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.
When it was called Firefox.
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.
Perhaps it doesn't copy other browsers. But its very existence is driven by the others. Who really thinks that if Firefox were not getting popular that MS would go back on their statement that there would be no major revisions after IE 6?
they are using their classic method of producing superior software by catering to the needs of the user
What does this mean?
From TFA:OK...so IE7 fails the acid test...just like IE6. Are there any browsers out there (other than that patched-up Safari version) that have actually passed the Acid Test? Any of them available for use?
____
~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey
"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."
IE Clippy: "It looks like you're trying to surf porn while avoiding spyware. Sorry, that just won't happen. Would you like to do it anyway?"
Even with tabs, without mouse gesture support it is useless to me.
The register article is wrong.
Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
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.
The only feature in IE7 that I need is the ability to download the lastest version of Firefox.
I'm so glad IE is supporting tabbed browsing. Now when you visit a malicious website, it will be able to open up multiple tabs and install 30 pieces of adware / spyware / malware simultaneously. Isn't progress wonderful?
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.
Considering the Web the new platform for building applications ( using AJAX, CSS2 and whatever else the Web gurus come up with ), it is a given that Microsoft cannot afford to loose the browser wars.
This actually may turn out to be more important than loosing to Apple or even Linux ( on the desktop ). Their product is the most popular in the market, but the underdogs are catching up fast. They are better in all respects, they get evolved where IE rarely gets updated, geeks love them.. Its a touch call for Microsoft. They are placing their bets on Lonhorn and IE7. Should their new toys fail to meet the raised expectations, Microsoft will loose big. By Google, Apple, IBM and everyone waiting to get his chance against the King.
Technology ramblings : Simple is Beautiful
fraudeliminator Shows a toolbar that indicates whether the site you are at is really the one you think it is. Utilizes constantly-updated blacklists and artificial intelligence. Helps prevent phishing.
There you go. And the cool thing about FF is, that you can ADD to it. Without needing to wait until a big corp does it for you in a blackbox kindof way. (because the button is there it doesn't mean it's failproof or it actually works.)
I think we can keep recursing like this until someone returns 1
They completely broke the UI.
First they violate their own guidelines by removing the menu from the top of the window. To boot, they made the UI a whacked around version of every other browser UI, with the back and forward buttons at the top next to the address and search bars, but the home button elsewhere and stop/reload mashed into one button at the other end of the address bar. They also don't have a dropdown menu on the back button, which is essential for getting away from sites that break that functionality.
Suffice it to say, this is what we've got for "progress" thanks to microsoft's browser dominance. No true significant advancements in the technology because microsoft's held it stagnant for so long. Thankfully they've got competition now, so maybe things can improve.
They've still got a long way to go.
Definatly worth the time it took to read it. And good critism, but don't expect them to fix the Compatibility errors, from what I've heard MS is trying to steal another standard and make it their own.
only because the security features might actually work this time
"Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein
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.
I consider it rather strange that the renderings of the acid2 test pages IE7 produced in this guy's review differ somewhat from the results a colleague of mine got during his test with IE7 on Longhorn Beta 1.
Not that unreproducible behaviour of certain MS products is strikingly unfamiliar to me, though I still wonder what has happened there, and if this is going to be fixed (as well as the whole rest of the CSS-mess in IE) in the final version...
:%s/Open Source/Free Software/g
YTARY!
That is not the reason people switch to FireFox. Yes, it's nice when they get there, but the reason people are switching is because they are easy meat when using IE.
I haven't heard about any security enhancements to IE 7 but if we can assume any that have been added are on the same level of ability as "Genuine Advantage" then the Firefox developers have absolutely nothing to worry about.
Deleted
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."
is that Microsoft is Rich. And therefore: 1. Could've afforded to invest in thinking up new concepts for the new browser, rather than having reading an article on why people like firefox, and putting that stuff in IE7. 2. Will now parade around with a colossal advertising campaign about how IE7 takes you to the Next Generation of the Internet, or Enables the Future of Web Interaction to Integrate You Ass Off, or whatever.
