We’ve been Scoblized


The information published in this post is now out-of-date.

—IEBlog Editor, 20 August 2012

Great to get a link from Mr Scoble on the IEBlog. For people who are interested in applying for employment at Microsoft here’s a link.  There is also the jobsblog, which talks about the different possible career paths at Microsoft. 

The IE team is a great place to work with lots of smart friendly people.  

 

Scott

Comments (125)

  1. Anonymous says:

    Nice to see more and more links to IEBlog across the blogosphere…

    Quick question – maybe to solicit a new post (!!):

    Given the plethora of other browsers "on the market" what features would you highlight in IE that you think puts it above the competitors?

    (context) I was trying to imagine what IE would be like if it was not integrated into the OS but an "out of the box" product that had to compete with others. As a rabid capitalist I think we’d have seen an escalation of features mentioned previously (tabs, stricter standards compliance, native popup-blocking, etc).

    Discuss….

    -f-

  2. Anonymous says:

    You know, i’m glad that you’re doing this. Maybe now you will begin to understand the frustration that is designing websites for IE. Security aside, it’s just embarassing that your browser is the only one left that’s truly broken. I hope you seriously take these considerations to heart and really work to improve your standards compliance. Security is a whole different thing, which I see as more a fault of the Operating System that most people run, rather than the broswer. Your job should be to make your browser the most compliant and accessable web browsing experience out there. Right now, you are failing. You’re sitting in the back of the class eating paste. I’m not one of those people who just ‘hates microsoft’ either. For example, I own an xbox because it is, quite simply, the best gaming experience out there. There’s no reason why I shouldn’t be able to say the same thing about IE. As it stands I have moved all my friends and loved ones over to Firefox. Not because i blindly hate you, but because your lack of conern for my overall internet experience is unacceptable. from CSS to popups to security, you guys have dropped the ball. Hopefully one of you will actually read this, and maybe it will make a difference.

    Your first priority should be to fix CSS. I really think that if you took a focused, intense approach to fixing this one problem completely, people would start to regain a little faith in you. just do it step by step. build our confidence a piece at a time. please.

  3. Anonymous says:

    Err, if I want to comment on this while I’m using Opera (I’m always using Opera, if I’m not using Firefox ;)), the Title, Name and Url-input-boxes are VERY small, they can’t contain 1 character, so you have to type blind. The Comment-input-box can handle a few characters…

  4. Anonymous says:

    How about providing browser stats for this site? :)

  5. Anonymous says:

    *FOR EVERYBODY HAVING TROUBLE POSTING WITH OPERA*

    Create a file called whatever.css with the following contents:

    input[type=text] { width: auto; }

    Go to File | Preferences | Page Style.

    Pick the file you just created as "my style sheet".

    Click on "configure modes".

    Tick "My style sheet" under the Author heading on the left.

    Your input boxes should now be an acceptable size.

    *FOR WHOEVER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CSS ON THIS WEBSITE*

    Is there any specific reason you set an explicit width on the input elements? If not, just get rid of it.

    If there is, but you don’t mind only Internet Explorer users getting the explicit width suggestion, change the code:

    input.text {

    width : 300px;

    }

    …to read:

    * html input.text {

    width : 300px;

    }

    …in http://blogs.msdn.com/skins/AnotherEon001/style.css

  6. Anonymous says:

    Another Scoble link referred to some Microsoft Research at http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=14275 showing a rather nifty way of viewing photos with quick zooming and selection. Perhaps you could consider adding this kind of feature for exploring web-browsing history in a future version of IE (maybe a bar under the address bar showing mini-thumbnails of the browsing history with zoomed in versions)? Now that would be cool.

  7. Anonymous says:

    "Perhaps you could consider adding this kind of feature for exploring web-browsing history in a future version of IE…."

    Blaaaah!!! Why? Why? Why? They’ve got a million other things to do FIRST!!!

    Don’t give them an excuse to hold off on updates until 2027.

  8. Anonymous says:

    Yeah, like making Windows work properly or something πŸ˜‰

  9. Anonymous says:

    Hi

    It is very interesting weblog, but it is hard to read it in blue.

    I read it in aggregator.

    You just use

    <FONT face=Arial color=#000080 size=2>

    May be it is better to use css instead, so we would see the text as is.

    thanks

  10. Anonymous says:

    Yeah, maybe it would be REASSURING to users if a single Microsoft site or blog was written with some half-decent code… Maybe… just a thought.

  11. Anonymous says:

    Perhaps I should apply… since it seems the folk that put up this page are having difficulty writing <a href="http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=http%3A//blogs.msdn.com/ie/">proper code</a>.

    If it was full of ampersand errors I might have let it slide, but the first three errors are basic tags errors.

    Shoddy job. Unfortunatley typical of Redmond’s products.

  12. Anonymous says:

    Geeze, no you’re trying to corrupt my code too…

    that last URL should point here: http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=http%3A//blogs.msdn.com/ie/

  13. Anonymous says:

    As much as I’d like to take responsibility for this site, how it validates, etc., please refer issues about the site to http://scottwater.com/Blog/about/contact.aspx.

  14. Anonymous says:

    You really could do with Dave Hyatt on the IE team … really.

  15. Anonymous says:

    Dean: Come on. So you didn’t code .text (or whatever it is). Clearly, the IE team chose it as a platform, and in doing so should have realized that it’s crappy code.

    I hate to say this, but microsoft and IE’s blatant disregard for simple standards compliance leads me to believe that any future improvement will not consider their importance.

    A missing > on the end of a </ul> tells me that Scott didn’t even bother to visit the validator. The fact that you incorporated his code into a blog with your name on it tells me you didn’t make the visit either.

    Validation is simply not on your agenda, I’m afraid. With a new XHTML spec now out, and more and more browsers reclaiming the market share you stole from Netscape, IE will becaome less and less of a problem frankly.

    IE 4 destroyed NN4 because it was simply a better product. Don’t think that the same can’t happen to you simply because you’re imbedded in Windows. Knowledgable users are already switching. My entire IT department is now on firefox – and we’re a windows shop.

    If you don’t make IE render valid code properly ASAP, you will continue to lose your audience. It won’t be coming back. Ask Netscape.

    When longhorn finally comes out, IE 6 will be 6 years old… how many of us do you think will be bothering to support it’s quirks?

  16. Anonymous says:

    "As much as I’d like to take responsibility for this site, how it validates, etc., please refer issues about the site to http://scottwater.com/Blog/about/contact.aspx.&quot;

    Why? Why not use a REAL blog tool instead of the same crappy one used on 90% of the crappy Microsoft blogs jsut because some MS employee tried to cobble together a crappy blog system.

    Use a real one and we won’t have to complain. This blog is setup so we can complain to you. Don’t start directing us to other sites to make other complaints. This is your blog. Just because you work for MS doesn’t mean you have to eat your own shit. (Scoble uses Radio.)

    You chose to use Scott’s crappy blog tool so I will hold you responsible for that.

  17. Anonymous says:

    "I also get the general sense that people want more ‘content.’"

    And then you post a story about getting linked to — that’s not content!

    By the way I think I could be on topic, respectful, fun AND profane. Would you still axe my post Mr Facist Censor Man?

  18. Anonymous says:

    "As much as I’d like to take responsibility for this site, how it validates, etc., please refer issues about the site to http://scottwater.com/Blog/about/contact.aspx.&quot;

    Dean, let’s contextualize your statement again for fun.

    I made the decision to use IE at our company. We were hcked because of the numerous exploits in IE. My boss, the CEO, and others came to me complaining. I told them: "Hey, don’t complain to me! It’s not my problem. Microsoft built it. Complain to them."

  19. Anonymous says:

    Dean, I admire your patience with these idiots even though I don’t see the point of communicating with various kids and malicious net thugs like Jesus Christ guy. I would definitely ban Jesus Christ without a single thought. The guy would complain to you and continue to be a noise no matter what.

    Jesus Christ, just shut up and go away. You are being ignored anyway, you are making an ass out of yourself. Take your friends, Jim and others with you.

    People should complain to Opera developers. If you chose a browser that doesn’t support standards, that’s your problem. This page renders perfect in Firefox. Opera should not be supported and should die as soon as possible. I definitely direct Opera users to Firefox and IE. First install a decent browser.

  20. Anonymous says:

    "People should complain to Opera developers. If you chose a browser that doesn’t support standards, that’s your problem. This page renders perfect in Firefox. Opera should not be supported and should die as soon as possible. I definitely direct Opera users to Firefox and IE. First install a decent browser."

    Alex, you are the idiot here. These guys are claiming they want to support standards. How can that be if they don’t want to write standardized web code?

  21. Anonymous says:

    "Jesus Christ" called me an idiot. Oh my god! How dare you. πŸ˜‰ Jesus Christ, you are relevant as much as Jim is relevant. First show some respect, then prove that you know what you are talking about, then call me an idiot, then that might mean something. But right now, you are just a joke, nothing much.

    They write perfect code, it is your opera browser that doesn’t show it properly. I view this site on firefox now, where is the problem? It is a perfect site to me. Just go and download IE or Firefox and quit being like Jim and his slashdotter friends. Web developers do not support Opera, its market share is almost nothing. Opera, as a company is also full of idiots. Opera has been news on slashdot several times. They can’t render MSN properly and yet shamelessly complain about Microsoft, and many other idiots believe them. This blogs is perfectly standards complaint, stop lying like Jim.

  22. Anonymous says:

    > This blogs is perfectly standards complaint, stop lying like Jim.

    http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fblogs.msdn.com%2Fie%2F

    I guess the W3C are liars too now?

  23. Anonymous says:

    Jim: You are saying that Firefox is not standard complaint browser, because it is perfect on Firefox.

    Also the validator is just an attempt to implement the spec, it is not the spec itself. Remember that next time you lie. If you don’t valiate against that implementation, it doesn’t mean you are non-stanard. If you do validate, it also doesn’t mean you are standard complaint.

    Here is how W3C says that Jim is a liar (once again)

    "For that reason, the fact that the W3C Markup Validator says that one page passes validation does not mean that W3C assesses that it is a good page. It only means that a tool (not necessarily without flaws) has found the page to comply with a specific set of rules. No more, no less. This is also why the "valid …" icons should never be considered as a "W3C seal of quality"."

