IE9 does not run on Windows XP
Don McKenzie
http://www.itnews.com.au/News/251335,ie9-a-non-event-for-most-businesses.aspx
Cheers Don...
============
--
Don McKenzie
Site Map: http://www.dontronics.com/sitemap
E-Mail Contact Page: http://www.dontronics.com/email
Web Camera Page: http://www.dontronics.com/webcam
No More Damn Spam: http://www.dontronics.com/spam
These products will reduce in price by 5% every month:
http://www.dontronics-shop.com/minus-5-every-month.html
http://www.dontronics-shop.com/ics.html
Bare Proto PCB for PIC or AVR projects?
"I'd buy that for a Dollar!".
Rob
> IE9 does not run on Windows XP
>
> http://www.itnews.com.au/News/251335,ie9-a-non-event-for-most-businesses.aspx
>
>
> Cheers Don...
>
> ============
>
What's Windows XP? :)
SG1
"Rob" <mesa...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4d7fc9fd$1...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
10 years ago XP meant experimental or expensive, can't quite remember
which?????
kreed
> IE9 does not run on Windows XP
>
>
> Cheers Don...
>
> ============
>
> --
> Don McKenzie
>
> Site Map: http://www.dontronics.com/sitemap
> E-Mail Contact Page:http://www.dontronics.com/email
> Web Camera Page: http://www.dontronics.com/webcam
> No More Damn Spam: http://www.dontronics.com/spam
>
>
> Bare Proto PCB for PIC or AVR projects?
> "I'd buy that for a Dollar!".
Who would use that piece of crap anyway when you have Firefiox ?
Barry OGrady
Firefox doesn't work with some links.
Don McKenzie
> On Mar 16, 5:26 am, Don McKenzie<5...@2.5A> wrote:
> Who would use that piece of crap anyway when you have Firefiox ?
I agree kreed, but...
Users are forced to use it when micro$oft, and some other products do an upgrade, or call a browser, and they do
actually force you into it.
If it was up to me, I would kill the thing.
There should be a law punishable by death (or worse), against apps not using the default browser.
Perhaps direct an attack of the relentless Roddle-bot, or the recently discovered Godzilla Sea Monkey, against
non-compliant authors.
I assume that xp users mustn't install the new version. After all, one so called expert in that article claims 67 per
cent of corporate desktops are using xp.
Cheers Don...
======================
Barry OGrady
>On 16-Mar-11 8:53 AM, kreed wrote:
>> On Mar 16, 5:26 am, Don McKenzie<5...@2.5A> wrote:
>
>> Who would use that piece of crap anyway when you have Firefiox ?
>
>I agree kreed, but...
>
>Users are forced to use it when micro$oft, and some other products do an upgrade, or call a browser, and they do
>actually force you into it.
>
>If it was up to me, I would kill the thing.
>There should be a law punishable by death (or worse), against apps not using the default browser.
>
>Perhaps direct an attack of the relentless Roddle-bot, or the recently discovered Godzilla Sea Monkey, against
>non-compliant authors.
>
>I assume that xp users mustn't install the new version. After all, one so called expert in that article claims 67 per
>cent of corporate desktops are using xp.
>
>Cheers Don...
Firefox still has bugs that make it unusable at times.
Mick DaDik
>
> Firefox still has bugs that make it unusable at times.
>
That used to be the case... but these days I havent found anything that
doesnt work that runs ok in ie... to a point that occasionally I get a
page not work as expected and I cut the URL into ie and it does the
same... My paranoia from years gone by has forced me into trying ie but
lately I have been very happy that Firefox is as compatible as ie.
Mik
terryc
> Firefox doesn't work with some links.
Shrug, that is the ste owner's problem and not mine and yes I do include
government pages as well.
terryc
> Firefox still has bugs that make it unusable at times.
Or webpages are none standard?
IME, FF bugs are fixed very quickly.
atec77
--
X-No-Archive: Yes
atec77
> On 16-Mar-11 8:53 AM, kreed wrote:
>> On Mar 16, 5:26 am, Don McKenzie<5...@2.5A> wrote:
>
>> Who would use that piece of crap anyway when you have Firefiox ?
>
> I agree kreed, but...
>
> Users are forced to use it when micro$oft, and some other products do an
> upgrade, or call a browser, and they do actually force you into it.
>
> If it was up to me, I would kill the thing.
> There should be a law punishable by death (or worse), against apps not
> using the default browser.
>
> Perhaps direct an attack of the relentless Roddle-bot, or the recently
> discovered Godzilla Sea Monkey, against non-compliant authors.
>
> I assume that xp users mustn't install the new version. After all, one
> so called expert in that article claims 67 per cent of corporate
> desktops are using xp.
>
> Cheers Don...
>
> ======================
>
>
much better
--
X-No-Archive: Yes
atec77
--
X-No-Archive: Yes
Barry OGrady
wrote:
I had to copy and paste a url from Firefox to IE for an insurance
quote site. Firefox ignored the link but IE worked, and that is not
the first time.
Having said that I do use Firefox as my default browser.
>Mik
Barry OGrady
Firefox still does not work with some links, and that bug is not
even acknowledged by FF promoters.
FF is constantly being updated to fix bugs that are not even
acknowledged.
How much does Mozilla pay people to pretend to like their product?
Barry OGrady
It is your problem when it happens to you.
Admittedly it happens less often these days.
Don McKenzie
> On 16/03/2011 8:44 AM, Don McKenzie wrote:
>> On 16-Mar-11 8:53 AM, kreed wrote:
>>> On Mar 16, 5:26 am, Don McKenzie<5...@2.5A> wrote:
>>
>>> Who would use that piece of crap anyway when you have Firefiox ?
>>
>> I agree kreed, but...
>>
>> Users are forced to use it when micro$oft, and some other products do an
>> upgrade, or call a browser, and they do actually force you into it.
>>
>> If it was up to me, I would kill the thing.
>> There should be a law punishable by death (or worse), against apps not
>> using the default browser.
>>
>> Perhaps direct an attack of the relentless Roddle-bot, or the recently
>> discovered Godzilla Sea Monkey, against non-compliant authors.
> Interestingly when you strip the microsoft browser from win7 it runs much better
I'm running w7, but if I were to strip IE out of it, what happens to apps that are looking for IE?
Like Mick, I usually try IE, if FF appears to have a problem, but generally don't find any real difference.
And when I wack web pages together, I always test on both FF and IE, and anyone who doesn't, is asking for future problems.
Been doing this since I was in short pants. :-)
Cheers Don...
atec77
> On 16-Mar-11 10:18 AM, atec77 wrote:
>> On 16/03/2011 8:44 AM, Don McKenzie wrote:
>>> On 16-Mar-11 8:53 AM, kreed wrote:
>>>> On Mar 16, 5:26 am, Don McKenzie<5...@2.5A> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Who would use that piece of crap anyway when you have Firefiox ?
