Talk:History of Internet Explorer

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as Mid-importance).

Microsoft Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Microsoft, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to Microsoft on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MicrosoftWikipedia:WikiProject MicrosoftTemplate:WikiProject MicrosoftMicrosoft articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Microsoft Windows: Computing Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Microsoft Windows, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Microsoft Windows on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Microsoft WindowsWikipedia:WikiProject Microsoft WindowsTemplate:WikiProject Microsoft WindowsMicrosoft Windows articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Channels

Why didn't IE 5 and IE 6 have the channel icon anymore? The only way I can access channels is to use the favorites.

Image

The image Internet Explorer 5.png doesn't seem like it. IE 5 would display a "done, but with errors on page" message on the lower left corner. IE 5.0 won't even show the navigation in the right place, it would bring it down to the bottom.

(Note: the text abouve isn't mine) I just updated the screen shots, I guess wiki must have fixed it. I also have pictures of IE7 and IE6 in the same resolution and showing the same wiki front page, but they are in the classic windows theme and not the roial or luna as is default in XP and Media center, should I still upload them? --AJenbo (talk) 19:38, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

History of Internet Explorer?

How can the History of Internet Explorer be complete if it leaves out IE on other platforms. Have IE for Mac and Unix been of no importance in the browser war against Netscape?--Hhielscher 14:43, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Windows Internet Explorer 7 Vista.jpg

Image:Windows Internet Explorer 7 Vista.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 21:23, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Netscape Trainwreck?

There have been some accounts that IE development during the "browser wars" era forced Netscape into a software engineering trainwreck. That is, Netscape was under too much pressure from the rapid series of IE feature deployments to keep up with QA or start over from scratch. Wasn't this admitted during the MS anti-trust trial? If it can be properly referenced, it would make an interesting addition to this history article. DonPMitchell (talk) 18:25, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Internet Explorer 1.0 and 2.0 logo.png

Image:Internet Explorer 1.0 and 2.0 logo.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 13:32, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

bullshit on the stats

Totally shit, w3cschools is a crap place to get stats. Really biased to the smart people, and ff users.

- Most opinions are biased. If you've got a point, state it, support it, and sign it. Peer-reviewed research reports that make a conclusion, other than concluding that more research is needed, mayhave value when they have supporting data but are not worth much, without it. Remarks like that -- crude remarks -- contribute no value to anything. The descriptive term used in the remark is not likely to be objectively confirmedand is purely derogatory. It is unsigned, which also has no meaning but is potentially litigious.

References that support this view can be found throughout Wikipedia -- and in most scholarly works about Epidemiological Methods. (The subject is an example of scientific method, properly applied to drawing a conclusion -- aka expressing an opinion). Kernel.package (talk) 18:32, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Internet Explorer 1.0.png

The image Image:Internet Explorer 1.0.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:

Image:Internet Explorer 2.0.png

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --03:17, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on History of Internet Explorer. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:20, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]