Slashdot Mirror
IE7 Released As High-Priority Update
jimbojw writes, "Internet Explorer 7 was finally released this morning and is available via automatic update or download from Microsoft." And an anonymous reader notes stats on IE7 and FF2 downloads, adding: "Looks like FF2 is already outnumbering FF 1.5, while IE7 is having a hard time to find followers. Will today's release as a high-priority, force-fed update fix this issue?" The sans.org stats site will be updated throughout the day, so perhaps we'll get an indication.
Work that monopoly ... yeahhhhhh you like that dont you .. yeahhhhhhh whos your daddy
Installed smoothly, reassigned without giving a choice file types to IE, e.g. xml's
I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
Uh... did you even read the article headline?
I've heard of people not reading the article or even the article summary, but at least read the headline...
Registered Linux user #421033
Will today's release as a high-priority, force-fed update fix this issue?
Yes of course it will. Why would the majority of Windows users go out and manually download a web browser? For most of them IE works just fine. When IE7 comes in they will just consider it another one of Windows quirks and happily chug along with it.
Seriously. Of course the Firefox users jumped on the bandwagon and downloaded 2.0 (which is buggy and crash-prone, glad I'm still using 1.5 at work because my home browser is barely useable). If you've gone to the effort of getting a replacement browser you're obviously more up on what's available.
So tens of millions of users didn't swarm to download IE7 as soon as it was available. Seeing as I never once saw a major news report on it, the majority of users don't read technology news, and even most of the users who do don't care what browser they use so long as it works, why is the summary written as if there's a problem that the masses didn't mindlessly rush out and downloaded the latest shiny package from Microsoft?
I find the "forced" update (which isn't really forced) a little worrying, though. It should *at least* pop up a window saying that a new version of IE has been downloaded and is ready to install if the user wants it. It's a pretty major UI shift, people should be made aware of it. Blindsiding them with that isn't going to win MS any fans.
120 characters for a sig? That's bloody useless.
Yes. People on drugs were downloading IE7 voluntarily, now Microsoft release it for real, forcing people to upgrade.
I *want* people to upgrade to IE7. I don't care if they're using IE7 or Firefox. I just want to be able to write sane CSS.
In my company we have at least two programs whose functionality is broken when IE7 is installed, due to menus written using IE6's renderer. Even some of Microsoft's own software -- e.g. the file transfer function in their Xbox 360 DDK -- breaks when IE7 is installed. Pushing this major upgrade as a forced update is irresponsible. This isn't what the Automatic Update system is supposed to be for.
And even when nothing breaks, I suspect a lot of users are going to be pissed that their web browser interface has suddenly changed.
As if anyone with a windows box has a choice in the matter.
You'd rather people stayed with the old, proven-insecure IE6? Besides, what part of it being a high-priority download forces people to use it, rather than FF or Opera? Remember - total number of downloads and total number of users are not the same thing...
It's official. Most of you are morons.
Microsoft says they've taken steps aimed at the root causes of IE security problems, as in doing a real redesign.
It's not exactly sandboxed, but it has to ask permission from a "request broker" before changing anything in the rest of the system, and the request broker is smaller, more auditable, and not handling malicious input all the time. Troublesome features like installing Browser Help Objects are off by default.
If we're lucky this could be like IIS 6. If we're not lucky, it should still be better than the malware installation engine everyone's running now.
Don't expect your friends and relatives to report fewer malware installations, though. The bad guys will just shift to a different infection vector if IE7 lives up to its promises.
For isc.sans.org (which is probably not your typical site), 50% of Firefox users already use Firefox 2.0, and 23% of Internet Explorer users use MSIE 7.0. Overall, we got about a 50/50 split between Firefox and Internet Explorer users.
The stats on the site don't say much at all about the uptake of IE7 (or FF2, for that matter) among the general internet-using population. As you can see in the quote, the article doesn't make any pretensions that they do, either, noting that sans.org isn't a typical site.
Which is obvious, given the breakdown of FF vs IE users. A 50/50 split is obviously not a representative sample.
