Bigjakkstaffa
05-16-2005, 02:14 PM
http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2005/05/16/417732.aspx#comments
...see MS does listen
--Jakk:t
...see MS does listen
--Jakk:t
Click to See Complete Forum and Search --> : IE7 will have Tabbed browsing
Midknyte
05-16-2005, 02:16 PM
I thought that was leaked a while ago. I knew about it for a couple of months already. :confused: I'll have to backtrack.
Bigjakkstaffa
05-16-2005, 02:20 PM
Probably was, i vaguely recall hearing about it a while ago, still the news sites seme to have chosen today as the day to kick up a fuss
--Jakk:t
--Jakk:t
Zakalwe
05-16-2005, 07:33 PM
And so the usual Microsoft strategy continues:
Produce vastly inferior software, copy all the good features of competitors, and then rely on the fact that you own the desktop, and the ignorance of the average user, to make your product the most successful.
I really hope Firefox and the other alternative browsers can continue to build their user bases, but the fact that Windows comes with a browser means that the vast majority will use that, and never investigate any alternatives, especially while that browser appears "to the untrained eye" to be roughly equivalent the alternatives.
Oh well, at least Mozilla aren't relying on income from their software to be able to continue.
Produce vastly inferior software, copy all the good features of competitors, and then rely on the fact that you own the desktop, and the ignorance of the average user, to make your product the most successful.
I really hope Firefox and the other alternative browsers can continue to build their user bases, but the fact that Windows comes with a browser means that the vast majority will use that, and never investigate any alternatives, especially while that browser appears "to the untrained eye" to be roughly equivalent the alternatives.
Oh well, at least Mozilla aren't relying on income from their software to be able to continue.
Midknyte
05-16-2005, 07:36 PM
In all fairness, IE6 is pretty darn old. The original plan was to release a new IE with Longhorn, but that got delayed and delayed. IE7 was never meant to be a separate product, but times they are a changing.
FF is definitely more up to date (I use it :) so don't be thinking I'm an IE fanboy), but it still has its share of issues. Same with Opera.
FF is definitely more up to date (I use it :) so don't be thinking I'm an IE fanboy), but it still has its share of issues. Same with Opera.
G
05-16-2005, 07:46 PM
That is still no reason for me to move away from the excellent Opera V8+ (paid version)
Superb it is too.
Superb it is too.
richard_cocks
05-16-2005, 10:58 PM
^^ throwing good money after bad... :D
meh, I personally hate tabbed browsing, use the taskbar what it's for. and save screen space...
meh, I personally hate tabbed browsing, use the taskbar what it's for. and save screen space...
G
05-17-2005, 03:46 AM
What ever suits you best Rich.
Nevertheless, buying and supporting Opera was one of the best investments in software I have made.
Nevertheless, buying and supporting Opera was one of the best investments in software I have made.
cdroman
05-17-2005, 06:13 PM
Tried all the various browsers and still end up using IE most of the time. So Im looking forward to IE7.
:t
:t
cdroman
05-17-2005, 06:25 PM
Originally posted by Zakalwe
And so the usual Microsoft strategy continues:
Produce vastly inferior software, copy all the good features of competitors, and then rely on the fact that you own the desktop, and the ignorance of the average user, to make your product the most successful.
I really hope Firefox and the other alternative browsers can continue to build their user bases, but the fact that Windows comes with a browser means that the vast majority will use that, and never investigate any alternatives, especially while that browser appears "to the untrained eye" to be roughly equivalent the alternatives.
Oh well, at least Mozilla aren't relying on income from their software to be able to continue.
The problem is that the average user and some not so average users actually prefer MS software like IE. My teenagers will not use any other browser; I'll install others like Firefox etc.; they'll use it for a few days and go right back to IE. They do run through The Proxomitron though so they don't have any of the problems possible with IE. They also keep their pc's clean. I don't believe that MS makes vastly inferior products but they do make products designed to work with as wide a variety of other apps as possible and that leads to holes, vulnerabilities etc. It is difficult to have it both ways; high versatility, high security don't ya think?
