backtop


Print 80 comment(s) - last by akosixiv.. on Mar 26 at 1:31 PM


Internet Explorer 8 launches today around the world. The new browser features increased speed and security, as well as new browsing modes and other new features.  (Source: Microsoft)
Microsoft's entry in the next generation browser war is ready at last

The browser industry's next generation war has been waging for a couple years now.  Apple released Safari 3 in 2007.  Mozilla released Firefox 3 on June 17, 2008.  Opera released its 9.6 browser on October 8, 2008 and Google launched its Chrome browser on December 11, 2008.  Noticeably absent from these competitors was market leader Microsoft.  It had not released a browser since the introduction of Internet Explorer 7 in 2006 -- a browser whose major feature was the introduction of tabs (along with security improvements).

Last year, Microsoft began to perk attention in the computer community releasing a beta of Internet Explorer 8, which featured innovative browsing modes like InPrivate, which were quickly copied by its competitors.  The beta was followed by the release candidate, which hit the internet in January.  And today those efforts it teased at last year will finally come to fruition when it releases the finalized version of its Internet Explorer 8 around the world at noon. 

Steve Ballmer, CEO of Microsoft says that security is a major focus of the new browser.  Rather than forcing users to rely on antivirus, antimalware, and firewall programs, Microsoft, like its competitors, has been working to build a lot of protection into the browser itself.  States Mr. Ballmer, "Customers have made clear what they want in a Web browser -- safety, speed and greater ease of use.  With Internet Explorer 8, we are delivering a browser that gets people to the information they need, fast, and provides protection that no other browser can match."

Microsoft claims that its browser blocks two to four times the malware of rival next generation browsers.  While such claims are certainly suspect, especially given the added security layer that some browsers like Mozilla get from non-stock add-ons, Internet Explorer 8 is definitely a big step up from the security of Internet Explorer 7. 

Speed, as Mr. Ballmer mentioned, is another key area where IE 8 shines.  Microsoft claims it holds the speed record browsing 15 of the 20 top worldwide sites -- again a rather suspicious claim.  Still, those who have used IE 8 can likely relate that the browser does load JavaScript and pages with heavy CSS content or other advanced formats a lot faster than IE 7 did.  Microsoft brags, "Internet Explorer 8 is one of the fastest browsers on the market today, beating other top browsers in page load time on almost 50 percent of the 25 top comScore Inc. Web sites."

Accelerators and web slices are two key features of the new browser.  Both of these features provide faster access to popular or “favorites” content.  Another big feature is Microsoft's improved Live Search, which includes Visual Search Suggestions -- this rich search provides visuals of the pages being searched and other information.  While some will find it too much information, others will enjoy it, and the feature just may win a bit of search engine market share for Microsoft.

Internet Explorer 8 is available in 25 languages -- Arabic, Chinese (Traditional, Simplified and Hong Kong), Czech, Danish, Dutch, English, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Hebrew, Hungarian, Italian, Japanese, Korean, Norwegian, Portuguese (Brazil and Portugal), Polish, Russian, Spanish, Swedish and Turkish.

The final version will be available for download at noon, here.





Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

This is my only beef with DailyTech...
By Boze on 3/19/2009 9:34:46 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
Microsoft claims that its browser blocks two to four times the malware of rival next generation browsers. While such claims are certainly suspect, especially given the added security layer that some browsers like Mozilla get from non-stock add-ons, Internet Explorer 8 is definitely a big step up from the security of Internet Explorer 7.

Speed, as Mr. Ballmer mentioned, is another key area where IE 8 shines. Microsoft claims it holds the speed record browsing 15 of the 20 top worldwide sites -- again a rather suspicious claim. Still, those who have used IE 8 can likely relate that the browser does load JavaScript and pages with heavy CSS content or other advanced formats a lot faster than IE 7 did. Microsoft brags, "Internet Explorer 8 is one of the fastest browsers on the market today, beating other top browsers in page load time on almost 50 percent of the 25 top comScore Inc. Web sites."


I know this is a "blog" Jason, but you're posting on a news site. Unless you can provide evidence or references to the contrary of their claims, let the public formulate its own opinions and let reviewers determine the veracity of such claims; likely you'll only have to wait until one minute past noon today to find out if any of the claims are true or not anyway.