The second half of this blurb is blatantly misleading.
Reality has a conservative bias: it conserves mass, energy, momentum...
You have a choice, you just have to know how to exercise it.
My company has already said we should not take IE7 since it's not compatible with some of our stuff.
You know how you do this? Instead of using the (stupid) Express Install for updates which says "install everything", and instead of setting up auto updates to grab and install everything, you use the Custom Install, and deselect the change for IE7.
It aint that difficult. I won't be installing it on either my home or work machines for the time being.
Believe it or not, you can choose not to take this 'high-priority' update. I never just blindly install what the auto-updates thinks I should be a good boy and fetch. I look at it. =)
Cheers
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Now more than ever the browser is an application platform. Microsoft has had the vast majority of the market share in that department leading to a practically guaranteed torrent of revenue. If non-microsoft browsers gain enough market share, application developers will tend towards adding support for the new platform. That would force Microsoft to spend more money on development in order to stay competitive (no more 5 year release schedule). That would lead to a significant drop in Microsoft's profit margins.
In other news, Google's market share in the web search business has plummeted, while MSN search rose to be the most used search engine.
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
Oooh, how many lines of Perl can you write a Bayesian filter in? :P
'Yes, firefox is indeed greater than women. Can women block pops up for you? No. Can Firefox show you naked women? Yes.'
you're a [i]douchebag[/i] I have firefox 1.5.0.7 on my windows install at home which i rarely use. I tried my hardest but it kept telling me there were no updates. Therefore, my friend, you're a liar. You were NOT forced to get 2.0. Go troll somewhere else
Mozilla has not yet pushed 2.0 out via auto-update, and even when they do, it will ask permission.
Throw the bums out!
Good luck. IE7 fixes enough CSS to make it not work with the old IE 6 hacks but not enough to allow you to use one sane standard CSS template. Sorry.
Seeing as how I use this machine primarily for gaming, I use windows XP Home.
When it was announced that IE7 was available for download, I did so. It installed well, transferred all my previous IE6 settings/preferences without fail and, in general, performed reasonably well. As with any new product it does have some aspects I am not too happy about. My biggest gripe is the delays in loading pages the "Phishing filter" causes. I got to the point that I was disabling it when viewing pages that I already trusted.
Not long after, Firefox 2.0 was released. I viewed the changes made and wasn't surprised to see that, on the surface, pretty much ALL of the "new" aspects of FF2.0 are included in IE7. I waited a few days and then began reading reviews of FF2.0. I then compared them to reviews of IE7. VERY surprisingly, I was beginning to see that FF2.0 wasn't all that it was purported to be. Even in the area of stability, it seems it was lacking.
So why use FF2.0? To be blunt, I see no reason to do so.
But thats not the basis of this thread. The "update" method of "offering" IE7 is the issue. Since I downloaded IE7 and had it installed already I assumed that I was done. So it came to me as a bit of a surprise when Windows Update informed me that one of the updates was actually an installation of IE7. Umm, I already have it. Why would I want to download it again? I saw no reason to do so. Just out of curiosity, I did it anyways.
I really couldnt tell any difference at first glance. But as I used it more I noticed a difference. The "Phishing Filter" no longer slowed my browsing to dial-up speeds. So basically, my biggest complaint about the browser had been "patched".
In short, with the release of IE7 via download, I think Microsoft rushed out a browser to beat Firefox2.0 out of the gates, while it still had some shortcomings. The "update" release was basically, as far as I can tell, just a means to release IE7 to the public (in a manner that pretty much assures that Windows users are aware of it being available) while at the same time "patching" the previously downloaded browser.
As far as being "force-fed", I see NO evidence of it being so. BOTH times I installed it, I had the choice not to. I fail to see where its shoved down your throat.
As far as my choice between FF2.0 and IE7, I simply went with what worked best. When it boils down to it, thats all that really matters to me. If FF2.0 fixes the problems in a timely manner, like MS appears to be doing with its product, then maybe I will change my mind.