Slashdot Mirror
IE6 SP1 Will Be Last Standalone Version
mokiejovis writes "Program manager Brian Countryman stated that "as part of the OS, IE will continue to evolve, but there will be no future standalone installations. IE6 SP1 is the final standalone installation." See the Microsoft TechNet article." Several of the people submitting this story have come up with elaborate theories about why: killing competition, etc. etc. I think the truth is just that Microsoft intends to integrate DRM very tightly with their OS and browser, and they're aren't going to try to backport that to, say, Win98, so they just aren't going to release new versions of their browser for old, DRM-less operating systems. In the future server-side browser detection may be more about detecting whether the browser supports the DRM your "web service" uses than what version of Javascript or CSS the browser supports.
stand alone? I thought IE was already part of windows.
In the future server-side browser detection may be more about detecting whether the browser supports the DRM your "web service" uses than what version of Javascript or CSS the browser supports.
Browser detection has always been about identifying what capabilities the browser supports, or what bugs need to be worked around. Otherwise you wind up with sites that don't work in some browsers, and everybody bitches at you for not supporting them. The key is to not redirect to a page recommending that the user download IE or Netscape, since that really pisses people off.
I don't plan on producing DRM-protected content, so I don't plan on detecting browser support for it.
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
"Several people came up with conspiracy theories but these dont belong in the article. So I decided to give you my own theory."
Fleur de Sel
on a previous story
AC comments get piped to
Does this mean that you have to upgrade your OS every time a new feature comes out?
> IE6 SP1 is the final standalone installation.
That's a pretty funny statement. The service packs are bug releases, hence they contain required changes that were not originally planned. How can Microsoft claim this is the last one that will be needed? Does this mean Microsoft will just abandon all of their users still running older versions of Windows?
I suggest this is just laying the groundwork for FUD to force users to pay Microsoft to "upgrade" their OS in order to replace the latest IE security vulnerability with a whole new set of problems, vulnerabilities, incompatibilities and restrictions.
I think the truth is just that...
I don't remember the role of the editor including giving personal opinions over and above those stated in linked articles. Why don't editors submit the story with a summary of other people's reasons, then post their own comment?
I do agree with Michael though, it seems fairly pluasible. All the same, it obviously has a competition-killing aspect to it, since Microsoft will tightly control their DRM technology, meaning that DRM-only web sites will probably be IE only, or at the very best IE plus other browsers whose licenses allow embedded proprietary code.
That way we can ensure that we are uniquely identified! No more worries about security, privacy, or LINUX.
Wonder what Darl thinks about this one?
Is it me or is this exactally the thing the DOJ had them in court for so long to prevent? And finally won?
with the conspiracy theories. You people should go work for the government.
Its another reason to go and talk to CTO and tell him to evaluate TCO again in favor of another browser, ie. Mozilla.
Tying a browser to hardware can be really bad for us mozilla men. Online Banking will jump on it real fast. Secure communication will later require IE for authentication. This would put us at a huge disadvantage. I had a thought: Would it be possible to run a "Virtual Palladium" (software driven)? It'd involve running parts of the software in a virtualization machine like bochs. Microsoft patented the hardware not any software.
IE will continue to evolve, ...
... etc. ...
As far as I can tell, development of IE's features was iced around 5 years ago. Compare and contrast with Opera, Mozilla, Phoenix
"It's not your information. It's information about you" - John Ford, Vice President, Equifax
I think that at first this will only be used for Microsoft stuff like Passport and MS updates but knowing how some companies follow Microsoft soon the only sites us Linux people can use will be slashdot, gnu, and other OSS news and project sites...of course that will all change after the revolution :)
Learn lisp today!
What I am expecting will happen is that IE will be absorbed into the integrated office environment, in the same way the Word/Excel et al are being drawn into just one package.
By bundling everything in together (probably with a mail client), M$ no longer have to worry about the opposition packages. It also would no surprise me to see integrated OS and Office package bundles/licenses, to keep out the competition.
As for the lack of support for DRM in Win98 being a motivation for no longer producing a standalone version, remember that M$ officially no longer supports Win98 installations.
An infinite number of monkeys will eventually come up with the complete works of
It's not about supporting your customers base but making DRM reality. Monkeys at the Linux band will do so as well, otherwise their commercially driven OS will be simply end in the dumpster.
They just want to avoid the use of MSIE + Wine...
The fact that many web sites rely on MSIE in the client side is a lock-up mechanism.
Do you have NOTHING better to do on a Saturday morning and/or afternoon?
What are you trying to tell us? That with Microsoft's next IE move we should all just bend over because we're about to get screwed?
It's the beginning of the end for private personal computing as we know it!
Anyone got some champagne?
I for one, don't care. I haven't seen anything I would call a "feature" since ... well... a while. IE6's media integration and image handling are more of an annoyance than a feature, and I CERTAINLY don't concider DRM support a feature.
When DRM comes around, I'm moving to something else.
no comment
Is this the same microsoft that was told it couldnt bundle the browser with its OS?
I think that Microsoft's grand plan to move the world over to Trusted Computing will end up cornering them into a one-dimensional business plan. Anything outside that market will end up thriving. Robust alternatives like linux and Mac OS will become the dominant platform because they will not corner themselves into discreet markets, but rather, will continue to expand.
If this is the last stand-alone version of IE they are betting that their operating system and plan is the *only* operating system and plan. If they make too many mistakes in their Trusted Computing movement they may fail entirely as a company in the near future.
Shouldn't You expect more from your DJ?
1. Microsoft ships their browser for free with the OS, fairly tightly integrated, thus marginalizing Netscape and any other browser on Windows.
2. Netscape et. al. convinces Gov't to sue MS for monopolistic, anticompetitive practices.
3. MS is found guilty of monopolistic, anticompetitive practices.
4. MS is slapped on the wrist by the Gov't and promises to play nice, ships OS update to remove the IE icon from the desktop.
5. {six months pass}
6. MS announces even tighter integration of IE into the OS.
Pity they weren't broken up.
All the more reason to use Mozilla.
Bottom line, if this ultimately makes the Internet a more secure place to do business, then I'm all for it. Digital signatures would be very cool once they are implemented on a global scale. No more paper filing, the trees would be happier :), and best of all, if this is implemented well, that bond of trust between businesses and consumers can be strengthened.
On the other hand, I still don't want to see everything on the Internet become a pay service.
Homestarrunner.net -- It's Dot Com!
When you are already the #1 to get more money you need to be more monopolistic ;-)
:(
A solution to save MS, is to splitt them !
But will US gov be strong enough to fight against the MS lobby ?
They were not even able to resist agains the oil lobby, so how could they do so
-EZT
And AOL just gave how much away for the rights to use this for the next 7 years???
Seriously. Isn't this a bad move for them to make regarding the anti-trust suit? Doesn't this kill their whole "freedom to innovate" mantra?
In any case, it doesn't really matter. Strange that Microsoft would virtually abandon a project that could have much work done to it, and yet try to push along new OS/Office versions which really have much possible improvement.
Maybe they are realizing that they can't compete with the Moz group, and are deciding to go in through the back door, back to their old tricks.
I've always said it, and I always will, the community's incessant bitching about how insecure microsoft is has led to attrocities in design.
Example: Windows file protection - to avoid DLL Hell. DLL Hell was pure and simple bad user habits (running in Administrator mode etc etc). So they made a system that completely bypasses security, and disallows everyone on your system from changing files... even administrators. It's a travesty, that's what it is.
Well, here we see another travesty: because of simple HTML script exploits, which under normal circumstances (ie, if you weren't running as admin) would have very little consequences, Moft has come up with another travesty, has introduced 'state' into what should be stateless... And as a result, I just can feel the hours and hours of headache that is now set upon us programmers, for the rest of time.
I can clearly recall posts on slashdot, (but to be fair: /. isn't the only guilty body, every bitchy tech writer of the times is), saying how IE had too many priviledges.
All I have to say is BULLSHIT... IE has as many priviledges as the user running it - and as such, just as many, not any more than Mozilla running at the same user level.
Now, because of that bitching, we have a 'lowered priviledge set'... something which isn't based on users... it's a whole policy scheme... It's introducing complexity where there is no need for any... Yadi yada... *Sigh*...
Boo on everyone.
what did you expect? this is slashdot!
As part of the OS, IE will continue to evolve, but there will be no future standalone installations.
Doesn't this tend to fly in the face of the anti-trust suit against them? Since when did IE become an acknowledged "part of the OS" again?
Further improvements to IE will require enhancements to the underlying OS.
Really? Well, I guess the Mozilla developers got hold of the Windows source code then because they seem to be doing just fine at making their browser more feature-rich and bugfree than IE.
Everybody's jumping to conspiracy conclusions, but here's the simple answer: when you give away browser upgrades for free, but you charge for OS installations, and you think that the browser is becoming more important than the OS, you have to merge the two together.
As time goes by, more and more applications become web-based. These days, consumers are more concerned about the version of their browser than the version of their operating system. When you try to hit your favorite web sites, check your web-based email, etc., it doesn't matter whether you're on Windows 98 or Windows XP: the browser version is what matters. They know they can't simply start charging for browsers, so the way to fix this issue is to only do new browsers with new operating systems, and blur the line between the browser version and the OS version.
Bottom line, Microsoft wants to get consumers more interested in OS versions again. If consumers see a web site that says, "Sorry, you need Windows 2005 to view this site," then they have a much higher chance of opening their pocketbooks than if the web site says, "Sorry, you need IE8 to view this site."
What's your damage, Heather?
It is completely laughable and sad that Microsoft was found to be an illegal monopoly for this very reason, and now they are integrating IE and Windows even further. The government really showed Microsoft!
No matter what your opinion is about the anti-trust trial or anti-trust laws in general, this is a clear display of how the Bush administration favors big business and selectively enforces laws in the favor of big business. The DOJ forced a "slap in the wrist" settlement against MS, and now MS and co. don't fear doing again what they were found guilty of doing before.
"You spoony bard!" -Tellah
More and more people are not buying the upgrades for either Hardware or Software, because what they have is just good enough. This is driving manufacturers wacko. For word processing and basic home stuff, a few hundred megs of CPU speed is good enough. There is no compelling need. A lot of people are not doing the routine upgrade, and are getting off the treadmill.
Although their cash reserves gives them a decent shot.
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
How many minutes has it been since Microsoft spent 3/4ths of a billion dollars putting that Netscape stuff to rest? It was a strange set of arguments they had, simultaneously attempting to prove that IE was "an inextricable part of the OS" and yet entirely optional with no unfair advantage over any other browser option the user might attempt to use.
