IE7 To Ship With Windows Patches Tomorrow [Not]

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

IE7 To Ship With Windows Patches Tomorrow [Not]

Posted by ryuzaki0 on Monday October 9, 2006 @05:31AM from the ready-or-not dept.

An anonymous reader writes, "Microsoft plans to push out Internet Explorer 7 as a 'high priority update' when it ships security patches tomorrow, according to Washingtonpost.com's Security Fix blog. That means anyone who has Windows configured to download and install patches automagically from Redmond will be greeted with IE7 next time they boot up their machines. In related news, it appears IE's worldwide market share actually increased a couple of points since July, despite a number of high profile zero-day attacks this year." The article notes that the IE7 "containment wall" protected mode will not be available on XP, but only to those who purchase Vista.

Update: 10/09 21:26 GMT by kd : An anonymous reader points to this Microsoft blog posting where it is revealed that the article linked above is incorrect. IE7 will not be pushed tomorrow.

15 of 293 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

WGA? by Honest+Olaf · 2006-10-09 05:35 · Score: 5, Interesting

Formerly IE7 was only available to folks who passed WGA, but Windows Update is available to all. Does this mean that IE7 will be distributed to users with non-genuine XP?
Praise Allah! by drinkypoo · 2006-10-09 05:36 · Score: 4, Interesting

Anything to get people away from IE6, with which we have to use stupid hacks that don't work reliably to get PNGs to display properly. Not to mention all the box model bullshit. Now maybe I'm just not using esoteric enough markup but every page I've designed for Firefox has worked right in IE7... so, BRING ON THE UPGRADE! IE6 is a sad joke from both the security and standards compliance points of view and Microsoft is doing the right thing.

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
1. Re:Praise Allah! by nine-times · 2006-10-09 05:52 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  I'm wondering if it's really an improvement. Can't find them, but a while back there were complaints on /. that IE7 fixed enough things that IE6 hacks won't work anymore, but didn't fix the things that people had used the hacks to fix. I haven't seen this myself (I'm not doing web development these days), but supposedly the result of these "fixes" was that pages that displayed properly in IE6 and Firefox (and maybe other browsers) would not display properly in IE7. Therefore, web developers would have to go back through their sites and figure out how to support standards-compliant browsers, IE6, and IE7.
  Now, I don't want to assert that as fact because, as I've said, I'm not aware of the facts. But I wanted to ask, is this the case? If so, is it still a problem, or have these issues been addressed in more recent builds? Anyone?
Actually, 'Yay!' by Odin_Tiger · 2006-10-09 05:37 · Score: 2, Interesting

Hopefully, it will be weird enough for users to call and ask about it, thus allowing me to weed out the few who are still using IE when they know they're supposed to be using Firefox.

--
Unpleasantries.
Good or bad news for the web developers? by YA_Python_dev · 2006-10-09 05:37 · Score: 4, Interesting

So this is a good or bad news for the web developers (not end users) that want to create useable standards-compliant websites?

--
There's a hidden treasure in Python 3.x: __prepare__()
1. Re:Good or bad news for the web developers? by drinkypoo · 2006-10-09 05:46 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  It's a "bad news" if you want to test in IE6 *and* have a fully patched OS.
  
  Sure, unless perhaps you know what you are doing. Then you can have multiple IEs installed. I have IE5.5, IE6, and IE7 installed on my laptop alongside FF 1.5.whatever so I can do testing. To my right is a dual G5, running safari and ff/mac. IE/mac and Opera aren't even on the radar, the number of visitors using them is statistically insignificant for us. Really that's true of Safari as well but I like to support default web browsers.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
2. Re:Good or bad news for the web developers? by mackyrae · 2006-10-09 06:25 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  It's a good news in that they've taken leaps and bounds as far as standards support. Still not as good as it should be, but at this point I'll take anything.
  
  Except now, the Holly Hack doesn't work, but not all of the positioning stuff was fixed. If they weren't going to fix it all, they could've at least left that container around <html></html> so the * html body p (the Holly Hack) would still work correctly.
  
