Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Offers Phone Support For IE 7
An anonymous reader writes "The BBC is running a short piece detailing Microsoft's newest step in testing Internet Explorer 7, which just went into Beta 2 yesterday. They're now offering free phone support to U.S., German, and Japanese users who try out the trial software." From the article: "'We believe that IE 7, even at this beta stage, is a significant improvement and we want as many people as possible to try it and use it,' said the browser development team in a post on its blog. 'IE 7 is feature complete and has been through significant compatibility and reliability testing. People (especially technology enthusiasts) will have a good experience with it,' continued the post. Microsoft said the new version addresses some problems affecting banking and news sites. It is also designed to be more secure than the current version, with built-in protection against malicious software and online phishing scams."
built-in protection against malicious software and online phishing scams.
So are they doing away with ActiveX?
I thought the days of Microsoft rushing products in an attempt to maintain market share were over with adoption of the trusted computing model. I guess I was wrong. When I used IE7 last, I found it to be far from completion and could definetly not recommend it to any of my clients or even my friends. I definetly saw some cool features in it, but I do not understand how they can be pushing this as a viable solution for some.
I love to deploy my packages
I was absolutely sure they mean it will contain a skype-like application, voice chat, internet telephony.
Nope. Support by phone will be available. MSIE won't support a phone.
Anagram("United States of America") == "Dine out, taste a Mac, fries"
Customer: Hello MSFT? I can't get IE7 to work
Support: Let's check some basics, Is your computer plugged in?
Customer: yes
Support: Is your computer on?
Customer: yes
Support: Is your monitor on?
Customer: yes
Support: Are you running Windows XP?
Customer: yes
Support: Aha, I think I found your problem.
What's the criterion for inclusion in this scheme? Your mother country has to have invaded another sovereign state? ;-)
I'm really looking forward to a good experience when running Windows Update experience, since that's all I ever use IE for.
The world is made by those who show up for the job.
...that Microsoft is playing catch up these days. It's well aware of the fact that it's lost the confidence of the true "tech-oriented" people and now it hopes to win them back.
What they don't understand is that their business model needs changing. No longer is software that's outdated the moment you release it that has security holes in it left and right that don't have patches going to be tolerated.
We have an open source browser with wide spread web support. I don't care if you have the tabs or not, I'm not going back to find out that you had invested not enough time yet again into security and watching as my box fills with adware.
Let's not forget who is really to blame in this adware thing, and it's MS... Ceasing use of IE has kept my PC free of adware for going on two years now. Don't think I'm going back cuz you made it prettier or add features we already had elsewhere.
Judges and senates have been bought for gold; Esteem and love were never to be sold.
It is good to see that an x64 build is now available with IE7B2.
a ult.mspx (where you can choose your desired poison) as opposed to the one in the stub (which links to the technology overview document).
Shame that as usual the phone support feature is not available in the UK...(not that I really care, FF is fine).
Note that the download link is http://www.microsoft.com/windows/ie/downloads/def
, , , , , karma elon
that we don't start bashing MS for this. Give them credit for beta testing and making sure that the product works and also for providing support to the end-users that try it. This seems like a interesting move on their part and a good effort to make sure that the code they will eventually release is stable. I use many beta products every day and they do not provide me phone support. If gmail craps the bed then I am SOL.
/. trashing this for one reason or another. Just don't bash them later for not testing their code.
I can image that we will see a lot of people here at
- Andrew
I meta-moderate because I care.
Newer windows version needed.
Damn...
some manual cfg required.
That the software can "phone home" more easily?
Of course, MS probably won't have people install Firefox nearly as often as I do...
Slashdot Burying Stories About Slashdot Media Owned
That's what the website says -- released 4/24. Yet I've been using IE7 for a while now, I'm thinking about 6 weeks, and I could have sworn it was Beta 2. In fact, my Help/About box claims that its Beta 2 as well. So is this a rerelease or really version 2.1?
You're special forces then? That's great! I just love your olympics!
