I strictly recommend not to wait until you get enough amount of money to buy different goods! You can get the credit loans or just short term loan and feel yourself fine

Actually, just spotted this review...:
http://www.cbronline.com/article_news.asp?guid=F1861DAE-FEE0-4C4D-9D53-265B2BDC0B6C

From the article: "Web developers, now accustomed to having to test their pages against more than one browser for compatibility, will be disappointed to know that while support for web standards such as CSS has been improved, it is still not complete."

Given all their resources, you'd think they'd be able to just plain get it right... especially since others (open sourcers even) have actually done it already. But it might make the playing field level, so of course they won't do it. I challenge anyone to name a product developed by Microsoft which beat the competition on a level playing field. This article outlines some of the places where the playing field had a helluva slant:
http://www.vanwensveen.nl/rants/microsoft/IhateMS.html
Very illuminating on many levels.
Regards,

Dave

Hi Juha,

Interesting to see your take on things. I would, however, from my perspective as a professional web developer, disagree with your assessment that IE7 is in any way a significant improvement on IE6 with respect to standards compliance. IE6 is absurdly bad by any measure - buggy, inconsistent, and downright backwards in most ways regarding to CSS any of the W3C standards.

One might rightfully have hoped, given a) their embarassing failure at making IE6 anything approaching an open standards compliant browser, and b) their massive development resources, that Microsoft would've at least come close to the level compliance of upstart open source development groups like Mozilla (Firefox) and KHTML (the bunch that built the Konqueror browser for Linux's KDE desktop, and on which Apple's Safari is based) as well as comparatively tiny Opera team.

But, sadly, if you look at IE7blog, the Microsoft developers unequivocally state that they are not even striving for ACID2 compliance (a browser rendering standard which Safari and Konqueror both achieve, and which Firefox and others very nearly achieve - so it's definitely possible).

What it means is one of two things: 1. Microsoft don't see it in their interest as a monopoly to support open standards, or b) they've got incompetent developers. Given the large and growing list of known IE7 bugs - see http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/MSIE7Bugs/ - it might be the latter, but I suspect the former has something to do with it.

Microsoft are not a beneficent organisation, no matter what Bill's giving to charity... History is littered with broken technology companies who trusted in Microsoft's sense of fair play and integrity. Based on watching them like a hawk for the past 15 years (I'm from Seattle), I believe I'm justified in saying that Microsoft has earned no mercy from any pundit, and they have earned nothing but scorn from any computer user savvy enough to know how badly they've been burned. I know that building work-arounds for their crap browser has cost my web development clients (and me) tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars.

I just want to know to whom at Microsoft to send the bill.

Regards,

Dave

Speaking of which, one thing that annoys me about WGA is that you have to validate Windows (as you do when you first install it) in order to errm, validate Windows again.

This is a pain if like me you do frequent installs for test purposes, and need to get the latest updates. You can only validate Windows a limited amount of times before the product key expires...

I think you're a bit too harsh about IE7 not being standards compliant and more secure than IE6; everything I've seen so far point to it being far better at both than IE6. In order to get the full security benefits of IE7 though, you will need Vista which is better engineered than XP in that respect.

The irony here is that IE7 will actually break a lot of sites which have used workarounds for IE6's poor standards compliance. It has been funny watching Microsoft trying to hammer that point home... :)

As I only run Linux on my laptop, desktop, and servers, IE7 isn't yet an option (although Wine lets me run IE5,5.5, and 6.0 on Linux without using Windows - I only do it to test how badly those outdated, non-compliant browsers render my W3C compliant web development projects). If you run Windows, then you'll notice that you get pushed pretty hard down the WGA (Windows poorly named "Genuine Advantage" as it's neither genuine, nor advantageous) path - in fact you can't download IE7 without accepting it. The bottom line: IE7, no matter how well it copies the good features of other, more innovative browsers like Opera, Konqueror/Safari (they're from the same code base), and Mozilla Firefox, IE7 doesn't conform to web standards to any useful extent, nor is it significantly more secure than it's totally lame predecessor, IE6, which is the bane of the security and web development world (type "IE Flaws" in google - I get roughly 10 million results). Do us all a favour, reject IE7, use Firefox (or Opera or pretty much anything else).

Dave