Beta
×

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!

Microsoft to Issue Out-of-Cycle Patch for IE

CmdrTaco posted more than 10 years ago | from the download-reboot-repeat dept.

Bug 391

rsw writes "Microsoft will be breaking their normal patch cycle and issuing a patch for the Download.Ject attack (a.k.a. Scob). They claim that the forthcoming patch will be a "long-term solution to the core vulnerability" exploited by Scob." Note that this does not mean that they are replacing IE with FireFox.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Final solution is. . . (-1, Redundant)

UFNinja (726662) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835033)

So they're switching to Linux eh?

The mounting pressure (4, Interesting)

Mz6 (741941) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835034)

Seems as though all of the exploits coming out against IE has finally got to them. I've counted about 5+ just from the Full Disclosure and BugTraq mailing lists in the past few weeks. All of them different in nature of thier attacks.

Re:The mounting pressure (5, Insightful)

EnnTeeDee (799496) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835185)

"Our [Microsoft IE] users should have confidence that as long as they're running the latest browser with all the latest security fixes, they will have the most powerful and secure browsing experience," Hachamovitch said.

Umm, yeah, we should (in a perfect world) be able to have confidence that the biggest software company on the planet puts out the best product. But Microsoft is too big and juicy a target to inspire confidence.

We also should be able to trust our elected leaders to be able to spend our tax funds wisely, but I'm not holding my breath on that either.

Wow (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Crowhead (577505) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835035)

The released a patch when it's needed, not when it's scheduled. How novel.

Re:Wow (5, Informative)

chrisgeleven (514645) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835118)

Except this patch was needed a few weeks ago (and the exploit if I remember right has been known for months).

Re:Wow (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9835127)

I would not call the release of the patch at this time to be "when it's needed" since it was needed months ago.

Re:Wow (1)

imbaczek (690596) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835222)

I'd say it's neither.

First? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9835039)

Am I the first post?

Firefox (4, Interesting)

FortKnox (169099) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835050)

Note that this does not mean that they are replacing IE with FireFox.

Good, cause firefox has render problems on slashdot all the time (where as IE doesn't). I don't think its firefox, either, cause it doesn't happen on any other site I go to.

Re:Firefox (2, Informative)

Mz6 (741941) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835075)

Well... I think someone submitted that as a Slashdot bug and they wrote it off as a Mozilla one instead.

Re:Firefox (4, Informative)

AliasTheRoot (171859) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835122)

/. doesn't exactly produce the most compliant html...

however I've never had any problems with the site using firefox.

Re:Firefox (1)

yohan1701 (779792) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835226)

the problem i have is that the side bar overlaps the main content all the time. so the background for sections will behind some of the text for the main content. its really annoying.

Re:Firefox (1)

AliasTheRoot (171859) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835255)

wierd, doesn't do that for me - not on windows or linux. sounds like a font size thing.

Re:Firefox (2, Informative)

StRex (32430) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835347)

The funny thing is that, as mentioned elsewhere [slashdot.org] in this discussion, changing the font size using Ctrl+Mousewheel, and then changing back to the original size fixes the problem--until you refresh. It is particularly strange that the only site where I have Firefox rendering issues is /. though....

Re:Firefox (1)

hawkbug (94280) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835380)

I have the exact same problem, using either Mozilla or Firefox. The stupid side bar overlaps, but hitting refresh quickly fixes it.

Re:Firefox (2, Interesting)

Billobob (532161) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835110)

It could have something to do with the fact that Slashdot doesn't exactly use standards-friendly HTML...

Re:Firefox (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9835213)

In Firefox I get text overlapping text from other table cells occasionally. Slashdot may have crappy HTML, but a browser should NEVER overlap table cells no matter how bad the code is.

Re:Firefox (3, Insightful)

datadriven (699893) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835121)

I only use firefox. What render problems? I haven't been able to get IE to run on slackware anyway.

Re:Firefox (0, Redundant)

Mick Ohrberg (744441) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835131)

...firefox has render problems on slashdot...

How much of that is due to Firefox actually rendering wrong, versus how the HTML that Slashcode generates TELLS it to render? I.e, is it Firefox or the HTML on this site that's to blame?

