I finally decided to go ahead and install IE 7 so my system would stop scolding me for it. I was enormously surprised that it did not bring back those blasted shortcut icons. It did, however, install itself in the quickstart menu without my permission (though surprisingly, not on the desktop) and in my Start menu.
It still sucks though. I haven't had time to find out how badly it sucks, but it does. IE's CSS support remains atrocious (and their beveled borders still look horrible), so that my blog still doesn't show the light-up LEDs. I'm just pleased I didn't have to reconfigure my whole system to roll back one of IE's crazy change sprees, though.
Ironically the updater also installed the latest version of the malicious software removal tool at the same time. Maybe that's why IE didn't screw me over. It certainly counts as malware to me!
ID:24251
 Dec 15 2006, 11:06 am
|
|
|
Dec 15 2006, 11:13 am
|
|
Jermman
 |
Oh come now, it's not that bad.
|
Yes it is.
| |
:O
| |
I got it yesterday and it doesent work with my windowblinds well, You are best off using firefox.
| |
Aha! I've invented a new witticism:
Microsoft's standards aren't. | |
Lummox JR wrote:
I finally decided to go ahead and install IE 7 so my system would stop scolding me for it. Yeah, I had to do the samething. It is horrible. It even loads slower now. Also, the tabs do not even work. It says when you click a link it will open in a new tab instead of a whole new window to make it more convienant, but, it lies. It opens a whole new window. They cannot even program the simplist things correctly. Also, last night, I was writing my final exam and I started writing it that very minute (well, half an hour earlier) and I had two pages done. My phone rang, so I went to go answer it (please note that I was ignoring the "updates ready" pop-up for the past 15 minutes because I was busy writing my essay). So, I went to go answer my phone and I came back and windows auto-restarted my computer because it installed the update by itself. I lost all my work. I know what you are going to say, "save your work", but, the fact is, I was only working for a half an hour, I was on a writing streak. Ideas kept popping into my head. If I stopped and saved, I would have lost the streak. I mean, was the update really that important? I doubt it. It was a small security fix. I would have updated in about an hour, but could it wait? No! I hate Windows! | |
Cavern wrote:
So, I went to go answer my phone and I came back and windows auto-restarted my computer because it installed the update by itself. I lost all my work. Yeah, I hate that "feature". Whoever decided that was a good idea should be shot. It's one reason why I instinctively press Ctrl-S whenever I've been typing something and I walk away from the computer. So much so that I even do it to webpages sometimes. Oops. =P Strangely, Windows hasn't been bugging me to install IE7 (though it did automatically apply itself to all the computers at work even though we expressly told it NOT to, causing all kinds of havoc), and I don't feel any need to do so anytime this century. Winamp is also bugging me to upgrade. I decided I didn't want any of its crappy new features (stop loading down my music player with all these stupid third-party plugins that I don't want!) so I'm not going to upgrade until there's one with a security fix. I can't find the STFU option though, so I'm reduced to closing the window every time. Interface designers take heed: Always include a STFU option. | |
Yeah, IE has never been much for CSS. I've had to create workarounds for half of my websites due to IE's crappy interpretation of distances, and borders.
Plus, I have to put in redundant lines of CSS and HTML just to get simple things to work, such as physical centering of DIVs. I'm a little resentful of Microsoft, after my legal copy of Microsoft Windows XP was flagged as "not genuine", and nagged me to the point I no longer install updates. You know, they warned us all for ages that Microsoft IE 7 would be 100% compliant with CSS, and that it would be safer, faster, and better, but it's ALL been wrong thus far. They even warned us that it would not render all the IE6 CSS hacks that were created due to their negligence in the first place. I read a statement from the development journal that went so far as to state that hacks were poor practice, and that no page-designer in his right mind would consider using an IE hack in his page. Given that 90% of the populace is ignorant of the fact that CSS even exists, none the less that IE doesn't render it right, so not making a page look the same as it should on a compliant browser just makes no freaking sense. Thanks Microsoft, you have just acknowledged the fact that you have made the internet a more complicated mess than it already is, and since most people are too ignorant (ignorant in the sense that they don't know better, not an insult) to switch over to better browsers, it affects over 85% of all the visitors to MY pages, which probably hints that the majority of the people on the internet use a shitty browser. | |
Crispy wrote:
Interface designers take heed: Always include a STFU option. Along with a STFU button, I have always needed a "I'm not an idiot" button. I hate it when things constantly pester you about this or that. Microsoft is HORRIBLE about that. You start windows for the first time, you get a "Windows Tour" think popping up. Then it tells you when it hides inactive icons(What is the point of hiding them if you are announcing it?), which normally pops up twice in a row. Then, you decide to make a nice document outlining your frustration of pestering on your new computer, and Microsoft pesters you about participating in the customer something or another program. So you tell that to fuck off, and start typing, then this dumb paperclip pops up telling you that it thinks you are writing a letter, so you kill that, only to have it come back again with some other stupid question or comment. I guess what I am getting at is that Linux is so much more user friendly. | |
Cavern, you can turn off the auto-reboot feature. Granted, by default it shouldn't even be on, but there are ways to disable it. You'll have to google around for it a bit, but I believe it has something to do with the group policy settings. I've been burned by it before as well.
| |
Aha. Thanks for the tip Lummox!
