...

View Full Version : Why not an Internet Explorer 7?



theabyss
05-08-2003, 03:51 AM
Hey everybody. I'm new to the forums right now and I've been reading some of the stuff in this section. I'm just wondering when Microsoft will create a IE 7 with popup blocking. I know of even Netscape that does this in their 7 version. It seems that they're lagging behind a bit.

It would be cool if you could have a browser that had every option thinkable. Such as which types of scripts, cookies, and maybe even some server side coding to accept or not accept. Don't know if preventing server side things are possible, but it probably can be done.

I've heard about that new "Lockhorn" or "Blackcomb" Windows coming out, so maybe they'll do it then? Not sure. I surf the web with IE 6 SP1 and I have everything disabled in the Internet zone. All cookies are blocked, unless I add the address to my accept list. This also is the same with the "Trusted Sites" option, but I still have a lot of security in that zone.

My system is very clean and I'd like all users systems to be like mine. If the Internet in general figured out that using a type of technology to promote ads (Javascript popups for one thing), maybe it would lead them to stop because the turnout rate is low. On my personal site, I keep content very low. My custom DTD for my site is only 14 lines! :eek:



<!ELEMENT html (head, body)><!ATTLIST html>
<!ELEMENT head (title, style)><!ATTLIST head>
<!ELEMENT title (#PCDATA)><!ATTLIST title>
<!ELEMENT style (#PCDATA)>
<!ELEMENT body (p)*><!ATTLIST body>
<!ELEMENT p (#PCDATA | a | img | br)*>
<!ELEMENT a (#PCDATA)>
<!ELEMENT img EMPTY>
<!ELEMENT br EMPTY><!ATTLIST br>

<!ATTLIST style type CDATA #REQUIRED>
<!ATTLIST p id ID #IMPLIED class CDATA #IMPLIED>
<!ATTLIST a href CDATA #REQUIRED>
<!ATTLIST img src CDATA #REQUIRED alt CDATA #REQUIRED>


I know this type of web design isn't possible for all sites, but shouldn't they work towards this? I'm probably asking for an Internet utopia that probably isn't possible, but I bet that if Microsoft made an IE 7 with a lot of features that computer illiterate people understand, we'd be on our way. Just my thoughts on the Internet in general.

mouse
05-08-2003, 06:54 PM
Security should be constantly reviewed and enhanced whatever the browser. I'd put my money on IE not being branded as "7" it'll be XQ or TX or GZX or any other collection of letters containing an X. It'll probably integrate with messenger, hotmail, .net and other services so will take a while to emerge, probably as you say, when the next os comes out.

They've no competition atm with Netscape being something only old school net users remember ever using, most people have never heard of it.

theabyss
05-08-2003, 07:31 PM
I have never used Netscape myself, but am willing to try it. I'd like to see exactly how popups are stopped. Not sure how that popup blocking feature works. It would be a lot better than having scripting totally disabled like on my IE.

It'll be kinda cool if they call the new IE 7 "Internet XPlorer" because it has XP in it and sounds the same. I bet that's what they're planning, but I could be wrong :D

liorean
05-08-2003, 07:55 PM
TheAbyss - Ns7's popup feature is the same as the one in Mozilla (since NS7 is built on Mozilla). What they do, is to block any calls to the function open unless it's triggered by a user event. It can also disable various other javascript features.
http://liorean.web-graphics.com/moz-popup-prefs.png
http://liorean.web-graphics.com/moz-popup-exceptions-prefs.png
http://liorean.web-graphics.com/moz-scripting-prefs.png
I would recommend you to use one of the stable Mozilla versions instead of Ns7.

(iow the moz versions that aren't nightlies, and doesn't end with one of 'a', 'b', 'rc#')

Roy Sinclair
05-08-2003, 07:59 PM
MS hasn't leaked a word about any new versions of IE, one wonders if they are working on it at all.

Don't waste your time using anything branded Netscape these days. The current "Netscape" browsers are just older versions of the Mozilla browser repackaged with a lot of excess programs and other nonsense. Get and use the current Mozilla browser instead.

brothercake
05-08-2003, 11:11 PM
I recommend Phoenix (http://www.mozilla.org/projects/phoenix) - it's the mozilla gecko rendering engine in a lightwieght interface - I use it all the time - and it has the same JS-preferences as mozilla.

