Slashdot Mirror
IE7 Released and Available for Download
Luis Escalante writes "After over a year and a half, IE7 has been released to the public as of Monday afternoon. Download it directly here. Word hit the streets after several mangers of the IE division posted on the IE blog."
I've heard nothing but bad things about it
I believe he's referring to a year and a half since IE7's development was announced. According to wikipedia, that's about accurate.
Whoa, now THAT is news. Thanks, I've been waiting years for a SWF player that might actually work and not suck.
Here's to hoping that the audio sync issues have finally been fixed.
You'll be glad to know it's possible to block the automatic update to IE7.
Fortunately, he's not the only one. IE6 comes standard with Win2k SP, WinXP SP2, and Win2k3 server, so it'll be supported (on those platforms) as long as they are. That means if you're using Windows 2000 SP4, IE6 will be supported until 2010. For WinXP SP2, you'll have to look up the date.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Nope, I did. Immediately denied. Why else would I be whining about it?
Wow...I'm usually the last bugger to defend MS, but you can indeed show the menu by right clicking and checking "Menu bar".
Not there by default though.
I must admit, IE7 ain't bad. Still gonna use FF or Flock(for shared bookmarks) for now though.
C:\funpath>ftp ftp.mozilla.org /pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/latest/win32/[IN SERT LOCALIZATION HERE, SLASHBOT]
Connected to manna.mozilla.org.
220 (vsFTPd 2.0.1)
User (manna.mozilla.org:(none)): anonymous
331 Please specify the password.
Password: [anonymous@]
230 Login successful.
ftp> cd
250 Directory successfully changed.
ftp> ls
[IMAGINE LIST OF MOST RECENT VERSION HERE, SLASHBOT]
ftp> get "[FULL NAME OF FILE SLASHBOT IS TRYING TO GET]"
200 PORT command successful. Consider using PASV.
150 Opening BINARY mode data connection for [FULL NAME OF FILE SLASHBOT IS TRYING TO GET] ([SIZE OF SLASHBOT'S FILE] bytes).
226 File send OK.
ftp: [SIZE OF SLASHBOT'S FILE] bytes received in [TIME]Seconds [SPEED]Kbytes/sec.
ftp> bye
221 Goodbye.
C:\funpath>.\firefo~1
Welcome to Mozilla Firefox
Still, the sooner IE6 disappears, the easier things will be.
I don't see IE6 going anywhere anytime soon. IE6 is the end of the line for Windows 98, ME, 2000 and XP pre-sp2. A lot of people are running those operating systems and aren't going to be changing anytime soon. Heck, even IE5 still seems to be clinging onto 3-5% of the market, despite the fact that it's over 5 years old.
locked me down with this software to a specific experience regarding its UI. I cant change the size of icons, nor the position of toolbars etc. Why not MS??
/. main page doesn't render correctly.
The mostly unmovable toolbars is the first thing I noticed. The second thing is that the
It's a mess. Firefox et al have nothing to worry about.
Lurking at the bottom of the gravity well, getting old
Be forewarned that installing this version of IE7 is nothing like installation of RC1.
The 14 MB download seemed a bit large, but acceptable for MS. But I wish it warned me about the time for intallation.
First, the installer started up and did its normal thing. It downloaded updates--kind of odd for something released today--and tried to install extra software. Then I figured things were about done. In grand MS tradition, it required a computer restart--annoying, but I'm used to it from MS.
Then came the real trouble.
During the restart the IE installed hijacked the entire computer for 10 or 15 minutes. I wish it warned me before the restart that this it was going to coninue installing before I could use the computer--then I would have waited to restart until I had time. For 10 minutes the installer reached into the depths of my computer and sold its soul to Microsoft, and that was all before it installed the "Core Componants" of IE7!
Then it forced a computer restart, and then the computer was finally usable by me again (after another little pieces of work by the installer).
On top of all this, the installer never gives any indication as to how far along in the process you are--so you have no idea that it will be another 15 minutes or more while the installer copies the entire contents of your hard drive onto MS servers. I guess I've been spoiled by Opera--2 painless minutes and it's over. Basically; if you really want IE7, do it when you have time. Get dinner or something while its installing.
