Windows 7 Kill Switch For IE Confirmed — For More Apps, Too

CWmike writes "Microsoft has confirmed that users will be able to remove its IE8 browser, as well as several other integrated applications, from Windows 7. Jack Mayo, a group program manager on the Windows team, listed in a blog post the applications that can be switched off. They include Internet Explorer 8, Fax and Scan, handwriting recognition, Windows DVD Maker, Windows Gadget Platform, Windows Media Player, Windows Media Center, Windows Search, and XPS Viewer and Services. He explained that the files associated with those applications and features are not actually deleted from the hard drive. The public beta of Windows 7 does not include the ability to 'kill' said apps. But a pirated copy of Windows 7 Build 7048 includes the new removal options, and has been leaked on the Internet." (We mentioned the reported ability to turn off IE8 yesterday as well.)

Comments

Why not?

[John Hasler]

> He explained that the files associated with those applications and features are not
> actually deleted from the hard drive.

Why not?

Re:Why not?

[qoncept]

The article also mentions they can be reinstalled/reenabled without the installation disk. My guess is that genuinely is the reason. I remember Windows 95 randomly asking me to insert the installation disc when I was updating drivers or installing non-MS software, which was ridiculous.

Of course, its also possible the libraries are still being used (and loaded, and still eating up resources) for other things.

Re:Why not?

[davidphogan74]

One of the articles mentions Windows Update, which requires IE's API's to work properly. I'm sure other cases would come up as well.

Re:Why not?

[ikirudennis]

Does that mean that flaws in IE8 still leave a computer vulnerable if it's been "uninstalled?"

Re:Why not?

[Anonymous Coward]

It is the nightmare called windows side by side install.

So you uncheck the box it is 'uninstalled'.
Later on you decide 'wait a second I did want that' and check it back.

Now instead of popping the disk back in. It is magically there again.

Any application can take advantage/disadvantage of this. Basically you install it into the winsxs dir and it pretty much stays forever.

The only resource that will be consumed is disk space.

For example in vista telnet is not 'on the box by default' you go check the box and it installs it into the system32 dir. Where did it get that? The network was off, and i put no disk in. It did a hard link to the real file that lives in the winsxs dir. You can get this same sort of thing in linux using the ln. In windows not so easy but it can be done.

Re:Why not?

[digitalunity]

Explorer, MMC, Control Panel, just to name a few all use mshtml.dll. In addition, any .NET application that utilizes the WebBroswer class or MFC application that uses the CHtmlView class will need mshtml.dll to be available.

The only alternative here is for Mozilla or another OS browser to reimplement mshtml.dll from scratch - a daunting task of questionable logic.

Re:Why not?

[nobodyman]

From the article:

If a feature is deselected, it is not available for use. This means the files (binaries and data) are not loaded by the operating system (for security-conscious customers) and not available to users on the computer. These same files are staged so that the features can easily be added back to the running OS without additional media. This staging is important feedback we have received from customers who definitely do not like to dig up the installation DVD.

Best of both worlds in my opinion. I also like that there is one unified interface for managing features. This is just one example, but in vista you could use 'add/remove components' for IIS, but if you wanted to disable Media Center, you had to do it from the group policy editor. Extremely frustrating.

Re:Why not?

[Captain Spam]

The only alternative here is for Mozilla or another OS browser to reimplement mshtml.dll from scratch - a daunting task of questionable logic.

"Daunting" puts it lightly, apparently. WINE, for instance, attempts to reimplement mshtml.dll via the Gecko engine for all the things that use it for HTML rendering. Like, say, Steam. To date, I still don't think it's possible to complete a purchase or demo download from start to finish entirely within the Steam client under WINE/Crossover. You still need to start the purchase externally, enter Steam, and finish it there because they haven't fully reimplemented all the calls properly.

So, yes, it has been tried, and it isn't quite perfect yet.

Re:Why not?

[Sancho]

Internet Explorer is a web browser. Trident is the layout engine. Other programs can make use of Trident to, in effect, allow for web browsing. Microsoft can use Trident in places other than IE where it makes sense to have a layout engine. Removing IE will not remove Trident.

It's really not that hard, people.

Re:Why not?

[Chyeld]

Incorrect. Microsoft can't uninstall the RENDERING engine because they've done their damnest to hook it into everything in the system while obscuring how it's done to ensure no one can come along and rip it out and replace it.

My suggestion was, given they weren't suppose to do that and even got spanked for doing it, maybe they should stop trying to pull this crap and simply publish the API's that their rendering engine implements. And by publish, I don't mean the typical Microsoft BS of dumping out a specification that even they can't implement, but an actual honest to goodness "this does that, that does this" document.

If they did that, then regardless of the 'advisability' of the integration in the first place, you'd at least have the opportunity to replace the rendering engine with your own.

A single step toward modularity

[qoncept]

The killer is that these are all just specialized applications that should be easily installed and uninstalled, just like any other application. It blows my mind that they could be so entrenched that just removing them, or not having them installed to begin with, isn't trivial.

Re:A single step toward modularity

[Anonymous Coward]

Not only that, but having 2 apps to do the same thing is ridiculously wasteful and inefficient.

I know. Why only have 2 apps to do the same thing when you can have 5, 6, hell maybe an even dozen?! Go Linux.

Re:A single step toward modularity

[Anonymous Coward]

It blows my mind that they could be so entrenched that just removing them, or not having them installed to begin with, isn't trivial.

Software engineering 101: what part of the word "dependency" blows your mind? What platform lets you snap out the provided rich text rendering engine for something else? Practically every application on the platform uses it in some way! And why do you trust Joe Sixpack to do this? What will he do when it renders things oh-so-slightly differently? He won't put together that it is because he changed out the HTML renderer.

