Internet Explorer 9 Released

[funkydude]

-{ Quote: "The final, consumer-ready Internet Explorer 9 is available for download starting at 9:00 PM PDT at www.BeautyOfTheWeb.com in 39 languages." }-

http://www.beautyoftheweb.com/#/download
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/archive/2011/03/14/ie9-release-globally-available-for-consumers-and-businesses.aspx

[J_L]

Also available here: http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/internet-explorer/products/ie/home

[Triple Helix]

-{ Quote: "Also available here: http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/internet-explorer/products/ie/home" }-

Thanks for the link I will give it a few days before I install! :thumb:

TH

[Hugger]

Installed and running fine. I haven't broken it yet.
However I do notice that the Prevx tab isn't visible.
Hugger

[MatDE]

~ Off Topic Comments Removed ~

Thanks for the links. First install of german IE9 didn't work flawlessly. It kept stuck at 17 %. So I had to shut down and then after reboot I could uninstall IE9 which seemed to be installed fine though at the first time. Nevertheless installed it again and this time - maybe because I choose the 2nd option to not care about open files and reboot - it worked without being stuck.

Only question I have now: How do I disable temporary internet files (no hdd cache) in IE9? I am using private mode but those files are written anyway to my SSD? WTH? - Should private mode not explicitly stop that behavior?

[moontan]

it works pretty good.

it seems a little faster than the RC.
some web pages are broken but can be fixed by using the Compatibility View.

if you scroll down this page you will see there is text over some images but it will display properly in Compatibility View:
-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loon-

[Chubb]

Full installer for international versions:

http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/internet-explorer/downloads/ie-9/worldwide-languages

[BoerenkoolMetWorst]

When will IE9 come through windows update for IE9 RC and IE8 users?

[JoeBlack40]

I'm a "newbie" in IE ;D and i barely use it,as i use Chrome or FF as my default browser.My question is,are there some extension for IE as Flash Block and Add Block like in FF and Chrome?Cause i really like IE9 and i hate to see ads flashing on every page.

[Daveski17]

-{ Quote: "I'm a "newbie" in IE ;D and i barely use it,as i use Chrome or FF as my default browser.My question is,are there some extension for IE as Flash Block and Add Block like in FF and Chrome?Cause i really like IE9 and i hate to see ads flashing on every page." }-

AFAIK the Simple Adblock (http://simple-adblock.com/downloadpage/) extension for IE 9 is no longer completely freeware.

" Free/Pro version
- Free version is limited to 100 adrequests"

[Daveski17]

-{ Quote: "it seems a little faster than the RC." }-

Do you think that the RAM usage has improved?

[firzen771]

does IE9 install over IE8 or will i have 2 installations, one of IE8 and one of IE9?

[pandorax]

I want to do this tutorial (http://www.megaleecher.net/Adblock_IE9) to adblock but there is no import button for import xml file? In private filtesing's new name is tracking protection on final ie 9. How can i import this xml to block ads?

[harsha_mic]

-{ Quote: "does IE9 install over IE8 or will i have 2 installations, one of IE8 and one of IE9?" }-
it installed directly over IE8. Just one installation needed.

[harsha_mic]

-{ Quote: "I want to do this tutorial (http://www.megaleecher.net/Adblock_IE9) to adblock but there is no import button for import xml file? In private filtesing's new name is tracking protection on final ie 9. How can i import this xml to block ads?" }-
go over here .. http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/Browser/TrackingProtectionLists/

click "Add TPL" link. I am not sure if there are any other steps.

[harsha_mic]

IE9 seems to be lot faster than IE8. Added TPLs and sites loads lot faster without any ads and pop-ups like..:thumb:
bharatmovies.com
deals2buy.com

[trjam]

IE9 is like night and day over IE8. They really did a very good job with it.

[harsha_mic]

i think load times are bit faster than my chrome...or atleast very comparable to it.:)

[pandorax]

-{ Quote: "go over here .. http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/Browser/TrackingProtectionLists/

click "Add TPL" link. I am not sure if there are any other steps." }-
Thanks.

And guys, is it render pictures with gpu?

[firzen771]

-{ Quote: "it installed directly over IE8. Just one installation needed." }-

ok thanks

[pandorax]

-{ Quote: "I'm a "newbie" in IE ;D and i barely use it,as i use Chrome or FF as my default browser.My question is,are there some extension for IE as Flash Block and Add Block like in FF and Chrome?Cause i really like IE9 and i hate to see ads flashing on every page." }-
You can activate "Activex Filter" in security section for block flash. But i wonder are there any flash blocker addon because if you want to watch flash video on any page and deactive activex for that page you can see flash video including flash ads.

[iravgupta]

They just need to work on getting a good add-on development platform in place. The current one is pathetic.

[dw426]

-{ Quote: "AFAIK the Simple Adblock (http://simple-adblock.com/downloadpage/) extension for IE 9 is no longer completely freeware.

" Free/Pro version
- Free version is limited to 100 adrequests"" }-

That was a bright move on their part ::) Oh well, in IE, nothing ever beat a good HOST file anyway.

[JoeBlack40]

Thank you guys for suggestions,but i have to completely agree with
-{ Quote: "They just need to work on getting a good add-on development platform in place. The current one is pathetic." }-
Back to Chrome and FF.

[BoerenkoolMetWorst]

Still, the new tracking protection is a lot better than the old InPrivate filtering, so an adblocking addon is not really needed.

[Greg S]

-{ Quote: "go over here .. http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/Browser/TrackingProtectionLists/

click "Add TPL" link. I am not sure if there are any other steps." }-
My IE8 InPrivateFiltering list from IE8 was left intact along with the new tpl that I added. The only difference is that my InPrivateFiltering list is Disabled after installing IE9 and has been renamed to Your Personalized List. I have left it that way(Disabled) for now because I read somewhere that if it is enabled, it will over ride the new tpl's. Don't know if that is true or not but as of right now, I am happy with the new lists and left the Your Personalized List disabled.

[Someheresomethere]

How to block Ads with IE 9 (Since the tracking lists Microsoft offers don't actually block ads):

-Download Fanboy's Adblock List for Internet Explorer 9:
http://www.fanboy.co.nz/adblock/ie.html

-For better results, follow these instructions to use a special stylesheet:
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=18511915&postcount=71

Here's a screenshot comparison:

-Easylist:
http://img546.imageshack.us/f/easylist.jpg/
-Fanboy's list
http://img580.imageshack.us/f/fanboys.jpg/
-Fanboy's list + Style sheet
http://img695.imageshack.us/f/fanboystylesheet.jpg/

I recommend that you use both Fanboy's list and Stylesheet, since they complement each other .

[Mr.PC]

-{ Quote: "When will IE9 come through Windows Update?" }-
I wonder the same...:-\

[funkydude]

-{ Quote: "Do you think that the RAM usage has improved?" }-

That was never an IE issue, it was a flash issue.

-{ Quote: "
-For better results, follow these instructions to use a special stylesheet:
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=18511915&postcount=71
" }-

Interesting because IE collapsed elements that were blocked with TPL's fine for me ???

[Greg S]

-{ Quote: "That was never an IE issue, it was a flash issue.

" }-
Hmm, I'm not getting flash to work on YouTube. Reckon what's up with that? In IE8, I had it set to allow for YouTube so with IE9, I don't get the yellow popup at the bottom of the browser to allow it either.

[Daveski17]

-{ Quote: "That was never an IE issue, it was a flash issue." }-

Most likely, but I had problems with missing icons & sidebar issues with the RC on my laptop (I haven't tried the RC on my desktop yet). When I reverted back to IE 8 they were resolved. I assumed that this was some RAM issue (my laptop only has 1 Gbyte of RAM). I may be wrong about this but it's all I can think of. IE 9 will probably be fine on my 64 bit Win 7 machine but I am still a bit dubious about upgrading on my laptop. Especially as I hardly ever use IE anyway on it. I would rather not have a desktop icon problem & a working sidebar with IE 8 than have IE 9 & its attendant problems.

[funkydude]

-{ Quote: "Hmm, I'm not getting flash to work on YouTube. Reckon what's up with that? In IE8, I had it set to allow for YouTube so with IE9, I don't get the yellow popup at the bottom of the browser to allow it either." }-

Not sure, ActiveX filtering? I actually removed the site restrictions from flash myself so it's allowed on all sites and use ActiveX filtering instead.

-{ Quote: "Most likely, but I had problems with missing icons & sidebar issues with the RC on my laptop (I haven't tried the RC on my desktop yet). When I reverted back to IE 8 they were resolved. I assumed that this was some RAM issue (my laptop only has 1 Gbyte of RAM). I may be wrong about this but it's all I can think of. IE 9 will probably be fine on my 64 bit Win 7 machine but I am still a bit dubious about upgrading on my laptop. Especially as I hardly ever use IE anyway on it. I would rather not have a desktop icon problem & a working sidebar with IE 8 than have IE 9 & its attendant problems." }-

I believe gadgets not working is because they use the IE engine to render certain things. I don't use gadgets, so you'd have to risk it and find out if it's fixed in release.

I can't see how the amount of RAM you have would affect it at all, that would be quite odd.

[sportsfan7700]

Using IE 9 as main browser..all seems well. By the Way, Internet Explorer nine downloaded directly from Windows update this morning. Everything from IE 8 is carried over.

[funkydude]

I'm thinking of ditching my IE9 TPL site or making it a forward to fanboy's site.

I've removed all my TPL's and added all of fanboy's TPL's and it seems to block 99% of ads (only the google "text" ads get past). Can anyone confirm that also?

http://www.fanboy.co.nz/adblock/ie.html

[Someheresomethere]

-{ Quote: "I'm thinking of ditching my IE9 TPL site or making it a forward to fanboy's site.

I've removed all my TPL's and added all of fanboy's TPL's and it seems to block 99% of ads (only the google "text" ads get past). Can anyone confirm that also?

http://www.fanboy.co.nz/adblock/ie.html" }-

Yeah, I can confirm. The style sheet seems to eliminate them, though.

[vasa1]

-{ Quote: "I'm thinking of ditching my IE9 TPL site or making it a forward to fanboy's site.
..." }-

If not inconvenient, it's better to redirect than to "ditch".

[cgeek]

@Someheresomethere
Thanks for the Opera CSS tip. I downloaded the one from Fanboy's website and works great! :thumb:

[Trooper]

-{ Quote: "I wonder the same...:-\" }-

I wonder the same as well.

[radial5]

I think MS have done a commendable job with IE9, I've been using it since Beta. Other than a couple of niggles with flash content I haven't had any issues. I like the selective ActiveX filtering - it really seems to let you have more control on what Add-ons and extensions are used when browsing and the TPL feature further adds to it.

(I do think it's a shame that XP is not at least getting an XP compatible version with some of the new features, I suppose there is always one of the strong alternatives for those that don't like IE8.)

[MatDE]

I think MS screwed up big time. :thumbd: - Whatever simpleton in Redmond had the idea to mess the InPrivate function should be cruci... thrown out! :wacko:

With IE8 we SSD users could minimize write action by surfing in InPrivate mode. Because temporary internet files weren't written to disk (SSD). Great function I use(d) with FF and - so far - IE.

Now in IE9 those morons changed that (obviously for no reason other than to piss off SSD users): NOW temporary internet files ARE written to disk in InPrivate mode and then are DELETED when IE9 is closed. - Great idea, really!!! :thumbd:

Result: I'm not going to use this piece of .. :wacko:

[Greg S]

Hmm, how did you manage to get them not written to disk? I've used InPrivateBrowsing quite alot and it's always written to the disk. As a matter of fact, it uses ClearMyTracks to erase written items when the browser is closed.

