|
|
Will we ever see another major IE update from M$ for OS X?
|
|
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: The Intertube
Status:
Offline
|
|
Is M$ going to release new IE for OS X? Are they still working on it? Are they pissed because Apple now has its own inhouse browser?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Livingston NJ USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Does it matter? Its a worthless pice of software. Safari, OmniWeb and Mozilla rule my world.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Status:
Offline
|
|
Internet Explorer is far from useless. It's actually a fairly good browser that was long top of the line in standards compliance and it still have quite a few cool features and a whole lot of polish.
It's just slow, that's all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
It does matter. It'd be nice to have a little competition from MS. But MS doesn't like competition 'cuz they're a bunch of sissies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Australia
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by sealobo:
Is M$ going to release new IE for OS X? Are they still working on it? Are they pissed because Apple now has its own inhouse browser?
The problem is some 3rd party software's help system (e.g. Adobe app.) hard wire Internet Explorer as the help engine (as far as I understand changing the default web browser in the Internet preferences does not change this behaviour). So there is still a need for Microsft to come up with improvements (unless Apple can convince Adobe or other developers to change their code to use Mac OS X's default browser instead of hard wire IE)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: europe
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by veryniceguy2002:
The problem is some 3rd party software's help system (e.g. Adobe app.) hard wire Internet Explorer as the help engine (as far as I understand changing the default web browser in the Internet preferences does not change this behaviour). So there is still a need for Microsft to come up with improvements (unless Apple can convince Adobe or other developers to change their code to use Mac OS X's default browser instead of hard wire IE)
Find and select the main help file in the Finder, open the Get Info dialog on it, and chose Safari as the app the file is to be opened with.
It's not hard-wired to Internet Explorer (should use Help Viewer though).
|
Nasrudin sat on a river bank when someone shouted to him from the opposite side: "Hey! how do I get across?" "You are across!" Nasrudin shouted back.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: under about 12 feet of ash from Mt. Vesuvius
Status:
Offline
|
|
I agree with Guy, MS are a bunch of pussies. Nothing is stopping them from updating and improving their stuff, they just don't feel like it, they don't see the need. Monopoly inertia.
|
i look in your general direction
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: No frelling idea
Status:
Offline
|
|
Will the release IE6 yeah. But I won't use it. This is the thing, before Apple produced it's own browser (which I believe they had to do) other browsers were dragging in the speed department, IE was the worst and it seemed like everyone was taking their sweet time about it including OmniWeb which was my deflaut browser until Safari. Now that Safari is out, as a beta mind you, other developers are actually putting in an effort to bring fast web browsing back to the mac, it was embarrassing in OS X. M$, I don't know, I have begun to think they have given up on the Mac b/c of the poor Office sales, but really $450, hmm, what could be the problem. My dad runs it in Office 98 in classic instead of paying more for it, hmm, what could be the problem (scratches head).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Jul 2002
Status:
Offline
|
|
God, I hope so.
Safari is a hunk of junk, but at least it doesn't randomly render pages invisibly.
|
Commander ~Coxy of the 68kMLA
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Behind the dryer, looking for a matching sock
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by Coxy:
God, I hope so.
Safari is a hunk of junk, but at least it doesn't randomly render pages invisibly.
Yeah, it's a real piece of crap. </sarcasm>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Florida
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by Coxy:
God, I hope so.
Safari is a hunk of junk, but at least it doesn't randomly render pages invisibly.
Whether you like the brush metal look or not, (can be the only legit beef) Safari is by far, the best berowser for the mac, it's not even close.
Why do you think Chimera and OW BOTH are going with the core Safari is using?
IE is drowning a slow painful death and it's so gratifying to watch.
|
All Your Signature Are Belong To Us!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: France
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by Coxy:
God, I hope so.
Safari is a hunk of junk, but at least it doesn't randomly render pages invisibly.
Safari rules, even though some pages still are not working.
Mind it still is beta. The speed however is great, just compare it with IE and before you do bring a napkin, better ten napkins since you need them when you start to cry by seeing such a slow program having been accepted by the mass for quite a while.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: St. Louis
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by KidRed:
Why do you think Chimera and OW BOTH are going with the core Safari is using?
Chimera (now Camino) is not moving to Safari's core. They are still using the Gecko rendering engine.
-JARinteractive
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Riverside IL, USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
IE 6 is supposedly slated for early next year.
|
Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them.
-- Frederick Douglass, 1857
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Atlanta, GA
Status:
Offline
|
|
camino isn't going to use webcore.... they're using gecko, and that will never change.
OW, on the other hand, obviously is already using webcore in it's latest sneakpeek release of 4.5.
get your facts straight before posting uninformed garbage like that.
