In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Marcel Kilgus <ql- [EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>Malcolm Cadman wrote: >> So ... what in particular is painful about IE ? > >Mainly it's inherently unsafe to use it on the internet. No IE user >should be surprised if they catch some virus, worm or whatever. Apart >form that it's usually slower, it doesn't have proper keyboard >navigation, it lacks browser tabs, it doesn't recognize mouse >gestures, the bookmarks are inferior, it doesn't allow site specific >settings, the popup blocker is lacking, it doesn't have an ad filter, >it doesn't include an RSS client, it doesn't maintain state (opened >URLs) between sessions, when it crashes you cannot just continue to >work where you left off, there is no proper cookie management, it >renders pages wrongly and doesn't comply to most standards, it's not >very customizable. > >Okay, those were just the things that I could immediately come up >with. I guess with some effort the list would be longer ;-) All useful features, and yet not having them doesn't prevent enjoying the use. >> I use both IE ver6 and Opera ver6, and usually IE is much the quicker at >> finding sites and downloading ... despite Opera's claim to be the >> fastest thing in West ..... > >Opera 6 is how old? 5 years? Unlike IE, Opera HAS been improved in the >meantime. They're at version 9 now. Which is not comparing like for like. The Opera 6.04 [ free version ] that I am using says 2002, IE 6.0.29 [ came with Windows XP Professional ] says 2004. So, one around 4 yrs old and the other around 2 yrs old. I am also on dial up, not broadband, so speed deficiences show up more. I often run them side by side, just see how each performs. Also, for Geoff, Opera is often configured to identigfy itself as IE. PS ... Are you able to make to the Byfleet Show on 5th November 2006 ? -- Malcolm Cadman _______________________________________________ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
