Anyone else think that IE8 is crap

PROLIANT

Very good Marley Boy.

marleyboy

PROLIANT wrote: »

Erm, no. Like to see Firefox run IIS technologies without flopping on it's @rse. Fail

Java script is a run-time component instantiated within the script - talk to Sun Microsystems.

Such as life

Explain, can you enumerate recent exploits that have caused problems, because I certainly have not encountered any.

Not many left to pick from, look at the end of the day it boils down to what you use in your browser, Firefox is ok for something that cost's nowt, Internet Explorer has had problems in the past and will continue to develop bug's which is why Microsoft have the cream of software Engineers working on the project, Firefox falls on it's @rse when it encounters allot of Microsoft technologies for example Active-X components and server-side pages.

Having had IE 7 & 8 beta installed and uninstalled due to its major security flaws, its numerous errors, AND its instability, I can safely say my Firefox has never once failed me whereas IE was so bad I had no choice BUT to uninstall it.

MS as you admit, will continue to develop bugs, meaning we have to wait for yet another one of MS patches to fix the endless array of bugs and will continue to do so, which is why MS NEED the cream of softweare engineers to work on it, seem as they are too eager to send such software out, without first ironing out the bugs.

Something I can safely say I have never ONCE endured with Firefox, which is flawless with my Active X.

Id like to see for example WMP files run in my MP4 player, rather than me having to convert it (because of MS limiting such files to its own format.) something MS will NEVER do. I have two players as a result of the CRAPINESS of MS, I have an MP5 player that automatically converts files form AVI,Divx,Mpeg, FLV to play in its format, where as my Gogear, will only allow streaming and downloading onto its appliance using WIndows Media Player.

Something they omitted to mention in the manuals when buying them.

Its the very reason they have now produced WINDOWS 7, after flooding the market with its (not fully functioning Vista), that doesn't work with half of hardware from Printers, to Sound cards (NIL support for Soundblaster).

So what do MS do about it? invent Windows7, give us all a trial run of it, then say "there you go, buy this one", does this mean we can all get a refund for the useless VISTA pack, (which has had endless incompatibility issues with every business and company who used it).......I think not, its a case of give it a year and buy the next product we have produced, we can then go around issuing patches or fixes for that, until its 2 year shelf life has ran out, and we INSIST you buy our newer product.

[Deleted User]

marleyboy wrote: »

Its the very reason they have now produced WINDOWS 7, after flooding the market with its (not fully functioning Vista), that doesn't work with half of hardware from Printers, to Sound cards (NIL support for Soundblaster).

It's a shame that Creative don't have the technical ability to satisfy their customers when Azuntech (who use the same X-Fi chip) have had fully functioning suites for Vista from a very early point. Hardly the crime of Microsoft.

So what do MS do about it? invent Windows7, give us all a trial run of it, then say "there you go, buy this one", does this mean we can all get a refund for the useless VISTA pack, (which has had endless incompatibility issues with every business and company who used it).......I think not, its a case of give it a year and buy the next product we have produced, we can then go around issuing patches or fixes for that, until its 2 year shelf life has ran out, and we INSIST you buy our newer product.

Vista works fine. Nobody is forcing you to part with your cash, it's your own choice whether you want to buy the next edition of Windows.

marleyboy

Vista has proven to be incompatable with the majority of hardware in companies, I am not just talking my business, I know many who suffer as a result of Vista, from Plotters, to Scanners, many companies wont use it as a result, its the very reason MS have created Windows 7, to help fix its incompatibility issue.

[Deleted User]

marleyboy wrote: »

Vista has proven to be incompatable with the majority of hardware in companies, I am not just talking my business, I know many who suffer as a result of Vista, from Plotters, to Scanners, many companies wont use it as a result, its the very reason MS have created Windows 7, to help fix its incompatibility issue.

By whom?

The driver model in 7 has hardly changed from Vista, which is why a large proportion of hardware will function by using Vista drivers in compatibility mode, so if your hardware isn't supported under Vista it's highly unlikely it will function under 7 unless the manufacturer releases drivers to do so.

chunter

DatabaseError wrote: »

I must admint to using IEtab in ffox for those especially badly written sites..

Nice. Designed in Word or Publisher? Frontpage?
Shouldn't someone tell them?

marleyboy

anewhope wrote: »

By whom?

The driver model in 7 has hardly changed from Vista, which is why a large proportion of hardware will function by using Vista drivers in compatibility mode, so if your hardware isn't supported under Vista it's highly unlikely it will function under 7 unless the manufacturer releases drivers to do so.