Now that that case is put to rest it's about time they made sure that the next generation of DRM technology can't be run under WINE or on the MAC. The best approach I can imagine for this is to have is use an entirely proprietary API for IE and to update it with WindowsUpdate. It's not hard to imagine the newbie surfing along who gets this webpage.
Our web servers have observed that your computer needs several security updates available for free from Microsoft [here]. For the safety of our customers we cannot allow you to continue surfing our site until these updates are in place. We apologize for any inconvenience.
At that point the user is using the latest IE with DRM enabled with no idea how many or few sites need it. All your content can then be DRM protected by default with FrontPage, and the user's take is that everything "just works" when they use IE, and has intermittant and annoying problems with every other browswer. This strategy is getting old.
They now intend to call it Microsoft Firebird (TM)
SYS 64738 NO CARRIER
All your browser are belong to us.
I can't beleive how long IE6 has been out. WHere the hell is IE7? Microsoft at one time did this crazy thing ... they broke the law but got some quick inovation going. I liked having a new browser every so often. Then IE6 came out and nothing... nothing... and more nothing.
... my question is WHO CARES?
I have since switched to Ph...Firebird. I miss not using beta software and I miss things like the google bar and the ebay bar... but I can live.
So if Microsoft decides to never release a standalone browser ever again
The ultimate network admin tool needs HELP!
So... does this "decision" affect IE development for OS X as well?
Not that there's been anything new for IE there... 5.22 is about it right now.
I'm wondering if they're going to start bundling updates into Office for Mac.
So I guess Mac users won't be getting a standalone version either. Oh well, no big loss.
Why can't they just release a browser that supports transparent PNGs?
MS is moving twords DRM because it will allow them to control the entire platform more easily and even hurt other OSes in the process.
Microsoft promised way back when that they would never charge for Microsoft Internet Explorer. If they refuse to release a stand-alone version, this presumably means the only way to acquire MSIE legally is to purchase it. You just happen to get a whole operating system as a free bonus. However, as Microsoft swore they'd never charge for MSIE, this presumably means all future Microsoft operating systems will be free.
Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia.
I may be really dense but I don't get it. You can only run IE on windows operating systems so as long as you can update IE using windows update this is going to have almost zero impact on home users.
If they include it with the os you could say that M$ has started charging for IE in the price of the OS
. But how is this really different from before ? (seeing as IE can only run on windows).
Must admit, I'm a bit confuzzled.
Mozilla took the last 4 years to rehash a more stable but slower version of netscape 4.X with tabs, phoenix is basically just the browser component of Mozilla. They have not exactly revolutionised they world with innovation over said period.
Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
What truth?
There is no dupe
Where is the line between standalone and integrated? The IE component is used lots of places other than the web browser. I'm on Windows 95 (it runs suprisingly well), and there are quite a few places where programs other than IE use the IE HTML-rendering component.
In Win98 and later versions, the operating system uses the IE component to render some stuff (the desktop can be a web page, for example). IE can then be seen a just a program that provides a couple of navigation buttons to the standard IE component, and it's already "integrated" into the OS, and there is no "standalone" IE.
Microsoft is saying that from now on, they'll just release updates to IE as OS patches (service packs), and if they're not supporting your os anymore (win 95, win 98), then you won't get patches for IE. This means that if you have a version of windows that they're not releasing SPs for, then you're stuck with a browser with loads of security holes that you KNOW are never going to get fixed (although many would argue that even with a recent version of windows, you KNOW the security holes won't be fixed).
The only real difference I see is that there will no longer be a separate IE installer.
As it currently stands the browser is effectively integrated into the OS and for all intents and purposes most people who use Windows don't view it as a separate component.
Try updating an older version of IE and see what it does to the OS. Try getting your aunt or grandfather to use Mozilla or Opera.
This is just a shipping simplification on their part not a change of policy.
As a web designer, this worries me. How am I supposed to test my sites from here on out? Before it was as easy as loading up said site into IE 6 or IE 5 or what have you and seeing if the layout was as it should be. What now?
Not that I need a version number, but I would like to know how they're going to dole out any updates to Javascript, CSS, and the like. I sure hope it doesn't become small updates like "CSS Update 12-2-04". The goood thing about browsers up until this point, new features were released all at once in slow updgrade cycles, which meant you were testing at a stationary, not a moving, target. I'm curious to know how this will be handled from now on.
And yes, yes I know, "code to standards", which is the way it *should* be, but in practice, there's the reality that not all browsers output the way you need them to (especially IE).
the future server-side browser detection may be more about detecting whether the browser supports the DRM your "web service" uses than what version of Javascript or CSS the browser supports.
I doubt it.. seeing how most web pages are coded from html, javascript, and css, not DRM code. Only a small percentage of webpages have any sort of services built into them anyway. I'd say parsing the html will remain a high priority for web browsers for years to come.
HTML = webpage code, Browser = webpage client, did I miss something?
Q: Why is this? the anti-trust? (no further standalone)
A: Although this is off topic, I will answer briefly: Legacy OSes have reached their zenith with the addition of IE 6 SP1. Further improvements to IE will require enhancements to the underlying OS.
What, exactly, about web browsing could require 'enhancements to the underlying OS'? The only answer I can think of is DRM/Palladdium, but of course Microsoft does not want to say that. They want these "improvements" to sound like "features" that people would actually want. Perhaps they will play on peoples' fears of online banking and ordering?
"Wow, you're like some kind of superhero able to ward off happiness and success at every turn."
-- Ryan Stiles
On a similar note, wouldn't this make things even worse for Microsoft's with regards to the antitrust case in the EU? If I'm not mistaken, the Media Player bundling is a big deal already?
zWhat would an EWOULDBLOCK block, if an EWOULDBLOCK could block would? -- me
I interpret the story to mean: "We won't fix any of the IE security vulnerabilities."
Hmm, all of a sudden the AOL/Netscape settlement takes on a new level of relevance.
Does this mean that I can no longer avoid installing IE updates and stick w/ 5.01 while still updating my system?
I do security
No, see, it's just that Microsoft wants people to buy new copies of Windows. This change means that you won't be able to get the most recent IE without upgrading. It's simple short-term greed.
BTW, with this move, there's a window of opportunity for Mozilla, Opera, Konqueror et.al. For the next two years or so--until Longhorn is widely adopted--the MS web standard won't change. Web designers will have to stay compatible with this release of IE if they want to keep the majority of their audience. This means that any reasonably up-to-date browser will soon also be compatible with the majority of websites so competition will be based on the quality of software, not whether it will work on a particular website.
This might lose MS their web monopoly.
So if there are no more standalone versions, does that mean there are no more Macintosh versions? The article didn't mention that.
average computarded person doesn't even know what a web browser is, or that there's more than one of them.
this is why m$ was so afraid of netscape, and if aol was smart, they would start their own linux distro, netscape linux and take advantage of this.
"You never want a serious crisis to go to waste." - Rahm Emanuel
There is no reason for MS to continue "innovation" in browser area. Server centric model is of no interest to them -- their money is on the client side. Since Netscape had a chance to convert that into server centric model, MS entered competition and tried to pull the blanket by diverting standards.
.NET IE can become an intallation utility with rudimentary features, that downloads .NET programs from the server and launches it locally. There is no reason for MS to do anything else with IE. Now, .NET is becoming part of the OS, so why should IE be different?
;-)
Well, Netscape is no longer with us (rip), Mozilla/Opera/etc. are not significant competitors (we are not talking features here, but market cap) -- reasons for competition don't exist anymore. It's time to play the client side. IE hasn't evelved for the last couple of years because MS has no use for it. IE is a "window" to the server, and that's enough.
With
Anyway, just another conspiracy theory. Not even that original.
Netscape 4.x had IRC?
WOW! What easter egg was that in?
Microsoft calls their next OS version, "Lisa".
Then the circle will be complete!
I have to admit that I'm a bit confused by this. First of all, it's a two-sentence statement in a chat room, so there is very little information to go on.
My question is, does this mean that end users will have to upgrade their OS to receive a new browser version? If this is the case, that's a huge blow to web developers. There are still a lot of things that IE6 supports poorly or not at all: transparent PNGs, CSS2, etc. I'm not seeing any indication that Microsoft is concerned about the continuing development of their browser AT ALL.
IE6 has really stagnated, and since Microsoft and AOL settled, I firmly believe that AOL will stop paying developers to work on Mozilla/Netscape. If both IE and Mozilla stagnate, the people who lose are developers whose platform is a web browser. I'm concerned that the stagnation of both browsers may stifle the innovation of developers who wish to deploy applications to standards-compliant web browsers instead of to a specific platform. (This means that those of you who don't use Windows should be VERY concerned, because if web browsers stagnate now, developers will continue to develop for a single platform instead of to a standards-compliant web browser platform. Microsoft doesn't seem to be interested in extending IE's functionality -- instead, the company seems to be pushing developers to make IE plugins, which creates lock-in.)
The Web has only been around for 10 years, and has only really taken off in the last 6. I don't think browser innovation is at its "zenith", and I certainly don't believe that DRM is the only thing left to add to browsers. It concerns me that Microsoft (or at least that Microsoft spokesperson) seems to think this is the case.
Simpli - Your source for San Jose dedicated servers and colocation!
IE 6.0 supports a great deal more DOM manipulation than even IE 5.5. At work, I have had to scale down pages that we generate for certain customers because they use IE 5.5. Of course, since e-commerce sites for the general public have to guarantee compatibility with a larger volume of customers, you don't see changes in IE versions.
.org works as well as IE 6 for most DOM stuff, but a properly patched IE is still nice for integration purposes in Windows.
The umpteenth milestone of Mozilloenixbirdron Browser
I use Mozilla, Opera, Konqueror, and IE for various purposes. It's all about using the best tool for the job.
For more information, click here.
Tell that to a web designer. They'll laugh in your face.
Mozilla is fast, stable, mostly bug-free (and what bugs it has are fairly straightforward to work around) and very standards compliant. The last is important: it means I know what will happen if I write certain code.
Wish I could say the same for IE. Even its bugs have bugs. (Though admittedly it is not as bad as NS 4.)
'Sensible' is a curse word.
It just gives me another reason to use Linux and Mac OS X. Keep at it Microsoft, you only have to try a little harder to scare all your customers away.
Karma: The shiznight, mostly because I am the Drizzle.
It sounds like they're not doing true transparent PNG support and there's no mention of them fixing the longstanding HTML and CSS bugs.
Those of us who make websites for a living don't care what it's tied to as long as Microsoft can follow standards. If the browser is truly XHTML/CSS/Javascript compliant I don't care if it requires a blood sample to boot, it means that I won't have to do any browser detection or special cases to deliver a site to my clients, saving them money and me some grey hairs.
