas Man]

Nobody said FF invented tabs, it's just an open source web-browser that enables you to create extensions to improve usability
You'd be suprised how many firefox fanboys have this idea in their heads.

[ComputerJy]

You'd be suprised how many firefox fanboys have this idea in their heads.
They have the idea that FF is the first browser to use tabs. and that's true since FF is Netscape's dearest son

[Ideas Man]

Ad Blocker isn't same as popup blocker
I use IE frequently and I can tell you there are no AdBlockers for IE

I'm well aware of the differences between the two.

Here's a little program I used called AdSubtract (http://www.intermute.com/products/adsubtract.html) so, you were saying......?
Mind you, this has been out since like 98 or 2000, so this is waaaaaay before the time of any firefox extension. Granted it's not free, but in it's time, it was a godsend.

[Merri]

With browsers, not free = not worth it, since can get it free for other browsers.

So, Ideas Man, you claim Firefox without extensions is poorer than IE. Can you back up this claim with something that has some flesh on it? What makes this opinion true? Because I'm using Firefox without extensions and I find it far better than IE (my opinions are backed up in various posts I've already written in several threads, not hard to find them).

[ComputerJy]

With browsers, not free = not worth it, since can get it free for other browsers.

So, Ideas Man, you claim Firefox without extensions is poorer than IE. Can you back up this claim with something that has some flesh on it? What makes this opinion true? Because I'm using Firefox without extensions and I find it far better than IE (my opinions are backed up in various posts I've already written in several threads, not hard to find them).
I'm not an IE fan but it is the standard for most sites

[penagate]

They have the idea that FF is the first browser to use tabs. and that's true since FF is Netscape's dearest son
Netcaptor is widely credited with being the first web browser to use the tab model.

[Ideas Man]

No, what I'm saying is all these things that are supposed to be firefox unique, do exist for IE. I never said that it was a better deal, and not free does not automatically equal not worth it for web browsers. Back in the day of dial-up, this actually was worth the money, any extra bits you could get from not getting ads was beautiful.
Now fast forward to today, we still have ads, but broadband is also a major player in the market, IMO, although they are nice, they aren't entirely required. I don't mind ads in general, they fund the sites I like (like VB forums ;) ), they all seem to load asynchronously with the page, so it doesn't hinder page speed, and they aren't always obtrusive, there are the occasional ones that really tick you off, but regular ones, I don't mind. Of course that's ME, some people can't stand them period, and that's OK, to reiterate, what I was saying was the 'major' selling points for ff aren't unique, they do exist for IE, whether they're free or not, that's another story.

The only real difference is that ff has people developing extensions just for the fun of it, IE doesn't really. I don't know why this is, maybe it's seen as something that you simply don't touch I don't know, but the foundations are there for it to be done, it is possible if you are willing and demanding.

[ComputerJy]

Netcaptor is widely credited with being the first web browser to use the tab model.
so..
I didn't say FF is the first tab-browser!!!
Another thing... we're talking about free browsers

[Merri]

I'm not an IE fan but it is the standard for most sites

Define "most". How many sites you can find each week that do not work with non-IE browser? I tend to find about one such site each month when I'm not looking a collected list of such sites. A lot of sites are being made Firefox compatible and at the same time other browsers compatible, often just sending feedback is enough to let the changes happen. All Finnish banks are already Firefox and Opera friendly, for example.

[penagate]

so..
I didn't say FF is the first tab-browser!!!
Another thing... we're talking about free browsers
It would appear from the post I quoted that you did, although that has absolutely no bearing upon my statement, and also Netcaptor is freeware. So don't be so quick to retaliate next time.

[ComputerJy]

It would appear from the post I quoted that you did, although that has absolutely no bearing upon my statement, and also Netcaptor is freeware. So don't be so quick to retaliate next time.
Buy NetCaptor Pro Now - It's Fast, Easy, and Risk-Free

it's the first line in red bold texthttp://noteme.com/vb_extension/smilies/angel2.gif

[ComputerJy]

Define "most". How many sites you can find each week that do not work with non-IE browser? I tend to find about one such site each month when I'm not looking a collected list of such sites. A lot of sites are being made Firefox compatible and at the same time other browsers compatible, often just sending feedback is enough to let the changes happen. All Finnish banks are already Firefox and Opera friendly, for example.

It's not that they don't work, they just doesn't look the way they should look..
Another thing I don't just open web-sites to check if they work on FF. But most sites on my bookmarks doesn't display correctly on FF

[ComputerJy]

It's becoming a habit for me to start new pages in this thread

[penagate]

Buy NetCaptor Pro Now - It's Fast, Easy, and Risk-Free

it's the first line in red bold texthttp://noteme.com/vb_extension/smilies/angel2.gif
Yes, there is a Pro version and then there is a free version... ;)

[ComputerJy]

Yes, there is a Pro version and then there is a free version... ;)

Ah,, Come on... The free version doesn't have full features.. ;)
anyway this thread dicusses IE not netcaptor :p

[Ideas Man]

This thread, like any IE vs Firefox thread if going off course, and most likely won't reach a good conclusion, I predict some fighting if it continues much past this point.

[szlamany]

Don't get me wrong, guys. I am a Firefox user and really love it. Sometimes, I am just thinking why others are still using IE and refuses to use Firefox.

There are already a lot of threads discussing why Firefox is better, maybe this thread would give IE lovers the chance to air their voices.You have all gone hugely off topic here.

The question posted was Why is Internet Explorer better?

There was a thread a week or so ago about FF - if you want to banter on about freeware and mozilla and opera - go back to that thread.

Those who have posted about IE and why it is "better" made very good points (sorry to use that term - certainly don't want to debate which is "better" - very subjective). If you want to debate those points - this thread is appropriate.

[Invincible]

I explained what I planned on doing and she asked me to explain to her, in terms she could understand, what benefits Firefox has over IE for a non-computer person. I couldn't give her any answers.


I even managed to get my fathers new GF over to Firefox when I was back home this christmas..you can really not have done your homework..:D:D:D

[Merri]

Those who have posted about IE and why it is "better" made very good points (sorry to use that term - certainly don't want to debate which is "better" - very subjective). If you want to debate those points - this thread is appropriate.

So, maybe it would be a good time to put all the good points into one post so it would be possible to get back on the topic. It had already been long offtopic when I wrote my first message in this thread.

[Invincible]

At least IE is finally listening and coming out with the new version that will have the "candy" that is so desperately wanted.


When it comes to implementing new standards, they are still way behind. They have fixed the painting. Not much more.

[szlamany]

So, maybe it would be a good time to put all the good points into one post so it would be possible to get back on the topic. It had already been long offtopic when I wrote my first message in this thread.If I had time today I might ;)

But then we are still getting posts now that are not on topic :rolleyes:

[szlamany]

When it comes to implementing new standards, they are still way behind. They have fixed the painting. Not much more.I would venture to say that to the simple consumer, the simple office worker and probably 90% of the IT directors of the world that statement doesn't hold any water. They all believe that MS is king of the world.

[bulletrick]

Please wait for me, guys! I am still writing my lengthy reply! Sorry! :D

[Invincible]

I would venture to say that to the simple consumer, the simple office worker and probably 90% of the IT directors of the world that statement doesn't hold any water. They all believe that MS is king of the world.


What a dumb consumer think, and what technical specifications are can be pretty different. The world would go nowhere if all people in the world would think that the world is perfect as it is right now. No one would create anything new. Why do you think MS is finaly comming with IE 7 now, when they first anounced that they would not come with one before Vista came out. Well simple. It is because people are are making the move to new browsers. And why do they do that? because there is better alternatives out there. So what is so much better with the other browsers. Well, most of the points (as already said) is in the other thread here), but what is so much better with IE? Well, this thread was supposed to be about that, but the ONLY reason I have seen so far in this thread is: "Because our costumers use it". Well, how many pepople surfing the web out there, has cosutmers with browsers to really think about? Not that many I guess. You find a few in this thread since this is a dev forum. But if you asked on the street. Then you wouldn't find that many in %. So if all of them made the switch, what would you have to do then? Well, you also had to do the switch. But would you feel you made the switch to a worse browser? Well, I guess that is up to you to answer, but one thing I can tell you. Popular browsers like Opera and Fx has far much more power under the hood then IE when it comes to XHTML, CSS, and SVG support as well as other new technologies.

