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!

Quiz Microsoft's IE Team Leader

Roblimo posted more than 7 years ago | from the man-in-the-hot-seat dept.


About as timely an interview as you can get: Microsoft released Internet Explorer 7 last week, and today we're gathering questions for IE team general manager Dean Hachamovitch. As usual, please follow Slashdot interview rules when posting or moderating questions. We'll publish Dean's answers verbatim as soon as he replies.

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered


First question (4, Funny)

LiquidCoooled (634315) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547378)

Do you prefer Internet Explorer or Firefox?

Re:First question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16547418)

And what extensions you use with it?

Re:First question (-1, Offtopic)

gh4nd1 (1012181) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547538)

I prefer Firefox, but everything is standardized to Internet Explorer, which sucks because some backgrounds are not displayed when I open a page with Firefox, so if producers would just make their format fit with Firefox, it'd make me like Firefox even more

Re:First question (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16547574)

The question wasn't directed at you, idiot. It was an interview question for the IE guy.

Re:First question (0, Flamebait)

gh4nd1 (1012181) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547662)

wow don't be an ass this topic was up for discussion and i answered to something i wanted to answer to what is the point in posting a question if it restricted to one person?

Re:First question (wasted question) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16548036)

Do you prefer Internet Explorer or Firefox?

Why waste space with this question? You know what the answer will be.

How about this... (5, Interesting)

also-rr (980579) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547388)

Would you like to make available IE on other operating systems?

Re:How about this... (5, Interesting)

AKAImBatman (238306) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547572)

IE used to be available on Solaris, HP-UX, and Mac OS 9/X. Microsoft dropped support for all of those platforms. Considering that my attempts to install IE on Solaris 8 caused the CDE profile to be corrupted, I'm not sure that the lack of support is a bad thing. At the time, I found it more useful and reliable to build Mozilla nightlies.

CSS (5, Interesting)

Beuno (740018) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547408)

Why did you go half way implementing CSS instead of fully supporting standards all other browsers have for some time now.

Re:CSS (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16547518)

Does the IE roadmap include at any point 100% W3C compatibility, or are there features in the standard that you do not ever intend on supporting?

Pointless question. (5, Insightful)

Petersko (564140) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547616)

"Why did you go half way implementing CSS instead of fully supporting standards all other browsers have for some time now."

I believe that NO browser fully supports CSS. Am I wrong in this assumption? Even if you're asking them to support the standards to the same level as all other browsers the implementation would still be incomplete.

There's a built-in derogatory slant to your question. I believe that IE supports more than 50% of CSS standards, which would mean they went further than half-way. Your choice of words is subtly antagonistic.

It's not a "Have you quit beating your wife" question, but neither is it a suitable one for a serious discussion.

Re:Pointless question. (1)

Drizzt Do'Urden (226671) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547768)

You are right!

On my site (http://www.menzonet.org), Safari get's the 3 columns right, but sometime the footer wrong, and FireFox get's most of the time the 3 columns right, but the footer always right. IE7 it's sometime wrong for both.

The columns get's hoosed when the content is larger than the viewport.

Re:Pointless question. (2, Interesting)

DittoBox (978894) | more than 7 years ago | (#16548174)

Have you done any serious web design? I mean hand coding, XHTML 1.0 valid code, using CSS/Divs? You're pulling out the same excuse that all the MS funded studies about Windows being more secure because it has less vulnerabilities. It's not the amount of vulnerabilities that are acknowledges or that get fixed, it's the seriousness and size of the problems that matter. There are some very serious short-comings in the way IE5 and IE6 addressed standards, and to a large degree een IE7. They are far more serious, and far more vile in nature than the bugs that Gecko/Firefox/Mozilla, Opera, Safari etc. have.

Let's imagine for a moment that all browsers support only 50% of XHTML/CSS standards. If that's true it still isn't a real indicator of the problem, because the other 50% that IE doesn't support is where a lot of basics might be. Even then it's not to say IE's "50% support" isn't horribly broken.

