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!

MSIE 7 May Beat Longhorn Out The Gate

timothy posted more than 9 years ago | from the sincerest-form dept.

Internet Explorer 733

Quantum Jim writes "InternetNews.com reports that a major upgrade for Microsoft Internet Explorer may be imminent. Apparently in response to the recent mass migration away from MSIE, top Microsoft developers have been soliciting for improvements in the old browser at a web log and at Channel 9, an aggregate journal previously discussed by /.. InternetNews.com speculates that improvements could possibly include support for tabbed browsing, better security, more PNG and CSS compliance, and RSS integration (which Firefox and Opera Mail already support). Go competition!"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered


Secret to the fast release revealed! (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9916384)

It will be based on the Mozilla source!

Re:Secret to the fast release revealed! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9916388)


Re:Secret to the fast release revealed! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9916486)

That's his last name? "Schnitzel"?

Re:Secret to the fast release revealed! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9916541)

* (c) 2004 by Gary R. Niger (topnig@gnaa.us)
* This post is free gayware; you can redistribute it and/or modify
* it under the terms of the GNAA Gay Nigger License as published by
* the Free Gayware Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or
* (at your option) any later version.
* This post is made in the hope that it will be first, but WITHOUT ANY
* WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of UN-FAILABILITY or FIRSTNESS.
* See the GNAA Gay Nigger License for more details.
* You should have received a copy of the GNAA Gay Nigger License
* along with this program; if not, write to the Free Gayware
* Foundation, Inc., 57 Tumple Street, Room 69, San Francisco, CA 0800-HOMOSEXUAL USA

bout damn time (0, Offtopic)

SteveXE (641833) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916385)

All i can say is its about damn time.

Re:bout damn time (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9916557)

omg!! u r waering LEDERHOSEN !!! wtf?!? w00t!! go gnetoo!!!!

Yeah (4, Funny)

stecoop (759508) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916386)

MSIE 7 May Beat Longhorn Out The Gate... But I use Mozilla and the bell rang a long time ago.

Gnoppix sucks at display. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9916509)

That is all.

Can you mod yourself on slashdot? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9916515)

Cuz, I can't imagine any other way this got modded funney.

Re:Can you mod yourself on slashdot? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9916589)

I can't imagine any other way this got modded funney.

omg dont u C its cuz it menshuns der FierFox browser.

FireFox (5, Insightful)

Laivincolmo (778355) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916398)

Well, firefox was able to grab my interest before IE. Even with the new features, I will stick with firefox because of the community that maintains it.

Re:FireFox (2, Interesting)

mfivis (592345) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916423)

Well, firefox was able to grab my interest before IE. Even with the new features, I will stick with firefox because of the community that maintains it.

I totally hear that. Browsing is definitely an area where innovation is to be embraced, not quarantined and hardened. The promise of always being ahead of IE technology is enough to keep me with Mozilla.

Re:FireFox (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9916433)

I'll stick to coding to FireFox since the page'll display the same on all the platforms my company cares about (Windows, Mac, Solaris, Linux).

If MSIE 7 runs on each of those platforms, I might consider supporting it too.

Beat Longhorn? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9916400)

So, we're talking what.. 2008? 2009?

oh gross (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9916404)

yesterday i went out on a date with timecop and he wanted to suck my dick which is okay but he crossed the line when he was insistent about fingering my prostate!!!
that's the last time i use osdn personals

On the one hand this is good news (5, Insightful)

multiplexo (27356) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916405)

Consumers benefit from competition, in this case superior browsers from groups such as Opera and Mozilla and integrated browsers such as Konquerer or Safari offer features and security that Microsoft doesn't provide.

On the other hand it's depressing that MIcrosoft is a big enough monopolist to let the status and security of what they maintain is an integral part of the operating system, namely the browser, to go almost completely to shit before they bestir themselves to even think about fixing it.

Re:On the one hand this is good news (4, Insightful)

Detritus (11846) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916563)

It's nothing new for Microsoft. From my experiences with them, any investment of time/money in producing patches or updates requires a business case. How is it going to generate more profits or advance the strategic goals of Microsoft? Broken software is not a sufficient justification.

