Is IE8 the Vista of web browsers?
-
lol it reminds me a lot of this comic sketch/mac ad. Security Parody[^]
<>< :: have the courage to use your own reason
I hadn't seen that one, thanks for the laugh.
-
There's a site I visit via ssl that apparently has both secure and non secure content being displayed. I know this because IE8 throws a message box in my face each and every time I visit warning me of this. Yeah. I get it. They're trying to help me make my browsing more secure (or at least promote a little plausible deniability). However, this is a site I trust, so I'd like to disable this annoying warning. Either for this site or for good. But neither option appears to exist. I simply have to live with MS doing the Will Robinson thing each and every time I go there. Is this the new Vista like way of doing things? Annoy the crap out of your users for their own good, without giving us any way of controlling the experience. Why does UAC come to mind? Of course, ultimately the solution was simple. I just use Firefox for that site. These guys really live in their own little world, don't they?
Christopher Duncan Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes www.PracticalUSA.com
Yes. In in that it is a first step in getting rid of damning legacy, IE8 is the Vista of the IE series. Things is with IE8 though we get compatibility mode - a big button at the top of the window that you can press whenever you think the page doesn't look quite as nce as it should do. Sometimes they even press it for you. Bear in mind though that in 99% of case its about whether or not an image fits snugly against its neighbour instead of having a world ending 1 pixel gap between the two. The security warning has always been there. Knowing what its for I would never switch it off. You see, when that helpful little padlock icon is there I am re-assured that everything I type into the form is going to be sent to the site in a secure fashion. But wait. The popup just told me that there is content that hasn't come from the secure site that I trust. Now, what kind of content is that I wonder? OK, if its just an image then it shouldn't be considered a big deal, but what it it a hidden iframe? If I type my credit card number into the iframe, where is it going to go, and how will it be sent. This is also why you get a warning when crossing from https to http and especially why cross-site scripting isn't allowed. BTW. I like IE8, so far. The RC doesn't crash twice a day like the beta did, presumably because the feedback data helped stamp out bugs and its got some useful developer tools built right in which even Firefox doesn't have until you've added 3 1/2 plugins and then configured them.
-
is let those browser-sniffers fail hard. The preferred, standards-compliant method is to use capability-sniffing, not browser-sniffing. If a site is changing what it does based on the browser name, it is (almost always) badly designed and needs to be corrected. Opera, the king of all browsers (suck it, Safari), had to create a spoofing mechanism just to deal with the idiot browser-sniffing sites. I don't know if that's what IE8's compatibility mode does, but I suspect it is.
Don't let my name fool you. That's my job.
Naruki wrote:
If a site is changing what it does based on the browser name, it is (almost always) badly designed and needs to be corrected.
I wonder if ever had to create a cross-browser site... In my experience as a web-developer, in 90% of the cases there is no other way to make a modern web-page display correctly both in FF and IE6 without *some* conditional tags, user-agent parsing or JS agent-tests. When building a new site I always make it a habit of first testing it using FF and Firebug and then tweaking it to work with IE6. Where I live (Israel) more then 50% of the Internet users are still using IE6... I believe that every web-developer in here can understand my frustration :~
-
There's a site I visit via ssl that apparently has both secure and non secure content being displayed. I know this because IE8 throws a message box in my face each and every time I visit warning me of this. Yeah. I get it. They're trying to help me make my browsing more secure (or at least promote a little plausible deniability). However, this is a site I trust, so I'd like to disable this annoying warning. Either for this site or for good. But neither option appears to exist. I simply have to live with MS doing the Will Robinson thing each and every time I go there. Is this the new Vista like way of doing things? Annoy the crap out of your users for their own good, without giving us any way of controlling the experience. Why does UAC come to mind? Of course, ultimately the solution was simple. I just use Firefox for that site. These guys really live in their own little world, don't they?
Christopher Duncan Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes www.PracticalUSA.com
To stop this message, you need to set "Display mixed content" to "enabled". If you see the security warning box, click "More info" button (bottom left of the dialog). Click the last link "I'm having trouble using some websites what includes mixed content, what do I do?" which tell you where to set it.
TOMZ_KV
-
There's a site I visit via ssl that apparently has both secure and non secure content being displayed. I know this because IE8 throws a message box in my face each and every time I visit warning me of this. Yeah. I get it. They're trying to help me make my browsing more secure (or at least promote a little plausible deniability). However, this is a site I trust, so I'd like to disable this annoying warning. Either for this site or for good. But neither option appears to exist. I simply have to live with MS doing the Will Robinson thing each and every time I go there. Is this the new Vista like way of doing things? Annoy the crap out of your users for their own good, without giving us any way of controlling the experience. Why does UAC come to mind? Of course, ultimately the solution was simple. I just use Firefox for that site. These guys really live in their own little world, don't they?
Christopher Duncan Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes www.PracticalUSA.com
Chris, I read the comments and tried to figure if someone has mentioned this. It is not about trusting the site or not, this is not what SSL is for, SSL is for ensuring that a THIRD party, say a hacker, won't be able to understand the messages being sent and this scenario is irrelevant to a site that you trust or don't trust because the third party will always exist. My point is disabling the warning doesn't relate to "I trust the site". Please correct me if I am wrong. Adam
Make it simple, as simple as possible, but not simpler. Looking to hire .NET Software Consultant in London or South East UK? My Technical Blog on ASP.NET, C# & SEO
-
I've got to agree. IE7 was the vista of browsers. IE8 is the Weven of browsers.
