Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Responds to IE Criticism
darthcamaro writes "Looks like there was an online free-for-all on Microsoft's chat servers yesterday with Internet Explorer engineers. Several interesting things come out in the story including the fact that the IE big wig thinks that all of his engineers should have other browsers installed to see what they can do and, catch this...he thinks they're the underdog. 'I've worked at Microsoft for 14 years and I have always felt like the underdog,' said Hachamovitch. 'Maybe the road behind us looks easy, but at the time going it wasn't. I welcome the feedback today. Getting informed is the only way I know to get better. The day we don't get heated feedback I'll be concerned.'" Reader nkodengar notes that "Microsoft has posted an article on MSDN listing everything that will be affected by the the updates to Internet Explorer in Service Pack 2. This will be particularly important to developers who use ActiveX controls, pop-up windows and file download counters in their websites..."
Let's remember, while Mozilla was still on unstable milestones MS had a much more advanced and working browser. It's barely changed since then. They're dragging their asses. It must have been a decision within microsoft, there's no way they could fuck up THIS BADLY with IE development.
IE stills sucks at CSS support. The bottom line is, when I design something and test it in mozilla, it also looks fine in Opera and Safari. When I look at it in IE there's a very good chance something looks wrong due to some missing feature or weird implementation.
They just hack everything together. You can't even use css like tr:hover although a:hover works because of their shitty implementation.
Photos.
Looks like MS has now gone for secure by-default way:
1. The modal installation prompt for ActiveX controls will be initially suppressed using the Information Bar.
2. Changes would have to be made to the way some pages automatically redirect or behave differently when refreshed after a control is not installed
3. If the dialog does not provide an option to install the ActiveX control, the file might not be correctly signed. - Phew! No more hidden installs then, hopefully!
4. In SP2, the Information Bar will suppress file download prompts that are launched automatically
5. Enforcement of file-extensions to match the content-type.
6. SP2 will have the pop-up blocker that is turned on by default
7. And, finally, there are some browser window restrictions
I still don't think SP2 will be a panacea, but for corporations with a large number of users, or naive end-users, SP2 should bring a sigh of relief...
http://efil.blogspot.com/
Microsoft will now suppress downloads not initiated by the user directly.
Along with other things like this one, Microsoft is effectively blocking pop-up ads this time around. It's should at least rival the offerings from Mozilla, OmniWeb, etc.
This is finally gone! No more shithole websites set as the default
The Political Programmer
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but the new IE changes are part of WinXP SP2 which means that only people using WinXP will block pop-ups by default?
Most of the problematic friends/relatives/co-workers/etc. who bug me with computer questions are still using Windows 98/ME/2000... heck I know people still using Windows 95 because they're too cheap to upgrade...
I seriously doubt that this is the end of the pop-up ad as we know it...
A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing -- Emo Phillips
What's so special about file download counters that will cause them to break in the new version of IE? I thought they were server-side anyway?
Since it's more difficult to configure a web server to count downloads of all file types, people often use a PHP script which redirects to the target file.
For example http://server.com/getfile.php?file=test.exe
The PHP script updates the server-side counter and then redirects the user to the real file they wanted.
Ever seen those "Your download should start in 5 seconds..." messages?
The new behaviour will make it impossible to automatically pop up a file download dialog, rendering this type of download counter/anti-leech script usless.
"People choose," replied Hachamovitch (IE lead engineer). "Hundreds of millions of people actively use Windows and they get to choose. Nothing in Windows as it ships keeps them from downloading other software that extends their browsing experience (e.g. the Google or Ebay toolbars) or changes it (e.g. an alternative browser)."
What a load of shit. I spent 8 hourts on line with MS tech support trying to disable IE entirely from my system. You see, when you remove it, the system recreates it. And even when it isn't there, it uses a default installed version which is integrated into the system.
Microsoft tech support has NO CLUE on how to remove it so I messaed around and came up with a way to have all Microsoft apps default to using Firefox instead
This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
Here you go!
Um, you are sadly mistaken in so many respects I don't even know where to begin. IE is buggy, IE is integrated into the system and when Microsoft apps attempt to open a browser, they use the systems browser not your default browser; this in itself is a potential security nightmare as it does so from shell. Don't believe me? Check your registry sometime by searching for iexplore.exe and url.dll
Aside from those two glaring errors, Firefox has a greater set of default functionality and a HUGE plethora of add-ons that extend it's ability.
