Microsoft releases new 60-second IE9 ad

[GollyJeeWizz]

They need to quit making Internet Explorer 9 something it's not. These ads are so misleading to people who haven't really used the web browser. It makes you think "Wow, look at how immersive that is!" then you actually use the web browser and you actually find out it's just another web browser with less extension support when compared to Firefox and Chrome, and that it's actually slower.

Just show raw footage and leave it at that. Show people what they are actually going to be experiencing. Not some fabricated experience.

[Vice]

Firefox does not download a list from FF's servers

Chrome does not download from Google's servers

Safari does not download a list from Apple's servers.

All the ad blocks are third party, and as has been said before, the bets ad block is outside the browser anyway. And if you don't want to support a site with it's ads, then don't use the site, and don't be a leech.

He said that Internet Explorer has a built in way to block ads. I am questioning how it works. I never said anything about 3rd parties. And I was not suggesting that Chrome, Firefox or Safari have built in adblockers so I don't know why on earth you are bringing that up at all.

And if I want to view a website without viewing the advertisements that's my right. I'm not going to get into a debate with you over this. IE does not fit my needs, get over it.

Right... And with that argument you're using Chrome now why ? since it's now working hard to get the position of IE6. So instead of going with someone who's actually changed and showed that they are changing, you're instead option for either, a browser that's generally ok, but very techy, and is working the same way as IE6 was with it's own little functions, a browser that pretends to be open source while at the same time having the most locked in browser specific functions of all, and working very heard to become the new IE6, or another platform specific lock in monopoly browser.

Seems your argument would be better if you used a third party sync tool that works on all browsers.

This is laughable. Chrome is updated practically every week. They are continually adding new features and newer technologies all the time. Even after they became the market leader they went out of their way to release an iOS version of the browser which now means Chrome is the first browser to cover all the major platforms. Windows, Mac, Linux, iOS and Android. And maybe one day they will release a Windows Phone version too.

I don't need a 3rd party sync option, I have Chrome. And if you actually read what I said with an open mind instead of looking at things you can misconstrue to argue with me over you would clearly see that when Microsoft has a monopoly they stagnate. That has not happened with Google they have continued to innovate constantly with their products. Their search system is just one example. Reverse Image Searching, Local Searching, Personalized Search Results, Voice based searching. All this while holding the majority of the search market.

Chrome is a good browser and it is supported by a good company that wants nothing more than to give consumers the best most compatible browser there is. Name one technology that Chrome utilizes for displaying or interacting with web content that is exclusive to Google. One feature that cannot be added to Safari, Firefox or Internet Explorer because Google won't allow it to be ported. And again I'm referring to page rendering and/or interacting technologies not proprietary browser interface features like bookmark syncing which no one (not Microsoft, Apple, Mozilla or Opera) has opened to competitors.

[.Neo]

but my original point stands, it lacks proper extensions. I mean how many extensions are there for IE? 100? How many are there for Chrome or Firefox? Probably 200,000 combined if not more.

Personally I never cared much for extensions and know a lot of causal users who don't either, let alone know what they are. If you rely heavily on them Internet Explorer won't be an opinion, but for those who don't it's a non-issue.

That said I think some of Microsoft's brands just suffer from a next to irreversible bad reputation. "Internet Explorer" probably being the worst. It's incredibly superficial but renaming the browser could actually improve things.

[BajiRav]

He said that Internet Explorer has a built in way to block ads. I am questioning how it works. I never said anything about 3rd parties. And I was not suggesting that Chrome, Firefox or Safari have built in adblockers so I don't know why on earth you are bringing that up at all.

And if I want to view a website without viewing the advertisements that's my right. I'm not going to get into a debate with you over this. IE does not fit my needs, get over it.

The feature is called Tracking Protection. You can build your own or import (& sync) 3rd party lists including EasyList (which I use).

See: http://www.iegallery.com/en-US/trackingprotectionlists

[Vice]

Personally I never cared much for extensions and know a lot of causal users who don't either, let alone know what they are.

Yeah but I'm not talking for everyone. I'm talking for myself giving my reasons as to why I won't use Internet Explorer. We aren't market watchers here we aren't analysts giving advice to the new york times. I'm just giving my opinion on this post in this forum, I'm not trying to sway people.

