If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rating: | Display Modes |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
Windows Update to IE11
Leala wrote:
WLM doesn't quote newsgroups at all but does quote email properly. In newsgroups, quotes have to be done manually and people are too lazy to do it or just don't give a rat's ass about it. So people *please* stop using WLM and use a decent newsreader. This is my rant for today. :-) I could care less what people use. Since the majority of purposed questions and replies occur in the first group of messages with the balance usually digressing. Anything later since folks don't trim previous quoted content is just as much as an annoyance as unquoted content. I could post this same reply in WLM instead of SeaMonkey and both messages (the above quoted and my reply) would be easily understood yet insignificant 19 replies later to the original op question. WLM quotes Html properly, not plain text. There's a reason for that..some might echo that it's due to MSFT's position on moving to forums and deprecating use of nntp as a mechanism for controlled feedback which holds some low-level of truth yet an extremely misunderstood. MSFT position on quoted text in WLM is based on design intent for WLM which is first and foremost intended for use with Hotmail type accounts (Hotmail, Msn, Live, Outlook.com) signed on to MSFT services to take advantage of integrated features (Contacts, Calendar, Photo-email which overrides an isp size limitation on messages size, Windows/Live Essentials Photo Gallery, and previously shared contacts and SkyDrive with Windows Live Messenger). MSFT would much prefer (and still does) that if plain text quoting is necessary then use Outlook or the Hotmail/Outlook.com web interface - both of which provide plain text and html properly quoted content. Why? Both are monetized products and meet the intent of any corporation prime objective - generated revenue, cash flow, and increase earnings. Usenet never had a chance with its sophomoric clique-ish following (said affliction exists in any group) and quite a few replies in this thread and others are perfect examples why. The sad part is that many contributions and discussions in this forum would benefit MSFT prior to eventual digression...but rarely is something discussed in here that has not been asked or answered in the web based forums. But you are right on one account g. Some WLM users just don't give a rat's patoutie about properly quoted text, trimming sigs, top/bottom posting..and some of those same users have no trouble following threads and content regardless of how many interject non-value added opinions about 'who uses what' and continue to provide more value added knowledge to this forum than the complainers. -- ...winston msft mvp consumer apps |
Ads |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
Windows Update to IE11
SC Tom wrote:
I respect your preference, was simply curious I didn't like them when tabs were first introduced, but over the years have found them to be very useful. I think it's the easiest way to "multi-task" the internet LOL. Of course, that's *my* preference :-) I didn't care for them (tabs) at first but eventually found that use of them was much more efficient than multiple windows or navigating to another window, or taskbar thumbnails, or aero-peek, etc. Easier and less screen 'noise'. -- ...winston msft mvp consumer apps |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
Windows Update to IE11
Buffalo wrote:
"Robin Bignall" wrote in message ... On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 11:47:37 -0400, pjp wrote: Is it wise to allow this update or should one skip it and stick with IE10? I installed it today and Kaspersky's Password Manager told me to disable enhanced protection mode. The only protected mode I could see is in 'Security' in Internet Options, but unticking that gave me an immediate message that my PC would not be adequately protected. Win7Ult. Any thoughts on this? When I went to a MS website, it said enhanced mode in IE11 will not work with Win 7. Well, I just tried Googling it and now I can't find that link. Does anyone know if it can actually be used in Win7 64bit? Windows 7 doesn't support AppContainer which is required for full Enhanced Protected Mode (EPM) that are present in IE10/11 for Win8.x On Win7 EPM only enables 64-bit tabs on a 64-bit o/s thus enabling EPM on a 32 bit system does nothing since 32-bit Win7 supports neither 64-bit nor AppContainer. -- ...winston msft mvp consumer apps |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
Windows Update to IE11
John wrote:
Thank you for all of that. Useful stuff. J. You're welcome. -- ...winston msft mvp consumer apps |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
Windows Update to IE11
....winston :
SC Tom wrote: I respect your preference, was simply curious I didn't like them when tabs were first introduced, but over the years have found them to be very useful. I think it's the easiest way to "multi-task" the internet LOL. Of course, that's *my* preference :-) I didn't care for them (tabs) at first but eventually found that use of them was much more efficient than multiple windows or navigating to another window, or taskbar thumbnails, or aero-peek, etc. I liked tabs straight away, but I use separate windows as well. When busy I might have ten tabs open in one window and a couple of other windows open. If I want two web pages on two different monitors, separate windows is of course the only way to go, and I really like the way Firefox allows me to shuffle tabs within and between windows. -- Mike Barnes |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Windows Update to IE11
On 12/11/2013 10:27 PM, Paul wrote:
Bob Henson wrote: On 12/11/2013 6:49 PM, Chris S. wrote: "Bob Henson" wrote in message ... On 12/11/2013 3:47 PM, pjp wrote: Is it wise to allow this update or should one skip it and stick with IE10? The test version was badly broken - but they may have fixed it for the release. I'm waiting for more comments before it goes on here. I tried it a few days ago. A couple of my financial sites balked. Told me my browser wasn't supported, or words to that effect. Removed IE 11. I'll wait until the world catches up! Chris That's what happened to me, except the sites didn't tell me anything, the just refused to respond. What obviously appeared to be (and were in Firefox) links remained steadfastly non-responsive - they didn't show the usual underline. I think that rather than the world catching up it is Internet Explorer 11 that needs to catch up - all though I'm not very technical, my guess is that HTML5 was involved and IE could not handle it yet. As Firefox *could* handle it, Internet Explorer 11 came off the system sharpish! It's a pity, because it did appear to be very quick now it firmly integrates itself into Windows again. There are User Agent string changers. http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/18450...et-explorer-8/ You can change the information at the Registry level. http://www.pctools.com/guides/registry/detail/799/ ******* The "User Agent" string, is how the web site figures out what code to serve to you, compensate for missing Flash plugins or no HTML5 available or whatever. It starts with the User Agent, and the probing goes from there (separate probe for Flash). ******* There should also be a Compatibility View option, as described here. This is likely how Microsoft wants you to resolve these problems. http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/i...-view#ie=ie-11 I don't really use IE all that much, so can't vouch for any of the above. Thanks for the ideas - but since Firefox works I don't see the point in bothering. I was only trying Internet Explorer 11 out of curiosity, and in case Firefox screwed up its last 24 ESR release badly. As the latter contained no significant changes, I've got another year before I have to bother looking around again. -- Bob - Tetbury, Gloucestershire, UK Very funny Scotty - now beam down my clothes. |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
Windows Update to IE11
"...winston" wrote in message ... Gene E. Bloch wrote: On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 00:50:14 +0000, John wrote: On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 15:11:00 -0800, wrote: On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 22:16:35 GMT, mick wrote: On 12/11/2013 21:38:57, wrote: On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 11:13:08 -0700, "Buffalo" wrote: "NY" wrote in message ... "mick" wrote in message ... On 12/11/2013 15:47:37, pjp wrote: Is it wise to allow this update or should one skip it and stick with IE10? Thanks for asking the question, I'm waiting too. FireFox is my preferred choice of browser anyway but I do like to have the other popular ones to test my website. My experience is that anything newer than IE 8 causes blurry fonts in the email-reading pane of Windows Live Mail. Each time I have been offered an upgrade to IE, I have set it to "Hide" so it doesn't get installed accidentally if I install everything that is offered. Uninstalling newer versions of IE (if I accidentally install one) restores the non-blurry fonts, but it is a pain to have to do it. I just installed it in my Win7HP 64 bit system and my fonts are fine in my Live Mail. They were fine with IE ver 10 also. Perhaps you could try reinstalling Windows Live Mail. Haven't checked it for speed, etc, but so far it is working fine. I did the regular updates today and IEv11 was not offered as an update? Where did you update it from? Any problem with Favorities/Cookies or anything like that after updating? Best reason(s) to update? I have not had any regular updates today, only IE11 is listed. I'm running Win7 64bit and I had 16 updates today and IE11 was not one of them. Me, too, in case anyone's collecting data points. All updates worked perfectly. Win7, x64, IE-ten. Word2007. Also got a couple of MSE updates. J. But I did get IE 11 (yesterday). MS must be rolling it out in dribs & drabs. Maybe they want me to feel superior and you to feel inferior? Kidding, of course. There's a slight possibility that IE11 is being restricted (not pushed) or limited to certain Win7SP1 sytems. - i.e. you might have got it yesterday but not today. Though, if hidden it would still be present (not removed). I was offered IE11 as the only Important update yesterday (Win7HP SP1 x86), along with three Optional ones. Today I was offered nine Important, one Recommended, and two Optional. I don't often see WU split up like that; usually it's all together. (Two of the five Optional ones were MSE definition updates, so that doesn't really count- I get them daily.) -- SC Tom |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Windows Update to IE11
Char Jackson wrote:
I currently have 153 tabs open. What a mess it would be if I needed to have 153 separate instances on my taskbar. I don't need 153 tabs open nor do I need 153 separate instances on my taskbar and I suspect you don't either. -- XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups The Usenet Improvement Project: http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/ |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
Windows Update to IE11
On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 16:19:59 -0500, "...winston"
wrote: If a more robust approach is necesssary to prevent IE11 from being offered/installed - MSFT provides a toolkit to block automatic delivery of IE11. http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/downl....aspx?id=40722 Thanks for the link. Myself, I use IE9. -- -gufus Thou Shalt NOT excessively annoy others or allow Thyself to become excessively annoyed |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Windows Update to IE11
"Paladin" wrote in message ...