  Now, if you want your site to work correctly, you need 3 style sheets. One is for all web-standards-compliant browsers. One is for IE < 7, and one is for IE 7. Then, use conditional comments to tell it which to use:
  
  <link href="css.css" type="text/css" rel="stylesheet" />
  
  
  
  
  
  --
  look! it's a bird, it's a plane, it's....a girl? yes, a girl browsing Slashdot on Linux
Containment Wall by TubeSteak · 2006-10-09 05:40 · Score: 3, Interesting

However, one of IE 7's most useful security features, a protected mode -- billed as a "containment wall" to prevent the browser from installing software or changing computer settings without the user's consent -- will not be available for XP users. That feature will be reserved for users who upgrade to Windows Vista, the next version of the operating system, due in January.
Is this "Containment Wall" something that can be hacked into working on XP?

--
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
every time I try firefox, I go back. by krell · 2006-10-09 05:49 · Score: 2, Interesting

I keep going back to the "Bad" one after using Firefox. Reasons including pages that don't display right in Firefox and that nasty "do you want to remember this password?" or whatever pop-up that LACKS a basic "no, and never ever ask me again for ANY site!!!!" option right on the popup. Better yet, it shouldn't ask this in the first place.

--
Where were you when the voynix came?
1. Re:every time I try firefox, I go back. by APLowman · 2006-10-09 06:27 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  You are right. I didn't dig deep in obscure menus to kill this annoyance that (1) should not be the in the first place and (2) should have a turn off option right on the pop-up. I know, it's an old glitch. Netscape has had it going WAYYY.... back.
  
  glitch
  1 : a usually minor malfunction ;
  2 : a minor problem that causes a temporary setback
  3 : a false or spurious electronic signal
  
  I'm not sure how putting options in the "Options" dialog is a "glitch". I'm pretty sure implementing a clean UI free of clutter, rather then including every option possible on every pop-up for lazy/ignorant users, is not a glitch. There is nothing wrong with this feature being on in the first place, since there is nothing to stop you from turning it off or clicking "No". Please keep in mind not everybody cares if their passwords to trivial things are stolen, this feature is great for passwords like that.
Re:Thank God by Mateo_LeFou · 2006-10-09 05:49 · Score: 3, Interesting

I think that the majority of people click on anything that says "Internet" when they want to use the internet. Since MS long ago renamed Explorer "The Internet" (via the start menu) that's what they'll use for the foreseeable future.

--
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
They just need to make our jobs a little harder... by Anonymous Coward · 2006-10-09 06:07 · Score: 1, Interesting

This is a huge PITA for web developers. It's even worse than just IE6. Now somehow we need to do fixes for IE6 AND IE7, since the majority of people will be using either one of those. And you can't even test pages in IE6 and IE7 easily, since MS doesn't let you have both installed at the same time! I don't have IE7 installed because I need to test for the bugs in IE6. Now how am I supposed to do that?
Re:Thank God by thebdj · 2006-10-09 06:08 · Score: 2, Interesting

You aren't kidding. Little story: I was working in mail order at the time, and a gentleman called up in reference to a product the company sold. One of the requirements for the item being sold was that you needed a web browser. The device in question was a GPS system for a laptop, though I am not 100% sure why it needed a browser. Well, this gentleman obviously had a hard time understanding what a web browser was. I even said, "If you are surfing the internet, you have a web browser." The old fool still didn't understand. I mean, it is really sad how these concepts that truly are rather simple just seem to miss many PC users. Hence, why IE becomes the internet. Though, I have managed to switch my siblings off of AIM to gaim. No longer does instant messaging just mean that ad ridden AOL product.

--
"Some days you just can't get rid of a bomb."
Is this Goodbye Non-MS Browsers? by Toreo+asesino · 2006-10-09 06:43 · Score: 2, Interesting

Bearing in mind for the majority of users, when presented with a question - they'll just click "yes" to make it go away, I suspect this is a very under-hand tactic to render non-IE browsers as non-default.

Think about it - a message will pop-up saying "Want to upgrade to the new shiny IE? (y/n)"....one restart later, and the next question will be "Want to make it your default browser? (y/n)".....and just like that, poor Firefox/Opera is sat there collecting dust.

It's funny; I have a good friend working in Microsoft. Apparently, Microsoft aren't worried about Windows being pushed to the side, nor Office, nor any of the "paid" stuff....it's IE and WMP that's getting Microsoft hot under the collar right now. I believe it's starting to show.

--
throw new NoSignatureException();
Re: Fabricated Recommendation? by bunratty · 2006-10-09 06:47 · Score: 2, Interesting

Actually according to Secunia 'they' should be using Opera.
I must have missed that Secunia is recommending users to switch to Opera. Can you point me to where they say that?

--
What a fool believes, he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.