I'd like some opinions on this please and any other tidbits you may have.
Opera
- Thread starter Smash
- Start date
spycatcher34
Emperor
Its a waste you have to serf with a huge ad banner everywhere. Not that many features compared to IE and not as many updates support services as MS. All IMO of curse. 
Sodapop
Teh pop in teh can
The table will look somehow messed, and the banner really gets annoying after a short while... I'd recommend to get mozilla instead if you really want to get rid of IE... Doesn't include a few of the fancy css options, but at least the page won't look all messed... But sadly, internet explorer remains the best browser... 
I have Mozilla(reformed MAC user where Netscape is the LAW) but I hear about this "fastest browser in the world" stuff.But my dial up means a good hour d/ling so before doing that and finding out it stinks.........
I see the ad banner is gone with purchase but they want a pretty hefty price for a browser.Havn't they heard that MS is giving IE away for free..I mean um made it an intrical part of the os adding functionality and a user freindly interface
I see the ad banner is gone with purchase but they want a pretty hefty price for a browser.Havn't they heard that MS is giving IE away for free..I mean um made it an intrical part of the os adding functionality and a user freindly interface
Sodapop
Teh pop in teh can
Well if I had to choose something else than internet explorer, I'd obviously go for mozilla. I used opera for half an hour and decided to delete it. The banner was annoying, and it was really messing up internet pages when there are a lot of tables, like text written over the table border and other ugly things. After all, internet explorer is still free for download, and won't mess the tables. On the other hand, I used mozilla for a couple of days and found that it was pretty efficient. I only went back to IE because of the fancy color bars on the right.
This is not a big deal, but I just missed them.
But except those few css implementation missing, mozilla is a lot better than opera IMO...
This is not a big deal, but I just missed them.
But except those few css implementation missing, mozilla is a lot better than opera IMO...starlifter
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2001
- Messages
- 4,210
I just found this thread, as I've been testing Opera 6.03 this weekend. I just made a post @ Smash in the Poll & Info thread that AoA move here.
What table is Messed? Can you describe it, or a page where I can see it? So far, I have been unable to discoverer defective/incompatible formatting.
About the banner (well, actually, half-banner)... Opera is free, and it is independent, and as far as I've been able to discover, superior in almost every way to IE in particular.
I found Netscape to be a superior browser to MS IE, though not across the board. Some things IE does better than NS. But so far.... I have been unable to poke holes in Opera. It is certainly much much more stable, and uses resources both correctly and efficiently. This leaves more headroom for other programs. Programmers in this Forum know what proper heap handling, minimal resources usage, and stability mean to other apps that may be running... average users simply see fewer crashes, less loss of data on your hard drive, and fewer re-installs of Windows.
What table is Messed? Can you describe it, or a page where I can see it? So far, I have been unable to discoverer defective/incompatible formatting.
About the banner (well, actually, half-banner)... Opera is free, and it is independent, and as far as I've been able to discover, superior in almost every way to IE in particular.
I found Netscape to be a superior browser to MS IE, though not across the board. Some things IE does better than NS. But so far.... I have been unable to poke holes in Opera. It is certainly much much more stable, and uses resources both correctly and efficiently. This leaves more headroom for other programs. Programmers in this Forum know what proper heap handling, minimal resources usage, and stability mean to other apps that may be running... average users simply see fewer crashes, less loss of data on your hard drive, and fewer re-installs of Windows.
starlifter
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2001
- Messages
- 4,210
by Spycatcher34:
So far, I have been unable to find anything that it cannot do, relative to MS IE (well, actually, I have not yet been able to crash Opera, and I have been trying). And everything that both can do (I am testing them side by side as we speak), Opera does the same, or far better. The one thing MS IE is clearly superior at, is crashing, and hogging resources and causeing other programs to crash (making a typical user think that something else is the culprit, when in fact it is MS IE).
Further, Opera is not susciptible to the vast majority of hacker and virus problems that plague MS IE. Opers is not at all virus proof... viruses are mostly enable by MS's lausy underlying OS... but there are many "attacks", like malfourmed URLs, that crash IE, or oprn your system up for exploitation.
