I have serious doubts on who actually made it. Considering IE 5 for the Mac fully supports pngs and not even IE 6 does this. I know MS put it out.. but I doubt MS coders made it.
But it is still people who work at Microsoft, so therefore it is MS who makes it.</strong><hr></blockquote>
My point was.. it's not the same idiots that obviously left out support for pngs in IE. They contracted a bunch of Mac programmers to do their work. While yes they work for MS.. they aren't apart of the MS programming team.
My point was.. it's not the same idiots that obviously left out support for pngs in IE. They contracted a bunch of Mac programmers to do their work. While yes they work for MS.. they aren't apart of the MS programming team.</strong><hr></blockquote>
what are you talking about? MS has always had a huge number of mac specific programmers. ever since 1984. they are the largest development house out of Apple. They didn't "contract" mac coders. they employ and hire them. they are part of MS.
No the first IE 5.0 WAS made by contracted Mac programmers by MS. Before that.. MS products for the Mac where just crappy ported MS apps. A lot of these programmers where just used for IE then let go. I know one of them personally that was let go after IE 5.0 was complete. And a lot of them used to work for Apple. And applenut I am talking since Windows 3.1/95 has been out.
I think what he means is they no longer simply hand a Windows version over to Mac coders to port anymore. The Mac BU is now a more independent entity that works on them from the ground up. They no longer have people from the Windows side peering over their shoulders cutting features and functionality. I think IE 5.1 just needs a new rendering engine as its too slow. My main complaint.
<strong>No the first IE 5.0 WAS made by contracted Mac programmers by MS. Before that.. MS products for the Mac where just crappy ported MS apps. A lot of these programmers where just used for IE then let go. I know one of them personally that was let go after IE 5.0 was complete. And a lot of them used to work for Apple. And applenut I am talking since Windows 3.1/95 has been out.
IE 5 is the best browser for OS X, easy, so I don't understand why it's being ragged on so bad for speed. It seems to me that OS X is the problem, not the browsers.
IE 5 has it's share of problems on OS X for user, espeically when it comes to updating download icons in the finder, or drag n' drop functionality. But it doesn't suck as hard as Omniweb.
Omniweb is butt-slow. It sucks. The sneakypeek 10 of OW 4.1 is faster, but it's still slower than IE 5.1 for OS X. If the Omnigroup ever gets their act together then OW might be ok, but for now it's too slow to be usable. Compare OW to IE for browsing speed, and IE wins easily.
<strong>I think what he means is they no longer simply hand a Windows version over to Mac coders to port anymore. The Mac BU is now a more independent entity that works on them from the ground up. They no longer have people from the Windows side peering over their shoulders cutting features and functionality. I think IE 5.1 just needs a new rendering engine as its too slow. My main complaint.
<strong>IE 5 is the best browser for OS X, easy, so I don't understand why it's being ragged on so bad for speed. It seems to me that OS X is the problem, not the browsers.
IE 5 has it's share of problems on OS X for user, espeically when it comes to updating download icons in the finder, or drag n' drop functionality. But it doesn't suck as hard as Omniweb.
Omniweb is butt-slow. It sucks. The sneakypeek 10 of OW 4.1 is faster, but it's still slower than IE 5.1 for OS X. If the Omnigroup ever gets their act together then OW might be ok, but for now it's too slow to be usable. Compare OW to IE for browsing speed, and IE wins easily.</strong><hr></blockquote>
OW SP 10 is TONS faster for me than IE 5.1 And makes pages render a lot better to boot.
<strong>OW SP 10 is TONS faster for me than IE 5.1 And makes pages render a lot better to boot.</strong><hr></blockquote>Agreed!! I'll take OW 4.1 over IE 5.1 any day now... well, most days. OW still seems to have issues with CSS and Java (but IE dislikes some Java too).
I want all the people in that other thread arguing that IE is not a bad browser and that MS defeated Netscape because IE was that good to come read this. Then I want them to go away.
Comments
<strong>Maybe they don't want freaks like you hacking their UI.
That doesn't stop anyone.. it can be hacked just like OS X was.
because M$ made it
CAn't wait for OW to get their shit straight, that will be the best Mac browser.
