Internet Explorer 5.2

aquaticaquatic
Posted:
in Mac Software edited January 2014
Is there anything new in it besides Quartz text smoothing and making my homepage *snicker* <a href="http://www.msn.com?"; target="_blank">www.msn.com?</a> I mean, I already have Silk 1.1 installed, so what else is different about IE 5.2? It's supposed to be faster and more stable, but were there actually other changes?



Also, any bugs that mean we should wait for 5.2.1?



Please discuss.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 20
    evoevo Posts: 198member
    Man, having <a href="http://www.msn.com"; target="_blank">www.msn.com</a> as my homepage is just really great. I'm so glad Microsoft gave us this much needed feature in Internet Explorer 5.2. I mean, the homepage I've had for 4+ years, <a href="http://www.macnn.com,"; target="_blank">www.macnn.com,</a> is good, but msn.com is beyond my wildest dreams. And now it is the default homepage in IE 5.2. Thank you so much Microsoft. This finally puts IE at the front of the X browser race.



    (Note: I'm being sarcastic)
  • Reply 2 of 20
    his dudenesshis dudeness Posts: 560member
    Hmmm, yes I did detect a slight hint of sarcasm there... The homepage lasted all of 3 seconds on my Powerbook. So long, msn...



    Actually, this is a very good improvement. I hated the old version with a passion, and this is almost useable...
  • Reply 3 of 20
    scott f.scott f. Posts: 276member
    [quote]Originally posted by His Dudeness:

    <strong>Actually, this is a very good improvement. I hated the old version with a passion, and this is almost useable...</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Ummm... I think it might be a placebo effect. From what I've read so far, the ONLY thing that was updated was the use of Quartz anti-aliasing of text... no other improvements have happened under the hood, so whatever you "hated" about the "old" version is still there. (AFAIK)
  • Reply 4 of 20
    cyko95cyko95 Posts: 391member
    I just hope this doesn't mean we're gonna have to wait for IE 6 for another year. <img src="confused.gif" border="0">
  • Reply 5 of 20
    zadakzadak Posts: 50member
    Isn't Interface extras new?



    I have sure missed the "open in new browser window"-feature.
  • Reply 6 of 20
    aquaticaquatic Posts: 5,602member
    No Zadak that came from 5.1. Those were nice touches. IE could use more stuff like that, a la feature from Opera and Mozilla, like Tabbed browsing, remembering windows positions, etc.



    Man IE 5.2 sucks and I haven't even installed it yet!



    Why? Well, according to the IE 5.2 Installer, I don't have enough priveleges. I am logged in as a frikkin Admin. It asks for my password, I give it, and it doesnt' accept it. This happens over and over. Other stuff installs fine.



    Grade-A M$!
  • Reply 7 of 20
    zozo Posts: 3,117member
    to tell the truth it feels as fast as Mozilla and sometimes faster.



    They did a good job... I think I can use IE more often now... a;though Ive gotten really used to having windowed tabs... those things rule.
  • Reply 8 of 20
    aquaticaquatic Posts: 5,602member
    Hehe careful ZO, let's not go thinking IE is good enough to be a part of MacOS X or anything... like <a href="http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=5&t=000890"; target="_blank">they</a> did over here.



    Sorry about starting a duplicate thread :o
  • Reply 9 of 20
    donnydonny Posts: 231member
    Making MSN my start page, I feel is a bit controlling and over-kill, but otherwise, I have found 5.2 to be OK. I would not praise it like some people seem to be doing on this post. It does seem a bit faster in loading for some pages but slower on some complex pages. I appreciate the font smoothing support, but Silk does it for me on all applications. It is not that wonderful of a feature after Silk was introduced a couple weeks ago.

    Also, IE 5.2 hangs-up a lot more than 5.1.4 before starting to load a new page selected from a link. All I can think of... Not too big of an update...
  • Reply 10 of 20
    kecksykecksy Posts: 1,002member
    Why would anyone want to use IE when Mozilla is faster, far more stable, more compliant, and doesn't need an installer? To Anyone who doesn't have it, go download version 1.0 here: <a href="http://www.mozilla.org"; target="_blank">http://www.mozilla.org</a>;



    Did I also mention it's not a M$ product.
  • Reply 11 of 20
    ghost_user_nameghost_user_name Posts: 22,667member
    [quote]Originally posted by Keeksy:

    <strong> is faster</strong><hr></blockquote>Not in the interface. Mozilla's UI is absolutely horrible on the Mac. It looks like a straight Windows/Linux port because, well, that's exactly what it is. The UI is slow and it lacks simple customization (of the toolbar). And why does it have to wait two seconds every single time I open a new window or open the prefs? Lame. Don't even mention themes -- those break a even more general UI guidelines.

