Spring RTS Engine

I didn't say that. I just said it would be hard for you to not act like an idiot.

Deathblane wrote:

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.

Yeah, I really (really, REALLY) need to load the latest version of Opera and see if it works with my security systems.

[EDIT] P.S. Who is running Opera within *nix, and using the ActiveX controls? This is what I am really interested in.

http://www.opera.com/support/search/sup ... ?index=415

Seems you need to do more work than just install in on Linux, but that's common sense, really.

ZellSF wrote:...each Windows reinstall (which I do frequently)...

You call people incompetent IE users but you reinstall Windows frequently yourself. Aha. My last (win2k) reinstall dates 2 1/2 years back and I've been using FF and IE6 ever since then. What does this tell me? I'm the better windows user, apparently.

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$?

├é┬Á$ = MICRO $OFT. Just say MS, HAARP

And How about you stop your Firefox jihad in a thread about IE? Much appreciated.

/me points and laughs at Zell .

Firefox rulez. Faster, Safer, tons of extensions that do like everything. I would take more thought into Opera, but I dont use it for the sake of that I dont want to re-bookmark everything. Since Operas importer dosnt work for me

Get over yourself everyone. Hers how it breaks down.

Internet Explorer may be well written, but it gets attacked far heavier than the rest of the browsers. Firefox is safer because not nearly as many people use it. Mac OS X is safe because no one bothers to write viruses for it. In the end, I will stick with Firefox because IE7 is just playing catchup. I haven't seen the recent tests, but all of the browsers are still broken. IE6 was the most broken, Firefox next, Opera was the best. Internet Explorer is about as fast as firefox to patch a hole, and opera is still day-after updates. I use firefox, I find that it is a lot faster for me. Its up to you, and no amount of being an assclown will change someone elses opinion. Only they can do that.

Get over yourself everyone. Hers how it breaks down.

Internet Explorer may be well written, but it gets attacked far heavier than the rest of the browsers. Firefox is safer because not nearly as many people use it. Mac OS X is safe because no one bothers to write viruses for it. In the end, I will stick with Firefox because IE7 is just playing catchup. I haven't seen the recent tests, but all of the browsers are still broken. IE6 was the most broken, Firefox next, Opera was the best. Internet Explorer is about as fast as firefox to patch a hole, and opera is still day-after updates. I use firefox, I find that it is a lot faster for me. Its up to you, and no amount of being an assclown will change someone elses opinion. Only they can do that.

That's pretty much what I've said about security. More users means more known security holes. It doesn't show how secure the browsers actually are though.

/me points and laughs at Zell .

You do realize that I'm not alone in looking stupid here, no?

You call people incompetent IE users but you reinstall Windows frequently yourself. Aha. My last (win2k) reinstall dates 2 1/2 years back and I've been using FF and IE6 ever since then. What does this tell me? I'm the better windows user, apparently.

Indeed you are.

And How about you stop your Firefox jihad in a thread about IE? Much appreciated.

Well, it really shouldn't have been brought up that "IE is teh sux and Firefox is teh awesome" in the first place in a IE thread. Sure, I shouldn't have responded either, but I like pointing out that people are wrong too much not to


Edit: say, Internet Explorer 7 is available via Windows Update now, right?

Now you are reaching. You want us all to stoop down to admit we're as nutty as you. I feel like I'm stuck in Dr. Strangelove or something. "I'm just as sorry as you are Dimitri"...

Ok, I gotta go home. I hold no hard feelings about this thread. It's been interesting to see what everybody thinks.
And I think no ill will toward you Zell. You are entitled to your opinion. So if you still want to argue with the wind that's fine, I'm leaving the forum for the night.

So in the meantime, let's just say to each other for now: "I hate you!! ...let's hug"

ZellSF wrote:

BlackLiger wrote:

ZellSF wrote: No, I'm an anti-Firefox fanboy, huge difference there. What the hell is ├é┬Á$?
Your opinion. And it sucks.
No, it's not. I could use Internet Explorer 7 without ever being bothered by spyware. You might just be a crap user.
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.

Really? It strikes me as the same concept. Releasing a patch for a buggy piece of software AFTER its official release is the same as any other quick fix.

Its why Spring is still in BETA. Because its not gonna be declared complete till its absolutely bug free (or rather, till OSRTS is released, since thats a total re-write)

Ummm, can we stop feeding the troll yet?

BlackLiger wrote: Really? It strikes me as the same concept. Releasing a patch for a buggy piece of software AFTER its official release is the same as any other quick fix.

I misread something, I think. Yes, it's the same. But you're as unlikely to be robbed as you are unlikely to be affected by a security hole in your browser.

Let's kill the huge quote trees now.

Ummm, can we stop feeding the troll yet?

That would be trolls, not troll. Learn English. And in an Internet Explorer thread, I'd claim Firefox fanboys trolling would be worse than someone defending Internet Explorer. If this was a Firefox thread and I was saying IE was better, it'd be another case entirely.

Discussing a products competition related directly back to the product. My opinion is that Firefox isn't as good as some people would have you believe, but it is still better than internet explorer. Personally, I'm waiting for Firefox 2 to give my final word on which is better.

I'm not using Firefox and I personally can't wait for Firefox 2.0.

Why? It has a spell checker. The internet will be a better place when more browsers get that. Camino (Mac OS X browser) also has spell checking in the nightly builds. Which would explain why there aren't many spelling errors in my posts :P

Now someone needs to do a browser with grammar checking.


That's not very on topic though. Can anyone who has upgraded to Internet Explorer 7 tell me how it deals with it when you open a RSS feed? In details please.

And answer if it's on Windows Update already.

Internet Explorer 7 isss..?

Like MSN.com or what..

I may have it, I don't know >.>

I just get online and look stuff up..

It's actually called Internet Exploiter 7. No it's not a website.

rattle wrote:It's actually called Internet Exploiter 7.

I thought it was called Internet Exploder.

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

Yes, it's faster, more standards compliant, has more features and is more stable. Oh wait, it's none of those things :/

Its faster at rendering than firefox (though ocasionly not as acurate)

Not by any significant margin, and is considerably slower at script execution..

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.

The more "forgiving" you are of sloppy HTML, the more unpredictable your rendering engine becomes. Firefox has a quirks mode that deals with shoddy HTML pretty much as well as IE, but then again, I bet you didn't know that.

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.

I pity the fool who doesn't actually know that HTML is a mark-up language and not a presentation language.

Can we also get some comments from someone who has actually tried IE7 for more then 2 hours?

I've been using it for 2 months... And I work on the internet all day.

:EDIT: Ok, I give that firefox is now alot faster.... I guess that must have been an older version I had that wasa slow, that or my conection was messed up at the time.


:EDIT: Oh, and what pray tell is the point of using a mark up language.... oh yhe, to make somthing more prestentable...

aGorm

aGorm wrote: :EDIT: Oh, and what pray tell is the point of using a mark up language.... oh yhe, to make somthing more prestentable...

Actually, a mark-up language is intended to give a document semantic meaning. HTML doesn't specify at a pixel-level how documents should be rendered.