Just a warning.
Apparently this is no longer the case (though I havent tried it to confirm) and you can actually run it under wine (with a little bit of work).... http://www.tatanka.com.br/ies4linux/news/28
Since MS fixed the "* html" hack and a few others yet forgot to fix the rest of CSS they shit on, we're going to have fun with this one...
'Yes, firefox is indeed greater than women. Can women block pops up for you? No. Can Firefox show you naked women? Yes.'
Most of IE 7 seems to be functionality already found in Firefox, but I do like the new Quick Tabs feature (Ctrl-Q). This shows a mini version of all the tabs currently open and allows you to select one, in a similar way to Expose on OS X.
Agreed. Not much manouverability on the toolbars. The Favourites button, which when clicked opens up your faves as a nested scrollbar, ADDS two more clicks for each Fave. The icons look strangely like they were designer by Amine artists. But the tabbed browsing is okay, and the onboard Google is good, even though I've kept my G-bar for the extra options. Hm. Back to Firefox we go.
Yeah, it's so that when you load up Vista for the first time, your Start menu will be jam-packed with Windows Internet Explorer, Windows Mail, Windows Media Center, Windows Media Player, Windows Live Messenger download, Windows Calendar, Windows Defender, and more.
The marketing group controls Microsoft now, which makes sense since the guy leading it, Ballmer, is a marketing guy. It's the reason we have 14 versions of Vista coming out.
"Sufferin' succotash."
Microsoft uses atdmt webbugs to keep track of the number and location of downloads. atdmt will simply redirect you.
9 DC1-848C-4BF2-8335-86C573AD86D9/IE7-WindowsXP-x86- enu.exe
Ah. Courtesy of elinks, on the server, which bypassess the rubbish-zapping proxy:
http://download.microsoft.com/download/3/8/8/3888
Download to your heart's content, knowing that you won't affect Microsoft's browser count one bit!
Prediction for end of Universe #42: Fencepost error in Quantum_bogosort.cpp
For the best part of last year proeminent webdev figures have adviced people to stop using the * html hack. The better alternative is to make use of the conditional comments supported by all versions of Explorer and conditionally include an extra
Those conditionals allow you to pinpoint various IE versions accurately and also let your website validate properly (since all the IE hacks are included via a stylesheet which is technically commented out).
I'm not giving you links, do your own homework people.
i ate crayons when i was a kid and now i have two braincells and the blue ones taste nicer
Actually, the change isn't as major as I thought. According to an IEBlog article:
:).
"In addition, users will no longer see the so-called Mixed-Content prompt, which read: This page contains both secure and nonsecure items. Do you want to see the nonsecure items? IE7 renders only the secure content and offers the user the opportunity to unblock the nonsecure content using the Information Bar. This is an important change because very few users (or web developers) fully understand the security risks of rendering HTTP-delivered content within a HTTPS page."
So basically, if pages previously displayed the Mixed-Content prompt, now they'll act slightly differently. But there's very few serious corporations or online services that display that error message, so I believe the impact on F5's revenues will be minimal. Oh well, I thought I was on to something
my blog
You probably know this already, but anyone in a similar position should definitely check out ies4linux. IE6 / 5.5 / 5.0 only so far I'm afraid, but it works very well.
http://savingiceland.org
I'll bite...
And yet, Linux continues to be the same impossible-to-use monstrosity it has always been.
My wife and kid do fine with it, thank you very much, and we do a lot more with our computers than most folks I know.
It is truly fascinating how the open source community can stand there like deer in the headlights congratulating themselves on how their most powerful competitor is learning so much from them. Microsoft is now creating open standards, open formats, even open source applications - not one hundred percent of the time, but hey, they're doing it! They're starting to look more and more like us.
You are correct, not 100% of the time. In fact, not even 0.1% of the time. But if they open up at all, that's a good thing. It's not a competition in the traditional sense of snarfing up market. It's a competition to be Free, which is a win-win, always. If they become more Free, good. It's not like Free has to try to be less Free in order to 'compete'.
Hey, wait a minute. Why don't we look more like Microsoft? Where's our readily accessible documentation localised in dozens of languages?
Here.
Where's our toll-free licensing hotline?
Not necessary. We don't compete on their terms! But if you must, this will do...
Where's our reliable and knowledgeable tech support team?
Choose your interface. I like this. BTW, it is very difficult and unwieldy to get MS tech support (human, not website) for the average user. I have never heard anyone say, "Gee, MS tech support is so reliable, knowledgeable, and easy to use!"
Our software assurance subscription that actually sends a disc in the mail when there's an update?
1990 called, they want their software distribution model back!
apt-get update && apt-get upgrade
You know what really bugs me? That last one. I used to pay $4.95 a month for a quarterly package of three major Linux distributions. I liked that. So how come now I only get that from Microsoft?
Apples and oranges. MSDN releases are limited. Linux distributions are free to use as you please.
Honestly, people. Why is Microsoft getting so much better, while *we're* really starting to SUCK?
ROTFLMAO!! We continue to get better all the time, certainly at a faster rate than the 'competition'. I would know, I actually -use- Free software, instead of trolling about it.
And on a more pressing note, just look how much closer those headlights are getting! So how many seconds to *SPLAT*?
There is no splat. Free is pretty tough to make go away.
A house divided against itself cannot stand.
Right here.
The results (Mem Usage/Peak Mem Usage/VM Size):
IE 7: 153/162/130
Fx 2: 96/113/85
It looks like browser users who don't like memory leaks should start complaining about IE 7. Actually, IE 7 didn't even finish the test; the Flash plug-in crashed before it was done. Otherwise, memory use probably would have climbed even higher.
What a fool believes, he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.
You have to validate your copy of Windows. What B.S.! I was about to install it on my test computer here at the office, but since it requires validation before you install it I have the smoking gun I need to push Firefox as the next web browser here at work. Thank you Microsoft. In doing something so wrong, you actually did something right. Cheers!
One day the toilets of the world will rise up... And I'm going to nuke them.
Igor Presnyakov stole my hat
In http://pmt.sourceforge.net/gamma_test/
on a normal PC, the GIF, JPEG, sRGB patches and the unlabeled patches
should match gamma=1/2.2 but they match gamma=1/1.96 instead.
This foils attempts to match images with backgrounds and images in other formats.
The workaround is to remove the gAMA chunk from PNG files while preserving
the sRGB chunk.
... zero
I know that this sounds like a troll, and you can mod it that way if you want, but it did really happen.
I already had RC2 installed on it. I downloaded the exe linked from the article and ran it.
It uninstalled the old IE, rebooted, worked on installing for about five minutes, then rebooted.
After that, it would get to the desktop without the menu bar at the bottom and show errors:
lsass.exe
The application failed to initialize properly. (0xc0000005) Click OK to terminate the application.
It had the same error for services.exe, and show them both twice.
After that, it does nothing.
This is just a warning for people. It screwed up mine, I assumed it was screwing up others, too.
Clearly you are not a sysadmin or a web developer.
For sysadmins you have to decide when to push out IE7 to your great unwashed masses. Are there compatibility problems due to your corporate desktop configuration? You don't want to find out after you push it out to a few hundred or half million machines. It is significant because it breaks apart much of the previous integration, it uses a different security model, and it treats http content in https sessions differently. Making sure everything is going to work correctly in your environment is a big deal.
For web developers, you probably already have IE hacks running rampant through your sites. IE 7 adds another version to deal with. If the CSS handling really is much better, then you'll just need to exclude the many hacks needed for previous IE versions. If it is improved, but still not great, you'll have to tweak all the hacks so that your layout works with yet another partially-compliant IE version. Again, it's a big deal.
IE is part of your Windows system, like it or not. You can say "don't browse the web with IE", but you CAN'T completely avoid it on a Windows system without real difficulties. IE 6 is completely integrated into your system. Hopefully IE 7 is better. In ANY case, a system level upgrade on a functioning Windows box is nothing to take lightly.
Life is short: void the warranty.
Yes.
Eh? The library is already open; the process refers to it using a file handle. Any process that hasn't opened the library yet will use the new one.