I imagine that whatever IE comes out with next will be branded along the lines of MSN Explorer - still deeply embedded in the OS, and possible even more so, but visually a strong "browser brand". It will also be highly skinable to appeal to extremes - from business intranet users who want a plain conservative look, to nutters who want it to look like the cover of a Cradle of Filth record. And they will add popup blockers; blatantly.

It will also be very nearly almost incredibly standards compliant, but the factor by which it deviates will be so arrogantly ironic that the internet itself will explode from the frustration of it all.

liorean
05-08-2003, 11:58 PM
Well, Phoenix (or Mozilla Firebird as it's new name is) is a good browser - but it doesn't have some of the features that I really like about Mozilla, like DOM Inspector, Venkman , some of the XPIs I use etc. I'll convert when Mozilla Application Suite converts, not before. I can take Composer and ChatZilla not being present, but the rest of the suite iare features I use more or less regularly.

On a second note, have you seen this (http://www.mozillazine.org/weblogs/asa/archives/003196.html), Brothercake? It's Moz1.4 based instead of 1.02 as Camino is, and is reportedly faster than Camino and Safari both.


As for Ie7, there are rumors. I know the tasman team are working on ie6 for mac, too. As for features in ie7w, I'd say DOM will be far better supported, probably DOM3 for at least some things. They won't drop doctype switching and won't do anything radical to their rendering engines, but they will likely amend the XHTML issues, add CSS support for most of CSS2 ignoring a few irritating details, and implement CSS3 parts that aren't ready for prime time yet.

As for popup blocking, they may add it, but I doubt it.



I think we'll have to wait for ie7w for some time yet, though - ECMA262-4 is nearing an end, and I would think Microsoft wants to bring a killer JScript .NET enabled engine that beats Spidermonkey. (They've been after moz in that sector too long, and they have been working on their own implementation alongside with the development of the spec. So has moz, but their implementation isn't fully backwards compatible yet and thus can't be used in the browser yet.)

theabyss
05-09-2003, 01:05 AM
Thanks for all of the input. I'm downloading the Phoenix browser right now. It seems like it's a Mozilla Lite version :) I'll check out how this browser runs and post my results here. Thanks again! :thumbsup:

theabyss
05-10-2003, 01:14 AM
Very nice! :D I'm liking this browser right now. What I like the best is the "Block images from this server" context menu. That means I can block ad servers from displaying ad images. I just love the options for cookies that you can make them "session only". Totally awesome!

What's really great is the automatic import of IE favorites. I set up my "Bookmarks Toolbar" just like IE's "Links Bar". Very awesome! My favorite sites are just one click away. It definetley seems like this is the browser I've been having in mind, but maybe they could reject certain HTTP headers sent? A little tip for the dev team :D

Overall, 9.8 out of 10! I can give it a 10 out of 10, but any product is improvable ;)

Thanks for the browser tip brothercake! :thumbsup:

brothercake
05-10-2003, 01:53 AM
No worries mate :thumbsup: What really sold me was that all your bookmarks can be on the bookmarks toolbar - you can put folders on the toolbar, with folders inside those, etc ...

liorean made a good point about moz - it has a lot of features which are very useful for developing. But I use Phoenix for every day surfing.

zoobie
05-10-2003, 02:07 AM
NS just called their's 7 because it sounds like it's ahead of Microsoft...That's why they skipped 5.:D

jkd
05-10-2003, 02:22 AM
Originally posted by zoobie
NS just called their's 7 because it sounds like it's ahead of Microsoft...That's why they skipped 5.:D

But they are soooo far ahead... it really isn't even funny. IE needs some serious development.

theabyss
05-10-2003, 04:12 AM
IE needs some serious development.