    Again Jim, you are as relevant as Jesus_Christ, no wonder why you have approved Jesus_Christ’s swears.

  24. Anonymous says:

    You are using faulty logic to infer statements about Firefox that I have not made, and attributing them to me.

    You are misrepresenting the W3C by implying what they say about quality is actually talking about validity. They explicitly state that the page is invalid.

    You are misrepresenting me again when you state that I approve of Jesus_Christ’s swearing. This is a deliberate lie as I have pointed out to you a number of times that I do not approve of Jesus_Christ’s swearing.

    This weblog is not "perfectly standards compliant". What you say is obviously not the truth. Anybody can verify this by using a validator or reading the specifications. The code is available for all to see, the specifications are available for all to see. They don’t match up. You claim the code is "perfectly standards compliant". That is not the truth.

    Now, did you have anything to add to the discussion about the attention this weblog is getting?

  25. Anonymous says:

    You called me an ass first, idiot.

  26. Anonymous says:

    And I’m not using Opera. Why are you assuming such moronic stuff?

  27. Anonymous says:

    " You are using faulty logic to infer statements about Firefox that I have not made, and attributing them to me. "

    No you say that only W3C’s validator implementation determines whether it is standard complaint or not, and Firefox disagrees with you and you are clearly implying that Firefox is not standard complaint because it doesn’t complain like the W3C’s implementation does.

    W3C doesn’t misrepresent itself. The paragraph I quoted is from their FAQ. You have the same exact Jesus_Christ logic here, you almost claim that W3C doesn’t know what it is talking about. Very funny actually.

    "You are misrepresenting me again when you state that I approve of Jesus_Christ’s swearing."

    No you said you don’t find them offensive.

    "Anybody can verify this by using a validator or reading the specifications."

    As W3C says, validation is just a guideline nothing more nothing less. You are the one who disagrees with W3C here.

    "That is not the truth."

    Tell this to Mozilla developers and W3C guys. They say that you are a liar, not me. You don’t have any expertise to determine whether W3C’s validator fully conforms with the specs. W3C says that it is not, and it specifically says it has its own flaws.

    This is just like your claim that JScript is different from Javascript because they have different names, and that IE is not compatible with JavaScript even though every book says it is.

    I don’t know when you will concede that you have lied so far intentionally, but I am hopeful you will concede to that too at one point. Afterall you have conceded that you were wrong numerous times. :)

  28. Anonymous says:

    run4yourlives.com &raquo; Validation: Important Only to Some

  29. Anonymous says:

    I read on some mozilla.org page that document.all, while it’s not going to support document.get.elementbyID, was going into the Gecko DOM someday. I’ll let you smart people figure out why this is! :>

    BTW Alex you are talking in circles in a lot of that last post and I think you know it. :/

    <not a web designer hat on!>

  30. Anonymous says:

    > No you say that only W3C’s validator implementation determines whether it is standard complaint or not

    I have not said that. What you say is untrue.

    > and Firefox disagrees with you

    Firefox does not claim the weblog adheres to the standards, so what you say is untrue.

    > you are clearly implying that Firefox is not standard complaint because it doesn’t complain like the W3C’s implementation does.

    This is faulty logic, a browser can do what it likes with documents that don’t adhere to the specifications whilst remaining a conformant user-agent. The HTML 4.0 specification says so. What you say is untrue.

    > W3C doesn’t misrepresent itself.

    I never said it did. I said that you are misrepresenting the W3C by inferring that their statement about quality is actually talking about standards compliance. What you say is untrue.

    >> "You are misrepresenting me again when you state that I approve of Jesus_Christ’s swearing."

    >No you said you don’t find them offensive.

    Once more, you are lying when you say that I approve of Jesus_Christ’s swearing. I have never said that I don’t find Jesus_Christ’s swearing offensive. What you say is untrue.

    > As W3C says, validation is just a guideline nothing more nothing less. You are the one who disagrees with W3C here.

    I do not. You claimed that this weblog was "perfectly standards compliant". The W3C validator says that the code is invalid. I agree with the W3C. What you say is untrue.

    > Tell this to Mozilla developers and W3C guys. They say that you are a liar, not me.

    The Mozilla developers and W3C guys have never called me a liar. What you say is untrue.

    > You don’t have any expertise to determine whether W3C’s validator fully conforms with the specs.

    Since it is widely used to determine whether documents adhere to the specifications, and you can compare its output to the HTML 4.0 specification, the burden of proof is upon you to show that it is faulty.

    > W3C says that it is not, and it specifically says it has its own flaws.

    The output from the validator corresponds with the HTML 4.0 specification. Anybody can read it and compare it to the code on this weblog and determine that you are not telling the truth when you claim that it is "perfectly standards compliant".

    > I don’t know when you will concede that you have lied so far intentionally

    I think it is you who has problems with the truth.

    Once more, do you have anything to add to the discussion about the attention this weblog is getting? Or are you trying to prolong offtopic arguments without making any sense whatsoever?

  31. Anonymous says:

    Another nice idea about IE is its internet options dialog. It is small, especially in my screen. There are so many tabs, buttons, a little confusing. Another problem is you can’t resize it, so it is very hard to find out scroll through options in Advanced tab. I think the new security center in XP SP2 is much more usable.

    "BTW Alex you are talking in circles in a lot of that last post and I think you know it. :/"

    You know JP not everybody is so smart, so I am just trying my best to explain to Jim (and you), because even some intentionally lie, some slashdotters are actually very stupid. It is hard to believe, and you may never realize it, that’s part of the arrogance problem with you guys. Sorry to destroy your dreams, but that’s the way it is. Instead of cheerleading for Jesus_Christ and Jim, why don’t you learn why Jim and Jesus_Christ are lying or talking nonesense, read some books and design your own web sites, have some experience, go to college if you didn’t go yet, improve yourself both technically and mentally. Otherwise you will always be a follower, chasing after FUDs produced by Jesus_Christ, Jim and so on. You will be always their cheerleader and irrelevant to the real issues. Don’t you have some dignity for yourself?

    Jim:

    "What you say is untrue."

    Is that all you can say? I rest my case once again. :)

    "Or are you trying to prolong offtopic arguments without making any sense whatsoever? "

    Stop right there Jim, you are the one who prolong your lie. W3C doesn’t say this blog is non-standard. It was you and your lovely friend Jesus_Christ. Don’t try to spread your FUD professionally, and then claim to be right. All you said is it is not true, even you deny what W3C says in its FAQ. Anybody can go and read the W3C’s faq.

    Jim, you have retracted your claims numerous times yet you contunied to prolong your lies. Just stop right there instead of accusing IE team with your stupid claims. Every time you lie, you end up conceding, isn’t that a little bit shameless for you? Don’t you have any shame feeling? Wait, of course if you find "suck my dick" not so offensive, probably you don’t. Oh well, what can you do about a slashdot net thug having such low quality moral values. :)

  32. Anonymous says:

    >>"What you say is untrue."

    >Is that all you can say?

    It is all that is relevent.

  33. Anonymous says:

    The headline suggests that this blog was agoing concern and then in some sense discovered by Scoble.

    A look at the blog indices shows that Scoble was basically the firast blog to post a link to this site. See, eg. http://www.popdex.com/c/1065907656 and http://blogdex.net/track.asp?url=http%3A%2F%2Fblogs.msdn.com%2Fie%2F (the earliest link (9:10, jul 22) credits Scoble), also http://www.daypop.com/search?q=http%3A%2F%2Fblogs.msdn.com%2Fie&s=21&c=10&t=a&ext=true and http://www.technorati.com/cosmos/search.html?rank=&url=http%3A%2F%2Fblogs.msdn.com%2Fie%2F&start=141

    What happened was this. When the IE Blog was launched, a note was sent to a few Microsoft properties or affililiates announcing it, and they basically linked right away, as you would expect a property or affiliate to do.

    How do I know this happened? Well, if there were no links to IE Blog prior to Scoble’s post, how did he know the blog existed? Someone told him – most likely by email.

    So why the fuss – what any fuss at all – about being Scoblized? The announcement in Scoble was basically part of the IE Bl;og’s launch strategy. What would have been surprising would have been had he *not* linked to the IE Blog.

    See (and it appears that I always have to explain this to people from Microsoft), this is deception. When you say (or imply) that one thing happened, and in reality, something else happened, then you are not being honest with us.

    One thing you will learn very quickly in the blogosphere is that dishonesty is death. You will always be found out. And marketing – such as this – really stands out.

    Next time you boast about a link, make sure it’s from someone who doesn’t actually work for the company.

  34. Anonymous says:

    Jim: "It is all that is relevent. "

    Very well said, that’s how relevant you are.

    Stephen, what are you talking about? The only thing I understood is that you are just barking like a dog or a slashdotter? What are you saying exactly and how it is a deception? You make sense as much as Jim makes sense. Scoble links to various IE efforts continously, only a liar like you will come and spread his FUD and bark like a dog. All you proved is that you are an idiot slashdotter. Now go near Jim and Jesus_Christ and your other friends.

  35. Anonymous says:

    Alex Almeroth, are you a troll or do you don’t want to understand what the W3C HTML and CSS validator do?

    The validator checks the HTML code and presents you the errors in the code (and this blog has a lot of errors). If you get any error, then your page is *not* valid HTML, but if your page is valid, than this does not mean, that the website is automaticly "high quality". Is http://validator.w3.org/docs/help.html#validandquality really so hard to understand for you?

    –Thomas

  36. Anonymous says:

    Well,

    I can’t believe that a forum where people are supposed to be suggesting ideas and thoughts that provide insight to help better a product is continuing on like this.

    It is obvious that there are some intelligent people posting here but their arrogance/ignorance keeps getting in the way.

    I would like to add something to this discussion.

    IE is not perfect but neither are any of the others. No OS is perfect. The amount of time to construct one of these monstrosities is incredible.

    What is incredible is that Microsoft (the large Organizational oranism it is) has allowed this blog to be created and let the developers discuss what they do with the general pubic.

    So, in respect to the general public, i find the ‘you said/he said’ ramblings useless and annoying. Make your point, be considerate (not just to the developers but the rest of us) and move on. Stop wasting their time and ours.

