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

Internet Explorer Browser Collection

my-internet-explorer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 70 posts

Re: Internet Explorer Browser Collection

#51

Post by 24gttghh »

chrismorgan wrote: post #29

In 2012 I worked with a Windows 2000 Server machine that had IE5.5, and had to make a UI for a simple task on it. I chose to go with HTA. I tried to make my life easier by installing IE6, but failed to install it. It took me a while to even find an IE6 installer (the original links were all dead), and once I finally did, I couldn’t install it (it asked the internet for something as part of the process, and that part…

If you could find what the installer was actually looking for, you could setup a proxy server to rewrite the URL and point it to someplace that has it e.g. locally.

Re: Internet Explorer Browser Collection

#52

Post by mostlysimilar »

userbinator wrote: post #8

For some reason, that domain name arouses my suspicion... if I saw that in the search results I'd probably think "SEO spam site" and skip over it. One of the obvious things you can see between the versions is the gradual trend of dumbing-down and flattening the UI, most apparent between 8 and 9. The older versions' UI give the impression that they are very customisable and powerful , while the newer ones seem to be i…

> One of the obvious things you can see between the versions is the gradual trend of dumbing-down and flattening the UI,

This has been my experience for the majority of software, from native to web and mobile to desktop. Less options, less tools, less customization.

I think it's partly because software has become more mainstream over time, and instead of trying to teach people to use more complex things, developers have chosen or been forced into appealing to the lowest common denominator. Make it as simple as possible so people who aren't interested in learning how to use the tools can still get by.

I don't necessarily think this is a problem on its own, but combined with the business needs enforced by people looking to maximize profits it becomes less palatable. If we've built something that works for everyone, it's a hard sell to create more powerful options for the 10% (pulled that number out of my ass, I have no idea what the actual amount would be). Then we're all stuck with worse tools.

Re: Internet Explorer Browser Collection

#53

Post by izietto »

dsfyu404ed wrote: post #42
izietto wrote: post #14

As a long-time web developer, when I clicked on IE6 and I saw its screenshot I felt queasy for a brief moment. Not joking.

As a non-web developer all I felt was nostalgia.

I felt a bit of nostalgia too, but I think mainly for Windows XP UI. Maybe it wasn't very polished but it looked pretty funny and friendly; it made you feel like at home -- especially Windows XP Home Edition (ok ok I'm sorry...)

Re: Internet Explorer Browser Collection

#54

Post by mostlysimilar »

dsfyu404ed wrote: post #42
izietto wrote: post #14

As a long-time web developer, when I clicked on IE6 and I saw its screenshot I felt queasy for a brief moment. Not joking.

As a non-web developer all I felt was nostalgia.

For me it was both. IE6 was my first browser growing up so it was a huge blast of nostalgia.

Then I felt angry thinking about it remembering all of the hacks to get it to behave as a web developer.

Fun roller coaster.

Re: Internet Explorer Browser Collection

#55

Post by kalleboo »

dspillett wrote: post #45
pedrocx486 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two years after the infamous September that never ended. Kinda curious here, but it being September so I guess college?

> it being September so I guess college? Yes. September was the month that many new users discovered the Internet for the first time, because they were given access at University and other higher education establishments, which had many and varied implications. For instance there was an influx of beginner questions in Usenet groups, questions to which the answer was "please read the FAQ before asking more questions".…

IIRC the Eternal September specifically referred to when AOL added Usenet access, so it was users who didn't even know they were using the Internet

Re: Internet Explorer Browser Collection

#56

Post by kijin »

boomlinde wrote: post #47
dmurray wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the attractions of Chrome when it first came out was that it had less chrome, that most of the precious screen real estate could be devoted to showing the content of the web page, or at least to ads. I'd guess IE9 was a reaction to that. When we only had 640 vertical pixels, it was a huge change not to have 150 of them taken up with rows of icons and bookmarks by default. Now we have the space to get those con…

I had roughly the same amount of rows of pixels on my desktop computer in 2008 as I have now (1280x1024 to 1920x1080). I had even more for a few years prior to that, when I had a CRT monitor that I'd gotten for free (1600x1200). It's AFAIK pretty much only with 4k monitors that we have caught up with CRTs resolution-wise, and not a lot of people have either of those. w3schools lists a bunch of resoltion statistics. I…

1366x768 has been the default resolution for cheap laptops for over a decade now. It's only very slowly being replaced with 1920x1080, but even when this transition is complete, effective information density is unlikely to change much. There are only so many pixels you can squeeze onto a 13" screen before most users need to scale up the UI.

For someone with bad eyesight like me, the sweet spot for a 13" laptop would be 4K at somewhere between 250% and 300% scaling. That would give me just about the same effective information density as good ol' 1366x768. I guess there's a reason why this awkward resolution still refuses to die.

Re: Internet Explorer Browser Collection

#57

Post by kccqzy »

It is weird that IE 5 listed Mac OS 5.2.3 in the operating system. That's totally wrong for several reasons. First Mac OS was a name introduced since version 8 or so, and before that it was called System. Second I don't really think System 5.2.3 actually exists. Third and perhaps more importantly the Mac versions of IE were done by a completely different team within Microsoft, using a different rendering engine and having a different set of quirks. IIRC the Mac version gained full PNG support many years before the Windows version did; it was in fact the first browser to do so.

I wouldn't really consider IE for Mac together with IE for Windows. They are more like two different products with a same name.

Re: Internet Explorer Browser Collection

#58

Post by kccqzy »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #24
maaaats wrote: post #9

Are the downloads the old, compiled code? The iexplore.exe in IE 1.5 says modified in 1996. And it runs on my Windows in 2019. That's a feat! (Can't find any pages to open, though, guess it's too old http and possible tls stuff in the way?) Edit: Found some urls that worked

Yeah they should be; both Microsoft and Intel have a big reputation when it comes to backwards compatibility in their operating systems and instruction sets. It's only been fairly recently that they're starting to break with that, notably with Edge. Not sure about Windows yet, but, wouldn't be surprised if eventually they just put an older windows VM in there - if they haven't already.

Nah, you can't run 16-bit executables or NE executables in modern 64-bit Windows any more. The virtual 8086 mode that was being used is basically unavailable in long mode.

Re: Internet Explorer Browser Collection

#59

Post by justusthane »

hadrien01 wrote: post #11
maaaats wrote: post #9

Are the downloads the old, compiled code? The iexplore.exe in IE 1.5 says modified in 1996. And it runs on my Windows in 2019. That's a feat! (Can't find any pages to open, though, guess it's too old http and possible tls stuff in the way?) Edit: Found some urls that worked

http://example.com should work, it doesn't force https

Or http://neverssl.com

Re: Internet Explorer Browser Collection

#60

Post by acheron »

heinrichhartman wrote: post #19

I have good memories using IE3,4,5. With IE6 the UI took a turn for the worse. The look of IE7 freaks me out. Edge just looks like Chrome, which is acceptable to me.

Same. I remember arguing with a friend in late 2000 who still insisted on using Netscape 4. I had given up on Netscape years before and stuck with IE from around 3 through 5.5. I actually don't remember using 6 much on purpose. I know I switched to Phoenix at v0.4 and never touched IE again, which was apparently October 2002; IE6 had been at the end of 2001. It's possible I was using IE6 for that yearish, though I didn't start using XP for awhile, preferring to stick with Windows 2000.
Post reply on HN