I have split the posts about Windows XP into their own thread:
If you want to discuss that topic, please continue there, but remember to keep the debate civil and not take things personally.
So will not IE9.
I’m sorry, I’m not trying to offend you, and I respect your title and position here, at SitePoint. 
IE6, and 7, and 8, however good, still require own personal code to behave.
You believe IE9 will bring salvation. I see it it doesn’t.
<!--if IE...>
just got bigger.
Others browsers don’t rely for their features, on a 16GB+ free HDD, 2GB RAM OS, to run properly.
They (other browsers, of course) achieve more with less. This is good for everybody.
Peace out.
I don’t recall saying anything about believing IE9 to bring salvation. But it is pointless to talk to you. So whatever.
I’m looking for facts, not biased opinions.
If I have an opinion, it’s prone to be biased, don’t you think?
I’ll stop here with my personal opinions on IE9.
Sorry if I get a little to caught up.
I am firefox lover, but I must admit I am excited on this version LOL!
thanks for the heads up!
Personally I use chrome, opera and firefox and I would never even consider using IE, but maybe this new IE9 will change that, who knows? Sadly I doubt that IE9 will make life easier for webdevelopers like me, but maybe someone know something I dont? [URL=“http://nape.dk”]
The new font rendering in IE9 is pretty nice, I hope it becomes the standard on Windows. Direct2D I believe it is using.
Not likely. Direct 2D is part of the DirectX library which is MS proprietary. While the MS versions of Safari, Chrome, and Firefox can certainly use it, it would cause a significant rift between them and their counterparts in other OS’es (a problem MS doesn’t have to concern itself with). Each of these may employ OpenGL, but I don’t know if there’s a part of OpenGL that equivocates to Direct 2D since OpenGL is meant for 3D graphics.
On Windows Vista and 7, when using aero or having DWM (Desktop Window Manager) on; DirectX is already being used to build the actual windows. So in a way they are using DirectX indirectly. In reality it is merely an API call the same already done for GDI, which Firefox already does. However, my interest of making Direct2D the standard for font rendering is not limited to just browser.
Edit: I just learned Firefox 3.7 will in fact use Direct2D along with DirectWrite. Or so rumored anyways.
I can only imagine this whole Vista+ OS thing is going to create a nightmare for development testing. I doubt they’d lose much market share from the general public for not supporting non-windows OSs, but I bet most of those who do have IE on Mac (or other platform) are developers and only have it for testing purposes.
It’s not like it’s a new situation. There hasn’t been an IE for Mac since 2003 and it didn’t share a rendering engine with IE for Windows. So development testing for Mac users against IE9 is the same as it was against IE8, IE7, IE6… either use a separate PC, run Windows in a VM, or use a snapshot/VNC service like Browsercam.
My bad. I thought there were more recent Mac builds of IE since every Mac I’ve used (2004-2008) had IE installed (if you can tell I don’t own a Mac myself). I guess it must have been a relic more than anything else.
While that is true it’s worth pointing out Dan that Microsoft Office 2008 for Mac (and Office 2004 - it’s predecessor) USES the Tasman rendering engine (yes the EXACT same rendering engine that IE for Mac used!) in it’s Entourage and all other Mac Office version products - Therefore there’s a very real possibility that the numbers of Tasman users (even if it’s just in email) is high enough to warrant recognition. 
I am perplexed that it hasn’t been in since IE7, especially given that their ASP.NET platform basically requires it because its aspx pages are XML documents containing a hybrid of HTML elements and server controls.
Cheers,
D.