I would definately say that Win2000 and WinXP are vastly superior to other pieces of software out there. But that's just my opinion.:t
And so the usual Microsoft strategy continues:
Produce vastly inferior software, copy all the good features of competitors, and then rely on the fact that you own the desktop, and the ignorance of the average user, to make your product the most successful.
I really hope Firefox and the other alternative browsers can continue to build their user bases, but the fact that Windows comes with a browser means that the vast majority will use that, and never investigate any alternatives, especially while that browser appears "to the untrained eye" to be roughly equivalent the alternatives.
Oh well, at least Mozilla aren't relying on income from their software to be able to continue.
The problem is that the average user and some not so average users actually prefer MS software like IE. My teenagers will not use any other browser; I'll install others like Firefox etc.; they'll use it for a few days and go right back to IE. They do run through The Proxomitron though so they don't have any of the problems possible with IE. They also keep their pc's clean. I don't believe that MS makes vastly inferior products but they do make products designed to work with as wide a variety of other apps as possible and that leads to holes, vulnerabilities etc. It is difficult to have it both ways; high versatility, high security don't ya think?
I would definately say that Win2000 and WinXP are vastly superior to other pieces of software out there. But that's just my opinion.:t
kpm547
05-17-2005, 06:39 PM
Wow:eek: ...tabbed browsing. Ground breaking stuff. Next they're going to have wild ideas about conforming with CSS standards. This technology stuff is progressing too fast for me.
(notice the hint of sarcasm)
(notice the hint of sarcasm)
Zakalwe
05-17-2005, 07:27 PM
I would definately say that Win2000 and WinXP are vastly superior to other pieces of software out there. But that's just my opinion.
I definitely like using Win2000 and WinXP, but I wouldn't say they are "technically" superior to some other OSes. I'm a Unix tech for a job. I logged on to one of our systems the other day, and saw that it had been up for 428 days. Thats well over a year, and this is a system which has over 20 very busy Oracle databases running, with hundreds of users logging in all the time. In that period (well over a year) the system has shown no signs of slowdown, or flakiness, it has not been hacked, and has not had any other problems. All this from a system with 2 1GHz cpus, and 4GB of memory, so its not like its insanely highly spec'd.
Now I'm not saying that therefore unix is better in all respects than Windows, but what annoys me is that, in all this time, with all that money, MS have never bothered to sort out their OS and make it genuinely stable. They could do it if they wanted to, but they don't need to, because people just accept that "computers crash".
The strength that MS has is to make their software appealing, and easy to use. The only reason it works with a lot of other software is that the other software has to work with MS, not the other way around, due to their virtual monopoly on the desktop.
Case in point, when I installed Suse Linux on my laptop, it automatically detected the Windows partition, and provided an icon on my desktop, called "C: drive", which allows me to browse the files on that drive directly. Windows won't even acknowledge the existence of another OS, and certainly can't read an ext2 partition - this despite the fact that the Linux filesystem types are open software, and it would be childs play for the software giant to provide support for them. You have to get a third party software called Samba to connect to Linux/Unix from windows. The open standards are there, but MS won't use them.
As regards having a strong preference for IE, it certainly works fine, but there are a lot of really useful features that Firefox has, which IE doesn't. I use Firefox every day, and I only very rarely find a site which it can't handle - and that is usually a result of MS breaking the accepted standards, and using proprietary code, which only IE can interpret properly - hardly an example of "designed to work with as wide a variety of other apps as possible"
I definitely like using Win2000 and WinXP, but I wouldn't say they are "technically" superior to some other OSes. I'm a Unix tech for a job. I logged on to one of our systems the other day, and saw that it had been up for 428 days. Thats well over a year, and this is a system which has over 20 very busy Oracle databases running, with hundreds of users logging in all the time. In that period (well over a year) the system has shown no signs of slowdown, or flakiness, it has not been hacked, and has not had any other problems. All this from a system with 2 1GHz cpus, and 4GB of memory, so its not like its insanely highly spec'd.