Originally posted by KidRed:
Whether you like the brush metal look or not, (can be the only legit beef) Safari is by far, the best berowser for the mac, it's not even close.
Why do you think Chimera and OW BOTH are going with the core Safari is using?
IE is drowning a slow painful death and it's so gratifying to watch.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Australia
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by - - e r i k - -:
Internet Explorer is far from useless. It's actually a fairly good browser that was long top of the line in standards compliance and it still have quite a few cool features and a whole lot of polish.
It's just slow, that's all.
Slow and very buggy.
I might use safari if it looked better.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: England | San Francisco
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by IUJHJSDHE:
...
I might use safari if it looked better.
Safari looks lovely ... Omniweb owns them all though.
|
we don't have time to stop for gas
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: The bottom of Cloud City
Status:
Offline
|
|
I don't think MS will give up the browser wars that easy on the Mac side.
If they are ditching I.E. then I expect Word to follow.
|
"Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Retired
Status:
Offline
|
|
No, IE makes M$ no money. Word does. Thats why they'll always be word for the Mac.
I don't think they'll be any more major releases of IE for the Mac. How long has 6.0 been out on the PC side? With Safari, M$ will have an excuse to bolt.
|
Power Macintosh Dual G4
SGI Indigo2 6.5.21f
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status:
Offline
|
|
Camino is the fastest OSX browser out there.
Originally posted by veryniceguy2002:
The problem is some 3rd party software's help system (e.g. Adobe app.) hard wire Internet Explorer as the help engine (as far as I understand changing the default web browser in the Internet preferences does not change this behaviour). So there is still a need for Microsft to come up with improvements (unless Apple can convince Adobe or other developers to change their code to use Mac OS X's default browser instead of hard wire IE)
Err... you can pick a different browser straight from within the app...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Jan 2001
Status:
Offline
|
|
No, IE makes M$ no money.
Uh, IE makes MS buttloads of money. Its just not a direct revenue stream. If MS thought that browsers were not a source of revenue, you'd be surfing on Netscape right now.
|
yo frat boy. where's my tax cut.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
IE is still the most compliant browser in the world and doesn't have some of the stupid bugs Safari has (drag a jpg to the desktop and it starts the download again sometimes). IE's just missing tabs at the moment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by RooneyX:
IE is still the most compliant browser in the world ...
And yet still has trouble rendering quite a few sites that Gecko can render perfectly...leading me to believe that this 'most compliant browser' praise is nothing more than bullshit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UK
Status:
Offline
|
|
mac ie 5.5 rules!!!!!!!!!!!!!
well when you put it next to pc ie6 god i found out the other day that thing still cant do png's without adding extra code, made me look quite silly in a feedback session for my design course that all my sites pngs were buggered, bah works on every mac browser and mozilla its just that stupid ie6.0. Lets imagine the pc ie5.5 meeting
keith:"so guys what new features shall we put in to ie6?"
geoffo:"how about getting pngs working fine?"
keith:"nah lets just add a windows media player control into a skinned panel and pass it off as a new feautre and add an annoying image bar that everyone turns off, oh double that lets have annoying image resizing too"
geoffo:*taps keyboard for a few seconds* "right thats those features added"
keith:"you remebered to say it was revolutionary, right?"
geoffo:"yes"
keith:"our work here is done, now lets watch porn for a few months before we release it"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: NYC
Status:
Offline
|
|
Camino= teh r0xorz
Safari= nice, but still a few rough spots
IE=archaic
In other words, who cares?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: columbus, oh
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by sushiism:
mac ie 5.5 rules!!!!!!!!!!!!!
eh?
|
"Another classic science-fiction show cancelled before its time" ~ Bender
15.2" PowerBook 1.25GHz, 80GB HD, 768MB RAM, SuperDrive
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: May 2002
Status:
Offline
|
|
IE for OS9 looked and felt polished. But the OSX version is just a hunk of junk which can be said about alot of software
that looked and worked great under 9 but
is just aweful under X.
Safari is very good in looks/speed department but it would be nice if some
of the OW features come to saffri.
And how come the saffari tool bar can't
be configured like most other OS X tool
bars.
Back to the topic I think MS will still
make IE for the mac. It doesn't wan't to
lose 5-10% of the browser market.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: under about 12 feet of ash from Mt. Vesuvius
Status:
Offline
|
|
I just want to repeat my earlier statement that MS are a bunch of browser pussies.
|
i look in your general direction
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Florida
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by wtmcgee:
camino isn't going to use webcore.... they're using gecko, and that will never change.
OW, on the other hand, obviously is already using webcore in it's latest sneakpeek release of 4.5.
get your facts straight before posting uninformed garbage like that.