Naturally, one thing Opera has is the half-banner in the upper right hand corner (see my screenshots of it). This is because Opera does not have 3 things MS IE has:
1. Monopoly power.
2. A $700 billion dollar company behind it.
3. Dependence on MS.
In short, Opera is independent, and competing head to head with a predatory company that typically destroys the competition it cannot control or buy out.
Anyway, I'm just very happy that a small fish has developed a cross-platform product that is superior in every meaningful way I have been able to test so far.
You're probably thinking of the earlier years of Opera. That was my general impression of Opera in the past, and part of why I was so reluctant to even take the time to test it. I downloaded ii in June, but did not even give it a chance until this weekend. And I did not go into it with a favorable pre-disposition. But I simply cannot get around how good and feature-rich it is. It does common-sense things with ease... things that MS IE cannot do at all.
So far, I have been unable to find anything that it cannot do, relative to MS IE (well, actually, I have not yet been able to crash Opera, and I have been trying). And everything that both can do (I am testing them side by side as we speak), Opera does the same, or far better. The one thing MS IE is clearly superior at, is crashing, and hogging resources and causeing other programs to crash (making a typical user think that something else is the culprit, when in fact it is MS IE).
Further, Opera is not susciptible to the vast majority of hacker and virus problems that plague MS IE. Opers is not at all virus proof... viruses are mostly enable by MS's lausy underlying OS... but there are many "attacks", like malfourmed URLs, that crash IE, or oprn your system up for exploitation.
Naturally, one thing Opera has is the half-banner in the upper right hand corner (see my screenshots of it). This is because Opera does not have 3 things MS IE has:
1. Monopoly power.
2. A $700 billion dollar company behind it.
3. Dependence on MS.
In short, Opera is independent, and competing head to head with a predatory company that typically destroys the competition it cannot control or buy out.
Anyway, I'm just very happy that a small fish has developed a cross-platform product that is superior in every meaningful way I have been able to test so far.
Sodapop
Teh pop in teh can
Gah, I'd have to download it once again to show you with a screenshot. It messed up phpbb's table (yeah I know, for most of the people that's not much of a problem, but for me it is). Maybe I was using an older version, or maybe there was some config thing that was not right, but the text appeared over the table border. I found it was really annoying... But maybe there was a way to deal with it, but I got too annoyed before I found out. And I can't stand banners with flashing stuff etc... I just can't
Anyway, a few years ago, we made the choice to switch to internet explorer, when netscape had like 90% of the market of web browsers. Today, I probably wouldn't mind to switch back to netscape or another browser, but I think that those banners are as much capitalistic stuff as MS monopoly (I really just can't stand them
) So I might give another chance to mozilla or netscape in the near future, but never to opera, even with tables not messed up.Edit : Only to be convinced I don't have eye problems, I downloaded opera... And the tables aren't messed up. Opera simply have problems to deal with css classes, and it often gives weird results
starlifter
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2001
- Messages
- 4,210
It may be cecause of my AtGuard, but in fact, I have not been noticing ads, and definintely nothing flashing. Like you, I do not like blinking and flashing and distracting things. So much so that I will not allow it, and if I can't get rid of flashing and blinking stuff, and animated stuff, I will not use it, either. Opera does have an easy to use button to stop animated gifs, but I do not have it enabled.
This is the image that has been steady on my machine for several hours... not even new ads have appeared:
But like I said, it may be because of my ad blocking software. You do get dozens of choices, however, about exactly what kinds of ads you would like to see. I have not set any such options, though.
If anyone using Opera finds pages that do not load right, please post. I have integrated Opera into Dreamweaver now, and tested it against some tables, new and imported from other applications, after reading what Unknown Soldier posted. So far, there is very little difference among Netscape 6.23, IE 5.01, and Opera 6.03. However, MS products are known for deliberately sabotaging competitiors, after the MS people take a careful look at the "competition". But it looks like the people at Netscape and Opera these days are keeping up with MS's attempts to co-opt the HTML world. MS did fail when they tried to take over the Java world (I have a shrink wrapped copy of MS J++ on my shelf as a museum piece, LOL).
But anyway, if people find any sites that screw up different browsers, post a link. I'd like to test all 3 browsers, and examine the source HTML. I think there are not too many sites like that left, with the advent of the 6.xx browsers that catch up to MS's sad and desparate sabotage attempts.
This is the image that has been steady on my machine for several hours... not even new ads have appeared:
But like I said, it may be because of my ad blocking software. You do get dozens of choices, however, about exactly what kinds of ads you would like to see. I have not set any such options, though.
If anyone using Opera finds pages that do not load right, please post. I have integrated Opera into Dreamweaver now, and tested it against some tables, new and imported from other applications, after reading what Unknown Soldier posted. So far, there is very little difference among Netscape 6.23, IE 5.01, and Opera 6.03. However, MS products are known for deliberately sabotaging competitiors, after the MS people take a careful look at the "competition". But it looks like the people at Netscape and Opera these days are keeping up with MS's attempts to co-opt the HTML world. MS did fail when they tried to take over the Java world (I have a shrink wrapped copy of MS J++ on my shelf as a museum piece, LOL).
But anyway, if people find any sites that screw up different browsers, post a link. I'd like to test all 3 browsers, and examine the source HTML. I think there are not too many sites like that left, with the advent of the 6.xx browsers that catch up to MS's sad and desparate sabotage attempts.
Sodapop
Teh pop in teh can
Well ok then let's go with some examples...
Ugly bar in phpbb because opera doesn't handle classes
Now, the standard bar
How the bottom of cfc looks
And finally how the bottom of some other site looks like with opera (I won't name it, that would look like advertising ) Oh, and sorry for the ugly look of the copy/paste I made 
And with Int. Explorer
So I stay with IE only for the look. Oh and add to this the fancy bars on the right (I just love them )
Ugly bar in phpbb because opera doesn't handle classes
Now, the standard bar
How the bottom of cfc looks
And finally how the bottom of some other site looks like with opera (I won't name it, that would look like advertising
) Oh, and sorry for the ugly look of the copy/paste I made
And with Int. Explorer
So I stay with IE only for the look. Oh and add to this the fancy bars on the right (I just love them
)
chiefpaco
Emperor
Ironically enough, www.microsoft.com is a bit messed up in Opera. The menu is all over.
Sodapop
Teh pop in teh can
Well I can't see the irony there... The site was probably built with the new css technology (which is used almost everywhere today) A browser like IE handle css, while opera doesn't. The class look all messed up, with text bigger than it was meant to be, or the table smaller.
BTW, I hate to defend microsoft, but the fact is that IE is the browser that handle the most up to date technology. I'd love to see another powerful browser that can handly all of them, but there is no that I know of...
Becka
M AS IN MARTINI
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2001
- Messages
- 2,583
I can't comprehend using another browser. I have MSN explorer 7 and there's so much roooooooooooooom. I can see much more of the page then on the old explorer. And the colors are so nice and ambient.
And I don't have to check my email with Outlook Express.
And I don't have to check my email with Outlook Express.
starlifter
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2001
- Messages
- 4,210
OK, I do notice the position of the reply icon at the bottom of the CFC thread window.
I never noticed the arrows on the GC page, since Netscape does not display them either.
The horizontal line is darker with Opera:
As for the Microsoft site, I was trying to find the difference, when i finanlly discovered what it was... I was comparing Netscape to Opera. They are the same.
However.... the Evil Empire of MS strikes again.... it alters the page layout, depending on what browser it detects! It uses different layouts and HTML source for MS browsers than for other browsers. This is because MS does not follow industry standards... the white papers that specify what all bwosers should do. This is the heart of what makes MS a company that should be busted... they entered a market in which they had no presence, used dominace in antoher market (OSs) to freely distrubute an inferior product (IE), then tied it to their OS, liked in Federal Court to Judge Stanley Sporkin (circa 1995-96) that it could never be "saparated" from the OS, when people like me and others were routinely installing the MS OSs by just changing 2 lines in the install .INF file -- without MS IE. And then MS illegally distributed a product that could not have been developed or distributed otherwise, meanwhile improving it to the level of competitors. MS is still in court, guilty but not yet convicted of illegal dumping, market sabotage, exercise of monopoly, and of course lying to the courts.
So right now, MS (as usual) has it's own agenda with the HTML standards, and continues to do it's own thing... and do it in order to sabotage the competition. In the case of the MS site, they want the competitors to be able to properly use their site, so they send different HTML streams to non-MS browsers.
What you are referring to as "up to date technology" is in fact nothing more than continued attempts to make the average user only want to use MS products. Most people have no idea what MS is up to, and MS know it. They participate in the committees to esablish the worldwide standards, they agree to them, and meanwhile have no intention of compliance... and since they dominate every market, from OS to Office to Browser to E-mail, everyone else who complies with the white papers (that set the industry standards) looks like they don't have "compatible" products, because the server & MS Authoring software slips those nuggets of incompatablity into the HTML.
The CSS standards have been around and developed for years. I was just reading the 1999 standard last week.
It is not a matter of handling "up to date technology"... if someone poured sugar into your gas tank, and then said your car could not handle "up to date gasoline", you'd probably not be too happy with them.
MS has been poisoning the PC community for at least a decade, and arguably even before that. Even at this very moment, we in the PC world are about 8 years behind where we would be if MS had not illegally hijacked the PC world, after sabotaging IBM and DR, not to mention Apple, in the early 1990's. The entire industry has been almost stagnant since most of the real innovators were crushed by MS. The final insult is that even after illegally destroying hundreds of competitors, MS has still not given us products that are stable or inexpensive. The only vaguely good thing of late is that MS is trying -- sort of -- to head off the impedening mass defections by consumers. Coroporations (the real money) have been abandoning MS in the last year or two in greater numbers than ever (Linux has become a common refuge for savvy administrators and IT professionals), and they would not accept the Spyware-laden XP system (MS gives Corporate customer a version of XP without spyware; at this time, they intend to quitely control only private computers like yours).
So yes, MS does do things to cause compatibility issues... it is both their corporate nature, and their method of illegally leveraging their monopoly powers.
BTW, you can use Opera to change it's identification (e.g, identify it as MS or Netscape), and MS products may respond differently (e.g., a site admin can send the proprietary MS code, or the regular code that the industry has agreed to).
About the CSS.... both Netscape and Opera handle the correctly, according to the standard. Thunderfall uses them at CFC. MS does do some things on it's own, and of course it's own products are able to understand it. The rest of the world is left to either conform to the MS non-standard, or notice the differences. But one thing it's not, is a matter of ohter companies simply being unable or unwilling to write to the standards the developers & committees agree to.
@ chiefpaco: Just change the Browser ID in Opera... what you are seeing is MS sending it's own, proprietary & nonstandard stuff that only it's own browsers use properly. If you change to NS or Opera as the broswer ID, MS will send HTML that is industry-standard. (file ---> quick preferences)
I never noticed the arrows on the GC page, since Netscape does not display them either.
The horizontal line is darker with Opera:
As for the Microsoft site, I was trying to find the difference, when i finanlly discovered what it was... I was comparing Netscape to Opera. They are the same.
However.... the Evil Empire of MS strikes again.... it alters the page layout, depending on what browser it detects! It uses different layouts and HTML source for MS browsers than for other browsers. This is because MS does not follow industry standards... the white papers that specify what all bwosers should do. This is the heart of what makes MS a company that should be busted... they entered a market in which they had no presence, used dominace in antoher market (OSs) to freely distrubute an inferior product (IE), then tied it to their OS, liked in Federal Court to Judge Stanley Sporkin (circa 1995-96) that it could never be "saparated" from the OS, when people like me and others were routinely installing the MS OSs by just changing 2 lines in the install .INF file -- without MS IE. And then MS illegally distributed a product that could not have been developed or distributed otherwise, meanwhile improving it to the level of competitors. MS is still in court, guilty but not yet convicted of illegal dumping, market sabotage, exercise of monopoly, and of course lying to the courts.
So right now, MS (as usual) has it's own agenda with the HTML standards, and continues to do it's own thing... and do it in order to sabotage the competition. In the case of the MS site, they want the competitors to be able to properly use their site, so they send different HTML streams to non-MS browsers.
What you are referring to as "up to date technology" is in fact nothing more than continued attempts to make the average user only want to use MS products. Most people have no idea what MS is up to, and MS know it. They participate in the committees to esablish the worldwide standards, they agree to them, and meanwhile have no intention of compliance... and since they dominate every market, from OS to Office to Browser to E-mail, everyone else who complies with the white papers (that set the industry standards) looks like they don't have "compatible" products, because the server & MS Authoring software slips those nuggets of incompatablity into the HTML.
The CSS standards have been around and developed for years. I was just reading the 1999 standard last week.
It is not a matter of handling "up to date technology"... if someone poured sugar into your gas tank, and then said your car could not handle "up to date gasoline", you'd probably not be too happy with them.
MS has been poisoning the PC community for at least a decade, and arguably even before that. Even at this very moment, we in the PC world are about 8 years behind where we would be if MS had not illegally hijacked the PC world, after sabotaging IBM and DR, not to mention Apple, in the early 1990's. The entire industry has been almost stagnant since most of the real innovators were crushed by MS. The final insult is that even after illegally destroying hundreds of competitors, MS has still not given us products that are stable or inexpensive. The only vaguely good thing of late is that MS is trying -- sort of -- to head off the impedening mass defections by consumers. Coroporations (the real money) have been abandoning MS in the last year or two in greater numbers than ever (Linux has become a common refuge for savvy administrators and IT professionals), and they would not accept the Spyware-laden XP system (MS gives Corporate customer a version of XP without spyware; at this time, they intend to quitely control only private computers like yours).
So yes, MS does do things to cause compatibility issues... it is both their corporate nature, and their method of illegally leveraging their monopoly powers.
BTW, you can use Opera to change it's identification (e.g, identify it as MS or Netscape), and MS products may respond differently (e.g., a site admin can send the proprietary MS code, or the regular code that the industry has agreed to).
About the CSS.... both Netscape and Opera handle the correctly, according to the standard. Thunderfall uses them at CFC. MS does do some things on it's own, and of course it's own products are able to understand it. The rest of the world is left to either conform to the MS non-standard, or notice the differences. But one thing it's not, is a matter of ohter companies simply being unable or unwilling to write to the standards the developers & committees agree to.
@ chiefpaco: Just change the Browser ID in Opera... what you are seeing is MS sending it's own, proprietary & nonstandard stuff that only it's own browsers use properly. If you change to NS or Opera as the broswer ID, MS will send HTML that is industry-standard. (file ---> quick preferences)
Sodapop
Teh pop in teh can
Well at least MS is giving me a car to run their sugared gasoline 
Seriously, the technology is always evolving anyway, and since everything is now developped for IE, better use it to see most of the stuff. I'd prefer to sue some other thing, as I don't really like MS either. But for the moment, it improves my experience on internet since it makes the page looks nicer on the sites I visit the most. So until another browser can handle everything that makes page look nice, I guess I'll have to live with IE.
Seriously, the technology is always evolving anyway, and since everything is now developped for IE, better use it to see most of the stuff. I'd prefer to sue some other thing, as I don't really like MS either. But for the moment, it improves my experience on internet since it makes the page looks nicer on the sites I visit the most. So until another browser can handle everything that makes page look nice, I guess I'll have to live with IE.
Grnscrpn
Chieftain
As a Java writer making an applet work in opera is much easier, and quicker, and it doesn't crash as easy as IE. plus the Advertising at the top you can get a keygen to get rid of that takes 30 seconds to find and and enter the key code. plus the abilty to tell popups to appear in the background as opposed to on the screen is one thing that really makes me like opera. this allows my allready cluttered Start bar to remain, unclutter with extra's no matter how many windows/pages i open. then to shut it down and come back in the morning open opera and have all my sites open again ready to check, amazing.
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2001
- Messages
- 30,080
Just a question, but my understanding was that IE was "integrated" into windows OS. Basically, IE works by calling windows DLL functions, and in the reverse, windows uses the same functions for most file-access type actions (basically the explorer-type things). I guess MS argue that they are so intertwined, as windows calls the same interface as IE uses, but thats getting a bit off-topic.
I read somewhere that IE itself is only actually a few activex controls, which appears to make sense with the argument that it is not as integrated into windows as MS would like us to believe. And it sure looks like it could be made up from a few activex controls anyway....
Where am I going? If my understanding / supposition is correct, then in using another web-browser, aren't you still at the mercy of your OS (assuming that its windows) for the stability issues in particular? Unless of course your browser sends instruction directly to the CPU, rather than the OS (which I would have thought was unlikely/impossible, and even more likely to cause crashes). The features-side is another matter...
Sorry if this is a bit waffley, but I'm a bit
I read somewhere that IE itself is only actually a few activex controls, which appears to make sense with the argument that it is not as integrated into windows as MS would like us to believe. And it sure looks like it could be made up from a few activex controls anyway....
Where am I going? If my understanding / supposition is correct, then in using another web-browser, aren't you still at the mercy of your OS (assuming that its windows) for the stability issues in particular? Unless of course your browser sends instruction directly to the CPU, rather than the OS (which I would have thought was unlikely/impossible, and even more likely to cause crashes). The features-side is another matter...
Sorry if this is a bit waffley, but I'm a bit
chiefpaco
Emperor
Thx Starlifter @ all for helping so far. This site (my cable + internet provider) is quite messed up in my Opera too, menus all over:
www.rogers.com
Also, I'm trying to figure out why I can't download attachments here at CFC. Instead, I get the attachment.php file downloaded. I don't seem to have that problem in IE but don't know what I'm doing wrong here.
www.rogers.com
Also, I'm trying to figure out why I can't download attachments here at CFC. Instead, I get the attachment.php file downloaded. I don't seem to have that problem in IE but don't know what I'm doing wrong here.
starlifter
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2001
- Messages
- 4,210
You can look at Preferences -- Fonts & Colors -- page Styles... there are lots of CSS options. The ones I changed the overlays, but did not achieve the format of Explorer.
Then after looking at the source HTML, this is one of the sites created with some of MS's standards. NS handles this one it pretty well. As long as MS controls the serven/creation end of the HTML world, and page developers use their nonstandard "standards", then there will be some pages that are not displayed properly.
I'd just send an e-mail to Opera with the link, and let them know of examples like that one.
In the old days, NS used to come up with it's own tags and extensions, and MS got kicked in the teeth. But now that MS has illegally leveraged its monopoly to oust it's competitors, MS has an solid grip on the home-user market.
They work fine for me... but if you use right-click, you have to rename the xxx.php to the corrrect name and type manually. This occurs with eveyone, though.
starlifter
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2001
- Messages
- 4,210
I have been delving into their OS design since 1995. Their IE is a separate program. MS has tried to blend it in to their OS, even going so far as to do things like get rid of their old help system, and use explorer dlls.
The only option people really have, if the software makers use MS's rotton help "system" is to install MS IE. If you rn MS products, they insist you insall MS IE to run. This is an example of illegal activity of MS, and why they are in court in several states. If an Auto maker, Mortgage lender, or just about any company in a tangible industry tried this, average people would see and prosecute it more readily.
Anyway, IE is more than a few Active X controls. But MS deliberatly tries to intertwine it into their OS, and hve other non-related programs make calls to MS DLLs, which means otehr programs might work incorrectly, if MS can convince developers to go along with this illegal activity.
There is absolutely nothing, and I mean nothing at all (as a person who can and does understand and program the Windows OS), that prevents MS from simply releasing a simple program like NS or Opera does for its IE.
Imagine if, say, NS had control of consumer PCs, and made dozens of programs and applications check for the existance of NS being installed, and used parts of NS files (e.g., DLLs) to run. Everyone would think they "need" NS installed to run windows. What non-tech judge or prosecuter can feel comfortable denying it? they can't "see" it ... they can't open a hood ... they don't understand programming ... and they get a headache when they think about it because they know they are an intellectual midget about the subject. Hence, it is tied up in court.
So, MS IE is "necessary" to run some unrelated programs, like Visual Basic. It is "necessary" to run some common controls, etc. But the necessity is totally articifical. In older OS's, like Win95, I changed the install INFs myself (custom... 2 changes), and the entire OS installs and runs just fine.... even as MS tells courts that it is "impossible" to do what I (and others) routinely do. They lie. And it is to control you, the consumer. And take your money. And stop you from supporting competing ideas and products.
But, even this heavy handed stuff has not worked as much as MS wants. Therefore, they are (and have been for 4 years) planning to simply take over your persoanl machine and force you to do whatever they want, or not be able to run Windows. That is the reason they have convinced Intel to incorporate special hardware that MS can use to stop you from palyng MP3s, movies, running programs, etc. that MS does not approve of. XP had to be scaled back, and that is why it's spyware, at the moment, is not fully activated. The next MS OS will have vastly more spyware built into, and inseparable from, the OS.
So IE is more than Active X.... the details are actually available to developers, BTW. Also in good books by people like Charles Petzold.
Similar threads
