Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Members' Lounge (General Discussion) › Microsoft Internet Explorer 9
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Microsoft Internet Explorer 9

post #1 of 32
Thread Starter 

I recently downloaded the Windows 7 64 bit version of Internet Explorer 9 Beta. There is this early review from Laptop Magazine regarding it: http://www.laptopmag.com/review/software/internet-explorer-9-beta.aspx . So far, the web browser has been fairly stable to use even though it is a beta release. I really dig how it is interwoven into Windows 7 and the look and feel of the design is much improved as well. I do not know when the final release will be available, but I anticipate it is coming soon.

 

What are you thoughts about it? Please reply. Thank you.

post #2 of 32

I'm sure there's still not an Adobe Flash version for it (nor will there be, probably )

post #3 of 32


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jpelg View Post

I'm sure there's still not an Adobe Flash version for it (nor will there be, probably )

 

Here:

http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/flashplayer10/

post #4 of 32
Thread Starter 

This is why I post so many threads about specific topics here.

 

Thanks Cankin for that reply. I will download it and try it out in tandem with IE 9 Beta.

 

I can not wait until Microsoft releases the stable version soon. It has quickly become my favorite web browser for its features that are integrated with Windows 7.

post #5 of 32

I have stayed away from IE for years, but IE9 looks promising - so far it has received some good reviews and I like the Win 7 integration as well. Wonder when the stable version will be released - dying to give it a try.

 

Unfortunately, think it will only be available for Win 7, so I can only use it on my notebook and not my desktop which is still on Win XP ...
 

post #6 of 32


Quote:

Originally Posted by Cankin View Post

Here:

http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/flashplayer10/


Interesting. Have u tried it, Cankin? Is it stable?

post #7 of 32

Just read the forum section:

http://forums.adobe.com/community/labs/flashplayer10/

 

Sounds pretty flakey. Not ready for prime-time.

 

This is my issue with 64-bit OS's. In order to take full advantage, you need full integration: processor, OS, device drivers, & apps. If you don't have all four, it's an exercise in frustration. I would never recommend 64-bit OS versions to anyone who doesn't absolutely NEED 64-bit app support for their livelihood (read: most of the world, atm) to stay with the mainstream OS version.

post #8 of 32

The worst thing I can say about IE in Win7 64 is that occasionally I get this false alarm: IE has encountered a problem and needs to shut down. Then it continues to run. I did have some issues with Adobe Flash, but the patch I got from Steam appears to have fixed that as well. It's not the same as the Adobe update. I had doubts about running a 64 bit OS, but so far, so good.

 

Trivia question: What was the first 64 bit capable CPU produced for the PC?

 

 

 

 

 

AMD K8 renamed Athlon 64


Edited by Moontan13 - 9/25/10 at 6:57am
post #9 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpelg View Post

 I would never recommend 64-bit OS versions to anyone who doesn't absolutely NEED 64-bit app support for their livelihood (read: most of the world, atm) to stay with the mainstream OS version.



I disagree. If you have both versions available, try the 64 bit. The supporting hardware has been around a long time, and it appears that most peripherals have 64 bit driver support. More problematic is 64 bit hardware that doesn't have Vista or Win7 drivers. I had two items that were like that, a printer and a USB sound card, so I gave them to someone who was runing XP 64 and they work fine.

post #10 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moontan13 View Post





I disagree. If you have both versions available, try the 64 bit. The supporting hardware has been around a long time, and it appears that most peripherals have 64 bit driver support. More problematic is 64 bit hardware that doesn't have Vista or Win7 drivers. I had two items that were like that, a printer and a USB sound card, so I gave them to someone who was runing XP 64 and they work fine.


I've absolutely never had an issue with 64 bit, and most computers now have 4gb or more of RAM, for which 64 bit is a requirement.

post #11 of 32

I have been using an AMD Turion processor-based laptop running Vista64 for several years now. No real issues for me personally. But I'm an IT guy who knows my way around PC's & am willing to live with certain...idiocyncracies, if the benefit is worth it. For the most part, it has been problem free, as I am stil on my stock image. Even problem apps that shut down only affect that app, rather than the whole PC. I normally use the 64-bit version of IE (now IE8). However, Flash-based sites required shutting down my normal browser sessions (all tabs) to open the 32-bit IE8. What a pain.