Now I'm not saying that therefore unix is better in all respects than Windows, but what annoys me is that, in all this time, with all that money, MS have never bothered to sort out their OS and make it genuinely stable. They could do it if they wanted to, but they don't need to, because people just accept that "computers crash".
The strength that MS has is to make their software appealing, and easy to use. The only reason it works with a lot of other software is that the other software has to work with MS, not the other way around, due to their virtual monopoly on the desktop.
Case in point, when I installed Suse Linux on my laptop, it automatically detected the Windows partition, and provided an icon on my desktop, called "C: drive", which allows me to browse the files on that drive directly. Windows won't even acknowledge the existence of another OS, and certainly can't read an ext2 partition - this despite the fact that the Linux filesystem types are open software, and it would be childs play for the software giant to provide support for them. You have to get a third party software called Samba to connect to Linux/Unix from windows. The open standards are there, but MS won't use them.
As regards having a strong preference for IE, it certainly works fine, but there are a lot of really useful features that Firefox has, which IE doesn't. I use Firefox every day, and I only very rarely find a site which it can't handle - and that is usually a result of MS breaking the accepted standards, and using proprietary code, which only IE can interpret properly - hardly an example of "designed to work with as wide a variety of other apps as possible"
mireland
05-17-2005, 11:02 PM
don't really care for tabbed browsing myself..tried it with firefox and immediatly turned it off...:t
Zakalwe
05-17-2005, 11:28 PM
Don't mean to make a big argument about this, but can someone explain to me why you wouldn't want tabs?
I find them absolutely indispensible.
Here's an example:
I do a search in Google, and I get a page full of results, but I don't immediately know which one I want, or maybe there are 4 or 5 which are going to be useful.
In Firefox I simply ctrl+click a link, which then proceeds to load in a separate tab, and heres the kicker - in the background - so I can continue to browse my results, and open as many links as I am interested in, without having to reload my results page.
Once I have chosen all the results I am interested in, I can then click through the open tabs at my leisure, closing those which aren't needed. Also, if I change my mind, I don't need to go back to my search, I can just right click a tab, and choose "undo close tab".
The other feature I use a lot is the ability to save a "tab group".
It's all so elegant, and convenient, that when I am forced to use a non-tabbed browser on someone elses computer, it drives me mad not having it.
I find them absolutely indispensible.
Here's an example:
I do a search in Google, and I get a page full of results, but I don't immediately know which one I want, or maybe there are 4 or 5 which are going to be useful.
In Firefox I simply ctrl+click a link, which then proceeds to load in a separate tab, and heres the kicker - in the background - so I can continue to browse my results, and open as many links as I am interested in, without having to reload my results page.
Once I have chosen all the results I am interested in, I can then click through the open tabs at my leisure, closing those which aren't needed. Also, if I change my mind, I don't need to go back to my search, I can just right click a tab, and choose "undo close tab".
The other feature I use a lot is the ability to save a "tab group".
It's all so elegant, and convenient, that when I am forced to use a non-tabbed browser on someone elses computer, it drives me mad not having it.
Midknyte
05-18-2005, 12:22 AM
well, it's a big enough feature that MS is going to include it.
everybody's brain works differently, so do what feels natural.
btw, tabbed browsing extensions also adds middle click options. middle clicking on a link can open the link in a new tab. I often find myself middle clicking in IE. :p
Opera also has tabbed browsing if you don't like FF.
everybody's brain works differently, so do what feels natural.
btw, tabbed browsing extensions also adds middle click options. middle clicking on a link can open the link in a new tab. I often find myself middle clicking in IE. :p
Opera also has tabbed browsing if you don't like FF.
Tech^salvager
05-18-2005, 01:29 AM
I foudn firefox tabs to be worthless, all it is, is window inside a window only, not like windows inside a window, where you can only tab to another window.
but Maxthon tabs differ as where I can set them up so I can see 2 sites side by side vertical or horzonatilly.
