Internet Explorer 7 To Be XP Only

WindozeSux writes "The new Microsoft browser, Internet Explorer 7 will only be available for users of Windows XP. However, due to the fact the that a large amount of Windows users do not own Windows XP, IE7 is expected to boost the amount of Firefox users. From the article: 'Improvements in Firefox, along with IE 7 restrictions, could lead to a dramatic increase in the open-source browser's market share, according to Dotzler.'"

Comments

Skeptical

[SnAzBaZ]

I doubt this will cause a 'dramatic' increase. The kind of people not running XP aren't the kind of people who care about upgrading their browser either. They will probably stick with IE5/6 whatever they are currently using and continue to be oblivious to the options available to them. Those people who are even following IE7 or even care, are the kind of people who are already using Firefox/Opera/etc anyway.

Re:Skeptical

[Coneasfast]

i'm not even sure XP users will upgrade to IE7 manually. people just use whatever comes with their system.

of course, there is the automatic windows update system, which will tell users to upgade, and they will do it.

Re:Skeptical

[alfrin]

of course, there is the automatic windows update system, which will tell users to upgade, and they will do it.
You could put an update called "TROJAN! DON"T INSTALL OMG!!",
along with numerous confirmation messages, and users will still install it.

Yet Another Reason Why...

[Ann Elk]

...making the browser part of the OS is a Bad Idea. If it was "just an app", it could (probably) easily be made to run on Win2K. Since it's in bed with the OS, upgrading the browser now requires an SP-level update to the OS.

Dumb. Very dumb.

Backward compatible

[alienfluid]

MS realized that the last IE as well as the last OS (prior to XP) had some major security problems. Making all software back compatible is only going to make them more susceptible to similar problems. Going forward, and considering the fact that it has been over 5 years since the release of XP, it is thus wise that they are restricting it to XP only. In the IT industry, if you have not upgraded in 5 years (user programs, OS, Apps etc - not mission critical infrastructure), then there's something lacking and left to be desired. The software industry is constantly evolving and so should you. Who here run pre-2.0 kernel on their Linux boxes? I am sure some of you do, but not many.

Re:I love the smell of FUD in the morning

[frodo from middle ea]

why would this open to lawsuits ?

I don't remember anyone suing RH for cutting the support for RH 9.x and before, or not releasing a binary of a new product for the RH platform.

Good news for Windows users!

[SamSeaborn]

This is the kind of approach Microsoft should take more often.

Part of the reasons MS's product releases take so long and are so complex is their obligation to be backwardly compatible with all previous versions. And they've done a great job of it. (I have software that was written in 1994 for Windows 3.1 and it still runs fine on XP.)

Cutting the cord and telling Windows user's they must have XP is tough love, but will likely result in a more stable product and faster maintenance releases.

This approached worked great for Apple when they went to OS X.

Sam

Re:Good news for Windows users!

[ednopantz]

> Urm, except Microsofts software has gotten consistantly less stable, slower and worse security wise as time goes on, and Apple's done the opposite.

Proof? Let's put Win98 next to XP and see which is more stable.

Not good news for the web

[Sv-Manowar]

This isn't good news for the web in general. One of the better things to come from XP was IE 6.0, which brought an improved CSS model to both XP and 2000 at the time. If the improvements in IE 7.0 are restricted to Longhorn only, it could be a very long time before reliance on older methods can begin to fade out. I'd like to believe a lot of the users will move to Firefox, but due to its already high levels of publicity, I'm unsure as to just how much of an unaware market remains for a 'better browser'

Flawed reasoning

[Stormy Henderson]

The predicted mass conversion to Firefox is flawed reasoning. IE 6 users aren't going to say, "Oh my gosh, IE 7 for XP is out! My IE 6 on 98 is now worthless! Oh horrors! I'd better download Firefox pronto!"

They'll just ignore the announcement and keep on using IE 6.0, 5.5, and 5.0, just as they have been for years.

Double Standard

[Deviant]

You can say that the Linux browsers are backward compatible but I would like to see you take modern v ersions of Firefox or KDE and the like and build/install it on a distribution from 1999/2000. Can you imagine the library differences or the effort you would have with upgrading all of the RPMs in a version of RedHat from that era. Now, since you are charged for most of the commercial Linux distros when you are told to upgrade the distro for the sake of getting modern libraries you are in essence being told to upgrade to get a modern browser and modern versions of all of the software. This is totally ok but when MS wants to depricate their OSes in the same way you hear "they are charging $100 for just a browser upgrade." You are not paying just for a browser upgrade but an upgrade to all of the latest versions of everyting in the OS and you are paying for the security and bug fix updates for years and years. MS is a company and they put out a good product in modern windows and office that is worth paying for. I love and I use Linux but I get disgusted occasionally by such bias, double-standards and MS-can-do-no-right additude.

Re:lawsuits?

[Khuffie]

Yes, and? Apple does it. The latest version of Safari RSS isn't available for the previous point release of OS X, let alone a totally new OS. But wait, if it's Apple, no one on slashdot complains, because its not MS.

Re:Mod Parent Up

[Seumas]

Because moderators are idiots.

Every time I'm trying to be funny, Slashdot mods give me a +5, INTERESTING or INSIGHTFUL. Every time I'm trying to be insightful or interesting, they give me a +5, FUNNY.

Nonsense

[RiffRafff]

The software industry is constantly evolving and so should you.

What does a business benefit, if their current software does the job? Is a new version of Word going to suddenly make all of a secretary's documents better? Are their spreadsheets suddenly going to command more attention?

And as far as IE7 is concerned, what will it bring to a business whose intranet is optimized for IE6?

None of these increase cashflow; in fact, they will probably reduce productivity with all the Help Desk calls it'll generate when the new software doesn't look exactly like the old.

Most businesses will get IE7 when they buy new machines, not before.