Slashdot Mirror
IE7 Bugs and Reviews
An anonymous reader wrote to mention a Register article in which the possibility is raised of the current build dumping Yahoo and Google toolbars. At the same time, GWBasic writes "I've posted a review on IE 7 Beta 1. It is very clear that, unlike when Microsoft targeted Netscape, they are using their classic method of producing superior software by catering to the needs of the user. This is not IE 6 with a few features borrowed from the competition, but rather a clear step in the evolution of user-centric design." Flexbeta and ZDNet have looks at the new browser as well.
Yup, Microsoft looks like it made a poor imitation of Firefox. But hey, according to Microsoft apologists, nothing exists until Microsoft (re)invents it. So there you go.
But the next time someone says "OSS only copies from Microsoft", remind them of IE7.
Almost all the new features in that review (minus the "anti-phishing" functionality) are duplicates of things already done by firefox (tabs, customizable search box in the top right, etc).
The only thing that could be called truly new is the combined dropdown box for Back and Forward. Interesting idea, but it's certainly not "a clear step in the evolution of user-centric design."
LordBodak's journal.
I think everyone is putting too much emphasis on the new IE7 GUI and not even considering if there are any major impovements in supporting W3C standards. This is our chance to push Microsoft to support the web features of 2005. I know people are already jumping on the IE7 bandwagon and leaving firefox/opera but this is not wise.
Microsoft wins if people allow IE7 to be a crippled browser in terms of web development.
Tabbed browsing has been added, dropdown search, add-on manager. Now where have I seen those all before?
Seems like a good effort by Microsoft to play catch up, but that's it. Aside from the anti-phising feature, I've yet to see one new feature of any importance.
At least the author is pretty open about his bias. The writer goes on and on about the usability of IE, but proves he knows jack-shit about usability with three simple sentences:
"When only one tab is open, the tab bar is visible. At the right of all tabs is a small tab that immediately opens a new tab. This would make more sense as a button immediately to the right of the X to close a tab."
Yeah, that's sensible, put the "open new" button right next to the "close" button, that'll make sense for 99% of the population who don't have perfectly precise mastery of the mouse pointer. He also talks about dropping non-IE browsers years ago because they were "unpolished" but then mentions he switched to CrazyBrowser, which is a cluttered mess in its default configuration! The entire article screams of unprofessionalism.
Does no one find bitching about a beta a little less than productive?
While a review on a website probably doesn't accomplish this, the whole point to a beta is to get user input on bugs and other criticisms so that the end product is improved from what the engineers originally thought was a good idea.
"You're older than you've ever been, and now you're even older."
It means that the reviewer doesn't know what he's talking about. Sharnig Stop and Refresh is a *GOOD* idea? So if I want to stop a page, and it finishes just as I'm about to click it, the Stop button becomes THE EXACT OPPOSITE of what I want to do! That's screen-smashingly stupid!
- "Phishing?" Do not use that word in the final version. It looks stupid, it sounds stupid, and worst of all, like the one review said, no one but Slashdot users will know what it means.
- The menus. What the hell? I can understand the concept that by placing the menus next to the browser, the options apply to the tab, but honestly, most of them don't. This is totally inconsistent and just plain stupid.
- The tabs look alright. Not great, just alright. I think the "blank" tab to create a new tab is also stupid. I mean, maybe it's a good concept, but it needs more. Maybe a different color, or a small label, but just blank, it looks dumb.
- As usual, The Register is wrong. My Google Toolbar worked fine in IE7. Problem is, it looked like Firefox with the Google toolbar, simply redundant. I disabled it.
However, there are large improvements, like the rendering engine, and the Feeds (which I didn't play around with too too much). It's a good start, Microsoft, but I hope they're not finished yet. There's a lot of work left to do.Does no one find bitching about a beta a little less than productive?
Well to be fair IE 7 is a very important product release, whether it's a blazing success, or a tremendous dud. A beta 1 is usually fairly feature complete.
Having said that, the so-called review was inane, poorly written, and obviously hacked together in no-time to try to get some namespace. The "reviewer" basically just shows a couple of screenshots, and hilariously claims that this is some great new paradigm, and it isn't IE 6 with some tweeks. No, my reviewing friend, IE 7 is IE 6 with some tweaks, and in some ways is inferior to some of the IE 6 "mods" (like MaxIE) released years ago. Perhaps there is something extraordinary hidden in there, but thus far it has been the most astounding is this it???? ever. That "reviewer" is yet another lame astroturfer praying that Bill Gates might read his gloating, tripping over himself "review" and hire him (which are pretty common, and universally pathetic).
it's just me who finds the new layout horrible?
% 201/screenshot.png. Why on earth did they put the "file edit view etc." menu between the tabs and the final page?
Really, look at this: http://www.clothedandy.com/Writings/IE%207%20Beta
I mean, it's stupid. It "disassociates" tabs from the page, and it puts that menu in the middle. Why put in such relevant place a menu that it's so rarely used?
It's clearly a huge usability mistake IMO. It looks like IE developers though: "saving screen space == good usability". It's not. Good usability is good usability, and seeing that "file edit" menu there hurts my eyes.
"This is not IE 6 with a few features borrowed from the competition, but rather a clear step in the evolution of user-centric design."