[MatDE]

If this really was the case (can't verify now) then IE9 is simply as worse as IE8 was. 8) - Firefox let's you stop all disk caching and this is what I want using my SSD. - And sorry if I was wrong about IE8, but I was under the impression of much less writing there with InPrivate (as I said can't verify that now)!

However .. InPrivate mode in IE sucks, maybe it did also in IE8, but for sure now in IE9. And it seems stupid to me especially with privacy concerns to first write files that then are deleted if browsers like Firefox can do that without any cache writing to disk (SSD).

[Greg S]

Ok, I see. The option to not write to the temp folder. I may have never used that with IE. I have with Firefox but not IE. Can't you use one of those apps that create a Ram disk and adjust it?

[MatDE]

-{ Quote: "Can't you use one of those apps that create a Ram disk and adjust it?" }-

I could of course though I have only 2 GB RAM (32-bit Win7) which are more than enough for my usage. But since IE is only one of my backup browsers and since I was fine with IE8 I am probably now with IE9 just using Firefox all the time. :P - Praying that they do not forget about their SSD users. ;)

Simple Adblock btw didn't work in IE8 in InPrivate mode if I am not wrong, but Adblock Plus does of course in private mode of Firefox. ;) - Private mode for me is/was in fact SSD mode. :)

[firzen771]

strange that activex filtering seems to screw up flash, cant watch youtube videos with it enabled

[funkydude]

-{ Quote: "strange that activex filtering seems to screw up flash, cant watch youtube videos with it enabled" }-

That's the point. You enable it on-demand on a per website basis. Click the blue symbol in the address bar and select "Turn off Active X Filtering". Then that website is allowed.

I generally only recommend this feature to nerds/geeks as others find it too much work or simply forget/get confused when their websites don't work.

[firzen771]

-{ Quote: "That's the point. You enable it on-demand on a per website basis. Click the blue symbol in the address bar and select "Turn off Active X Filtering". Then that website is allowed.

I generally only recommend this feature to nerds/geeks as others find it too much work or simply forget/get confused when their websites don't work." }-

ah ok, so thats how it works, kinda like a noscript, thanks

[rolarocka]

Impressive. IE9 with JS on feels a little bit faster then Chrome with JS off. Great job MS :thumb:

[moontan]

i think the new Active-X filtering and Cross-site scripting filter are great security features.

you add Protected Mode under UAC which was in IE8 and it gets even better.
i haven't looked into Trackin Protection yet.

it is much faster than IE8.
it don't know if it is as fast as Chrome but the difference, if there is one, is small.

very hard to pick between the top browsers, as they seem so close in quality.

[Noob]

Downloaded and installed ;D

[kuti]

Anyone know a decent free adblock flash?

That all I need now on IE9.

Cheers

[moontan]

-{ Quote: "Anyone know a decent free adblock flash?

That all I need now on IE9.

Cheers" }-

i would think Active-X filtering would fit the bill, no?

you can't even watch youtube when it is engaged.

[funkydude]

-{ Quote: "Anyone know a decent free adblock flash?

That all I need now on IE9.

Cheers" }-

You shouldn't have an issue with ads when using fanboy's TPL's.

http://www.fanboy.co.nz/ie.html
Added them all.

[Kerodo]

Just installed here. I'm a Chrome fan, but I must say this is really nice. I might just switch... :)

[Daveski17]

-{ Quote: "I believe gadgets not working is because they use the IE engine to render certain things. I don't use gadgets, so you'd have to risk it and find out if it's fixed in release.

I can't see how the amount of RAM you have would affect it at all, that would be quite odd." }-

Oh OK. Thanks for the reply. I was under the impression that the sidebar consumed a lot of RAM, so I sort of assumed that was the root of the problem. But if the gadgets are tied into the IE engine that would explain it.

[m00nbl00d]

Although I'm not a regular IE user, I upgraded to IE9, and I dislike the fact there's no fast way to enable blocked cookies. IE8 was much better in that way.

At least, they could make it work like Chromium in what concerns to cookies.

I don't like it much. It may be faster than IE8 and introduce new features, but it lacks some decent usability, IMHO.

I always have cookies blocked and then allow on a per-site basis, when required. IE8 allowed me to quickly allow them. Chromium allows a better experience than IE8.

For me, IE8 is much better than IE9 in terms of usability.

-edit-

I also don't like the lack of usability with the InPrivate Filtering either (It has a different name in IE9, but I haven't searched for the English term, so I apologize for not mentioning the proper name.)

[funkydude]

m00nbl00d, the internet options are the exact same in IE9 as they were in IE8, probably also IE7.

Open up the cookies menu, select block all, click sites, add sites to allow list. Or simply use the import function to import a list of good sites.

I personally block all 3rd party cookies outright, I'm not sure why anyone would want to block first party cookies.

[m00nbl00d]

-{ Quote: "m00nbl00d, the internet options are the exact same in IE9 as they were in IE8, probably also IE7.

Open up the cookies menu, select block all, click sites, add sites to allow list. Or simply use the import function to import a list of good sites.

I personally block all 3rd party cookies outright, I'm not sure why anyone would want to block first party cookies." }-

You got me wrong. I'm talking about the little icon that used to appear in IE8 down bar (or whatever is called lol). All I had to do was to click it and allow the needed cookies. Now... pftt. Same deal for InPrivate Filtering usability... pfttt.

Microsoft takes the name "Windows" way too serious. ::)

-edit-

At least, they made it possible to have tabs in a separate row; not everything is lost.

[m00nbl00d]

-{ Quote: "That's the point. You enable it on-demand on a per website basis. Click the blue symbol in the address bar and select "Turn off Active X Filtering". Then that website is allowed.
[...]" }-

Will that enable all active-x for a given domain? Wouldn't the option to enable Flash on a per-site basis a better approach?

[Greg S]

-{ Quote: "Will that enable all active-x for a given domain? Wouldn't the option to enable Flash on a per-site basis a better approach?" }-

No, it is a per site basis

[kuti]

-{ Quote: "You shouldn't have an issue with ads when using fanboy's TPL's.

http://www.fanboy.co.nz/ie.html
Added them all." }-

I added them all but they aren't help block flash. >:(

[kuti]

-{ Quote: "i would think Active-X filtering would fit the bill, no?

you can't even watch youtube when it is engaged." }-

Have you experienced ads flash on youtube tv channels, especially on Channel 4 UK. They usually got 3 to 4 flash advertisements before the tv show is play. It is really annoying, this is not happen with firefox because adblock plus block them all and go straight to the show.

[funkydude]

-{ Quote: "Have you experienced ads flash on youtube tv channels, especially on Channel 4 UK. They usually got 3 to 4 flash advertisements before the tv show is play. It is really annoying, this is not happen with firefox because adblock plus block them all and go straight to the show." }-

There's a big difference between "youtube ads" and "block flash". You didn't make it very clear what you wanted.

I'm trying to figure out what domain youtube uses for it's in-video ads, it's probably not on fanboy's list yet.

[kuti]

@funkydude: sorry for my vague post. I tried simple adblock for IE and its working, block all youtube ads. But this application isn't free. Hope you could find a solution.

Regards

[m00nbl00d]

-{ Quote: "No, it is a per site basis" }-

Yes, I know that. But, in setting Active-X protection, and then if allow Active-X for a given domain, then it will allow all Active-X for that domain, right? For what I could dig so far, there's no option to enable Flash or Java etc. It's all or nothing, for what it seems. Bad approach. Mine is better: Flash disabled for all domains and allowed on a per-site basis, and everything else disabled and enabled when needed.

I'm really disappointed with IE9. It's faster and introduces some nice features, I give you that, but it lacks basic usability and functionality. If they had in mind such feature like Active-X control, then for sure they should expand its capabilities.

[rolarocka]

-{ Quote: "Mine is better: Flash disabled for all domains and allowed on a per-site basis, and everything else disabled and enabled when needed." }-
Can u explain how u do that? TY

[m00nbl00d]

-{ Quote: "Can u explain how u do that? TY" }-

If you go to IE's add-on manager, if you select and right-click the Adobe Flash Player plugin, and then click More information -> Remove all sites. Close the add-on manager.

Go to Youtube, and verify if IE alerts you that Adobe Flash Player wants to initiate. Then, you can allow it for Youtube only. There are two options: Allow it for Youtube (in our example) or Allow it for All domains.

This way, you create a whitelist of domains that can use Flash.

Java plugin does have the same option, but one other user tested it out (I don't use Java) and it doesn't seem to have any effect on it, though.

It does work with Flash.

-edit-

By the way, if you also enable Active-X Filtering, then you won't see a warning that Flash wants to initiate. So, just disable Active-X for the current domain (the blue icon in the address bar), and then you'll get the warning.

[m00nbl00d]

Only now it came to my attention that IE9 doesn't allow to import/export InPrivate Filtering rules ???

[ShaneR34]

-{ Quote: "You shouldn't have an issue with ads when using fanboy's TPL's.

http://www.fanboy.co.nz/ie.html
Added them all." }-

I'm still seeing a fair amount of ads. Doubleclick is showing up often as well as others on pretty much every site that has them.

[ShaneR34]

Whew...

I just had IE crap out my system by using 100% of my CPU. I had to manually kill all IE's running processes.

That's not a good sign...

[Greg S]

-{ Quote: "Whew...

I just had IE crap out my system by using 100% of my CPU. I had to manually kill all IE's running processes.

That's not a good sign..." }-
I've had that to happen once. I agree with moon that it is fast but I'm not for sure if I'm going to stick with it for now. I've rolled back and installed it three times so far and get different results each time. Two of the times, flash wouldn't work on YouTube even though everything was set for it to. As of right now, I have it working and best I can tell, the fix was to disable flash in manage addons for a few sessions then re-enable it. My other issue is with my default search page Yippy. Not a biggie but for some reason, it does not want to show the favicon in the urlbar or taskbar recent items. I can save it as favorite and it will show there but not in the other two spots. The one install I had that flash worked, Yippy's favcion worked but the one for Seven Forums didn't work.

[Hugger]

I'm keeping it on my pc but not using it. Lacking in simple usability and functions.
Examples-
I can't put together the toolbars the way I want them.
No adblock-and I don't want to be jumping through hoops to put one together.
Arguably the best of the best put this together and I feel like it's just another example of MS giving us what they decided we wanted.
I hope I'm wrong.
Time to sit back and watch.
Hugger

[ShaneR34]

-{ Quote: "I've had that to happen once. I agree with moon that it is fast but I'm not for sure if I'm going to stick with it for now. I've rolled back and installed it three times so far and get different results each time. Two of the times, flash wouldn't work on YouTube even though everything was set for it to. As of right now, I have it working and best I can tell, the fix was to disable flash in manage addons for a few sessions then re-enable it. My other issue is with my default search page Yippy. Not a biggie but for some reason, it does not want to show the favicon in the urlbar or taskbar recent items. I can save it as favorite and it will show there but not in the other two spots. The one install I had that flash worked, Yippy's favcion worked but the one for Seven Forums didn't work." }-

I don't believe it's a flash issue. Thinking the same, I uninstalled flash and I get the same results.

It only seems to happen when I close the browser...the processes do not close and immediately jump to 25% CPU usage per process.

Weird...

[vasa1]

Some comments:
Microsoft IE9 release: Download "the best browser" (http://blogs.computerworld.com/17983/microsoft_ie9_release_download_the_best_browser?ub)

[m00nbl00d]

I think I came across another issue with IE9's Parental Controls. While visiting a local blog, which had a Youtube video in one of its articles, I noticed that Parental Controls (I added Fanboy's lists) places its icon on top of the Youtube video on that blog, and if I click on it, the video starts playing.

I may be wrong, but it shouldn't, because I removed Flash execution from all domains, and only play it when required.