Re:Firefox (1)

stinkyfingers (588428) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835133)

Additonally, pasting into message submission boxes doesn't work ... otherwise, I would have done son here.

Re:Firefox (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9835135)

firefox has render problems on slashdot

No, that horrible yellow colour appears on all browsers (except lynx, of course)

Re:Firefox (3, Funny)

Malc (1751) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835173)

Come on now! You don't think the /. authors live up to expectations and actually develop under Linux using one of the many standard's compliant browsers do you? It's obvious that they code for and test with IE! ... how else could you explain it?

Re:Firefox (5, Interesting)

hattig (47930) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835263)

What is sad is the multitudes of fixed HTML examples that Slashdot readers keep coming up with, but still haven't been used even though I remember some of them being done a year ago!

Re:Firefox (1)

angrist (787928) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835182)

I havn't had a problem with /. and firefox.

Both at home (0.8 on OSX 10.3.5)
and at work (0.9 on Windows 2k sp4)
slashdot renders fine.

Re:Firefox (1)

irokitt (663593) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835437)

The two combinations you mention do work perfectly. Firefox 0.9x has solve rendering issues for me, and I never had any rendering problems under Linux (Slackware 9.x, and every Firefox release since 0.7). Every Firefox version before 0.9 gave me serious issues when rendering Slashdot, but it was annoying, and I just learned to deal with it. In fact, whenever I used IE to look at Slashdot, I thought it looked funny.

Re:Firefox (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9835198)

I browse /. with Mozilla without any problems at all.

Re:Firefox (5, Interesting)

hattig (47930) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835233)

I think it is a problem with Firefox. I've noticed that it happens a lot on table layout pages, especially large ones. Livejournal can have the same problem.

Basically it guesses widths of table cells/columns at some stage, then sticks with them as more of the page loads, and doesn't compensate for the new contents, which may include more tables, which will then overflow other elements on the page. Well, it is something like that. I think it could be solved by merely re-formatting the page after it has fully loaded ... although the simple Resize Font trick fixes everything anyway (ctrl+mousewheel)

Re:Firefox (2, Informative)

dsanfte (443781) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835304)

Occaisionally the slashdot homepage will not fully render in Firefox. It will appear blank except for images until a reload or two is done. The comments pages also tend to be text-biased too far left on occaision, rendering the comments' text a bit into the Sections and help left-sidebar. This is also fixed after three or four reloads.

Re:Firefox (1)

The-Bus (138060) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835283)

Comparing Firefox 0.91 vs. Internet Explorer 6.0, rendering this page. Settings are nested.

Right off the bat, IE is placing the Dell ad located under the story over some of the topic icons. This is only because I've got the browser resized to 1/3rd of the screen for side by side viewing. Firefox is displaying everything fine... I'm running all this in Windows XP.

I do see problems with rendering for Firefox, mainly with the Universal Table Editor by Tom Wellige. Some Flash pages don't work as advertised, Quicktime doesn't auto-play, but that's about it.

Re:Firefox (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9835367)

So that's the problem - Firefox rendering Slashdot. I just thought they were using a new sickening glowing olive color for the IT section.

Re:Firefox (1)

0racle (667029) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835375)

Personally I've had more problems with IE rendering Slashdot then any other browser. Seems to me Slashdot and this colour scheme is seriously messed.

not just firefox and mozilla (1)

poptones (653660) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835402)

As I sat at the library doing my browsing on my laptop (500mhz 600x with mdk10), I discovered yesterday that this ALSO happens in konq (not normally a kde user but I've been playing lately). I didn't see it on the main page but the "reply submitted" page is completely fucked up and the mozilla back/forward trick don't fix it.

How ironic is it the website most commonly linked to "the linux community" REFUSES to create a site that consistently renders properly in anything except MSIE?

Damn (3, Insightful)

Billobob (532161) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835053)

Note that this does not mean that they are replacing IE with FireFox.

Awww damn, and here I thought that Microsoft would include one of its strongest competing products instead of it's own that millions of dollars were funneled in to. Maybe I'm just too naive...

Does anyone use IE anymore? (4, Interesting)

AngryScot (795131) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835063)

and if they do why?