Blow me, I will state what ever I think is right. I may have been wrong about camino, so just correct me, no need to be a dick.
|
All Your Signature Are Belong To Us!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Kill Devil Hills, NC
Status:
Offline
|
|
We're gonna see MSN and Explorer 6 for Mac. We're truly blessed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2001
Location: type 13 planet
Status:
Offline
|
|
Yeah, soon we'll have 51 browser flavors. Sweet. When in the **** do we get a "modern" plug-in architecture so flash isn't so damn slow (compared to Windows).
|
New, Improved and Legal in 50 States
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by - - e r i k - -:
Internet Explorer is far from useless. It's actually a fairly good browser that was long top of the line in standards compliance and it still have quite a few cool features and a whole lot of polish.
It's just slow, that's all.
Since when was IE more standards compliant that Netscape/Mozilla?
IE has always had so many non-standard features designed to encourage web developers to build for IE-only!
And it continues to get worse... just look at plugins!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by sushiism:
mac ie 5.5 rules!!!!!!!!!!!!!
well when you put it next to pc ie6 god i found out the other day that thing still cant do png's without adding extra code
I just tried it, accessed a page with a PNG inline and accessed a PNG directly. Seemed to work fine in IE6. Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're trying to do?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Somewhere, but not here.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Poll: the creator of this thread/poll read the sticky at the top of this forum.
No or No or No???
|
Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by pliny:
I agree with Guy, MS are a bunch of pussies. Nothing is stopping them from updating and improving their stuff, they just don't feel like it, they don't see the need. Monopoly inertia.
not really... they don't get paid for IE so why update it as regularly as the Windows version which accounts for 98% of the market?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: ~/
Status:
Offline
|
|
MS continues to sell a lot of web server-side software and creation software. Clearly they optimize the server side to be browsed with Internet Explorer. The more people use IE at home/work, the more server-side software they can sell. And the more server-side software they can sell, the more they can get people to view the content "best with IE."
So, it still is in MS's financial interest to continue to develop IE for the Mac. Thing is, since little has really changed browser-wise for the longest time, there was no motivation for MS to put tons of resources into IE 6 for MacOS. And IE 6 for Windows is basically nothing more than IE 5 with a few user-side "features" added and XP support. Show me a page that only works well with IE 6... since there really aren't any, there was no motivation on MS's part to work on IE 6 for the Mac (since IE 5 can do everything anyway).
On top of that, the screen shots I've seen of MSN for MacOS X look like the browser still uses OS 9-ish buttons and widgets, just like IE 5 does.
While I'm sure there will eventually be an IE 6 for the Mac, I don't think it'll be any time soon. Probably not until IE 6.5 or 7 for Windows (and I've not heard anything about that other than Longhorn for 2005).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Jul 2002
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by KidRed:
Whether you like the brush metal look or not, (can be the only legit beef) Safari is by far, the best berowser for the mac, it's not even close.
What, the complete and utter lack of useful features I want and the large number of poorly implemented *standard* features isn't a legitimate beef?
|
Commander ~Coxy of the 68kMLA
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2000
Status:
Offline
|
|
Don't forget the crappy contextual menus!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Status:
Offline
|
|
Right now i use Safari, its butt ugly, did anyone ever see that? Brushed metal, or brushed metal removed its an ugly a$$ed little app. I dont find it good looking or intuitive in the least bit. I use it for one reason, tabs, thats all. Sure I could use mozilla, but i dont want to use a 40mb web browser, or a browser that has a larger memory footprint then a sasquatch or one whos interface can lag so severely u have to wait for a menu on the browser window itself to pop open... i've had nothing but bad luck with Mozilla.
I think Omniweb is crap, slowest peice of software in the world, sorry for all u OW lovers out there, but you've obviously got all the time in the world to wait for it to launch and its memory usage is nothing to scream about either. (btw, is it me or does Safari not like giving back ram? IE always used to give back what it used, Safari doesnt seem to wanna do that...)
I still Love IE 5.5, many windows developers envy it, its got a consistent interface, it runs very smoothly. If it were faster, and had tabs, there isnt a doubt in the world that i'd be on it, rather then this aforementioned, ugly little app. IE 5.5 still loads faster (launch time) than Safari does.
If IE 6 is a vast improvment, and has tabs, then i will almost certainly switch back. some days i'm almost tempted to anyways!
-Telusman
|
"No ma'am i'm not angry at you, I'm angry at the cruel twist of fate that directed your call to my extension..."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: New York, NY
Status:
Offline
|
|
I'd settle for IE 5.3 just to fix some bugs and such. Right now it's my main browser, because (on my machine at least) Safari can't handle more than two tabs at once without quitting or getting a spinning beach ball. With 2 gigs of RAM, I think it should be able to keep track of a few web pages without getting hopelessly confused.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Status:
Offline
|
|
You think Safari is ugly, and you think IE looks better?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Status:
Offline
|
|
IE Is scores prettier than Safari. the interface is consistent and polished... shame the speed isnt. IE is a much nicer looking program than Safari.
