Anyone can upload extensions, at no charge. But the site is quite new really so most developers haven't bothered yet. The only extension I've used, IE7Pro isn't mentioned either.
I have no idea why it's not on the IEAddons site, but IE7Pro is a very useful piece of work. It's got a complete implementation of AdBlock, Greasemonkey, no NoScript though.
(Additional note: both the features the author of your quote says were stolen from Chrome were in the initial beta release of IE8, six months before Chrome was even seen)
IE8 was definitely the earlier one. Chrome was first unveiled September 2008, and IE8 first unveiled March 2008 (though Microsoft had been talking about it as early as August 2007)
You're describing Web Slices, not accelerators. Accelerators are merely right click menu addons (which have slightly more intelligence to determine where they aren't relevant).
Web Slices are the ones that require additional markup... and most importantly that additional markup is nothing more than a specifically structured DIV tag (no non-standard stuff involved).
Why can't people research this stuff before making asstarded kneejerk responses?
Actually, "Developer Tools" (built into the browser) is quite good, and IE7Pro provides almost all of the other things on your list, WITHOUT having a toolbar.
I think it's because even fucking MS SQL Server has a smaller footprint than Firefox, which is largely like a large Tyrannosaurus print in the backyard.
That may be because it refuses to let IE even try. What sort of fucked up crap is that? If the site doesn't work in a particular browser, that's the users problem isn't it? Don't try and ram your petty biases on your visitors.
I have two tabs open, and I've already got it eating 85MB. And one of the two tabs is the Firefox Google start page. By contrast, IE8 (RC1) is eating 80MB for 6 tabs. If Chrome really uses double that, then that's pretty awe inspiring.
PHP (and I suppose all other server scripting languages / cgis) can access all the filesystem, inside or outside the web. So what's the point having sensible files inside the web tree...
Actually, PHP for one usually can't access files outside the web root and the/tmp folder. This handy feature is called OPEN_BASEDIR and on web hosts, for example, is commonly enabled.
So, to sum you up... "because in my opinion (which is all that's important, of course - your opinion is not important at all) HP and Microsoft products are crap and should be given away free. But Apple, who could never do anything wrong [as evidenced clearly by the blatant ass-kissing you write on Roughly Drafted, which is only slightly more fair and balanced than Fox News] is worth $10 and anyone who doesn't think so if a cheapskate who needs to shut up. Now excuse me while I head back and go fellate Apple management some more".
You know, you still haven't answered why an iPod touch costs $10 to update, and an HP iPaq costs... nothing. No subscription revenue passes between hands either way. So what's different?
And it annoys me, incidentally, since I actually happen to own an iPod touch. And I ask why Apple believes it is necessary to say "here's your update, $20 thanks" (they roughly double the US dollar price to get our local price) when HP (who for the most part I would consider infinitely more evil than Apple - I mean, HP) don't.
Been there, done it. My cellular provider puts up firmware images (they take a while, but they do it eventually) and they don't charge for it. Hell, the last one enabled GPS hardware which was previously disabled!
I'm pretty shocked and appalled that Microsoft doesn't feel it necessary to charge for new features (such as the Xbox 360 updates, including the one that added HD over component) yet Apple does.
Wrong actually. Windows Mobile phones can be upgraded just as easily as an iPhone once your provider creates the image. In fact, I just had mine upgraded from Windows Mobile 6.0 to Windows Mobile 6.1 at no charge! (That 0.1 jump is larger than it sounds).
Slashdot Mirror
I'll cover these bit by bit...
Firefox addons aren't installed into Windows Explorer (unlike IE6 extensions)
Correct. However, not all IE extensions are capable of being loaded by Windows Explorer. Actually, almost none are.
don't have administrator access to the system (unlike IE6 & IE7)
Stop running as an administrator then. Not the browser's fault.
and don't operate as a website plugin (which can be copied, modified, and made to run on page load)
I'm not even sure what that means, but the way I interpret it you're saying that Firefox plugins can't react to DOM events? Pretty sure they can!
Consider it done.
Also, Firebug is unnecessary. The Developer Tools built in aren't too bad.
Anyone can upload extensions, at no charge. But the site is quite new really so most developers haven't bothered yet. The only extension I've used, IE7Pro isn't mentioned either.
