Slashdot Mirror


MSIE 7 May Beat Longhorn Out The Gate

Quantum Jim writes "InternetNews.com reports that a major upgrade for Microsoft Internet Explorer may be imminent. Apparently in response to the recent mass migration away from MSIE, top Microsoft developers have been soliciting for improvements in the old browser at a web log and at Channel 9, an aggregate journal previously discussed by /.. InternetNews.com speculates that improvements could possibly include support for tabbed browsing, better security, more PNG and CSS compliance, and RSS integration (which Firefox and Opera Mail already support). Go competition!"

27 of 733 comments (clear)

  1. FireFox by Laivincolmo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, firefox was able to grab my interest before IE. Even with the new features, I will stick with firefox because of the community that maintains it.

    1. Re:FireFox by danheskett · · Score: 5, Interesting

      To say that "Firefox is compliant" is a joke. Firefox aka Gecko is more compliant, but don't be fooled into thinking that it renders everything right all the time. It certainly doesn't. Not to say IE is better.. it's not.

      Unluckily, the W3C has made a complete mess of web standards. To the point that there are so many barely used, misunderstood, unclear, ambigious, and depreciated standards that figuring anything out at all is an accomplishment of some scale.

    2. Re:FireFox by @madeus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Unluckily, the W3C has made a complete mess of web standards. To the point that there are so many barely used, misunderstood, unclear, ambigious, and depreciated standards that figuring anything out at all is an accomplishment of some scale.

      I agree, they have totally cocked it up IMO.

      They have gone from TBL's origional HyperCard inspired idea for the WWW (which he admits didn't live up to his vision of an easy to edit & publish system) to promoting an overly complicated XML driven inteface which acts as a high barrier to entry.

      Certainly, in 1995 it was a lot easier to learn how create a web page. You can still use the same HTML of course, but few places teach that - they all want to try and teach new users about CSS, XHTML, DHTML, JavaScript and other buzzwords which only serve to overwhelm people.

      While that's fine for some people (like me), gone is the notion of a simple to grasp mark up language and editing system. I think that's why blogs are so popular - people can use a third party service that effectively creates their own website for them and allows them to update it easily and the whole process is just so simple (unlike with the the hundreds of naff, user-hostile applications that *claim* to make web design easy).

      A very easy to use but powerful scripting language (something not unlike HyperTalk itself springs to mind), the ability to easily use other native interface widgets - like tabs and menus -, as well as some basic drawing tools (line, rectangle, circle and a basic fill tool spring to mind) together with an easy publishing system should have been the goals for HTML & HTTP IMO.

      They seem to have no ability to focus clearly on the most important issues and then communicate those thoughts unambigously. Instead they create multiple broken 'transitional' implimentations which confuse people and lead to apathy as far as compliance goes.

      IMO we should have a system where - say you are browsing your web site and you spot a spelling mistake on it at http://www.i-like-kibble.org/about.html you should just be able to click an edit button in your browser, be asked to supply a username and password and then have it open webdav://www.i-like-kibble.org/about.html either in a built in editor or it should ask you to select an editor (such as notepad, gedit or even MS Word). When the page is 'saved' in the editor, the changes should be uploaded to the site automatically by the browser. If they had been even remotely competant and argued for this from day one (and hacked up a couple of functional implimentations) we could all have that functionality today.

      Instead we have an overcomplicated system focused squarely at technical users that is seeing little 'real world' use, because the vast majority of people just find using systems like Tables with a little CSS far easier and more practicle to manage.

      And what really annoys me? CSS wasn't even that well designed. It's got huge gaping holes in functionality. You should be able to align anything by top left, top right, bottom left and bottom right of an object (such as a div) both as an absolute and a percentage. You should also be able to specify on what layer within that said container the object you are positioning should be drawn. Of course that doesn't work in any recent browser, because the developers have been too busy trying to impliment the mixed messages coming out of the W3C, and ensuring backwards compliance, along with supporting 'real world' hacks due to the dominance of IE.

      Bit of rant - probably too long and ranty for most people to want to read - but I'm just annoyed that something as influencial as the WWW wasn't better steered by the W3C.

