Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×

151 comments

So... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31374210)

now we kill flowers in addition to IE6?

I will never upgrade my IE6. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31375478)

Not until I am given the option in IE8 to revert the GUI to match IE6's EXACTLY.

There is NOTHING I hate more than a forced interface change.

If anyone knows how I can do this without installing a 3rd party application let me know.

Otherwise IE6 will remain on my machine forever...

Re:I will never upgrade my IE6. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31375652)

The only “forced interface change” I’d like to see for people like you is the inside of a coffin, six feet under. Get off my internets, it isn’t 2001 anymore.

People like you are happy with a steaming pile of gooey shit as long as it has the same old GUI they’re familiar with. Gooey GUI shit. Get it?

Re:I will never upgrade my IE6. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31375680)

it isn't 2001 anymore.

You're right, a black man is president now.

Re:I will never upgrade my IE6. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31375990)

I have to ask: What's so great about the IE6 interface to make you feel so strongly about it?

Re:I will never upgrade my IE6. (1)

BlackSnake112 (912158) | more than 4 years ago | (#31376026)

Probably misses the file, edit, view.. across the top. Tools-->toolbars-->menu bar puts those back.

Re:I will never upgrade my IE6. (2, Insightful)

smisle (1640863) | more than 4 years ago | (#31376708)

yes ... which puts the menus UNDERNEATH the back arrows and the address bar. wow, it looks like crap, and is annoying to use.

Then, they added the shortcut buttons (home, page, tools, RSS, etc) to the right of where the tabs go. What's the use of adding tab support if you're going to cut the tab space in half?

And, one more thing while I'm ranting - what's up with the "call home" connecting that IE 7 and 8 do when they start up? I expect to be able to use my browser as soon as it opens, not be locked out while it looks for updates or loads extensions or whatever else it might be doing.

Re:I will never upgrade my IE6. (2, Informative)

smisle (1640863) | more than 4 years ago | (#31376640)

I sort of agree, I can't stand the new interfaces for 7 or 8 ... but I also can't use IE6 since it's not secure... enter Firefox and Chrome. You can get a Firefox theme that makes it look like IE6 if that's really what floats your boat.

Re:I will never upgrade my IE6. (2, Funny)

martas (1439879) | more than 4 years ago | (#31376362)

dude, if you're so masochistic as to like using the ie6 POS interface, then the whole "kill ie6" movement is actually good for you. more websites you can't use => more pain => more sick perverted pleasure.

also, try chopping off your balls. i hear it huts real nice.

Re:I will never upgrade my IE6. (1)

mcvos (645701) | more than 4 years ago | (#31376428)

What is it about IE6's interface that you like so much? The lack of tabs? The bizarre rendering?

Incidentally, I recently needed IE6 to test a website for a customer that's somewhat stuck in the past. So I install VMWare Fusion, Win XP, and discover this particular copy of WinXP already comes with IE8. After a bit of googling I find a couple of ways to uninstall IE8, and one of those seemed to work. Unlike promised, however, it didn't free up a hidden IE6. Instead, I had no IE at all. So I got the IE6 installer from MS' download page. Apparently, despite its widely publicised death, IE6 is still being distributed by MS, but this time I was happy about it. Or would have been, if the installer worked. It didn't. It complained I had a more recent version already installed.

So, next step: take regedit en remove IE8 from the registry. Install again, but again the installer refused, because it claimed not to have an internet connection to download something it needed. Of course it had an internet connection, it just didn't have a browser. I reinstalled IE8, but that didn't seem to work. Looks like I managed to create a Windows installation that had no version of IE at all, and unwilling to accept the installation of one. I got IEtester instead, and that works fine.

Hate to speak ill of the dead, but... (5, Funny)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 4 years ago | (#31374222)

Considering the reckless life it lead, is it any surprise it finally succumbed to all those viruses?

Re:Hate to speak ill of the dead, but... (5, Funny)

teknopurge (199509) | more than 4 years ago | (#31374262)

You think IE would have used some protection.....

Re:Hate to speak ill of the dead, but... (1)

lorenlal (164133) | more than 4 years ago | (#31374590)

Sadly, you have to posses the protection and know how to use the protection for it to be effective.

It never succumbed to viruses (1)

MillionthMonkey (240664) | more than 4 years ago | (#31375090)

It's being buried alive... you haven't heard the last from IE6.