    Be thankful that we have the browser we do. Do any of you remember having to pay for JUST the browser. Like I did in the early 90’s with ‘Internet in a box’ which I believe was from Mosaic.

    If you are having security problems maybe you should look at your own surfing habits. Or, look at the developers of some of the problem web pages. It might not be the problem with the browser but the developer him/her self.

    Apart from that my biggest problem with IE is the lack of support for blocking pop-ups.

    Thank you,

    Rob

  37. Anonymous says:

    Thomas, I quoted that faq before you did, but looks like you are most probably another net thug trolling on the net.

    W3C validator doesn’t mean anything for standards. It is a volunteer project, its results suck, it has its own flaws. These are accepted even by zealots like you. The spec is there, your implementation may vary. The validator doesn’t validate so many standards complaint browsers, it is no where a quality assurance.

    Thomas W3C shouts at your face in that faq:

    "This is also why the "valid …" icons should never be considered as a "W3C seal of quality"."

    You are not writing to the validator’s implementation of the spec, you should write for the spec. Don’t be lazy and go and read the spec. Validator is a specific implementation and interpretation of the spec. If you are not complaint with the browser you may still pass the validator. So keep that in mind, there are sites which validates fine but in fact non-standard complaint. I don’t see why you don’t accept W3C’s own admission. I am of course passing your stupid logic that W3C is able to come up with enough resources to implement the spec fully and write an excellent validator. That’s why we have huge number of browser developers, if it was that easy to implement the spec we wouldn’t have so many different browsers with so many different ways of interpreting the code. Of course, for simple minded people it is a good way of saying that their site is standard complaint if only they validate, it is not a bad thing, but claiming that because this simple validator validates your code you are standard complaint is at best absurd if not stupid. That’s where we can differentiate profesionals and ametours, beacuse you probably get the idea that validators are the only way to be standard complaint from alistapart and you thought you all figured it out. They are only a useful tool, not a quality assurance thing. Before going into web design business maybe you should better read the spec and understand it, instead of relying on the buggy validator as a way of saying you are standard complaint.

  38. Anonymous says:

    Someone for the love of god ban Alex! He ruins everything, he doesn’t help Microsoft he just makes them look bad, what a zealot.

  39. Anonymous says:

    Hello Rob,

    > IE is not perfect but neither are any of the others.

    Yes, this is right, but there is a huge difference between "totaly broken" and "has some small bugs".

    > Be thankful that we have the browser we do.

    No, the people who have to create websites will not be thankful for the Internet Explorer. This browser is wasting our time and money because of the lack of standards compliance. Microsoft knows the problems for years and is not able (or don’t want) to solve them. This is the reason, why the people’s comments are so angry in this blog. As an user, you will not care about all these standard compliance things, but for web developer, the Internet Explorer is just a nightmare (like Netscape 4 a couple of years ago).

    > Do any of you remember having to pay for JUST the

    > browser.

    Yes, but you still pay for the Internet Explorer, when you buy a copy of Windows. And please remember, that Microsoft only gave the IE for free, because they wanted to destroy Netscape.

    > If you are having security problems maybe you should

    > look at your own surfing habits.

    Sorry, but this argument is really stupid. Other companies and projects are able to produce secure browser, why is Microsoft not able to do this?

    > Or, look at the developers of some of the problem

    > web pages. It might not be the problem with the

    > browser but the developer him/her self.

    Hey, we are talking about security problems and you would ascpect, that the author of the website *wants* to execute some malicous code through your Internet Explorer.

    > Apart from that my biggest problem with IE

    > is the lack of support for blocking pop-ups.

    Are you using Windows XP? SP2 will include a popup blocker.

    –Thomas

  40. Anonymous says:

    "Thomas, I quoted that faq before you did, but looks like you are most probably another net thug trolling on the net."

    So anyone who doesn’t agree with you Alex is a thug, zealot, idiot or an arse?

  41. Anonymous says:

    Ok Alex, you have proofed that you are a troll or really dumb. I will now do the same as everybody else here: just ignore you!

    –Thomas

  42. Anonymous says:

    Good thinking tomas… I’m going to use ‘alex’ as a curse word for the next few weeks to vent my anger.

  43. Anonymous says:

    "Ok Alex, you have proofed that you are a troll or really dumb. I will now do the same as everybody else here: just ignore you! "

    I disagree. An idiot calling me a troll doesn’t make me a troll. Check out your friends, Jesus_Christ, The Wolf, Jim and so on. Some people refer to you as zealots, some others idiots, some slashdotters, and some as net thugs. The commonality you have with Jesus_Christ who says "Suck my dick" is right there.

    "No, the people who have to create websites will not be thankful for the Internet Explorer."

    More than 90% of the web disagree with you. :)

    "This browser is wasting our time and money because of the lack of standards compliance."

    You don’t even read the spec, all you do is just validate your simple page. Besides, if you don’t like it, just close your site to IE visitors. People dictate you that you should better support their browsers, if you have no respect for your users you should go out of business anyway, but guess what you are not here because IE hurts you at all, you are simply disrespectful to the choice of web users. Either respect, or stop being a web designer. Period.

    "Microsoft knows the problems for years and is not able (or don’t want) to solve them."

    No, again, you have proven us to be one of the common liars and net thugs. Why should Microsoft take you seriously anyway if you disrespect them and users who choose Microsoft product. You are the one who creates problem, not Microsoft.

    "This is the reason, why the people’s comments are so angry in this blog."

    Check out Slashdot. Everybody there is also angry but who cares? Do you get it?

    "As an user, you will not care about all these standard compliance things, but for web developer, the Internet Explorer is just a nightmare (like Netscape 4 a couple of years ago). "

    I am a web developer, IE is one of the best browsers out there. It just works. Many people who bash IE is known to be anti-Microsoft bashers. Sure there are issues with IE and certainly they are addressing it, but that doesn’t mean people should take you seriously. On the net you can find enough number of idiots who will believe in whatever they read on the net.

    For example, proving that you are nothing more than a Microsoft basher:

    "Yes, but you still pay for the Internet Explorer, when you buy a copy of Windows. And please remember, that Microsoft only gave the IE for free, because they wanted to destroy Netscape"

    another proof

    "Sorry, but this argument is really stupid. Other companies and projects are able to produce secure browser, why is Microsoft not able to do this?"

    Thomas you are the one who is supposed to prove that you are not a typical slashdotter and so far you failed miserably. Your opposition support my argument that only Microsoft bashers are supporting your views, and it is definitely a good thing for public to know. You can go and bark at slashdot, that’s where stupidity belongs.

  44. Anonymous says:

    "More than 90% of the web disagree with you. :) "

    Uh, hate to tell you this but a lot less than 90% of the people on the net make websites… just think if they did though, everyone would hate you!

    "Check out your friends, Jesus_Christ, The Wolf, Jim and so on."

    Apart from the fact none of us know each other…

    "You don’t even read the spec, all you do is just validate your simple page. Besides, if you don’t like it, just close your site to IE visitors. People dictate you that you should better support their browsers, if you have no respect for your users you should go out of business anyway, but guess what you are not here because IE hurts you at all, you are simply disrespectful to the choice of web users. Either respect, or stop being a web designer. Period."

    What drugs have you been taking?

    "I am a web developer, IE is one of the best browsers out there. It just works. Many people who bash IE is known to be anti-Microsoft bashers. Sure there are issues with IE and certainly they are addressing it, but that doesn’t mean people should take you seriously. On the net you can find enough number of idiots who will believe in whatever they read on the net."

    Right, so why does that make IE a good browser? Many people who are know to bash IE are also known to bash you because you have no clue what you are talking about.

    "For example, proving that you are nothing more than a Microsoft basher:

    "Yes, but you still pay for the Internet Explorer, when you buy a copy of Windows. And please remember, that Microsoft only gave the IE for free, because they wanted to destroy Netscape"

    another proof

    "Sorry, but this argument is really stupid. Other companies and projects are able to produce secure browser, why is Microsoft not able to do this?" "

    Those are valid statements, why do you consider them bashes? Microsoft with all its money really should be able to do those things. And Microsoft really did destroy Netscape, but it made a better project so even if their motives where wrong, it gave a decent resault. Now we have Mozilla.org.

    Alex, grow the hell up or just go the hell away so we don’t have to put up with this moronic crap a moment longer.

  45. Anonymous says:

    reading through the comments would be more enjoyable if Alex didn’t exist.

    – from a person who’s only ever used xphome (aside from whatever ‘os’ the texas instrument’s 99 used, and about 4 hours on a mac)

  46. Anonymous says:

    Dear Scott and IEBlog team,

    My major problem I am having with IE is the attitude it stands for. You see, there was that innovative company Netscape making the web accessible. Then Microsoft moved in took over the market (which is fine with me, as you guys really made an effort).

    Having a nice market share of 90% and all of a sudden you stopped devoting resources. I mean it is not just happened yesterday that people started complaining about the lacking features expected of a modern browser (download manager, pop-up blocker, tabbed browsing, skin support, etc). Most of all having such a huge market share, you failed to recognise the responsibility you are having on making sure that this thing is well-secure.

    You, to me, showed a high level of dissappointing ignorance towards these problems. Now I see, that you are realising the threat from other browsers in terms of market share and all of a sudden Microsoft feels the need to do something about it. I think this is totally two-faced and morally wrong. You dissappointed me once and I won’t let that allow to happen again. Instead, I support those people who are committed to create the best browsing experience for me – not because of market share, but because that’s what they love to do.

    No matter what you are going to implement, you will always continue to play this kind of game I utterly do not appreciate. Therefore, I cannot and do not want to use IE. Naturally speaking I do not recommend IE to anybody, it’s rather the opposite.

    While I do believe your sincere intends Scott, your company and the perceived spirit it embodies is inappropriate and incompatible with me, making most of your undoubtably good software become a necessary evil :-( .

    Kind regards

    Soenke

  47. Anonymous says:

    "No matter what you are going to implement, you will always continue to play this kind of game I utterly do not appreciate. Therefore, I cannot and do not want to use IE. Naturally speaking I do not recommend IE to anybody, it’s rather the opposite."

    My thoughts exactly. I recommend anything _but_ ie. Mozilla Rocks!

    IE = bloated code = waste of everyone’s time

    how did I ever find myself here?