      Of course I'm also annoyed at MS for how little they have done in this area (and how much they could have done given their dominance). Full kudos to the Mozilla contributers for giving them some competiton though. Even Windows users deseve features like tabs and autofill[1] *hugs Safari* (even though it's filthy KHTML ;).

      [1] Though the first time I saw AutoFill was in Internet Explorer for Mac OS Classic.

  2. On the one hand this is good news by multiplexo · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Consumers benefit from competition, in this case superior browsers from groups such as Opera and Mozilla and integrated browsers such as Konquerer or Safari offer features and security that Microsoft doesn't provide.

    On the other hand it's depressing that MIcrosoft is a big enough monopolist to let the status and security of what they maintain is an integral part of the operating system, namely the browser, to go almost completely to shit before they bestir themselves to even think about fixing it.

    --
    cheap labor conservatives - they want to keep you hungry enough to be thankful for minimum wage.
  3. How is this possible?!?!? by jjh37997 · · Score: 5, Funny

    I thought IE and the Window OS were so tightly integrated that they were virtually the same thing? Do you mean IE was actually a separate program all along?

  4. Re:Browser Wars II: Mozilla Strikes Back? by mechsoph · · Score: 5, Interesting

    That's why they wanted to call it Phoenix....

  5. Re:Call Me Clueless by PeteQC · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As more and more application start to use HTML browser as their "interface", the war is for the future of computing. Event SAP created web interface to its popular Enterprise System. So, as the time go, more and more applications (specially business applications) will use HTML as a way to create remotely-accessible interface. So, the OS could become less and less important and the browser would become more and more important. So, if people lose interest in IE, they won't be tied to Windows anymore and then Microsoft will lose revenues.

    --
    Montreal - Best city to live in!
  6. Re:Browser Wars II: Mozilla Strikes Back? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    And so at last the beast fell and the unbelievers rejoiced. But all was not lost, for from the ash rose a great bird. The bird gazed down upon the unbelievers and cast fire and thunder upon them. For the beast had been reborn with its strength renewed, and the followers of Mammon cowered in horror.

    from The Book of Mozilla, 7:15

  7. Re:And the standings are.... by foidulus · · Score: 5, Funny

    My prediction: lynx will make a comeback and overtake them all!

  8. Re:Browser Wars II: Mozilla Strikes Back? by dubiousmike · · Score: 5, Insightful

    it strikes me that we, as the slashdot crowd, tend to be the types where our jobs are highly dependant upon computers and thus as we progress in our careers, we care more and more about security of our blessed boxes. The health of these boxes are as important as the specific tasks whos sucess pay our bills. We care about our computers and the health of our friend's, family's and even stranger's computers.

    In the mean time, the rest of the population care about learning, communication and entertainment.

    I guess what I am getting at is most of us bash Microsoft because they choose usability (not the disability flavor, just that it works) over security. Slashdotters generally have a distaste for Flash even if it is because it is used gratuitously for entertainment. We choose to block ads and popups and some of us IMAGES because we feel it is useless and fluffy even though it is the main source of revenue for many businesses' web endevours. But the thing is, most folks ont he internet care that when their kid goes to PBS Kids, it works. When they go to their favorite mainstream band's website, it just works. When they go to their bank's website, it just works. When they want to play Yahoo games or take part in fantasy sports, it all just works.

    Where Microsoft suceeds is giving the consumer what they WANT. For stuff to work, even if it means that their computer is riddled with spyware and viruses. As long as their credit card number doesn't get swiped or find kiddee pr0n on their computer and everything else works, they are satisfied.

    I saw that someone wrote that Opera is a superior browser. While they are correct when using their guidelines, most end users would feel quite the opposite. Opera, at least with older incarnations, has not been a mainstream friendly browser. As an advanced user, I think its great. My mom, my kid and most folks int he public school system I work in think otherwise.

    We all know that a lot of user's problems with a computer gone "bad" would disappear without IE 5.5. But of course, many folks wouldn't want to use the web as much without the end user usability IE 5.5 has provided. Quite the double edged sword and frankly, we here at Slashdot are the minority in the internet using world.