Plus it doesn't use ActiveX. Need I say more?
This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
You've obviously never coded anything but the most simplistic website. IE completely ignores the standards which means making a web page that works in both IE and every other browser in the world is difficult. The result is that since IE has a large market share, most web developers write nonstandard pages that works in IE and breaks in every other browser in the world. What makes this even worse is that IE is a single-platform browser essentially turning the web into a windows-only system (and before you get started about IE existing on the Mac you should know that Mac IE and Windows IE are completely different beasts and break in completely different ways).
As for IE being faster, I have not noticed IE being any faster than FireFox, but if it is it's probably because bits of it run in ring zero, whcih is an enormous security risk (one you will never see any Linux developers taking).
As far as security is concerned, IMHO FireFox, etc probably have as many security holes in as any other bit of well designed software. The Mozilla team fix security problems ASAP, MS fix security problems shortly after someone made use of them (AFAIK there has never been a zero-day attack whcih simply put means that if MS patched holes as soon as they knew about them we would have no security problems with fully up to date systems).
http://blog.nexusuk.org
Actually, returning null when window.open() is blocked is the usual behavior for Firefox, and I assume for most other popup-blockers, as well. If memory serves, window.open() returns the window it creates so that you can further manipulate it from your code. Thus, no windows created --> null return value. Those of you with popup blockers can test the functionality here.
This pretty much means that the popup window will be officially dead in a year's time.
Actually, it simply means that window.open() popups will be dead in a year's time. It's an arms race, just like spam vs. antispam. Popups will simply move from JavaScript to CSS. The popup window appears as a CSS layer which is above the layer showing the main page.
To see an example of this, go to http://www.tek-tips.com. The first thing you'll see is a popup sailing across your screen and bouncing a couple of times off the bottom before giving you the opportunity to close it.
This is the near future of annoying adversiting, folks.
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
Firefox has a BUILT-IN google search bar and ability to customize your toolbars.
And how the hell can you browse without TabbedBrowsing?
^_^
I believe in de-evolution. God made the world perfect, man fell, and its been going downhill ever since!
It's just different strokes for different folks. You're a more knowledgable user, so naturally you're able to stave off spyware a bit better. With the ActiveX management and pop-up blocking, this should help protect a lot of the more ignorant users out there.
Around here, the prevailing attitude is that you're an idiot if you use Internet Explorer, because, you know, it's "M$" and all. But in the real world, people don't treat their operating systems and web browsers like religions and just use whatever they like best. If you like IE, keep on using it! I like Firefox and so will keep on using that. Variety is what makes the world interesting, you know...
The reason they suggest these things is in large part due to their blocking of these possible exploits. No longer can ActiveX run in a pop-up or dialog window, and from what I can gather from the third item, when the dialog box comes up confirming the installation of an ActiveX control, the user will be able to see exactly what the program does. Granted, it'll be easy for a spyware developer to insert falsehoods in that description, but if the program does not perform as advertised, then it creates some leverage for lawsuits against the spyware developer.
The Political Programmer
I was talking my sister through a nasty IE viral/spyware infection over the phone, and this is an actual conversation:
ME: Now close the web browser
SISTER: The what?
ME: Web browser, you know, the thing that you get to web pages with
SISTER: Huh?
ME: If you're looking at www.google.com, what software are you using?
SISTER: Oh, the big E thing. That's the internet
She is a 10 year computer user, and has a higher degree from a major university. I rest my case.
I called up my parents, of course, to inquire if she or I was adopted. Same parents, but she came from the shallow end of the gene pool.
Now I admit Mozilla is slow, but FireFox is much faster. I showed a friend 2 nights ago.
Mozilla took 20 seconds to load plus all my tabs. FireFox took about 2-3.
Now I only run IE for updates, so I can't tell you how it compares, but 3 seconds is more than fast enough for me.
Regards Luke
#include witty_one_liner.h
There are plenty of companies who do not charge you for bug fixes.
Since we're talking about Microsoft, as far I can remember, their service packs (and not just the ones for Windows) have been free of charge too.
