Fantastic achievement!

Feel free to elaborate your opinion on whats missing that all 3 other browsers have to make IE 'suck'.

 

Can you elaborate on just what makes IE not suck compared the 3 others browsers or any browser of your choice.

 

Predictable troll response.

"Suck" is quite a harsh word. There are many issues with IE9, as with other browsers, that still need worked on. For example: In built spell checker, better updating system, improved sandboxing, improved GUI(wtf favourites bar?) and as always further improving on standards.

That's not to say other browsers have no issues, infact many of them were already mentioned by Mr. PC.
Other things include the lack of process isolation and sandboxing in Fx/Opera, improving on hardware acceleration (where Opera has none), improvement on malware blocking and general online security methods such as heaspray protection. Supporting emerging anti tracking methods such as DNT (which Chrome is still err'ing over)

Responses like ^ or like Mr. PC's add constructive input, yours serves no purpose other than to try and stroke flames.

 

Here is another one - when you click a member's name, Chrome does not give you a menu, rather takes you to the member page.
I am a browser junkie myself, but increasingly I feel Chrome on Windows has no equal.

 

Chrome is the most polished browser.

unfortunately, there are things that irks me:
- auto-updater
- install to user space
- ever bloating data folder
- not skinnable

i know there are workarounds about most of these issues, but still...

i have switched to Firefox after testing extensively all the top 4 browsers for the last 2 months.

Firefox and Opera can effectively be hardened by various means, icalcs, Sandboxie etc...

 

The thing I really don't like about Chrome is the download UI. There is no option to make the downloads appear in a new background tab automatically.
There is an in-built option in Opera to do this and can be done in FF by the means of an extension.

 

Why would using the latest version be a bad thing?

 

i would have to disable SRP every times the bloody thing updates because the auto-update file gets a new name/ID every time you check for an updates.

yeah, i know, i could use Chromium, i could disable auto-update etc...

frankly, i feel Firefox is just as good a browser and better in some aspects.
and vice-versa.

 

Ah, I see. Is there not a way to use both SRP and keep secure with auto updates?

 

i know one can install Chrome to Program Files if you get the Google Pack.
i'm not sure if that would fix that one issue though.
-----------------------
edit:

the easiest way for those using Chrome and SRP would be to disable googleupdate from the autostart, disable SRP and manually check for update.
i figure doing that once a week or so would be enough...

 

If by rubbish you mean vastly more secure than other mainstream browsers I absolutely agree. Chrome and IE9 are really close in terms of security with Chrome just pulling ahead.

 

You're probably right, but you know what they say: "De gustibus non est disputandum".

 

Yes, that's a fair point.

 

Do you have a source for this information?

 

I got the feeling that it is IE9 that is pulling ahead actually

 

I don't feel like googling it right now. IE9 sandboxes each tab/javascript renderer and runs in low integrity. It also has the #1 highest detection rate (by far) for detecting malicious sites.

It's security drawbacks include:
Being targeted the most
Slightly weaker sandbox than chrome (not quite as strict, but only very slightly looser)
Not packaging flash/sandboxing flash.

I don't think I need to go into why Chrome is secure, it's reputation should really stand on its own. (one exploit in 3 years)

Well on the one hand IE9 does lead in a huge margin when it comes to detecting malicious sites... however the fact that it does not package and sandbox flash is a huge point to Chrome. Chrome's patched/sandbox'd flash puts it ahead of the other browsers purely because Adobe is one of the biggest targets on the application level.