Internet Explorer 10 Test Drive

[a_ump]

Internet Explorer Platform Preview Guide for Developers(click for more info, massive breakdown)

The IE10 Platform Preview Guide for Developers provides an early look at the developer features coming to the next version of Internet Explorer. By using the documentation and samples in this guide, web developers and designers can prepare to use these new features. To download and install Internet Explorer Platform Preview, see the Internet Explorer Test Drive site

Internet Explorer Test Drive site
Wow, microsoft already moving past 9. I really don't understand why no matter what updates, they can't just include all those features or w/e into a 9.XXX version instead of doing like mozilla and plowin through version numbers.

 

[newtekie1]

Internet Explorer Platform Preview Guide for Developers(click for more info, massive breakdown)

Internet Explorer Test Drive site
Wow, microsoft already moving past 9. I really don't understand why no matter what updates, they can't just include all those features or w/e into a 9.XXX version instead of doing like mozilla and plowin through version numbers.

They tried that and people complained that they didn't get anything new for years on end even when they did.

When your competitor is pumping out "new" versions, you have to too, even if the updates included in those versions don't warrant a totally new version number.

 

[douglatins]

Thats why chrome is the best! Its like 12! >9 >5. FTW!

But i do agree with newtekie. The number marketing is valid here too.

 

[TheMailMan78]

I'm sticking with IE9 for a while. I rather like it.

 

[remixedcat]

Firefox FTW!!!!!!!

 

[TheMailMan78]

Firefox FTW!!!!!!!

Do you use an SSD? Because if you do Firefox sucks.

 

[mlee49]

I was gonna make an: "It's the same thing" meme, but no one would get it.


And I use FF w/an SSD, no suckage for me.

 

[TheMailMan78]

I was gonna make an: "It's the same thing" meme, but no one would get it.


And I use FF w/an SSD, no suckage for me.

Where are your temp files going?

 

[remixedcat]

Do you use an SSD? Because if you do Firefox sucks.

How does it suck on an SSD?

 

[dir_d]

Im using WaterFox 5.0 and it locks up and is really slow at times. I moved the Temp folder to my WD drive along with downloads but it still is slow.

 

[mlee49]

Where are your temp files going?

Climbing in your windows, snatching your cache up...

Hide your cookies, hide your files...




Um, dont know. Mass storage I presume?

On topic, IE10 will be super-ultra-mega-browsergeden.

 

[TheMailMan78]

How does it suck on an SSD?

See Firefox stores all the temp files on your primary drive which causes tons of rewrites on the SSD. In other words it wears it down faster.

IE does the same thing, HOWEVER you can easily move the temp folder to another drive via the options. If you try and do that with Firefox you better pack a lunch. Its a BITCH. There is no simple way to do it.

 

[erixx]

+1

Installing....

 

[remixedcat]

See Firefox stores all the temp files on your primary drive which causes tons of rewrites on the SSD. In other words it wears it down faster.

IE does the same thing, HOWEVER you can easily move the temp folder to another drive via the options. If you try and do that with Firefox you better pack a lunch. Its a BITCH. There is no simple way to do it.

It does have high page faults though. Hrmmmm when I get my SSD I will have to tweak the fox for that I guess. No way in hell I'm ever goin back to IE.

 

[cheesy999]

Thats why chrome is the best! Its like 12! >9 >5. FTW!

But i do agree with newtekie. The number marketing is valid here too.

just a point, but if version numbers matter that much, does that make windows 2000 precisely 1993 better then windows 7?

 

[WhiteLotus]

See Firefox stores all the temp files on your primary drive which causes tons of rewrites on the SSD. In other words it wears it down faster.

IE does the same thing, HOWEVER you can easily move the temp folder to another drive via the options. If you try and do that with Firefox you better pack a lunch. Its a BITCH. There is no simple way to do it.

Felt I should thank you for that interesting bit of information. I'm

 

[TheMailMan78]

Felt I should thank you for that interesting bit of information. I'm

You're what?

 

[Cheeseball]

Dead

LOL

 

[qubit]

The latest Firefox with Adblock+, Flashblock and a few other plugins does it for me. No ads, ever and some excellent functionality. The ad blocking alone is the killer reason to use it.