A quote: (4, Insightful)

Sebby (238625) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916409)

"The truth is that consumers aren't going to worry about things like CSS and PNG support," said Robert Iliad, a developer who is participating in the feedback process. "There are still millions of consumers using IE 5.5, so how are you going to get them to use IE 7.0 just because of some obscure thing called CSS?"

Now this is what I call truely clueless. Typical MS thinking that is the cause of IE's sercurity vulnerabilities and lack of established standards.

Simple Solution to Acceptance... (1)

Chordonblue (585047) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916457)

Bundle this with SP3...

On the other hand, based on how long it took SP2 to show up, maybe IE 7 WILL ship with Longhorn after all! ;)

Re:A quote: (1)

MBAFK (769131) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916460)

If web devlopers use these technologies to enhance their sites, users with browsers that can't handle CSS or PNG correctly wont see pages which are necessarily as pretty or functional as they would with a more compliant browser. If the gap gets big enough and is publicised I think at least some people would change browser.

Re:A quote: (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9916466)

The truth is that he's right.

The vast majority of users have no idea what HTML, CSS, PNG, or almost any other 'computer thingie' is. All they know is that Internet Explorer is The Internet.

Of course, the fact that they're right doesn't mean that this is a good excuse for not writing secure software. Even if users don't care about security (many don't even care if their computer ends up as part of a botnet), they could at least write secure software.

Corporations Sucks (4, Insightful)

Nurgled (63197) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916469)

This is the attitude throughout Microsoft. It's the same reason why the Windows API still sucks after 20 years. The vast majority of customers don't give a damn about any of this stuff because they don't care: no sites will use alpha-transparent PNG unless IE does, so why bother implementing it?

This is the problem with relying on commercial entities for "innovation": they'll only bother when it actually benefits them. Mozilla, on the other hand, implement things purely for the sake of completeness and interest.

Re:A quote: (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9916498)

Actually, they aren't clueless. Most people (Normal People(TM)) honestly don't know or give a crap about standards compliance. My mom is an example. A great number of people on Guam for instance, believe that MSN and Internet Explorer are all there is to the internet. Also, security vulnerabilities aside, when ever something dominates its market (read ~90% marketshare) vulnerabilities are going to be found in any large & complex software system. You may argue that has better security practices, and it may be so. But the bottom line is that by using , you are not part of the majority, hence you are largely ignored as a target because it is not worth the virus/spyware writer's time.

Re:A quote: (1)

GoofyBoy (44399) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916504)

>Now this is what I call truely clueless. Typical MS thinking that is the cause of IE's sercurity vulnerabilities and lack of established standards.

Its called "knowing their customer".

There are clueless users out there and if you tell them to upgrade just because of security ("Isn't this what the Windows Update is for?") or of standard compliance ("but all my web sites look ok") then you won't get people to move.

Tell them it faster, makes new web sites look prettier, popup blocking and has tabbing features, all sexy reasons, then people have a motive to move.

About Windows 95/IE 5.5 Users (2, Insightful)

linguae (763922) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916554)

About his concerns for people who are still using IE 5.5 (mostly all Windows 95 users, since they can't upgrade to IE 6, nor does MS support them anymore), they can be convinced to use IE 7.0 through convincing them to buy a new computer. There are still a lot of Windows 9x boxes out there, so Microsoft could use security as a incentive (among others) for people with older versions of Windows to switch to Windows XP with the new and improved Internet Explorer. (Likewise, Linux/BSD supporters could convince Windows 9x users to switch for the same reasons, too, and there is always Mozilla/Firefox, which runs on Windows 95, so there are other options)

Still, though, the developer's comment was stupid; everyone benefits from full CSS and PNG support; it would save developers a lot of time trying to get their pages to render properly under IE, and it would make IE more standards compliant.

Choices (0)

CmdrMooCow (213594) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916413)

A new Internet Explorer with nice support and better features later...

or a Mozilla/Opera browser with nice support and better features [b]now[/b].....

Tough call.

Still, it's a move in the right direction, and it shows that even the developers know that IE has issues, and they [i]want[/i] to fix it.

Re:Choices (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9916446)

how about a book on HTML now?
you know, instead of [b]now[/b]

Browser Wars II: Mozilla Strikes Back? (4, Interesting)

LostCluster (625375) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916416)

It's somewhat ironic that the competitor Microsoft thought they had killed, Netscape, is now again, in the form of the now open source Mozilla and it's variants, the biggest threat to IE.

