Microsoft Ends IE on the Mac

ron_ivi writes "Microsoft is to cease IE support for Apple's Mac on Dec 31st of this year." And with this change, every mac on the internet will become even more secure than their Windows based counterparts. CT Deja Vu 'eh? Sorry.

Comments

from the-dupe-dept.

[u2boy_nl]

Posted by Zonk on Sunday December 18, @11:47PM
from the who-needs-ie-anyway dept.

RandomMacUser writes "A while ago, Microsoft stopped updating IE for Mac, freezing it at version 5. But according to this Microsoft webpage, all support will cease December 31, 2005, and any official distribution with cease January 31, 2006. Also, the webpage suggests 'that Macintosh users migrate to more recent web browsing technologies such as Apple's Safari.'"

http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/12/18/ 227225&tid=113&tid=3

Re:from the-dupe-dept.

[Dun Malg]

why must all 12 posters in my example above think that they were the first (and only) person to realize it was a duplicate story?

They don't think that. It's just that since it is a dupe, the actual content has already been extensively commented on elsewhere, leaving nothing but its status as a dupe to talk about. If you want to read about MS discontinuing IE for the Mac, go back to the original article on the subject. The de facto topic under discussion in duped articles always reverts to "dupes and the lazy, unprofessional /. editors who post them".

Re:from the-dupe-dept.

[tomhudson]

Also, when they first saw the story, maybe there were *no* posts?

Lets face it, it takes a few seconds to hit "reply to this", write your "Hey dummy, its a dupe!" and hit submit - especially since the server is probably responding to 50 people doing it all at once - its getting slashduped.

Besides, what did you expect - its Troll Tuesday and the editors want to play too.

Re:from the-dupe-dept.

[Flammon]

Should be:

from the yeah-umm-sorrry-about-that-my-bad dept.

Oh wait, that would be a dupe dept

Sigh

[Anonymous Coward]

So here I am, obsessively refreshing Slashdot, as we do, and what do I see at the top of the page? Ya sure, I've got mod points, no I haven't meta modded lately. What ho, free day pass?

So I see a big blank page, thanky adblock plus, hit the continue to free day pass link, and what I see? Bright red dupe. Oh wait, but this time with trolling in the janitor's comments!

Hotness. So this is what being a Slashdot subscriber is all about? I'm sold.

Re:Sigh

[mkw87]

What was funny for me was that I left work with my browswer open to slashdot, and at the time the last story was yesterdays post of this. I came in, sat down, hit refresh, and virtually the same damn article was still at the top.......I was very confused.

Would you like that article in English?

[eldavojohn]

In case you noticed, the linked article read like a bad translation from Chinese to English. Probably because it was.

If you'd like a better article regarding this, try out this article which is easier and it also contains a relevant quote:

"It is recommended that Macintosh users migrate to more recent web browsing technologies such as Apple's Safari," Microsoft said.

Instead of having to put up with awkward sentences like the following from The People's Daily article:

IE will not be a problem for Apple users because most of them have applied different browsers on their computers.

I hope everyone has "applied" firefox by now.

I'm not going to say anything about this remark:

And with this change, every mac on the internet will become even more secure than their Windows based counterparts.

Other than this is an arguable statement. It's possible that whatever browser has the highest usage rating will have the most virii written for it. If Firefox becomes the dominant browser, it might even be safer to have IE installed on your computer to avoid the latest virus. Yes, a Firefox virus is fixed faster than an IE virus, but it's still a liability.

Re:Would you like that article in English?

[tpgp]

If Firefox becomes the dominant browser, it might even be safer to have IE installed on your computer to avoid the latest virus.

Utter nonsense.

In the context of the article this is doubly nonsense because IE for Mac is discontinued and vulnerabilities for it will never be fixed.

In a wider context, its still nonsense. If you're concerned about security, you use the browser with the more secure architecture - not the one with the least users.

Re:Would you like that article in English?

[tpgp]

Ok, so you're right. There, that's not something you see on a slashdot post very often, is it?

Nope :-) You're obviously a gentleman!

I guess our argument comes down to whether an architecture really is safe. Maybe IE's architecture is just unsafe because the current lines of attack are developed to target its architecture?

No, I think IE's architecture is unsafe therefore lines of attack were developed to target it...

Embedded into the O/S and activeX are a good starting point for things for MS to fix.

As a programmer, I'm fairly bias when I say this but hackers are very resourceful. I do not doubt their abilities to target different applications when it suits them.

True - and I'm sure that Firefox will recieve more hacker attention as it grows more popular (it allready has) - I just don't think that will translate into more exploitable vulnerabilities.

Not secure...

[random_culchie]

And with this change, every mac on the internet will become even more secure than their Windows based counterparts.
Not if they keep using old unsupported software..
Nothing will force them to change from IE. Arguably this makes them even less secure.

Re:Not secure...

[frodo from middle ea]

Just to play the devil's advocate.

How does an insecure application (which I don't doubt IE is ), with no hooks in to the kernel space (unlike IE on windows), make mac insecure ?

For argument sake, if IE/Safari/Opera/Firefox all have same # of vulnerabilities in their mac versions. Will they not be equally secure or insecure ?

This is obviously a strong contrast against IE on windows v/s Opera/Firefox on Windows, as IE seems to work a lot in OS or kernel space.

Re:Not secure...

[cortana]

Well basically it's a myth. No part of IE runs in 'kernel mode'. Unfortunatly it's one of those myths that will be impossible to stamp out.

IE is built in to the OS in the sense that it comes with Windows, and is impossible to remove.

First of all, the 'trident' rendering engine is used by many third party programs, so removing it would break them in the same way that removing a commonly used library would. That is fair enough.

The problem we all have with IE is the fact that you can't remove the front end, iexplore.exe. If you remove it from add/remove programs, it is just marked as being invisible. If you delete it, system file protection puts it right back. If you set an ACL on it denying everyone the permission to execute it, system file protection undoes your change.

If you run it, it asks if it is to become the default browser. Of course, the default answer is yes; so a user who runs it by accident will probably end up unintentionally switching back to IE.

The problem with this is that it's too damn easy to run IE by accident! Programs like mIRC and MSN Messenger hard code IE as their handler for HTTP urls, so when a user clicks on a link from IRC, or picks 'read hotmail inbox' from MSN messenger, IE runs and probably becomes their default browser. ARGH!

Cancelled TWICE?

[JonTurner]

It's bad enough MSFT cancelled it once, but to do it twice, why that's just cruel.

Re:Cancelled TWICE?

[Pope]

Mac IE was so bad, they had to cancel it twice just to be safe!

This just in...

[Billosaur]

Microsoft no longer to support IE for Apple

In a related story, Apple IE users will no longer be supported.

And in business news, Microsoft announced it will discontinue support for IE on the Apple platform.

Thank you and good night.

Re:This just in...

[BushCheney08]

So, anyone know when IE6 for Mac is coming out?

dupes aside

[TedRiot]

I think this might be a good thing for web in general, because sites need to start supporting web browsers in general if they want to keep their mac users instead of assuming that mac users will want to install IE. Not that mac IE ever behaved like its windows counterpart..

Back in 1999 it was a very good browser

[YA_Python_dev]

Everyone please remember that IE/Mac is a very different browser than IE/Win, and back in 1999/2000 it was one of the most standards-compliant browsers around.

According to The Web Standards Project it helped to start the "CSS layout revolution".

Brain-dead comment

[Malc]

"And with this change, every mac on the internet will become even more secure than their Windows based counterparts."

Remove this brain dead inflamatory comment, and there's nothing really left of this story. I hope the person submitting it is proud of themselves. Especially considering this is a dupe of a previous front page story.

Furthermore, this comment is just plain wrong. When Microsoft stops support for IE on the Mac, are they going to remove it from all the Macs that already have it? No of course not, so the security situation will not change immediately. I hope Microsoft will continue to supply security patches, otherwise there is a danger that every Mac on the internet with IE will become less secure over time as exploits are found.

Out of curiousity, just how insecure has IE on the Mac been?

Re:Brain-dead comment

[TeacherOfHeroes]

I hope Microsoft will continue to supply security patches, otherwise there is a danger that every Mac on the internet with IE will become less secure over time as exploits are found.

Unless thats what they want to happen.

Would it be so bad for MS if the public perception of os x as more secure than windows was damaged a little?

suggestion

[lovebyte]

I am a subscriber.
I sent an email to tell it's a dupe 20 minutes before the story appeared to everyone.
I was hoping it mattered.
I am disappointed.

Since during the last duped story someone suggested a way to avoid dupes, let me add my idea:
During the time the story is not yet fully released:
Allow subscribers to post.
Automatically give 5 moderation points to all subscribers and allow moderation.
Editors, please check the subscribers posts before releasing the story to everyone.
If all is ok, remove the subscribers posts and release story.

Re:suggestion

[mopslik]

let me add my idea

Here's an even easier idea that the editors can try out, patent-free:

• Click "Old Stories" to reach the Search Slashdot page.
• Type "IE Mac" into the search bar.
• Behold the power of searching (second result).

Re:suggestion

[sydneyfong]

Only on slashdot would somebody pay for the "priviledge" to do work that editors are supposed to be paid to do.

Meanwhile, CmdrTaco continues playing WoW...

Two corrections here...

[jht]

First of all, this is a dupe from Sunday. Nothing new to see here. Move along. These aren't the droids you're looking for.

Secondly (and more important): IE for the Mac was an entirely different product, with a different codebase and a different rendering engine. While IE for Mac did have an occasional vulnerability (typically patched pretty quickly), it was at the time a more standards-compliant browser than its distant Windows cousin.

Unlike IE for Windows, IE for Mac was simply an application. No low-level stuff, no rendering engine used by the system (like IE Win and, for that matter, Safari/WebKit for the Mac), no ActiveX compatibility, no nothing. Other than the lack of pop-up blocking (which wasn't a common feature in any browser yet), IE was a pretty decent product. Most Mac users used IE, and were pretty happy with it - it had versions for the old Mac OS, and a spiffy Carbonized version for OS X). When Apple announced Safari, though, the writing was on the wall for IE Mac - why keep building a browser that earns no revenue and doesn't even help draw users to other Microsoft products? Just to get a few more MSN pageviews by people too lazy to change their default homepage?

Nah.

Same freaking article title, much worse snarking

[frankie]

Quick refresher course in web history: 5 years down the road, Mac IE is outdated and in desperate need of retirement. But back in 2000, Mac IE5 was far and away the most standards compliant browser available. It had little or nothing to do with Win IE, except that IE6 was later based on Mac IE's rendering engine. It did not support ActiveX, and has no higher security risk than anything from Mozilla and pals.

Sheesh, the very latest article for Jebus' sake!

And Office?

[Ed Avis]

Doesn't Microsoft Office have all sorts of hooks into Internet Explorer? At least on Windows, you need the latest IE for the latest Office, or it installs at the same time, or something like that. What does this say about the future of Office for Mac?

Re:And Office?

[griffindj]

Unlike Safari, MS Office has no "real" counterpart on the mac... as of yet. I say that owning a copy of keynote2 and pages. Unlike IE for the Mac, MS Office for the Mac has a big lead on that market, and I think they will continue to support office well into your mid-life crisis. I use Office 2004 for my mac, and I haven't seen any tie-ins with IE. Although my install disc did come with msn messenger. Luckily uninstalling IE on the mac is a simple drag and drop in the trash can away.

Re:Give 'em a break

[Durandal64]

You're misunderstanding why Internet Explorer causes security problems. Safari is no different from any other Mac OS X application in that it uses frameworks to do its thing. So if there's a security vulnerability in any framework, every application which uses that framework is vulnerable. WebKit is no better off or worse off. It's just a framework for managing HTML connections and rendering HTML content.

This is not analogous to what Microsoft has done with Internet Explorer. Windows Explorer uses the MSHTML DLL to browse the file system, and Microsoft's HTML integration with the file browser runs so deeply that security flaws which would normally only be minor browser irritants become flaws which can execute arbitrary code in the file browser's memory space. Witness the security travesty that is ActiveX. A browser technology laden with security flaws suddenly becomes an operating system-level problem because of ActiveDesktop.

Apple does not use WebKit for the Finder, and the Finder is far less tied into the underlying OS than Windows Explorer is. The Finder has some special features over other applications, but at the end of the day, it's just another application which can be quit if you don't like it without really losing much. In Windows, it's a different story. For example, it's impossible to manipulate the Control Panel without Windows Explorer because that interface is guarded by private APIs. Mac OS X uses a separate application to change system settings.

Two negatives make a positive, correct?

[rolfwind]

So IE work on the Mac must be continuing!

Not again!

[roman_mir]

So let me get this straight. They ended IE support of Mac, then they restarted IE support for Mac and then they ended IE support of Mac all over again and all of this within the course of 2 days? Sneaky bastards!

my IE on Mac support ended

[psbrogna]

when I installed Suse. I'm not exactly all broken up about this.

Sad

[nuremon]

What's sad about this is that I still need to use IE on MAC to make silly things work on Disney's website and a couple other places. I love web standards...

Re:So much for Mac

[WinterSolstice]

I have a similar issue - SAP's NetWeaver Portal is IE only (and actually *is*, for admins). They use all kinds of stupid DOM tricks that simply don't work under firefox, and they don't even use them intelligently. They use it for a stupid right-click menu that shouldn't even have been implemented that way. Hello? Java? The whole thing requires Java 1.4.2_08 or higher anyway.

I'm pissed off about it, and I have opened SAP OSS notes regarding it :)

I do wish there was a way to get firefox to be more 'crapatible' so I didn't have to use IE at all. It's annoying, since most of the admins use Unix here. We have to run an IE session just for this.

-WS

Re:So much for Mac

[CastrTroy]

That's not something you should blame on open source software. You should either blame the developers of the website that only works on IE, or blame it on Microsoft for making a browser that is not standards compliant. In the case where saying firefox can't work with an IE only website, well, that's really not Mozilla's fault. Maybe it's activeX, maybe it's something else. You can't expect Mozilla to copy ActiveX, or some other non-standard technology that microsoft has built into the web browser. And maybe you shouldn't have bought into a solution that relies on some proprietary piece of software. It really sucks that many things require Microsoft products to work, even though we know that they don't need MS to program similar software. The best thing we can do is to stop buying solutions that require things such as IE and MS Office.

IE on Windows

[sbirnie]

If they would only stop supporting IE on Windows - then we'd ALL be safer!

Re:Give 'em a break

[Durandal64]

My point is that IE/Mac is more secure than Safari. IE/MacOSX was a lousy Carbon job so it's not tied into any framework besides Carbon. In much the same way as any malware app on Windows can embed an IE control to download files, ads, rootkits, etc., any Mac app can embed Safari to do the same thing.

So? How is this any different from using the Core Foundation API to do the same things? Any API can be used toward malicious ends. Apple had an API for establishing network connections long before WebKit, but I didn't see anyone whining about that one. Microsoft's error wasn't in including an HTML renderer library as you seem to think. Their error was making low-level OS components reliant on that library. Apple has not made that mistake.

I agree that a WebKit app can do much less damage than an IE/Windows app assuming everyone's system is patched up, since most Windows users run as Administrator all the time, but both Safari and IE/Windows have had flaws that opened up users' systems in unexpected ways.

And the same is true of any library. Security exploits are not exclusive to HTML renderers.

Uninstalling Mac IE

[rjamestaylor]

Luckily uninstalling IE on the mac is a simple drag and drop in the trash can away.

True, and coming from a Windows background this was of particular joy to discover. Amazing what happens when business rules don't get in the way of computer owner preferences. (However, I haven't and wouldn't want to try to remove safari to see if Apple allows it so easily.)

Re:Uninstalling Mac IE

[stewby18]

I haven't and wouldn't want to try to remove safari to see if Apple allows it so easily.

I'll save you the trouble: yes. You'll still have the WebKit framework, since that's an integral part of several other bundled apps and a whole bunch of 3rd-party apps, but Safari itself is trivial to remove.

Dialog at 7:30 in the morning

[Qbertino]

Jules: 'Why did you post that dupe? Again.'

Slashdot Admin: 'What?'

Jules: 'Do I look like I'm stupid?'

Slashdot Admin: 'What?'

Jules: 'Do I look like like someone who needs to be told everything twice?'

Slashdot Admin: 'What?'

Jules: 'Don't you understand what I'm saying? What country are you from?'

Slashdot Admin: 'W...? What?'

Jules: ' "What"? "What" ain't no country I ever heard of. Do they speak english in "What"? '

Slashdot Admin: 'What?'

Jules: ' Say "What" again. SAY "WHAT" AGAIN! I DARE YOU, MOTHERF*CKER, I DOUBLE DARE YOU. '

Vincet: 'How do you read our submitions and the articles posted?'

Slashdot Admin: 'W... w... we ... we don't actually.'

Jules: 'So you think we're stupid?'

Slashdot Admin: 'What?'

*BLAM!* *BLAM!* *BLAM!* *BLAM!* *BLAM!* *BLAM!* *BLAM!*

Re:It makes you think.

[krewemaynard]

You're story didn't get rejected...They're just holding out till Beatles-Beatles submits it.

no big loss

[Wansu]

It ain't like many Mac users were running IE. Heck there's plenty of browsers available for the Mac.

Safari
Firefox
Mozilla
Opera
iCab
Omniweb

to name a few.

I TOLD THEM IT WAS A DUPE!!!!

[FyRE666]

For christ's sake! I'm a subscriber and get to tell these clowns when they're about to post a dupe. So not only does Taco not bother reading any articles posted the previous day, he doesn't even bother reading emails telling the idiot he's about to post a damned dupe! What's the point?!!