[GollyJeeWizz]

IMO techies are the dumbest of the lot when it comes to give another chance to old-broken things that may have improved. Case in point? IE and Hotmail. I am always amused by people who say if you are "techie" (whatever that means), you shouldn't be using IE for browsing or Hotmail for email. IE9 actually ranks above Chrome in terms of perf. on all my systems. Although I have stopped using Chrome altogether on all my computers since past few months. I prefer Aurora+IE9/IE10 combo. :)

Okay, that's you and that's your preference. Doesn't mean you have to come on here and try to alienate and belittle "techies" because they prefer to stay away from Internet Explorer because of its past history and its known security threats. I always give all software a fair shot. I keep my Internet Explorer up to date at all times and every once in a while I will load it up to see if I could stand using it again. The first thing I notice upon loading it up every time is it takes 3 times as long to completely start up than Chrome. Chrome is much more sleek, minimalistic, and because of that, it just functions and operates a lot smoother (for me). Not to mention, the options user interface is much more structured and uniform than it is in Internet Explorer 9, and easier to understand. That is my preference, but you don't see me responding saying "Oh, people who use Internet Explorer make me laugh because they don't understand how flawed the browser is."

[BajiRav]

Personally I never cared much for extensions and know a lot of causal users who don't either, let alone know what they are. If you rely heavily on them Internet Explorer won't be an opinion, but for those who don't it's a non-issue.

I don't personally bother with anything except Ghostery but to each his own IMO.

[Vice]

The feature is called Tracking Protection. You can build your own or import (& sync) 3rd party lists including EasyList (which I use).

See: http://www.iegallery...protectionlists

Thank you.

[.Neo]

Yeah but I'm not talking for everyone.

I realize that. I'm just adding that extensions aren't for everyone.

[BajiRav]

Okay, that's you and that's your preference. Doesn't mean you have to come on here and try to alienate and belittle "techies" because they prefer to stay away from Internet Explorer because of its past history and its known security threats. I always give all software a fair shot. I keep my Internet Explorer up to date at all times and every once in a while I will load it up to see if I could stand using it again. The first thing I notice upon loading it up every time is it takes 3 times as long to completely start up than Chrome. Chrome is much more sleek, minimalistic, and because of that, it just functions and operates a lot smoother (for me). Not to mention, the options user interface is much more structured and uniform than it is in Internet Explorer 9, and easier to understand. That is my preference, but you don't see me responding saying "Oh, people who use Internet Explorer make me laugh because they don't understand how flawed the browser is."

If IE9 takes 3x longer than Chrome on your system, then your system is messed up. The rest of your post is not relevant to what I was trying to get at but probably chose wrong words. I was talking about the I-am-a-techie-because-I-don't-use-IE crowd. ;)

Edit: as far as IE's interface is concerned, here is my work IE (had to turn off favorites bar for obvious reasons but it's off by default anyway) I don't see how Chrome is much more minimalistic or sleek but whatever,

[Vice]

I realize that. I'm just adding that extensions aren't for everyone.

Did that really need to be said though? I think it's obvious that there will be people who don't want extensions just like there are people who can't use a browser without them.

[.Neo]

Did that really need to be said though? I think it's obvious that there will be people who don't want extensions just like there are people who can't use a browser without them.

In that case why add that that you do need them? And maybe obvious to you, many others here seem only to be able to reason from their point of view and act as if it applies to everyone. So to answer your question: Yes it needed to be said.

[Vice]

In that case why add that that you do need them?

Because I'm giving my own opinion on this topic for me with my usage scenario and my reasons for why I'm not interested in IE. That is how Forums work users post their own opinions and experiences, I'm sure you're aware of this having spent many years on this board.

Posting what the general publics view is, is irrelevant because we all know the majority of computer users make very little use of the capabilities of their computer in general and that includes browser functions like extensions. That's just a fact that is obvious and doesn't need to be said.

[LightEco]

I stopped using extensions when Firefox broke them with every 0.0.0.1 update. Really don't have any extensions I need anyway. Sites make money off ads, so I'd rather support sites I care about instead of just being a giant freeloader. IE has come a long way since IE6 and 7 and with the increased competition from Chrome, its only going to get better. That's why these commercials exist, to counter the Chrome TV ads.

[.Neo]

Because I'm giving my own opinion on this topic for me with my usage scenario and my reasons for why I'm not interested in IE. That is how Forums work users post their own opinions and experiences, I'm sure you're aware of this having spent many years on this board.