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
Yeah, what do you people think betas are for? You got comments, wait until the final release is out!
-- Don't Tase me, bro!
- "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.I'm not sure I was aware of this method.I seem to remember a few times Microsoft "met the needs of the user" by supplying a "good enough" solution for less cost than the competition, but if I had to pick ONE time when they may have provided a better solution to take a market it would have been IE 4 (after ealier IE versions sucked) versus an aging and slow to develop Netscape, even then they had to bundle it, make illegal deals, and include ActiveX to screw up any chance at security. Mind you the author of this review would seem to think that was not a case of superior software winning out.
I'm not saying MS has never made a good peice of software, but in the past to dominate the market, price and vendor pressure seem to have been the preferred weapons. After they GET the market they have sometimes made a product that is amoung the best of breed (Excel would be my example here)
Insert pithy comment here.
My university, which is one of the largest in Virginia, has already prominently placed Firefox or Mozilla on virtually all of its lab machines. We also have a general user lab that runs Red Hat Enterprise Linux Workstation 4. More and more students are being conditioned to think "IE=bad for me" because if you live on campus or in an apt that uses the school network, then if you use an unpatched OS or browser, you can come back home if there's a major worm problem and find your access cut off until you upgrade. Firefox is the easiest way to get around that.
Click here or a puppy gets stomped!
Didn't read the article, did you? The author admits to only beeing experienced in the use of the 'Crazy browser' browser. He states that the new features in IE7 are not copies of features from other browsers. It is obvious from this that he hasn't used Safari or Firefox, which combined have implement every feature he lists except for the merged history. Even the design decisions on tabs, like the single close button at the right, is stolen verbatim from Firefox, which the author is obviously oblivious to.
You want IE7? Use Safari or Firefox.
Try out fish, the friendly interactive shell.
The Slashdot introduction says "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."
I'm sorry but that is about as wrong as it can be. Every single "new" feature mentioned in the article is already present in every other browser that I know of as a built-in feature or an add-on. This refresh of IE is clearly borrowed from the competition. Unless IE7 includes more changes than what was mentioned in the article, it will still be behind the day it comes out in Vista/Longhorn.
The NSA: The only part of the US government that actually listens.
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
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."
B rowser Helper Objects/ to delete them (try to help people with that over the phone), IE finally has a way to disable the stupid toolbars. Also evolutionary.
Boy, aren't we trollish today.
1) IE finally got with it and threw in tabbed browsing. Not revolutionary, since Opera and Mozilla came up with it before, but evolutionary for sure.
2) IE finally came up with a simpler navigational system. Until now IE needed two toolbars on the top of my screen compared to Firefox's one (not including the tab bar or the menu bar). They simplified their back and forward buttons, as well as combining the stop and refresh button, and combined two toolbars into one. Certainly evolutionary.
And the best part...
3) Microsoft included an Add-on manger with this version of IE 7. It allows BHOs to be turned on and off.
What can I say? IT'S ABOUT FREAKIN' TIME!
For those who don't know the acronym, BHO stands for "Browser Helper Objects," or as they've been described to me by other users, "Toolbars from hell." They're the adware-included toolbars littered with casino links and junk, as well as redirecting all your 404 and search inquiries to their sponsored pages. Finally, rather than having to dig through the registry to HKLM(and HKCU)/Software/Microsoft/CurrentVersion/Explorer/
However, I do still have one complaint. Microsoft can piss off for making this XP-only. 50% of businesses are still using 2K. That's a lot of people to piss off.
If you have a problem with software, the beta stage is _EXACTLY_ the time to complain it. And no, it doesn't just have to be directly to Microsoft - discussion within the community helps too.
Waiting for the final release and then saying "this feature sucks" will, quite rightly, be met with the response, "Why didn't you try out the betas and tell us about it at that time?"
-- MartinG To mail me: echo kewyjlcxyzvjfxbqwh | tr bcefhjklqvwxyz
How are other web developers planning on dealing with the issue of testing for multiple browsers? In my office, we do our best to make sure our site and software is compatible with the most current browser on a user's platform, but most of our users have Windows 98 or Windows 2000, not XP (which we have in our office). I've never been able to have multiple versions of IE on one computer; does anyone know if that will change with IE7?
