Slashdot Mirror
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.'"
This won't happen. Microsoft would be open to so many lawsuits that they would actually notice.
Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
When competition is starting to rise, you don't limit the available platforms, especially when your competitor supports more then you do already.
Wait, what am I saying. Please limit IE7 to no operating systems and save the world the trouble.
Of course this is probably another: Hey corporation running 9x, upgrade!
That is pretty bad when you make a dupe of your own post! lol...Plus, the fact that IE7 would only be for XP and up has been known for quite a while now.
"A truly wise man realizes he knows nothing."
I am soooooo sad, now I can't have an unstable browser on one of several unstable OSes by MS. Maybe I will look for another browser. Perhaps Firefox.
One ring to bind them - should probably have more fiber and less rings in their diet.
And the problem isn't so much the random user moderators with their 5 points or whatever, but the permanent mods who go to posts you make 5 days ago and hit them with -1 or whatever. This is the reason that Plato's Republic would fail.
Actually, anyone still using Windows 2000 are morons. MS will not be issuing any more patches for it, which means when new flaws are discovered in XP, chances are they will apply to 2k as well, making the OS even that much more insecure.
While it might apply less to users behind firewalls, it's still a stupid move. Upgrade to XP, or Switch to Linux or something, just don't continue to use an unsupported OS.
If you need web hosting, you could do worse than here
Now if IE fuckes up a computer, and someone gets pissed off enough, they can sue Microsoft, saying the user PAID money for a product and trusted that product.
I know nobody that has sued Microsoft. But there is some security in knowing it came from a real company.
Or maybe I should write this another way. What if the development group of Mozilla gets together one night for beers. They decide they have had it with freeloaders, they are pissed off, so they will write in some small virus into their software. How many people would get infected before they would know? And if you did get infected, what could you do? You got Mozialla for free.
The prinicple of law I am thinking about is like the following. I have a shed in the backyard. I let you put your lawnmower back there for free. I do something stupid, the shed burns down. The guy who owns the lawnmower is screwed, nothing he can do. But if he pays me money, even only $5 or something small, and I destroy what is his, he can get the value of his property back. I now have a responsibility to care for his property, and that responsibility did not exist before.
This is the world we live in. People have been screwed before, and once it happens (no matter what, girlfriend fucks trusted friend, insurance company denies injury payment, company unjustly fires employee), once it happens nobody wants to be in a position of weakness with respect to the law. It is better to prepare like you will sue.
Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."
"I love and I use Linux"
Bill, what did I just say in my last email?
You're spending way too much time astroturfing.
Even Melinda is complaining. She's afraid you're coming down with OCD like Howard Hughes.
Steve
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
So, sphincter breath, are you going to sign up to get me a FREE PSP?
Using Windows 98 or 95 instead of Windows XP is like using Xenix instead of Fedora Core 3/4 or any other latest modern Linux or BSD distribution. Microsoft should not be making everything eternally backward compatible. People who b*tched endlessly about Windows 3.1 nevertheless did the same about Microsoft dropping 16-bit Win 3.1 compatibility even though they were on Windows 95 Revision B by then.
Would you still use a ten year old version of a Unix variant in your business simply because you didn't want to pay for the upgrade? Would you use a ten year old Linux distro because you didn't want to spend the time on upgrading?
You do what you have to, to be part of the modern technological world. I don't expect vidoes to be published on Betamax, I don't expect music to be published on 8-track, I don't expect the latest and greatest software to be ported to OSes that are the farthest removed from latest and greatest. This would be like trying to publish modern PC games for use with a Trident chipset video card with 1MB RAM. The latest and greatest should work with the contemporary, not the yesterday.
If my grammar and spelling are off, I am [distracted/tired/careless] (take your pick)
and everytime i try to be funny i get "-1, troll", quit complaining, you have it good.
Mike
I heart the RIAA & MPAA, im sure its mutual...