With Active-X Filtering, for example in Youtube's own site, if I turn it off, as I previously mentioned then I get a warning from IE asking me if I want to allow it. Youtube also complains I need to install Flash. Makes sense.

I also get it with Parental Controls for the blog, but if I click on the video, it will play! No request to install Flash is shown at all, at the image of what happens on Youtube website.

Seriously speaking: Internet Explorer 9 is a bloody mess. It may be faster than any other IE version, but it lacks usability and functionality.

Also, the UI was designed by whom? A team of kindergarden kids? With all respect to the kindergarden kids, obviously. Internet Explorer 9 team ought to be ashamed of themselves for such result - unfinished!

I look at Chromium and then I look at IE9, and I have no urges. Well, I do have them, but they're 100% compelling me into using Chromium, as I've been for the last ~2 years.

[m00nbl00d]

There's actually one more thing that I'd like to mention regarding Pinned Sites feature. It's ridiculous, and I'll explain why.

Here (https://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/archive/2011/03/11/internet-explorer-9-security-part-3-browse-more-securely-with-pinned-sites.aspx) you'll what Microsoft states about Pinned Sites feature.

The interesting one is the following reason, IMHO:

-{ Quote: "Fourth, when you pin a HTTPS site to your taskbar, you can avoid insecure HTTP to HTTPS redirections. For instance, if you type bank.example.com into your address bar, the first request sent out to the network is destined for -http://bank.example.com, using the insecure HTTP protocol. Under normal circumstances, that site will immediately send you a redirect to the -https://bank.example.com site. However, if you use the HTTP protocol from an unsecured network (say, your local coffee shop), an attacker on the wire can intercept that insecure request and send you to his phishing site instead of your real banking site.

Only careful examination of the URL in the address bar and verification of the HTTPS Lock icon’s certificate information will allow you to detect a man-in-the-middle attack like this. However, when you pin -https://bank.example.com to your taskbar, when you launch your pinned banking application, the very first request is already using the HTTPS protocol, helping to prevent the man-in-the-middle from intercepting and redirecting your traffic to a malicious site." }-

** Emphasis is mine

This is very nice, specially if you use IE9 to access your bank's account. But, websites opened using Pinned Sites open without BHO (Browser Helper Objects)! I don't know about all banks, but some provide flash content in their website!

Or imagine you have an account in Youtube, accessing it requires your Gmail credentials, correct? Well, you need Flash for Youtube. ;D More examples could be given.

Was this a well thought feature? If a given website requires no BHO like Flash, then I guess is a nice one, but not if it needs it.

-edit-

This is a really nice feature for such situations, but Microsoft really threw it out of the "Windows" with such design preventing BHOs. -edit- I believe that Microsoft should have introduced options to decide which BHOs to allow/deny.

[funkydude]

m00nbl00d, you know fine well Flash is ActiveX not a BHO. It loads fine using pinned sites.

[funkydude]

-{ Quote: "I don't believe it's a flash issue. Thinking the same, I uninstalled flash and I get the same results.

It only seems to happen when I close the browser...the processes do not close and immediately jump to 25% CPU usage per process.

Weird..." }-

Do you have addons attached to IE? I suggest you look though the list of addons. Also, I don't have EMET attached to IE9, incase you do.

[m00nbl00d]

-{ Quote: "m00nbl00d, you know fine well Flash is ActiveX not a BHO. It loads fine using pinned sites." }-

You're right about that one! Momentary insanity! I don't know why I confused it. LOL

Moments ago I did post something regarding Active-X Filtering and Flash. ;D But, sometimes I do tend to call everything that gives functionality to IE a BHO. ;D

Still, I wonder if it could break certain functionality if certain BHO is needed, for whatever websites? * This was a stupid question, because that's going to be a side effect! **

I'll test it with the bank account, though, so that relatives can make use of that feature. It's a really nice one for such situations.

Again, thanks for waking me up! ;D

-edit-

** Still, I believe it would be welcome an option that could let users pick which BHOs they would want to allow for certain websites. Rather allow only 1, for example, than all a person may have in IE.

[m00nbl00d]

OK. This is awkward.

I pinned a website to the taskbar. For testing purposes I used a system where I got Prevx SafeOnline. Prevx SafeOnline does add a BHO to IE. At least, that's what IE calls it! ;D

I opened the pinned website, but BHO was initiated, so was all others.

Could someone verify that?

[m00nbl00d]

I switched Fanboy's lists by those provide at -http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/Browser/TrackingProtectionLists/Default.html

Fanboy's lists were crippling Wordpress blogs. Images would not appear. Has anyone experienced this?

They do appear fine with the lists provided in the link above. I just didn't add the one from TRUSTe, it's way permissive.

[Greg S]

-{ Quote: "I switched Fanboy's lists by those provide at -http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/Browser/TrackingProtectionLists/Default.html

Fanboy's lists were crippling Wordpress blogs. Images would not appear. Has anyone experienced this?

They do appear fine with the lists provided in the link above. I just didn't add the one from TRUSTe, it's way permissive." }-
Which ones did you add from the ms link?

[m00nbl00d]

-{ Quote: "Which ones did you add from the ms link?" }-

I just didn't add TRUSTe's list. This list allows many stuff; more than it blocks. TRUSTe is more about allowing good services than anything else.

I actually added this one EasyPrivacy Tracking Protection List instead of the one provide at the Microsoft link; it's more complete* *They're the same. -http://easylist.adblockplus.org/en/

I do notice some slowness while browsing with all these lists. I'm on a 128 kbps connection right now, and the slowness is perceptible. Removing the lists speeds things a bit. I'll try and narrow down the ones that will do a better job. I won't be using IE9 that much, so not much of a big deal for me... But, I want a smooth experience to relatives who do use it, when I upgrade them to IE9.

[Greg S]

-{ Quote: "I just didn't add TRUSTe's list. This list allows many stuff; more than it blocks. TRUSTe is more about allowing good services than anything else.

I actually added this one EasyPrivacy Tracking Protection List instead of the one provide at the Microsoft link; it's more complete -http://easylist.adblockplus.org/en/

I do notice some slowness while browsing with all these lists. I'm on a 128 kbps connection right now, and the slowness is perceptible. Removing the lists speeds things a bit. I'll try and narrow down the ones that will do a better job. I won't be using IE9 that much, so not much of a big deal for me... But, I want a smooth experience to relatives who do use it, when I upgrade them to IE9." }-
Did you add both the Privacy Choices?

Also, in comparison of the two list(EasyList), I'm not seeing any difference in their content. They look the same to me.

[m00nbl00d]

-{ Quote: "Did you add both the Privacy Choices?

Also, in comparison of the two list(EasyList), I'm not seeing any difference in their content. They look the same to me." }-

No, I added only the one here -http://easylist.adblockplus.org/en/

To be honest, I have no idea why I said this one is more complete. They actually are the same, at least judging by the link provided in both websites. I believe I saw it mentioned somewhere that they were different, which is why I thought they were; had no reasons not to believe I guess. ;D

But, no, you're right, judging by the URL and name of the list, they have to be the same. Sorry if I caused any confusion. :(

[funkydude]

I have noticed some avatar FPs with Fanboy's lists but they are far better at blocking ads than the MS listed ones. It would be best to report the URL as a FP on fanboy's forums and get it sorted.

[ronjor]

-{ Quote: "WebM filter preview gives IE9 WebM compatibility

By Peter Bright

Google has released a preview WebM filter for Windows Vista and Windows 7. When installed, the filter will allow Windows programs—including Windows Media Player, Windows Media Center, and perhaps most importantly of all, Internet Explorer 9—to play back WebM-encoded video." }-http://arstechnica.com/web/news/2011/03/webm-filter-preview-gives-ie9-webm-compatibility.ars

[Someheresomethere]

Anybody know of a registry hack or something to make the back and forward button ALWAYS change color according to the website?

[m00nbl00d]

-{ Quote: "I have noticed some avatar FPs with Fanboy's lists but they are far better at blocking ads than the MS listed ones. It would be best to report the URL as a FP on fanboy's forums and get it sorted." }-

You're right, Fanboy's list seems to be more efficient. But, for now I had no lists, and I accessed -http://www.pcworld.com and Parental Controls icon appears all over the place. I thought it was due to Active-X Filtering, so I disabled. The same still happens.

Is anyone able to reproduce it? (@ all)

[JRViejo]

-{ Quote: "Microsoft yesterday followed Mozilla's lead by adding support to IE9 for the same "Do Not Track" technology used by Firefox 4.

The feature, dubbed "Do Not Track User Preference" by Microsoft, is another way to let users opt out of the online tracking conducted by Web sites and advertisers. Firefox 4 -- and now IE9 -- will transmit special information with every HTTP page request, telling the site that the user does not want to be tracked." }-
IE9 follows Firefox 4's lead on 'Do Not Track' (http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9214669/IE9_follows_Firefox_4_s_lead_on_Do_Not_Track_) by Gregg Keizer.

[Mr.PC]

Group Policy Settings For Internet Explorer 9 (http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=21e84c24-b967-4d6d-850a-5eb554d18447)

[funkydude]

If you think tracking protection is blocking something just open up dev tools (F12) click the console tab the refresh the webpage. It will tell if if anything was blocked.

Fanboy's TPL collection is serving me well so far.

[funkydude]

Anyone noticed that certain sites will make IE9 display a border around the webpage? Well, that's because it's being forced into 'Quirks' rendering mode. A.K.A. the website hasn't been updated to allow IE9 to run properly like any other browser.

Most forums, including this one, force it into IE7 mode. You can check this by hitting F12 and looking at the "Document Mode" dropdown. Updated websites such as facebook will show "IE9 standards (default)" where as most forums will show "IE7 standards (default)".

I've even noticed some websites as "Quirks mode (default)" and I have no idea what that is. All-in-all it's up to the website administrators to upgrade their site to stop forcing IE9 into a previous rendering mode as far as I can see.

FYI, forcing this forum into IE9 mode breaks it, and it will probably be this way until it's upgraded? Any forum admins feel like teaching us about that?

[m00nbl00d]

-{ Quote: "If you think tracking protection is blocking something just open up dev tools (F12) click the console tab the refresh the webpage. It will tell if if anything was blocked.

Fanboy's TPL collection is serving me well so far." }-

That's a nice hint, actually. Haven't thought about it, though I did notice that it's possible.

But, except for the once called "InPrivate Filtering", there's nothing else enabled (I mean, no lists for now.), and even "InPrivate Filtering" is set to let me decide what to block or allow.

Could it still be blocking something ??? I'm still discovering IE9. ;D It could also be some bug. I'll see if I can dig any further.

[Robin A.]

-{ Quote: "

FYI, forcing this forum into IE9 mode breaks it, and it will probably be this way until it's upgraded? " }-

This forum works well in IE9 mode, in my case.

[Greg S]

-{ Quote: " and even "InPrivate Filtering" is set to let me decide what to block or allow.

Could it still be blocking something ??? I'm still discovering IE9. ;D It could also be some bug. I'll see if I can dig any further." }-
In my case, even though InPrivateFiltering aka Personal List is disabled by default, it appears to still be blocking. How, I don't know. This was one of the reasons why I rolled backed and reinstalled IE9 a few different times. I thought it was causing my infamous YouTube Blackbox no video problem. After rolling back to IE8, I reset the registry to original default values and cleared all the InPrivateFiltering data. Reinstalled IE9 and flash worked. Anywho, that was my second attempt. I found something else I wanted different before installing IE9, so I rolled back again. Reinstalled IE9 for a third time doing everything as before, no flash again on the third try. Flash is working now though. I think it had something to do with me disabling the flash addon for awhile then enable it. Only issue I have now is that my search engine Yippy and Seven forums favicon will not show in the taskbar frequent items list. Yippy will not even show in the address bar. I don't think it has to do with IE9 but rather the Crappy app CrapCleaner. I've used CC only for keeping cookies and favicons and somehow after all this time I believe it's got it all screwed up.

