Difference between revisions of "Talk:Internet Explorer"

Revision as of 16:40, August 19, 2011

This article could be expanded a great deal. I'd like to know about the history of IE, and its place in the history of the web browser in general.

• What about the fight with Netscape Navigator?
• How popular is it, and how would we measure its popularity if they simply give it away with each copy of Windows?

  If you don't buy a Mac, you get IE preinstalled. Most users don't even know how to download and install new software, so staying with what it came with doesn't mean much.

• What are its security problems, in more detail? Why hasn't Microsoft addressed these? Are there solutions or alternatives?
• Most interesting would be the web standards aspect. How about the CSS box model, for example? Or the need for JavaScript programmers to write every piece of code twice: once for IE, plus once for FireFox and other standards-compliant browsers.

This article is lightweight and haphazard. I'm going to delete it if no one helps me fix it up. Better to have nothing, than something this lame. --Ed Poor ^Talk 15:35, 16 August 2011 (EDT)

Recent additions by SeanS don't sound correct to me. Did you summarize MS propaganda, or what?

My impression is that Internet Explorer is the number one source of computer viruses, i.e., it's so bad at security that often just visiting a bad website with Explorer results in immediate infection. So let's not talk about "a focus on Internet Security" as if this were something MS was succeeding with. And what you wrote contradicts the lede.

Come to think of it, it's hard to believe this was an innocent error. I need you to submit a Conservapedia:Writing plan. --Ed Poor ^Talk 16:55, 18 August 2011 (EDT)

If they do not sound correct to you, then you may change them to what is not Propaganda, if microsoft says they are adding more security in the source i used, then that is what I am going to put into the article. If you find another source that says otherwise, please, put it here or edit the article itself with said information. And even then, saying it increased security does not mean that it is a nigh-impregnable bastion which no virus can push through, it just means that it has more security, how much said more is is not stated.

and why the accusation I was deliberately trying to insert false information? It was midnight and I picked the first available Google result, which the external links here considers truthful enough to also include for those seeking more information. It isn't like I planned to just leave the stuff there with a single source from Microsoft, I simply haven't gotten around to getting more info for the article. --SeanS 17:12, 18 August 2011 (EDT)

Calm down, no one accused you. Hard to believe != You are guilty. Please lecture me less on what I can or shouldn't do, and spend more time fixing the article. Specifically, I need you to address the issue of browser security. Otherwise, the whole article should be deleted, because as it stands now it is misleading. --Ed Poor ^Talk 18:28, 18 August 2011 (EDT)

I apologize for jumping to conclusions. I plan to work on the article, just need to gather sources for info and whatnot. I haven't really used Ie since 6 (I use firefox) so i dont have as much experience with the problems of 7-9--SeanS 18:30, 18 August 2011 (EDT)

Studies have shown that IE9 is by far and away the most secure browser on the market. Should we include both sides of this story? BradB 19:57, 18 August 2011 (EDT)

We should include both sides of the story, but not just the side you and Sean are pushing. The phrase "studies have shown" is not trustworthy; it's the usual lead-in to liberal trickery. You may as well say studies have shown that legal gun ownership "kills kids" (when what you have in mind is a study of the illegal drug sales which defines includes adults up to 25 years old).

Unless you can provide some genuine insight into browser security, you better not get involved in this. --Ed Poor ^Talk 12:37, 19 August 2011 (EDT)

Start over

Microsoft did not "develop" IE. Significant parts of it were bought or licensed from another company. Don't put anything in the article which is not properly sourced. Please discuss all changes here before making them. --Ed Poor ^Talk 12:40, 19 August 2011 (EDT)