BTW the roses from Microsoft are infected with a plant virus.

Re:It never succumbed to viruses (1)

martas (1439879) | more than 4 years ago | (#31376368)

it's not being buried alive. it's been undead for a looong time now.

Re:Hate to speak ill of the dead, but... (5, Insightful)

jmactacular (1755734) | more than 4 years ago | (#31376490)

Reckless? Please. Everyone likes to hate on IE, but that's because we all have short memories. Back in the day, when IE 6 was released, it was easily the best browser around. And IE 5, and IE4. It is naive to think any software company can prevent every security hole at the time of release. There will *always* be a determined and clever attacker who finds a way after it enters the market. And being the biggest in the market obviously makes them the biggest target. IE also takes a lot of heat for "standards", but that's because sometimes they are inventing the thing that will turn into the standard, like the XMLHttpRequest object, the foundation of AJAX. Believe me, supporting IE6 in 2010 is the bane of my existence, but I don't think it's fair to assign blame years later, for something that was created so long ago. In fact, I am thankful they put so much work into backwards compatibility, otherwise I think things would be even worse. Ultimately, IE6 will be replaced by IE8 in the next 1-2 years as the corporate world rolls out Win7 deploys.

Translation (4, Insightful)

iamapizza (1312801) | more than 4 years ago | (#31374230)

And by "a little piece of IE heaven," they actually mean "any other browser".

Re:Translation (4, Interesting)

amicusNYCL (1538833) | more than 4 years ago | (#31374434)

Not true. I actually know what the announcement is going to be, and it's going to make a lot of people who visit sites like Slashdot happy (or surprised).

Here's a hint: it's about supporting a standard that no one thought Microsoft would support.

Maybe a new version as well..

Re:Translation (1)

isama (1537121) | more than 4 years ago | (#31374490)

do you mean is will finaly support xhtml? yes i know IE8 has good xhtml support but i personally just don't like it...

Re:Translation (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31374544)

IE9 is entirely rebuilt with 100% HTML5 support. SVG support.

Re:Translation (1)

denis-The-menace (471988) | more than 4 years ago | (#31374842)

Don't you mean MS' flavour of HTML5
and MS' flavour of SVG?

Re:Translation (4, Funny)

amicusNYCL (1538833) | more than 4 years ago | (#31374546)

I've already said too much. They're looking for me now, I can hear the helicopters.

Re:Translation (1)

paxcoder (1222556) | more than 4 years ago | (#31376548)

What is MIX anyway?
Also I'll be very angry at myself if I get excited that MS finally decided to support SVG or any other W3C standard. Their browser should just die.

Re:Translation (1)

mcvos (645701) | more than 4 years ago | (#31376454)

They're going to use the Webkit renderer.

Re:Translation (5, Funny)

PRMan (959735) | more than 4 years ago | (#31374592)

it's about supporting a standard that no one thought Microsoft would support.

HTML?

Re:Translation (1)

Dorkmaster Flek (1013045) | more than 4 years ago | (#31375000)

You jest, but according to rumours, that's exactly what it is [thenextweb.com] !

Re:Translation (1)

Myopic (18616) | more than 4 years ago | (#31376228)

Awesome. So Microsoft is planning to release IE9 sometime in early 1998?

Re:Translation (0, Offtopic)

idontgno (624372) | more than 4 years ago | (#31375002)

+1 Funny Because It's True

Re:Translation (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31374604)

Too late. Windows 7 ships with IE8, that piece of shit which doesn't even support CSS right.

Re:Translation (1)

guruevi (827432) | more than 4 years ago | (#31374636)

OGG Theora? SVG? PNG?

Microsoft will have to follow the standards this time because people (web developers and knowledgeable customers) won't put up anymore with custom development for specific browsers. ActiveX bit and will bite many corporate customers in the behind and with the plethora of portable devices, computers are not the only hardware that receive the web anymore.

Re:Translation (3, Insightful)

omnichad (1198475) | more than 4 years ago | (#31374686)

That's OK, corporations are starting to move on....to Silverlight ;-)

Re:Translation (2, Insightful)

plague3106 (71849) | more than 4 years ago | (#31374922)

Nothing wrong with that. SL will work on FF, IE or Safari, and on Windows or Mac.

