Meh Internet explorer 7

NOiZE · Post by **NOiZE** » 19 Oct 2006, 21:49

Well personally i use Opera, and quite happy with it. Sometimes it has some annoyances, but every program has that for me

ZellSF · Post by **ZellSF** » 19 Oct 2006, 21:50

Foe OfTheBee wrote:IE 7 is like Firefox, but ugly and with worse CSS support.

Also false. The browsers has tons more differences than that. That would be like me saying Firefox is like K-Meleon, except less awesome.

Risasi · Post by **Risasi** » 19 Oct 2006, 22:06

Dude, you are just argumentative.

ZellSF · Post by **ZellSF** » 19 Oct 2006, 22:10

Risasi wrote:Dude, you are just argumentative.

And right. Don't forget right.

It takes two to argue, so you have to blame more than just me.

aGorm · Post by **aGorm** » 19 Oct 2006, 22:13

IE Renderer is way better. From a certain point of view.

Its faster at rendering than firefox (though ocasionly not as acurate) and also way more forgiving on sloppy HTML.
Of course some people say that means its a bad renderer, because it alows sloppy code. On teh flip side some people think its better for that very reason.

Unfortunatly the company I work for is very MS orientated, so I use IE.

What realy bugs me is how so thing just wont render the same in either browser. That is the problem. If you write perfect HTML all browers should show it the same, but they dont. Pretty dam Gay. (thats a genral complaint aimed at all browers, and no, none of them are "right" so no "Firefox renders it correctly" crap. Why can't they all just agreee on how things should work. Would make life so much easier and take all theat browers compatiblity code out of web pages...

aGorm

rattle · Post by **rattle** » 19 Oct 2006, 22:36

aGorm, it was IE which had troubles displaying websites properly comes to stylesheets. The same stylesheet tags displayed the way it was intended to in different browsers.
One argument which IE got over FF is probably a better memory management. FF still likes to fall in deep memory holes but a CTRL+W every 20 minutes doesn't hurt.

Anyway, IE3 < IE 4 < IE 5 < IE6 IE < IE7< *. Can't be denied.

HAARP · Post by **HAARP** » 19 Oct 2006, 22:58

Dude, what are you, a ├é┬Á$ fanboy?

There's no reason to defend IE. There isn't. It's still a spyware-ridden piece of crap, not worth existing. Let alone the fact that it's install automaticly, just cause they can

ZellSF · Post by **ZellSF** » 19 Oct 2006, 23:33

Dude, what are you, a ├é┬Á$ fanboy?

No, I'm an anti-Firefox fanboy, huge difference there. What the hell is ├é┬Á$?

There's no reason to defend IE.

Your opinion. And it sucks.

It's still a spyware-ridden piece of crap

No, it's not. I could use Internet Explorer 7 without ever being bothered by spyware. You might just be a crap user.

Let alone the fact that it's install automaticly, just cause they can

That's not the only reason, and again, you can hardly blame the company for this. You would've done the same in their place. How, exactly, were you planning on downloading and installing Firefox if the OS didn't already come with a browser anyway?

If you're talking about 7 installing automatically, that's because you allow the OS to install security updates. Internet Explorer 7 is a security update.

BlackLiger · Post by **BlackLiger** » 19 Oct 2006, 23:49

ZellSF wrote:
Dude, what are you, a ├é┬Á$ fanboy?
No, I'm an anti-Firefox fanboy, huge difference there. What the hell is ├é┬Á$?

There's no reason to defend IE.
Your opinion. And it sucks.

It's still a spyware-ridden piece of crap
No, it's not. I could use Internet Explorer 7 without ever being bothered by spyware. You might just be a crap user.

Let alone the fact that it's install automaticly, just cause they can
That's not the only reason, and again, you can hardly blame the company for this. You would've done the same in their place. How, exactly, were you planning on downloading and installing Firefox if the OS didn't already come with a browser anyway?

If you're talking about 7 installing automatically, that's because you allow the OS to install security updates. Internet Explorer 7 is a security update.

... really? So, is that like having a new bank account after theives drained my old one of all its cash is a security update?

ZellSF · Post by **ZellSF** » 20 Oct 2006, 00:01

BlackLiger wrote:
ZellSF wrote:
Dude, what are you, a ├é┬Á$ fanboy?
No, I'm an anti-Firefox fanboy, huge difference there. What the hell is ├é┬Á$?