Also Maxthon seems to eat less ram then FF
Also IE is fine with me I don't have problems with it or anything else, infact I haven't really had any major problems with MS OSes since 98.
but Maxthon tabs differ as where I can set them up so I can see 2 sites side by side vertical or horzonatilly.
Also Maxthon seems to eat less ram then FF
Also IE is fine with me I don't have problems with it or anything else, infact I haven't really had any major problems with MS OSes since 98.
Tech^salvager
05-18-2005, 01:34 AM
Originally posted by Zakalwe
Don't mean to make a big argument about this, but can someone explain to me why you wouldn't want tabs?
I find them absolutely indispensible.
Here's an example:
I do a search in Google, and I get a page full of results, but I don't immediately know which one I want, or maybe there are 4 or 5 which are going to be useful.
In Firefox I simply ctrl+click a link, which then proceeds to load in a separate tab, and heres the kicker - in the background - so I can continue to browse my results, and open as many links as I am interested in, without having to reload my results page.
wheel click is faster since you don't need a extra button.
Once I have chosen all the results I am interested in, I can then click through the open tabs at my leisure, closing those which aren't needed. Also, if I change my mind, I don't need to go back to my search, I can just right click a tab, and choose "undo close tab".
The other feature I use a lot is the ability to save a "tab group".
It's all so elegant, and convenient, that when I am forced to use a non-tabbed browser on someone elses computer, it drives me mad not having it.
I just like how regular IE or Maxthon if I want to use tabs.
Don't mean to make a big argument about this, but can someone explain to me why you wouldn't want tabs?
I find them absolutely indispensible.
Here's an example:
I do a search in Google, and I get a page full of results, but I don't immediately know which one I want, or maybe there are 4 or 5 which are going to be useful.
In Firefox I simply ctrl+click a link, which then proceeds to load in a separate tab, and heres the kicker - in the background - so I can continue to browse my results, and open as many links as I am interested in, without having to reload my results page.
wheel click is faster since you don't need a extra button.
Once I have chosen all the results I am interested in, I can then click through the open tabs at my leisure, closing those which aren't needed. Also, if I change my mind, I don't need to go back to my search, I can just right click a tab, and choose "undo close tab".
The other feature I use a lot is the ability to save a "tab group".
It's all so elegant, and convenient, that when I am forced to use a non-tabbed browser on someone elses computer, it drives me mad not having it.
I just like how regular IE or Maxthon if I want to use tabs.
G
05-18-2005, 06:58 AM
The fact that FireFox does not rely on an income to survive Zakalwe is the reason they are doing so well , besides being a very popular and sound browser too. Their free browser does not have a very small advertising panel as Opera does, but besides this in many respects Opera is superior.
Opera extremely feature-rich and I for one am happy to support Opera Software by purchasing their software. Would you do the same if FireFox had to be purchased etc. Therefore, your argument is very one-sided (may be you didn't have the time to expand further) and not very well defined as point out in my comments above. Incidentally IE has many security holes, FireFox has some but are plugged before they become a problem and Opera has none.
In fact IE and FireFox are targets, Opera is not. I will stay with Opera – I think this is the smart move if one thinks about it a little more.
A user should be free to choose what browser, and the like, they prefer. If some users enjoy using IE, that is fine by me. What I will say, and this goes with all Windows users, plug the gaps and browse smartly.
“Now I'm not saying that therefore unix is better in all respects than Windows, but what annoys me is that, in all this time, with all that money, MS have never bothered to sort out their OS and make it genuinely stable. They could do it if they wanted to, but they don't need to, because people just accept that "computers crash".”
Market forces, user apathy and software developer inertia makes all of your comments valid in respect to M$ OSes. They have a duty to create a sound and robust product. It is only in recent years that they have started to listen to users, professionals and institutions.
