Slashdot Mirror


Internet Explorer 9 Will Not Support Windows XP

MojoKid writes "As it turns out, news this week is that the same features that made IE9's hardware-acceleration possible probably aren't compatible with Windows XP. Microsoft initially dodged giving a straight answer to the question of XP support but has since admitted that the new browser won't be XP-compatible when it launches. This has created a small tempest of protest from those users still using XP, but this is less of an arbitrary decision than some appear to think. It's literally impossible to port Windows Vista/Win 7-style hardware acceleration backwards to XP. Microsoft would have to either develop a workaround from scratch or create a CPU-driven 'software mode.'"

15 of 454 comments (clear)

  1. Thats ok , as an XP user by rossdee · · Score: 5, Funny

    I don't use Internet Explorer, I use Firefox

    1. Re:Thats ok , as an XP user by sopssa · · Score: 5, Interesting

      So, those wanting to or forced to use IE-only websites might also be forced to upgrade from XP. Welcome to the effects of proprietary lock-in.

      Forced to upgrade? IE8 works just fine on XP and will continue to do so. It also doesn't have any of the exploits that IE6 has.

      Also, how does it differ between proprietary and open source then? If you're using some 10 years old version of your Linux OS and it doesn't support some feature that the newer OS/kernel versions have, you're not going to be able to install programs that require said feature.

    2. Re:Thats ok , as an XP user by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But the real problem is that there are still many, many, many websites that DO NOT WORK unless you are using MS-Windows with Internet Explorer

      Is this true?

      The only time I run IE is about 5 minutes after I build a computer and only then to download Firefox.

      Can you give a partial list of these "many, many, many" websites, and by chance are any of them fur-fag sites?

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    3. Re:Thats ok , as an XP user by DRJlaw · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I know of several dozen websites that deal in financial transactions and related, and which will all check for software versioning and require downloading active x controls onto the user's machine for at least some functions.

      they are major financial partners in stock trading, banking, sale of treasury securities, and such, they pay a small fortune every year for VPN security and encryption, and everyone else in the financial industry has to occasionally deal with them.

      it's still vendor lock-in with bells on. Your comment about 10 year old OS versions isn't just a red herring, it shows a complete lack of understanding.

      Yes... on your part. The vendor is not Microsoft. The vendor is your financial partners. Microsoft is not imposing version checking. Microsoft has long provided alternative interfaces which negate the need for ActiveX controls. It is your financial partners who are refusing to support later browsers and alternate browsers. It is your financial partners, and not Microsoft, who control the gateways to the services that you want.

      So we will probably upgrade the machines that still run Windows in every office, yet again.

      Thank your financial partners, not Microsoft. If those financial partners only provided service through the old CompuServe interface, you wouldn't be blaming CompuServe for failing to completely overhaul their service to be web and HTML based. If those financial partners only provided service by telegraph, you wouldn't be blaming Western Union for failing to upgrade your telegraphy machines on demand.

      The machines that still run Windows in every office should still work. The machines are even security supported for four more years (assuming that they're on XP). If you're bitter that you can't replace them with the new shiny exactly in the manner that you want, then suck it up and blame your financial partners, not Microsoft. You're obviously no longer Microsoft's customer, so why should they solve your problem in a way that doesn't generate revenue rather than telling you to pound sand?

  2. So XP users will be stuck with IE8 forever.. by wellingtonsteve · · Score: 4, Insightful

    We're gonna have another IE6 on our hands in a few years time - every other browser (and maybe IE9, IE10 and so on) will (hopefully) be implementing HTML5 properly in the future but XP users will be stuck with IE8 so websites will never you be able to make the switch to HTML5 (replacing Flash with etc..) because of having to support IE8

    1. Re:So XP users will be stuck with IE8 forever.. by dingen · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I seriously doubt XP will still be used a lot when HTML5 has become mainstream. It's not like you see many Windows 98 or 2000 installations in today's world, so why would XP be any different?

      --
      Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
    2. Re:So XP users will be stuck with IE8 forever.. by amiga3D · · Score: 4, Insightful

      XP is actually not a bad OS. I don't like MS for political reasons but after all the years of XP development the OS is stable and fast and hardware requirements are low compared to newer MS operating systems. Most importantly, Vista and Win7 just don't offer any real compelling reasons to upgrade for the average web surfer. As long as firefox and opera support XP I can see a lot of people sticking with it until their old computers die.

    3. Re:So XP users will be stuck with IE8 forever.. by KingMotley · · Score: 4, Informative

      Time will tell whether Windows 7 manages to convince a majority to upgrade again, but it will be a long time before there's the kind of critical mass that happened with XP.

