<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Crazy like a Firefox?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2004/12/20/crazy-like-a-firefox/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2004/12/20/crazy-like-a-firefox/</link>
	<description>because technology is just another ecosystem</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2009 21:54:58 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: joffaboy</title>
		<link>http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2004/12/20/crazy-like-a-firefox/comment-page-1/#comment-231</link>
		<dc:creator>joffaboy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Feb 2005 01:39:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://redmonk.com/sogrady/wp/?p=238#comment-231</guid>
		<description>Well it looks like Bill G has been reading this thread?... (16/02/05)

Gates promises free antispyware, new version of IE
--
Microsoft by midyear plans to release a test version of a new Internet Explorer (IE) browser that better protects users from scams and malicious code while surfing the Web, the company announced Tuesday.
http://www.computerworld.com.au/index.php?id=77816035&#38;eid=-180
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well it looks like Bill G has been reading this thread?&#8230; (16/02/05)</p>
<p>Gates promises free antispyware, new version of IE<br />
&#8211;<br />
Microsoft by midyear plans to release a test version of a new Internet Explorer (IE) browser that better protects users from scams and malicious code while surfing the Web, the company announced Tuesday.<br />
<a href="http://www.computerworld.com.au/index.php?id=77816035&amp;eid=-180" >http://www.computerworld.com.au/index.php?id=77816035&amp;eid=-180</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lachlan Hardy</title>
		<link>http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2004/12/20/crazy-like-a-firefox/comment-page-1/#comment-230</link>
		<dc:creator>Lachlan Hardy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Dec 2004 07:50:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://redmonk.com/sogrady/wp/?p=238#comment-230</guid>
		<description>Okay, Bruce, so XPSP2 wasn't about competitive features or innovation for IE. I can dig that. I agree that it has delivered a better and safer browsing experience (although I don't think it is as enjoyable or safe as Firefox)

So my question is: will the browser (IE, OS-integrated, or something else) for Longhorn have actual new features? Will it have a rendering engine that implements all of CSS 2.1, PNG transparencies or even some CSS 3?

I don't want details (okay, I do, but I don't expect them). I just want to hear that this will happen

Stephen, sorry if this is hijacking your thread, but it seemed to be veering in this direction, anyway</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Okay, Bruce, so XPSP2 wasn&#8217;t about competitive features or innovation for IE. I can dig that. I agree that it has delivered a better and safer browsing experience (although I don&#8217;t think it is as enjoyable or safe as Firefox)</p>
<p>So my question is: will the browser (IE, OS-integrated, or something else) for Longhorn have actual new features? Will it have a rendering engine that implements all of CSS 2.1, PNG transparencies or even some CSS 3?</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t want details (okay, I do, but I don&#8217;t expect them). I just want to hear that this will happen</p>
<p>Stephen, sorry if this is hijacking your thread, but it seemed to be veering in this direction, anyway</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bruce Morgan</title>
		<link>http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2004/12/20/crazy-like-a-firefox/comment-page-1/#comment-229</link>
		<dc:creator>Bruce Morgan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Dec 2004 20:52:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://redmonk.com/sogrady/wp/?p=238#comment-229</guid>
		<description>At work, my main browser (60%+ usage) is IE on either an internal Longhorn build or XPSP2.  I frequently use other browsers as well, some Gecko based, some IE based, and some that use a different rendering engine.  I also use various UI prototypes that host the IE components.

At home, I try to have a browser of the week, cycling through a bunch of odd browsers and IE hosts as well as the usual suspects.  I'm not going to name names, because I'd leave someone out, or get misinterpreted and/or misquoted.  "So good, even IE's development manager recommends it instead of Internet Explorer !!!!"  

My family mostly uses MSN Explorer from MSN Premium which provides content filtering, integrated mail client, etc.  Before I joined IE, I was a development manager on the MSN Client team working on the various features in MSN Explorer, mostly browsing but also things like Photo Email.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>At work, my main browser (60%+ usage) is IE on either an internal Longhorn build or XPSP2.  I frequently use other browsers as well, some Gecko based, some IE based, and some that use a different rendering engine.  I also use various UI prototypes that host the IE components.</p>
<p>At home, I try to have a browser of the week, cycling through a bunch of odd browsers and IE hosts as well as the usual suspects.  I&#8217;m not going to name names, because I&#8217;d leave someone out, or get misinterpreted and/or misquoted.  &#8220;So good, even IE&#8217;s development manager recommends it instead of Internet Explorer !!!!&#8221;  </p>
<p>My family mostly uses MSN Explorer from MSN Premium which provides content filtering, integrated mail client, etc.  Before I joined IE, I was a development manager on the MSN Client team working on the various features in MSN Explorer, mostly browsing but also things like Photo Email.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sogrady</title>
		<link>http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2004/12/20/crazy-like-a-firefox/comment-page-1/#comment-228</link>
		<dc:creator>sogrady</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Dec 2004 20:23:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://redmonk.com/sogrady/wp/?p=238#comment-228</guid>
		<description>perhaps you're correct bruce, in that they don't (or rather shouldn't) speak for the IE team. 

