Internet Explorer 9...

[W3MIV]

The new version has been released finally, and I have been giving it some tryouts. As some of you may (or may not) know, I am a dedicated fan of FF. That said, I must admit that MS seems to have done their HW on this new IE. It is actually faster than either FF or Chrome. I am using the 64-bit flavor, and I am informed that the 32-bit is even faster than this one.

Maybe MS has finally done something right with a browser? Time will tell. This new version includes the tracking protection feature everyone has been jumping up and down over as a FF add-on, and it seems that IE is now compatible with many add-ons from developers doing the same bits for FF.

I realize this thread will attract the usual parochial pom-pom shaking by MS detractors, but as a dyed-in-the-wool FF man I must give credit where credit is due. Also, to my mind, criticism offered without actual trial of the software targeted is mere bullshit.

Only time and use will reveal the real utility of this new browser. So far, I give it high marks.

[NQ6U]

The big problem with using IE is that leaves you open to various exploits due to Microsoft's continuing lack of attention to security issues.

[KC2UGV]

I'll take security over speed.

[WØTKX]

Using Chrome a lot more these days, but still use FF, especially for password sites. IE is usually fired up as the work environment is MS centric. Use Safari mobile 'cause of the iPhone.

But I will applaud the efforts of Microsquish if they really fix it.

[W3MIV]

The big problem with using IE is that leaves you open to various exploits due to Microsoft's continuing lack of attention to security issues.

Yes and no. I believe the problem is more that of Windows than of IE, per se. We have had no lack of threats exploiting FF or Chrome.

You are relatively safe because you use a Mac OS which is about six percent or so of the market. So, too, with Linux distros, which own about the same or a tiny slice more share than Mac. My xyl, who uses Macs, was recently shocked (yes, SHOCKED!) to find that she was attacked by malware through Skype. It locked her system entirely, refusing to let her even reboot without first agreeing to instal what purported to be a "virus protection system." It took the geeks at the Apple Store to restore her system to normal operation. (Need I say that she is a wonderful graphic designer but knows nothing at all about her hardware, and when it comes to anything Macintosh, my eyes simply roll back in my head and I pass out.)

[KC2UGV]

Yes and no. I believe the problem is more that of Windows than of IE, per se. We have had no lack of threats exploiting FF or Chrome.

You are relatively safe because you use a Mac OS which is about six percent or so of the market. So, too, with Linux distros, which own about the same or a tiny slice more share than Mac. My xyl, who uses Macs, was recently shocked (yes, SHOCKED!) to find that she was attacked by malware through Skype. It locked her system entirely, refusing to let her even reboot without first agreeing to instal what purported to be a "virus protection system." It took the geeks at the Apple Store to restore her system to normal operation. (Need I say that she is a wonderful graphic designer but knows nothing at all about her hardware, and when it comes to anything Macintosh, my eyes simply roll back in my head and I pass out.)

Actually, for the third year running, Chrome has escaped the Pwn2Own contest unscathed. All other browsers were beaten.

I'd say Chrome is a bit better, security wise.

[W4GPL]

I realize this thread will attract the usual parochial pom-pom shaking by MS detractors, but as a dyed-in-the-wool FF man I must give credit where credit is due. Also, to my mind, criticism offered without actual trial of the software targeted is mere bullshit.

As a Linux advocate, I come from a large community of of pom-pom shakers. It's entirely possible that IE9 is all the things you say it is and more. The problem isn't the functionality of the software, but rather Microsoft's business philosophy. Microsoft has grossly ignored industry standards in an effort to force other businesses into using a single platform. Instead of embracing cooperative projects, they went their own direction with things like ASP, ActiveX, and now Silverlight.

Yes, someone needed to show Flash the door, but to do it by creating an equally inferior application instead of working with Google & the Mozilla Foundation on HTML5 and WebGL is just silly. Yet again, web developers are forced to pick sides, ultimately alienating one user or another. At some point Microsoft needs to realize Apple, Linux, RIM, and Google aren't going away. People will loath their products a lot less if they simply embrace interoperability.

Microsoft's motives are sinister and that ultimately slows down innovation and productivity.

[W4GPL]

I'd say Chrome is a bit better, security wise.

Unquestionably. The process accounting, the sandboxing, all of it.. no browser compares to the security Chrome offers. Not to mention it's considerably faster in Linux compared to Firefox.

Now if they'd just add a mouse center-click scroll option in Linux & Mac, I'd be a happy camper.

[w3bny]

Foxyfluff, adblock plus, and noscript FTW! The ONLY reason I still keep IE around is 1. Work demands it (that and its there machine) some sever apps at home demand it. other that that, I dont use it.

[WØTKX]

Before MS did TCP/IP I learned Xenix, BSD via AT&T, Apollo Domain and HP-UX. Later, as I got my silly MCSE the trainers at the "boot camp" told those of us with 'Nix experience to not fight the way MS does it... you won't learn the idiosyncrasies of the MS way. They were right, MS did some silly stuff to avoid standards.

I love my trackball and Bamboo tablet combo. Dunno about running it in Linux, but I'm tempted to build a dedicated CAD and rendering Linux box. Mostly for Blender. Damn program is hard, but I'm getting there.