[szlamany]

I tried really hard just now to google some statistics about home vs business PC figures - lots of links - too much to read...

But I think the argument stands without stats to back it up anyway.

Typical home user - buys a cheap box from a discount shop - has all the software installed. End-game - they never change a thing on the box - if we are lucky they avoid installing spyware and getting a virus!

Typical office worker - small office - same story as above (it's sad though - isn't it).

Typical office worker - big office - IT controls every step they make. (I work with some shops that don't even put PC's on the desk - all thin-clients running on application servers. They can't even put a screen saver on there desktops!

Typical developer (1% of the PC's worldwide) - 40% are using FF, 60% are using IE.

I'm probably nearly on target with this assessment ;)

[Invincible]

And a year ago 7-8% where using Fx, about 90% IE....see where I am going here..and you are going nowhere????

[bulletrick]

Sorry, guys. I've been out for a while.

Whew! Just a few days and it's already in three pages! :D

Thanks szlamany for reminding them our topic.

See, guys, I am about to be Computer Engineer this April and one thing that I learned from being an Engineer is to derive solutions and decisions from empirical data and if possible, statistics. No opinions, only hard facts.

And, to make a decision for a choice of course of action or product usage, there should be a cost-benefit analysis which can give you more benefits. Cost-effectivity, in short.

I started this thread to see if people can win me back to IE. Hoping to get sensible opinions that can be an empirical data that I can depend on making my decision.

I think the only useful on-topic info I got is the info about IE 7 Beta 2. It is a good idea! Another proof that competition is healthy especially for consumers. If there was no competition, there won't be developers working hard to make their products "better".

Maybe you want to know my story.

I am a former IE user. I don't care about tabs or themes. My friend uses Opera but I didn't even tried installing it on my PC. I didn't see any good reason for me to use Opera.

Tabs? Themes? What the heck. As long as I get my work done, I am fine.

Then, I started to depend more on the Net. More emails, research papers, etc. I was a regular user. Not a big-time web programmer.

But I experienced problems that causes me to have non-value adding activities.

What were those? First, when a SINGLE IE window did not respond (got stuck, hanged, crashed, etc.) of course I will "End Task" that SPECIFIC window. But the problem is: ALL IE windows closes! "Nooooo! My research materials are gone! I forgot to bookmark them!!!"

So, open a new IE window again, go to Google, try to remember the best keyword combination that produced the best results (which can take very long), sort out the search results, then wait for them to download again.

Ok, I said, maybe because I have a slow PC (500Mhz PIII, 128MB RAM). Ok. I understand. IE is forgivable.

However, when I started to use my friends' computers which are much faster and better equipped with hardware than mine, I experience the same problem.

I said to myself, "Whoa. IE has some issues here..."

Then came Fox. I started to use it with v1.2.0. I was using Fox and IE simultaneously and experienced an increase in performance level in the same machine! When a single Fox window crashes, the system and other Fox windows are not affected.

So one good reason why I am staying with Fox. Here is another one.

I went to work last June in a company using very old systems (Windows 98) with very low performance machines. How low? Try opening 4 or 5 windows of MS Word and you will get MS Word windows with a lot of disfigured graphics with white spots and rectangles.

I tried to play with Fox and installed it that machine. One time, I was using Fox and was carried away. I forgot about the slowness of the PC and accidentally opened 4 MS Word windows with a Fox window with about 3 tabs!

The MS Word windows began to display erroneously again, but to my surprise, Fox is still alive and kickin'!

This incident really made me stick to Fox.

CONCLUSION: There should be an independent, non-biased study on which is better, or in Engineering lingo, which is more cost-effective.

The study should contain what errors or major bugs each have and how it affects our work. AND which browser really have those HELPFUL features that makes the user's lives easier and more effective.

My next posts would be quoting some of the posts here that I think should be answered. Please watch out for them! :D

[szlamany]

And a year ago 7-8% where using Fx, about 90% IE....see where I am going here..and you are going nowhere????You are talking about that last stat I put in 40% using FF and 60% using IE?

That was the "developer" group - 1% of users worldwide ;)

Back to the money aspect - I would not attempt to market to this group for anything.

The money is in the first 3 groups.

btw - I'm not trying to go anywhere. I'm in the group of users that could care less what my "surfing experience" is. I develop VB and SQL code 40 to 60 hours a week. I use an internet tool to work in VBFORUM (60% of the time), google for help (30% of the time) and check my bank balance (10% of the time) :p

[bulletrick]

Linux? Why? FF? Why? Some google-version of OFFICE products? Why? There are so many applications needed by the users of the world, why decide to re-write OFFICE? What kind of business model is that? Investors too dumb to realize that in the long run all they did was fund some developers having a good time!

Sorry, szlamany. I happen to be an open source advocate, too.

Rewriting the software to convert them to "free" software" (http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html) is not really a "business" model. It is more like charity, an outreach program, or caring for the poor, whatever term.

They rewrite them to HELP those who can't procure the best but the most expensive. I can say that MS Office has better functionality than other OFFICE applications but, the question is, can I afford them? What's the use of having the best features if I can't use them?

People can learn from them, people can contribute to make them better, and anyone can use them for free. It is a community effort, not a way for some giant corporation to get richer; which, no matter how good or bad their products are, is all they stand for. I think you have misunderstood the very principle behind open source. The developers might have had a good time, they might not, but they did it for a clear reason.

Exactly.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

The dumb FF extensions. FF'ers seem to love them more then the browser itself.

If you had read my story, when I first installed Fox, I did not know about those so I just stuck to the default installation features, but still I
experienced the difference.

IdeasMan stated that after a while they will get tired of the toy extensions and its again nothing more then a basic browser. If your running Windows then why in the heck wouldnt you want to use a browser that is also written by the authors of Windows?

If you had read my story, I did not consider the "toys". I am more with the performance.

Why would not I want that browser because it was made by the same author of Windows? If I have a Nike shoes, should I wear Nike socks? What if Nike socks sucks? (Sorry for the pun..) I would still use the shoes but the socks is not for me even though it also came from the "authors" of the shoes.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

As additional note, I think no browser should get too big marketshare on the Internet. I'd worry if Firefox went over 80%. That won't happen (atleast it is very unlikely), but when there are more browsers out there, web developers understand their responsibility better and we get better sites that work on all browsers.

Good point!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please understand, firefox has not invented anything new really

They don't have too. They are just improving the features.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

you claim Firefox without extensions is poorer than IE. Can you back up this claim with something that has some flesh on it?

Yep. This goes out to EVERYONE: Empirical data please.

[bulletrick]

Need to sleep first guys. I might be replying after about 17 hours. :D

[szlamany]

Sorry, szlamany. I happen to be an open source advocate, too.

Rewriting the software to convert them to "free" software" (http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html) is not really a "business" model. It is more like charity, an outreach program, or caring for the poor, whatever term.

They rewrite them to HELP those who can't procure the best but the most expensive. I can say that MS Office has better functionality than other OFFICE applications but, the question is, can I afford them? What's the use of having the best features if I can't use them?I am of the belief that PC's, or computers for that matter, became a reality for home users because of corporations. If IBM and MS didn't make the PC and DOS a reality we would still only have COBOL and mainframes (I've been doing this since 1980 - so I've got a pretty good scope on the past 25 years of computer growth). Sure hobbyists would play with Altair machines - but that would be like CB radio/shortwave and not having cell-phones.

Closed-source development for corporate clients drove this PC world forward. Sure it was for a capitalistic end goal - but I cannot fault those companies for that.