There's no reason to defend IE.
Your opinion. And it sucks.

It's still a spyware-ridden piece of crap
No, it's not. I could use Internet Explorer 7 without ever being bothered by spyware. You might just be a crap user.

Let alone the fact that it's install automaticly, just cause they can
That's not the only reason, and again, you can hardly blame the company for this. You would've done the same in their place. How, exactly, were you planning on downloading and installing Firefox if the OS didn't already come with a browser anyway?

If you're talking about 7 installing automatically, that's because you allow the OS to install security updates. Internet Explorer 7 is a security update.
... really? So, is that like having a new bank account after theives drained my old one of all its cash is a security update?

That's just an invalid comparison that shows that you really haven't understood what we've been talking about in this topic.

Forboding Angel · Post by **Forboding Angel** » 20 Oct 2006, 00:30

ZellSF wrote:
It's still a spyware-ridden piece of crap
No, it's not. I could use Internet Explorer 7 without ever being bothered by spyware. You might just be a crap user.

bullshit

Maybe if you only visit 5 sites and NONE of them have banner ads.

ZellSF · Post by **ZellSF** » 20 Oct 2006, 00:36

Forboding Angel wrote:
ZellSF wrote:
It's still a spyware-ridden piece of crap
No, it's not. I could use Internet Explorer 7 without ever being bothered by spyware. You might just be a crap user.
bullshit

Maybe if you only visit 5 sites and NONE of them have banner ads.

Haven't ever used Internet Explorer 7 enough to have an opinion, have you? Because I visit far more sites than that each Windows reinstall (which I do frequently) and never get any spyware because of it.

tl;dr: You're wrong, simple as that. The first word of your post is a perfect description of your post.

But it's nice that some of the people who claim Internet Explorer 7 is a bad browser actually prove that they haven't ever used it.

Forboding Angel · Post by **Forboding Angel** » 20 Oct 2006, 00:41

ZellSF wrote:
Forboding Angel wrote:
ZellSF wrote: No, it's not. I could use Internet Explorer 7 without ever being bothered by spyware. You might just be a crap user.
bullshit

Maybe if you only visit 5 sites and NONE of them have banner ads.
Haven't ever used Internet Explorer 7 enough to have an opinion, have you? Because I visit far more sites than that each Windows reinstall (which I do frequently) and never get any spyware because of it.

tl;dr: You're wrong, simple as that. The first word of your post is a perfect description of your post.

But it's nice that some of the people who claim Internet Explorer 7 is a bad browser actually prove that they haven't ever used it.

My god, you are a rabid fanboi. "Down boy!"

Some thing go in a cycle. The Gui will still eat developers, IE will still suck, and M$ will always massively overprice their software, and you'll probably still be dumb. Some things just don't change.

*leaves thread*

Risasi · Post by **Risasi** » 20 Oct 2006, 00:45

Wow, this argument is still going....

Zell, c'mon dude...you gotta chill out a bit. You are practically slobbering at the mouth with foam. It pretty bad when you have me defending Firefox. After all I'm a Mozilla fanboy. You are just getting illogical and trying to defend an indefensible position. That position being MS IE is secure.

Look it hasn't even been a day and they found a bug in IE7 that was reported months ago in IE6:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/10/19/ie7_first_bug/

I'm not trying to totally diss on IE. I use it...sometimes. I have to for work if I want to be able to do my job. Regardless my browser of choice right now is Mozilla 1.7, but I'm slowly becoming fond of FF. It's a good middle ground. Does almost anything, has pretty good security as long as one doesn't go crazy with the extensions, and now it can run IE in a tab for websites you specify. What's not to like?

PicassoCT · Post by **PicassoCT** » 20 Oct 2006, 00:53

He is simply not here for the Explorer but for the Fire..

This Thread is about to become a Opera.

ZellSF · Post by **ZellSF** » 20 Oct 2006, 00:55

Zell, c'mon dude...you gotta chill out a bit. You are practically slobbering at the mouth with foam.

I'm quite relaxed actually. So you shouldn't worry.

It pretty bad when you have me defending Firefox. After all I'm a Mozilla fanboy.

Considering Firefox is the main browser in the Mozilla project, that makes all the sense in the world. Mozilla itself doesn't exist any longer, and has been renamed SeaMonkey. So I wonder why you refer it to that name when you're supposedly using it and so should've know that wasn't its name.