I mannaged to get my work to use fireFox after showing them a /. thread about it

Re:Does anyone use IE anymore? (2, Insightful)

neilcSD (743335) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835096)

Of course they do. IE is by far the most used browser in the world. It is, after all, included with the most used OS's in the world. Those who know their stuff don't use a lot of Microsoft products, but a lot of people aren't in the know.

/. threads work like that?! (2, Funny)

UFNinja (726662) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835108)

Maybe I can convince my boss to let me play Doom 3 on my workstation. I'll just show him a /. thread on it. ;-)

Re:Does anyone use IE anymore? (2, Insightful)

dotslasher_sri (762515) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835174)

Many users are not aware that there are good alternatives to IE. What firefox needs is publicity. Sure we all know about firefox but many home users havent heard about it yet.

Re:Does anyone use IE anymore? (1)

LilJC (680315) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835359)

Many users are not aware that there are good alternatives to IE. What firefox needs is publicity. Sure we all know about firefox but many home users havent heard about it yet.

For the time being, that's just as well. My corp runs Mozilla exclusively. They're so hooked they won't touch IE with a ten foot pole. That being said...

What Firefox needs is a web that is mostly compliant with W3 standards, not MS standards. Until IE loses about 10% more user-base to Mozilla, Firefox, etc web developers will continue to make sites that not only favor IE, but if push comes to shove will only work with IE.

In the meantime, Firefox will wait in the wings for the common man when the web is ready for it.

Re:Does anyone use IE anymore? (4, Informative)

ErichTheRed (39327) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835188)

The problem I found is that a lot of web apps are coded for IE's "extensions" that don't translate over to Firefox. We have a few internal apps at work like that, but there are public examples too. E.g, my power company paid some contractor to put together an online bill pay system for them, and obviously they're not interested in fixing it. Open the page in IE, and it works fine. Open it in Firefox, and you get a blank screen.

Re:Does anyone use IE anymore? (2, Insightful)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835473)

"The problem I found is that a lot of web apps are coded for IE's "extensions" that don't translate over to Firefox... my power company paid some contractor to put together an online bill pay system for them, and obviously they're not interested in fixing it."

Complain! Even with major companies it can be that easy. Verizon Wireless's pages were IE-only for a while - I (along with many others, I'm sure) complained about it and threatened to take my business elsewhere; and they fixed it.

Re:Does anyone use IE anymore? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9835212)

i open IE about once a day to look at pages that don't load in firefox

Re:Does anyone use IE anymore? (1)

smooth wombat (796938) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835232)

We still do and I work for one of the larger departments in our Commonwealth (PA). We have to because we are using SAP (arrrrrrrrrggghhhhhhh!!!!!!)

That doesn't stop me from using Firebird though. My supervisors supervisor and I have talked about it and even though it is not a 'standard' apllication he has no problems with it.

Then again, I work in the IT department and the whole attitude here is pretty easy going. There has been talk of trying to use Linux in some of our servers as well as using other open source apps (Firebird/Mozilla for instance) but nothing has come down yet.

Re:Does anyone use IE anymore? (1)

rscrawford (311046) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835370)

I work for a distance education organization, and most of our students still use IE. However, in our office we use Firefox, Netscape, IE, and Safari (on our Macintosh test station). We've also officially announced on our marketing website that we support Firefox 0.9.2, and have listed Firefox at the top of the list of supported browsers (Netscape is second, IE is third). To our users that inquire, we actively recommend against IE for security reasons, but we still test in it.

However, there are still people in my office (marketing) who use IE because they just can't grok that there are alternatives. For such people, IE is the Internet.

Re:Does anyone use IE anymore? (2, Interesting)

syates21 (78378) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835400)

Please feel free to demonstrate how FireFox can seamlessly (and securely) used a user's workstation credentials to authenticate to a web server without requiring a username/password as IE does with Windows Integrated Authentication.

That is one of the larger issues that cannot be solved by just tweaking some HTML to make it more compliant. It's also a big deal from a user experience standpoint in the corporate intranet world.

Re:Does anyone use IE anymore? (2, Interesting)

Unnngh! (731758) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835461)

If you look at most large websites that get lots of hits from the random public (i.e. yahoo, etc.), I think you will find that their browser stats show 90-99% of people using IE. Several years ago the place I worked at was at the 99% mark with IE so we simply stopped worrying about Netscape compliance, etc.