>>>
>>> I agree kreed, but...
>>>
>>> Users are forced to use it when micro$oft, and some other products do an
>>> upgrade, or call a browser, and they do actually force you into it.
>>>
>>> If it was up to me, I would kill the thing.
>>> There should be a law punishable by death (or worse), against apps not
>>> using the default browser.
>>>
>>> Perhaps direct an attack of the relentless Roddle-bot, or the recently
>>> discovered Godzilla Sea Monkey, against non-compliant authors.
>
>> Interestingly when you strip the microsoft browser from win7 it runs
>> much better
>
> I'm running w7, but if I were to strip IE out of it, what happens to
> apps that are looking for IE?
no problems so far although the updates are a little slow it still works
>
> Like Mick, I usually try IE, if FF appears to have a problem, but
> generally don't find any real difference.
>
> And when I wack web pages together, I always test on both FF and IE, and
> anyone who doesn't, is asking for future problems.
falls over tough
>
> Been doing this since I was in short pants. :-)
reliase this win7 machine is a virtual and about the closest I get to
using their product
>
> Cheers Don...
>
> ==================
>
>
>
>
--
X-No-Archive: Yes
Don McKenzie
> How much does Mozilla pay people to pretend to like their product?
I don't ever recall ever paying Mozilla anything for anything, and I love tbird and ff.
Is this a trick question Barry?
Cheers Don...
=========================
Don McKenzie
>> I'm running w7, but if I were to strip IE out of it, what happens to
>> apps that are looking for IE?
> like ?
> no problems so far although the updates are a little slow it still works
:-)
I honestly haven't done a list, but Microsoft updates do at times, and I know many posters could come up with a list.
Many "about" links also goto IE.
I know I get slightly pissed off when I magically jump to IE at times.
> reliase this win7 machine is a virtual and about the closest I get to using their product
OK, I am running the other way, w7pro with virtual xp. works for me.
BTW what ever happened to the simple old:
=========
READY
>RUN_
=========
atec77
> On 16-Mar-11 10:39 AM, atec77 wrote:
>
>>> I'm running w7, but if I were to strip IE out of it, what happens to
>>> apps that are looking for IE?
>> like ?
>> no problems so far although the updates are a little slow it still works
>
> :-)
>
> I honestly haven't done a list, but Microsoft updates do at times, and I
> know many posters could come up with a list.
> Many "about" links also goto IE.
>
> I know I get slightly pissed off when I magically jump to IE at times.
>
>
>> reliase this win7 machine is a virtual and about the closest I get to
>> using their product
>
> OK, I am running the other way, w7pro with virtual xp. works for me.
>
> BTW what ever happened to the simple old:
> =========
> READY
> >RUN_
> =========
>
> Cheers Don...
>
> ==================
>
>
Sun have an excellent virtual machine and apart from a couple of
specific programs bill aint needed here anymore
--
X-No-Archive: Yes
Rob
Interesting when I look up web stats there are more people using IE that
Firefox.
Dennis #1
Not surprising really. The bulk of users are plug and play. Those not
involved in technical work are not motivated to learn, seek and download
something better. Same as most people are not interested in lifting the
bonnet on their car.
Don McKenzie
> Interesting when I look up web stats there are more people using IE that Firefox.
that may depend on which set of stats you look at
http://www.dontronics-shop.com/
Browsers Grabber Hits Percent
Firefox No 232394 40.6 %
MS Internet Explorer No 193424 33.7 %
Google Chrome No 85254 14.8 %
Opera No 26632 4.6 %
Safari No 22888 3.9 %
Mozilla No 9353 1.6 %
Unknown ? 1310 0.2 %
Netscape No 575 0.1 %
Epiphany No 212 0 %
Cheers Don...
========================
Petzl
It's now "normal" because of the browser wars to have some web sites
work with some browsers and not others.
I have faced up to using three Internet Explorer, Firefox (main) and
Google Chjrome (like reading foriegn news and it auto translates,
probably the most buggy though)
--
Petzl
Liberal Labor? Pot Kettle?
Ask your MP on their stand on a Moslem moratorium!
Vote 1, Christian Democratic Party, for one
Vote 2 Pauline Hanson for Senate
http://paulinehanson.net.au/ .
http://tinyurl.com/CDP-Candidates
Liberal Labor are like the Roman Republic where rich politicians try and induce votes by bribing plebians with elaborate promises and colloseum games.
kreed
> On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 14:53:00 -0700 (PDT), kreed
>
>
>
> <kenreed1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Mar 16, 5:26 am, Don McKenzie <5...@2.5A> wrote:
> >> IE9 does not run on Windows XP
>
> >>http://www.itnews.com.au/News/251335,ie9-a-non-event-for-most-busines...
>
> >> Cheers Don...
>
> >> ============
>
> >> --
> >> Don McKenzie
>
> >> Site Map:http://www.dontronics.com/sitemap
> >> E-Mail Contact Page:http://www.dontronics.com/email
> >> Web Camera Page:http://www.dontronics.com/webcam
> >> No More Damn Spam:http://www.dontronics.com/spam
>
>
> >> Bare Proto PCB for PIC or AVR projects?
> >> "I'd buy that for a Dollar!".
>
> >Who would use that piece of crap anyway when you have Firefiox ?
>
> Firefox doesn't work with some links.
Extremely rare for it not to work, I doubt I have had this problem in
the last year or so.
On the other hand, it depends on what sort of sites you visit, and
everyone is different.
kreed
> On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 13:07:00 +1100, Rob <mesam...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On 16/03/2011 8:53 AM, kreed wrote:
> >> On Mar 16, 5:26 am, Don McKenzie<5...@2.5A> wrote:
> >>> IE9 does not run on Windows XP
>
> >>>http://www.itnews.com.au/News/251335,ie9-a-non-event-for-most-busines...
>
> >>> Cheers Don...
>
> >>> ============
>
> >>> --
> >>> Don McKenzie
>
> >>> Site Map: http://www.dontronics.com/sitemap
> >>> E-Mail Contact Page:http://www.dontronics.com/email
> >>> Web Camera Page: http://www.dontronics.com/webcam
> >>> No More Damn Spam: http://www.dontronics.com/spam
>
>
> >>> Bare Proto PCB for PIC or AVR projects?
> >>> "I'd buy that for a Dollar!".
>
> >> Who would use that piece of crap anyway when you have Firefiox ?
>
> >Interesting when I look up web stats there are more people using IE that
> >Firefox.
>
> It's now "normal" because of the browser wars to have some web sites
> work with some browsers and not others.
> I have faced up to using three Internet Explorer, Firefox (main) and
> Google Chjrome (like reading foriegn news and it auto translates,
> probably the most buggy though)
> --
> Petzl
> Liberal Labor? Pot Kettle?