  48. Anonymous says:

    Hello Thomas,

    "Alex Almeroth, are you a troll or do you don’t want to understand what the W3C HTML and CSS validator do?"

    You are missing the point. This forum should not be the basis for name calling because someone on a dev team didn’t use standardized code or whatever the matter may be.

    As I said before; make your point, be considerate (not just to the developers but the rest of us) and move on. Stop wasting their time and ours.

    Thank you,

    Rob

  49. Anonymous says:

    Rob,

    The point is that complying with standards is what make web development easy. Breaking standards as IE does, makes it hard. The IE team is apparently unable to tell us that they will support standards due to internal politics, so whether they will or will not in future is in question.

    Since they aren’t complying with standarsds here it seem apparent that they don’t plan to support standards in future, though they can’t/won’t say that. And that’s the main reason so many folks here are pissed off.

  50. Anonymous says:

    Developers! Developers! Developers!

    Standards! Standards! Standards!

    Firefox! Firefox! Firefox!

    http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=http%3A//blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2004/07/23/193152.aspx

  51. Anonymous says:

    Why do I keep hearing about Firefox? We are talking about real browsers here, not some fiddleware created by hobbyists.

    No really, I sure hope that the current legislation wakes up and destroys the GPL. We do not need those hobbyists destroying our worldwide economy. Or – like Firefox – destroy the WWW which has been handled fine by Microsoft, thank you very much.

  52. Anonymous says:

    Hey Debran, are you a friend of that Alex guy? Same stupid arguments…

    I should know it better, but ok, let’s feet another troll:

    > not some fiddleware created by hobbyists.

    Mozilla.org is not driven by "hobbyists", their staff is paid and all programmers are professional software engineers. Most of them worked for Netscape, the predecessor of Mozilla. There are some volunteers developing on Mozilla, but most of them do QA and similar things.

    > No really, I sure hope that the current legislation

    > wakes up and destroys the GPL.

    Mozilla is currently licenced under MPL and NPL (Mozilla & Netscape Public License) and now they are trying to get all code under MPL/LGPL/GPL tri-license. This means, that you can chose which licence do yo want to chose, if you build software on top of mozilla. You don’t need to use the GPL.

    > Or – like Firefox – destroy the WWW which has been

    LOL, why is Firefox destroying the WWW? Because it standard compliant and available for almost every operating system, not only Windows?

    > handled fine by Microsoft, thank you very much.

    ROTFL, of course.

    –Thomas

  53. Anonymous says:

    "Uh, hate to tell you this but a lot less than 90% of the people on the net make websites… just think if they did though, everyone would hate you!"

    Uh, hate to tell you that most of the web sites only work on IE. Just IE. Especially on intranets everything work with just IE. For every idiot like you there are ten times more developers who simply care only about IE.

    "Apart from the fact none of us know each other…"

    Net thugs can be friend anywhere they meet. The point is the common stupidity.

    "What drugs have you been taking?"

    You are not relevant to the developer community.You just previously made a comment that shows how little you know about web programming. I love that comment, it gave me a good laughing, but seriously what are you other than a net thug?

    "Right, so why does that make IE a good browser? Many people who are know to bash IE are also known to bash you because you have no clue what you are talking about."

    There is a big difference between someone who is a net thug without a clue and a person who knows what he is talking about.

    "Those are valid statements, why do you consider them bashes?"

    "Suck my dick" is Microsoft bashing. Remember you are nothing more than a net thug coming here to bash Microsoft. Stop being a net thug, then you will get respect.

    "Microsoft with all its money really should be able to do those things."

    Looks like you are really smart, why don’t you do it? Mozilla is an open source project as you know, just go and develop it, install it to every machine out there. But wait, you are not smart, you are a net thug just saying stupid things. So what’s the point of this question?

    "And Microsoft really did destroy Netscape, but it made a better project so even if their motives where wrong, it gave a decent resault."

    Destroy Netscape? Netscape destroyed itself. Netscape 6 was the most crapy program I have ever used. It sucked. Netscape 4 was the worst browser ever. If you continue to be a net thug and lie how do you expect people to take you seriously? That’s why I like you speaking on technical issues, you just spit out a totally wrong comment, so wrong that I literally couldn’t stop myself from laughing the last time you did it. Remember the two methods. :)))

    "Now we have Mozilla.org."

    You don’t have anything. I don’t see how a net thug can claim to have mozilla. You don’t own it, it is just a browser project from Netscape, it has its own developers that try to float it around. Most of its developers went to other companies after AOL dropped them. There is money just to support the development efforts for 2 years. After that probably Sun and IBM will fund it. Sun and IBM owns the project, if it was up to net thugs like you, the project will be dead again. I know, you thought you have mozilla because it is free and you feel special because you can get the source and do nothing with it and doesn’t unerstand a single technology in mozilla, but you have it, because you can browse with it. You are just a free rider on top of hard working people.

    "just go the hell away."

    Why? You are seriously entertaining as hell. Especially when you talk technical. You don’t understand anything about browsers, except using them. It literarlly reminds me a 5 year old kid trying to speak about serious issues. So please, tell us more about what you think about javascript, html, xhtml, mozilla because I just love it to read your comments. I am damn serious about this. Let’s stay technical and see how funny it gets. Oh, please I also love to see more technical comments from I Hate It too.

    "The point is that complying with standards is what make web development easy."

    He got the point alright. Here is what I Hate It means. You go to W3C’s volunteer crapy implementation, it gives you 200 erros and you have to pick which ones are real ones and which ones are not. Well if your site shows just fine in IE/Firefox/Opera it doesn’t matter, you got to do this validation, because then you can put a nice small gif image which looks lovely and very pretty that says your page is validated. Then you work on them for 2 months and prepare your first page. You put a nice logo that says It is validated, and show to your boss who just paid you thousands of dollars for 1 page per 2 month productivity. I Hate It proudly tells her boss that they did the right thing because while the competitor’s page shows in all visitors browsers and cost so little, their one page can be also validated using W3C’s validator and oh yeah I Hate It just made thousands of dollars for doing nothing but working to earn a logo that doesn’t mean anything whether it is standards complaint or not and has no value at all. Oh, I am sorry, I Hate It probably loves to see that tiny logo, it looks so cool on her page. Even though her page may be in fact totally non-standard and a crappy page the logo will be there. I Hate It would be happy because she just put html tags, put few h1 tags here and there for the title and oh yeah, we forgot, she also didn’t use tables, so she is ultra standard complaint if you know what I mean. She will probably go in circles to celebrate how much she worked just to make the validator to say that her page sounds ok, but at least she is dilusional to think that her one page is standard complaint, because she read on slashdot that w3c validation means being standard complaint.

    "Breaking standards as IE does, makes it hard."

    Here I Hate It means that when her page shows perfectly on IE, IE doesnt show her validation logo, because IE is evil and against W3C so it breaks all the links to W3C thus breaking the standards. This makes it very hard for I Hate It to be standard complaint, because you see without that link her page is no more standards complaint. Her visitors would go crazy if they don’t see that nice cute little logo. I Hate It cries and curses at Microsoft for breaking the standards.

    "The IE team is apparently unable to tell us that they will support standards due to internal politics"

    Here I Hate It thinks that Bill Gates is evil and all, so she thinks that he issued a policy banning IE dev team to say nothing about standards support. Because it is top secret, though I Hate It receive this top secret memo. Well I Hate It have no clue on what exactly standards complaince means anyway, but I am deeply disappointed to see that I Hate It didn’t talk about the secret IE assasin team who is trained to kill other browser developers? Don’t you think we should want IE team to disband that group?

    "so whether they will or will not in future is in question."

    Wait a minute I Hate It, doesn’t the secret memo says in the future they will not support standards? Come on, tell us the truth.

    "Since they aren’t complying with standarsds here it seem apparent that they don’t plan to support standards in future"

    Except they are standard complaint. I Hate It also thinks that this page can blow up when viewed in Firefox, because IE team put a special code to blow up your computer? Those evil evil IE team developers. Shame on you.

    "though they can’t/won’t say that. And that’s the main reason so many folks here are pissed off."

    Oh yeah, mac idiots are pissed off at Microsoft, just because of Microsoft’s IE. Otherwise they would love IE. I remember mac zealots urging people to upgrade to the new version of a Microsoft prouct every time Microsoft upgrades its products. Actually these mac idiots love Microsoft, but they hate Microsoft because of IE’s standard complaince. Really otherwise they wouldn’t get pissed off at all. I know if it wasn’t IE, I Hate It would show us how much she adore Microsoft.

    But I Hate It forgot to mention another important reason: The secret assasin team within IE team? What about the secret bombing machines Microsoft is producing underground? So many idiots are pissed off at Microsoft not because of just IE, but because of the bombing machines really. I Hate It, tell us more about your other secret stories please, so we can fix them right here maybe. Wait this is a trap Microsoft prepared for us. It is too late now, assasin team is on its way to kill us all. I Hate It, you are so right, we had to listen to you about Microsoft. But we have mozilla now, they are going to save us from this secret evil IE assassin team. Wait, we also have Safari team and Opera team. Though you have to pay a thousand bucks to Safari team, and 39$ to Opera team. They are not working for free.

    This is what really I Hate It is talking about. That’s the reason she named herself as I Hate It, otherwise it would be I Love It.

  54. Anonymous says:

    Let’s see what Thomas net thug is trying to tell us:

    "Mozilla.org is not driven by "hobbyists", their staff is paid and all programmers are professional software engineers."

    They have covered their asses only for 2 years, next year the money AOL gave will dry up. Most Netscape developers who developed mozilla are not working for mozilla anymore. The project stalled. Its best programmers went to Apple and Opera. Firefox’s future is dim.

    "There are some volunteers developing on Mozilla, but most of them do QA and similar things."

    Yes, most of them are doing nothing but sitting as qa, bugs guys. Firefox’s small success is due to the lack of progress in IE, not the great progress in Firefox. That’s really too bad for Firefox. Once the money dries up, I wonder what will happen.

    "they are trying to get all code under MPL/LGPL/GPL tri-license."

    Once they go the GPL way, they will never recover. Perl is just another example what happens when you try to destroy the world using a license. You end up being irrelevant.