Those numbers may have changed some since '99 but even back then Netscape was supposed to be "big". It just wasn't big enough for us to care.

Not firefox (1, Funny)

ChrisMG999 (308536) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835069)

They're replacing it with Safari

I've migrated ove... (4, Interesting)

Ratchet (79516) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835088)

...the most finiky of users, my Mom, to Firefox without her even knowing it. Now if Dad would stop playing Solitaire long enough for me to get at his computer then I'd de-IE him as well.

Re:I've migrated ove... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9835250)

I did the same after wiping my mom's computer clean to get rid of the mass of viruses and malware she'd accumulated. People are inclined to think that FOSS like Firefox is only for power users, but in this case it actually does more for the less enlightened users who don't understand what buttons not to push.

"I don't understand how to use it," she told me.
"Click the fox instead of the e," I replied, and that was all the explanation necessary.

Slashdot (4, Funny)

john_smith_45678 (607592) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835092)

...where I come for all my MS IE patch news.

Re:Slashdot (4, Insightful)

LilJC (680315) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835287)

Parent has been modded funny, but I think a lot of us do.

I've walked into work before with the owners complaining of not being able to get to half the web sites they like to peruse and hit slashdot to see what's up. Half the time I'm back in 20 seconds with an satisfactory explanation about a recent or in-progress attack.

Of course, I have to (for the umpteenth time) explain to my boss/CEO that I can't fix other peoples' servers, only ours. Wish I could at least get that guy to remember how a sort works in Excel.

Firefox is not necessary (1, Funny)

darth_MALL (657218) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835093)

From the article: "Our users should have confidence that as long as they're running the latest browser with all the latest security fixes, they will have the most powerful and secure browsing experience," So there you go. Nothing to see here. Move Along.

Firefox is not the answer. (3, Insightful)

garcia (6573) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835112)

I am throwing Karma out the window on this one as my comments on this subject fall on deaf ears here but... Firefox is not an acceptable replacement for IE for 90% of the users out there so I really think we could have done without the snide comment.

Yesterday I mentioned that nearly everyone who visits my site with Firefox are coming in from Slashdot URLs. It may come as a surprise to you but more than 90% of the Internet users out there aren't aware or concerned with IE vulnerabilities. It may also come as a surprise to you but Firefox isn't exactly the best browser out there if you want 100% compatibility with the "broken" sites on the Internet. These same users that don't know of the issues w/IE are more concerned that they cannot reach their online banking, see their sites the way that the "broken" authors intended, and have a seamless browsing experience.

Firefox is not the answer to MS' issues. Better preparation for security is.

Re:Firefox is not the answer. (5, Informative)

kid_wonder (21480) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835183)

I disagree. I use firefox for just about everything; online banking, online account management, etc. Every once in a while I need to open up IE to view a flash animation or some other stupid site that uses ActiveX - but at that point I know what they are trying to do and can establish the risks of going to it in IE.

btw, regarding all these /. problems, for some reason I get this render problem intermittently, but a simple reload typically handles the problem.

Re:Firefox is not the answer. (1, Redundant)

p4ul13 (560810) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835260)

Ocassionally the text overlaps with the menu on the left side of /.

A page refresh usually clears this up for me.

Re:Firefox is not the answer. (1)

stratjakt (596332) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835411)

Or a submitted post will come back to a blank screen, rather than the "Submitted" page.

I've seen lots of weird quirks viewing /. on Firefox (same quirks with big brother Mozilla too). Oh, the irony of it, that /. seems to have been coded specifically for IE.

Re:Firefox is not the answer. (5, Informative)

PeteQC (680043) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835210)

There is a lot of "broken" sites that won't be right in IE when Microsoft will release it's SP2 for XP with a lot of added security to IE.

Pop-up won't show, and all the non-correctly defined elements won't show right neither. So, maybe finally the webmasters will correct their sites.

Re:Firefox is not the answer. (1)

Malc (1751) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835219)

To most people it's not the sites or authors who are broken, but Firefox!