Companies like closed-source - it equates in their minds (whether it's true or not - it does) to support and continuity. And the people sitting on the board of directors making decisions consider that the most important aspect of any business decision - whether it be software, hardware, what long distance phone company to use, who's going to pave the new parking lot, who's going to cut the hedges...

So - in the long run - I do not see your being an open source advocate swaying the IE-BETTER discussion.

[Invincible]

You are talking about that last stat I put in 40% using FF and 60% using IE?

That was the "developer" group - 1% of users worldwide ;)


Did you try to make a statment now? Because you didn't. As I said, YES; you will find a lot of those people here since this is a dev forum. And that was my point. You are not representativ for the rest of the group which is 99%. Your likes and dislikes means nothing, since you are controlled by your office and money. But here is news for you. Surfing the web with the browser you want is free. Let the 99% rest of the world know about it, and let them deside if they want to have black and white TV, or the colours back.



btw - I'm not trying to go anywhere. I'm in the group of users that could care less what my "surfing experience" is.

So you finaly realized that...thats what I have been trying to say too...you are talking about having a good grasp of the last 20-25 years, but to be honest it seems like you are stuck in those days. If everyone was like you, not caring, then we would still be back in the old days with COBOL and Mainfraims. Is that your point? You really want to go back there, with radio and no TV, and all that? If that is not your point, you are lousy about argumenting for anything else. The world is moving on, no matter if you like it or not. Deal with it.

[szlamany]

Invincible - why are you being so harsh?

Because I personnally don't care what browser I use doesn't mean I cannot partake in a discussion about a product benefits.

And actually - having a product I've developed running on thousands of PC's right now does make me a representative for the rest of the group. Having that product be responsible for tracking 10's of thousands of students and patients does give my opinion some weight. Having had customers from Anchorage Alaska, southern Arizona and all across the US and Canada does have some bearing.

I am not controlled by my office - I am my office - I am an ISV that has been producing commercial products since 1986. Being in business for 20 years is no small feat - I've had to navigate the downfall of Digital Equipment corporation, survive the Y2K nightmare - embrace VB and MS SQL as a solution for my customers going forward, and craft for them a product that is lightyears ahead of my competition.

With the IT directors I work with we fashion the "best" solutions every day - using state of the art concepts.

About the only thing that has been mentioned so far about IE that I see as a bad mark is the fact that all sessions crash when one freezes up - I consider that type of behavior a huge negative.

[ComputerJy]

Invincible - why are you being so harsh?

Because I personnally don't care what browser I use doesn't mean I cannot partake in a discussion about a product benefits.

And actually - having a product I've developed running on thousands of PC's right now does make me a representative for the rest of the group. Having that product be responsible for tracking 10's of thousands of students and patients does give my opinion some weight. Having had customers from Anchorage Alaska, southern Arizona and all across the US and Canada does have some bearing.

I am not controlled by my office - I am my office - I am an ISV that has been producing commercial products since 1986. Being in business for 20 years is no small feat - I've had to navigate the downfall of Digital Equipment corporation, survive the Y2K nightmare - embrace VB and MS SQL as a solution for my customers going forward, and craft for them a product that is lightyears ahead of my competition.

With the IT directors I work with we fashion the "best" solutions every day - using state of the art concepts.

About the only thing that has been mentioned so far about IE that I see as a bad mark is the fact that all sessions crash when one freezes up - I consider that type of behavior a huge negative.
You are really angry http://noteme.com/vb_extension/smilies/BoomSmilie_anim.gifhttp://noteme.com/vb_extension/smilies/BlueFlagRocket.gifhttp://noteme.com/vb_extension/smilies/AR15firing.gif

[szlamany]

You are really angry I certainly didn't want to come off appearing angry - not sure what you mean...

[Invincible]

Invincible - why are you being so harsh?
.


Because you don't get my points, and you don't answer my questions.


Because I personnally don't care what browser I use doesn't mean I cannot partake in a discussion about a product benefits.
.

True. Never said anything else. Don't know where you got it from. Keep to the facts Mr.


And actually - having a product I've developed running on thousands of PC's right now does make me a representative for the rest of the group. Having that product be responsible for tracking 10's of thousands of students and patients does give my opinion some weight.



Not really. You don't even say if the costumers use their browser at all. On the web page I am working on now, we have a few*10*million hits a month. Can't say that my voice should count more just because of that. But let me break down the consept for you a bit, so you maybe understand my voice a little bit. You are a VB developer if I have understood it right. Do you use any new feautures in VB5-6-.Net that they didn't have in some older versions? Well I guess so. Well, what if 60% of your market didn't have machines that could handle compiled code like that. So you have to downgrade your self to VB4. Even if it was FREE, I repeate FREE for all your costumers to upgrade. Would you still love to do it just because of the money, or would we start to see some frustration?

[ComputerJy]

I pick frustration! :)

[szlamany]

You are a VB developer if I have understood it right. Do you use any new feautures in VB5-6-.Net that they didn't have in some older versions? Well I guess so. Well, what if 60% of your market didn't have machines that could handle compiled code like that. So you have to downgrade your self to VB4. Even if it was FREE, I repeate FREE for all your costumers to upgrade. Would you still love to do it just because of the money, or would we start to see some frustration?I must clarify - I don't do this for the money - my joke about using a browser 10% of the time to check my bank balance was just that - and trying to point out that most users probably use a browser for such mundane daily activities...

The .Net framework is free to download - and my customers will be slow to do that - so I am restrained from using new features because of the reality of the IT departments being able to move quickly. Having one organization, for example, that supports over 1000 PC's, means they have to carefully consider what it is in the silo. I respect that consideration - I cannot fault them for it.

With that said we end up supporting VB6 applications and move slowly toward using VS 2005. The new features in MS SQL 2005 are so incredible that I am chomping at the bit to get my hands on them - all I can do is discuss them in the DB forum here and dream of the day when all my customers finally get MS SQL 2005 on there boxes.

The lowest common denominator is a reality we all live with - whether it be browser capabilities, websites designed for 800x600 monitors - right?

And I do get your points - I'm really just playing devils advocate here. If there is a question you asked of me that I did not answer, please restate it and I'll try my best.

No anger - no frustration ;)

[RobDog888]

Ok, things are getting heated here and partially off topic, so if you guys dont want to see the thread closed or posts deleted then we all need to be respectfull and remember that we are trying to discuss "Why IE is better..." and if it involves the browser wars then should that be a separate thread?

[RobDog888]

I think you brought up a good point szlamany as most internet users are not worries about which browser they use, only if it works and they can get to their favorite site (myspace, google, online banking, etc.). These users are swayed by the FF extensions that make the browser "appear" as better since it has the additional features.

It was also brought up that the development community are the ones making all the whoop-la about FF which is a small percentage of the internet community as a whole.

IE can be viewed as better for the reasons below:
1. Authored by Windows (if your running windows like the majority of systems are)
2. Has more $ behind it for developing new versions.
3. It is not a fad or fly by night company.
4. you guys fill in some more

[Merri]

Where do you pick up this information "FF is used by a small percentage of the Internet community" and "only development community push the noise"? Some facts about how much Firefox has spread (http://www.xitimonitor.com/etudes/equipement13.asp).

Europe: over 20%
Australia: over 18%
North America: over 15%
Worldwide: 11.5% (reported last November by OneStat, it is larger by now)

Firefox has been downloaded over 150 million times from the official sources. Likely there are much more copies out there than that.

This is a bad misinformation you have had here. Firefox couldn't have that big share if only developers used and promoted it. There are millions of regular users who use it. I help several each week with their problems. Age range is wide, I've helped over 70 years old and less than ten years old. There are schools switching to Firefox, there are universities switching to Firefox, there are cities switching to Firefox... this isn't a small percentage like it was over a year ago.