On 2013-11-13, Gene E. Bloch wrote: On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 18:55:39 -0500, Chris S. wrote: So people *please* stop using WLM and use a decent newsreader. Use a decent OS. Windows is lazy, geared towards non-computer peeps. "peeps".. says a lot about you. So does his blaming it on the OS, when it's clearly a function of a particular application. It's clearly a function of the IQ of icon clickers. They aren't computer users. As the idiot that can't cut signatures from post clearly shows. Poorly designed software to meet the needs of idiots. lmao. Moronware. Well, you sure show your immaturity and arrogance. Goodbye and good riddance. (Hopefully) -- Buffalo |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
Windows Update to IE11
On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 20:43:34 -0500, Paul wrote:
Robin Bignall wrote: On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 11:47:37 -0400, pjp wrote: Is it wise to allow this update or should one skip it and stick with IE10? I installed it today and Kaspersky's Password Manager told me to disable enhanced protection mode. The only protected mode I could see is in 'Security' in Internet Options, but unticking that gave me an immediate message that my PC would not be adequately protected. Win7Ult. Any thoughts on this? "Incompatibility of Kaspersky Password Manager 5.0 plug-ins with Internet Explorer 10/11 when Enhanced Protected Mode (EPM) is enabled" http://support.kaspersky.com/10576 I just checked IE 11, which I installed yesterday, and that line in Internet Options / Advanced, for enhanced protection enable / disable, *simply is not there* (in Win7). Maybe it only appears as an option for Win8. -- Robin Bignall Herts, England |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
Windows Update to IE11
On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 23:55:37 +0000, Robin Bignall
wrote: On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 20:43:34 -0500, Paul wrote: Robin Bignall wrote: On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 11:47:37 -0400, pjp wrote: Is it wise to allow this update or should one skip it and stick with IE10? I installed it today and Kaspersky's Password Manager told me to disable enhanced protection mode. The only protected mode I could see is in 'Security' in Internet Options, but unticking that gave me an immediate message that my PC would not be adequately protected. Win7Ult. Any thoughts on this? "Incompatibility of Kaspersky Password Manager 5.0 plug-ins with Internet Explorer 10/11 when Enhanced Protected Mode (EPM) is enabled" http://support.kaspersky.com/10576 I just checked IE 11, which I installed yesterday, and that line in Internet Options / Advanced, for enhanced protection enable / disable, *simply is not there* (in Win7). Maybe it only appears as an option for Win8. But it does appear in the gpeditor, so I disabled it there. Incidentally, I still am having the problem of IE11 not always shutting down properly if one tries to open many sites in quick succession. Running copies of iexplore build up to the point where IE refuses to start and I have to end process on each. Has nobody else ever noticed this? -- Robin Bignall Herts, England |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
Windows Update to IE11
On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 23:37:35 -0500, Paul wrote:
Gene E. Bloch (Beta Bloch) See. You are a beta tester. It's even in your .sig :-) Sly fella, aren't you? At least you were kind enough not to call me (ahem) Beta Blocher :-) Actually, given some of the chat in this NG, I should just criticize you for having a newsreader that doesn't suppress sigs properly {:-) and a half} -- Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch) |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
Windows Update to IE11
On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 16:31:00 +0000, John wrote:
If so, it is not working as I know I'm still superior. To just abut everything. In case of disbelieve in this self-evident fact ask my cats. Or the dog. She thinks I'm *wonderful*. What you say is obviously inarguable. That said, I'm gong to argue. At least, I'm tempted to do so :-) Also, given what you said, maybe I should get a dog. It should help a *lot*. -- Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|