[funkydude]

-{ Quote: "This forum works well in IE9 mode, in my case." }-

Break was an overstatement, some things just look odd, like quote boxes.

edit: nevermind it actually looks fine...

[xxJackxx]

-{ Quote: "I just didn't add TRUSTe's list. This list allows many stuff; more than it blocks. TRUSTe is more about allowing good services than anything else." }-

They are calling them good sites. I disagree. I have also read that an "Allow" on one list overrides "Block" on any list so use the TRUSTe list at your own risk.

One thing I do not like about IE9 is that I see no place on the interface that shows me the integrity level. Before when it said protected mode was off I knew that it had inherited admin rights from a parent process and I could close it and re-launch it. Now I can only tell if I open Process Explorer and check it from there. :thumbd:

[funkydude]

-{ Quote: "They are calling them good sites. I disagree. I have also read that an "Allow" on one list overrides "Block" on any list so use the TRUSTe list at your own risk.

One thing I do not like about IE9 is that I see no place on the interface that shows me the integrity level. Before when it said protected mode was off I knew that it had inherited admin rights from a parent process and I could close it and re-launch it. Now I can only tell if I open Process Explorer and check it from there. :thumbd:" }-

I thought the "ielowutil.exe" was to keep it as low?

[xxJackxx]

-{ Quote: "I thought the "ielowutil.exe" was to keep it as low?" }-

True, if you launch it from a shortcut. If you are installing or uninstalling software and it opens the browser to ask you to fill out a survey or something similar, it inherits the installers' Admin permission and launches with an integrity level of High.

[m00nbl00d]

-{ Quote: "They are calling them good sites. I disagree. I have also read that an "Allow" on one list overrides "Block" on any list so use the TRUSTe list at your own risk.
" }-

Yes, so it seems that an allow overrides a block. So, all it takes is for user blindly trust certain lists, and then they end up allowing everything. Insane or brilliant? ::)

-{ Quote: "
One thing I do not like about IE9 is that I see no place on the interface that shows me the integrity level. Before when it said protected mode was off I knew that it had inherited admin rights from a parent process and I could close it and re-launch it. Now I can only tell if I open Process Explorer and check it from there. :thumbd:" }-

Indeed, that also one of the problems of IE9. There's no easy way to know if an instance of it was started by an elevated program.

It's possible to enable the Status Bar, where in IE8 is where such appears, but besides showing the URL loading, no other information such as Protected Mode or blocked cookies will appear. :thumbd:

At least, IE team could have made IE9 alert the user for that, in one of those yellow warnings that appear *. Why not? :thumbd:

-edit-

* The same for blocked cookies, obviously.

[m00nbl00d]

-{ Quote: "True, if you launch it from a shortcut. If you are installing or uninstalling software and it opens the browser to ask you to fill out a survey or something similar, it inherits the installers' Admin permission and launches with an integrity level of High." }-

Correct, and we know what happens with 99% of users, right? They end up using that session, if they want to use IE at that moment, rather than closing it and opening a new instance under Protected Mode.

At least, with IE8, if they're aware of what Protected Mode is, they could/can keep an eye on it.

[funkydude]

-{ Quote: "
At least, with IE8, if they're aware of what Protected Mode is, they could/can keep an eye on it." }-

I highly doubt the average user even knows what protected mode is, so I'd disagree with that one ;D

The question is does IE9 inherit elevation from what opened it or does it open as it's own process now instead of becoming a child of another?

[xxJackxx]

-{ Quote: "I highly doubt the average user even knows what protected mode is, so I'd disagree with that one ;D

The question is does IE9 inherit elevation from what opened it or does it open as it's own process now instead of becoming a child of another?" }-

I'll agree that most people wouldn't know the difference but as an Admin over a dozen other users I have to keep an eye on such things. When I install something for a user and it prompts for an admin logon I have to make sure that when I walk away from the machine I left nothing running that inherited my logon.

IE 9 does inherit the permission of a parent process. Verified with Sysinternals Process Explorer.

[m00nbl00d]

-{ Quote: "[...]

IE 9 does inherit the permission of a parent process. Verified with Sysinternals Process Explorer." }-

That's right. Any object will inherit the permissions of the object that started it. Unless the object to be started (in this case IE) has an explicit low integrity level applied to it (or an explicit lower integrity level than the parent process).

That's how I run Chromium. Elevated objects cannot execute it. Because it's set with a low integrity level, chrome.exe cannot even be executed by the elevated object.

[ShaneR34]

-{ Quote: "Whew...

I just had IE crap out my system by using 100% of my CPU. I had to manually kill all IE's running processes.

That's not a good sign..." }-

I discovered that the above was caused my Comodo Firewall. As soon as I uninstalled Comodo, problem solved...

[m00nbl00d]

-{ Quote: "[...]I don't think it has to do with IE9 but rather the Crappy app CrapCleaner. I've used CC only for keeping cookies and favicons and somehow after all this time I believe it's got it all screwed up." }-

Most likely. Two days ago a relative was having a problem accessing Gmail with Mozilla Thunderbird; everything else was OK. After some research, I was finally able to make it work; its settings were all messed up.

I opened CCleaner to clean junk files, and noticed that it was recognizing Mozilla Thunderbird as Mozilla Firefox, and pretty much everything selected for deletion. I didn't bother before, because for what I could tell it had never detected Mozilla Thunderbird; at least, not that I can remember, anyway.

Bottom line is, it ruined Thunderbird's configuration. Now, will only be set to clean cookies and temp files, and nothing else, and only for IE. I hope it won't fail at it. ;D

[funkydude]

I don't think they've fixed CCleaner yet, it used to erase favicons for all your favourites, and completely remove any ordering you had on your favourites bar. Haven't used it on IE since beta.

[funkydude]

Internet Explorer 9 Network Performance Improvements

-{ Quote: "The browser’s networking subsystem is a crucial component for delivering a high-performance Web experience. In today’s post, I’ll demonstrate this using some real-world measurements, showing that that even in a “fast” network environment, the network time dominates the time spent in other subsystems that affect page load time." }-

http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/archive/2011/03/17/internet-explorer-9-network-performance-improvements.aspx#comments

HTML5 Video Update—WebM for IE9

-{ Quote: "Today IE9 can play HTML5 video in both the industry-standard H.264 format and the newer WebM format. With the WebM Project’s release of WebM Components for IE9 (Preview), Windows customers running IE9 can play WebM videos in Web pages. IE9 is the only browser today committed to supporting both formats directly. " }-

http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/archive/2011/03/16/html5-video-update-webm-for-ie9.aspx

See also, WebM test: http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/graphics/videoformatsupport/default.html

[allizomeniz]

This is a question for anyone who's download IE9 from Windows Update. The download at the Windows IE page is approximately 17 MB. Is it smaller through Windows Update or about the same?

Thanks.

[MrBrian]

From IE 9’s anti-tracking feature ‘flawed', study finds (http://www.which.co.uk/news/2011/03/ie-9s-anti-tracking-feature-flawed-study-finds-247480):
-{ Quote: "However, a Which? Computing study found that when a user has downloaded multiple TPLs [Tracking Protection Lists], all of the rules from all of the TPLs are grouped together into a single list where an ‘allow’ takes precedence over a ‘block’.

For example, a consumer may choose to install two TPLs: one by EasyList and one by TRUSTe. The EasyList TPL might ‘block’ web beacons, whereas the TRUSTe TPL might ‘allow’ them. In this case, the web beacons would be ‘allowed’." }-

[Sadeghi85]

-{ Quote: "Anyone noticed that certain sites will make IE9 display a border around the webpage? Well, that's because it's being forced into 'Quirks' rendering mode. A.K.A. the website hasn't been updated to allow IE9 to run properly like any other browser.
" }-

I believe in developer tools HTML tab you clicked on body.

-{ Quote: "FYI, forcing this forum into IE9 mode breaks it" }-

Forcing into IE9 mode made fonts look weird just like Fx4 with gfx.font_rendering.directwrite.enabled set to true.

[m00nbl00d]

One nice feature that is now part of IE9, is that now it's possible to have a folder of our own choice where to store downloaded files, by default!

[funkydude]

-{ Quote: "
Forcing into IE9 mode made fonts look weird just like Fx4 with gfx.font_rendering.directwrite.enabled set to true." }-

Yes, that's DirectWrite, and it looks far better than the old font to me. Most browsers will start using it from now on.

If you have issues with DirectWrite on your monitor, there is a configuration tool floating around somewhere.

-{ Quote: "This is a question for anyone who's download IE9 from Windows Update. The download at the Windows IE page is approximately 17 MB. Is it smaller through Windows Update or about the same?

Thanks." }-

Didn't even know it was on Windows Update, but I guess that sounds about right.

[Sadeghi85]

-{ Quote: "Yes, that's DirectWrite, and it looks far better than the old font to me. Most browsers will start using it from now on." }-

Yes, also found it here:

-{ Quote: "If you were expecting to be greeted by the new Direct2D/DirectWrite hardware accelerated hardware rendered fonts on all sites, you soon find out that's far from the truth. If Internet Explorer 9 sees a site as being designed for IE 9, it will render it by default with IE 9 standards. If the site's not rendered in IE 9 standards, the fonts won't be rendered by Direct2D.
I have, however, found a workaround. And it's something you're only going to do if you're seriously determined to do this every time you load IE. When you come across a site not rendered with IE 9 standards, you can go to the settings menu and select 'F12 developer tools' or just tap F12 on the keyboard. Then under 'Document mode', select 'Internet Explorer 9 standards'. Fonts will then be rendered with Direct2D without those horrible jagged edges on text. " }-

-http://techfission.posterous.com/internet-explorer-9-beta-released-a-first-loo


-{ Quote: "If you have issues with DirectWrite on your monitor, there is a configuration tool floating around somewhere." }-

Do you mean Windows own "ClearType Text Tuner" tool?

[funkydude]

Yeah that's the tool I meant. Also that link is exactly what I was trying to describe earlier. It's a shame, but luckily, most mainstream sites either remove the UA-Compat metatag and properly use the html doctype, or set the UA-Compat type as "edge", allowing whichever version of IE that browses the page to use it's own rendering mode.

[Daveski17]

-{ Quote: "Didn't even know it was on Windows Update, but I guess that sounds about right." }-

Oh I hope not. Then I can just stick with IE 8! :)

[funkydude]

-{ Quote: "Oh I hope not. Then I can just stick with IE 8! :)" }-

-{ Quote: "Yes, it will begin rolling out via Windows Update on March 21. It will be delivered as an Important Update." }-

https://twitter.com/IE/status/48107081634549760

[vasa1]

-{ Quote: "Oh I hope not. Then I can just stick with IE 8! :)" }-

Check this out:
Why You Should Install Internet Explorer 9 (http://www.ghacks.net/2011/03/18/why-you-should-install-internet-explorer-9/)
and in case you won't, here's a quote:
-{ Quote: "Applications may use the rendering engine of Internet Explorer to display web contents. And that’s the main reason why you should upgrade. ...
They usually do not reveal those information to the user directly, but if you look at the system requirements you often see Internet Explorer listed on the page." }-

[Greg S]

-{ Quote: "Most likely. Two days ago a relative was having a problem accessing Gmail with Mozilla Thunderbird; everything else was OK. After some research, I was finally able to make it work; its settings were all messed up.