> Ask your MP on their stand on a Moslem moratorium!
> Vote 1, Christian Democratic Party, for one
> Liberal Labor are like the Roman Republic where rich politicians try and induce votes by bribing plebians with elaborate promises and colloseum games.
They are jus the 2 wings on the same bird of prey
Dennis #1
"kreed" <kenre...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:402d868d-97f4-4b0d...@18g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
=========================================
I've never had a problem with FF not opening any links. I have heard that
the only sites that have issues are those relating to some of the more
extreme fetish sites.
Rob
> Barry OGrady wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 10:16:26 +1100, terryc
>> <newsnine...@woa.com.au> wrote:
>>
>>> Barry OGrady wrote:
>>>
>>>> Firefox still has bugs that make it unusable at times.
>>>
>>> Or webpages are none standard?
>
>
>>> IME, FF bugs are fixed very quickly.
>>
>> Firefox still does not work with some links, and that bug is not
>> even acknowledged by FF promoters.
>
> occurs when it's been authored with something awful like 'Frontpage'
> incidentally.)
>
>> FF is constantly being updated to fix bugs that are not even
>> acknowledged.
>
> *bad* thing?
>
FF 4.0 out very soon BTW
Bill_h
> On 16/03/2011 6:26 AM, Don McKenzie wrote:
>> IE9 does not run on Windows XP
>>
>> http://www.itnews.com.au/News/251335,ie9-a-non-event-for-most-
businesses.aspx
>>
>>
>> Cheers Don...
>>
>> ============
>>
>>
> What's Windows XP? :)
What's IE? :)
--
Bill_h
terryc
2. You just ring up and ask them to post it out.
Parko
> Opera has a user-agent spoofing tool built-in, and I believe there's an
> add-on for Firefox.
Konqueror does this also, for quite a wide variety of browsers. Runs on
Windows too.
Barry OGrady
>I can't recall seeing a site that 'required' IE for a very, very long
>time (years).
>
>I can't run it, and would never want to anyway.
I still use Firefox on Windows XP, Windows 7, OSX, and Solaris 10,
in spite of its minor bugs.
It is a little annoying being forced to us IE when Firefox can't
handle a link though.
>Opera has a user-agent spoofing tool built-in, and I believe there's an
>add-on for Firefox.
>
>--
SG1
"Bill_h" <bil...@mindless.com> wrote in message
news:4d80ad18$0$29881$c3e8da3$5496...@news.astraweb.com...
According to some Internet Exploiter. Infinity Extreme. Insanity
Extroidinare. Or the browser I use.
>
>
>
> --
> Bill_h
Rob
> On 16-Mar-11 1:07 PM, Rob wrote:
>
>> Interesting when I look up web stats there are more people using IE
>> that Firefox.
>
> that may depend on which set of stats you look at
> http://www.dontronics-shop.com/
>
> Browsers Grabber Hits Percent
> Firefox No 232394 40.6 %
> MS Internet Explorer No 193424 33.7 %
> Google Chrome No 85254 14.8 %
> Opera No 26632 4.6 %
> Safari No 22888 3.9 %
> Mozilla No 9353 1.6 %
> Unknown ? 1310 0.2 %
> Netscape No 575 0.1 %
> Epiphany No 212 0 %
>
> Cheers Don...
>
> ========================
>
>
interesting that it varies so much my site is not a technical site
50.8 IE
21 FF
Don McKenzie
almost verifies what Dennis #1 said.
Cheers Don...
====================
--
Don McKenzie
Dontronics Blog: http://www.dontronics.com/blog
Dontronics Site Map: http://www.dontronics.com/sitemap
atec77
--
X-No-Archive: Yes
Huge Ackman
> IE9 does not run on Windows XP
>
> http://www.itnews.com.au/News/251335,ie9-a-non-event-for-most-businesses.aspx
>
>
> Cheers Don...
>
> ============
>
Been known for ages that IE9 isnt for XP. They would rather you buy new
than they support old. XP is just old.
kreed
> On 16/03/2011 6:26 AM, Don McKenzie wrote:
>
> > IE9 does not run on Windows XP
>
>
> > Cheers Don...
>
> > ============
>
> Been known for ages that IE9 isnt for XP. They would rather you buy new
> than they support old. XP is just old.
very reliable, stable and well documented though
will take some time for 7 to reach that stage.
Tom
And lot of real working software (like PLC development, micro
programming) doesn't run yet on Vista or 7
Tom
Rob
SP1 is out for W7
David Ross
wrote:
> IE9 does not run on Windows XP
>
> http://www.itnews.com.au/News/251335,ie9-a-non-event-for-most-businesses.aspx
>
> Cheers Don...
>
> ============
..And thats bad because...
David
Petzl
<wolv...@example.com> wrote:
>>
>
>Been known for ages that IE9 isnt for XP. They would rather you buy new
>than they support old. XP is just old.
Just "upgraded" to IE9 (home edition Win& 32 bit) and its still brokem
crap! Have to use Fire Fox as main browser
--
Petzl
Liberal Labor? Pot Kettle?
Ask your MP on their stand on a Moslem moratorium!
Vote 1, Christian Democratic Party, for one
Vote 2 Pauline Hanson for Senate
http://paulinehanson.net.au/ .
Huge Ackman
Everything good takes time to please people. Win XP is old and is
starting to be left out already. Oh sure, it will be years before it is
"win 98" old but it has already started down that path.
I know it seems unfair to update for the heck of it and if all you do is
the odd web site gawking and a bit of email and the usual crap, you dont
really need more. Hell, you can still drive a 1964 EH Holden if you want
- they were reliable and well built. It's just that all the bells and
whistles you get these days with newer cars arent in the EH as it was
built. Things exist in Win 7 that dont exist in XP. If you want or need
the new things or just want to remain viable, with your computer, for
longer, you will eventually choose to update but that doesnt mean that
Win 98SE wont work for you with a lot of web sites and email.
Huge Ackman
Surprisingly, it made my 2 64 bit Win 7s run a hell of a lot faster when
I put it in. Cant say why as nothing was going wrong with them before,
one which I only built the end of Jan 2011 and only a slacker machine,
I3 with 4gigs ram for dull jobs. The other, a laptop bought in 2007 only
a 1.86Mhz C2D with 4gigs. The laptop has 64 bit architecture, though -
the other doesnt. Still, both a real lot faster.
Huge Ackman
IE9 works here and pretty damned fast, too. What's broken for you?
Huge Ackman
Nothing wrong with old stuff. I reckon the D-type Jag was one of the
better looking machines built of its era. Hell, vintage cars can bring
in a lot of money, too!