Avantslash - View Slashdot cleanly on your mobile phone.
you can turn the tek-tips ads off by just disabling java script. i was looking around and eng-tips a while ago and notices those new intrusive ads, so i turned off java script and all was fine. i bet smarter people than me could just find what java script commands they're using and just filter those. or maybe something like mozilla's adblock where it selectively disables java script for certain websites.
Except it's still trivial to do a download counter with that method despite the IE change. Just have your PHP script start the binary stream or (if it's 3rd party) give a real redirect instead of outputting an html redirect page. I do it all the time on my website (cheap plug: OSWD.org).
I always thought it was an excuse for download.com or whatever to put another banner ad in your face. They give the mirror thing even when there's only one download source available. Download.com doesn't need to care about leeching because they're just a collection of links to 3rd party servers.
All of those moving div layer type of schemes basically rely on the javascript "setInterval" function to do their magic. If you have a proxy that can modify page content, set it up to change "setInterval" to something like "dontsetInterval" or some such thing. Break the code, in other words. The thing then stays offscreen because the code to move it onscreen never gets run.
There's very few occasions in which I want setInterval to actually work, and I just whitelist those when I happen to run across them.
- Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set him on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
To see an example of this, go to http://www.tek-tips.com.
I remember this one, and it's annoying indeed!
If you use the Mozilla AdBlock extension, you can block the "http://www.tek-tips.com/jsource.js" that's responsible for this annoyance.
zWhat would an EWOULDBLOCK block, if an EWOULDBLOCK could block would? -- me
Maybe if switching to a Mercury requires that you tow it home with your Ford, and you have to keep the Ford around, not only because you cannot get rid of it, but also in case there is a road the Mercury can't drive on.
Not to be pedantic, but Ford owns Mercury. :)
Maybe if Ford made every effort to drive any dealership that offered a BMW out of business. Maybe if Ford refused to update their new cars safety features, when it was known that newly built roads could turn their cars into healh hazards. Maybe if Ford designed there cars in such a way that roads had to be rebuilt for them, ensuring that no other car could drive on those roads.
My question is this: Are we so anti-Microsoft that we'll settle for clunkier software without complaint, just because it's not made by Microsoft? Where is the hue and cry for a faster, more responsive Firefox? Why do we accept things without complaint just because we admire the politics of the developers?
The answers to your questions are, respectively, "no", "www.mozillazine.org (and tons of blogs)", and "They don't; the drivers and developers of Mozilla family products get flamed all the time".
Seriously, if you think all the Firefox developers get is praise, spend some time on the MozillaZine forums.
You just can't automatically redirect the user to that script. They have to click on the link to start the download. The page was clear about this if you actually bothered to read it. If the user clicks on the link then the browser assumes they wanted to download the file.
"The new behaviour will make it impossible to automatically pop up a file download dialog, rendering this type of download counter/anti-leech script usless."
If that were actually true (which it's not) it would break all web-based CVS/SVN repositories.
"Ever seen those "Your download should start in 5 seconds..." messages?"
All the sites have to do is tell the user to click the link instead of wait because the browser will block the automatic launching of the script.
If they want to force a delay they can use sessions to tell the script not to pass the file to the user until X amount of time and then use JavaScript to disable the link until X amount of time has passed. If a user disables JavaScript and clicks too soon, the file script can just show the user a "Your file isn't ready yet. If you had JavaScript enabled you'd know this." With a self referencing link and same JavaScript code set to however many seconds are left of the delay. The delay option is still there. It just has to be done differently.
Site owners can still count downloads if they want. They just have to use server side scripts only that don't interfer with the file being sent to the user.
Ben
Work Safe Porn
Gates saw Microsoft which was a little nothing company that sold BASIC to hobbyists eclipse IBM . He knows it wasn't because he was smarter or better but because of IBM's complacency and M$'s dumb luck and a bit of aggressiveness. He learned that business giants are not as invulnerable as they look. Now that he is the giant he is afraid that the same thing can happen to him. So he he sees threats in every tiny start-up, he is afraid that he is going to miss The Next Big Thing(TM) and be knocked on his ass by two guys in their garage. (which almost really happened with Netscape) So he will either co-opt or crush those little start-ups when they start to look promising. But he's still afraid, he's still looking over his shoulder because somewhere, out there, there is a guy coding in his basement, filing a patent, tinkering in his garage on some seed of Microsofts ruin.