Re:Firefox is not the answer. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9835239)

I'm not sure why you think Firefox is not an acceptable replacement for 90% of IE users. I constantly convert friends and business customers over to Firefox all the time, and I have yet to hear a complaint. The only feedback I've received so far has been very positive. I think most people though, don't even realize a change has occured (I change the firefox icon to that ugly IE blue E) You need to install Flash, director, adobe, etc, to make sure they can do the stuff they're used to, but Firefox seems to do every thing they need. The only time I don't switch people over is when they use some crummy Intranet application that uses ActiveX or something.

Re:Firefox is not the answer. (2, Interesting)

mbourgon (186257) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835259)

"more than 90% of the Internet users out there aren't aware or concerned with IE vulnerabilities."

That's odd. At least every week I have someone mention some new spyware or popup they run into, and how do I deal with it. Many of them are now quite happily running Mozilla or Firefox.

And the problem with viewing people's sites isn't my problem, it's the site's. If it doesn't work, I go elsewhere. And my bank's site works just fine with Moz.

Re:Firefox is not the answer. (1)

garcia (6573) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835372)

That's odd. At least every week I have someone mention some new spyware or popup they run into, and how do I deal with it. Many of them are now quite happily running Mozilla or Firefox.

That's odd. Most of the people I know have little to no idea what Spyware is, how to combat it other than to run Adaware, and that it comes from the issues built into IE. You are either talking to a better informed group (which I assume you are), the people that I know are just that clueless about computers and the world around them, or you are exaggerating to make your point.

Re:Firefox is not the answer. (1)

Misch (158807) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835379)

Yeah, and I just noticed this on a site I need to use for work...

Attention Netscape Users! The FSAFEDS web site now supports Netscape browser versions 6.1, or higher due to accessibility requirements.

Good 'ol 508. Funny thing is that their site worked on Firefox anyways. (It's mostly forms, html pages, & a few PDF's.)

Re:Firefox is not the answer. (1)

DarkBlackFox (643814) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835264)

Better preparation for security is.

Yes, and this "better preparation" is coming in the form of XP SP2. However, as a result, a number of the "broken" sites on the Internet will no longer function in IE either, as security features already present in Firefox are added to IE.

From what I've read so far, the compatibility of Internet Explorer will most likely drop down to or even a bit lower than that of Firefox, come service pack 2.

Re:Firefox is not the answer. (0, Flamebait)

the_mad_poster (640772) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835298)

What a load.

Give me a broken site with a significant level of traffic (in other words, don't give me some 13 year old kid's site hosted off Geocities) that doesn't work in Firefox 0.8. Or, were you talking out your ass?

I use it exclusively on three different boxes - the only exception is work where I'm forced to use IE and I limit my browsing to about a dozen sites. 0.7 solved almost all of the rendering "problems" that the multitudes of completely clueless web developers caused. I've never seen a site render improperly in 0.8 except /., and even this broken-ass POS loads right most of the time now that I use 0.8. The rare exceptions to this rule are the occasional sites that are so broken they have a browser sniffer. I've encountered ONE site of significance like that (other sites were all personal sites playing stupid Javascript parlor tricks). Changed the UA and it worked just fine. Company caved to complaints less than 2 days after launching said broken-ass site and removed the sniffer.

I call bullshit.

Re:Firefox is not the answer. (1)

kwandar (733439) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835303)

I don't honestly know what 90% of the users you are referring to, but I've been slowly replacing Is on my friend's, family, and now my employees machines.

No one complains, they are all happy, functionality is similar and IE users easily adapt to it. I've only encountered one person with an issue - they used the portfolio tracking section related to the Globe & Mail didn't seem to act properly. I didn't have time to investigate so moved them back to IE temporarily.

Unlike many other open source products, I've found Firefox to be easily accepted and in fact welcomed, by 90%+ of those I try it on.

And - while many users are not aware, I'm finding a surprising number who are becoming aware of IE vulnerabilities.

Re:Firefox is not the answer. (1)

sahuaro (524043) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835330)

". . .more than 90% of the Internet users out there aren't aware or concerned with IE vulnerabilities."

So what are you saying? That ignorance is bliss?

". . .you want 100% compatibility with the "broken" sites on the Internet."

Doesn't this play right into Microsoft's hand? Shouldn't we be educating the public that some sites are broken (because they require IE) and need to be fixed.

