4 ms·
Their browser is too tied to the OS. Why can't you have IE7+ on Windows 2000 or IE9 on Windows XP? the latest version of Firefox (3.6) works on both. And, why
by rythie 16y ago
Their browser is too tied to the OS.
Why can't you have IE7+ on Windows 2000 or IE9 on Windows XP? the latest version of Firefox (3.6) works on both.
And, why can't you install multiple versions of IE on a computer?
I think these things are holding a number of the remaining people back from upgrading.
- arethuza 16y agohttp://tredosoft.com/Multiple_IE http://tredosoft.com/Multiple_IE
- deleted 16y ago[deleted]
- ck2 16y agoIE Tester is significantly better than Multiple IE http://www.my-debugbar.com/wiki/IETester/HomePage http://www.my-debugbar.com/wiki/IETester/HomePage Runs IE 5.5, 6.0, 7.0, 8.0 and even 9.0 in tabs. Plus Multiple IE is quite a bit broken these days.
- eam 16y agoOr there's also, http://www.my-debugbar.com/wiki/IETester/HomePage http://www.my-debugbar.com/wiki/IETester/HomePage
- eli 16y agoI really like IE Tester, but it crashes every 10 minutes or so.
- ck2 16y agoHey even Firefox 3 won't work on Windows ME (grandma uses it). Firefox 2 is becoming too big of a security risk.
- rythie 16y agoThere is something call KernelEx apparently: http://sourceforge.net/projects/kernelex/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/kernelex/ which can fix that. Or you could use Opera, that even supports Windows 95! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_web_browsers#Historical_web_browsers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_web_browsers#Hist...
- est 16y agoI remember there was a HTML4.01 upgrade pack for IE back in Win95 or something. Why don't they do the same for IE6? A HTML5 upgrade pack for all IE.
- steve19 16y agoNo way! The last thing we need to support IE6+HTML5 as well as IE6. IE6 needs to die.
- nfnaaron 16y ago"Their browser is too tied to the OS." During the debates surrounding the anti-trust trial MS argued that that, browser tied to the OS, is a feature. They were close to saying that the browser is the OS.
- rythie 16y agoOnly because Microsoft made that stupid design choice, there is no reason it needed to be part of the OS. The numerous alternative browsers that work perfectly well illustrates that.
- nfnaaron 16y agoAgreed 100%.
- mlinsey 16y agoYes. This was all an unfortunate result of Microsoft taking the "Browser is the OS of the future" hype a little too literally...
- electromagnetic 16y agoYes, in recent years. However, Microsoft has being using IE to display information for a long time, it's just that recently it has become progressively more tied to explicitly IE to the point that things freak out and crash if you disable IE. It wouldn't be a problem if Microsoft had been using the 'browser' as an integral part of the OS for displaying information etc. However, Microsoft is using IE as an integral part of the OS. I remember back in my days of using MSN messenger it was easy as a drop of a hat to cause a BSOD by disabling IE and clicking the link in MSN to my hotmail inbox. It would try to launch IE, freak out, crash MSN, then Explorer and then you'd get a BSOD. From what I've heard, this problem has somehow gotten worse.
- rythie 16y agoThey could have chucked this into a separate library, they didn't have to link it to the same one that is used to browse the web. No one would care if the internal documentation browser wasn't updated.