By My company for a start, then there's the glass making company my brother works for, or the plastics factory My friend works for, whos whole machinery, relies on an a Windows system to run it. All of which couldnt work with Vista, so had no choice but to revert (that advice being given to them from a MS Technician), IT in general, within the business trade are all struggling to use Vista with their existing (perfectly working) hardware,

The reason? Vista doesn't have the drivers compatible for the hardware, from Printers to servers. And I am talking the vast majority of small, local businesses.

Sure each company could upgrade all their expensive hardware to make it more compatible with Vista, but why should they, when they have spent thousands of pounds on licensing with Microsoft for the existing XP they had to upgrade to a few years prior?

And your right, upgrading to 7 might still not work for them, but who's fault is that? The companies for relying on existing "licensed" software to run the machinery and\or hardware successfully, Or the "licensed" Software the Company in question, whom pays thousands of pounds a year to ensure its regularly updated, yet no longer has the capability of supporting such hardware?

[Deleted User]

marleyboy wrote: »

By My company for a start, then there's the glass making company my brother works for, or the plastics factory My friend works for

That's hardly a broad enough cross section to quantify it as a proven fact. It's no great surprise to hear of a manufacturing company running aging hardware.

Whos whole machinery, relies on an a Windows system to run it. All of which couldnt work with Vista, so had no choice but to revert (that advice being given to them from a MS Technician),

Revert? Did they upgrade then discover nothing worked and had to get a technician in to resolve the matter? To me, that isn't a sound foundation to base your point on. Anyone could tell you that if your hardware isn't supported then you shouldn't upgrade.

IT in general, within the business trade are all struggling to use Vista with their existing (perfectly working) hardware,

Generalisation. Our sites run a mix of XP and Vista, we've had no teething problems and no hardware had to be replaced to facilitate this.

The reason? Vista doesn't have the drivers compatible for the hardware, from Printers to servers. And I am talking the vast majority of small, local businesses.

If their old printers haven't been supported by the manufacturer then it would not be wrong to assume their workstations are dated and would not meet the requirements to run Vista. Technology, quite rightly, should not move at the pace of the slowest adopters. Is 7 going to be plagued by people annoyed that their now even older hardware won't function on it?

Sure each company could upgrade all their expensive hardware to make it more compatible with Vista, but why should they, when they have spent thousands of pounds on licensing with Microsoft for the existing XP they had to upgrade to a few years prior?

If something is working fine within the business it's often best to leave things as they are until there is a requirement to upgrade. Downtime costs the business money.

And your right, upgrading to 7 might still not work for them, but who's fault is that? The companies for relying on existing "licensed" software to run the machinery and\or hardware successfully, Or the "licensed" Software the Company in question, whom pays thousands of pounds a year to ensure its regularly updated, yet no longer has the capability of supporting such hardware?

It's not the responsibility of Microsoft to make third party hardware work when the manufacturer has made the decision to end support for their hardware. I guess by this point your hardware will have been depreciated to the point it can no longer be considered an asset on the balance sheet, which is usually when things get replaced.

marleyboy

It is Microsoft's responsibility to keep existing hardware "adaptable" for a company who has paid a licence to ensure the existing software controls it, as smoothly as its predecessor.

That's why we pay for a licence, Many people will be annoyed that their existing software no longer supports particular hardware, however "updated" the software is.

The fact that many companies are struggling with updated software to run their existing hardware and\or machinery I think IS the responcibility of the licence paid on their EXISTING currently working software.

Some manufacturers still rely on Windows 3.1 to run some machines as effectively as they always did, (I am talknig industrial machinery here), whats the chances of Vista effectively running those?, XP couldn't.

Imagine for example a new HD television unable to support the Standard DVD or Digital channels. Would that be acceptable?

As Computers are now sold with Vista "as standard", as with Windows 1, there will come a time when MS no longer supports the products like ME, 2000 or XP, with security updates or SP packs,. Meaning the chances of a company relying on "existing" software to be supported by MS, and I mean existing MS software, a little more "shaky", pushing a company into upgrading both the software and the hardware, on an industrial scale that can be very expensive and time consuming.

If your company is paying a licence anually, and per computer for the use of a software product, it at the very least, should remain capable of continually doing the job and yet supporting updates and Security Patches for the product. Not push a company into having to upgrade the Software, in order to have continued support, nor accuse them of being "outdated"

PROLIANT

Morning, see this pointless debate is still going round in circles?