Dennisk

Re:Firefox is not the answer. (1)

Incoherent07 (695470) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835368)

I'll put it this way:

Most people don't care which TV has the absolute best picture quality, or the biggest screen. They buy a TV which has good enough picture quality, a large enough size, and fits in their budget.

In the case of IE vs. Firefox, cost is a non-issue. Something like 95% of computers come with Windows. Firefox is a free download. So the decision really comes down to "is it good enough". IE, being the majority browser by a huge margin, displays pretty much every site that people want to visit. (The only site I've ever come across which is essentially unusable in IE is the Mozilla extensions page.)

This notion of "good enough" versus "best" seems to be a huge problem for some of the OSS zealots roaming around Slashdot. And as far as the average Joe User is concerned, Firefox is NOT the best browser, for reasons that the parent stated.

Re:Firefox is not the answer. (1)

thirteenVA (759860) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835388)

WOW! are you saying people need to keep using IE because 'broken' sites exist due to poor developers?

Well then maybe i should wear a condom under my pants because people are walking around with HIV.

Re:Firefox is not the answer. (1)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835392)

Huh? The reason Firefox isn't a good replacement is because so many sites out there have been tuned for IE's non-standard rendering? That's not Firefox's fault. That is the fault of the people that set up those few offending sites.

Few sites are like that, although there are some, like Engenius Tech's site that won't bother serving a page to Firefox, that's not Firefox's fault either.

What to tell your online bank (1)

Animats (122034) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835429)

Bank of America's site, including online banking, statement printing, and bill paying, works just fine with Mozilla/Firefox.

Bank of America has one of the best online bill payment systems around. No fees. They'll transfer money to major companies with which they have an arrangement, and mail checks to anyone else you select.

Bank of America is the biggest bank in the United States.

Point this out to any bank that wants you to use IE.

Does this mean Microsoft is going... (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9835115)

...with the Rhythm method?

Missing a key word in the description (1)

twenex (139462) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835192)

Note that this does not mean that they are replacing IE with FireFox......... YET

eh (1)

jford235 (677581) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835194)

They are getting totally slammed with IE scew ups in the past few weeks. theres at least one big thing each week. But I guess when you hold the market share and people still design their sites for your browser over everyone elses and so on, you can pretty much do what you want.

Long-term solution? (5, Insightful)

RonnyJ (651856) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835197)

They claim that the forthcoming patch will be a "long-term solution to the core vulnerability" exploited by Scob."

So, are their patches normally NOT long-term solutions to vulnerabilities then?

Re:Long-term solution? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9835275)

Of course not. The best business practice is selling the same thing over and over again. They've just gotten into that habit, and so it spread into their patches. A patch that isn't broken can't be patched by itself.

Re:Long-term solution? (1)

kurt.griffiths (715821) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835312)

Of course they would rather have long term solutions, but they release short-term solutions first because they are easier and help buy MSFT time until they can come up with something better.

Is there something wrong with me? (3, Interesting)

Klar (522420) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835215)

shhh, don't tell anyone, but I'm still using IE6.. I dunno, I'm just so used to using it, and it seems to work well for me. I haven't had any virus or security problems(that I know of).. I always want to try firefox after reading posts about its power, but man.. IE is just so..so.. easy.

Re:Is there something wrong with me? (1)

dotslasher_sri (762515) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835243)

and..umm...whats difficult about firefox. Try it out man..you will fall in love with it. :-)

Re:Is there something wrong with me? (1)

Tairnyn (740378) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835271)

I rarely can tell the difference. In fact, it really only grabs my attention when using nice features that are included by default, such as the search field and tabbed windows. The time I save on inspecting every site address before I go to it more than makes up for the small learning curve for settings and such.

Re:Is there something wrong with me? (1)

mindaktiviti (630001) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835438)

Firefox has a learning curve? What version did they implement this in?

Re:Is there something wrong with me? (1)

Mz6 (741941) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835291)

please be joking, please be joking, please be joking... joke?

If you have always wanted to try it, try it already!

Re:Is there something wrong with me? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9835417)

ever saw slashdot's user agents stats? around 78% of all visitors use MSIE. and that's not cause of the faked user agent string because slashdot doesn't use fucked up stat generator software.

Re:Is there something wrong with me? (1)

smooth wombat (796938) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835363)

I always want to try firefox after reading posts about its power, but man.. IE is just so..so.. easy.

