IE revisited and tabbed browsing

10 Comments

• One reason I like Tabbed browsing is when I'm reading my list of sites in the morning that aren't RSS ready (yes, I still read some of those) and it's easier to do that when you can manipulate the browser windows within the same program instead of having to go to multiple windows to do it.
  
  
  
  Look at it this way. RSS Aggregators were created to keep RSS feeds consistent, and you use Visual Studio to keep all of your development in one place, thing of this as the same thing. Logically grouping one task.
  

• People are still talking about IE..who cares about it...what a joke.
  

• Jeff, is there really anything in the .Net framework 1.1 that is missing that is a showstopper, that keeps things from rolling out? You can create updateable Smart Clients with it as it is now. You can do ASP.net authentication/authorization by writing your own controls and DB as it is now. You can use Enterprise Services to handle transactional components - right now. You can create your onw strongly type collections - right now. Lets take a further look into the future - why do Indigo if webservices works well now. Why do XAML if Windows Forms is adequate and improving. Why create the MBF? - I can roll my own components. Why do objectspaces? Why do WOE? Why should MS take the .Net platform further at all - after all 1.1 is very good. But if 1.1 is good enough, why are we .Net developers so eager to get our hands on .Net 2.0? Why were people so upset when objectspaces was delayed to longhorn?
  
  
  
  Now, lets try this - why have full CSS 2.0 support in IE? Why have better JavaScript/DOM support in IE? Why support PNG transparency? Why support SVG? Why have tabbed browsing? Why have popup blocking? Why have improved security?
  
  
  
  The same answers apply to IE that also apply to .Net - it's a matter of providing developers with the ability to provide a product that delivers greater value and an enhanced experience for end users. This acts to create a need for MS products - which is not wrong. An improved IE would not necessarily necessitate this, unless it was tied to Longhorn which would act as a selling point.
  
  
  
  I'm tired of hearing about why IE is just fine - but everything else MS does needs to be improved. Lets stop kidding ourselves and admit that IE is not a money maker for MS and for the past 2 years has been quite a liability. This is why we don't see IE fever at MS like we once did. It's okay - but for MS to live in denial about this is absurd.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

• Yeah, it's not a money maker and is a liability. So? Comparing developer technologies to the browser is like comparing a hammer to a Cray.
  
  
  
  My point stands that IE is 99% adequate from a developer and use standpoint. It's a hammer.
  

• I appreciate having the "option" to use tabbed browsing. I use FireFox as my main browser mainly because it allows tabbed browsing and it has built in pop-up blocking without installing spy-ware (a.k.a. Google toolbar). I use IE because I develop ASP.Net applications and our company uses IE. I agree that IE is adequate for developers, but if some features from other popular browsers could be added into IE I might use it for things other than checking that my Intranet site will look good for Bob in Accounting.
  

• ASP.NET doesn't need IE, save for maybe keeping scroll position on post-back (in which case I'd say your design isn't right in the first place to require that).
  

• I'm with Jon: I switched to Mozilla as my main browser at home because it runs substantially faster than IE on my system and because I've come to love tabbed browsing. I develop for an all-IE intranet at work.
  
  
  
  You say, "The only real missing "feature" anyone could come up with was the lack of tabbed browsing. This, to me, is a weird cultural thing with Windows users. You are all aware that in Windows, we can have, well, windows, right? In addition to the comment about alt-tabbing about your applications, big and multiple monitors allow you to spread out Windows and move about them. It floors me that there are people that browse full-screen at 1280x1024.....I've never seen tabbed browsing as a feature because I never understood confining browser windows inside of another window."
  
  
  
  To me your comments exibit a strange kind of bias, maybe a developer bias. Most users don't have multiple monitors. I run a 21 inch monitor at 1600x1200 and you're right, I don't run anything at full screen except for Visual Studio.NET, and that only when I've got the solution explorer, the class view, the code and the designer going. And besides...who cares what a user "should" do (i.e. use multiple windows and alt-tab or the icons on their start menu). If they want tabbed browsing, why not give it to them?
  
  
  
  Beyond all that, I thought I'd tell you how I use tabbed browsing in Firefox. With IE, there would be times where I'd have twenty browser windows open, especially if I'm reading a news page like news.google.com or a zine like netsurfer digest or a blog like yours. I'll see an interesting link to investigate but want to keep reading the main text, so I right cllick or shift-click to open it in a new window (I do this so often that I programmed my wheel to be a shift so I could shift-click to open content in a new window with one hand). But again, then I'd end up with browser windows all over the place. If I got distracted or had to look something else up,
  
  
  
  With tabbed browsing, I will usually sort of keep my browsing categorized. i.e. I'll have the blog and all the interesting links from the blog open in one browser, the zine and all the interesting links in the zine open in another browser, etc. Maybe it's silly, but I love it and wish IE had it.
  

• OK... so some of you want that feature, and you get it in other browsers. So why then are you looking for an upgrade if another product meets your needs?
  
  
  
  And as for CSS compliance and table-less design, SuicideGirls.com is all tableless, works in IE and all other browsers I've tried it on, including Safari. Do they understand something about design that the rest of you don't?
  

• You are correct that ASP.Net does not require IE, however, our company has "standardized" on IE as "The Browser" so I must develop for IE.
  
  
  
  Other browsers do have the features I want and I do use them when given the choice. Some companies I have worked for will not let users install software and only let them use what the company has approved. Many times this means browsing with IE. So if I'm stuck using IE, why not ask for an upgrade for features I find useful?
  

• Almost forgot: ASP.Net DOES require IE for client side validation. In version 1.0 and 1.1, client side validation will not work in Mozilla or FireFox. See this article for more information: http://aspnet.4guysfromrolla.com/articles/051204-1.aspx