I opened CCleaner to clean junk files, and noticed that it was recognizing Mozilla Thunderbird as Mozilla Firefox, and pretty much everything selected for deletion. I didn't bother before, because for what I could tell it had never detected Mozilla Thunderbird; at least, not that I can remember, anyway.

Bottom line is, it ruined Thunderbird's configuration. Now, will only be set to clean cookies and temp files, and nothing else, and only for IE. I hope it won't fail at it. ;D" }-

Lol, I rolled back for the fourth time and reinstalled IE9. This time around, I didn't use any type of temp cleaner. I didn't reset InPrivateFiltering to default or clear it's filtering list. I uninstalled Adobe flash. After that, I reinstalled IE9, reinstalled Adobe flash and for ten hours now, it's all worked perfect.

[m00nbl00d]

-{ Quote: "I'll agree that most people wouldn't know the difference but as an Admin over a dozen other users I have to keep an eye on such things. When I install something for a user and it prompts for an admin logon I have to make sure that when I walk away from the machine I left nothing running that inherited my logon.

IE 9 does inherit the permission of a parent process. Verified with Sysinternals Process Explorer." }-

One solution is to apply an explicit medium integrity level to IE. I wouldn't apply a low integrity level to it, because it will break certain functionality and, most likely, cripple the way certain applications may interact with it.

By applying an explicit medium integrity level to IE, you'll be preventing objects with a higher integrity level (such as installers/uninstallers running with administrator privileges) from starting it.
Doing this, you'd also be preventing IE from malfunctioning. Everything would work as before, except it wouldn't be possible to elevate it.

[Greg S]

-{ Quote: "One solution is to apply an explicit medium integrity level to IE. I wouldn't apply a low integrity level to it, because it will break certain functionality and, most likely, cripple the way certain applications may interact with it.

" }-
Hi moon, if one runs AppGuard, is it still needed to set integrity level for IE?

One more issue that keeps cropping up after IE9 install. Email notify for the threads here at Wilders do not go to the right posting. It always drops me back a page or so.

[m00nbl00d]

-{ Quote: "Hi moon, if one runs AppGuard, is it still needed to set integrity level for IE?
" }-

Does AppGuard prevent an installer/uninstaller from elevating IE?

Actually, some time ago, I expressed my disapproval towards installers/uninstallers that open IE after installing/uninstalling/upgrading; specially security software (There's some irony here.). My disapproval has to do with that fact that websites do get compromised, without exception. Security vendors have seen their websites compromised, and some more than once. It's simply reckless.

Regarding IE, considering that if applying an explicit low integrity level, will for certain cripple certain functionality, applying a medium integrity level would make it work without any malfunctioning behavior, and also prevent installers/uninstallers from elevating it.

But, and this is something that I haven't tested myself, and therefore I don't know how it woud work - with IE, because Protected Mode in enforced by UAC - is if applying an explicit medium integrity level, Protected Mode (a.k.a low integrity level) would no longer be applied. It's what makes sense, though.

So, unless you've got other measures in place to take care of the fact that IE would run with a medium integrity level, I'd leave IE alone.

[Sadeghi85]

-{ Quote: "Yeah that's the tool I meant." }-

It was my monitor settings, took a while to figure out, also configured ClearType, it looks a lot better now.

[Daveski17]

-{ Quote: "https://twitter.com/IE/status/48107081634549760" }-

OK, thanks for the info.

[Daveski17]

-{ Quote: "Check this out:
Why You Should Install Internet Explorer 9 (http://www.ghacks.net/2011/03/18/why-you-should-install-internet-explorer-9/)
and in case you won't, here's a quote:" }-

Ermmm ... oh OK. I just hope it doesn't frag my sidebar on the laptop this time! >:(

[Hugger]

Where is Protected Mode in IE 9?
I don't see it listed and it isn't showing in the task bar.
Windows 7 Pro x64.

[m00nbl00d]

-{ Quote: "Where is Protected Mode in IE 9?
I don't see it listed and it isn't showing in the task bar.
Windows 7 Pro x64." }-

IE9 does not show that information any more. To be sure you're running IE9 with Protected Mode enabled you'd need something like Process Explorer (change its columns settings to show integrity levels).

[funkydude]

It's pointless information to the average user, Chrome doesn't show it either. There is no reason it should ever not be in Protected Mode, short of the "program opening a browser" discussion earier.

[Hugger]

OK. Thanks for the help.

[Noob]

For some reason after installing it, it fails to open (I have said previously that IE9 is my second browser, so i rarely open it)
But yesterday i decided to use it to check my mails but i couldn't open it :thumbd: ???

[Daveski17]

-{ Quote: "For some reason after installing it, it fails to open (I said have said previously that IE9 is my second browser, so i rarely open it)
But yesterday i decided to use it to check my mails but i couldn't open it :thumbd: ???" }-

Have you tried uninstalling & re-installing Noob? I hope this IE release isn't going to be problematical. I'm just glad I very rarely use it.

[m00nbl00d]

-{ Quote: "For some reason after installing it, it fails to open (I said have said previously that IE9 is my second browser, so i rarely open it)
But yesterday i decided to use it to check my mails but i couldn't open it :thumbd: ???" }-

What were you expecting? It felt rejected. ::)

Take a peek at Event Viewer and see what errors may have appeared at the moment you opened IE9.

[Noob]

Bah, screw it, i'll do a restore and re install it again :D

[1chaoticadult]

-{ Quote: "What were you expecting? It felt rejected. ::)

Take a peek at Event Viewer and see what errors may have appeared at the moment you opened IE9." }-

lol moon good one. IE9 didn't work because it was jealous of Chrome ;D

[CatFan432]

This jealousy thing is no joke. I help a friend whose desktop computer was the very model of a problem free computer until she bought a new laptop and booted it up in the presence of the desktop. Ever since that moment the desktop is a veritable cornucopia of neuroses. No network or syncing involved, apparently just sheer raw jealousy.

Off topic, I know. Sorry

[m00nbl00d]

Can anyone manage Adobe Flash Player settings with IE9? The flash content doesn't load, at all. Does it happen with you too? (I updated to newest version 10.2.153.1)

I actually first tried with Chromium, and it loads, but then it won't let me modify any settings. And, I may be wrong, but I think settings I had defined before, are back to default values ???

I then tried with IE9, but it happens what I explained above.

[radial5]

Hi m00nbl00d,

I had a similar issue in beta, I had to go to add remove programs uninstall Flash player, run CCleaner (not sure if it clears anything), downloaded the latest version and installed - I've had no major issues since.

It could also be that your Active-X filtering is enabled and is blocking flash content for the site your on, to the right of the address bar there may be a blue circle with a line through it, this indicates that Tracking Protection or Active-X protection is active for that site. If you click the blue circle and turn off Active-X filtering this may resolve your issue if my first suggestion didn't work.

radial.

[m00nbl00d]

-{ Quote: "Hi m00nbl00d,

I had a similar issue in beta, I had to go to add remove programs uninstall Flash player, run CCleaner (not sure if it clears anything), downloaded the latest version and installed - I've had no major issues since.
" }-

I actually did that, but haven't tried again with IE9.

But, the same still happens with Chromium - Adobe Flash Player settings load fine, but I can't modify any? I wonder if it's a problem with Chromium.

-{ Quote: "
It could also be that your Active-X filtering is enabled and is blocking flash content for the site your on, to the right of the address bar there may be a blue circle with a line through it, this indicates that Tracking Protection or Active-X protection is active for that site. If you click the blue circle and turn off Active-X filtering this may resolve your issue if my first suggestion didn't work.

radial." }-

No, I didn't have Active-X filtering enabled when I opened Flash Player settings page. Thanks for remembering me about it, though.

[radial5]

-{ Quote: "Where is Protected Mode in IE 9?
I don't see it listed and it isn't showing in the task bar.
Windows 7 Pro x64." }-

Hi Hugger,

If you go to Internet Options>select the Security tab - Protected mode will show as either ticked or not ticked at the bottom of the tab - however I'm not sure if this is a true indication that it is running in protected mode or not.

radial

[radial5]

-{ Quote: "I actually did that, but haven't tried again with IE9.

But, the same still happens with Chromium - Adobe Flash Player settings load fine, but I can't modify any? I wonder if it's a problem with Chromium.



No, I didn't have Active-X filtering enabled when I opened Flash Player settings page. Thanks for remembering me about it, though." }-


Hi m00nbl00d,

do you have any extensions enabled in chromium such as flash block - do you have the same problems with your extensions disabled?

I'm not really familiar with chromium so may not be of help :-\

May be worth starting a new thread :)

radial

[Greg S]

-{ Quote: "Hi Hugger,

however I'm not sure if this is a true indication that it is running in protected mode or not.

radial" }-
I have found that it's not an indication that it's running in protected mode. I had that option ticked in IE8 which carried over with IE9 install. It didn't become official until I enabled it through one of IE9's security popup dialogs

[m00nbl00d]

-{ Quote: "Hi m00nbl00d,

do you have any extensions enabled in chromium such as flash block - do you have the same problems with your extensions disabled?

I'm not really familiar with chromium so may not be of help :-\

May be worth starting a new thread :)

radial" }-

No, no extensions blocking flash/anything in Chromium. I only have click to play enabled, so that flash content only plays when I want, and what I want. I thought it could be some problem with that, but I tried it with it disabled, but the same occured.

Anyway, I do not wish to go off-topic.

Thanks for the feedback. :)

[Mr.PC]

The version offered on March 14 (http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=f14f7ae7-14e3-4907-8ebe-8bedef8c2fba) (9.0.8112.16421) was a RTM.

After the March 21-Fiasco (http://www.infoworld.com/t/web-browsers/false-alarm-windows-update-not-pushing-out-ie9-290) (IE9 supposed to come via Windows Updates on March 21 (https://twitter.com/IE/status/48107081634549760)), what's Next? ???

[Daveski17]

I don't really want IE 9 anyway.

[dw426]

-{ Quote: "I don't really want IE 9 anyway." }-

Me either. I've used it off an on for a bit..and it just to me feels like the same old browser to me. It's got acceleration, yes, but so do the others, and hardware acceleration is having its own problems. It has tabs on top, so do the others. It has better security...well hell, they didn't have much of a choice did they, after the years of verbal beating they took for it? It took some buttons away..so did the rest. It lacks decent extensions, even Opera has them now. It sped up javascript..well, that seems to be the thing browser devs focus most of their time on. In my opinion, IE has gone from a "why bother?" browser to a "me too" browser.

[The Hammer]

-{ Quote: "Me either. In my opinion, IE has gone from a "why bother?" browser to a "me too" browser." }-
Well that's progress at least.;D

[dw426]

-{ Quote: "Well that's progress at least.;D" }-

I can't argue with that ;D

[Mr.PC]

The great 'expectations' and 'excitement' about IE9 blew out quickly.

As far as the usual MS "supporters", they are whistling...away...;D

-IE9 release via Windows Update. Exactly WHEN?

[Greg S]

-{ Quote: " I've used it off an on for a bit..and it just to me feels like the same old browser to me. It's got acceleration, yes,

" }-
I didn't quote all but think you made a decent appraisal of it. About the acceleration, for me it did seem faster to start with but by the time I got everything enabled and set back up, it now doesn't seem noticeably faster.

[iravgupta]

The company that can approve a design like this (http://help.artaro.eu/images/general/avast650.jpg) one, where each ad-on creates it's own separate toolbar, deserves to be spanked. So much for "making the site shine". When something this horrible gets released publicly, it's a testament to the company's non-existent design aesthetics.

