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.

53 of 851 comments (clear)

  1. I liked Internet Explorer 7 the first time... by jolande · · Score: 4, Funny

    When it was called Firefox.

    1. Re:I liked Internet Explorer 7 the first time... by James_Aguilar · · Score: 5, Funny

      I think the problem is, as this guy said, "I stopped using non-Microsoft browsers over two years ago because I found them to be unpolished." That is the only possible explanation for how he thinks that IE7 isn't "borrowing from the competition."

      List of things borrowed:
      1) Search bar
      2) Tabs
      3) Tabs in context menus
      4) Not passing the acid test
      5) TINY REFRESH BUTTONS THAT ARE IMPOSSIBLE TO CLICK ON OMGZ?

      That is all.

    2. Re:I liked Internet Explorer 7 the first time... by James_Aguilar · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.

    3. Re:I liked Internet Explorer 7 the first time... by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 4, Funny

      Microsoft had to change the name after discovering that "Firefox" was already in use by the Mozilla Foundation.

      --
      You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
    4. Re:I liked Internet Explorer 7 the first time... by Seriman · · Score: 5, Informative

      I spent my yesterday morning screwing around with IE 7 and the truth is, it wants to be firefox really bad, but it's just not good enough. I admit that I am biased, but I have always used the browser I thought was superior, which means I used IE6 for a long time. After rebooting twice from the installation, it broke trillian and anything with a web browser control, that's probably related to it being a beta product though. The browser itself isn't even a reasonable duplicate of firefox. The tabs are an afterthought at best. I didn't find a way to bookmark tabgroups and the top two bars were locked in place, only the file menu and nav buttons could be moved. It was generally disagreeable and I had to remove it. This is my opinion: IE7 is a steaming turd that has been roughly molded to resemble firefox, just don't touch it, smell it, or _use_ it and it's fine.

    5. Re:I liked Internet Explorer 7 the first time... by mrmagos · · Score: 5, Informative

      So far, only development versions of Safari and Konqueror do.
      I'm not sure when they'll be available for public consumption, but the compliant Konqueror should be released with KDE 3.5.

      --
      Never start vast projects with half-vast ideas.
    6. Re:I liked Internet Explorer 7 the first time... by NanoGator · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "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."
    7. Re:I liked Internet Explorer 7 the first time... by jallison · · Score: 4, Informative
      IE7 allows middleclick on links to open in a new tab. Where as Firefox has removed that feature.

      Tools/Options/Tabbed Browsing/Tab Focus/Select Load Middle-clicked URLs in New Tabs. FF 1.0.6

    8. Re:I liked Internet Explorer 7 the first time... by koh · · Score: 4, Funny

      Did I forget anybody?

      You forgot Protoss zealots.

      --
      Karma cannot be described by words alone.
  2. Looks like firefox by nurhussein · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Looks like firefox by Azureflare · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Oh great,here we go with firefox vs. opera again. But seriously, I'm an Opera user, and I'd say Firefox is a modular implementation of opera. Firefox doesn't try to be a monolithic browser that does everything all in one piece; it lets users decide how they want to make their browser. In many ways, Firefox can be whatever the user wants it to be.

      Opera is much more managed, and in many ways I like it because I just don't have to worry about if all those addins I installed will work with the next version of firefox, etc... I just want a browser that works.

      Oh and I love the session management in opera.

      But I wouldn't say Firefox is a poor implementation of opera. It's just another way of looking at the experience of the web browser, that is influenced by Opera heavily.

    2. Re:Looks like firefox by Koroviev · · Score: 5, Funny
      Yup, and Firefox is just a poor imitation of Opera.

      Yup, and Opera is just a poor imitation of Greek Drama.

  3. Didn't follow Firefox? by matt_king · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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).

    1. Re:Didn't follow Firefox? by antek9 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Yes, and what's worse: MS' anti-phishing technique involves sending each link you click to Microsoft for verification against a blacklist. Scary, if you ask me.
      'We advise you not to click on that link to cracks.am, which is a well known phishing site.' Oops, or is it?

      --
      A World in a Grain of Sand / Heaven in a Wild Flower,
      Infinity in the Palm of your Hand / And Eternity in an Hour.
  4. "evolution of user-centric design"? by LordBodak · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Oh come on. There was not a single revolutionary thing in that entire review. Safari shares its stop and refresh buttons, a feature which is extremely annoying. Half the time you want stop you end up hitting it right when it changes to refresh and now you're reloading the page you were trying to stop.