You are just getting illogical and trying to defend an indefensible position. That position being MS IE is secure.

It is more than secure enough if you're not an idiot. I realize you might find this difficult.

Look it hasn't even been a day and they found a bug in IE7 that was reported months ago in IE6:

As said, that's because of the amount of users. Just because Firefox has less known security vulnerabilities doesn't mean it has less security vulnerabilities.

From the description, that bug is anything but dangerous for the end user anyway.

My god, you are a rabid fanboi. "Down boy!"

I'm an anti-fanboy. Because Firefox needs more of those. Why would I be a fanboy of something I use rarely? Weird logic you've got there.

Some thing go in a cycle. The Gui will still eat developers, IE will still suck, and M$ will always massively overprice their software, and you'll probably still be dumb. Some things just don't change.

Some people will always be too damn lazy to type "soft", some people will always refuse to acknowledge that they've proved that they have no idea what they're talking about. You're one of those.

* Leaves thread

You shouldn't have entered in the first place, really.

tl;dr: You need more than less than critical flaws found in a browser used by 90% of the world and personal insults, anti-IE fanboys. That won't ever get anyone convinced Internet Explorer is an inferior browser.

Risasi · Post by **Risasi** » 20 Oct 2006, 01:05

Already is a great opera. George Lucas eat your heart out you pontificating bastard...

I don't care, I gave up on this thread three hours ago. No use fighting over spilled beta code on the Microsoft altar of sloppy coding.

Anyway, at least it's been entertaining today. I need it after this morning. One crashed RAID array on a Microsoft Exchange 2003 server. NO validated system state backup. Damn Microsoft.
Problems with a third party Email hosting company who won't return my calls after a problem that started SATURDAY with the version of Outlook they run.
A remote user with a crashing laptop, who lost his windows profile this morning. Nevermind I just mailed him a new laptop that will be there tomorro. Oh joy, joy, happy, happy! It's only a day late!!
The worst part is he needed a laptop a week ago, so I had to find something locally off of the shelf instead of ordering from Lenovo and wait 5-7 business days, which would have been the smart thing to do. That left me with the problem of "downgrading" from Windows Media Center to Windows XP Pro. That was a three hour conversation to M$, who initially wanted to charge me another $10 for a new Product Key, after the copy I JUST BOUGHT WITH THE LAPTOP DIDN'T WORK.
I probably infringed on some Microsoft law setting up a dual boot Windows MCE/XP Pro install...now just waiting for the subpeona.
Oh yeah, my coworker and I also had one problem with a Debian spam filter server running LAMP. Quickly resolved in about an hour and a half.

Read that list above with care, you'll begin to undertand why I am not fond of Microsoft products...

ZellSF · Post by **ZellSF** » 20 Oct 2006, 01:09

Read that list above with care, you'll begin to undertand why I am not fond of Microsoft products...

Read your post and you'll realize it has nothing to do with Internet Explorer 7 and so nothing to do in this topic.

No use fighting over spilled beta code on the Microsoft altar of sloppy coding.

You can't write a single post without spelling errors and complain about code that's likely at least the length of 100 posts? Uh...

Deathblane · Post by **Deathblane** » 20 Oct 2006, 01:10

PicassoCT wrote:He is simply not here for the Explorer but for the Fire.. This Thread is about to become a Opera.

*groans*
It's puns like this that make me wish for the fabled face stabbing device of Bash.org fame.

More on topic, I presonally use Opera. It seems to me to have a higher learning curve than Firefox but once your used to it it does more, more easily.

It did have some issues with some sites, but with the last two versions or so that appears to have been cleared up.

Risasi · Post by **Risasi** » 20 Oct 2006, 01:12

ZellSF wrote: Considering Firefox is the main browser in the Mozilla project, that makes all the sense in the world. Mozilla itself doesn't exist any longer, and has been renamed SeaMonkey. So I wonder why you refer it to that name when you're supposedly using it and so should've know that wasn't its name.

Help, About, Right Click Drag, CTRL+C, CTRL+V:

Mozilla 1.7.12
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050915

P.S. I also have SeaMonkey installed. And said so earlier. Pay attention.

You are just getting illogical and trying to defend an indefensible position. That position being MS IE is secure.
It is more than secure enough if you're not an idiot. I realize you might find this difficult.

So I am an idiot?

Spring RTS Engine

Meh Internet explorer 7