Love him or hate him, I found a few interesting things to think about in one of his recent commentaries http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,1952995,00.as p
Summary: MS's biggest problem is IE and they should just dump it.
The world is made by those who show up for the job.
Could this also be a widescale method of finding potential bugs in the software? When someone calls in they can record the problem and see if other callers are getting similar errors. I just hope it doesn't turn out like the last beta boot software which wouldn't let you boot. If Microsoft is providing support, however, it's probably damn stable (compared to other windows apps).
Yes, that's right. You get this lovely tripod with gripping arm, absolutely free with your trial of IE7 Beta. Now, when you are stuck on interminable hold with Microsoft Tech support, you won't have to hold the phone up to your ear -- the Phone Support will do all the work! It frees up your hands so you can send hate mail to Bill Gates while still waiting for the next available tech support specialist.
GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
P.S. Please remember to uninstall any previous IE7 builds before installing this one: Control Panel, Add / Remove Programs, Show Updates, scroll to the bottom.
Yeesh! Really? Why do you have to do that?
Another attempt at copying a Firefox feature into IE7?
Until recently, when installing Firefox on a Windows computer, you had to do the uninstall old version / install new version thing to avoid duplicate - and "dead" - entries in the list of installed software.
http://www.yafla.com/dennisforbes/Why-Internet-Exp lorer-7-Shouldn-t-Matter/Why-Internet-Explorer-7-S houldn-t-Matter.html
Right on the money.
Asside from obvious criticisms, I think this is an interesting move on Microsoft's part. I remember when the browser wars started. I chose the wrong side. I was excited by Windows95. I was excited that it included TCP/IP and a web browser. I didn't know or really even care about compatibility or specs or any of that stuff. I was a relatively new and unwashed user and I loved Microsoft for all the things in Win95.
With IE7, they seem to be attempting to bring some of that newness back, or maybe it's just my own perspective. In any case, I'm not a new or unwashed user any longer and I have real concerns over vulnerabilities and other annoyances. Will ActiveX remain as the most exploitable part of MSIE and any OS that uses it? Will CSS remain 'broken?' (I shouldn't say broken since that word implies accident and gives the impression that it's unintentional. CSS is incompatible and is intentional sabotage on Microsoft's part against the world of compatibility. In spite of all standards agreed upon, Microsoft in all its power and glory is unwilling to be compatible with the rest of the world.)
I think the borge icon doesn't reflect the level of evil Microsoft has obtained.
Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
Until recently, when installing Firefox on a Windows computer, you had to do the uninstall old version / install new version thing to avoid duplicate - and "dead" - entries in the list of installed software.
Depends what you mean by recently.
this blog says the issue you're complaining about was fixed over a year ago
There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
...that Microsoft is playing catch up these days.
:P
You mean, like, the 31 last years ?
Well, they don't when they can afford not to...
I have discovered a truly marvelous proof of killer sig, which this margin is too narrow to contain.
"Hello, welcome to Microsoft Internet Explorer Seven phone support..."
"Press 1 to be told to reboot, press 2 to be told to reinstall IE7, press 3 to be told to reinstall the OS, press 4 to be told to apply next month's patches to the OS, press 5 to be told to contact the website's administrator for writing non-IE7 compliant HTML, press 8 to purchase Microsoft malware protection services..."
Remain calm! All is well!
I'm not a web professional, but I've been given the job of designing a small website for my employers, and IE's crappy CSS support has caused me a world of hurt.I was going to ask whether anything has been done about fixing it, but an earlier post regarding the Acid 2 test has pretty much answered that. (It's a wish list? Well, yeah, but if Konqueror and Safari can grant those wishes, why not IE?)
I suppose the most we can hope for with IE7 is that it stays broken in the same ways as previous versions, so we don't have to learn a whole new raft of ugly hacks just to a get a page to look presentable.
on linux? :(
./IE7BETA2-WindowsXP-x86-enu.exe
Apparently it doesn't even install
$./IE7BETA2-WindowsXP-x86-enu.exe
run-detectors: unable to find an interpreter for
Should I run the installer as root?