If you ever take a look at SpreadFirefox and ignore the fanboy posts, you'll find out there are a lot of normal people spreading the fire, doing groundwork. Developers couldn't do that, they're mostly too busy with the development ;)

[RobDog888]

Too bad that link is not in English so I can only go off the map. The way it is being presented makes it look like its a virus "spreading" all over but in low percentages. Just because they download it doesnt mean that they are sticking with it. I think we would have to go off of various website hits to determine a more accurate sampling of who is actually using what.

[szlamany]

Even I downloaded FF - but I'm using IE because of it's integration with Mind Manager.

4. Integration with other major corporate products

[RobDog888]

#5. ActiveX support.
#6. You can only get a Windows Update with IE.

[penagate]

Oh no no no. #5 is a major security vulnerability, you can't claim that as an advantage ;)

It's being phased out by none other than MS themselves anyway.

[RobDog888]

Yes it may be but then so could allot of other things too could be considered security issues. Without ActiveX you can not do online virus scans from a number of vendows, do a Windows Update, Office Update, and run a number of other website controls and programs.

In the end, it is a plus when managed correctly.

[penagate]

Windows Update and Oppice Upfate didn't have to need ActiveX, they could work fine without it. It will be disabled by default in IE 7 anyway, so obviously they must be changing the stystem to work without it as majority of users would not know to enable it just for Windows Updaete.

But online vireus scans... to do a virus scan you need acvcess to all the computers files, don't you agree that is a major security risk? It could go through your files, retrieve data, destroy data... many possibilities.

[NoteMe]

I am really sorry if you think I go of topic again. I just wanted to show some things that my teacher showed me 5-6 years ago. And it is still not fixed in IE. I just tested it in IE 7, and can see that it is still not fixed or added to IE. Which proves that IE is holding back the web.

Here is a few examples:
http://www.mozilla.org/projects/mathml/demo/basics.xhtml
writing math formulas on the web is not easy without making a picture. This web page shows a way of doing it. Never seen it before? Reason no one using the technique since IE is holding back the web. This is how it is supposed to look:
http://www.noteme.com/images/ss/math.jpg


This is an other example:
http://www.mozilla.org/start/1.0/demos/eagle-sun.html
You are supposed to be able to both move the sun and the bird. Doesn't work in IE. BUt the funny thing (just look at the pictures for those of you who are just using IE) is that the shadow changes dynamicaly:
http://www.noteme.com/images/ss/bird1.jpg
http://www.noteme.com/images/ss/bird2.jpg

Last example for now:
http://www.mozilla.org/start/1.0/demos/stickies.html
Dynamicaly made notes. You can make new, and move them around. For IE users look here:
http://www.noteme.com/images/ss/notes1.jpg
http://www.noteme.com/images/ss/notes2.jpg



ANd just for fun....CornedBees home page.::D:D:DD:
http://stud3.tuwien.ac.at/~e0226430/base.xhtml



- ØØ -

[RobDog888]

All your noteme links are giving the 404 error.

[NoteMe]

All your 404s are now fixed..:D

[RobDog888]

Yes, so far the rendering engine of FF is about the only thing that I have seen that is a positive for FF'ers. :)

But that is not to say that IE will never catch up or implement a better engine either but as of now (IE 6 and possibly 7) its lacking in its rendering features to include support for some of the standards I suppose.

[szlamany]

I am really sorry if you think I go of topic again. I just wanted to show some things that my teacher showed me 5-6 years ago. And it is still not fixed in IE. I just tested it in IE 7, and can see that it is still not fixed or added to IE. Which proves that IE is holding back the web.
NoteMe - let's bring this statement of yours back into topic.

I'm not expert enough to understand how the issues you mention work...

But why do you think that MS - or IE for that matter - is ignoring handling these issues? Are they part of a standard that MS and the rest of the browser community has agreed to?

[tr333]

IE can be viewed as better for the reasons below:
1. Authored by Windows (if your running windows like the majority of systems are)

i know plenty of people that would consider this a reason to not use windows... but then they wouldn't use anything that isn't licensed under the GPL or a GPL-compatible license. :afrog:

[tr333]

But why do you think that MS - or IE for that matter - is ignoring handling these issues? Are they part of a standard that MS and the rest of the browser community has agreed to?
not sure about microsoft, but the rest of the browser community has agreed to them.

MathML (http://www.w3.org/Math/)
CSS (http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/)
PNG (http://www.w3.org/Graphics/PNG/)
XHTML (http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/#recommendations)

i heard that MS had fixed PNG support in IE7. but that still leaves out most people who don't use it (yet).

[szlamany]

i know plenty of people that would consider this a reason to not use windows... but then they wouldn't use anything that isn't licensed under the GPL or a GPL-compatible license. :afrog:And you feel this has something to do with the topic of this thread in what regard? What part of the "Why is IE Better" does this pertain to?

not sure about microsoft, but the rest of the browser community has agreed to them.
I was looking for a much more technical analysis of the reason - at least historical or specific...

[RobDog888]

To re-iterate, lets keep this thread On-Topic as I would hate to Close it when there are some good points being made backed up with evidence.

So anyone have any more reasons why IE is better? I think we left off at #7?

[nothingofvalue]

I personally don't have much use for most of the firefox extensions. Other than tabbed browsing, I don't really use many of the "bells and whistles" that firefox has. One thing I will say that contributed to why I made the switch is the speed. Firefox will load a page much quicker than IE. I am certainly a Microsoft supporter and realize that despite their image of being the three-hundred pound gorilla, we all owe them for the innovation they have provided.

With that said, the fact of the matter is, Microsoft got lazy with the development of their browser. Since IE is bundled with Windows they could afford to be lazy. However, after many changes to Windows, IE remained fairly unchanged. Now Microsoft is being forced to play catch-up, something they are not accustomed to doing. There is no doubt that the only reason IE 7 is going to have the new features is because of Firefox. In the end, that is exactly what all of us should desire in our free market system. Like firefox or hate it, it is competition and competition forces companies like Microsoft to continue to innovate and we all benefit.

[tr333]

With that said, the fact of the matter is, Microsoft got lazy with the development of their browser. Since IE is bundled with Windows they could afford to be lazy. However, after many changes to Windows, IE remained fairly unchanged. Now Microsoft is being forced to play catch-up, something they are not accustomed to doing. There is no doubt that the only reason IE 7 is going to have the new features is because of Firefox. In the end, that is exactly what all of us should desire in our free market system. Like firefox or hate it, it is competition and competition forces companies like Microsoft to continue to innovate and we all benefit.
great point. without competition, microsoft would have no incentive to upgrade their web browser. if only all browsers would stick to web-standards without "embracing and extending", (IE/Netscape being the main perpetrators) then designing web-pages would be much easier.

disclaimer: Fx also has browser extensions (XUL, etc.), but does not have the same market share as IE.

[NoteMe]

I was looking for a much more technical analysis of the reason - at least historical or specific...


W3C (World Wide Web Consortium) standarizes everything on the web. (X)HTML, CSS, and so on. The inventor of WWW is leading it. He used to work here at CERN, where he and some Technical students like me made the WWW. THen he moved on to W3C to standarize the web, so we can have a web standard. Most browsers follow this standarisation, except IE. They are WAY behind. As I have said a million times by now.

You can read about the history here:
http://www.w3.org/Consortium/history

If you still don't get it. Here is a VB history for you. The standards are like VB 2005 right now. Most browsers stribes to get there. IE does not. ANd have lived on VB 4 standards for a decade, and doesn't seem to even try to catch up. They are getting furuther behind every day that passes by. And they don't even anounce that they want to catch up. The world moves on, IE doesn't follow.


- ØØ

[tr333]

just out of interest, can anyone view the MineHunter demo (http://www.mozilla.org/start/1.0/demos.html) properly in IE? it is a version of minesweeper developed using only Web Standards. I am using a mac computer, and (as expected) it doesn't work in IE:Mac (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Explorer_for_Mac).


When IE:Mac was released it was the most standards-compliant browser available. It also had some great features such as the "Auction Manager" for automatically tracking online auctions (like eBay).

