That's what Microsoft just said:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/09/16/no_ie9_9_on_windows_xp/

I guess those are the first signs of Microsoft actively moving XP to the background and pushing people towards Windows 7. XP users are now officially second-class citizens :)
Posted on 2010-09-16 03:46:47 by Scali
How do you accelerate a sled?

I.E. is bloated and slower than other browsers.

Posted on 2010-09-16 09:20:14 by skywalker

How do you accelerate a sled?

I.E. is bloated and slower than other browsers.


Early tests show that IE9 is indeed the fastest with the HTML5 canvas (DX10 acceleration)... Firefox is second (DX9 acceleration), and Chrome is third (OpenGL acceleration).
Chrome is still the champ of JavaScript though.
Posted on 2010-09-16 09:45:28 by Scali
I.E. is bloated and slower than other browsers.

IE6 maybe ;)
Posted on 2010-09-16 13:22:36 by ti_mo_n
IE6 is pretty lean and mean actually - it loads noticably faster than IE7 or IE8 on lower-end machines (defined as "something dualcore with 2gigs of ram"). Page rendering speed might be better in the newer versions, but I don't generally use very css/html/javascript-heavy sites.
Posted on 2010-09-16 13:32:47 by f0dder

IE6 is pretty lean and mean actually - it loads noticably faster than IE7 or IE8 on lower-end machines (defined as "something dualcore with 2gigs of ram"). Page rendering speed might be better in the newer versions, but I don't generally use very css/html/javascript-heavy sites.


Just my opinion..

The installer for I.E. 8.0 is 16 megs compared to 8.3 for Firefox.

Unless there are files elsewhere, I.E. 6.0 is taking up 2 megs on my computer.

I.E. can't be customized near as much as F.F. either.

When I had it installed, I remember having to fix a bunch of items where "my permission wasn't asked."
:D

I think M.S. is getting a kickback from the hard drive and ram chip makers.




Posted on 2010-09-16 15:18:18 by skywalker
Unless there are files elsewhere, I.E. 6.0 is taking up 2 megs on my computer.
Ever heard of comctl32, wininetapi, ..... . .. . .. ?
Posted on 2010-09-16 15:22:44 by f0dder
Well, I've been a happy Chrome user for quite a while now (although I'd be even happier if there was a proper Chrome port for FreeBSD), but I was curious as to how well this acceleration would work on my laptop with Intel IGP.
I have to say, it works remarkably well, with the FishIE test.
Chrome will barely stay out of the single digit framerates, even with only 20 fish... but with IE9 it ran 20 fish at 55 fps... it also scaled up very nicely. Even with 1000 fish I still got a better framerate than Chrome did with 20.
So the acceleration works very nicely, even on low-spec hardware.

As a sort of bonus, I found that there now is a Flash preview plugin for 64-bit browsers. I was very happy to see that, as it is the main reason why I still browse in 32-bit (or at least, it was before I started using Chrome... then the main reason became the lack of a 64-bit version altogether :) ). Not having Flash just breaks too many sites at this point, especially one of my favourites: YouTube.
Posted on 2010-09-16 16:18:52 by Scali