I have no idea why it's not on the IEAddons site, but IE7Pro is a very useful piece of work. It's got a complete implementation of AdBlock, Greasemonkey, no NoScript though.
Then why, pray tell, does every single other browser take less RAM to do the same thing?
Oh dear god early AJAX!
I once did some of that way back when - I felt like murdering the bastards in Microsoft's Exchange Server team that invented that monstrosity.
(Additional note: both the features the author of your quote says were stolen from Chrome were in the initial beta release of IE8, six months before Chrome was even seen)
IE8 was definitely the earlier one. Chrome was first unveiled September 2008, and IE8 first unveiled March 2008 (though Microsoft had been talking about it as early as August 2007)
You're describing Web Slices, not accelerators. Accelerators are merely right click menu addons (which have slightly more intelligence to determine where they aren't relevant).
Web Slices are the ones that require additional markup... and most importantly that additional markup is nothing more than a specifically structured DIV tag (no non-standard stuff involved).
Why can't people research this stuff before making asstarded kneejerk responses?
IE does indeed have a catalog just like that.
http://www.ieaddons.com/
Actually, "Developer Tools" (built into the browser) is quite good, and IE7Pro provides almost all of the other things on your list, WITHOUT having a toolbar.
Actually, IE8 does indeed have addons, including an ad blocker!
You'll just have to get over the fact that the ad blocker is part of an addon called "IE7Pro".
I think it's because even fucking MS SQL Server has a smaller footprint than Firefox, which is largely like a large Tyrannosaurus print in the backyard.
That may be because it refuses to let IE even try. What sort of fucked up crap is that? If the site doesn't work in a particular browser, that's the users problem isn't it? Don't try and ram your petty biases on your visitors.
I have two tabs open, and I've already got it eating 85MB. And one of the two tabs is the Firefox Google start page. By contrast, IE8 (RC1) is eating 80MB for 6 tabs. If Chrome really uses double that, then that's pretty awe inspiring.
What are these magic two lines? Is it...
quantum_engine on
quantum_redirect_browser_before_http_request_is_made 1
Because that's the only way to fix it (short of getting a Subject Alt Name added to the certificate, assuming EV, or getting a wilecard if it's not)
PHP (and I suppose all other server scripting languages / cgis) can access all the filesystem, inside or outside the web. So what's the point having sensible files inside the web tree...
Actually, PHP for one usually can't access files outside the web root and the /tmp folder. This handy feature is called OPEN_BASEDIR and on web hosts, for example, is commonly enabled.
Oh, I agree. And to be honest, my carrier probably only did it because customers kept asking "when do we get the new WM release?"
I see... god you're an asshole.
So, to sum you up... "because in my opinion (which is all that's important, of course - your opinion is not important at all) HP and Microsoft products are crap and should be given away free. But Apple, who could never do anything wrong [as evidenced clearly by the blatant ass-kissing you write on Roughly Drafted, which is only slightly more fair and balanced than Fox News] is worth $10 and anyone who doesn't think so if a cheapskate who needs to shut up. Now excuse me while I head back and go fellate Apple management some more".
You know, you still haven't answered why an iPod touch costs $10 to update, and an HP iPaq costs... nothing. No subscription revenue passes between hands either way. So what's different?
And it annoys me, incidentally, since I actually happen to own an iPod touch. And I ask why Apple believes it is necessary to say "here's your update, $20 thanks" (they roughly double the US dollar price to get our local price) when HP (who for the most part I would consider infinitely more evil than Apple - I mean, HP) don't.
You linked to a page of other chat applications. Your point?
Been there, done it. My cellular provider puts up firmware images (they take a while, but they do it eventually) and they don't charge for it. Hell, the last one enabled GPS hardware which was previously disabled!
I'm pretty shocked and appalled that Microsoft doesn't feel it necessary to charge for new features (such as the Xbox 360 updates, including the one that added HD over component) yet Apple does.
Yes, but Microsoft is based in the USA. And Microsoft adds functionality to the Xbox 360 via free updates all the freaking time!
Wrong actually. Windows Mobile phones can be upgraded just as easily as an iPhone once your provider creates the image. In fact, I just had mine upgraded from Windows Mobile 6.0 to Windows Mobile 6.1 at no charge! (That 0.1 jump is larger than it sounds).
Seriously, when has this ever happened? Sounds more like a pipe dream to me.