Everyone here continues to bellyache about things without offering up solutions that actually work outside of their parents basement. This is not a new problem, dependency management sucks, and will always suck because third party apps are built to certain implementations of things and become reliant on undocumented behavior without even realizing it.

Deleted or Deactivated?

[oahazmatt]

Which is it? One sentence says that the program can be "removed" and then it's explained that the program can be "turned off" but the files aren't deleted. That's hardly removing the product. It's equivelent to not using it.

Re:Shortcuts

[davidphogan74]

It also prevents them from being loaded, as the articles explain. If needed for API's that require them, or if you turn them back on, they're available, but otherwise don't get loaded.

Stupid...

[Bert64]

> He explained that the files associated with those applications and features are not
> actually deleted from the hard drive.

That is stupid... The idea of removing something, is to reduce clutter on your system and reduce the support burden... If something is installed but not being used it still needs security patches. If it's removed, you no longer have to worry about it at all.

Re:now this switch should be on by default

[qoncept]

I don't know that that's fair. When I came back to my computer after installing Ubuntu for the first time, I found a whole lot of garbage I didn't and would never want installed, and much of it I wasn't able to uninstall after the fact. But people want to be able to use their computer out of the box and not have to install anything. "People" being most people, not you.

Two revisions too late?

[hwyhobo]

Having installed IE8 just recently, I find it vastly improved (particularly in speed) compared to IE6 and 7. It is slightly amusing that Microsoft gives us the option to remove it now.

Re:Kill switch for DRM

[MBGMorden]

I plan to buy a new LCD and I will choose something with DVI instead of HDMI just because DRM. As I don't have HDMI capable hardware I would like to kill DRM on my machine (don't watch TV so I don't have an HD TV either), If Win7 allow me that and after all the kids in their basements test the OS for hidden nasties and middle fingers from MS, I'll switch for Win7. I need 64bit addressable memory.

Besides some extra pins for audio, HDMI and DVI differ only in pinout. Electrically they're the same, and you can go from one to the other with just a simple converter. A monitor and computer with plain DVI can still use DRM if both support HDCP (and in the same light, HDMI can be transmitted unencrypted just like DVI is).

Re:A contradiction? You tell me.

[Em Emalb]

Dude, it's a step in the right direction and you're irritated at them for it?

People have been screaming about this for literally YEARS and when something positive is initiated, they still get blasted for it.

Re:A contradiction? You tell me.

[KTheorem]

The rendering engine for IE is used other places in Windows (like the help system IIRC). The same goes for others like WMP. The libraries are needed for other applications and the executable is so small in comparison that removing it rather than just disabling it makes some sense.

Files not deleted

[FadedTimes]

I am fine with this. If I decide I do need the app, it is nice to not have to find the install media or do a download. I am glad they have the ability to some what 'kill' the app. When I go to Windows 7, I will kill everything but IE (I have websites that require it that I need). This is at least a step in the right direction. They also are not installing some applications by default anymore in Windows 7, and you have to get them if you want to from the download site.

Re:Files not deleted

[Phroggy]

If you use Firefox, you can probably use the IETab extension to load specific web sites using Internet Explorer's rendering engine (which will NOT be removed when you disable IE), integrated with Firefox's tab management. You can maintain a list of sites that should be loaded with IE's engine, so it's automatic and you don't have to switch browsers.

Re:Shortcuts

[thethibs]

That's a vital point. IE's underlying APIs are published and available to developers. There is no way to know how many applications (in addition to Update) would be broken by completely removing IE.

Re:Kill switch for DRM

[vux984]

I plan to buy a new LCD and I will choose something with DVI instead of HDMI just because DRM.

Do you know what you are talking about?

The DRM is HDCP, not HDMI. DVI is compatible with HDCP, and most new DVI panels support HDCP over DVI.

If you go out of your way to find one that doesn't, you are just being a twit. Not having HDCP support just means you can't play HDCP content; it doesn't strip HDCP protection from a signal or anything like that.

If you don't play and don't intend to ever play HDCP content, then it doesn't matter in the least whether or not your panel supports it or not, because its not going to affect you in the slightest. Having HDCP support doesn't automatically encrypt not HDCP content.

I'm curious what monitors are currently on your short list of possible buys?

The only monitors at newegg that I can find that don't support HDCP are the lowest end consumer junk TN panels that only have 1 VGA input. And no digital inputs at all.

The year of ubuntu on the designer workstation?? *ubuntu 9.04 beta 4 64bit It's pretty pretty fast and stable.

Your going to look pretty silling sitting there with your no-name brand 17" VGA monitor with a cheap 6-bit TN panel trying to convince people you are a "professional graphics designer".

Re:now this switch should be on by default

[stevied]

Full-blown apps are relatively easy to remove, but some of the "desktop environment" stuff - applets, the various managers (volumes, power), libraries - sit at the centre of a web of dependencies and aren't easy to get rid of. Even things that are only "Recommends:"-ed seem to pop back sometimes when I'm not looking :/

Having said that, disk is insanely cheap these days, so that even I, who's pretty obsessive about avoiding 'bloat', have learnt to live with leaving the packages around. Memory's pretty cheap too, and anyway actually stopping unnecessary components from running is a bit easier.

And, of course, no one distro / desktop environment "fits all." Xubuntu is lighter and more "loosely coupled", and there are other Ubuntu variants that are even more hardcore (I keep meaning to give #! a spin ..) That's really where free software trumps commercial: each subculture that feels the need can roll its own.