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 Offers Phone Support For IE 7

Zonk posted more than 8 years ago | from the test-this-browser dept.

Microsoft 195

An anonymous reader writes "The BBC is running a short piece detailing Microsoft's newest step in testing Internet Explorer 7, which just went into Beta 2 yesterday. They're now offering free phone support to U.S., German, and Japanese users who try out the trial software." From the article: "'We believe that IE 7, even at this beta stage, is a significant improvement and we want as many people as possible to try it and use it,' said the browser development team in a post on its blog. 'IE 7 is feature complete and has been through significant compatibility and reliability testing. People (especially technology enthusiasts) will have a good experience with it,' continued the post. Microsoft said the new version addresses some problems affecting banking and news sites. It is also designed to be more secure than the current version, with built-in protection against malicious software and online phishing scams."

cancel ×

195 comments

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

Acid 2 & install problems. (-1, Troll)

Whiney Mac Fanboy (963289) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196057)

From the IE Blog: [msdn.com]
P.S. Please remember to uninstall any previous IE7 builds before installing this one: Control Panel, Add / Remove Programs, Show Updates, scroll to the bottom.
Yeesh! Really? Why do you have to do that?

Could someone who lives in the US please call the support number (1-866-876-4926) and ask?

Oh, and for those of you wondering about Acid 2, the IE7 beta 2 FAQ [msdn.com] has a comment from "Bobby G" with a link to this screenshot. [teezeh.info] Not much improvement. Perhaps the lack of improvement is explained by the kind of attitude displayed by MSFT employees (also from the faq comments):
Bobby G.,

We've written about the Acid2 test before. It is not a compliance test but is, instead, a wish list. We've been clear that we were not going to pass this test since we were first asked about this. The author of the test is well aware of this.

- Al Billings [MSFT]

Re:Acid 2 & install problems. (0, Troll)

Gnavpot (708731) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196125)

P.S. Please remember to uninstall any previous IE7 builds before installing this one: Control Panel, Add / Remove Programs, Show Updates, scroll to the bottom.

Yeesh! Really? Why do you have to do that?


Another attempt at copying a Firefox feature into IE7?

Until recently, when installing Firefox on a Windows computer, you had to do the uninstall old version / install new version thing to avoid duplicate - and "dead" - entries in the list of installed software.

Re:Acid 2 & install problems. (3, Insightful)

Whiney Mac Fanboy (963289) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196157)

Until recently, when installing Firefox on a Windows computer, you had to do the uninstall old version / install new version thing to avoid duplicate - and "dead" - entries in the list of installed software.

Depends what you mean by recently.

this blog [blogspot.com] says the issue you're complaining about was fixed over a year ago

Re:Acid 2 & install problems. (1)

Gnavpot (708731) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196381)

Depends what you mean by recently.

this blog says the issue you're complaining about was fixed over a year ago


That is recently, comparing to my Phoenix/Firebird/Firefox usage history.

Re:Acid 2 & install problems. (1)

Zathrus (232140) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196558)

That is recently, comparing to my Phoenix/Firebird/Firefox usage history.

Since it was fixed in 1.0.3, which came out not long after 1.0 (a hair over 5 months), then you're complaining about it being busted in beta versions as well? Are you serious?

Yes, it should've been fixed in 1.0 release, but that doesn't make your statement any less silly.

Re:Acid 2 & install problems. (0, Offtopic)

Rocketship Underpant (804162) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196236)

Wow, I'd forgotten how lame installing and un-installing software in Windows is. If I want the latest developer version of Safari (or any program, for that matter), I just drag it to my Applications folder.

Re:Acid 2 & install problems. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15196132)

Hey man, you'd be better off submitting what you've said to some PC magazine as an editorial. Here on /., you'll just get modded down as Troll for expressing an oppinion that some moderator didn't like.

Geeze Mods! He an interesting point! It's not like he posted something like, "IE Sucks!" or "IE and MS is for fags!"

Goddamn! The modderation REALLY SUCKS these days!

Oh wait, I guess this will be modded "Flamebait" - BFD

Re:Acid 2 & install problems. (1)

Horatio_Hellpop (926706) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196216)

//Yeesh! Really? Why do you have to do that?//

Ummm ... maybe because it's BETA SOFTWARE?