And, also, the re-rise of that competitor is bringing out the first major feature additions to IE in years...

Re:Browser Wars II: Mozilla Strikes Back? (0, Redundant)

ralphart (70342) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916470)

"You can't win, Bill. If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine"

Re:Browser Wars II: Mozilla Strikes Back? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9916517)

And so at last the beast fell and the unbelievers rejoiced. But all was not lost, for from the ash rose a great bird. The bird gazed down upon the unbelievers and cast fire and thunder upon them. For the beast had been reborn with its strength renewed, and the followers of Mammon cowered in horror.

from The Book of Mozilla, 7:15

LOL (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9916534)

5% to 95%..that sure is a big threat.

How is this possible?!?!? (5, Funny)

jjh37997 (456473) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916419)

I thought IE and the Window OS were so tightly integrated that they were virtually the same thing? Do you mean IE was actually a separate program all along?

Re:How is this possible?!?!? (1)

DarkMantle (784415) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916538)

Open Task Manager, and sort by Image Name.

Open "My Computer" and type "slashdot.org" beside where it says "Address" and hit enter.

Note in Task Manager "IExplore" (aka Internet explorer) still isn't there.... hmm.... same program just with a slightly different name.. :(

Next Word, and Publisher will be the same program with different toolbars enabled..... Wait... they did that already.

Re:How is this possible?!?!? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9916580)

Even if they are the same (not saying that's the case), it wouldn't stop MS from releasing an IE update before releasing Longhorn.

Re:How is this possible?!?!? (1)

mobby_6kl (668092) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916588)

Huh? Win98 (or 2k) doesn't come with IE6, you get IE6 as a separate update, same would be here.

And IE will probably continue to suck. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9916421)

Who cares?

We have Mozilla, and unless Microsoft pulls a quantum leap out of their ass then everybody who has already switched will go on continueing to recommend Mozilla.

Having a browser that doesn't make up a large part of your OS is a GOOD thing.

Think about it:
It's a browser. It's ment to parse HTML and a couple other languages into a image on your desktop that you can interact with.

Having security exploits possible is enough to make me avoid using IE and probably any future incarnations.

Anyways beating Longhorn means any time between now and 3 years from now, so MS has a pretty big windows to release a new browser.

And the standings are.... (1)

CrazyTiger (797612) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916425)

In first place,and in the red and blue tuxedos,we have fan favorite Mozilla and his baby brother Firefox!In second place,in the red suit and opera goggles,we have Opera!And in dead last,in the blue fat suit,we have Internet Explorer.

Who will win?It's up to YOU in BROWSER WARS OF LATE 04!

God Bless Microsoft (0, Troll)

AveBelial (762816) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916426)

From Article: My name is John, and I work on the Internet Explorer team. It's a little hard to explain my actual function on the team, but my current official title is "Development Manager"

Isnt it Reassuring that microsft have such a well organised and effcient team on the case...

Wow (1)

JPMRaptor (644111) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916428)

Now it will be almost as good as Firefox was a year ago (well Firebird or whatever it was named back then).

Call Me Clueless (3, Interesting)

rudy_wayne (414635) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916429)

But I don't understand the point of "The Browser Wars".

Don't get me wrong, I'm glad that Microsoft is finally making some long over due improvements.


If everyone stops using IE and moves to Mozilla/Opera/whatever, Microsoft's loss in revenue is exactly zero.

If everyone abandons other browsers and uses IE exclusively, Microsoft's increase in revenue is exactly zero.

So what's the point of all this?

Re:Call Me Clueless (5, Insightful)

PeteQC (680043) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916479)

As more and more application start to use HTML browser as their "interface", the war is for the future of computing. Event SAP created web interface to its popular Enterprise System. So, as the time go, more and more applications (specially business applications) will use HTML as a way to create remotely-accessible interface. So, the OS could become less and less important and the browser would become more and more important. So, if people lose interest in IE, they won't be tied to Windows anymore and then Microsoft will lose revenues.

Re:Call Me Clueless (2, Insightful)

Sebby (238625) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916480)

You can only get IE on Windows (unless you're geek and play around with Wine).

