Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
Microsoft tags IE 7 'high priority' update
news.zdnet.com — "The justification, of course, is the significant security enhancements in IE 7," Schare said. Microsoft recommends that all Windows users install the new browser when it ships, he added.
schestowitz- 933 diggs
- digg it
- phpirate, on 10/12/2007, -3/+49Thank god for that. At least now us web developers can actually use some of the better things the web has to offer, like alpha transparencies in PNGs and more CSS stuff.
- theantidote, on 10/12/2007, -1/+17Yes! That's exactly what I thought! Too bad it wont work for anything less than XP. Oh well...time to start saying you don't support IE6!
- Chewie67, on 10/12/2007, -0/+33Exactly. I may eat my words, but anything is better than IE 6.
The sooner we get everyone up to a more standards compliant web browser, the better. - Mathiasdm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+26I totally agree!
And hopefully, IE8 will implement the entire CSS 2.1 specification. - diotro, on 10/12/2007, -13/+9I totally agree. The world needs to make the jump to a better web environment.
Hopefully Microsoft will make it a required update, instead of something voluntary. - wastern, on 10/12/2007, -4/+32*I totally agree!
And hopefully, IE8 will implement the entire CSS 2.1 specification.*
shall we start the countdown until its release in 2011? - sirber, on 10/12/2007, -17/+15can I run it on linux? ;)
- embeem, on 10/12/2007, -7/+4You can already do png alpha transparencies in IE, it just requires a bit of work; http://openwrt.org/ uses multiple layers of pngs with alpha transparencies and renders fine in pretty much any browser.
- nofxjunkee, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4maybe, ie4linux has ie5-6 running so i'd say it's definitely possible.
ie7 renders my sites pretty well I have to say. security be damned! that part has little effect on me. I'm just stoked web design is getting easier and less hackish. - Miriem, on 10/12/2007, -11/+1Plug
Awesome Google Stats Graphs
http://googled.wordpress.com/2006/07/25/35/
End Plug - brentzilla, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5"I may eat my words, but anything is better than IE 6."
Hope you're hungry...Netscape 4 and IE 5.x are much worse :) - cldnails, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Amen, hopefully now we will see some more consistency between the popular webrowsers display...ie FF and IE.
- Chewie67, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@brentzilla - "Hope you're hungry...Netscape 4 and IE 5.x are much worse :)"
True, but neither one has been a factor for 5 years now. If you're still designing sites to be NS 4 or IE 5 you're waisting your time. It's called "Diminishing Returns". - danielandrews, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4Any web dev worth his salt knows that you can't use this stuff just because IE7 is out. Using transparent pngs and whatnot will work for all users of modern browsers, but not everyone will upgrade. it'll still be a year or two before we can really take advantage of the latest CSS standards, sadly.
The weakest link (people using 2k/IE6 etc) will be holding back web design for a few years to come. - nofxjunkee, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2"Any web dev worth his salt knows that you can't use this stuff just because IE7 is out."
True. But every web dev worth his salt has had to hack up their HTML and CSS so badly just to make things work in IE that any glimmer of hope of a better way should bring a tear to their eye. Ok, I'm no pro web dev and I exaggerated slightly, but 60-70% of IE users upgrading is nothing to scoff at. It's a pretty good start.
- jon1012, on 10/12/2007, -14/+21To be sincere, I've found a lot of websites coded in accordance to standards being broken in IE 7... I'm not that happy... more testing, more browser...
and IE 7 won't work in wine, so no testing for linux web-designers...- kodek, on 10/12/2007, -11/+14Maybe cause it's still beta software?
- scratt, on 10/12/2007, -9/+29Maybe coz it's still not standards compliant.
- redxii, on 10/12/2007, -6/+14But a beta is useless if the developers receive no feedback. Silence means everything is OK.
- wastern, on 10/12/2007, -11/+10*Maybe cause it's still beta software?*
then why are the pushing it out as an update? that doesn't sound beta to me - noahhoward, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12It's not standards compliance, we had a box at work with IE7 set up on it (beta, but thats not important, if they haven't hammered out the CSS specs by now, that is not a quick fix). Id did leaps and bounds better than IE6 but I can tell you right now that by "standards" compliant Microsoft means "we reinterpreted and 'improved' the standards".
It will still break on issues such as the box model. They ahve also removed a bunch of useful hacks for fixing things.
My big concern was having to support IE 6 and IE7 because, we learned that we were going to have to hack style declarations twice in a specific order. If they are forcing it out (can't say I agree with the move) then at least that issue is gone.
Is it really that hard just to make a god browser though, I mean all these open source groups are doing a much better job and MS has a fleet of paid developers. All of those resources and we only /might/ see full CSS 2 support? What about CSS 3 I'm not waiting until I'm 40 years old to be able to put my expertise to good use. I'll block the browser before then. - shmatt, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13It STILL breaks the box model?!
Dammit, then IE is still useless. At work we're not allowed to use IE hacks or quirks mode. - noahhoward, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3Yeah still breaks it. It's either that or it support it to a higher deree than we have all gotten used to from FireFox... which I find hard to believe.
- Dracker, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2Won't work in wine? I run vmware.
- shmatt, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I thought that was what's so great about ie 7, that it pretty much finally complies with CSS. how can you say it complies when it can't render the width of a div correctly?
good thing we have places like alistapart and cssplay. - NoodleGuy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5@wastern:
From the FIRST Sentence of the article: "IE 7 will be delivered in the fourth quarter as a 'high priority' update via Automatic Updates in Windows XP"
Is it Fourth Quarter? Are they releasing it now? is it still in beta?
I can read.
- chris9902, on 10/12/2007, -6/+20I'm sure people will bitch that MS is "forcing" them to do something but tbh this is the only way 99% of people will update.
- darkfate, on 10/12/2007, -9/+13Who says you need to do it? You can just hide the update and you won't need to download it. I did that with the WGA notification.
- pabster, on 10/12/2007, -12/+5And if you're smart, you will uncheck the box for this update.
- inkubux, on 10/12/2007, -13/+27Sorry to say this but IE7 is still a bad html renderer, and doesn't follow the standards.
It's better than nothing for sure.- baalzebub, on 10/12/2007, -5/+39i rather open the web page in a text editor and imagine what the webpage would look like in my mind.
- steeel, on 10/12/2007, -18/+2You mean to be redirected to a ghey site?
- GS13, on 10/12/2007, -10/+5Dont Click the Blue "E" :) Microsoft Issues Tool To Block IE7 Auto Updates http://www.informationweek.com/management/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=191203474
- stephenwq, on 10/12/2007, -5/+9And? Whats the point? are we meant to be angry?
This article has no point. Its high priority because it has small security features, its an update to the software.- alexp2ad, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14The point is that a good 70% or so of internet users are likely to get IE7 instead of IE6, and you think that isn't news?
I think you've not read the article, this isn't an IE7 update, it's that all XP users using updates will be updated from IE6 to IE7. - benthere, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Not really. All users using AU will automatically download the installer and be asked if they want to install it.
- sheppoor, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0True, there is a bit more to the story - or should have been in the story. (Also, where did 70% come from?)
Yes, most XP users at home will have the update forced upon them. But corporations will hold it back until they are ready to support it, which may be a while. Also, plenty of home and corporate users are still on 2000, and I still see tons of home 98 and ME users out there too.
It is a big deal due to the big bang nature of the release. All developers will need to support IE7 out of the gate. But it won’t overwhelm the legacy of IE6 / IE5.x for a long while.
Unfortunately, developers need to support IE6 and the new unique issues of IE7's interpretation of the standards. Debugging IE7 bugs in Web2.0 code (or whatever you call it) won’t be easy or cheap, but it will need to be done quickly because while sites may stop working (AJAX is great, but it is a more fragile house of cards when it comes to client incompatibilities).
So, we will have a mini Y2K-like scramble for developers.
But in the end, the world will be a better place, right? Because of IE7's unique interpretation of standards, the next few months translates to more bloated conditional code, and overall increased development costs for the foreseeable future.
- alexp2ad, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14The point is that a good 70% or so of internet users are likely to get IE7 instead of IE6, and you think that isn't news?
- Beaver6813, on 10/12/2007, -11/+5Lol i would rather use ***** ie 7 with small security improvments than ***** ie 6 with none...
- dkmeek, on 10/12/2007, -15/+10Thank da gods in da heavens. Firefox kicks ass, so I don't even bother with IE. I would uninstall it if that were actually possible. Still the best of the best Mozilla Firefox. I say if you wanna browse, why not do it in style!
- noahhoward, on 10/12/2007, -5/+0Add/Remove windows components. Registry Edit if nessecary.
- warpzone, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2nLite
- macewan, on 10/12/2007, -9/+155 years between the browser software updates? I don't know who this microsoft outfit is but that's horrible - stick with Firefox
- naio21, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Indeed. Balmer is too slow for a CEO (and is slowing MS as well). Gates is already being missed.
- Technopundit, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2Firefox takes an annoyingly long time to open. Still, I have it installed because of the fool web developers who somehow laughably think Firefox is some kind of "new standard" and post sites which they are too lazy to make IE compatible.
- gerkin, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Ummm you obviously don't develop websites or have any idea what standards are given that comment. Supporting IE6 is bad enough, supportin IE7 will be hell if it's anything like the betas. It barely works better than Mosaic did ;)
- BladeMelbourne, on 10/12/2007, -10/+15Is it me, or is the new interface worse than MSIE 3?
It lacks consistency - and those toolbar icons are lacking any sense of style, let alone eye candy.
Still, if it supports the standards better than MSIE 6, then I guess it's a v.small step in the right direction.
I still can't bring myself to install Beta 3 on my primary desktop...- noahhoward, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Install it while it is still beta if you have any curiosity. People were sayign it replaced IE 6 when you downloaded and installed it but it uninstalled from 'add/remove programs' for me.
- Sargos, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The UI is consistent with the rest of the Vista UI.
If you install Vista Beta 2, you will see that this is the case and everything looks very well themed.
Now on XP this UI will definitely look like ass :-P
- adsoftheworld, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11If the adoption rate of IE7 will be as good as I6 over IE5, I think web developers like myself are lucky. IE7 is much better than IE6, so we can start doing sites with slicker interfaces. I hope in 6 month IE6 will be as insignificant as IE5 now.
- cbreaker, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Yea, everyone loves slicker IE-Only Web Interfaces. I mean, that's what it will be, and always be, until Microsoft stops ***** around and just makes it WORK. But no, they use every single little snippit of code they have to lock people in. They don't want it to be fully standards compliant, because then it's replacable. If they quirk the ***** out of it, you'll always have special IE only pages.
- djjoemex, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1IE7 Graphic Interface sucks because you can't save a page without enabling the classic menu toolbar. I rather use Internet Explorer 6 with MSN Beta Toolbar. This toolbar uses all the services of IE7 and has many windows Live new applications availiable. It is not preconfigured so if you like tabbed browsing you can download all those features. Is better than the classic MSN toolbar. It has a Phishing Filter something that Firefox doesn't have.
- Hastin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Yes, you can save a page. Just click the 'Page' button. Ironic that saving a 'page' is on the 'Page' button'.
- wastern, on 10/12/2007, -15/+8This is going to mess up a lot of internal business apps.....they are going to be *****. they will be a HUGE, HUGE backlash
- estvir, on 10/12/2007, -6/+13What kind of moron would update all the browsers at a business without testing it first ? I hope the people who blindly update do have problems, so maybe they'll learn an important lesson.
There will be no 'huge, huge backlash' - go back to your basement. - wastern, on 10/12/2007, -6/+9the workstations were i work have autoupdate turned on, which means as a critical update this should in theory just download and install. then upon reboot all my ***** will be broken.
(we aren't permitted to changed the settings and even if i keep clicking to wait someone else will let it go through as its a shared system)
remember everyone getting their panties in a bunch over SP2? this is going to be the same ***** all over again - estvir, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8RTFA, you aren't going to be FORCED to update, you will be prompted to decide.
SP2 ? Oh yeah, I remember that.. everyone was over that fairly quickly, and the very few apps which didn't work where updated quickly and forced developers to be that little bit less lazy.
So, you're saying everyone will realise how silly crying about this is and get over it ? Sounds good. - pmuessig, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5I partially have to agree with wastern. But think about it the other way around. Not from an internal business perspective, but rather from business' public websites that discriminate browsers to allow the user to access their damn site. I can’t count on my hands how many times when browsing with firefox that a site won’t let me access it without spoofing my browser.
When users start automatically getting IE7 installed and it becomes their default, when they visit these sites there might be a lot of frustration from both the user (“I can’t access your site!”) and the admin (“*****, I gotta redo my html?”). - vonnie, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10Some internal business apps deserve to be messed up with. Maybe that will teach them to write clean html,css,javascript code instead of using all sorts of hacks and tricks. I'm guessing that the sites that work perfectly on ie6, firefox, opera and safari, will continue to work on ie7. If you are an ie6-only coder, well you deserve any breakage you get.
- DocNo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3@wastern
If you actually read the article (Yeah, I know - what a concept) you would see they have an IE 7 blocker that can be deployed for sites that are relying on Automatic Updates.
Just like they had for SP2. Except unlike SP2, this one won't expire.
Personally, I'd be embarrassed to admit I was using Automatic Updates in a business environment - WSUS is ridiculously easy to set up. You can control which updates are deployed and when, and most importantly you get reports on which machines have patched and which haven’t. Reports are very good – that whole proactive thing… - Karyyk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2lol, you know, I used to think like that, but I've seen an applications specialist push out stuff to our locations without doing ANY testing. It's called arrogance. What can possibly go wrong? Mind you, this is at a company with over 200 locations east of the Mississippi, not mom n pop. You'd be amazed what some people will do when they're overconfident.
That being said, this is a good thing. Anything that will protect users from themselves is fine by me, and I see next to no areas where IE7 isn't superior to IE6 (hey, Microsoft is copying from the best now). - shmatt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@vonnie-
see, that's the problem with MS browsers. Go ahead and write a perfectly clean CSS page, 508 and all that, and see if it renders in IE. You have about a 50% chance you'll need to 'fix' it.
I shouldn't have to add redundant code to make IE treat my div's right.
display:inline is retarded but I have to use it a lot. - kodeiko, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@vonnie:
The site that I coded to work in Firefox, Opera, Safari (and hacked to work in IE6) fails in IE7.
My latest project that required no hacks for IE6 to work, apparently doesn't render the same in IE7 because it would display a redundant horizontal scrollbar. And I don't know why.
So much for standards-compliant. We'll just end up with having one more IE to worry for. I was wondering why can't they take some (more) time and render things (almost?) perfectly and then roll out IE7, instead of making us wait for IE8 for something more compliant.
Then the vicious cycle of having to worry about the adoption of IE8 like we did IE7 will happen again... It's never ending..
- estvir, on 10/12/2007, -6/+13What kind of moron would update all the browsers at a business without testing it first ? I hope the people who blindly update do have problems, so maybe they'll learn an important lesson.
- JohnnySoftware, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5Instead of recommending "updating when it ships", why doesn't he hold off on recommending it until it ships?
The article does not state how IE 7 stacks up against its competition - if that is the right word.
It would be nice to see a detailed comparison of CSS compliance/completness, MIME type correctness, DTD recognition, etc.
By the way, will they be changing the Windows XP software license again?
A lot of people do not like to have to agree to something different than they did when they bought the OS or their whole computer even, just to get a bug fix and a couple new features.
Seems like if they want to change the deal after the sale, they could just ship a new OS.
Then people could make a decision at the time of sale whether they liked the agreement enough to buy it or not. Instead of changing it after the sale, when the purchaser has already given up his money and the warranty period has fully expired.
MIght be interesting to see a side-by-side comparison of the IE SLA and the Firefox & opera ones. - Mekun, on 10/12/2007, -9/+9Who cares i wont be using it. Ill stick to FF.
Nothing to see here just move along.- wvdavis, on 10/12/2007, -6/+6My grandmother (85 y/o) will tell you she cares, but she will still prefer to use Firefox over IE.
- Dotnetsky, on 10/12/2007, -11/+6I'm reading this with IE7 and I like it. Firefox is nice for a backup to check CSS and script. IE7 rocks.
- yokat, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7have you tried to read buried comments , have you noticed how does IE7 can't handle the fade in/out effects properly when you digg a comment or a story , how do those google ads at the top of the page look... Because of the clear type effect which is enabled by default my website looks like ***** when you use fade in/out effects on IE7 so does digg.
- estvir, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4Yeah, and some of the things you mentioned affect Opera and other browsers, so who's at fault, the people who coded this site (for not making it cross-compatible) or all the other developers of non-ff browsers ?
- yokat, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Opera works just fine and nobody has to make their site cross-compatible for a newly released browser which is expected to be standart compatible after 5 years.
- Technopundit, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1And this affects me, how?
- SolidusSnake, on 10/12/2007, -13/+6I can't wait for it, i'm tired of using this Firecrap browser and all the memory leaks that comes with it.
- pornel, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9if you don't like FF why don't you use different non-MS browser? http://opera.com or osx+safari.
- DreadPirateWes, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0Lose some of your gimpy extensions and it will run fine. It's not the browser's fault if someone writes a piece of crap for it that hogs and then you install it.
- johnie1, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2am i the only one using:
http://windowsupdate.62nds.com/
update without the crap (: - wired4u, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4Since IE7 sucks so badly, I was wondering what Microsoft actually dose with the billions in R&D they spent on making it. Hell FF probably has 1% the budget that Microsoft but they seem to be able to build a great browser. Just a though.
- inkubux, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2[sarcasm]I'ts called open source.. Not sure if you heard of it?[/sarcasm]
- Daisuke, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2actually, that comment would have made a lot more sense if that wasn't sarcasm...
- phogasmic, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4That is great news! This means most users will update, even the most non-savvy, and I can finally start using trasparent pngs, without worrying if 90% of my users have they're javascript turned on.
- varske, on 10/12/2007, -6/+2won't the automatic update thing be illegal in the EU anyway? Microsoft is now being fined millions of USD a day for anti-trust, so I hope so.
- Shinta, on 10/12/2007, -10/+7The new IE sucks.
- cldnails, on 10/12/2007, -8/+2Still find it hard to believe FireFox hasn't taken over a larger market share by now, at least to the point htat this wouldn't be news. Knowing Microsoft there are probably going to be built in advertisements.
- estvir, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4There are no built in advertisements, and why would there be ? Have they _ever_ done that for one of their products ?
You're an idiot. - DooDah, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4yeah i agree IDIOT, but they do advertise on msn messenger!!
- DooDah, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2also......
at the end of the day the only solutions is to mash all browser into one and to support everything which is available cause lets face it firefox doesn''t support everything! - cldnails, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0As a matter of fact they build in advertisements with everything, Messenter, Hotmail, Windows comes preloaded with advertisements...trying to get you to buy, ie Roxio. I will keep going if you like, but I digress. I'm sorry to upset you fanboys.
Calling me an idiot for a comment... lol
- estvir, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4There are no built in advertisements, and why would there be ? Have they _ever_ done that for one of their products ?
- applepro, on 10/12/2007, -7/+4thanks, that means they admit IE6 is garbage. haha, firefox baby... i'm done with IE.
- apocalizer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1NOW you're switching? Took you long enough...
- HappyScrappy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Don't forget to update your Firefox today. The Firefox team recommends everyone do so (and if you have update checks on, it'll suggest it, just like Windows Update will suggest IE7). 1.5.0.4 wasn't secure.
- alrahman, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Im an Firefox user, but I'm glad MS is focusing on customer needs for once. IE6 is way too outdated.
- noahhoward, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3I find it almost funny that I'm trying to tweak an App to work with IE's ***** suppot for the DOM while I'm reading this.... or I would if I wasn't ready to pitch my PC out the window.
- Phil246, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2would this be coming through *windows* update or *microsoft* update.
If its the former, surely thats just another admission that they tied the browser deep into the OS?
yes yes its just semantics, but thought the observation was worth mentioning - Qtip42, on 10/12/2007, -8/+3IE sucks
windows sucks
msn sucks
messenger sucks
office sucks (especially front page)
.....is there anything they do that doesn't suck?- timmarhy, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1 nope
- noahhoward, on 10/12/2007, -5/+0Well... they've got Bill... I mean all that sucking has to be aimed at something
- astrotrain, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Microsoft will be Microsoft... no matter what version of IE they make, it will NOT be in standards with everyone else. It will always be "Microsoft's" version of HTML.
That means bloat your 4 K HTML files up to 20 K to have all the MS Office Code in it
so that MS Office will be able to read and display your code. - FlashBagMan, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0What bugs me is in the fourth paragraph it states:
" Automatic Update will present the choices to install, not install or postpone installation."
But the very next paragraph states:
"Additionally, Microsoft on Wednesday plans to make available a special tool to block automatic delivery of the new browser version, Schare said"
So why would you need the blocker if you choose to not install in the first place?
Even if your an update lemming (I hope not after WGA) an new feature release is not a critical update and should present the user with the choice reguardless of the automatic updates settings. The tool just indicates to me the plan M$ is using to insure that 99% of the user DB will get the new version because we all know most of the user base knows nothing of the blocker or how to get it... only those of us that would bitch about it. I'll bet you can choose not to download it but rest assured unless you watch it like a hawk, you will get it eventually without the tool.
do yourself a favor and disable updates and do everything manually when needed.
firefox is better anyhow.- mouseclone, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1You know. I have been a MS admin for a long time now. I started way back on Apple E2s and then Macs mixed with some DOS 6.22/windows 3.1(1). Those were, to me, solid days of computing.
I have read several articals about MS in recent days about why they should or shouldn't do. They (Microsoft) should have never ever joined IE and Explorer togeather. Having progman/explorer/iexplorer linked and using everything togeather was a very bad move IMO.
You computer is at risk not because you have a connection to the internet but because IE wasn't patched yesterday. Why is that important, because your OS is Explorer/IE combined.
Yes it is great to have the ability to go inot explorer and just type in an address to get to the web. Look around though, how many users do that. 80% of the users out that open IE and type what they want in a search page. errr... i want to go to google.. but my home page is MSN, search google in MSN and then do another search? WTF?
in 10 years this may change. I'm switching to Linux at my house as fast as i can. I have removed MS XP on my personal computer at home. My laptop will not run W2K or XP so i have Linux installed on it. I don't have to worry 2 much about security. Why? major reason i site behind a firewall. If someone is in that much of desperation to hack my computer then they have to get though the firewall that is hardware based and then to the computer.
Also if someone wants to get to something then they will if they have the knowledge of how to get through your security.
Point is I don't care for MS any more. The none standards, we think we have a big dick aditude is over rated. Most people will never have an understanding of that because they just don't care. I don't want my personal information sent to anyone unless i say so. I'm not saying that Linux users can't have issues with that, but most users of linux know a little more about computers than the avarage Joe. - HappyScrappy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Blockers aren't for the end users anyway. Blockers are to make their corporate customers. Corporate customers don't want Windows Update suggesting their employees update their browser until they have made sure their web sites work with the new browser.
Yes, MS would like 99% of Windows customers get IE7. Because all of them invariably have some version of IE on there before that is less secure. Firefox also released a suggested update today because of security issues in the previous one. If you have update checking on, Firefox will suggest you update, same as MS Windows Update will do. - Technopundit, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@mouseclone
The apparent fact that you've been in IT so long, yet use a laptop which won't even run XP is a testament to the crappy wages of a career in IT.
Here's to a long and happy retirement, assuming you don't end up working as a greeter at Wal-Mart.
BTW, before you leave your current employer, rip off a new laptop. - noahhoward, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@Technopundit:
Are you really that retarded or is my connection distorting things? IT pays pretty ***** good.
I'd take a guess that he likes his laptop more than he thrists for Windows XP, I highly doubt it has anything to do with money.
- mouseclone, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1You know. I have been a MS admin for a long time now. I started way back on Apple E2s and then Macs mixed with some DOS 6.22/windows 3.1(1). Those were, to me, solid days of computing.
- cldnails, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1I think it's funny that I get 'thumbs down' for simply not support IE... lol, silly fanboys.
- gremos, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I remember days when I could not wait to get my hands on IE 4.0.x on Windows 95 (what a piece of ***** that was...). I was so naive back then... Now I am going to wait for a few months until they work out all the bugs, security holes, and the rest of garbage that Microsoft usually gets into their software.
- anchorman, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3High Priority?
Microsofts real reasons for doing this?
Microsoft: Our last browser was such a piece of crap, it is imperative that you get rid of it as soon as possible. IE6 is not secure! (Sorry, you can't uninstall it)
Web Surfer: What's the second reason?
Microsoft: Firefox is taking our market share! It is a high priority that you stop using it immediately! - Bisqwit, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Does "high priority update" mean that it will reboot my computer without asking, even when I've configured it to not install anything without asking?
(It has happened before...) - CausticNoise, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0Microsoft tags Windows XP a 'high priority' update for Linux.
"The justification, of course, is the significant profit enhancements we will get from having all Linux OS's out there upgraded to XP," Schare said. Microsoft recommends that all Linux users install their XP immediately, he added. - SmeRndmGy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Of course it is going to be a high priority update. Was there anyone out there who thought it wasn't going to be high priority?
- ThinkFr33ly, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3First of all, the update is OPTIONAL ( http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2006/07/26/678149.aspx ). The only thing that is "pushed" to the client via Windows Update is an installer shim. When it runs it prompts the user and asks them if they would like to install an update for IE. They can say Yes, No, or Ask Me Later.
Second, guess what I was greeted with this morning when I came in to work? It was a Firefox dialog saying that I was already updated to the new version and would I like to restart firefox so the changes could take effect. How is this really any different? Does anybody have knowledge that version 2.0 of Firefox won't be pushed this way, just like version 1.5.0.5 was today?
Could IE7 have bugs? It almost certainly does... but the fact of the matter is that it has some very important security related design changes and fixes that will make Windows users safer. If large e-commerce sites are worried about how their pages will display in IE7, why don't they download a copy of the freely available beta and test it ( http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2006/01/31/520883.aspx )?
Microsoft's decision to push IE7 out via Windows Update is a good one not just because of the security reasons, but because it will move a huge percentage of the people on the web to a browser with far better standards support ( http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/search.aspx?q=compliance&p=1 ). The lag time between standards adoption will be dramatically reduced. Let's face it, a big reason that many sites aren't standards compliant today is because of IE. If Microsoft simply offered it as a download on their web site it would take years for adoption to reach high enough levels to stop coding for IE6. - TruckStuff, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0I see a lot of comments here from developers supporting this move. Has nobody thought about the fact that the UI in IE7 is *totally* different? Users who aren't as "tech savvy" as others are going to be absolutely lost. I can already hear the phone calls I'm going to get when my friends, relatives, coworkers, etc. install this without knowing what it is: "My internet looks totally different and I don't know what to do." Just kill me now. Please.
- Technopundit, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Sorry, but killing you would be wrong. Instead, suggest you have your friends and coworkers install Linux. Your death will then be quick, horrible and nobody will attend your funeral.
- Technopundit, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Sorry, but killing you would be wrong. Instead, suggest you have your friends and coworkers install Linux. Your death will then be quick, horrible and nobody will attend your funeral.
- dbm2736, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0I think this is just another example of MS bullying. They are well aware that many people have Automatic Updates turned on and just install updates without thinking.Of course many of those have already had disasters and may have learned their lessons, but the point is that Microsoft knows that many, many fewer people would bother to download and update if they didn't push it on them. If you are going to download another browser by choice there are several better, more proven models out there. Trusting Microsoft is a chumps game these days.
- radiofrequency, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1The real justification, of course, is that without bundling or some kind of forced distribution process IE7 can't beat firefox in marketshare.
We all know how critical it is for Microsoft to control/pollute standards on the web for personal gain. - Hellfire51, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0I guarantee that they will push this out with Windows Update and then report some sort of download statistics saying they have "5 million downloads" or something ridiculous like that never mentioning the fact that Windows Update will annoy any user that doesn't download it.
- phill, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I tried to install it, but their web site says the my Windows isn't Genuine.
- coopetition, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1If only I had put it in the Security section. Matters not.
http://www.digg.com/software/Microsoft_tags_IE_7_high_priority_update - 8d2s, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0IE7 is got a big problem that will kill it before its release, "IT DOESNT HAVE A SESSION MEMORY" like Opera or the new Firefox, so when the damn thing crashes ALL pages you had open go to HELL., unlike IE6 which you can still End Task one page at the time, with some exceptions.
If IE7 doesnt add that feature, I wont have option but to move to Opera, and leave IE7 only for windows updates.- noahhoward, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Wait a minute, it doesn't support sessions??? Can you point out an article to confirm that?
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by