Plus its a great way to use all those MS devs out there, who (like me) don't know Flash.

Re:Translation (2, Insightful)

omnichad (1198475) | more than 4 years ago | (#31374966)

I agree it's an improvement. But why can't corporate types just use HTML/CSS/minimal Javascript and let their software run on ALL platforms? Why does the core of any web-based corporate software have to be some plugin-dependent binary?

Re:Translation (3, Insightful)

HaZardman27 (1521119) | more than 4 years ago | (#31375198)

For one, because Silverlight makes writing web-apps much easier.

Re:Translation (3, Informative)

Tumbleweed (3706) | more than 4 years ago | (#31375498)

For one, because Silverlight makes writing web-apps much easier.

No, what you get when you use Silverlight are *Silverlight* apps. There's a difference, and not knowing that difference is why we're in the "Can't move away from IE6" problem. Learn the lesson, please.

Re:Translation (1)

Tumbleweed (3706) | more than 4 years ago | (#31375460)

Microsoft will have to follow the standards this time because people (web developers and knowledgeable customers) won't put up anymore with custom development for specific browsers.

Wishful thinking. That's exactly what was said before IE7 came out. And then again before IE8 came out. I'll believe it when I test their next browser myself and see that it works. This is the realist in me talking.

The cynic in me says that even if they DO start supporting realistic standards, they'll probably turn around and try to patent 'complying with standards' (or have someone else do it and fun their lawsuits against others so they appear innocent).

I would _love_ to see them actually put out a decent browser, though. I'm just not getting my hopes up (again).

Re:Translation (1)

sconeu (64226) | more than 4 years ago | (#31374684)

ODF?

Re:Translation (1)

HaZardman27 (1521119) | more than 4 years ago | (#31375166)

it's about supporting a standard that no one thought Microsoft would support.

W3C standards?

Something was missing.... (5, Funny)

voodoo cheesecake (1071228) | more than 4 years ago | (#31374254)

They should have send a blue screen of death dressed up as the grim reaper!

Nobody is completely evil (5, Funny)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 4 years ago | (#31374290)

The Internet Explorer team has got to be the coolest group in Redmond... unless, of course, you believe the cake is a lie [mozillazine.org] !

Re:Nobody is completely evil (1)

PPalmgren (1009823) | more than 4 years ago | (#31374860)

The firefox 2 cake was pure evil. Cake with black icing stains teeth and it is very hard to remove with anything but a long brushing. Pretty much any bakery will advise you to not use black icing for an office party for this reason.

Re:Nobody is completely evil (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31375816)

Wasn't our fault. We ordered over the phone, and that's what the bakery did.

For Firefox 3, we had an IE alum living in the area who could go talk to the bakery, so you got a better cake.

Re:Nobody is completely evil (1)

clone53421 (1310749) | more than 4 years ago | (#31375992)

You couldn’t just tell them to “put the internet icon” on it?

(Don’t ask me “what internet icon”... you know exactly what icon.)

Such a pity (5, Funny)

ilikebees (1382425) | more than 4 years ago | (#31374294)

It's so sad when a parent outlives a child.

Re:Such a pity (1)

rabidmuskrat (1070962) | more than 4 years ago | (#31374360)

It's so sad when a parent outlives a child.

Not in this case...

Re:Such a pity (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31374424)

Yes in this case. Both should have had an "accident" years ago...

Re:Such a pity (5, Informative)

BearRanger (945122) | more than 4 years ago | (#31374456)

Better than the child outliving the parent. That's how zombies are made...

Re:Such a pity (1)

Chris Mattern (191822) | more than 4 years ago | (#31375142)

Um, no. In fact, the child outliving the parent guarantees that it *won't* become a zombie, unless you've broken init.

Re:Such a pity (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31376770)

Hate to spoil your fun, but init doesn't die during startup. It spawns the initial processes and simply wait(...)s on them (and /dev/initctl) until you decide to halt the machine.

The flowers I'd send (3, Interesting)

greenguy (162630) | more than 4 years ago | (#31374318)

And you can send me dead flowers every morning
Send me dead flower by the snail mail
Say it with dead flowers at my wedding
And I won't forget to put roses on your grave
No I won't forget to put roses on your grave

Re:The flowers I'd send (1)

cayenne8 (626475) | more than 4 years ago | (#31375610)

"Ah, I'll be in my basement room with a needle and a spoon

And another girl to take my pain away

Take me down little Susie, take me down

I know you think you're the queen of the underground

And you can send me dead flowers every morning..."

