IE7 Separated from Windows Explorer 434
An anonymous reader writes "Security experts warned Microsoft 10 years ago that putting IE as a component of Windows Explorer was a bad idea, looks like Microsoft finally decided to listen to the advice. According to a short write up in Business Week, Microsoft has decided that when IE7 comes out with Vista it will no longer be a component of Windows Explorer and will be able to replace IE6 even on XP machines."
Replace IE6 on XP machines? (Score:4, Insightful)
I wonder what would happen if you decided to remove IE 7 after installing it. Or will they "upgrade" it like they do with DirectX and Media Player (ie one way upgrades only, essentially no rolling back).
They are talking about Click to activate ActiveX controls as being a security benefit thats been added for the user - I thought it was because of losing the patent dispute?
ps, the guy talking sounds like Farnsworth, its worth listening just for that!
Re:Replace IE6 on XP machines? (Score:4, Insightful)
Companies do this stupid stuff all the time. It's called "Spin".
Banks were marketting the instant scan of checks to customers as a security feature. "See your checks online right away, to be able to spot fraud easier!" In truth? With the instant scans of the checks, "check float" has been removed, and a big issue that banks had with some illegal behavior that most people thought were ok, is gone.
Heck, sometimes it comes to down right lies. I worked for a certain ISP signing people up for service, and if we were having computer problems, like a crash or something, we were told to tell customers that we were "upgrading" our system to provide "better customer service in the future". Which of course is a lie, because the network just sucked and was slow as crap, and the computer would crash and reboot all the time.
I don't believe any "feature" anymore as of Java, which marketed things like "architecture neutral", when I realized, it wasn't "architecture neutral" it was just designed to be an easily emulated architecture.
Re:Replace IE6 on XP machines? (Score:4, Informative)
Check floating is not illegal. It's simply an artifact of the way banks work. You're probably thinking of check kiting [wikipedia.org], which is an illegal scheme that takes advantage of the float periods.
Re:Replace IE6 on XP machines? (Score:2)
Re:Replace IE6 on XP machines? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Replace IE6 on XP machines? (Score:4, Informative)
In Canada, post-dating cheques is very legal, and very common. The provincial insurance companies accept post-dated cheques for payments due in the future, so it's certainly legal at that level.
I ran into this years and years ago when I first computerized the books for a small business - the vendor didn't provide any functionality for tracking post-dated cheques (they were a US vendor, and we were their first Canadian customer). When we called to request this feature, their response was "but post-dating cheques is illegal!". Pretty funny at the time. It took them over a year to get this functionality working right, incidentally.
Oh, and the banks here WILL honour post-dates. If I cash a cheque earlier than the day it is dated for, it usually gets caught. If it goes through by accident, it will be reversed (not as an NSF) and it's up to me to collect the money from the cheque writer.
Re:Replace IE6 on XP machines? (Score:2)
Considering that one of the services I and many others pay for is overdraft protection, strictly speaking, I'm not obliged to have money in the account when I write a cheque. If you could set up a situation where the overdraft was large,
Re:Replace IE6 on XP machines? (Score:2, Funny)
Somebody better tell the government that.
Re: java and architecture neutrality. (Score:3, Interesting)
The problem is that some OSes and implementations don't draw anything at all. So, on Windows and Linux, you get a pixel, on Mac OSX, and Sun, you get nothing. (I mean, it's a 0 width, 0 height rectangle, that
Re:Replace IE6 on XP machines? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Replace IE6 on XP machines? (Score:2)
Having experience with previous Microsoft IE Betas (4.0 w/ the new explorer, and 5.0), I'm not too keen on replacing my stable installation of IE. Without it, I won't be able to properly test web applictions and might as well uninstall IE6.
Re:Replace IE6 on XP machines? (Score:4, Interesting)
All it means (Score:2)
Welcome news (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Welcome news (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Welcome news (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, don't know.... (Score:3, Informative)
Or are you talking more that it will be tested on XP and all, but the final version won't be available?
By the way, you can download and run the beta now. It's open. Even has an uninstall on it.
Re:Welcome news (Score:3, Insightful)
You mean, like the fact that XP actually ships with newer components than W2K? By your logic, why stop at Windows 2000? If it can be made to run on XP, then why not NT4? NT3.51? At some point you have to draw a line in the sand and say "beyond this point we do not go". It likes like they picked their cutoff.
Re:Welcome news (Score:2)
Re:Welcome news (Score:3, Informative)
Because it has a [Spyware or Linux-esq in appearance or feature] detachable sidebar with network/financial/whatever monitor, detachable clock, and transparent window titlebars, as well as no START word on the Start button.
In other words, window dressing. The demonstration I saw of it had Outlook open faster when the system was under heavy load than when it was started from scratch, and it still took many seconds. The presenter didn't know why th
Lied to the EU? (Score:5, Interesting)
Interesting seeing as Microsoft are now suddenly able to seperate the two (in reference to Windows XP, not Windows Vista).
Re:Lied to the EU? (Score:5, Informative)
Maybe it could be done but this is the reason it will only be done for xp. On the other hand, having seen some of microsofts products it doesnt suprise me that a web browser which executes remote code (activex) is part of the os.
Re:Lied to the EU? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Lied to the EU? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Lied to the EU? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Lied to the EU? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Lied to the EU? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Lied to the EU? (Score:3, Insightful)
Which goes back to my point about the car radio. BMW makes the car radio part of the ignition circuit and therefor "vital" to the usage of the car. Sure, you replace the radio with an aftermarket Sony, but you'll lose some of the
Re:Lied to the EU? (Score:3, Informative)
> did the Konqueror folks rip off the idea and do exactly the same thing?
If it were merely that IE was the file system browser, it wouldn't be the problem it is. IE is a critical component of the help rendering engine, and the source of a lot of the APIs underneath that -any- file system browser in Windows is normally going to depend on.
In addition, critical DLLs (COMCTL32, and SHLWAPI for two) have been updated, APIs added, and code
Re:Lied to the EU? (Score:2)
Microsoft managed to convince that if those things stop working, windows is "rendered useless". It's not. The kernel is running, drivers are managing the hardware, the win32 API can be used.....
Of course Microsoft was interested in make judgues think that IE could n
Re:Lied to the EU? (Score:2)
Re:Lied to the EU? (Score:3, Informative)
So I guess they were not lying, at least according to BusinessWeek.
Re:Lied to the EU? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Lied to the EU? (Score:2)
Re:Lied to the EU? (Score:3, Informative)
It is, and you can [www.iol.ie] (with Gecko, at least).
Re:Lied to the EU? (Score:2)
Re:Lied to the EU? (Score:2)
Nope, that was the US case. The EU case is primarily about bundling Windows Media Player.
Re:Lied to the EU? (Score:2)
Re:Lied to the US DOJ? (Score:2)
Sad (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Sad (Score:2)
Re:Sad (Score:5, Funny)
Because this marriage produces a kid every other day that has three eyes or extra limbs??
That woudn't be so bad... (Score:3, Funny)
On XP (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:On XP (Score:2)
That said, if installing IE7 also keeps Windows Explorer from accessing the web, it is still a big step for security on XP.
Okay, but... (Score:5, Interesting)
I imagine a lot of users are quite used to typing webaddress.com into Windows Explorer, now. I suppose that should respond by launching the user's default browser with the command line argument webaddress.com, but is that what it will do, or will WinExplore still function as a browser?
Re:Okay, but... (Score:2)
Re:Okay, but... (Score:2, Informative)
it's a VERY simple programming trick.
As long as the registered default browser has the same interface calls published in the registry, it should work fine, and would allow for alternative browsers to cleanly interact with the OS.
On the other hand, this is Microsoft we're
Re:Okay, but... (Score:2, Interesting)
No it isn't. Most of the problem is that ActiveX and other MS native components on a webpage aren't supported in other browsers, and for good reason.
Windows Update for example always calls IE and uses ActiveX. Changing the default browser is going to break WU.
Re:Okay, but... (Score:2)
Re:Okay, but... (Score:2)
It's not simple because you need to ask: how well can Windows Explorer function when you take Internet Explorer out of it? The dependence isn't necessarily one-way. It sounds like the two are thoroughly one program, at the moment.
Re:Okay, but... (Score:2)
"Windows cannot find '(null)'. Make sure you typed the name correctly, and then try again. To search for a file, click the Start button, and then click Search.
[ OK ]
Finally! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Finally! (Score:2)
Great! Now to get Konqueror! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Great! Now to get Konqueror! (Score:4, Informative)
As for how tightly tied konqueror is to itself, that's pretty much moot. Much of Konqueror's capabilities are provided by kioslaves, which are another layer entirely, and could theoretically be used by other apps. *Shrug*
Re:Great! Now to get Konqueror! (Score:2)
Re:Great! Now to get Konqueror! (Score:3, Informative)
So, konquerer really can be anything you want. So this isn't the best example.
Konqueror is neither (Score:2, Redundant)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Great! Now to get Konqueror! (Score:2)
Re:Great! Now to get Konqueror! (Score:5, Informative)
This isn't entirely correct. EXPLORER.EXE, which is tied in with IE and is largely responsible for the GUI, can be crashed by IE. This mucks up the GUI to the point where the system is apparently hung. However, the NTOSKRNL.EXE almost never gets faulted by these kinds of crashes and, in reality, continues to run even though the interface is completely hosed. This is analogous to crashing XWindows in Unix in the sense that X can be completely hung but system processes underneath it continue to function normally. The difference is that a Ctrl-Alt-Bksp will kill X and give you a command prompt, whereas Windows has no such option. There has been talk in the past of Microsoft releasing a command-line version of Windows Server (i.e. the GUI is optional), but AFAIK, that's just been talk with no real action.
Note that crashes that do fully lock up a Windows box are almost always caused by faulty drivers, usually video drivers because these run in kernel space. Linux is just as susceptible to faulty drivers as Windows is. I've had a number of servers up and croak with a KERNEL PANIC because of a faulty RAID driver. Dodgy hardware, poor cooling, overclocking, etc. also locks up boxes but this isn't a Windows-only phenomenon by any means.
that's what sftp is for, konqueror helps. (Score:3, Informative)
That's why you should be running sftp instead of ftp. Konqueror works with sftp:// [ftp] very well.
If you edit a file with Emacs and save it, you create a file with a '~' at the end of the filename. If it is a remote file, where do you create that? Locally, or remotely?
That's not an issue specific to the browser. If the user has permission to look at the file, they have th
IE7 is on the Rebound (Score:5, Funny)
Yes, I also heard she is now dating some new guy Winslow Vista.
Re:IE7 is on the Rebound (Score:2)
Re:IE7 is on the Rebound (Score:2)
meh (Score:4, Interesting)
Good news (Score:5, Interesting)
Today, with people having more horsepower in their computer then they know what to do with, same goes for hard drive space, having a tightly integrated web browser / file browser doesn't make sense, and it has been a source of Microsoft's security problems.
Yes, you will still be able to type a web address in the file explorer in Vista and have a web page display . While explorer and internet explorer are no longer integrated, Vista will transparently switch between the applications and maintain the same window view.
I am sure that I.E. components will still be launched at system startup, to give Microsoft and edge over 3rd party browsers for quick browser launching, but by removing the integration with the file explorer, this will definitely be a welcomed change that should offer better security in the long run, which Microsoft desperitely needs.
Re:Good news (Score:3, Insightful)
It's possible to share code without making an application part of the operating system. They're called DLLs.
Re:Good news (Score:3, Informative)
Yes, and the one under discussion currently is called mshtml.dll. IE/Windows Explorer is essentially just a wrapper around that. You can use either interchangeably, the only real difference is the set of default buttons, views, menu options, etc. For example, you can open Windows Explorer, type "slashdot.org" in the address bar, hit enter, and surf slashdot. Or you can open up IE, type C:\ in the addr
So this explains the delay? (Score:5, Interesting)
I doubt though that something so integrated into windows explorer can be seperated and reprogrammed into a seperate application within the extra 2 months.
Its alot of work not to mention may break many applications. For example cdroms that use autoplay sometimes display html and javascript in the windows explorer menu in a seperate pane. I suppose you could reprogram windows explorer to just call an IE7.dll to display it.
But Microsoft was found guilty of merging IE into a million libraries so third party apps would not function without IE and infact required it. Even a command prompt program that uses strings requires IE as a result.
Thank god I am not on the windows development team.
So in other words... (Score:4, Insightful)
Damnit (Score:5, Funny)
It was so much nicer here in hell before it froze over.
Summary is misleading (Score:2)
You've always been able to upgrade IE on its own. Heck, I remember installing IE4 over IE3 on NT ten years ago. This is hardly a new feature for IE7.
Re:Summary is misleading (Score:3, Informative)
Today, Microsoft's announcement indicated that Windows XP users would be able to upgrade to IE7. Thus, this is a "new feature" for IE7 that IE7 did not have before today - backward compatibility with older operating systems.
I'm Sure That (Score:2)
I could swear I remember (Score:2)
Uninstall (Score:3, Funny)
Yes! I can finally completely uninstall it from my system!
Actually, I'll just stick to my Mac.
FTP Evidence (Score:4, Interesting)
What about windowsupdates (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:What about windowsupdates (Score:3, Insightful)
Bout Friggin Time (Score:4, Insightful)
All I can say is that now that they have done this, I'm beginning to believe that they want to build a decent and secure product for their customers.
it already has (Score:4, Informative)
Re:it already has (Score:2)
Good for web devs? (Score:2)
Glad to hear it (Score:4, Interesting)
Clever, eh?
It just doesn't matter, it just doesn't matter... (Score:2)
Tomorrow, they could decide to leave IE and Windows Explorer integrated. But it just doesn't matter.
The early reviews I've read on Vista have been lukewarm, but it just doesn't matter. Vista is delayed again, and again, features are pulled out, then it is delayed again, but it just doesn't matter.
No
Why do I not trust the security fix of this? (Score:2)
Podcasts. Oy vey. (Score:2)
Another story posted by people that don't get it.. (Score:3, Insightful)
How many of these stories a day are we now going to get?
IE7 replace IE6? WTF, That has always been possible.
Also Explorer uses the IE 'rendering' dlls, it doesn't use Internet Explorer.
There are so many things wrong with this post and story I don't even know where to start and won't.
If you don't get it, don't post it.
Re:OMG! (Score:2)
Re:REALLY...Then.... (Score:2)
KDE is one thing, but for GNOME... (Score:2)
Re:Why not just buy a mac-mini? (Score:2)
You can buy/build a much more powerful PC for $600, install a Linux distro of your choice, and run Firefox.
for that matter, why not just install Firefox?
Re:Why not just buy a mac-mini? (Score:2)
Yeah, that's what Dell said, too. (I kid...but seriously, not everyone likes an OEM's choice in software)
require little or no setup
and do pretty much everything most people need a computer to do.
Heh...define "need". I "need" it to run the games I play on weekends. Oh...
Plus, you'll get some absolutely unparalleled OS features.
Don't guess I'
Re:Back in the Day (Score:2)
Re:Back in the Day (Score:2)
I use firefox most of the time when on a PC but when I gotta use IE for some reason this setting has proved to be very useful and comforting.
Burning karma (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Is ActiveX gone too? (Score:4, Informative)
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/ie/ie7/featureta
From here
http://forum.pcstats.com/showthread.php?t=35534 [pcstats.com]
He he, "one quirky feature". Way to miss the point. Note that you can disable Download Signed ActiveX controls too, or make at least make it prompt you.
There's a best practices document here
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url
I think the basic problem is that they still want to avoid breaking websites that rely on ActiveX as much as possible. You can see lots of stuff in that document which means that some ActiveX controls will still automatically on a webpage. If anyone develops and exploit for them and you run it on XP as an admin, you have a problem. Of course, if the user knows what they are doing they can make it secure, but the default setting is more geared to compatibility than security.
Re:That explains it.. (Score:2)
I actually prefer the old behaviour, but whatever.