|
Internet explorer 6 (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Coup |
| not my anti mircosoft banta then:p |
|
|
| C-naptik |
I have Windows XP instaleld, so IE 6.0 comes with it
I have to say it works very fine, IE 6.0 looks indeed better, the context menu when you leave your mouse on a pic is useful
There are some more icons to the right too, can be useful
I don't know if it's IE 6.0 or WIn XP but all buttons look WAY nicer !!
Very smooth and not straight shapes, it looks really nice
As well as the "*" for passwords look different too
If you think about downloading something, download Win XP instead !
The only bad thing to it so far (and it's major) is how to set up a local network
I struggled 4 houts today trying to set up my local network between my comp with Win XP and the one with Win 98, plus setting up the net connection sharing, plus the FTP server (if you don't set up the right IPs, it won't work) and the ability to play over a LAN (with IPX stuff)
That wasn't easy !
If someone found a good solution...
I came up with an okay result, but that's still not perfect |
|
|
| Spad |
Just installed it and all seems good so far. I love the way you can lock toolbars...looks pretty neat.
I disagree about the Java & Plugin stuff though. It's not Microsoft's responsiblity to provide support for other people's software. Say when they released Win2k for instance, I play games and a few of them didn't work with Win2k. Therefore the publishers released a patch and all was well.
As far as Quicktime should be concerned, there's a new browser out and they need to patch their software to support it. That's how it should be in my opinion. If it were any other browser nobody would bat an eyelid but because it's MS everybody screams conspiricy. |
|
|
| FASTDJMP3 |
| just downloaded it , and i still don't notice any difference |
|
|
| trancaholic |
| quote: | Originally posted by Spad
I disagree about the Java & Plugin stuff though. It's not Microsoft's responsiblity to provide support for other people's software. Say when they released Win2k for instance, I play games and a few of them didn't work with Win2k. Therefore the publishers released a patch and all was well.
|
Java is a standard in much the same way as flash, html, javascript etc. and when it's free for M$ to incorporate there's really no excuse for not having it in there (and since the "patch" is available the manhours have been spent).
The only reason for the decision is that M$ wasn't allowed to extend the Java-language to take advantage of Windows-only features in their Visual Java-thingy. This would have undermined the only great things about Java: Safety and platform independence.
Truth is that M$ is scared of Java as it is becoming increasingly popular as a development tool, and as such developers wouldn't have to sell their products carrying "Requires Windows XX"-badges. And the day that becomes reality a *lot* of Windows users (me included) will delete the bug-infested piece of crap from their computers and use Be, Elate or some other stable platform. Therefore M$ does what it does best: Divide and conquer - every lamer will from now on blame it on the Java-application when it won't run because of a lacking Java RTE in Windows and as such developers will be faced with the choice whether to abandon a huge part of their user-base, or go M$-C#/.Net. |
|
|
| [A|ienFactory] |
| It takes hours to install! |
|
|
| apri_peel |
| quote: | Originally posted by C-naptik
If you think about downloading something, download Win XP instead !
|
im sorry but i have to disagree with that, do NOT get win xp. that thing is a bit screwed up. you cant use software that doesnt have some sorta code in it. i read an article on that, and its a major bug and microsoft cant even fix it. so i say, stay with win2k, win98, or even win95 which is by far the best OS microsoft has ever come up with (win 3.1 cant handle much of the new stuff)
as for ie6, ive had it for over a month now, not too bad i guess, doesnt crash as ie5 did. i guess all microsoft did was fix a coupla bug here and a coupla there. id say get it, wont hurt ya |
|
|
| Dj_Andy |
Starting downloading...
I hope I won't regret... |
|
|
| C-naptik |
Well Apri-peel, knowing that i've used Win XP for months and that you only read an article about it, i think i'm a bit more well placed to know what i'm talking about, mmh ?
Every piece of software i tried to install on Win XP was compatible. I know of nothing that didn't work so far.
The only bad things i repeat is the local network setup (but maybe it's just me, or it's cos it's still a beta), and i can't install my TV-card because the drivers don't work on XP, but maybe there will be a patch.
When installing XP, i didn't need ANY of my drivers that were on CDs.
XP found everything by itself.
I didn't even need to set up my DSL connection with the drivers-CD i have. XP does everything.
Plus i rarely crashes with XP, i can last at least 24 hours without having to reboot or to deal with "low on resources" problems that occur all the time when you use Win 98 or Win ME !
I don't know about Win2k though
Besides, Win XP is much nicer to look at and to use
I really don't see any drawbacks ! (except the few ones i mentioned before)
I even think it goes faster to load web pages
But i guess that's fine if you give more credit to a brief article rather than to someone who's used for a while and can truly relate.... |
|
|
| Optimus Trance |
| it looks ok...:D:D:D |
|
|
| apri_peel |
well, my borther tried out win xp too, and he wasnt too excited about it. i guess it all depends on what software you use.
all i know is that i really like win2k, which is fast, bery stable, does not use too many resources, and i like its NT base |
|
|
|
|