Wow, that's the funniest and most completely bullshit sentence I have read all year. Nobody cares about the "evolution of user-centric design" (what the fuck is that supposed to mean, anyway? It's just 100% PR waffle, straight from the arse of a dihorettic bull), the general public variety of users don't know what they want, don't really care and shouldn't be given any say in the matter anyway.
It's us DEVELOPERS who have to put up with the "nuances" (and that's being polite) of Microsoft's sub standard browser offering. It's our employers who pay us a fortune in man hours so that we can work round these "nuances". And it's our future careers that depend on browse consistency and the full implementation of standards like SVG and CSS3. I am absolutely gutted that Microsoft failed on every level to implement worthwhile technologies and bring their browser up to scratch, they insult us developers by implementing long-overdue PNG transparency which we can't use until everyone has switched away from IE5/6 anyway, and claim to have "improved" their abysmal CSS support.
Who gets the real benefit from the new IE? The people who matter most. The mindless drones who will lap up any offering from MS, or get it installed on their PC automatically whether they like it or not. The people too stupid to have switched to a better browser already. The brain-dead end users have their silly tabs and phishing scam (read: user stupidity) filter, and we get nothing.
Even if this is "just a beta" it demonstrates not days, not months, but YEARS... yes YEARS of freaking work and does not include any significant changes. It doesn't even deserve a new version number. We all know it already, but Windows is a joke, IE is a joke, and Microsoft are a joke who can't be bothered to do anything properly because as long as idiot uneducated users lap up their crappy products they have an enduring monopoly and there is not a damned thing we can do about it.
I say us developers should lobby our employers to sue over lost profits. Microsofts failure to implement standards means we are still unable to deliver cutting edge software to our users, and we still have to put up with IE's goddamned quirks. Microsoft should be sued by every company on earth with its hand in web development and FORCED to bring their crap-pile browser up to scratch and keep it that way instead of pissing away their time making sure the browser interface is just the right degree of "fucking confusing" to send any sane persons hatrid of IE into critical mass.
For lack of a better ending. GRRRRRRAAAAAAAAAAARGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
Gadgetoid.com - Gadgets & Games Journalism
erm, so like firefox didn't borrow those from opera
your point?
Erm, so like I said the competition, not "just Firefox." Is Opera part of the competition? Why, yes, my dear man, I do believe so. Thank you.
My point is that the thing the guy in the article said about not borrowing from the competition is wrong. That should have been clear if you read my post.
It also seems that Microsoft is using all its "security initiatives" to intrude evermore into consumers' lives, get more data about them, sign them up for Microsoft services, and lock out competitors. With IE7, apparently there will be yet another layer of intrusion: phishing protection by sending all visited URLs to Microsoft. Do you really think the average user will think about the privacy implications of this?
And let's not kid ourselves: Microsoft is not the only company doing this. Today I installed a Logitech mouse under Windows, and guess what -- it wanted to install a "Logitech messenger" to automatically get updates and deliver "product information". Spyware and adware, it seems, is becoming the norm, rather than the exception, even for "respectable" applications. Microsoft's interest in spyware maker Claria confirms this trend.
Now, IE7 will offer some features which competitors have had for years to average users who would never try Firefox. This is a good thing, and as some have pointed out, the gigantic feature advantage that Firefox will retain (particularly its extensibility, but also upcoming improvements such as SVG support and super-fast back/forward) will hopefully drive more users to it. I can't help but wonder, though, whether we are witnessing the development of a massively polarized information society, where some will work and play in a maximally commercialized environment full of spyware and ads, and others will have free software, built by regular people in their own enlightened self-interest. And it seems that Microsoft, rather than AOL as was predicted in the early days of the Net, is the driving force behind this.
Perhaps it is time to rethink the PC concept -- from what is preinstalled to service and support -- on the basis of free software. An "open PC" that comes with thousands of free applications and games as well as an Internet-based support and update contract could be an excellent deal. Lindows seems to have tried something like this, but they don't seem to be clued up enough to me to pull it off.
Most businesses are still stuck on W2k. They only get XP when they get a new machine, and for many companies (especially the small ones), this only happens when the old one dies or can't run the software anymore. As more apps move to the internets, the incentive to upgrade will go down. Don't have the .NET runtimes,
and can't install 'em on your Windows 98 box? Who cares? "Just fire
up the internet icon and click on the accounting button on the
intranet page" says the PHB.
My experience says things are different. Most people DO have an old PC, because they aren't geeks and don't care about getting the latest ATI card so they can play GTA:XXX. How old is your microwave? Why don't you 'upgrade' it? That's the same feeling the average person has towards computers.
Yeah, right.
"No more talking from Opera zealots please... you're almost as bad as Gentoo zealots."
;)
Or FireFox zealots. Think about what usually starts this convo.
"Derp de derp."
From the review:
The stop and refresh buttons are combined into a single button that is logically separate from back and forward. The button is "cancel" while a page is loading, and "refresh" when the page is done loading. There's no need to clutter the screen with more buttons.
About the only feature of MSIE that I prefer over Mozilla/Firefox is the ability to click the stop button even after a page has fully loaded in order to stop those fscking animated GIFs.
Morons!
---------------------------------------------
SERENITY NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!