"IE 7 is feature complete" Is this in the same way that Vista is now "feature complete"? Yeah right.
//Yeesh! Really? Why do you have to do that?//
... maybe because it's BETA SOFTWARE?
/. today.
Ummm
"Duh" quotient is up on
Frammin' on the jim-jam, frippin' at the krotz!
Anyone else catch the line:
:-)
Supported Operating Systems: Windows 2000; Windows 95; Windows 98; Windows ME; Windows XP.
I guess there is hope for those that don't want to upgrade their Pentium/133 systems.
Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
No it does NOT prevent phishing scams, but actually IE actually makes various online hosting providers' anti-phishing filters useless. If someone hosts a text (yeah, .txt) file with HTML, *only* IE renders it as an HTML page.
One of my friends who was drowsy late night after cramming for exams, got phished!!! All fault of IE and partially his (being too drowsy!)... by this site : http://newphotosfamyli.bravehost.com/link2.txt
(Yeah, the site is still up after being reported to concerned people! If someone knows this fellow please punch him in the gut for me, thanks!).
More details and comparison of how Opera, Firefox and IE handle this phishing site are in my blog : http://blog.mritunjai.com/2006/04/23/gone-phishing /
- mritunjai
"Hello, this is Dogbert's Internet Explorer 7 Helpdesk. How may I destroy you?"
"Please hold while I disconnect, erm, redirect you to the appropriate expert. Sucker!"
Wow, I'd forgotten how lame installing and un-installing software in Windows is. If I want the latest developer version of Safari (or any program, for that matter), I just drag it to my Applications folder.
He who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.
That it's a significant improvement to IE 6. What I don't quite get is why it should be a significant improvement to the competition; specifically Opera & Firefox.
ich bin der musikant
mit taschenrechner in der hand
kraftwerk
Microsoft has decided to offer free phone support for Calculator and Solitair.
hilarious
Stuff like page transitions, HTML TIME, their own proprietary tags for fancy text shadows, blur and gradiants. I realize a few rare people might use those but I think they could just use open standards instead. So many other programs out their depreciate things over time, why cant they? Thats how Firefox (phoenix) became the lightweight champ it is, it dropped a lot of the bloat Mozilla had.
Ummm ... maybe because it's BETA SOFTWARE?
Errr, right, but I've used loads of BETA SOFTWARE and never had to uninstall the previous beta before installing the new version, I just went right ahead & installed it over the previous version.
What makes IE 7 special? It's not just because it's BETA SOFTWARE (I presume the capitalizion is important for you for some reason)
Surely MS's install / uninstall software is mature enough by now - even if IE 7 is BETA SOFTWARE.
There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
nt
I for one welcome our new XHTML/CSS rendering overlords.
[Insert pithy quote here]
P.S. Please remember to uninstall any previous IE7 builds before installing this one: Control Panel, Add / Remove Programs, Show Updates, scroll to the bottom.
Yeesh! Really? Why do you have to do that?If you use Crossover Office under Linux you can have as many different versions of IE as you want.
Who wants an Internet phone toy that only manages to connect you
to TWO other countries (with no choice of which ones), anyway?!?
Skype is -my- friend, here!
Not perfect, but it does all that I want done in the VoIP dep't.
What about you? Do you think MS will ever catch-up in VoIP?
I like that companies try new things, but really do we need Microsoft focusing on some integration of some phone support in a browser?
I think too many software companies still have the philosophy that more is better. In reality we just want the tool to work right the first time and be secure. I think Microsoft should focus all its effort on producing a fast totally secure web browser first. Then when that is done create a API in which you add-on features you want (which will not break nor leave the original funtionality open to bugs or hacks). Quit screwing around by rewriting code and adding more crap to programs that only a few people might use. Secure the program and give people the option to add it later.