IE 9 perhaps? (4, Insightful)

dmgxmichael (1219692) | more than 4 years ago | (#31374340)

Hmm.. So they might show up with a build of IE 9? Would be appropriate (turn a 6 upside down).

I feel sorry for the IE team at Microsoft - they get a lot of flak for a situation they didn't cause. They didn't choose to discontinue browser development in 2003. Where it up to them IE 6 would have been superceded in 03, 04 at the latest, instead of 07. And if IE 7 had come sooner IE 6 wouldn't have become as entrenched as it is now.

Re:IE 9 perhaps? (4, Interesting)

ircmaxell (1117387) | more than 4 years ago | (#31374516)

I feel sorry for the IE team at Microsoft

I don't. They openly ignore standards, because they don't see it as necessary. I was at an event where the IE team lead (this was a month or two before IE8's release) gave a talk and was answering questions. He said that IE8 will support "most" of CSS 3. Someone asked why not all of it, he replied to the effect that they don't think the parts they left out "mattered". When asked how it did on the ACID test, they said that it didn't matter, because that test doesn't test anything that's necessary (and it requires things that they didn't see a reason for)... Keep in mind, this was a developer, not a manager. So unless management has it so ingrained in their heads that "This IS the only way", these decisions are being made at the development team level... And you wonder why IE sucks so hard in comparison (and is a thorn in the side of every web developer). It's not that they don't follow standards. It's that they purposely don't follow them... They know better, but make the rational choice to be different. I have no pity for someone who thinks like that...

Re:IE 9 perhaps? (1)

e2d2 (115622) | more than 4 years ago | (#31375534)

yeah but in fairness most developers don't get to choose feature sets. Those are chosen by "business people" that know it all.

Re:IE 9 perhaps? (5, Insightful)

jpmorgan (517966) | more than 4 years ago | (#31375952)

But perhaps he's right? Everybody likes to jump on ACID as some ultimate measure of a webbrowser's worth. Neither ACID2 nor ACID3 were based on the most important or commonly used features of HTML, JavaScript and CSS, but a sampling of obscure little bits that most webbrowsers were doing wrong at the time.

As useful as ACID are, it's important to realize that they are NOT proper compliance tests. It could be argued that one of the real failings of the W3C standardization process is that they never produce a compliance test suite. So you can't accurately state that a browser (like IE) poorly supports relevant standards, without relying heavily on anecdote.

Re:IE 9 perhaps? (1)

clone53421 (1310749) | more than 4 years ago | (#31376028)

Hell, if they even made a halfhearted effort to comply with standards it would be an improvement.

I’m not asking for 100/100 on Acid3 (Firefox is only at what, 94/100)... Internet Explorer is only just finally passing Acid2.

Re:IE 9 perhaps? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31376482)

or maybe because getting close to a decade later the 1 thing that's an official recommendation isn't technically part of css3:
http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/current-work#CSS3

They did choose to build the piece of shit (1, Troll)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | more than 4 years ago | (#31374538)

IE6 is a piece of shit and the devs who build would either have to be criminally incompetent or they did it on purpose.

And IE7 is little better. It is just XP compare to Vista. When you are the bottom, every direction is up.

Re:They did choose to build the piece of shit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31374594)

IE6 is a piece of shit and the devs who build would either have to be criminally incompetent or they did it on purpose.

And IE7 is little better. It is just XP compare to Vista. When you are the bottom, every direction is up.

well, someone at MS built IE6 of course, but then they closed the IE-team down. The current IE-team started with IE8, as a quick placeholder, before IE9..

Re:They did choose to build the piece of shit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31375604)

When you say devs, do you include the project managers, or do you just mean the software writers?

The Mac/PC IE5 mess was a debacle of internal politics, little known on the outside, although sometimes accurately alluded to and guessed online. IE6 was simply a continuation of that disaster.

Absolutely go ahead and blame Microsoft for IE6, but it's not right to blame the people who wrote the code. They already suffered enough by having to live through that hell.