And the same goes for me, I posted my scenario where Internet Explorer will do just fine. I'm sure you're aware forums aren't a one-way street and people tend to reply.

Posting what the general publics view is, is irrelevant because we all know the majority of computer users make very little use of the capabilities of their computer in general and that includes browser functions like extensions. That's just a fact that is obvious and doesn't need to be said.

Like I said: Many others here act as if their needs apply to the vast majority something that isn't the case, which makes it relevant. So while it's an obvious fact to you apparently it isn't to everyone.

[HawkMan]

He said that Internet Explorer has a built in way to block ads. I am questioning how it works. I never said anything about 3rd parties. And I was not suggesting that Chrome, Firefox or Safari have built in adblockers so I don't know why on earth you are bringing that up at all.

And if I want to view a website without viewing the advertisements that's my right. I'm not going to get into a debate with you over this. IE does not fit my needs, get over it.

This is laughable. Chrome is updated practically every week. They are continually adding new features and newer technologies all the time. Even after they became the market leader they went out of their way to release an iOS version of the browser which now means Chrome is the first browser to cover all the major platforms. Windows, Mac, Linux, iOS and Android. And maybe one day they will release a Windows Phone version too.

I don't need a 3rd party sync option, I have Chrome. And if you actually read what I said with an open mind instead of looking at things you can misconstrue to argue with me over you would clearly see that when Microsoft has a monopoly they stagnate. That has not happened with Google they have continued to innovate constantly with their products. Their search system is just one example. Reverse Image Searching, Local Searching, Personalized Search Results, Voice based searching. All this while holding the majority of the search market.

Chrome is a good browser and it is supported by a good company that wants nothing more than to give consumers the best most compatible browser there is. Name one technology that Chrome utilizes for displaying or interacting with web content that is exclusive to Google. One feature that cannot be added to Safari, Firefox or Internet Explorer because Google won't allow it to be ported. And again I'm referring to page rendering and/or interacting technologies not proprietary browser interface features like bookmark syncing which no one (not Microsoft, Apple, Mozilla or Opera) has opened to competitors.

Being upgraded every week, not a positive thing, it's an annoying thing, especially in a work environment. "OMG I have to upgrade now again !" Also the problem isn't with not being upgraded int he IE6 comparison, it's with getting to big and starting to impose "standards" of their own that aren't part of the web , which they have already started doing. That's why they're being blamed for being the new IE6 by all the web technologists.

As for their horrible ****** child of a iOS version of Chrome.... it would have been better if they hadn't made it, it's just safari placed in another shell with a slower javascript.

[Vice]

And the same goes for me, I posted my scenario where Internet Explorer will do just fine.

Like I said many here act as if their "power user" needs apply to the vast majority which isn't the case, which makes it relevant.

Just brings me back to my original reply really: Yeah but I'm not talking for everyone. I'm talking for myself giving my reasons as to why I won't use Internet Explorer. We aren't market watchers here we aren't analysts giving advice to the new york times. I'm just giving my opinion on this post in this forum, I'm not trying to sway people.

I'm happy for you to say you don't use or need extensions or don't care about them. I just think it didn't need to be said that most don't care about them when replying to me saying I use them because it makes it sound like you're saying I think everyone needs extensions which wasn't the case. I was just saying I need them and that's just one reason (of the three I mentioned) why IE is not a good fit for me personally.

Being upgraded every week, not a positive thing, it's an annoying thing, especially in a work environment. "OMG I have to upgrade now again !" Also the problem isn't with not being upgraded int he IE6 comparison, it's with getting to big and starting to impose "standards" of their own that aren't part of the web , which they have already started doing. That's why they're being blamed for being the new IE6 by all the web technologists.

As for their horrible ****** child of a iOS version of Chrome.... it would have been better if they hadn't made it, it's just safari placed in another shell with a slower javascript.

I don't think you've ever used Chrome because Chrome never prompts the user to upgrade anything. It just does it. One day you open it and it's just upgraded. No dialog boxes, no loading boxes, no download prompts. It downloads new versions in the background patches the binary, backs up your old binary and then the next time you open it, you're on the latest version. Instantly, no fuss.

