IE6 better than everything else?

[lavacano201014]

This is going to sound really picky, but those dialog boxes look horrible.

They look better with default WinXP colors.

It's basing the non-titlebar colors on this:

[blue_h3x]

This is going to sound really picky, but those dialog boxes look horrible.

They look better with default WinXP colors.

It's basing the non-titlebar colors on this:

Which still looks horrible

[lavacano201014]

Which still looks horrible

I like my dark gray color schema.

It's better than the WinXP default. Looks like it was designed for a five year old, imo.

[blue_h3x]

Which still looks horrible

I like my dark gray color schema.

It's better than the WinXP default. Looks like it was designed for a five year old, imo.

Toy-box blue and green! Such a good combination

[Mincus]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/07/20/chrome_does_resource_blocking/

Apple added the ability to webkit and it ended up in Chrome as well, so it does properly block ads now.
Apple did something right! And it was open source code that benefited the community! The universe may well implode now.

[Passerby]

This is going to sound really picky, but those dialog boxes look horrible.

It's sort of a problem with Linux, but more so with users not used to having the choice to configure things and so not realising they can very easily change these things. Some people just don't like the way it displays dialogs when certain distros choose dodgy defaults.
Most notably this has been a failing with Ubuntu's "brown" theme that many people hate (but can be changed in a few clicks very easily) or more recently that they've moved the close/minimise/maximise buttons to the left like OS X (again, can be changed in a few clicks).
What should be pointed out is that it's completely customisable. It's just in a win98-a-like mode there with darker colours. Could make it look like Vista/Win7 or completely different if you wanted. Clearly lavacano is happy with it looking like that.

it really depends on the distro i find suse did pretty good job defaults and they did a good job making everything look fine across the board it's qt4 app a gtk+ or a wine app. but aside from ubuntu most linux users choose linux because of it being customizable and it being open-source

[Netherthoughts]

Back on topic. I completely doesn't make sense at all. The most important websites like google aren't even supporting it anymore. Really, I believe that the writer of that article is just being a troll. 

[blue_h3x]

Back on topic. I completely doesn't make sense at all. The most important websites like google aren't even supporting it anymore. Really, I believe that the writer of that article is just being a troll. 

By Really, I believe that the writer of that article is just being a troll.  you mean the OP, then no I'm not trolling.
If you mean the Register, then they're not trolling either, you do get some insanely stupid in-charge of IT. The issue might come down to default installs of XP have IE6, and unless any effort have been made, these machines will still be on IE6. So when they [IT managers] choose something which is compatible with the machines they have, IE6 wins by default.

[blue_h3x]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/07/30/uk_government_sticks_with_ie_6/

Oh dear

[chimaeraUndying]

Windows XP - the operating system that refuses to die

For good reason too. It's way less memory intensive and space using than Win7. I love 7, but there's no way it could ever run on a netbook well.

(Now, I love Win7, but XP still has it's uses. And yes, I'm pretending the abomination that is Vista never happened.)

[Mincus]

Wonder how much additional power using IE6 is using over even IE7. It is that much slower that when you're looking at numbers of computers in the 100s then the extra CPU cycles it takes to do anything start to become meaningful in terms of power use.

(insert IE rant of your choosing here, you're all big and ugly enough to know its issues by now)

[blue_h3x]

Wonder how much additional power using IE6 is using over even IE7. It is that much slower that when you're looking at numbers of computers in the 100s then the extra CPU cycles it takes to do anything start to become meaningful in terms of power use.

(insert IE rant of your choosing here, you're all big and ugly enough to know its issues by now)

You thinking about the electricity bill we have to foot?

[Mincus]

You thinking about the electricity bill we have to foot?

I think it could be a factor, although I've no hard data other than the numbers in this thread to demonstrate that. But generally longer execution time == more CPU power used, which means more power used.