but it still perplexes me to hear IE folks talk about all the added features in IE when it still lacks the most fundamental, IMO, in tabbed browsing. 

to that point, what do you use - IE or Maxthon?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>perhaps you&#8217;re correct bruce, in that they don&#8217;t (or rather shouldn&#8217;t) speak for the IE team. </p>
<p>but it still perplexes me to hear IE folks talk about all the added features in IE when it still lacks the most fundamental, IMO, in tabbed browsing. </p>
<p>to that point, what do you use - IE or Maxthon?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bruce Morgan</title>
		<link>http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2004/12/20/crazy-like-a-firefox/comment-page-1/#comment-227</link>
		<dc:creator>Bruce Morgan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Dec 2004 19:29:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://redmonk.com/sogrady/wp/?p=238#comment-227</guid>
		<description>Stephen, you're right that there is a whole raft of users that won't see the features we added to IE for XPSP2 - people who aren't using XPSP2.  When our next platforms ship, they'll have the SP2 level IE as well. 

The purpose of the XPSP2 release was security; the features the IE team added are security features.  IE in XPSP2 was not intended to be a competitive response to features in other browsers. Sure, the popup blocker was last to market. It's fine by me if you want to define what we added as "filling holes", or design mistake corrections, or preventing things from going wrong, or even minor functional alterations.  Regardless of semantics, our customers have a better and more secure browsing experience because of what we added to XPSP2.

English and Vamos have nothing to do with the IE team.  What these two guys in Australia said is not informed by what we're doing on the IE team so their comments give no special insight. You shouldn't take what they said as representative of anything but ill-advised comments by two people who probably should have known better.

As for tabbed browsing, I like it.  It's a nice addition to the browsing experience.  And since I actually am in a position where my opinion matters (unlike our Australian executives) that should carry more weight.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Stephen, you&#8217;re right that there is a whole raft of users that won&#8217;t see the features we added to IE for XPSP2 - people who aren&#8217;t using XPSP2.  When our next platforms ship, they&#8217;ll have the SP2 level IE as well. </p>
<p>The purpose of the XPSP2 release was security; the features the IE team added are security features.  IE in XPSP2 was not intended to be a competitive response to features in other browsers. Sure, the popup blocker was last to market. It&#8217;s fine by me if you want to define what we added as &#8220;filling holes&#8221;, or design mistake corrections, or preventing things from going wrong, or even minor functional alterations.  Regardless of semantics, our customers have a better and more secure browsing experience because of what we added to XPSP2.</p>
<p>English and Vamos have nothing to do with the IE team.  What these two guys in Australia said is not informed by what we&#8217;re doing on the IE team so their comments give no special insight. You shouldn&#8217;t take what they said as representative of anything but ill-advised comments by two people who probably should have known better.</p>
<p>As for tabbed browsing, I like it.  It&#8217;s a nice addition to the browsing experience.  And since I actually am in a position where my opinion matters (unlike our Australian executives) that should carry more weight.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sogrady</title>
		<link>http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2004/12/20/crazy-like-a-firefox/comment-page-1/#comment-226</link>
		<dc:creator>sogrady</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Dec 2004 18:13:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://redmonk.com/sogrady/wp/?p=238#comment-226</guid>
		<description>gotta love readers that beat me to the punch. Zk.net (thx Zk) nicely highlighted what would have been my first response - essentially that a whole raft of users will never see any of those new "features."

but to be honest i find the use of the word "features" extremely problematic. 

take Popup blocker. this would have classified as a new feature about 2 years ago. not now. as you're no doubt aware, competing products have had this for quite a while. to me, this was more about plugging a product hole.

or what about ActiveX installation and blocking? i'd lump those more in the category of correcting an old design mistake than new feature. ditto for the other security improvements. remember that these don't actually improve the actually improve the users browsing experience, they simply prevent things from going wrong. 

look, i'm not religious about this - i happily jumped from Netscape to IE when IE became the better browser, and were i still on Windows, would happily jump back if you improved IE. see the link here (http://www.redmonk.com/sogrady/archives/000016.html) for why i switched. 

but c'mon, you can't sit there with a straight face and tell me that in 4 years, the addition of the "features" you mentioned is honestly a competitive effort, can you? 

it'd be very nice to hear someone from MS actually admit that tabbed browsing is actually a very nice  - although certainly not revolutionary - addition to the browsing experience. instead we get commentary like the following:

Steve Vamos, Microsoft Australia's managing director: 

"I don't agree that just because a (competing) product has a feature that we don't have, that feature is important," he said. "It is not. It is only important if it is a feature the customer wants. There are plenty of products out there with features we don't have. We have plenty of features that our customers don't use."

