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 Ends IE on the Mac

CmdrTaco posted more than 8 years ago | from the clearly-macs-are-more-secure-now dept.

Internet Explorer 289

ron_ivi writes "Microsoft is to cease IE support for Apple's Mac on Dec 31st of this year." And with this change, every mac on the internet will become even more secure than their Windows based counterparts. CT Deja Vu 'eh? Sorry.

cancel ×

289 comments

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

from the-dupe-dept. (3, Insightful)

u2boy_nl (927513) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298554)

Posted by Zonk on Sunday December 18, @11:47PM
from the who-needs-ie-anyway dept.

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.'"

http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/12/18/ 227225&tid=113&tid=3 [slashdot.org]

Re:from the-dupe-dept. (0, Redundant)

penguinwhoflew (904673) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298582)

I, for one, welcome our new amnesiac overlords.

Give 'em a break (-1, Redundant)

LePrince (604021) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298586)

It's not like they could've typed "mac internet explorer" in their own search engine at the bottom of the frontpage and saw that the 5th link was that article from yesterday...

Or is it ?

Re:Give 'em a break (-1, Redundant)

generic-man (33649) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298652)

When this story was in The Mysterious Future!, I clicked the Internet Explorer topic icon link just to the right of the story text. The old Mac IE story popped up at #1. I even e-mailed CmdrTaco about it, as I did with the RSS story, but my complaints fell on deaf ears. At least Taco got his snarky and irrelevant "security" jab in.

(Safari has had FAR more security problems than IE/Mac ever has, because Safari is tied into Mac OS X and can be used by any application just like Internet Explorer is in Windows.)

Re:Give 'em a break (4, Informative)

Durandal64 (658649) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298775)

You're misunderstanding why Internet Explorer causes security problems. Safari is no different from any other Mac OS X application in that it uses frameworks to do its thing. So if there's a security vulnerability in any framework, every application which uses that framework is vulnerable. WebKit is no better off or worse off. It's just a framework for managing HTML connections and rendering HTML content.

This is not analogous to what Microsoft has done with Internet Explorer. Windows Explorer uses the MSHTML DLL to browse the file system, and Microsoft's HTML integration with the file browser runs so deeply that security flaws which would normally only be minor browser irritants become flaws which can execute arbitrary code in the file browser's memory space. Witness the security travesty that is ActiveX. A browser technology laden with security flaws suddenly becomes an operating system-level problem because of ActiveDesktop.

Apple does not use WebKit for the Finder, and the Finder is far less tied into the underlying OS than Windows Explorer is. The Finder has some special features over other applications, but at the end of the day, it's just another application which can be quit if you don't like it without really losing much. In Windows, it's a different story. For example, it's impossible to manipulate the Control Panel without Windows Explorer because that interface is guarded by private APIs. Mac OS X uses a separate application to change system settings.

Re:from the-dupe-dept. (-1, Redundant)

PsychicX (866028) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298603)

Hey, this isn't a dupe. The author painfully took the time, instead of writing a review about what the news was about, to take a dig at IE. I mean, so what if Tiger doesn't ship IE any more anyway. So what if IE5 for the Mac is so old that nobody used it unless they really had to. The point is that if given a news story, you can't be wasting your time summarizing it -- especially summarizing a dupe -- when there's perfectly good cheap shots to be taken.

Re:from the-dupe-dept. (-1, Redundant)

squiggleslash (241428) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298664)

The dig at IE is not in italics, which means it's CmdrTaco not the author who came up with this.

In any case, it's only a dupe for those people who haven't checked Zonk off their front page stories. This probably means that 90% of long-time Slashdot readers will be seeing this for the first time here. I have to assume CmdrTaco is one of them...

Re:from the-dupe-dept. (-1, Redundant)

lucabrasi999 (585141) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298624)

I see 13 comments have replied (so far). Of those 13, at least 12 are announcing that this is a DUPE!!!!

While Taco should be ashamed that he let this dupe get through the "Slashdot editing process" (such as it is), why must all 12 posters in my example above think that they were the first (and only) person to realize it was a duplicate story? And, why must all 12 readers insist on posting "DUPE" in ALL CAPS?

Re:from the-dupe-dept. (5, Informative)

Dun Malg (230075) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298689)

why must all 12 posters in my example above think that they were the first (and only) person to realize it was a duplicate story?

They don't think that. It's just that since it is a dupe, the actual content has already been extensively commented on elsewhere, leaving nothing but its status as a dupe to talk about. If you want to read about MS discontinuing IE for the Mac, go back to the original article on the subject. The de facto topic under discussion in duped articles always reverts to "dupes and the lazy, unprofessional /. editors who post them".

Re:from the-dupe-dept. (-1, Redundant)

phase_9 (909592) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298739)

DUPE! (what was that noise? oh my karma hitting the floor...)

It makes you think. (-1, Redundant)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298659)

How many good stories which could have gotten a good converstation going got rejected because of this dupe. I for one usually feel really annoyed if I post a story it gets rejected right before a dupe pops up. This was a good article it had a good posting. All this will do is give people an other chance to say the same thing they did a couple of days ago. Dupes that are a couple of months old are understandable. But when they are still on top of a sub section is just a little to much.

Re:It makes you think. (1)

dhasenan (758719) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298687)

It's probably not that bad. Most likely, there wouldn't have been anything in its place, just a longer delay.

Re:It makes you think. (1)

King Babar (19862) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298740)

How many good stories which could have gotten a good converstation going got rejected because of this dupe.

Probably not so many. My last story got rejected, but it was just the latest ThinkSecret rumor about Yonah-based notebooks and minis. To be honest, there aren't that many real Apple stories these days. That should change as we get closer to MacWorld Expo. They might be able to use a real story on the G4- and G5-optimized builds of Firefox, but other than that...I'm not thinking of much.

Sigh (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14298555)

So here I am, obsessively refreshing Slashdot, as we do, and what do I see at the top of the page? Ya sure, I've got mod points, no I haven't meta modded lately. What ho, free day pass?

So I see a big blank page, thanky adblock plus, hit the continue to free day pass link, and what I see? Bright red dupe. Oh wait, but this time with trolling in the janitor's comments!

Hotness. So this is what being a Slashdot subscriber is all about? I'm sold.

Re:Sigh (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14298768)

So you complain about a system which you basically cheated? (subscription system in exchange for viewing an ad).

Way to be a cheap fuck and still whine about it.

Would you like that article in English? (5, Insightful)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298559)

In case you noticed, the linked article [people.com.cn] read like a bad translation from Chinese to English. Probably because it was.

If you'd like a better article regarding this, try out this article which is easier [cbronline.com] and it also contains a relevant quote:
"It is recommended that Macintosh users migrate to more recent web browsing technologies such as Apple's Safari," Microsoft said.
Instead of having to put up with awkward sentences like the following from The People's Daily article:
IE will not be a problem for Apple users because most of them have applied different browsers on their computers.


I hope everyone has "applied" firefox by now.

I'm not going to say anything about this remark:
And with this change, every mac on the internet will become even more secure than their Windows based counterparts.
Other than this is an arguable statement. It's possible that whatever browser has the highest usage rating will have the most virii written for it. If Firefox becomes the dominant browser, it might even be safer to have IE installed on your computer to avoid the latest virus. Yes, a Firefox virus is fixed faster than an IE virus, but it's still a liability.

Re:Would you like that article in English? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14298655)

It's possible that whatever browser has the highest usage rating will have the most virii written for it.

The amount of people using a certain piece of software is NOT a relation to the amount of bugs and flaws it has. We all know about the common IIS vs. Apache argument.

That being said...
The more people that use a specific piece of software, the bigger target it is for hackers/crackers. Software with fundemental flaws and more "powerful" software (direct access to the OS, user data and exe functionality, scripting, excessive privelges etc.), determines the footprint of what it can destory when a flaw is found.

 

Re:Would you like that article in English? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14298694)

'It's possible that whatever browser has the highest usage rating will have the most virii written for it. If Firefox becomes the dominant browser, it might even be safer to have IE installed on your computer to avoid the latest virus. Yes, a Firefox virus is fixed faster than an IE virus, but it's still a liability.'

That is interesting, but not the current situation, you may be dreaming of a day when IE will not have the dominence it now holds.

Re:Would you like that article in English? (4, Insightful)

tpgp (48001) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298711)

If Firefox becomes the dominant browser, it might even be safer to have IE installed on your computer to avoid the latest virus.

Utter nonsense.

In the context of the article this is doubly nonsense because IE for Mac is discontinued and vulnerabilities for it will never be fixed.

In a wider context, its still nonsense. If you're concerned about security, you use the browser with the more secure architecture - not the one with the least users.

Rob considers himself a journalist (1)

MondoMor (262881) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298771)

when it suits him [slashdot.org] .

How he can think of himself as a journalist, yet post editorial flamebait like that is beyond me.

Would it kill him to mark his "editorials" as such? Would it kill him to spend a few minutes a day reading his own blog?

A little attention to detail and integrity would make his "journalistic" pretensions a little easier to swallow.

It's deja vu all over again.... (-1, Redundant)

8127972 (73495) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298563)

.... as this is a DUPE!

http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/12/18/ 227225&tid=113&tid=3 [slashdot.org]

I guess posting dupes is a disease that's spreading.

Re:It's deja vu all over again.... (-1, Offtopic)

Hrodvitnir (101283) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298641)

One more mutation and it could become contagious between DHCP servers!

Yet more bad news for Mac IE users (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14298565)

I just heard on Sunday that they're also ending IE for Mac [slashdot.org] .

3..2...1...DUPE (-1, Redundant)

A beautiful mind (821714) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298567)

DUPE! [slashdot.org]

Retract the story taco while you can.

Re:3..2...1...DUPE (-1, Redundant)

Aielman (735065) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298686)

Which is worse, dupe or redundant? It never fails, when a duplicate is posted there are numerous duplicate posts about it being a duplicate. I might be willing to understand if there were 300 comments and the previous duplicates were buried below threshold, but when there are 33?

Bleh (0, Troll)

Jaysyn (203771) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298569)

I didn't care about this the first time it was posted...

Jaysyn

Not secure... (4, Insightful)

random_culchie (759439) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298572)

And with this change, every mac on the internet will become even more secure than their Windows based counterparts.
Not if they keep using old unsupported software..
Nothing will force them to change from IE. Arguably this makes them even less secure.

Re:Not secure... (2, Interesting)

frodo from middle ea (602941) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298742)

Just to play the devil's advocate.

How does an insecure application (which I don't doubt IE is ), with no hooks in to the kernel space (unlike IE on windows), make mac insecure ?

For argument sake, if IE/Safari/Opera/Firefox all have same # of vulnerabilities in their mac versions. Will they not be equally secure or insecure ?

This is obviously a strong contrast against IE on windows v/s Opera/Firefox on Windows, as IE seems to work a lot in OS or kernel space.

Re:Not secure... (1)

tpgp (48001) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298754)

And with this change, every mac on the internet will become even more secure than their Windows based counterparts.
Not if they keep using old unsupported software..
Nothing will force them to change from IE. Arguably this makes them even less secure.
Hmmmmn, somehow, I doubt that someone using a version of IE on a Mac past the end of 2006 is the sort of person who'd be applying security updates in any case.

I agree with the general gist of your post however - that it's better for software to continue to recieve patches indefinitely then not.

However, outside the Free / Open Source Software world, this is never going to happen.

I love the smell of (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14298574)

duplicates in the morning. Kind of fruity if you ask me. (It goes well with the Aqua-like look to the article on slashdot.)

FIRST DUPE POST (-1, Redundant)

Un quebecois (621765) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298575)

Hey..

Re:FIRST DUPE POST (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14298642)

err... in reply to your sig.. "I'm like my code. Fast, Effeciant, Bullet Proof." surely you mean 'efficient'.. but don't change it. That's very funny.

Oh, I see, sorry, you were being funny. Hmm. Okay. :-)

Yes, very funny.

*Sigh* (0, Redundant)

BarryNorton (778694) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298576)

Not only is this a dupe, but the horrid undisguised bias in this crappy new version has already been contradicted in previous comments...

Re:*Sigh* (1)

g0at (135364) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298693)

The commander-taco-in-chief posted this. I think it is meant as a representation of the quality and pride with which he oversees his web site. Pretty appropriated I'd say.

-b

story moderation (-1, Redundant)

JeanBaptiste (537955) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298577)

not just comment moderation

would stop the dupes

redundant? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14298688)

I'm the first person to post that. In this article anyways.

Re:story moderation (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14298736)

Have fun. [kuro5hin.org]

Dupe... (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14298579)

What good is an on-duty-editor if he doesn't read the mail i sent him about this story being a dupe...

Saw this before... (-1, Redundant)

Weatherman-au (572907) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298580)

http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/12/18/ 227225&tid=113&tid=3 [slashdot.org]

Unfortunately I didn't get my mail client open in the five seconds between seeing the preview story and it going live!

Re:Saw this before... (-1, Redundant)

jjeffrey (558890) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298608)

I did. Sent a mail off. A good 10 mins before it went green. Didn't help.

Re:Saw this before... (1)

aed (156746) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298610)

Wouldn't have mattered... I did manage to open my mail client and even send out a mail about this...

Double whammy (0, Redundant)

EiZei (848645) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298588)

They duped the RSS news bit and now this.. the editors are on a roll!

Re:Double whammy (0, Offtopic)

BushCheney08 (917605) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298647)

Ummm, you misspelled 'troll'

Cancelled TWICE? (5, Funny)

JonTurner (178845) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298591)

It's bad enough MSFT cancelled it once, but to do it twice, why that's just cruel.

Re:Cancelled TWICE? (5, Funny)

Pope (17780) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298696)

Mac IE was so bad, they had to cancel it twice just to be safe!

Duping = More secure (0, Offtopic)

Hyperhaplo (575219) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298595)

Are Mac users more secure now that this article has been posted twice?
Is someone trying to cheer MS on here?
Could this be a conspiracy against IE.. on slashdot! of all places? Could people be trying to indicate that IE is so bad that MS can't even be bothered to try and force it down Mac users throats like the do with every other user they get their claws into?
Who knows. Who cares. Go Zonk Go! DUPE! :)

Whoopty f'ing doo (1, Flamebait)

PenguinBoyDave (806137) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298598)

I use Firefox on Mac. IE on Mac sucked. As far as I'm concerned, they are doing everyone a favor by discontinuing it. Safari is better that IE as far as that goes.

This just in... (5, Funny)

Billosaur (927319) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298599)

Microsoft no longer to support IE for Apple [slashdot.org]

In a related story, Apple IE users will no longer be supported [slashdot.org] .

And in business news, Microsoft announced it will discontinue support for IE on the Apple platform [slashdot.org] .

Thank you and good night.

Re:This just in... (-1, Offtopic)

sucker_muts (776572) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298636)

Do slashdot editors ever do a google on their own site?

This could easily stop their horrific dupes, it's not even funny anymore...

It's not a dupe... (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14298752)

... at this rate, it is a quadrupe!

Re:This just in... (-1, Redundant)

ranton (36917) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298660)

When I saw this article, I thought that my browser was broken and using cached pages.

Good to know it wasnt an IE error :-)

Re:This just in... (5, Funny)

BushCheney08 (917605) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298667)

So, anyone know when IE6 for Mac is coming out?

Re:This just in... (1)

thelost (808451) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298792)

while there is a certain amount of humour to this i find little in a journalistic website having such poor standards set for theirselves. surely they wish to be taken seriously? To compare, how often do you see a newspaper running exactly the same story day after day? When you fail to even do the simplest checks to see that something has already been reported on your own website then you start losing journalistic integrity.

Fire Rob Malda (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14298602)

Yeah, I know, it's his "blog," even though the site's own mantra refers to it as "news." Not only is he obviously trolling his own user base, based on a dupe of a post that wasn't here not all that long ago, but it's becoming painfully obvious that he doesn't even read his own site any longer.

Try www.digg.com for a site where the news is placed in the hands of people who should have control -- the visitors. Not lazy sleaze-bags who are willing to post veiled product advertisments, but unwilling to even provide the slightest modicum of quality control on their own site.

Re:Fire Rob Malda (-1, Redundant)

A beautiful mind (821714) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298646)

I'd try dig if they would write a proper interface for comments. I come to slashdot for the comments, the discussion. If Digg can replace that, by all means I'd frequent that place, but currently any kind of discussion sucks on Digg.

Oh thank God... (1, Insightful)

sketchydave (924305) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298605)

Does this finally mean I can stop banging my head on my desk when IE for the Mac decides that CSS stands for Can't See Styles?

dupes aside (3, Insightful)

TedRiot (899157) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298607)

I think this might be a good thing for web in general, because sites need to start supporting web browsers in general if they want to keep their mac users instead of assuming that mac users will want to install IE. Not that mac IE ever behaved like its windows counterpart..

Re: site support for non-IE browsers (1)

rewinn (647614) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298782)

> because sites need to start supporting web browsers in general if they want to keep their mac users instead of assuming that mac users will want to install IE.

Yep, and we're not talking insignificant sites. My credit card company (one of the Big Three) site has important functionality that doesn't work except under IE (...according to their tech support and my attempt to use Safari.)

One assumes MS considered the cost of keeping IE/Mac barely alive was worth more than the risk of forcing such sites to broaden their browserability, which in turn suggests something about MS's acknowledgement of the market role of non-IE browsers.

Mod redundant (-1, Redundant)

Fahrvergnuugen (700293) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298609)

And the top two posts under apple category are.... http://apple.slashdot.org/ [slashdot.org]

Who cares anyway? IE for the mac has been meaningless since Safari arrived.

Back in 1999 it was a very good browser (5, Informative)

YA_Python_dev (885173) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298615)

Everyone please remember that IE/Mac is a very different browser than IE/Win, and back in 1999/2000 it was one of the most standards-compliant [tantek.com] browsers around.

According to The Web Standards Project [webstandards.org] it helped to start the "CSS layout revolution". [webstandards.org]

Do the editors even read slashdot? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14298617)

Sometimes I honestly wonder if the editors even read the site.

Just look at http://apple.slashdot.org/ [slashdot.org] you see the dupes right next to eachother with nearly identical titles! This is just silly.

Day Pass / Paid Accounts (-1, Redundant)

BarryNorton (778694) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298618)

Given that I saw, using the free day pass, that this was a dupe before it was published, I was thinking - can't subscribers be given temporary veto over articles on preview?

Sure it's a potential for misuse, but stories are generally a day behind the other sites here anyway, and accounts could be revoked in the worst case...

Some potential subscribers might feel that they're been abused to do part of the editing process, but so many are bitching about paying for a site full of dupes at the moment that this would probably balance out...

IDIOT MODS (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14298791)

Don't mod off-topic in a dupe!

What exactly is the point of 'daddypants' address? (-1, Redundant)

byolinux (535260) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298620)

I emailed this in as a dupe a half an hour or so before it was posted, but nobody pulled it. Makes me wonder if there's actually any point to it at all... worse still, the IE story was the last thing posted in the Apple section.

In Soviet Russia... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14298622)

story dupes you. Sorry, I had to say it.

Brain-dead comment (2, Insightful)

Malc (1751) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298633)

"And with this change, every mac on the internet will become even more secure than their Windows based counterparts."

Remove this brain dead inflamatory comment, and there's nothing really left of this story. I hope the person submitting it is proud of themselves. Especially considering this is a dupe of a previous front page story.

Furthermore, this comment is just plain wrong. When Microsoft stops support for IE on the Mac, are they going to remove it from all the Macs that already have it? No of course not, so the security situation will not change immediately. I hope Microsoft will continue to supply security patches, otherwise there is a danger that every Mac on the internet with IE will become less secure over time as exploits are found.

Out of curiousity, just how insecure has IE on the Mac been?

Re:Brain-dead comment (4, Insightful)

TeacherOfHeroes (892498) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298751)

I hope Microsoft will continue to supply security patches, otherwise there is a danger that every Mac on the internet with IE will become less secure over time as exploits are found.

Unless thats what they want to happen.

Would it be so bad for MS if the public perception of os x as more secure than windows was damaged a little?

Re:Brain-dead comment (1)

hackstraw (262471) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298779)

"And with this change, every mac on the internet will become even more secure than their Windows based counterparts."

Remove this brain dead inflamatory comment, and there's nothing really left of this story.


Very true. I was going to comment on that and the usual dupe, but both were caught by others (-1 Redundant for me).

However, the "brain dead inflammatory comment" was probably added by an "editor". I decipher the story topics as the following (reading slashcode would confirm that, but I rarely read articles before knowing everything about them :)

user_xyx writes "Something interesting in italics" Followed by editor slant to begin flamewar in regular font.

An "unedited" comment looks like (the next article on the front page):

evilduckie writes "According to this BBC article photos taken by the Mars Global Surveyor show the European Beagle 2 probe which was lost after it apparently crash-landed on Mars."

No extra flamage needed on this!

Since this is a dupe, go ahead and read my -1 Redundant post about IE on Mac "support" here [slashdot.org] . I tried to be more factual, and not as trollish but IE is clearly a substandard product on a Mac. And I said once before, that IE was either never or at least has not been supported for at least a few years.

I've found it unnecessary for so long that I'm not sure if its installed on my Tiger box, and I have not used it in a very, very long time on my Panther box.

Re:Brain-dead comment (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14298794)

Keep in mind that the brain-dead, inflammatory comment was added in by Malda himself. Brain-dead and inflammatory are two words often used in describing the way he's been running this site for a while now.

suggestion (5, Insightful)

lovebyte (81275) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298634)

I am a subscriber.
I sent an email to tell it's a dupe 20 minutes before the story appeared to everyone.
I was hoping it mattered.
I am disappointed.

Since during the last duped story someone suggested a way to avoid dupes, let me add my idea:
During the time the story is not yet fully released:
Allow subscribers to post.
Automatically give 5 moderation points to all subscribers and allow moderation.
Editors, please check the subscribers posts before releasing the story to everyone.
If all is ok, remove the subscribers posts and release story.

Re:suggestion (1)

Skater (41976) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298787)

What makes you think they'd be more likely to check the posts than they would their own email?

Re:suggestion (0, Redundant)

ZorbaTHut (126196) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298790)

That would require the admins and editors to do work. I've seen very little sign of interest in that.

dupe analysis! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14298637)

With all those dupes, it makes one wonder if the /. editors actually read /. at all!
seems like they have better things to do!

Slashdot Ends Dupes on the Intarweb (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14298638)

News at 13.

This is a subject line. (-1, Offtopic)

Meor (711208) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298640)

Thanks for the dupe, faggot. How are you able to post on Slashdot when you don't even read it?.

Two corrections here... (2, Funny)

jht (5006) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298649)

First of all, this is a dupe from Sunday. Nothing new to see here. Move along. These aren't the droids you're looking for.

Secondly (and more important): IE for the Mac was an entirely different product, with a different codebase and a different rendering engine. While IE for Mac did have an occasional vulnerability (typically patched pretty quickly), it was at the time a more standards-compliant browser than its distant Windows cousin.

Unlike IE for Windows, IE for Mac was simply an application. No low-level stuff, no rendering engine used by the system (like IE Win and, for that matter, Safari/WebKit for the Mac), no ActiveX compatibility, no nothing. Other than the lack of pop-up blocking (which wasn't a common feature in any browser yet), IE was a pretty decent product. Most Mac users used IE, and were pretty happy with it - it had versions for the old Mac OS, and a spiffy Carbonized version for OS X). When Apple announced Safari, though, the writing was on the wall for IE Mac - why keep building a browser that earns no revenue and doesn't even help draw users to other Microsoft products? Just to get a few more MSN pageviews by people too lazy to change their default homepage?

Nah.

Who's throwing the IE released party? (-1, Flamebait)

digitaldc (879047) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298650)

I remember hearing about this before, but who is going to throw the released from IE party on December 31st?

5...4...3...2...1 Hoooray! We are now more secure!

Same freaking article title, much worse snarking (5, Informative)

frankie (91710) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298663)

Quick refresher course in web history: 5 years down the road, Mac IE is outdated and in desperate need of retirement. But back in 2000 [alistapart.com] , Mac IE5 was far and away the most standards compliant browser available. It had little or nothing to do with Win IE, except that IE6 was later based on Mac IE's rendering engine. It did not support ActiveX, and has no higher security risk than anything from Mozilla and pals.

Sheesh, the very latest article [slashdot.org] for Jebus' sake!

It's really good riddance to bad rubbish (1)

kindafun (935717) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298665)

Nothing but good will come from this. It was once the best browser on the planet but it languished and was passed by many. It's hard to imagine that many users on X were using it. If they were and read about this they'll be so much happier by the change. Use Safari or Firefox on X and see what web pages are suppose to look like!

Welcome to last week (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14298670)

Good job Taco.

commence dupe fits. (-1, Redundant)

Chas (5144) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298671)

n/t

And Office? (3, Insightful)

Ed Avis (5917) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298673)

Doesn't Microsoft Office have all sorts of hooks into Internet Explorer? At least on Windows, you need the latest IE for the latest Office, or it installs at the same time, or something like that. What does this say about the future of Office for Mac?

redundant (-1, Redundant)

dargon (105684) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298679)

if only my mod points would allow me to mod the original post as redundant flamebait

Did you even look at apple.slashdot.org??? (0, Redundant)

mb10ofBATX (126746) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298684)

Seriously, go to the apple section [slashdot.org] and this post and its dupe appear RIGHT BESIDE EACH OTHER.

Seriously, a little due diligence in posting stories would be nice.

Huh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14298699)

...Echo...echo...echo...

Oh... forget it's a dup... (-1, Redundant)

dark-br (473115) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298701)

...let's see the bashing :)

Who cares at this point? (1)

Y-Crate (540566) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298721)

I'll ignore the dupe aspect of this story to state that IE for the Mac has not received a significant update since the year 2000. Everything between then and the termination of development in 2003, was simply basic maintenance updates that kept it running on each version of OS X and squashed a few security bugs here and there.

IE for the Mac has been very dead for a very long time.

I'm outta here... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14298725)

...just like IE 5.x for the Mac. We can sit around and laugh all day at Microsoft and their crap software, but nothing beats a human that's crap at their job.
 
The cackhandedness of Slashdot editors to not notice duplicate stories on their own site is simply not forgiveable. Do you read each other's stories?
 
I guess it just goes to show the amount of care and consideration that goes into maintaining the site - none. I can't think of another site that duplicates stories, and also does so without acknowledging it, or withdrawing duplicates once they're posted - maybe it's a failing of the underlying Slashcode and the way it works, I don't know.
 
While I can tolerate the odd duplicate story, I know there are both human and machine ways to get around it. The thing is that it's not the dupes that are the thing that annoys me, it's your lack of dealing with the problem and your attitude towards them that I find sad.
 
So, while we'll all be sat here talking about holes in systems and applications and the like, please patch the one in your site; the fundamental, gaping, chronic, duplicate posting hole.
 
This will instantly be modded down as off-topic, but I don't care, just like IE5.x for the Mac, I'm outta here...

Merry fucking chistmas to you Taco (-1, Redundant)

A beautiful mind (821714) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298727)

...for bitchslapping most of the posts to "Offtopic".

Holy shit! (0, Redundant)

aug24 (38229) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298731)

We got an apology for a dupe... the editors can read!

Justin.

Infinite Loop (1, Funny)

lbmouse (473316) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298737)

Wonder if Neowin will start posting slahdot [neowin.net] dupes and then someone from slashdot can start posting the Neowin dupes that are dupes, etc.

So much for Mac (0, Flamebait)

W.Mandamus (536033) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298744)

D*mn, we have to use an industry specific website that generates documents that there are no other options to get. The site only runs on IE. I was hoping to migrate the office to Mac next year. If we can't get these docs though we aren't in business.

What I hate most about open source is that the developers don't seem to get it. There is industry specific business critical software out there that will only interface with microsoft products. We can't use OpenOffice because no document assembly program will interface with it and OO.O's developers don't care to put in document assembly. We've been using firefox for everything but one website because firefox can't work with an IE only website. I'd love to use more open source in my business but you don't make it easy.

Geez ... so many hissie-fits about dupes... (0, Redundant)

scheming daemons (101928) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298750)

So it's a dupe.

Big farking deal.

Simple solution... ignore it.

The anal-retentiveness of the MUST-FRET-ABOUT-ALL-DUPES crowd in here is incredible.

Damn, you guys sure fit the engineer stereotype to a T. Relax.

LET IT GO. Take a deep breath. Repeat to yourself "Dupes cannot hurt me, it is best to ignore them" 100 times. Then take a puff on your inhaler, straighten your glasses and pocket protector, and get back to work.

Don't worry folks.. (0, Redundant)

Lihtan (803863) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298755)

...I'll try submitting this story again tomorrow. Third time's the charm.

Dupe? How about Tripe? (1)

erroneus (253617) | more than 8 years ago | (#14298759)

...uh...no, that doesn't work does it...

Anyway, how about we try for three and a bunch of us submit this story AGAIN!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?