Re:IE 9 perhaps? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31374596)

I feel sorry for the IE team at Microsoft - they get a lot of flak for a situation they didn't cause.

They didn't cause the lock-in with proprietary IE only mechanisms? I'm sorry but they DID cause much of the greif associated with IE 6 by making it so difficult and costly to migrate from it.

The bad design is bad.

Re:IE 9 perhaps? (1)

lorenlal (164133) | more than 4 years ago | (#31374696)

Actually, they did cause a lot of that situation. IE 6 was implemented to use completely proprietary standards, and it was a focal point for MS vendor lock-in. It was designed to pretty much launch anything that said "you should launch me." Years were spent patching its numerous security holes, and that comes back to the team that developed and supported it.

Yes, they might not be at fault for the discontinuance of development. Yes, newer editions may have lessened the impact. But the browser was designed, built, and forced down on many of us for years, and they made it that way.

Re:IE 9 perhaps? (3, Insightful)

Thaelon (250687) | more than 4 years ago | (#31374780)

They didn't choose to discontinue browser development in 2003.

No, they did it in 1998, yet shat out IE 6 after.

It's not like IE 6 was some first, beta version that they sent out that got adopted before it was ready. It was the sixth major release! They stopped caring because they had market share based on monopoly, not a superior browser. It wasn't until Firefox gave them serious competition that they started trying to fix it.

Re:IE 9 perhaps? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31375132)

They didn't choose to discontinue browser development in 2003.

That shouldn't have mattered. It should have been easy to migrate from. The fact that the discontinuance was significant simply points out how flawed the design was. "IE only" is bad design. Bad design for those that used it and bad design by MS for making it all possible.

"Thanks for the good times IE6" (0, Redundant)

Arancaytar (966377) | more than 4 years ago | (#31374344)

Oh yeah... good times, good times.

It's funny they didn't bother showing up. (1)

voodoo cheesecake (1071228) | more than 4 years ago | (#31374364)

They could have at least sent someone to offer condolences, but after allocating $9 Billion to the clouds we see their priorities are elsewhere.

Were the flowers sterilized? (3, Funny)

stefanlasiewski (63134) | more than 4 years ago | (#31374442)

And shortly afterward, plants surrounding the funeral began to wither and die from a exotic new fungus.

Re:Were the flowers sterilized? (5, Funny)

DCstewieG (824956) | more than 4 years ago | (#31374740)

Sadly, Microsoft has a working fungicide but they refuse to ship it until next Tuesday.

Re:Were the flowers sterilized? (2, Funny)

TheSpoom (715771) | more than 4 years ago | (#31374910)

The fungus immediately bloomed into advertisements, and funeral organizers had difficulty pruning quickly enough to keep up with what they are now calling "deadware".

Human moment (5, Insightful)

trurl7 (663880) | more than 4 years ago | (#31374502)

I think that's a fantastic gesture on their part. Yes, it's all in good fun, but look - one of Redmond's lawyer types could've gotten a hold of this, and gotten some judge to issue an injunction based on a combination of ip violation/unfair competition/market image tarnishing/some other frankly-my-dear-I-just-don't-give-a-damn excuse. Yeah, it'd never hold up, but nothing stopping them from just being dicks.

Instead, they took it in good fun, and did the human thing - exhibited humor. Yes, they're still evil, blah blah. But this has that WWI 1914 Christmas Eve soccer-game feel. So let's acknowledge it with good cheer.

Re:Human moment (2, Insightful)

lucian1900 (1698922) | more than 4 years ago | (#31374784)

Not suing is not a "fantastic gesture on their part".

Re:Human moment (1)

idontgno (624372) | more than 4 years ago | (#31375050)

Agreed. "Not Suing" is a fantastic gesture the precise way "not rolling up with AKs and blowing everyone away" is a touch of kindness.

No one deserves credit for not doing the wrong thing.

Re:Human moment (4, Insightful)

clone53421 (1310749) | more than 4 years ago | (#31375076)

Perhaps not, but joining in on the festivities was certainly more than anyone expected.

Re:Human moment (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31374902)

Apple would have gone the "sue them" route for sure.

