Prev: My first abpg posts: Yahoo, web, Flickr, etc.
Next: Watchguard Firewall - Request Denied ??
From: Sebastian G. on 13 Apr 2008 09:16
Andrew Rossmann wrote:

> In article <MPG.226a8baa3f06a459896c7(a)adfree.usenet.com>,
> void(a)nowhere.lan says...
>> IE is bad and disliked because it exposes your OS to more than any other
>> accepted browser does. It does not follow the WWW standards and will
>> render broken code/pages as it think the coder meant to code them, which
>> can be a threat.
>
> The upcoming IE8 will default to standards mode, meaning some sites may
> not work if they are coded to be IE-specific!!

It still won't be able to display the most simplest standard confirming
websites either. For example:

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">
<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>></TITLE></HEAD><BODY>
<!-->If your browser displays this, it is obviously broken, since this is a
comment!<-->
<img src="http://www.bowblog.com/archives/images\wrong.jpg"></img>
</BODY></HTML>
From: Gary on 14 Apr 2008 18:16
Among the obvious security and rendering problems over the years, IE is
also a resource hog. q.v. http://preview.tinyurl.com/2b9ude

-Gary
From: Kyle T. Jones on 14 Apr 2008 20:55
Chilly8 wrote:
> X-No-Archive: Yes
>
>
> One reason I changed streaming service providers is becuase Live 365
> does not work with Firefox, and I was catching HELL for that. I
> just cannot UNDERSTAND why so many people HATE Internet
> Explorer. WHAT is so BAD about Internet Explorer to make Live
> 365 broadcasters lose listeners, after Firefox no longer worked with
> the Live 365 player Window?
>
>
>
>

Many in this thread have given you a variety of good reasons; I'll offer
one more.

One of the reasons IE, and even Office, is disliked is because Microsoft
refuses to accept standards that just about everyone else has agreed upon.

This means anyone involved with webpage/webapp design is basically
forced to program things twice: once to work in IE and once for just
about everything else.

Anywho. Cheers.
From: blessed style on 15 Apr 2008 04:21

On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 22:16:29 -0000, Gary <garyd(a)efn.org.spamsux>
wrote:

>Among the obvious security and rendering problems over the years, IE is
>also a resource hog. q.v. http://preview.tinyurl.com/2b9ude

That's nice to know. For a while there Firefox was actually harder on
system resources in comparison with IE.
From: Sebastian G. on 15 Apr 2008 06:41
blessed style wrote:

> On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 22:16:29 -0000, Gary <garyd(a)efn.org.spamsux>
> wrote:
>
>> Among the obvious security and rendering problems over the years, IE is
>> also a resource hog. q.v. http://preview.tinyurl.com/2b9ude
>
> That's nice to know. For a while there Firefox was actually harder on
> system resources in comparison with IE.


If you leave away 50% of the site because you can't render it, this is easy.
If you don't trade CPU time for doing extensive incremental rendering for a
better user experience, it's even easier.
If you don't need to decompress the data because you don't support it when
combined with E-Tags, it buys you a bit.
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2
Prev: My first abpg posts: Yahoo, web, Flickr, etc.
Next: Watchguard Firewall - Request Denied ??