I notice, however, that since it's a group policy setting, XP Home users won't be able to set it. The crippleware operating system strikes again! Danial.Beta wrote: Along with a STFU button, I have always needed a "I'm not an idiot" button. Evidently Microsoft considers all of its users to be idiots. After all, if they weren't they'd be using Mac OS X or Linux, right? ;-) | |
I'd rather be an idiot than a loser (Mac).
| |
I finally decided to go ahead and install IE 7 so my system would stop scolding me for it. I was enormously surprised that it did not bring back those blasted shortcut icons. It did, however, install itself in the quickstart menu without my permission (though surprisingly, not on the desktop) and in my Start menu. Interesting. When I got around to installing it, it forced its way into my Desktop folder. What's more, if I delete the shortcut, it comes back! Also, I have grown to greatly dislike it. Not only does it not fix the CSS problems of old, but it introduces many new ones. A) It loads things slower. B) For some reason, now browser windows (such as showtexts in wiz_chat) seem larger, and puffier. C) I dislike having anything in my Desktop. D) It's Internet Explorer. Need I continue? | |
It's possible to permanently remove IE from your desktop, but I don't remember offhand how to do it. There should be info all over the Web though.
| |
"I read a statement from the development journal that went so far as to state that hacks were poor practice"
...in the very same blog that he mentioned conditional statements for IE. There really is very very little reason to use hacks when there's conditional statements which are far more reliable. The only problem is conditional statements aren't available in 100% of situations, but most of the time they are. "IE's CSS support remains atrocious (and their beveled borders still look horrible), so that my blog still doesn't show the light-up LEDs" I'm pretty sure that's down to the fact you're using some experimental CSS3 (border: transparent springs to mind), which the trident engine is literally incapable of handling. They wanted to include CSS3 in IE7 but couldn't because the engine was incapable without a total rewrite. Probably down to the fact some of the objects are OS widgets and not proper web controls at all. That said, I haven't got IE7 since it considers my perfectly valid windows key to be... well, invalid. Actually, two of them. Different ones. In case you're wondering who this is: Da_Rushyo. | |
Um, no. He's not using border:transparent. Anywhere. At all. The only border stuff he's using is colours and inset/outset, all of which is in CSS 2.1 (possibly earlier, I didn't check). And the LEDs are done using :hover and :before, which are also in CSS 2.1 (again, possibly earlier).
Besides: Transparent borders have been around since CSS2. Conditional statements are better than outright hacks, yes. The point remains that they shouldn't be necessary. | |
Hmm, you're right. I'd actually been referring to background: transparent because I knew border-color was CSS 2 but I thought all other transparent entries were CSS 3.
Of course conditional statements shouldn't really be needed but Ter's argument was that by not using hacks he would be forced to display buggy features to IE users, which isn't true. I mean, I hate IE as much as the next developer and as a user I find the frequency of crashes tremendously annoying, but it could theoretically be worse. Plus, sometimes I like to use the non-w3c tags provided by IE for interface reasons. Conditional statements are a nice way of handling that. At the end of the day for all the mess iframes are, they can still do very unique things. Quick question for you all, does IE 7's select tag respond to valid CSS? | |
Takha wrote:
I mean, I hate IE as much as the next developer and as a user I find the frequency of crashes tremendously annoying, but it could theoretically be worse. No, actually, the fact that it is almost compliant means that people will be willing to use it and hacks will be deemed acceptable(Normally at the cost of non-IE browser support). If it had no CSS support at all, than people would just be forced to use a better browser. I realize that there are a lot of computer illiterate people out there, but I'm sure 99% of them have a tech savvy friend, kid, grandkid, sibling, or uncle to install another browser. IE's half assed support is probably the worst possible scenario. | |
Most end users don't know what CSS is nevermind if their browser implements it properly. If IE had never implemented CSS 2, the majority of users would still be using CSS 1 and we'd be forced to include even greater legacy support.
Consider the recent update of IE 7, which many consider inferior to the more recent version of Opera. Opera barely exists as far as web prevelence is concerned (very few non-techies use it, typically around 1% of users utilise Opera), whilst IE7 forms between 5% and 40% of a typical web site's traffic already! | |