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!

IE7 To Ship With Windows Patches Tomorrow [Not]

kdawson posted more than 7 years ago | from the ready-or-not dept.

293

An anonymous reader writes, "Microsoft plans to push out Internet Explorer 7 as a 'high priority update' when it ships security patches tomorrow, according to Washingtonpost.com's Security Fix blog. That means anyone who has Windows configured to download and install patches automagically from Redmond will be greeted with IE7 next time they boot up their machines. In related news, it appears IE's worldwide market share actually increased a couple of points since July, despite a number of high profile zero-day attacks this year." The article notes that the IE7 "containment wall" protected mode will not be available on XP, but only to those who purchase Vista.

Update: 10/09 21:26 GMT by kd : An anonymous reader points to this Microsoft blog posting where it is revealed that the article linked above is incorrect. IE7 will not be pushed tomorrow.

cancel ×

293 comments

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

Thank God (5, Funny)

Mateo_LeFou (859634) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366463)

I've been looking forward to that whole tabbed-browsing thing they invented

Good or bad news for the web developers? (4, Interesting)

YA_Python_dev (885173) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366561)

So this is a good or bad news for the web developers (not end users) that want to create useable standards-compliant websites?

Re:Good or bad news for the web developers? (1)

xENoLocO (773565) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366677)

It's a "bad news" if you want to test in IE6 *and* have a fully patched OS.

It's a good news in that they've taken leaps and bounds as far as standards support. Still not as good as it should be, but at this point I'll take anything.

Re:Good or bad news for the web developers? (5, Interesting)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366735)

It's a "bad news" if you want to test in IE6 *and* have a fully patched OS.

Sure, unless perhaps you know what you are doing [google.com] . Then you can have multiple IEs installed. I have IE5.5, IE6, and IE7 installed on my laptop alongside FF 1.5.whatever so I can do testing. To my right is a dual G5, running safari and ff/mac. IE/mac and Opera aren't even on the radar, the number of visitors using them is statistically insignificant for us. Really that's true of Safari as well but I like to support default web browsers.

Re:Good or bad news for the web developers? (0, Flamebait)

xENoLocO (773565) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366791)

Perhaps you misunderstood.

It's a pain to have multiple instances. Not impossible. I've been testing in IE7 for months, but thanks for your feeble attempt at being a smartass. Much love. :)

Re:Good or bad news for the web developers? (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367015)

It's a pain? It's neither a pain nor even slightly difficult. you unpack the cabfiles into a directory and create a file called iexplore.exe.local in the directory. (You can delete some files, but it's not actually necessary to do so.) If that's hard for you, then I wonder how you manage with CSS? I personally use dreamweaver and it even allows me to specify multiple browsers that can be selected from the preview menu, so I don't even have to go hunting for icons. How much easier can it get?

Re:Good or bad news for the web developers? (2, Insightful)

xENoLocO (773565) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367171)

The windows virtual machine method is a pain. I wasn't aware that method was reliable, since the last time I read about it they were still having issues getting it to work properly.

"... I wonder how you manage with CSS? I personally use dreamweaver ..."

Says he with 20 validation errors on his website. :)

Re:Good or bad news for the web developers? (2, Informative)

pe1chl (90186) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366911)

This does not really work. You can install multiple versions but they will all send the same browser version to the website and the "conditional comment" evaluation is also done using one version.
That will break the methods you can use to have different versions of the browser looking at the same content in a way compatible to each of them.

Re:Good or bad news for the web developers? (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367097)

This does not really work. You can install multiple versions but they will all send the same browser version to the website and the "conditional comment" evaluation is also done using one version.

Ah, that is good information, which I did not have before. Although there are ways to change the useragent, the conditional comment thing is pretty serious.

Guess it's time to make myself more Windows 98 VMs.

Re:Good or bad news for the web developers? (1)

Kjella (173770) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367123)

Sure, unless perhaps you know what you are doing. Then you can have multiple IEs installed. I have IE5.5, IE6, and IE7 installed on my laptop alongside FF 1.5.whatever so I can do testing. To my right is a dual G5, running safari and ff/mac. IE/mac and Opera aren't even on the radar, the number of visitors using them is statistically insignificant for us. Really that's true of Safari as well but I like to support default web browsers.

Well, I missed one thing in your list and that's W3C compliance checks. Rather that testing everything in browsers that aren't on the radar, test against W3C. If it still breaks, well... then the browser is marginal and broken, who cares? I'd be more concerned about using IE bugs that the other browsers have chosen to mimic, but aren't really in the spec.

Re:Good or bad news for the web developers? (2)

Antiocheian (859870) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367287)

If it still breaks, well... then the browser is marginal and broken, who cares?

None important, just the customer and the visitors.

Crawl back to CIWAH you moron!

Re:Good or bad news for the web developers? (1)

Tim C (15259) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366763)

Just as releasing IE6 was bad if you wanted to test in IE5?

It'll be a pain for small-time web shops for a little while, but if IE7 really is going to be pushed out as a high priority, most people will end up getting it relatively quickly.

More serious shops should already have a range of different OS and browser combinations setup for testing; this will only add a couple more. Certainly it's no worse than testing under (eg) a couple of combinations of OS X and Safari, or various distros and various versions of Mozilla, FF, Konqi, Galleon, etc.

Re:Good or bad news for the web developers? (2, Interesting)

mackyrae (999347) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367357)

It's a good news in that they've taken leaps and bounds as far as standards support. Still not as good as it should be, but at this point I'll take anything.

Except now, the Holly Hack doesn't work, but not all of the positioning stuff was fixed. If they weren't going to fix it all, they could've at least left that container around <html></html> so the * html body p (the Holly Hack) would still work correctly.

Now, if you want your site to work correctly, you need 3 style sheets. One is for all web-standards-compliant browsers. One is for IE < 7, and one is for IE 7. Then, use conditional comments to tell it which to use:

<link href="css.css" type="text/css" rel="stylesheet" />

<!--[if lt IE 7]>

<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="iehacks.css" />

<![endif]-->

<!--[if IE 7]>

<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="ie7.css" />
<!--[endif]-->

Re:Thank God (1)

beckerist (985855) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366701)

I hate to be the first to do this, but Firefox has had tabbed browsing for as long as I've been using it (at the very least with a plugin). I'm certainly not trying to flame, merely the ignorant asking [the nieve?], but what is the appeal of IE? Why do people, the MAJORITY of people, keep using it?!?

Re:Thank God (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366745)

You obviously missed the sarcasm when he said MS "invented" tabbed browsing.

every time I try firefox, I go back. (2, Interesting)

krell (896769) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366793)

I keep going back to the "Bad" one after using Firefox. Reasons including pages that don't display right in Firefox and that nasty "do you want to remember this password?" or whatever pop-up that LACKS a basic "no, and never ever ask me again for ANY site!!!!" option right on the popup. Better yet, it shouldn't ask this in the first place.

Re:every time I try firefox, I go back. (2, Informative)

APLowman (968256) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366939)

I'm going to assume you never looked under Tools->Options->Privacy->Passwords because there is this handy checkbox that turns off saving passwords. The reason it is on by default is because many users would think Firefox didn't have that feature, since most users don't look at the options screen. Firefox has always had the ability to turn this off completely, as well as the ability to turn it off by domain; offering much better control then IE. Really there is no reason to use IE as your primary browser, just get the IE tab plugin for Firefox so that when you hit a stie that dosn't work you can switch to IE to use it.

Re:every time I try firefox, I go back. (2, Insightful)

krell (896769) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366975)

"I'm going to assume you never looked under Tools->Options->Privacy->Passwords because there is this handy checkbox that turns off saving passwords"

You are right. I didn't dig deep in obscure menus to kill this annoyance that (1) should not be the in the first place and (2) should have a turn off option right on the pop-up. I know, it's an old glitch. Netscape has had it going WAYYY.... back.

Re:every time I try firefox, I go back. (1)

ElleyKitten (715519) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366969)

If you go to Tools->Options, then Privacy->Passwords, and uncheck Remember Passwords, it won't ask you again.

What sites do you go to that don't work right in Firefox? It's been a long time since I've seen one, though I know a few sites that don't work well in IE6, mostly because of the stupid PNG transparency issue. IE6 is so old and outdated, I don't know how people can stand it.

Re:every time I try firefox, I go back. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16367247)

You obviously don't use a coporate intranet at work, or you'd know that in most workplaces IE is the standard and if CSS is broken or a site requires ActiveX and FireFox won't load it right nobody cares. I work for a government contractor that designs a web-based system for filing HIPPA [wikipedia.org] complaints. I came on this project after it was "done" only to discover that many things on this site only function in IE due to poor CSS. I am now the only programmer on the project, and I have informed my project manager that the site (which is intended to be used by the public) needs to have serious reviosions or be redone from scratch. The system isn't that big so a complete rewrite would only take a month or so, however CMS [hhs.gov] , the agency that hired us only cares about IE compatablity. I attempeted to push for this by saying that IE 7 may break under the current code, although this route isn't getting me too far either. Go check it out [hhs.gov]

Re:Thank God (3, Interesting)

Mateo_LeFou (859634) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366795)

I think that the majority of people click on anything that says "Internet" when they want to use the internet. Since MS long ago renamed Explorer "The Internet" (via the start menu) that's what they'll use for the foreseeable future.

Re:Thank God (2, Interesting)

thebdj (768618) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367083)

You aren't kidding. Little story: I was working in mail order at the time, and a gentleman called up in reference to a product the company sold. One of the requirements for the item being sold was that you needed a web browser. The device in question was a GPS system for a laptop, though I am not 100% sure why it needed a browser. Well, this gentleman obviously had a hard time understanding what a web browser was. I even said, "If you are surfing the internet, you have a web browser." The old fool still didn't understand. I mean, it is really sad how these concepts that truly are rather simple just seem to miss many PC users. Hence, why IE becomes the internet. Though, I have managed to switch my siblings off of AIM to gaim. No longer does instant messaging just mean that ad ridden AOL product.

Re:Thank God (1)

Tim C (15259) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367257)

To be fair, it's "Internet (Internet Explorer)", just like my default email client is "E-Mail (Mozilla Thunderbird)" (parenthised bits are on a separate line).

They've not renamed IE to "The Internet", they're making it obvious for the less technically savvy that that's the program you use to access the Internet. You're free to change it to whatever you want, in which case it'll say (eg) "Internet (Mozilla Firefox)".

Re:Thank God (1, Insightful)

nuzak (959558) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366859)

> Why do people, the MAJORITY of people, keep using it?!?

Because it's good enough for them.

Re:Thank God (1)

xENoLocO (773565) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367039)

Exactly. *Our* reasons to switch browsers aren't near enough reason for everyone to switch browsers.

Re:Thank God (0)

dwlovell (815091) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367181)

A lot of very smart people keep using IE because it still loads faster and renders more websites the way the developer intended. (you can pontificate on all the crappy reasons why we are in this mess, but it is still reality)

A lot of developers still prefer IE because some dhtml features for Enterprise applications are disabled by default or broken in Firefox/Mozilla. (modal dialogs, correct rendering of dynamic scaled nested divs with scrollbars that interpret height:100% as height of container, not height of entire page)

I think Firefox does do better on CSS standards and div positioning for document layouts and I hope IE gets on the ball on CSS and PNG alpha, but Firefox and other of the "standards" browsers need to really get on the ball for using the browser as an applications platform. You still cannot beat IE for creating a "windows-like" application running in a browser without resorting to Flash or other applets. (and no, I am not condoning the use of ActiveX.)

-David

Re:Thank God (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16366925)

Mozilla.org betas had tabbed browsing last century, before work started on pheonix (ff). Opera was the first browser with "tabs", IIRC they started out as minimised MDI windows(??).

Speaking as someone who went from NN to Opera to Moz, I'll answer your question if you answer me this. Why weren't you using Opera or the Mozilla betas back in 1999?

Prefer IE6 (1)

kilox (774253) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366481)

With that horrible UI?

The article says this month (4, Informative)

alta (1263) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366507)

The article has been updated because microsoft will not confirm "tomorrow" but will confirm this month.

Tomorrow seems a likely time to me...

WGA? (5, Interesting)

Honest Olaf (1011253) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366511)

Formerly IE7 was only available to folks who passed WGA, but Windows Update is available to all. Does this mean that IE7 will be distributed to users with non-genuine XP?

Re:WGA? (1)

Kelson (129150) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367205)

I would guess not. IIRC, only "critical" updates are available to systems that haven't passed WGA, and this is a "high priority" update. It looks like even the automatic update next month is only going to be semi-automatic [msdn.com] (it'll offer the download, but require user confirmation).

Praise Allah! (4, Interesting)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366535)

Anything to get people away from IE6, with which we have to use stupid hacks that don't work reliably to get PNGs to display properly. Not to mention all the box model bullshit. Now maybe I'm just not using esoteric enough markup but every page I've designed for Firefox has worked right in IE7... so, BRING ON THE UPGRADE! IE6 is a sad joke from both the security and standards compliance points of view and Microsoft is doing the right thing.

Re:Praise Allah! (2, Interesting)

nine-times (778537) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366853)

I'm wondering if it's really an improvement. Can't find them, but a while back there were complaints on /. that IE7 fixed enough things that IE6 hacks won't work anymore, but didn't fix the things that people had used the hacks to fix. I haven't seen this myself (I'm not doing web development these days), but supposedly the result of these "fixes" was that pages that displayed properly in IE6 and Firefox (and maybe other browsers) would not display properly in IE7. Therefore, web developers would have to go back through their sites and figure out how to support standards-compliant browsers, IE6, and IE7.

Now, I don't want to assert that as fact because, as I've said, I'm not aware of the facts. But I wanted to ask, is this the case? If so, is it still a problem, or have these issues been addressed in more recent builds? Anyone?

Re:Praise Allah! (0)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366979)

Can't find them, but a while back there were complaints on /. that IE7 fixed enough things that IE6 hacks won't work anymore, but didn't fix the things that people had used the hacks to fix.

It's mostly not true. Your best weapon in the IE hack arsenal is the IF IE conditional "comments". Lots of people are currently using hacks that would best be replaced with IF IE. You can test for specific versions or that you're within a range of versions, so it's trivial to apply separate hacks to IE5.5 and IE6 but none to IE7. In fact the hack I borrowed for PNG transparency (first google hit when I looked) is a javascript loaded only from IF IE LT 7 (or was it a < symbol?) that, once it is loaded, checks to see if it's running on less than 5.5 and then doesn't do anything (no PNG support before 5.5) and then loads different code depending on if it's 5.5 or 6.0.

Now, I don't want to assert that as fact because, as I've said, I'm not aware of the facts. But I wanted to ask, is this the case? If so, is it still a problem, or have these issues been addressed in more recent builds? Anyone?

From all that I've read, and from what I've seen, it's really not much of an issue. Granted, I'm no CSS guru, I can just do enough with it to make it do most of the things I want it to do. (Most of the things I can't figure out, I've been able to confirm that CSS can't actually do it, and you have to use javascript, so I feel pretty good about my level of knowledge...) In general there are ways to tweak your hacks such that they will work.

Re:Praise Allah! (1)

bruce_the_moose (621423) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366907)

Um, yeah, but I've been hearing from users (mostly sales guys who always have to have the latest) that my sites--which are IE6, Netscape, Firefox, Safari, and Opera happy--break with IE7. Quoth The Who, "meet the new boss, same as the old boss."

Re:Praise Allah! (1)

thelost (808451) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367141)

It sounds great, but let's be realistic. What this means for web devs is having support IE 5.5,6 & now 7 too. People won't automatically migrate to 7 because they can. Even worse than that I've read far too much stuff about IE7 having very little extra support for CSS standards.

yay! (1)

Klaidas (981300) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366539)

Well, I've been waiting for this - I mean, let's face it, about 80% of computer user use IE as their default browser. And since tomorrow, they are getting tabs, new GUI, features, features, more features security updates, etc...
Even being a long-time Firefox user, I'm looking forward to test it (ya, I know, there were betas, there was a RC, but this is the stable one!)

Re:yay! (1)

sqlrob (173498) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366707)

This is the stable one

And if you believe that, I have a bridge to sell you

Re:yay! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16367113)

Does the bridge support tabbed browsing?

Means Nothing (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16366549)

In related news, it appears IE's worldwide market share actually increased a couple of points since July, despite a number of high profile zero-day attacks this year."

As long as the average user doesn't take security into consideration on their computers - which a majority of them do not - then the number of zero day attacks mean nothing. I really don't think that would have any bearing on IE's market share increasing or decreasing.

Re:Means Nothing (1)

Kelson (129150) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367235)

Hasn't IE's marketshare increased every summer for the last few years, wth Firefox and company catching up again in fall?

Actually, 'Yay!' (2, Interesting)

Odin_Tiger (585113) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366559)

Hopefully, it will be weird enough for users to call and ask about it, thus allowing me to weed out the few who are still using IE when they know they're supposed to be using Firefox.

Re:Actually, 'Yay!' (0)

Timesprout (579035) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366897)

when they know they're supposed to be using Firefox.


Actually according to Secunia 'they' should be using Opera. Its funny how the best tool for the job theory goes out the window when it comes to Firefox.

Re:Actually, 'Yay!' (1)

chroot_james (833654) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367061)

People aren't anti-ie because they're agnostic. It's all religion when it comes to browsers.

And BANG! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16366569)

Just like that IE6 was slain. Any more IE6 support requests can now be marked WONTFIX and users can either unpgrade to XP/IE7 or download firefox or Opera.

And there was much rejoicing.

What's going to break tomorrow? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16366571)

I can imagine hundreds of applications breaking as users start their computers up with the lastest 'patch' from Microsoft. Anyone who relies on ASP's or B2B websites had better turn automatic updates off.

no no no (5, Informative)

jaiyen (821972) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366597)

The RFTA references a post on the Microsoft IE blog that says IE7 is coming 'real soon now' and that it "will be delivered to customers via Automatic Updates a few weeks after it's available for download". How the submitter took that to mean it's going to be automatically for everyone from tomorrow is a mystery.

Re:no no no (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16366773)

You must be new here.

Re:no no no (1)

Chapter80 (926879) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367059)

From TFA:
Update, 1:14 p.m. ET: The above post was changed to say IE7 would be released this month. Microsoft declined to confirm whether it would release IE tomorrow as part of its patch process, only to say that it planned the release sometime this month.

I think it DID say tomorrow, and has since been updated.

Re:no no no (1)

Kelson (129150) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367163)

On top of that, even after it does become available through automatic updates -- which will most likely be in the November patch cycle, given that it's "a few weeks after" the October release, you can block the update [msdn.com] (at least for now).

Containment Wall (3, Interesting)

TubeSteak (669689) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366613)

However, one of IE 7's most useful security features, a protected mode -- billed as a "containment wall" to prevent the browser from installing software or changing computer settings without the user's consent -- will not be available for XP users. That feature will be reserved for users who upgrade to Windows Vista, the next version of the operating system, due in January.
Is this "Containment Wall" something that can be hacked into working on XP?

Re:Containment Wall (2, Funny)

emarkp (67813) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366681)

Yes, it's typically done by installing Firefox or Opera on XP. It's the proven solution that I use.

Re:Containment Wall (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16366941)

Ha funny. You sir, are a mental midget.

To answer the GP, no, no it can not. If you want IE6 to be safe get a hardware firewall and configur eit correctly.

Re:Containment Wall (1)

Kjella (173770) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367199)

Ha funny. You sir, are a mental midget.

To answer the GP, no, no it can not. If you want IE6 to be safe get a hardware firewall and configur eit correctly.


Funny hearing insult from someone who has absolutely no clue at all. What exactly would you do with a hardware firewall to make IE safer? Blocking outbound port 80 might help, but I doubt you'll be happy with the results...

Use DropMyRights (1)

bogie (31020) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367293)

Article here http://msdn.microsoft.com/security/securecode/colu mns/default.aspx?pull=/library/en-us/dncode/html/s ecure11152004.asp [microsoft.com]

So for example this is my shortcut to IE

C:\DropMyRights\DropMyRights.exe "c:\program files\internet explorer\iexplore.exe" /c

If you try to install something like Shockwave you get an error. Now I don't use IE much at all but if your in a situation where you have to use it and have to login as Admin this is a decent solution.

As an occassional web developer (2, Funny)

arevos (659374) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366621)

I was dreading the inevitable process of trying to get a new CSS design working in IE 6; but hopefully now I don't have to :)

Re:As an occassional web developer (1)

Per Wigren (5315) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367031)

I was dreading the inevitable process of trying to get a new CSS design working in IE 6; but hopefully now I don't have to :)


Actually, IE7 [edwards.name] is THE solution. Don't confuse it with Internet Explorer v7. IE7 is the best tool a modern web developer can have. It's a JavaScript library that automatically convert standards compliant modern CSS to IE 5+6 workarounds so you can code your pages using clean W3C-compliant CSS2+3 and XHTML and your pages will work fine in IE 6, IE 5.5 and even IE 5.0. It's magic!

Here is the list [edwards.name] of all IE-bugs it fixes.

admission (1)

joerdie (816174) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366625)

I thought IE has had tabs all this time. As a firefox user I havent been around IE that much lately but i could have swrorn they where already doing this.

Re:admission (2, Informative)

Timesprout (579035) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366855)

No the IE team specifically made a design decision against using tabs back when they were building version 5 of IE.

The article says "could be" (2, Informative)

origamy (807009) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366627)

Please RTFA before posting: "According to a post on the company's IE blog, that high-priority update could be IE7"

If you dont want to install it... (4, Informative)

jorghis (1000092) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366657)

If want to prevent the automatic install MS has a page for you here: http://www.microsoft.com/technet/updatemanagement/ windowsupdate/ie7announcement.mspx [microsoft.com]

It looks like you have the option to just click "no thanks" when it asks you if you want to upgrade to IE7.

A proposal that cannot be rejected? (2, Insightful)

rumith (983060) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366673)

How nice. It's like I come and replace your old rusty garage door with a brand new one, with all the bells and whistles, some heavy armor and even an electronic keypad to open it. However, I will not allow you to change the password to open the door from the factory default "1234". Unless you pay me, that is.

Re:A proposal that cannot be rejected? (1)

EXMSFT (935404) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366879)

Wow that's a weird metaphor.

Re:A proposal that cannot be rejected? (1)

kfg (145172) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366971)

Wow that's a weird metaphor.

Wait for metaV.0

KFG

Re:A proposal that cannot be rejected? (1)

jorghis (1000092) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367011)

I dont follow that analogy. How is MS refusing to allow you to change your combination from 1234 unless you pay them?

Re:A proposal that cannot be rejected? (1)

rumith (983060) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367153)

The article notes that the IE7 "containment wall" protected mode will not be available on XP, but only to those who purchase Vista.
I cannot be 100% sure, but something is telling me that without this "containment wall" IE7 security will be, well, a disaster.

Re:A proposal that cannot be rejected? (1)

jorghis (1000092) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367259)

Oh, I see what you are saying. A better analogy would have been that you went and installed all the security measures you could on the garage but didnt do one because the architecture of the house didnt support it. It isnt like they are deliberately trying to sabotage the security to force you to upgrade to vista which seems to be what you are implying.

Tomorrow is not accurate (2, Informative)

DigitlDud (443365) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366691)

The blog post the article is referring to says it will be pushed out via Automatic Updates a FEW WEEKS after it's available for download. And it's not available for download yet. Somehow I doubt they ment tomorrow.

Wow (1)

wumpus188 (657540) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366709)

Finally, IE with proper combobox implementation... Wow, just wow..

For a Firefox user: (1)

jbeaupre (752124) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366711)

For a Firefox user such as myself, can someone give me a link or explanation of the pro's and con's of putting IE7 on my XP box? Browsing experience doesn't factor in, so are there other factors to consider?

Re:For a Firefox user: (2, Funny)

Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366929)

explanation of the pro's and con's of putting IE7 on my XP box?

Sure:

- Pros: you get the latest Microsoft software that hopefully *fixes* the previous version
- Cons: you get the latest Microsoft software that *hopefully* fixes the previous version

Re:For a Firefox user: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16367321)

Con: You can't test your pages in IE6.

don't want it! (1)

krell (896769) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366733)

Don't want it. They force tabbed browsing on you whether you want it or not (there's a big hole in the screen if you turn it off), and the locations of other things are moved to less-intuitive locations. Worst of all, installing it turns off "Visual Studio".

Re:don't want it! (1)

lindquist (942409) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366923)

What do you mean it turns off Visual Studio? That would seem a pretty stupid thing to do...

yes, it turns off VS (1)

krell (896769) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367009)

Yes, it turned off my Visual Studio. After I installed IE7 and tried to run Visual Studio (I admit, an older version), I got a DLL error. I googled the error, and confirmed the incompability. I simply uninstalled IE 7 (could not stand it due to the messed-up control area and menu anyway) and VS worked again. Luckily.

Re:yes, it turns off VS (1)

lindquist (942409) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367069)

sounds like I'm not getting this update then. Thanx for the heads up!

Re:yes, it turns off VS (1)

krell (896769) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367105)

I'm hoping they fix it. However, as per a typical "beta", there was no place to report problems other than the usual "drop comment into a black hole" Microsoft feedback area.

Do you like tabbed browsing, by the way?

Re:yes, it turns off VS (1)

Phu5ion (838043) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367115)

Visual Studio (I admit, an older version)

Oh good, I was afraid you were using VS.NET. I don't know why someone would be using VS.NET, but it was the first think that came to mind.

Of course, MS could be using it as an excuse to get you to upgrade to .NET where they have fixed that incompatibility.

Or maybe I'm just being paranoid.

Yay for CSS! (1)

Lord Ender (156273) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366751)

I recently started using CSS for the first time. I went right from the spec. The HTML and CSS validated strict. It looked great in Firefox. Then I tested it with IE6, and started to cry. I spent more hours trying to hack my way around the bugs in IE6's rendering than I spent making the page design in the first place.

With this news, though, I can go back to writing real CSS! This will save me so much time! The only people who won't be able to see my page properly are people who don't maintain their machines AT ALL. And they can piss off, for all I care. Running an unpatched Windows machine is peeing in the public pool of the internet.

Re:Yay for CSS! (2, Insightful)

pe1chl (90186) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366977)

not too quick... the CSS support in IE7 still sucks badly when compared with competing browsers.
sure it is better than IE6, but don't assume your valid CSS will work OK in IE7, it probably will not.

The biggest inconvenience (3, Insightful)

ezratrumpet (937206) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366753)

...will be to those people who have no idea when they start their machines that they must endure a lengthy install and restart process before they can get to work.

EP! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16366769)

according tothis join in especially of events today, live and a job to leaving the play track of where series of debates I know it sux0rs, Standard5 should Downward spiral. In IT A BREAK, IF 3 simple steps! development model about half of the visions going world. GNAA members ARROGANCE WAS if you move a table subscribers. Please recent Sys Admin luck I'll find with THOUSANDS of area. It is the Become an unwanted engineering project fear the reaper Members are worthwhile. So I for *BSD because Sales and so on, And suugesting dabblers. In truth,

Am I The Only One Concerned? (2, Insightful)

The Real Nem (793299) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366899)

I'm sure IE7 is a positive step from IE6, but how big of a resource hog is that shinny new interface? When I updated to Windows Messenger Live (yes I'm aware of the alternatives, but 99% of my friends use it) I couldn't believe how much resources the thing ate up. Right now it's sitting at a ridiculous 48 MB of memory usage.

More to the point, how much of IE7 is integrated into the kernel and how much memory does it consume when I'm not even using it? How does it affect boot times? I'm unlikely to use it for anything I don't have to so I think I'll be avoiding it for as long as possible.

Re:Am I The Only One Concerned? (1)

Sylver Dragon (445237) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367299)

On my system, Task Manager reports that the two executables for IE7 (iexplore.exe and iuser.exe) are taking up about 10MB of memory total. By contrast FireFox is taking about 20MB. Both are freash instances of the browser sitting at the main google page. Of course, I have a bunch of extensions installed for FF along with all of my bookmarks, so it is probably a bit high.
Of course, this is running on Vista RC1 so, YMMV.
In all, if the security of IE7 is even half as good as MS is claiming, I'll be happy. I'm tired of cleaning spyware off my user's systems.

Re:Am I The Only One Concerned? (1)

NineNine (235196) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367365)

As long as it doesn't have terrible memory leaks like Firefox, I don't care how big the footprint is. Big is much better than infinitely big over time. I've never understood why the guys at Firefox can't (or won't?) fix something as simple and serious as memory leaks.

New exploits to ship on Wednesday (1)

Animats (122034) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366913)

Following the push of IE7 on Patch Tuesday, new IE7 exploits will be deployed on Exploit Wednesday. Coming soon to a computer near you.

Firefox in Australia (1)

Brad_sk (919670) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366917)

Just curious - How come Firefox is so famous in Australia...?

Re:Firefox in Australia (1)

Megaweapon (25185) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367285)

Just curious - How come Firefox is so famous in Australia...?

A dingo ate my IE!

What I can look forward to (1)

shawn443 (882648) | more than 7 years ago | (#16366973)

75 users calling me up saying they think they have a virus because something is new. After explaining its not, 25 users saying they dont like it and want the old one. I have learned old people don't like new things.

They just need to make our jobs a little harder... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16367075)

This is a huge PITA for web developers. It's even worse than just IE6. Now somehow we need to do fixes for IE6 AND IE7, since the majority of people will be using either one of those. And you can't even test pages in IE6 and IE7 easily, since MS doesn't let you have both installed at the same time! I don't have IE7 installed because I need to test for the bugs in IE6. Now how am I supposed to do that?

What a difference a day makes (1)

GregVernon (980273) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367103)

First off, I for one can't wait for the new Internet Explorer. The new transparent PNG and CSS support will finally make cross browser compatibility a, slim, possibility! The older versions of Internet Explorer where horrible at both and made any site much more difficult to code. Secondly, as I have read the comments for this story I have noticed a general change in mood from yesterday's article concerning toolbars. Yesterday the general assembly of "slashdotters" was remarkably pro-Microsoft, whereas now, it seems like it is the usual Microsoft screws up this, Microsoft screws up that, etc. etc. Even though the articles are completely different, it is kind of interesting to see how the reactions differ, especially in the span of 24 hours.

Sys Admins Watch Out For Incompatability! (1)

Scott872004 (998053) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367159)

All the SA's need to keep a close eye to this one, my company supports users that use a MAJOR payroll company (ADP) and their software will not work with IE 7. Many applications will cease to work in the same fashion, especially if they are security laden type web-based applications. My WSUS server is not going to let this update pass, regardless of the tabbed browsing and the new glitz and glam, Microsoft has gone too far in their blatant disregard for the customer's best interest. This will cause problems for a bunch of people when they do it. Historically, lots of time and energy are wasted when they push updates like this. I'm no programmer, but is is ridiculous that you release a full version upgrade (IE 7) and it cannot perfom the vendor-specific functions of the previous version (IE 6). What kind of action is that? Microsoft is interested in one thing in this market and that is money. Again they prove thier point.

Is MS Waiting for XP SP1 to die before IE7 ?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16367167)

I find it peculiar that MS is seemingly waiting for XP SP1's support date to pass to distribute IE7. I guess that only makes sense as bundling IE7 with this months updates for XP SP1 customers would be a silly thing to do. Then again, "silly" and "Microsoft" often appear in the same sentence. Will IE7 even run on SP1? If so, I don't care. I'm a smug Mozilla/Firefox user.

A bit off topic, MS's IE7 site boldly displays these words: "we heard you...you wanted it easier and more secure". No, you heard the sound of IE's dominance deteriorating away like a landslide. MS rarely does anything for the customer anymore, it's all about you, Microsoft. Then again, I thought the IE7 site was talking about internet porn, but alas, it was only IE7. :)

Don't expect miracles (1)

suv4x4 (956391) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367173)

IE7 will come with the WGA checks, and we know more than half of those 8x% that have IE6 now don't have legit Windows. They will not get IE7, even if they want it (of course, a small minority of them wil crack it).

Unless they go on a crackfest, all of them, we can expect steady 50% or more of IE6 for the next few years. Pitty, but remember IE5.0 guys! IE6 is bearable in my humble opinion (I'm a web dev).

The couple of points where IE's adoption increased: we have over a million people (half a million only official downloads of RC1 if I remember, counting bittorrents etc., companies will spread it internally to multiple test machines) or more, trying out Vista. Vista comes with IE (7).

Also hundreds of thousands testing their sites in IE7 (not just web devs). So there we go with this. Notice the IE7 share is around 2-3 % before release. It's those guys.

Significantly Higher? (1)

webword (82711) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367203)

When it comes to switching browsers, I really only care when I see value. In general, I stick with what works until (a) it breaks or (b) the positive value of switching is significant.

For each person, the significantly higher will be different. Extremely minor updates are enough for those folks that want the latest and greatest. For others, it takes a crazy value propostion to be enough for a switch. Obviously this kind of thinking can be mapped to an innovation adoption curve [wikipedia.org] .

I'll wait. My browser isn't broken and the value isn't there. But now I ask, does IE7 arouse your interest? Are you sold on the business case [microsoft.com] ?

Windows Media player mashup (1)

LiquidCoooled (634315) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367241)

Does Windows Media Player still leave traces in Internet Explorers' History?

I say this because I discovered the default WMP plugin for Firefox (identified on installation) leaves traces in Internet Explorers history and cache.

Clearing firefoxes cache does not remove this...

I realise its not an IE problem specifically and its not a Firefox problem, but its something that surprised me...

see here: http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?t=4725 58 [mozillazine.org]

Block IE7 (1)

ZOMFF (1011277) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367277)

It is possible to block IE7 from being installed via WindowsUpdate by adding a registry key:
HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\Setup\7.0
REGDWORD Keyname=DoNotAllowIE70 Value=1

oh god (1)

matt328 (916281) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367345)

I don't know about you guys, but I've started eating advil already.

How to avoid a possible disaster - For Admins (5, Informative)

mgpeter (132079) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367347)

This is for all the Network Admins for Windows Networks.

If you do not want Automatic Updates to Install IE7 when it is released then just set the following registry key on every workstation:

Registry key: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\Setup\7.0
Key value name: DoNotAllowIE70

* When the key value name is not defined, distribution is not blocked.
* When the key value name is set to 0, distribution is not blocked.
* When the key value name is set to 1, distribution is blocked.

NOTE: This is highly recommended as everytime I dealt with any Major release from Microsoft things started getting trashed. Microsoft should NOT Automatically deploy this in this way.

For lazy/Proficient Admins here is a Kixtart Script to do this on a list of computers over the network: NoAutoIE7.txt [pcc-services.com]

Why so cagey? (3, Insightful)

LordSnooty (853791) | more than 7 years ago | (#16367359)

I've spent the day co-ordinating my department's response to the auto-install of IE7, since several of our apps are incompatible. We've had to block it with the reg key. But why are they so cagey about the actual release date? "This month" isn't good enough, I need a precise date if I'm to avoid a phalanx of users unable to use business-critical web sites. What can be so hard about it? Have they not set a date themselves? If not, why say "this month"? They bang on in their blog about how we ought to be ready, and here's a load of tools to help you, but we won't give you the exact date, that would ruin the game, right?
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>