Having the biggest browser marketshare means you can get more sales of Windowz, and you can spit on standards. The more users of it, the more developers write for it, the more users need Windowz to run it.

So while it doesn't directly translate to direct revenue, it does translate into indirect revenue.

Ok.... you're clueless. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9916521)

Or unless you use MacOS, MacOS X, Solaris, HP/UX...

Re:Call Me Clueless (4, Insightful)

Nurgled (63197) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916485)

Anyone who uses Internet Explorer is using Windows. If Internet Explorer has the highest market share, they control the de facto standards and can keep customers locked into Internet Explorer and by extension Windows.

False. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9916548)

Most people who use IE probably are using Windows, but that is by no means a requirement. Moron.

Re:Call Me Clueless (1)

Detritus (11846) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916487)

Control. The ability to dictate "standards" and the presence or absence of features.

Re:Call Me Clueless (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9916489)

By creating non standard html/other extensions, and Windows-only features (like ActiveX), they are able to continue to make it difficult to move from the Windows platform.

So picture this: you run a cross platform browser that works with *all* websites. You use a cross platform office suite that works with *all* document formats 100% perfectly. All other applications you use are also available on different OS's.

Why then choose windows?

It's all part of a well known strategy called customer lock-in. Make it difficult to change so people won't bother to try.

Re:Call Me Clueless (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9916493)

Why should M$ revenues be the point of it? How about better software for users and a more secure Internet for all of us?

Re:Call Me Clueless (1, Insightful)

xigxag (167441) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916518)

The purpose of IE was to simply to stop Java or some other non-MS technology from becoming a standardized computer interface. By integrating IE into the operating system (and into Money, Encarta, etc.) MS makes sure that the average consumer must continue to use the Windows cashcow for the "best" home computing experience. If everybody switches to Firefox which is platform-agnostic, then people will feel comfortable switching to Linux for their daily computing tasks. (Hence the second-tier defenses, Office and DirectX/Xbox, but that's a different story.)

Re:Call Me Clueless (4, Insightful)

The Vulture (248871) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916529)

If everyone stops using IE and moves to Mozilla/Opera/whatever, Microsoft's loss in revenue is exactly zero.
Not true. A lot of companies are using the Microsoft server tools (like IIS, SQL Server, Windows Media Server) because they're designed to work with Internet Explorer (and vice-versa). If all of a sudden Mozilla/Opera/whatever had 97% of the browser market, then companies would have to stop serving up web pages that don't render properly in Mozilla/Opera/whatever. And if you're not serving up those pages, when it's time to upgrade your Windows server software, why upgrade? Why not just switch to other open source tools, like Apache?

Additionally, once everything standardizes on a platform-independant browser, like Mozilla, who needs Windows anymore? Okay, granted, a lot of software is still available for Windows, etc., etc., but perhaps for a company that doesn't need Windows-specific applications, they might switch. This scares Microsoft more than anything else.

If everyone abandons other browsers and uses IE exclusively, Microsoft's increase in revenue is exactly zero.
Again, not true (in fact the opposite of what I state above). Since IE has a dominant portion of the browser market, companies are more willing to buy the Microsoft server tools, which brings in money for Microsoft. Also, this leads to client lock-in, since in order to view the Microsoft content, you need a Microsoft client.

-- Joe

Re:Call Me Clueless (1)

v1x (528604) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916532)

I think part of the revenue comes from vendor lockin that come with MSIE. Since this browser does not play well with open standards, while other widely used MS technologies like ASP & ActiveX are deliberately designed to be incompatible with anything else, MS manages to collect revenue from the developers who have to remain 'compatible' with MS technologies simply because the end-users are often locked into an MS World (hey, it sounds like a real application :P) on account of the MS Windows monopoly. Its one loop that must be broken if we are to make any serious improvements in the end-user experience. Anyhow, thats my 2c on why the browser-wars might be important.

Re:Call Me Clueless (1)

Fuzzle (590327) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916540)

The progress of internet technology. Just another form of competition that delivers better, more convenient technology and products to consumers. Or at least, that's the end purpose.

not _exactly_ (2, Insightful)

ihatewinXP (638000) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916542)

I would have to imagine that microsoft benefits in mindshare and monetarily by having IE as your default browser. Being that millions of users are still unaware that you can change your homepage (or just dont care to) MS gets to advertise their sites and services by default to many windows users. Also the search function (and the fact that if you incorrectly type and address you are presented with a 'search') links directly to the MS portal and advertisers on their engine.
Now I admit that it is not much, but to by default have a user in your sphere can be directly profitable or at elast usefull in a number of ways.

Re:Call Me Clueless (1)

pat_trick (218868) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916543)

The main thing is that if you're using their browser, then they can direct you to their standards of browsing. For instance, visit http://support.microsoft.com/?scid=fh;[ln];kbhowto [microsoft.com] in Firefox, then visit it in IE. You'll note that there's a drastic difference between the two content wise.

If MS has you using their browser, than they can tell web developers to make websites using their technology, with the assurance that what the developer makes is what the customers sees. Thus, MS makes money by selling developers on its standard vs anyone else's.

Re:Call Me Clueless (1)

TheRealFoxFire (523782) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916544)

Okay: You're clueless.

If Microsoft successfully grabs and holds a monopoly on browsers, it can continue to create software and encourage other developers to create software (web applications) which use IE enhancements like DHTML.

Then people begin to rely on those web applications, like online Banking sites, webmail, etc. This holds people on the MS platform, increasing OS sales, but probably more importantly, those enhancements often require a Microsoft server platform, which equals big bucks for MS.

Re:Call Me Clueless (1)

Stick_Fig (740331) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916566)

Directly, you're correct, but it strengthens the overall product for MS to keep it strong. It makes Windows look worse for IE to be in a state of disarray, because it reflects on the OS as a whole.

This is why it's now biting them in the ass. You think that the entire industry is going to stifle until you release another version of your browser? Good luck.

Re:Call Me Clueless (1)

happyhangone (599849) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916584)

Because the internet navigators are the api of the future, if you make the navigator, you control the future of programming in the in computing... There is no new program with a web interface out there, is better that dealing with each of the api's in all the platforms out there... http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/APIWar.html [joelonsoftware.com]

About time (1)

JayLEB (760484) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916436)

When the building blocks of an entire O.S are made up of notoriously buggy software like IE6, it's high time Microsoft actually figured "hey, MAYBE we should fix up this old piece of junk" Add growing opposition from Mozilla Add countless worms taking advantage of IE6's holes and presto, you get a serious wake up call for MS. Hmmm, took them a few years to realize it...

Waiting on Google (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9916440)

The June Google Browser graph [google.com] shows an interesting turn in IE's share. Now, is it like previous "bumps" where IE quickly rebounded, or is this the sign of an actual turn? I hope they release the July figures soon.

They might want to look at the bug.. (1)

TheNME (789963) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916443)

where if you search for some text that's not on a page and press F1 when the OK box appears, ie crashes.. not that anyone has probably ran into it (besides me)..

Re:They might want to look at the bug.. (1)

AveBelial (762816) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916488)

Not on 6.0.2900.2180 SP2 it dont...

Re:They might want to look at the bug.. (1)

TheNME (789963) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916569)

Cool they fixed it, I wonder if it was because of the bug reports I filed, or if they found it independently.

Re:They might want to look at the bug.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9916525)


Mine says "There is not enough memory for this task. Quit one or more programs to increase available memory.(2)"

The (2) is quite a neat little enigma, hmm? Still, I doubt they'd bother fixing it, it didn't seem to eat my registry or affect any other programs.

IE5.0, win2k SP3, 256meg RAM.

Standards (2, Insightful)

Norgus (770127) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916450)

If microsoft do manage to get standard complience into this new IE browser, then at least the rest of the internet that was still catering to shity IE 5.5 type design will be practically forced away. It might be good news for people who don't even USE IE. *continues living in a fantasy*

It won't matter. (0, Flamebait)

Anhaedra (760705) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916454)

There is nothing they can do to save themselves, once you have tried Firefox, there is no reason to go back, unless you are stupid. I'm sure with the release of IE7 we will get a wonderful friend of the Alexa plugin. Oh! And we can't forget about those logs that IE keeps in the c:\windows\internet logs folder! Why on earth would IE need several duplicate logs? Hmm....

Bad troll, don't quit your day job. (0, Troll)

TheNME (789963) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916481)

C:\WINDOWS>dir internet*
Volume in drive C is SATA #1
Volume Serial Number is 14C1-3331

Directory of C:\WINDOWS

File Not Found


Re:Bad troll, don't quit your day job. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9916528)

:x of course you would want to do

dir internet* /a

Just to make sure it's not being sneaking and hiding it!

Re:It won't matter. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9916531)

"c:\windows\internet logs"

You must be confusing Zone Alarm and Internet Explorer. Allow me to explain:
One is a firewall (Zone Alarm)
and one is an Internet Browser (Internet Explorer)


Why does MS still care? (0, Redundant)

IvyMike (178408) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916459)

I don't understand why Microsoft cares about the browser wars anymore. IE development costs them money, and I don't see what the benefit is.

I mean, back in the day, I used to think that the scenario was, "IE will be so much better than Netscape that websites and web users will flock to it, thus furthering our Windows monopoly." But that scenario seems pretty far-fetched today; Netscape the company is gone, and nobody choses Windows because they like IE.

At some point, it looked like MS had just abandoned IE development, but what's the case for picking it back up?

Re:Why does MS still care? (1)

Fuzzle (590327) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916576)

If the majority of websites are only accessible by using IE, and IE is only available on Windows, then people may choose not to use OSX or LInux. Far fucking fetched, yes, but this is what companies worry about.

How about a nice serving of FUD??? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9916461)

Joe Consumer says, "Why should I upgrade now to the Firebird/Fox/Whatever thing, when Microsoft *promises* to release a new version of IE soon??"

Mozilla (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9916462)

providing MS/IE with "prior art" since 1995!!!!!111

IE as browser is redundant? (1)

usefool (798755) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916463)

It would seem MS is no longer interested in the browser business, they're updating it simply for protecting its general security "reputation".

However, more importantly, as IE is part of the OS, maybe IE will eventually becomes a more tightly integrated explorer for Windows?

eBay Scammers (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9916472)

Some ass from this IP keeps sending me eBay scams.

Microsoft could just use Firefox! (1)

xmas2003 (739875) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916474)

Microsoft downloads Firefox 1.0, changes program and version number, compiles, and offers as Internet Explorer 7.0 - sure be a lot easier! ;-)

Re:Microsoft could just use Firefox! (1)

RLiegh (247921) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916497)

It doesn't work (that well) for netscape, why would it work for Aiiiiyeeee?

What... (2, Insightful)

RLiegh (247921) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916475)

no popup-blockers? no flash-click-to-view? Other than the fact I'm on XP, is there any compelling reason to switch over?

Re:What... (1)

Osty (16825) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916514)

no popup-blockers? no flash-click-to-view? Other than the fact I'm on XP, is there any compelling reason to switch over?

The update to IE6 in XP SP2 adds a popup blocker (I don't know if it has click-to-view for flash), so that won't be a new feature for IE7. Besides, you can find many [daishar.com] popup [google.com] blockers [msn.com] for free for IE6 already. Just because it's not built into IE doesn't mean it can't be done with IE's programming model.

trojan horse (1)

daveinthesky (608820) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916482)

As great as this sounds, I can't help but suspect that there will be a number of "improvements" that will make things even more hellish for anyone developing web apps and hoping to attain consistency across the browsers.

Are the _really_ going to fix the css box model?

The problem is... (4, Insightful)

krahd (106540) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916519)

That, until now, each major IE upgrade has a new, non standard and non-supported-by-other feature, that was immediately and widely adopted by web designers (perhaps because it gets immediately added to Dreamweaver et al).

So, here we go again, new pages that look like crap in non-IE... :(

The advantages of monopolys are endless.


Not too shabby, but (1)

Jaana (125042) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916535)

That would almost make it a good browser. Now, if they just made it as customizeable as Firefox, and got rid of all of the defaultly annoying 'user friendly' crap, implement a Linux version, and sell it to someone who isn't M$, I might actually consider liking it a little.

This doesn't sound good (1)

tahpot (237053) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916555)

To release IE7 is going to be bad for web developers. We are going to end up with another dud browser that we have to support that won't fully support web standards.
I'm guessing IE7 will be like IE5 and be useless unless your running the .5 version... which will likely come out with longhorn.

So event if the version that comes with longhorn is half decent, everyone will still need to support the IE7 version that was released before longhorn.

Maybe I am just dumb. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9916560)

But I don't understand why everyone goes crazy over tabbed browsing. I rarely have more than 8 or so browser windows open at once, so it's not real hard to keep track of what I'm doing. Do other people have tons of browser windows open all the time? When I occasionally DO have tons of windows open, I browse them in chronological order (e.g. reading multiple Slashdot discussions). I never switch back and forth between them; I just close the current one when I'm done and move on to the next. But maybe that's just me.

I have used tabbed browsing in Mozilla, and one thing that annoyed me TREMENDOUSLY was that on the right-click menu for the tabs, there is a "Close tab" and "Close all tabs" and they are RIGHT NEXT TO EACH OTHER (maybe this is changed now). I accidentally click the "all tabs" one too many times. Also, because I'm so used to using IE I will accidentally click the 'X' in the top right corner to close the browser, only to realize that there were a few more tabs I wanted to visit before exiting (I thought I had them in regular browser windows)! Maybe this is just me, too.

the behemoth awakens. (1)

yagu (721525) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916565)

I welcome the upgrade -- it's really about time! But, I find MS' marketing/business strategy disrespectful at best, patently offensive otherwise. I've long been downloading and installing alternative browsers for people who were fed up with IE and its almost uncountable warts, security problems, etc. And people have absolutely fallen in love with the suite of other features in alternative browsers. A common lament from these mostly MS users was, "Why can't IE do this?", or "Why doesn't IE have this feature?". I pointed out that it was because MS didn't have to respond to the marketplace, because they owned it. This was when they had successfully squashed Netscape at modest cost, and reached more the 95% saturation of the markeplace.

NOW they're responding to slipping numbers once again. They only respond to this niche when they must... what a rude approach. They claim they've needed to continue business unfettered to allow their continued "creativity" and "innovation". Hockey puck! They're running scared with IE now not to satisfy pent up demand but to fend off horrible competitive consequences. It's their right to run the business that way, but I find it offensive they get to do it.

Firefox 1.0 (1)

Southpaw018 (793465) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916568)

...is scheduled to be released soon. Does this mean MS is taking notice of the Open Soruce (and far superior) software out there, and they're rushing to beat FF1?

Before microsoft steals ideas... (1)

ActionJesus (803475) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916570)

Does anyone own tabbed browsing/built in customisable search engine bar/etc copyrights? I realise that firefox is open source and all, but can microsoft just steal the idea without so much as a thank-you? Is there prior art before firefox?

Just in case microsoft decides to put it in and go "ooh, look what we invented, lets patent it hey its ours"

Does the mozilla public license [mozilla.org] help at all? (had a quick look, but only seems to cover source code itself)
(Note: i havent used safari/opera, and theres more than likely non-browsers programs that do similar things, but just a thought....)

Feedback (2, Interesting)

Shinglor (714132) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916578)

I didn't buy their request for user feedback. I'm sure they know exactly what is wrong with their browser. They're not stupid, just evil.

It doesn't matter whether they add tabbed browsing, RSS feed integration or any other interface improvements as long as they support XHTML1.1/CSS2 and the recommended modules of CSS3. If users want features they can easily switch to Opera but as a web developer I have no choice but to make my pages work in IE. So until IE fades out of common usage or it is updated to support current standards, the development of the web be halted and we'll be stuck with 1990s web technology.

Tell them what you think (1)

mmmuttly (631983) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916585)

Feel free to go here and tell them to get on the stick. I should bill them for all the unpaid hours I put in trying to make their buggy CSS work. I hates them hates them hates them

tabbed browsing != greater efficiency (1)

x3ro (628101) | more than 9 years ago | (#9916586)

Tabbed browsing allows the user to view multiple sites within a single browser window, saving system resources that would otherwise be used by multiple browser launches.
.. can any Windows developers shed any light on this? My assumption is that it's bullshit, and the chrome for a new browser window (not a new instance of the app) would be roughly equivelant to the resources needed for a new tab. 'Multiple browser launches' are not necessary (unless you want a fresh session).
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>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account