Internet Explorer 9 Released

Yes, maybe. But Fx 4 works properly.

Maybe they would 'win' more often if they didn't rush half-baked software out for various reasons better known to themselves.

*cough* Vista *cough*

Lucky you. I take it you are using Win 7. I am not going to update my laptop from Vista as it is working relatively well. I can live without IE 9 on it.

EDIT: Seems to be fine on my Win 7 64 bit desktop. I have added Fanboy's TPL, which seems quite effective (nice one Fanboy ). It is fast, but there again so is my computer anyway.

IE 9 on Win 7 x64 ... I give it 6 out of 10 for effort.

 

Don't take my post as a negative statement, I've always supported MS products, and IE9 seems to work very well on my Vista. I am surprised to see it on Windows updates so soon, but after reading Eice post perhaps RTM should be understood in a broader context.

 

There will always be those that love to bash MS. Simple fact of life....

 

My apologies, I just find it odd that the same people that thought it should be rushed out to Windows Update ASAP (admittedly I don't think you were one) are the same people thinking it's been rushed.

 

I just don't think it is as easy as that. I think Win 7 is a suburb OS & I use MSE on both of my computers & I am very impressed with it as an AV.

The trouble with MS is that it is virtually a hegemony & they have been known in the past to release software prematurely. I bought my Belnea O.book (laptop) in good faith that Vista would be as stable as XP was as on OS. Luckily, I haven't had a lot of problems with Vista. I know I lot of people who have though. Seven is far more stable & is what Vista should have been. I suppose I could upgrade my laptop to Win 7, but it is working reasonably well & upgrading an OS can often be fraught with difficulties. I am a firm believer that if it isn't broken ... don't fix it!

Simple fact of life ...

 

I think that my laptop's problem with IE 9 is that it only has a gig of RAM. I know that the sidebar in Vista is a tad RAM intensive so that's probably my problem. IE 9 does seem OK on my Win 7 desktop.

 

IE 9 was taking over a gig of Ram with two tabs open last night for me, lol. It's crazy.

 

Jeez! That's a lot of RAM.

I think that my Belnea's design goes back about five years or so (mine is three years old) & was probably intended to run XP. When Vista was released they probably thought that as Vista needs a gig of RAM just to run, they could get away with it. As a consequence I am always fighting excessive RAM use. I can't believe that I used to run Norton & then later McAfee as an AV! IE 9 is working fine on my desktop, it is fast, although I have noticed that Fanboy's TPL list doesn't block adverts in the 64 bit browser.

 

I tried to give IE 9 a shot, I truly did. I have no hatred for it whatsoever, but after that memory usage and the slow as molasses page rendering, I had to bid it farewell and pack its bags. Nothing has ever worked as well as FF on my system, and I don't have the slightest clue as to why.

 

Not sure of that's the problem. I'm using IE9 on my netbook with only 1GB of low-clocked DDR2 RAM, and it's still the fastest browser out of the big 3.

 

Have you tried resetting IE to default settings?

 

Yeah Eice, I did that, did a reinstall, removed the TPLs, shut down the web and script shields in Avast, shut down MBAM and played with browsing both inside of and outside of Sandboxie. It works beautifully right at install, and it'll do just fine for a few minutes after you open it up. But, after that grace period, and especially if you travel to graphically heavy websites, it gets bogged down. It's a shame really, it may not be the most feature-filled, good looking browser out there, but when it works for me, I kinda get to liking it.

 

What about updating your video drivers? Are we talking about a laptop with an intel card?

 

Nope, actually I'm using a Radeon HD5570 on a desktop system. My drivers are the newest, as I had to install that for FF4 to support hardware acceleration on my system.

 

Vista needs 2 GB RAM, Win7 - 32bit can actually work with 1GB. I have 2 GB RAM on my Vista64, and it uses around 830 MB simply to see the desktop (nothing running active). Opening 2 tabs either with IE9 or Chrome memory usage hits 1GB RAM.

Vista uses a lot of RAM even doing nothing, on the other hand if I decide to start many programs simultaneously (like Photoshop, Google Earth, Media Centre, although I would never need to do so in normal circumstances) RAM usage increases but not dramatically (1.3 GB RAM).

I should think it would be cheaper to increase your RAM to 2GB than to upgrade to Win7 -32bit.

 

One last question: 32- or 64-bit version of IE9?

 

Yes, I believe that MS worked hard to solve the Vista RAM usage with Win7.

I've noticed similar things with Vista as well.

Very probably. My desktop was custom built & the bloke who built it for me lives just down the road from me, so customising is relatively simple. Unfortunately my laptop's manufacturer (Belnea) doesn't exist anymore. So I'm not sure just how I'd go about that. I don't like messing under the bonnet unless I really know what I'm doing.

 

You didn't quote (I wonder why... ) the Best part:

RTM precedes general availability (GA) when the product is released to the public.

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

 

"General availability or general acceptance (GA) is the point where all necessary commercialization activities have been completed..."

Commercialization activities, not coding activities. It's okay if English isn't first your first language, but do learn to tell the difference if you want to act knowledgeable about it.

 

Yes, for the very obvious reason that it was completely irrelevant. If you could read, you'd have found out that RTM and GA are merely different phases of availability, not of development and/or testing.

Again, basic English skills.

 

Don't be so sure about that...

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.

I wonder who can really read basic English...

 

According to javvin.com? Uh, sure. Already posted a source that proves you wrong, but I see you've ignored it for obvious reasons.

IE RTM releases, and RTM releases from other major reputable software vendors have always been final versions. I'm not sure what sort of super-secret ultra-final post-RTM version of IE9 that you're still holding your breath waiting for, but good luck.

 

Since javvin.com didn't convince you, here, it is another one:
http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/R/RTM.html

And another one:
http://debaatobiee.wordpress.com/category/oracle-in-windows/

I'm sure you can find more...

I posted three (3) sources proving that you are wrong...
So, what?

 

Let's suspend all disbelief and assume, for the sake of argument, that you and the no-name sites you dredged up are actually right. Given that IE9 final was released 14th March, where is this super-secret post-RTM IE9 build that you've kept hiding around?

(Or, for that matter, feel free to show us a post-RTM build of Windows 7 as well.)

Go ahead, I'm waiting.

 

Kept hiding around

So, an upcoming IE9 Update (via Windows Update)

will Not Remove the RTM notation and Change the IE9 Version, ah?



We'll see about it...