Anyone else think that IE8 is crap

judderman62

Marty_J wrote: »

http://www.webdevout.net/browser-support

I said standards support, not "things created by Microsoft" support.

Firefox can "without flopping on its @rse" ayway.

Other browsers can run it a lot faster than IE.

You want me to list all the previous security problems with IE?

Well for starters, if they had the "cream of software engineers" working on it, one would expect it to be a lot better.

Secondly, Microsoft trying to have the internet their way is the reason IE has such poor standards support in the first place. I believe the internet should be available to everyone, and there are those of us who choose not to use a Microsoft operating system for various reasons. Having sites which only work properly in IE is an epic fail. The idea that you have to use a certain browser is pretty abhorrent.

Still, I'm sure Microsoft send you a Christmas card every year for your unwavering support.



Apart from all that, it's great!

excellent post my man and I agree 100%

Marty_J

PROLIANT wrote: »

What I mean by standards is that like most standards in technology around the world any similar product would plug in or interface to another in a seamless fashion, take this analogy;
the belling-lee RF connector that you plug in to the back of your TV from the antenna co-axial down lead will plug in to any TV, the IEC "Kettle lead" will fit any appliance with the 3 pin IEC socket fitted, so why should software products not follow the lead of a standard from a IT Pioneer such as Microsoft?
It is not a monopoly as IE is free, you do not have to pay to download and use it, it also plays a core role in the Microsoft operating system - many applications will not work with certain IE interops un-available i.e. Office, .NET applications etc, yes have Firefox but it should not interfere with the normal operation of a sub-set of systems within its host.

Java applications will not function without Sun Microsystems Java Run-Time framework; does that mean Sun have a monopoly?

Well, history has shown that monopolies do not drive innovation; competition does. The idea that we should all dance to Microsoft's tune is not very appealing. You're talking about a company which has a pre-eminent position in the computer market engineering the internet in such a way as to make it only work properly with their products. Sorry 3rd world - no internet for you!

IE may be free in the sense that you don't have to pay for it, but it does have the considerably less free requirement of using Microsoft Windows (of which we're told it is an integral part).

As for Sun, no they don't have a monopoly concerning Java for the same reason that Apple doesn't have a monopoly concerning Apple Macs.

PROLIANT

Certainly been an interesting debate Marty, but I am tired now and need my sleep for work in the morning.
Good night all.

marleyboy

PROLIANT wrote: »

Well in reply minus the "sarcasm", no Microsoft do not send me a xmas card and as for cross-platform support well I work with both Microsoft and Linux operating systems on a daily basis and Microsoft is the chosen tool to do the job - it does the job very well, before I moved in to IT Management when I was an Engineer I had a guy at work who chewed my ear everyday about how good Linux is and how crap Microsoft was,
so one day I removed his XP Professional workstation and replaced it with an Ubuntu machine, he lasted abut 6 hours before he came back complaining that he could not do his job because of this and that, my reply was "be careful what you wish for".

I did swap back his XP Machine as his line manager was twisting his face that the guy was not doing any work for best part of the day. Lesson learned.
Why people hate Microsoft so much I just cant understand, I have get great results from both systems - a good hybrid that works well together.
However until the open source martyrs get their finger out and start coding in a way that is truly cross-platform and stop banging on about their "perfect" equilibrium, we will still have these issues to deal with.

Can you explain to me exactly how cross platform Microsoft's XP\Vista software is? does it for example work on a Mac? or do you need an emulator?, does it work with Linux? And what exactly do you mean by "this n that" regarding your colleagues issues with Ubuntu?

Are you saying that Microsoft products were incompatible? I.E was he unable to perform administrative tasks on a Microsoft server using Ubuntu?

With OS you always have the option of building their code on your own system, regardless of what platform you are using; Unlike Microsoft, where you simply do not have such an option, as the Microsoft Martyrs refrain from including the Source code. Maybe because its hard coded to a single 80x86 Platform? To me, that doesn't sound even remotely cross platform.

I cannot comment on having "perfect" equilibrium, but those in open source have gotten a lot more of their "finger out" with cross-platform than Microsoft have ever done.

sk3

PROLIANT wrote: »

as for cross-platform support well I work with both Microsoft and Linux operating systems on a daily basis and Microsoft is the chosen tool to do the job...one day I removed his XP Professional workstation and replaced it with an Ubuntu machine, he lasted abut 6 hours before he came back complaining that he could not do his job because of this and that, my reply was "be careful what you wish for".

