Internet Explorer 7

Have you tried IE 7 beta 2 already? It seems Explorer can finaly compare itself with other browsers.

It has after all some functions (for example tabbed browsing, zoom, rss..). But GUI is terrible and it eats a lot of memory.

But first of all it can finally interpret css according to standards.

Did they remove ActiveX?

And they probably introduced at least a hundred new vulnerabilities too.

>>1

css 2 is out, they are still behind.

>>2
No. They can't just remove it. But it seems a lot of ActiveX functions are disabled by default. But question is, if it will be same in the final release..

New vulnerabilities? Sure. But question is, who cares?

>>3
It understands position:fixed, advanced selectors, aplies :hover on all elements, has peek-a-boo bug fixed, guillotine bug fixed, double-border bug fixed, 3px bug fixed, knows abbr, can use opacity... It's not much but better than nothing.
Anyway they can't fix it all. If they included min/max width/height, all webdesigners would have lots of spare-time and lots of money so all of them became drug addict. Microsoft just can't do it.

What is the PNG support on it?
I want my transparency with my PNG.

>>6
Yes, at last. In image even in background. I can already see those banner headlines saying: Microsoft developed semitransparent images!"

>>7


Thank god. As a webmaster, it pisses me off cause I like to use the PNG transparency, but it looks like shit in IE, which then means I need to limit the stuff, and do without that cause one shitty browser just won't go with it.
*grumbles*
bout time...

>>8

my ie compatibility code usually has an activex exploit that downloads and installs firefox and replaces the blue "e" on the desktop.

not really. i use javascript to make a bar at the top which says "this page and most others on the web look like ass in IE, get firefox". luckily my page is for the techncally inclined anyway.

>>9
And morons like this are why everyone hates Firefox. You think it's a fucking religion. Get the fuck over it.

>>10
Hate the players, not the game.
...baby

>>11
I think that's pretty much exactly what he is hating

>>9
Wasn't funny. Why don't you just write your pages in accordance with standards and then do some little hacks for ie? It's same as if you had written on your t-shirt: I look like ass if you don't use Superb-Beautifying-Glasses™.

>>13
Why do 'little' hacks, when people can just use FF/Opera/etc? Unless you're getting ad revenue, I don't see the point.

>>14
Because 80% of people uses MSIE. Half of them even don't know that there is some other browser. Admit it.

I am grateful for IE7. I don't care if people will have full computer of mallware. I don't care if IE7 will eat half of their memory. I don't care if it has fucking controls and gui. Fuck those people, it's their problem.

But internet can't stagnate because of those people. It is good if they will have preinstalled browser which respects standards better than IE6. At least. Regardles of that it's still piece of shitty crap.

>>1
first of all it can finally interpret css according to standards.
No, it can't. It's still bullshit.

>>4
question is, who cares?
Intelligent users, developers, and corporations.

>>5
If they included min/max width/height, all webdesigners would have lots of spare-time and lots of money so all of them became drug addict. Microsoft just can't do it.
Lol

>>9
my ie compatibility code usually has an activex exploit that downloads and installs firefox and replaces the blue "e" on the desktop.
Awesome, can I have it? I really want something like this so I can stop caring about that piece of shit of a browser. Be sure to include a script to launch Firefox on the currently loaded page, then kill IEXPLORE.EXE , so it just takes a few seconds to load the site for the first time, then you have it working.

>>10
It's not a religion, it's called decency. Opera, Safari and Konqueror are decent too, you can use these. Just not Microsoft's shitty explorer. It's killing the web.

>>13
Why don't you just write your pages in accordance with standards and then do some little hacks for ie
HAHAHAHAHAHA, you don't make bread off web development, do you?

>>14
MSIE is like Mother Russia; users don't get revenue from advertisers, advertisers get revenue from users; and users don't watch ads, ads watch users.

>>15
80% of people uses MSIE
And because of these morons the web is stalled, and so much time, efforts and money are wasted.

It is good if they will have preinstalled browser which respects standards better than IE6.
It's "good", just like it's "good" if you get fucked in the ass with a can of Coke instead of a 2L bottle.

