Internet Explorer 7 (Final Version): Revisited
A few minutes ago I downloaded and installed the newest and final version of the latest and somewhat biggest mistake of Microsoft (well next to Windows i guess), and ladies and gentlemen, I am referring to Internet explorer 7 (A.K.A Internet Exploder 7). So, what was I thinking when i did such a thing? Well, It seems that there are quite a few people who are actually impressed by the final version. To tell you the truth I was surprised because I have already tested the Beat 2 version (although I did test a beta version more or less I would have an idea on how the Final version would perform).
So, I decided to waste precious bandwidth just to be able to try this version. After waiting for about an eternity for downloading a 14MB installer in my super dial-up connection, I was able to installer the said browser in my PC (geeshh! Firefox 2.0 only took me a few minutes to download and it's only 5+Mb). The installation of IE7 is somewhat a lot faster than the one I tested, but it is still longer than the installation of Firefox 2.0. it took me about 8-10 minutes to install. Not bad, for IE7 standards but not good enough.
After installation I was required to reboot my system, maybe to update older files in my hard drive, so I restarted. I took a deep breath before I started the performance testing that I have applied to the beta 2 version of IE. Again, I used 56kbps dial-up for this test (and I found out that Dial-up is definitely the best speed to test these new browsers and not DSL connections this is because you'd see just how fast the browsers will be able to display graphic and texts from websites).
I fired up IE7 and loaded Yahoo's Homepage, it took quite a while before texts and graphics showed in IE7 but it was faster than the Beta version. This was somewhat good but still, it's not good enough. Firefox 2.0 loads the Yahoo homepage in my PC about 4 seconds faster (with Firefox web page Cache cleared). Having been somewhat satisfied with the improvement in speed and web page rendering. I tried, loading more tabs into the IE interface. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and.... on the 8th tab IE7 became sluggish and somehow it's having some trouble in loading the 8th page (Adobe acrobat homepage). After realizing that IE7 is getting all unstable, I closed the Abode acrobat page and everything went smoother compared to when the Adobe page was loaded. So, IE7 can't handle flash objects very well, also it has trouble trying to handle tabs that are more tan 8 (although i'm not really sure if it has something to do with my hardware, but firefox can load upto 30+ tabs with out any sweat in my PC tsk..tsk..).
Then, I loaded Yahoo's new beta mail GUI. I gotta' say Yahoo's Beta mail page looks better in Firefox than IE7. Now, while testing IE7 I realized that the Tile function that i once loved in the bate version of IE7 was in fact a way to cover up how horrible IE7 handles its tabs. When I tried to load 8 tabs in the browser the tabs just became smaller and smaller, this is mainly because the "Home" and "Options" tool bar are located next to the "tabs" area. So, the tab would only have really small spaces to occupy and they need to fit in that small space (poor tabs). So , to address this issue, the MS people thought about the "tile" function for, supposedly, easier navigation. I have to admit this was good, but the way the "Tile" function was implemented was crappy at best. The Browser tends to slow down and even hung up when the user switches from the "tab" look to the "tile" look. Furthermore, the tiles that should show the users a preview of the pages that are loaded do not update as fast as they should. So much for preview.
Still, after making the installer of IE7 grow to 14MB Microsoft still was not able to fit a dictionary and spell checker function on IE7. Mozilla Firefox was able to fit Spell checker on a 5MB installer.
My verdict? Well although some say that the performance of the final version of IE7 is good. It's not good enough to win back Firefox users like me. It's just too little too late in the part of Microsoft. Security-wise, IE7 is still one big security risk for all Windows Users. Heck! it still has the exploits that IE6 has. I mean, how foolish could the MS people be? IE7, does NOT deserve the version 7.0 title, its' better of to be called 6.5 or something. My recommendations still stand (and they stand high and proud) junk IE, and adopt either Mozilla Firefox or Opera or any other open source browser for Windows Vista and the succeeding Windows Versions and let the MS people concentrate on making Windows a better OS for PC users.
i need time to evaluate ie7. it looks good to me. better than ie6. but i still prefer firefox. 1 more browser to watch, and another one to keep an eye on especially when it throws a fit like throwing javascript errors you don't find in ff, safari or ie6.
Posted by: - Issai Marie - | November 10, 2006 06:26 PM
Hmmm... yeah it is better than IE6 but I'm still quite unsatisfied about it's performance. firefox 2.0 is also somewhat unsatisfying for me but it's way better than the performance of IE7. I am already looking forward to the updates for IE7. and also on the firefox side. thanks again for commenting on this post. =)
Posted by: Blaise Cedrick | November 10, 2006 11:52 PM
but what i learned lately, if it breaks in ie6, ie7 and firefox, i can always count on opera. its good to not rely on just one browser.
Posted by: - Issai Marie - | November 13, 2006 10:09 PM
I agree, I have Opera, FF2.0 And IE 7 on my pc right now.
Posted by: Blaise Cedrick | November 14, 2006 02:41 PM