“The open standards are there, but MS won't use them.” – true. The developers of FireFox and Opera do.
Tabbed browsing is the best. You can thank Opera Software for that idea, besides others. Using IE is a pain when one gets used to tabbing, as it is so much faster, convenient and an intelligent way of going about browsing.
Opera extremely feature-rich and I for one am happy to support Opera Software by purchasing their software. Would you do the same if FireFox had to be purchased etc. Therefore, your argument is very one-sided (may be you didn't have the time to expand further) and not very well defined as point out in my comments above. Incidentally IE has many security holes, FireFox has some but are plugged before they become a problem and Opera has none.
In fact IE and FireFox are targets, Opera is not. I will stay with Opera – I think this is the smart move if one thinks about it a little more.
A user should be free to choose what browser, and the like, they prefer. If some users enjoy using IE, that is fine by me. What I will say, and this goes with all Windows users, plug the gaps and browse smartly.
“Now I'm not saying that therefore unix is better in all respects than Windows, but what annoys me is that, in all this time, with all that money, MS have never bothered to sort out their OS and make it genuinely stable. They could do it if they wanted to, but they don't need to, because people just accept that "computers crash".”
Market forces, user apathy and software developer inertia makes all of your comments valid in respect to M$ OSes. They have a duty to create a sound and robust product. It is only in recent years that they have started to listen to users, professionals and institutions.
“The open standards are there, but MS won't use them.” – true. The developers of FireFox and Opera do.
Tabbed browsing is the best. You can thank Opera Software for that idea, besides others. Using IE is a pain when one gets used to tabbing, as it is so much faster, convenient and an intelligent way of going about browsing.
richard_cocks
05-18-2005, 08:12 AM
Originally posted by Zakalwe
, but what annoys me is that, in all this time, with all that money, MS have never bothered to sort out their OS and make it genuinely stable.
2k/XP is genuinely stable, I've never had either crash.
, but what annoys me is that, in all this time, with all that money, MS have never bothered to sort out their OS and make it genuinely stable.
2k/XP is genuinely stable, I've never had either crash.
richard_cocks
05-18-2005, 08:15 AM
Originally posted by Zakalwe
Don't mean to make a big argument about this, but can someone explain to me why you wouldn't want tabs?
I find them absolutely indispensible.
Here's an example:
I do a search in Google, and I get a page full of results, but I don't immediately know which one I want, or maybe there are 4 or 5 which are going to be useful.
In Firefox I simply ctrl+click a link, which then proceeds to load in a separate tab, and heres the kicker - in the background - so I can continue to browse my results, and open as many links as I am interested in, without having to reload my results page.
Once I have chosen all the results I am interested in, I can then click through the open tabs at my leisure, closing those which aren't needed. Also, if I change my mind, I don't need to go back to my search, I can just right click a tab, and choose "undo close tab".
The other feature I use a lot is the ability to save a "tab group".
It's all so elegant, and convenient, that when I am forced to use a non-tabbed browser on someone elses computer, it drives me mad not having it.
I do exactly the same, opening new windows and alt-tabbing back (I can alt tab back as fast as it opens so I don't lose any time). We clearly operate in very similar ways but instead you have an extra bar wasting space.
Don't mean to make a big argument about this, but can someone explain to me why you wouldn't want tabs?
I find them absolutely indispensible.
Here's an example:
I do a search in Google, and I get a page full of results, but I don't immediately know which one I want, or maybe there are 4 or 5 which are going to be useful.
In Firefox I simply ctrl+click a link, which then proceeds to load in a separate tab, and heres the kicker - in the background - so I can continue to browse my results, and open as many links as I am interested in, without having to reload my results page.
Once I have chosen all the results I am interested in, I can then click through the open tabs at my leisure, closing those which aren't needed. Also, if I change my mind, I don't need to go back to my search, I can just right click a tab, and choose "undo close tab".
The other feature I use a lot is the ability to save a "tab group".