      Current Market share (March 2010):
      Windows XP 32 bit (-3.48%) 40.33%
      Windows 7 64 bit (+3.95%) 22.99%
      Windows Vista 32 bit (-1.51%) 16.88%
      Windows 7 (+1.16%) 10.92%

      XP is losing 3.48% of it's market share each month, and Windows 7 is gaining nearly 4.64% market share each month. How long exactly at that rate will it take for Windows 7 to reach this critical mass point?

  3. Good. by upuv · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yes XP just worked. It still works better than win 7 in my regard.

    However XP + ie is basically an invitation to be hacked / malwared / infected / ripped off.

    ie6 is still around basically because xp is. Any one who does any sort of web stuff hates ie6. ie6 is point blank holding back the web. Of course ie 7-8 also have a truck load of issues. But it's the combination of ie + xp that is the real killer.

    Lets hope win7 takes hold with ie9 and relegates the other lesser M$ combinations to the bit bucket.

    ( Of course I say all this and I personally only use FF and Linux )

  4. People need to stop bitching by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It is unreasonable to expect a vendor to continue to support their old products forever. MS has quite a long support cycle, and it is a pretty predictable one too. XP has now entered what one might call "sunset" support. They still patch it, their answer to security issues isn't "Just upgrade to a new one," but they are done adding features. It is the final version, feature wise. That ended at the end of 2009, when general support for XP was terminated. We are now under extended support, the "sunset support", until 2014.

    Windows 7 is of course being upgraded and supported as it is new. General support is scheduled to end for it in 2015, and extended support in 2020, though they've been known to extend the support dates before.

    That is not bad at all. XP was released in 2001. It got nearly a decade of mainstream support, and it going to have 13 years in total support. Compare that to Ubutnu LTS or OS-X and you find it is extremely long. Solaris is one of the few OSes that has support cycles of that length.

    So people need to STFU. No, XP is NOT going to get anymore new features. Deal with it. If you wish to continue using XP, then you can do so without those features. If not, upgrade to a newer OS.

    This isn't the first new feature XP hasn't gotten either. DirectX 10 and up are Vista and 7 only, the DWM is Vista and 7 only and so on. XP is an old OS. It's a good one, but it is an old one. They are not going to offer new stuff for it indefinitely.

    For that matter Windows 2000 won't get IE9, and didn't get IE8, though it's extended support doesn't end until mid this year.

    I could see people being mad if Vista weren't getting IE9 or something, or if XP wasn't getting security patched. If MS had a policy of "As soon as a new Windows comes out we completely drop the old one," that would be reason to complain. As it stands, they support their OSes for a long, long time. You get at least a decade of total support, which is quite a lot.

  5. Re:Not surprised by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 4, Interesting

    XP's graphics handling is really crappy compared to 7 and Vista, so this is no surprise. Flip an LCD to portrait mode in XP, then try to turn on vsync because horizontal tearing just became vertical tearing. Can't be done.

    Whether or not XP can handle it doesn't really matter. Windows 7 is where Microsoft's focus is now and their money is better spent supporting the road forward. One other thing worth looking at is why people are still using XP? Chances are in a couple of years once Windows 7 has proved itself many companies will upgrade to the new OS, invalidating any effort Microsoft put into making IE9 work with the older platform.

    Beyond companies, who are probably still using IE6 anyhow (ugh), people who really want to stick to XP and want to have the latest version of IE might end up being gifted by some hacker making it possible.

    --
    Jumpstart the tartan drive.
  6. Re:Bye Bye XP by hedwards · · Score: 5, Funny

    You do realize that Win XP's coffin has more nails than a typical big box hardware store, right? I'm a little curious how this particular nail is going to be the one that finally smites the beast.

  7. Firefox on Mac OS 10.3 by klubar · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Firefox has a similar problem. The new versions are not support on fairly recent versions of the Mac OS. Windows XP is getting really old--how long does MS need to maintain compatibity? (It's not like they don't want customers to upgrade).

    When Apple drops support for not very old versions of the OS or hardwar, it's called brilliant marketing strategy. When MS does it, it's called abandoning compatibility

  8. I've seen many stupid things in my life but... by tkjtkj · · Score: 4, Insightful

    but this takes the cake! I refer to: " It's literally impossible to port Windows Vista/Win 7-style hardware acceleration backwards to XP. Microsoft would have to either develop a workaround from scratch or create a CPU-driven 'software mode." I mean, to say a thing is "impossible" and then, in the same breath, reveal not one but TWO methods of doing the thing is as funny as it is absurd.

    --
    "There are 11 kinds of people: those who know binary, those who don't, and those who could not care less!"
  9. Thats really annoying by fartrader · · Score: 4, Insightful

    IE is simply the best firefox downloader around.