Don't turn DailyTech into a joke of a news outlet like FoxNews. Do you really want to be known as the "fair and balanced" tech reporting site? And yes... I'm posting on Firefox. :)




RE: This is my only beef with DailyTech...
By Silverel on 3/19/09, Rating: 0
RE: This is my only beef with DailyTech...
By kmwagner on 3/19/09, Rating: 0
RE: This is my only beef with DailyTech...
By fatedtodie on 3/19/09, Rating: -1
RE: This is my only beef with DailyTech...
By aftlizard on 3/19/2009 11:08:01 AM , Rating: 2
Well beyond the tone of your reply, I have to agree. The RC candidates really were pretty inconsistent.

MS isn't completely wrong however as some web pages do load up incredibly fast but others not so, in fact quite a few web pages I had to run in compatibility mode and others simply wouldn't render correctly no matter what mode I was in. Perhaps this release fixed most of that but for now I will keep FF as my primary browser, but it's not perfect either.


By aftlizard on 3/19/2009 11:09:01 AM , Rating: 2
Oops replied to the wrong. person


By afkrotch on 3/19/2009 3:16:52 PM , Rating: 2
My IE8 test was a little bit of a mixed bag. I loaded it on 2 comps. I hate dual monitor setups on a single computer as the 2nd one is pretty much worthless when you're in a game, so I just have 2 comps there instead.

Anyways. One machine worked flawlessly. Now the compatibility mode annoyed me. I hated having to click the button. Then it became transparent. Now, it seems to be back again. Have no idea.

My other machine was horrible, cause it'd crash as soon as you paste a link into the url box. The url drop-down opened, but no links ever got saved in it. Ctrl-click a link and the other tab would open, but go nowhere. You can manually type in an address and it'd go fine.

I ended up having to reload the machine to fix that issue. Uninstall, registry cleaning, and reinstall did not fix it. Don't know what the hell happened there.

I tried out FF and Chrome, but saw no point. Does the same stuff as IE8, but has a completely different layout that I didn't like (mainly cause I wasn't use to it).

Add-ons/Extensions don't matter to me. Have one core playing with a browser that does everything or spread the workload to the different cores by using seperate programs that run in the background.


By Lerianis on 3/19/2009 11:40:00 PM , Rating: 2
It's not an opinion based on 'FUD'. The fact is that these things ARE suspect with the number of times that Microsoft has said things like this, and later on we have found out that outside testers timed the pages and found.... Microsoft was lying through their teeth about the speed of Internet Explorer.


By Ratinator on 3/19/2009 11:17:36 AM , Rating: 3
If they have pre-debunked it, then back it up with facts and not opinions. It is pretty simple to do.


By CGfreak102 on 3/23/2009 1:03:52 PM , Rating: 2
"IE8 beta is the slowest of the next gen browsers."

First off, why are you judging a beta version. Thats like taking a new car Ford or any car company is working on, one that has known issues with. Then putting that on the market and being judgmental towards it. For the simple people out there here is a definition of the word 'beta'. 4: a nearly complete prototype of a product (as software) <released in beta> <the beta version> (From http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Beta ). That being said if you still dont understand that it will have issues, might think of doing something else with your time.


RE: This is my only beef with DailyTech...
By JasonMick (blog) on 3/19/2009 10:46:28 AM , Rating: 2
Internet speed testing is highly subjective. One of the main elements that is at the testers' discretion is what version of competitors browsers are used. Did Microsoft test against Firefox 3.0 or 3.0.6? They don't say. Further, they can pick certain sites which their browser does well on, over sites that their competitors do well on.

Apple, Microsoft, Mozilla all claim to have "the fastest browser" and make similar claims as these. I say take them all with a grain of salt. That's all I meant.

As I said, IE 8 is noticeably faster. I think that is the story at the end of the day, regardless of whether FF or IE is faster on xxxxx site.


By omnicronx on 3/19/2009 12:00:22 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
As I said, IE 8 is noticeably faster. I think that is the story at the end of the day, regardless of whether FF or IE is faster on xxxxx site.
While testing the RC, I noticed that many sites which they label 'top 20' were quite speedy, and definitely faster than FF. But.. other sites I noticed no improvement at all, and was definitely slower on a lot of other sites. Makes me wonder if MS optimized IE specifically for certain sites, or perhaps certain common actions used within these sites.