We already recommend Firefox to our customers as a superior alternative to IE. Our site is developed and tested primarily on Firefox, then IE for backwards compatibility. Even so, though, this issue has me concerned.
-- The reason it's called the right wing? Irony.
What a sterling silver, perfect, museum-quality example of what bad UI does to a user. You learned to manually kill processes, constantly. If I designed a car and drivers trained themselves to kill the engine in drive every time, that would be some shoddy design on my part.
(MS can't possibly outdo the dialog boxes from Excel when you try to save to a different format, though. For teaching the user to ignore what's being said and impatiently click "Yes" -- dang it! -- those are without equal. Particularly in conjunction with the way they include a second "Save Changes" dialog if you try to close the document you've just saved to the other format. Every user trains herself to ignore those after the first time or two.)
"Fundamentalism" isn't about divine morality. It's about human authority.
Then he mentions these superior features: .... opens a new tab. I was like, wow. And then he explains that he doesn't think it's a good UI element anyway.
- tabbed browsing
- a context menu that opens links in a new tab
- it doesn't pass the acid test
- it has "phishing protection" (whatever the hell that is--he doesn't explain what it does)
- a revolutionary navigation system where you can see your browsing history in one list
- a (small) tab that
- a search box in the top right corner - lack of toolbar options
- you can manage the addons in the browser.
This guy is an idiot. Look at the prefs. It's just the IE6 prefs with the version number bumped. And this guy has the nerve to suggest that IE7 is completely different from the current version? Come on!
1. Profit! ... ?
2. Profit!
3. Profit!
4. Profit!
5.
6. Catch Up
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
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.
Except that your taskbar has much more than IE windows in it. Taskbar, quick launch, other apps etc. When all is running as usual, you can only fit two or three IE windows in your taskbar. Then you have no idea what you are clicking on. Then you start grouping them together which is an extra click and a headache.
Also, opening a fresh window instead of a tab is resource consuming.
You can't middle click on link in IE and expect the page to be ready when you come to it.
You can't pick up windows and rearrange them in the taskbar while you can do that with tabs (at least in many applications).
The taskbar just doesn't suit as a tab bar replacement. It just doesn't.
Here is a free download of IE7 with standard-compliant code added.
Classic method of producing superior software? As opposed to their classic method of spreading FUD, their classic method of "embrace, extend, extinguish", or their classic method of cutting off the competition's air supply?
I'll grant that Microsoft did improve IE a great deal during the Netscape days, as one of the prongs in a multi-pronged attack on that company. Hell, history shows that the only motivation that Microsoft has for improving IE at all is competitive threat. The fact that they're starting to show some genuine improvement in IE again (after some years of stagnation) is testament to the fact that they're taking Firefox seriously.
What distinguishes this from the Netscape days is that Microsoft already played their "integrate the browser into the OS" trump card, and their new competitor has no "air supply" revenue streams to constrict. On top of which, Google is demonstrating itself to be a damn clever producer of web-applications which are genuinely cross-platform, so the whole "embrace and extend" tactic is starting to show signs of fatigue.
Microsoft might face a new challenge here: going feature-nuts on IE is one way to compete, but it's likely to open up new avenues of insecurity in a browser that already has the worst security track record. I don't think of Firefox as the be-all and end-all in secure browsing, but can Microsoft deliver the goods in security, even against a less-than-perfect competitor? I know they can bolt on features like there's no tomorrow, but it looks to me like security is the major root cause of Firefox migration at this point. Can Microsoft compete on security?
proof, n. A demonstration that a conclusion is implied by certain premises and axioms.
3) Microsoft included an Add-on manger with this version of IE 7. It allows BHOs to be turned on and off.
Am I the only one that's ever done: Tools -> Internet Options -> Programs Tab -> Manage Add Ons Button in IE6?
Even their evolutionary stuff has already been done, by them! The screens look exactly the same in IE6 as 7.
