Ramblings of an old Doc

 

Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols over at ZDNet summed it up pretty neatly for me and revealed problems and vulnerabilities which I didn’t know about.

Quoting just the highlights (see the review for details):

Operating system incompatibilities: XP is ignored. Whether it’s a dinosaur or not, it’s one of MS’s OS’s and this, to me at least, just isn’t playing fair.

Performance: FF4 betas and Chrome outperform it on the majority of benchmarks. Heck, Opera 11 seems faster to me, also.

The 64-bit version of IE 9 is second-rate. It’s slower that the 32 bit version. What does MS say? “The majority uses x32.” Well, x64 folks matter less? Good to know.

Lack of Security: While more secure than ie8, it’s far from secure. See the review for details. Basically? The Tracking thing is spotty, and the way it handles plug-ins (the fave attack point of hackers) does not warn the way it should when using an outdated plug-in. That’s a major vulnerability.

Lack of Compatibility: So you use “Compatibility”. So, you’re using a prior form of rendering. So much for the hype.

That’s why I’m pretty disappointed. Also? It doesn’t look all that good, at least to me. So I’m sticking with Chrome and FF and Opera.


Comments (Page 5)
6 PagesFirst 3 4 5 6 
on Mar 19, 2011

Sure...sure...wouldn't that require we all disliked IE9 as much as you do though.

Just a thought.

It would...

I think it's OK-ish.....just not as good as the OS it's intended for.

If IE9 was as much of an improvement over older vers as Win7 is over any other OS created by MS  then it would be kicking some serious arse.

on Mar 19, 2011

Not necessarily. IE9 is nowhere near perfect as I'm sure you can attest. Those who are satisfied with it need do no such thing but I've heard more from those who aren't. Numbers I mean, and the things that are wrong with the browser are real, to us, as I'm sure that the things right with it are to you. Like I said in a previous post, it works for some but no others. Why that is is unknown.

on Mar 19, 2011

An article about the Tracking Protection Lists available in IE9 for those of you who like it. Short version: one of these things is crap.

I found this one balanced and very informative, Savyg:

http://blog.privacychoice.org/2011/02/08/reconstructing-do-not-track/ 

"Each browser’s approach to Do-Not-Track has strengths, weaknesses and dependencies. An ideal approach could combine the best attributes of the Microsoft and Firefox approaches:
A binary, global do-not-track signal which must be respected as to activities commonly defined as “tracking.” This provides simplicity and durability for the broadest set of web users, provided that “tracking” can be appropriately defined.
Settings to control tracking interactions directly in the browser. This provides certainty that choices are honored, with less dependency on server-side compliance.
The ability for any selection to be made in an web interaction, rather than within the browser setting menus. This makes choices findable in a context where users can best understand their purpose and effect.
Choices to selectively allow or disallow tracking at the company or website level, as a complement to global settings. This provides versatile choices to afford web users the greatest benefit from their online profile and encourages value exchange with web providers.
Independent audits of tracking practices which cannot be externally verified. This allows marketers to continue to use non-behavioral data without compromising certainty for consumers."

If IE9 was as much of an improvement over older vers as Win7 is over any other OS created by MS then it would be kicking some serious arse.

Amen! 

on Mar 19, 2011


Sure...sure...wouldn't that require we all disliked IE9 as much as you do though.

Just a thought.


It would...

I think it's OK-ish.....just not as good as the OS it's intended for.

If IE9 was as much of an improvement over older vers as Win7 is over any other OS created by MS  then it would be kicking some serious arse.

Well said, old man! 

on Mar 19, 2011

I'm wary of installing ANYTHING from MS because I clicked a news topic at the MSN website and it INSTALLED Live Messenger WITHOUT asking me for ANY permission whatsoever.  MS Malware? Seriously?    Has this happened to anyone else?

on Mar 19, 2011

soulspark, I've never heard of that happening before.

Could you give a link to that site? 

on Mar 19, 2011


If IE9 was as much of an improvement over older vers as Win7 is over any other OS created by MS  then it would be kicking some serious arse.

For IE it pretty much is.  Unlike Win7, it has established competition that already performs great, and functionally is pretty much the same (at least until HTML5 animated stuff comes out, where the other browsers will need further enhancements from what I've seen.)

on Mar 19, 2011

Sure Doc. Don't know how to create links yet, but the site was - asus.msn.com      I clicked on a news article that was on their current events slide show header and it redirected me to a related site containing the article.  Also a window popped up telling me the Live Messenger was being installed. Like I said NO "do you want to install?" just "you'll eat it and like it."....

on Mar 19, 2011

What browser were you using, soulspark?

 

on Mar 19, 2011

DrJBHL
What browser were you using, soulspark?

I'd imagine it had more to do with the OEM software than the site/browser.  ASUS software is better than some, but I still got rid of it.

on Mar 19, 2011

I wonder how long it will be before MS says everyone has to use IE9 with their websites and discontinues available downloads for IE8.

I'm also wondering if Firefox 4 will have a big memory leak. Lately Firefox has seemed bloated.

on Mar 19, 2011

Quoting DrJBHL, reply 69What browser were you using, soulspark?

I'd imagine it had more to do with the OEM software than the site/browser.  ASUS software is better than some, but I still got rid of it.

I was wondering if he was using a browser which 'told' the site he didn't have live messenger? 

on Mar 19, 2011

Would IE9 do that? Curious.

on Mar 20, 2011
on Mar 20, 2011

Didn't work more than it did. No surprise there. They should rename it. Qwerky fits.

6 PagesFirst 3 4 5 6