    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.
    1. Re:"evolution of user-centric design"? by hoggoth · · Score: 4, Funny

      > I'm one of those guys who smashes buttons seven or eight times

      You must be a barrel of laughs waiting for an elevator.

      --
      - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
    2. Re:"evolution of user-centric design"? by ergo98 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      There was not a single revolutionary thing in that entire review

      Not to mention that only in the most perverted of senses was it a "review". Fawning overview is more like it. We get a good sense of the so-called reviewer's credentials when he says the following:

      "I stopped using non-Microsoft browsers over two years ago because I found them to be unpolished. "

      Of course tastes vary, but even amongst the most fanatical Microsoft apologists (including myself) it is pretty much universal that Firefox, or even Opera, is the primary daily browser. No one needs to suck on the Microsoft choad and pretend that everything they make must be the best in the market, especially when their flagship browser is going on half a decade old.

      Of course every now and then you come across the real dyed-in-the-wool Microsoft apologist, very seldomly a developer but more likely a "somewhat involved in the tech industry" kind of person (e.g. an @Home Computer virus removal technician) who'll swear that IE is the greatest thing now and forever. I suspect that's what we have here.

      The only feature of IE 7 that strikes me as a nice piece of user interface is the clear and graphical method of creating a new tab. Everything else is just a minor polishing of IE 6.

  5. Acid Test by TripMaster+Monkey · · Score: 4, Informative

    From TFA:
    Unfortunately, having tabs doesn't always mean you'll pass the acid test.
    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

    1. Re:Acid Test by nick-less · · Score: 4, Funny

      Are there any browsers out there (other than that patched-up Safari version) that have actually passed the Acid Test?

      No, because passing the acid test, breaks ./ compatibility...

  6. Not ditching google and yahoo toolbar support ! by 1010011010 · · Score: 4, Informative
    --
    Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
  7. Does it support W3C standards? by dduardo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Does it support W3C standards? by Reckless+Visionary · · Score: 4, Informative

      I checked out every css selector/property that I could find that I knew didn't work in IE 6. I was able to find no added support in IE7. They failed.

      --
      I think I'll stop here.
    2. Re:Does it support W3C standards? by barzok · · Score: 5, Informative

      From what I've read so far (direct from MSDN), there's nothing that significantly improves the lives of web developers. Only 2 of the many CSS bugs have been resolved, no improvement in CSS implementation/support, no good debug tools.

      So IE7 will continue holding us back.

  8. The Only Feature That Matters... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 5, Funny

    The only feature in IE7 that I need is the ability to download the lastest version of Firefox.

  9. Yes! by Luscious868 · · Score: 5, Funny

    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?

  10. Something borrowed, nothing new by alvinrod · · Score: 4, Insightful
    After glancing over the screenshots and reading some of the comments the author had, the appearance to firefox is remarkable.

    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.

    1. Re:Something borrowed, nothing new by bigman2003 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But if it is a solid browser, that addresses the shortcomings of IE 6, then it will do what it needs to do...

      All it NEEDS to do is catch-up. Microsoft is in the position of dominance, and all they need to do is produce something 'good enough.' It is the upstarts that need to aspire to 'great.'

      Because, being good enough, and coming installed on 90% of the computers sold is a very powerful combination.

      Not to mention the fact that it still has the IE specific features that people use. It is the only browser that runs a good percentage of the WYSIWYG editors out there. And people will keep using it because of things like that.

      --
      No reason to lie.
    2. Re:Something borrowed, nothing new by S.O.B. · · Score: 5, Interesting

      You're absolutely right. In the absence of any real functional difference people will simply use the browser already installed (ie. IE).

      The only real disadvantage IE 7 has is that it will only be available for XP SP2. And IE 7 is not a big enough carrot to get people to upgrade when they can get the same functionality with Firefox/Mozilla/Netscape for free.

      --
      Some of what I say is fact, some is conjecture, the rest I'm just blowing out my ass...you guess.
    3. Re:Something borrowed, nothing new by shellbeach · · Score: 4, Funny

      After glancing over the screenshots and reading some of the comments the author had, the appearance to firefox is remarkable.

      Well, sure, but can your great big so-called fire-thingy install spyware for you, automatically, without you even noticing, huh?

      Beat that, you Open Source geeks - only IE7 is fully compatible with spyware straight out of the box!