On top of that threat from beneath there is also the threat from his big business peers. IBM, Apple, Sun, Oracle, etc. - they all want to knock Microsoft down. Combined they account for even more intellectual and financial capital. He's on top now and they *HAVE* to work with him but they resent it. If M$ teeters it's disgruntled allies will seek to knock him down. Some of them with a great deal of pleasure.
We see Microsoft on top but Gates sees it as being on top in the same way a rodeo rider is on top of the horse.
I think your argument is correct. Who could possibly think there's other companies or organizations that build influential software that people use all the time?
No, truly, Microsoft is the only place to create influential software...
This akin to how WindowsUpdate works. You get a notification that critical updates are available and that you really should install them to protect the computer.
Who's at fault when the user ignores those messages?
That would be exactly right if there weren't so many unpatched security holes in Internet Explorer. Even if you patch up to the hilt, you go to a website and you get hit with malware. The choices made by Microsoft to integrate the browser and in addition to allow untrusted code to execute via that browser is *not* the users' fault.
In addition, people are overloaded these days with what they need to become mini-experts in: finance, real estate, law, the public education "system", etc., ad nauseum... they are neither inclined nor do they have the time to become anything more than simple users of their computer and its operating system.
I just spent about five hours last weekend helping two friends wipe spyware/trojans/malware off of their computers (a task that I was not completely successful in doing due to one very creative browser hijacking malware program) and they were shocked when I told them they should not be using IE. "Why didn't any of our network admins tell me anything about this?" one of them asked me incredulously.
Why indeed...
- Leo
You don't use science to show that you're right, you use science to become right.
Don't forget to uninstall 0.8 first. If you install overtop of the old version you may end up with strange bugs (I did). Removing the browser won't touch your profile.
My username does not make me Apathetic. It's irony, get it?
> Microsoft includes Mozilla and IE in its default Windows install. This is something we would NEVER expect any other company to do. See the Nissan/Mazda example above. Also, what about people that don't like EITHER, should they also include Opera and Konqueror ports?
No, not Microsoft; the PC OEMs..
Oh, wait - if they do so, their OS vendor penalizes them, so they can't if they want to stay in the market. Oh well, so much for consumer choice.
If you are not aware of it, Dean Edwards, from everything I've read, has been leading a fantastic project to fix a number of CSS issues with Internet Explorer and doing a fantastic job. His solution is accomplished via a script you include in your markup.
See the previous slashdot story: Making IE Standards Compliant for more information.
Above link redirects to the bathtub girl. I never saw her before - now I wish myself back in the good old days where I'd only heard about her
Check out my PHP Url Validator
I'll try it some time, but I remember that Windows ME wouldn't even install on anything less than a 300 MHz processor - at least the beta wouldn't.
A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing -- Emo Phillips
Thank you! Stop changing headers to show your browser as IE to view sites that won't allow it otherwise.
Those tools kick ass for web developers but using them to casually browse sites that trip on an alternate browser only compounds the problem.
The admins can't justify *not* catering to IE specifically when it holds 98% share. No matter how much he may want to. They've got suits to answer to and all those suits care about is reaching the most people. And as stated earlier, they likely think that "e" is the Internet as a whole.
.NET is the problem. This is M$ next attempt to control everything on the web. They couldn't get everyone to fall for the IE specific crap (tho lord knows enough did), this is next step. Everytime someone refuses to write to the .NET standard M$ loses a bit more control.
Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.
Also, for top speed, put these lines in your user.js
, true);u ests", 8);
user_pref("network.http.pipelining", true);
user_pref("network.http.proxy.pipelining"
user_pref("network.http.pipelining.maxreq
user_pref("nglayout.initialpaint.delay", 0);
user_pref("config.trim_on_minimize", false);
And..watch your page load times fall dramatically. Especially on a page with a lot of images.
It's easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.
I have a Mac, and I went to "Mac OS X" and "Downloads" to see what goodies were available. Opera was in the top of the list, and all the rest but iCab (which hasn't been updated in ages) were on the first page of Internet applications.
I don't think two clicks from the home page, click from the OS home page, and that click is in the top navigation bar that's on every page in the OSX section, counts as "deep in the site".