How about a new version of IE for OS X, eh? We've been stuck with this one for 2 years.
Windows OEM license costs what, £80-90? Even the low end Office is double that.
If MS start bundling something 'good enough' for most with all Windows licenses for £20-30 extra then every shareholder out there would complain very loudly. If they put the price of Windows up significantly, the low end market will leave Windows and move to LindowsOS beacuse it's 'good enough' and would then be a really significant saving.
MS aren't that daft. Office isn't getting bundled with Windows any time soon.
Greg
(Inside a nuclear plant)
Aaaarrrggh! Run! The canary has mutated!
Netscape 4.x had Java (sort of), and Java IRC clients are about as user-friendly and feature-filled as Chatzilla.
Bolting an IRC client onto a browser isn't "innovative." If it is, then you owe Microsoft credit for a lot of equally useless "innovations."
For more information, click here.
This just keeps getting nastier and nastier. Now, let's say in 2006 if your dear old Uncle Bill wants to use AOL 10, which just happens to use IE 7 as its browser, he's going to have to upgrade his Windows OS to do so. Nice going, Microsoft! Just yet one more avenue to force people to upgrade.
"We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars." - Oscar Wilde
Further improvements to IE will require enhancements to the underlying OS.
Emacs is said to be the text editor that pretends to be an OS, but the new IE will be the first browser that is an OS...
Hell is not other people; it is yourself. - Ludwig Wittgenstein
I'm guessing that not even 0.01% of the people on Slashdot know me, but probably 99% have seen my picture... a picture of my backside, that is. You see, almost since the beginning of Slashdot, trolls and other malcontents have been posting links to a website containing a picture of me spreading my ass wide for the camera. In addition to the links, elaborate ASCII art representations of my picture have also been posted (some of them with tattoos!). Songs and poems have been written, and Slashdot users have even named themselves after me.
Who am I? In case you haven't guessed, I'm the Goatse.cx guy.
Believe it or not, I discovered my picture on the Internet only about 4 months ago, despite it apparently making the rounds for years. Being somewhat old-fashioned, I logged on to the Internet for the first time only about a year or so ago. At first I used the Internet primarily for Instant Messaging and occasional emailing, but I found myself surfing the web more and more. Back in January, I was over at my computer-literate friend's house watching HGTV. He was looking at Slashdot on his computer. When a commercial came on, I ventured over to his desk to see what he was reading. Just then, he clicked on a link in a posted message. It opened up a picture that shocked the hell out of me. My friend wasn't shocked, but mildly pissed off. "Goddamn trolls," he said. Apparently, they had "redirected" the link. He was going to close the picture when I stopped him. I came in for a closer look. I could not believe it... after all those years, I was once again face-to-face with a picture of my wide open ass.
You see, about 11 years ago, I had a live in lover (I'm gay, by the way) who was really into S&M. I wasn't really interested at the time. Curious, yes, but it sounded a bit too painful to me. But Brett completely changed my way of thinking. He showed various methods to stretch my anus to sizes I couldn't obtain with the largest of most painful of dumps. It's amazing how stretchable the anus is if you work at it though. I guess it's sort of like a woman's vagina in childbirth. In three months, I was able to insert 20 oz. soda bottles in my ass without even using any lubricant. In five months, I was up to 2 liter bottles, although they hurt like hell. But you know, Brett showed me how pain could be erotic, how it could open up new levels of sexual bliss. One night, when we were both high on cocaine, Brett was playing with his new camera. He asked me to open wide... and I did. That was the birth of the picture you see daily on Slashdot.
I have no idea how that picture ended up on the Goatse.cx website, however. Brett and I broke up about 2 years later, amicably. I don't know what happened to that picture. I suspect Brett kept it, and maybe one of his future estranged lovers stole it and posted it. I haven't talked to Brett in years. I don't even know where he is these days. But anyway, thank you Slashdot, for keeping his--and my--memory alive.
Sincerely,
The "Goatse.cx" guy
Yeah, yeah, I know, but we can dream, can't we?
I think such a strategy might ultimately be bad for MS, particularly as the Web is becoming more and more standards-based. It would essentially be the opposite of the strategy that caused a gradual migration to IE from Navigator: "You need Windows 2005 or Mozilla 1.6 to view this page." If one is free, it's not a tough choice.
I can hear it now, 'screw them.. i wont upgrade, bla bla bla'.
While that may work for some of us, big business ( the core of the market ) WILL use it, will upgrade and will continue to bend over to DRM.
Eventually 'we outsiders' will be pushed into a non operational status.. Sort of like trying to pay for a burger with out 'money'.. sure its not requred, but try to live outside the 'system'..
This is only one more step in the process of domination of freedom.
Sure ill fight it to the last like the rest of you.. but bitching about it on here wont do squat for stopping the process for the *masses*. ( i.e : sheep )
---- Booth was a patriot ----
I have been a user and a developer and find it disheartening that we continue to rack up long threads about things that are outside our control. Granted, we can migrate away from the OS/Browser in question but to be completely honest here, we have to follow around a company that asks us as users and developers to jump through proverbial hoops anytime they feel there products limits what we can/cannot do. My only question is how do we once and for all come to a consensus on what is the best solution for getting what our customers(end-users) want? Assuming M$ OS's/Browsers are in the picture, we only have one option, do what they tell us to do. In other words, big brother drives our decisions.
Tell that to a web designer. They'll laugh in your face.
(opens window to alley) Hey, get out of my trashcan! There's no more sandwiches in there... and let me ask you a question about Mozilla.
You should look at MozDev - there's a furious amount of development going on for extensions and plugins to the basic browser. It's amazing, and something I haven't seen in the IE community since the dot-com money went away.
--Pat / zippy@cs.brandeis.edu
then Macintosh. I'll throw away the windows platform in a heartbeat if all this DRM shit means I cant use my machine the way I want to. I would rather pay Apple's Music Store 99 cents a song than have to put up with DRM BS. It looks like to me Apple and MS are getting ready to attack each other again - MS buying Virtual PC was a blocking move, and Apple's Music Store is the only way to innoculate Apple from being held hostage to MS' DRM. Check and Mate.
...remember that M$ officially no longer supports Win98 installations.
Actually, microsoft still supports win95 to a certain extent, which is a good thing, because Windows 95 is one of the best lightweight desktop OSes for anything above a 486-66Mhz.
At the risk of going off-topic, I will now recount a story. Having obtained a P200, I installed Slackware Linux with the (purportedly lightweight) Blackbox windowing system, and was severly disappointed with the speed of normal tasks like web browsing. So, with nothing to lose, I dug out a win95 disc and installed it. I was pleasantly surprised. Running quickly with a mere 200 MB hard disk footprint, windows 95 only occasionally disappoints me with its lame SMB support and system-killing winamp crashes.
If I hadn't been able to install a new version of Internet Explorer, that system would not be as useful to me as it is now (try IE 3... I dare you). So it's a good thing miscrosoft still offers partial support for legacy OS like 95 and 98, because that allows seemingly useless old systems to breath a new life as simple web browsing, word-processing consoles.
IE/Mac and IE for windows have always been completely separate products.
Really, they don't even come from the same company. The Mac Business unit is pretty independent these days.
--
the strongest word is still the word "free"
I thought part of that whole anti-trust case stuff was that they couldn't "integrate" IE and other applications into the OS as a way to force out the competition? I guess they payed off that "board" that was suppose to make sure they stick to the settlement? I think the industry as a whole needs to phase MS out of existence over the next 2-5 years.
If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land,
it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. -James Madison
oh and I'm sure you will.
I don't understand what all the whining is about. Didn't personal computing basically start in a garage? It separated itself from the "big boys" and became a hobby, then a business, then an industry. Are you saying that you geeky geeks can't do it again? Are you saying it would be to inconvienent? If you have to take another path, do you take it?
Hey bubba! Red or Blue
I don't like big words..., does that make me anti-semantic?
Did you submit this story with your theory attached? If not, it's not too late!! Who knows, maybe tomorrow we'll see the same article with a different theory attached
I don't understand your logic here. What part of "no more standalone Internet Explorer" means that innovation in the browser is over?
Please explain why you've made this logical jump, as I see no obvious justification...
PSHAW!
Think of all of the friends and family that you know that bought a computer during the interet craze. Most of those had Windows 98 on them. Now think of how many of them ever bothered to upgrade their browsers. Many websites that deal with secure communications to non tech savvy people have to deal with this. At least now they can say "Oh, you need IE 5.5 or greater" and link them to a download site. Now they are going to back you into a corner and say "You need Windows 2008 or greater" or they are just going to stop developing past IE6. Either way, it is a strange move on MS's behalf. They must be underestimating Netscape / Moz's abilities. I wonder some times why there are sites complain that you need IE6 to view them, yet they work fine in Mozilla if you hack the response to mimic IE6. Lazy people I guess.
I don't bother with ie anymore
Opera, Konqueror and Mozilla supports more DOM modules than MSIE 6 SP1.
On MS website, they clam that.
This is not true....According to Microsoft own claims, through the document.implementation.hasFeature() method, Microsoft Internet explorer 6sp1 claims that it do not support DOM Level 1 HTML, but the DOM Level 1 XML returns true on the support question.
But...the node-type constraint, which is defined by the Node interface is not defined my MSIE6 SP1. In other words, Microsoft do not support ANY DOM modules at all.
Oh, so just send in a lot of Mail to M$... You all know that MSIE have full PNG support[2] since MSIE 4.... Thats what they promisted[3].----
Mike Menk
Grimstad,Norway.
[1] http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url= /library/en-us/dndude/html/dude03262001.asp
m l
[2] http://osys.grm.hia.no/html-repguiden/sshoot/
[3] http://www.petitiononline.com/msiepng/petition.ht
I've seen the inevitable 'online banking' scenario thrown up here a few times. What's going to happen is this...
:)
At some point, bank X will say "we're now going to require IE8 to secure online banking".
People will complain and say "hey, but I only have WinXP, and I can't get Win2006" (or whatever it becomes).
Microsot will have contacted banks and negotiated a way for banks to giveaway (or sell) copies of the latest Windows version, locking in users who may have considered switching at that point.
Bank replies with (or promotes in branches)
"Hey - to give you the ultimate in security, we're going to require Windows 2006 - the best in security. If you don't have a copy, we can sell you an copy for only $29.95, which can be applied to your checking account over a 3 month period - that's less than $10 month for modern security!" or something like that.