[dw426]

-{ Quote: "The company that can approve a design like this (http://help.artaro.eu/images/general/avast650.jpg) one, where each ad-on creates it's own separate toolbar, deserves to be spanked. So much for "making the site shine". When something this horrible gets released publicly, it's a testament to the company's non-existent design aesthetics." }-

I don't follow you. Are you complaining about Avast again, in an IE thread? Or are you complaining about IE having separate buttons for add-ons (trust me, what you're linking is NOT a toolbar)? If you're complaining about the button issue, Firefox also does this, and, last I checked, Chrome. That's not an IE issue.

[dw426]

-{ Quote: "I didn't quote all but think you made a decent appraisal of it. About the acceleration, for me it did seem faster to start with but by the time I got everything enabled and set back up, it now doesn't seem noticeably faster." }-

IE did seem to be a bit quicker than both Firefox and Chrome, but I think it's because of the way each browser handles it. Either way, acceleration isn't an issue if you're one of those whose video card is on the so-called "blacklist" and not supported. We're not talking about just the on-board graphics systems, but full-blown cards.

[iravgupta]

-{ Quote: "I don't follow you." }-Bingo.

-{ Quote: "Are you complaining about Avast again, in an IE thread?" }-Again?

-{ Quote: "Or are you complaining about IE having separate buttons for add-ons (trust me, what you're linking is NOT a toolbar)? If you're complaining about the button issue, Firefox also does this, and, last I checked, Chrome. That's not an IE issue." }-
I am not complaining about IE having separate buttons for add-ons, and I am fully aware that all browsers including Chrome, Safari, Opera and Firefox have separate button for add-ons, how else would you manipulate the add-on. My concern is the fact that to add one button, IE needs to use a full toolbar like UI, instead of accommodating it besides the address bar like Chrome and other browsers do. And it would have been acceptable if it had been just one row, but IE needs separate rows for each button. If that does not strike you as horrible, or you are not able to see the difference in the implementation then I don't think this is the right subject for you and me to have a discussion on.

[dw426]

-{ Quote: "Bingo.

Again?


I am not complaining about IE having separate buttons for add-ons, and I am fully aware that all browsers including Chrome, Safari, Opera and Firefox have separate button for add-ons, how else would you manipulate the add-on. My concern is the fact that to add one button, IE needs to use a full toolbar like UI, instead of accommodating it besides the address bar like Chrome and other browsers do. And it would have been acceptable if it had been just one row, but IE needs separate rows for each button. If that does not strike you as horrible, or you are not able to see the difference in the implementation then I don't think this is the right subject for you and me to have a discussion on." }-

Then perhaps actually explain that instead of linking a picture of a button?...And kill the attitude.

[iravgupta]

-{ Quote: "Then perhaps actually explain that instead of linking a picture of a button?..." }-I think it was just me who thought a screenie would make it clear.-{ Quote: "And kill the attitude." }-Fedex me the button. I'll press it for ya.

[dw426]

-{ Quote: "I think it was just me who thought a screenie would make it clear.Fedex me the button. I'll press it for ya." }-

It probably was just you. P.s, the toolbar issue does suck, but, hey, it's Microsoft. They can't learn all their lessons all in one sitting, right? ;D

[Mr.PC]

-{ Quote: "The company that can approve a design like this (http://help.artaro.eu/images/general/avast650.jpg) one,
where each ad-on creates it's own separate toolbar,
deserves to be spanked.
When something this horrible gets released publicly,
it's a testament to the company's non-existent design aesthetics." }-
Can't agree more! :thumb:
-{ Quote: "the toolbar issue does suck, but, hey, it's Microsoft.
They can't learn all their lessons all in one sitting, right? " }-;D ;D ;D

[Daveski17]

-{ Quote: "Me either. I've used it off an on for a bit..and it just to me feels like the same old browser to me. It's got acceleration, yes, but so do the others, and hardware acceleration is having its own problems. It has tabs on top, so do the others. It has better security...well hell, they didn't have much of a choice did they, after the years of verbal beating they took for it? It took some buttons away..so did the rest. It lacks decent extensions, even Opera has them now. It sped up javascript..well, that seems to be the thing browser devs focus most of their time on. In my opinion, IE has gone from a "why bother?" browser to a "me too" browser." }-

I've never liked it (IE) anyway, after downloading Firefox 2 a while ago & discovering Mozilla I can't understand why I ever used it. I'm using Firefox 4 (portable) as I write this on a working lunch with a terribly under-powered work computer running XP & it still beats what I saw of the IE 9 RC!

[vasa1]

FWIW,
http://www.pcworld.com/article/222953/7_hardtofind_internet_explorer_9_addons.html

[funkydude]

It's amusing how attached some people can get to a piece of software that they treat everything else as an outside threat to be attacked. You'd think they were protecting a family member. Oh those 1's and 0's, how important they have become to us!

-{ Quote: "FWIW,
http://www.pcworld.com/article/222953/7_hardtofind_internet_explorer_9_addons.html" }-

Nothing really useful, all the good stuff is already built in.

[vasa1]

-{ Quote: "...
Nothing really useful, all the good stuff is already built in." }-

Sorry about that. Just trying to be helpful ;)

[funkydude]

-{ Quote: "Sorry about that. Just trying to be helpful ;)" }-

I don't understand why you're apologizing to my opinion.

[Robin A.]

-{ Quote: "
Nothing really useful, all the good stuff is already built in." }-

The spell-checker is not built-in. Speckie is a good solution to this.

[Kerodo]

-{ Quote: "

-IE9 release via Windows Update. Exactly WHEN?" }-
MS seems to be slow about this kind of stuff. I wouldn't be surprised at all if it took quite a long time to reach Win Updates...

[funkydude]

-{ Quote: "MS seems to be slow about this kind of stuff. I wouldn't be surprised at all if it took quite a long time to reach Win Updates..." }-

They have more than just home users to think about, unlike competitors.

[midway40]

-{ Quote: "To be clear, IE9 RTW released to AU/WU today [March 21] for IE9 Beta and RC users only. Only AU/WU machines with IE9 Beta or RC will see this update -- and it will be un-selected by default. Which is why there's no broad communications yet (perhaps there should have been).

For machines not managed by WSUS, SMS, or SCCM, IE9 is not yet available since we don't release pre-release content (or, in this case, specifically targeted updates to a subset of machines) to WSUS.

I can't speak to future release dates, but I encourage all admins to deploy the IE9 Blocker Toolkit to unmanaged machines where they need to block the installation of IE9 for AppCompat or testing reasons." }-

Infoworld (http://www.infoworld.com/t/web-browsers/false-alarm-windows-update-not-pushing-out-ie9-290)

[Mr.PC]

-{ Quote: "They have more than just home users to think about, unlike competitors." }-
That arrogant attitude is enough to make even more Home Users turn their back on IE!
Needless to mention what's going on with XP users...

[Daveski17]

Anyway, the best *argument for me not to use IE 9 is that there is no freeware adblocker that I know of that will work with it. Simple Adblock is now vendor ware for IE 9.

*Well, apart from the fact that it stopped many icons from appearing on my laptop desktop & some of the gadgets stopped working. :thumbd: >:(

[Mr.PC]

-{ Quote: "Nothing really useful, all the good stuff is already built in." }-Scripts that prohibit context menu activation via right click.
- Google Chrome: Allow Right Click (http://www.chromeextensions.org/other/allow-right-click/)
- Firefox: RightToClick (http://netticat.ath.cx/RightToClick/RightToClick.htm)
- IE:???

[The Hammer]

-{ Quote: "That arrogant attitude is enough to make even more Home Users turn their back on IE!
Needless to mention what's going on with XP users..." }-
There's been two new versions of the OS. Support has to be killed off for XP at some point, but when is the best time? I guess Microsoft decided now, as far as IE is concerned.

[moontan]

come on folks, it's no big deal.

there are other good browsers to chose from for XP owners.
no need to argue over this.

Chrome and Firefox are excellent choices for people who won't/can't use IE9.

[Cudni]

Removed ot posts

[m00nbl00d]

Is it possible to disable referrers in IE? Some registry key, perhaps?

[The Hammer]

-{ Quote: "come on folks, it's no big deal.

there are other good browsers to chose from for XP owners.
no need to argue over this.

Chrome and Firefox are excellent choices for people who won't/can't use IE9." }-
Exactly right.

[allizomeniz]

I downloaded a 17MB file from FileHippo that was supposed to be IE9 and when I started the install, it went online and started downloading something else. The message said "Downloading Internet Explorer 9." I let it run for 15 minutes or so and the progress hardly moved. Can anyone tell me how big the installation package for this thing is??

[JRViejo]

-{ Quote: "Can anyone tell me how big the installation package for this thing is??" }-
allizomeniz, according to Microsoft:

Windows Internet Explorer 9 for Windows 7 (http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=F14F7AE7-14E3-4907-8EBE-8BEDEF8C2FBA) - IE9-Windows7-x86-enu.exe - 17.3 MB (HD Space: 70 MB).

Windows Internet Explorer 9 for Windows 7 64-bit Edition (http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=62E67358-DA9A-499D-AA19-EB93996CA8E0) - IE9-Windows7-x64-enu.exe - 34.7 MB (HD Space: 120 MB).

[moontan]

-{ Quote: "I downloaded a 17MB file from FileHippo that was supposed to be IE9 and when I started the install, it went online and started downloading something else. The message said "Downloading Internet Explorer 9." I let it run for 15 minutes or so and the progress hardly moved. Can anyone tell me how big the installation package for this thing is??" }-

i downloaded mine from Microsoft and it did the same thing.
the installer seemed to stuck at around 25%.
i had to try 2-3 times, i also tried rebooting one after a try.
it finally worked but the installer seemed pretty wonky.

[allizomeniz]

I tried again and it stopped around 25% and stayed there for quite a while then finished all at once. Wonky indeed. :)

[Mr.PC]

IE9′s anti-tracking tool flawed – Microsoft should try harder (http://conversation.which.co.uk/technology/internet-explorer-nine-anti-tracking-tool-flawed/)

Privacy protection and IE9: who can you trust? (http://www.zdnet.com/blog/bott/privacy-protection-and-ie9-who-can-you-trust/3014)

(Taken from THIS (http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=1848707&postcount=43) post).

[dw426]

-{ Quote: "IE9′s anti-tracking tool flawed – Microsoft should try harder (http://conversation.which.co.uk/technology/internet-explorer-nine-anti-tracking-tool-flawed/)

Privacy protection and IE9: who can you trust? (http://www.zdnet.com/blog/bott/privacy-protection-and-ie9-who-can-you-trust/3014)

(Taken from THIS (http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=1848707&postcount=43) post)." }-

Yeah, I've read the same stuff elsewhere. MS messed it up pretty good. It is pretty cute how MS domains are allowed on some of the lists. I would guess the ad-blocker in Chrome allows Google, I'll soon find out. Perhaps it's the "cost of doing business".

[vasa1]

-{ Quote: "Yeah, I've read the same stuff elsewhere. MS messed it up pretty good. It is pretty cute how MS domains are allowed on some of the lists. I would guess the ad-blocker in Chrome allows Google, I'll soon find out. Perhaps it's the "cost of doing business"." }-

If you're meaning ABP for Chrome, you can block what you want, including Google and its spawn. How that will affect your browsing experience is another matter ;) .

[funkydude]

-{ Quote: "Yeah, I've read the same stuff elsewhere. MS messed it up pretty good. It is pretty cute how MS domains are allowed on some of the lists. I would guess the ad-blocker in Chrome allows Google, I'll soon find out. Perhaps it's the "cost of doing business"." }-

It comes down to trusting a list, which is exactly what you so with ABP subscriptions.