 

My wife runs a similiar laptop with Vista64 too. However, I had to configure hers to use the 32-bit IE by default because she does not want to deal with that. Also, Blackberry synching does not work via USB under Vista64, so she cannot do that. She needs to get a Bluetooth adapter instead, as supposedly that works. Before she got her Blackberry, her Palm-based phone couldn't synch via USB either. Stupid.

 

My sister-in-law got a new Logitech webcam for her Vista64-based desktop PC. She wants to be able to Skype us (we live half a country away). Too bad the Logitech won't work under Vista64, even though it was a new model when she bought it. Stupid.

 

What do you think I'd recommend to my aunt who is looking for a new PC? Stay away from Vista64-based PC's, that's what. Because I know I will end up supporting it to a certain degree, and I don't want the hassles, nor have to answer questions why an app or device won't work on her PC.

 

I'd blame the application designers for not coming out with proper 64-bit versions of their software or hardware drivers, but they have a business to run too. It's a catch-22. The general public won't (knowingly) opt for 64-bit OS's if they can't use their favorite app/device/etc. with it. But developers won't allot the resources to write & support 64-bit anything if the numbers don't warrant it. Especially in this economy.

post #12 of 32

FWIW, Microsoft said that with Vista and Win7, they were moving forward, and not promising legacy support for old OSs, apps and hardware.

That's why I wasn't too arsed about a couple XP devices that didn't work

post #13 of 32
Thread Starter 

64 bit computing is still optional at New Jersey Institute of Technology, but it is required for the Newark College of Engineering and the College of Architecture. I have had no problems with either my Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit Edition or Ubuntu 10.04 LTS 64 bit or Linux Mint 9 LTS 64 bit with legacy hardware and their 32 bit device drivers. Of course, I bought a new ASUS N61JV-X2 notebook PC about a month and a half ago before the start of classes on August 30th.

 

I have had no problems with Macromedia Flash or the beta version of Flash Player Square on the 64 bit version of Internet Explorer 9 Beta, Mozilla Firefox, Google Chrome, Opera Browser, or Apple Safari. Everything has been running rock solid on Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit Edition. As for GNU/Linux, I installed the 64 bit Flash Player Square on Mozilla Firefox, Google Chrome, and Opera Browser and tested several websites that deploy Flash technology quite heavily without incident.

 

Microsoft states that Internet Explorer 9 will only be available for Vista and 7 only. Internet Explorer 8 is the most current version of the web browser that is available for Windows XP Home, Professional, Media Center, and Tablet Editions either in 32 or 64 bit versions.

 

The most compelling features set that I like the most about Internet Explorer 9 Beta include GPU hardware acceleration, jump lists, Aero Peek, pining tabs to the taskbar, and seperate tab processes that are sandboxed. I also appreciate the seamless integration with Microsoft Bing search within the web browser. Furthermore, the minimalist design is appealing even though it is no more than a me-too concession to Google Chrome. Even though it is still in Beta pre-release phase, it is remarkably stable with few bugs even with my heavy browsing usage patterns. If Microsoft will fix the drop-down menu list bug and improve the startup performance, then Internet Explorer 9 will soar to reclaim a larger share of the crowded web browser market in the near future.

 

So far, Microsoft has finally engineered their Internet Explorer to be a truly competitive product in the cluttered web browser marketplace. It has easily become my favorite. I eagerly look forward to the final stable release soon.

post #14 of 32

I don't have 64bit, does it have obnoxious toolbars like every other IE evar?

post #15 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by logwed View Post

I don't have 64bit, does it have obnoxious toolbars like every other IE evar?

 

From what I've read and comparison pics I've seen one of the main selling points of IE9 is that its toolbars take up the least space of all the mainstream browsers.

 

However it seems its toolbars still take up more real estate than Comodo Dragon (a fork of the Chromium browser that's more secure and faster than Chrome and ships without all the Google tracking nonsense).
 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Members' Lounge (General Discussion) › Microsoft Internet Explorer 9