A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices. -- William James
I've used IE7 for about a day now and find it works well enough. Nuances of where buttons are etc are typical for any browser redesign and are a minor learning curve. I had to spend a small amount of time familiarizing with ff too.
This is a beta, and a beta one at that. I find the bashing and such unseemly. Yes, ff is in my opinion better, but I would rather MS try to give us what we've shown we like rather than what they think is good for us. Borrowing popular design features from your competitors is a time honored tradition is every industry. It doesn't freak me out or offend me. Hopefully, enough feedback from users will result in a more polished product at final. That is the idea really.
The under the hood stuff that matters to developers, is in my opinion and probably for 99 per cent of the users, irrelevant. Developers have to make it work. I could care less about acid test and css compliance. I want it to render fast and go where I want. Frankly, I still find for most sites, that IE renders a bit faster. Not significantly, but it is there.
I expect on this board where "ms = evil" to go on trashing this and vista (stupid name), but the reality is that one week after being released as final, they will both have a larger installed user base than mac and linux combined. Ditto on the browser front. And that is with people having to go to the trouble of downloading IE7.
Like it or not, if a challengers are going to even break 15 per cent combined, they are going to have to wow the general public with ease of use and integrated features. Having a group of geeks feeling smug in their little corner of the net does not bring success. Sorry, I didn't invent the world.
I just tried Firefox 1.06 on The Second Acid Test and it looks like it fails as well. I guess that now means Firefox is just as half-baked as IE7 if you go with the standard ranking system on Slashdot. Not that anyone will actually acknowledge that, of course.
In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us. - Fyodor Dostoyevsky
Simpsons already did it!
iCab3 beta for Mac OS X and Mac OS 9(!) passes Acid2 test and is freely available for download.
Moving the menu bar breaks the Windows standard user interface. Meanwhile, Firefox has followed the Windows standard user interface as completely as they can... sometimes to the detriment of non-Windows ports.
Also, moving the tab bar away from the window makes it harder to immediately identify which tab you're on.
Merged stop-and-reload is just plain daft. The only current browser I know that does this is Safari, and it's the biggest reason I use Shiira instead of Safari on Mac OS X. Is Microsoft copyng Apple's bad ideas again, like when they released the first version of Windows with cooperative multitasking despite having concurrent multitasking working first?
Both these problems can be avoided by using the HTML control from another application, as you can see by the screen-shot of Crazy Browser.
Merging the drop-downs into a single button is visually confusing and doesn't save any space. Putting some of your navigation controls on the opposite side of the address bar is also confusing.
All in all, I'd say the user interface is significantly less consistent and more confusing than IE5 or IE6. This is almost a step back to the early days of the web when browsers seemed to be in a contest to see which could be weirder.
PS: The search bar is just a copy of the search bar on every other browser out there, except the "select search engine" button is on the other side.
PPS: Microsoft can't avoid the reboot when it installs IE, because it's replacing a component that it's using all over the system... they need to kill and restart every GUI program on the system to move the old control out of the way.
The reason that the menu is below the tabs is simple. If it were above the tabs, then you'd be able to use the menu even when Javascript has annoyingly tried to disable it.
To you or me, being able to use the menu at any time is a feature. To MS, however, it's a bug - it gives control to the user, which is basically anathema to the whole concept of a leveraged monopoly.
My analysis may be a little paranoid, I'll admit.
If your comment title says 'Re: Foo', I'm not likely to read it.
Right now I have a ton of css hacks in place to handle MSIE 6 ... How will IE 7 affect those?
Will I ahve to remove them, so that IE7 renders properly? (But IE6 no longer does)
Will I have to keep using the same hacks to get my pages to work?
Will it ignore the IE6 Hacks, and render properly?
Option #3 is by far the best, ignore the hacks like Firefox and Safari (and opera and the rest), and just render the page as intended.
There is a tremendous amount of "bitching" which is functionally different from "constructive criticism"
I claim that the difference lies primarily in the mind of the beholder.
Microsoft doesn't seem to play catch-up too well anymore.