    "LOL, why is Firefox destroying the WWW? Because it standard compliant and available for almost every operating system, not only Windows?"

    No Firefox is not standard complaint at all. It has lots of bugs, and it does implement non-standard features. It is destroying WWW, because it just doesn’t work in so many browsers. Instead of fixing the problems, their developers shamelessly accuse the developer community. Firefox is pretty much crappy on Windows. It doesn’t support copy image to clipboard for example. It crashes a lot and randomly, consumes lots of memory, and it doesn’t run animated dhtml scripts properly.

    "ROTFL, of course."

    Good doggy. Sit now Thomas and roll when we tell you to roll. Now you can bark again. Bark!

  55. Anonymous says:

    IE is a piece of crap, Alex is a piece of crap polisher. Polish that turd alex, polish.

  56. Anonymous says:

    Bois….time to go back to your playstaitions, bedtime soon….

  57. Anonymous says:

    > Hey Debran, are you a friend of that Alex guy? Same stupid arguments…

    No, I actually just wanted to see if he picks up my "arguments". Well, he did. So I hope even the last person in here sees that you should ignore him and not reply at all (which is sadly still happening). Daniel/Alex will not go away if you reply. Sadly, I could do without him.

  58. Anonymous says:

    Hm, I should read my replies once again.

    > Daniel/Alex will not go away if you reply. Sadly, I could do without him.

    Should read: Daniel/Alex will not go away if you reply, sadly. I could do without him.

  59. Anonymous says:

    just before ignoring the issue….

    is there a way(personal stylesheet or whatever its called) in a blog like this, that one could make 1 persons comments ‘collapse’ so that you don’t see them/need to scroll past them?

    i don’t know much about web; sorry if that’s a dumb question.

  60. Anonymous says:

    Alex, you have _no_ idea what youre talking about. Please shut up about Firefox.

    Firefox is GNU/GPL and is the programmers don’t get paid. Your whole post contains bullshit.

    Sjeez.

  61. Anonymous says:

    This is _all_ marketing from Microsoft.

  62. Anonymous says:

    @realitybath

    http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2004/07/22/192138.aspx#193149

    I hate it made a bookmarklet that forces the display of Alex’s posts off.

    @wtf

    As far as I know, Ben Goodger, the lead dev, gets paid. Alot of the other main programmers get paid too. The rest of alex’s post sadly is as you said.

  63. Anonymous says:

    Snowknight, thank you very much for the bookmarket, this makes this blog much more readable! Good work, bye Alex.

    –Thomas

  64. Anonymous says:

    thanks snowknight and ihateit, i never heard about bookmarklets before… seem pretty usefull – pretty neat the things people come up with πŸ˜€

    took me awhile to figure out i need to change link opening behaviour for bookmarks in tbe (for firefox) for it to work.

    blog looks 2X better now.

  65. Anonymous says:

    Thank you bookmarklet people!!!

    Yet more reason to learn javascript πŸ˜‰ *gets out the books*

  66. Anonymous says:

    Too many work to patch IE…

  67. Anonymous says:

    Realitybath, for more great bookmarklets, just visit Jesse Ruderman’s Bookmarklets Site: http://www.squarefree.com/bookmarklets/

    –Thomas

  68. Anonymous says:

    Hehe,

    You can use the same bookmarklet to ignore major slashdot idiots too :) It might be helpful for the IE team too.

    javascript:(function(){var l=document.getElementsByTagName(‘a’);for (var x=l.length-1;x–;){if (l[x].innerHTML.indexOf(‘Thomas’)!=-1 | l[x].innerHTML.indexOf(‘Jim’)!=-1 | l[x].innerHTML.indexOf(‘JP’)!=-1 | l[x].innerHTML.indexOf(‘Debran’)!=-1 | l[x].innerHTML.indexOf(‘The Wolf’)!=-1 | l[x].innerHTML.indexOf(‘snowknight’)!=-1 | l[x].innerHTML.indexOf(‘I Hate It’)!=-1 ) l[x].parentNode.parentNode.style.display=’none’}})();

    By the way, Debran admitted that she intentionally trolled here. Just one more reason to ignore all the slashdot trolls.

  69. Anonymous says:

    thanks thomas… i actually spent about an hour there earlier πŸ˜€

  70. Anonymous says:

    Your welcome. Its just something I stumbled across while exploring. Thomas’ link has some nice ones, but my favorite one splits the current page in two. Its so helpful on long pages.

    http://www.jmesnil.net/weblog/2004/07/bookmarklet-to-split-html-document.html

  71. Anonymous says:

    Soo much nicer without Alex!

    I have not seen is garbage posts for a while now πŸ˜€

    I have never met someone who talks out of their arse so much, he said I had no clue about web development… hah, just because I don’t use javascript or another .net platform to make my programs doesn’t mean I don’t know about web development. I use something better than anything .net has to offer anyhow: php5.

    Anyhow, I only have one problem with IE, I couldn’t care less about the UI because I never use it. I want better support for CSS2, XHTML issues fixed and a standalone version for windows 98/2000 users.

    Hope the team can manage that or else I will be spending just as much time in the next few years making my pages work on IE as I do now.

    Good luck to the IE Dev Team!

  72. Anonymous says:

    Lookie guys!! So I *wasn’t* hallucinating:

    http://mozillazine.org/talkback.html?article=5063

    "Mozilla Adds Undetectable document.all Support"

    So this is good right? It adds support for IE-detecting code, which of course has the majority of web surfers by the balls πŸ˜‰ And keeps the standards in tact by not emulating IE if the site detects for document.all specifcally, since this type of site would have a scanner for standards-based browsers as well.

    [ unless I’m wrong in assuming that document.all is not in ECMA 262). ]

    BTW Alex, if you haven’t javascripted me to death yet, I am thinking very much about learning Javascript. HTML looks too complicated to me though..

  73. Anonymous says:

    "HTML looks too complicated to me though.."

    Just so I don’t look too silly by that comment, I mean i odn’t want to have to worry about standards, all the tons of different tags…and since I’ve tried learning HTML unsuccessfully before, with very limited success (frames & target=_blank links, anyone ;)).

  74. Anonymous says:

    "’Mozilla Adds Undetectable document.all Support’

    So this is good right? It adds support for IE-detecting code"

    Might I ask how undetectable document.all support can be detected? :)

  75. Anonymous says:

    snowknight, with as little knowledge as I have about these things, I would guess that it supports code that is not aware of browsers other than IE (in this day and age!! ;)) and therefore does not check for them, causing problems……..

    Sites that are multibrowser-aware would check if a browser supported document.all then move on to the standards way…but why would they do this when there are other equivalents that work in BOTH IE (I assume) and other browsers? I don’t know…

    This sounds like a very good decision to me, *Excellent* for users, perhaps useful to MS (therefore posted at the IEblog by me) in how to possible develop support for standards as well without regression!!

    /waits for actually knowledgeable person to chime in

  76. Anonymous says:

    >snowknight, with as little knowledge as I have about these things, I would guess that it supports code that is not aware of browsers other than IE (in this day and age!! ;)) and therefore does not check for them, causing problems……..

    Should be:

    "I would guess that it supports SITES"

    (sorry to copy Jim’s reply method, I find it so much faster then appending another quotation mark)

  77. Anonymous says:

    >snowknight, with as little knowledge as I have about these things, I would guess that it supports code that is not aware of browsers other than IE (in this day and age!! ;)) and therefore does not check for them, causing problems……..

    Fixing again, I had two ideas in mind while writing this paragraph that made it somehwat incromprehensible:

    "I would guess that it supports SITES that are not aware of browsers other than IE (in this day and age!! ;)) causing problems for browsers that don’t support it (since it’s not in ECMA 262). This checks for these multibrowser-unaware sites and allows document.all.

    Sorry for triple post, this is still confusing me and I may have ot post more corrections! (crossing fingers for an edit function!)

  78. Anonymous says:

    Actually, you could save yourselves a *LOT* of time and pick up Maxthon:

    http://www.maxthon.com/

    It’s absolutely amazing, customizable, and already fixes a lot of IE’s quirks – namely, the PNG transparency bug. I’ve got the PNG Tool button sitting in my Plugin bar, and it just takes a simple click – or I can run it automatically after every page load. Seriously, you’d be doing the world a great favor if you just purchased Maxthon and ran with the ball.

  79. Anonymous says:

    IE team, I hope you guys will be able to convince whoever is in charge of you HOW IMPORTANT it will be to release a standalone Internet Explorer upgrade for systems that you are still supporting, e.g., 2000, 98, ME. People using these systems for whatever reason

    Yes the last 2 are outdated but you say you will support them until 2007, why not actually support them them. You are already recommending people (XP users only unfortunaltey :() download SP2 which is still in RC. This is showing how important an upgrade to the aging IE is.

    No, a browser is not an OS function, we all know that is, respectfully, BS. No I do not have any arguments against you bundling IE w/Windows though, I can see the logic in that.

    People do not want to upgrade an OS for a BROWSER UPGRADE, regardless of what Mac OSX is doing with their Safari requirements, that doesn’t make sense either (however Mac users are used to paying more for things Windows users wll get for free).

    Don’t leave the customers in the dust :(

  80. Anonymous says:

    >IE team, I hope you guys will be able to convince whoever is in charge of you HOW IMPORTANT it will be to release a standalone Internet Explorer upgrade for systems that you are still supporting, e.g., 2000, 98, ME. People using these systems for whatever reason

    sorry for the cutoff there.

    "People using these systems for whatever reason are doing so knowing full well MS is providing support for these products, covering security vulns, etc.

    At least come out and tell us you will not support them if you WILL NOT (in real terms). I remember that the patch released for IE ADODB was still a patch and not a full fix for the security zone exploits that allowed them to escalate to local zone. If XP SP2 fixes this, it should fix Internet Explorer x98,x2k as well.

  81. Anonymous says:

    Chris Pirillo: As I see it Maxathon offers nothing over an already proven product, Firefox. Sure they are not the same, but do we really need Maxathon? What does it offer that you can’t get already with a browser based on Gecko or KHTML?