Originally posted by CharlesS:
You think Safari is ugly, and you think IE looks better?
|
"No ma'am i'm not angry at you, I'm angry at the cruel twist of fate that directed your call to my extension..."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: sunny southern california
Status:
Offline
|
|
safari is a piece of crap.
just like all the other iapps out there, they keep getting more bloated with each revision, slower and slower until they are unuseable, try itumes with 2500 songs, try using itunes to decode oggs, try friggin' iphoto with 8-900 photos.
these programs are supposed to be working on the worlds most advanced OS, and they are all bloatware. insane.
i haven't tried safari 2, because the first one was so damn disappointing. so friggin' ghetto and half a$$ed.
i'm going to stick with OMNI or moz, IE is still a damn good browser.
the whole issue of which browser is the fastest is a moot point on the macintosh. they are all slow as frozen $hit. OW is decent, free, and better than safari. hell last night using moz in gnome on X11 was better than safari rev. 1.
i hope MS comes out with IE 6 soon. it'll be more feature rich and worthwhile than safari bloat version 3.
i'm not downloading any more of these iapps. i saw itoons 4, and laughed and said, no friggin' way, as if 3 wasn't slow enough.
forgive the rant... just my 2 cents.
this whole browser flame war is riddled with personal preference, nothing empircal, my post and all the tohers on this thread illustrate this perfectly...
Originally posted by Coxy:
God, I hope so.
Safari is a hunk of junk, but at least it doesn't randomly render pages invisibly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by cowerd:
Uh, IE makes MS buttloads of money. Its just not a direct revenue stream. If MS thought that browsers were not a source of revenue, you'd be surfing on Netscape right now.
Would you mind backing that up?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Earth
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by theory:
And how come the saffari tool bar can't
be configured like most other OS X tool
bars.
Nice to see that I'm not the only one complaining about this
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: England, UK
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by CharlesS:
I just tried it, accessed a page with a PNG inline and accessed a PNG directly. Seemed to work fine in IE6. Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're trying to do?
IE for Windows can't handle transparency in PNGs without extra code in the HTML. They come out like this:
The grey background to the image is supposed to be transparent. In safari and most other browsers it looks like this:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Edinburgh, UK
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by Coxy:
God, I hope so.
Safari is a hunk of junk, but at least it doesn't randomly render pages invisibly.
Untrue. It does it a lot less often than IE, admittedly, but it still does it.
The page I usually notice this problem on is the front page of BBC News Online, although, as I said, it only happens occassionally.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: NYC
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by Telusman:
Right now i use Safari, its butt ugly, did anyone ever see that? Brushed metal, or brushed metal removed its an ugly a$$ed little app. I dont find it good looking or intuitive in the least bit. I use it for one reason, tabs, thats all. Sure I could use mozilla, but i dont want to use a 40mb web browser, or a browser that has a larger memory footprint then a sasquatch or one whos interface can lag so severely u have to wait for a menu on the browser window itself to pop open... i've had nothing but bad luck with Mozilla.
Dude, try Camino. It has Mozilla's standards compliance with a nice Aqua interface and good Cocoa performance. It has tabs, popup blocking ,etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Menands, NY
Status:
Offline
|
|
I was going to vote in your poll, but you forgot to include the "Who cares?" option.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by Telusman:
Right now i use Safari, its butt ugly, did anyone ever see that? Brushed metal, or brushed metal removed its an ugly a$$ed little app. I dont find it good looking or intuitive in the least bit. I use it for one reason, tabs, thats all. Sure I could use mozilla, but i dont want to use a 40mb web browser, or a browser that has a larger memory footprint then a sasquatch or one whos interface can lag so severely u have to wait for a menu on the browser window itself to pop open... i've had nothing but bad luck with Mozilla.
I think Omniweb is crap, slowest peice of software in the world, sorry for all u OW lovers out there, but you've obviously got all the time in the world to wait for it to launch and its memory usage is nothing to scream about either. (btw, is it me or does Safari not like giving back ram? IE always used to give back what it used, Safari doesnt seem to wanna do that...)
I still Love IE 5.5, many windows developers envy it, its got a consistent interface, it runs very smoothly. If it were faster, and had tabs, there isnt a doubt in the world that i'd be on it, rather then this aforementioned, ugly little app. IE 5.5 still loads faster (launch time) than Safari does.
If IE 6 is a vast improvment, and has tabs, then i will almost certainly switch back. some days i'm almost tempted to anyways!
-Telusman
Any reason why you're not using Camino? It seems to fit all your requirements (Tabs, stability, speed, features, compatibility).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|