Re:CSS (5, Insightful)

LordEd (840443) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547744)

A better question: Are you aware that no matter what answers you give here, they will never satisfy the anti-Microsoft Slashdot crowd?

pro Open Source != anti-Microsoft .. (4, Interesting)

rs232 (849320) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547890)

"A better question: Are you aware that no matter what answers you give here, they will never satisfy the anti-Microsoft Slashdot crowd?"

Why do you assume that pro Open Source equates with anti-Microsoft

was Re:CSS

Re:CSS (4, Informative)

AKAImBatman (238306) | more than 7 years ago | (#16548038)

Are you aware that no matter what answers you give here, they will never satisfy the anti-Microsoft Slashdot crowd?

It's difficult to speak for everyone, but I can give my own opinion on your question.

I used to like IE5. Whether I disliked Microsoft or not, it was a superior browser in its day. The problem is, that the standards that Microsoft helped create all those years ago are not actually supported by Microsoft today. To use the example I pointed out in my own question, IE's lack of DOM 2 Events support means that there is absolutely no way to write DHTML code that works in both IE and Firefox. Yet, I can easily write code that works in Firefox, Safari, and Opera.

Is there any reason for this dichotomy? Yes and no. Code can be made to work across the major non-IE browsers, because they all provide at least basic support for the W3C standards. IE has its own attachEvent() model that is (obviously) incompatible at a code level, and subtly incompatible at the behavior level. All that microsoft needs to do is to lay a parallel API that supports the W3C standard, and I would be a happy fellow. Yet they haven't done that, won't do that, and I have NO IDEA WHY.

So I continue to write code that works in Firefox, Safari, and Opera, then special patches to make it work in IE. From where I'm sitting, I just want the problem to go away. If Microsoft fixes their browser, then I'll be happy. If Microsoft can't do that, then I will carry the "Down With IE!" torch until their browser is irrelevant in the market. Then I'll also be happy.

Basically, my web browser opinion is not one based on my feelings about Microsoft. I just want a market were I can target a single standard is all. If Microsoft abuses their Web Browser monopoly to stand in the way of that, then it is my duty as a web developer* to help smash that monopoly.

* What happened to the "Developers, developers, developers" jingle, hmm? Are we important, or aren't we?

Re:CSS (1)

DittoBox (978894) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547954)

Another question I have is related to this: Do you realize that with IE5 and IE6 you've made many web designer's lives a living hell?

Re:CSS (3, Interesting)

Ant P. (974313) | more than 7 years ago | (#16548062)

A better question:

Do you have any plans to support CSS 2.1 *when it's finished*?

Not Strictly IE Related but... (-1, Troll)

jbrader (697703) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547412)

When will your company realize that it's only a software development company and not the Roman Empire?

Re:Not Strictly IE Related but... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16547452)

On a related note, how many people have told you personally to die in a fire?

Evil Plan? (5, Interesting)

dsginter (104154) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547420)

As someone who has developed for multiple browsers, it really seems like there is a secret ploy at Microsoft to keep IE relatively incompatible with other browsers.

Is this purposeful? If not, what is the reason?

Re:Evil Plan? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16547674)

Secret? I thought it was pretty obvious.

A few choice questions. (0)

Whatistehmatrix (835267) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547442)

1) What is your most used browser you noticed [both you and your team] and why?


2) Why is there still a huge lacking of CSS on internet explorer? is there any plans on fixing this problem?

IE's design goals (4, Interesting)

Tet (2721) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547454)

I've seen it mentioned (by Chris Wilson, amongst others) that IE7 was never going to pass the ACID2 tests when it shipped. Although as a web developer, that's not a situation I'm particularly pleased about, I'm mostly OK with it. I can appreciate that some aspects of the browsing experience will be propritized above others. However, I don't think I've ever seen a clear statement from Microsoft that 100% HTML and CSS compliance is even a goal. Can you comment on that?

Is it your goal to render a standards compliant website correctly in all cases, or are you just aiming to implement those parts of the spec that are used by the majority of your customers? Naturally, I can understand prioritizing the things that are hitting your customers above those that are rarely used in the real world, but part of the reason the some of them aren't used in the real world is down to lack of browser support. I find it incredibly frustrating that some of my site layouts have to be butchered just to get them to work in the commonly used browsers. If IE fails to render a compliant page according to the spec, can you commit to actively tracking it as a bug with a view to fixing it in a future release of IE, even if it only affects a handful of people?

This needs to be answered (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16547462)

Why are you so gay? And why do you allow IE to destroy the fucking internet?

MOD PARENT UP! (4, Funny)

Petersko (564140) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547672)

"Why are you so gay? And why do you allow IE to destroy the fucking internet?"

This is an important question. We don't want people to view the average slashdotter as able to participate in a calm, reasonable discussion. We need to be viewed as zealots, collectively frothing at the mouth.

I'd even like to see this question include just for humour.

Re:MOD PARENT UP! (3, Insightful)

Bromskloss (750445) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547944)

We don't want people to view the average slashdotter as able to participate in a calm, reasonable discussion.
Actually, I can understand outbursts like grand parent, seeing how the opposing force (Microsoft) slimily smiles and puts forward their arguments in a way that, to an uneducated person, might seem reasonable. Politicians seem to be a frequent target, since having them take the right desicions means better business for Microsoft, thought it to the rest of us means less choice, less freedom and worse technology. Heh, the feeling you get is that if they were to decide freely, we wouldn't be allowed to run whatever software we like, particularly not operating systems! That causes frustration, you know.

CSS and IE compatibility (2, Interesting)

dontbflat (994444) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547464)

It has been widly know that IE, Firefox, and others all behave differently when it comes to CSS compliance/compatibility. Since new incompatabilities are found every day, how will microsoft respond to these incompatibilities? Will it be possible to get updates weekly to address these issues for us developers that like to play by the rules of CSS and HTML and prefer strict mode vs quirky?

A question (5, Interesting)

also-rr (980579) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547466)

Would you like to see a universal architecture so that all rendering engines* worked in all web browsers, and all plugins** worked with all rendering engines? *Gecko, mshtml etc **Free and non-free - flash, mplayer and the like

Prediction: (5, Funny)

Atlantis-Rising (857278) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547486)

90% of the questions posted by slashdot will fall into one of two categories (or maybe both): 1) Why is Microsoft the Evil Empire and what are you doing to stop this (like using Firefox) and 2) What the fuck is up with your CSS support, dude?

Re:Prediction: (4, Informative)

Roblimo (357) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547712)

I'll add another prediction: That lots of people won't read and follow this note in the Slashdot Interview FAQ [slashdot.org] :

You can ask as many questions as you'd like!

But please, only ask one question per submitted comment.

You can ask a compound (multi-part) question, but if you make your question so complicated that no one's sure what you're asking, it's less likely to be moderated up. If you have several burning questions, take a minute to organize your thoughts and separate them into multiple comments.

- Robin

Interface (5, Interesting)

techmuse (160085) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547492)

The new version of IE makes it much harder to work with certain critical aspects of the browser. While I like some aspects of the new browser, some of the interface changes make it much more difficult to work with, and this will keep me firmly in the Firefox camp for now. For example, bookmarks now require many more clicks to access, especially if you use links nested in folders. Also, most interface elements can not be moved around as was previously possible (and is currently possible in Firefox.) The menu bar itself is hidden, and when exposed, appears in the middle of the browser controls! Why go to so much trouble to make essential elements of the program difficult for users to access?

Standardized Compliance Tests (5, Interesting)

justinbach (1002761) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547494)

How important is it to Microsoft to ensure that IE passes acknowledged tests of compliane (i.e. Acid2) at the cost of sacrificing newer and possibly more exciting/efficient proprietary technologies?

Best/Future Features (5, Interesting)

x_MeRLiN_x (935994) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547498)

What are the best features of IE7 that sets it above the competition, what features are perhaps lacking and are you currently working on adding these?

My Question (5, Interesting)

B3ryllium (571199) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547502)

Well, I can't think of a real Slashdot-headed question to ask, so I'll go for the entertaining rather than socially relevant:

Presumably, throughout this development process for IE7, your team has had their nose to the grind-wheel, so to speak. What sort of things did you do to chill out and relax? Were there any in-office perks, like pool tables or whatnot? And were you actually all in the same office, or did some members of the team have to telecommute from far-off lands, like Oregon?

Standards Compliance Development Time (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16547504)

It is said the IE team spends more time in rituals of Satanic Worship and baby killing and eating than in standards compliance. How many infants does the average IE dev team member kill and eat in a year? Or relative to KLOCs if you prefer giving the figures that way.

IE8? (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16547510)

If you adopt FireFox 2.0 as IE8, your boss would be impressed with how much you improved the product in a very short time. My question is: would you take the extra time to remove CSS features from IE8? Thank you and God Bless.

DOM 2 Events (5, Interesting)

AKAImBatman (238306) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547536)

One of the stated purposes of IE7 was to better support the W3C standards, and (presumably) to increase compatibility among W3C-compliant browsers. Yet despite multiple requests for DOM 2 Events support, the IE team decided to overlook this support [mozillazine.org] . Currently, IE is the only major browser lacking DOM Events support. Which is a major issue, as IE's attachEvent() design means that special code must be written for IE compatibility.

As someone who's been forced into using runtime patches (example [lachy.id.au] ) to increase IE's compatibility with DHTML code, I feel compelled to ask: Why has the IE team ignored this critical standard?

Re:DOM 2 Events (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16548042)

Dude, there are only three major browsers or four if you're a machead. That's like saying Canada is the only North American country with a parliament. It's true, but not that amazing.

Not just the Events module... (2, Interesting)

Snover (469130) | more than 7 years ago | (#16548166)

There is a painful lack of support for not only the DOM 2 Events, but also for several other significant parts of the DOM specification.

Some issues I've personally encountered, several of which I hit on a regular basis:

* Namespaces are completely absent from IE's DOM implementation (createElementNS, getAttributeNS, etc. functions simply do not exist).
* Prototyping of DOM elements is impossible without using proprietary HTC behaviours.
* Tables that are created dynamically will not appear unless elements are added to -- in other words, using DOM to write content does not display anything, even though is optional.
* importNode? Nope. Doesn't exist.
* getElementsByTagName('object').item(0).getElements ByTagName('param') returns EVERY IN THE ENTIRE DOCUMENT, not just ones under the requested object. Yikes!

And one other thing the lovely DOM Level 0...

* navigator.plugins exists but is always empty. What's up with that? Either don't have the attribute at all or populate it properly, for fuck's sake.

The worst thing is that as far as I can tell, there has been NO improvement in the JavaScript engine between IE6 and IE7 (except that the Microsoft Script Debugger doesn't work anymore. Thanks, guys! Not everyone has or wants to buy and install Microsoft Office just to debug in your broken browser.)

Does it hurt when they remove your soul? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16547540)

I mean really, dealing with the Devil and all that. It had to hurt a little. Do you miss it?

Doing WebSite development. (4, Insightful)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547556)

Doing some WebSite development I found that with IE 6 (I havent been able to test IE 7 Yet) I always had to wander away from the standards and the only reason I have gotten is that MS just doesn't like them. Is IE 7 going to make sure that they follow the stands much more closely so when I make HTML and I test it in IE, Firefox, Safari and Opera they all look the same, I normally get the Last 3 to work without much fighting but IE always decided to do it differently. Giving us New Windows Only features is not useful for the developers, but following the standards is. As well our custerms weither they know it or not like it better when we follow the standards (Less junk and warning messages, Or misaligned stuff).

Simple questions (5, Interesting)

Billosaur (927319) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547560)

IE has a dominating command of the market, although Firefox is slowly making inroads, due to innovations such as tabbed browsing that IE has had to incorporate to maintain that command. But where are the IE innovations? Why can't the IE team get ahead of the curve on Firefox? Is there anything you consider an innovation that is unique to IE that would plausibly be something the browser market would have to incorporate to stay competitive?

Why ditch platform conventions (5, Interesting)

linuxci (3530) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547570)

One of the biggest complaints [browserden.co.uk] about IE7 is that it does not obey the standard user interface guidelines for Windows XP. As an update that'll be pushed to users automatically [msdn.com] next month do you not consider it a bad idea to break platform conventions?

There is a workaround [enhanceie.com] that involves editing the registry to get the menu bar in the correct place but why is this not implemented as part of toolbar customisation?

Microsoft jisallim aklak (5, Interesting)

BeeBeard (999187) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547634)

What do you make of all this pro-Firefox, anti-IE digital jihadism?

anti Open Source pro-Microsoft digital jihadism (2, Funny)

rs232 (849320) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547772)

What do you make of all this anti Open Source pro-Microsoft digital jihadism?

was Re:Microsoft jisallim aklak

Re:anti Open Source pro-Microsoft digital jihadism (1)

BeeBeard (999187) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547998)

Touche (which I think is French for "touch me there, OK now harder!"). Perhaps you've just added another part to a two-part question.

IE7 + Win2k (5, Interesting)

TubeSteak (669689) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547642)

Why haven't you guys hacked IE7 to run on Win2k minus the WinXP SP2-dependant security features?

It's not like it'd be any less secure than IE6 on Win2k.

Security (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16547652)

Have you got anything without spam?

How much of SpyGlass is left in IE7? (5, Interesting)

HaeMaker (221642) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547660)

As I recall, Microsoft licensed SpyGlass browser code as the basis for Internet Explorer. Is there any of it left, or have you finally rewritten all the IE code?

Re:How much of SpyGlass is left in IE7? (3, Interesting)

Jon Abbott (723) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547806)

IIRC, Microsoft's license with Spyglass was: We will agree to pay you a set amount for every copy of Internet Explorer that we sell. Then they went and gave it away, so that they weren't selling it. It's either genius or insanity, depending on how you look at it...

Re:How much of SpyGlass is left in IE7? (3, Informative)

linuxci (3530) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547840)

IE7 is the first release that does not mention Spyglass Mosaic in the about box.

Why? (1)

jcrash (516507) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547666)

How come I cannot open a new tab with the address of my current page in the new tab? Why are my only two choices "My homepage" and "blank page"??

IE as Open Source (1, Interesting)

GodWasAnAlien (206300) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547668)

The base of Open Source software is constantly rising.

A software company can either decide to add value to that base of software,
or fight the tide and compete directly with it.

Will Microsoft, at some point decide to open source a few things, like IE, that have been equalled or surpased by open source?

Or will Microsoft instead try to "compete" with such software via other means: legislative, marketing, proprietary lock in?

A question .. (1)

rs232 (849320) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547730)

A question for Dean Hachamovitch: What feetures did the Firefox developers borrow from IE7.

Does this mark a faster release cycle? (4, Interesting)

Control Group (105494) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547786)

I realize, of course, that any answer you give to this question may not be valid a couple years down the road, but as of now:

Does the release of IE7 mark the beginning of a more aggressive development/release cycle for Internet Explorer? That is, we are all aware of various aspects of CSS, for example, that are not currently supported in IE (though kudos on all the progress in this direction you've made): can we expect updates to IE, either as service packs, point releases, or new versions, that will provide better standards support in the relatively near future? Or will we be limited to security fixes for the foreseeable future, as with IE6?

IE vs. Firefox (3, Interesting)

thoriphes (984506) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547802)

Besides matching some of the features in Firefox (ie. tabbed browsing), what are some others to look forward to in IE7 that an avid Firefox user such as myself would find useful?

Web Development (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16547824)

Do you or does anyone else on the IE team run multiple versions of IE on the same machine for testing purposes? Do you use the DLL hack that's been published here or some other method?

Security (5, Interesting)

Seto89 (986727) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547844)

One of IE7's revolutionary features was supposed to be security, although it took less than 24 hours for Secunia to post [secunia.com] an advisory about a security hole. Moreover, the bug seemed to be carried over from as early as IE5.5 [secunia.com] . What approach did you take to improve browser's security, and how come the vulnerabilities have been carried over?

ooh ohh! i have a question! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16547868)

Do you want to continue running scripts on this page?

question (1)

vismat (697720) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547878)

What are the main reasons to change the current (and probably really familiar) look, that to my opinion offers a better acces to some of the advanced option that we use in computerlab excercises?

Why no protected mode? (1)

jo7hs2 (884069) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547888)

1) Why did you make the IE protected mode only for Vista? Is it for technical reasons, or marketing reasons?

2) Will IE ever have a way to permanantly set the window size on open from within IE? I've always been irritated by IE (and Windows) only occasionally remembering what size I want it when not maximized, and more frequently deciding to store the smallest size possible.

3) How do you feel about the new interface. I mean, obviously you like it, or it wouldn't be there, but what is your opinion? Personally, after a few days, the lack of top menus and the new placement of buttons seems really logical. IE is really simplified. I really appreciate the close buttons ON the tabs. That has always annoyed me about Firefox's tabbing support.

4) Have you considered implementing a "certified" toolbar system? Or even drop toolbars altogether?

5) You folks aren't going to name the next version of IE something stupid, like vista or anything, right.

IE7? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16547892)

Are you viewing Slashdot on IE7? If so, why is the site suddenly broken?

How about this.... (5, Interesting)

Toreo asesino (951231) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547896)

Let's pretend for a moment that Internet Explorer isn't the default web-browser built into Windows and instead, users are presented with a choice on first login (e.g. a message asking 'How would you like to browse the internet? MSIE, Firefox, Opera').

Would you expect IE to become as dominant as it is now if users had to specifically choose it over another?

Ignoring the slight impracticalities, if so (I'm guessing you do), on what basis would this be?

Windows 2000 (1, Offtopic)

Erwin_D (960540) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547902)

Why is Windows 2000 not supported? I paid more for Windows 2000 then XP costs, and 2000 is barely 18 montsh older then XP. Can you imagine I and many others feel cheated?

how does microsoft choose which CSS/DOM to add? (4, Interesting)

jonwil (467024) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547904)

How does microsoft choose which bits of the CSS and DOM standard to implement?

DOJ Antitrust Settlement (4, Interesting)

KJSwartz (254652) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547910)

While upgrading to IE7, I noticed that IE6 had to be removed before Windows could install IE7. Does this mean that Internet Explorer is not so tightly bundled into Microsoft/OS that it can not be removed in the name of competition? Also, is the complete IE7 API available for license and fee-free?

Moo (1)

Chacham (981) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547914)

Knowing the IE is pushed onto ever so many desktops, are decisions ever made based on what most people already do? Easing an erstwhile difficulty is a major thrust of Windows the OS, and i'm sure some of that exists in IE. But Windows looks forward, and it just keeps backwards compatibility in mind. Is IE the same, or is contemporary usage the main point, with innovations taking second seat?

Toolbars&Big Screens [Forward-Backward & H (1)

phorest (877315) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547916)

Was any thought given about not being able to move/reposition/undock the forward/backward/address bar/refresh/close buttons? All the while burying the history function in the dropdown history menu, as opposed to having a stand-alone history button?

I say this about the forward and backward buttons being unmovable because there are a lot of us with big monitors and if I can't move those buttons it makes it hard to use them. That's a lot of real-estate to cover every time (upper left on a 21 inch monitor) Also with a bigger monitor it would be great to be able to undock any toolbar and have it hover always on top.

I've always moved the address bar to the lowest possible toolbar position on the left and the standard toolbar to the right of the address bar.

Questions for IE Development Team (5, Funny)

kseise (1012927) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547924)

Would you like to install SearchBar Helper? Select Yes to Close this Window.

Browser integration (5, Interesting)

solevita (967690) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547936)

We've been told in the past that the reason that IE was so deeply embedded (to the point that it could not be removed, as we were told) in to the operating system was to improve the online experience of a Windows PC. With Web 2.0 firmly in place, the desire for a web browser integrated in to the operating system is, some would say, greater than ever.

Where do you stand on this issue? How central to the XP and Vista experience will IE7 become?

Moo (1)

Chacham (981) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547940)

Who decides what features make it in? I'm sure the team comes with a mandate, but a whole slew of "little things" are integral to a browser. Does a meeting define those, or do people code what they think is useful, and have it decided later if it should make it in or not?

client-side persistent storage (2, Interesting)

gradix (688156) | more than 7 years ago | (#16547958)

What about the client-side session and persistent storage (like in Firefox 2) ? See http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/ #scs-client-side [whatwg.org]

IE5/6 already has this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16548146)

of sorts its called Persistant Storage
http://msdn.microsoft.com/workshop/author/persiste nce/overview.asp [microsoft.com]

but any kind of persistant storage (flash local object, unexpiring cookies) will be abused by advertising and tracking companies, just like cookies where a good idea to begin with , now they are even detected by antirus and spyware apps i bet the original designers never imagined that when they designed them and just like modern day cookies it will be detected as unwanted and removed by apps

until they solve the abuse factor its not something people will want in a hurry

ActiveX control and spyware (1)

weiqj (870224) | more than 7 years ago | (#16548000)

Why didn't you guys change the logic of handling ActiveX control for years until the WIndows XP SP2? Do you think you are responsible of the wide spread of spywares in the last several years?

IE 7+ (4, Interesting)

wwrafter (906101) | more than 7 years ago | (#16548066)

First, thank you for the efforts the team has already put in. I'm pretty sure that the two features that will provide the biggest benefit to developers, and by extension the users, namely better CSS (hopefully some CSS3) support and moving to the W3 standard event model, will be addressed in the next version of IE. My two part question: Do you have any ETA on the next version, and is there any possibility of adding pieces to IE7 via Windows Update? I recognize changing the event model is not really an option here, but adding support for say border-radius or opacity css support seems like it would be a fairly innocuous change.

Teaching others about new features in IE7. (5, Interesting)

srothroc (733160) | more than 7 years ago | (#16548118)

You have implemented a new GUI and new security features; these have been examined, praised, and lambasted on just about every tech site out there, so those of us "in the know" are aware of all of the changes and their implications. You also have resources like the quick reference sheet [microsoft.com] available to help new users of IE7. These are all well and good, but they'll be of no use to anyone who does not know about them or how to use them.

What I want to know is this: how will you spread word of the new changes and features to neighbor Joe or Grandma Smith -- will you rely on word-of-mouth from the technocracy, or do you trust that your features are transparent enough that they will easily understand the difference between, say, types of SSL certificates provided by sites?

Project Management? (4, Interesting)

RingDev (879105) | more than 7 years ago | (#16548138)

What type of project management processes and structures did you impliment in order to keep the vast number of people and resources invovled with this project in line? How do you feel about those processes now that it's done, and what would you have done differently?


Allowing Developers to Test for Compatibility (5, Insightful)

miyako (632510) | more than 7 years ago | (#16548148)

IE7, like IE6, renders a lot of pages significantly differently than the other main HTML rendering engines available (Geko, KHTML, and Opera). At the same time, IE7 requires WGA to run - so that applications like Wine are unable to run it. This means that web developers who are using Linux and Mac OS X will have an extremely difficult time testing their sites with IE7. Was this intentional? If so what was the reason behind it (do you want to force developers to move to Windows for web development, or simply set IE aside as something different that isn't a regular browser and must be specifically developed for), and if not how do you plan to rectify the situation?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

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>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account