    [quote]<strong>more compliant</strong><hr></blockquote>Maybe standards compliant, but not developer compliant. Remember, there are a lot of pages out there built specifically for Internet Explorer and it's quirky rendering. Thus, they won't render right in "correct" engines.



    I'm not saying I like IE over Mozilla; I just think some people need to open their eyes to all sides of the arguments.
  • Reply 12 of 20
    surfratsurfrat Posts: 341member
    [quote]Originally posted by starfleetX:

    <strong>Maybe standards compliant, but not developer compliant. Remember, there are a lot of pages out there built specifically for Internet Explorer and it's quirky rendering. Thus, they won't render right in "correct" engines.



    I'm not saying I like IE over Mozilla; I just think some people need to open their eyes to all sides of the arguments.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    How's this for open eyes...



    IE 5.2: I hate it. Sucks a fatty.



    In other words, "Chimera, it still rules."



    <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />



    [ 06-19-2002: Message edited by: SurfRat ]</p>
  • Reply 13 of 20
    aquaticaquatic Posts: 5,602member
    Mozilla sucks. Chimera will be awesome. It sucks right now (sorry, had to say it)



    Opera, haha.



    Netscape 6.2.3, FAST, (fastest in my tests) good, but crashes ALL the time. Haven't tried 7, what's it like?



    So, IE for me, at least for a little longer
  • Reply 14 of 20
    horned_froghorned_frog Posts: 577member
    Just from a consumer's POV, I would say this update made my IE worse than 5.1.4.



    --I find I get the beachball a lot more often and for longer periods of time than I did before.



    --I don not find it snappier, if anything it is a tad slower, and it takes longer for images to load, if they decide to load at all, I thought this update was supposed to fix that? (I still oftentimes have to ctrl-click an image and tell it to "load image."



    --the "application unexpedtedly quits" 2-3 times per day just by asking it to do normal tasks, i.e. refreshing a page, hitting command-tilde to switch between open pages, etc. This maybe happened once per week before.



    --very often if I click into my favorites and select one, the program won't do anything, I am forced to type in the address manually.



    --maybe it is just me, maybe it is my screen resolution (800x600) but I really don't like Text Smoothing. Of course I am glad it is there for everyone else, just a personal preference. Note I'm not complaining, just glad it can be turned on/off.
  • Reply 15 of 20
    chucksterchuckster Posts: 56member
    With IE 5.2, I have gotten "Quit Unexpectedly" several times, and I get hung up (i.e. the spinning CD never goes away) while running AIM express and when playing games on Yahoo.
  • Reply 16 of 20
    aquaticaquatic Posts: 5,602member
    Geez how did you guys install it? Even though I'm Admin (the only user of this Mac) it wouldn't accept my password so I "didn't have enough permissions" to install it. :confused:



    Damn Microslop... Does anyone know how to get around this?



    Why does it need to be root anyway?
  • Reply 17 of 20
    his dudenesshis dudeness Posts: 560member
    [quote]Originally posted by His Dudeness:

    <strong>Hmmm, yes I did detect a slight hint of sarcasm there... The homepage lasted all of 3 seconds on my Powerbook. So long, msn...



    Actually, this is a very good improvement. I hated the old version with a passion, and this is almost useable...</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Actually, I take it all back. This is a piece of GARBAGE!
  • Reply 18 of 20
    sledgehammersledgehammer Posts: 505member
    [quote]Originally posted by starfleetX:

    <strong>Maybe standards compliant, but not developer compliant. Remember, there are a lot of pages out there built specifically for Internet Explorer and it's quirky rendering. Thus, they won't render right in "correct" engines.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    I am coming to agree more and mopre with the views on standards compliance expressed <a href="http://webstandards.org/"; target="_blank">here</a> and <a href="http://alistapart.com/stories/netscape/"; target="_blank">here</a> and on the sites linked to from those. (Though they do seem to do a bit of IE praising.) My stance: screw screwy web design, push for standards compliance.

    <a href="http://webstandards.org/"; target="_blank"></a>



    [ 06-22-2002: Message edited by: SledgeHammer ]</p>
  • Reply 19 of 20
    dreadpiratedreadpirate Posts: 26member
    Question: Is it possible to turn text-smoothing off? Because I like it for the most part, but at times it's sort of blurry-feeling. I'm using a 12" ibook, so it may be the size of my screen, but regardless - 5.2 seems cool in every way, but is the text-smoothing optional?



    Is there anyone who DOESN'T like text smoothing?
  • Reply 20 of 20
    outsideroutsider Posts: 6,008member
    Text smoothing for Mozilla and Omniweb are vastly supierior than what IE offers for some reason. Been using Mozilla for the last couple weeks and just installed Omniweb 4.1. I'll never go back to IE (unless Netscape and Omni go bankrupt soon)
Sign In or Register to comment.