Quality Hosting e3 Servers
I decided I would try it out. The installer asked me if it could validate my copy of Windows is genuine. That's when I exited the installer. I don't mean to turn this into an anti-Microsoft rant, but for fuck's sake Microsoft, don't treat me like a fucking criminal. Yes, my copy of Windows if valid (academic site license). No, I shouldn't have to prove that to you. It's a fucking browser. It shouldn't be tied to the OS. Either way, I shoulnd't have to prove anything to you just because "I have nothing to worry about."
It's bullshit like this that really makes me doubt Microsoft's intentions here. I'm sure the developers are serious about improving their product, but I'll never know that because management keeps mandating dirty tricks like this.
Hmm, I just did the acid2 test in both MSIE 7 and Firefox. NEITHER passed it. MS's background is red with a vague happy face shape over on the left side, and although firefox doesn't have the background the image is still all discombobulated.
I've been running beta2 for months now and it actually seems to work better than the previous versions by a long shot. Not nearly as many problems with loading content that has traditionally given IE problems.
The tabbed browsing has a few advantages over firefox's and a few features are yet missing that firefox's tabbed browsing had from it's earliest incarnation. Of course beta 1 of firefox was based off of a heavily tested and proven codebase, and much of IE7 has been a complete rewrite.
It would be nice to right click and "open in new tab" now and then, a feature that is glaringly absent. However I do like the new layout, it took me a while to get used to the fact that the standard button layout was gone, and there was nothing I could do about it, but once I got used to it, it worked well, probably more efficient than my previous surfing experiences. However, there should be an option to use the standard web controls that people have used since the stone age of the world wide web, as my wife, being a neophyte, hates it, and refuses to get used to it. And she cant use firefox on her web applications her work provides because firefox doesn't like cold fusion, so she sort of has to. It would be nice if she could use the familiar interface.
It also seems to load pages much faster than previous versions of IE, and dare I say it *gasp* firefox. One of the first things I tested, out of curiosity. Of course these tests were not scientifically conducted, and results can changed based on connection, and host bandwidth, client bandwidth, etc. etc. but it's competetive in that area.
Prior to downloading the beta, I was getting sick of firefox, and hadn't been having a very good experience with it for a while. Probably because of an extension I loaded or something else completely unrelated to the sacred browser itself, but it seemed to be a resource hog. I have heard there were fixes, and I applied them, but my browsing experience continued to suck. And I was considering buying opera. I figured I'd try ie7 before I went that route since I was considering a change anyway, and so far, nothing has been bad enough to chase me off. I'll continue testing it. However I'll probably still buy opera if they don't add a few features and refine a few they don't already have.
And to the guys at MS, why not make it acid2 compliant? While your at the drawing board, might as well just make the necessary adjustments. One less thing to be critisized over at least, and I doubt it would require huge amounts of sweeping changes.
... what did you expect, something profound?
Depends what you mean by recently.
this blog says the issue you're complaining about was fixed over a year ago
That is recently, comparing to my Phoenix/Firebird/Firefox usage history.
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/41597000/jpg /_41597894_gates_getty300.jpg
Opera is free! You don't have to buy it.
You do know that Opera's free, right? It has been for months. I personally use Firefox, but I'd encourage you to try Opera. It's been fine with Cold Fusion since v6
So, you are saying that you probably messed up Firefox by loading one extension or the other, imply that you have no idea what it was, and then turn around and claim that IE7 renders pages quicker in pristine form?
You're right. It wasn't scientifically conducted, even if you ignore the variables of your net connection. Not knowing exactly what you were testing with Firefox, etc., and then comparing it to a new install of another browser is outside of common sense.
However, the fact that you were honest about that (unlike certain marketing people in Redmond, WA ever will be) makes it an interesting comparison.
That is recently, comparing to my Phoenix/Firebird/Firefox usage history.
Since it was fixed in 1.0.3, which came out not long after 1.0 (a hair over 5 months), then you're complaining about it being busted in beta versions as well? Are you serious?
Yes, it should've been fixed in 1.0 release, but that doesn't make your statement any less silly.