[szlamany]

Noteme - thanks for that info...

Do you have a clue as to why MS feels no need to be a leader in this area?

They lead in other areas - MS SQL Server is one example that I live and breathe every day. For that they go way beyond the ANSI-standard SQL syntax - T-SQL has so much more flavor and depth.

So why does MS neglect the W3C standard?

[penagate]

I think quite honestly the success of the more standards compliant Mozilla took them by surprise. They were overtaken very quickly. Now they are rushing to finish CSS 1 compliance for IE 7 and start work on CSS 2.1 for future versions (beyond 7). Mozilla are already working on CSS 3. IE's Trident rendering engine is very old, and will really need recoding to handle anything newer than CSS 1 and (very) basic 2.1.

Opera has also been more standards compliant for a long time but never had the popularity Firefox does now, at any one time. I guess MS didn't feel they were such a threat.

[mendhak]

Because it doesn't really need to. IE is the most popular browser out there simply because it comes with Windows. In order to reach larger audiences, a web developer only needs to ensure that his site works with IE. This means that IE can loosely follow standards and introduce some of its own, without backlash.

This is a thought from years ago.

The IE team has recognized the need for standards support, and they have now started working towards it.

[szlamany]

Interesting blog

http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2005/04/22/410963.aspx

actually a google for "why does ms ie ignore w3c?" brings up lots of links...

this one is entertaining: http://www.alttags.org/archives/2004/04/29/33/

I know I don't like listening to a grumpy customer I might have tell me how a click in my app should sort a column - or what color might be better for a highlight - I'm glad I don't have to listen to a consortium :eek2:

[penagate]

I can show you some *HTML/CSS code that renders completely differently in Firefox, IE, and Opera. Is that the way the web should be? No, so that's why we have standards in the first place.

That article on alttags.org was actually quite well-written, a lot of good points.

[tr333]

That article on alttags.org was actually quite well-written, a lot of good points.
i agree... but since it was written in april 2004, it is little bit out of date. it mentions that the microsoft website doesnt validate and has no doctype. i can verify that that www.microsoft.com correctly validates as HTML 4.0 Transitional (not sure why they don't use at least HTML 4.01).

[NoteMe]

So why does MS neglect the W3C standard?


I think most points are already covered here already. They don't need to, because everyone is using it. And the same happend back in the days before Netscape. Nothing new happend on the web. Then Netscape came along. And pushed IE furuther. The best thing that has ever happend to the web (at least my point of view). Now the web has been standing still nearly the last 10 years again. And things happen. And once again, MS feels that they need to push forward. Competition is always good. Costumers never benefit from no competition in a market segment. Then nothing new will happen. It is like if there was only one car company. Then we would still all drive around in a T-Ford. Now Fx and Opera is pushing IE again. And the only way they can do that is because they get users. If they had a really great browser but no users. MS would never come out with IE 7 at this point. So as long as there is more then one popular browser out there, one will always be better, and then the next one should try to catch up. Only that way we will go forward in this life.

[szlamany]

And I guess a difference that only just fully dawned on me now - there is not really any money in it.

MS SQL 2005 (for example) has a ROI for MS that is huge - they certainly want to lead on this front.

IE 7/8/9 and so on simply serves the web community.

[NoteMe]

It used to be money in it. Netscape based all it's income from their browser. Then MS did the trick of starting to have IE for free, and then send IE out with Windows. Netscape went from a million dollarcompany based on the income of their browser to ZERO. Their developer didn't get any money anymore. DIdn't know where to get money from. And suddenly no one came to work anymore. After that IE has not pushed forward at all. They had no one to comepte with. Hence no action in that department.

Now it is different. Opera manage to get money out of their browsers. Mozilla, and Fx and so on do it more or less for free. Now the real cometition can start all over again.


- ØØ -

[visualAd]

I stopped using Internet Explorer in 1998, mainly due to the security issues and lack of website control. I realised how much faster web browsing could be when I found myself on a MAC using Safari.

I started off using Netscape and then moved to Friebird which, is now Firefox. On Windows 2000, IE does not allow popup blocking, is slow and most imporantly does not have a tabbed browsing facility.

So I would recommend Firefox. Sorry for being such a brainless BORG ..... ;)

[Merri]

Mozilla, and Fx and so on do it more or less for free.

As a note, Mozilla Corporation has some employees working on Firefox and Thunderbird. They get enough money in various ways to keep it up. They don't need tons of developers like Microsoft though, because open source has shown it works well enough for this kind of project despite most developers don't get paid in money.

But the main point is: there are some centralized developers who take care of the directions and can work on the project in a long term. A common problem in open source projects is that there is a lack of a person who can do it nearly every day in his (or her) life.

[RobDog888]

I just saw this post by NoteMe and though it was good for this thread of giving another reason why IE is better:
There is actualy a "despute" between google and Fx right now. Fx has a bug with memory leaks right now with unused HTTP*** what ever they are called in JS Ajax stuff. Google say they don't have any unused objects of this type on their home page. But for some reason Fx is leaking like a river on their Ajax made pages...:)



- ØØ -

[szlamany]

A common problem in open source projects is that there is a lack of a person who can do it nearly every day in his (or her) life.Which, whether it's true or not, supports a bit of RobDog's 3 points for why IE is better.IE can be viewed as better for the reasons below:
1. Authored by Windows (if your running windows like the majority of systems are)
2. Has more $ behind it for developing new versions.
3. It is not a fad or fly by night company.
I get the same kind of reaction to my shop selling my product to a large enterprise. Some of my competion is big-time companies.

Unfortunately the merits of any product is never measured on it's capabilities alone.

[RobDog888]

Hmm, maybe it may be easier to see why IE is better if we compile a side by side list?

[NoteMe]

I just saw this post by NoteMe and though it was good for this thread of giving another reason why IE is better:


Errr...why? Because they don't follow the same standard when it comes to Ajax as all other browsers do? Or that Fx found a memory leak, and they are fixing it for the next update??


- ØØ -

[NoteMe]

Hmm, maybe it may be easier to see why IE is better if we compile a side by side list?


I don't think it is possible to be honest. Just out of the same reason this thread will not go anywhere, and we will never agree. Because you can say that since it is made by MS, it is a PRO. Then I can say that it isn't and if fact more of a negatie effect.

Then again I can say that Extensions in Fx is really PRO, then you can call them wistles and bells.

It is all about preferences. But the only fact on the table is that Fx is more standarized browser then IE is and has been the last 10 years..and will be the next few years...


- ØØ -

[Merri]

Which, whether it's true or not, supports a bit of RobDog's 3 points for why IE is better.

But you have to notice, as I proved before the problem sentence, this does not affect Firefox as it has paid developers who can spend each day of their life on development and planning :) Open source's advantages are also greater if compared to closed source, but I guess you start saying this goes to offtopic as it has nothing to do why IE is better.


RobDog888: how IE can become better if there is an issue in Firefox? No program can become any better in itself from bugs or problems found in another program.

I find this an issue in these topics: people lose track on what actually makes something better from what it actually has. Comparable better is almost always arguable.


Let's take an example.

IE fanboy says: "IE has ActiveX. This makes IE better than other browsers because they don't have it. ActiveX allows a lot of possibilities and functionality for websites. It is used for Windows updates for example."

Firefox fanboy says: "Firefox doesn't have ActiveX. This makes Firefox secure as ActiveX is known to be a very vulnerable technology and one of the biggest reasons for IE's security leaks. ActiveX only works on IE, it is rarely used and it isn't really a web standard."

A regular user says: "ActiveX? I don't know, I don't care as long as I can do what I need to do. If it is bad for me in some way then I don't want it."

Now, based on this: would ActiveX be a plus or a minus?

I think it is a big minus, because I think this from the point of a Firefox user and a regular user. Is this a biased opinion?

[visualAd]

One could say the same about Firefox extensions and installing untrusted extensions on Firefox can have simialr consequences to running an unknown active x control.

It was for this reason that now, like IE, for the Install dialog to pop up, the extension must be from a trusted srource and, the timed dialog makes sure that you notice the big red letters "UNSIGNED" when you install it.

[RobDog888]

Its all subjective so like you say there is no definitive answer.

But its not "all about preferences" as if it was then the engine could be crappy and have great extensions and it would be considered the best. We know this isnt true and that the basics are what really matter.

FF has made some really good advances in its short lifetime as compared to IE but if something is already done then its easy to copy it and make it better. ;)

ActiveX is a security problem when it comes to the sites that take advantage of naive users by prompting them to install a control when they dont really need to and they do without checking the certificate. Then it goes and does harm to their system and then they hear about all this ActiveX security talk and think its true. I really doubt it that anyone has ever hasd an security issue with any of MS' ActiveX controls they installed.

I see ActiveX as a plus and a minus. It all depends on how its managed. I have never had an issue with it since I dont install things I dont need or arent from reputable sites.

[penagate]

Yea but then people don't set their security settings, go to all sorts of sites without thinking about whether they are "reputable" or not, and unwittingly install all sorts of crap. These aren't just MS controls.

Edit: I'm fairly sure IE, in stock configuration, does not prompt users before running ActiveX controls.

[Merri]

But the problem with ActiveX security issues are that there have been many that don't prompt the user. For example: spyware/malware did get into my computer when I used IE even though I never did anything really wrong. With Firefox this didn't happen anymore and haven't happened although I still browse the same sites. The same has happened to many other users who didn't use IE anymore. ActiveX wasn't the only reason for the spyware problems in itself, but it still causes this kind of problems.

[NoteMe]

For most of my friends exactly that has been the biggest reason for going to Fx from IE. Thanks for reminding me Merri..:)


- ØØ -

[RobDog888]

Well I think its the fact that IE hadnt been developed for the past couple years and FF took the ideas and wants of users and did something about it. Now IE needs to catch up. I wouldnt be surprised to see that IE 7 is just a quick fix to regain some of the market share while they are working on a complete re-write for a future major release.

So I guess it all boils down to the fact that inexperienced or unknowing users are making statements (in general and not in theis thread ;)) about FF being better when its mostly the fact that FF has more of its default settings set better for security.

[Merri]

And some IE users who haven't really read all that much about browsers, their history, how they work and so on claiming it is only security which makes people to switch into Firefox (and other browsers).

Really, that kind of statements are not worth anything and only make the thread go worse.



The core problem with the threads topic is that it tries hard to claim something that can't be reasoned to be true. IE defenders can mostly go into either seeking the few positive facts, making positive facts from "nothing" that doesn't really matter or go against the users of other browsers with provocative statements. Plus the hassle we see when people who don't really know enough mix the soup.

[RobDog888]

True. People switch for many reasons. Some reasons are valid and otehrs are just to jump on the bandwagon.

So I guess we were only able to list out a few reasons out of 150+ posts. It went better then I thought it would. :lol:

[Merri]

Then some more positive news: I was yesterday and today working with a new design for one of my Finnish sites (http://www.megatokio.com/) and saw how much IE7 really had fixes in it. Too bad there is still one problem I couldn't solve without writing a few extra lines into the code so I left it in. But maybe it'll be fixed in the final version. Atleast the result was much better than IE6. The CSS problems are finally getting fixed and the web developer part of me is very happy about that.

[szlamany]

Merri is coming over to the dark side :D

[RobDog888]

I thought I felt an earthquake! :eek:

Merri will soon be doing development for MS on the next version - IE 8. :thumb:

[Merri]

Nah, the Opera 9 in works seems much more impressive than IE7 and FF2 for now, but I guess I'll stay with Firefox for a longer while. I don't have a negative reason to switch from what I now use.

[RobDog888]

If you switch to IE permenantly then I will give you 10 Rep points! :D :lol:

See, that is how most users should think. If there is a valid reason to switch to a different browser then its justified and not because of the hype.

Maybe I should offer Reps to all that switch to IE permenantly :lol:

[penagate]

I've been trying all day to come up with a plus for IE and finally I have one. It supports display:inline-block whereas Firefox does not :D

Opera does though. So it doesn't really make IE better. Just a bug in Fx.

[RobDog888]

I still dont see why we cant create a IE vs FF list like I started. Plus, now we can add that Merri gives his honored stamp of approval on IE 7 :D

[Merri]

I've been trying all day to come up with a plus for IE and finally I have one. It supports display:inline-block whereas Firefox does not :D

Opera does though. So it doesn't really make IE better. Just a bug in Fx.

Try display : -moz-inline-block;

Gecko supports it, but it isn't used at all because there is really no need for it. It has been removed from CSS because there is no need for it.

[Merri]

Oh, and I do have tons of negative reasons not to use IE6 and IE7B2 has far too many rendering problems for me to use it. I have it in my laptop but not my desktop. I guess some of you can guess the reason... (tip: I built this desktop computer myself)

[penagate]

How do you mean "removed" Is part of 2.1 spec right?

And yeah I've tried -moz-inline-block and -box and fiddling at the moment.

[Merri]

Afaik it was in the CSS specs before but then removed. Have they put it back again? I haven't read any "really knowing" stuff about it though.

[penagate]

It's listed in the 2.1 working draft.
http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-CSS21-20030915/visuren.html

I don't know why they haven't pushed 2.1 to Recommendation yet...

Edit: What the hell is up with the W3.org page :confused:

[tr333]

Try display : -moz-inline-block;

Gecko supports it, but it isn't used at all because there is really no need for it. It has been removed from CSS because there is no need for it.
afaik, -moz-inline-block; is not css, but is actually XUL.

[penagate]

-moz-inline-block is a very broken inline-block. -moz-inline-box is XUL but it works better than either of the other two. There is a thread in Bugzilla about it.

[CornedBee]

I don't know why they haven't pushed 2.1 to Recommendation yet...
Because there aren't 2 complete and interoperable implementations, which is a requirement for a Candidate Rec to become a full Rec. In other words, there aren't 2 programs out there that both fully and correctly support CSS 2.1.
Scary, isn't it?

[penagate]

Because there aren't 2 complete and interoperable implementations, which is a requirement for a Candidate Rec to become a full Rec. In other words, there aren't 2 programs out there that both fully and correctly support CSS 2.1.
Scary, isn't it?
Very. It's a standard at least though. Should be full Reccomendation soon then when Gecko or KHTML or someone achieves full support.

[NoteMe]

I am probably going to get banned for this. But just have to tell you.

I havn't been able to sleep one second all night. No idea why. Just didn't feel like sleeping. So I have thought about a lot of different things, read 100pages in my Java Script book and thought some more. Suddenly I realized (if my facts are strigt) this:

IE "lovers" Fx "haters":
- Robdog, Hack, szlamany....
- Americans over 30 years old.

Fx "lovers", IE "haters"
- NoteMe, Pengate, Merri....
- Non Americans under 30 years old.


Scary? True? Hmmm...


- ØØ -

[RobDog888]

THATS IT! YOUR BANNED! :lol: Ha ha. :D

Other then being slightly off topic and an FF'er I dont see why you would think you'd get Banned? At least I dont think you would.

Yes, maybe there is something to this small comparison you posted.

Maybe a poll with 4 options:
IE lover > 30; IE lover < 30; FF'er > 30; FF'er < 30. :D

[szlamany]

Nice try Noteme - but if that suggestion was true...

Then why would I have a wide-screen laptop, be running OFFICE 2003 on every workstation in my office - already have SMALL BUSINESS SERVER 2003 on my server.

Purchased Sony Vegas and DVD Architect for editing...

Well - actually the Sony Vegas is very telling - and actually on topic.

5 years ago we had Fast DV hardware capture/render card - with Speed Razor NLE. Well - Fast went out of business - Speed Razor evaporated - the editing workstation died - leaving me with about $3000 worth of useless hardware (that would not work with the new workstation) and some video files encoded with a hardware codec that are now lost forever.

