Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Reaffirms Default Do-Not-Track For IE10, Windows 8 Express Setup

Billly Gates writes "Microsoft has confirmed that Internet Explorer 10 will have Do-Not-Track settings enabled by default. IE 10 comes with Windows 8, and will go release candidate for Windows 7 very soon, according to Anne Kohn in a comment in IE's blog. During Windows 8 setup, users who choose the 'Express' option will have DNT on by default, while using the 'Custom' option will give them the chance to change the setting, if they want. IE 10 already has a score of 319 in html5test.com, while MS is trying to position IE as a great browser again. Will this pressure other browsers such as Firefox and Opera to do the same?" When Microsoft began talking about this in May, it touched off quite a debate at W3C about whether browsers should have DNT turned on by default or not.

17 of 184 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Do not what? by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 4, Funny

    And you don't know Google search either. What kind of web sites do you build?

    --
    Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
  2. Well, considering MS is a grey evil by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 4, Insightful

    DNT only works if websites honor it. Some have already said that if browsers turned it on by default, they would not honor it. So... could MS, a company with a long history of embrace and strange while raping it up the ass, be enabling it by default to give websites an excuse to ignore it and thereby kill it from within while appearing to the gullible as a nice company?

    Well, Soulskill sure is gullible enough. a great browser again. Indeed.

    It ain't Paranoia if you think MS is out to screw everyone else. In fact, that is hopelessly naive. MS happily screws itself too.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  3. Re:Do not what? by ledow · · Score: 4, Informative

    HTTP header to request "opt out" of any tracking on websites you visit.

    i.e. will be ignored by just about everyone by default anyway, and even when you "opt out" you can still be tracked by most websites in the world, and turning it on or off will have virtually zero visible effect to the user so you'll never know even if the website "accidentally" tracked you anyway.

    Worthless, ill-designed, junk.

  4. Re:yay! by imagined.by · · Score: 5, Interesting

    But in this case, it's horribly wrong.

    This will effectively KILL the do-not-track project.

  5. Re:Wait a minute, by cheater512 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Wow! A score of 319 is really impressive!

    Wait hang on.
    * Chrome 22: 442
    * Chrome 21: 437
    * Opera 12.50: 409
    * Firefox 14: 345

    Sure its better than IE 9, but a modern browser it is not.
    Doesn't even come close to stable Firefox.

  6. Re:Do not what? by AngryDeuce · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yeah, I don't know what people are smoking these days, but you've got to be seriously delusional if you think that Do Not Track is going to be respected in any way. They'll track anyway, and if they get busted, they'll call out the lawyer brigades and nothing will fucking happen. Hell, maybe they'll even end up with some sweet legal precedent saying they have every right to track us if we deign to navigate to one of their websites.

    I trust NoScript and Adblock, I sure as shit do not trust "we won't track you, we promise!"

  7. Re:Wait a minute, by Billly+Gates · · Score: 4, Insightful

    IE 10 already has a score of 319 in html5test.com, while MS is trying to position IE as a great browser again.

    Again!? Implying it was great once? What have I missed? I've been in web development for around 12 years now, and I most certainly do not remember ever having many nice things to say about IE. Or do you mean great, as in having the majority monopoly-based userbase?

    10 years ago how well did Netscape 4.7 do CSS compared to IE 6? ... thats what I thought.

    Soulskill edited my entry as I put a whim of sarcasm stating slashdotters and webmasters favorite browser (sarcasm intended). Needless to say I remember IE 6 frustratingly and angrily beating Netscape quite well as it was the first browser to support the proper box model as long as it didn't go into quirks mode. I wanted Netscape to win but 10 years ago went to IE 6 and it was a better browser. IE 5 was not bad either and invented AJAX. IE 6 is just well very old and not meant for anything but simple 50k websites with 2 or 3 tiny 25k pics with a css that is about half dozen lines or less usually specifying fonts or something silly. Not the bloated sites we have today. The things it does wrong are were very cutting edge and not standardized in 2001. It is similiar to alot of css 3 stuff I see with different arguments for color picking a gradient for example. W3c will pick one syntax in 10 years times and one of the browsers today wont be standards complaint with it in the future. IE 6 shouldn't have been used for so long.

    MS let it rot and did not fix the rendering bugs nor the huge security risks as MS thought we would all be using Vista and IE 7 by 2005 (2004 was Longhorns original date if I remember correctly) and the delaying made things worse.

    Anyway give MS credit for at least trying to make a somewhat decent browser and making your life as a web developer easier. IE 10 is supposed to be truly competitive to Firefox and Chrome which is good for METRO developers. Remember people like your Mom, grandparents, Chinese, and corporate employers wont ever switch no matter how much we beg. At least let them enjoy a somewhat similar browsing experience you have at home. I saw a benchmark testing emca javascript and IE 10 was the most compliant browser out there. It will make everyone's life easier if people use 1 standard for the internet and IE is catching up finally.

  8. Re:yay! by PimpBot · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Don't you think it was DOA anyways? The system depended upon honest advertisers, which is an oxymoron if I ever heard one.

  9. Re:Do not what? by caspy7 · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm a professional web developer of 16 years+, and I don't know what "Do Not Track" is.

    No need to embarrass yourself in front of the class dude.

  10. Re:Do not what? by c0lo · · Score: 4, Funny

    Worthless, ill-designed, junk.

    Nooooo!?! Next thing you are going to tell me is that the hackers disregard RFC3514 during attacks???

    --
    Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
  11. Re:yay! by ChatHuant · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This will effectively KILL the do-not-track project.

    Good. The do-not-track project as designed by Mozilla and Google is worthless, and I'm reasonably sure it's intentionally broken. It's just trusting the web site to agree to your browser's plea to please not track it; there is no enforcement mechanism, and no way to even know your request is honored or not. A proper design would not even connect to a tracker's web site.
     
    Of course, Google has a major conflict of interest in this - tracking people is what makes them the big money; that's why I suspect Mozilla and Google came up with this "design", pretending to care about privacy while aware that many users aren't knowledgeable or caring enough to set the DNT flag, and also on the fact that when push comes to shove they can just ignore the "don't track" request. Microsoft is pretty much calling their bluff there.

  12. Re:Wait a minute, by makomk · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Apparently, even Konqueror - which hasn't really been under active development for years and had very little funding before then - manages to score 321.

  13. Re:boo! by TheRaven64 · · Score: 5, Informative

    It won't screw Google over. The most relevant legislation with regard to DNT is the EU directive which says you must not track a user if they express a desire not to be tracked. However, if the header is sent by default, then Google can convincingly argue that the user has not expressed this desire. If, however, it is off by default, then this argument would be nonsense because the user must have explicitly enabled it.

    I would love to see it as a setting with no default and a prompt when you install the browser, so that every user must make a conscious decision to either be tracked or not be tracked.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  14. Re:Do not what? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Informative

    You are missing the point of the header. It is something that is sent along with the initial HTTP request that expresses the user's desire. By itself, that's all it does. It can, however, be used in later legal proceedings. In the EU, for example, tracking someone after receiving an explicit opt-out is illegal. If someone can prove that you are tracking people who do not wish to be tracked then you are liable for large fines.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  15. Re:boo! by Eirenarch · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The article on Ars Technica states that the EU authorities stand behind DNT by default which if true means that Google can argue nothing (at least in Europe)

  16. Re:yay! by guises · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Exactly. My initial reaction was against this, but self regulation never works. Do Not Track is simply an effort by the data aggregators to stave off real privacy regulation - "Look! We'll make a token gesture to respect the privacy of the tech savvy minority as long as we can run roughshod over the vast majority. See, we're honest folks."

    Kudos to Microsoft for calling it like it is on this one.

  17. Re:Everyone is Super? by rsmith-mac · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Pretty much. Short of government regulation we as a community can't actually compel advertisers to do anything (just getting them to acknowledge DNT in the first place was a small miracle), so if we actually make it hard for them to do their thing they'll just ignore DNT entirely.