You you focus on reading the F-ing article. Yes, yes, that's a tall order, but in the time it took you to post your completely off-topic and obviously ignorant reply, you could have read the article and saved yourself from looking like a moron.
all the anti-IE/MS thoughts aside (you slashdot wankers never seem to ease up on that... its like each one of you (think that you) have something new to add to the WE HATE IE "war" each time you post)...
isnt phone support a little too 80s ?
any software (and definately any web software) that i have a problem with has never and will never result in me picking up a phone... particularly something as wide spread as internet explorer. websites, forums, email, live chat, etc are not only more convenient for both the end user and the staff on the other end... but they also rely on the user STAYING IN FRONT OF THE COMPUTER when the techie on the other end is actually talking them through a problem. not everyone has a phone next to their computer (i know i dont), and a company with as many customers as MS is not one i'd like to call on my cell phone at cell phone rates whilst i sit in a queue
just what are they hoping to achieve by offering support in a form that makes it the least convenient/effective possible?
It seems that they're really pulling off the "still no CSS" stunt. Too bad. Also, IE7 still tries to download properly served XHTML. What a failure.
Fight hunger. Filet a politician and send him to a 3rd world country of your choice.
//Errr, right, but I've used loads of BETA SOFTWARE and never had to uninstall the previous beta before installing the new version, I just went right ahead & installed it over the previous version.//
... uninstalling takes about 90 seconds on my three-year-old laptop. Your time must be extremely valuable, if that's too long for you.
Errr, right, but I've used loads of BETA SOFTWARE and have had to uninstall the previoius beta before installing the new version.
I've probably done this two dozen times over the past few years. Not unusual at all, in software development cycles. It's BETA SOFTWARE (in caps, to help you realize that's not the final product) and you should expect it to have some inconvenient usage requirements.
And really
Frammin' on the jim-jam, frippin' at the krotz!
You were using the Beta 2 Preview. The real Beta 2 was only just released last night (http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2006/04/24/58254 6.aspx).
a secure browser? o_O -- Bridget
It would be nice to right click and "open in new tab" now and then, a feature that is glaringly absent.
Really? Safari on the Mac has that feature.
Oh, that's right. Windows only uses one mouse button, unlike Macs. Silly me!
...not Beta 2 (as in TWO).
Story here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12477036/
So, what's the truth? Beta 2 or Beta 3?
Dedicated Linux servers (root access) $45 p.M.
Second, I usually get better speed out of IE6 than I do from my fully extension-loaded Firefox. That's easily explained though: it does less work. It cheats on speed by rendering pages incorrectly, cheats on memory usage by sharing much of its code with the OS, and has way less features than I get from extensioned FF. However, even a brand new install of FF already does more than IE and performs almost as well, even despite IE's aforementioned "cheating".
Think of IE as a "lite" browser and it makes sense - less features* with slightly more speed.
Last, "Firefox doesn't like ColdFusion" can easily be reversed to mean "ColdFusion doesn't like Firefox". Assuming you're correct in that they have some incompatibilities (no experience, myself), I'm betting CF was developed specifically for IE and does things contrary to standards, and FF can't figure out what it wants.
*features like security, HTML rendering quality, CSS capabilities, customizability, etc.
I remember there being phone support in IE5. This one time I was browsing some foreign sites to meet beautiful ladies, and my IE had a warning pop-up that said I needed to be authenticated to proceed. My modem started to dial and mere minutes later, I was finally viewing the pictures and movies that I had wanted to access in the first place.
Sure, this "phone support" was expensive, since I got a $89.22 phone bill for a three-minute call to Bulgaria a month later, but all in all everyone had a great time.
Small potatoes make the steak look bigger.
It would be nice to right click and "open in new tab" now and then, a feature that is glaringly absent.
You mean missing in IE7b2? It's not, it's right there between 'Open' and 'Open in New Window'. Even if you're using a IE control host that doesn't understand 'Open in New Tab' then it's still there just greyed out.
And you can also ctrl-click a link to open it in a new tab.
Sweet, I'll check it out. I did not know that. Perhaps it will be the best of both worlds.
