Internet Explorer 7... coming

Jon · Post by **Jon** » 2005-02-15 09:43pm

SAN FRANCISCO--Reversing a longstanding Microsoft policy, Bill Gates said Tuesday that the company will ship an update to its browser separately from the next major version of Windows.

A beta, or test, version of Internet Explorer 7 will debut this summer, Microsoft's chairman and chief software architect said in a keynote address at the RSA Conference 2005 here. The company had said that it would not ship a new IE version before the next major update to Windows, code-named Longhorn, arrives next year.

In announcing the plan, Gates acknowledged something that many outside the company had been arguing for some time--that the browser itself has become a security risk.

"Browsing is definitely a point of vulnerability," Gates said.

The new browser version will work on machines running on Windows XP Service Pack 2, a security-focused update to the operating system that the company launched last summer, Gates said.

Mike Nash, an executive in Microsoft's security business and technology unit, said in an interview that Microsoft has not determined how or when the final version of IE 7 will ship, but that it is planned ahead of Longhorn.

Nash said it has not been decided whether IE 7 will come with a different Windows update, such as a security revamp.

"We'll be updating Windows on a regular basis," he said. "How the browser gets packaged--whether it's with a service pack--has not been nailed down. There is going to be a Service Pack 3 (of Windows XP). That's not a surprise. How that relates to (IE 7's release), we haven't figured out yet."

More...

Rogue 9 · Post by **Rogue 9** » 2005-02-15 09:46pm

About damned time.

Praxis · Post by **Praxis** » 2005-02-15 09:52pm

*shiver*

Having used the Alpha of IE7, I'm quite afraid.

It's better than IE6 in rendering (Durandals sig works, and there is all the SP2 enhancements), but the new GUI layout is terrible in every single way- no improvements whatsoever, weirdly placed buttons at very strange sizes- and the performance isn't that good. And no tab browsing.

Please, oh please be improved by the beta. I'm sure performance issues will be worked out, but if that GUI isn't VASTLY revamped, stay far away...

White Haven · Post by **White Haven** » 2005-02-15 10:05pm

Course it's got a long way to go before anyone actually thinks about switching back from Firefox. Start by NEVER FUCKING STEALING FOCUS, ever, at all, under any circumstances, EVER. Ahem, sorry, I ahve to use IE at work, and it drives me nuts.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2005-02-15 10:36pm

I'm sure this version won't be burdened by feature bloat and all new security holes that won't be fixed until 2007.

Post by **Vympel** » 2005-02-15 11:49pm

RUN AWAY, RUN AWAY!!!!!!!

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2005-02-16 07:30am

Hi everyone
I used to IE becuse well... it was right there

Then one day someone showed me Firefox,

Never looked back since then

wautd · Post by **wautd** » 2005-02-16 07:35am

Globaw warming, tsunamis, IE7 realease, AIDS, war in Iraq,...

Keep 'em coming!

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2005-02-16 11:38am

i gots no plans on switching from my precious firefox. though it's nice to know that for once there won't be a default browser installed on the OS.

Vohu Manah · Post by **Vohu Manah** » 2005-02-16 12:16pm

Somehow I am not impressed.

sketerpot · Post by **sketerpot** » 2005-02-16 01:06pm

Does anybody have screenshots? I don't know whether to be impressed or contemptious. I'm going to go with contemptious by default, since I love my tabbed browsing and my Adblock extensions and my portability and [see posts by the Firefox Pimping Squad for the rest].

Post by **Beowulf** » 2005-02-16 03:40pm

I use IE at work because: I'm not supposed to install any programs.

Uraniun235 · Post by **Uraniun235** » 2005-02-16 04:33pm

Considering that I stumbled across IE 3.0 (or was it 2.0?) a couple of months ago at work (it was some Win95 box in the school district), I can't help but shrug my shoulders and say "big deal."

Praxis · Post by **Praxis** » 2005-02-16 05:16pm

Beowulf wrote:I use IE at work because: I'm not supposed to install any programs.

IIRC FireFox 0.8 could be downloaded and unzipped and run without ever actually running an installer...

entfern · Post by **entfern** » 2005-02-16 05:35pm

Mr Bean wrote:Never looked back since then

Yes until you run across sounds that won't play in FIrefox, or a menu with the menu options missing. . . Though I hate reverting back to IE in those cases

Praxis · Post by **Praxis** » 2005-02-16 05:56pm

entfern wrote:
Mr Bean wrote:Never looked back since then
Yes until you run across sounds that won't play in FIrefox, or a menu with the menu options missing. . . Though I hate reverting back to IE in those cases

Or when you click the Email button in MSN Messenger and it launches IE.

ARGH!

SyntaxVorlon · Post by **SyntaxVorlon** » 2005-02-16 06:28pm

Beowulf wrote:I use IE at work because: I'm not supposed to install any programs.

Ask IT, they might be willing to let you have that specific program.

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2005-02-16 06:59pm

Beowulf wrote:I use IE at work because: I'm not supposed to install any programs.

do your computers have side usb ports? if so you might want to consider getting a usb flash key and installing firefox on it. that way you're not technically installing any programs on their machines.

Post by **Beowulf** » 2005-02-16 07:02pm

I work for the government... have I said enough?

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2005-02-16 07:10pm

From what I've heard, they've finally gotten around to implementing full support for 8-bit alpha blending for 24-bit PNGs. The fact that it's taken this long is utterly absurd. Internet Explorer 5.0 on Mac OS 9 could display such PNGs correctly, and it was released in 1998.

Maybe it's a little too much to hope for that they'll clean up and fix their abominable CSS implementation. If anything, I expect more super-special Internet Explorer-only tags.

Uraniun235 · Post by **Uraniun235** » 2005-02-16 07:43pm

MS employee comments on IE 7 release announcement
If anyone here has a Something Awful forums account (or, on the off chance that SH/SC is public these days), you can read some commentary by an MS employee on IE 7.

Some quotes from him...

I am a Security Support Engineer in our support organization. Part of my job is to review all upcoming MS software (so I have alphas, betas and in some cases early specs of all MS products and product changes) as my team does supportability reviews with an eye on how it affects the security landscape and how it solves customer problems. So we take a lot of customer feedback to the dev org and beat them about the head with it to enforce changes that customers want.

Unfortunatly the security bugs have priority (and we have alot of them as you are all well aware). So yes the W3C compliance is on the list of fixes but its priority is lower than fixing our security problems.

All I can say is I'm personally ashamed and sorry for our poor compliance and we beat devs about the head on it all the time. All we can do is glower at them and make them work at it so it will improve.

Its a pathetic response but....we're working on it.

You heard me, me and all my ms buddies want tabs and so do a ton of customers.

Why is an entire new version of IE required to fix these bugs and security problems? Is the code of IE6 that mangled with holes whereby it requires an entire rehaul?
Yes, IMO (and this is my personal opionion, not an official MS opinion) its a stinking, festering pile. It has way too much old code that has carried over from the "old days" that needs to die.

Microsoft has a lot of great talent, and they produce some great products. Unfortunately, IE is not one of them anymore, especially compared to its recent competitors. I assume this is because Microsoft hasn't allocated sufficient resources to IE development for years.
Yes the team was kind of hacked apart, but it had more to do with litigation.

sketerpot · Post by **sketerpot** » 2005-02-16 07:45pm

Praxis wrote:
Beowulf wrote:I use IE at work because: I'm not supposed to install any programs.
IIRC FireFox 0.8 could be downloaded and unzipped and run without ever actually running an installer...

Can you do that with any later Firefox versions? At school I can't install programs (because the damn school changed the fucking administrator passwords without telling me the new ones!) so I'm stuck using a folder-contained old Firebird 0.7. It still kicks IE's ass, but it would be nice to be able to upgrade.

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2005-02-16 08:13pm

Praxis wrote:
Beowulf wrote:I use IE at work because: I'm not supposed to install any programs.
IIRC FireFox 0.8 could be downloaded and unzipped and run without ever actually running an installer...

My uni has the same principle, but again, most PCs have Firefox v1.0 onboard (they used to have Opera and Firebird) which you can use. Most use IE though, because to most, IE is THE internet browser and the only one at that.

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2005-02-16 08:35pm

Durandal wrote:From what I've heard, they've finally gotten around to implementing full support for 8-bit alpha blending for 24-bit PNGs. The fact that it's taken this long is utterly absurd. Internet Explorer 5.0 on Mac OS 9 could display such PNGs correctly, and it was released in 1998.

There is a way to force IE6 to properly render PNGs with 8-bit alpha which involves a bit of ActiveX trickery. Google Maps uses it, IIRC.

Maybe it's a little too much to hope for that they'll clean up and fix their abominable CSS implementation. If anything, I expect more super-special Internet Explorer-only tags.

Well, IE in "force standards mode" isn't too bad.

Slartibartfast · Post by **Slartibartfast** » 2005-02-16 08:39pm

If this means that the next release of Windows is completely devoid of any integrated browser whatsoever, and IE 1/2/3/4/5/6/7/8 will be totally optional, then I'm all for it.