"Duh" quotient is up on /. today.

Re:Acid 2 & install problems. (1)

Whiney Mac Fanboy (963289) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196289)

Ummm ... maybe because it's BETA SOFTWARE?

Errr, right, but I've used loads of BETA SOFTWARE and never had to uninstall the previous beta before installing the new version, I just went right ahead & installed it over the previous version.

What makes IE 7 special? It's not just because it's BETA SOFTWARE (I presume the capitalizion is important for you for some reason)

Surely MS's install / uninstall software is mature enough by now - even if IE 7 is BETA SOFTWARE.

Re:Acid 2 & install problems. (1)

Horatio_Hellpop (926706) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196681)

//Errr, right, but I've used loads of BETA SOFTWARE and never had to uninstall the previous beta before installing the new version, I just went right ahead & installed it over the previous version.//

Errr, right, but I've used loads of BETA SOFTWARE and have had to uninstall the previoius beta before installing the new version.

I've probably done this two dozen times over the past few years. Not unusual at all, in software development cycles. It's BETA SOFTWARE (in caps, to help you realize that's not the final product) and you should expect it to have some inconvenient usage requirements.

And really ... uninstalling takes about 90 seconds on my three-year-old laptop. Your time must be extremely valuable, if that's too long for you.

Re:Acid 2 & install problems. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15196308)

P.S. Please remember to uninstall any previous IE7 builds before installing this one: Control Panel, Add / Remove Programs, Show Updates, scroll to the bottom.

Yeesh! Really? Why do you have to do that?

If you use Crossover Office under Linux you can have as many different versions of IE as you want.

Re:Acid 2 & install problems. (5, Informative)

Chr0nik (928538) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196369)

Hmm, I just did the acid2 test in both MSIE 7 and Firefox. NEITHER passed it. MS's background is red with a vague happy face shape over on the left side, and although firefox doesn't have the background the image is still all discombobulated.

I've been running beta2 for months now and it actually seems to work better than the previous versions by a long shot. Not nearly as many problems with loading content that has traditionally given IE problems.

The tabbed browsing has a few advantages over firefox's and a few features are yet missing that firefox's tabbed browsing had from it's earliest incarnation. Of course beta 1 of firefox was based off of a heavily tested and proven codebase, and much of IE7 has been a complete rewrite.

It would be nice to right click and "open in new tab" now and then, a feature that is glaringly absent. However I do like the new layout, it took me a while to get used to the fact that the standard button layout was gone, and there was nothing I could do about it, but once I got used to it, it worked well, probably more efficient than my previous surfing experiences. However, there should be an option to use the standard web controls that people have used since the stone age of the world wide web, as my wife, being a neophyte, hates it, and refuses to get used to it. And she cant use firefox on her web applications her work provides because firefox doesn't like cold fusion, so she sort of has to. It would be nice if she could use the familiar interface.

It also seems to load pages much faster than previous versions of IE, and dare I say it *gasp* firefox. One of the first things I tested, out of curiosity. Of course these tests were not scientifically conducted, and results can changed based on connection, and host bandwidth, client bandwidth, etc. etc. but it's competetive in that area.

Prior to downloading the beta, I was getting sick of firefox, and hadn't been having a very good experience with it for a while. Probably because of an extension I loaded or something else completely unrelated to the sacred browser itself, but it seemed to be a resource hog. I have heard there were fixes, and I applied them, but my browsing experience continued to suck. And I was considering buying opera. I figured I'd try ie7 before I went that route since I was considering a change anyway, and so far, nothing has been bad enough to chase me off. I'll continue testing it. However I'll probably still buy opera if they don't add a few features and refine a few they don't already have.

And to the guys at MS, why not make it acid2 compliant? While your at the drawing board, might as well just make the necessary adjustments. One less thing to be critisized over at least, and I doubt it would require huge amounts of sweeping changes.

Re:Acid 2 & install problems. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15196459)

Opera is free! You don't have to buy it.

Re:Acid 2 & install problems. (1)

nursegirl (914509) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196532)

You do know that Opera's free, right? It has been for months. I personally use Firefox, but I'd encourage you to try Opera. It's been fine with Cold Fusion since v6

Re:Acid 2 & install problems. (1, Interesting)

ausoleil (322752) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196549)

So, you are saying that you probably messed up Firefox by loading one extension or the other, imply that you have no idea what it was, and then turn around and claim that IE7 renders pages quicker in pristine form?

You're right. It wasn't scientifically conducted, even if you ignore the variables of your net connection. Not knowing exactly what you were testing with Firefox, etc., and then comparing it to a new install of another browser is outside of common sense.

However, the fact that you were honest about that (unlike certain marketing people in Redmond, WA ever will be) makes it an interesting comparison.

Re:Acid 2 & install problems. (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15196738)

You were using the Beta 2 Preview. The real Beta 2 was only just released last night (http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2006/04/24/58254 6.aspx [msdn.com] ).

ActiveX? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15196066)

built-in protection against malicious software and online phishing scams.

So are they doing away with ActiveX?

Typical Microsoft Response (1, Interesting)

kungfuSiR (753429) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196074)

I thought the days of Microsoft rushing products in an attempt to maintain market share were over with adoption of the trusted computing model. I guess I was wrong. When I used IE7 last, I found it to be far from completion and could definetly not recommend it to any of my clients or even my friends. I definetly saw some cool features in it, but I do not understand how they can be pushing this as a viable solution for some.

Re:Typical Microsoft Response (1)

dashersey (751215) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196121)

Sounds kind of like Firefox beta... why is MSFT evil when they release beta versions of their products?

disclaimer: I disdain msft as much as the next guy, but I'm all for fair commentary.

Re:Typical Microsoft Response (1)

CETS (573881) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196212)

When I used IE7 last Have you tried this one? Are you part of the beta? Seems you jumped on the MS bashing wagon a little too quickly. It is beta just as FireFox, Google et. all have done in the past. If this were a release candidate then maybe you would be fair in making this comment.

Now that is some title... (4, Informative)

Vo0k (760020) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196075)

I was absolutely sure they mean it will contain a skype-like application, voice chat, internet telephony.

Nope. Support by phone will be available. MSIE won't support a phone.

Re:Now that is some title... (1)

Chris Pimlott (16212) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196206)

Yes, I was thinking the same thing. How boring.

Support Script for Phone representatives (0, Troll)

neonprimetime (528653) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196081)

Customer: Hello MSFT? I can't get IE7 to work
Support: Let's check some basics, Is your computer plugged in?
Customer: yes
Support: Is your computer on?
Customer: yes
Support: Is your monitor on?
Customer: yes
Support: Are you running Windows XP?
Customer: yes
Support: Aha, I think I found your problem.

US, German and Japanese only? (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15196083)

What's the criterion for inclusion in this scheme? Your mother country has to have invaded another sovereign state? ;-)

Re:US, German and Japanese only? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15196190)

If that were true, then this list would be much longer. I know you're trying to be funny and on /. this is modded accordingly. However, if /. wasn't biased this would be modded flaimbait or troll as are the other political comments that are pro-America/republican/Bush/etc.

Re:US, German and Japanese only? (3, Funny)

a_nonamiss (743253) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196219)

Soon to be available in Latin, Greek and Mongolian...

Re:US, German and Japanese only? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15196434)

Unfortunately old world imperialists will have to wait for the retail edition.

Re:US, German and Japanese only? (3, Funny)

misleb (129952) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196458)

My home country is the fatherland, you insensitive clod!

Re:US, German and Japanese only? (3, Insightful)

GIL_Dude (850471) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196481)

It's fairly simple, really - it's about resources. Getting all of the multi-language "stuff" done generally comes later in the project, so they have to start with just a small set. Japanese is considered (by MSFT) as representative of language types that use pictographs style glyphs, German has some of the longest words on screen and tests your software well for things like size of text fields, labels, button text, etc., and of course English is known by so many people (as a first, second, or third language) - plus the MS "dogfooders" all need it in English...

Re:US, German and Japanese only? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15196505)

Cheers, that completely did me.

Re:US, German and Japanese only? (1)

Luscious868 (679143) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196777)

Your mother country has to have invaded another sovereign state? ;-)

Um, I think you mean "liberated" unless, of course, you'd like to join the Vice President on his next hunting trip.

Improved Windows Update experience (5, Funny)

jbeaupre (752124) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196089)

I'm really looking forward to a good experience when running Windows Update experience, since that's all I ever use IE for.

Re:Improved Windows Update experience (1)

xer.xes (4181) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196346)

Guess once which site doesn't work correctly on my machine anymore after installing Beta2 :D

Re:Improved Windows Update experience (1)

soulhuntre (52742) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196499)

Guess once which site doesn't work correctly on my machine anymore after installing Beta2 :D

For the record, Windows update runs just fine.

Re:Improved Windows Update experience (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15196526)

http://windowsupdate.62nds.com/ [62nds.com] - Firefox windowsupdate!

Seems to me... (2, Insightful)

danpsmith (922127) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196095)

...that Microsoft is playing catch up these days. It's well aware of the fact that it's lost the confidence of the true "tech-oriented" people and now it hopes to win them back.

What they don't understand is that their business model needs changing. No longer is software that's outdated the moment you release it that has security holes in it left and right that don't have patches going to be tolerated.

We have an open source browser with wide spread web support. I don't care if you have the tabs or not, I'm not going back to find out that you had invested not enough time yet again into security and watching as my box fills with adware.

Let's not forget who is really to blame in this adware thing, and it's MS... Ceasing use of IE has kept my PC free of adware for going on two years now. Don't think I'm going back cuz you made it prettier or add features we already had elsewhere.

Re:Seems to me... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15196149)

> No longer is software that's outdated the moment you release it that has security holes in it left and right that don't have patches going to be tolerated.

Other people understanding not what said is being?

Seems to you... (1)

alexhs (877055) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196164)

...that Microsoft is playing catch up these days.

You mean, like, the 31 last years ? :P

Well, they don't when they can afford not to...

Re:Seems to me... (1)

misleb (129952) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196515)

The bottom line is that most people will just use whatever is shipped with the OS. It doesn't really matter how outdated or bad it is. Well... within reason.

fyi: x64 support now there too.. (3, Informative)

simonjp (970013) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196101)

It is good to see that an x64 build is now available with IE7B2.

Shame that as usual the phone support feature is not available in the UK...(not that I really care, FF is fine).

Note that the download link is http://www.microsoft.com/windows/ie/downloads/defa ult.mspx [microsoft.com] (where you can choose your desired poison) as opposed to the one in the stub (which links to the technology overview document).

I am hoping (4, Insightful)

endrue (927487) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196106)

that we don't start bashing MS for this. Give them credit for beta testing and making sure that the product works and also for providing support to the end-users that try it. This seems like a interesting move on their part and a good effort to make sure that the code they will eventually release is stable. I use many beta products every day and they do not provide me phone support. If gmail craps the bed then I am SOL.

I can image that we will see a lot of people here at /. trashing this for one reason or another. Just don't bash them later for not testing their code.

- Andrew

Re:I am hoping (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15196134)

that we don't start bashing MS

This is slashdot. I wouldn't get your hopes up.

Re:I am hoping (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15196311)

[QUOTE]Give them credit for beta testing and making sure that the product works and also for providing support to the end-users that try it.[/QUOTE]

Why?

In the software house I work in, if we try to show our users the product in the same "finished state" that is sent to Beta by Microsoft, they go somewhere else!

We have to make sure the product works, period, before we risk showing it to the users.

I'm supposed to give Microsoft credit for having enough dominance over their users that they don't have to bother getting it right before they start fielding it?

I don't give credit to a supplier who provides part of the promised package and then depends on me, as his customer, to point out things about his implementation that violate solid working principles in his area of expertise.

But, the focus is wrong (1)

WebHostingGuy (825421) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196326)

I like that companies try new things, but really do we need Microsoft focusing on some integration of some phone support in a browser?

I think too many software companies still have the philosophy that more is better. In reality we just want the tool to work right the first time and be secure. I think Microsoft should focus all its effort on producing a fast totally secure web browser first. Then when that is done create a API in which you add-on features you want (which will not break nor leave the original funtionality open to bugs or hacks). Quit screwing around by rewriting code and adding more crap to programs that only a few people might use. Secure the program and give people the option to add it later.

Re:But, the focus is wrong (1)

CaymanIslandCarpedie (868408) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196395)

but really do we need Microsoft focusing on some integration of some phone support in a browser?

I think you misunderstood the article (unless I did). What they are saying is if you use the beta and have problems you can call them on the phone for help with the issue, not that IE is having some type of Skype functionality. Its simply that they are offering free phone support (call if you have a problem) to all the beta testers.

I suggest (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15196562)

You you focus on reading the F-ing article. Yes, yes, that's a tall order, but in the time it took you to post your completely off-topic and obviously ignorant reply, you could have read the article and saved yourself from looking like a moron.

Re:I am hoping (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15196355)

I give them credit and I'm excited, but if they want smaller developers to be able to start making things work well with IE7 already, they should let IE6 and IE7 coexist. We of limited resources still need to support the current mainstream and can't start seriously looking at the next generation if it hampers that ability.

Open with wine... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15196107)

Newer windows version needed.
Damn...
some manual cfg required.

Does "phone support" mean (0, Troll)

Advocadus Diaboli (323784) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196108)

That the software can "phone home" more easily?

Neat, less grief for me. (1)

Rob T Firefly (844560) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196113)

After a lifetime of being everyone's "computer geek" freidn/relative and entertaining the occasional midnight phone call from people saying things like "Help me Rob, I just clicked on the Internet and my email says an instant error message!" I can finally direct some of that love to Microsoft.

Of course, MS probably won't have people install Firefox nearly as often as I do...

Yesterday? (2, Interesting)

rjstanford (69735) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196114)

That's what the website says -- released 4/24. Yet I've been using IE7 for a while now, I'm thinking about 6 weeks, and I could have sworn it was Beta 2. In fact, my Help/About box claims that its Beta 2 as well. So is this a rerelease or really version 2.1?

Re:Yesterday? (1)

rjstanford (69735) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196133)

Ah, it all makes sense now. The Word Document was released yesterday. IE7b2 remains as it was released some time ago. Stupid article summary...

Re:Yesterday? (1)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196372)

No, no, Beta 2 was released just now and the article isn't stupid, but the About box said Beta 2 for the Preview too.

Re:Yesterday? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15196295)

You're running Beta 2 Preview. This is the full Beta 2.

Re:Yesterday? (1)

scumbaguk (918201) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196307)

I thought the other was RC2 not beta 2.

Re:Yesterday? (2, Informative)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196362)

You probably used the Beta 2 Preview.

Re:Yesterday? (3, Funny)

misleb (129952) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196565)

Could be Beta 2 Preview Release Candidate 1 Service Pack 2.

Re:Yesterday? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15196374)

I've been using IE 7 Beta 2 for many weeks now as well. Someone has their news mixed up. This wasn't released just yesterday.

Dvorak's spin (2, Informative)

jbeaupre (752124) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196119)

Love him or hate him, I found a few interesting things to think about in one of his recent commentaries http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,1952995,00.as p [pcmag.com]
Summary: MS's biggest problem is IE and they should just dump it.

Bug Catcher? (1)

Metabolife (961249) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196122)

Could this also be a widescale method of finding potential bugs in the software? When someone calls in they can record the problem and see if other callers are getting similar errors. I just hope it doesn't turn out like the last beta boot software which wouldn't let you boot. If Microsoft is providing support, however, it's probably damn stable (compared to other windows apps).

Free Phone Support (4, Funny)

Billosaur (927319) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196124)

It is offering free telephone support to consumers in the US, Germany and Japan who decide to try it out.

Yes, that's right. You get this lovely tripod with gripping arm, absolutely free with your trial of IE7 Beta. Now, when you are stuck on interminable hold with Microsoft Tech support, you won't have to hold the phone up to your ear -- the Phone Support will do all the work! It frees up your hands so you can send hate mail to Bill Gates while still waiting for the next available tech support specialist.

Re:Free Phone Support (1)

LeddRokkenstud (945664) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196147)

I wonder if the phone support will be outsourced to a foreign country. Chances are, it will.

Obvious criticisms (3, Insightful)

erroneus (253617) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196140)

Asside from obvious criticisms, I think this is an interesting move on Microsoft's part. I remember when the browser wars started. I chose the wrong side. I was excited by Windows95. I was excited that it included TCP/IP and a web browser. I didn't know or really even care about compatibility or specs or any of that stuff. I was a relatively new and unwashed user and I loved Microsoft for all the things in Win95.

With IE7, they seem to be attempting to bring some of that newness back, or maybe it's just my own perspective. In any case, I'm not a new or unwashed user any longer and I have real concerns over vulnerabilities and other annoyances. Will ActiveX remain as the most exploitable part of MSIE and any OS that uses it? Will CSS remain 'broken?' (I shouldn't say broken since that word implies accident and gives the impression that it's unintentional. CSS is incompatible and is intentional sabotage on Microsoft's part against the world of compatibility. In spite of all standards agreed upon, Microsoft in all its power and glory is unwilling to be compatible with the rest of the world.)

Re:Obvious criticisms (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15196228)

Standards? Like the standards that Slashdot doesn't obey [w3.org] themselves? And how about Unicode? Slashdot doesn't support that, either.

Don't throw stones in glass houses, buddy. At least Microsoft updates their software.

Re:Obvious criticisms (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15196323)

I was excited by Windows95. I was excited that it included TCP/IP and a web browser.

Windows 95 didn't include a web browser. At that time it was a separate application that you could buy in internet connection packs or download freely.

The first version of Windows to have a built-in web browser was Windows 98, which incorporated Internet Explorer 4.

Will CSS remain 'broken?'

Yes. Although it will be less broken than previous versions, it still leaves vast swathes of the 1997 CSS 2 specification unimplemented. Furthermore, they retained compatibility for all the people writing quirks-mode non-cross-browser CSS, but broke things for the people writing strict-mode cross-browser CSS (e.g. display: table-cell in combination with an attribute selector).

Re:Obvious criticisms (1)

140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196333)

Remember how long IBM insisted on foisting on us the EBCDIC and actively sabotaged ASCII for decades? Using monopoly power to sabotage compatibility is nothing new. And it does not work either. dhtml, proprietary file formats, "new-and-improved"CSS all will end up in the same dust heap of history along with EBCDIC and Betamax.

Not evil enough (1)

sgt scrub (869860) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196153)

I think the borge icon doesn't reflect the level of evil Microsoft has obtained.

YOU FAIL iT!! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15196161)

FreeBSd used to [goat.cx]

Microsoft IE7 phone support (5, Funny)

0WaitState (231806) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196172)

"Hello, welcome to Microsoft Internet Explorer Seven phone support..."

"Press 1 to be told to reboot, press 2 to be told to reinstall IE7, press 3 to be told to reinstall the OS, press 4 to be told to apply next month's patches to the OS, press 5 to be told to contact the website's administrator for writing non-IE7 compliant HTML, press 8 to purchase Microsoft malware protection services..."

Re:Microsoft IE7 phone support (1)

alexhs (877055) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196264)

Pressing 6...

Oops ! My phone BSOD'ed !

Broken rendering (5, Insightful)

zenmojodaddy (754377) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196181)

I'm not a web professional, but I've been given the job of designing a small website for my employers, and IE's crappy CSS support has caused me a world of hurt.I was going to ask whether anything has been done about fixing it, but an earlier post regarding the Acid 2 test has pretty much answered that. (It's a wish list? Well, yeah, but if Konqueror and Safari can grant those wishes, why not IE?)

I suppose the most we can hope for with IE7 is that it stays broken in the same ways as previous versions, so we don't have to learn a whole new raft of ugly hacks just to a get a page to look presentable.

Re:Broken rendering (1, Troll)

Zontar_Thing_From_Ve (949321) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196277)

I'm not a web professional, but I've been given the job of designing a small website for my employers, and IE's crappy CSS support has caused me a world of hurt.I was going to ask whether anything has been done about fixing it, but an earlier post regarding the Acid 2 test has pretty much answered that. (It's a wish list? Well, yeah, but if Konqueror and Safari can grant those wishes, why not IE?)

Haven't you learned? Microsoft doesn't support standards, it writes them. That way, whatever broken stuff their software does, it is "standards compliant". Referring to Acid2 as a "wish list" as the previous post you mentioned said says everything you need to know about Microsoft's plans. For what it's worth, Firefox can't correctly render the Acid2 test page either.

Re:Broken rendering (1)

zenmojodaddy (754377) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196572)

Strangely enough, I'm none too enamoured of Firefox at the moment. It too has its share of rendering quirks - nothing quite so bad as IE, but there all the same. One technique I've used in the site is to set a large padding-bottom value for columns, with a similarly-large negative margin-bottom, and placed the columns in a container with overflow:hidden. This ensures that both columns end up the same height. Nice and neat. However, if you try to link to an id within one of the columns, large chunks of the content go missing due to the way Firefox handles the overflow:hidden property.

Of all the browsers I've tried testing my pages on, the one that give me fewest problems is Konqueror - I write the code, and it works. I use XFce for my Linux desktop, and I'd love to see a standalone browser for Linux using the KHTML engine, preferably with a GTK2 GUI, so I don't have to install all of KDE just to be sure the browser works...

Re:Broken rendering (1)

makomk (752139) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196511)

I suppose the most we can hope for with IE7 is that it stays broken in the same ways as previous versions, so we don't have to learn a whole new raft of ugly hacks just to a get a page to look presentable.

Don't worry - they've been carefully fixing up their CSS support just enough to break all those nice hacks everyone's been using to get their websites to work on IE, but not enough that you don't need them...

Re:Broken rendering (1)

courtarro (786894) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196731)

I think emphasis on the Acid test is a bit overblown, since it tests far more than just standard valid CSS handling. It also takes into account very specific points about fallback methods, handling of bad tags, improper syntax, etc. Even Safari, which passes the Acid test, still doesn't allow web developers to replace the goofy Aqua buttons on a site with standard ones. In general, what we need in IE7 (well, all browsers) is support for all the features properly-coded standard CSS; full compliance with Acid is a luxury for another day.

Does it run... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15196192)

on linux?
Apparently it doesn't even install :(

$./IE7BETA2-WindowsXP-x86-enu.exe
run-detectors: unable to find an interpreter for ./IE7BETA2-WindowsXP-x86-enu.exe

Should I run the installer as root?

Feature Complete? (0, Troll)

Raithmir (916779) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196209)

"IE 7 is feature complete" Is this in the same way that Vista is now "feature complete"? Yeah right.

Supported OSs... (1)

MMC Monster (602931) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196217)

Anyone else catch the line:

Supported Operating Systems: Windows 2000; Windows 95; Windows 98; Windows ME; Windows XP.

I guess there is hope for those that don't want to upgrade their Pentium/133 systems. :-)

Re:Supported OSs... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15196378)

Supported OSs for the .doc file! But I don't think even the doc file will show up correctly in any previous version of office.

Re:Supported OSs... (1)

HaydnH (877214) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196707)

That is the supported OS for the doc file - the beta only runs on XP & 2003.

Phishing scam protection - MY FOOT !!! (4, Interesting)

mritunjai (518932) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196222)

No it does NOT prevent phishing scams, but actually IE actually makes various online hosting providers' anti-phishing filters useless. If someone hosts a text (yeah, .txt) file with HTML, *only* IE renders it as an HTML page.

One of my friends who was drowsy late night after cramming for exams, got phished!!! All fault of IE and partially his (being too drowsy!)... by this site : http://newphotosfamyli.bravehost.com/link2.txt [bravehost.com]

(Yeah, the site is still up after being reported to concerned people! If someone knows this fellow please punch him in the gut for me, thanks!).

More details and comparison of how Opera, Firefox and IE handle this phishing site are in my blog : http://blog.mritunjai.com/2006/04/23/gone-phishing / [mritunjai.com]

Re:Phishing scam protection - MY FOOT !!! (3, Interesting)

nursegirl (914509) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196425)

This is really disturbing - Safari renders it as html instead of text as well. Good thing I use Firefox for unknown sites. I need to mention this to other Mac users. Everyone I know has been told about the inherent unsafety of IE, but most people think Safari is safe.

Has anyone tried Konqueror on this site?

Re:Phishing scam protection - MY FOOT !!! (1)

makomk (752139) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196533)

Has anyone tried Konqueror on this site?

Renders it as text, not HTML. Mind you, it even renders *binary* files as text occasionally...

Re:Phishing scam protection - MY FOOT !!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15196471)

Read your blog. Your friend really made a big mistake. IE sucks.

Re:Phishing scam protection - MY FOOT !!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15196507)

I don't see what the problem is. Why would the extension matter for filtering?

Re:Phishing scam protection - MY FOOT !!! (1)

bobbutts (927504) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196754)

I hope they enjoy my many logins with bogus user information :P

Scott Adams Style (5, Funny)

berenixium (920883) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196229)

"Hello, this is Dogbert's Internet Explorer 7 Helpdesk. How may I destroy you?"

"Please hold while I disconnect, erm, redirect you to the appropriate expert. Sucker!"

No doubt (2, Funny)

CaptainZapp (182233) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196238)

'We believe that IE 7, even at this beta stage, is a significant improvement and we want as many people as possible to try it and use it,'

That it's a significant improvement to IE 6. What I don't quite get is why it should be a significant improvement to the competition; specifically Opera & Firefox.

Re:No doubt (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15196316)

To the competition this is a huge improvement: now they can show off how many decades ahead of IE7 they are, instead of just IE6

In another news... (2, Funny)

William Robinson (875390) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196249)

Microsoft has decided to offer free phone support for Calculator and Solitair.

Why dont they depreciate some of their bloat in IE (2, Interesting)

VGfort (963346) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196286)

Stuff like page transitions, HTML TIME, their own proprietary tags for fancy text shadows, blur and gradiants. I realize a few rare people might use those but I think they could just use open standards instead. So many other programs out their depreciate things over time, why cant they? Thats how Firefox (phoenix) became the lightweight champ it is, it dropped a lot of the bloat Mozilla had.

Will they help me get it running under wine? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15196299)

nt

Excellent! (1)

rlp (11898) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196301)

I for one welcome our new XHTML/CSS rendering overlords.

Why only -2- other countries?!? (0, Offtopic)

ivi (126837) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196309)


  Who wants an Internet phone toy that only manages to connect you
  to TWO other countries (with no choice of which ones), anyway?!?

  Skype is -my- friend, here!
  Not perfect, but it does all that I want done in the VoIP dep't.

  What about you? Do you think MS will ever catch-up in VoIP?

Windows validation? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15196357)

I decided I would try it out. The installer asked me if it could validate my copy of Windows is genuine. That's when I exited the installer. I don't mean to turn this into an anti-Microsoft rant, but for fuck's sake Microsoft, don't treat me like a fucking criminal. Yes, my copy of Windows if valid (academic site license). No, I shouldn't have to prove that to you. It's a fucking browser. It shouldn't be tied to the OS. Either way, I shoulnd't have to prove anything to you just because "I have nothing to worry about."

It's bullshit like this that really makes me doubt Microsoft's intentions here. I'm sure the developers are serious about improving their product, but I'll never know that because management keeps mandating dirty tricks like this.

i hate slashdotting plebs most of the time (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15196563)

all the anti-IE/MS thoughts aside (you slashdot wankers never seem to ease up on that... its like each one of you (think that you) have something new to add to the WE HATE IE "war" each time you post)...

isnt phone support a little too 80s ?

any software (and definately any web software) that i have a problem with has never and will never result in me picking up a phone... particularly something as wide spread as internet explorer. websites, forums, email, live chat, etc are not only more convenient for both the end user and the staff on the other end... but they also rely on the user STAYING IN FRONT OF THE COMPUTER when the techie on the other end is actually talking them through a problem. not everyone has a phone next to their computer (i know i dont), and a company with as many customers as MS is not one i'd like to call on my cell phone at cell phone rates whilst i sit in a queue

just what are they hoping to achieve by offering support in a form that makes it the least convenient/effective possible?

Re:i hate slashdotting plebs most of the time (1)

bobbutts (927504) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196776)

you can buy a cordless phone for $5 at the drugstore.. WAKE UP

Still no :before, no application/xhtml+xml (3, Informative)

GeekDork (194851) | more than 8 years ago | (#15196574)

It seems that they're really pulling off the "still no CSS" stunt. Too bad. Also, IE7 still tries to download properly served XHTML. What a failure.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>