By vic1218 on 3/20/2009 12:51:51 AM , Rating: 2
The point is you should refrain from injecting your own opinion in a news article.


RE: This is my only beef with DailyTech...
By napalmjack on 3/20/2009 12:41:05 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
I think that is the story at the end of the day, regardless of whether FF or IE is faster on xxxxx site.


What most of us want to hear is how fast IE8 is on XXX sites.
;)


By akosixiv on 3/26/2009 1:31:45 PM , Rating: 2
just stick with FF, most of the XXX sites have been coded with viewing from IE being just an afterthought.


By lexluthermiester on 3/25/2009 11:37:26 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Apple, Microsoft, Mozilla all claim to have "the fastest browser" and make similar claims as these. I say take them all with a grain of salt. That's all I meant.


At this point in time, who has the faster browser is becoming a null argument. Internet speeds are rising quickly, and the average speed of the system running the browsers are getting faster as well. What we all need to look at is the total package. Is the browser easy to use? Is the browser secure? Will it correctly display the web pages I visit? Will it run stable? Will it run needless and pointless crap without asking me first? Those questions are the reason I run Firefox and Opera.

quote:
As I said, IE 8 is noticeably faster. I think that is the story at the end of the day, regardless of whether FF or IE is faster on xxxxx site.


Fair enough. But there is one side of this equation that many have over-looked. And that is, why would we want a web browser written by the same company as the OS it runs on? The inherent security risks are not worth the very minor benefits.

I make a habit of forcibly deleting IE from every install of windows that runs in my home. FireFox and Opera are the browsers of choice. If I want a safari, I'll go to Africa where I'll be a little more secure. And Google's browser is good, but not quite there yet.


RE: This is my only beef with DailyTech...
By jarman on 3/19/2009 11:46:31 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Don't turn DailyTech into a joke of a news outlet like FoxNews.


You had a well formed argument until you added that sentence. Insinuating that Fox News is any different/worse than any other cable news organization is borderline delusional, at best.


By spread on 3/19/2009 11:15:37 PM , Rating: 2
This just in:

Using Internet Explorer gives you chlamydia.

/FoxNews


RE: This is my only beef with DailyTech...
By omnicronx on 3/19/2009 11:57:10 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
I know this is a "blog" Jason, but you're posting on a news site.
DT is a news/blog site, they have two separate sections.
quote:
Don't turn DailyTech into a joke of a news outlet like FoxNews. Do you really want to be known as the "fair and balanced" tech reporting site?
quote:
Unless you can provide evidence or references to the contrary of their claims, let the public formulate its own opinions and let reviewers determine the veracity of such claims;
Its a Blog, that's the entire point, you do not necessarily have to back up your claims, and it can be opinionated. If this were posted as news than I would agree with you, but it is not, so Jason can feel free to voice his opinion. In fact I think the very reason he posted it as a blog, is because feelings about browsers are quite subjective in the first place. They will vary person to person depending on their needs (and worries).

If you don't like DT blogs, stick to the news section.


RE: This is my only beef with DailyTech...
By acase on 3/19/2009 12:42:46 PM , Rating: 5
I don't really care either way about what he wrote, but uhhh, unless IE7 is lying to me this IS posted in the news section and not the blog section.


RE: This is my only beef with DailyTech...
By omnicronx on 3/19/2009 2:01:33 PM , Rating: 2
Damn, I'm sorry for grilling you then ;)

You even wrote 'I know this is a "blog" Jason', but I never caught on that it was posted as news.

Sorry about that.


By acase on 3/19/2009 4:44:02 PM , Rating: 2
That wasn't me that wrote that I was just taking up for it...but I will accept the apology anyways ;-)


By callmeroy on 3/19/2009 12:28:45 PM , Rating: 2
Your first mistake is if you actually view daily tech as a serious tech news site. It's clearly not, its most definitely just a news BLOG site -- DT almost NEVER is on the ball delivering the news first on anything, they almost NEVER write the original story --- many many times I've seen the stories written on other sites -- almost word for word in some cases, they just change up a word or two so its not so overly obvious I guess.