... what did you expect, something profound?
So does it mean I can make free phone calls from IE like Skype does?
The only numbers at Microsoft that they actually answer are the sales and piracy hot lines.
01/20/09
Hello? Yes, i'd like some help with my browser please. Yes, well it appears i've caught a virus through it. Right. Right. Patch released next cycle? Some time next month? Great! You've been very helpful.
You feel sleepy. Close your eyes. The opinions stated above are yours. You cannot imagine why you ever felt otherwise.
Customer: I can't get to internet ... number of Q-s and A-s
Support: How come?
Support: It seems your system has been infected with (insert)some malicious software(/insert). Please press start, then programs, then click Microsoft UpdateByPhone.
Customer: Ok, done
Support: Now, type in the patch: 0110001011011001001...
Support (several hours later): Ok, we're done, now reboot your computer.
If Beta 3 is out, that usually means Beta 2 is out. Geez, stop worrying...
Opera is not Free. It may not cost you money, but it costs you some of your liberty. Until Opera comes with the source code, I'm sticking with Konqueror.
Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
Beta 2 or Beta 3?
Beta 2. Why don't you RTFA?
I develop web apps every day, and the variable browser support for CSS has generally been a huge pain for me, since I develop on Linux/Firefox, and need to test in Windows/IE, Firefox, Safari, etc. I installed IE7 on its own virtual machine (seems like a huge deal to have it live nicely with IE6), and am pleasantly surprised. Not only does it look and act more like firefox/safari/galeon/etc, it's rendering is more in line with other browsers as well. From initial testing, CSS support in IE7 is a great improvement. Little niceties like tr:hover now work, and the inheritance of characteristics is much more consistent. So, out of the box, it renders exactly the same as Firefox and other browsers on the pages I've tried so far. Though I have yet to get into much of the positional CSS, which will probably be more of an issue. Has anyone worked with this in any depth? Previously, very poor IE support for positional CSS, and to a much lesser extent with Safari, led me to abandon reworkings of some web apps to move from tables to completely CSS-based designs. I suppose the most we can hope for with IE7 is that it stays broken in the same ways as previous versions, so we don't have to learn a whole new raft of ugly hacks just to a get a page to look presentable. Not really. I'd say the most we can hope for is that it fixes itself. I have as strong a dislike of Microsoft as anyone, but I'm so tired of getting angry at IE and having to do all the extra work to claim cross-browser compatibility. Let's recognize an improvement when it's made--even though it's really just doing what it should in the first place. If it makes our lives a little easier on the web dev side, then I'm happy.
No, actually I'm saying that I was running firefox, with google preview, and the google toolbar with pagerank, and let me see, I think I had a weather extension that loaded in the status bar. I may have had one more in there, but I don't remember for sure, as it's been a while since I ran it.
,ie7 and opera on them, compare the features of the "pristine" browsers, and post benchmarks of the entire process.... or I could leave that up to someone who's job it is to do so, and have a beer instead....
In IE I was running stumble upon, and the new google toolbar beta, which I love due to it's bookmarks feature.
At any rate, it was not an even comparison, and I did make that disclaimer. Thank you for taking note of it..
I'm sorry if I offended you by being honest about my browsing experiences, next time I'll buy three brand new machines, install windows on them patch em up, then put naked versions of firefox
Oh look, it's miller time.
... what did you expect, something profound?
This is a bit off topic but I just noticed that the IE addons page was rooted earlier today Maybe Microsoft should start focusing on their web server security before they worry about web BROWSER security especially before linking the site to the support page for IE7.
I kept hearing blue screams of death.
regarding IE7 and its "usability", found this interesting: IE 7b2, a UI report
oooOOOOOoooo, the whole thing is the worm... /obscure
... what did you expect, something profound?
This is a troll, so you may want to mark it as such, but IMHO the BBC is to technology reviews as gardening magazines are to motor vehicles: The BBC knows only one operating system, and that is Windows, and one software company, and that is Microsoft. When the BBC writes about any computing article, it's usually from the point of view of a Microsoft press release, and their articles on any other piece of computing or technology is usually very suspicious and highly critical.