Why cannot Microsoft just bundle Firefox/Opera into the Windows Vista? All problems would be over...

>>17
Because Windows Vista is a piece of shit, as long as they don't remove or somebody cracks that digital rights infringement/treacherous computing kernel bullshit, that shit ain't getting into my house. Oh, and the new UI is so kewl and awesome you need 1 GB RAM and a last gen graphics card for it to be decent, another reason not to have it.

>>17
Why won't they do it, answer: It's bloody microsoft. they are as stubborn as ever and they truly want their products to be the only products used. Hence the hesitation of unveling source code. BTW im not an anti windows freak i use windows as much as everything else it sucks but i have no choice as I need to work on some programs which only work on windows.

No one should ever need to fight what browser they are using  I dont really give a shit about what everyone else uses.

Man, why do people think that if you use IE your going to get infected to mailware and shit automaticly? Unless your a complete retard you shouldent have any problems. I use it because I like it, I tried others and they seem clunkly because I have been using IE since I switched from netscape back in the day.

>>20
You WILL get infected automatically if you visit the right sites with the wrong patches. There are several videos of this in action somewhere, but I forgot where. Either way, it's up to you wether you want to be just careful or have increased safety instead.

>>19
No one should ever need to fight what browser they are using  I dont really give a shit about what everyone else uses.
Ok, then perhaps I won't really give a shit about what everyone else uses and make my sites work on my browser, and if they don't in yours, so sorry.

>>20
Man, why do people think that if you use IE your going to get infected to mailware and shit automaticly?
Because you will, lol. I'd bet $20 you already got at least two malware hidden extensions or modules installed. Any advertisement in a seemingly respectable site can and will exploit your browser no matter what configuration you have. And you don't know what's a respectable site until you visit it anyways. Unless all you do in the net is visiting msn.com and using MSN Messen OH WAI- (you'll get assraped with that too anyways).

I'm tired of fixing stupid IE users' computers even having supposedly secure configurations. You use it out of sheer ignorance, there are no excuses for it.

>>22
Only work in your browser huh? Enjoy your complaints/not getting paid then.

And if you're tired of fixing peoples computers "because of" IE, then don't. Let them bake in their own sauce, in the end the problem resides between the monitor and chair anyway.

>>23
And if you're tired of fixing peoples computers "because of" IE, then don't. Let them bake in their own sauce, in the end the problem resides between the monitor and chair anyway.
If you think it's a user's fault, you're ignorant, plain and simple. Users are by definition somewhat stupid, and they can't be expected to behave. The browser should be secure and robust enough so that they can't break their computer by trying that awesome naked spice girls screensaver Bill Clinton emailed them.

>>24
Fails for being a Firefox Faggot Cultist.

>>25
When did I say I use Firefox or he should use Firefox? I'm not a cultist of any browser, just sane enough to avoid MSIE like the plauge

>>26
No, you're a faggot firefox cultist.
Opera or bust.

>>24
I belive you are completely off track.
First of all they are using Internet Explorer which is regarded as unsafe very widely, ignorance to that is not an excuse considering the media buzz around this and how many pages are there dedicated to bringing this to light. Not to mention the whole peer pressure by retarded cultists. If they get infected while using that browser against recomendations it is their fault, they have a choise.

Whatever could happen to you as a computer user is up to you only to avoid or prevent wether it is by downloading patches to vulnerabilities to your computer or avoiding unsecure things. As I was saying, you don't have to help them if you don't want, it's their fault that they got into that shit in the first place. If they want to use IE, they should at the least learn ways to avoid getting in shit and how to fix if they do. And you know, best motivation for learning is desperation.

Gentlemen, please don't flame.

Let me resume the facts:
- IE7 has better support of css than IE6.
- IE7 understands PNG transparency.
- IE7 is still piece of crap.
- IE will be always unsafe.
- If someone opens "that awesome naked spice girls screensaver from Bill Clinton", Firefox neither Opera can't help him.
- Microsoft should release new Windows with some other browser.
- Microsoft can't do this, because if he chose either Firefox or Opera, fans of the other browser would go to the streets demonstrating, then it overgrew to the civil commotion. Then martial law would be imposed. Some browser-activist would be killed in an accident. Then the government would be forced to demit. Then browser fans would made nuclear weapons and that would start the apocalyptic end of the world.

>>27
No, you're a faggot firefox cultist.
Opera or bust.

Why hello there Mr Pot, still the same as ever I see.

Standards-compliant pages look like ass only in IE.

If they look fine in Firefox or Opera, and if they comply with the standard as much as practical, they'll look fine in Netscape, K-Meleon, Safari, Konqueror, Dillo, Links, Lynx, and even the W3's POS editor, Amaya.

If they look fine in IE, and it's not because the webmaster used IE-only hacks, they'll look like ass in eveverything *except* IE and IE wrappers.  The Trident rendering engine sucks, plain and simple.  Gecko, Opera, KHTML, and even homebrewed rendering engines are much better and nicer looking.

>>31
I think, you don't know what you are talking about.

Dillo? Have you ever seen it? Does it know css? Lynx? Which pages look fine in that text browser? Netscape? Which version? Old Netscape sucks, the new one == Firefox.

Valid pages can look fine in IE6/Mozilla/Opera. It just takes more time to write css, because you have to include some hacks which will affect only IE. It isn't so hard and not imposible at all.

>>32
is right

I made many pages while trying to make it look the same in both IE, Mozilla, etc. If I designed the page on Mozilla I was able to make it look identical in IE, Opera and Mozilla in quirks mode without any major noticable bugs or extra coding for IE.

IE is a lot more lenient to the html and css you feed it, while opera and firefox might spit it out and call it shit, IE will still display what you wanted somehow, so as far as you don't overengineer your shit like a dumb retard, use useless crap like <blink> every other line and code html/css while testing it with Mozilla/firefox it'll look fine in anything with minor or no additions for IE specifically.

>>29
If someone opens "that awesome naked spice girls screensaver from Bill Clinton", Firefox neither Opera can't help him.
Only it may install and run automatically if you're using IE, although I agree that it was a bad example because if we're talking about an email attachment (not an ActiveX control or script within MSIE or OE) lusers will equally fail it using any other browser.

>>32
you have to include some hacks which will affect only IE. It isn't so hard and not imposible at all.
No. For a complex website, it's hard, and sometimes impossible. For example, MSIE6's margin inheritance is hopelessly fucked.

>>33
IE is a lot more lenient to the html and css you feed it
And it expects you to be a lot more lenient on how it interprets it

while opera and firefox might spit it out and call it shit
Opera is more likely to bit than Firefox, I've found Firefox just as lenient as MSIE, only it doesn't ignore most tags and attributes like the later, so they have a greater impact.

>>32
Huh??  I take it you've never heard of "graceful degradation."  A page shouldn't look like ass when you take away CSS or images.  Less complete, yes, but not totally messed up.  A page shouldn't look fine in one browser and unreadable with entire sections overlapping, too big, too small, or up and vanishing completely in another browser.

Dillo? Have you ever seen it? Does it know css?
I use it every day.  It has a load time of just a few milliseconds.  When I want a page right this second, and I don't have Fox or Opera open, I don't care about CSS.

Lynx? Which pages look fine in that text browser?
Just about every page out there, execpt for ones designed by CluelessFrontPageUser@DumbCompany.com.  That's not you, is it?

BTW, >>34 is right.

>>33
I second >>34

>>35
You are right of course. Valid and SEMANTIC pages should be fine readable in all browsers. But the discussion was about IE7 and it's css support.. BTW, you think standard compliant page without css looks like ass in IE?

apt, start a browser war

OH WAI-

http://www.comeboot.com/  cheap UGG Boots under $50. http://www.comeboot.com/  cheap UGG Boots under $50Christmas, arrived a few days. I realized the high quality, as I took them out of the box. The interior of sheepskin material was very thick. The plants were too often is difficult and takes a while, and leave  http://www.comeboot.com/  Rose UGG Boots. http://www.comeboot.com/  Rose UGG Boots http://www.comeboot.com/  UGG Boots Free Shipping. http://www.comeboot.com/  UGG Boots Free Shipping