IE9 - Upgrade Now or Wait?

Having tried (and hated) the RC for Internet Explorer 9, I'm wondering if the official final version is worth upgrading to.

The RC version hung up/froze repeatedly - after a few hours I gave up and reverted back to IE8 (this was about 2 months ago).

• What are your experiences using the final version of IE9 (good or bad)?
• What (if any) are the key benefits of upgrading (better security, faster, etc.)?
• Are there any benefits or drawbacks to installing the 32-bit version on a 64-bit copy of Win 7 (an article at a major online site hinted the 32-bit might be a better option)?

Thanks in advance for everyone's thoughts.

 

I haven't been able to get SP1 to work yet. I think I'll wait a while on IE9 until I see some positive results posted.

 

I just upgraded to IE9 and it went off without a hitch.

 

Internet Explorer 9 Final (http://www.majorgeeks.com/Internet_Explorer_9_d909.html) listed on MajorGeeks front page today.
Rating: 2.8 (65 votes) from MG members.

"Nuff said" ?

Bazza

 

Agreed. No "upgrade" for me.

 

Thanks DavidGP. It really is a pity that voters bring their prejudices with them, instead of voting fairly, for or against, any particular piece of software they are using. Especially some MG members. :cry

I haven't used IE for ages, except for one MG link. I use it to print out info as IE formats it better, than my usual Browser.

Bazza

 

Just posting a update.

I have got IE9 downloaded and it works without any crashes and freezes. But there is other browsers out there that are in the same league as IE9.

There is Chrome 10, Opera 11.01 but there is a 10.60 beta, Firefox 4rc1 and finally Rockmelt has come out of beta aswell.

I am using Opera 11.01 and Rockmelt with IE9. But it's down to the person's preferences.

 

Although I doubt Microsoft will ever make this an option, it would be nice if there was a way to have both versions (IE8 and IE9) on a PC at the same time for web browsing use. At least this would allow users to compare the two without drawn-out installs and uninstalls.

 

Running both 8 and 9, shouldn't be a problem. I know I can run both 8 and 6 on windows 7. Though, I'm running a virtual version of 6 through vmware thinapp.

 

Sorry to see that I can't use it on my XP machine.

 

I just installed it and am using it right now. I like what I see and I noticed smoother scrolling of pages than with IE8. I've generally avoided using IE8 because it did not scroll pages as smoothly as Firefox, Chrome, or Opera on the older system I'm using with Windows 7; in other words, IE seemed to perform poorly compared to the other browsers. So, Microsoft has, indeed, made IE faster with version 8 than older versions of IE.

Like Chrome, IE now uses the same box as a URL box and a search box.

DavidGP mentioned Favorites, i.e. bookmarks manager, in IE9. That is much different than IE8. I haven't played with enough yet to have a thoughtful opinion on it.

In connection with bookmarks, I use Delicious.com and I've found Firefox and Opera to work better with the Delicious toolbar than IE8. So far, I'm still dissatisfied with how the Delicious toolbar works in IE. I'm not sure whether the blame for this belongs with Micorosft or with Delicious.com.

 

I think this (along with the Vista/7 requirement for Windows Defender) is Microsoft's way of encouraging people still using XP to upgrade to (read: increase Microsoft's profits by purchasing) Windows 7.

Although not as advanced (and possibly not as secure) as Windows 7, XP is still a very functional OS. Many business-specific software suites (such as some for medical billing and automotive repair) still will not work on either Win 7 or Vista. I have two clients in this situation; neither software provider has any timeline for upgrading to compatibility with Win 7.

Equally sad is that, by denying the latest free offerings to XP users, Microsoft is essentially creating a new "digital divide" with low-income users and families who can't afford to drop $350+ on a new Windows 7 PC. I do some pro bono work for PC users in need. Most of the systems are older single core with 512MB-1GB of DDR 3200 at best - given the minimum $100 cost of a Win 7 license plus upgrading the memory to 2GB, it isn't worth it.