New
#41
Why? This has probably been said already in this thread, but to put it to bed:
Maybe they've used many browsers on many different platforms e.g. Firefox, Chrome ,Bon Echo, Opera, Konquerer, Seamonkey, Epiphany, Shiretoko, ON: BSD, Linux, Solaris, Mac OS, Windows 2000/XP/Vista/7, and have reached the conclusion all their own that Internet Explorer is the slowest, least standards compliant browser out there. And a nightmare to design for.
Web Browser Standards Support Summary
As noted, the Acid 3 test results are widely published - of course by those who wish to tout the advantages of their favorites, or to disparage IE. But once again, benchmark tests, including the Acid 3 test, don't reflect real world usage. I have asked for those who keep referring back to the Acid 3 test to provide real world examples of sites not working with IE, but none have been presented. If it such the problem, why not? Examples should be aplenty.
If a Lamborghini can beat a Porsche to the finish line on a drag strip, does that make it a better car? If a Rolls Royce offers a smoother ride than a Lexus on the Autobahn, is the Rolls a better car? If a BMW corners better than Mercedes, is BMW a better car?
I have personally not found one site that I cannot view with IE - including my banks for Bill Pay, credit union, or my Government accounts for my retired Air Force and health insurance business - some of which did not allow access to FF last time I tried. And there have been several comments in this thread from some of you who report you "only use IE when FF does not work." Does not work? How does that make FF better? Perhaps the occasional site failing with FF is not problem for you, but for me, it would be a problem, and since I am very happy with IE's speed, FOR ME, IE is better.
I refer back to my link earlier to PCWorld's Browser Showdown test. It did not use "benchmarks" to compare. It used,These are about as "real world" as you can get. The conclusion,...nine popular Web sites: Amazon, MySpace, Yahoo, PC World, YouTube, Microsoft, Apple, eBay, and Wikipedia.
We loaded each site ten times in each of the browsers and repeated the process the following day to rule out any network traffic or server issues. Prior to each test run, we cleared the browsers' caches as well. We also repeated the load tests to ensure that we had sufficient data to identify loading speed trends. To ensure consistent results, we performed testing on a fresh Windows Vista installation, and we reinstalled the operating system before each round of testing. Additionally, we removed the two best and two worst scores for each page load test to produce more consistent results.BUTBy and large, we found that Internet Explorer 8 performed well, and beat out Firefox 3.0.7 in the majority of our time trials.
In practical, everyday use, you likely won't notice much of a difference between IE 8 and Firefox 3. Due to the fact that broadband connections are so commonplace today, and the fact that browsers in general can load pages faster than they could even a couple years ago, the page load time differences between the two are relatively moot.
Could you please provide a link or two to sites that won't work on FF? I do all my banking on line, and access no less than 6 financial institution sites, using FF. Not to mention I'm on line many hours a day, on countless sites and haven't encountered sites that don't function. I'm not disagreeing with you, but rather would like to see some examples. Thanks!
Last edited by dave1812; 04 Dec 2009 at 14:40.
I didn't post the results to disparage IE, or to tout the advantages of my favourites.As noted, the Acid 3 test results are widely published - of course by those who wish to tout the advantages of their favorites, or to disparage IE. But once again, benchmark tests, including the Acid 3 test, don't reflect real world usage.
The fact is that IE8 faired poorly versus FFox.
BTW IE8 also had to D/L an 'add in' to view that site.
How about you too since (1) I suggested the same thing with IE days ago in post #19 in response to Qdos reporting in #18,And (2) where I asked specifically again for examples in post #23 - and (3) in light of your own post #7 where you agreed FF has some issues, if rare,some sites iE7 and iE8 hang badlyI don't have any alternative browser loaded and have no desire to download one now and start hunting for sites that don't work. I said, "last time I tried". I should have clarified that with "a couple years ago" and I apologize for not doing so. But at that time, there were plenty, as evidenced by the several websites that were dedicated to listing sites that don't work with FF - they are still around, although I have no doubt they are in need of updating - here's a couple:To each his own--I DETEST using IE and only use it in the very rare instance when it's required.
ListAfterList.com - Websites that Don't Work in Firefox
Gripes about Web Sites That Don't Work Well With Firefox
And of course, why would there be IETab if not needed?
****
That said, there are still some on-line security scanners that report to accept IE only - I say "report" because I don't have any alternative to test with, but I have no reason to doubt the sites own published system requirements:
BitDefender Online Scanner - Click on FAQ
Symantec Online Scanner - Click on the two Learn More links
WindowsSecurity Online Trojan Scanner
Let me repeat something I said earlier in post # 4 and in post # 12***********Digerati said:
The bottom line, however, is EVERY web page should be browser independent.
IE8 has the best UI of all browsers. Plus it has protected mode which makes it the safest. Just install Simple Adblock and you are ready to go. So IE8 ftw.