Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols over at ZDNet summed it up pretty neatly for me and revealed problems and vulnerabilities which I didn’t know about.
Quoting just the highlights (see the review for details):
Operating system incompatibilities: XP is ignored. Whether it’s a dinosaur or not, it’s one of MS’s OS’s and this, to me at least, just isn’t playing fair.
Performance: FF4 betas and Chrome outperform it on the majority of benchmarks. Heck, Opera 11 seems faster to me, also.
The 64-bit version of IE 9 is second-rate. It’s slower that the 32 bit version. What does MS say? “The majority uses x32.” Well, x64 folks matter less? Good to know.
Lack of Security: While more secure than ie8, it’s far from secure. See the review for details. Basically? The Tracking thing is spotty, and the way it handles plug-ins (the fave attack point of hackers) does not warn the way it should when using an outdated plug-in. That’s a major vulnerability.
Lack of Compatibility: So you use “Compatibility”. So, you’re using a prior form of rendering. So much for the hype.
That’s why I’m pretty disappointed. Also? It doesn’t look all that good, at least to me. So I’m sticking with Chrome and FF and Opera.
I think I speak for all of us when I say we do not care about your sexual preferences.
Back on topic. I just installed Pale Moon. Its no different than FF. Same look, feel and everything else. Even uses the same persona. The same browser just a different name. A little bit smoother too.
I think it (IE9) sucks in every way (design, performance and function) but since I'll eventually have to skin it for WB, it'll have to take up some space in the corner...
I think you need to take a big step back and re-evalutate whom is being rude and crude here.
I use Firefox...always have always will. I've never had any problems with it so I never felt any need to change. The only thing I ever use IE for is online banking...then I just park it. I've never been into the browser war...so to speak.
That was the point of my post. Everyone has their own tastes and it is OTT to demand conformity, or belittle others because their's are different. My response was excessive to hammer that point home. If you put down people because they have different tastes, you should not be surprised when they take offense and insult you back.
The better way to go is not to belittle others because their tastes are different, to begin with. But then, that would deprive you of an opportunity to preach, wouldn't it.
scratchthepitch... NOTHING in the quoted [by you] comment #39 was either "insulting" or "brow beating" or even "belittling".
There's no cause nor justification for being "excessive to hammer that point home".
Let's leave the policing of public forum comment to those entrusted to do so.
Thankyou.
I'm a preacher now. Who can magically transform into someone else! Awesome.
Anyway...letting it go.
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/bott/privacy-protection-and-ie9-who-can-you-trust/3014
An article about the Tracking Protection Lists available in IE9 for those of you who like it. Short version: one of these things is crap.
Lets all get together and write Microstuff a dear 'Who Cares' letter stipulating our dislike of their Internet Explorer #9 and its many 'idiot-syncrasies'. Not that it will matter but it might make some people feel good.
Sure...sure...wouldn't that require we all disliked IE9 as much as you do though.
Just a thought.
It would...
I think it's OK-ish.....just not as good as the OS it's intended for.
If IE9 was as much of an improvement over older vers as Win7 is over any other OS created by MS then it would be kicking some serious arse.
Not necessarily. IE9 is nowhere near perfect as I'm sure you can attest. Those who are satisfied with it need do no such thing but I've heard more from those who aren't. Numbers I mean, and the things that are wrong with the browser are real, to us, as I'm sure that the things right with it are to you. Like I said in a previous post, it works for some but no others. Why that is is unknown.
I found this one balanced and very informative, Savyg:
http://blog.privacychoice.org/2011/02/08/reconstructing-do-not-track/
"Each browser’s approach to Do-Not-Track has strengths, weaknesses and dependencies. An ideal approach could combine the best attributes of the Microsoft and Firefox approaches:A binary, global do-not-track signal which must be respected as to activities commonly defined as “tracking.” This provides simplicity and durability for the broadest set of web users, provided that “tracking” can be appropriately defined.Settings to control tracking interactions directly in the browser. This provides certainty that choices are honored, with less dependency on server-side compliance.The ability for any selection to be made in an web interaction, rather than within the browser setting menus. This makes choices findable in a context where users can best understand their purpose and effect.Choices to selectively allow or disallow tracking at the company or website level, as a complement to global settings. This provides versatile choices to afford web users the greatest benefit from their online profile and encourages value exchange with web providers.Independent audits of tracking practices which cannot be externally verified. This allows marketers to continue to use non-behavioral data without compromising certainty for consumers."
Amen!
Well said, old man!
I'm wary of installing ANYTHING from MS because I clicked a news topic at the MSN website and it INSTALLED Live Messenger WITHOUT asking me for ANY permission whatsoever. MS Malware? Seriously? Has this happened to anyone else?
soulspark, I've never heard of that happening before.
Could you give a link to that site?
For IE it pretty much is. Unlike Win7, it has established competition that already performs great, and functionally is pretty much the same (at least until HTML5 animated stuff comes out, where the other browsers will need further enhancements from what I've seen.)
Sure Doc. Don't know how to create links yet, but the site was - asus.msn.com I clicked on a news article that was on their current events slide show header and it redirected me to a related site containing the article. Also a window popped up telling me the Live Messenger was being installed. Like I said NO "do you want to install?" just "you'll eat it and like it."....
What browser were you using, soulspark?
I'd imagine it had more to do with the OEM software than the site/browser. ASUS software is better than some, but I still got rid of it.
I wonder how long it will be before MS says everyone has to use IE9 with their websites and discontinues available downloads for IE8.
I'm also wondering if Firefox 4 will have a big memory leak. Lately Firefox has seemed bloated.
I was wondering if he was using a browser which 'told' the site he didn't have live messenger?
Would IE9 do that? Curious.
The IE1 to IE9 upgrade cycle ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5QqYVurImY&feature=player_embedded
Didn't work more than it did. No surprise there. They should rename it. Qwerky fits.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