Virtual Earth is nowhere near Google's offering, and IE7 really is just an attempt to prevent defections.
It seems that Microsoft is trying to not look so bad, by offering something at least 'near' to what the competitors are offering.
Also, if Microsoft finds an IT company that's doing very well for itself in a lucrative market, that's Microsoft's next venture. All of the good ideas don't come from Redmond.
Linux/Open Source/Anti Microsoft News
Please excuse my fixation on appearance and design as that is my line of work.
This looks like garbage. Total fucking garbage.
I realize it is a beta but I will assume Microsoft is using the standard def'n od 'beta' in that it is feature complete but with outstanding bugs.
The entire interface is a bug. God, I don't even know where to start. The tabs are brutal, completely nonsensical placement between a menubar and the toolbar. Tiny, tiny refresh/stop button, one of the most used buttons in any browser and its about 10 pixels across. Tiny, tiny throbber - which is nothing new from old versions but again, is a vital part of the browser's user feedback. That sucker should be a lot more obvious (how much time have you spent staring at the stupid globe?). Also a second tiny icon toolbar, mixed with the menu... god damn, if they didn't set out to break every rule of good UI design, they have failed miserably in the interface department. I really can't believe how bad that is.
And - where is the antialiased text? What year is it? My fuggin' PSP has antialiased browser text!
I know it seems like I am freaking out a bit, but honestly, for one of the world's biggest software companies with more money than Satan to inflict this on such a huge proportion of the computing public is just kind of sick. This one app will deeply affect most computer users. And it sucks worse than practically anything else.
Firefox devs, rejoice. You have handed the giant its own ass.
If Jesus wants me it knows where to find me.
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.
Tabbed browsing... WooooW!
I musta been in suspended animation with the Freezer Geezer for this technology to have progressed so fast!
The documentation is publicly available. No need to join MSDN (I haven't even installed the beta anywhere for lack of an available box) http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url= /workshop/essentials/whatsnew/whatsnew_70_sdk.asp
Says only Alpha Channels have been added.
CSS, HTML and JavaScript affect me more than PNG, but that's just me.
IE7 looking like firefox is the least of my concerns, just confirms the trend toward what internet browsing is going. One thing not discussed though is the memory use. No matter what I am doing in IE, the memory usage will always be smaller than Firefox by at least 50%. (Three tabs in Firefox = 43,264 K / IE6 3 windows opened 23,076 K) As a control freak checking my task manager every 62 minutes, 50% more memory used for browsing is a catastrophic incident that is corroding my affiliation to Firefox.
It SUCKS. I tried installing it the other day (yes, I know, daring huh) and at the end of the install it said I did not have access to install this. I'm not only an administrator on my machine, but the ONLY user. It now won't let me uninstall it because it says it was installed by another user. Now IE and half of the Control Panel forms are broken. Thank god for firefox...
You know its bad when Microsoft starts breaking their own stadards. Im referring to the placement of the menu bars of course. The standard is right below the title bar but Microsoft decided tot put them below the address bar. This would be fine as long as they gave the user an option to move it up to where the standards says it should be. Im all for giving the users options to break standards but dont make it a mandatory thing. Especially when the standard was made by Microsoft themselves.
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!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2005/07/29/444957 .aspx
The IE team just responded here
The key to anti-phishing is user education and keeping users informed of new cunning tricks spotted.
This will just make people feel that the technology will protect them and disengage their grey matter.
Whoooaaa... Take two steps back there cowboy.
Slipstreaming and OPK have a place in a company with very many PC's. But getting your GF's laptop going is not one of them.
The parent post is quite clear, He turns on his GF's new laptop.
I know of what he's talking about because I have the same experience at the small company I work for. Even after buying a computer with SP2 installed, there's a truckload of MS updates requiring reboots. Followed by more Symantec updates requiring reboots.
Before firing off a quick dismissal, please remember there's a whole world of users outside your immediate circle that can and likely do have very different experiences than yours.
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
You insensitive clod!
Interested in a Flash-based MAME front end? Visit mame.danzbb.com