So in selecting a successor - I went with Sony nle and that software render engine and software codecs.

Over 30 years old? Yes - and we own your world :D

[szlamany]

and already have MS SQL 2005 installed on a server...

and already using VS 2005 for production software...

[NoteMe]

Talk about going off topic.. :rolleyes: What does that have to do with it?? Nothing... :rolleyes:


PS: MartinLiss more years then you can count....american....IE lover...;)



- ØØ -

[Hack]

I am probably going to get banned for this. But just have to tell you.

I havn't been able to sleep one second all night. No idea why. Just didn't feel like sleeping. So I have thought about a lot of different things, read 100pages in my Java Script book and thought some more. Suddenly I realized (if my facts are strigt) this:

IE "lovers" Fx "haters":
- Robdog, Hack, szlamany....
- Americans over 30 years old.

Fx "lovers", IE "haters"
- NoteMe, Pengate, Merri....
- Non Americans under 30 years old.


Scary? True? Hmmm...


- ØØ -While it is true that I am an American over 30, I do not fall into the category of Fx hater or the category of IE lover. IE user, yes, but that is more because it is a standard at work than because it is my preference. hoo-wah :D

[NoteMe]

While it is true that I am an American over 30, I do not fall into the category of Fx hater or the category of IE lover. IE user, yes, but that is more because it is a standard at work than because it is my preference. hoo-wah :D


That is why I added the "" around lover and hater....I don't think Merri is a Fx lover either. And I love more then just Fx. I am using Flock most of the time anyway....but you get my small humoristic point don't you??


- ØØ -

[szlamany]

Talk about going off topic.. :rolleyes: What does that have to do with it?? Nothing... :rolleyes:
Sony=MS - purchasing from 800 pound gorillas is safer in the long run. But this point about IE has been expressed several times in the thread.

Actually I would use FF if it was already installed on all the workstations in my office. In order for me to do something like that I have to have time and desire. Time is short - way too busy - and the desire has not risen enough for FF yet.

[Hack]

....but you get my small humoristic point don't you??- ØØ -Yes, hence the smiley :bigyello:

[szlamany]

I only got involved in this thread cause I was bored :D

Actually based on these figures - it's not getting much attention from the forum at all.

[Hack]

I only got involved in this thread cause I was bored :DI didn't think you had time to get bored. :bigyello:

I think the bottom line is non-IT people (and they are by far the larger audience) use IE because it is there. If Firefox was there, they would use it.

[RobDog888]

Nope, I disagree Hack as everyone knows I use IE and I am not a non-IT user and not because its "just there". :)

[Hack]

Nope, I disagree Hack as everyone knows I use IE and I am not a non-IT user and not because its "just there". :)Be that as it may, that is the reason non-IT people use it. IT people can actually tell you why they use the browser that they do.

[RobDog888]

I dont think they would all use FF just because it would be there. Non-It people probably think if it aint broke dont fix it.

[Hack]

I dont think they would all use FF just because it would be there. My point is that non-IT people use IE because it is there. If IE wasn't there and FF was, then they would be using FF.

[RobDog888]

How could you say such a thing? On one of my kids system they have IE and FF and they are non-IT people. They had FF on there not by their decision and they use IE still.

I dont think such a blanket statement would apply to all non-IT people.

[NoteMe]

My point is that non-IT people use IE because it is there. If IE wasn't there and FF was, then they would be using FF.


That is a very good point. And I belive it is very true. It is like everyone just use the remote controll that comes with their TV. Even if there is much better and more posh looking remote controlls out there with touchscreen LCD and stuff (maybe not a good example, but true).


. ØØ .

[RobDog888]

Steve, where did you find that anaylsis window for "Who posted" in your post #181?

[RobDog888]

That is a very good point. And I belive it is very true. It is like everyone just use the remote controll that comes with their TV. Even if there is much better and more posh looking remote controlls out there with touchscreen LCD and stuff (maybe not a good example, but true).


. ØØ .
I dont use the remote controls that came with either of my TVs. I use, on one TV, the remote that came with the DVD player and for the other TV I use a multi-function remote to handle all the devices ike TV, DVD, VCR,etc.

[szlamany]

RD - click on the number or REPLIES - it's a link...

btw - I'm using FF right now to look at threads on the forum. I'm actually finding the "scroll" jumpy as the page loads - seems odd to me. Maybe you become used to a difference like that.

It also seems to load slower - but I'm going to play with both for a while and see if I can come out of the 1980's :D

[NoteMe]

Click here:


http://www.noteme.com/images/ss/188.gif

[NoteMe]

I dont use the remote controls that came with either of my TVs. I use, on one TV, the remote that came with the DVD player and for the other TV I use a multi-function remote to handle all the devices ike TV, DVD, VCR,etc.

I am talking about most people. Just like we talk about most people with IE...not everyone do it..but most people..we have to generalize if not all our posts will be very long if we want to write about all freaks..;)


- ØØ -

[Hack]

but I'm going to play with both for a while and see if I can come out of the 1980's :DAin't nuttin' wrong wid de 80's! :D

[NoteMe]

Ain't nuttin' wrong wid de 80's! :D


It is the decade God tries to forget...;)

[RobDog888]

Thanks guys! Thats a nice feature to have. I never clicked on it before as I just thought it was another link to the thread. Just like the dumb tooltip didnt relate to the username when hovered over it and showed the replies and read counts instead.

[szlamany]

You guys have TV's with remote controls? Are they color too?

[NoteMe]

You guys have TV's with remote controls? Are they color too?


To be honest...my TV is 5 countries away, and I don't even miss it..:)


[Edit] And it is colour..:) Grrrrr @ Americans..:D

[szlamany]

Thanks guys! Thats a nice feature to have. I never clicked on it before as I just thought it was another link to the thread. Just like the dumb tooltip didnt relate to the username when hovered over it and showed the replies and read counts instead.I wanted to say that I beat Noteme to the punch on that one because I replied with IE - but I think I actually replied to that one with FF :lol:

[NoteMe]

I wanted to say that I beat Noteme to the punch on that one because I replied with IE - but I think I actually replied to that one with FF :lol:


I even took a screenshot, fired up PSP drew on the picture, fired up the FireFTP extension in Fx, uploaded the picture to my web server and posted the post within the same minute as you...;)



- ØØ -

[szlamany]

I even took a screenshot, fired up PSP drew on the picture, fired up the FireFTP extension in Fx, uploaded the picture to my web server and posted the post within the same minute as you...;)



- ØØ -Youth :lol:

edit: must be those darned extensions!

[RobDog888]

It really doesnt matter if IE is dominant because it comes with Windoes. so does allot of programs and they dont have the market share like IE does. Its not like its the first time IE got any kind of competition, remember Netscape?

[NoteMe]

It really doesnt matter if IE is dominant because it comes with Windoes. so does allot of programs and they dont have the market share like IE does. Its not like its the first time IE got any kind of competition, remember Netscape?


Yeah, I posted about them earlier in this thread. They soared MS ass untill MS kicked the legs under Netscape by squeezing the out with money on book.



- ØØ -


Youth :lol:

edit: must be those darned extensions!


I am not even tired...:D

[RobDog888]

So then you agree that its not because IE comes with windows.

[NoteMe]

So then you agree that its not because IE comes with windows.


Errrrr no...exactly oposite.


[Edit]And that people don't know better

[szlamany]

Noteme - when you say people don't know better...

They don't care though - isn't that true?

In order to market a product you must make a person think they need it - that's marketing 101.

MS did that with IE though - but not with consumers - but by having a relationship with hardware vendors that made them think they needed it - thus it comes installed on every box out the door.

[RobDog888]

They included it with Windows is why its on every box.

Right Steve, they say why change when its working fine or maybe if someone showed them a comparison of the two they can make an educated decision and would want to change to whichever was the better choice. I thought thats part of what we were trying to do here?

