Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Man upgrades Internet Explorer 1.0 to 9.0

winrumors.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 54 posts

Re: Man upgrades Internet Explorer 1.0 to 9.0

#41

Post by caf »

ugh wrote: post #22
rbanffy wrote: post #20

To be fair, IE3 and, more specifically, Microsoft News and Mail, had one intriguing idea - that mail (and NNTP) messages were things to be managed like files and folders by a shell extension. I would love to have Nautilus turn into a mail or calendar client when opening specific folders (somewhat extending magic into discovering what a folder is about)

Really? I’m quite happy that the world has been moving into another direction. You no longer have to browse your music or photos in the filesystem, you have a dedicated music or photos program. That seems ideal to me, I wouldn’t want my file browser to be a swiss army knife.

There's no need for it to be a completely separated interface, though - in theory, at the top level you could have "Files", "Music", "Photos", "Mail" and so on. When you descend into "Files", you see the root of a traditional filesystem, when you descend into "Music" you see a music-specific interface.

Re: Man upgrades Internet Explorer 1.0 to 9.0

#42

Post by ugh »

caf wrote: post #41
ugh wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? I’m quite happy that the world has been moving into another direction. You no longer have to browse your music or photos in the filesystem, you have a dedicated music or photos program. That seems ideal to me, I wouldn’t want my file browser to be a swiss army knife.

There's no need for it to be a completely separated interface, though - in theory, at the top level you could have "Files", "Music", "Photos", "Mail" and so on. When you descend into "Files", you see the root of a traditional filesystem, when you descend into "Music" you see a music-specific interface.

Would you really want your file browser to become such a monster?

Re: Man upgrades Internet Explorer 1.0 to 9.0

#43

Post by caf »

ugh wrote: post #42
caf wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no need for it to be a completely separated interface, though - in theory, at the top level you could have "Files", "Music", "Photos", "Mail" and so on. When you descend into "Files", you see the root of a traditional filesystem, when you descend into "Music" you see a music-specific interface.

Would you really want your file browser to become such a monster?

It's really more of a question of "Why does my shell currently privilege file browsing above music or email browsing?" I would contend that it's for historical reasons more than anything else.

Re: Man upgrades Internet Explorer 1.0 to 9.0

#44

Post by yesimahuman »

Niten wrote: post #14
pavs wrote: post #10

"If you’re an Internet Explorer fan..." Wait what? I was under the impression that most people use IE either because its installed by default or they are forced by their corporate overloads. Do people actually use IE because they really liked it after comparing it with other options?

For one thing, IE 8 is arguably a more secure browser than Firefox due to its use of low-integrity process isolation on Windows Vista and 7. It's also more stable than Firefox in my experience, probably because of the way it isolates browser windows into separate processes. And now IE 9 has a rendering engine that's at least equal to Firefox's. It lags behind Firefox's user interface in some respects (customization,…

My biggest issue with IE as a browser is that Microsoft's enterprise support priorities are not inline with my innovation priorities. I would rather support faster moving browsers such as Chrome or Firefox.

Supporting IE seems to me to be supporting a project that will be obsolete in many ways soon after launch, and will stay that way for quite some time.

Re: Man upgrades Internet Explorer 1.0 to 9.0

#45

Post by kgermino »

jcw wrote: post #29

It doesn't look like he used 1.0 in the video. Did I miss something?

Are you sure? What's that at the 1:30 mark?

Serious question, I thought it was IE 1, but now I feel like I missed something.

Edit: I'm sure he does, he explicitly mentions various performance issues with IE 1.0 several times, starting with a screenshot at about 1:30

Re: Man upgrades Internet Explorer 1.0 to 9.0

#46

Post by citizenkeys »

This video takes me all the way back to 1995, when I actually got Internet Explorer 1.0 with the Windows95 Plus! Pack.

Internet Explorer 1.0 through Internet Explorer 4 were during the Browser Wars. Internet Explorer 4 came with Windows 98, so after that the war was over since most people just started using Internet Explorer because it came with Windows and was the default browser.

Re: Man upgrades Internet Explorer 1.0 to 9.0

#47

Post by Derbasti »

pavs wrote: post #10

"If you’re an Internet Explorer fan..." Wait what? I was under the impression that most people use IE either because its installed by default or they are forced by their corporate overloads. Do people actually use IE because they really liked it after comparing it with other options?

I hate to admit it, but I played around with IE9 in the last couple of days and I like it. Obviously, it can't sync with Chrome, but if it did, I might just ditch Chrome when working on Windows. It is very minimal and fast--just the way I like my browser.

Re: Man upgrades Internet Explorer 1.0 to 9.0

#48

Post by estel »

JeremyBanks wrote: post #40
Hixie wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah that's weird. I don't understand how that happened. If anyone happens to have IE2 around I'd love to be able to study this.

The install's floating around in a lot of places; for example: http://www.oldversion.com/Internet_Explorer.html ; or as part of this multiple-version package: http://utilu.com/IECollection/ . When I tried loading the Acid Tests websites in IE2 (from the utilu collection on XP SP2) it gave me the error "Site Temporarily Unavailable (error id: 'bad_httpd_conf')". Not sure what's up.

As he said in the video, IE1/2 don't send a hosts header with their request and thus can't access most sites, ACID included. You'll have to download the test and all necessary files to a local disk in order to run it.

Re: Man upgrades Internet Explorer 1.0 to 9.0

#49

Post by michaelcampbell »

zackattack wrote: post #34
michaelcampbell wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's got a good, non-emotional speaking voice, and his content:noise ratio is high. Also, the tempo of the overview is near perfect, and his choice of what video to show to go with his voiceover is flawless.

> He's got a good, non-emotional speaking voice Can you please elaborate on what you mean by this? What makes it good? What makes it non-emotional? What is an example of a bad voice? What is an example of an emotional voice?

He reports the facts in a way that doesn't give any clues to any biases; he gets neither excited nor upset at any point that I could detect. His voice is pleasing; not nasal, screechy, grating, nor anything else widely considered objectionable.

I suspect you knew all of this and were simply trying to jump on some point that sounded subjective to you and perhaps it is, but that's what I mean.

Re: Man upgrades Internet Explorer 1.0 to 9.0

#50

Post by michaelcampbell »

mirkules wrote: post #28
pavs wrote: post #10

"If you’re an Internet Explorer fan..." Wait what? I was under the impression that most people use IE either because its installed by default or they are forced by their corporate overloads. Do people actually use IE because they really liked it after comparing it with other options?

As someone once told me, "Internet Explorer is the application I use to download Firefox"

chuckle I suspect there are several people that do the same thing. I'm one. Then I use FF to download chrome... =)
Post reply on HN