> The browser comparison available here is mostly a lie:
Um, just WHERE do you see on that web page that Microsoft claims they
had these features BEFORE it was present in other web browsers? Yeah,
now we now who is the liar!
As to that web page showing Firefox and Chrome don't have some features
of IE8, yeah, it gets real easy to claim lies when you haven't a concept
of the word "and". Did that web page say IE8 only had a phish filter?
Nope. Notice the word "and" in the description. Did that web page say
IE8 only had InPrivate Browsing? Nope again, but you seem to be
deliberately blind to the word "and" in its description.
"phishing AND malware protection"
"InPrivate Browsing AND InPrivate Filtering"
> Both Chrome and Firefox have had phishing protection well before IE did -
> both use Google lists, the most accurate so far.
Based on your claim (that Microsoft said they had anti-phishing feature
before Chrome), well, when the hell do you think Chrome got released?
IE7 was out before Chrome, and IE7 has its phish checker then. Yeah,
pretty easy to make a claim that Chrome had anti-phishing when you
ignore that IE7 (with its anti-phishing) was available long before
Chrome showed up. Double-DUH!
Internet Explorer 7 released October 2006.
Chrome released September 2008.
Oh yeah, 2008 comes before 2006, uh huh.
Anti-phishing was a feature added to Firefox v2. It was first a Google
extension. Later they integrated it into Firefox.
Internet Explorer 7 released October 18, 2006.
Firefox v2 released October 24, 2006.
IE still wins by being first with an anti-phish feature. IE7 got
released before Firefox 2. Also, it was LATER when the extension was
incorporated into Firefox.
> Web Standards: ACID 3 anyone? World-class supprot for CSS 2.1?
You haven't the intelligence of a gnat's fart regarding what *is* the
Acid 3 test suite. Some boob mentions Acid 3 as though it were a fair
test and says IE fails that test and, like a lemming's boob, you
regurgitate their spewage without doing any investigation yourself.
Gee, why does IE fail so many Acid 3 tests? Because the authors of that
test are the same ones pushing for HTML 5 acceptance but which is still
a proposed DRAFT and *not* a standard. You're too lazy or to stupid to
actually go look at the spec for HTML 5 to see it is still a draft. Go
. Is it really that hard
to see "Draft" specified for the status for HTML 5? Maybe, just maybe,
HTML 5 won't be a draft anymore by the time IE9 arrives.
Unlike web sites that should automatically switch from using SVG to VML,
the Acid 3 authors use only SVG knowing that it will hurt results when
using IE. Oh golly, like someone else couldn't come up with the same
vector graphics tests but which used only VML and then make Firefox and
its ilk look bad. Duh!
They are NOT an independent testing service. They are quite obvious in
their agenda if you actually bothered to READ their web sites. Acid 3
uses non-yet-standardized HTML code. Acid 3 is deliberately biased
Also read the following for some history:
> Reliability: Firefox was first with crash recovery. Chrome invented tab
> isolation and Chrome has much better crash recovery - or better said - it
> does NOT crash (within experimental error).
And your point is? Oh yeah, that you couldn't bother to actually read
the web page you noted to see it NEVER said it had this feature first.
So did you actually check when Firefox had crash recovery versus when it
was available using a free add-on? Oh yeah, like Firefox users never
consider using add-ons, uh huh. The IE7Pro add-on was available long
before Google showed up.
So let's see what that web page said about recovery:
"Only Internet Explorer 8 has both tab isolation and crash recovery
features; Firefox and Chrome have one or the other. "
Yes, Firefox has crash recovery. It doesn't have tab isolation. Chrome
has tab isolation (by using a separate process for each tab). It does
not recover a crashed tab.
Have YOU even used Chrome? I did and found it a bare minimum web
browser with little configurability but then that's what Google wanted.
planning on moving to Ajax web apps. They want it for their purposes,
not yours. You do realize that Google also updates Chrome whenever they
feel like it. You don't get to choose when the state of your host will
change. You will need to use an SRP (software restriction policy) or
app rule in a HIPS-enabled security product (some firewalls have it) to
prevent their GoogleUpdater from running; however, since they have no
Update function to select within Chrome, you'll have to do an update in
the blind by going to their site to download Chrome and see if it
happens to be a later version than what you have. Google also violates
security for software installs by dumping files in the %userprofile%
where the user has write and execute privileges rather than using MSI
and/or installing their software under the Program Files folder where a
limited user won't have permission to install software. Oh yeah, like
I'm entralled with Google's want to avert security and takes away my
control of updates. Yes, Chrome is a lot faster than IE (and Firefox)
impact to you depends on whether or not you actually use Ajax web apps.
> Why does Microsoft have to always lie... >.>
Why do you?
So is Firefox paying you to proselytize their Google-sponsored web
browser? Oh, I suppose you're also ignorant that Google pays $50M, or
more, a year to Mozilla.
Is IE the best web browser? Depends on how you use your web browser.
content and AJAX apps) web pages but it is so minimally configurable
that I felt it was a child's toy. I also do NOT like their search
integrated into the address bar. I definitely don't appreciate they
change the state of my host whenever they want. If they made their
product more configurable (through the UI) and made their install
compliant with normal security measures and let the user choose when to
update then I would've left that web browser on my host. It would've
provided a good check of web page layout against IE's rendering.
Firefox has a ways to go for recovery, including separate processes for
the tab resources. Oh wait ... no point going into why one web browser
is better than another depending on its use and user preferences because
you're not interested in facts.