Secondly with the Fox News thing -- if you believe the station is a joke because you made up that opinion on your OWN from actually watching it -- that's cool....but hating or joking at Fox News is the current popular trend -- so folks just say they hate it or its joke because that's the "in thing", I doubt most people even watch it or have watched it at all yet they judge it...

I only watch Fox News for one reason -- I like Glen Beck's show and he's on there now (used to be on CNN). I catch his show about 3 times a week even though its on everyday.

As a strict news station - no I don't watch much Fox News outside of Glen's show.

All I know is he seems pretty honest and logical to me on the majority of the issues.

-fin


RE: This is my only beef with DailyTech...
By Staples on 3/19/2009 3:21:37 PM , Rating: 2
Every author at this site has very pronounce biases. I read this site but I do not recommend it to any of my friends because it is so full of spin articles.


By nixoofta on 3/21/2009 3:42:45 PM , Rating: 2
If you're comin' out of the closet we're gonna need more info...

ie...."My name is ****** and I read Dailytech"

Step 1. "We admitted we were powerless over reading Dailytech and our lives had become unmanageable."


By Moishe on 3/23/2009 9:46:38 AM , Rating: 2
You are right. I was just gonna post about that.

Without proof or a good logical reason why these claims are suspicious... Mick is just being stupid.

Sure IE has never been the best, but Microsoft is certainly capable of making a high quality product and they're no more or less trustworthy than Apple, Opera, or Mozilla.


Acid3 score?
By dickeywang on 3/19/09, Rating: 0
RE: Acid3 score?
By MScrip on 3/19/2009 2:21:27 PM , Rating: 5
So, it doesn't render the Acid test correctly... how about every other website you visit?

I like the idea of the Acid test... it's a good way to see if a browser is compliant.

But, another good test is if my favorite websites look right.

Oh, and IE has always sucked at the Acid test, right? So why is IE used the most?

Is the Acid test really the measure of a good browser?


RE: Acid3 score?
By TomZ on 3/19/2009 4:14:54 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Is the Acid test really the measure of a good browser?
No, its an esoteric test of combinations of things that will never occur in reality. "Compliance" with Acid is academic, really.

The larger compatibility story is going to be how IE8 renders pages in a more compliant way that IE7, but where you have a lot of web sites who are coded based on the assumption that IE7 and IE8 are the same. I personally think that Microsoft is going to incur the wrath of a lot of users in the short term for finally addressing this problem. In other words, short-term pain for a long-term gain.


RE: Acid3 score?
By Lerianis on 3/19/2009 11:43:17 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, it isn't 'academic'. The Acid 2 and 3 tests use the major things that are included in the standards. If they don't display correctly, a lot of pages that use those standards ALSO won't display correctly.


RE: Acid3 score?
By tfk11 on 3/20/2009 2:22:04 AM , Rating: 2
As a web developer I can attest to the importance of adhering to the standards. Ie is still lagging other popular browsers by fair margin in its level of standards support yet it is able to render many web pages properly while other browsers have problems despite stronger standards support for the sole reason that these pages were created specifically for ie due to its large market share.

It's agreed that avoiding a browser with poor standards support while still rendering virtually every page correctly has no immediate benefit. However, every web developer that has created a standards based layout that renders perfectly in all the popular browsers except ie will attest to the fact that avoiding browsers with weak standards support is very good for the internet as a whole over the long term.

Please don’t disregard the importance of the acid test due to the fact that no real web pages employ as many standards as the test page. We’d like to be able to use all the features provided by the standards without resorting to so many hacks one day but until all popular browsers have better standards support some features will remain underutilized. So yes, the acid test really is a measure of a good browser.


RE: Acid3 score?
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 3/20/2009 7:59:44 AM , Rating: 1
My biggest problem with this argument is the academic nature of it. IE had at one point > 80% market share. They were the standard, yet academics decided to go off on their own and "create a standard". Heck the group that puts out these "standards" was founded after the browser war where IE destroyed Netscape. How is it that a group can come in after the fact and push for "standards" when IE clearly established standards several years prior. If a company already had working standards in place (IE didn't seem to have problems serving up the web) then why would these guys take the Open Source approach and decide to go off on their own and "make their own standard". I say its the Open Source approach because every time someone in the OS community doesn't get their way a new flavor of the parent system is spun off that does operate "their way". Look no further than Mandrake/Mandriva to attest to this behavior.