See Firefox stores all the temp files on your primary drive which causes tons of rewrites on the SSD. In other words it wears it down faster.

IE does the same thing, HOWEVER you can easily move the temp folder to another drive via the options. If you try and do that with Firefox you better pack a lunch. Its a BITCH. There is no simple way to do it.

It's a plus point to IE that you can move the temp files somewhere else easily. However, the issue of Firefox temp files wearing out an SSD is an issue with the flash technology they use, not a flaw in Firefox. After all, hard discs don't get knackered like this, do they?

 

[newtekie1]

However, the issue of Firefox temp files wearing out an SSD is an issue with the flash technology they use, not a flaw in Firefox. After all, hard discs don't get knackered like this, do they?

When is the last time you've heard of an SSD going bad because it was written to too much? You haven't, because SSDs have so many re-writes that even the first generation of consumer SSDs haven't even come close to hitting their re-write limit. And with modern generations of SSDs they have wear levelling so that each part of the drive gets written to before it starts to re-write over bits. So deleting a file, then writing another file doesn't fill the space of the old file, it fills new space, so that one section of the drive isn't written to a significant amount more than the rest, and the drive doesn't start to fail because of that one section.

Basically, most articles that talk about SSD life and really look at it, say that even if you are writing to the drive almost constantly the drives on the market to day should last 5+ years, so it is nothing to worry about. I mean how many of us plan to keep any part of our PC for 5 years, especially an SSD that will be considered a slow small piece of crap in 5 years time?

Also, moving the Firefox cache is hardly "a bitch". It takes all of 30 seconds.

• Type about:config in the address bar.
• Right-click and select New > String from the menu.
• Enter browser.cache.disk.parent_directory as the preference name and the new path to the cache location, for example d:\temp

Sorry there isn't a GUI option for this, but seriously was that all that hard?

 

[qubit]

When is the last time you've heard of an SSD going bad because it was written to too much? You haven't, because SSDs have so many re-writes that even the first generation of consumer SSDs haven't even come close to hitting their re-write limit. And with modern generations of SSDs they have wear levelling so that each part of the drive gets written to before it starts to re-write over bits. So deleting a file, then writing another file doesn't fill the space of the old file, it fills new space, so that one section of the drive isn't written to a significant amount more than the rest, and the drive doesn't start to fail because of that one section.

Basically, most articles that talk about SSD life and really look at it, say that even if you are writing to the drive almost constantly the drives on the market to day should last 5+ years, so it is nothing to worry about. I mean how many of us plan to keep any part of our PC for 5 years, especially an SSD that will be considered a slow small piece of crap in 5 years time?

Also, moving the Firefox cache is hardly "a bitch". It takes all of 30 seconds.

• Type about:config in the address bar.
• Right-click and select New > String from the menu.
• Enter browser.cache.disk.parent_directory as the preference name and the new path to the cache location, for example d:\temp

Sorry there isn't a GUI option for this, but seriously was that all that hard?

Dude, I was only responding to MM who was saying this was a "problem" with FF! It was MM saying that there's no easy way to move the cache, not me!

I'm sure I've seen articles and forum posts about SSDs developing bad sectors though, even with the wear-levelling algorithms. I have no personal experience of using SSDs, however. Also, the fact that memory blocks can be written to individually, but only erased in pages really doesn't help when you're writing thousands of small files.

I think because of this limitation, an SSD is best used as a boot drive, where it's really fast.

 

[remixedcat]

This is why I'm saving for an SLC SSD rather then an MLC SSD. SLC's are made for demanding servers. yeah It's gonna hurt payin for it but it will be worth it.

 

[newtekie1]

Dude, I was only responding to MM who was saying this was a "problem" with FF! It was MM saying that there's no easy way to move the cache, not me!

I'm sure I've seen articles and forum posts about SSDs developing bad sectors though, even with the wear-levelling algorithms. I have no personal experience of using SSDs, however. Also, the fact that memory blocks can be written to individually, but only erased in pages really doesn't help when you're writing thousands of small files.

I think because of this limitation, an SSD is best used as a boot drive, where it's really fast.

I wasn't arguing with your post, sorry if it seems that way, I was simply expanding on it. Basically, take away from my post that it isn't an issue with Firefox or SSDs, because it isn't really an issue at all.