Internet Explorer 9 to be the Fastest and Safest Web Browser

Yeah, IE's bookmark manager is abysmal but as far as I can tell Simple Adblock works quite well. I thought IE 6 wasn't too bad & earlier versions of IE were all I had to compare with. Firefox #2 spoiled me a bit when I discovered that a browser could have a decent download manager, decent spell-checker, bookmark manager etc. I suppose the up side to all of this browser competition is that it should work to the advantage of the end user (hopefully). I still can't see IE 9 replacing Chrome or SeaMonkey for me though.

 

I don't know about you guys, but me as a webdesigner when i hear about IE (doesn't matter with version) i'm turning in something evil. It doesn't matter is is 6 ,7 8, 9

 

Microsoft Internet Explorer 9 beta due in September:
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/microsoft/microsoft-internet-explorer-9-beta-due-in-september/6943

 

Still not faster than Chrome or Opera though!

 

Faster! Faster! Faster!....must....see....webpage...now!.....You guys do realize every website on the Internet can be accessed and looked at, for the most part, just as quickly in any browser? But, does every website look and act the same in every browser? Stop being so obsessed over nanoseconds and start worrying about standards and security, will you? Tell me what benefit getting to a website in nanoseconds will have if the website won't even work properly, or, if upon getting there, you get smacked upside the head by an exploit, or, the privacy features are so bad you might as well not even have any privacy?

Here's my predictions for IE9:

1. HTML 5 support will be half-arsed.

2. It won't be faster, let alone as fast as other offerings.

3. It still won't be very WC3/Acid compliant.

 

Sorry, it's my British sense of irony again! IE9 can be faster than light for all I care. I just think it is kinda funny that they are bending over backwards to sell it to Joe Public as some form of 'warp speed' browser. Although, my computer has speeded up drastically since I have beamed McAfee NetProtect Plus into outer cyberspace.

...Best place for it!

 

Not helping much, is it?

 

Eh, they're selling it like that because everywhere you go, no matter how respected a computing website is, every "browser war" focuses on speed. Every review of upcoming changes in a browser is benchmark this, benchmark that. These reviewers, and, in turn, the vendors have kept feeding the public the almighty benchmark, leading your average user to believe speed is the true test of a browsers usefulness. If it's half a second slower than a competitor, well then such and such browser is trash. It's really pathetic in my eyes, hell, we even have threads here with proclamation titles of "speed kings", where of course every fanboy/girl flocks in masses to dance around virtual bonfires and chant the name of their precious browser, whilst tossing chart after chart at everyone else "proving" how inferior everyone elses' choice is.

 

Not really...

 

Well, yeah, you're right of course. I am more worried about Firefox 4 & how it will work on my platform personally. I use Fx sometimes, it can be useful. I usually download with it (& of course use it for sites that Chrome breaks). I think it will probably be best to make a clean install. The transition from Fx #2 to #3 was not a good one for me. I eventually sorted it out though.

As for IE9, no doubt I'll get it as an update eventually. As I think we have stated before, I would rather a stable & useful browser was released, rather than a rushed one, due to the 'circus' we are getting now.

 

IE9 may end up making me eat my words, we'll see. I'm not exactly against it being successful, I just don't expect a miracle out of them. I'm actually considering moving up to FF4 Beta, the move to the latest 3.6.8 has been problematic, even after a clean reinstall. But anyway, I just don't see IE9 making up as much ground as people seem to be expecting.

 

If I remember correctly there was a lot of promotion for IE8, & I thought that was a bit of an anticlimax. At least MS gave it a bookmarking toolbar. That was the only thing that actually impressed me!

Good luck with Fx4 beta.

 

IE 9 won't work on XP. Probably Microsoft urge to use 7. I do not care about : I'm using Opera since many years, the only thing I do with IE are manual updates.

 

I used to use Opera a lot. I think Opera ASA should consider some form of extensions for Opera. It would boost its popularity a lot IMO.

 

I hear ya. It's pretty sad and pathetic really......

 

Can you whitelist scripts in SOME way similar to NoScript, or is it the useless "full on" or "full off" every other browser uses? If scripts CAN be managed to that extent, then, I honestly don't see a need for extensions in Opera. Opera's lack of market isn't because of extensions, it's a lack of marketing. Every new major version of a browser that is released gets full reviews, Opera, they get "Oh yeah, by the way, a new Opera is out. Check it out if you want *shrug*". There are no "Works with" buttons on websites like there was for Firefox for so long, I mean, you have to SEARCH for Opera reviews and news. I go to computing websites and I'm damn near greeted with the latest on Chrome, IE, and Firefox. Hell, even Safari is getting good coverage now. Opera is just an also-ran to everybody. That's a fantastic way to keep the bad guys from exploiting it, but it's not the best way to run your business and get people to give a crap about you.

 

AFAIK it is either on or off.

WOT & a decent adblocker would be nice.

Yeah, I don't know what's going on with that either. They do have a bit of a dodgy reputation for breaking pages. Perhaps Norwegians are just not very good at aggressive advertising.

 

Yep, that's an understatement. They've been around forever, and yet still have just a very tiny piece of the market. I'm inclined to think they do it on purpose and don't want to become more popular. It's a good browser, so you'd think it would naturally have gained more market share by now. Yet it hasn't. Which means, as said above, there just isn't any marketing. Pretty strange...

 

Then it's useless in my eyes, especially without at least the benefit of sandboxing Chrome provides.

Isn't that WOTs fault though? It installs to IE, if it works there it should work in Opera. Maybe I'm missing an important techie fact though. Ad-Blocking is good enough with Fanboys' list. I would say that the built in content blocker is useless (for ads that is).

 

I don't know enough about Opera or WOT to know this. It isn't open source so maybe the WOT techies don't have enough information. I had some problems with Fanboy's list. I am probably doing something wrong, but I spoke to one or two of the guys on his New Zealand site & they couldn't figure why it was breaking pages after I installed his list either.

Opera, breaking pages? Who'd have thunk? LOL

 

Maybe they just don't have the advertising budget?

 

An ad list breaking pages isn't necessarily Opera's fault. A lot of small websites/pages rely on ads to either keep a website free or, at the least, pay for hosting costs. So, if that is the case, and you come along with a thorough blocking list, chances are something is going to get wonky. That may not be what is going on in your case, it's just a possibility I figured I'd toss out there. IE, by the way, as you well know, is not open source either. Yet WOT functions just fine on it.

 

They'd gain one if they...advertised We're not talking about a 30 second spot on national TV here, just get the word to people SOMEHOW.

 

From what I could gather the guys at Fanboys were not really sure themselves but had originally devised the list on XP. They seemed to think that may be a significant factor, that & apparently Opera tend to subtly change the whitelist format on every release.

There is an imperative for WOT to develop for IE though, 70% of the Internet community use IE. I reckon they did it with Microsoft's approval. It was probably the first plug-in that they wrote for all I know.

 

I think they painted OPERA ASA on the side of a rally car once ....