That's so true. It seems like IE updates don't even exist now. IE 6 seems so old it's like using tables for webpage layout. Very old indeed. The problem with Microsoft is that they're not open-source, but that would be an oxymoron wouldn't it? :D

Netscape gained a lot of ground a while a go when I read an online article that they released the source code. I think it was sometime around the AOL merger, but I'm not sure. IE use will never decrease that much though, because Microsoft forces illiterate users to think that they can only run their browser. Plus, with being installed with Windows, it gives them the advantage of not having users need to know how to install it.

I hope there's a day where every user uses something like Phoenix. That would certainly be the browser utopia I'm looking for :)

[added:]
Very cool features I've found! It's for the Phoenix browser: http://texturizer.net/firebird/extensions.html

Some cool things to add to the browser. You can right click on an image and make it disappear! Pretty cool when you want the ad companies to be quiet :D

Alex Vincent
05-11-2003, 10:46 PM
Originally posted by zoobie
NS just called their's 7 because it sounds like it's ahead of Microsoft...That's why they skipped 5.:D

Actually, no. When mozilla.org first launched with code Netscape open-sourced, the plan was to eventually deliver a product Netscape could call Netscape 5. Simultaneously, a few good men (and probably fewer good women) started working on a next-generation layout engine, Seamonkey.

I might have my facts jumbled on whether it was a layout engine and whether it was called Seamonkey. But in any case, the mozilla.org team decided to completely throw away the codebase Netscape donated, and go with the Seamonkey/Gecko platform. Netscape Communicator 5 was thus never released, and the next-generation browser platform, Netscape 6, was based on Mozilla 0.6, running Gecko.

It was because of the generational change in the codebase that they numbered it 6.

Now, Netscape 6 was a public-relations disaster. It wasn't ready for prime-time. Netscape 6.1 was based on Mozilla 0.9.2, and Netscape 6.2 on Mozilla 0.9.4, but even so, it just wasn't good enough.

Mozilla 1.0 was the source code which Netscape 7.0 was based on. It was and is an industrial-strength product.

Incidentally, mozilla.org is planning another "stable release" within the next month or so, called Mozilla 1.4; apparently, this is to replace Mozilla 1.0 as the branch for stable, less-experimental code improvements. This may (I don't have insider information, and I don't work for anyone who does) mean a Netscape 7.x release based on Mozilla 1.4. (I believe Netscape 7.0.1 is based on Mozilla 1.0.2.)

Furthermore, there are plans to make Mozilla Firebird (formerly called Phoenix) the basis of a browser-only Mozilla. Similarly, there are plans in the works to make the Mail/News component of Mozilla standalone, and possibly (but not set in stone yet) the Composer application as well.

http://www.mozilla.org/roadmap.html
http://www.mozilla.org/roadmap/branding.html

whackaxe
05-13-2003, 05:30 PM
IE being the most used brower on the web, if they had pop up blocking, advertising companies would find other ways of advertising.

mouse
05-13-2003, 05:54 PM
Originally posted by whackaxe
IE being the most used brower on the web, if they had pop up blocking, advertising companies would find other ways of advertising. So let them find a new way, then block that. :D

whackaxe
05-13-2003, 05:59 PM
they would porbably revert to spam and banner ads again. banners suck so popups maybe around for a while :p

brothercake
05-13-2003, 06:14 PM
There are ways of making non-window popups - you can use createPopup to make a non-windowed window that can move outside the boundaries of the parent window; normal pop-up window blockers won't stop that. I'm sure there are other ways too - even conventional "pop-up layers" with DHTML can be prettty annoying if they're done the right (ie, wrong) way.

Ironic really ... by the time IE get round to adding pop-up blocking, it won't work, because pop-ups won't be windows anymore.

mouse
05-13-2003, 06:24 PM
The DHTML + Flash combo is doing my nut at the moment, they all seem to play before giving the option to close. Reputable companies like Jaguar and Nike using them :mad:

liorean
05-13-2003, 06:49 PM
Originally posted by Alex Vincent
Actually, no. When mozilla.org first launched with code Netscape open-sourced, the plan was to eventually deliver a product Netscape could call Netscape 5. Simultaneously, a few good men (and probably fewer good women) started working on a next-generation layout engine, Seamonkey.

I might have my facts jumbled on whether it was a layout engine and whether it was called Seamonkey.
Almost right. Seamonkey is the codename for the entire Mozilla Application Suite. NGLayout, renamed Gecko, was the rendering engine.
But in any case, the mozilla.org team decided to completely throw away the codebase Netscape donated, and go with the Seamonkey/Gecko platform.Not really. Mozilla.org decided to write a new one instead of using the old messed-up one, and then Netscape decided to go with their new "Gecko" rendering engine instead of the old one, which confusingly enough was named "Mozilla" (Which in turn is named after the working group that constructed it with Mosaic as base. The name has been passed down from WG to rendering engine to project team to browser).

The whole browser didn't get replaced, though. SpiderMonkey, the main JavaScript engine, is a revision of the onld one and not a rewrite, for example.
Now, Netscape 6 was a public-relations disaster. It wasn't ready for prime-time. Netscape 6.1 was based on Mozilla 0.9.2, and Netscape 6.2 on Mozilla 0.9.4, but even so, it just wasn't good enough.

Mozilla 1.0 was the source code which Netscape 7.0 was based on. It was and is an industrial-strength product.Well, I'm sceptical. It was still too prone to crashing, hogging the CPU and leaking memory. 1.21 was the first one where they had killed almost all CPU hogs and crashing bugs that commonly occured in 1.0 and 1.1.
Incidentally, mozilla.org is planning another "stable release" within the next month or so, called Mozilla 1.4; apparently, this is to replace Mozilla 1.0 as the branch for stable, less-experimental code improvements.Yep. It's because of the next phase in the project needs to get going - the development that is intended to produce Mozilla 2.0.
This may (I don't have insider information, and I don't work for anyone who does) mean a Netscape 7.x release based on Mozilla 1.4. (I believe Netscape 7.0.1 is based on Mozilla 1.0.2.)I can confirm this. I talked with timeless on irc a few days back, and he said Netscape are working on a version 7.1 (possibly named 7.5, but for now it's called 7.1) that will be branched from the 1.4 version.

Furthermore, there are plans to make Mozilla Firebird (formerly called Phoenix) the basis of a browser-only Mozilla. Similarly, there are plans in the works to make the Mail/News component of Mozilla standalone, and possibly (but not set in stone yet) the Composer application as well.Not only plans. Starting with version 1.5, Mozilla will revert to a pre-production state where they replace all current components in the Mozilla Application Suite with either stand-alone applications such as the Mozilla Firebird based Mozilla Browser, or with extensions to said Mozilla Firebird. None of the current components of the Mozilla Application Suite is intended to be dropped, but they might not have been converted to the new architecture yet as of the 1.5 and 1.6 releases. (Which can be considered to be pre-production releases for Mozilla 2.0 in the same way 0.6, 0.8 etc. were pre-production releases for Mozilla 1.0)

whackaxe
05-13-2003, 06:59 PM
your right brothercake actually. a fine example of this is at www.guitaretab.com and flash ads suck as well, they take up loading time when you could be blissfully watching the rest of the page. this is an example of quick loading though http://www.waitallday.com/

theabyss
05-14-2003, 03:40 AM
Originally posted by Alex Vincent
this is an example of quick loading though http://www.waitallday.com/

I'm not seeing anything. All it says is "Please wait...". I'm guessing that their site is using something I have disabled. Probably META refresh.

brothercake
05-14-2003, 01:55 PM
For giggles - jkd sent me this - the world's first semantic popup (it actually works in mozilla) :cool:


<advertisement
xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"
xlink:type="simple"
xlink:href="http://www.google.com"
xlink:show="new"
xlink:actuate="onLoad"
/>

whackaxe
05-14-2003, 04:00 PM
erm...theabyss...look at the url www.waitallday.com

www. WAIT ALL DAY.Com

WAIT - ALL - DAY

you understnd now? but look in the status bar, after the files loaded and all that you get some wierd stuff like "closing fridge door" lol how long did you wait?

