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 Ends IE for Mac

Zonk posted more than 8 years ago | from the who-needs-ie-anyway dept.

Internet Explorer 728

RandomMacUser writes "A while ago, Microsoft stopped updating IE for Mac, freezing it at version 5. But according to this Microsoft webpage, all support will cease December 31, 2005, and any official distribution with cease January 31, 2006. Also, the webpage suggests 'that Macintosh users migrate to more recent web browsing technologies such as Apple's Safari.'"

cancel ×


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

I'm bummed. (3, Funny)

yroJJory (559141) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287415)

Yeah right.

Long live Safari and Firefox!

Re:I'm bummed. (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14287476)

It would be nice and save all us with Non-techie friends/relatives if they discontinued IE on the latest Winblows operating system.

Re:I'm bummed. (1)

leathered (780018) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287486)

Agreed, but don't forget where Safari comes from [] .

Reading this on Konq now, an excellent browser with much promised for version 4.

Frist ps07!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14287418)

Frist ps07!!

I CALL B.S. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14287419)


Microsoft admit defeat? (-1, Offtopic)

RalphSleigh (899929) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287426)

There must be some evil world domination plan reason for this. But the less I.E. the better..

Re:Microsoft admit defeat? (3, Funny)

sseymour1978 (939809) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287514)

Umm.. only world domination technique here..

1) Bad browser for mac takes it to the knees.
2) While windows version is good and shiny...

Too hard to implement. cancelled.

MS gets wise (-1, Flamebait)

Beuno (740018) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287427)

Good thing they're recognizing that there are much better products then theirs

Re:MS gets wise (1)

jZnat (793348) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287502)

That, and they're also realising that developing applications for Mac OSX is not worth the effort when you make your own OS in the first place. Sure, they'll probably continue to release MS Office for OSX, but that's about it (I hope).

Re:MS gets wise (5, Insightful)

Michalson (638911) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287622)

Exactly. IE is a free product, but costs Microsoft money to develop (it's not just a port of Windows IE). Office for Mac makes money, but IE only exists to try and "enrich" whatever platform it's on. Back in the day IE was actively developed for the Mac (along with some major cash from Microsoft being pumped into Apple's stock) it was because Apple was down on it's luck.

There was no way Microsoft was going to let it's main "competitor" die off. If Apple disappeared, it would allow enough space in the desktop market for a new, real competitor to enter (like Linux - at the moment Linux has to compete with both Windows *and* OS X, making it much harder to be accepted as a mainstream consumer desktop OS).

A long as Apple is in the picture taking up the number 2 position, Microsoft has a safety against real competition on the desktop, simply because of how certain brand markets tend to operate (Coke vs. Pepsi, Intel vs. AMD, etc). Now that Apple is doing well, there is no reason for Microsoft to pay extra money to keep Apple in the game. They can just sit back and watch Apple act as an albatros in the plans of Linux and any other potential desktop competitor, safe in the knowledge that Apple itself will never actually grow beyond a certain percentage of the market.

Interesteing Problems (5, Interesting)

ben_white (639603) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287429)

I use a Mac and love it, but I am concerned about this development, as there are few websites (including my bank) which don't work with Safari (and my bank's web pages don't load correctly on Firefox).

Re:Interesteing Problems (4, Insightful)

amembleton (411990) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287471)

Well, if Mac users cannot get hold of a supported copy of IE, then it might force websites (such as your bank), to test their websites against browsers other than IE.

Re:Interesteing Problems (4, Insightful)

garcia (6573) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287608)

Or, in a more likely scenario, they aren't going to care and they will continue to only support IE for Windows or other browsers that happen to closely mimic its behavior.

And switching banks because of browser compatibility isn't an option for most people.

Re:Interesteing Problems (1)

toadlife (301863) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287683)

Unfortunately your scenario is the more likely one. Big banks are like that. Induvidual customers mean almost nothing to them. If a large bank lost every single customer that used a Mac, it would make no difference to them finacially.

Re:Interesteing Problems (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14287475)

Get a better bank

Re:Interesteing Problems (5, Insightful)

Hiro Antagonist (310179) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287490)

Have you told your bank? Because problems like this never get fixed if nobody complains. More importantly, if you tell them that their pages are broken in Firefox/Safari, and they tell you to get IE, switch banks, because businesses tend to listen when they lose customers because of things like this. When you close your accounts, and they ask the reason, tell them why.

You wouldn't buy a lawnmower that only worked on 'Black & Decker' grass, you wouldn't buy a knife that only cut 'Chicago Cutlery' brand onions, so why the hell would you do business with a bank that forces you to use tools that you don't want to, namely, Windows and IE?

Re:Interesteing Problems (1)

tburling (862578) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287556)

Wachovia's online banking requires IE for a subset of their services. I have complained but their response was to explain that their website is designed only for IE users. I'm actively looking for a new bank; preferably one that works better with MoneyDance (

They are entitled to code for IE only and I am entitled to vote with my feet. This announcement should speed me along a little.

Re:Interesteing Problems (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14287620)

... businesses tend to listen when they lose customers because of things like this.

No, nowadays they just sue their competitors or customers.

Re:Interesteing Problems (2, Interesting)

thesnarky1 (846799) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287633)

What he said.

I've tested my bank against all the browsers I can get my hands on. It works quite pleasingly. Displays the same on all of them.

I've also recently closed a bank account due to poor service, and they asked ye olde "why are you choosing to switch away from us?" I had the good pleasure of expressing my complaints, and the person on the other side said "Huh, haven't heard that before, I'll pass it along." Whether they did or not, I don't know, but they DO care about business, and some employees even like to see their business succeed.

I know some businesses around my college don't test on certain browsers because they think no one uses them. I was helping one guy out, and mentioned I use Firefox, and he was taken aback.

Unfortunatly (or perhaps fortunatly) it IS still a Microsoft world, and many people don't know other browsers exist. I you come across a website/company that doesn't utilize a browser, let them know, it does work.

Re:Interesteing Problems (1)

bigtrike (904535) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287670)

You wouldn't buy a lawnmower that only worked on 'Black & Decker' grass, you wouldn't buy a knife that only cut 'Chicago Cutlery' brand onions, so why the hell would you do business with a bank that forces you to use tools that you don't want to, namely, Windows and IE?

I hope this will get more sites to work with non IE browsers aas well, but a lot of people will just think "why buy a computer which might not work with your bank?"

Re:Interesteing Problems (1, Insightful)

the_instigator (679233) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287494)

You can struggle on with ie5 while you lobby your bank to updgrade it's web client... yeah. right. But still, I think this is a skewed perspective on the actual problem here.

Re:Interesteing Problems (1)

The NPS (899303) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287513)

My bank actually just recently migrated away from supporting only IE. Yours, and others will hopefully have to follow suit.

Buy a Windows PC (-1, Flamebait)

rsilvergun (571051) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287541)

sorry, but you're basically screwed. Your in the dreaded niche within a niche (a Mac user who won't shell out $300 for a windows pc or virtual pc). And while you do bring some money to the table, you're also a hugh support headache. I guess you could vote with your dollars (if you're in the states works fine in Firefox). Still, unless the number of Firefox/Safari users goes way up, you're probably not going to see support, or only partial support at best.

Re:Buy a Windows PC (1)

gnuLNX (410742) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287576)

Perhaps, but there are quite a few banks that have support for Firefox. Two Banks I use (Key Bank and Citizens..formally charter one) both work fine with Firefox.

Like a previous poster said, vote with your dollars. Yeah it is a pain in the ass to switch banks but it is for a good cause...and everyone needs at least one good cause worth fighting for.

Re: This highlights the actual problem, which is.. (4, Insightful)

fyngyrz (762201) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287634)

...Java, ActiveX and all other client-side processing designs for web sites.

No, really. If the server does all the work and uses nothing but standard CGI, then the web site will work for everyone. Everyone. If you really stick to basics, sites that deal with numbers can work for such crufty old things as text browsers without a glitch. If you must have images (say, for graphing your banking activities) then sticking to JPEG and GIF will again gather in by far the widest array of users.

Every time some developer chooses client-side processing of any kind, they are locking out users. Which is form over function, and as such, I think is a very poor decision.

It's one thing to be bleeding edge when you're showing off and nothing depends on it; it's entirely another to get the blood from your legitimate clients because you want to use new stuff.

Re:Interesteing Problems (5, Interesting)

Androclese (627848) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287616)

I had the same problem with Bank One (Chase). I explained to them that they needed to get with the times and update their website; especially considering that IE is full of security holes and no developed for on Mac.

She told me nothing was going to change.

She was wrong.

I changed banks to one that had Safari / Camino / Firefox browser support.

Re:Interesteing Problems (3, Informative)

SethJohnson (112166) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287643)

Wells Fargo is browser-independent.


Re:Interesteing Problems (1)

fyngyrz (762201) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287680)

WF works with Safari, Firefox and Omniweb, but only Omniweb will remember the password — so there are some minor behavior differences. If you hav security issues at home, this may not be minor, either. :-)

Who is really suprised? (2, Insightful)

solaufein (576986) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287430)

Somehow not suprised. Though, IE 5.1.7 (?) for OS 9 worked better than Netscape (At least IMHO.) Will MS then stop offering Office for OS X? I doubt it, as that is their last real in as it relates to X.

Hmmm. (5, Funny)

Caspian (99221) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287431)

...the webpage suggests 'that Macintosh users migrate to more recent web browsing technologies such as Apple's Safari.'

In other news, the RNC chairperson suggested 'that Republicans migrate to other parties such as the Democratic party', and North Korean leader Kim Jung-Il suggest that 'North Koreans embrace alternative political systems, such as capitalism'...

Re:Hmmm. (1)

tarquin_fim_bim (649994) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287546)

Too bad about the flamebait abomination, it made me laugh. More power to your dissapearing karma.


Parent was not Flamebait. (1)

Caspian (99221) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287629)

It was an attempt at pointing out irony. (You insensitive clods!)

What the? (5, Funny)

omeomi (675045) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287433)

The next article down the page says: "Find out how Internet Explorer 5 for Mac can show you the Internet in new, exciting ways." ???

Chalk one up for truth in advertising. (4, Funny)

JonTurner (178845) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287467)

>>Internet Explorer 5 for Mac can show you the Internet in new, exciting ways.

Well, getting hacked *IS* exciting. Downloading antispyware updates would be a new experience for most Mac users.

At least they're honest.

Re:Chalk one up for truth in advertising. (1)

generic-man (33649) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287589)

You clearly have never used IE for Mac. The browser renders pages so slowly that it'd take years for a hack to come through.

Whats next? (1)

woja (633458) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287435) telling everyone that they are ceasing IE for PC and for everyone to use firefox?

Re:Whats next? (1)

netkid91 (915818) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287528)

Only in my dreams. Bill, is that you?

What? (5, Funny)

trepidation_i_am (868811) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287436)

They dont recomend Firefox? Well I never..

Thank you Microsoft (1)

NaCh0 (6124) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287440)

This is good news for web developers everywhere.

Now for those old NS4 and IE4's out there... (1)

penguinoid (724646) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287442)

Since when does Microsoft admit it is not the best and recomends a competitor? OK, so they quit support, but still...

Haha! (0)

mikejz84 (771717) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287448)

"It is recommended that Macintosh users migrate to more recent web browsing technologies such as Apple's Safari." Now look to the picture on the right!--See What you're missing!

Confused (0, Redundant)

ChowRiit (939581) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287449)

I must admit, I never really saw why anyone would WANT to use Internet Explorer on a Mac - the only reason I have in installed on my Windows machines is soley for Windows Update...

Re:Confused (2, Funny)

m50d (797211) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287460)

They don't. They just click the blue e for internet icon.

Re:Confused (2, Insightful)

amembleton (411990) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287483)

the only reason I have in installed on my Windows machines is soley for Windows Update

How do you not have it installed on your machines? By default IE is installed with Windows and I haven't managed to remove it.

Re:Confused (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14287580)

I believe MacIE5.2+ (if there is a newer version) was more advanced than WinIE5.5 for quite a few standards, both in HTML and CSS. A lot of graphic designers were using it a few years ago the way web designers are using Firefox and Opera now, for development, as most things worked. To this day some things in IE Mac are more standardized than IE6.0 on Win.

Time Magazine Cover (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14287452)

Time must have known about this generous gift to Mac users for some time.

Thank you Microsoft, tis the season for giving!

Too bad Microsoft doesn't care as much for their own OS users...

Merry Christmas (1)

penguinoid (724646) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287487)

Thank you Microsoft, tis the season for giving!

When I think of x-mas, I think of baby Santa Claus lying in a manger, under a plastic x-mas tree with a pile of presents. Tis the season for spending money!

Speaking of Safari ( (4, Interesting)

SuperficialRhyme (731757) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287453)

Speaking of safari, does anyone know why some websites are locking out safari users?

I got caught in the net to catch them by some messed up code (using Firefox on Linux) as my wife gets the "we don't support safari" error message from

Is there something safari doesn't support that would need? or what reason is there to lock out your userbase?

Changing the user-agent string apparently fixes things, but who wants to order from a company that doesn't allow you as a customer?

Anyone have any answers as to what breaks on the page in safari?

Re:Speaking of Safari ( (0, Flamebait)

QuietLagoon (813062) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287512)

does anyone know why some websites are locking out safari users?

This is part of the reason why Microsoft is dropping support for IE on the Mac. Many sites are IE-specific, now all those Mac users will be unable to surf those websites, making OS-X a little less enticing to those who would switch from Windows. Just when OS-X is starting to gain some legs. What a coincidence.

Re:Speaking of Safari ( (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14287557)

yup. Not working on any version of Linux as far as I can see.
Citibank also doesnt like me using linux, but will allow me to once I navigate through a few screens telling me I am naughty.

Re:Speaking of Safari ( (4, Interesting)

SuperficialRhyme (731757) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287567)

Well, amusingly enough doesn't allow IE on the Mac either. Only Netscape 7+ and Firefox.

Here's the full message:

        We're sorry, but we do not support the version of the browser you are using.
        Our site works best with the following browsers:

        PC users
        Internet Explorer 5.5 and above Download browser
        Netscape 7 and above Download browser
        Mozilla (including Firefox) 1.0 and above Download browser

        Mac users
        Netscape 7 and above Download browser
        Mozilla (including Firefox) 1.0 and above Download browser

        We're working on supporting Safari. Please check back soon.

Re:Speaking of Safari ( (1)

JPriest (547211) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287691)

Right now Apple could not wage all out war with MS becasue they depend on them to provide some software for the Mac. This isn't as important as not needing Office any more, but it is one small step closer to an independant Apple.

Re:Speaking of Safari ( (1)

gnasher719 (869701) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287520)

>> Anyone have any answers as to what breaks on the page in safari?

Probably a hard-coded check for browsers that the webpage has been tested with: Either Netscape 7 or Firefox on the Macintosh, that's what the error message on says (note that it does _not_ say "We don't support safari", that would mean they would recognise Safari).

About the most stupid webpage that I found complained that I didn't have Flash installed. I do have Flash installed. Then they directed me to a webpage where I could download Flash for Windows. Believe me, Flash for Windows wouldn't do me any good whatsoever, because I am one hundred percent sure it doesn't run on a Macintosh.

Did I mention that 90 percent of these problems are caused by sheer stupidity? If the web designer isn't stupid, then there is no need to _support_ any modern browser, just write decent HTML.

Re:Speaking of Safari ( (1)

SuperficialRhyme (731757) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287555)

I'm sorry, I should have posted the whole story. It's at my website (from this morning) but I didn't want people hitting it. Anyway, it happens with most of the Gap Inc. websites. They all used to say "Unsupported Browser: Safari" in the title bar, but that has since disappeared from all but

The sites affected are:

Interestingly enough another gap inc. site: is not affected, though it is an entirely flash (shudder) page.

Re:Speaking of Safari ( (1)

lubricated (49106) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287522)

I just tried it in firefox. I think it doesn't support firefox either. At least not 1.5.

Re:Speaking of Safari ( (1)

SuperficialRhyme (731757) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287542)

I'm using firefox on linux (there's more at my website and the ubuntu forums). Are you using it on windows or linux?

Re:Speaking of Safari ( (1)

Tony Hoyle (11698) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287702)

Works fine on firefox 1.5 here (Windows version).

Maybe it's detecting you're running Linux or something?

Re:Speaking of Safari ( (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14287544)

They have the former CEO of Gap on their BoD. Seems like an odd coding mistake to make.

Re:Speaking of Safari ( (1)

jspoon (585173) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287547)

It's probably because Gap is still pissed off from when Steve JObs was their CEO.

Re:Speaking of Safari ( (2, Interesting)

skurk (78980) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287565)

No idea. Maybe it's a "better safe than sorry" approach, who knows. The least they could do is add a "Click here to continue at your own risk" link.

My bank says they don't support Safari either, but when I set it to identify as, say, Windows MSIE 6.0, it works like a charm. Same goes for

I guess this is what happens when you spoon feed developers with only one technology. :-/

Same story with Linux, FF and Opera (1)

DoddyUK (884783) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287572)

It's the same story with Opera 8.51. No matter what the User Agent option is set to, I'm refused entry to this site supposedly because they do not "support the version of the browser" I am using. Strange thing is, I'm also denied access to the site when viewing in Firefox 1.0.7.

Though the fact I'm running Ubuntu Linux may have something to do with it, though that shouldn't be the case as the site gives instructions for "PC Users" as opposed to "Windows Users".

So, I'm running Ubuntu Linux on a PC and browsing using Mozilla Firefox 1.0.7. So, in theory, shouldn't that give me access, as described in their instructions? Even the title bar says it's a Browser problem, as opposed to an OS incompatability. Though why issues with an OS should play on a commercial website, I don't know.

Re:Same story with Linux, FF and Opera (2, Interesting)

SuperficialRhyme (731757) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287592)

This thread from the ubuntu forums [] might be of interest to you. I couldn't figure out why I was getting stuck this morning, so I wondered if it was just an ubuntu issue (or all firefox on linux). Apparently someone with FC3 was also locked out, so it seems they've locked out linux users.

Re:Speaking of Safari ( (1)

EvilMonkeySlayer (826044) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287573)

Support most likely, gap will probably have some support plebs who read from scripts who are only probably trained to support IE and maybe another browser or two like Navigator 4.7 or Firefox. It's incredibly short sighted and not very bright either. But, that's what the business world is very often like.

It's also possible that the people who created the site aren't fully competent (see business world reason above).

I just tried visiting the site myself (with UA switcher extension set to Safari) and was amazed that it wouldn't let me in if I had JS or cookies disabled as well.
This surprised the heck out of me, it's like saying we won't let you browse our shop if we at first ensure we can take note of everything you look at. Would you like it if you went into a gap shop and they stopped you at the door and said you can only enter this shop if you allow a minder to watch everything you do and also do you mind if we look in your bag to make sure you have some money?
It's bad business, even if someone isn't buying. A person just browsing has the chance of returning in the future as a buyer.

Re:Speaking of Safari ( (1)

Canyon Rat (103953) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287686)

Here is what I get when I view the Gap site in Safari:

"We're sorry, but we do not support the version of the browser you are using.
Our site works best with the following browsers:

PC users
Internet Explorer 5.5 and above. Download browser: []
Netscape 7 and above. Download browser: []
Mozilla (including Firefox) 1.0 and above. Download browser: []

Mac users
Netscape 7 and above. Download browser: []
Mozilla (including Firefox) 1.0 and above. Download browser: [] "

It sounds like they have decided to only support a couple of browsers and they reject others based on the useragent string.

Safari & Camino (1, Redundant)

TedTodorov (121485) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287455)

Anything that Safari chokes on (for example some functions on, Camino handles fine. I can't imagine, short of total browser ignorance, why anyone would still be using IE under OS X.

Re:Safari & Camino (1)

SCVirus (774240) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287525)

... how about so someone doesn't have to switch from browser to browser just to view a webpage. IEs major problems on windows are security and spyware do to its massive market share... that is not an issue on a mac as even if 100% of mac users used IE it would still not be a relevent target. So IE on Mac has only a couple annoying IE issues but very rarely are those a problem as websites are designed for IE.

Not the Only News from Microsoft (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14287464)

In related news Microsoft today said they were also stopping the development of Windows. They have decided that it is too outdated to continue patching. The VMS-OS2-Win32, UNIX wannabe is dead technology. The company suggested people buy Linux or OSX solutions instead.

MSN? (1)

EvilMonkeySlayer (826044) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287468)

Wasn't MS continuing development of the IE engine for MSN for Mac?
I remember hearing something about that a long time ago. I could be wrong, just googled and found this [] so I guess I must be wrong. But I swear hearing something about them continuing it for paying MSN users.

Not surprising (2, Interesting)

Bogtha (906264) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287469)

Back when the most recent MSN redesign was launched, it didn't initially work in Internet Explorer on the Mac [] , and that was way back in January. If Microsoft's web developers don't even bother testing in it, then I don't think it's too important to them.

Now if only... (1)

antiaktiv (848995) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287470)

...people stopped using it too. I mean, most "switchers" stay on IE, for some completely unfathomable reason.

Re:Now if only... (1)

Ars Dilbert (852117) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287667)

It's not unfathomable. IE *is* the Internet. Most home users are unable to make a distinction between the Internet content and the application they are using to view that content.

Anecdote: I once set someone's IE home page to about:blank, purely out of habit. I always set mine to a blank page. And sure enough, they called me 30 minutes later: "The Internet is down!"

I've also had many users complain that the Internet was down when MSN was having problems. Yes you've guessed right: was their home page. They didn't understand that they could simply ignore the broken home page and browse somewhere else.

Christmas has come early! (1)

ericdano (113424) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287477)

Thanks Santa. I was hoping for something good for Xmas. And did you deliver. You the Man!

Seriously though, I can't remember the last time I used IE on my Macs. I use Safari a lot, and love the .Mac syncing, so my bookmarks are always the same between the 3 macs I have. In those rare times Safari doesn't work, FireFox is readily available.

On my XP machine, I NEVER use IE. It's always FireFox......

Asshole! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14287570)

On my XP machine, I NEVER use IE. It's always FireFox......

So you're one of the asshole's that's always propagating viruses by not using Windows Update!!! (Windows Update requires IE!)

Meawhile management... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14287480)

Of Apple Computer continues it's outspoken support for Microsoft's Open XML document format and remains quiet as a church mouse on ODF. What bozo's. I must enjoy the 0.005% market share, I hope their share holders do too.

who cares (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14287481)

i.e. is a piece of shit anyways

Demonstrates IE's market dominance (0)

Toby The Economist (811138) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287495)

MS don't need IE on the Mac any more.

It mattered back when IE had real competition.

Now it's just a distraction. The Mac is a niche market and always will be and Firefox isn't a real threat to IE - nothing is, or can be, because IE is bundled with Windows.

Re:Demonstrates IE's market dominance (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14287603)

This kind of attitude is what gives IE it's dominance. That attitude of "Well, heres IE, nothing else is useful." That attitude is dying, which is why teh Fox has it's large (and growing) marketshare.

Re:Demonstrates IE's market dominance (2, Interesting)

gnuLNX (410742) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287625)

"The Mac is a niche market and always will be and Firefox isn't a real threat to IE "

I think you will eat those words in 2 years time.

Damn near all developers are coding on Unix platforms and porting to wintel these day's. With the Mac move to intel processors OSX will become the defacto standard platform that all cross platform applications will work on. Microsoft see's the real threat. Many developers (myself included) only support Unix/Linux and Windows because 3 is just to hard. But with OSX moving to intel it will be a total cake fact it will probably hurt Linux some. I know my primary development machine will become an Apple with OSX on intel procs.

winners and losers (-1, Flamebait)

bcrowell (177657) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287507)

The winners:
  • MS, because they weren't profiting from Mac IE, and it was using up their resources to maintain and support it.
  • Firefox, because this will increase their market share, and encourage web sites that are IE-only to shape up.
The losers:
  • Some Mac users, who will no longer be able to use IE-only sites (such as some banking sites) unless they want to stay with a browser that is no longer being updated (and therefore will more and more unpatched, known security holes).
  • Apple, which over the years has been losing support from software and peripheral vendors, and may some day soon wake up and find itself in third place on the desktop, behind Linux. This is an excuse for people to say "Macintoshes? Hah, they don't even have the blue 'e' thing for getting on the information superhighway!"

Re:winners and losers (4, Interesting)

rekoil (168689) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287562), don't forget there's no IE for Linux to begin with...

Re:winners and losers (3, Interesting)

gnuLNX (410742) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287692)

"Apple, which over the years has been losing support from software and peripheral vendors, and may some day soon wake up and find itself in third place on the desktop, behind Linux"

I would agree except for the fact the Apple is switching to Intel processors which means we will have a BSD unix OS with enough company dollars to add all the polish to the final product. Remember many of us don't mind paying for a good product. The reason I use Linux is because Windows is a horrible platform for developers and Macs are to expensive with obscure hardware (good, but obscure).

Having just used (ok played around with) a friends developer edition Intel Mac I can say that I am sold. We are both Unix developers who port applications to Windows. He does all his development on the Mac side and let me just say I am envious. For the most part he has a solid Unix platform that just plain works. That and combined with some of the developer tools on the Mac like the shark profiler...shit I am sold. I love Linux like a little brother. A naggin little brother that alway's needs tinkering with. When it comes time to for development I don't want to dink around with getting video cards working so my OpenGL app renders correctly on every card (this is a bigger problem than you might expect). I also don't want to test the application on every damned Linux distribution out there. Nope I want to sit down and code to a standard machine (Intel-OSX) and then port it to the other platforms. basically I am a wanna be Mac developer. I can't justify the cost of a Mac right now since they are switching platforms, but soon...ah yes. soon.

However I am a developer and not Joe six pack (Joe doesn't like the same beers as me!!). However I do believe that many developers will be sold on the Mac platform and this will create a large spike in applications running on both Mac and Linux. I personally think the OSX/Linux combo will be the 1-2 punch for Microsoft. Steve just has to get the computers to a reasonable price...still charge a premium but make it affordable for Joe Belgian style six pack.

disclaimer: For the most part I am an idiot...I tried to audition for an idiot role in a film, but did not get the part. I have never slept in a Holiday in Express so you should probably take what I say with a small grain of salt.


It's not just the mac version (3, Informative)

Bert64 (520050) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287508)

The windows version hasn't seen major updates for years... In many ways the mac version is more up to date than the windows version, at least it has vastly superior CSS support.

A good thing for all non-IE users (1)

mack knife (96580) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287521)

While this development might seem to be an affront to Mac users who need IE to access certain websites (banks etc), I think in the long run this will help anyone who uses an alternative (non-IE browser). Websites can no longer just say "You need to use IE," lest they lock out all Mac users. They'll need to move away from proprietary content, which is a good thing for everyone.

the reason (1)

know1 (854868) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287523)

it won't be as responsive on mac as on windows as it won't have access to hidden memory and processor power, so they don't want peoples ideas of IE to be sullied by....a level playing field

good news... (-1, Flamebait)

logik3x (872368) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287527)

This is good news.. has anyone using IE5 is retarded... it's has secure has yelling your pin number when you enter it...

Risky Move - (1)

Ruff_ilb (769396) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287532)

On one hand, people will think "Gah, I don't want to buy a Mac, they don't have IE!"

But when they actually TRY safari/FF, they'll realize that these browsers are AT LEAST as good as IE, and switch over for sure.

Could go either way.

Once A Great Project (5, Interesting)

sophiaknows (939814) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287536)

It's been easy to hate on since MS stopped updating it in like 2001 anyway. But IE 5 for Mac was the best and most standards compliant browser on any platform the day it was released. Awesome work by the original team. Sad it came from MS. Sadder still that they basically abandoned it once their contractual obligations to Apple were up

Can't... say... it! (1)

menkhaura (103150) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287578)

more recent web browsing technologies such as Apple's Safari or... Fir... Firef... Firefly... Fireox... Firexof...

A casualty of the Intel transition (5, Insightful)

rekoil (168689) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287598)

This is most likely due to the upcoming Intel transition. IE is written against the Carbon APIs (and most likely in CodeWarrior), which by all accounts (including Jobs himself) takes substantially more code refactoring to make Intel-compatible than a Cocoa application. IE simply looked at the dev costs of continued maintenance in light of making it Mactel compatible, and said "meh, it's not doing anything for us anyway". And they need those brains working on porting Office:mac, which actually does make MS money. Personally, I haven't launched IE on my Mac in months, so I doubt I'm going to miss it.

Re:A casualty of the Intel transition (3, Insightful)

sophiaknows (939814) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287654)

This is completely a product of the fact that back when MS was facing white hot antitrust heat in the late 90s they made an agreement with Apple to create and support new versions of Office and IE for the Mac for a period of years. Those years are now up. They'll probably release new version of Office because there is still money in it. But supporting IE on Mac gaint them nothing that their overwhelming market dominance doesn't already give em.

That makes sense (1)

teslatug (543527) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287599)

This makes sense, Microsoft is trying to move towards standards compliance since they restarted IE development. Why should they invest energy in the Mac platform, when a (more) standards compliant browser like Safari not only exists, but is supported by Apple. Of course, they won't be able to provide Mac users with the custom crap that runs only on IE, but that's just a tiny nudge to see if they'll move to Windows. I personally don't see this as a bad thing. It will encourage developers to code to standards as they'll no longer have a supported version of IE to fall back on Macs.

Windows comes with the very basic tools (1)

E8086 (698978) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287607)

Those sorry excuses for application included with the generic Windows installation are only temporary tools to use until you pick a better one. IE is needed until you pick a better browser to upgrade to, Firefox/Mozilla or Opera, and to get Windows updates. Wordpad works until you get MS Office or OpenOffice. And Windows Media player is a poor temporary substitue until you can get Media Player Classic or VideoLan player, when will RealNetworks learn and stop their useless lawsuits. And you have Paint until you get Photoshop or some other image editor. They don't have to compete with other options, they only have to be there for temporary use until you decide on another better application to use in place of them.
Makes sense, Apple should know OSX the best and 'should' be able to make the best browser to go with their OS. IE for Mac is a leftover from when there was no Mac browser and people had to choose between IE and Netscape, and from what I remeber neither worked very well.

Who uses IE on Mac anyways? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14287617)

I can always flip over to my XP box if some page won't display properly on Safari.

I had a few show up a little mal-formatted, but never had the urge to crank up IE on a Mac...

Seems like a wast of time to me (5, Funny)

stunt_penguin (906223) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287631)

Couldn't they have just emailed both people still using IE on the Mac and saved themselves the trouble of a whole press release.

How is this support different than years ago? (0, Redundant)

hackstraw (262471) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287648)

My Mac came with IE when I got it in 2004 (I guess Apple does not fear competition). It is the currently available version when I choose Internet Explorer -- About.... It shows me the version number and copyright information and that it is the currently available version. Also, there is a Support... button. That brings up a dialog box that ignores my "Click to here on a slider vs a page at a time" global setting that shows a bunch of text that is not selectable to copy and paste, but formatted in a readable format. There is a Save... button that saves all of this information to a extensionless file that when you click on it, it loads IE with that document that is not formatted which you will find exactly as follows including all formatting and the Times font at the end of this post. What kind of support is this, and how is this different than what is at least 2 years old? I've only used IE on my Mac to either debug a buggy website maybe a year to 18 months ago before compatabilites or whatever has changed that I can use Safari for everything. I've never came across software that has ever had this kind of "support".

I've heard that Office is good for the Mac, but I've only seen it, mostly PowerPoint, but have never used it. IE for the Mac is old and pretty lame. Windows Media Player is also old, very resource intensive, and does not play so many of the WMVs out there that I only download one if I'm very curios in the video and it is not available in another format, and it may or may not work.

Below is the "Support Information" file's contents formatted exactly as it is displaying in IE now:

This dialog contains essential hardware and software configuration information that describes your computer system. This information is needed by Technical Support to assist you in resolving any problems you may encounter. Explorer Version: 5.2.3 (5815.1) Encryption: 128 Bit User Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.23; Mac_PowerPC) Machine Type: Unknown System Version: System 10.3.9 TCP/IP Software: Open Transport - version 16.3.0 Drag Manager: 68K & PPC Version Text Encoding Converter: Version 1.9.0 System Memory: 2097,148K Bytes Loaded plug-ins: DRM Plugin.bundle (no version info): Mimetypes currently handled by DRM Plugin.bundle: application/x-drm Flash Player Enabler.plugin (8.0 r22): Mimetypes currently handled by Flash Player Enabler.plugin: application/x-shockwave-flash application/futuresplash Java Applet Plugin Enabler (no version info): Mimetypes currently handled by Java Applet Plugin Enabler: application/x-java-applet application/x-java-applet;version=1.3.1 application/x-java-applet;version=1.3 application/x-java-applet;version=1.2.2 application/x-java-applet;version=1.2.1 application/x-java-applet;version=1.2 application/x-java-applet;version=1.1.3 application/x-java-applet;version=1.1.2 application/x-java-applet;version=1.1.1 application/x-java-applet;version=1.1 application/x-java-vm NP-PPC-Dir-Shockwave (9.0): Mimetypes currently handled by NP-PPC-Dir-Shockwave: application/x-director QuickTime Plugin.plugin (7.0.3): Mimetypes currently handled by QuickTime Plugin.plugin: application/sdp application/x-sdp application/x-rtsp video/msvideo video/flc audio/mid audio/vnd.qcelp audio/vnd.qcelp audio/AMR audio/x-gsm audio/aac audio/x-aac audio/x-caf video/x-mpeg video/3gpp audio/3gpp video/3gpp2 audio/3gpp2 audio/x-m4a audio/x-m4p audio/x-m4b video/sd-video application/x-mpeg video/x-m4v audio/x-mpeg video/mp4 audio/mp4 audio/x-mpeg audio/mpeg3 audio/x-mpeg3 image/x-macpaint image/pict image/x-quicktime image/x-sgi image/x-targa image/x-tiff image/jp2 image/jpeg2000 image/jpeg2000-image image/x-jpeg2000-image image/x-bmp Other mimetypes QuickTime Plugin.plugin can handle: video/quicktime video/x-msvideo video/avi video/quicktime audio/x-wav audio/wav audio/aiff audio/x-aiff audio/basic audio/x-midi audio/midi video/mpeg audio/mpeg audio/mpeg audio/mp3 audio/x-mp3 image/x-pict image/png image/x-png image/tiff RealPlayer Plugin (no version info): Other mimetypes RealPlayer Plugin can handle: audio/x-pn-realaudio-plugin Windows Media Plugin (9.0.0 (3307)): Mimetypes currently handled by Windows Media Plugin: application/x-mplayer2 video/x-ms-asf-plugin application/asx video/x-ms-asf video/x-ms-asf audio/x-ms-wma video/x-ms-wmv audio/x-ms-wax video/x-ms-wvx video/x-ms-wm video/x-ms-wmp application/x-ms-wmd video/x-ms-wmx Default Plugin Carbon.cfm (no version info): Mimetypes currently handled by Default Plugin Carbon.cfm: *

Corporate software depends on activeX (1)

Hackeron (704093) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287663)

Software like Accipiter that costs around $5,000 per month for a basic license depends on IE6. We had to find out the hard way that our new shiny Macs failed to work with the IE5 for Mac and now all support is being dropped, great...

Hell, we all know IE is a pos and I witnessed the CIO cracking Accipiter's encryption within 5 minutes (!!) but IE on a Mac was a selling point for the upper management and its a shame to see the support go.

I see IE all the time on Macs (1, Redundant)

pbooktebo (699003) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287676)

I can't believe that some folks use this as their default browser, but so many do. I constantly see people click an email link and see IE pop up as their default browser (pun intended, as there are always a bunch of pop-up ads unblocked).

I feel a bit sad for them, but it is usually more trouble to get them comfortable with a new browser. I'll make the suggestion, but some folks just don't want to deal with the change.

I don't know it IE is still shipped with Macs, but it will be nice once it is gone and folks are using a more up to date browser.

Office, not IE, would be the killer (4, Insightful)

Nice2Cats (557310) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287694)

Apple doesn't have to care about IE, because Safari and Firefox do the trick a lot better now anyway. What Apple has to be scared shitless about, however, is Microsoft killing Office for OS X. There is nothing in the Apple universe to replace MS Office at the moment for Joe Average -- NeoOffice/J (OpenOffice for the Mac) works fine for me, but most Apple users I know gag on it not being completely aquified. Without a full office suite -- single programs like Pages doen't count -- Mac sales plummet. And please don't even mention Apple Works, which should be taken out and given a clean, quick, merciful death.

I have no idea why Apple let themselves get into this situation where Microsoft can do very serious damage any time they want. What Apple should do is a second Safari -- admit they can't support a complete office suite by themselves and start pushing a version based on NeoOffice/J or OpenOffice. Sooner or later, Bill Gates is going to pull the plug.

Don't forget Opera.. (4, Informative)

the_rajah (749499) | more than 8 years ago | (#14287704)

The Mac version of Opera works great, too. I've got four browsers on my old iMac G3-333 that runs Tiger. IE, Safari, Firefox and Opera. My linux boxes have Firefox, Opera and Konqueror. My bank's site gives me a non-supported browser warning when I access their site with Opera, but allows me to proceed and, other than some minor rendering problems, works OK.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?