3 ms·
That's pretty much complete BS. IE is no more dependent on Windows than Chrome is, but yes, various bits of the Windows UI are dependent on the Trident engine
by daeken 15y ago
That's pretty much complete BS. IE is no more dependent on Windows than Chrome is, but yes, various bits of the Windows UI are dependent on the Trident engine in IE. Either way, IE is no more inherently insecure than any other browser, despite its many vulnerabilities in the past. In addition, security improvements in the OS itself affect not only IE, but any browser running on top of it, making your claims even more silly.
I know you like to hate on MS (how many times have we been over this in the past few months?), but really, your claims here are completely unfounded. IE has a completely shit track record, but they have done a whole, whole lot in recent years to improve its security. Look at the many, many vulnerabilities in other browsers/layout engines compared to IE in recent years -- it's pretty startling. There are many reasons to hate on IE, but the effort put into securing it -- and the way they've gone about securing it -- is definitely not on of them.
- rbanffy 15y agoThe part you seem not to get is that if you have a bad engineered product, it's only natural that you have to invest more than those who don't have poorly engineered products, regardless of how bad your track record ends up being. As for your claim IE is no more dependent on Windows than Safari or Firefox, I will have to take your word for it, as it has been a long time (almost a decade) since I last inspected IE and what interfaces it used from the underlying OS. At that time, they both seemed very intimate. And yes. I derive a lot of fun from observing Microsoft. As for investments in an OS affecting all software running on it, it all depends on the fix not being the introduction of an improved API, as software using the old one will remain vulnerable.