People will just use it because it's going to be pushed by most major banks. MS is the only company that can afford to do this (buy mindshare from large companies) and they're about the only company can can't afford NOT to do it as well.
Perhaps banking with MS software will be 'free' and using something else (linux/mac) will cost a 'security fee' because you're using something that can't be 'trusted'. There are teller fees, why not 'browser fees' for 'untrusted' browsers?
Microsoft may have already bought a bank (or started their own) in the next few years anyway. Banking fees are certainly a stream of steady income. If WalMart can sell used cars (probably real estate at some point too!) does MS banking sound all that far-fetched? Perhaps everyone writing M$ will give the idea even more credibility!
creation science book
come on, guys...
Thomas Penfield Jackson is a Reagan appointee. Colleen Kollar-Kotelly is a Clinton appointee. Interesting how the Democrats turn out to be the ones who don't care about the end consumer, huh?
(Score:+1, Funny)
AC
If Linux is for fags, then I guess I'll go download a distro now. Congratulations. You've succeeded in your attempt to get more people to use Linux.
Microsoft didn't kill anyone with IE. Netscape lost the browser wars because they had an inferior product (after v3.0) while Internet Explorer continued to improve. I was a Netscape Supporter to the last, but even I got tired of waiting for them to catch up. Microsoft beat Netscape, but we can't hardly blame them for that. That's what competition is all about.
IE6 SP1 is the *last* version of IE. Starting with Windows Longhorn, all that will remain is basically just a set of APIs. This doesn't mean Longhorn won't include a browser, though, you'll still be able to browse through the main interface/Explorer.
That's exactly what the top poster is talking about. Not symlinks and wine. Symlinks and wine won't help if you can't get IE separately from the OS.
You truly are the RealIdiot!
Is there a Real Idiot mod downgrade?
Can I justify using software that blocks file sharing? I am a musician that wants to record PD Classical music, eg; Flow My Tears by John Dowland with a gifted vocalist. Then I want to release an mp3 with a free use copyleft attached to it of the recording. Will I be blocked by DRM in IE explorer from doing this?
If I am blocked by software from doing this them that software can be deemed to be in direct conflict with freedom of speach!
All this DRM bullshit has been caused by garbage, created the RIAA. My gloves are off. I am going to do it! If I find that any DRM software blocks my ability to send my freely created music over the net to anyone who wants to download it then I will initiate proceedings against that software under the First Amendment!
OH THE SHAME I fell off the wagon and use sigs again!
Further improvements to IE will require enhancements to the underlying OS.
So, not even Microsoft believes that IE is an integrated part of the OS?
I installed crossover a month ago, and was very pleased to be able to run IE inside my linux. Now I can be using Linux and check to see what quirky things IE will do, alongside my Mozilla. It is just nice to be able to do that from my machine.
What will this mean for CrossOver and Wine having the ability to run IE in the future? Will this make it much more difficult to get IE running inside CrossOver and Wine? Is that an intended effect by Microsoft?
Probably a nice side effect in their minds.
Brandon Petersen
http://www.gxconcepts.com/
$20/month/customer, all media free
"Deluxe Features" = $35/month
MS has been jonesing for a subscription model for three years.
Who cares about IE? Maybe people will start using decent browsers then.
Does anyone have a link to download the full version of IE 6 SP1?
Um, I hate Bush as much as the next guy, but what did they have to do with the antitrust case and MS's current evil plots?
-- Having a Creationist Museum is like having an Atheist place of worship
Yesterday, MS and AOL settle for MS illegally using it's Monopoly position to crush Netscape throught bundling the IE with the OS. The next day, I am reading about how they plan to integrate it even tighter to the extent that you will no longer be able to install or upgrade to the new IE without installing or upgrading Windows. The whole DOJ action has proved to be a monumental failure. The only value it has was that it temporarily restrained MS just enought to give Linux and OSS a chance to grow. It was a window ( another good word ruined) of opportunity that with the perverse synergy DRM,Palladium, Trusted Computing,Microsoft Computers,Server/Client and of course .Nyet, MS is hoping to slam shut.
These are dark days.
... the newer versions of the OS are built more around IE (even more so than it is now), hence making IE not as visible as an application?
Just look at their next OS, the whole GUI, and the way it works has been redone.
By eliminating IE as a standalone product, no one can really try to sue them for bundling the Browser with the OS, because they no longer bundle it together, they made the 2 (OS & Browser) become 1.
And if you fully integrate both, how can you distribute a standalone browser for everyone else? Which would make IE SP1 the last available one.
Is that what I have? So "standalone installation" is Microsoft code for "Well, we'll let you delete it (it goes in the recycle bin and all) but it instantly comes back"?
If WinXP wants to protect its help system, that's fine. But the IE frontend shouldn't have anything to do with that. And even so, there's no excuse for Outlook being undeletable. It doesn't show up in the Add/Remove applications window, even under "Windows components"
High-speed Road Trip (18.000KPH)
... this way to egress!
;)
What's that line? Oh yeah, "There's a sucker born every minute." Imagine, embedding arguably the worlds most insecure client into the kernel of the most common OS! The crackers must be jumping for joy.
Personally, I prefer, "You can fool all of the people some of the time; You can fool some of the people all of the time; But you can't fool all of the people all of the time." ~ AL
Is there any doubt that if honest Abe were around today, he wouldn't be a GNU guy?
Words to men, as air to birds.
- IE's layout & rendering codebase is a big, huge, monolitic piece of junk. It was no longer fruitful to maintain.
- The time is ripe for significant advancements in the browser space, and for integrating the notable advantages of a DOM-like model with the notable advantages of more traditional programming APIs
- Win32 is getting old. So is GDI. Unmanaged code is out. WinForms is crusty.
- Unless Microsoft introduces interesting and significant new technologies in the next version of Windows, it is going to see diminishing sales.
I'll let you do the guessing.You wouldn't expect your print copy of MSDN
to offer a fair and unbiased depiction of
Linux, would you? Of course not, by its
very design, its an advocacy publication,
and you expect it to represent the commercial
interests of its parent, not to be nytimes.com.
Well, look at the very top of your Slashdot
page -- OSDN. Slashdot has no more responsibility
to meet your criteria of "fairness" than MSDN
does. It's an advocacy publication too, just
like MSDN. Next thing you know, you'll be
complaining that the Roland User Group Magazine
doesn't feature Yamaha keyboards.
Just wait until the economy goes back up, and Bush gets re-elected. If then, he does nothing, then go ahead and blaim him, but the last thing he wants right now is for tech companies to take a huge hit right when the markets are starting to turn around.
"Much work is lost, for the lack of a little more." -Edward H. Harriman
Konquerer has a tight browser integration with KDE, why not whine about them? Well, I guess it's not tightly integrated with any kernel, so that's always a plus. Really, this is a logical move for MS. They're just integrating the UI. I wouldn't shed a tear if IE and Explorer were made into the same thing. It'd probably end up being less bulky.
How about web authors around the world organizing a Blow Up IE Day, where they make their webpages blow up (crash) IE when people view them with IE? Or, perhaps a less abrasive campaign where MS's plans to continually take users' money is outlined in plain, simple terms? Really, we can sit around whining about this, or do something.
"Would it kill you to put down the toilet seat?" -- Maya Angelou
Slashdot continues to go down te tubes.
Recently I had to rebuild my system; (Win2KPro). I then went about downloading the latest versions of various applications and went to Microsoft to download IE6.
It took me quite a while to realize that IE6 SP1 was the full release.
What the heck were they thinking naming it like that?
So, from now on, if all you want to do is upgrade your browser, you'll have to switch to Mozilla or another non-Microsoft application.
That's interesting. If AOL is caught on an older version of the standalone browser, then doesn't MSN have a big advantage ? Start building in lots of new features and AOL's browser would start to look jaded.
Would probably be tough to call it anti-competitive too. "Look, we went to AOL and they did this contract with us!"
So does Anonymous Coward have good karma?
IE is fast on a 233MHz P-II. Mozilla is "fast" on a 1GHz box. IE crashes about once a day. Mozilla crashes about once a day.
Your scientific analysis of IE bugs vs Mozilla bugs concludes that Mozilla bugs are "easy to work around", but IE bugs "have bugs"... I avoid writing to cutting edge standards, since I know I'll alienate most of my users whether they use IE, Moz, Konq, Opera, Safari, or whatever. On everything but, Moz and IE are pretty much equal, except that Mozilla is soooo slowwww at rendering Javascript-generated stuff (menus etc) that, because not everyone is a geek with a 2GHz CPU, it's mostly Moz that I have to "optimise" for if I'm ever kicked into doing "fancy" pages.
i keep all my innovation in a box in my closet.
.
where does microsoft keep theirs?
i've seen the microsoft source code.
10 print "Starting windows 98"
20 goto 50000000
. . . .
50000000 gosub 30
50000001 goto sco
If there is enough people that wants or do not want something it will be provided.
Case in point, Internet Banking. There is not much value Added that a Bank can do. Remember Gates' much maligned comment a few years ago (pre interenet if I remember) that banking will be reduces to a few lines of code. He was close to being right, except Banks didn't want that and rebelled.
If there is a market for a Bank to fully support a FOOS solution, it will be provided. We could even do it ourselves thru a non profit organization, that bought the needed "Connection" services, like Credit card clearance, money transfer etc.
Help fight continental drift.
The Antitrust case sputtered and died around the time Bush because president. Of course, we can't just blame the Bush Administration, Clinton's Administration had his problems too, and didn't completely go away when Bush came in, but that's about it.
"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity." -- Hanlon's Razor
Sorry, but this just begs for the question:
Nowadays, who the hell needs IE anyway?!
From our new accounting software's web interface that they say will only require you to use a "common web browser":
e 5" codebase="../../msxml/msxml4.cab#version=4,10,9404 ,0" type="application/x-oleobject" STYLE="display: none"></object>
<object id="MSXML4" classid="clsid:88d969c0-f192-11d4-a65f-0040963251
If you don't want to repeat the past, stop living in it.
Now Microsoft Comic Chat... *that* was innovative.
Just wait. Soon as Microsoft strikes a deal with Hollywood, to produce the next online Matrix trailer (or whatever) in a DRM-only format, the exodus will begin.
The REAL jabber has the user id: 13196
What you do today will cost you a day of your life
As Dante pointed out to me, they can't stop you simply copying mshtml.dll across, which is really the only part I actually care about. So it's not such a big deal after all.
Host: Rob (Microsoft)
Q: when will IE get transparent PNG support?
A: Ian, I'm sorry, I can't answer that question for you
With this:
Host: Brian (Microsoft)
Q: Why is this? the anti-trust? (no further standalone)
A: Although this is off topic, I will answer briefly: Legacy OSes have reached their zenith with the addition of IE 6 SP1. Further improvements to IE will require enhancements to the underlying OS
It would seem that MS has painted itself into a corner with the feature set of IE. They seem to rely on the OS for so many things the browser does (like alpha blending, or the lack thereof). I wonder if the OS development team has oversight of the IE development team. There really isn't much reason that the IE team wouldn't be able to build a feature like alpha blending independant of the OS (lots of apps like Photoshop do this), unless they have been told not to deviate from the OS feature roadmap. Why else wouldn't the IE Program Manager be able to answer a question about PNG support? Sometimes it seems like the IE team is really just a department of the OS team, which is something that MS could not legally admit from what I understand.
US Democracy:The best person for the job (among These pre-selected choices...)
At least it's more public now their intent not to dramatically evolve IE in it's current format.
If you want a certain kind of development, they're almost telling you to pick a different browser, but if you want to keep up with what they feel is the new wave, then you go with them. It's a simple matter of course.
There's no reason why IE has to be built with the same audience in mind as the current open source endeavers, which will probably picck up the slack for those who want it.
This is the most disturbing part of this whole story for me.
::bangs head violently against desk::
This is Telex4's point, in this comment's grandparent. "Microsoft will tightly control their DRM technology..." should not be the most disturbing part of the this whole story, because it isn't part of this whole story; it's the editor's OPINION.
This thread is having a petty argument over whether or not slashdot is a news site and whether or not slashdot's editors are truly editors in the journalistic sense.
1. Slashdot is a news site. They relay news, the same way local newspapers relay Associated Press articles and articles from better papers (NY Times, Washington Post, etc.).
2. Slashdot's editors are editors. Many people read slashdot exclusively, at least for this kind of news, and slashdot's editors are in charge of what stories go through and what their readers are subjected to.
3. Yes, editors do pass subtle opinion within stories in newspapers all the time. There's a difference between what they do and slapping "I think that..." directly after a story. What slashdot editors do DRAMATICALLY changes the articles they post. In this case, it changed a sotry about MS no longer bothering to make new versions of IE work on old Windows installations into a story about the tyrant software villains deftly attacking the open-source world.
Slashdot editors: C'mon, I know it's your site, but just cut it out, eh? I hope you realize how hypocritical you all are when you scold MS/SCO/etc. for spreading FUD.
Intereasting though that this move will coincidently force people who want the latest version (which will prob be nessicary in future for compatability with many websites etc.) of what is one of most widely used piece of software in the world to fork out big bucks for the latest windows OS.
Time Magazine Interview with Tim Berners Lee, unfortunately, a preview to a for-pay full article. If anyone knows where the full article is, for free, let me know.
In any event, in this article, TBL - creator of the web - discusses what his greatest fear for it would be. In other words, what would harm the web most?
His answer: A "split" internet. Browser A is best used for this site, browser B is best for this one. DRM, thus, is technology that will do - as most of us are no doubt aware - more harm than good. It DESTROYS the ubiquitous nature of how one SHOULD be allowed to access online content. Time, ironically, has designed their site to be used with Browsers X and Y (Netscape and IE).
AIRC, Part of the settlement was the ability of the judge to review any further nastyness by Microsoft.
Which could be mergers, or tightly intergrating media player or IE or whatever.
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
It'll probably start evolving once microsoft starts losing significant market share to other browsers. Until then, microsoft has no reason to improve it.
Does this mean that, from now on, when IE crashes the OS crashes too? Windows stability going down...
There's a growing sense that even if The Future comes,
most of us won't be able to afford it.
-- Lemmy
Does this mean that Slashdot will be deleting the big blue e graphic from the gif folder?
Beep beep.
Update Option A
Update Option B
IE, being a classic app ported using Carbon, simply can't compete with these two browsers that are Cocoa. Camino, in particular, can read any site that IE can.
For that matter, do the Mac vers go away too?
all im seeing on this forum is people bitching about tieing the windows kernel to the IE web browser. i dont see how they are doing that. the OS is not the kernel. an OS should have a dedicated browser, as HTML is such a simple way to store and provide information to the user, so there should be a single way to present that HTML in applications on the OS. besides, the main reason for this is to make people upgrade. "oh shit! thats evil! they can't make money!" you may say, but then you are dumb. they are in bussiness and they are very good at what they do.
Question
http://www.ironfroggy.com/
Imagine if a secure DRM system was in place, and it was adopted with widespread usage.
Maybe all books, movies, magazines, t.v., artwork, etc could be instantly accessed. Instead of waiting for a book to be shipped, or going to the movie rental store, everything could be secure enough to be trusted.
Don't flame me for saying DRM may have potentially good uses. It doesn't mean you have to use it for everything!
I'd much rather pay a small fee and instantly access the full media of my choice, than wait around for days or weeks to get a DIVX from p2p.
www.Beyond7.com Insane modern art water sculpture.
why would any computer-literate person use the ms browser? it is a security black hole, proprietary, slow, feature-lacking and bloated. There are much better browsers available (mozillafirebird). oh, and let's not forget non-w3c compliant.
I think while Microsoft will no longer upgrade the core code of Internet Explorer in the standalone version for Windows 98/ME/2000/XP, they will continue to offer Service Packs that will very likely extend the functionality of IE.
.PNG graphics support and support for CSS stylesheet formats.
Do not be surprised that we will see by June 2004 new SP's for IE 6.0x that will add a Sidebar function and tabbed browsing on the main window, plus possibly add full
"Because the browser is free, and the OS costs $" means: "The OS costs $ and you're forced to buy the browser too." And unfortunately enough people don't object to this (yet), since virtually everybody needs a web browser with their desktop OS now and instead of demanding to choose and pay for the browser of their choice they accept MS making the decision for them.
Karma. Moderation. Is my
What are they going to say when piracy keeps going strong even after they turn the PC into an expensive paperweight with this DRM stuff? I for one am not interested in upgrading to a PC crippled by DRM packages. I just hope Linux gets a larger share of the desktop before it's too late.
I'm sure piracy will keep going on full steam regardless of the PC users having freedom to do whatever they want with their own stuff.
Much better than IE, except it does not support ActiveX and VBScript. I get a much smoother surfing experience with Mozilla than I get with IE.
Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
Ohhh! Ohhh! I bet you this is one big Microsoft conspiracy... Hahahaha. Just kidding. Not EVERYTHING they did is a conspiracy... just perhaps MOST.
That phrase does not mean what you think it means.
That doesn't work. That only downloads a small file. I need the full version. If SP1 is the final version, why not save it to CD, and avoid further downloads later?
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/ desktop/consumer/default.mspx
look at the last two charts
MS DOS x.xx Windows 3.xx Windows 95 Windows NT 3.5x
already have ZERO support options from microsoft.
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
Try developing websites using CSS 2 -- over 5 years old as of this month. Hell, CSS 1 and PNG have both been around for nearly 7 years, and IE's support for both is still flakey.
Half-decade old standards are not "cutting edge", and I guarantee you after trying to exploit them you'll rapidly find yourself wanting to lump IE6 into the same category as NS4 while poaching the entire MSIE development and management team over a pit of boiling tungsten.
I write to the most recent standards I can because I'm not prepared to quadruple the complexity of my markup for the sake of a few fractions of one percent of my users seeing my website's style.
I'm talking basic CSS positioning, which works fine in Moz but not in IE. It is over five years old, and works in all browsers but IE so it isn't very cutting edge.
;-) For instance, I've never used javascript for drop-down menus...
I can probably do anything you need javascript for in CSS in Moz.
'Sensible' is a curse word.
Every argument you'll find on slashdot has huge logical flaws which are never directly addressed. The linux zealots who post on this site are very desperate to believe that they are smarter than other people, this is because they can't get girls so they have no source of esteem. For this reason they will defend their choices in software even though there is no good reason to use it.
Ooh! I'll be first in line to buy that! Right after I get done buying a copy of Warcraft 3 from the DMCA-wielding jackbooted thugs of Blizzard.
Call (206) 338-5780 COLLECT for information about a genuine BA, BS, MA, MS, MBA, or Ph.D.
Debunking the "59 Deceits"
...you can no longer choose to not update IE when you update Windows with security patches, etc.
pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
Even funnier is this statement:
"Host: Rob (Microsoft)
Q: when will IE get transparent PNG support?
A: Ian, I'm sorry, I can't answer that question for you"
[voice style="Pokerfaced Federal Officer]
You're on a need to know basis, and you don't need to know.
[/voice]
No no no, wait:
[voice style="smooth type"]
I could tell ya, but then I'd have to kill ya.
[/voice]
But then again, their adoption sceme of PNG's is just to transparent (ow! - had to pun): They'll _never_ fully support them!
Moderation: +4. Modded 70% Funny and 30% Overrated. 100% Saturated.
I think the truth is just that Microsoft intends to integrate DRM very tightly with their OS and browser, and they're aren't going to try to backport that to, say, Win98, so they just aren't going to release new versions of their browser for old, DRM-less operating systems.
Exxxxxcellent! Given that Google's Zeitgeist reports that Win98 is the top version of Windows used to access its site (and by extrapolation, the most popular Windows on the desktop), it is very encouraging to hear that Microsoft is planning to piss off home/desktop users in a similar way to how it pissed off corporate users with Licensing 6.0. Now Mozilla just needs to commit to continuing to support Win98, since Microsoft has seen fit to abandon its biggest market.
Absolutly. As an end user, does DRM really benefit me in any way? No. It only benefits those who want controll. Which is what it's all about any way.
Richie
Sig? What Sig?
And I'd love to see a menu bar like the one at the top of your browser window simulated without any Javascript: submenus and checkable items, plus text-edit items and 'dialog box' submenus (ala RISC OS), etc.
Perhaps it's just that I don't use the more esoteric CSS2 properties?
I guess that 7 year promise of access to standalone versions of MISE are meaningless ot AOL now aren't they?
Don't Tread on OpenSource
This is the very reason why Lindows and others simoila to it MUST be embraced NOW! Now that M$ has paid off Netscape, NOTHING stands in their way...unless we PUT it there! And frankly, Lindows looks like our best shot!
I've been using Mozilla for about six months now and I really like it. It's faster than IE (IMO) and is a lot more 'professional'. Another thing that I've found is that if I browse with IE for a week and run a spyware removal program like Ad-Aware, I find a buttload of cookies, data miners, etc. A week of browsing with Mozilla only yeilds one cookie-- doubleclick...
Anyway, for all those people who replied that their bank supports non-MSIE browsers I have to say, they do now, but your days are probably numbered.
Supported, that is, until some "brilliant" bean-counter comes along and takes a look at the IT budget s/he's going to comment, "Why are we paying salaries to support browsers that only comprise 10% of our hits combined?"
Then, THHWWAAKKK! the tech support people for the "odd-ball" browsers get cut from the staff and the "brilliant" bean-counter gets a promotion and a raise that more than the combined salaries of the jobs s/he cut!
Am I coming across as a little cynical? Perhaps, but so far it's the way the world seems to work.
Debunking the "59 Deceits"
Me too, I just have to stay away from some stuff that would make my life a lot easier if I could use it. But I can't, since it doesn't work in IE/Win. Though I usually find Moz faster, but then I don't use much Javascript. (And usually IE/Win specific javascript at that.)
You know, I could do that. Except it wouldn't work in IE/Win: it would need :hover and display: hidden (and probably position: fixed) which don't work correctly there...
Like float? Or :hover? Both of these have heisenbugs in IE/Win. (Extensively researched though, so they are mostly predictiable.) And I would dearly love position: fixed. Or a little further afield: I would also love q (or :before and :after with which I could duplicate it.) or .png support (which Microsoft promised for IE 4).
Not that IE is trash. It is a perfectly usuable browser. I just wish they would catch up on standards support to where everyone else (including IE/Mac) was two-three years ago. Then I wouldn't always feel I'm designing around it.
'Sensible' is a curse word.
Given information on the net I've seen, and conversations with MS employees, the new thing that "requires ties to the OS" is crazy 3D visual effects, not DRM. Longhorn (the next windows) introduces all these dumb effects in the windowing system. I was talking to one guy about the next IE, and I said "I can't wait until standards support and PNG support are in there", and he said "Wouldn't you rather those developers be putting cool 3D page transitions like in PowerPoint and eye-candy effects like that?" So it seems it's stupid proprietary eye candy, not DRM. A good thing in that we won't be getting DRM, a bad thing in that we get stupid features instead of the things we want out of a modern browser.
** Microsoft loads gun, aims at foot, and pulls trigger.
:-)
The net result of this is the reduced availability of Internet Explorer to end users and web developers.
As a web developer, if I cannot get access to a web browser, I am not going to develop for it. It's just that simple. Even now I only put minimal effort towards supporting IE when I author for the web.
Other people who actively try to support IE will probably be inhibited from getting IE7+ by high costs of whatever version of Windows will carry it in the future.
Thank you Microsoft, this is a big help.
Join Tor today!
<HTML VIEWSOURCE="NO">
we see www.microsoft.gov
Only a matter of time. Microsoft wants to control the world, and it's not gonna happen. It's not 1998 anymore. People are a little more knowledgeable of Microsoft's anti-competitive acts and the alternatives (read: linux, apple). Shoot Bill Gates an e-mail and tell him what you think.
"Further improvements to IE will require enhancements to the underlying OS."
It's about innovation, Winston. Don't you want to see the Party innovate Winston?
On a more serious note, "innovation" at M$ is synonymous to "Lock consumers in and lock competition out," as if anyone didn't already know that.
The real problem you're discussing is one that has been noted many times: the internet kills anything successful.
Basically, the promise of the net is everyone's a publisher, and can make something kewl, and show it to everyone.
The problem is if they do a good job of it, they get popular. Bandwidth bills go up. They can no longer afford the site, because banner ads don't get you shit. Unless you're a lowest common denominator genius like stile (but there's only one stile).
So, they either die, get bailed out by a benevolent donor, or get bought by someone who cares about all the page hits.
So slashdot purely existing as a "great tech news site" was not a long term option. Because being great means being attracting attention, and attraction attention costs YOU money on the net, not your consumers. This inversion is not necessarily the panacea it was thought to be 10 years ago.
Personally, I'm quite content to go on loving to hate slashdot for the forseeable future. Gives us gov't workers something to bitch about at coffee break.
Either solution can be hacked if you just pick apart the licensed client for a copy of the key-- after all, millions of clients will share it. But I'm sure the DMCA will be used to prevent widescale distribution of "illegal" clients.
Even if every single current microsoft product was to fail horribly, sales go to zero, etc, etc, they still have GIANT PILES OF MONEY on hand. Like ridiculously large.
So even if they 'fail entirely', they have enough cash laying around to start maybe 5-10 new companies, let alone restart themselves.
They may be forced to abondon the dark side, but they will not die.
I mean the minimum for running real apps on top of the OS, not the MS specified minimum that allows getting to the desktop.
Do you really think people will buy new computers because their banks say so?
Any bank that tries this is going to see a massive shift to telephone and in-person banking and their profit margin disappear in the short term and any of their customers who need online banking switching to banks that support their current computers.
Even a freebie upgrade is expensive if it means one has to change computers and legacy apps to make it work.
Few people have that kind of loyalty to their banks.
Tech Public Policy stuff
they've given up in the browser war. They understand that Mozilla / KHTML / Opera (and derivatives) is far superior to IE, so there is no longer a demand for new features in IE. The best they can do is force it on the user by including in the OS, but don't expect any major user interface changes. People will continue to use it because it is part of the OS.
#!/
I read thru the comments. All I hear is whine whine whine. You are addicts! Hell, as long as you can see Natalie pour hot grits into Carrie-Ann's pants, you won't care what browser you're using.
Think about this.
IBM had the computer world in the '70s. A couple of guys in a garage changed that. They had far less resources than anyone does now. David vs Goliath.
Try starting from ZERO. Like they did. Can you?
Nerds and geeks? No, sadly enough. Just users with an over rated sense of self importance.
I am pulling the plug on Slashdot. Good bye (l)users. That sound you hear behind you is the next PC revolution, and I'm going to be on that truck.
I don't like big words..., does that make me anti-semantic?
Surely nothing wrong with producers being paid for their work.
Of course the evil empire will try and take it too far, but are the linuxers, even embracing the concept?
Lighten up.
Slashdot is whatever the editors want it to be.
And they don't have to tell us what that is, if they don't want.
Feel free to start your own site, to spread your objective opinion.
At least here you have a forum to disagree with their point of view, that's more than you usually get from a newspaper.
That's all I had to say. Brilliant Fucking Plan, Einstein. I'll just start prostletyzing right now, and I should have a few more zombie zealots for you by morning.
Oh and while I'm at it, I'm going to write a program that makes me a million billion zillion dollars. Then I'll be able to buy that unicorn I've always wanted.
Jackass.
I realize it's whatever the editors want it to be, and "it's a free country, dude", and all that. I just wanted to point out small shreds of integrity slipping away in the meantime.
The logo should be changed to "Our Opinion of News for Nerds. Stuff that would matter if it were accurate."
so it makes sense to ensure that the new "CableTV/Telco style" version of the internet will only run on IE - and vice versa ...
DRM and the end of public open networks is the sort of project all the major players are counting on the Microsoft monopoly to help achieve. It's why the monopoly (though illegal) is still allowed to continue. Microsoft is useful.
Seems like massive overkill (booting a new virtual OS just to check browser compatibility), but that's what MS is forcing people to do by completely tying the browser to the OS.
Hey, another reason why they bought Connectix! They're expecting an upsurge in the market for VirtualPC!
the fact that it hasn't been moderated -1, Offtopic yet. Almost ALWAYS, any anti-Michael thread is instantly moderated -1, Offtopic.
Or maybe he's just on a bathroom break.
It reminds me of when Microsoft avoided their out of court settlement over bundling IE into MS Windows. They said they wouldn't force OEMs to install it and then, with MS Win98, "integrated" it into the OS.
This time it could be aimed at AOL and their out of court settlement. No IE, no browser, therefore no "browser technology" to share under the royalty free license. OK, browsing technology, but that isn't the same thing.
Some on-line secure transactions require IE, and I'm pretty sure that some require Windows not Mac.
m l
t .asp?b=BrowserTest.asp
After a pathetically unsuccessful search the only ones I can actually find evidence of are
BAS on-line (Government sales tax, the ATO is the Austrlian Taxation Office)
http://www.portphillip.vic.gov.au/bas_online.ht
"The type of businesses the ATO is interested in are those who meet the following criteria:
You have annual turnover of less than $2 million
You have computer access and use Microsoft Windows (any version)
You have internet access and internet banking access
You have an e-mail address
You have one of the following internet browsers: Internet Explorer 5.0, Internet Explorer 5.5 Service Pack 2 or Internet Explorer 6.0
You are not currently using the ATO electronic commerce interface
You prepare your own BAS
You lodge a BAS on a quarterly basis (not monthly)
You have lodged more than 2 quarterly BAS, Commonwealth on-line Banking. "
It may be that this restriction is because it just a trial scheme, on the other hand, why not gain exposure to all the browsers/OS that people use?
And the Commonwealth Bank's netbank system's FAQ includes an unpasteable table, with the following footnote: http://www.commbank.com.au/Netbank/Support/defaul
"Netscape users: Netscape 6 + browsers are incompatible with NetBank."
Mozilla passed the test. Opera doesn't get mentioned. Linux is not an operating system, apparently!
I did fine in Opera 7.10, but my real question is, hwo can a server know what browser you are if you fake the string? I mean, I've been to sites and had "Identify as MSIE 6.0" on but it still gave me the "not compatible" issue. Is it some feature they check just to weed out browsers? And to what end?
This is my digital signature. 10011011001
I don't care that Microsoft goes this way, I always have fine open source to run.
Browsers are applications, not the OS.
Again, M$ shows not only they are the worst programmers around,
but their customers are the dumbest users around.
Mozilla.
Firebird.
Why does everyone persist in saying DRM is "Digital Rights Management" which is Microsoftspeak for "we are for the artists and against the bad pirates/hackers"? Why not call a spade a spade?
It is "Digital Restriction Management"! It is for locking the world into their monopoly.Don't fall for their Orwellian 1984ish politically correct speak trap.
Call it what it is!
So, we're going to see two new real internets develop - the free internet and the "free" internet. I know which one i've chosen.
No, really, does MS know there are other operating systems out there or are they completely blind to their competition?
I swear they just assume that people fall over themselves to grab the latest $300(AU) or so upgrade for windows so they can keep up to date. The day is not far off when people will actively be looking for alternatives to replace their restrictive proprietary windows OS at home and in business. Linux may be the answer, but then again, maybe something else will come along.
Tying the internet browser to the OS is just plain dumb on MS part. People want choice. What if we all had to drive Ford cars on the road. There were no models, just a Ford95, Ford98, FordXP. People would look at alternatives like GM or Toyota. Problem is the fuel and roads are all designed for Fords. Toyota may be easier to drive and faster but because everything is Ford only it would be hard to do.
Take this into consideration too. Now that IE6.whatever is the last IE for 98 and ME, what if a security flaw was discovered and all the hackers in the world found out. There would be no updates. "Either you upgrade to WindowsXP or just die" says MS. What about your poor family who are trying to put son/daugher through school and they need a computer. They can't afford a good one so they just buy a second hand PC with windows98. Some hacker finds a vulnerability with the browser and while surfing the net for an assignment, the son/daugher's data is erased. The cruel thing is they have no option but to start again. They can't update their explorer to fix the problem...
And one more thing, now that the OS and Browser are one, what happens to the dumb people who install Hotbar, Kazaa, BonziBuddy, Gator, NewDotNet, Xupiter and other spyware that smashes IE to bits? Now that the browser is even more tightly integrated, we will find that the computer won't boot at all. Even to back up data we need.
RATM!
You moved your mouse. Please restart Windows for changes to take effect.
Ok, so this is about the priviledges IE has compared to the priviledges a user has? Could you clarify this? I'm not sure where you're making the distinction. Are you making a distinction?
Hmm. Looking at some other posts you seem to be saying that IE having lots of priviledges isn't a problem because- Hmm. Actually I'm not sure what your point is at all. What are you getting at? What's the problem?
Looking at quite a lot of other posts they don't seem to have completely understood you either. And what do you mean by "priviledges" anyway? I thought I knew what you meant, but reading back over your posts I don't think I do. You probably don't mean it in the traditional unix manner, since, for instance, serving web pages up as root is obviously a bad idea. Is this a Windows thing I'm unaware of? Could you provide an example as you what context you're refering to?
I was probably wrong to post my rather knee-jerk reaction post before this, but it would help if you explained your case better. Then you'd have less of a chance of people grabbing the wrong end of the stick.
Better yet...all the more reason to use linux!
Several of the people submitting this story have come up with elaborate theories about why: killing competition, etc. etc. I think the truth is just that Microsoft intends to integrate DRM very tightly with their OS and browser...
Integrating DRM is a strategy for killing competition, if not the strategy.
Maybe im wrong but wasnt the whole antitrust hearing against microsoft about how it bundled its software and was unremmovable, making things more difficult for third party vendors? This seems to be just doing that. I recently wrote a DRM system using microsoft's SDK and the one thing I found really irritable was that no other browser was able to view DRM content-quite possibly because of mS's refusal to be interoperable.
any benefit at all for Micro$oft to do this BUT...and about uninstalling IE: I love Mozilla..and before I installed it on this computer I "uninstalled" ie...It's quite apparent that it's still in my computer because when I'm on AIM, and say I click something on the "Aim Today" window, it pops up in Internet Explorer. Hummmmmmm.......Damn MS
It makes sense at this point in time for the OS to become entirely "browser" oriented.
I happen to like MS and IE, and see this as a natural progression. -Jerry
Ad Astra Per Asper
If people actually paid for the software the use, the music they listen to, and the movies they watch, the software, recording, and movie industries couldn't get away with a tithe of the garbage that they are shoving down our throats as we speak.
The recording industry was shoving garbage down American throats even before Napster brought recording piracy to the common person. Even now, it blames the decline in record sales on piracy rather than on the 30 percent drop on new titles per year. Analysts have claimed that record sales actually rose during the months Napster was in operation.
And how do you expect a home user to pay $6,000 to become proficient with a program such as 3DS Max?
And though I can see some causation from piracy to the DMCA and foreign counterparts, how was the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act a response to piracy?
Will I retire or break 10K?
Just as most PDFs can be used freely, most webpages will, even if DRM is used.
Try getting your aunt or grandfather to use Mozilla or Opera.
All I have to do is download Mozilla F*reb*rd, install it on my grandmother's Windows XP machine, hide IE, and tell her to click the bird when she would have clicked the 'e'. And once I hook up cable Internet service, I will do so, and she probably won't complain much. (Both of her banks' web sites work with Gecko.)
"But why did you put Firebird on there?" <analogy>Shouldn't a Pontiac Firebird get better gas mileage than a Ford Explorer?</analogy>
Will I retire or break 10K?
If people have to update their machine XP+ to run their IE:s. It is not going to happen. If you are planing to be domininant player in browser market your product should at least run most of the windows versions. Very few people are updating their OS without updating their hardware same time. And time between hardware updates seem to be increasing. So I think If microsoft wont do multiplatform DRM somebody else does it. Later on microsoft have to buy it or lose the market share.
jk
I _do_ create content for IE and Mozilla at work (it is not internet ... it is for customers' LANs). The latest version of IE (IE 6) is *necessary* for the work I do in XML and ship to the client for display.
If the backend was slightly faster, I would do server side XSL transformation instead of client side and support IE 5+, Mozilla 1.2+ and Opera 7+, but because of speed I dropped Opera and do client transformations - for now. I also dropped out support for IE 5.x because the XSL support was buggy - the standard wasn't set when those came out. Of the Microsoft browsers, only IE 6 has the features I need.
Testing against the two (IE and Moz) really improves the XSL because they sometime report different error messages that tell you where the problem is. If the XSL is well-formed, they both are ok with that, though if IE doesn't understand something it may blow up when you exit the browser - try sticking in a <meta> for expires in the XSL!
When I do straight DHTML instead, I would definitely include Opera 7.x. (I wouldn't mind testing in Safari also, but I don't think my work will buy me a Mac!)
-antimuon
Any bank that tries this is going to see a massive shift to telephone and in-person banking
Some banks' checking account plans have a cover charge, where the bank charges the account holder $3 or so just to walk in the door.
Few people have that kind of loyalty to their banks.
Unless, as in the case of the City of Terre Haute, Indiana, their bank is the only bank with ATMs in the area. Using another bank's ATM typically costs $4 per withdrawal and may not allow deposits at all.
Will I retire or break 10K?
December 31, 2004 (AP, Redmond, WA) - Microsoft Corp. announced today that they were completely discontinuing support for their Microsoft Windows ME operating system . One was quoted as saying, "Now that they've left ME alone, can they leave me alone?" The recommended Microsoft alternative to Windows ME is Microsoft Windows Longhorn. During the announcement, Microsoft announced that the current version of their Internet Explorer product is not available for other versions of Windows as of today. Open source advocates are suggesting that you switch to another operating system (I.E., Linux, FreeBSD, or Mac OS 12) and another Internet browser (I.E., Mozilla/Pheonix/Firebird/CometBrowser comet systems bought mozilla? BASTARDS!, Opera, Konqueror/Safari, or Galeon). Microsoft strongly recommends NOT following their directions, even though (must scratch borg implant), I mean, because these other operating systems are evil. (Author was unable to complete article due to the MSUS Secret Service murdering author. However, the dead body hit the mouse, and clicked "Send" on Outlook LH.)
I though AOL's browser on Windows just wrapped the IE dlls. Of course, MS can pull the ole undocumented API trick with this but I really don't believe that Time Warner could give a rat's ass. 3/4 of a billion is the only real positive gain they've seen on that side of the ledger. Before too long they are going to drop the "AOL" from their company name. I wouldn't be surprised anyway. AOL lives or most likely dies on it's own. Time Warner just wants to get back to being the "other Disney".
Doesn't Safari use KHTML for rendering? All you would need is a Linux or FreeBSD box to test using Konqueror. If your bosses are too cheap, you could always use Knoppix...
i think what the microsoft guys are saying about the IE6 zenith is simply a reflection that standalone browsers have gone about as far as they can go now that people are used to browser integration. personally, i love the fact that internet and windows explorer use the same basic interface in xp. i can go from net navigation to file management with one click of the folders button. the internet feels like a part of the OS, and not something bolted on. this is a good thing.
people don't get upset about microsoft not releasing standalone versions of windows explorer. why is internet explorer any different?
i expect microsoft to integrate windows explorer, internet explorer, windows media player, office, and whatever else, via longhorn's new UI sidebar. this makes complete and total sense from an ease-of-use standpoint.
the only thing that bothers me is that firebird will probably get shut out of all this nifty new integration and will still have that bolted-on feel despite the mozilla group's best efforts.
There is no Open Source DRM. DRM cannot work if it is Open Source. However, it is not a bad thing if you produce say, a home movie, and don't want your neighbor distributing it to the world. With tapes and older non-digital media, there was a quality penalty for copying, which for the most part prevented people from distributing copies of the information. With digital information, this is naturally hard to prevent. OSS thrives on this model of free distribution of information. My friend John, who incidentally works at Microsoft likes to say: "Information wants to be free."
I like to put it slightly differently: Information is free, until I sell it to you.
I was very surprised by your saying that Terre Haute had one.
A quick Google search doesn't turn up any other major banks in Terre Haute. If you find some real competition to Terre Haute First National Bank (which was until recently IE-only with the exception of Netscape 4.7x; see bugzilla.mozilla.org bug 187615), I'll give you a cookie.
Will I retire or break 10K?
I would only be a win for the consumer if the consumer realized what was going on.
If the average user notices that he can browse any site with IE, but only half the sites out there with Mozilla, he/she is unlikely to choose Mozilla. I wish we lived in a world where the average consumer was sufficiently concerned with freedom that this would spur them on to use FOSS products, but if that were the case, they probably would already be using them.
"And though I can see some causation from piracy to the DMCA and foreign counterparts, how was the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act a response to piracy?"
And what should the citizentry's response have been? How is piracy, and all the other things that so far happened a "responsable" reaction? So far people actions have been along the:
Bad thing happens.
We do bad thing in response.
More bad things happen.
We do even worse thing.
I believe the above is known as a vicious circle. Want to know how those turn out?
Instead of being the "forever vigilant" citizentry our form of government requires to maintain life and longevity, and hence our way of life. We (past and present) failed to excercise our responsabilities and now look were we are with few hopeful signs on the horizon.
If "We the people" storm Washington and instigate revolution? It will as much because of our failures as it will be theirs.
Firstly, the reasons that Microsoft are doing this is simply to make their OS business more financially efficient, as everything at Microsoft is done. That's my opinion. Whether they're trying to tie it into DRM is irrelevant because Microsoft already controls what the browser can and can't do on your computer. And crackers will find their around any security as they have always done.
/. yet you try to hold the editors up to some sort of standard that YOU THINK is correct. I think that if /. were to give in to people like you it would die very quickly, because no one would come here any more: They could get the same dilluted, spineless, commercially biased news on CNN, MSNBC or on MSDN.