  82. Anonymous says:

    Chris, thanks a lot for the tip. It is really a great browser. Everything in IE automatically works on Maxthon. I was recommending Firefox to my friends, now I will recommend this browser. Especially after the security problem with mozilla, it is a good idea to put them back to IE. It is way better than Firefox. Firefox simply doesn’t work in many sites. Microsoft should definitely pay attention to this browser.

    The Wolf is just a stupid net thug, he has nothing to do with IE, web development or javascript. His site says that he is using only GNU programs. He is here to confuse people and bash Microsfot. Just to warn people about that. You can ignore The Wolf and others using bookmarklet here :

    http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2004/07/23/193152.aspx#195283

    Never mind about him, he is seriously a 5 year old kid thinking that he is challenging Microsoft. Oh, he knows php5 by the way, the one I already know and use, and improve upon it. I just love The Wolf when he is talking technical. It is like a non-techie girl who thinks that all computers run windows.

    The Wolf, please tell us how much computer programming you know, I love to hear that. You seem to be a really smart boy.

  83. Anonymous says:

    Wow, with Maxathon, you can change the tabs’ place, which you can’t do with Firefox. Also you can completely configure the interface the way you like, unlike Firefox. Firefox should learn a lot from this browser. This browser simply rocks. Way better than Firefox, and furthermore it is based on IE, instead of Gecko, which doesn’t work in many web sites. I thought Chris’s suggestion that Microsoft should buy this company was a little funny at first, but I think Microsoft should consider that. At least hire these guys. This browser is 10 times better than Firefox, which I thought was great. I was a big Firefox advocate until I came across this browser. In fact I think I tried myIE before, but myIE wasn’t this good. I don’t know what they did, but this one just works great.

    Forget about Firefox, just download this browser and try it yourself and learn from the interface and all. Check out the nice touches. With next IE you should try to match this browser, not Firefox.

    But watch out the overwhelming number of features, that may be intimidating to new users. Maxthon is great, but it has too much options. You should definitely curb those options to make it less intimidating.

    Finally I am giving up Firefox.

  84. Anonymous says:

    Alex: your problems are solved with Firefox extensions. Download miniT, it allows you to change tab positions & with undoclosetab it will restore closed tabs to their former position via a middleclick the close tab button.

    miniT: http://update.mozilla.org/extensions/moreinfo.php?id=176&vid=335&category=Tabbed%20Browsing

    undoclosetab:

    http://update.mozilla.org/extensions/moreinfo.php?id=58&vid=173&category=Tabbed%20Browsing

    Should these be in Firefox basic? Probably. But they’re not, for whatever reason. And I don’t hate you for sticking with MyIE2 if you’d like, just if you have customized FF a lot here is a way to solve these problems.

    (BTW this is _P, hello Alex ;))

  85. Anonymous says:

    Hmm..I have a question about MYIE2’st transparent PNG thingy. Yes, there is an option to apply it during page load, but is it more of a hack than a real source code change? I am curious here.

    I also thought it was a little weird to see Myie2 mentionned in this context here, but they have done a very good job!

  86. Anonymous says:

    _P thanks for the comments. I didn’t switch to Firefox for the sake of it. It was giving me a better browsing experience overall, but I still use IE and one thing I hated was to switch back an forth and run two browsers at the same time. Now I have it all. But you never know, I got used to Firefox, I might go back if I think I am more productive with Firefox. For now I will stick with Maxhton for a while. I don’t like hunting those extensions. Even for copying an image to the clipboard you need to install an extension. That’s just stupid.

    Also some net thugs, like The Wolf, may come to your blogs and disturb you. He did it to some guy. So I suggest not to use trackback, instead comment here directly. I know these net thugs so I didn’t leave my web url. Be aware of the problem.

  87. Anonymous says:

    Well Alex, yes I agree certain things that are out of FF base are silly, but FF base install is also very feature filled–compare it to IE for example, lol

    (BTW I *Think* copy image is in new builds of Firefox. and yes, I know that wasn’t the point of your argument but just to show that it *was* eventually implemented

    One example of this I know was the autoscroll extension. Used to be autoscroll.mozdev.org but the devs realized it was damn useful & good for IE migration and included it

    I’m not sure what qualities the core devs look for in extensions though–it seems very much "up to them" ;)).

    Thank god it’s nothing like Epiphany on Gnome, which IMO takes Firefox’s mandate much to far and leaves it completely nonconfigurable. AT least they left about:config in!

    So: the strength of Firefox is in the geek, BUT it is also IMO the best browser a beginner can use, heck it’s exactly like IE from the start, no tabs even, but it includes at this time better security ! Compare this to IE-based browsers like MYIE2, which have a much more complex interface. Again, good for a geek, not so good for a beginner user, and a bit less configurable.

    The pwoer is in extensions, ability to customize the browser. Look at all the implementations of tabbed browsing on . Firefox’s default install is a decent system to build on for those who have kind of grown used to using tabs, for example, the focus last tab extension makes the tabs emulate Opera, and this type of stuff is something you don’t find in any other brwoser, it’s up to the devs how they see it, and while they may choose the most sound interface, well we all have bad habits! πŸ˜‰

    (I’m sorry for this too long post that would seem to be an advertisement for FIrefox, but I wanted to discuss the how you put it (I somewhat agree, just cause I don’t always want to downlaod extensions for a new profile! ;)) silly base install.

    I really do like the way you can idosynchronize (word?) Fierfox to the way you do things.

    -_P

  88. Anonymous says:

    _P, yeah Firefox’s extensions are great, but in practice they don’t offer great value, because it is a pain in the ass to explore them and find them. For example, I found copy image extension only because after a while I was fed up with it and had to actively check it out. At first I thought it is not possible, but then I learnt that you can do it through an extension. I enjoyed Firefox for a long time without copy image though. I mean people seem to hate searching and exploring these extensions.

    Many geeks know what firefox is all about, but very very few of them know a great extension. You see links to firefox on many blogs, but not to specific extensions which are great. So, it looks like people don’t bother with extensions at all, and if they don’t, then that diminishes the value of those extensions. For example, until your post I didn’t know you could move tabs at all, and people still complain about that in various sites.

    I am not sure about security though. The recent mozilla security was just lame. The bug is reported 2 years ago, it wasn’t fixed until a security mailing list talked about it. From the original bug it looks like developers simply ignored the problem. When they fix the problem, they fixed it quickly just to give the impression that they can do it quickly? That’s not professional. Did they do tests, did they ask customers whether they rely on that feature? I am deeply disappointed after that incident though. It is not that mozilla had a security problem, but that developers ignored the problem for 2 years.

    Btw, I don’t think you have to be sorry about the advertisement of Firefox. I think IE team is looking for posts just like yours, thoughtful and insightful.

  89. Anonymous says:

    I agree. I found the old texturizer.com extensions site more useful in finding the extension I want (out of like 300!!) bcause I could just use find as you type and search through all the descriptions for a specific keyword. Chances are you’ll get what you want, after all, you’re liekly not the only one with certain habits! Hopefully, someone has already come up with something, OR you can request something in the forums and hope to god someone whips you something up (also something others may find useful & download too, long afer you’ve gone & installed it & even forgot about it!)

    I agree it was very intimidating at first (the texturizder site probably should have included instructions to use FAYT) and as an experienced FF user I know what extensions I want now and robotically search for them in new installs, but I do feel update.mozilla.org in its current form is a bit of step back in terms of actually finding what you want…even the old site had categories!

    A way to search: in terms of category dropdown (tabbed browsing), search term (drag and drop), press "search".. :)

    Damn, now I’m throwing out (basic, yes I’m compltely sure the website devs of u.mo have already thought of this) ideas for Firefox on an IE blog and perhaps helping IE…what the…. ;_

  90. Anonymous says:

    I agree. I found the old texturizer.com extensions site more useful in finding the extension I want (out of like 300!!) bcause I could just use find as you type and search through all the descriptions for a specific keyword. Chances are you’ll get what you want, after all, you’re liekly not the only one with certain habits! Hopefully, someone has already come up with something, OR you can request something in the forums and hope to god someone whips you something up (also something others may find useful & download too, long afer you’ve gone & installed it & even forgot about it!)

    I agree it was very intimidating at first (the texturizder site probably should have included instructions to use FAYT) and as an experienced FF user I know what extensions I want now and robotically search for them in new installs, but I do feel update.mozilla.org in its current form is a bit of step back in terms of actually finding what you want…even the old site had categories!

    A way to search: in terms of category dropdown (tabbed browsing), search term (drag and drop), press "search".. :)

    Damn, now I’m throwing out (basic, yes I’m compltely sure the website devs of u.mo have already thought of this) ideas for Firefox on an IE blog and perhaps helping IE…what the…. ;_

  91. Anonymous says:

    I think you misunderstood me _P. The value of the extensions doesn’t necessarly come from their value themselves but the fact that lots of people use it. I don’t wake up everyday and ask myself which extension I am going to install in my firefox. As an example, RoboForm is a great tool, available for IE, but very very few people use it. Not enough people know how to install it how to use it or even whether such a thing exists. You see my point? You really need lots of people to use a particular extension to make that useful. If a great extension sits there and I don’t know about it it has no value to me, and I am not going to spend everyday looking for great extensions. Sure, if I really search for them, I might find them, better I can even write one myself, but the point is always being able to make an extension popular. Firefox itself is a good example. In the real world, people has no idea what firefox was. I converted to Firefox even though I knew tabbed browsing was in mozilla long time before. Somebody told me about trying firefox, I wasn’t hopeful about it, but then it simply rocked. Fast, responsive and so on. Btw. Dave Hyatt converted me to Firefox. I complained to him tha mozilla was damn slow and he told me to try Firefox, and suprisingly the guy was right, Firefox was completely different and fast. The only reason I complained to Dave was because I was using Linux and on Linux your only decent browser choice is mozilla. In other words, I wasn’t trying to replace IE, but ended up replacing it because I was a Linux user and learned about Firefox. In other words, you need to offer some real kick ass value for people to use those particular extensions and people should get really excited about it. That’s why I was a Firefox advocate for a long time, not because I hated IE, but because Firefox offered great value and still does.

    Btw, still looks like there are some key issues where Firefox is much better. Specifically text-resize is one such example. This is one area where IE team should go and beat themselves. On the fixed size, the IE just doesn’t resize the text. That itself is an important reason to continue to use Firefox.

  92. Anonymous says:

    ah ah! Understood :) In the end, I guess it’s just two different philosiphies, am I going to go out and graze a bit, then take something home with me I like? Or if I have pizza order in at 6PM each night, I’m gonna take that for sure, I’m lazy! If it pushes you to do it (feature you reall want is missing) you’ll graze…still I guess with FF there is going to be extension bundling packs in 1.0. Semi-opera stance.

    Maybe IE’s place is somewhere in the middle of these two, offering less features than Opera but more than current? I don’t know. I do know that Opera’s intterface is prettay complex, if IE can do that cleanly, well, go IE!

    (I have another extension for text resize too and that you may know about and/or are talking about when you mention font sizes! Text zoom: http://extensionroom.mozdev.org/more-info/textzoom )

  93. Anonymous says:

    Reprinting the above with some corrections (plus in case you got me blcoked mista!)

    ah ah! Understood :) In the end, I guess it’s just two different philosiphies, am I going to go out and graze a bit, then take something home with me I like? Or if I have pizza order in each night, I’ll take that, less work for me. But then, say someone created a superfabulous automatic pizza machine that automatically orders food from the market, and cooks it for 6PM gonna take that for sure, I’m lazy, I do less!—but I still have to find out about the in Science!Tonight or whatever, among zillions of other shady things!

    If it pushes you to do it (feature you really want is missing) you’ll graze. Still I guess with FF there is going to be extension bundling packs in 1.0. Semi-opera stance.

    Maybe IE’s place is somewhere in the middle of these two, offering less features than Opera but more than current? I don’t know. I do know that Opera’s intterface is prettay complex, if IE can do that cleanly, well, go IE!

    (I have another extension for text resize too and that you may know about and/or are talking about when you mention font sizes! Text zoom: http://extensionroom.mozdev.org/more-info/textzoom )

  94. Anonymous says:

    Sorry, JP for confusing you so badly. I think the point of the document.all support is so that if a site tries to use .all without checking to see if support is available, it will work. However, a statement like if(document.all) will fail.

    MyIE2’s transparancy plugin? I really know anything about that, but there is a hack web sites can use for that purpose. Maybe they’re related?

  95. Anonymous says:

    "indexOf(‘snowknight’)" "slashdot trolls" "net thugs"

    Alex, maybe you should try to learn a little more about who it is you decide to call names. You might realize there is more to a person than your first impresion. I made that statement about your post because you seemed to be running at the mouth, filled with anger and rage. After _P showed up, you seemed to calm down. The real sad part is that you were really close to some real points against firefox (namely copy image, memory leaks, and dhtml).

    If you don’t respond to this, I’ll already know why. I’m sorry, but I’m not going to change my name just to get around your favlet.

    Oh and IE Team, the best of luck in your endeavor.

  96. Anonymous says:

    Well, I switched from IE to Mozilla to MyIE2/Maxthon and now to Firefox a while ago.

    The initial reason to move away from IE was actually tabbed browsing, I loved the way Mozilla did it and I even accepted its slow loading time (that was back when Mozilla was a pre 1.0 product and my 350Mhz PII I had wasn’t considered that slow) just because it made surfing the net so much easier.

    Now with Firefox I found a Browser that works just great. Its fast, customizable and standard compliant. Oh, and it gives you this nice warm feeling in your tummy that you get when you use free GPLed software. :)

    Firefox is still far from perfect though. I have to disagree whith other comments here, I don’t see any problem with copying images to the clipboard from the Firefox without any extension necessary ("Copy Image" in rightclick menu). I also never experienced a memory leak on a current milestone release.

    But there are other "problems". Firefox doesn’t feel and work like a native windows aplication (simply because it isn’t).

    It doesn’t look like a native app and it simply does a lot of things much different than most new and windows only user would expect. Moving and customizing the toolbars, for example, is done much differently and not necessaryly better.

    Limited Drag-and-Drag support for the bookmarks toolbar is another of this little problems.

    I’m an official SP2 Betatester and I do still like the Internet Explorer, I just cannot use it very effeciently because of its lack of tabbed browsing support. It looks and feels great and the new security features and popup blocker are very nicely done, even slightly smarter than in Firefox. The new add-on manager was long overdue and is very similiar to Firefox’s extension manager but covering even more.

    I just don’t understand why antique and basic bugs weren’t fixed in this updated build?

    Correct PNG Alpha Channel support should be very, very easy to add/fix, why wasn’t this done?

    Well, I’m happy enough with Firefox, but I wouldn’t mind switching back if Internet Explorer would finally offer the better alternative and not look like a dead (end) application any more.

  97. Anonymous says:

    It hurt like hell, but we’re looking forward to doing it again.

  98. Anonymous says:

    @Christoph: I’m pretty sure the "Copy image" was only added in the latest version of Firefox (0.9). Honestly, I could care less, though. Saving images is just fine for me.

    @Alex Almeroth: IE 5 for the Mac is the worst browser ever, not NN4.

    And IE sucks due to its poor support of standards (CSS, PNGs). You’re probably not a web developer, because you’d know it’s a pain in the ass.

    IE increases cost and time. More time to work around IE and more file size to work around it (more bandwidth and server space taken up).

    I bet if IE weren’t used by the majority of people on the web, there would be a lot of nice effects on sites these days with PNGs and semi-transparency.

  99. Anonymous says:

    1. To me, IE is a tool to check how a site looks to IE users.

    2. I will use it for browsing again if and when it becomes better than other browsers I can get for free – provided I still run Windows by then.

    3. Whoever disagrees with 2. has no reason to read this blog, let alone post comments – please go away.

  100. Anonymous says:

    "@Alex Almeroth: IE 5 for the Mac is the worst browser ever, not NN4."

    Don’t be stupid. IE 5 is one of the first browsers that supported standards. Most of the standards zealots even admit that, well mostly because it is a mac browser, but I guess you are all-anti-Microsoft basher.

    I know everything about web development, more than you to know that IE is one of the best browsers out there.You can do pretty much anything with IE, it is Opera and other sub-browsers which suck.

    You can do more nice effects with IE then you can do with any other browser

    Sure IE has its own problems, but your point is not that though, it is more like IE sucks attitude, the average slashdotter kid attitude.

  101. Anonymous says:

    Listen to Alex people, for he is the only one in this entire weblog who has any brains, plus he really knows what he’s talking about. He said it himself: "I know everything about web development"

    Really, arguing with him is just pointless. He knows _everything_. We should all bow down and thank him for sharing his wisdom with us.

    Specifically, he tells us what _really_ matters for web development. NICE EFFECTS! You can do more NICE EFFECTS with IE then you can do with any other browser. That alone should show the light to all you stupid slashdot trolls. Seriously, I don’t think Mozilla can even do any of IE’s nice filters for opacity to create fade effects. How stupid can a browser be to not even do that??

  102. Anonymous says:

    Wise Guy, are you saying that people should listen to stupid slashdot kids like you? Who are you? What’s your job? You can’t even use your own name in a simple form here. You bash Microsoft like slashdot idiots, then you attack others that show you what you are. Which business you expect to believe in an idiot like yourself? What’s your particular credibility? You think people will trust your stupid nick? Why so far Jim, Jesus_Christ and others supported you? Someone who says "suck my dick" is your supporter, another person who finds that not offensive also supports you. You expect us to believe idiots like you? Why?

    javascript:(function(){var l=document.getElementsByTagName(‘a’);for (var x=l.length-1;x–;){if (l[x].innerHTML.indexOf(‘Thomas’)!=-1 | l[x].innerHTML.indexOf(‘Jim’)!=-1 | l[x].innerHTML.indexOf(‘JP’)!=-1 | l[x].innerHTML.indexOf(‘Debran’)!=-1 | l[x].innerHTML.indexOf(‘The Wolf’)!=-1 | l[x].innerHTML.indexOf(‘snowknight’)!=-1 | l[x].innerHTML.indexOf(‘Wise’)!=-1 | l[x].innerHTML.indexOf(‘I Hate It’)!=-1 ) l[x].parentNode.parentNode.style.display=’none’}})();

    I am glad to show that there are some pure idiots on the net that should be dismissed for the nonesense they talk. Trying to discuss over their stupid claims is a big mistake. They are totally unreasonable, so it is better if we just let them bark, instead of trying to argue with them. That’s what I do here, almost all of the net thugs ended up barking like dogs here instead of spreading their FUD, which is really the goal here. Once someone comes with reasonable arguments, of course that’s different.

    Wise Guy, go on and bark more, I am definitely happy to see you only barking.

  103. Anonymous says:

    I found a great news on slashdot that claims that Microsoft is selling Slate because it recommended Firefox over IE. Ignoring all the reasonable reasons why Microsoft is selling that unit, assuming the stupid assumption that Microsoft is evil and that they don’t like people recommending competing products, for some reason Microsoft can not do anything but to sell that unit? This is how stupid the Wise Guy, Jim, The Wolf, Jesus_Christ etc.. are. They are so idiot that they can’t even think and understand that this news is totally BS. These are the same idiots who come here and attack people. None of them is able to show a serious business, a serious person behind their stupid Nicks. But I guess one of the idiots will claim that he doesn’t believe in that news thus he can’t be the idiot, yet he continues to believe other Microsoft-bashing Slashdot stories. Almost all the same claims coming from the idiots also appear on Slashdot, a coincidence?

    Are we going to go with a kid who names himself as the Wise Guy and carries what he reads on Slashdot to here, or are we going to ignore idiots and talk about real features, issues?

  104. Anonymous says:

    "The Wolf is just a stupid net thug, he has nothing to do with IE, web development or javascript. His site says that he is using only GNU programs. He is here to confuse people and bash Microsoft."

    1. I am involved in web development, you can have a look at some of my more recent php5 code (you can’t view the end product as I don’t have php5 on my server :( ) here: http://www.pixelcarnage.com/sitewolf/

    That code is based on my site engine I call SiteWolf, it will be a blog once I finish writing all of the modules and code.

    2. My site doesn’t actually say anything about me only using GNU programs. I’m a web developer and designer who uses Photoshop. Is Photoshop GNU? I bet Alex thinks it is, but that’s because he is so damned stupid.

    3. I’m not here to confuse people, that appears to be your job. Most of the things you say amount to slander for which you could be sued.

    "I found a great news on slashdot that claims that Microsoft is selling Slate because it recommended Firefox over IE. Ignoring all the reasonable reasons why Microsoft is selling that unit, assuming the stupid assumption that Microsoft is evil and that they don’t like people recommending competing products, for some reason Microsoft can not do anything but to sell that unit? This is how stupid the Wise Guy, Jim, The Wolf, Jesus_Christ etc… are."

    One question, what do I have to do with any of that news on slashdot? I have never posted there and I have never read whatever article you are talking about.

    "They are so idiot that they can’t even think and understand that this news is totally BS."

    I like that, I’m so an ‘idiot’. I think we know who is the real idiot here don’t we. And again, you make it look like I know the article you are talking about. It occurs to me that you appear to know an awful lot about slashdot for someone who hates it.

    "None of them is able to show a serious business, a serious person behind their stupid Nicks. But I guess one of the idiots will claim that he doesn’t believe in that news thus he can’t be the idiot, yet he continues to believe other Microsoft-bashing Slashdot stories."

    Apart from the fact that I have just started to recode my site and offer my products again. You have no idea who we are or what we are like, but you have made it very clear you are a complete ass who has nothing better to do than go off at people for pointing out faults in software that NEEDS fixing. God help the people that read your ‘book’ if it even exists (lets face it, your grammar is worse than mine was when I was 10).

    "Are we going to go with a kid who names himself as the Wise Guy and carries what he reads on Slashdot to here, or are we going to ignore idiots and talk about real features, issues?"

    Are we going to go with an idiot who thinks he is in charge of this blog when in fact he has no clue about what he is talking about and assumes anyone who doesn’t agree with him 100% is an evil slashdot reader? I don’t think so.

    "Wise Guy, are you saying that people should listen to stupid slashdot kids like you? Who are you? What’s your job? You can’t even use your own name in a simple form here."

    Yeah right, whatever. Like you even use your real name, I mean Alex Almeroth doesn’t come up once in any search engines. You must be really popular. Try searching for Rowan Lewis.

    Whats my job? Well right now I’m a designer and developer. I specialize in PHP and Apache based development and I design with only the best CSS and XHTML code.

    "I am glad to show that there are some pure idiots on the net that should be dismissed for the nonesense they talk. Trying to discuss over their stupid claims is a big mistake. They are totally unreasonable, so it is better if we just let them bark, instead of trying to argue with them. That’s what I do here, almost all of the net thugs ended up barking like dogs here instead of spreading their FUD, which is really the goal here. Once someone comes with reasonable arguments, of course that’s different."

    I think we can all guess what the key to the problem is here.

    "I know everything about web development, more than you to know that IE is one of the best browsers out there.You can do pretty much anything with IE, it is Opera and other sub-browsers which suck."

    If you knew anything about web development you would understand the need to follow the w3cs standards to produce code that will work well in all browsers not just your IE specific crap.

    Also, you keep spouting off about there being so many websites that don’t work in browsers other than IE. First off I don’t know ANY sites like that. Second, why do you think it only works in IE? Could it be because all the browsers where coded to support the standards to make it simpler for developers and designers to code their sites and have them look the same in each browser, while IE doesn’t?

    "You can do more nice effects with IE then you can do with any other browser "

    Yeah, I can picture any website Alex makes now… something like this: http://masterharuka.com

    Thats all for now, thanks.

  105. Anonymous says:

    2 suggestions:

    1) Moderate the comments and remove the flame wars from neowin/slashdot hobbyist programmers who enjoy cyber mud slinging

    2) Add an API in version 7 that uses a set of objects that enables people to create plugins for IE using J(ava)Script, instead of C++. Include a compiler and obviously some heavy weight security settings to restrict people from installing them without you manually choosing to do so.



    chris

  106. Anonymous says:

    I simply can’t believe the childish ranting on this blog. It’s a wonder anything ever changes for the better with this kind of mud slinging taking place.

    IE 6 is not perfect. No software can be. Do you know why? Because it’s all coded by people – who aren’t perfect either. (This mud slinging proves the last point.)

    I am a web developer. I code for as wide an audience as possible.

    This means I’m conscious of IE and some of its limitations vs. browsers that support later specs and standards. I don’t code to suit any one browser – sites should work in all.

    This does not mean that I feel the need to bash Microsoft for lack of support here in a forum they provided to gather feedback.

    If the possibility of loosing some market share spurs Microsoft to improve IE, comply with standards, and add helpful features then I support it. Fully. If their intention is simply to listen, respond, and make a better IE and ultimately a better web experience for everyone then I support it. Whatever brings IE up to par (better standards support, tabbed browsing, etc.) can be a good thing.

    Use this opportunity wisely people. Provide helpful suggestions and feedback without the name calling banter or this line to Microsoft may cease to exist. If it’s not helpful and provides no good outcome – don’t comment. This goes for both sides. And I do understand there are clear sides. Take the anger elsewhere.

    Thanks,

    Christopher

  107. Anonymous says:

    lets get back on topic and have everyone list the top 5 complaints about IE – what would you like to see changed? be specific.

    "you can be a part of the problem or part of the solution"

  108. Anonymous says:

    Lack of CSS position-fixed on all HTML elements. Currently IE only supports it on the body tag.

  109. Anonymous says:

    The top five things I would like to see changed:

    1. CSS 1 support (specification published December 1996).

    2. CSS 2 support (specification published May 1998).

    3. HTML 4 support (specification published December 1997).

    4. HTTP 1.1 support (specification published June 1999).

    5. PNG 1 support (specification published July 1996).

    As things stand, Internet Explorer partially supports them, but with numerous shortcomings. These specifications are between five and eight years old, and all of them were available to Microsoft before publication in draft form.

  110. Anonymous says:

    1. Establishing market dominance and then abandoning ongoing development

    2. Elimination of standalone versions tying IE updates to OS updates.

    3. Lack of standards support

    4. Lack of useful and common browser features

    5. Nurturing poor Microsoft-specific web coding amongst Microsoft web sites, related properties, blogs, and other web locations… (Complete lack of knowledge of standards and their support amongst IE and other developers at Microsoft)

    6. Complete lame attempts to solicit the user input that has been obvious with no corresponding development or even promises to commit to such development

  111. Anonymous says:

    "Why so far Jim, Jesus_Christ and others supported you? Someone who says "suck my dick" is your supporter, another person who finds that not offensive also supports you. You expect us to believe idiots like you? Why?"

    Alex, I haven’t "supported" anyone and certainly not just for their perspective. Hell, if anything, I would say: I support Alex because he makes IE, this blog, and blind Microsoft support look bad.

    So… You are the only person I have "supported" at this blog.

  112. Anonymous says:

    Christoph, its nice to see some sensible people around here. :) I get the feeling part of that was aimed toward me so I’ll explain: copy image and memory leaks were the starting point to some of the real issues. The first is that there is a lot of stuff enabled in the backend that is inaccessible, and other features that should be included isn’t. The second is firefox’s performance if its used or left minimized for long periods of time.

    "lets get back on topic and have everyone list the top 5 complaints about IE – what would you like to see changed? be specific."

    Alright, hmmm…

    1) Major bugs in current standards implementation fixed (float is basically broken, background-attachment, etc)

    2) Better support for existing standards (Jim covers that rather well)

    3) Better encryption. Firefox supports 256bit encryption; IE supports 128bit encrytion*.

    *Pre-SP2. I don’t know if that changes after.

    4) Remove the hidden history. IE stores history in a few hidden files on the system. Those files also include the history of files opened in Windows! Thank you, but we have enough spyware to worry about as is.

    5) Better feature set: tab browsing, easier customization, etc.

    6) Useful innovation. If Opera has brought Mouse Gestures and Firefox will bring Livemarks (RSS support added post 0.9.2), what has IE brought us? Colored Scrollbars? What good does that really do?

  113. Anonymous says:

    Christoph, sorry about my rant, but I had to make it clear to anyone that read the rants Alex posted that he was just talking shit.

  114. Anonymous says:

    For those who are sick of mud slinging from slashdotters, here is an easy solution for you guys:

    avascript:(function(){var l=document.getElementsByTagName(‘a’);for (var x=l.length-1;x–;){if (l[x].innerHTML.indexOf(‘Thomas’)!=-1 | l[x].innerHTML.indexOf(‘Jim’)!=-1 | l[x].innerHTML.indexOf(‘JP’)!=-1 | l[x].innerHTML.indexOf(‘Debran’)!=-1 | l[x].innerHTML.indexOf(‘The Wolf’)!=-1 | l[x].innerHTML.indexOf(‘snowknight’)!=-1 | l[x].innerHTML.indexOf(‘Wise’)!=-1 | l[x].innerHTML.indexOf(‘I Hate It’)!=-1 ) l[x].parentNode.parentNode.style.display=’none’}})();

    This bookmarklet will help you ignore them completely. These slashdotters will not stop this though, and new ones will keep coming. None of them are here to discuss new features and help IE team. They are mostly here to spread FUD, attack people who say things they don’t like to hear. Many are so disgusting that they don’t find it offensive to swear at the IE team. They will take on whoever they don’t like. I agree that the comments should be moderated and even IP addresses should be banned if the person’s whole goal here is to be rude.

    On the other hand, I found the IE team extremely tolerant and positive even against the slashdot idiots. Which is something everybody should learn from. They are so positive that some of the slashdot idiots end up apologizing for their rude behavior. Some others continue to spread FUD and swear though. So my best suggestion is to let the slashdotters to continue to rant but to use the bookmarklet to ignore them.

  115. Anonymous says:

    @The Wolf

    I understand completely, Alex seems to have some serious issues.

    As said before: I do like Firefox but I wouldn’t really mind using Internet Explorer if there weren’t so many current problems with it.

    What I absolutely don’t understand is, why the IE development that took place with Internet Explorer in XP SP2 didn’t fix some basic issues. My god, standard compliance is not easy to reach, but fixing these issues should not take more than a few days, even for a single developer:

    – Try to access this domain (and million others) with Internet Explorer: http://www.kröt.de

    All current browsers support this natively because it’s the current standard, well, of course execpt IE.

    – PNG alpha channels. That’s really really easy to fix.

    What’s so hard about fixing this?