I really think the whole web standards thing is still just another "We don't like Microsoft and their IE Browser so were going to make standards for the OS community then whine when we have to still re-code for IE".

/rant off


RE: Acid3 score?
By tfk11 on 3/20/2009 12:13:58 PM , Rating: 2
It would be silly to argue that IE doesn't get the job done because it clearly does, yet the way in which it does so has traditionally not only failed to consider users not running Microsoft software but often excludes these users by design. Had the "standards" set forth by Microsoft been more open and interoperable it may have been possible for other browsers to follow Microsoft's lead rather than developing their own set of open standards. In my opinion the whole "We don't like Microsoft and their IE browser" attitude is well deserved.

The argument would indeed be purely academic were it not for the closed and quirky nature of the "standards" set forth by Microsoft which I believe was and continues to be the driving force behind the push for establishing open standards.


RE: Acid3 score?
By Moishe on 3/23/2009 9:53:39 AM , Rating: 2
You're right that this "method" is the pattern of Open Source. There are good things about being unsatisfied with proprietary and limited thinking, but there are bad things about forking and forking.


RE: Acid3 score?
By Eri Hyva on 3/21/2009 4:50:47 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
So why is IE used the most?


Eh?

IE is shipped with every Windows installation so far, Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows 7.

We shall see if Microsoft ships final Windows 7 with IE, but probably yes.


Now the EU will have a strong case...
By chillingrsx on 3/19/2009 9:19:59 AM , Rating: 1
"Rather than forcing users to rely on antivirus, antimalware, and firewall programs, Microsoft, like its competitors, has been working to build a lot of protection into the browser itself."

...against Microsoft for trying to monopolize itself against the antivirus/firewall 3rd party companies.




RE: Now the EU will have a strong case...
By Reclaimer77 on 3/19/2009 9:27:21 AM , Rating: 1
Because the browser will be more secure ?

You are a jackass.


By chillingrsx on 3/19/2009 9:32:47 AM , Rating: 2
They putting those 3rd party software protection companies out of business because it's made from Microsoft.

/sarcasm end


RE: Now the EU will have a strong case...
By FITCamaro on 3/19/2009 10:30:47 AM , Rating: 5
I don't know why this got rated down. In a way he's right. But so is the other guy.

The browser will now be more secure.

But it wouldn't surprise me to see the EU try to sue Microsoft for this because it would cause people to stop using third party programs if they are no longer needed. Look at when Microsoft wanted to release Vista with the kernel locked down. The EU threatened them because AV makers complained this would make their products less necessary. Of course they worded it as Microsoft was trying to make its own products better and have an unfair advantage.


By Bytre on 3/19/2009 4:17:06 PM , Rating: 2
Hogwash. The bad guys can continue to exploit vulnerabilities in the kernel from discovery until patch, and without the documented and stable kernel hooks (which MS added in SP1), protection vendors had to rely on offline scanning to clean up such threats.

Some vendors didn't care because they didn't have kernel mode protection.


By Spivonious on 3/20/2009 8:17:36 AM , Rating: 2
In Windows 7 you can uninstall/disable IE8, so the EU has zero arguments.


IE8
By blagishnessosity on 3/19/2009 9:28:49 AM , Rating: 2
The only reason I give a crap is because years from now maybe I won't have to bend over backwards getting my web pages to display properly in IE. But as far as actual browsing is concerned, as stated above, there's no replacement for FF + AdBlock.




RE: IE8
By FITCamaro on 3/19/2009 10:32:23 AM , Rating: 3
IE7 + IE7Pro accomplishes the same thing. But yes I still use Firefox as well.


RE: IE8
By Bruneauinfo on 3/20/2009 12:23:52 AM , Rating: 2
only problem is you'll never get this through the skulls of people who don't code web pages.


RE: IE8
By noirsoft on 3/22/2009 12:22:10 AM , Rating: 2
I do a bit of lite HTML coding for personal websites, and I always find that my pages look correctly on IE first-time out, and that I have to do extra work to make them look right on Firefox. And yes, they are standards-compliant. It all depends on which browser you test on while developing, since they all interpret the "standard" a bit differently.