Secondly, Slashdot is here, free to use for those of you who complain even more than some Microsoft flunky that Slashdot is biased. You aren't paying a cent to read
Thirdly, Microsoft only Security in the form of online banking will be almost impossible for Microsoft to crack outside of the USA. My old mother uses a 300MHz PC with Win98 and IE5 and she's as happy as can be. So many people in the world use older PC's and older Windows versions, and what's more hand their computers down to the next users once they no longer want them. Banks mostly have to cater to those users as well as to users of the newest OS's and Browsers. My bank, Credit Suisse, is a good example, in that is provides a standalone Java application that requires Java 1.1.4 compatibility, thus ensuring it runs on every platform (except for OSX which has no older Java versions available- works fine in classic though). If they were to jump, say, to a DotNet application they would lose me and at least 40% of their online users.
Microsoft will probably continue to lead the marketshare in desktop computing for many years to come, with alternatives only gradually eroding away at that market, but as long as there are alternatives available, be it Linux, *BSD or OSX, I'm happy. I even still have an oldish 450MHz K6-2 with Win98 that is just fine for most things I need in computing. The lust for unneeded newer technology is as bad a drug as cocaine.
You might like this site.
I realize it's whatever the editors want it to be, and "it's a free country, dude", and all that. I just wanted to point out small shreds of integrity slipping away in the meantime.
Integrity?
You're new here, huh?
Thanks for the help. However, I followed the instructions, got the menu mentioned, and then the program just exited.
ie60sp1.exe
:)
Your welcome
Hell, CSS 1 and PNG have both been around for nearly 7 years, and IE's support for both is still flakey.
Your argument makes little sense.
WordStar and Clarisworks have been around forever, and where is good OpenOffice support for those formats?
-M5B
I think I'll just go back to MS Bob.
that's what ms said, and they can't lie. they just
can't. it wouldn't be right.
First, when your job gets outsourced to India, Linux is all you'll be able to afford, so why worry about Microsoft?
Second, (not to you in particular), what kind of Browser accessible Digital Rights matter to anyone? The RIAA and MPAA are screaming about movies and music, but frankly, I don't use a browser for MP3's and I doubt much of anyone else does. Maybe they oughta try to enable DRM in newsreaders if they want to slow down piracy of movies, TV and music.
This Browser/DRM integration worrying seems like paranoid ranting and a total non-issue.
One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.
You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.
FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.
Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.
OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.
Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.
All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.
Fact: *BSD is dying
IE is fast on a 233MHz P-II. Mozilla is "fast" on a 1GHz box. IE crashes about once a day. Mozilla crashes about once a day.
What crappy OS are you running? I have IE (5.5) running on a P200 (win95) and it is slow
And I have Mozilla 1.3 running on a P300 (OS/2 ver4.5) and it is fast. I'm very happy with Mozilla as long as it has enough memory and very unhappy with IE 5.5 as it is so slow
Dave
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
Now it seems that Apple is moving onto another browser just in time to avoid product stagnation. It seems like a prescient move after reading this story...
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Great. Our company creates websites for cities. Right now, it's IE-only (which sucks) and I can imagine that in the future it will stay like this. So if I want to develop on Linux, I will either have to dual-boot (to check stuff in IE, since it won't run on Linux anymore) - which is no option, having to reboot every time you updated some stuff - or get 2 machines for every developer - which is also not an option. So looks like I will have to stick with developing on Windows XP. LUCKY ME! :(
Also, concerning online banking: my bank (postbank.nl) already sucks. They used Microsoft specific Java. Result? The whole site works (well enough, anyway) except when entering the security code to complete a transaction. I then get a message saying there was an error starting Java Runtime shit (which isn't true, 'coz you need Java during login already, how fucked up is that?)
Here's the secret to immortality:
>I swear they just assume that people fall over themselves to grab the latest $300(AU) or so upgrade for windows so they can keep up to date.
Sorry, but 95% of people I know fall into this category. They're afraid of computers, and just "want it to work" because their time is too precious to actually spend a moment learning about alternatives. Whatever microshaft demands, they'll pay. (Interesting how everyone I know with Macintoshes all use MS Office, MS Outlook and MS IExplorer...just call it Macdows, already) Even the most "liberal" people I know buy microshaft without complaint. The rest of us, who fight "the system", will eventually be marginalized into irrelevance. This battle is lost. We can continue to enjoy *nix as a hobby, but in the wider world it is doomed without a champion with deep pockets.
bkr
"Browsers already such as Opera can fake the version that the browser is identifed as."
;)
Actually, using Opera 6.0 on the Macromedia.com site and faking the version to be Mozilla 4.7 or IE 5, their scripts still caught me and displayed the offending browser as "Opera." I have seen some tricky code wher they just check some known shortcoming of a browser (dang, good documentation kinda sucks eh?) that doesn't happen in others, with a bunch of switch statements. So they don't even ask for the version string sometimes.
Anyway, it was annoying to download flash within Opera's program just to have to redownload it for IE. Ditto with Java support in some other (older) browsers, like netscape. Anyway, I'm sure they'll do some watered-down DRM compatibility download for those of you working for the government whose machines cannot be upgraded every couple days or employees that can't afford to log out of *n?x just to copy and paste info --oh, wait... I mean, 'read aloud and write on a pad'
Here's a BIG sales message for Linux: Microsoft has apparently disabled all the methods of downloading IE6 SP1. None of the methods mentioned in answer to the parent post work.
It's that kind of trickiness that will eventually cause the end of Microsoft's dominance.
Than why in hell did MS start to make an operating system?
Oh... sorry, you meant building a monopoly...
It's going to happen! So enjoy it! Or next time, don't drop the soap.
Clayton
That was the funniest (+5: Funny)-comment that I have read in ages!
Opinions stated are mine and do not reflect those of the Illuminati
Don't worry; it's okay to be wrong
This statement must be of great comfort to you. Repeating that your opponent is wrong does not help your argument. You should have checked your facts. Microsoft was found to be guilty of anti-compettative practices. The settlement was in the punnishment phase of the proceedings.
OTOH, I don't know why I keep feeding these trolls.
Read, L
This is the most insightful comment I've read on this thread yet.
Although still beta, Apple's Safari browser deserves some mention as something other than etc.
Safari may not have the best features from Mozilla and Konqueror yet, but it is doing pretty well. I am using it on Mac OS X in preference to the bundled IE or Mozilla which is also available. If nothing else, it does have a performance advantage.
END OF LINE
"Why are we paying salaries to support browsers that only comprise 10% of our hits combined?"
Imagine being told that you can get a 10% increase in customer numbers, simply by changing a few lines of code...
WordStar and Clarisworks are not increasingly common open standards Microsoft helped to create and claim to support seriously.
May I suggest not "big business" as such...rather, big-time campaign contributors.
I know it's a small distinction, but it's an important one.
I want to be alone with the sandwich
Then what about IE for the Mac??
"We can confirm that Debian does *not* ship the version with the trojan horse. Our version predates it." [CA-2002-28]
Sheep are people that follow the 'herd' with out questioning. Sheep just do as they are told. Do not deviate.
That would apply to OSS too if the masses would flock to it with out wondering why.
It was just a *GENERAL* statement towards the public in general.
Too bad you will never see this comment. being an AC..
---- Booth was a patriot ----
After months of effort, the determined hacker who captures their video stream to see what his broken monitor would not display see mostly blue with one bit of text, "MSIE has caused an exception fault in 0x00001, press any key to reboot."
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
No, it wasn't. It simply allowed script kiddies to load up Windows boxes with the latest MSCC 'sploit-of-the-week.
IE6 SP1 is faster than Mozilla 1.3.1 on a Celeron 2.0 GHz with 256MB RAM. Opera 7.11 is faster than IE6 SP1 on the same system. (running WinXP SP1). I haven't tried Mozilla on my old laptop, but IE5.5 SP1 isn't horribly slow (considering that the laptop is a P75 with 16MB RAM on Win95B). Opera 6.05 is slower starting up on that system, but runs MUCH faster.
Try a bank affiliated with a University, or some other institution that values peer review and loathes vendor lock in. A high proportion of them use Macs, Unix an Linux for personal work and they don't put up with shit like IE only pages.
When you leave the big dumb bank, voice your reasons forcefully but politely in emails and calls. Point out that 50 to 60% of Windoze users have older Microsoft operating systems and up to 15% don't run Microsoft at all, so softare that only talks to the current OS serves much less than a majority it their online cutomers. Not serving one in ten of your customers is madness, serving less than half is suicidal. Even big dumb banks will think twice before moving in that direction and enough defectors will reverse their direction faster than "ILoveYou" make Wall Street a believer in free software.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Can you name one thing Microsoft does better than anyone else? Ease of use? Nope. Stability? Nope. Features? Name one "feature" that has not been coppied numerous times and better by free software. People are sick of the tricks M$ plays to make the Office file format work. Govenrments and reasonable institutions are backing out of all M$ DRM and abusive EULA like paper files are better. Businesses with a clue have already moved "vital" functions away and the desktop will follow quickly. Microsoft has little to offer that others have not done better and more honestly and no amount of money can reverse the bad reputation their abusive practices are earning them. A pile of their own stock value? Can you say dot-net == dot-bomb?
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Now that AOL has "settled" with M$, it's up to Opera to sue them for damages.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
With half of Windoze users working with win98 and the rest streched over w2k, XP, coding to any IE never works for even a majority of Windoze users.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
As for saying that this is a news site - it is, but not in the traditional fashion. It's a forum on current events in IT, and the editors have every right to voice their opinions, too.
If you don't like the way they run it, then go start your own site. :p
(Cross-posted -- sorry)
Joel writes, "Microsoft has settled the lawsuit with AOL, agreeing to pay AOL $750,000,000 in a complicated deal that allows AOL to continue to use Internet Explorer for several years. I'm not sure why the second part is interesting."
In light of the recent news that "IE6 SP1 is the final standalone installation", I think this could be an interesting way of lulling AOL into complacency.
Let's say that the rumors are true, and IE development is at a standstill. What's to prevent Microsoft from putting a ton of resources into the MSN browser and zooming past a totally unprepared AOL?
This would leave AOL with some poor options:
* stick with the vanilla IE6, long surpassed by a superior MSN, or
* get Mozilla/Netscape/Phoenix/Firebird to the point where it could be comfortably used by existing AOL users
Thoughts?
Joe
http://www.joegrossberg.com
Ignorance is bliss. At this rate, "free" won't exist....soon enough.
Just as a matter of intrest, how do you do that? Is there a option that you can add to your user.js? Thanks, Ed
I got here 700 posts too late, but I think this long undiscovered--and under developed--Internet Explorer bookmarklet innovation deserves mention.
c om
http://donotgo.com/book.htm
or
www.powercons.