[Glenn9999]

Download it from here (the sending page).

This post has been edited by Glenn9999: 05 March 2008 - 04:48 PM

[nitroshift]

Thanks! Downloading now and reading the info.

[Tripredacus]

Well it loads pages slower than IE6. Also typing in this window is a lot slower. There is about a 1-2 second delay before the letters i am typing in appear. Also, the animations on the screen pause when I am typing.

In addition, my whole purpose for installing this was to see if IE8 finally followed the CSS standard, and it does not. My website's CSS passes the w3c's code inspector (why I use the pass badge) but the page still looks wrong in IE8. It also looks wrong in any version of Firefox and also IE7. It is interesting to note that it looks proper in IE6.

I use Firefox as my primary browser, so the fact that this runs like garbage is not a concern.

EDIT: I my pic shows how the performance of my computer was effected by typing. Make sure to look at the Quick Access pane to the left of the reply box.

This post has been edited by Tripredacus: 08 September 2008 - 08:37 AM

[Tripredacus]

Sorry some of the buttons dont' work like Fast Reply and Edit... But regular reply works.

[JurgenDoe]

No need for downloading Ie8 at all its still buggy and they haven't changed much at all....
Same old crap as it was before.....doesn't support CSS correct and doesn't support hover at all

My suggestion...better upgrade to FF and you'll be more happier

[TranceEnergy]

Beta 2 due this month.

[cluberti]

JurgenDoe, on Mar 6 2008, 09:51 PM, said:

No need for downloading Ie8 at all its still buggy and they haven't changed much at all....
Same old crap as it was before.....doesn't support CSS correct and doesn't support hover at all

My suggestion...better upgrade to FF and you'll be more happier

One, it's buggy because it's a BETA. Two, it fully supports CSS 2.1 - anything above and beyond is still not a finalized spec, so it's likely not supported properly (if at all) because the decision (well publicized) with IE was to support standards - but only final ones that aren't going to change (and will end up giving you what happened with IE6).

[CoffeeFiend]

cluberti, on Aug 15 2008, 07:39 PM, said:

Two, it fully supports CSS 2.1

I hate IE as much as the next guy, and I think IE8 is still trash overall, but it's still the first browser we've seen from Microsoft to have decent standard support in a LOT of years. Finally a browser not holding back the web! That's something we've been waiting for MANY years. The same standard page made using standard markup should work on all major browsers without any hacks, browser-specific stylesheets or anything. I'm definitely looking forward to that, even if I'm not going to use it.

In other news, 8 is less than 5. It goes: 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10... See the pic.

[clevermax]

Microsoft just makes you hate their products even if you're a windows lover. I'll tell you why.

I recently installed Google Chrome. Installation was very light, and it took less than a minute to get it installed and working. Wow...

I decided to try out IE8 as well. Downloaded and installed. It asked me to reboot after the install. Ok, I rebooted... The machine was 'Configuring Updates' for the next 5 minutes. After all that, it was saying, 'Failed to install the updates properly - reverting back'.... WTF?!! Why can't IE8 get installed in my legal Vista Home Premium?! I just hate it.

Anyone here faced this problem? I'd appreciate any information as to what went wrong.

[cluberti]

clevermax, on Sep 5 2008, 09:43 PM, said:

I recently installed Google Chrome. Installation was very light, and it took less than a minute to get it installed and working. Wow...

It can run executables from javascript with no prompts whatsoever, not to mention that it (by default) sends your omnibar information back to Google - and that was just the first day, I'm sure there will be many more "fun" things about Chrome to come up as time moves on. I'm hopeful these will be addressed quickly, but one has to wonder - how much security does Chrome actually have if such a simple exploit was included in the release?

I will agree that Chrome is quite zippy on javascript pages (due to compiled js and a very good engine), but more complex (not javascript driven) pages tend to choke it and slow it down immensely, and some pages just don't look quite right when compared to Firefox, Safari, Opera, or IE. Also, Google's applications are inherently in beta status for a long time, leaving some of us wondering how much actual refinement and further development actually goes into their applications once they do release - dev might indeed continue full-scale, but there's no way to know if it never hits "1.0" or "2.0" (in fact, how many Google apps compared to their entire stable are in beta? - I'm actually curious...)

clevermax, on Sep 5 2008, 09:43 PM, said:

Anyone here faced this problem? I'd appreciate any information as to what went wrong.

The IE installer logs everything. Look for ie8*.log files on your box - the information on why it failed should be in there.

[clevermax]

cluberti, on Sep 6 2008, 08:32 AM, said:

The IE installer logs everything. Look for ie8*.log files on your box - the information on why it failed should be in there.

Thanks. I found the log, but in that, there are only INFO entries. Not even a single warning or error. I could not figure out what went wrong.

[cluberti]

In that case, IE8 (the installer) actually finished, but CBS failed (component-based servicing). Look for a cbs.log file in the windows\logs\cbs folder.

[clevermax]

cluberti, on Sep 6 2008, 09:02 AM, said:

In that case, IE8 (the installer) actually finished, but CBS failed (component-based servicing). Look for a cbs.log file in the windows\logs\cbs folder.

Looked at it, and it has some error logs after the IE8 installation was over. But I couldn't make out what exactly the problem was.

Error: WmiCmiPlugin eventloghandler.cpp(46): InstrumentationManifestAssert failed. HR=0x80073aa2.
Error: WmiCmiPlugin eventloghandler.cpp(183): ProcessEventsInstall failed. HR=0x80073aa2.
Error: WmiCmiPlugin eventloghandler.cpp(203): EventLogHandlerInstall failed. HR=0x80073aa2.
[22]Configuration error.
Error: CMIADAPTER: AI failed. HRESULT = HRESULT_FROM_WIN32(15010)
	Element:
	[54387]"<events xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/win/2004/08/events" xmlns:win="http://manifests.microsoft.com/win/2004/08/windows/events" xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema">
  <provider guid="{b2a40f1f-a05a-4dfd-886a-4c4f18c4334c}" message="$(string.eventProviderName_Core)" messageFileName="%SystemRoot%\system32\ieframe.dll" name="Microsoft-PerfTrack-IEFRAME" resourceFileName="%SystemRoot%\system32\ieframe.dll" symbol="BERP_IEFRAME">
	<channels>
	  <channel chid="defch" name="Microsoft-PerfTrack-IEFRAME/Diagnostic" type="Analytic" />
	</channels>
	<tasks>.....

And it goes on and on.... :-(

This post has been edited by clevermax: 05 September 2008 - 10:08 PM

[cluberti]

May I ask if this was an upgrade from Vista RTM to Vista SP1, or Vista Beta/RC to Vista RTM to Vista SP1? These errors seem to happen on machines upgraded to SP1, and I've seen some complaints of people trying to install SP1 on Vista RTM getting the same errors. The servicing engine is failing, and I'm not entirely sure there's a good workaround for this.

[TranceEnergy]

cluberti, on Sep 6 2008, 06:08 PM, said:

The servicing engine is failing, and I'm not entirely sure there's a good workaround for this.

KB 938371 was updated to v2, after sp1 was released, so i always integrate it = Windows6.0-KB938371-v2-x64.msu , before i slip sp1. Resulting iso is 0.001% slimmer and well, never had a broken install of vista that way yet.

[Nerwin]

I tried it, Its not too bad from what I seen here. Of course everyone is different and has different views, But to me it seems a little better than IE7, I mean it can handle more tabs easier it seems and also remember its just a BETA, so give it some time, But I still stick with Firefox and Chrome, all the way!