By vailr on 3/19/2009 9:36:48 AM , Rating: 2
Is that: Noon Eastern Time or Noon Pacific Time?




By Brandon Hill (blog) on 3/19/2009 10:03:21 AM , Rating: 1
The only time zone that matters in the U.S., EST :)


By JBird7986 on 3/19/2009 10:45:55 AM , Rating: 2
Just to point out...technically, we went off EST at the beginning of the month. The launch is at Noon EDT, Eastern Daylight Time...it'd be 11AM EST.


By callmeroy on 3/19/2009 4:24:11 PM , Rating: 2
I forget if it was because of NYC and Wall Street (the "financial heart" of the country) or because of Washington DC and the federal government but I remember someone telling me for one of those reasons, if you are talking about time in general and its implied you are meaning this country -- by default its always assumed to be eastern time zone, unless otherwise specified.

Since I have never lived anywhere BUT on the East Coast of the US -- I never really bothered think it about it much, but that's what I was told.


By mondo1234 on 3/19/2009 3:41:40 PM , Rating: 2
According to Net Applications, MS browser marketshare was down to 67%. Maybe this will bring it up...

http://marketshare.hitslink.com/firefox-market-sha...


I like it...
By frombauer on 3/19/2009 10:00:16 AM , Rating: 3
I've beem using it along with FF for a few weeks and it DOES feel a lot snappier than IE7.




IE Is not bad
By rudolphna on 3/19/2009 10:10:45 AM , Rating: 3
Ive downloaded it, and been using the RC version for some time now. It is quite fast, and someone used snappy, which is appropriate. It is definetly far better than IE7.




Latest IE8 Exploit Fixed?
By ltcommanderdata on 3/19/2009 9:11:37 AM , Rating: 2
http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=2934

I wonder if they've fixed the IE8 exploit found at the latest Pwn2Own contest? I guess not seeing the timeframe. Although realistically the results of these contests aren't really indicative for people to be too concerned about browser vulnerability. These exploits were no doubt prepared beforehand. The same person focused on cracking Safari first, then IE8, before moving on to Firefox cracking them all.




Honestly
By dsraa on 3/20/2009 2:10:22 PM , Rating: 2
After using it both today and yesterday, I liked IE7 MUCH MUCH MORE! IE8 crashes way too much. It needs to be tested some more. There was plenty of times I had multiple tabs open, and one of them would crash, and then go into a cycle of re-opening and then crashing again, until I basically had to FORCE IE8 to close...
And honestly, yes it is a little faster on some sites, but it loads new sites just as slow as other browsers do.

SUX.....I want IE7 back....




tabs
By rubbahbandman on 3/23/2009 12:29:16 AM , Rating: 2
I like how smoothly ie8 runs on flash intensive sites like espn.com, but I find ie8's tabbing terrible compared to firefox in terms of speed. This could be an isolated problem with me, but it's irritating waiting 5+ seconds for a blank tab to open.




its fast
By loop13 on 3/26/2009 1:41:02 AM , Rating: 1
i love 8 ,7 was
quote:
shit
Shit




The only thing really suspect...
By sweetsauce on 3/19/09, Rating: 0
No extensions
By blowfish on 3/19/09, Rating: -1
RE: No extensions
By theapparition on 3/19/2009 9:26:52 AM , Rating: 4
Not sure what you mean. I've been using extensions on IE for quite some time. Granted there are not nearly as many as there are for Firefox (which I also use), but even IE7 can use extensions.


RE: No extensions
By quiksilvr on 3/19/2009 2:17:27 PM , Rating: 2
Speed is what I need. Granted the start up time for IE is much faster than Firefox, however once things get running Firefox blazes past it. That and the insane amount of extensions Firefox has pushes it ahead of the pack for me.


RE: No extensions
By Proteusza on 3/19/09, Rating: -1
RE: No extensions
By theapparition on 3/19/2009 9:35:08 AM , Rating: 4
Agreed how?

There already are adblock extensions for IE, and spelling checkers, etc. Just do a quick search and you can find all sorts of IE extensions.

And just for future reference, quoting anything from The Register doesn't help your cause.


RE: No extensions
By Proteusza on 3/19/09, Rating: 0
RE: No extensions
By bhieb on 3/19/2009 12:59:07 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I dont care about anybody's business model, I dont want to see any adverts or have my browsing behaviour tracked. Sorry.