Petzl
<wolv...@example.com> wrote:
>On 18/03/2011 6:50 PM, Petzl wrote:
>> On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 14:26:32 +1100, Huge Ackman
>> <wolv...@example.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Been known for ages that IE9 isnt for XP. They would rather you buy new
>>> than they support old. XP is just old.
>>
>> Just "upgraded" to IE9 (home edition Win7 32 bit) and its still brokem
>> crap! Have to use Fire Fox as main browser
>>
>IE9 works here and pretty damned fast, too. What's broken for you?
Yeah sure not according to everyone I know
Something has changed on its cookie storage/handling which means I
can't log into many websites. Commenting/messages on places like
YouTube/Twitter/Facebook and others is pretty useless, the pagelayout
from IE7 changed and don't like it,
Fact is FireFox works where IE8 and now IE9 don't and now use three
browsers (FF,IE,Chrome) whereas before I only used "Internet
Explorer". Futher fact is Microsoft since Gates left has become buggy
junk I will be faceing up to giving Google Chrome if they can get it
working
Rob
Yep had a bit of a play in one just the other day.
Rob
How's these stats. Off an image data base.
Windows XP 15481 (47.4 %)
Windows 7 5289 (16.2 %)
Macintosh 5177 (15.8 %)
Windows Vista 4694 (14.3 %)
Windows 1329 (4.0 %)
Unknown 511 (1.5 %)
Windows 2003 Server 70 (0.2 %)
Windows 2000 35 (0.1 %)
Windows 98 10 (0.0 %)
iPhone 3 (0.0 %)
.....................................
IE8 11603 (35.5 %)
Firefox 8177 (25.0 %)
IE7 5492 (16.8 %)
Safari 3183 (9.7 %)
Chrome 2671 (8.1 %)
IE6 1208 (3.7 %)
Unknown 139 (0.4 %)
Opera 87 (0.2 %)
IE5.5 24 (0.0 %)
IE5.0 8 (0.0 %)
Flock 4 (0.0 %)
iPhone 3 (0.0 %)
Don McKenzie
>> Nothing wrong with old stuff. I reckon the D-type Jag was one of the
>> better looking machines built of its era. Hell, vintage cars can bring
>> in a lot of money, too!
>
> Yep had a bit of a play in one just the other day.
A d type in oz?
that would be rare. wasn't an e?
Or do you mean a vintage car?
I had an FJ holden for years, and drove one recently, and was horrified. :-)
Then, my first car was a 1924 Rugby.
My first registered car was a 1938 Morris 8/40
Cheers Don...
Rob
> On 19-Mar-11 4:58 PM, Rob wrote:
>
>>> Nothing wrong with old stuff. I reckon the D-type Jag was one of the
>>> better looking machines built of its era. Hell, vintage cars can bring
>>> in a lot of money, too!
>>
>> Yep had a bit of a play in one just the other day.
>
> A d type in oz?
> that would be rare. wasn't an e?
>
Had a play with one of them as well. I'm now waiting for the rebuild of
another E so I can have a fiddle. Yep depends on who you know.
Jasen Betts
> On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 09:44:46 +1100, Don McKenzie <5...@2.5A> wrote:
>
>>On 16-Mar-11 8:53 AM, kreed wrote:
>>> On Mar 16, 5:26 am, Don McKenzie<5...@2.5A> wrote:
>>
>>> Who would use that piece of crap anyway when you have Firefiox ?
>>
>>
>>Users are forced to use it when micro$oft, and some other products do an upgrade, or call a browser, and they do
>>actually force you into it.
>>
>>If it was up to me, I would kill the thing.
>>There should be a law punishable by death (or worse), against apps not using the default browser.
>>
>>Perhaps direct an attack of the relentless Roddle-bot, or the recently discovered Godzilla Sea Monkey, against
>>non-compliant authors.
>>
>>I assume that xp users mustn't install the new version. After all, one so called expert in that article claims 67 per
>>cent of corporate desktops are using xp.
>>
>>Cheers Don...
>
> Firefox still has bugs that make it unusable at times.
IE can't download dynamic content over https.
--
⚂⚃ 100% natural
--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ne...@netfront.net ---
Jasen Betts
>>
>
> Firefox still does not work with some links, and that bug is not
> even acknowledged by FF promoters.
> acknowledged.
Unlike Microsoft I have never heard on Mozilla doing anything like
that.
Jasen Betts
> On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 14:26:32 +1100, Huge Ackman
><wolv...@example.com> wrote:
>
>>>
>>
>>Been known for ages that IE9 isnt for XP. They would rather you buy new
>>than they support old. XP is just old.
>
> Just "upgraded" to IE9 (home edition Win& 32 bit) and its still brokem
> crap! Have to use Fire Fox as main browser
can you hit this URL with it and tell me if the "download source" link
works. I spent several hours trying to report it to microsoft but they
didnt appear to have a free bug reporting service.
https://www.smtpcorp.com/iebug/iebug.php
Barry OGrady
Add-ons Blocklist
This page lists blocklisted add-ons that should no longer be used with
Mozilla products.
* McAfee Site Advisor, versions below 3.3.1 for Firefox 4. Reason:
incompatibility breaks core Firefox features (see bug 637542)
* RelevantKnowledge, version 1.3.328.4 and below for Firefox.
Reason: high crash volume (see bug 615518)
* Java 2 Plugin v1.5_00-1.6_99. Reason: These versions of the Java
plugin are no longer supported by Oracle and cause severe stability
issues for Firefox 3.6 and later (see bug 634639)
* Bandoo, version 5.0 for Firefox 3.6a1pre and higher. Reason:
high crash volume (see bug 629634)
* Shopper Reports, version 3.1.22.0 for all applications. Reason:
high crash volume (see bug 630191)
* Browser Update, all versions. Reason: spyware/adware with no
user value masquerading as a Firefox update (see bug 629717)
* Skype extension, versions below 5.2.0.7165 for Firefox. Reason:
high volume of crashes and severe performance issues. Please update to
the latest version. For more information, please read our
announcement.
* Bing Bar for Firefox. Reason: security issue, blocked at
Microsoft's request (see http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2430460).
* Default Manager, v2.2 for Firefox. Reason: security issue,
blocked at Microsoft's request (see
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2430460).
* Search Helper Extension, v1.0 for Firefox. Reason: security
issue, blocked at Microsoft's request (see
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2430460).
* Internet Download Manager, v2.1-3.3 for Firefox 3.0a1 and newer.
Reason: caused startup crashes (see bug 382356).
* Free Download Manager, v1.0-1.3.1 for Firefox 3.0a1 and newer.
Reason: high crash volume (see bug 408445).
* Yahoo Application State Plugin, v1.0.0.5 and older for Firefox
3.0a1 and newer. Reason: high crash volume (see bug 419127).