There is no "flaw" in it, calling it a flaw is quite arrogant to be honest, simply because everyone has a different opinion. I'm in the opinion that explicit block should overwrite explicit allow, Microsoft disagrees. I don't go write a blog pasting it as a "flaw", because it simply isn't, Microsoft has even confirmed this. But you can trust Mr. PC to dig up as many negative things about MS as possible, even if they've been discussed before on this forum in separate threads, as you can see, the first article is over a month old. ::) ::)

[Greg S]

-{ Quote: "
I'm in the opinion that explicit block should overwrite explicit allow, Microsoft disagrees.

" }-
I share your opinion. To me, it's only common sense to do so

[Mr.PC]

-{ Quote: "But you can trust Mr.PC to dig up as many negative things about MS as possible" }-I was Not the first one who brought these articles up. I took them from another post (http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=1848707&postcount=43).
-{ Quote: "the first article is over a month old." }- Wrong again...;D
The Second article is from February 14; not the First one (March 16)!

Since when just a month's-old Article (Feb. 14) is Not Valid?

[funkydude]

-{ Quote: "I was Not the first one who brought these articles up. I took them from another post (http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=1848707&postcount=43)." }-

Thanks for completely confirming my point:

-{ Quote: "even if they've been discussed before on this forum in separate threads" }-

[Mr.PC]

-{ Quote: "Thanks for completely confirming my point:" }-
There was No need for that. :wacko:
I had already stated it THERE (http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=1849151&postcount=180). ;D ;D ;D

[Daveski17]

Re: Internet Explorer 9 Released

Still waiting ... :wacko:

[Mr.PC]

-{ Quote: "Re: Internet Explorer 9 Released
Still waiting ... :wacko:" }-
And waiting...;D
March 29 and Counting (http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=1847408&postcount=144)...:argh:

[vasa1]

-{ Quote: "Re: Internet Explorer 9 Released

Still waiting ... :wacko:" }-

Eat chocolate digestives in the meanwhile. Seems they're consumed in vast quantities by the Beeb.

[Mr.PC]

-{ Quote: "Eat chocolate digestives in the meanwhile. Seems they're consumed in vast quantities by the Beeb." }-
;D ;D ;D

[Daveski17]

-{ Quote: "Eat chocolate digestives in the meanwhile. Seems they're consumed in vast quantities by the Beeb." }-

I prefer Jaffa cakes to be honest. I guess I'm just not a biscuit type of bloke.

[Daveski17]

-{ Quote: "And waiting...;D
March 29 and Counting (http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=1847408&postcount=144)...:argh:" }-

Maybe MS are trying to fix its bugs before shipping it to Blighty ... ;D

[funkydude]

-{ Quote: "Maybe MS are trying to fix its bugs before shipping it to Blighty ... ;D" }-

Ah the beauty of humanity, everyone's opinion is different, no one choice can satisfy everyone.

Now on the one hand you have to firstly acknowledge that everything new, from hardware to software has teething problems. Do you A. rush out your brand new software to Windows Update to satisfy the rare home users like Dave that for some reason, hesitate to use the freely available download link, or do you B. not upset millions of business users by pushing it out ASAP, and let it slowly sink it, whilst people test and report teething issues, then publish it to Windows Update with any possible teething issues removed?

Some people would call it a choice of opinion, others would call it simple logic.

[Daveski17]

-{ Quote: "Ah the beauty of humanity, everyone's opinion is different, no one choice can satisfy everyone." }-

De gustibus non est disputandum. ;)

-{ Quote: "Now on the one hand you have to firstly acknowledge that everything new, from hardware to software has teething problems. Do you A. rush out your brand new software to Windows Update to satisfy the rare home users like Dave that for some reason, hesitate to use the freely available download link, " }-

Ah, yes ... the update link ... I did try the RC & had problems (on my laptop) with it. I'm actually in no hurry for IE 9 & almost certainly will hardly ever use it. I just think it's kinda funny that Fx 4 reached me first. ;D

-{ Quote: "or do you B. not upset millions of business users by pushing it out ASAP, and let it slowly sink it, whilst people test and report teething issues, then publish it to Windows Update with any possible teething issues removed?" }-

Yes, M$ would never prematurely release any software (like an operating system perhaps) that was flawed, half-baked & full of bugs, would it?

*Cough* ... VISTA! *Cough* :-X :ouch:

-{ Quote: "Some people would call it a choice of opinion, others would call it simple logic." }-

Some might call it slacking ... ::)

[dw426]

-{ Quote: "Ah the beauty of humanity, everyone's opinion is different, no one choice can satisfy everyone.

Now on the one hand you have to firstly acknowledge that everything new, from hardware to software has teething problems. Do you A. rush out your brand new software to Windows Update to satisfy the rare home users like Dave that for some reason, hesitate to use the freely available download link, or do you B. not upset millions of business users by pushing it out ASAP, and let it slowly sink it, whilst people test and report teething issues, then publish it to Windows Update with any possible teething issues removed?

Some people would call it a choice of opinion, others would call it simple logic." }-

Or, do you C. Continue the delay and watch while Firefox and Chrome pass you by in market share yet again, and, remain the most used browser..in the business world? Oh, wait, how can they upset "millions" of business users when, if we're to believe all the stories, the business world is the one whining about still being able to keep XP...which IE9 isn't available for?

[Daveski17]

-{ Quote: "Or, do you C. Continue the delay and watch while Firefox and Chrome pass you by in market share yet again, and, remain the most used browser..in the business world? Oh, wait, how can they upset "millions" of business users when, if we're to believe all the stories, the business world is the one whining about still being able to keep XP...which IE9 isn't available for?" }-

*Sound of hammer hitting nail squarely on the head* ;D

[funkydude]

-{ Quote: "Or, do you C. Continue the delay and watch while Firefox and Chrome pass you by in market share yet again, and, remain the most used browser..in the business world?" }-

Actually, that's A. Nothing is stopping anyone from downloading IE9, it not being on Windows Update is hardly going to be an excuse for someone to decide to use Chrome or Firefox, there will be other reasons.

-{ Quote: "
Oh, wait, how can they upset "millions" of business users when, if we're to believe all the stories, the business world is the one whining about still being able to keep XP...which IE9 isn't available for?" }-

Touche! But business will always be more important than home users. One of the many flaws in MS's system, adding to things like, no exploit reward.

[dw426]

-{ Quote: "Actually, that's A. Nothing is stopping anyone from downloading IE9, it not being on Windows Update is hardly going to be an excuse for someone to decide to use Chrome or Firefox, there will be other reasons." }-

Oh, it will for some lazy butts out there, lol. But point taken.



-{ Quote: "Touche! But business will always be more important than home users. One of the many flaws in MS's system, adding to things like, no exploit reward." }-

But I am right..:P ;D I think it's side-splitting hilarious they're holding back for business users not only again (in regards to the whole XP vs 7 issue), but they're holding back for business users on a product that, by all accounts, those business users can't even use! Somebody in an MS office up there in Redmond has to be thinking "Wtf?" ;D

[Matthijs5nl]

I have never read that Microsoft confirmed that users of Internet Explorer 8 will receive version 9 via Windows Update, so what are you waiting for?

[funkydude]

-{ Quote: "I have never read that Microsoft confirmed that users of Internet Explorer 8 will receive version 9 via Windows Update, so what are you waiting for?" }-

Are you sure? Even if it wasn't posted, it's inevitably going to happen. Web developers will be hoping for sooner than later.

[Matthijs5nl]

-{ Quote: "Are you sure? Even if it wasn't posted, it's inevitably going to happen. Web developers will be hoping for sooner than later." }-
I guess that users will have to manually update/opt-in via Windows Update, it won't happen automatic. Just like with the update to Internet Explorer 8. Probably they will also first try it for a small audience.

Also with the update to Internet Explorer 8 the manual update was made available one month after release, so we will have to wait some time I think.

[Daveski17]

-{ Quote: "I have never read that Microsoft confirmed that users of Internet Explorer 8 will receive version 9 via Windows Update, so what are you waiting for?" }-

If I remember correctly IE 8 was released as an update. I don't see IE 9 being any different. Actually I can wait ... I have a large supply of Jaffa cakes ... ;D

[doktornotor]

Do not really see what is the problem here? Go and download it... New IE versions have never been pushed via WU days after release. ::)

Heck, you can even distribute it via WSUS if you import it there. Just did that a couple of days ago on a selected group of test monkeys. :P

[ronjor]

Internet Explorer 9 will not be broadly rolled out on Windows Update until the end of June (http://windowsteamblog.com/ie/b/ie/archive/2011/03/29/a-thoughtful-approach-to-measuring-browser-adoption.aspx)

[iravgupta]

-{ Quote: "Just did that a couple of days ago on a selected group of test monkeys. :P" }-
We are all test monkeys for Microsoft. They never seem to reach a stage where they say this is where we wanted to be even with shipping products. Usually behind the curve, playing catch-up to either Google or Apple.

[Mr.PC]

-{ Quote: "Internet Explorer 9 will not be broadly rolled out on Windows Update until the end of June (http://windowsteamblog.com/ie/b/ie/archive/2011/03/29/a-thoughtful-approach-to-measuring-browser-adoption.aspx)" }-
Thanks for the Article, Ron! :thumb:

waiting....and waiting...June...and waiting...end of June...:argh:

[Daveski17]

-{ Quote: "Do not really see what is the problem here? Go and download it... New IE versions have never been pushed via WU days after release. ::) " }-

Are you sure? I'm fairly certain that I got IE 8 in a standard Windows update. I remember this because a relative of mine (who has even less knowledge of computers than I do) had a hell of a time with it. Her Norton AV kept uninstalling it.

EDIT: Just seen Ron's link ...

"Every browser has a mechanism for updating their users from a previous version of a browser to the latest and greatest. For IE9, it is done through Windows Update."

-{ Quote: "Heck, you can even distribute it via WSUS if you import it there. Just did that a couple of days ago on a selected group of test monkeys. :P" }-

Hmmmm *thinks* that might be an interesting career move for me as a Microsoft test monkey ... maybe not ... ;D ;)

(I remember Vista)

[Daveski17]

-{ Quote: "Internet Explorer 9 will not be broadly rolled out on Windows Update until the end of June (http://windowsteamblog.com/ie/b/ie/archive/2011/03/29/a-thoughtful-approach-to-measuring-browser-adoption.aspx)" }-

Cheers for the info Ron :thumb:

[doktornotor]

-{ Quote: "Are you sure? I'm fairly certain that I got IE 8 in a standard Windows Update" }-

Yeah, but certainly not a couple of days after release.

[Daveski17]

-{ Quote: "Yeah, but certainly not a couple of days after release." }-

Oh yeah, sorry I'm half asleep. It has been more than a couple of days though.

[Eice]

-{ Quote: "Internet Explorer 9 will not be broadly rolled out on Windows Update until the end of June (http://windowsteamblog.com/ie/b/ie/archive/2011/03/29/a-thoughtful-approach-to-measuring-browser-adoption.aspx)" }-
Ye gods, the arrogance! The excuses! This is an outrageous disgrace. How dare they!

[SweX]

-{ Quote: "Ye gods, the arrogance! The excuses! This is an outrageous disgrace. How dare they!" }-

Well, IE 9 will NEVER be rolled out on my Windows Update that's for sure ;D

[Daveski17]

-{ Quote: "Well, IE 9 will NEVER be rolled out on my Windows Update that's for sure ;D" }-

Don't feed the trolls. ;)

[vasa1]

-{ Quote: "Don't feed the trolls. ;)" }-

Not even chocolate digestives?

Anyways, plans for Win8 are full steam ahead (judging by the graphic leaks) and my grand aim of "leap-frogging" Vista & Win7 doesn't seem too unrealistic.

