I use IE6, and despite all the warnings from Brad, it works fine for me on F-T. All I want is a browser that works and doesn't get in the way. IE6 never crashes on me, and all web pages look fine to me as IE6 displays them (whether they are "perfect" or not doesn't concern me as long as everything "looks right"). Therefore I have no interest or motivation to mess with any other browser. If I ever do run into a web site that won't work with IE (hasn't happened yet), I would have to be extremely motivated to try something other than IE. As far as making an anti-MS political statement by not running IE, whatever floats your boat I guess... Of course my choice of IE has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with the fact that I'm an MCSE and make my living supporting MS networking and office products.

 |  IP: Logged

Bobby... good luck finding a Mac that DOESN'T include IE. And when you boot it up for the first time, you will have the option of downloading the newest version if one is available (both in OS 9 and X), provided you remember to plug in that ethernet cable thingamajig. Just remember to press command-T (command is the little "apple" button on the keyboard next to Option) to get rid of the crap on the side of the screen in IE. You'll never use it anyway.

If I find a page that doesn't load properly in OmniWeb I usually just ignore it. If it's a page I think I really want to see, I'll use IE temporarily. If the page annoys me too much I'll click-off it and never go back.

I like OmniWeb mostly because of the controls it gives me over pop-ups, cookies and banner ads. I can tell OmniWeb when to allow or deny cookies on a site-by-site basis. I can accept or deny ALL cookies by default then I can check off each site on the list as to whether to follow the default behavior or follow a "custom" behavior.
Same thing with banner ads. I can set up rules via expressions to allow or deny them.

 |  IP: Logged

 |  IP: Logged

I must admit that a 'one size fits all' browser solution is the simplest one; hence I use IE6.

 |  IP: Logged

Just wondering what the opinions are here for die-hard Opera users (like me) in regards to websites written with bad code, or code that only Internet Explorer can recognize? I am finding more and more websites that even Netscape cannot display. I know the majority of users use IE because most people have Windows and most people won't bother to install a superior product since IE comes pre-installed with Windows...but for those who DO want something better and have installed Opera, what do you think?

#1 When you come to these evil websites, do you bother to open up IE to view the page, or do you just say "to hell with it" and leave the website?

If the content is something I really want or need to see, I will open up IE, as netscape is becoming more unreliable than Opera in some cases, thank you Bill Gates.

#2 Do you find yourself resorting to IE to see if the content is good and then deal with using IE if the website is worth it?

I use Opera always unless a specific page requires me to do otherwise, and then I will typically only use it for that one site.

#3 Do you tend to not bother with websites that are reasonably interesting because you know it has non-standard code? In other words, are there sites that you would normally visit regularly if they displayed properly in Opera?

perhaps. I have run into sites that might be interesting, but don't seem worth the time to bother with IE.

#4 When you resort to using IE to look at a webpage, are you as amazed as I am at just how many advertising popups are really on the internet?

Oh yeah. It's pretty ridiculous.

#5 Does IE's lack of mouse button shortcuts drive you crazy?

I think you are referring to the mac version here. the mac version of Opera does not work very well on my Imac at work, so I typically just use IE there, as netscape usually just causes my computer to completely lock up.

At some point, I will probably register Opera, just to give them my support, but until I do, I will not complain about the ads. I don't find the ads at all obtrusive. It was a smart way to get their browser out for free without losing a ridiculous amount of money. I would much rather have a constant ad in the upper right extreme of my browser than have 2-3 ads pop up in seperate windows when I load certain websites.

 |  IP: Logged

It is a real shame the telecom companies in the United States and Europe are hurting so bad. Their financial hardships have drastically slowed down the build up of broadband infrastructure. And the bad thing is that AFFORDABLE and widely available broadband Internet with real time streaming video (even in HD form) is what will be needed to get the computer industry out of its deep hole. In fact, that kind of thing may be needed to bring about a new level of efficiency and speed in business to get the world's economy as a whole back on a proper, positive track.

Our local phone people finally announced DSL availability to start in November. That's the good news...the bad news? 80 bucks a month, due to our low population.

I hate dialup, but I use the web on three different computers (home, theatre, day job) and I use my personal account for all three, so I'm hoping they will come up with some kind of package deal, otherwise I'm afraid I'll be stuck in dialup land for awhile, in one or two places at least. I'm sure they'll get plenty of complaints, so I'm hopeful they'll rethink the prices.

 |  IP: Logged

quote:

---

Joe, remember that here in the UK, unless you are amazingly rich, it's basically dial up or nothing, when you can actually get a connection!

---

I’m on AOL 24/7 and connections are never a problem, but it does cost £15.99 (US $25) a month. Broadband is available in my area which I would like, but that costs £34.99 (US $55) a month. And you have to buy a modem pack for £85.

A friend of mine is with BT 24/7 and a pound cheaper, but his connection can take a long time, and frequently can loose it.

For the time being until Broadband prices hopefully fall, I have installed Internet Boost which seems to work well.

quote:

---

70 minutes to 2 hours to download an update for a WEB BROWSER? Anybody besides me see something a bit screwy here?

---

Internet Explorer includes shell updates for Windows, adding to the total size. That's why most of the time you can fix a messed up Windows OS by un-installing IE, installing Windows on top of Windows and re-installing IE.

Of course it would be nice if Microsoft better documented that, but it's an 'integrated browser/shell' so I guess they don't really have to because you're not just updating your browser, you're updating your 'browser/shell'.

Either way, I keep IE up-to-date and use Opera.