And slow and breaks compatibility at will and bloated.

I switched to Firebird both at home and work at nearly the same time and was astounded by the speed of rendering web pages. Even on my dial-up at home. Then I discovered tab browsing and no pop-ups! Gah! What more could I ask for?

After trying Firefox... (1)

mindaktiviti (630001) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835398)

Try Firefox and you'll realize that it's even easier than IE, even though IE is "so so easy".

Re:Is there something wrong with me? (5, Informative)

GigsVT (208848) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835415)

My wife was infected by spyware by simply visiting a site that was an etrade affilliate site (they were offering a free PDA if you opened an etrade account).

She told me at the time the only difference between her computer and her friend that sent it to her was that she had Sun Java installed and he didn't. He didn't get infected and she did.

This was several months ago, she searched and didn't find any exploit info about it.

A couple days ago she found the exact exploit she had encountered on a vulnerability list, a combination of Sun Java and an IE bug cause a certain vulnerability.

So you might think you are safe, but how many "zero day" or unknown exploits, such as the one my wife got infected by spyware via are out there?

Remove need for patching...by removing IE. (5, Informative)

The Fifth Man (99745) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835224)

Re:Remove need for patching...by removing IE. (1)

aklix (801048) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835436)

i would just rather leave IE there, like i did. It doesnt harm anything and it is still good for web designing. all though im trying to get the stupid transparency out of my website so its compatable with firefox. I dont know y i used a template in the first place i was probably being lazy.

My organization just dumped IE for Firefox (5, Interesting)

gearmonger (672422) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835253)

"long-term solution" hee hee ha ha *snort* [coke comes out nose] riiiight.

Rightly or not, that Homeland Defense notice got some peeps in senior management a little spooked and asked our IT department to start making Firefox the default browser on all new systems they set up for employees.

As a long-time Mozilla and Firefox user, I couldn't be happier. Whether it's the right reason or not, I couldn't care -- at least there's a hint at the IE domination trend slowing down a bit, and that is good for consumers.

Re:My organization just dumped IE for Firefox (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9835384)

[coke comes out nose]

you've been sniffing?

IE vs Mozzy (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9835262)

Microsoft may have won the browser-war in the late 1990's but at what cost???

Mozilla/Netscape as of the last couple of years made fantastic progress and is definately now the better browser in both functionality, security and last but not least mozilla looks better to me and renders websites better too...

M$FT should just throw in the towel on IE and reduce its function to Windows Update and able to download Mozilla/Netscape, (just make it a ftp downloader tool)

FUD or CRUD ? (0, Troll)

bushboy (112290) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835325)

Crap Reads Upside Down ?
Create Rendered User Devils ?
Complete Readable User Documentation ?
Could Run Under DOS ?

IT: Microsoft to Issue Out-of-Cycle Patch for IE (0, Redundant)

webhuis (700068) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835326)

Note that this does not mean that they are replacing IE with FireFox. M$ are to release an anti-virus that has two components. 1. An anti-virus 2. A blocking list of suspicious clients that offered malware. They will be forced to replace IE by Firefox. Regards, Martin.

It seems that ... (3, Insightful)

Hatfieldje (147296) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835329)

One of the biggest complaints against MS is that they are slow to respond to user need, while quick to add profit-margin-stretching-even-though-the-user-does n't-want/need-anyway "features" (e.g. Clippy). So how is the /. community going to react when MS actually starts listening to the customer and adding true features like security, speed, efficiency?

I've noticed over the past couple of months that there have been a few of opinions coming out. One is that it's too late for MS. They screwed the pooch years ago and their entire user base will end up jumping ship.

Another is that this is nothing but a marketing ploy. MS isn't really changing their ideology, they're just making us think they are, so we're better off jumping ship.

The other (my personal opinion) is that it's a welcome change. I will be glad when Windows becomes an environment that is as stable and easily configurable as linux. I love competition. It's what makes America thrive, and if MS can become competitive (again) in the eyes of /. geeks, just think about how much more time/effort will go into linux to make it even better. And, as for jumping ship, we'll have no need. But we may have a fleet comprised of MS, *nix/*BSD, etc.