  9. Re:A quote: by six11 · · Score: 5, Informative

    (MS guy) "The truth is that consumers aren't going to worry about things like CSS and PNG support," said Robert Iliad, a developer who is participating in the feedback process. "There are still millions of consumers using IE 5.5, so how are you going to get them to use IE 7.0 just because of some obscure thing called CSS?"

    (Sebby) Now this is what I call truely clueless. Typical MS thinking that is the cause of IE's sercurity vulnerabilities and lack of established standards.


    I think what Iliad is saying here is that consumers really don't care if their browser supports de facto fringe standards. I wish CSS and PNG support (as well as some stable ECMAScript, etc.) were supported, but that's not the name of the game. As long as MSN and Google and ESPN and Craigslist and Slashdot (insert longer list of highly traffiked web sites here) work in IE as-is, there is no reason for IE to change. And there is no reason for those sites to change unless IE changes. (Here I open myself up to charges that increased usage of other browsers like FireFox and Safari could force those sites to change... that's another discussion)

    Until recently, security really wasn't an issue for typical web users. I've had people send me credit card information and passwords over standard email. I've pointed out to other people that the web form with which they're submitting their personal or financial information is not secure. I've always tried to get my friends and family to use other browsers because using IE just isn't safe. In all these cases, I generally get a vacant stare, because unless their credit card number is stolen, or somebody assumes their identity, they don't care. Those millions of users Iliad mentions are part of that vacant-stare category. Sure, if Microsoft had a corporate culture more like Google's, they would have internal pressure to fix these problems and be standards-compliant. But MS only feels the pressure when there are financial reasons for doing so.

    Web developers would prefer to code web pages in one cross-platform, cross-browser syntax, but thanks to Microsoft's indifference in the matter, web developers have to endlessly tweak things so it looks OK in IE as well as whatever browsers their target audience may be using. Given that the target audience for most web sites are IE users, and given that proprietors of those commercial web sites are more interested in making money than some philosophical desire to be standards compliant, whatever MSIE supports becomes the standard.

    Slashdotters know that universal support for CSS would be good. We also know that PNG is a legally pure image format. But in the world of PHB-controlled e-commerce sites and the typical demographic that visit their sites, PNG and universal CSS come second (or third, or forth, ...) to a host of other concerns. Those concerns are what Iliad are talking about.

    In any event, it seems that the reason Microsoft is going to release 7.0 before Longhorn is because of security concerns. CSS and PNG aren't necessarily related to that.
  10. More than meets the eye, here by ekhben · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And no, IE7 won't be a Transformer.

    Microsoft does not sell IE. They gain no direct profit from people's use of it, so you have to wonder what their motive is here. Let's assume that "good" and "evil" are subjective and emotive words that have no relevance to this discussion, ok?

    If you read Joel Spolsky's API war article, some perspective may be gained. Microsoft wishes only to discourage Web developers from moving away from the IE platform. If developers move away, Microsoft no longer has control over web development, and can no longer keep new technologies on the fringe.

    This is bad news for a company with plans to move to network applications. If a platform for network applications exists outside of Microsoft's control, it will be much harder to profit from. Thus, Microsoft's interest is served here by retaining that 90%+ browser market share, to prevent the adoption of new technologies not under MS control.

  11. MS caught in their own lies again by phillymjs · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In a C|Net article from May 31, 2003, a Microsoft rep said, "Legacy OSes have reached their zenith with the addition of IE 6 SP1. Further improvements to IE will require enhancements to the underlying OS."

    Cut to a year and change later, Longhorn is taking too long to arrive and people are getting sick/scared enough of all the security deficiencies in IE to actually look for a better browser. Because informed consumers are their worst enemy, Microsoft gets a little nervous that their lock on the browser market might be in jeopardy, and POW! Miracle of miracles, it is suddenly possible to further improve standalone versions of IE on non-Longhorn versions of Windows! Whoda thunk it?