Ben English, Microsoft's security and management product manager: 

"I don't believe it is a true statement that IE doesn't have the features that our customers want," he said. "We take user feedback very seriously. If you have that feedback, then you should feed it back to us because we will feed it to the product team."

(link http://news.com.com/Microsoft+says+Firefox+not+a+threat+to+IE/2100-1032_3-5448719.html)

as for Mr. Massy, say hi for me. he was kind enough to weigh in here (http://www.redmonk.com/sogrady/archives/000057.html) with some comments on just the article you mentioned, i think.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>gotta love readers that beat me to the punch. Zk.net (thx Zk) nicely highlighted what would have been my first response - essentially that a whole raft of users will never see any of those new &#8220;features.&#8221;</p>
<p>but to be honest i find the use of the word &#8220;features&#8221; extremely problematic. </p>
<p>take Popup blocker. this would have classified as a new feature about 2 years ago. not now. as you&#8217;re no doubt aware, competing products have had this for quite a while. to me, this was more about plugging a product hole.</p>
<p>or what about ActiveX installation and blocking? i&#8217;d lump those more in the category of correcting an old design mistake than new feature. ditto for the other security improvements. remember that these don&#8217;t actually improve the actually improve the users browsing experience, they simply prevent things from going wrong. </p>
<p>look, i&#8217;m not religious about this - i happily jumped from Netscape to IE when IE became the better browser, and were i still on Windows, would happily jump back if you improved IE. see the link here (http://www.redmonk.com/sogrady/archives/000016.html) for why i switched. </p>
<p>but c&#8217;mon, you can&#8217;t sit there with a straight face and tell me that in 4 years, the addition of the &#8220;features&#8221; you mentioned is honestly a competitive effort, can you? </p>
<p>it&#8217;d be very nice to hear someone from MS actually admit that tabbed browsing is actually a very nice  - although certainly not revolutionary - addition to the browsing experience. instead we get commentary like the following:</p>
<p>Steve Vamos, Microsoft Australia&#8217;s managing director: </p>
<p>&#8220;I don&#8217;t agree that just because a (competing) product has a feature that we don&#8217;t have, that feature is important,&#8221; he said. &#8220;It is not. It is only important if it is a feature the customer wants. There are plenty of products out there with features we don&#8217;t have. We have plenty of features that our customers don&#8217;t use.&#8221;</p>
<p>Ben English, Microsoft&#8217;s security and management product manager: </p>
<p>&#8220;I don&#8217;t believe it is a true statement that IE doesn&#8217;t have the features that our customers want,&#8221; he said. &#8220;We take user feedback very seriously. If you have that feedback, then you should feed it back to us because we will feed it to the product team.&#8221;</p>
<p>(link <a href="http://news.com.com/Microsoft+says+Firefox+not+a+threat+to+IE/2100-1032_3-5448719.html" >http://news.com.com/Microsoft+says+Firefox+not+a+threat+to+IE/2100-1032_3-5448719.html</a>)</p>
<p>as for Mr. Massy, say hi for me. he was kind enough to weigh in here (http://www.redmonk.com/sogrady/archives/000057.html) with some comments on just the article you mentioned, i think.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bruce Morgan</title>
		<link>http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2004/12/20/crazy-like-a-firefox/comment-page-1/#comment-225</link>
		<dc:creator>Bruce Morgan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Dec 2004 11:18:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://redmonk.com/sogrady/wp/?p=238#comment-225</guid>
		<description>True about W2K. If you're running Win2K (or Win95, or Win98, or WinMe, for that matter) you don't get the latest and greatest IE. Point is that there are new features in IE.

BTW, the IE in Windows Server 2003 SP1 and the XP 64 bit editions will have the XPSP2 feature set.

It's certainly true that there was a time when IE didn't get enough attention, but that time is long past.  I didn't join the IE team until 7 months ago, when the team was nearing the end of XPSP2 work.  I spotted no resting on laurels, instead there were a lot of people deeply engaged on the problems at hand.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>True about W2K. If you&#8217;re running Win2K (or Win95, or Win98, or WinMe, for that matter) you don&#8217;t get the latest and greatest IE. Point is that there are new features in IE.</p>
<p>BTW, the IE in Windows Server 2003 SP1 and the XP 64 bit editions will have the XPSP2 feature set.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s certainly true that there was a time when IE didn&#8217;t get enough attention, but that time is long past.  I didn&#8217;t join the IE team until 7 months ago, when the team was nearing the end of XPSP2 work.  I spotted no resting on laurels, instead there were a lot of people deeply engaged on the problems at hand.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Zk.net</title>
		<link>http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2004/12/20/crazy-like-a-firefox/comment-page-1/#comment-224</link>
		<dc:creator>Zk.net</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Dec 2004 10:16:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://redmonk.com/sogrady/wp/?p=238#comment-224</guid>
		<description>Bruce.. I'm sorry, I'm using W2k. What enhancements are you referring to? ;)

Unfair, I know. As a web developer, I personally welcomed the one-browser-world, but only because it made my life easier. In particular, Netscape 4 made my life difficult. A IE6/Firefox world would be slightly worse than an all one-browser world, but infinitely better than the IE5/NN4 world of the past. But, I do believe the IE team (sorry Bruce, if this seems unfair) has rested on their laurels too long and I do hope that Firefox puts the fire under their butts again.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bruce.. I&#8217;m sorry, I&#8217;m using W2k. What enhancements are you referring to? <img src='http://redmonk.com/sogrady/wp/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /><br />
Unfair, I know. As a web developer, I personally welcomed the one-browser-world, but only because it made my life easier. In particular, Netscape 4 made my life difficult. A IE6/Firefox world would be slightly worse than an all one-browser world, but infinitely better than the IE5/NN4 world of the past. But, I do believe the IE team (sorry Bruce, if this seems unfair) has rested on their laurels too long and I do hope that Firefox puts the fire under their butts again.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bruce Morgan</title>
		<link>http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2004/12/20/crazy-like-a-firefox/comment-page-1/#comment-223</link>
		<dc:creator>Bruce Morgan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Dec 2004 04:53:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://redmonk.com/sogrady/wp/?p=238#comment-223</guid>
		<description>I'm only going to speak for myself, not for Microsoft.  Otherwise I fear what I say will show up as a [mis]quote on CNet, say.  Then my friend Dave Massy will give me grief like how I tease him over being portrayed as the savior of the IE team last summer. 

What do you mean by "lack of new features"?  What about IE in XPSP2, where we delivered a host of new security-oriented features?  A few of them are UI features, such as Manage Add-ons, the Popup Blocker, and the changes around ActiveX installation and download monitoring.  Others are internal, such as local machine lockdown as well as many root cause mitigations for various types of potential exploits.  

But if you're looking for innovation, well, IMHO that has been scarcely seen in web browsers in quite a few years.  Check out iRider for something I thought had an interesting, even "innovative" approach.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m only going to speak for myself, not for Microsoft.  Otherwise I fear what I say will show up as a [mis]quote on CNet, say.  Then my friend Dave Massy will give me grief like how I tease him over being portrayed as the savior of the IE team last summer. </p>
<p>What do you mean by &#8220;lack of new features&#8221;?  What about IE in XPSP2, where we delivered a host of new security-oriented features?  A few of them are UI features, such as Manage Add-ons, the Popup Blocker, and the changes around ActiveX installation and download monitoring.  Others are internal, such as local machine lockdown as well as many root cause mitigations for various types of potential exploits.  </p>
<p>But if you&#8217;re looking for innovation, well, IMHO that has been scarcely seen in web browsers in quite a few years.  Check out iRider for something I thought had an interesting, even &#8220;innovative&#8221; approach.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sogrady</title>
		<link>http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2004/12/20/crazy-like-a-firefox/comment-page-1/#comment-222</link>
		<dc:creator>sogrady</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Dec 2004 00:18:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://redmonk.com/sogrady/wp/?p=238#comment-222</guid>
		<description>Bruce: ah, that does shed a new light on your comments. and as you may have guessed from my comments, i agree with you - IE is a strategic platform. but given the evidence - IE's lack of new features and innovations, and the talk in some quarters of MSFT of Avalon/Amazon clients and RSS readers usurping the footprint - can you say that MSFT as an organization shares your view?

Tony: thx for the clarification. i try to take a balanced view on the topic - based on most of the metrics i see, Firefox has made serious inroads into IE territory and is trending up. that said, IE is still far and away the dominant platform and likely to be there for a while.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bruce: ah, that does shed a new light on your comments. and as you may have guessed from my comments, i agree with you - IE is a strategic platform. but given the evidence - IE&#8217;s lack of new features and innovations, and the talk in some quarters of MSFT of Avalon/Amazon clients and RSS readers usurping the footprint - can you say that MSFT as an organization shares your view?</p>
<p>Tony: thx for the clarification. i try to take a balanced view on the topic - based on most of the metrics i see, Firefox has made serious inroads into IE territory and is trending up. that said, IE is still far and away the dominant platform and likely to be there for a while.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