<strong>"Why is Internet Explorer so bad?"
because M$ made it
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I have serious doubts on who actually made it. Considering IE 5 for the Mac fully supports pngs and not even IE 6 does this. I know MS put it out.. but I doubt MS coders made it.
IE5 for 9 is SO much better than any Windows browser in everything save pure rendering speed...
although Office 2k1 on 9 rocks, too...
hmmmm
<strong>Who then?</strong><hr></blockquote>
MS has a Mac programming team they pay to do such things. Including Office. That is why IE 5 for the Mac is so much different than IE 5 for the PC.
<img src="confused.gif" border="0">
<strong>So it is Microsoft then. . .
Not the same MS that is coding Windows.. and coding IE for Windows no...
They contracted it out grover.
<strong>
Not the same MS that is coding Windows.. and coding IE for Windows no...
They contracted it out grover.</strong><hr></blockquote>
But it is still people who work at Microsoft, so therefore it is MS who makes it.
<strong>
But it is still people who work at Microsoft, so therefore it is MS who makes it.</strong><hr></blockquote>
My point was.. it's not the same idiots that obviously left out support for pngs in IE. They contracted a bunch of Mac programmers to do their work. While yes they work for MS.. they aren't apart of the MS programming team.
It's Microsoft coders, just accept it.
<strong>
My point was.. it's not the same idiots that obviously left out support for pngs in IE. They contracted a bunch of Mac programmers to do their work. While yes they work for MS.. they aren't apart of the MS programming team.</strong><hr></blockquote>
what are you talking about? MS has always had a huge number of mac specific programmers. ever since 1984. they are the largest development house out of Apple. They didn't "contract" mac coders. they employ and hire them. they are part of MS.
you sure do BS a lot
[ 11-28-2001: Message edited by: Sinewave ]</p>
apple_otaku
<strong>No the first IE 5.0 WAS made by contracted Mac programmers by MS. Before that.. MS products for the Mac where just crappy ported MS apps. A lot of these programmers where just used for IE then let go. I know one of them personally that was let go after IE 5.0 was complete. And a lot of them used to work for Apple. And applenut I am talking since Windows 3.1/95 has been out.
[ 11-28-2001: Message edited by: Sinewave ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
hope the guy you know isn't as reliable as your friend from the finder team
I'll give it to you that the Mac BU is a bit seperate from MS.
IE 5 has it's share of problems on OS X for user, espeically when it comes to updating download icons in the finder, or drag n' drop functionality. But it doesn't suck as hard as Omniweb.
Omniweb is butt-slow. It sucks. The sneakypeek 10 of OW 4.1 is faster, but it's still slower than IE 5.1 for OS X. If the Omnigroup ever gets their act together then OW might be ok, but for now it's too slow to be usable. Compare OW to IE for browsing speed, and IE wins easily.
<strong>I think what he means is they no longer simply hand a Windows version over to Mac coders to port anymore. The Mac BU is now a more independent entity that works on them from the ground up. They no longer have people from the Windows side peering over their shoulders cutting features and functionality. I think IE 5.1 just needs a new rendering engine as its too slow. My main complaint.
apple_otaku</strong><hr></blockquote>
Bing Bing Bing. Give that man a cigar.
<strong>IE 5 is the best browser for OS X, easy, so I don't understand why it's being ragged on so bad for speed. It seems to me that OS X is the problem, not the browsers.
IE 5 has it's share of problems on OS X for user, espeically when it comes to updating download icons in the finder, or drag n' drop functionality. But it doesn't suck as hard as Omniweb.
Omniweb is butt-slow. It sucks. The sneakypeek 10 of OW 4.1 is faster, but it's still slower than IE 5.1 for OS X. If the Omnigroup ever gets their act together then OW might be ok, but for now it's too slow to be usable. Compare OW to IE for browsing speed, and IE wins easily.</strong><hr></blockquote>
OW SP 10 is TONS faster for me than IE 5.1 And makes pages render a lot better to boot.
<strong>OW SP 10 is TONS faster for me than IE 5.1 And makes pages render a lot better to boot.</strong><hr></blockquote>Agreed!! I'll take OW 4.1 over IE 5.1 any day now... well, most days. OW still seems to have issues with CSS and Java (but IE dislikes some Java too).