Interesting Game on my Desktop - it is called IE8 [modified]

[Baeltazor]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA YEAH I AGREE! :-D

[GDMFSOB]

Well I dont know, I have had it for about 8 weeks now and no problems at all?? i actaully installed it becuase ie 7 kept crashing

[DogGoneDog]

IF you dig you can find Adblocker for the new firefox. The old firefox had the maker and they have a website. I don't have it here a work but I will repost tonight. The only thing I can find or make work is my Norton Security tool bar. Anyone find that?

Everyone's entitled to my opinion

[C Bates]

SRWare Iron -- Chrome built w/o Google's data gathering.

[Kevin McFarlane]

WizardMaster wrote:

IF you dig you can find Adblocker for the new firefox.

I was referring to his comment about moving to Google Chrome, which has no ad blocker. It seemed odd to move from FF 3.5.1 because of broken ad blocker to a browser which has none at all! Anyway, it seems that it's only him who has this problem with FF 3.5.1 and Ad Blocker judging from other posters.

Kevin

[Doug Perreault]

I don't recall that I've had IE8 crash since I made two changes. First, I found my CPU was overheating so I cranked the fan up. Temps have gone down from 80C to 45C and things have gone a whole lot better since. Amazing how many crashes we blame on software that could be due to some pet hair in the fan. The other thing is, if you have the UAC turned off in Vista, you might want to check your permissions in your registry. Click the Start Button, type in Regedit and press Enter (once Regedit shows in the search results). In Regedit, right click on HKey_Classes_Root and click on Permissions. If you've not done this recently and you've been running with UAC off, I can almost bet you will find the message "No permissions have been assigned for this object." I have found this issue to be a cause of a huge number of problems. After fixing this (see http://www.brianpeek.com/blog/archive/2007/11/29/weird-vista-registry-issue.aspx[^]) I rarely have any crashes with Vista or IE8. Firefox doesn't crash either, but I prefer to use IE8 because I often need to use the Print Preview feature and some of the print options that IE8 just does better than any other browser out there. I usually open all the articles I find interesting in e-mail newsletters first, then close them as I read them. I can have multiple IE8 instances with dozens of tabs in each and I don't have a problem with crashes.

[VEMS]

I uninstalled IE8 on Vista, misbehaving. I will wait for the second patch. Along with that, I disable Flash 10, tooo many crashes using either.

modified on Monday, July 20, 2009 10:58 AM

[Trevortni]

:omg: Does this really work? There is a reason I've reverted back from both IE7 and IE8, after using either for an hour or so, you see.... (Most of that hour spent trying to find a way to fix the UI).

[LloydA111]

Yes it does work :-D On XP anyway, I guess it works on Vista and W7

If everything was not true, would it be not true that everything is not true? So by saying everything is not true, you are automatically denying that everything is not true. Im so confused...

[Trevortni]

Thanks! I'm going to try this on the computer I don't really care about! :-D

[LloydA111]

Your welcome :) However, since trying it again earlier today, it still loads the IE6 UI, but now when you type a url in, it now opens IE7:confused: Which is strange as it didnt before, although my computer has had updates recently, so I dont know if Microsoft have found out about this and got rid of it :( :thumbsdown:

If everything was not true, would it be not true that everything is not true? So by saying everything is not true, you are automatically denying that everything is not true. Im so confused...

[Trevortni]

You mean when you type it into the Address Bar? Or when you externally open with an address?

[LloydA111]

When I type it into the address bar, it now simply opens IE7:thumbsdown:

If everything was not true, would it be not true that everything is not true? So by saying everything is not true, you are automatically denying that everything is not true. Im so confused...

[Trevortni]

OK, I've tried it out.... When I type something into the Address Bar, it does open a new window for some reason, though at least it's still using the IE6 UI.

[Plamen Dragiyski]

I had issue with FF3+ for the image renderer. It seems more heavy than IE and FF2.0 ones and site with even one larger background I get not more than 1-2 fps while scrolling. => Hello Firefox 2.0 :)

[Homncruse]

Trying not to flame, but resistance to change like that is what breaks the web. IE6 needs to be *banned* from the internet. If you MUST insist on IE, at least use the latest version - or at *least* anything newer than IE6. Try doing web design/development with standards-compliant adherence and see how it fares in IE6... Argh.

[Trevortni]

Banned? Certainly sounds like flaming to me. I'm not the one who insists on IE. At home, I use Firefox. At work, I asked to use Firefox when I started there, and was told no. As for resistance to change, I'm not resistance to change - just being forced into making changes for the worse. Why oh why can't Microsoft let us fix these glaring UI errors? And don't get me started on the "ribbon". Fundamentally, I am opposed to the removal of choice. If you're not, then feel free to write web pages that won't allow me to visit them with IE6. Just don't be surprised when I choose not to visit them.

[Homncruse]

Any IT department who disallows Firefox for at least general-purpose usage has got to be - if I may be so bold - completely ignorant to the flaws within IE6. The size of the attack surfaces present on IE6 would require a digital equivalent of at least a zip code (U.S.), if not its own country code. For the legacy applications out there that only support IE6, use it for that purpose IF YOU MUST, but honestly, those applications rely on a broken browser and shouldn't be supported with an organization's money anyway. Ultimately, it's those applications and the IT departments supporting them who are holding the rest of the Web back; once that bottleneck is gone, we can move onto the Next Big Thing and let the progression of technology take its course. In many cases, making sure a site is IE6 compliant (and it very rarely is right out of the box, despite working in standards-compliant mode of EVERY OTHER MAJOR BROWSER) usually adds an extra 50% development/debugging time, and involves many hacks that aren't guaranteed long-term viability (IE6 could unlikely be patched, or other browsers might start recognizing IE6-specific tags, either by design or unintentionally) or otherwise drags down performance for other browsers via additional overhead processing time and/or filesize (CSS child selectors in IE6, anyone?). Yet we can't ignore the IE6 users - not yet, anyway - because they still make up a surprisingly large slice of the market pie. It's a vicious circle that few have attempted to break, and none successfully: do you denounce IE6 and eliminate or cripple that user base unless they upgrade, or do you support IE6 and give them no reason to upgrade? One scenario begets the other. I'm opposed to the removal of choice as well, but there is a limit - how long can the public expect a severely crippled browser to be supported? If you want to drive an old Studebaker around town, you're more than welcome to, but PLEASE don't expect us to lower freeway/highway speeds or carry antique parts in our auto parts shops to accommodate you when the rest of the world has long-since left your technology behind. At some point, you've got to let go. At least an old Studebaker has collector's value. IE6? Not so much. You may not embrace the ribbon (I'm indifferent), but that's why alternative (read: better) browsers with traditional interfaces exist. Or you could bite the bullet and get used to the new change or get ready to ditch all Microsoft software usage, because that seems to be the way all their applications are going. It h

[Cameron Vetter]

Uwe Keim wrote:

Firefox 3.5 took 60 seconds to start

You got lucky, on my machine it was taking 3-4 minutes to start...