And about them imposing standards. They are integrating standards in to their browser, anyone can implement the same standards and if they don't like those standards they don't have to use them. Google has not however decided to not implement other web standards. H.264 competes directly with Googles own WebM. And yet H.264 is in. Flash also competes with WebM and HTML5 which Google use a lot. And yet Google will soon be the only avenue Linux users have to get Flash on Linux once Adobe end support for their own product. Why? Because the web needs it and Google is a web company. The browser is simply a window in to an ecosystem and Google thrive off that ecosystem and for that to succeed they need to give people the best window on the planet.

And I agree that the iOS version of Chrome isn't as good as the Android version in rendering. Because of Apple crippling them and making them use WebUIView. But even with this issue Google (unlike Mozilla) still brought Chrome to iOS. Yes it uses the phones built in WebKit renderer and not Googles but at-least the wrapper around that, the interface, the bookmark syncing etc all works. That is what I really wanted, having the Google renderer would be nice don't get me wrong but it isn't a deal breaker for me by any means.

[HawkMan]

If IE9 takes 3x longer than Chrome on your system, then your system is messed up. The rest of your post is not relevant to what I was trying to get at but probably chose wrong words. I was talking about the I-am-a-techie-because-I-don't-use-IE crowd. ;)

Edit: as far as IE's interface is concerned, here is my work IE (had to turn off favorites bar for obvious reasons but it's off by default anyway) I don't see how Chrome is much more minimalistic or sleek but whatever,

yeah, chrome doesn't stand a chance in that regard.

[.Neo]

Just brings me back to my original reply really: Yeah but I'm not talking for everyone. I'm talking for myself giving my reasons as to why I won't use Internet Explorer. We aren't market watchers here we aren't analysts giving advice to the new york times. I'm just giving my opinion on this post in this forum, I'm not trying to sway people.

I'm happy for you to say you don't use or need extensions or don't care about them. I just think it didn't need to be said that most don't care about them when replying to me saying I use them because it makes it sound like you're saying I think everyone needs extensions which wasn't the case. I was just saying I need them and that's just one reason (of the three I mentioned) why IE is not a good fit for me personally.

I acknowledged I realize you aren't talking for everyone. Twice now. Beyond that I don't really care whether you think my initial reply was needed or not.

[rfirth]

yeah, chrome doesn't stand a chance in that regard.

One of my biggest issues with Google Chrome is that it doesn't play nicely with touch screens, or even mice in certain circumstances.

For instance, open enough tabs so that the entire top of the screen is covered with tabs. On my computer, that is 6 tabs. Now, try to put the mouse at the top of the screen, select the title bar, and drag it down - effectively un-maximizing Chrome so that you can drag the window around. It doesn't work because you can't click on the title bar.

On every other window, including IE, you can do this.

Despite IE9 giving you lots of open space at the top, Chrome requires a lot more vertical screen real estate. This is especially obvious if neither IE nor Chrome are maximized... Chrome requires almost twice as much vertical space because it suddenly needs to add a title bar.

[JustGeorge]

so pay for a sub or don't visit the website. hosting, traffic and journalists aren't free resources.

And neither is my time cleaning off a damn PC after (insert whatever site here) allows a malicious ad to infect my system, potentially compromising my data! I wouldn't block ads to begin with had that little problem came about. Don't give me that crap about paying for a sub if I don't like it. Telling people to pay for a sub or deal with possible malware infiltration might as well be extortion.

I say that if Neowin or any other site that feels people who use ad blocking software are really, truly hurting them monetarily, then implement detection of ad blocking software and ban us freeloaders outright!

[rfirth]

Telling people to pay for a sub or deal with possible malware infiltration might as well be extortion.

[JustGeorge]

^^ Oookayy :rofl: ^^

[HawkMan]

funny, i've never been infected by drive by ad malware, or any malware.

[Kelxin]

what a pointless troll, and completely off topic. but then again, judging from your other recent posts not entirely surprising. Also, other browsers like FF and chrome have fallen faster recently so...

funny, i've never been infected by drive by ad malware, or any malware.

Hrm, funny that I'm trolling about the security of the browser, but then you make a comment about how it's been secure for you. My post was completely on topic and not a troll. The sandboxing is still incredibly more secure than IE, and the reason for it falling so fast at the last convention was the monetary reward that was offered in showing working code to bypass its security. Even from that, the person that bypassed the sandbox said it is by far the hardest browser to drive by hack on the market.