Today's lesson is brought to you by the word "niggardly". Remember kids, don't attribute to racism what can be explained by Scandinavian language roots. -- Robert Royall
-
It's a good thing generally, although it will be years until we are ridden of the last versions of IE7. So until then, we'll be coding for IE8, Chrome, Firefox, Opera etc, whilst adding hacks for IE7, and then separate hacks for IE6. Yes, we still get alot of hits for IE6, and since everytime a version of XP is installed it is the default browser, it will be around for a while. At least the end is in sight!
Cognize2k wrote:
At least the end is in sight!
I estimate another 6.5 years.
-
is let those browser-sniffers fail hard. The preferred, standards-compliant method is to use capability-sniffing, not browser-sniffing. If a site is changing what it does based on the browser name, it is (almost always) badly designed and needs to be corrected. Opera, the king of all browsers (suck it, Safari), had to create a spoofing mechanism just to deal with the idiot browser-sniffing sites. I don't know if that's what IE8's compatibility mode does, but I suspect it is.
Don't let my name fool you. That's my job.
-
Naruki wrote:
If a site is changing what it does based on the browser name, it is (almost always) badly designed and needs to be corrected.
I wonder if ever had to create a cross-browser site... In my experience as a web-developer, in 90% of the cases there is no other way to make a modern web-page display correctly both in FF and IE6 without *some* conditional tags, user-agent parsing or JS agent-tests. When building a new site I always make it a habit of first testing it using FF and Firebug and then tweaking it to work with IE6. Where I live (Israel) more then 50% of the Internet users are still using IE6... I believe that every web-developer in here can understand my frustration :~
yuvalyer wrote:
Where I live (Israel) more then 50% of the Internet users are still using IE6...
I am from tiberias and I couldn't agree more, in my workplace, almost 50% are still in IE6 and it's the ugliest browser there is... Web developing is realy painful task. We just make it work on IE7 (all our production computers have IE7) and just check in FF if it looks normal :-D
-
This was in IE6 and 7 as well (if I remember rightly). Now follow carefully: 1. Find the Tools menu. I'll go grab a coffee while you're looking for it. 2. Select Internet Options 3. Hit the 'Security' tab 4. Select the 'Custom level...' 5. Scroll down the list until you find the 'Miscellaneous' section 6. If you are brave and promise not to sue me if it causes The End Of The World For Your Computer, then find the 'Display Mixed Content' and select 'Enable'. 7. Hit 'OK' about 37 times. Now give it a try. People think IE is a bloated mess with confusing and hard to find settings. I think that's harsh and uncalled for.
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
People think IE is a bloated mess with confusing and hard to find settings. I think that's harsh and uncalled for. Hard to find settings? No not really--until you begin to use another browser like Firefox; then you see the relative ease you were missing out on. Bloated mess? Not at all. There aren't enough features for it to be bloated. IE is just now (with version 8) catching up to features that have already been in Firefox 3 and other browsers for a while now. I'll give examples: - Smart Address Bar - "Find on Page" - Enhanced Tabbed Browsing - Inprivate - Automatic crash recovery Furthermore, it seems that I still can't order my icons (like I used to be able to do in IE6). However the real problem developers have had with IE is its quirkiness in rendering (I'm still amazed at how PNGs didn't get full support until IE7). However IE8 is a promising segue to browsing standards. There will be unfortunate but necessary "growing pains" in which some developers will need to change their conditional code.
-
Naruki wrote:
If a site is changing what it does based on the browser name, it is (almost always) badly designed and needs to be corrected.
I wonder if ever had to create a cross-browser site... In my experience as a web-developer, in 90% of the cases there is no other way to make a modern web-page display correctly both in FF and IE6 without *some* conditional tags, user-agent parsing or JS agent-tests. When building a new site I always make it a habit of first testing it using FF and Firebug and then tweaking it to work with IE6. Where I live (Israel) more then 50% of the Internet users are still using IE6... I believe that every web-developer in here can understand my frustration :~
And a little bit of research will show you that you haven't done enough research if you still think browser-sniffing is required where feature-sniffing works. There are rare or other special cases, but the majority of cases do not require it. And the problem discussed here is the consequence of such sloppy practices. It's not easy at first learning this crap, but once you understand and practice it gets a lot easier.
Don't let my name fool you. That's my job.
-
yuvalyer wrote:
Where I live (Israel) more then 50% of the Internet users are still using IE6...
I am from tiberias and I couldn't agree more, in my workplace, almost 50% are still in IE6 and it's the ugliest browser there is... Web developing is realy painful task. We just make it work on IE7 (all our production computers have IE7) and just check in FF if it looks normal :-D
We are an Australian company and we develop and maintain an Australian Booking Engine for the corporate travel arena and our site is mainly accessed by clients from mid to large organisations. Our users are forced by their company polices to use a certain browser and guess what we have 84% IE6, 13% IE7, 2% Firefox 2 and only 1% Firefox 3 usage. My feeling is that a lot of organisations have spent so much money on web proxies and enterprise firewalls that they really don't care what browser is installed on the client machine. And therefore the out-of-box browser is policy. And ability to use group policy to configure IE is a plus a guess. I believe that most Australian organisations will probably skip Vista and go from XP to Win 7 and therefore our next target browser after IE6 is IE8. That's provided MS does not include a Win 7 to XP downgrade path. Otherwise we be stuck with IE6 for a long long time.
-
Naruki wrote:
Opera, the king of all browsers
I have to agree about Opera. Google sure likes it, that's for sure. They stole a whole bunch of its features for Chrome.
Opera was the principal browser innovator, e.g, the first to introduce tabbed browsing. Firefox merely popularised it. Things often work that way. The innovator is not as successful as the populariser. I first used Opera in about 1998-9. I still use it but today I prefer Firefox as my primary browser. recently I've also been using Chrome. I find that each of these is better for certain tasks.
Kevin