Kudos to MS for trying to fix their old mistakes, and hopefully in a couple of years, they'll have them fixed and we can really have an OS War!

Re:It seems that ... (1)

Tumbleweed (3706) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835408)

As far as IE is concerned, they can make it super-fast and super-efficient and super-secure, but it's STILL horribly broken as far as standards support goes, and therefore quite deserving of scorn. Scorn, scorn, scorn! A pox on the house of IE, I say, until they commit publicly and fully to web standards (which they haven't done to this day, even the 'new' IE team).

At least... (0, Troll)

kurt.griffiths (715821) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835339)

At least they are trying hard to suck less.

Re:At least... (1)

gnuLNX (410742) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835460)

So what. They have sucked so hard for so long that I fear the stench of their suckage will lingere for generations to come!

Ah... Firefox. (1)

9-bits.tk (751823) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835350)

Note that this does not mean that they are replacing IE with FireFox

Damn.

Aw Dang (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9835442)

Why the hell would I get a 411?: ATTENTION: RE/ AWARD NOTIFICATION; FINAL NOTICE We are pleased to inform you of the announcement today, 29th july, 2004 of winners of the EUROPE ELGORDO SWEEPSTAKE LOTTERY/ INTERNATIONAL, PROGRAMS held on 17th JUNE, 2004. Your email address is attached to ticket number 023-0148-790-459, with serial number 5073-11 drew the lucky numbers 43-11-44-37-10-43, and consequently won the lottery in the 3rd category. You have therefore been approved for a lump sum pay of US$1,000,000:00 ( one million united states of america dollars) in cash credited to file REF NO. EESW/25041238013/03. This is from total prize money of US$80,400,000.00 shared among the seventeen international winners in this category. All participants were selected through a computer ballot system drawn from a collation of frequent internet users from all over the world from Australia, New Zealand, America, Europe, North America,Africa, middle east and Asia as part of International Promotions Program, which is conducted bia-annually. CONGRATULATIONS! Your fund is now deposited with a Security company insured in your name. Due to the mix up of some numbers and names, we ask that you keep this award strictly from public notice until your claim has been processed and your money remitted to your account. This is part of our security protocol to avoid double claiming or unscrupulous acts by participants of this program. We hope with a part of your prize, you will participate in our end of year high stakes US$1.3 billion International Lottery. To begin your claim, please you are to provide the below details to this commission via email to Mr chrest Raul, FOREIGN SERVICE MANAGER, MADRID SPAIN, {raul_60@totalmail.com}. For due processing and remittance of your prize money to a designated account of your choice and to enable the speedy evaluation and processing of your winnings. we advice that you adhere strictly to procedures, to avoid any disqualifications and subsequent cancelation 1. your full names 2. your full home / office address 3. direct telephone/fax numbers and email 4. occupation /age 5. amount won 6. next of kin 7. lottery date. the above detailed information will be absolutely neccessary for the processing of your payment cheques, drafts or wire transfers. Please note that this winning is valid for two weeks and failure to issue claims after this period will automatically void your payment. Remember to quote your ticket number, serial number and lucky number in your future correspondence. Furthermore, should there be any change of your address, do inform your claim agent as soon as possible. Congratulations once again from all our staff and thank you for being part of our promotions program. Yours Sincerely, Mrs. Alexanderia Reyes N.B. Any breach of confidentiality on the part of any of our winners will result to disqualification. SORRY FOR THE LATE INFORMATION THANKS Mrs Alexanderia Reyes PROMOTION MANAGER EUROPE ELGORDO PROMO LOTTERY COMPANY MADRID SPAIN

Fired (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9835447)

anybody who writes i.e only sites should be fired on the spot.

they have no business in the IT industry. I don't care if ie was the defacto standard - you write to industry standard - especially web pages.

firefox is great!! it is fast and renders pages the way they are suppose to - it is ie and the web sites that are broken and need to get fixed.

I doubt they will ever... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9835451)

I doubt that Microsoft would ever replace IE with FireFox. They're not that intelligent. If they were intelligent, their peice of shit OS would be worth more than dumpster fodder.

::sigh:: If only it was possible.... (1)

enilnomi (797821) | more than 10 years ago | (#9835479)

...to fashion an exploit using CSS

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?