It's all so elegant, and convenient, that when I am forced to use a non-tabbed browser on someone elses computer, it drives me mad not having it.
I do exactly the same, opening new windows and alt-tabbing back (I can alt tab back as fast as it opens so I don't lose any time). We clearly operate in very similar ways but instead you have an extra bar wasting space.
pandaz3
05-18-2005, 08:32 AM
I have used FF, Opera, IE and another that escapes me, I always went back to IE till the last two versions (1.02, 1.03) of FF. I like the more easily programed extensions for the toolbars. and I like to put my most used "favorites" folders on the toolbar for faster navigation to where I want to go. I could just put individual sites on IE (I'm not the clever type).
I look forward to IE7.
I look forward to IE7.
cdroman
05-18-2005, 01:40 PM
Originally posted by Zakalwe
Case in point, when I installed Suse Linux on my laptop, it automatically detected the Windows partition, and provided an icon on my desktop, called "C: drive", which allows me to browse the files on that drive directly. Windows won't even acknowledge the existence of another OS, and certainly can't read an ext2 partition - this despite the fact that the Linux filesystem types are open software, and it would be childs play for the software giant to provide support for them. You have to get a third party software called Samba to connect to Linux/Unix from windows. The open standards are there, but MS won't use them.
True.
I guess it's in how a person views "better software". For myself I have yet to find any version of Linux, Suse included that finds and is as compatible with as many different types of hardware as XP. This leads me to believe that the latter is a better piece of software; not to mention it is very stable. It seems to me that instabilities are usually caused by the addition of a poorly written app/apps that cause undesirable behaviour.
As for IE; I keep going back to it or to one of it's derivatives over and over again, which in turn leads me to believe it to be a better piece of software.
It's just nice that we are lucky enough to have several different options available to us all which in effect keeps everyone happy.(most of the time):t
Case in point, when I installed Suse Linux on my laptop, it automatically detected the Windows partition, and provided an icon on my desktop, called "C: drive", which allows me to browse the files on that drive directly. Windows won't even acknowledge the existence of another OS, and certainly can't read an ext2 partition - this despite the fact that the Linux filesystem types are open software, and it would be childs play for the software giant to provide support for them. You have to get a third party software called Samba to connect to Linux/Unix from windows. The open standards are there, but MS won't use them.
True.
I guess it's in how a person views "better software". For myself I have yet to find any version of Linux, Suse included that finds and is as compatible with as many different types of hardware as XP. This leads me to believe that the latter is a better piece of software; not to mention it is very stable. It seems to me that instabilities are usually caused by the addition of a poorly written app/apps that cause undesirable behaviour.
As for IE; I keep going back to it or to one of it's derivatives over and over again, which in turn leads me to believe it to be a better piece of software.
It's just nice that we are lucky enough to have several different options available to us all which in effect keeps everyone happy.(most of the time):t
Tech^salvager
05-18-2005, 02:03 PM
there is something on teh net that you can get tha twill let windows have teh ability to connect to ext2 fs's.
chubtub
05-18-2005, 02:30 PM
I can not live without tabbed browsing!
I have 3 tabs open at the moment and have as many as 6 open at a time.
I have 3 tabs open at the moment and have as many as 6 open at a time.
cdroman
05-18-2005, 06:19 PM
Originally posted by chubtub
I can not live without tabbed browsing!
I have 3 tabs open at the moment and have as many as 6 open at a time.
Yeah; sometimes I like tabs in which case I use Maxthon, K-Meleon etc. But that probably won't be the case if IE7 has tabs.:t
I can not live without tabbed browsing!
I have 3 tabs open at the moment and have as many as 6 open at a time.
Yeah; sometimes I like tabs in which case I use Maxthon, K-Meleon etc. But that probably won't be the case if IE7 has tabs.:t
Tech^salvager
05-18-2005, 09:47 PM
Originally posted by cdroman
Yeah; sometimes I like tabs in which case I use Maxthon, K-Meleon etc. But that probably won't be the case if IE7 has tabs.:t oh yeah same here cdroman
Yeah; sometimes I like tabs in which case I use Maxthon, K-Meleon etc. But that probably won't be the case if IE7 has tabs.:t oh yeah same here cdroman
Zakalwe
05-18-2005, 10:59 PM
Midknyte
Tech^salvager
cdroman
Richard_cocks
G
pandaz3
chubtub
Lots of very excellent points there - I guess the obvious theme here is that everyone has their own preference for what works best on their own system.
I guess thats why they're called PCs - Personal Computer :t
Thanks guys, I've got a few new things to check out now - Kmeleon, Maxthon.
Might even look at IE7 when it comes out, after having read this thread, even though it is produced by "The Evil Empire" ;)
----------------------------------------------------------
Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, still exists
Tech^salvager
cdroman
Richard_cocks
G
pandaz3
chubtub
Lots of very excellent points there - I guess the obvious theme here is that everyone has their own preference for what works best on their own system.
I guess thats why they're called PCs - Personal Computer :t
Thanks guys, I've got a few new things to check out now - Kmeleon, Maxthon.
Might even look at IE7 when it comes out, after having read this thread, even though it is produced by "The Evil Empire" ;)
----------------------------------------------------------
Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, still exists
beast16t
05-19-2005, 09:08 AM
The point on tabbed browsing as far as I'm concerned is to leave space on the taskbar for other apps. If you've got 3 or 4 apps open already and then want to browse a few web sites at the same time it's going to get mighty cluttered down there.
The only times I use IE is when I run a windows/office update or use a site where the webmaster has been lazy and coded specifically for IE. It would only take a bit more effort to do it for all browsers!
So long as FF stays nice and small and fast I don't mind. If MS made IE fit into an installer that was less than 10MB even I would be impressed. Lets face it, the last time they made some software that small it DOS :r
The only times I use IE is when I run a windows/office update or use a site where the webmaster has been lazy and coded specifically for IE. It would only take a bit more effort to do it for all browsers!
So long as FF stays nice and small and fast I don't mind. If MS made IE fit into an installer that was less than 10MB even I would be impressed. Lets face it, the last time they made some software that small it DOS :r
chubtub
05-19-2005, 10:35 AM
Originally posted by beast16t
The point on tabbed browsing as far as I'm concerned is to leave space on the taskbar for other apps. If you've got 3 or 4 apps open already and then want to browse a few web sites at the same time it's going to get mighty cluttered down there.
Very good point, my thoughts exactly.
The point on tabbed browsing as far as I'm concerned is to leave space on the taskbar for other apps. If you've got 3 or 4 apps open already and then want to browse a few web sites at the same time it's going to get mighty cluttered down there.
Very good point, my thoughts exactly.
Zakalwe
05-19-2005, 05:20 PM
The point on tabbed browsing as far as I'm concerned is to leave space on the taskbar for other apps. If you've got 3 or 4 apps open already and then want to browse a few web sites at the same time it's going to get mighty cluttered down there.
Agreed. Well said.:cool:
__________________
Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, still exists
Agreed. Well said.:cool:
__________________
Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, still exists
beast16t
05-20-2005, 04:28 AM
Wow! I made an appropriate comment :)
I feel all warm inside :r
I do hope for the sake of all the users who aren't very tech savvy that MS make IE7 a lot more secure and less prone to bugs. No matter how annoyed I get with users doing silly stuff I still don't want them having their PC infected with virus/malware/spyware.
I feel all warm inside :r
I do hope for the sake of all the users who aren't very tech savvy that MS make IE7 a lot more secure and less prone to bugs. No matter how annoyed I get with users doing silly stuff I still don't want them having their PC infected with virus/malware/spyware.
G
05-20-2005, 05:38 AM
True to form M$ are forcing users to upgrade as IE7, at this time, is only applicable to WinXP.
SysOpt.com
Copyright Internet.com Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Copyright Internet.com Inc. All Rights Reserved.