[SweX]

-{ Quote: "Don't feed the trolls. ;)" }-
I don't, what I said is true ;D

Maybe it should have been easier to understand if I said that I run XP.
And since IE 9 don't run on XP, It will never ever show up as an update. ::)

[Daveski17]

-{ Quote: "Not even chocolate digestives?" }-

Not even Jaffa cakes ... ;D

-{ Quote: "Anyways, plans for Win8 are full steam ahead (judging by the graphic leaks) and my grand aim of "leap-frogging" Vista & Win7 doesn't seem too unrealistic." }-

I think by Win 8 I will have converted to Linux! ;)

[Daveski17]

-{ Quote: "I don't, what I said is true ;D " }-

I believe you. :)

-{ Quote: "Maybe it should have been easier to understand if I said that I run XP.
And since IE 9 don't run on XP, It will never ever show up as an update. ::)" }-

OK, well, you can always use Firefox 4 which will work on XP. 8)

[vasa1]

This is all so confusing but then I'm easily confused:
http://www.conceivablytech.com/6512/products/microsoft-ie9-downloads-what-downloads

[dw426]

-{ Quote: "This is all so confusing but then I'm easily confused:
http://www.conceivablytech.com/6512/products/microsoft-ie9-downloads-what-downloads" }-

I spotted a reference to Opera in that report, dear god that's like spotting a snow leopard in a subway tunnel in New York City. *Ahem*..Back on topic: I have no idea what's going on with IE9, nor Microsoft. It honestly does seem like they are still playing the catch-up game. My opinion is that they really should think about having a shorter cycle like FF, Chrome, and heck, even Opera. They also made a bad move by not supporting XP. First they anger their lazy business users by threatening to take XP support away, then they anger them further by wanting to roll out IE9 through updates...though no one has still explained to me how it angers businesses that MS would roll out a browser, that, by all accounts, the majority of business not only can't use, but won't even be seen in their updates.

IE9, for what it is, is a decent offering, and Microsoft has come a long way. But, there just isn't anything there that is all that special. Especially not after two years. Just my two cents.

[vasa1]

One aspect in this whole Vista/Win7 is the obvious implication is that Microsoft is the way to access the web.

[funkydude]

-{ Quote: "I spotted a reference to Opera in that report, dear god that's like spotting a snow leopard in a subway tunnel in New York City. " }-

I hate it when people mention loyalty when it comes to software, I can't comprehend it. At first I thought he was making some generalized statement towards some kind of loyalty to the browser a person chooses, then I realized he was pegging it against Opera which makes sense since it is after all, the Apple of browsers.

[dw426]

It's really a shame, to me. Opera could be right up there in the battle, but Opera's own people hold it back. It's a great little browser, they've made some mistakes (bitorrent, Unite), but otherwise there is simply no reason it should still be stuck at the market share it has. I can never get the thing to work properly, and it's in dire need of a better way to block scripts and ads, otherwise I'd use it. I put the blame squarely on the shoulders of Opera's people for it's stagnant use, not the browser itself. Okay, back to IE9, lol, sorry.

[Daveski17]

Yes, Opera would be brilliant if only it worked properly ;) . Interestingly both Opera & IE 9 have problems for me with adblocking. I can't get Opera's internal adblock.ini file not to break pages & its extension adblocker doesn't work. Simple Adblock for IE 9 is (AFAIK) no longer freeware. Apart from being a tight git, I just can't justify paying for an adblocker for a browser I will almost inevitably hardly ever use.

Unless there is some way to tweak IE 9 for adblocking that actually works .... ?

[dw426]

Yeah, Simple Adblock is no longer free. Though, on IE (and Opera for that matter), you could try HpHosts with only their ad/tracking server list. I wouldn't go overboard and add a bunch more to it, but it may very well solve the problem, and, it's one less extension that may slow down your surfing or cause problems. I might even try that out myself, depending on how I end up feeling about Chromes ad blocking extensions.

[Acadia]

-{ Quote: "
Unless there is some way to tweak IE 9 for adblocking that actually works .... ?" }-
If I am not mistaken, Tracking Protection is a full blown ad blocker although MS might not want to call it such so as to not anger advertisers. It even contains a link to an adblocker plus black list.

http://www.liveside.net/2010/12/07/ie9-tracking-protection-a-built-in-ie9-ad-blocker/

Acadia

[Daveski17]

-{ Quote: "you could try HpHosts with only their ad/tracking server list. I wouldn't go overboard and add a bunch more to it, but it may very well solve the problem, and, it's one less extension that may slow down your surfing or cause problems. " }-

Thank's I may look into that.

[Daveski17]

-{ Quote: "If I am not mistaken, Tracking Protection is a full blown ad blocker although MS might not want to call it such so as to not anger advertisers. It even contains a link to an adblocker plus black list.

http://www.liveside.net/2010/12/07/ie9-tracking-protection-a-built-in-ie9-ad-blocker/

Acadia" }-

OK, thanks for the information, I'll have a look at that.

[cheater87]

Its looks bleh :( Very bland IMHO.

[Daveski17]

-{ Quote: "Its looks bleh :( Very bland IMHO." }-

The 'Tracking Protection'? I was kind of hoping it might work ... when I download IE 9 that is. ;)

[Eice]

-{ Quote: "If I am not mistaken, Tracking Protection is a full blown ad blocker although MS might not want to call it such so as to not anger advertisers. It even contains a link to an adblocker plus black list.

http://www.liveside.net/2010/12/07/ie9-tracking-protection-a-built-in-ie9-ad-blocker/

Acadia" }-
IE9's Tracking Protection (and IE8's InPrivate Filtering) do not filter out elements from first-party domains, i.e. if you're viewing www.website.com and the ads are hosted on www.website.com/ads/, they won't be blocked. This is not a bug, and is by design.

It works fine most of the time because the vast majority of ads come from third-party domains anyway, but personally I wouldn't call it a "full blown" ad blocker.

[Acadia]

-{ Quote: "... I wouldn't call it a "full blown" ad blocker." }-
I stand corrected. ;)

Acadia

[Eice]

-{ Quote: "One aspect in this whole Vista/Win7 is the obvious implication is that Microsoft is the way to access the web." }-
You don't say. Just like how Konqueror and Epiphany promote the obvious implications that KDE/GNOME are the ways to access the web?

[Matthijs5nl]

Internet Explorer 9 will be distributed over Windows Update at the end of June, to give administrators time to prepare: http://windowsteamblog.com/ie/b/ie/archive/2011/03/29/a-thoughtful-approach-to-measuring-browser-adoption.aspx

[dw426]

-{ Quote: "Internet Explorer 9 will be distributed over Windows Update at the end of June, to give administrators time to prepare: http://windowsteamblog.com/ie/b/ie/archive/2011/03/29/a-thoughtful-approach-to-measuring-browser-adoption.aspx" }-

And again, I gotta ask, how many business users? I thought these "hundreds of millions of business customers that rely on Internet Explorer" were the ones forcing MS to support Grandpa XP?

[Mr.PC]

-Classic Shell now makes Internet Explorer 9 look like IE8: HERE (http://downloadsquad.switched.com/2011/04/04/classic-shell-makes-windows-explorer-and-ie9-look-like-their-anc/) and HERE (http://sourceforge.net/projects/classicshell/files/latest)


-IE9 Tips: HERE (http://www.thewindowsclub.com/tips-tricks-tweaks-for-internet-explorer-9) and HERE (http://www.thewindowsclub.com/more-tips-tricks-for-internet-explorer-9-to-browse-in-a-smarter-faster-way#more-26326)

[Kerodo]

Just for general info to anyone interested, I did a reformat of Win 7 x64 today, and IE9 showed up in the Windows Updates. I don't know if it will show up on already existing installations or not, but it did show up here today on a new install.

[Zeena]

Hi Kerodo :)

Yep!
Just checked for updates like I always do on a Tuesday night... IE9 - Via... Windows Update :D

Zeena

[The Hammer]

-{ Quote: "Just for general info to anyone interested, I did a reformat of Win 7 x64 today, and IE9 showed up in the Windows Updates. I don't know if it will show up on already existing installations or not, but it did show up here today on a new install." }-
It showed up under optional updates for me today.

[The Hammer]

-{ Quote: "IE9 is like night and day over IE8. They really did a very good job with it." }-
Yes it's vey responsive.

[dw426]

-{ Quote: "Yes it's vey responsive." }-


If you keep it out of Sandboxie it is. Inside of it, things go downhill.

[Mr.PC]

-{ Quote: "Just checked for updates like I always do on a Tuesday night... IE9 - Via... Windows Update :D " }-
Yes, I got IE9 through Windows Update, too. Still a RTM version though...???

[Matthijs5nl]

That is the very latest version.

[Mr.PC]

-{ Quote: "That is the very latest version." }-
I know, but Release to Manufacturing (RTM) (http://www.javvin.com/softwareglossary/RTM.html):
"RTM versions are typically released to manufacturers before they are released to the general public so that
the manufacturers can conduct integration and work out any bugs the software may encounter with hardware devices.
The release of an RTM version does not necessarily mean that the creators have worked out all the problems with the software;
there still may be more versions of the product before it is released to the general public. "
???

[Osaban]

Yes, it appeared as an important update on my computer. It is as fast as Chrome, no difference whether sandboxed or not, but I can't see yet a single reason for me to switch. Being an RTM version it kind of shows the urgency from MS to launch it asap given the tough competition from other browsers.

[funkydude]

-{ Quote: "it kind of shows the urgency from MS to launch it asap" }-

Really? The past few pages of this thread disagree with you.

[Eice]

-{ Quote: "I know, but Release to Manufacturing (RTM) (http://www.javvin.com/softwareglossary/RTM.html):
"RTM versions are typically released to manufacturers before they are released to the general public so that
the manufacturers can conduct integration and work out any bugs the software may encounter with hardware devices.
The release of an RTM version does not necessarily mean that the creators have worked out all the problems with the software;
there still may be more versions of the product before it is released to the general public. "
???" }-
"The term "release to manufacturing" or "release to marketing" (both abbreviated RTM, initials also commonly used for the quite different "return to manufacturer" of faulty goods)—also known as "going gold"—is a term used when software is ready for or has been delivered or provided to the customer. It is typically used in certain retail mass-production software contexts—as opposed to a specialized software production or project in a commercial or government production and distribution—where the software is sold as part of a bundle in a related computer hardware sale and typically where the software and related hardware is ultimately to be available and sold on mass/public basis at retail stores to indicate that the software has met a defined quality level and is ready for mass retail distribution. RTM could also mean in other contexts that the software has been delivered or released to a client or customer for installation or distribution to the related hardware end user computers or machines. The term does not define the delivery mechanism or volume; it only states that the quality is sufficient for mass distribution. The deliverable from the engineering organization is frequently in the form of a gold master CD used for duplication or to produce the image for the web."

- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_release_life_cycle#RTM

[Daveski17]

Finally I get the IE 9 update. Yes, it's still pants & shags with my sidebar & desktop icons on my laptop. >:(

C'mon Mickeysoft get it right for a change. I have uninstalled IE 9, & at least on the laptop, I will stick with Idiot Exploiter 8. At least it worked. I never use it anyway.

I will check my desktop later ...

[Daveski17]

-{ Quote: "Really? The past few pages of this thread disagree with you." }-

I think Osaban has a point here. I get the feeling MS were racing Mozilla to beat them releasing Fx 4.

[funkydude]

-{ Quote: "I think Osaban has a point here. I get the feeling MS were racing Mozilla to beat them releasing Fx 4." }-

I find this humorous because the IE release date was set about a month before it was released, and everyone was complaining that Fx4 was being rushed to beat it. ::)

Apparently people can whine for weeks about IE not being on Windows Update when it was released, then when it's finally out on Windows Update, they can whine that it was "rushed out" lol..? Contradictory much? I guess Microsoft simply can't win. ::)

I added some gadgets to my desktop, they work fine with IE9.