To be fair, I don't think they are really trolling for MS. I think they simply ask the same reporters to write articles on computing that they ask to write articles on the Queen's birthday.
Mod this down if needed, but think about it, please.
MS Support: How may i help you ?
IE 7 User: Wheeeeeeee......
MS Support: Sir... ?
IE 7 User: Wheeeeeeee......
Firefox: Shut uppp!!
MS Support: Sir, please refrain from using IE and go see a doctor.
http://www.firefoxflicks.com/flick/?id=19542
I don't want a signature.
I can't believe what I've been reading here. I don't like IE/windows anymore than the next poster, but give microsoft some credit for actually providing phone support for their pre-release software. This is very simple: it's beta software and you don't have to install it if you don't want to. It's beta software and because it's beta software, MS can put any OS validation scheme they want because they aren't forcing IE7 on users. Of course, they can do it regardless anyway. At this point, what ever they want to do is completely fine. At this point, we don't know what features will be in the final release. Is it safe to assume that the validation scheme will be in the final release? Probably. For now, we have to give them the benifit of the doubt. If the final release does have it, that's when you start giving them hell for it. Hell, the final release could still be beta software but the fact is that we just don't know. I may not be optimistic about vista but since I haven't used it, I don't think that I can say that it's good or bad.
--- Don't ever trust a woman until she's dead- B.B. King
And she cant use firefox on her web applications her work provides because firefox doesn't like cold fusion, so she sort of has to.
ColdFusion is a web programming language just like ASP, JSP, PHP, etc. It produces HTML just like any other language. There is no such a thing as a web browser that "doesn't like" an application programming language - the browser never sees the language, it sees the resultant HTML.
I am the Web Services Manager for Lightyear - http://www.lightyear.net/ - all code ColdFusion, all code written in Firefox first then bugfixed for IE.
What I don't get is why this beta version of MSIE does not install as an independent program that still leaves the previous MSIE version accessible.
.local version of MSIE 7, and it runs, but it fails in some small but critical areas (like the evaluation of [if lt IE 7] conditional comments). It should be possible to compile a version that can be used for a betatest and does not disturb the installed browser.
Who wants to try a beta test program that completely wipes (or better: hides) the stable version?
How are we supposed to check websites, modify them to work on MSIE 7, and still test for compatability with MSIE 6?
It is not like it is completely impossible. You can quite easily install a
Maybe the reason for offering phone support is the large number of users that would not install a beta version over a stable version when it is unsupported?
"It is also designed to be more secure than the current version, with built-in protection against malicious software and online phishing scams."
(sarcasm)
So, then, how did they manage to stop people (esp PEBKAC) from using it?
(/sarcasm)
uR iGn0ranc3, Their Power
Remember, as MicroSoft says, "the software should not be used in mission-critical environments".
.. paranoid crackpot leftover from the days of Amiga.
I'll put a comment on the bottom of my website:
"This page is designed with standards in mind, and fully meets the w3c specs. If this page looks bad in Internet Explorer, please call Microsoft tech support and express your concerns, since it is a problem with their rendering engine."
That should be fun!
I called their support line to check on a very simple matter, but the person I spoke to, (granted, this could be a unique occurrence, but I doubt it), politely told me that Microsoft does not give phone support for Betas.
I, in turn, politely pointed out that their IE7 Beta 2 Support site, *specifically* states that consumers, (English speaking ones, in the U.S.), should call in for support if they had any problems or questions.
I don't think this particular Microsoft representative believed me.
I ended the conversation by suggesting that they ought to check on the site itself and correct it, if they didn't want unsuspecting consumers calling them about non-existant support.
Wikipedia:
"it's not about aptitude, it's the way you're viewed" - Galinda
"Extension and content-type/MIME should matter for filtering."
:-)
FYI and FWIW, the thing that HTTP User Agents are *supposed* to look at is the Content-Type header. URLs say nothing about "files" or "extensions"; the fact that a URL ends in a period followed by three characters should not be considered significant. Sure, Apache and IIS use files and directories, but there isn't anything in the specs about that.
The link you posted comes up with "text/plain" in the header, so it should be treated as text. (If the link came up with a "text/html" header, it should be treated as HTML, regardless of the ".txt" extension on the end. (Of course, most web servers just use the extension to pick which Content-type to send, but again, that's an implementation detail, and not something the client should care about.))
Now, of course, Microsoft Internet Explorer *does* ignore both Content-type and apparent file extension (depending on version and configuration). MSIE attempts to detect the content type based on looking at the file contents. Which can be very bad, as you note. Another very poorly thought out "feature" from Microsoft.
FYI, you can fix this behavior on some versions of Internet Explorer. Tools -> Internet Options -> Security -> pick a zone -> Custom Level -> Miscellaneous -> Open files based on content, not file extension. Set to "Disabled". Repeat for other zones, as needed.
The "file extension" and "content" phrasing in that option is misleading. When Microsoft says "file extension", they really mean "Content-Type header"; when they say "content", they really mean "MSIE analysis of content".
I prefer to use Firefox.
dragonhawk@iname.microsoft.com
I do not like Microsoft. Remove them from my email address.
Since it was fixed in 1.0.3, which came out not long after 1.0 (a hair over 5 months), then you're complaining
Where did you see me complaining?
I was actually trying to waste karma by making a funny comment regarding the possible cause for the need to uninstall old IE7 betas before installing: Yet another attempt at copying Firefox features into IE7. Who cares how long that feature existed in Firefox?
about it being busted in beta versions as well?
Now, that is a really funny question.
First: We are comparing to a IE7 beta, aren't we? Beta to beta, apples to apples, seems reasonable to me.
Second: Have you ever seen 1.0 versions of Phoenix/Firebird which I mentioned as part of my usage history? No? Huh, I really guess some beta versions were included then.
You will be assimilated.
How about the KB912812 blunder? Luckily I only approved that patch for a small test group, but needless to say it either breaks or changes the way ALL of our web apps behave.
The fact is that you just can't continually get developers to buy into ActiveX and then break everything. Sooner or later people are going to get sick of this shit and look elsewhere for develpment environments. Microsoft just doesn't seem to understand that even the smallest change like KB912812 can cause a LOT of man hours in code re-writing. Also if you're dependent on third party apps that use ActiveX like we are, you get stuck waiting for them to update their code before you can run some security updates.
Sure, there is a compatibility patch, but it's not permanent. The patch will only function for x amount of time, then ActiveX reverts back to being broken.
We have a corporate culture that depends heavily on surfing the web for information. Internet Explorer security updates are a MUST for us if we want to avoid viruses and spyware. Sure we run anti-virus and anti-spyware, but it's not always enough if the user consciously clicks yes to install the malware.
This isn't the first time this has happened. I spent a ton of time writing some admin scripts that add printers, map network drives, etc. to automate some tedious parts of my job. Basically the users could go to a web page and click on the printer or drive they want, and it did other similar stuff. Then a security patch for IE 5.5 broke all of that. Sure it wasn't safe to begin with, but why didn't MS either find a way to make it safe or do a better job notifying people that ActiveX changes would break some apps?
I think Microsoft has a HORRIBLE practice of using it's developers and customers to 'test the waters'. They use all of these wonderful features as a selling point, then disable or change most of them for security or legal reasons.
As the guy who has to deal with this patch drama, I prefer less features to flaky half baked features that will be removed or changed.
BOO MICROSOFT!!!
Sony never learned from Betamax and tried to foist the infernal memory stick on us, now it has finally relented and supports MMC & SD. Not only it wasted money in tooling and development of the memory stick, it has to continue to spend extra to support two memory interfaces in its products.
Today it looks like, the cause for open document formats, open APIs and open standards is doomed and is continually sabotaged by the evil empire de jour, that happens to be Microsoft. But such high margin islands dont survive.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact