To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
There is nothing immature about pointing out the flaws in both Microsoft's products and their business practices. Even with the improvements IE 7 has, it is still the town idiot of web browsers. IE 8 will be the same.
As long as Microsoft's browser remains as closed and tied to proprietary crap as it currently is, it will always be the most useless browser of the bunch.
-->There is nothing immature about pointing out the flaws in both Microsoft's products and their business practices.
Pointing out flaws is of course not immature, except when the flaw pointed out does not exist as in the case of OP.
-->As long as Microsoft's browser remains as closed and tied to proprietary crap as it currently is, it will always be the most useless browser of the bunch.
If by closed you meant closed source = crap, then I beg to differ and provide Opera as proof.
Regarding "tied to proprietary crap" I would be very much interested and appreciative if you enlighten me what exactly constitutes this proprietary crap. My sole objection of the kind was ActiveX (from a security standpoint) which have been already dealt with in IE7.
The only major issue remaining, web standards support, is supposed to be resolved in IE8.
Personally, I will not fancy the idea of using IE as I am so dependent on several Firefox extensions that my whole computing experience will take an unfortunate dive if I switch. Yet, calling IE useless as a browser, especially for the common 'internets' user is, at the very best, unjustified.
Except that you really don't have any point to make. IE8 is standards-based. You can embed content in your pages to provide compatibility with previous browser versions, but that isn't the default. So, really, what is your point, other than venting?
Compare the security records of Firefox, Safari, and IE7. Unless you're one of those people whose ideology prevents him from objectively evaluating cold, hard facts, you'll discover (oh, the shock, the horror) that Firefox/Safari have had, in fact, far more vulnerabilities than IE7. Yeah, all of that bunk about browsing "safer" was just that: bunk. Further, for all those "advances" that Firefox has made, it's had remarkable difficulty getting plug-ins to work from one update to the next. I've lost count of the number of times that it's crashed; meanwhile, I'm told to get rid of my existing plug-ins before installing new updates, and then reinstall the plug-ins, afterward. Wow... remind me about all this newfound efficiency that I'm supposed to be seeing...
Opera is closed. Does that make it "crap", too? Nope, didn't think so. And what, exactly, is "proprietary" about IE8? Like Opera, it's built on prevailing Web standards.
Edited 2008-06-16 07:30 UTC
did you read on ?
Pages without the tag will continue to use the "doctype switch" to choose between the old, nonstandard "quirks mode" and the new "standards mode"; pages with the new tag will still use the doctype switch, but this time to choose between "quirks mode" and "IE 7 mode." The tag will be supported in beta 2 of IE8 (due in August), and is also available to IE 8 beta 1 with the latest security update.
in fact, in case you missed it again....
but this time to choose between "quirks mode" and "IE 7 mode.







Member since:
2007-02-07
I am confused. Why do they call the standards compliant mode, "quirks mode" ?
FTA: Web developers will be able to add a tag to their page (or their web server) to force pages to render in the same manner as IE7. Pages without the tag will continue to use the "doctype switch" to choose between the old, nonstandard "quirks mode" and the new "standards mode"; pages with the new tag will still use the doctype switch, but this time to choose between "quirks mode" and "IE 7 mode."
RTFA could prevent confusion (and probably immature MS bashing).