    Technically such an improved beast should be called IE 6.5. If they actually do call it 7, it's purely for marketing reasons-- they'll launch some flashy commercials to try to snow people into thinking this is some totally reworked wonder that fixes everything they didn't like about IE 6, when in reality it will just be IE 6 with some bugs fixed and some extra shit grafted on. Too bad their campaign will probably work on the uninformed.

    Don't roll over and take this, people! Keep informing your friends/family/clients that there are better browsers out there, and install your alternative browser of choice wherever possible. Don't let them listen to whatever sunshine Microsoft will be blowing up their asses about the "new, improved" IE.

    ~Philly

  12. Make your own browser by $exyNerdie · · Score: 5, Informative

    .....support for tabbed browsing.....

    Well, MSDN front page has an article with code to build your own custom web browser with tabs and an integrated link to a search engine.
    You don't need to buy anything for this. Visual C# express is a free download

  13. What for? by dustmite · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So if we wait until Microsoft develops and releases these features in Internet Explorer, then we get to do everything that we .. uh .. already can do today in browsers like Firefox. Thanks, but no thanks, we can get now what they're offering next year.

    Microsoft are truly amazing: Can any other IT company consistently generate excitement and buzz amongst their customer base by announcing that they are going to add features that everyone else has had for years already???

    1. Re:What for? by bmantz65 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's the problem, most of their userbase doesn't know that Firefox, Opera, or even some of the IE shells exist, thus the ignorance to tabbed browsing.

  14. Re:A quote: by mhesseltine · · Score: 5, Insightful
    If web devlopers use these technologies to enhance their sites, users with browsers that can't handle CSS or PNG correctly wont see pages which are necessarily as pretty or functional as they would with a more compliant browser. If the gap gets big enough and is publicised I think at least some people would change browser.

    And if people with browsers that didn't support the standards would realize the problem and upgrade, this might work.

    What will actually happen is either

    • Users will assume that the website is "broken" and move to another site, never letting the webmaster know there's a problem
    • or
    • Users will begin contacting webmasters telling them that their site is "broken" and refusing to believe that it's actually their browser that's the problem.
    --
    Overrated / Underrated : Moderation :: Anonymous Coward : Posting
  15. CSS compliance and IE by eidolons · · Score: 5, Interesting

    As a web developer / designer, I've been using Mozilla and the like for a long time. But what interests me is what the majority of people use - I need to design stuff that works for everything. Since Explorer has ALWAYS been a pain when it comes to CSS compliance, myself and every designer out there have had to bend over backward to write code that has all these little IE fixes built in. I'm sick of having to play with code and then check both Netscape and Explorer for consistency. Please, oh please, give IE 7 some decent fricken CSS compliance!! That way, I will KNOW that it will all look the bloody same, just like it should for pete's sakes.

  16. Speculation by lou2112 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The cited article itself says that it's based on speculation. Channel 9 attracts developers, not "consumers"; so, the "consumers" the article mentions who "are demanding that IE be fitted with tabbed browsing", etc., are actually just developers. Indeed, the majority of IE's consumers couldn't give a damn about tabbed browsing, or CSS, or PNG.

    Sadly, this whole article (i.e., Slashdot's article) has become a collection of threads promoting FireFox, Opera, etc., and generally IE-bashing instead of actually discussing the issue at hand. Sure, perhaps the majority of geeks don't use IE, but we're also the people who would use OpenOffice instead of MS Office, Linux instead of Windows, etc. I.e., we're not Microsoft's intended audience.

    So, take a moment and think about the article's premise. Will there be a new version of IE before Longhorn? I'd venture to say no. Why? Mainly, a better IE would be a major selling point for Windows (as Safari has become for Mac OS X, e.g., Tiger's Safari RSS). Also, it's probably moved all new development of IE to Longhorn APIs, and doing double-development of new features is a nuisance (as it was for Apple).

    In general, developing new features for IE 6 just doesn't make sense from a business, marketing, or technical perspective. Saying a new release of IE "may be imminent" just adds more vapor to the breeze, seemingly endorsing speculation, and creates even more opportunities for MS-bashing. Whereas MS-bashing can be justified, ripping apart products that exist only in your mind is ludicrous.