theabyss
05-14-2003, 09:42 PM
I have everything disabled in IE6 in the Internet Zone, so any site that's not in my Trusted Sites can't do much. No scripts, ActiveX, etc. I feel that my computer is protected this way. The only thing I have enabled for the Trusted Sites is scripting. That's it. CodingForums and PayPal are the only sites in this category. I use the IE6 privacy option to block first and third party cookies and only CF and PayPal are set to Always Allow cookies. Pretty secure, huh? :D

So, I couldn't see much. I'm guessing it was JavaScript that made the messages on the status bar and that's a big problem with me. I like having control of what runs on my computer. If I can't access a site, I just leave. It's up to the webmaster to make is accessible :)

whackaxe
05-15-2003, 04:00 PM
owww. your no fun man :D i dont think it changes much in security, and i have nothing to hide. nice webserver choice though ;)

theabyss
05-15-2003, 09:37 PM
I can always add that site to allow scripting. It won't be able to set anything else though :D

whackaxe
05-16-2003, 05:21 PM
you dont need to, it just displays random stuff in the status bar. i can't believe some registered it :p

theabyss
05-18-2003, 04:24 AM
that status bar text relies on JavaScript. I looked at the source of the waitallday page and it showed all of the messages. I don't know why someone would waste money hosting a site like that. I guess they're trying to create humor :cool:

whackaxe
05-18-2003, 04:32 PM
that status bar text relies on JavaScript. I looked at the source of the waitallday page and it showed all of the messages

umm...well thats what i just said :p

its like www.turnoftheinternet.com phun!

theabyss
05-19-2003, 01:53 AM
I had to view the source to see the effect of that site too. I clicked the image but I'm guessing JavaScript had to open a window somehow. I saw the effect of the page by going to:

http://www.turnofftheinternet.com/shutdown.html

It shows what the shutdown screen without the fullscreen. What happens if a user doesn't know the Alt-F4 combo to close the window???

whackaxe
05-19-2003, 03:22 PM
they're screwed :p

theabyss
05-19-2003, 10:21 PM
I should sue them saying my computer got damaged because I shut down my computer improperly :D

whackaxe
05-20-2003, 04:21 PM
i doubt theyre they're the only ones who make you shut down your computer improperly. how about windows? :p illegal error or blue screen of death?:D

theabyss
05-20-2003, 07:45 PM
That would be sweet :D

liorean
05-31-2003, 02:40 AM
Internet Explorer as a standalone browser is now officially a final product as of ie6sp1. (Read the news, it's on half the blogs out there...)

It will be fully integrated in the OS in the future, and upgrades will require upgrades to the underlying OS.


In other words, we're stuck with ie6 for as long as we have Windows versions XP and older still in use. *sigh*


As for the security thing, on Windows 2003 Server we will have radically raised security, meaning for example ActiveX and scripts disabled by default. I see no indication that this will not be carried over into the next Home and Personal versions of Windows.

Oh well, bless Mozilla for being the better browser in any case.

Over and out,
// Liorean

theabyss
05-31-2003, 02:55 AM
That's a very big dissapointment! :mad:

I was hoping to have some new featues like popup blocking and more security with scripts and ActiveX. Then, I wouldn't have to have it all disabled.

Just proves that Microsoft can't do anything right :rolleyes:

Jason
05-31-2003, 03:02 AM
Aren't they stoping mozilla and fetauring Pheonix as the new version or something? In any case its going to be better then IE...stupid microsoft products...


Jason

liorean
05-31-2003, 03:26 AM
There's a little (or rather, a lot) confusion here. Mozilla consists of a number of project, the main of which is the Mozilla Application Suite. The Application Suite will change from the XPFE structure using among others the components Navigator and Messenger, to a GRE driven structure using Mozilla Firebird and Mozilla Thunderbird as the base for the new components Mozilla Browser and Mozilla Mail/News, which will be separate applications in the suits instead of parts of one gigant application.

However, this is mostly a UI issue. The parts that make up Mozilla, namely SpiderMonkey (the JS Engine), Gecko (the rendering engine), XPConnect, XPCOM etc. will all remain the same. It's not like they are scrapping one browser for another. It's more like a change in the look and feel and customisability of the current browser.



EZ Archive Ads Plugin for vBulletin Copyright 2006 Computer Help Forum