Actually, I am posting this Anon because Apple might sue me for using the word "Apple"

Re:Human moment (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31375982)

Redmond wouldn't sue... this isn't Apple we're talking about... *ducks*

Re:Human moment (2, Informative)

jpmorgan (517966) | more than 4 years ago | (#31375988)

You sound surprised... the IE team at Microsoft does stuff like this all the time. I was under the impression that they habitually send the Firefox development team congratulatory cakes upon major releases: http://www.intothefuzz.com/2008/06/17/let-them-eat-cake/ [intothefuzz.com]

Re:Human moment (1)

IronHalik (1568993) | more than 4 years ago | (#31376626)

I think that's a fantastic gesture on their part. Yes, it's all in good fun, but look - one of Redmond's lawyer types could've gotten a hold of this, and gotten some judge to issue an injunction based on a combination of ip violation/unfair competition/market image tarnishing/some other frankly-my-dear-I-just-don't-give-a-damn excuse. Yeah, it'd never hold up, but nothing stopping them from just being dicks.

Instead, they took it in good fun, and did the human thing - exhibited humor. Yes, they're still evil, blah blah. But this has that WWI 1914 Christmas Eve soccer-game feel. So let's acknowledge it with good cheer.

You pretty much defined Stockholm syndrome.

Scapegoating 101 (3, Interesting)

fserb (264517) | more than 4 years ago | (#31374522)

I don't think this is self-jest. Microsoft and IE team love this... the current message is "yes IE6 is broken, you should upgrade to IE8/9 because it's much better". Except that it isn't. So the funeral flowers serve them well, because they can pretend the real problem is with IE6, where in fact the problem is with them.

Microsoft has been using this "network admins don't upgrade from IE6, it's not our fault" type of argument for too long as an excuse for the mess they keep putting web standards into.
If everybody suddenly upgraded to the latest and greatest IE8/9 we would still be in the same place regarding IE not following web standards. We would be free of "IE6 doesn't have a clue about the box model". But we would be at "IE8 doesn't support canvas (or proper event bubble)". Just so 9 years from now they will be sending flowers to the IE8 funeral and saying sorry for not supporting canvas...
A proper solution for Microsoft now would be to completely ditch IE backend, use one of the current available libraries like Webkit, and put in place an IE frontend that can have IE6/7/8 tabs and a proper standard backend (defaulting to the proper backend). Any other move on this area coming from Microsoft seems to be either evilness or PR (which I think it's the case).

Re:Scapegoating 101 (2, Interesting)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 4 years ago | (#31375168)

How much can you bitch about Microsoft forcing you to upgrade, or about the features in the upgrade, when Microsoft is giving it to you for free? If you want a browser with a different feature set, then use IE just long enough to download one of the many alternatives out there! Personally, I use Firefox, but keep IE around to handle the broken webpages that only work in IE. The only reason people are clinging to IE6 is they are still accessing pages written to expect IE6's broken behavior, and they either know or suspect that those pages will not work properly with ANY other browser.

Re:Scapegoating 101 (1)

OrwellianLurker (1739950) | more than 4 years ago | (#31376460)

How much can you bitch about Microsoft forcing you to upgrade, or about the features in the upgrade, when Microsoft is giving it to you for free? If you want a browser with a different feature set, then use IE just long enough to download one of the many alternatives out there! Personally, I use Firefox, but keep IE around to handle the broken webpages that only work in IE. The only reason people are clinging to IE6 is they are still accessing pages written to expect IE6's broken behavior, and they either know or suspect that those pages will not work properly with ANY other browser.

Because Microsoft does everything in its power to force people to use IE. This is especially true in the workplace. After my mom had gotten trojan after trojan, I tried to switch her to Ubuntu (easy distro imho). Sadly, her work required her to use a website that only works through Internet Explorer 6. She works from home, so she doesn't get technical support (except from me) and I don't want her to risk her job calling them incessantly. All she needs is a fucking web browser-- but thanks to Microsoft's shitty, broken IE anything developed for it only works for shitty, broken IE. This is intentional. It's called their business plan.

Re:Scapegoating 101 (2, Insightful)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 4 years ago | (#31376878)

Sadly, her work required her to use a website that only works through Internet Explorer 6. Unless she works for Microsoft, that sounds like more her work's fault than Microsoft's fault. Is it Microsoft's fault that businesses a) Were stupid enough several years ago to implement systems that relied on the crufty behavior of a specific browser, rather than open standards, and b) now are too cheap and/or risk averse to redesign their systems, and therefore continue to use tools that by their very design can't possibly work in a secure browser environment? Remember, this crap was built with .ASP code that just naturally assumed it could do whatever the hell it wanted to your computer. Fixing the browser security model means breaking these crufty app's fundamental design.