  17. Article summary--uh, "recent mass migration?" by rd_syringe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    All the submitter did was link to a blog entry that listed a couple of public advisories and mentioned Mozilla. Apparently, when put through the Slashbot filter, that becomes "recent mass migration away from MSIE?"

    According to Google Zeitgeist, IE 6 hasn't dropped at all and is still massively slaughtering the competition. In fact, Slashdot's own browser statistics show that IE is the majority browser for people accessing this website! Also note that every year is the year of "Linux on the desktop," yet Linux is still at 1% of usage on Zeitgeist.

    I don't like IE either, but come on. There is no "recent mass migration."

    1. Re:Article summary--uh, "recent mass migration?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The Zeitgeist is from June, before the major effect of the advisories was felt. On my site, IE has slipped a couple percentage points in the past couple months (and it's not a tech site).

    2. Re:Article summary--uh, "recent mass migration?" by 0x0d0a · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't like IE either, but come on. There is no "recent mass migration."

      I think the tiny grain of truth somewhere was that the current version of IE actually saw a market share decrease last month instead of an increase.

      Really, why do Slashdot story submitters have to have such completely and deliberately inaccurate stories? It *sucks*. I'd happily add a day or whatever on to the time until a story comes out if the eds would just read the linked to article on each story that they actually pass.

      On the other hand, the "year of the desktop" claims have a bit more meat to them. Linux has a small desktop market share, and so a doubling over the course of a year doesn't look like all that much.

      Also, most of the people talking about the "year of the desktop" are talking about whether the desktop is technically ready. They aren't factoring in transition time (which may well be up to five years -- nobody is going to throw out all their existing, reasonably well systems to install Linux -- they're just going to install Linux when they do their next upgrade).

    3. Re:Article summary--uh, "recent mass migration?" by stuuf · · Score: 5, Insightful

      IE 6 hasn't dropped at all and is still massively slaughtering the competition.

      It's not slaughtering the competition, it's slaughtering it's ancestors. IE 4/5 are dropping, netscape/mozilla are steadily rising.

      --

      Everyone is born right-handed; only the greatest overcome it

    4. Re:Article summary--uh, "recent mass migration?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Most competitive browsers have the ability to hide their identity, making the stats essentially worthless.

      Both my mozilla and opera say they are IE6. Of course so does my IE6, which is never, ever opened. I don't even have a link to it visible on my desktop or start menu.

      What really gets me is that Opera and Mozilla have a Google search bar built into it, so they should be going there in very high numbers. What if it only registers hits to the main page?

      How many downloads of Opera and mozilla per day? of those...practically no one uses it? Hard to believe.

  18. Re:Slashdot in Firefox by BZ · · Score: 5, Informative

    > (a) why this happens

    It's an error in some min-width computation code in Gecko.

    > (b) why it only happens occasionally

    Because it's only an error in the incremental reflow code; if the initial layout happens early enough, the problem is not hit.

    > (c) whether anyone is working on fixing it?

    It's been fixed in trunk Gecko since April. It's not fixed on the stable Firefox branch yet, and probably won't be because the fix leads to problems of its own on some sites.

  19. Re:Yeah by chregu · · Score: 5, Informative

    Do you mean something like the Mozilla ActiveX control?

    And it works in IE like any other ActiveX (the webpage is not that clear as you can use the control in any Windows application), we did some tests for a project some months ago.

  20. Mod Parent Up by einhverfr · · Score: 5, Informative

    Additionally, even in June, it should be noted that Mozilla has regained substantial marketshare, nearly reversing the losses that the Netscape codebase had suffered since 2002. Way to go.

    Mozilla is doing well in all its forms. The Google figures if you look closely, indicate a general increase of Internet Explorer 6 is mostly at the expense of other versions of IE. Mozilla and "Other" are actually slowly gaining.

    AND this was before the latest security advisories hit.

    AND Netcraft has issued an advisory indicating that banner ads could be used to spread malware.

    --

    LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP