Slashdot Mirror

Any version of IE from 4.0 onwards never ever touches any PC I care about. It was single-handedly one of the main reasons I stuck with Windows 95 and NT 4.0 for so long (and still do on most of my PCs.)

That was until 98lite came out, which later became litePC. That suddenly made Windows 98 and 2000 usable. There isn't much that can make XP or Vista usable, though, as they're already useless out of the box.

You just stated the reason why everyone qualified to have an opinion not on the MS payroll directly or indirectly believes using IE to be more dangerous. Back when I was using Windows as a primary OS, the second thing I did after installing it was to use 98lite to remove IE completely from the OS. The first, of course, was zapping Active Desktop.

"Wow. Now I see what you mean about web sites not being compliant." She told me. "Our site looks ok, why don't others?"
"They don't properly test them, or think some flair is really necessary that's only supported in IE 5.X. They forget Web Browsing is like window shopping in a Ferrari. You move on to the next one REAL quick."

Though I have to say Opera's pop-up management sucks compared to Mozilla's. Since I've installed Mozilla for her, I havn't heard a peep. Before it was "Some links just don't work anymore" - which was due to Opera not opening REQUESTED Javascript URLs.

BTW, I just didn't think it was a 'grand' idea to replace the presidents browser, but IE kept storing/retrieving some virus in it's cache (maybe from Eudora's preview?), and the calls from the president about viruses on her PC were getting annoying. Not to mention the reboot required to delete the IE Cache file that's ALWAYS open due to the wonderful Win98 integration! ;)

(*sigh* No, once the file is detected by NAV as having a virus, you can't do anything with it.. But it's open so it can't be quarrantined... get it? :P)

Someone has

Why have I never seen discussion about 98lite which is a stripped down windows?

I'd've thought that proved it....

erm.... maybe this page?

Have you ever heard of Win98Lite?

It is a program that erradicates IExplorer from Windows. Windows is completely usable. You have to get another web browser (Netscape, Mozilla...) and a file amnager (the old on from Win95... or use Midnight Commander ontop a Cygwin bash shell).

I used back then, to get a P1666 no-mmx with 32MB of RAM to run Windows 98. Before Win98Lite, it was slow as.... as WinXP. After using Win98Lite, it was usable again, moderately fast... a cool college machine. Until SuSE 5.3 got its way into it, of course *grin*

More information can be found here

Apparently, it can be done with a 100k zip file, for free.

Apparently, it can be done with a 100k zip file, for free.

Use Opera, it doesn't work with Hotmail's download script.

What a pleasant side-effect. I removed IE to stop Viruses from auto-executing, and also happend to stop another potential source of viruses. :) And of course, desktop scanners are a must.

This is the first step for him and Microsoft to admit that this is in-fact possible on a wide scale.

There is already a tool (IEradicator) that can remove IE from any version of Windows older than Win2Ksp2. Having Microsoft admit this is possible, is just another step forward,

Wouldn't it be nice if windows WAS packaged with all of the bloat, like IE or all the old MSDOS components, but you could choose NOT to install them? This seems perfectly viable to me, they merely add some uninstall code and some extra items to the add/remove windows components menu. Microsoft gets all it's "nesessary" components in, but you don't have to install them. Seems like a fine idea to me. In fact, someone's already gone and done it. So I don't think there is a really any viable argument that it can't be done.

From the website 98lite.net's Why? page.
Important info at bottom of post for all unbelievers of it's practicality.

BTW this was written before Aug 2000.

"Firstly, let me say straight up that I think Microsoft put together some great products. The Windows series of operating systems are excellent interfaces to a computerised work environment - remember DOS word processing packages - ugh! You cant hope to satisfy everyone - but by making software (including operating systems) modular, and highly customisable, you can maximise your number of happy users. Along the way I think that Microsoft forgot the single home user that can not afford the latest gear, that doesnt want a 24 hour internet connection, that doesnt want to upgrade all the time - or that simply doesnt have the dollars to keep up with the fast pace of computer developments. I found myself asking...

"Why is all this stuff that I never use, or dont even have the hardware to support, installed on my computer without me having the choice to delete it, or better yet - not to install it in the first place."

Windows98 offers many improvements over windows95, unrelated to IE4, that make it a more desireable operating system than its older counterpart:

Greater Stability
Better memory management
Can execute code direct from the file cache (vcache)
Application launch acceleration
Better driver support
Faster bootup/shutdown
ACPI support
...and the list goes on....

It is a great OS, however, there is some extra overhead imposed by some of these new features, that slows your system down. If you dont have the horsepower this slowdown is really noticable. As soon as I upgraded to win98 I noticed that Explorer was slower to load, and that my system seemed to work harder just navigating around my disk.

Harder than it ever did with windows95. In addition, the windows take longer to redraw, and all the icons seem to take longer to get updated and repainted - I could actually watch the windows repainting. It was like there was a large weight sitting on my computers chest.

Granted, I am using a relatively slow computer. It is a NoteBook I have borrowed from work (a no-name clone, P133 (not MMX) 10.5 inch 256 colour LCD display and 14.4 Modem, NO CD, but thankfully 32MB RAM, 2.1G HDD). This system is a real dog, that has sub-par disk and graphics subsystems that benchmark below a 486DX100. I can not afford to buy a faster computer of my own, so I'll do *anything* to squeeze the last drop of system performance from this notebook. Several months after upgrading to Windows98, I concluded that

Windows98's IE Explorer was:

Slower to load
Slower to use once loaded
Consumed more memory which caused more swapping.and my system was in general 5-10% slower to use.

This was not very satisfying. I reloaded win95 as a dual boot), but I found that I missed all the improvements in Windows98. So I deleted '95 and went back to '98. The speed that Windows98 Explorer loaded really became an issue when I discovered the alternative shell LiteStep. The LiteStep shell gave me an extremely powerful shell replacement and application launch facility in the LiteStep Popup Menu, used less memory, and was a neat interface to boot. Yet, every time I wanted to view a directory, I had to wait for Explorer98 to load. I tried looking for a faster, smaller, Explorer replacement but I really like Explorer in "My Computer" mode (opening a separate window for each folder), something that no third party replacements do very well. I tried for a long time to get the smaller and faster Windows95 Explorer to load instead - and evetually my perseverence paid off... Notice I haven't mentioned the "webification" of Windows98 yet. I dont use IE, simply because I prefer Netscape. I dont dislike IE, it is a nice browser. I simply want the choice. In addition, I dont like the idea of an active desktop (which bogged my P133 system to a crawl)and dont care for web view of folders and all this "integration" that Windows98 promotes. I like to keep my local and internet perspectives separate. I know you can turn off most of the IE4 webification in windows98 - using tweakUI or using a utility from from Windows Annoyances - but turning IE off does nothing to speed up Explorer, and doesn't give me back any hard drive space. Again I find myself asking why I cant remove all these files that I dont use...

Lastly, everyone says...
"You cant remove IE from win98 because IE is so tightly interwoven with the operating system"

...thats like waving a red rag to this bull, and 98lite is the culmination of my frustrations. Using 98lite, my system is much "snappier" to use, and MyComputer windows of my hard disk directories simply snap open. My small hard drive has about 40+MB few files on it, and I couldnt be happier. My computer seems much faster, and is simply a much nicer beast to use and my day-to-day computing experienced has improved dramatically. 98lite is not just about removing IE from the system. I have developed 98lite into a tool that gives you the power to choose which system components you want to keep or remove - including the choice to remove IE if you want. Many people are installing Windows98 using 98lite - and then installing IE4.0 or IE5.0 for the their browser. This preserves the faster explorer shell - but gives you IE web browsing if thats your choice. Outlook Express (98 and also version 5) also continue to work well."

98Lite.net

98lite.net shows it's not only possible, but helps improve the speed and reliability of windows.

Is perjury still against the law?

Webster: " the voluntary violation of an oath or vow either by swearing to what is untrue or by omission to do what has been promised under oath : false swearing"

And for all you disagreeing posters, read the actual 98lite.net pages first before you post back.

I have used it for Windows 98: http://98lite.net/
98 lite is a great program, which strips out IE and other crappy features.
Other /.'ers have said it before, but this is an appropriate place to mention it again.

well since some time there has been this product called "98lite" that demonstrates that it is possible to run ur own stripped down version of windows, it even makes it runs faster and smoother then when u only stick to the original...

Fact is, the GUI of X Windows with whatever window manager doesn't even come close to the performance of explorer. Okay, blackbox, windowmaker, etc are fast

Exactly. And if you're going to run a seriously crippled WM (by todays standards) just to get the same kind of speed that you get in Windows, then what's the point? Linux zealots want to slam you for running KDE or Gnome because it's bloated or whatever... they tell you your system is slow because you are running a bloated Window Manager... well tell me this, why is it that I have to run a 1MB Window Manager like Window Maker just to get the same speed that I get in MS Windows which has a God Only Knows how many megabyte Window Manager running. To those people, I suggest you check out www.98lite.net That will help level the playing field once again. How fast is your blackbox now?

Then, try to play a game or watch a DVD. Yeah, you can get it to work. Only after serious time spent installing and tweaking. Then, performance isn't as goog as windows.

This is a really good point. When you install Windows all of these things work "out of the box". To get the same basic funtionality out of a Linux distro, you have to spend hours/days fussing with libraries and configuration files. And when you finally have it "working", it's slower than molasses rolling uphill in the middle of January.

Now, I LOVE Linux and use it for servers/firewall

Again - I can't agree with you more on this issue. Linux as a server for web, e-mail, dns, ftp, samba, nfs, dhcp, router, firewall, etc absolutely rocks!!

but as a desktop OS....Its got a long way to go. Also, I HATE windows

hehehe... I read a post on here somewhere a while back that said "Linux isn't for geeks, it's for people who hate Windows". There's a lot of truth in that statement. I hate M$ Windows but I'm afraid I hate the X Window System even more. I wouldn't mind checking out OSX, but it sounds like OSX has the same speed issues as the X Window System.

install Windows (ouch)

run IEradicator (wonderful little IE remover available here), and make sure Outlook is gone too

install ZoneAlarm, and make sure not to give net access to any MS apps

run Opera and Eudora

enjoy! If evil bureaucrats force use of Exploder/Outlook, install them (after the forcible extraction in step 2) and use only when necessary, giving them one time access privileges only.

A quote from this page:

"Not for use with Windows 2000sr2 or Windows XP"

So, if you have run Windows Update lately I suspect your installation is updated to sr2.

OK, there really needs to be some coverage about this site 98lite.net

It's a program for modularizing windows into components to speed up Windows operation and stabilize the platform. in other words... you can remove internet explorer. And many other "integrated" features that microsoft says will "cripple" the OS.

Sure it's modular... Here is proof.

Every discussion about Windows not being modular or about impossibility of removing different Windows components should start by visiting 98lite.net. Didn't anyone mention about it in the court when Microsoft showed the fake presentation on how IE is the key element of OS?

Sure it's modular... Here is proof.

Every discussion about Windows not being modular or about impossibility of removing different Windows components should start by visiting 98lite.net. Didn't anyone mention about it in the court when Microsoft showed the fake presentation on how IE is the key element of OS?

However, as such programs as 98Lite show, you take the IE out of windows and still leave the ability to render html, by leaving the html rendering dlls registered and on the machine.

So, not IE, no active desktop, and the ability for apps to still use built in html rendering. Isn't this what we are looking for? Then any program could be the browser, MS would just be providing the guts.

I think that this is what MS is afraid of. They want control of the browser becuase it roughly equels control of the internet (for the average person).

Ever notice what happens when you upgrade IE? The first screen you get when IE is fired back up is a request for the user to change the home page to MSN. This is a big deal in terms of driving traffic to MSN.

This grip on the internet via IE also allows MS to embrace-and-extend... which they could still by controlling the abilities of the html rendering dlls...

You're right about one thing: it is not a technical issue. It's about control.

I thought that the issue at stake was whether M$ so deeply rooted IE that it was impossible to remove it and maintain functionality?

Did I miss something? What brought about the change?

Yes it is modular or Win98 Lite wouldn't exist.

Here is proof.

"The product was not designed to be modular," said Rob Enderle, an analyst with Giga Information Group.

Perhaps it is more accurate to say the product was designed to be not modular.

It is interesting that IEradicator supports Windows 2000 up to SR1, but no further. Is SR2 the update where Microsoft added non-modularity as a "feature"? That would have occurred during the trial, am I right?

To be completely honest, I am not quit sure how this works, but this company has some software related to this story.

One is IEradicator that declaws IE from Win9x, 2k,and ME. Its freeware, try it in a VMWare virtual partition and watch windows die.

Another is 98 lite which can install 98 w/o IE

I am surprise these guys haven't see legal action from a vealous M$ trying to cover up some stuff...anyway, someone should try it and report back.

Removing them would result in a slower, much-less user friendly Windows that would be a support nightmare

I don't see how removing bloated components is going to slow things down much more. 98lite is a program that allows you to remove the bloat of Windows, allowing for a streamlined version that you can customize.

By intertwining code to minimize overlap, he said, Microsoft makes a product that saves valuable disk space but becomes difficult to segregate.

I'd hate to see Windows without this 'disk space saving' coding techniques.

It is possible to remove a whole lot of the default crap that ships with Windows.

Before I switched to Linux full-time, I tamed my Windows box with 98lite. To quote from the specs page, the current version allows removal of:

* Internet Explorer
* Media Player7 (Me)
* MovieMaker (Me)
* PC Health (Me)
* Media Player2
* DirectX
* Direct Media
* Task Scheduler
* MS Cryptography
* Web Folders
* Internet Control Panel
* Internet Search
* Telephony
* ISDN Configuration Wizard
* Disk Defragmenter
* Scandisk
* ICM Color Profiles
* Imaging Support
* System Information
* CleanUp Manager
* Tune-up Wizard
* Active Movie
* Dr. Watson
* Data Access Components
* Connection Manager
* Email Stationery
* Windows Help Files
* Legacy Windows 3.1 files
* DOS command Files
* Desktop Color Schemes
* Desktop Tiles

98lite allows the removal of the entire MSHTML engine and all the other Windows Media crap. So, if "the current operating system is highly dependant on core technologies like IE and Windows Media Player", I sure didn't notice it after I ran 98lite.

--jon

It is possible to remove a whole lot of the default crap that ships with Windows.

Before I switched to Linux full-time, I tamed my Windows box with 98lite. To quote from the specs page, the current version allows removal of:

* Internet Explorer
* Media Player7 (Me)
* MovieMaker (Me)
* PC Health (Me)
* Media Player2
* DirectX
* Direct Media
* Task Scheduler
* MS Cryptography
* Web Folders
* Internet Control Panel
* Internet Search
* Telephony
* ISDN Configuration Wizard
* Disk Defragmenter
* Scandisk
* ICM Color Profiles
* Imaging Support
* System Information
* CleanUp Manager
* Tune-up Wizard
* Active Movie
* Dr. Watson
* Data Access Components
* Connection Manager
* Email Stationery
* Windows Help Files
* Legacy Windows 3.1 files
* DOS command Files
* Desktop Color Schemes
* Desktop Tiles

98lite allows the removal of the entire MSHTML engine and all the other Windows Media crap. So, if "the current operating system is highly dependant on core technologies like IE and Windows Media Player", I sure didn't notice it after I ran 98lite.

--jon

Download IEradicator and get rid of that POS for good.

The only reason why Netscape failed is b/c MS abused its monopoly power to crush it.

Netscape lost because MS bundled IE and because Navigator was an abomination to HTML rendering engines. The product has to do what it's supposed to (render web pages) somewhat well before people will use it. Ever tried to get CSS to work in Navigator 4?

(actually, part of IE is ALWAYS loaded in Win9x, as that's what the file browser is)

Nope. The Internet Explorer integration didn't start until Windows 98. Internet Explorer wasn't even [functionally] alive when Windows 95 first came out. And part of IE isn't always loaded; take a look at 98lite for an example of how IE can be de-integrated from Windows.

...the web browser is a core part of the computing experience today...

Bullshit!

...just like a graphical user interface...

Bullshit!

Next, Sun claims they illegally tied IE to the operating system. As noted above, web browsing is now an essential part of the PC expierence; it only follows naturally that it should be included as part of the OS.

Bullshit!

Now, here is where Sun really flies off the deep end and displays the true motivation behind the suit, which is Larry's obession with trying to beat Bill Gates and his highly successful company.

Larry is CEO of Oracle. Scott is CEO of Sun. Are you always this moronic in public, or are you trying to entertain us?

Sun also claims that Microsoft has illegally tied IIS into its server OSes. This one strikes me as really odd, because IIS isn't installed by default, it is simply included on the CD.

That is false. IIS is selected for installation by default on Win2K, and on XP it is installed without even asking you whether you want it.

In fact, for NT 4.0, you had to get a separate CD or download to install it; it wasn't even part of the standard distribution.

NT 4.0 is no longer sold or supported by Microsoft.

You cannot honestly ask any company to ship their competitor's product with their own. That is an absurd idea at best.

Of course you can, when the company in question is a monopoly. The ILECs were (admittedly ineffectively and half-heartedly) forced to open up their monopoly infrastructure to competing service providers. Why should the monopoly OS be treated any differently? It shouldn't.

...the web browser is a core part of the computing experience today...

Bullshit!

...just like a graphical user interface...

Bullshit!

Next, Sun claims they illegally tied IE to the operating system. As noted above, web browsing is now an essential part of the PC expierence; it only follows naturally that it should be included as part of the OS.

Bullshit!

Now, here is where Sun really flies off the deep end and displays the true motivation behind the suit, which is Larry's obession with trying to beat Bill Gates and his highly successful company.

Larry is CEO of Oracle. Scott is CEO of Sun. Are you always this moronic in public, or are you trying to entertain us?

Sun also claims that Microsoft has illegally tied IIS into its server OSes. This one strikes me as really odd, because IIS isn't installed by default, it is simply included on the CD.

That is false. IIS is selected for installation by default on Win2K, and on XP it is installed without even asking you whether you want it.

In fact, for NT 4.0, you had to get a separate CD or download to install it; it wasn't even part of the standard distribution.

NT 4.0 is no longer sold or supported by Microsoft.

You cannot honestly ask any company to ship their competitor's product with their own. That is an absurd idea at best.

Of course you can, when the company in question is a monopoly. The ILECs were (admittedly ineffectively and half-heartedly) forced to open up their monopoly infrastructure to competing service providers. Why should the monopoly OS be treated any differently? It shouldn't.

...the web browser is a core part of the computing experience today...

Bullshit!

...just like a graphical user interface...

Bullshit!

Next, Sun claims they illegally tied IE to the operating system. As noted above, web browsing is now an essential part of the PC expierence; it only follows naturally that it should be included as part of the OS.

Bullshit!

Now, here is where Sun really flies off the deep end and displays the true motivation behind the suit, which is Larry's obession with trying to beat Bill Gates and his highly successful company.

Larry is CEO of Oracle. Scott is CEO of Sun. Are you always this moronic in public, or are you trying to entertain us?

Sun also claims that Microsoft has illegally tied IIS into its server OSes. This one strikes me as really odd, because IIS isn't installed by default, it is simply included on the CD.

That is false. IIS is selected for installation by default on Win2K, and on XP it is installed without even asking you whether you want it.

In fact, for NT 4.0, you had to get a separate CD or download to install it; it wasn't even part of the standard distribution.

NT 4.0 is no longer sold or supported by Microsoft.

You cannot honestly ask any company to ship their competitor's product with their own. That is an absurd idea at best.

Of course you can, when the company in question is a monopoly. The ILECs were (admittedly ineffectively and half-heartedly) forced to open up their monopoly infrastructure to competing service providers. Why should the monopoly OS be treated any differently? It shouldn't.

I use Opera and Netscape instead.

If you're running Windows 9.x-2000, I suggest you back up your machine completely and then give the MSIE install a try. You should get both satisfactory proof that Ballmer lied AND a better-running computer. Usual warning, your mileage may vary...

As for XP, while MS may have done a better job at kludging IE into the OS to make it harder to untangle this time, I'm sure a development contract to the people at 98lite plus access to the Windows API will result in a very fast and clean solution to the problem.

I don't work for them. I'll plunk down the extra $25 to take out what I don't want and still have Windows work.

A version for win2000sp2/XP is in the works according to the site.

With Products like IEradicator from 98lite which removes IE from all the Windows OS versions right up to Win2K and still keeps OS usable, would anyone in their right minds ever believe when Jim says "Forget about any business thing. Technically I just couldn't do it." ?

- Jalil

With Products like IEradicator from 98lite which removes IE from all the Windows OS versions right up to Win2K and still keeps OS usable, would anyone in their right minds ever believe when Jim says "Forget about any business thing. Technically I just couldn't do it." ?

- Jalil

Why bother calling in the developers at Microsoft? The 9 states can just show the judge 98lite, which has already accomplished what the 9 states want: a modular Windows installation.

Not only can it be done, but someone has already done it and turned it into a product you can buy. If the 98lite people can do it - without any special access to Microsoft APIs - then surely Microsoft can do it. They just don't want to.

Here's a clue: They're Lying. Their Lawyers are lying. this was settled with 98 Lite (which even works with ME).

Know why they are lying? Because that is a lawyer's job. It's also the job of the CEO when faced with a negotiation with a court. That's life.

============== quote
========== quote from article
In court filings late Friday, the company said the recently released consumer operating system, Windows XP, and the business-oriented Windows 2000 system could not be redesigned to satisfy state demands that they be made available in separate versions, with and without key programs, such as the Internet Explorer Web browser.
==========end quote from article

to Jonathan Krim:

I have been running without Internet Explorer on my PC since a few months after I got Windows 95 using products provided by 98lite.net . What I got out of de-integrating MSIE from my computer is reduced resource utilization and increased stability.

I'm running Windows 98SE now without MSIE. At this point, the first thing I do with a MS operating system is to remove IE as an operating system component. MS originally claimed that 98SE doesn't work without MSIE. 98SE works *better* without MSIE as an OS component. MS lied then. I'm using Opera and Netscape at this point.

The *freeware* product below is one that will eliminate MSIE from W2000. Unfortunately, they don't have a version for XP yet.

Try it on one of your organization's Windows 2000 machines and see for yourself if Microsoft is lying about the impossibility of detaching MSIE from W2000. If their thousands of programmers can't figure out how, perhaps they can license this company's products.

I recommend trying this on a newly installed W2000 OS with no new apps or user data, like any other software running on Windows, there's no guarantee that the next installation of any Windows program whatsoever won't cause the hard drive to melt or the monitor to explode or Satan to appear in person sitting on your desk. ;-) The script version is a no-brainer, simply download the file, read the brief instructions, and run as directed.

A.Lizard
p.s. any way to get a copy of this e-mail to the law firm for the State AGs doing the MS antitrust prosecution? The script version of the deinstaller takes about 2 minutes to run and a reboot to bring up the new IE-free OS. The judge might find a demo of IE disappearing from W2000 in an effortless way entertaining. The MS attorneys who are running W2000 will probably request it. a cc of the file. For their personal use. ;-)

fair usage quote from 98lite site
http://www.98lite.net/products.html

IEradicator 2001 NEW!!!

Looking for the hit-man? IEradicator is the first and only utility to remove all versions of Internet Explorer from all versions of Windows 95/98/ Me/2000 in 8 different languages!. IEradicator uses the built- in Windows setup engine to "rub out da big fella" in less time than it takes to oil your 12-gauge.
------------- end 98lite quote
============= end quote

This version is "free as in beer", a demo for a more sophisticated product. If MS can't figure out how to get rid of MSIE, I'm sure these people could come up with reasonable licensing terms.

It'll probably take (very optimistically) months to get anywhere near completion. And there are so many ways in which Microsoft can delay progress here still - like making the source distribution somehow "incomplete" or lacking polish to the build process. It reminds me of the ISO distributions of MPEG decoders, which are rather like token efforts and either don't work or just don't even build.

Even given an easily buildable distribution (which I'm sure they must have internally), it's still going to take ages to untangle everything. The fact of the matter is that this kind of module mingling is a demonstration of very poor programming practice. In the end it boils down to one of these possibilities:

• IE is mingled because MS have an incompetent team of engineers. But of course, MS proclaims that it has the best engineering team in the world.
• IE is mingled because it was written that way to start with and it's too difficult to untangle. Disproof: 98lite.
• IE is mingled deliberately because it's easier to code. Fair enough, but it's bad programming practice. See first point.
• IE is mingled deliberately to prevent untangling. If Microsoft hold that their engineering team is without equal, then logically it follows that this is the only possibility.

But back to my original point - the states being handed all this source code is all very well, but it's going to take a significant amount of time for them to get it working. And if it does take them a long time... then perhaps Microsoft will claim (proof by one statistic) that it wasn't actually easy.

This program does a nice job. Back when this case was actually started it was very easy to nuke IE and and have very light and clean OS, despite microsoft's claims that it was part of the core os (as if it was implemented in the kernel.. ha!)

Now it seems as of Win2K SP2, IEEradictor no longer works. I'm sure thats just due to changes in the way IE is added in, and with a little work probably could be made to work again. But I think this case is in regards to Windows 95, back when microsoft got on the warpath for browser dominance .

I ran 98 quite successfully in 16MB without the bloated shell.

Even if it did exist, what would programmers say other than "yes, with enough hacking, we can separate this out"?

Yeah, but.....

Didn't the 98lite team succeed in seperating IE from Windows with IEradicator?

Here's what they say:
The removal process is elegant with all COM servers politely being asked to de-register themselves from the system registry using their inbuilt deinstallation routines before being eliminated from the hard disk. IEradicator then pulls out the cleaning gear and gives the registry a good polish before returning control back to you. The MS HTML Engine (shdocvw.dll and mshtml.dll) is left on the machine to provide needed functionality for other applications that render HMTL (e.g. Outlook Express) or that launch a mini-browsing window (e.g. Winamp's Mini Browser, Netmeeting's Online Directory).

IEradicator gives you a leaner, faster desktop by eliminating all desktop web-integration including active desktop, single click, image previews, file/folder information, and custom backgrounds.

Even if it did exist, what would programmers say other than "yes, with enough hacking, we can separate this out"?

Yeah, but.....

Didn't the 98lite team succeed in seperating IE from Windows with IEradicator?

Here's what they say:
The removal process is elegant with all COM servers politely being asked to de-register themselves from the system registry using their inbuilt deinstallation routines before being eliminated from the hard disk. IEradicator then pulls out the cleaning gear and gives the registry a good polish before returning control back to you. The MS HTML Engine (shdocvw.dll and mshtml.dll) is left on the machine to provide needed functionality for other applications that render HMTL (e.g. Outlook Express) or that launch a mini-browsing window (e.g. Winamp's Mini Browser, Netmeeting's Online Directory).

IEradicator gives you a leaner, faster desktop by eliminating all desktop web-integration including active desktop, single click, image previews, file/folder information, and custom backgrounds.

At least, with the 9x versions. Take a look.

It is possible to remove Internet Explorer completely from most windows operating systems. Take a look at IEradicator. I have used 98lite with very good success in installing a stripped down version of windows 98 on my mother's old computer.

Here is a quote from their website about IEradicator: "IEradicator is tiny, script that uses the Windows setup engine to surgically remove Internet Explorer versions 3 through 6.0 from Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows 98 Second Edition, Windows Millennium and Windows 2000(sr1)."
You can download it from the company's website for free. It used to remove the entire HTML rendering engine but their current version leaves this in. If you want, you can buy the full version which will remove that too, effectively completely removing internet explorer from windows.

Adam

Microsoft spokesman Jim Desler said the company had proved during the trial that it is impossible to remove software features from Windows without damaging the operating system.