IE Heaven? (2, Insightful)

CopaceticOpus (965603) | more than 4 years ago | (#31374570)

I seriously doubt the existence of IE Heaven. But I hope it's there, because that would mean that IE6 is now rotting in IE Hell.

(plus one InFormative) (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31374616)

fatal mmistake5,

Flowers? Please ... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31374628)

It should have been euthanasia. When a dog bites you put it to sleep. Sending flowers is no condolence for their rottweiler taking a big chunk out of everyone's ass.

Word of the day. (1)

fahrbot-bot (874524) | more than 4 years ago | (#31374722)

  • Oxymoron: Noun, a figure of speech by which a locution produces an incongruous, seemingly self-contradictory effect, as in "cruel kindness", "to make haste slowly", or " IE Heaven ".
  • Serendipity: Noun, making desirable discoveries by accident, as in finding the first two examples above illustrate the third.

Re:Word of the day. (1)

clintp (5169) | more than 4 years ago | (#31374808)

obJoke, and clarification:

Luck is finding a needle in a haystack.
Serendipity is finding the farmer's daughter.

"Thanks for the good times IE6" (1)

Chris Mattern (191822) | more than 4 years ago | (#31375010)

"I think there were three."

Cause of Death (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31375068)

Killed by unknown infectious viruses and chronic immune system deficiency.

Send all IE users a fish ion a news paper (1)

plopez (54068) | more than 4 years ago | (#31375128)

"IE 6 sleeps with the fishes"

You know you've been a bad boy... (1)

Drethon (1445051) | more than 4 years ago | (#31375158)

When your parent (godparent?) is trying to help hammer the stake deeper into your heart.

On a note for a similar funeral: http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20070211 [userfriendly.org]

(Unfortunately posted by a zombie, would someone please talk to my IT people?)

If you want the results... (1)

PHPNerd (1039992) | more than 4 years ago | (#31375174)

The site has split up the article into a million pages. If you don't care to click a jillion times, here's the link for the results [tomshardware.com] .

Waaah (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31375214)

Yeah, and you know who wasn't at the funeral? The web developers, all too busy to come OR to order flowers because they're fixing IE6 bugs in their web sites.

I know... (1)

mr_lizard13 (882373) | more than 4 years ago | (#31375402)

I know IE6 is dead, but I can't help but think it will pop up again.

BOO! (1)

Ogive17 (691899) | more than 4 years ago | (#31375520)

Here I am! Posting from IE 6.0. I'm not quite dead. (still have IE6 at work)

I was giving it some thought as to why we haven't upgraded at work... what do the bosses not want employees to do? One answer is surf the internet all day. How do you prevent that but maintain internet connection so the intranet still is accessible as well as any other networked programs.. use IE6! Web pages have slowly stopped working correctly the past year or two.

Re:BOO! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31375672)

Meanwhile, everyone who cared and is able has installed Firefix despite the corporate policies that prohibited their doing so.

Just wait. (1)

flimflammer (956759) | more than 4 years ago | (#31375608)

Just wait till IE6 rolls around in its grave and becomes IE9.

Assuming IE9 gets some of it right... (1)

zero0ne (1309517) | more than 4 years ago | (#31375764)

it means one less attack vector for the baddies.

Every Windows user should be happy about that.

It just became a ZombIE (1)

Requiem18th (742389) | more than 4 years ago | (#31376098)

Now that it is officially deceased all the thousands of instances still around are to be considered undead.

IE heaven! (1)

Juln (41313) | more than 4 years ago | (#31376282)

IE heaven would be: they cancel the Trident rendering engine and announce they're using WebKit.

Come on MS, you can do it!

That's kinda cute (1)

Cyberllama (113628) | more than 4 years ago | (#31376288)

It's funny, I never thought I'd live to see the day when Microsoft became the plucky underdog and Apple became the evil empire but that seems to be exactly what's taken place . . . Sure, it's not true of the Desktop OS market, but by pretty much any other metric . . .

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...