anyone tried this yet? i have had it on machine for a couple of hours, and it seems quite spritely, and nice and tidy. IE9 Beta
I've installed it on my brand new i7 system and I'm thoroughly impressed with it, so much so that I've set it as the default browser over Chrome for now to see how well it fairs. Interface is as slick as I've ever seen and the speed is far quicker than I'd ever expect from IE.
Sounds like there might be a bit of a fight with the new browsers coming out soon. FF4, IE9, wonder what Chrome will throw out there.
IE9 beat all latest beta web browser in term of performance. However, Chrome gets 100% on Acid3 test. Firefox has it's plug-ins, while IE9 doesn't seam to have improved it's flexibility on that form IE8. IE9 has really interesting new features, such as pinning a web site on the start menu (WIn7 only), and when you right-click on it (supported web sites only - try: Amazon.com.. go there, drag the tab to your task bar), you have a list of links that you can jump to when selected. It has more, and it's worth a try. I noticed that like Firefox 4 Beta (when hardware acceleration is enabled) the font on some/most web site is hard to read. I think more work needs to be done on that side. Oh and like all GPU accelerated web browser your GPU may whine when on a page. Firefox 4 Beta 5 does that to me, but not IE9.
Speaking of ads... Have you seen the deceit in Microsoft's IE9 videos? Who would you say is at fault about keeping the web at the "minimum common denominator"? Who made IE6? Who made IE7 and IE8 not able to properly conform to web standards? Are we supposed to thank them now for all those years of not having a proper web experience because of them?. --------------- weight loss products colon cleanser vigrx
So far so good. The only issue is that my All CPU Meter (v3.2) gadget has died since I installed IE9 beta. Network Meter continues to run OK though. I like the pinning of the links to the task bar - very useful. What I didn't like was having to change my system policy so that the Menu Bar stays open all the time. As a web developer I am interested to see how it handles. As I develop for IE first and 'other' browsers second it will be interesting to see how much difference there is. I am intersted also to see how each vendor has implemented HTML5.
Interestingly, it seems that the 32 bit one is significantly faster than the x64 one, according to Sitepoint I am glad to see the speed and CSS3, though... not oooooo bothered about the 96/300 in the HTML5 test.
No version for XP. I don't understand why anyone would bother with IE. Once bitten, twice shy as far as I'm concerned.
I feel the same about the iPhone. But clients insist that their web sites look good on that too (a right royal pain)! I have a regular report of hits to my client's sites and IE still averages 90% of hits in its various versions. Firefox averages 7% with 'others' making up the rest (including the blasted iPhone). So, from my point of view it's a simple commercial choice. Funny thing is that clients appreciate this, but they still insist that I develop an iPhone site that looks like an iPhone app (which they have to pay for). I am sure it is just so they can look at it themselves!!
IE9 will not be having any XP support according to microsoft. I've tried IE9 for a while, and I also got curious and got chrome nightly and minefield (firefox nightly). IE9 beta is not very competitive with minefield and CN. The interface looks extremely ugly (but it's still beta so it'll probably improve) and it just doesn't feel right when you try to organize tabs and other actions.
Chrome is a bit faster than IE9. IE9 is much faster than Firefox 4 Beta 6. IE9 has better font rendering than Firefox 4 Beta 6 with hardware acceleration IE9 design is focus for those who uses few tabs (most of us), not 20. This makes IE9 small screen friendly. IE9 has the best Windows 7 integration Firefox is still master in add-on's Firefox 4 has Firefox Sync, allowing you to Sync Firefox between your computers Between IE9 and Firefox, IE9 has the best menu navigation, while Firefox 4 has a lot of work to do (I never used the Alt key so much in Firefox to open the menu. Win7 and IE8/9 doesn't have the problem, why not Firefox?!). IE9 has very interesting web developing features.
Both minefield (firefox 4 Beta 7) and chromium (chrome 7.0) are noticeably faster on my system. Acid3 tests show this incredibly well when IE9's animation is extremely choppy while chromium and minefield's animations are both smooth. All the web browsers score a final >90 though so they're fairly equal in that respect. I can't argue the first point because it's probably true and I don't know much about it. Although, it's not that I always have 20 tabs open, but when I'm doing research or just looking stuff up (like computer parts to compare prices and other junks) I'll have 10+ tabs open. Never broke 20 though xD. The good thing about focusing on more tabs is that it encompasses everyone (people who use lots of tabs are happy and people who use less don't care) where as a bowser focusing on just people who use less tabs will chase away the people who use more tabs. I would expect IE9 to have the best integration with W7 since the same company made both . For menu navigation, IE9 is like a mix between chromium's menus and FF's with the extra w7 feature of pressing alt to show the menu bar. I honestly don't use those things all that regularly so I like chromium's interface. I'm not sure what you meant in the parenthesis but just about every application with a menu bar can be accessed by pressing alt+f/e/v/b/t/etc. I'm not a web developer so I wouldn't know which is better but I was also impressed by chrome's web development tools.
The fact that Chrome runs on XP/Vista/Win7 but Microsoft can't even release a product that runs on one of their own operating systems doesn't strike you as a bit odd? It might be 'officially' end of life, but it's still the OS used by over 50% of all home computers. http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp
IE9 in XP is like removing 50% of it's features. Like what makes IE9, IE9, is Aero. Why support XP then? Also If you don't have the computational power to run Aero (most XP users, as they have Intel integrated graphics), then you don't have the computational power to run the hardware acceleration side of IE9. So basically, IE9 quickly becomes IE8. Why bother?
Daedelus, I think you are mischief making ;-) I suspect that the main reason the IE9 will not work in XP is that Microsoft are trying to leverage people away from there and onto Windows 7. It has a tough job there especially as many large organisations don't want the hassle of shifting their Windows Platform to a new one - it's expensive and time consuming to do it (having been involved in a shift from Windows NT to Windows XP once before). I personally hope they do manage to convince people to do it though as Windows 7 is a great OS and it looks like they may be onto a winner with IE9 also.