[NoteMe]

Noteme - when you say people don't know better...

They don't care though - isn't that true?


They don't know better. Like last time I tried to help my GF with her computer. She though Internet Explorer and the Internet was the same thing. She doesn't know or understand that IE is just an app to log on to the internet. Nor can she install an application on her own. We just have to admitt it, but most people out there is like that. My parents and lots of my friends too. Only by educating them they will understand how it really works.



- ØØ -

[Hack]

It really doesnt matter if IE is dominant because it comes with Windoes. so does allot of programs and they dont have the market share like IE does. Its not like its the first time IE got any kind of competition, remember Netscape?Netscape is the browser God tries to forget... :p

[szlamany]

They included it with Windows is why its on every box.That's exactly the marketing I'm talking about. I'm sure in the extensive contracts they have with major hardware manufacturers there is all kinds of language protecting that "inclusion" and possibly the "exclusion" of other apps.

That might be considered bullying - but it's working - most marketing is bullying.

20 years ago (oops I'm dating myself again) Pepsi would sell a grocery store a 26 week contract for "end-of-isle" display. Guess who sold the other 26 week contract - Coke. No room for any other soda manufacturer.

It's not always about preference or even value - marketing is about protecting your share from your competition.

[RobDog888]

Netscape is the browser God tries to forget... :pI think it was written by someone that loved boating. That part just sickened me all the time when I looked at it. :sick:

I can still hear the Sea Captian from the Simpsons going "Arrrrg!" whenever its mentioned. :lol:

[szlamany]

They don't know better. Like last time I tried to help my GF with her computer. She though Internet Explorer and the Internet was the same thing. She doesn't know or understand that IE is just an app to log on to the internet. Nor can she install an application on her own. We just have to admitt it, but most people out there is like that. My parents and lots of my friends too. Only by educating them they will understand how it really works.
Noteme - that's exactly what I just said.

Marketing is educating or seducing the public that your product is needed. Don't know better = don't care in this equation.

FF if they want market share must take the uneducated public and make them want that "extension". Just like the big 3 car companies here make us want SUV's.

[NoteMe]

FF if they want market share must take the uneducated public and make them want that "extension". Just like the big 3 car companies here make us want SUV's.


That is exactly what is going on though...if you havn't followed the conversation...havn't you read this thread...150million downloads of Fx...is that bad? Have they done something wrong? What went wrong with IEs marketing that suddenly lost 20-40% of thir market share..;)


- ØØ -

[szlamany]

Downloads don't equate to use - doesn't equal market dominance. I'm not saying that FF can't win the browser battle - but we haven't seen what MS marketing is going to do with IE7 once it's RTM.

If MS is aiming at FF then with IE7 they should see FF use drop.

[NoteMe]

Downloads don't equate to use - doesn't equal market dominance. I'm not saying that FF can't win the browser battle - but we haven't seen what MS marketing is going to do with IE7 once it's RTM.

If MS is aiming at FF then with IE7 they should see FF use drop.


Only time will see...but as I have tried to redirect you too before. I blogged about user statestics about a month ago. The newest stats say that Firefox is about 20% of the market. Much more on dev pages like this one. i can tell you that on my own page it is more like 45%. Finland has the highest numbers of user on the last stats with 38% and poor countries like Russia, China has the lowest, about 8%.

But all statestics shows that they are taking big steps every time a new statestic is comming out. They have more then doubled in a year.



- ØØ -

[RobDog888]

Maybe if IE came out with"extensions" then it would regain all its market shares lost to FF :lol:

[NoteMe]

That and catch up with the standards..:) Since we just talked about standards earlier and Ajax. Check out this:


try
{
var requester = new XMLHttpRequest();
}
catch (error)
{
try
{
var requester = new ActiveXObject("Microsoft.XMLHTTP");
}
catch (error)
{
return false;
}
}



Guess why there is an try catch there..:D..One for IE, and one for the rest of the browsers...:) good start on Ajax isn't it..:D


- ØØ -

[RobDog888]

So IE supports the .NET style Try Catch blocks. :D

[NoteMe]

So IE supports the .NET style Try Catch blocks. :D


Errr...why do you call it .NET try and catch??? Do you think VB invented it all..:D:D:D:D



- ØØ -

[Hack]

Errr...why do you call it .NET try and catch??? Do you think VB invented it all..:D:D:D:D



- ØØ -Of course....didn't Java start out being a version of VB? :D

[NoteMe]

Of course....didn't Java start out being a version of VB? :D


Hahaha....silly you...:) Yeah sure..:D If you want..:)

To be honest. Java was ment to be written in C++ in the start, which of course also have Try and Catch. But a very slow implementation.

The head programmer didn't like the way C++ treated Java, so he closed him self into his office. Made a new language he called Oak since there was an oak outside his office (the name was later changed since Oak was already patented).

The implementation of Try Catch Java has to offer is by far faster then the one in C++ today. Even if it resembles the same technque for the developer.

Then again most other stuff in Java is much slower then C++. With no realy pointers as C++ have.

VB on the other hand has toy pointers, if you can even call them that..:D


- ØØ -

[RobDog888]

No, but MS did and didnt it start out in a different language?

[NoteMe]

No, but MS did and didnt it start out in a different language?

To be honest, I don't know if it was Ada, C++ or Lisp that had it first. But I am pretty sure not MS made it up. Just as they didn't make up OOP. Except VB they just steal, beg and borrow, not invent...;)


- ØØ -

[RobDog888]

Well thats how the rest of the world operates, steal a product, make it better, and then call it thier own.

[NoteMe]

Exactly. Just like with IE 7 now...stealing from the other browsers...but what surprise me, is that they don't steal more, and try to do it better this time. They just do half an update in stead of doing it better.... :sick:

[RobDog888]

I thought of that too. I think they are in a crunch for time so they can get some of the share back quickly so they just amde some improvements and pushing it out there. I bet they will probably come out with new version, 8, next that will be either a signifigant rewrite or have all the features like FF and a few more. This is the only way to recapture a signifigant part of the market that they lost.

[szlamany]

I've been using WHEN ERROR IN ... USE ... END WHEN in Digital VAX-11 BASIC since 1980...

[NoteMe]

This is the fun part about the internet. If Fx never pushed MS, they would never come out with IE 7 now. It was not supposed to come out before 2007 or 2008 if I remember right. Only this way the internet can be better. The only power the users have is to chose the best browser at any time. Not much more. MS have the money to make a killer browser. But they would rather spend it on other things if they can. Now when users chose Fx, they have to give money to the browser department. And the internet starts moving again.

*Big grin on my face*


- ØØ -

[RobDog888]

Yup, see. MS was in a rucsh to put it out. So I know they will have a really impressive next version.

Either way we all win.

Do you guys think this thread is exhausted?

[szlamany]

Well - over 1000 views by people watching the three of us debate something that I could really care less about :D

Do you think that bulletrick will be able to get the empirical data he so badly wanted?

[Hack]

Well - over 1000 views by people watching the three of us debate something that I could really care less about :D

Do you think that bulletrick will be able to get the empirical data he so badly wanted?I thought about bulletrick just this morning. Do you supposed he will read through all of these posts, and just skip to the bitter end?

So, what have we concluded?

A: Some people like IE.
B: Some people don't.
C: Some people like FF.
D: Sometimes you feel like like a nut, sometimes you dont. Do you guys think this thread is exhausted?I don't know about this thread, but I am. :D

[NoteMe]

I don't know about this thread, but I am. :D



Old people..:)



PS it is still Fx not FF...;) FF is Fast Forward on your 8-track....:D

[RobDog888]

Young whipper snappers :D


Its FF for all you FF'ers out there. Remember Fx is so 2005. :D

[tr333]

Remember Fx is so 2005. :D
IE is so 2001. :D

[RobDog888]

I see you have a typo in there. It should be IE is so 20,001 :D

Guess its time to Close this thread. :)