* Vietnamese Language Pack, v2.0 for all applications. Reason:
corrupted files (see bug 432406).
* Apple QuickTime Plugin, v7.1.*, for all Firefox 3 versions on
Windows. Reason: remote code execution in multiple versions (see bug
430826).
* Crawler Toolbar, for Firefox 3.0a1 and newer. Reason: high crash
volume (see bug 441649).
* Daemon Tools Toolbar, versions older than 1.0.0.5, for all
applications. Reason: high crash volume (see bug 459850).
* AVG SafeSearch, versions older than 8.5, for all applications.
Reason: high crash volume and stability issues (see bug 527135).
* Enigmail, versions older than 0.97a, for Thunderbird 3.0pre and
newer. Reason: high crash volume and other stability issues (see bug
531047). Users should update Enigmail.
* YSlow, version 2.0.5, for Firefox 3.5.7 and newer. Reason: high
crash volume and other stability issues (see bug 542686). Users should
update to YSlow 2.0.6.
* Viewpoint Media Player, all versions, for Firefox 3.0 and newer.
Reason: vendor claims incompatibility with 3.0+, high crash volume and
other stability issues (see bug 539282). For more information, visit
the vendor page.
* Java Deployment Toolkit, versions 6.0.200.0 and older. Reason:
security vulnerabilities (see bug 558584). For more information, visit
the vendor page.
* Internet Download Manager, versions 6.9.8 and older, for Firefox
3.7a1pre and newer. Reason: high crash volume and other stability
issues (see bug 578443).
Barry OGrady
>On 19-Mar-11 4:58 PM, Rob wrote:
>
>>> Nothing wrong with old stuff. I reckon the D-type Jag was one of the
>>> better looking machines built of its era. Hell, vintage cars can bring
>>> in a lot of money, too!
>>
>> Yep had a bit of a play in one just the other day.
>
>A d type in oz?
>that would be rare. wasn't an e?
>
>Or do you mean a vintage car?
>
>I had an FJ holden for years, and drove one recently, and was horrified. :-)
>
>Then, my first car was a 1924 Rugby.
>My first registered car was a 1938 Morris 8/40
>
>Cheers Don...
>
>=============
I had a VC Commodore with the 5 litre V8. All of 160 KW!
>--
>Don McKenzie
Barry OGrady
Firefox bugs
Add-ons Blocklist
>
>--
>?? 100% natural
Jasen Betts
> On 19 Mar 2011 08:03:22 GMT, Jasen Betts <ja...@xnet.co.nz> wrote:
>>On 2011-03-15, Barry OGrady <ath...@hotmail.com.au> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 09:44:46 +1100, Don McKenzie <5...@2.5A> wrote:
>>>
>>> Firefox still has bugs that make it unusable at times.
>>
>>IE can't download dynamic content over https.
>
> Firefox bugs
>
> Add-ons Blocklist
>
> This page lists blocklisted add-ons that should no longer be used with
> Mozilla products.
[long list deleted]
that's a long list of buggy non-mozilla software,
are you trying to make some sort of point?
>>--
>>?? 100% natural
>>
If you're going to quote my sig quote it correctly.
--
⚂⚃ 100% natural
Barry OGrady
>On 2011-03-19, Barry OGrady <ath...@hotmail.com.au> wrote:
>> On 19 Mar 2011 08:03:22 GMT, Jasen Betts <ja...@xnet.co.nz> wrote:
>
>>>On 2011-03-15, Barry OGrady <ath...@hotmail.com.au> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 09:44:46 +1100, Don McKenzie <5...@2.5A> wrote:
>
>>>>
>>>> Firefox still has bugs that make it unusable at times.
>>>
>>>IE can't download dynamic content over https.
>>
>> Firefox bugs
>>
>> Add-ons Blocklist
>>
>> This page lists blocklisted add-ons that should no longer be used with
>> Mozilla products.
>
> [long list deleted]
>
> that's a long list of buggy non-mozilla software,
> are you trying to make some sort of point?
Its a list of software Firefox won't work with because it is poorly
written and Mozilla are not prepared to write proper code.
>
>>>--
>>>?? 100% natural
>>>
>
>If you're going to quote my sig quote it correctly.
>
>--
>?? 100% natural
Barry OGrady
>Barry OGrady wrote:
>
>> here is a list of major Firefox bugs that Mazilla has not fixed.
>>
>> Add-ons Blocklist
>>
>> This page lists blocklisted add-ons that should no longer be used with
>> Mozilla products.
>
>It seems you're confused.
No! The list is from Mozzilla itself.
It highlights the fact that Mozilla can't write compatible code.
>Everything you listed is an add-on to Firefox developed by third
>parties. It's /not/ up to Mozilla to fix these add-ons, but the people
>developing them. Half of them just recommended updating to the latest
>version, which FF usually does automatically anyway.
It is up to mozilla to write compatible code.
>
>(I hope you didn't spend too long digging this up.)
>
>--
>Usenet Improvement Project: http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/
atec77
> On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 00:08:22 +1000, Andy<nospam@> wrote:
>
>> Barry OGrady wrote:
>>
>>> here is a list of major Firefox bugs that Mazilla has not fixed.
>>>
>>> Add-ons Blocklist
>>>
>>> This page lists blocklisted add-ons that should no longer be used with
>>> Mozilla products.
>>
>> It seems you're confused.
>
> No! The list is from Mozzilla itself.
>
> It highlights the fact that Mozilla can't write compatible code.
>
>> Everything you listed is an add-on to Firefox developed by third
>> parties. It's /not/ up to Mozilla to fix these add-ons, but the people
>> developing them. Half of them just recommended updating to the latest
>> version, which FF usually does automatically anyway.
>
> It is up to mozilla to write compatible code.
mean the shite m/s tries to use instead of industry std which smacks of
empire building
>
>
>
>
>>
>> (I hope you didn't spend too long digging this up.)
>>
>> --
>> Usenet Improvement Project: http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/
>
--
X-No-Archive: Yes
Jasen Betts
> On 19 Mar 2011 20:47:35 GMT, Jasen Betts <ja...@xnet.co.nz> wrote:
>
>>On 2011-03-19, Barry OGrady <ath...@hotmail.com.au> wrote:
>>> On 19 Mar 2011 08:03:22 GMT, Jasen Betts <ja...@xnet.co.nz> wrote:
>>
>>>>On 2011-03-15, Barry OGrady <ath...@hotmail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 09:44:46 +1100, Don McKenzie <5...@2.5A> wrote:
>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Firefox still has bugs that make it unusable at times.
>>>>
>>>>IE can't download dynamic content over https.
>>>
>>> Firefox bugs
>>>
>>> Add-ons Blocklist
>>>
>>> This page lists blocklisted add-ons that should no longer be used with
>>> Mozilla products.
>>
>> [long list deleted]
>>
>> that's a long list of buggy non-mozilla software,
>> are you trying to make some sort of point?
>
> Its a list of software Firefox won't work with because it is poorly
> written and Mozilla are not prepared to write proper code.
>
why should Firefox be required to work with poorly written code.
--
⚂⚃ 100% natural
kreed
> On 19 Mar 2011 20:47:35 GMT, Jasen Betts <ja...@xnet.co.nz> wrote:
>
>
>
> >On 2011-03-19, Barry OGrady <athe...@hotmail.com.au> wrote:
> >> On 19 Mar 2011 08:03:22 GMT, Jasen Betts <ja...@xnet.co.nz> wrote:
>
> >>>> On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 09:44:46 +1100, Don McKenzie <5...@2.5A> wrote:
>
> >>>> Firefox still has bugs that make it unusable at times.
>
> >>>IE can't download dynamic content over https.
>
> >> Firefox bugs
>
> >> Add-ons Blocklist
>
> >> This page lists blocklisted add-ons that should no longer be used with
> >> Mozilla products.
>
> > [long list deleted]
>
> > that's a long list of buggy non-mozilla software,
> > are you trying to make some sort of point?
>
> Its a list of software Firefox won't work with because it is poorly
> written and Mozilla are not prepared to write proper code.
>
>
>
> >>>--
> >>>?? 100% natural
>
> >If you're going to quote my sig quote it correctly.
>
> >--
> >?? 100% natural
>
It is stuff from other parties, not Mozilla that wont work under
FF.
Just as possible that these 3rd parties did a piss poor job of their
code,
didn't check it with Firefox or wrote it for IE only.
If nothing else, Mozilla does come out and say not to use it, rather
than say nothing
and letting people (including the developers of these items) have
constant troubles
that are hard to locate the cause after using these items.
Barry OGrady
>On 20/03/2011 5:22 PM, Barry OGrady wrote:
>> On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 00:08:22 +1000, Andy<nospam@> wrote:
>>
>>> Barry OGrady wrote:
>>>
>>>> here is a list of major Firefox bugs that Mazilla has not fixed.
>>>>
>>>> Add-ons Blocklist
>>>>
>>>> This page lists blocklisted add-ons that should no longer be used with
>>>> Mozilla products.
>>>
>>> It seems you're confused.
>>
>> No! The list is from Mozzilla itself.
>>
>> It highlights the fact that Mozilla can't write compatible code.
>>
>>> Everything you listed is an add-on to Firefox developed by third
>>> parties. It's /not/ up to Mozilla to fix these add-ons, but the people
>>> developing them. Half of them just recommended updating to the latest
>>> version, which FF usually does automatically anyway.
>>
>> It is up to mozilla to write compatible code.
> comparable with nothing considered std in the industry , I guess you
>mean the shite m/s tries to use instead of industry std which smacks of
>empire building
Why does Mozzila keep making Firefox updates that break formally
working add ons? Is it deliberate or they just incompetent?
Why does Firefox ignore some links forcing us to go to IE?
Barry OGrady
Doesn't it bother you that an add on you have been using suddenly
is not compatible?
Barry OGrady
Doesn't it bother you that an add on you have been using is suddenly
not compatible with a FF update?
Doesn't it bother you that FF will not work with some links?
It happens less often but it still happens.
Barry OGrady
>Barry OGrady wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 00:08:22 +1000, Andy <nospam@> wrote:
>>
>>>Barry OGrady wrote:
>>>
>>>> here is a list of major Firefox bugs that Mazilla has not fixed.
>>>>
>>>> Add-ons Blocklist
>>>>
>>>> This page lists blocklisted add-ons that should no longer be used with
>>>> Mozilla products.
>>>
>>>It seems you're confused.
>>
>> No! The list is from Mozzilla itself.
>>
>> It highlights the fact that Mozilla can't write compatible code.
>
>No, it doesn't.
>
>Look at the list again - It highlights that OLD add-ons, written BY
>THIRD PARTIES (who on Earth do you think released the Java plugin, or
>the McAfee addon for Firefox?) are incompatible with newer versions of
>Firefox.
>
>>>Everything you listed is an add-on to Firefox developed by third
>>>parties. It's /not/ up to Mozilla to fix these add-ons, but the people
>>>developing them. Half of them just recommended updating to the latest
>>>version, which FF usually does automatically anyway.
>>
>> It is up to mozilla to write compatible code.
>
>You're wrong. Here's a hint: The Java plugin is maintained by
>*Oracle*. And ALL of the other add-ons you listed are maintained by
>other companies, /NOT/ Mozilla.
>
>/If/ they were from Mozilla, they'd be part of the stock program, not an
>'add-on'.
That's no excuse for Mozilla to keep changeing FF to prevent add ons
working.
Rod Speed
Because everyone tests their web site with IE, and most dont bother to see if it works with Firefox.
Don McKenzie
>> Why does Firefox ignore some links forcing us to go to IE?
>
> Because everyone tests their web site with IE, and most dont bother to see if it works with Firefox.
You are very correct Rod, I'm sure that is what they do.
Strangely, I do it the other way, always test on FF, then goto IE before publishing.
But I'm a Dinosaur. Dead ugly too!
Cheers Don...
=======================
--
Don McKenzie
Dontronics Blog: http://www.GodzillaSeaMonkey.com
Rob
> On 22-Mar-11 7:38 AM, Rod Speed wrote:
>
>>> Why does Firefox ignore some links forcing us to go to IE?
>>
>> Because everyone tests their web site with IE, and most dont bother to
>> see if it works with Firefox.
>
> You are very correct Rod, I'm sure that is what they do.
>
> Strangely, I do it the other way, always test on FF, then goto IE before
> publishing.
>
> But I'm a Dinosaur. Dead ugly too!
>
> Cheers Don...
>
> =======================
>
>
>
I just test with FF and don't bother with IE and no one has complained.
IE does some strange things with the font sizes which you have to be
careful, but something tells me that current versions have that sorted.
I work with Dreamweaver and that's mostly clean and works with most
popular browsers.
asdf
> Firefox doesn't work with some links.
That should be: some sites don't care a flying turd about Internet
standards.
Huge Ackman
> On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 23:14:25 +1100, Huge Ackman
> <wolv...@example.com> wrote:
>
>> On 18/03/2011 6:50 PM, Petzl wrote:
>>> On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 14:26:32 +1100, Huge Ackman
>>> <wolv...@example.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Been known for ages that IE9 isnt for XP. They would rather you buy new
>>>> than they support old. XP is just old.
>>>
>>> crap! Have to use Fire Fox as main browser
>>>
>
> Yeah sure not according to everyone I know
> Something has changed on its cookie storage/handling which means I
> can't log into many websites. Commenting/messages on places like
> YouTube/Twitter/Facebook and others is pretty useless, the pagelayout
> from IE7 changed and don't like it,
> Fact is FireFox works where IE8 and now IE9 don't and now use three
> browsers (FF,IE,Chrome) whereas before I only used "Internet
> Explorer". Futher fact is Microsoft since Gates left has become buggy
> junk I will be faceing up to giving Google Chrome if they can get it
> working
Part of the problem with browsers not working, I have found over many
years, is some people installing every damned one there is. I have FF4
and IE9 on mine and it works well. I have UNINSTALLED Chrome from many
machines and problems just disappear. This isnt to say that Chrome is
the problem itself but that something along with Chrome caused the
problem. I dont like Chrome, I must admit. FF4 is probably the fastest I
have ever seen a browser work to date.
Huge Ackman
> On 18/03/2011 11:15 PM, Huge Ackman wrote:
>> On 18/03/2011 6:01 PM, David Ross wrote:
>>> In article<8u9sqb...@mid.individual.net>, Don McKenzie<5...@2.5A>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> IE9 does not run on Windows XP
>>>>
>>>> http://www.itnews.com.au/News/251335,ie9-a-non-event-for-most-businesses.aspx
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Cheers Don...
>>>>
>>>> ============
>>>
>>> ..And thats bad because...
>>>
>>> David
>>
>> Nothing wrong with old stuff. I reckon the D-type Jag was one of the
>> better looking machines built of its era. Hell, vintage cars can bring
>> in a lot of money, too!
>
> Yep had a bit of a play in one just the other day.
Did you wipe the evidence off the seat when you finished? :)
Huge Ackman
> On 19-Mar-11 4:58 PM, Rob wrote:
>
>>> Nothing wrong with old stuff. I reckon the D-type Jag was one of the
>>> better looking machines built of its era. Hell, vintage cars can bring
>>> in a lot of money, too!
>>
>> Yep had a bit of a play in one just the other day.
>
> that would be rare. wasn't an e?
>
There are 2 I know about and there is a place that makes fibreglass body
copies to shove on a chassis, somewhere in Vic....well used to be anyway.
> Or do you mean a vintage car?
>
> I had an FJ holden for years, and drove one recently, and was horrified.
> :-)
>
Never driven an FJ. Driven an EH, a HD, a HK, HT, HG and VN as well as
assorted early 70s Toranas and now own a Captiva which is only front
wheel drive but the suspension is good enough for mild off road stuff
AND is has ESP which is great. Went for a 30K run down a dirt road when
it was dry and the dirt was like sand in spots so the car, at about 60K
may start to drift. The ESP put on the required brake on the correct
wheel and brought it back into line before I even had a chance to do a
thing. Also on a REAL bad dirt downhill in it with shitloads of gravel
and it has a downhill descent in it. Put that on and chucked it into
neutral and the car used the handbrake brakes to slow it down. Handbrake
brakes are drum in it and all wheels are disc. Strange thing having a
second lot of brakes on a car, for me.
> Then, my first car was a 1924 Rugby.
> My first registered car was a 1938 Morris 8/40
>
First car I ever owned was an old Austin A40 (Farina model). Loved it,
still think about it and so on.
Huge Ackman
> On 2011-03-15, Barry OGrady<ath...@hotmail.com.au> wrote:
>> On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 09:44:46 +1100, Don McKenzie<5...@2.5A> wrote:
>>
>>>> On Mar 16, 5:26 am, Don McKenzie<5...@2.5A> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Who would use that piece of crap anyway when you have Firefiox ?
>>>
>>> I agree kreed, but...
>>>
>>> Users are forced to use it when micro$oft, and some other products do an upgrade, or call a browser, and they do
>>> actually force you into it.
>>>
>>> If it was up to me, I would kill the thing.
>>> There should be a law punishable by death (or worse), against apps not using the default browser.
>>>
>>> Perhaps direct an attack of the relentless Roddle-bot, or the recently discovered Godzilla Sea Monkey, against
>>> non-compliant authors.
>>>
>>> I assume that xp users mustn't install the new version. After all, one so called expert in that article claims 67 per
>>> cent of corporate desktops are using xp.
>>>
>>> Cheers Don...
>>
>
> IE can't download dynamic content over https.
>
Gee... then I am not REALLY watching videos over https when I thoght I
was? What was I looking at, then?
Barry
That could be. I have a Cisco 2950 network switch with a built
in web server for settings and stats. FF ignores most of the links
from the main page so I use IE. Do you think Cisco would use
non-standard links?
Petzl
Yes I find Chrome very buggy also. Where it is useful is reading
foreign newspapers it has a Auto Translator for most languages
FF I like the spell checker. Not come accross one that works well in
IE
--
Petzl
http://home.iprimus.com.au/petzl/Mono.htm
Jasen Betts
1: you probably are looking at static content
2: it's displaying not downloading.
3: it's probably not IE displaying it.
If you offer content for download (using the header "Content-Disposition:
Attachment" etc. ) and flag it as Dynamic ( using the header "Pragma: no-cache")
and serve the page over HTTPS IE spits the dummy.
--
⚂⚃ 100% natural
--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ne...@netfront.net ---
Huge Ackman
> On 2011-03-25, Huge Ackman<wolv...@example.com> wrote:
>> On 19/03/2011 7:03 PM, Jasen Betts wrote:
>>> On 2011-03-15, Barry OGrady<ath...@hotmail.com.au> wrote:
>>>
>>> IE can't download dynamic content over https.
>>>
>>
>> Gee... then I am not REALLY watching videos over https when I thoght I
>> was? What was I looking at, then?
>
> 1: you probably are looking at static content
> 2: it's displaying not downloading.
> 3: it's probably not IE displaying it.
>
> If you offer content for download (using the header "Content-Disposition:
> Attachment" etc. ) and flag it as Dynamic ( using the header "Pragma: no-cache")
> and serve the page over HTTPS IE spits the dummy.
>
Damn! I am going to have to complain to all those places like smh.com.au
and sales sites and to the makers of Dreamweaver which I used to make
dynamic sites. Even used Expression Web. I always thought that dynamic
content coming on over https and http were real. Now you tell me it was
all faked! I am so floored!
LuR
listings. Back to Ie8 and all is well again. Ferk MS.
"Don McKenzie" wrote in message news:8u9sqb...@mid.individual.net...
IE9 does not run on Windows XP
http://www.itnews.com.au/News/251335,ie9-a-non-event-for-most-businesses.aspx
Cheers Don...
============
--
Don McKenzie
son of a bitch
> IE9 does not run on Windows XP
>
> http://www.itnews.com.au/News/251335,ie9-a-non-event-for-most-businesses.aspx
>
>
> Cheers Don...
>
> ============
>
Yes that's right. If you want to fix the Bugs in IE8 you have to
Buy Windoze 7 and install a new set of bugs called IE9
If you want the bugs Fixed in IE9 you will have to Buy a new pile
of Bugs called Windoze 8 when it's half way finished after it escapes
(I mean released) from Redmond later this year.
Huge Ackman
> IE9 doesnt work on Win7 either!! IT refused to click through to several
> ebay listings. Back to Ie8 and all is well again. Ferk MS.
>
> "Don McKenzie" wrote in message news:8u9sqb...@mid.individual.net...
>
> IE9 does not run on Windows XP
>
> http://www.itnews.com.au/News/251335,ie9-a-non-event-for-most-businesses.aspx
>
>
> Cheers Don...
>
> ============
>
That would be your machine's problem. No problem with various levels of
Win 7 and IE9 here.
Barry OGrady
If you want a browser that is unusable at time you want Firefox.
They still can't fix it.
annily
I think you left out a word, as that doesn't make sense.
> They still can't fix it.
>
It's never been broken for me.
--
Long-time resident of Adelaide, South Australia,
which probably influences my opinions.
Barry OGrady
wrote:
FF fails with some links and some pages, crashes, and is a magnet
for viruses. FF won't work with my Cisco 2950 switch.
PC user cover CD
If you are using Firefox, or some other web Browser other than
Microsoft Internet Explorer you may occasionaly see this error - or
something similar - when you click to install a program from this
disc..
"InstallShieldEngine (ikernel.exe) could not be installed":
This is because the setup routine for this program is not contained in
a single file. When you clicked Open (as is the case with Mozilla
Firefox) your browser has first 'downloaded' the file to your hard
drive, then tried to run it. Trouble is it only downloaded the
setup.exe file to your PC without the rest of the program's
installation files.
>--
annily
> On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 16:38:52 +0930, annily<ann...@annily.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> On 2011-04-07 13:22, Barry OGrady wrote:
>>> On Mon, 04 Apr 2011 16:19:41 +1000, son of a bitch
>>> <bitchi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2011/03/16 06:26, Don McKenzie wrote:
>>>>> IE9 does not run on Windows XP
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.itnews.com.au/News/251335,ie9-a-non-event-for-most-businesses.aspx
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers Don...
>>>>>
>>>>> ============
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes that's right. If you want to fix the Bugs in IE8 you have to
>>>> Buy Windoze 7 and install a new set of bugs called IE9
>>>> If you want the bugs Fixed in IE9 you will have to Buy a new pile
>>>> of Bugs called Windoze 8 when it's half way finished after it escapes
>>>> (I mean released) from Redmond later this year.
>>>
>>> If you want a browser that is unusable at time you want Firefox.
>>
>> I think you left out a word, as that doesn't make sense.
>>
>>> They still can't fix it.
>>>
>>
>> It's never been broken for me.
>
> FF fails with some links and some pages, crashes, and is a magnet
> for viruses. FF won't work with my Cisco 2950 switch.
>
Never seen those.
> PC user cover CD
>
> If you are using Firefox, or some other web Browser other than
> Microsoft Internet Explorer you may occasionaly see this error - or
> something similar - when you click to install a program from this
> disc..
>
Never seen that either.
> "InstallShieldEngine (ikernel.exe) could not be installed":
>
> This is because the setup routine for this program is not contained in
> a single file. When you clicked Open (as is the case with Mozilla
> Firefox) your browser has first 'downloaded' the file to your hard
> drive, then tried to run it. Trouble is it only downloaded the
> setup.exe file to your PC without the rest of the program's
> installation files.
>
Never seen that either.
Like I said, it's never been broken or me. You are probably not a
typical user.
kreed
> On 2011-04-07 17:17, Barry OGrady wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 16:38:52 +0930, annily<ann...@annily.invalid>
> > wrote:
>
> >> On 2011-04-07 13:22, Barry OGrady wrote:
> >>> On Mon, 04 Apr 2011 16:19:41 +1000, son of a bitch
> >>> <bitchin_2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >>>> On 2011/03/16 06:26, Don McKenzie wrote:
> >>>>> IE9 does not run on Windows XP
>
Exactly, either someone with a special system, or requirements who
never works outside of that area, or
a paid shill for microsoft, who has got little chance on here of
anyone listening to him or taking him seriously.
Maybe MS should just keep their money ?
Rod Speed
> annily <ann...@annily.invalid> wrote
>> Barry OGrady wrote
>>> annily<ann...@annily.invalid> wrote
>>>> Barry OGrady wrote>>>>>> Don McKenzie wrote
>>>>>>> IE9 does not run on Windows XP
>>>>>>> http://www.itnews.com.au/News/251335,ie9-a-non-event-for-most-busines...
>>>>>> Yes that's right. If you want to fix the Bugs in IE8 you have to
>> Never seen those.
>>> PC user cover CD
>> Never seen that either.
>> Never seen that either.
Utterly mindless conspiracy theory. No one is silly enought to pay BoG to do anything anymore.
> who has got little chance on here of anyone listening to him or taking him seriously.
You in spades.
atec77
clueless and nfi for him
--
X-No-Archive: Yes
keithr
Quite a lot of our internal pages at work are like that especially the
ones created by the IT department.
You just install ietab to cover these stupid cases, just right click the
page and select ietab and it uses the IE engine for that tab only.
Barry
Barry
wrote:
>On Apr 8, 10:48 am, annily <ann...@annily.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2011-04-07 17:17, Barry OGrady wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 16:38:52 +0930, annily<ann...@annily.invalid>
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >> On 2011-04-07 13:22, Barry OGrady wrote:
>> >>> On Mon, 04 Apr 2011 16:19:41 +1000, son of a bitch
>> >>> <bitchin_2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> >>>> On 2011/03/16 06:26, Don McKenzie wrote:
>> >>>>> IE9 does not run on Windows XP
>>
>> >>>>>http://www.itnews.com.au/News/251335,ie9-a-non-event-for-most-busines...
>>
>> >>>>> Cheers Don...
>>
>> >>>>> ============
>>
>> >>>> Yes that's right. If you want to fix the Bugs in IE8 you have to
>> >>>> Buy Windoze 7 and install a new set of bugs called IE9
>> >>>> If you want the bugs Fixed in IE9 you will have to Buy a new pile
>> >>>> of Bugs called Windoze 8 when it's half way finished after it escapes
>> >>>> (I mean released) from Redmond later this year.
>>
>> >>> If you want a browser that is unusable at time you want Firefox.
>>
>> >> I think you left out a word, as that doesn't make sense.
I left out a letter. Should be times.
How much is Mozzila paying people to promote their product?
They would be better spending the money fixing FF.
>> --
Barry
wrote:
What about when FF refuses to work with a link or does not render
a page properly?
I still use FF but there are times when I am forced to switch to
another browser.