    4. Re:Something borrowed, nothing new by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Microsoft's problem is that they're caught between two conflicting objectives under a common goal: They need to make sure that the operating system is the defining element of the PC. In order to do that, they try to a) keep the browser competition at bay and b) reduce the appeal of the (standards based) web. These are mutually exclusive objectives. They can't offer an excellent browser, because that would shift the focus from the OS to the web. They can't offer a lousy browser, because that would drive their customers to the competition and consequently loosen Microsoft's grip on the accepted web technologies.

      Mediocrity is the design goal for IE7.

  11. Wow by Microlith · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

  12. Re:Its actually pretty good by sqlrob · · Score: 4, Funny

    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

  13. What a terrible "review" by Darren+Winsper · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:What a terrible "review" by Synistar · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yes, it is obviously a fanboy generated screed. I would like to see a real review of the browser by real web content developers who know about real UI design and what areas current browsers need improvement on. Wait there are a few reactions:

      A reaction by Molly Holzschlag of thewebstandards.org, a reviewby Dave Shea of (CSS Zen Garden fame), or a review/reaction list on well known designer Shaun Inmans blog. But leave it to slashdot to link to some MS fanboy just to get a rise out of the flamthrower league.

  14. Re:Oh for god sake.... by RangerRick98 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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."
  15. Re:Classic method? by PhilHibbs · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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!

  16. The Reason It's Poor by Mateo_LeFou · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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
  17. Weird Interface by Bodero · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I'm usually a fan of what Microsoft creates, and I follow it closely. I can't help but agree with some of the criticisms of IE7, which, so far looks like a turd.
    • "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.
  18. "classic method of producing superior software"? by narrowhouse · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.
  19. Re:Man that Rocks by /ASCII · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.
  20. Totally inaccurate introduction by It+doesn't+come+easy · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.
  21. Re:Oh for god sake.... by ergo98 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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).

  22. Re:Classic method? by Darren+Winsper · · Score: 4, Informative

    The amusing thing is that Netscape tried this with betas of Netscape 4. So many people had issues with it that they dropped it before the final release. So Microsoft are only 8 years behind the competition ;)

  23. I'm not a usability expert but... by diegocgteleline.es · · Score: 4, Insightful

    it's just me who finds the new layout horrible?

    Really, look at this: http://www.clothedandy.com/Writings/IE%207%20Beta% 201/screenshot.png. Why on earth did they put the "file edit view etc." menu between the tabs and the final page?

    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.

  24. Oh the mirth! by wodeh · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "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
  25. Re:Oh for god sake.... by MartinG · · Score: 4, Informative

    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 .@adgimnoprstu
  26. Now I See the Game Plan! by Mateo_LeFou · · Score: 5, Funny

    1. Profit!
    2. Profit!
    3. Profit!
    4. Profit!
    5. ... ?
    6. Catch Up

    --
    My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
  27. Microsoft's "security" initiatives by Eloquence · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Recently my girlfriend bought a new laptop with Windows XP installed. Before I could use it, I had to reboot about 10 times (no exaggeration) to get required security updates for Windows and the bundled Norton Antivirus package. At the same time, the operating system constantly asked me to set up a Microsoft Passport account and sign up for other MSN services and automatic updates. In fact, in the recommended settings, Windows Update will randomly interrupt you while you're working and force you to reboot. People who say that "Windows is easy to install" seem to never have gone through this process. And remember, I wans't even installing the computer - I booted a brand new machine and connected it to the Internet. This is not malignant, it's an utter disaster of software engineering, especially for average PC users. (Nothing of the sort, of course, happens with any modern Linux distribution. I can update my entire Debian system without rebooting once or reading a single EULA.)

    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.

  28. Free Download by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny
  29. Manage Add Ons IS IN IE 6! by blazerw11 · · Score: 4, Informative

    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
  30. Re:Classic method? by MrPoopyPants · · Score: 4, Funny

    You're right. This is very stupid.

    MS should use some of their other UI ideas to augment this:

    The "STOP" button spins while loading the page. Then, when the page is loaded, the button is disabled for five seconds and a popup appears that says "Your page has loaded. The refresh button will be available in five seconds. Click here to refresh now" and there will be a button to click for refresh and a progress bar. This window automatically closes and the user is returned to the browser after five seconds. There could also be a "Are you sure you want to refresh?" dialog box where the "Yes" and "Cancel" buttons randomly change position each time the dialog box appears.

  31. Not really by Safety+Cap · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    Sure, grandma might have an eight-year-old PC, but most people don't, and most people get a new OS when they get a new PC.

    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.
  32. Morons by kelzer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!