So if, in a linux computing environment, I switched just one of the computers to windows, it would somehow magically work well? And instead of addressing his issues (which you conviently don't elaborate on here), you basically tell him to get stuffed?

Why people hate Microsoft so much I just cant understand

The rip off cost, the bugs, forcing their expensive proprietary software and systems onto people, forcing people to pay upgrade costs. MS has engaged in monopolisation (link) of software, practising vendor lock-in and coercing companies to comply. They've been at it so fiercely that several major courts in the US and Europe have fined them for billions of dollars. They've hindered the growth of free open source software in developing countries and elsewhere. There are also the strict DRM and software/hardware restrictions they place on users. Some legitimate users were not able to use their operating systems, MS's response was that they should simply buy new copies.

I have get great results from both systems

Well, as long as you're happy, no one else matters, right?

However until the open source martyrs get their finger out and start coding in a way that is truly cross-platform

How can you blame open source developers for being locked out of proprietary systems? It's like blaming someone for not using a car, when you've taken away the keys. MS has been proven to be guilty of screwing over other companies and developers, do you blame victims for what criminals do to them too?

Btw, I'm a xbox gamer and a keen halo fanatic.

sk3

PROLIANT wrote: »

Linux type software like PHP

What on Earth are you talking about, do you even know what linux is? It's an operating system, like osx or vista. PHP is a programming language, like perl or python. You are very critical of something you don't seem to understand.

Well, having worked in software development and still have my fingers in many C# pies...the problem we have is Linux type software like PHP which does not blend well with Microsoft.NET technologies

Right, so your problem is that your coding experience is with MS software and that's why you hate php and linux? That's like someone buying £1000 of sainsburys shopping vouchers and complaining because they can't use them at tescos.

One day the two technologies with work well together

Not if MS has any say in the matter. In one leaked email, a senior MS executive described their business relationship with open source software as a "jihad."

sk3

PROLIANT wrote: »

Most defiantly intentional, the goal to enforce uniformity globally, a standard and if these third-party developers worked to standards instead of trying to be different because they have issues with Microsoft then we would most certainly be there by now.

Yes, it should be illegal to have a choice. If people want to use computers, it should be exactly as MS allows them to. We should also have to phone up Steve Ballmer (all hail) to personally ask him for his permission to use the toilet.

There are/were standards developed together with many companies, odf, xml for example. MS stood in the way of the development of these and other standards. They don't want a standard which allows competition. In other words, they abuse their monopoly to force software developers and users to pay them alone and no one else. Imagine if ford tried to sabotage the use of cars made by other companies, they'd quickly get condemned and rightly so.

sk3

PROLIANT wrote: »

It is not a monopoly as IE is free

Courts have ruled that this is a lie. Part of the money you pay for a MS operating system goes towards developing and funding internet explorer. You can not use internet explorer properly without a MS operating system, which costs money. It's the same way that "free" mobile phones aren't exactly "free." They're only free if you sign a costly contract.

Java applications will not function without Sun Microsystems Java Run-Time framework; does that mean Sun have a monopoly?

Java is platform independent, free (truly free and not fake free) and open source. That's why so many platforms like windows, linux, macs, mobiles, electronic gadgets, etc. all use java. Sun produces a good framework for using it, others are free to develop their own frameworks though, I guess few bother to.

Old people sometimes stand in the way of development and change because they're too used to the old ways and don't want to learn new things. But the progress of software technology will not be hindered easily.

aliEnRIK

sk3 wrote: »

Not if MS has any say in the matter. In one leaked email, a senior MS executive described their business relationship with open source software as a "jihad."

Thats the main reason I hate Microsoft. They say something to your face, and secretly lie to you behind your back..........

[Deleted User]

sk3 wrote: »

How can you blame open source developers for being locked out of proprietary systems? It's like blaming someone for not using a car, when you've taken away the keys. MS has been proven to be guilty of screwing over other companies and developers, do you blame victims for what criminals do to them too?

Regardless of the rest of the discussion that I can't be bothered to get involved in because it's circular and repetitive, but how exactly are open source developers prevented from developing software on the Windows platform?