CrazyBrowser - IE fans, you guys have to try this

[e_dawg]

It adds the tabbed-browsing and pop-up blocking features of Opera and Mozilla with that familiar look and feel that you have grown to love with IE.

http://forums.storagereview.net/viewtopic.php?p=57636

 

[CougTek]

I already said what I think about it on SR. I'll let Mercutio comment here.

...scratch that, saw something I cannot not comment.

that familiar look and feel that you have grown to love with IE.

grown to love IE? :eekers: Edit your index.dat and tell me about it. After downloading patches after patches for YEARS, it still needed an 11MB service pack in order to finish the job of patching all the remaining known holes. Crazy whatever, just like the NetCaptor I used some one year and a half ago, is only IE with a face-lift. Yes, it's better, or should I say, less worst.

I agree that browsing on IE isn't a bad experience in itself, but once your factor in all the cons of IE, I can't figure it out how you can still grow to love it.

Please don't take it as a flame on you but rather as a rant on IE. Fatigue might make sound a bit harsh.

 

[timwhit]

Seems good to me. I think I will start using it. Thanks for the heads up e_dawg!

I don't actually read the SR computers section anymore because it all seems boring for some reason.

 

[e_dawg]

I have always enjoyed using IE for the most part. I don't care about all these security holes and patches. If the browsing experience is good (and it was for me), and nothing malicious happens to my computer in the process, then I have no reason to hate IE. Everybody talks about all the horrific security holes in IE as if they have been personally traumatized by it in some way, but I bet 99% of the people who complain about how bad it is have never actually had a security problem affect them personally. Seems like a case of mob mentality to me.

IE bashers have gotten so brazen recently now that the competition has finally delivered something of significance. Remember, before recent builds of Mozilla and Opera 6, nothing could touch IE as a browser.

Sigh... I guess it has always been fashionable to bash MS products.

 

[timwhit]

Is there anyway to get the google toolbar in Crazy Browser? That would make it perfect...

 

[timwhit]

I found that you can just type what you want to search for in the address bar and hit alt-enter to do a google search. Pretty simple, so my solution is solved.

 

[timwhit]

Pretty simple, so my solution is solved.

Hmm, it seems that I need to go to sleep. That should be problem.

 

[time]

Remember, before recent builds of Mozilla and Opera 6, nothing could touch IE as a browser.

Sigh... I guess it has always been fashionable to bash MS products.

It must be interesting to live in a dreamworld. Is the sky pink or green?

IE 3.0 was absolutely god-awful rubbish.

IE 4.0 was crash-prone buggy software.

It was only with IE 5+ that M$ could finally be taken seriously. Okay, maybe "seriously" isn't exactly the right word. How about "finally usable"? That's if you don't care about the security of your system, or course. Or did you think CougTek has been making up the security patch news to liven up his days?

No, it hasn't always been "fashionable" to bash MS products. In the old days, people didn't believe you if you said that Word was only suitable for one page letters, or that it was prone to eating documents (it's vastly improved now, at least in those respects).

For the first few years of Windows, I think most people made allowances for the new technology. But patience started to wear thin when Windows 95 came along.

The frustrating part for me is the recurrent M$ strategy, evident in IE (and propagated through their web development products), of changing the rules until all the other players drop out. The new rules are often stupid, and the world has to deal with them forever more.

Obviously none of this troubles you, or the fact that you're supporting a criminal company in the specific area it was found guilty. :-?

 

[Mercutio]

That's funny. I'm pretty sure I always bashed MS products.

IE has never, IMO, been a "good" browser. It is a barely acceptable minimum; since it presents pages reasonably well, but lacking some basic functionality (like progress bars that actually indicate progress, that's all it will be.

I should take back bashing Microsoft products a little. I don't think there's anything wrong with Encarta. Or their input devices, except the ergonomic keyboards. If pressed I'll even say nice things about Windows 2000. But IE is somewhere down on the list, next to DOS 4, BOB and WSH. Not good at all.

 

[Sol]

Well I can correct you on at least one thing there Mercutio... It was a little noticed fact that not long before they released Windows XP MS released the Microsoft Intellimouse Explorer II to replace the Intellimouse Explorer I that they never admited did not work with Windows 2000... The only outward difference between the two is some small print on the bottom of the mouse.

This sort of thing isn't exactly par for the course with MS... but the way they swept it under the rug does tend to cast doubt on thier other hadware... Especially since you may have noticed that with MS technical support is extra.

 

[e_dawg]

IE 3.0 was absolutely god-awful rubbish.

IE 4.0 was crash-prone buggy software.

It was only with IE 5+ that M$ could finally be taken seriously. Okay, maybe "seriously" isn't exactly the right word. How about "finally usable"? That's if you don't care about the security of your system, or course. Or did you think CougTek has been making up the security patch news to liven up his days?

IMO, IE 3.02 and 4.01 were far better than the sluggish and supremely unstable Netscape. Almost every version of Netscape I used until... well, Mozilla 1.0, which is not even Netscape anymore, was slower and less stable than its IE counterpart. And you're right, IE 3 and 4 weren't exactly that stellar either, but it was the fact that Netscape was so sh*tty that I simply couldn't use it. IE was at least "acceptable" through every version in my experience, so I always went with it over Netscape.

You have to understand that I was not a MSFT devotee all my life. In fact, I was on that anti-MSFT bandwagon back in the late 90's, and was constantly trying to use alternatives like Netscape and Linux as a substitute for not-so-good MSFT products in the mid 90's. But in the late 90's kept coming back to MSFT because I found I preferred using its programs over its competitors.

Were they always technically superior? No. Were they always more secure? No. But I usually enjoyed using and supporting their software more than the others... and in the end, that is what's important. (Office 97+ over WP, Lotus, and StarOffice; Win 98 and 2k over RH 6.0, 7.0, Caldera 2.4, Mandrake 7.1; IE 3.02, 4.01, 5, 5.5 SP1, and 6.0 SP1 over Navigator 3.*, 4.*, and 6). Navigator 7 (well, Mozilla 1.*) is the only good one.

The frustrating part for me is the recurrent M$ strategy, evident in IE (and propagated through their web development products), of changing the rules until all the other players drop out. The new rules are often stupid, and the world has to deal with them forever more.

Obviously none of this troubles you, or the fact that you're supporting a criminal company in the specific area it was found guilty. :-?

It does bother me somewhat as a consumer, and it would bother me much more if their products still sucked (I wasn't too happy with Office before Office 97 and Windows before Win 98). But I honestly feel that since Win 98SE and Office 97 that their software was/is quite good. The point is that I will still go with whatever software I like using the most -- regardless of how supposedly devilish its business practices are. They could be like Nike and use child labour for all I care. Guess what? I still buy Nike products and will continue to do so as long as they work well for me. Same for MSFT.

As a businessperson, I admire and respect MSFT. Their aggressive and strategically potent moves were so effective that every single one of its competitors were left holding the proverbial bag. Incumbent after incumbent were brushed aside, helpless against the beast that was Microsoft. Promising newcomers didn't stand a chance. If they didn't write the book on business strategy, they sure re-wrote it. Ironically, they excelled at free market capitalism and perfect competition to the point that they turned most markets they entered into their own monopoly. It's not their fault that their competitors were no match and the FTC was sitting on its ass. Crying foul, quoting the rules, and making excuses are for losers. A tip of the hat to the master.

 

[e_dawg]

That's if you don't care about the security of your system, or course. Or did you think CougTek has been making up the security patch news to liven up his days?

Forgot to address this. As I mentioned before, I never was affected in any way by any of these suuposedly serious security issues. Why would I stop using IE if I never had any security problems with it? Also, I was saying that 99% of the users out there probably haven't been negatively affected by these security holes while using IE either. Of course I know all those security holes are true and legitimate. I was not saying Coug was making them up at all. What I question is the paranoia surrounding these security holes. As in, he was hyping it up like it was a big threat to mankind, which it is not. I would be more worried that someone went through my garbage and got all my credit card receipts which have my CC #, expiration date, and signature on it. Malicious attacks from the Internet while I'm using IE just aren't keeping me up at night for some reason...

 

[time]

It does bother me somewhat as a consumer, and it would bother me much more if their products still sucked (I wasn't too happy with Office before Office 97 and Windows before Win 9. But I honestly feel that since Win 98SE and Office 97 that their software was/is quite good.

In other words:

Bend over, and enjoy it.

 

[Jake the Dog]

i'm with e_dawg (us canines need to stick together!)

for what i use my home PC's for, i have the choice between a linux distro and an MS O/S. i choose MS for many reasons. as for browser, i much prefer IE6 over any of the other currently availavble browsers. of course that's my subjective opinion.

security issues don't bother me as i keep my systems up to date and 'well patched'. that fact that they need patching regularly does on occasions annoy me a little but hey, i'm used to it. besides, that's MS life and i got over it early on, perhaps some of you guys should too

my opinion changes however when it comes to using MS O/S's and enterprise products in a large enviroment. in such environments, it's gotta be UNIX all the way.

 

[e_dawg]

Hey, enough with the snide remarks, time... I started this thread with the intention of letting fellow IE fans know about this great little program. I didn't set about challenging all Mozilla/Opera users and Microsoft bashers. Leave that for the pub and brewery.

 

[e_dawg]

BTW, thanks for the support, Jake. Life's tough being outed as a Microsoft devotee.

 

[Buck]

Since we're on the subject of Microsoft. I just sold a copy of Windows XP (which is normal for me), but this copy was already registered in my name. So, I proceeded to install it on the customer's computer that I built, and during the activation sequence, I was told that this copy was registered to someone else and I was recommended to call Microsoft at a toll-free number. Hence, I duly called, talked with a friendly bloke who gathered the activation key from the Setup Screen and the Product Key from the CD. Then he gave me a new activation key and I was on my way. I verified that the Product Key that came with the CD was now connected with the customer that I sold the license to, and he concurred. Within a matter of a few minutes (about 5) everything was settled.

Now, some may view this as a negative experience, and I viewed as a positive one. It was very easy to transfer the license, and as long as I keep my self honest, everything will be peachy.

Also, on the subject of IE. It is true that there are many patches for (almost as many as there have been recent upgrades and Gecko changes to Mozilla) it, but the software works the way it is supposed and at a decent speed. The only thing I’ve seen run quite a bit faster on a Windows system is the embedded core of Mozilla (pure Gecko), which lacks some of the extra features of a full-fledged browser. Security issues you say? Give Linux and its support cast of software some time. Once they are mainstream, more issues will arise. Here is a recent Linux/Apache issue: http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/security/Content/2002.09.13.html

If you give people time, they’ll find problems with almost any software.

Since we're on the subject of Microsoft. I just sold a copy of Windows XP (which is normal for me), but this copy was already registered in my name. So, I proceeded to install it on the customer's computer that I built, and during the activation sequence, I was told that this copy was registered to someone else and I was recommended to call Microsoft at a toll-free number. Hence, I duly called, talked with a friendly bloke who gathered the activation key from the Setup Screen and the Product Key from the CD. Then he gave me a new activation key and I was on my way. I verified that the Product Key that came with the CD was now connected with the customer that I sold the license to, and he concurred. Within a matter of a few minutes (about 5) everything was settled.

Now, some may view this as a negative experience, and I viewed as a positive one. It was very easy to transfer the license, and as long as I keep my self honest, everything will be peachy.

Also, on the subject of IE. It is true that there are many patches for (almost as many as there have been recent upgrades and Gecko changes to Mozilla) it, but the software works the way it is supposed and at a decent speed. The only thing I’ve seen run quite a bit faster on a Windows system is the embedded core of Mozilla (pure Gecko), which lacks some of the extra features of a full-fledged browser. Security issues you say? Give Linux and its support cast of software some time. Once they are mainstream, more issues will arise. Here is a recent Linux/Apache issue: http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/security/Content/2002.09.13.html

If you give people time, they’ll find problems with almost any software.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not very happy with Microsoft and its monopoly; it would be great to have good operating system with great software support. But, at present, that has not happened.

 

[Mercutio]

Ah yes Buck, but when bugs like that are found in products like Apache, usually there is a patch available within an hour, and sometimes in less than 15 minutes.

I don't think that's something Microsoft can claim. Ever,

But I digress.

 

[cquinn]

There is a difference between having a bugfix, and having a bugfix
that itself has been certified and tested as bugfree.

 

[Cliptin]

There is also a difference between a security hole and a security threat.

 

[Fushigi]

IMO, IE 3.02 and 4.01 were far better than the sluggish and supremely unstable Netscape.

IE 3 & 4 couldn't even render HTML properly. I'll take a sluggish but proper rendering over fast but wrong any day of the week. Netscape 4.x, even with the occasional crashes, was a better product at the time.

But with IE 5 and newer, IE has been the superior product. IE 6 with all known patches applied is my current browser of choice. I occasionally use Opera & Moz and keep Netscape installed for testing but what I end up using is IE. The last time I checked, Opera & Moz still had quirks that prevented some sites I use, most notably my web-based email, from working properly. I couldn't even log in under Opera.

- Fushigi