On the surface I would tend to agree, but without ad revenue the web will be a vastly different place. Do you think DT will keep on posting news if there were no revenue from it? There is no such thing as a "free" lunch, and the thousands of "free" pages you have likely enjoyed are possible from the very evil you hate.

I relate it to the DVR, an absolutely astounding consumer device that I for one cannot live without, but I can also see that it will drive content down because of the ability to skip what pays for that content.


RE: No extensions
By killerb255 on 3/19/2009 4:49:42 PM , Rating: 2
Definitely agree with this one.

Let's face it: nobody likes having their enjoyment interrupted by crap like ads and TV commercials. However, that's what pays for what we narcissistic jerks feel that we're entitled to for free...


RE: No extensions
By theapparition on 3/19/2009 4:57:44 PM , Rating: 2
Absolutely.

quote:
I relate it to the DVR, an absolutely astounding consumer device that I for one cannot live without, but I can also see that it will drive content down because of the ability to skip what pays for that content.

What consumers WILL see in the future is digital programming that blocks the ability to skip commercials. The stage is already set with the Digital Broadcast flags. Once those go into effect, the content producers will control even if we're allowed to record it at all on our DVR. Phillips already introduced technology that prohibits DVRs from skipping commercials.

I'll hate the day that happens, but it's definately coming.


RE: No extensions
By piroroadkill on 3/19/2009 10:06:27 AM , Rating: 2
Haha, The Register is utterly fantastic


RE: No extensions
By Vanilla Thunder on 3/19/2009 9:33:56 AM , Rating: 2
Agreed. FF FTW!


RE: No extensions
By Pirks on 3/19/2009 11:15:12 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I'll install it just to get faster Windows Updates
Still using XP? My condolences :P


RE: No extensions
By suryad on 3/19/2009 11:30:56 AM , Rating: 2
Not if you are using XP x64...like me...but I dont know what he is using.


RE: No extensions
By TomZ on 3/19/2009 4:11:33 PM , Rating: 2
Sorry, WinXP-64 < Vista-64 < Win7-64.

Oh no, did I just agree with Pirks? Someone please shoot me now.


RE: No extensions
By 67STANG on 3/19/2009 4:43:40 PM , Rating: 3
In my opinion, and this is just my experience... having recently upgraded to Vista64 (finally) from XP SP3.

XP-64 < Vista-32 < XP-32 < Vista-64 < Windows7 32/64


RE: No extensions
By Alexvrb on 3/19/2009 5:47:53 PM , Rating: 2
I have had very good luck with XP64, as well. I've had the same OS install for years and its rock solid. Might have something to do with the fact that it is essentially Server 2003 64-bit. The only issue was the initial lack of driver support, but that wasn't Microsoft's fault. WOW64 lets it run almost all 32-bit applications perfectly. The only exceptiona I can think of is security software. Avast and Ghostwall have me covered there, anyway. Shoot, Zonealarm is just now getting their butt into the 64-bit arena.


RE: No extensions
By omnicronx on 3/19/2009 11:40:22 AM , Rating: 2
While I too use FF+Addblock, there are few IE addblock plugins that work almost as well. Its not like they don't exist.


RE: No extensions
By Jjoshua2 on 3/19/09, Rating: 0
RE: No extensions
By omnicronx on 3/19/2009 12:05:56 PM , Rating: 2
IE has extensions (although they are called addons).. just not nearly as many.

You are correct about the IE download though, Jason linked the beta page which still has not changed (and probably wont).

P.S I find that loading too many extensions in FF slows it down (on first boot especially).


RE: No extensions
By GlassHouse69 on 3/19/2009 12:20:34 PM , Rating: 2
opera is more secure and stable than FF

ff has gotten to be its own cesspool


RE: No extensions
By Chocobollz on 3/20/2009 4:38:48 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah I agree, Opera FTW!


RE: No extensions
By madmuffin on 3/23/2009 11:51:38 AM , Rating: 2
Safari (Only on Mac) FF (PC) FTW


"Paying an extra $500 for a computer in this environment -- same piece of hardware -- paying $500 more to get a logo on it? I think that's a more challenging proposition for the average person than it used to be." -- Steve Ballmer
Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2015 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki