What is Digg?118 Comments
- 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.
- 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.
- 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. - 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? - scratt, on 10/12/2007, -9/+29Maybe coz it's still not standards compliant.
- 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!
- 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.
- 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. - 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. - 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, -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. - 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.
- inactive, 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.
- redxii, on 10/12/2007, -6/+14But a beta is useless if the developers receive no feedback. Silence means everything is OK.
- 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... - 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. - 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
- 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. - 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.
- 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.
- 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, -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. - 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... - 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. - 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. - 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.
- DooDah, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4yeah i agree IDIOT, but they do advertise on msn messenger!!
- 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.
- 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.
- 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 - 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 - kodek, on 10/12/2007, -11/+14Maybe cause it's still beta software?
- 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?”). - 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.
- 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". - cldnails, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Amen, hopefully now we will see some more consistency between the popular webrowsers display...ie FF and IE.
- 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. - 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. - inactive, 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! - 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… - 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?
- 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). - 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. - 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'.
- 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. - 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. - 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.
- 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. - 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.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 117 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is