Internet Explorer 8, 9, and 10 Reach End-of-Life Next Week (thenextweb.com)

An anonymous reader writes: On Tuesday, January 12, Microsoft Internet Explorer 8, 9, and 10 will officially reach their end of life. A new patch going live soon will add a notification that nags users to upgrade. "What's even bigger about the end of life for these versions is that this means Internet Explorer 11 is the last version of Microsoft's old browser that's left supported, as the company continues to transition customers to Edge on Windows 10."

Comments

Edge

[Anonymous Coward]

Edge sucks (no ad-block)

Re:Edge

[invictusvoyd]

I was under the impression that they had reached EOL 10 years ago

Re:Edge

[tepples]

In the meantime, until Edge gains support for content-blocking plug-ins, you can keep the worst ad networks from resolving at the DNS level.

Re:Edge

[Anonymous Coward]

Does anyone else find it humorous when Microsoft sites tell you they are not compatible with Edge???

Re:Edge

[Anonymous Coward]

Editing hosts files gives me cancer.

Re:Edge

[CaptnCrud]

Early on I saw that a lot, but....now not so much....

Re:Edge

[tehlinux]

privoxy.org will block most (for me all) ads. Edge is pretty legit with ad blocking.

Re:Edge

[Anonymous Coward]

Editing hosts files gives me cancer.

That's why I do it at least six times a day. I edit in reverse, so you get rectal cancer so you die penniless and assless.

Re:Edge

[bev_tech_rob]

Edge sucks (no ad-block)

That is the reason I am not currently using it. Hopefully when they enable extensions, then we can have our blockers.

Re:Edge

[Anonymous Coward]

They had OFFICIAL support?!?!?!?!?!?!?

Re:Edge

[eumoria]

Whoops modded incorrectly posting to remove sorry!

Re:Edge

[Bite The Pillow]

So now we know APK's alt...

Re:Edge

[tepples]

A stopped clock is right twice a day.

Re:Edge

[Marxist Hacker 42]

Considering all I use Edge for is visiting http://ninite.com/ to install a real browser along with a lot of other useful applications, it works plenty fine.

Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[Anonymous Coward]

Will a petition do the trick? The quality-of-life for everyone on the planet would improve by an order of magnitude if we could EOL Microsoft entirely and move on to a FOS OS that doesn't go through your underwear drawer at night when you're sleeping.

Re:Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[Ravaldy]

The narrow view of a basement dweller. You sir are not read to be making decisions for any corporation or enterprise.

Each tech has it's pros and cons.

Re:Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[phantomfive]

The narrow view of a basement dweller. You sir are not read to be making decisions for any corporation or enterprise. Each tech has it's pros and cons.

That may be true, but it is also true that my work life would be significantly improved if Microsoft Windows disappeared.

Re:Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[Anonymous Coward]

Not as long as using Linux means fixing weird glitches all day long. Here's a disastrous Ubuntu 14.04 experience of one guy.

Try sometimes installing a Linux distro and writing down all the little glitches and other unexpected behavior that you meet. You'd be surprised how long list you end up with.

Privacy is the only benefit that you get with running Linux on the desktop. All other areas (for example performance, stability, security and quality assurance) are garbage when compared to Windows.

Re:Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[Anonymous Coward]

That may be true, but it is also true that my work life would be significantly improved if Microsoft Windows disappeared.

It's also true that my work life would be significantly improved if clothes disappeared.

Re:Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[arth1]

Privacy is the only benefit that you get with running Linux on the desktop. All other areas (for example performance, stability, security and quality assurance) are garbage when compared to Windows.

Linux stability is garbage, you said?

# uptime
  13:06:17 up 1263 days, 1:01, 4 users, load average: 0.48, 0.40, 0.29

Re:Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[Anonymous Coward]

But not your co-workers.

Re:Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[Anonymous Coward]

Privacy is the only benefit that you get with running Linux on the desktop. All other areas (for example performance, stability, security and quality assurance) are garbage when compared to Windows.

Holy shit are you delusional.

Re:Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh come on man, that's just a trollbait.

Re:Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[phantomfive]

Maybe we can compromise and do both

Re:Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[Ravaldy]

The CEO told me I can work in my underwear if I close the door. Should I take him up on it?

Re:Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[Anonymous Coward]

Each tech has it's pros and cons.

So you're OK with one of the 'cons' being the fact that Microsoft is collecting very much personalized data on you when you use Win10, and furthermore you have 'updates' forced on you, having Win10 forced on you even if you decide you don't want it, and even if you manage to prevent them from forcing Win10 on you, they'll still force 'updates' on your Win7/8 installation, that effectively installs spyware and other malware on your computer, so they can collect very personal data anyway? Do you have Stockholm Syndrome with regards to Microsoft or something? Better get some counseling, friend, you've been brainwashed. Or are you a paid Shill for Microsoft?

Re:Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[phantomfive]

It's up to you, really, if you want to.

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[Midnight Thunder]

If we don't have Microsoft, who is the best contender to fill the gap? Linux is not a suitable desktop replacement, but does well on the server; MacOS means being able buying hardware from only one company and for the other contenders their maturity just isn't there.

I may not be a big fan of Microsoft, but I have to accept they fill the general day to day needs of corporations quite well.

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[phantomfive]

Linux is not a suitable desktop replacement,

Linux is a perfectly good desktop system. The main issues you'll run into are driver issues and lack of application support, especially in laptops. Ease of use is not a problem.

Re:Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why do you care what anyone uses? Just use what works for you and be happy with it. No need to muscle in on everyone else with your crap.

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[Anonymous Coward]

You do realize that "Linux is a perfectly good desktop system," and "the main issues you'll run into are driver issues and lack of application support," are mutually exclusive phrases, right?

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[phantomfive]

No. Not in this context. If Windows disappeared, then manufacturers would release drivers primarily for Linux, and applications would be written primarily for Linux.

Windows is innately no better at driver support than Linux, and in many cases is worse (jWindows is better on new hardware, which is when it matters most for purchasers of new computers).

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[Anonymous Coward]

Wrong.

You said "Linux IS a perfectly good desktop system," not "Linux would be a perfectly good desktop system, if Windows were to magically disappear."

Two completely different concepts.

Re:Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why do you care what anyone uses? Just use what works for you and be happy with it. No need to muscle in on everyone else with your crap.

So you like having Microsoft all up in your business? Unlikely. Do you work for Microsoft? More likely than not. Why would anyone want to knowingly use an OS that spies on what you're doing and doesn't give you control over the computer that you own? That's what Microsoft is doing: it's forcing Win10 on everyone, forcing updates on everyone, and collecting 'telemetery', aka spying on what you're doing on your own computer. They're acting no better than the criminals they're pretending to 'protect' you from.

Re:Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[Anonymous Coward]

Score:0, Troll

Yeah, sure, keep burying your heads in the sand you stupid bastards, and while you're doing that Microsoft is sticking a microscope up your ass.

When are people going to get tired of strangers spying on them? When are they going to get tired of Microsoft shills shouting down people who speak the truth? Seriously, what's wrong with everyone? Microsoft goes around lately telling the press 'Hey, look at us, Windows 10 has a ginormous adoption rate!' when the REASON for that is they're literally shoving it down people's throats. In what Universe is this actually considered and OK thing to do?

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[Anonymous Coward]

Linux is not a suitable desktop replacement,

Linux is a perfectly good desktop system. The main issues you'll run into are driver issues and lack of application support, especially in laptops. Ease of use is not a problem.

http://itvision.altervista.org/why.linux.is.not.ready.for.the.desktop.current.html

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[FlyHelicopters]

No. Not in this context. If Windows disappeared, then manufacturers would release drivers primarily for Linux, and applications would be written primarily for Linux.

No, they wouldn't... That is a nerd's wet dream, but it isn't going to happen.

Something else, probably OS X or something like it, would take Windows place.

For-profit companies generally don't want a "FREE" OS taking hold.

Re:Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[chipschap]

Even as a Linux fanboy, I agree with this statement. I don't care if you run iOS or Windows or if you think Linux isn't ready for the desktop. I'm quite happy, just leave me alone and I'll leave you alone. Except you aren't alone, are you, with Microsoft/Apple watching over your every move, but that's not my problem; if you don't care I don't care.

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[Dadoo]

http://itvision.altervista.org/why.linux.is.not.ready.for.the.desktop.current.html

Wow, that's a steaming pile of crap. Many of the problems on that list were fixed a long time ago (printer drivers), can't be solved, because vendors won't document their products, or exist in Windows, too (out-of-the-box nVidia support).

Re:Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[truck_soccer]

Welcome to being a human. You must be new here. Everyone is a fucking hypocrite, everyone cares about your personal, social, bedroom, bathroom, and recreational habits, and you will be judged on those things.

Re:Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[Anonymous Coward]

Pretty sure I have full control over my pc. I have access to basic input and output systems, I have access to drivers and settings, I have access to the tcp/ip and networking settings. What is the issue here? That a vanilla install of windows ships info to the mothership shouldn't surprise anyone since they've been doing it SINCE WINDOWS XP. MS blamers are the most pretentious group of douche rockets that I have ever had the pleasure of ignoring.

Re:Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[Anonymous Coward]

since they've been doing it SINCE WINDOWS XP

Bullshit. It doesn't transmit anything I don't explicitly allow it to, and it doesn't force a single update on me that I don't explicitly ask for either. How many pieces of silver does Microsoft pay you, you fucking piece of shit?

Re:Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[Anonymous Coward]

If people that understand what's going on don't inform the people who don't, then what are they to believe other than the blue-sky, everything-is-fine-don't-worry propaganda that Microsoft is selling them? Or do you LIKE more surveillance? Do you WANT even what you do locally on your own computers to be spied on by Microsoft, and whoever else they're sending the data to? Are you so thoroughly indoctrinated and brainwashed by the media and so-called 'social networking' that you think 'sharing' means allowing strangers to see every little thing you do, and 'privacy' is just what criminals want? Are you one of THOSE people? If you are then WISE UP.

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[cfalcon]

> For-profit companies generally don't want a "FREE" OS taking hold.

Linux has already taken hold everywhere but a few small Windows holdouts, like desktops and other niche uses. And this massive grab was fueled by for-profit companies.

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[Darinbob]

For corporate use, it's almost all using Excel, Word, PowerPoint, Outlook, and a browser, with some less frequent use of Plan and Access. In other words, Microsoft Office is the primary thing keeping corporations on Windows. Out of those Outlook is the real sticking point because the others do very well with alternatives like Open/Libre Office. The reason Outlook is such a bitch to discard is that so many corporations sold their souls to Exchange on the servers.

However, so many corporate workers are getting calendar and mail on the smart phones. That's really digging into the "windows only" mentality.

What's needed is official IT support for Linux. I know when I use Linux under VMWare I have to be very careful about which automatic updates I accept because they have often broken my system or configuration at times. So filtering updates through IT means someone else can be the guinea pig and also be able to provide help when my system goes belly up. But it's hard enough to even get decent OSX support from IT.

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[phantomfive]

Have you heard of Android? That shows how a free OS can gain a significant market share.

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[phantomfive]

From your article:

I want to make one thing crystal clear - Windows, in some regards, is even worse than Linux and it's definitely not ready for the desktop either.

So it's kind of irrelevant

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah and their FOSS browser, AOSP...which...oh....

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[hairyfeet]

Nope sorry, the problem isn't drivers its the developers and the fact that they KEEP BREAKING SHIT so it wouldn't matter if all the OEMs made drivers because even if Torvalds didn't trash them in the next kernel (which he would) you'd end up with the devs trashing the OS!

Just look at what has happened every.single.time. that Windows has given them a free shot by putting out a turd. Vista sucked ass? replace the barebones but functional ALSA with a fragile POS Puke Audio which to this very day is the most likely thing to break on any Linux update. Windows 8 had a shit UI? Well here comes KDE 4 and gnome Shell to replace two perfectly stable and functioning UIs with alpha quality shite that of course all the distros rushed to put as the default UI! Windows 10 is spyware? Well you can't go to Linux because you have SystemD trying to make an SVCHOSTS for Linux and breaking shit left right and sideways! Fuuuuuuucccckkkk!

I swear to God the worst enemy of Linux is NOT drivers, its NOT MSFT anything, its their own devs who can't just let shit get stable and have this insane need to just throw out what works and reinvent the damned wheel! Its like Linux from the top down is filled with these Bizzaro devs that go "Quick MSFT is sucking and Linux is running good! We will break drivers, crap all over the UI and Init, then users will have to work hard just to get back to half of what they had before! Users will feel leet, we will get lots of support jobs, we am brilliant!"...sigh.

Re:Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[SuiteSisterMary]

So, you're four years behind on security patches?

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[FlyHelicopters]

That is an interesting point of view...

"a few small Windows holdouts", like a billion desktops...

The consumer end of computers isn't going to Linux, no one cares what OS runs their TV or appliance.

Geeks who have these delusions of grandeur of Linux taking over are kidding themselves.

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[FlyHelicopters]

Have you heard of Android? That shows how a free OS can gain a significant market share.

That is exactly what I mean, when geeks have these delusions of grandeur when it comes to free software...

Tell me, what percentage of Android phones are actually pure Android? How many people who own an Android phone have installed anything outside of the Google Play store?

If I buy a Samsung Galaxy phone, does it come with a simple, free and open OS, or does it come locked down and running a custom shell provided by Samsung with only Google Play as the easy source of programs?

In many respects, Windows on the desktop is FAR more free and open than Android is, at least the version of Android that most end consumers actually use.

Yes, yes, YOU can download an image and install a clean version on your phone, but people generally don't do that.

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[Anonymous Coward]

You are forgetting the administration side. How do I centrally manage 10,000 Linux desktop computers. What's the analog to active directory, group policy, etc? How do I do compliance management?

(These are legit questions coming from a Windows Administrator). There is a lot more to the corporate equation than simply needing Outlook and a Web Browser - that is an incredibly naive viewpoint.

Who do I call for support? What is the cost of training new employees? How do I ensure backward compatibility while maintaining security? How much does a competent Linux admin cost?

Do you think a corporation cares if the OS is free or not? The Microsoft Tax is peanuts in relation to the big picture. Linux as a corporate desktop is a pipe dream - it focuses on the wrong thing.

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[Martin Blank]

The problem with letting things get stable is that, compared to the average user experience in Windows, Linux is still far, far behind. It's improved dramatically in recent years, largely because various devs stopped being content with the status quo and started pushing in other directions.

I use Windows, OSX, and Linux daily. In Linux, I primarily use Fedora, CentOS, Ubuntu, and Kali. I have KDE running in Fedora and CentOS, Gnome in Ubuntu, and Cinnamon in Kali. I've watched how they've changed over the years, and while some pushed too many boundaries at once (KDE4 got worse in my mind than Gnome 3, and then KDE started dialing back defaults), other apps have tried very hard to move up to the Microsoft level of usability. Some still have a long way to go, but those changes make the move more palatable.

Your frustrations with Pulse Audio are understandable. I spent far too many hours trying to get that to work properly even with commodity hardware, and it still crashed regularly. More recently, though, I barely notice that it's there. Likewise, I run into far fewer overall driver problems than I used to, with even cheap hardware on borderline-throw-away systems being supported out of the box.

We have to separate our habits as long-time Linux users from the usability of the masses. They want simplicity. No one should ever have to tell a novice, "All you do is open a shell, use vi to load this config file, and then make these changes." That should always be an option, but it shouldn't be mandatory for any but the most esoteric of settings. (Browsers have a great way around this using things like about:config to get at certain settings.) Someone likes remote X sessions? That's fine and they can continue using them, but it can't stand in the way of the necessary rewrite that became Wayland. Systemd is a more understandable problem, but we still need to not get so furious about it, because it makes everyone look bad and people don't want to be part of that fight, and that means not using Linux in some cases.

Meanwhile, Microsoft has continued to make it far easier to do many things, especially remote desktops and centralized app configuration. There still isn't anything in the FOSS world to really rival Exchange for growth, features, and usability, and most of the games are stuck in the 90s regarding their looks. (Valve has helped a lot on this front, but the drivers remain the biggest hurdle, and that's not something most devs can help with.)

The gap is narrowing, but we have to accept that the changes that are happening are necessary if we ever want to see the fabled Year of the Linux Desktop. We're going to have to accept concessions like running Office 365 on Linux until we can get comparable services together. Microsoft's move to make Windows nearly free of charge to most people was a brilliant marketing move, and now that it's accepted roving per-person licenses for much of its software usable across multiple devices, it has an even stronger position. The FOSS movement has to catch up to the features provided and move beyond them to provide something compelling.

I don't see Linux even getting to the 5% mark for desktops/notebooks by the end of the decade, but it does have a chance to move beyond the minuscule market it has. Opening up to changes is part of that, but so is becoming not so grumpy about changes and airing religious wars over niche things.

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[phantomfive]

You sound like the delusional one, man.
At very least, you don't have a very coherent post.

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[phantomfive]

Wow, some anger there man. See a psychiatrist.

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[Anonymous Coward]

Linux is a perfectly good desktop system. The main issues you'll run into are driver issues and lack of application support, especially in laptops.

So, basically, Linux is not actually a "perfectly good" desktop system.

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[Billly Gates]

Linux is not a suitable desktop replacement,

Linux is a perfectly good desktop system. The main issues you'll run into are driver issues and lack of application support, especially in laptops. Ease of use is not a problem.

Well for one you admit in your sig that SystemD is not all that great.

Also those of us who still run old IE more than likely are in a corporate environment. You know those environments which use jscript for the x and y's that are stored in doubles instead of floats in IE 6 so running any other browser outside of QUIRKS mode will incorrectly place them correctly (oxymoron right) so the webpages are scrambled in every other browser ... and many many other ancient exotic bugs just to make it display in 2001 which break in modern browsers.

These same sites which require GPO's in Active Directory to enable PCI lockdowns and other customizations etc.

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[FlyHelicopters]

I can't make it any more clear, if you don't understand it, then that really isn't my problem.

The version of Android installed on the vast majority of cell phones is anything BUT free and open... It might as well have nothing to do with generic Android.

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[Billly Gates]

No. Not in this context. If Windows disappeared, then manufacturers would release drivers primarily for Linux, and applications would be written primarily for Linux.

Windows is innately no better at driver support than Linux, and in many cases is worse (jWindows is better on new hardware, which is when it matters most for purchasers of new computers).

Windows and Unix (FreeBSD and old school Unix) is insanely better than Windows in the fact you can use ABI's or Application Binary Interfaces so drivers do not need recompiles. Need to run that 6 year old driver? No problem. Just go into FreeBSD sysinstall and enable FBSD 5.x ABI and it will magically work. Linux? Nope ... recompile. Ohh that is write the hardware OEM can't release the specs due to protect IP from a contractor who has a patent 5,743,775 on that. Guess you all can't have it or need to wait for only supported versions of Linux, etc.

RMS himself admitted he broke Linux without an ABI on purpose to force driver makers to open source. It ain't gonna happen! Too many patent agreements prevent this so Windows on the hand will just work.

Also do an apt-upgrade and watch what happens to your printers and Xorg? More than likely after a version or two something will break, XORG won't work etc. Again due to the lack of an ABI ATI and Nvidia drivers will not work without a recompile.

Take the Hairyfeet challenge. Get a 5 year old version of Linux and do 2 upgrades or more? They will ALWAYS break after the 3 rd release. Windows doesn't have this problem.

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[phantomfive]

Well for one you admit in your sig that SystemD is not all that great.

I do admit so. Even so, it's better than Windows :)

As for the rest, my sympathies to you.

Re:Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[EmeraldBot]

Will a petition do the trick? The quality-of-life for everyone on the planet would improve by an order of magnitude if we could EOL Microsoft entirely and move on to a FOS OS that doesn't go through your underwear drawer at night when you're sleeping.

Sure, just point us all towards an actual functioning FOS OS, that has official support for a wide variety of applications, has official certifications so that we can use the in high risk environments, has a continuing commitment towards backwards compatibility, and is willing to implement any features the client demands, when they demand.

If you think that's too arduous on you, then you see precisely why that solution has never worked, and never will work. If you champion developers who code what they want and do what they want, then they will never be able to fill out the sorts of things that you would need an OS for beyond basic usage. On the flipside, you would make all these developers working for free complete slaves to the users and severely stifle the projects.

For better or worse, Microsoft's business model is a very important thing for the market to have; they deal with all the crap and requirements because no one else is willing to do so. I am very happy with the way things are at the moment; we have both groups, and all of the users (us) are free to pick whichever one we want depending on what we need and what we want. Ultimately, the best outcome is putting choice in the user's hand, is it not?

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[Anonymous Coward]

I disagree. I have used Unix and DOS/Windows since the mid 80's and still use both today. I reboot my Linux VM much more often than my Win7 box (how ironic, right?) and the UI is second rate. The clipboard doesn't even work right in KDE. It only does unformatted text, and it doesn't work right half the time. Copy some text, and it only pastes in SOME programs. What a nightmare. If I wasn't a serious CLI user on Unix it would be a joke.

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[KGIII]

Take the Hairyfeet challenge. Get a 5 year old version of Linux and do 2 upgrades or more? They will ALWAYS break after the 3 rd release. Windows doesn't have this problem.

While the only product that I have Windows on, right now, is a phone - I'm actually a bit of a fan of the Windows OS, even if it's not installed. It was only recently that I let my MSDN subscription lapse and I participated in the MS MVP (winning multiple awards) for quite some time.

That said, what do I win? How do I need to document it? Do I get to pick the distro? Do I get to pick the hardware? Can I do it in a VM?

Also, releases are more frequent - meaning that 3 releases ago was only 14.04 (which was a LTS) so the most realistic release would be 13.10 which is three standard releases away from the current 15.10 version. It'd be a bit silly to show what it could do 5 years ago when I can just as easily show you want it can do now.

You gotta make it worth my time though. I don't need money, I've got plenty of that. I don't need wine, women, or song. Hmm... Only three upgrades? Yeah, I can do that. But, specifically, I only need to do one install and then two upgrades - and then one final upgrade? Yeah, make it worth my time and I'll do it. Is someone going to go from Vista, to 7, to 8, and then to 10? 'Cause I think I might even beat them in speed. Do I need more than the default installed applications? That shouldn't matter but it will tell me what to do to ensure I only need to do it once.

Thing is, I'm not even a Linux guru and I can do that. Hell, I can switch from 12.04 (Ubuntu) to upgrade multiple times and end up with all my data, all my settings, and have the end result be a perfectly fine CentOS latest beta build. (That might take some actual work.) I can probably stop in at Fedora in the middle and *still* come out with my data, settings, and even still have the same wallpaper and theme. Make it worth my time.

Hmmm.... If I can't do it (in a timely fashion - figure out a time limit and I'll agree or disagree) then I'll re-up my MSDN subscription and I'll install their OS on two devices - as the default boot choice. If I can do it then you and Mr. Feet have to do something... Say, wearing nothing but a pair of knee high stockings and two-piece string bikinis, dancing to an oompa loompa band, and singing a duet that I write about RMS and how he's your greatest man-crush.

Hint: Don't take this bet. However, it will be an awesome video.

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[KGIII]

You use standard images, you can roll your own if you want. AD can just be permissions and you can still do roaming profiles - hell, you can just use the computer as a dumb terminal and simply push everything out and just manage a few standard images (per job needed to fulfill) with things being saved to a separate /home folder with various permissions used to do what you want with it. If you want to be really fancy, you can even have new default profiles come with special permissions already enabled by doing what's pretty much just editing a template as those permissions will just be inherited and assigned automatically on new-user creation.

Basically, as near as I can tell, you can do whatever you want in those regards and do them in loads of different ways. You can even run your own local repository so that you can test updates before pushing them out. Much of it can be automated away.

To say something said above: I was an MS MVP for quite a while. I hold no ill will and LIKE Windows. I didn't switch to using Linux exclusively because I hated Windows. I switched because my brain was turning to mush because I wasn't doing anything new. No idealism or zealotry needed. Linux is just fine for me. Hell, OS X is a fine OS, I'm pretty sure, but I've never bothered to dig deep into it - I've used it a little. BSD is fine. Etc... I'm not a crazy zealot and just happened to want to do something to make me think more as I'm starting to get old. I used to use Unix and then I used some Linux when it came out. It's always been installed as a second/rescue OS. I just never really used it.

I forget the name but there are Exchange things you can poke at - they should probably cover much of what you need. The permissions system is nice and not so buried. If you want to be really intricate, you can do stuff like seriously set up SAMBA in some new and unusual ways. It just means looking at things a little differently. If you understand the basic concepts (why this happens when I push this) then you'll figure it out pretty quickly.

'Snot too hard, really. There's a learning curve but it's kind of go at your own pace unless you're taking it as a scholastic pursuit. As I'd been familiar with Linux and Unix (typically Solaris) I had a bit of a head start. When I first used Windows it was actually rather hard. I'd learned with command line. Reverting wasn't tough for me but I think the hardest things for some people to get are things like file management/directory structures and thinking that it is, or should be, like Windows. It's not, if you want Windows then use it. Linus is not Windows. Trying to use it like Windows will really not help and will make you right pissed off.

Oh, and don't worry about learning the commend line. De-dupe your bash_history and keep backups of it. ;-) There's often a GUI front end that someone's cobbled together. It might not be pretty but it works. If not, well, It's Qt time. Or you can introduce the sexy secretary Perl to your Python and C what happens. Hmm... I should probably avoid trying to be amusing. Seriously, though, it's not 1997 any more. It's not hard to switch and, for the most part, things just work.

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[KGIII]

Heh... It works fine as a desktop for me. The bonus is that I can also use it like a server in many regards.

From my house in Florida I connect to
my house in Maine which has
a desktop which is connected to
my server rack in the basement which has
some VM images which are
the OS image that is running on that
desktop in Maine which is connected to
a VPN by which I connect to
Slashdot...

Obviously, I'm retarded. However, I can be as retarded as I want.

Err... It's not always connected like this - I was just doing stuff and brought up a VM that's used to do some specific stuff. Seeing as I was there... Yeah, you get insane gibberish but the point is the same - it's a fine desktop and there's a lot you can do with it, easily, if you're willing to put some effort into learning. It gets worse - sometimes I'm not even using an installed OS but just running off a Live USB. I mostly set it up because I was in hotels and wanted to make sure that I had control of my encryption levels directly so I tunneled through my house. Surprisingly, it works. Seems to be stable as all hell and I can check my security system which I only allow certain machines and IP addresses to access. I'll skip the details for a whole variety of reasons. But, suffice to say, you can do the damnedest of things with relative ease and stability.

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Linux is a perfectly good desktop system" tell that to my Epson Printer vs Gimp: Gimp thinks that my tax forms should be formatted on 1" square wide in the center of the image. Otherwise ask the nerds that runs the linux forum help: "why you need to PRINT A SHEET OF PAPER? send your tax office a PDF file because we say so: n00b!"

This joke made my day! XD

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[buchanmilne]

Ubuntu != Linux

Most of the problems listed were Ubuntu/Unity-specific.

In my experience, Linux also wins on performance and stability, but is behind in applications available and support for new or obscure hardware (but support for widely used hardware that has been available for 1 year or more is better than Windows).

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[phantomfive]

You can easily get root on most Android phones. You can install your own software. That's not enough to be the ideal, but it's enough for me to be willing to buy it.

Re:Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[arth1]

So, you're four years behind on security patches?

Absolutely not. The OS does not require a reboot when patches are installed. And kernel modules can be reloaded a running kernel. That's the beauty of using a long term stable kernel version.
It's only the base kernel (what's not in modules) and the init process that isn't patched, and going through the kernel fix list during every update, none of the fixes there have any security impact for this particular installation.

Re:Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[arth1]

Oh come on man, that's just a trollbait.

Why do you think so?
I think it's a good piece of evidence that Linux stability isn't garbage compared to Windows, like the GP claimed?

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[FlyHelicopters]

Sure, you can... But that misses the point... People don't, because they don't care, don't see the point, and frankly have 473 other things in life far more important to them.

Sure, you can do it, but the comment was "Android is free and open and popular", implying that consumers have chosen that. They haven't.

For all intents and purposes, Android might as well be as closed as Windows, from the average person's point of view.

Re:Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[dave420]

Very true. You don't, however, know that your machine will successfully boot up should it have to...

Re:Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[SuiteSisterMary]

going through the kernel fix list during every update, none of the fixes there have any security impact for this particular installation.

That's an awful lot of assumptions.

You also have no idea if your computer will successfully reboot, or if you'll run into Novell hard drive syndrome.

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why is the default reaction of Linux-fanbois always either "it's open source, if you think it can be done better fix it yourself" or ad hominem attacks?

The problems described are reoccurring issues that have been going on for years (exemplarified by the incessant "Next year will be the year of the Linux-desktop" that is repeated as a mantra since at least a decade) and that are not or inadequately addressed, all because apparently the average Linux developer is a arrogant manchild who is unable of even the most basic form of introspection and/or self-criticism with regards to their fetishized favourite operating system.

The year of "Linux on the Desktop" will be the year after Linux developers have finally decided to pull their heads out of their collective arses and have decided to actually address issues that bother the common user (not: fanbois).

Re:Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[arth1]

That's an awful lot of assumptions.

No, it isn't. The change list is quite specific. If a fix has been made to a kernel driver that isn't called because you don't have that hardware, it can safely be assumed that the patch won't do anything for you, good or bad. If you install the hardware, the patch is already in place in the unloaded kernel, so you're good.
If the change is to handle an off-by-one error when using 256 cores, and your system has fewer, you don't need to reboot into the new kernel. If you install more cores, the patch is already in place in the unloaded kernel, so you're good.
If the change is to prevent user privilege escalation through a serial console, and the box is in a secured location where the only users who can use a serial console already have root privileges, you don't need the patch.
And so on.

If you're a sysadmin, it's your job to know these things. Blindly accepting all patches and rebooting weekly so you don't have to check what is patched and whether it affects you is introducing risks, not avoiding risk.

You also have no idea if your computer will successfully reboot

You don't know that when you install the patches and reboot into a new kernel immediately either. The only difference is when you do the reboot and possibly have to make corrections or back out.
I keep the system pointing at the old kernel, so if a reboot has to be done for emergency reasons, it will be done into a known working kernel. Rebooting into a new kernel won't happen until there either is a fix that is required, or hardware changes are done and a maintenance window is set aside where the new kernel can be tested.

Also, as far as possible, test both new patches and reboots in a staging environment, and with as identical hardware as possible. Especially for five nines systems.

The proof of the pudding is in the eating. And properly maintained Linux systems do prove themselves to be very stable, compared to systems that are so unstable that they are rebooted as a precaution every week or month.

Re:Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[SuiteSisterMary]

No, it isn't.

Yes, it is. You assume that the change list is complete, accurate, and comprehensive. You assume that you know every piece of software that is, or ever will be, running on your computer. You assume that you know every use case, interaction, or whatever, that is, or ever will be, running on your computer. And so on.

You don't know that when you install the patches and reboot into a new kernel immediately either.

Yes, which is why you do controlled tests, at a time of your choosing, rather than finding out when, four years down the line, your UPS happens to shit itself at the same time your generator fails during a massive power outage.

Also, as far as possible, test both new patches and reboots in a staging environment, and with as identical hardware as possible. Especially for five nines systems.

Absolutely, and one of the reasons is, change logs don't tell the whole story. Computers are complicated beasts. Also, blah blah, upgrade one member of the cluster at a time, yadda yadda, disaster recovery, and so on and so forth.

compared to systems that are so unstable that they are rebooted as a precaution every week or month.

Like Linux daemons that serve a certain number of requests, then spawn a new copy end themselves? Or xinetd-style 'spawn it, run it, kill it?' And while the OS itself may or may not be rock solid, most people run things other than the OS.

All I'm saying is, part of computer security is controlling as much as possible, and knowing, as best you can, in advance, what results when 'x' happens. Controlled reboots are part of that process.

Re:Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[Anonymous Coward]

Debian can patch sysvinit w/o requiring a reboot. It's not as impossible as it seems as init can be ordered to serialize state and exec("/sbin/init", "/sbin/init");

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[phantomfive]

Well that's true, people mostly don't choose Android because it is popular.
But that's ok, I don't care why they choose it, just as long as I have the option.

Re:Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[arth1]

Very true. You don't, however, know that your machine will successfully boot up should it have to...

Given that I don't point to the new kernel until I have a maintenance window, I have a pretty good idea that it will.

And the same can be said for doing the immediate reboot to a new kernel too - you don't know whether it will successfully boot up then either, no?

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[stooo]

>> You do realize that ... are mutually exclusive phrases, right?
No, it's not.
- The driver issues are already resolved. the 1% of PCs still having driver problems are easily avoided when purchasing HW.
- the lack of support from some software vendors will resolve itself quickly. Today, even in specialised jobs you can find suitable Linux alternatives, or at least packages working fine on Wine. Some big administrations have sucessfully switched to Linux for most of their desktops (eg. the city of Munich, with 40k Desktops)

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[david_thornley]

Let me put it this way. With the exception of games, I find Linux a perfectly good desktop system, better than anything Microsoft does. (I have a laptop for games.) It has pretty much all the applications I want, except games.

If LInux supports the hardware and software you want, its perfectly good in a desktop. There are two sorts of people this typically applies to: people who use a lot of applications and find the Linux software adequate or superior, and people who are very casual computer users, and use them only for web surfing (including Facebook), email, light word processing, and things like that. Of course, these people would usually be happy with an iPad (I really want to get my mother-in-law using one).

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[david_thornley]

The consumer end of computers is moving away from MS Windows, towards Android and iOS. Desktops and laptops are not going to just go away, but they won't be as important as they are now.

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[FlyHelicopters]

The consumer end of computers is moving away from MS Windows, towards Android and iOS.

Yea, but that really isn't happening...

Don't confuse the adoption of large numbers of Android and iOS devices with the removal of Windows devices.

The former can be added without removing the latter.

Now, if people get laptops and desktops with Android and iOS, that would be different, but that isn't happening.

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[Anonymous Coward]

Geeks who have these delusions of grandeur of Linux taking over are kidding themselves.

Then I'll continue to have delusions of grandeur. People have to keep hoping that things will get better otherwise one becomes nihilistic.

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[david_thornley]

I think you're looking too much at the short term, and people haven't had sufficiently powerful tablets for sufficiently long that they see them as viable Windows replacements. It's not going to happen all at once, but people will realize that they haven't used that laptop in six months, so why replace it?

Re: Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[Ravaldy]

What tells you Apple wouldn't be the next choice if MS wasn't there? I'm far more willing to believe Apple as a first option before Linux. I'm not trying to downplay the value of Linux but it has yet to prove itself as a platform for the masses when not "WELL CONTAINED" such as Android. Apple also reaps the rewards of containing it's OS in the hardware is chooses to. Linux is available in so many distributions that for someone that doesn't know better it's hard decision to make. The next issue is who do you call when you have OS issues? At the end of the day who is truly accountable for OS issues that need quick resolution? I'm not that close to the distributions themselves but my past experience showed that the community was the only place I could go and for many businesses that's not a valid option

My 2 cents.

Re:Can we end-of-life Microsoft instead?

[Ravaldy]

is collecting very much personalized data

People reveal tones more information on social network so it would appear most people don't truly care about that kind of privacy.

and furthermore you have 'updates' forced on you

Do you know how many times I've heard end users say "why didn't it just do on it's own". That's why it's forced on you. There was an issue with Windows 10 being forced on you but not without your final approval. Get your facts straight. If you read only the headlines I can see how you believe that actually happened.

that effectively installs spyware and other malware on your computer, so they can collect very personal data anyway?

You like to embark on conspiracy theories. I tend to like understand what malware actually is before calling something malware.

Better get some counseling, friend, you've been brainwashed. Or are you a paid Shill for Microsoft?

I'm in charge of technology for the company I work for. I have picked the products that fit the needs of this company. MS runs all our workstations (no real choice there because of the software we use for engineering) hence the reason our servers are also MS. We use Linux were it is suited in our business. In our case all tablets meant for data collection run Linux with our home grown software. We also have products with micro processors that run Linux to control LEDs, relay actions and collect logs available through a slimed down version of a web server. So do I have a biased opinion? I'd say I chose technologies I knew well but didn't discriminate towards technologies I though were better fitting for certain projects.

A small tip

[Anonymous Coward]

Something to do after installing Windows 10 is to chuck off Internet Explorer.

Internet exploder

[Anonymous Coward]

Did the internet just get 3 times safer ?

Re:Internet exploder

[invictusvoyd]

Nope . There is still something called Flash.

Re:Internet exploder

[Ravaldy]

And still other OSs with issues too. Just one announced now on /.

http://tech.slashdot.org/story...

Re:Internet exploder

[Anonymous Coward]

Pretty simple to disable in Edge.

Re:Internet exploder

[tepples]

Until you end up on video sites that say "Please reenable Flash" on those browsers for which the site doesn't say "Please install our app".

Translation: "End-of-life" means more control.

[Futurepower(R)]

For Microsoft, "End-of-life" means more control over users by forcing them to use new software that makes Microsoft's methods more dominant. My opinion, shared by many others.

Re:Translation: "End-of-life" means more control.

[gstoddart]

Essentially, yes .. if you haven't upgraded to our new hotness by now, we're going to abandon you and not give a crap what happens.

If you have upgraded to the new hotness, we have total control over your PC and mission accomplished.

Re:Translation: "End-of-life" means more control.

[Ravaldy]

Clearly a very bias opinion.

Re:Translation: "End-of-life" means more control.

[Anonymous Coward]

Like many, even most, other tech companies. What you imply for Microsoft is the well known Apple strategy.

Re:Translation: "End-of-life" means more control.

[amicusNYCL]

Sweet Jesus, I wasn't aware of this.

Tell me, how does Microsoft force anyone to use anything?

Re: Translation: "End-of-life" means more control.

[Anonymous Coward]

And every other software company. You still support your software from 10 years back ?

Re:Translation: "End-of-life" means more control.

[Anonymous Coward]

End of Life means: We no longer want to support that shitty source code, its old and our developers want to work on new things instead of old things.

Re:Translation: "End-of-life" means more control.

[Anonymous Coward]

Let me give you an unbiased opinion, actually just facts.
Since they started bundling Internet Explorer with Windows, they claimed it was a part of Windows that could not be removed, in other words it was a part of the OS. Logically, the complete bundle was always sold with the guarantee of X years of support on the whole thing combined. This was also the case for IE8 in Windows 7.

Only recently they changed their mind and decided not to support IE8 on Windows 7 anymore. If you want to stay secure, you have to migrate to another version that doesn't quite function the same.

This is called bait and switch. That is fraudulent and it is a crime.

Re:Translation: "End-of-life" means more control.

[Anonymous Coward]

Yet in every other case, running deprecated software is inadvisable and a stupid thing to do. Not defending Microsoft's piece of shit browser, but the fact that old, vulnerable and generally terrible versions like 8-10 are being phased out is a good thing.

Re:Translation: "End-of-life" means more control.

[gstoddart]

Yet in every other case, running deprecated software is inadvisable and a stupid thing to do. Not defending Microsoft's piece of shit browser, but the fact that old, vulnerable and generally terrible versions like 8-10 are being phased out is a good thing.

Oh, don't get me wrong ... every single version of IE has been a steaming piece of shit.

Upgrade to something else.

But the reality is a lot of people are stuck on older OS's on older machines and don't have the skills or money to upgrade to a new machine. These things won't go away simply because Microsoft abandons people. It just means a large amount of people are stuck with old and busted with little choice.

The problem is people should have stopped using IE years ago; because it's pretty much always been crap.

Re:Translation: "End-of-life" means more control.

[AmiMoJo]

To be fair, you can't expect them to support it forever, and they did give you over a decade of warning as to when EOL was scheduled. They will happily sell you a further support contract, I'm sure. The UK government probably already has one.

Re:Translation: "End-of-life" means more control.

[Anonymous Coward]

Isn't the the entire i platform? If you don't upgrade your whole OS, you don't get any browser patches. And for those older devices left in the dust, 0 app browser patches.

Android and pretty much every other platform can update their system apps independently.

Don't see what the big deal is.

Heck yeah!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

This news deserves a long, loud, and potentially drunken party.

Re:Heck yeah!!!

[invictusvoyd]

Like the Mozilla release party .

I'm stuck

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm stuck on IE 8 and cannot upgrade due to a critical accessibility bug in all newer versions. I opened a case with MS years ago and they will NOT fix it.

Re:I'm stuck

[Qzukk]

What accessibility bug?

Re:I'm stuck

[Anonymous Coward]

Cannot turn off anti-aliasing anymore.

Re:I'm stuck

[Anonymous Coward]

Looks like someone monkeypatched it for 32 bit Win7+IE9.

Edge?

[Anonymous Coward]

Too bad Edge won't run without UAC enabled.

Re:Edge?

[The-Ixian]

Why would you disable UAC?

Do you log in to your Linux boxes as root and do everything as a super user? Why would you do that on Windows?

Re:Edge?

[Anonymous Coward]

Disabling UAC does not mean running everything as superuser.

Re:Edge?

[beernutz]

Funny, Edge seems to run just fine for me with UAC disabled.

Re:Edge?

[dywolf]

because I don't like being asked a million times whether I really want to do every stupid little random thing.
UAC is an abomination unto the gods, may it burn eternally in the pit of fire.

Re:Edge?

[jawtheshark]

.... but it doesn't run on the (true) Administrator account (when you activate it).

Re:Edge?

[Anonymous Coward]

Pretty much this. I've had UAC disabled since the mechanism was introduced in Vista (2006 I think, which makes it basically 10 years of running without UAC) and have had absolutely no problems or consequences with it disabled, and probably in fact made life easier by not having to deal with edge cases of older software not expecting UAC in the first place.

Linux software has always had the root/non-root user situation figured out. Too much Windows software still expected (and even now, still expects!) Admin-level rights to work properly.

Re:Edge?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would you disable UAC?

Well one example, a user of the computer I setup may one day unplug their USB flash drive from the computers front *lower* USB port and the next day plug it back into the front *upper* USB port.

To Windows this makes it a brand new never-seen-before device, and even with preloaded drivers, it will prompt twice to reload USB drivers requiring the domain admin credentials at the UAC prompt. Local admin credentials will not work.

Another example is PCs with one on-board DVI (or VGA) connector and the rest being DisplayPort.
If you turn power to an LCD off connected to a display port, Windows sees the display port adapter as being unplugged. When power to the LCD is turned back on Windows now sees this never-unplugged display port adapter as a brand new never seen before device, and again even with preloaded drivers and being pre configured and setup, it requires administrator credentials to enable the second monitor again.

Explaining this to an end user is generally futile and it is easier to fix this (and the thousands of other) problem in UAC by disabling it.

Do you log in to your Linux boxes as root and do everything as a super user? Why would you do that on Windows?

Of course not, because in Linux I can actually tell sudo to allow one specific operation (say allowing access to a USB flash drive on a USB port - any USB port - or access to the video card device file) without having to allow *any other root restricted operation*

UAC is incapable of this, it is all or nothing with no fine (or even coarse) grain control.

Re:Edge?

[Anonymous Coward]

Because UAC interferes with some apps because of how it lies about the user id. Some apps just don't grok "admin" without admin privs, and they don't handle the popup correctly. I turn UAC off on all systems I have at home, and my employer turns it off on all desktop clients. In fact, I think you are the first person I know of who actually uses UAC!

Re:Edge?

[dave420]

So your domain admin has made it so all newly-inserted USB devices need administrator approval before being used, and you blame that on UAC, because that's what you see causing problems. That means you don't understand UAC and domains. Good work!

Re:Edge?

[The-Ixian]

I feel like you're doing it wrong.

In the early days of UAC on Vista, you are right, it was a pain. But things have gotten much better since then. Microsoft has improved UAC and app writers are more aware of UAC and design their software around it.

UAC is actually a clever feature, imo and it is invaluable from an network admin perspective because it allows on-the-fly privilege escalation much like sudo. Yes, I know you can use runas or the Explorer context menu, but the automatic prompting is nice.

All of my own family members whose Windows boxen I take care of have UAC set and run as a standard user. They have instructions to call me when they see the UAC prompt. Guess what? I rarely get calls about this.

Re:Edge?

[The-Ixian]

Yeah, something is not right here.

I admin a small network of about 150 Windows devices and all of our users are high-end CAD and have multiple monitors. We also allow writing to USB but disallow programs from running from removable drives.

We have *never* had issues like what the GP described.

However, the GP is correct about the "all or nothing" aspect of UAC. Because of this, we use a 3rd party product called DefendPoint (formerly Privilege Guard) which allows us to set domain-wide policy on what can be elevated and by whom. For example, we have a custom written "AppStore" which we allow to run elevated without prompting. This allows our users to install pre-approved applications and updates without the need for me to install it for them.

Re:Edge?

[The-Ixian]

Not only use it, but it happens to be a core element of our network structure.

I used to be one of those people who disabled UAC immediately. In the Vista days it was bad, no doubt. It has come a long way since then.

I also was the kind of person who would immediately disable SELinux on CentOS boxes until I took the time to learn it and then it was really pretty simple and now I have stronger systems because I run with it enabled.

Re:Edge?

[The-Ixian]

You are right, but only if you are running as a standard user. Most home users run under an admin account. In this case, running without UAC means that anything that is executed under your account, with or without your knowledge, will be silently elevated to the highest possible permission level.

So, it is especially dangerous to run as admin without UAC. It means that any exploit that manages to make it past your other counter-measures are guaranteed to have the highest privilege level.

Re:Edge?

[Anonymous Coward]

I feel its more effective to, if you want different or reduced permissions, to have the others use lower privileged user accounts.

but as for myself, I cant be bothered. UAC is a PITA.
I don't like being asked if I really want to run a program, or delete a file, or change a setting.

If I didn't want to do it, I wouldn't have done it.

its my computer, and I don't have time to give myself permission every time I'm trying to do something.

far as im concerned, its fake security for the insecure, or training wheels for the incompetent.

Re:Edge?

[beernutz]

That seems like an entirely different thing than "Edge won't run without UAC enabled."

Re:Edge?

[jawtheshark]

Yes, I didn't say anything else. Hence staring my phrase with "but".

Not entirely true

[truedfx]

Beginning January 12, 2016, only the most current version of Internet Explorer available for a supported operating system will receive technical supports and security updates.

This would mean that IE9 will remain supported on Vista. According to Windows lifecycle fact sheet, Vista's support doesn't end until April 2017, and IE9 is the most current version of Internet Explorer available for Vista.

Re:Not entirely true

[Anonymous Coward]

According to the KB, this update is only for Windows 7 SP1 and Windows Server 2008 R2 SP1.

Vista's fucked

[LichtSpektren]

MS Windows Vista is supposed to get security updates until April 2017, but they can't get IE10 or 11, and now IE9 is end-of-life. Keep that in mind when Microsoft promises to "support your device through its lifetime" or whatever bullshit.

Re:Vista's fucked

[Anonymous Coward]

MS Windows Vista is supposed to get security updates until April 2017, but they can't get IE10 or 11, and now IE9 is end-of-life. Keep that in mind when Microsoft promises to "support your device through its lifetime" or whatever bullshit.

Except that thenextweb.com is not the authoritative source for what Microsoft is actually going to do (hint: their reporting is wrong). Perhaps you could keep that in mind the next time you decide to bash Microsoft or whatever bullshit.

Re:Vista's fucked

[Wraithlyn]

Why the fuck can't they port IE11 to Vista?

Re:Vista's fucked

[kthreadd]

They don't want to encourage anyone to use Vista anymore. It's a rather old OS that is running out of support next year so they do as little as possible and only support IE 9 on Vista until then.

Re:Vista's fucked

[toddestan]

I'm actually kind of surprised they didn't extend their free Windows 10 offer to those that were still on Vista.

EOL means no more patches

[Anonymous Coward]

So this is definitely not about keeping people safe.

Re:EOL means no more patches

[amicusNYCL]

Uh, yes, that's correct. Instead of "keeping people safe", it probably has more to do with the developers at Microsoft not wanting to make changes to 4 different versions of their software across multiple operating systems when they could only do it to 1. If you're concerned about safety at all then maybe consider using a browser that was released within the past 3 years instead of counting on Microsoft to hold your hand.

Re:EOL means no more patches

[kthreadd]

All users have to do is upgrade to the latest version and they will continue to get patches. This will only affect users running old versions of IE on versions of Windows that can run a newer version.

MISS INFORMATION or poor assumption

[Ravaldy]

the company continues to transition customers to Edge on Windows 10."

Internet Explorer is NOT being discontinued anytime soon. There are a number of devices, enterprises, corporations and government entities that still use software written is god awful proprietary models such as ActiveX and still need to be available until they move away. Add to that the number of web services with NTLM support and you increase the number of users still needing IE.

So the reality is that Edge is being pushed as the browser for 99% of users. IE is still available in Windows 10 but is not "in your face" like Edge is.

Re:MISS INFORMATION or poor assumption

[110010001000]

IE11 is still there. But IE11 is being end-of-lifed ("discontinued")

Re:MISS INFORMATION or poor assumption

[110010001000]

Er I meant that anything less than IE11 was being end of lifed. Slashdot took out my less than sign.

We need better government.

[Futurepower(R)]

We need a government that supports the people (democracy), rather than a government that supports the rich and powerful (dictatorship of the rich).

Microsoft's Software is Malware. "Malware means software designed to function in ways that mistreat or harm the user."

Microsoft has a long history of extremely incompetent management. For example, the cover of the January 16, 2013 issue of BusinessWeek magazine has a large photo of Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer (now replaced by Satya Nadella) with the headline calling him "Monkey Boy". See the BusinessWeek cover in this article: Steve Ballmer Is No Longer A Monkey Boy, Says Bloomberg BusinessWeek. The BusinessWeek cover says "No More" and "Mr.", but that doesn't take much away from the fact that the magazine called Ballmer Monkey Boy -- on its cover.

Worst CEO in the United States: Quote from an article in Forbes Magazine about Steve Ballmer: "Without a doubt, Mr. Ballmer is the worst CEO of a large publicly traded American company today." Another quote: "The reach of his bad leadership has extended far beyond Microsoft when it comes to destroying shareholder value -- and jobs." (May 12, 2012)

Re:We need better government.

[Anonymous Coward]

Malware means software designed to function in ways that mistreat or harm the user.

Just because you pay women to beat you up and make you edit configuration files by hand doesn't mean the rest of us are into that.

Re:We need better government.

[EndlessNameless]

rather than a government that supports the rich and powerful (dictatorship of the rich)

The word you're looking for is "oligarchy".

Re:We need better government.

[Anonymous Coward]

Look! Another dumbass who thinks shouting "Socialism" proves his point!

Re:We need better government.

[malditaenvidia]

It's funny because every single point made here is true, but Google has managed to surpass all of them over the years. That's a company whose slogan used to be "do no evil". The market is so messed up, Microsoft and "Raging Bull" Ballmer seem tame in comparison to the likes of Schmidt and Zuckerberg. What a time to be alive.

Re:We need better government.

[blue9steel]

Plutocracy is probably closer to correct.

Re:We need better government.

[kheldan]

I think in part that's because Google isn't the binary code that's turning that pile of hardware in front of you into a usable tool instead of just so much metals and polymers; you don't have to use Google or any of it's products, there are other search engines out there, and other providers of the services that Google offers. On the other hand, for most people, it's Windows or nothing. I hate to make an analogy like this (as poor as it may be), but it's like your local water utility deciding to add things to the water piped into your house that you didn't ask for and can't filter out; you don't have much choice, and the alternatives are problematic at best. Personally I'm in the process of trying to transition away from any version of Windows and use some flavor of Linux, but so far I can't even get the 'Live' version of Ubuntu to run on the old Dell laptop I've got that I wanted to use as a 'trainer' for myself, before planning out the switch-over on my desktop machine; it's stalling the whole process out.

well outlined transition path

[nimbius]

as outlined by microsofts official policy, the transition path is to follow:
OEM-Vendors: will continue bundling IE10 with no fewer than 32,768 OEM specific plug-ins and search bars, as per "the agreement."
home users: through the dark caverns of innumerable bonzi buddies and search helpers, and through the cloistered mass of trojans and activeX malware, Windows will at first notify, then plead, then insist, and finally quietly download and install Edge with, or without your knowledge. You are to verbally complain (with or without audience) that either "someone changed my icons" or "the internet button isnt working."
Embedded applications: checkout appliances, billboards, interactive kiosks, computerized lathes and mills, and medical devices will continue to run Internet Explorer 3.0 until the last star falls from the heavens or the last operator dives from a major skyscraper.
Banking institutions: please continue to ensure browsers conform to at least windows explorer. The version clearly doesnt matter. Hell, just getting the name to stick with you guys is an accomplishment
Doris in finance: please install the final pinochle/oprah book club toolbar to your barely recognizeable "browser." Doing so will collapse the waveform and upon its arrival, shear the very fabric of reality and spacetime into what you may perceive as a perfect game of web solitare but which is in actuality the very embodiment of a digital christ, if you will. The singularity now ushered upon us, we may finally become one with infinity through your divine portal. The bonzi buddy will confirm this with his signature "flip"

Re:well outlined transition path

[Anonymous Coward]

Me: Your on-line payment website isn't working.
Bank: Can't be on our side, there must be something wrong with your system. What kind of anti-virus software are you using?
Me: None, I'm running Firefox on Linux.
Bank: Oh, never mind, It must be on our end then. We will let you know when we have fixed it.
Me: Speechless.

The linked article doesn't give the full picture.

[dstyle5]

What is actually happening is:

"Beginning January 12, 2016, only the most current version of Internet Explorer available for a supported operating system will receive technical support and security updates. Please visit the Internet Explorer Support Lifecycle Policy FAQ here http://support.microsoft.com/g... for list of supported operating systems and browser combinations."

So if you are running Vista SP2, which supports only up to IE9, you are still OK, it is still supported, as shown at the Internet Explorer Support Lifecycle Policy FAQ link above. Running Server 2012 (Not R2), then IE10 is still supported. Yes the article is valid for the operating systems they are referring to, but it doesn't paint a complete picture of what is going on for all of Microsoft's operating systems. Older IEs are supported for some operating systems, just not the two mentioned in the article.

Server 2012 users screwed again

[Anonymous Coward]

Server 2012 is now not only stuck with the garbage Metro UI, but can't get the latest version of IE. Server 2008R2 gets IE11, and 2012R2 as well, but if you installed 2012 server when it came out, you're screwed once again. No upgrade path to 2012R2 without a complete reinstall (not to mention purchasing) of the OS. I will never install a server OS from Microsoft without an R2 in the name again.

Re:Server 2012 users screwed again

[Ravaldy]

What's bad about the metro UI in 2012?

I personally find it convenient. Configured it once and bam, all administrative tools are in one place and organized. The day you need something not in there you just deal with it...

Re:Server 2012 users screwed again

[Anonymous Coward]

garbage Metro UI

Universal Windows Platform (UWP) is the final name that they settled with. The Metro or Modern terms are not used anymore.

Re:Server 2012 users screwed again

[Anonymous Coward]

No start button without installing a 3rd party app. Hot corners are a bitch to use through a windowed VNC-style interface, or through Hyper-v Machine viewer. No easy way to get a nice alphabetical list of installed programs for when I can't remember what the program was called. Try having several versions of SQL Management tools installed and picking the right one from the truncated titles displayed in Metro. Server Manager starts crashing randomly until server is rebooted (Doesn't seem to happen in R2) I also can't replicate between 2012r2 servers purchased months after the 2012 servers were installed.

At least 2012R2 should still be widely used in production for another 5-8 years, but never getting any improvements to the OS on 2012r1, even just 1 or 2 years after release is going to make those installs get worse and worse to manage over time, just like 2008r1, aka Vista Server.

I'm done beta testing windows server products in production.

Re:Server 2012 users screwed again

[Anonymous Coward]

OK, this is just wrong.

First, you can choose an in-place upgrade if you'd rather not do a clean install. This is actually the first option when running the installer. I.e., an idiot would probably do it without even reading the prompts. Apps/files/crap will all be there.

Second, if you're using non-free software then you have the buyer's responsibility of making wise purchases. If you have Software Assurance like any sane enterprise, you can upgrade to 2012 R2 or 2016. Same for CALs. The download links and license keys are generally available on the release date.

Your problems are 100% the result of your ignorance or poor decisions.

Re:Server 2012 users screwed again

[Anne Thwacks]

GUI on a server? I thought servers ran headless, via LOM/ssh.

Disclaimer: I do not use MS products.

Of Course

[Anonymous Coward]

Why isn't IE6 on that list? They should EOL it again. And put two rounds in its skull. And burn the body. And encase the ashes in a concrete cylinder.

Re:Of Course

[desdinova 216]

why not nuke it from orbit, it's the only way to be sure.

Re:Of Course

[l0n3s0m3phr34k]

And then launch said cement case straight into the Sun.

Re:Of Course

[tehlinux]

Double tap!

Re:Of Course

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't wants bits of IE scattered around the planet and floating in the air. That's why.

Who really cares?

[mr_diags]

Who really cares if "support" for these fossils stop? Who has any reason to ever use a Microsoft browser when there is Chrome, Firefox, Opera, Safari, and other better solutions? Is anyone really planning to use Edge? What troglodyte is still developing any server feed that requires using a Microsoft browser?

Re:Who really cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

I do. I use a program that is very specific to my industry and the multi billion dollar company that runs it REQUIRES Internet Explorer to use it. This program is used by a lot of people in the travel industry and is a standard. I am a 33 year old tech geek who is required to use IE or I cannot process air plane tickets through one of the largest travel processors in the world (Based in Pune, India). So please remember that there are entire industries that require certain browsers because of what those browsers have to be set up to do and have to be correct 100% of the time or the TSA might just give you a call for trying to book tickets for terrorists (One call only this year thankfully).

Re:Who really cares?

[Nexion]

I use Explorer every so often. To download Chrome or Firefox, but still... :P

Re:Who really cares?

[U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M]

Safari is only on OS X and iOS. And since the day Opera switched to Blink I've stopped counting them as a different choice anymore.

So it's really Chrome or Firefox now.

But Firefox keeps destroying their own browser for stupid reasons, remove or change things that people like and add things that nobody wants or even asked for.

That means there's only Chrome, unless you're a Windows users which means you can choose between Chrome and Edge.

Re:Who really cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not a developer, but the devs' offices are ~20 feet from my desk - our industry leading (won't say what industry, but we're a 1BN corporation in the US) company (we're almost 60% of our industry)'s web interface is IE-only. So, I get to use IE when I use that web interface. fortunately, everything else works in Chrome, but I have to use IE every day at work :(

The only upside is we do tend to always support the latest version of IE (but no, we do not support Edge - not that it matters to me, we mostly use Win7 in the office).

Re:Who really cares?

[Dadoo]

I use a program that is very specific to my industry and the multi billion dollar company that runs it REQUIRES Internet Explorer to use it.

Maybe if you and your industry complained to your vendors more about allowing you to use any browser, stuff like this wouldn't happen. Honestly, any company that codes to a specific browser, these days, should be run out of business.

Re:Who really cares?

[Dadoo]

our industry leading (won't say what industry, but we're a 1BN corporation in the US) company (we're almost 60% of our industry)'s web interface is IE-only.

With any luck, this will hurt your company enough, financially, that your management will think twice, before they code a web application to a specific browser, again.

Re:Who really cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

Many enterprise systems require use of some exact version of IE. If MS drops support for those ancient IE versions, it will just accelerate the transition from IE-only systems, which also liberates users from MS' leash. In the end, world will be better place for all but MS shareholders. It is weird how Bill Gates and other major shareholders will just watch the company to shoot itself into foot every day.

Re:Who really cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

stuff like this wouldn't happen

Actually it happens when companies get bamboozled by other companies. Their intent was never to make a valid product, it was to sell a shitty one that constantly needs to be updated to keep running the same.

Every software package that I've encounered in modern times with specific browser requirements (it's always IE) was very clearly written 10-15 years ago when that sort of behavior was "acceptable". Meaning, hiring managers didn't know what to look for when hiring programmers so they just hired idiots who had no idea what they were doing. So 10-15 years and 1000's of programmers sent on their Death March to keep the ball of bullshit (*ahem* cash cow) rolling is all it takes to keep utter shit like that around.

IE11 push

[BrookHarty]

My IT Department has been pushing out IE11 across all the corporate offices for months, and the IT Apps have been working since last year to make sure all custom apps work with it. SAP/Oracle was the only issue, but work around came as it was an industry standard.

We have daily quotas to hit home users who vpn in, to make sure they are upgraded, since they dont run AD login scrips. Its been quite the wack-a-mole to get all users upgraded.

And last year was the EOL of XP too, that was a fun rollout of new upgraded os/hardware rollouts across the entire company. I even ended up helping deploying new workstations on peoples desks. Even with the hired temps, we didnt have enough manpower to do it.

Been a busy 2015 for IT.

Re:IE11 push

[l0n3s0m3phr34k]

SCCM is your friend for those situations lol

Seems utterly pointless, given the use cases?

[King_TJ]

I mean, I understand how MS is doing this, where "the latest version of IE that can run on your supported OS is still supported" .... but here's the thing? People out there building new web sites for the masses are NOT going to waste time making sure they render perfectly on IE 8 or 9, in most cases. If they work, great... But the bulk of the QA testing is going to happen around the latest version of the browser (IE 11) -- and even that may die out with more emphasis placed on pages working well in "Edge" and Win 10.

So seems to me, in the "real world", the people sticking with using an older IE like 8 or 9 are doing so purposely, because they run older web-based applications or internal Intranet sites/portals that were coded specifically for those browser versions. We've already reached the point where you're stuck using an old version of a Microsoft OS just so you can keep doing that. So whether MS declares the old browsers "unsupported" or "supported" means little more than a technicality. (If I was MS, I would do this "dance" about supported versions too, just because I wouldn't want to deal with headaches from some idiot still on Vista who refuses to spend a buck to upgrade it, and now wants to argue over what "extended support for Vista" really means.) But are these people really all worried about missing a few security patches from MS for those old IE versions? Heck -- there's more inherent security weakness in using IE vs. an alternative browser!

Essentially, you should be using IE 11 or an alternative browser like Chrome or FireFox for everything at this point, *unless* you're in some weird "edge case" scenario where you still need outdated software to work with other outdated software you can't live without. Those situations will ALWAYS happen, and that's why you can still download a freeware CP/M emulator for Windows and other oddball apps like that. MS may as well realistically call all IE browsers before 11 "dead" and let people do as they wish with them.

So we can stop supporting them?

[Anonymous Coward]

Good, no more crap.

Former Linux/Firefox user now using W10/Edge.

[Anonymous Coward]

I was a Linux and Firefox user for many years. I would help regular people install Firefox, and even Ubuntu from time to time.

I don't know what happened, but all of a sudden so many open source projects went really stupid. Firefox went from being very usable to having a junk UI in just a few releases, and it hasn't gotten any better. GNOME 3 is totally unusable. Unity is shit, too.

I finally got fed up when something called systemd started screwing up my computer with each update. I wasted far too many hours debugging various bugs and problems involving systemd. In all my years of using several different Linux distros I pretty much never had a problem with the init system. Then systemd got involved and I'd run into problems all the time!

So when my computer had some hardware problems, I opted to get a Surface tablet thing instead. I didn't have high hopes, but I have been pleasantly surprised! Windows 10 generally works very well for me. I've never had a single problem booting my Surface. It just works. I even started using Edge, and I've been very surprised by it, too. It's fast, sites work well in it, and its UI is better than Firefox's.

If you had asked me 3 years ago what OS and browser I'd be using in 2016, I would've told you Linux and Firefox. But alas here I am using Windows 10 and Edge. And you know what? I'm actually happy with them both. They've improved over time, while Linux, Firefox, and the open source desktops have gotten worse.

I want to use and I want to support open source software, but it just can't compete any longer. Things were looking so good for it. Linux was becoming a real option as a total replacement for Windows and OS X, but then so many open source projects just went totally stupid, ruining what was such a good thing.

Instead of admitting how bad things have gotten, I'm sure that some people here will just accuse me of being a "shill". Well I'm not getting paid by anybody to say that Windows 10 and Edge are now better than Linux and Firefox. I'm saying that because it's the unfortunate truth!

Re:Former Linux/Firefox user now using W10/Edge.

[peppepz]

In which ways do you find that the Edge UI is better than Firefox's? In Edge, you can't drag-and-drop files, so you need to resort to Windows 3.1-era browse dialog boxes if you need to choose a file. You can't download files properly either: downloads will stop when you close the browser window, there's absolutely no way of knowing how fast you are downloading, and when the downloads finish, they silently open BEHIND the browser window. The UI has the same nature as that of the Lynx browser, that is text lines, but it has much fewer features and it's perhaps even less intuitive: the text-only links that make up the UI are actually hidden behind cryptic hieroglyphs and when you need a feature, assuming it's one of the few features that Edge actually supports, you have to hunt for it by clicking those pictograms to find out that they reveal hidden surfaces, sliding tabs and other incoherent, undiscoverable UI elements. I really can't understand what's to like in that browser, nor how a browser so limited and buggy could ever be released as part of a paid product. Even searching for text can cause Edge to crash on my machine. And even when it doesn't crash, the text search thingy remains stuck open even if you change tab or close the current one. It's as if the developers hadn't tested even the basic use cases of a browser (searching for text, downloading a file) before releasing it as a supposedly finished application.

Re:Former Linux/Firefox user now using W10/Edge.

[Teun]

I don't understand where you see the advantage of Edge over Firefox, the latter offers all plus so many handy plug ins.
One reason Edge is not ready for deployment is because it doesn't run on Linux on Mac.

Re:Former Linux/Firefox user now using W10/Edge.

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

One reason Edge is not ready for deployment is because it doesn't run on Linux on Mac.

Or Windows 7, 8 or 8.1.

Or even Windows 10, if you're running Enterprise on the Long-Term Servicing Branch (LTSB), as surely most big businesses who switch will be.

I think Microsoft have miscalculated on this one: if Edge isn't going to force most customers to switch to Windows 10, then not having Edge on the more popular Windows versions is just going to limit its relevance and make IE11 the new IE8.

Re:Former Linux/Firefox user now using W10/Edge.

[AmiMoJo]

You have discovered the genius of Edge's design. It's UI is already fucked and random features are broken. It took Firefox until version 43^pi/4 to reach that stage! Microsoft are way ahead of the game on this one.

Personally I prefer the old fashioned usability and stability of Pale Moon, but I'm weird like that.

Re: Former Linux/Firefox user now using W10/Edge.

[Anonymous Coward]

What's so unfortunate about this truth? It works well. Isn't that what you want?

Microsoft responds.

[Anonymous Coward]

A Microsoft employee responded in the usual socially backward way of Microsoft people.

Re:Microsoft responds.

[Anonymous Coward]

Did you just attribute a post to a Microsoft employee, with no proof whatsoever, as the backing for your argument?

I'm Stuck on IE 10

[Daetrin]

Every time i reboot my computer it tries to install "Internet Explorer 10 for Windows 7 for x64-based Systems" (despite the fact that i can run IE and it claims to be version 10) and gets a 9C48 error, and it also tries to install "Internet Explorer 11 for Windows 7 for x64-based Systems" and gets a 9C59 error. Plus a lot of the time after that the system will slow to a crawl as it deals with a ton of "WindowsWcpStoreCorruption" errors for about an hour. It won't let me install Windows 10, but it's not listed in the updates so i can try to uninstall it and do a fresh install. There is a "Windows Internet Explorer 9" but it won't let me uninstall that. (Or rather, it will let me try, but it never works.) I've tried at least a half-dozen fixes suggested on various Microsoft forums and none of them have worked.

I wouldn't actually care (well, aside from the "slowing to a crawl" thing) except this is on a work machine and i need to use IE for some things for compatibility reasons. I figure at this point i'm going to have to get IT to reinstall the OS (unless i can talk them into just giving me a new machine. =) Isn't having the OS tightly integrated with a browser just great? =P

Re:I'm Stuck on IE 10

[wjcofkc]

Windows update error 9c48

https://social.technet.microso...>

Dealing with different versions but you should be able to modify the instructions.

Re:I'm Stuck on IE 10

[Daetrin]

I've seen a number of solutions like that one where the first step is "uninstall the current version of IE". Which as i mentioned in the first post i have tried to do. Multiple times. If i try to uninstall IE via Programs & Features all i get is "An error has occurred. Not all of the updates were successfully uninstalled."

Also already tried:
Repairing Update process with Microsoft Fix it 50123
System Update Readiness Tool
Manually Reinstalling IE9
Manually Reinstalling IE10
Manually Installing IE11
Uninstalling IE via Microsoft Fix it 50778
Uninstalling via Revo Uninstaller
Uninstalling via the command line from Safe Mode

Re:I'm Stuck on IE 10

[wjcofkc]

You mentioned it is a work computer. Have you considered backing up your files and re-imaging? If it's a work computer their licensing should accommodate that. I'd say you are already pretty far past the point where that common practice would take place.

Re:I'm Stuck on IE 10

[JackieBrown]

You mentioned it is a work computer. Have you considered backing up your files and re-imaging? If it's a work computer their licensing should accommodate that. I'd say you are already pretty far past the point where that common practice would take place.

Wow - And I remember being annoyed when the help desk would tell me rebooting my machine would fix any error I could encounter (you know - rather than fixing the problem.)
Now the solution is to re-image

Re:I'm Stuck on IE 10

[wjcofkc]

Yes. Yes it is. Having spent far too long (thankfully no longer) supporting this kind of scenario, re-imaging is all that is left. We are talking about Windows, and often enough, this is the most reasonable solution. That is just how it is. When all else fails, use fire. This scenario has been the corporate solution to fixing a problem this extensive with Windows crapping out in in a matter where all else fails for a very, very long time. We are talking about Windows in a corporate environment after all.

Re:I'm Stuck on IE 10

[wjcofkc]

But seriously, invoke your inner hacker and solve it with that style, it is not hard.

Obvious troll, but whatever.

[Anonymous Coward]

2/10, you blew it on the last sentence.

So some guy installs unity Ubuntu on a laptop then is shocked, SHOCKED -- when suspend and bluetooth file transfer give him problems?

What a spoiled brat.

Far and away installing any well maintained distribution is a smoother experience than with Windows. Apart from truly esotaric hardware, most included FOSS drivers work, whereas with Windows you have to navigate manufacturer's websites and pray that they have a driver for your version of Windows.

Re:Obvious troll, but whatever.

[tepples]

At least with Windows, you can be sure that there will be a driver for each piece of hardware in your computer for the version of Windows that came with it. GNU/Linux, on the other hand, doesn't ship on PCs available in major retail chains. Mail-order GNU/Linux PC brands such as System76 have two problems: you're buying sight unseen with no way to test the screen or keyboard, and because of their lack of volume, they're usually a lot more expensive than a Windows PC of comparable size.

Re:Obvious troll, but whatever.

[Teun]

No one in his right mind would claim security has to be cheap or easy.

Oklahoma unemployment site

[l0n3s0m3phr34k]

This cracks me up, since the unemployment claims website says "This site is compatible with the Internet Explorer browser versions 5-9 only". Makes me wonder what they are running under the hood, and just how vulnerable the system is. Netcraft says IIS 6.0 on win2k3.

Re:Oklahoma unemployment site

[U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M]

So, their unemployment website requires a costly OS to be accessed? Is that supposed to be a joke?

Re:Oklahoma unemployment site

[kthreadd]

The Oklahoma Employment Security Commission clearly don't pay for an update themself. Windows Server 2003 has been end of life and unsupported for quite some time now.

Re:Oklahoma unemployment site

[dywolf]

I am so not surprised at this.

also not a joke: when you go to the tag agency here to renew your registration, the computers they have are, no joke, TRS-80s. and ill note this isn't because (or just because) Oklahoma privatized tag registration to private companies, but rather because... they are the only computers able to communicate with the state computers that hold the actual database.

Re:Oklahoma unemployment site

[dywolf]

that's the words of the people working there anyway, when I asked it.
but again, when it comes to being backwards, this state continues defy my least expectations.

Re:Oklahoma unemployment site

[thegarbz]

No the unemployment website requires an OS that's available at every workplace, school, public library and internet cafe to be accessed.
Don't confuse the cost of the OS with oppressing the poor. It would be far worse if it ONLY supported free OSes.

That said it's still an absurd requirement.

Re:Oklahoma unemployment site

[Anonymous Coward]

It would be far worse if it ONLY supported free OSes.

That said it's still an absurd requirement.

If more web sites did that then it would be a strong incentive for every workplace, school, public library and internet cafe to use free software.

Re:Oklahoma unemployment site

[Anonymous Coward]

I think it is very vulnerable given that it gives me a cert error due to a misconfiguration and https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltes... shows how terribly insecure its ssl setup is. If they haven't updated that, they probably fell behind the other updates as well. But all that doesn't matter as 2003 is out of both support windows, IIRC.

Re:Oklahoma unemployment site

[Anonymous Coward]

Since most public libraries and unemployment offices offer Windows PCs, it is effectively free to those who need it. Stop trying to make an ideological point when there is none.

Knowing state governments, they probably paid for the site development over a decade ago when IE was the dominant desktop browser. And they paid for maybe one or two "upgrades" since then, each priced dearly. And the price for adding alternative browsers to the officially-supported list was probably a budget breaker.

The ass-backward state of government IT is a real concern.

The Ballmers of the world work at Microsoft.

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft responds again! But that one is especially weird.

Re:Too bad IE11 is not EOL

[Anonymous Coward]

something about SJWs

"A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject."

HTML5 and CSS3

[U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M]

So long, older Internet Explorer versions. Don't let the door kick you on the ass on your way out.

There's still IE11 to deal with, but it doesn't suck as much as the older versions.

Logging in as root momentarily

[tepples]

Do you log in to your Linux boxes as root and do everything as a super user?

Some Debian users do. Debian doesn't set up sudo by default, instead expecting users to log in as root using a password chosen during installation. They log in as root, make changes, and log out. Ubuntu, on the other hand, doesn't create a root password during installation but instead sets up sudo to create a similar elevation flow to OS X and Windows 6+.

Re:Logging in as root momentarily

[Anonymous Coward]

It's also a one-liner change if you really need sudo

Re:Logging in as root momentarily

[Anonymous Coward]

This isn't true. Ubuntu and all those other systems do create a (random) root password, they just don't tell you what it is. Run 'sudo cat /etc/shadow' and you'll see the hash.

I know that this misconception comes from years of Ubuntu saying "the root account is disabled in Ubuntu", but it still bothers me. The system would not boot if root were "disabled". It's a lie. More than anything else this is what turned me off to Ubuntu: not that they were kind of forcing users to sudo (which is generally better practice) but that they explain it in a way that misleads the user as to how _their_ computer works.

Five or six years ago I was actually banned from Ubuntu Forums for telling people how to log in as root (in the command line). Seriously, that's it, I wasn't trolling at all. I would not write any commentary, just the code to allow the user to do what they were asking and links to a couple of relevant resources, including the sudo documentation. And I got banned. It blew my mind. The argument was that I should not be teaching bad practice to n00bs, but I think this underestimates the intelligence of new users; let them do what they want with _their_ machines.

Re:Logging in as root momentarily

[Anonymous Coward]

You leave root password blank and sudo will be installed during debian installation.

Re:Logging in as root momentarily

[JackieBrown]

The Debian installer must have changed since I last used it. I remember (3 or 4 years ago) I was prompted to create a root password and an initial user.

Re:Logging in as root momentarily

[Wyzard]

I've been running Debian for more than a decade and I never log in as root. Use su to get a root shell, or to run an individual command as root — the same way you'd use sudo, except that you type the root password instead of your own password. And, like with sudo, that's one root shell or command in a terminal window, where everything else is a normal user login session. There's no good reason to have your whole desktop session running as root.

These days, the Debian installer also supports setting up sudo the way Ubuntu does, instead of having a root password. But I prefer to have a separate password for the root account, so that if someone learns my login password there's still another barrier to root access.

Re:Logging in as root momentarily

[tepples]

It does ask for a password for root, an unprivileged user, and a password for that user. But when I installed Debian 8 "jessie" about a month ago, I don't remember seeing any indication that if I left the root password blank, it would instead install and configure sudo.

Because network effects

[tepples]

The quality-of-life for everyone on the planet would improve by an order of magnitude if we could EOL Microsoft entirely and move on to a FOS OS

Why do you care what anyone uses?

Because without a broad user base on a Free operating system, developers of applications and hardware peripherals are unlikely to spend much effort on making their products compatible with a Free operating system.

Obligatory

[fbobraga]

http://saveie6.com/

GNU/Linux or Android?

[tepples]

Richard Stallman was right about one thing.

If Windows disappeared, then manufacturers would release drivers primarily for Linux, and applications would be written primarily for Linux.

By "Linux" did you mean GNU/Linux or Android? Because I've already seen a lot of application developers forgo a Windows desktop application in favor of one for Android. (Case in point: Try signing up for an account to comment on Instagram pictures or chat with WhatsApp users without a major smartphone sometime.) And if GNU/Linux, then why it and not OS X or iOS?

Re:GNU/Linux or Android?

[phantomfive]

(Case in point: Try signing up for an account to comment on Instagram pictures or chat with WhatsApp users without a major smartphone sometime.)

That's a good point.

And if GNU/Linux, then why it and not OS X or iOS?

I refuse to use iOS because Apple has root, not me.
Manufacturers will continue to avoid OSX for the same reason they do now: all OSX hardware is built by one company.

Re:Too bad IE11 is not EOL

[dywolf]

I hear they also use computers, and drive cars.
because this somehow affects you, you should probably stay inside.
no wait, they also live in houses and apartments. you should go outside.
doh! they like going outdoors! I guess your screwed.

External peripheral makers love OS X

[tepples]

I refuse to use iOS because Apple has root, not me.

People who disagree with the maker of a phone or game console having root are unfortunately outnumbered.

Manufacturers will continue to avoid OSX for the same reason they do now: all OSX hardware is built by one company.

All internal hardware is built by one company. But through USB and Thunderbolt, Apple has provided plenty of space outside the case for third-party peripherals. A lot more peripheral packaging advertises support for OS X than for "Linux" (presumably GNU/Linux).

Re:External peripheral makers love OS X

[phantomfive]

People who disagree with the maker of a phone or game console having root are unfortunately outnumbered.

Yeap. But that's ok, I don't mind being in the minority.

All internal hardware is built by one company. But through USB and Thunderbolt, Apple has provided plenty of space outside the case for third-party peripherals.

You are right, but I imagine if Windows disappeared, it would be similar to the phone market when iOS came out. Dell, Asus, HP, Lenovo, etc would join together to try to counter the Apple threat, because their business-lives would depend on it. Also, the manufacturers for whatever internal hardware Apple didn't choose, would also have reason to support an alternative to Apple.

The market pressure for an open platform is just too large. We saw it with IBM, despite difficult legal challenges, for example.

Inaccurate.

[Anonymous Coward]

"Internet Explorer 8, 9 and 10 are reaching ‘end of life’ on Tuesday"

That's not quite right. The last available version of Internet Explorer for a given OS is the only one being supported. For instance, in Server 2012, there is no update to IE11 available; IE10 will be the supported version of IE on Server 2012.

Things end up discontinued

[tepples]

I don't mind being in the minority.

The problem with being in the minority is that the products on which you rely are likely to end up discontinued. A minority preferred 10-inch low-cost laptop PCs, but they were discontinued at the end of 2012.

Re:Things end up discontinued

[KGIII]

LOL You've been bitching about that netbook thing for a couple of years now. (I'm assuming that's what your link goes to - I didn't click.) I think I might actually have a couple at home that are in that size range and a couple that are slightly smaller. When I get back to Maine, probably in the early spring, I'll look and you can have 'em if you want. Why? You're gonna be insufferable when the damned thing dies on you so you might as well get a spare. Otherwise, even in 2016, you'll be ranting about "that damned fine ultra-portable you had back in the day, that they discontinued, and it broke." ;-)

Seriously, I'll look when I get back home. It's not like it gets used at my house. I'm pretty sure I have the same model that I've heard you mention once or twenty times and a couple of others that are similarly sized. I know I have some 9" netbooks - one from Acer and the other from Asus (I think?) and I think I have a much more recent model from Lenovo that is either 11" or close to it. At least I'm pretty sure that I've neither given them away nor had one of my kids abscond with them. They prefer the more expensive stuff. That didn't go away when they turned into adults or had their own money.

I seem to recall getting Ubuntu to work on the Asus. I just couldn't fall in lust with it. I prefer a much larger device, a keyboard with a number pad, and room for two drives. At any rate, I'll be sure to look. If I haven't then just remember to bitch about it some more come spring. That'll remind me - though I kind of doubt you'll need a reminder. If it dies before then you'll be straight up impossible.

Re:Things end up discontinued

[tepples]

LOL You've been bitching about that netbook thing for a couple of years now. (I'm assuming that's what your link goes to - I didn't click.)

Yes. But mostly I was using it as an example of computing products that get discontinued because not enough other people demand it.

Re:Things end up discontinued

[KGIII]

I have been sicker than a dog for almost a week now. I've made a mental note to look and find the appropriate sized devices for you when I get home. That should be sometime before Memorial Day.

Like if that would mean a thing

[hyperar]

Enterprises will continue to do whatever the fuck they want anyway.

Re:Like if that would mean a thing

[Anonymous Coward]

Yep, that's why they won't let our security group dump Java. What a PITA patching that mess is.

Re:Too bad IE11 is not EOL

[Anonymous Coward]

Looks like you need some of this, buddy

https://s3.amazonaws.com/rapge...

IE 11 and Windows 7 update

[Anonymous Coward]

This IE 11 news brings back recent memories of applying "Important" updates to a fresh install of Windows 7. IE 11 was the final update in the most frustrating experience I have ever had with software. For many users including me, Windows 7 hangs on "searching for updates". So to fix this you manually apply a Knowledge Base patch/fix (KB123-blah-blah). Microsoft does not know if this patch will work but recommends you give it a try. I does not work so you apply another one. Rinse and repeat.

Finally if your lucky you fix this and windows starts downloading updates. But some of the updates fail. So you apply (KB234-blah-blah). Rinse and repeat, Rinse and repeat. OK a few updates are applied but the original problem is back: Windows 7 hangs on "searching for updates". Wow!... Apply KB. Rinse and repeat, Rinse and repeat. To add to the frustration is eternal reboots and slowness.

I've never experienced this level of frustration with Linux. Not even close. Windows is a black box. Or more accurately, a black hole. And if you're wondering, I'm not installing this Windows 7 for myself thank goodness.

Re:Too bad IE11 is not EOL

[Anonymous Coward]

SJWs have taken over the world. So you must have nothing to do with it. Run away and kill yourself quickly before they get you. Woooooo! They so scary!

Slashdot bot

[Anonymous Coward]

Lol M$? It is bad because M$!
Someone said something bad about glorious GNU/Linux?? Must mod comment as troll!

Help us save IE6! Sign the Petition

[Cito]

Petition to save IE6!

IE6 has been the victim of false and misleading accusations all over the web, such as complaints about its compatibility with web standards. This is simply the confused ramblings of a vocal minority. After all, how can IE6 be violating standards when it has essentially BEEN the standard for years?

The SaveIE6 campaign is all about showing the world the benefits of using the web browser IE6. There are currently too many browsers with too many unnecessary features. They are hard to use and render web sites badly and inconsistently. Contrast this with IE6â(TM)s proven technology and well-documented behavior.

Please support the SaveIE6 campaign and help make the internet a better place!

You can help out here: http://www.saveie6.com/

-grin-

I prefer to no longer own a PC

[Anonymous Coward]

Than use win 10.

So... IE 6 is still alive???

[mspohr]

Good to see that they didn't EOL IE 6... forever!

Still?

[h8sg8s]

And still you come across sites that demand to be read only with IE 8. Stupidity is apparently a widely held human trait.

Bleh

[Anonymous Coward]

Another attempt by Microsoft to push people into windows 10. Enough I say!!! If I have to move from windows 7 some day it will be to a Linux distro, not to another flavor Windows. I'm really sick of it. Of course, i don't use internet explorer in any version.

Edge has already reached its end of life too

[aliquis]

That browser too is a steaming pile of junk. Slow and nasty. More of the same. Just retire IE & Edge completely - it's trash - has it ever been good? I guess not, 11 versions of crap - AWESOME MICROSOFT!

It's like space-travel "imagine were we'd been ..."

Edge? Not yet.

[renegadesx]

Until Edge supports Inbox by Gmail and AdBlock Plus, I am sticking with Chrome. Personally I haven't used Firefox in years, way to bloated. I'm a long time Linux user, but I must say Edge is pretty nice.

If only IE WOULD go away!

[Tony Isaac]

Unfortunately, lots of large enterprises have so much in-house crapware written that works only on IE 8 or 9 that they aren't going to be allowing their employees off IE for a long time. The medical industry, oil, banking all fell into the Microsoft-only trap and can't get out.

So Windows still exists?

[Anonymous Coward]

Unbelievable. Whatever.

Hairyfeet, champion of ignorance

[Tenebrousedge]

You've read too much vitriol and not enough information. Systemd is a good idea, and necessary, and SysV init was so completely broken that [a] almost all its intended functionality was replaced by other software, and [b] every other UNIX system had already replaced it before systemd was even conceived. The idea that you cannot track processes, or control their resource use, is indescribably braindead.

You keep on deep throating an OS where you can only upgrade to the latest edition if the manufacturer has bothered releasing drivers for it, and you have zero recourse when things fail, and we'll keep using something that is at least fixable.

I'm also going to call you out (every time) for your own personal idiocy in trying to compare a server/workstation OS to a desktop OS. If you are a programmer, you should probably be using Linux. If you are not Linux is going to be, at best, the same as any other OS, and probably worse. Linux is something that is necessary to people developing hardware and software products. It's like criticizing a HMMWV for not being a BMW. I understand in this analogy you're a car dealership and so have your own myopic perspective on what cars should be like, but this thing where you're completely impervious to the real world is getting really tiresome.

Re:Hairyfeet, champion of ignorance

[hairyfeet]

And programmers are what? 0.002% of the population? Then have a heaping cup of STFU and stop the "Linux is ready for the desktop" bullshit which was EXACTLY what I was responding too! Did you tell HIM it was for programmers? No? That is because you are guzzling the koolaid by the gallon and don't say shit unless somebody calls you out on the BS, then you trot out the worthless anecdotes.

Meanwhile MSFT puts out an OS that is pure spyware and gets more users in a fucking week than Linux has gotten in 20 damned years, what does that tell you? It tells me that nobody will even take your shit for free if the choice is Linux or fricking malware because at least the malware is several levels more stable than your shit sandwiches!

Re:Hairyfeet, champion of ignorance

[Tenebrousedge]

I'm trying to imagine your world for a minute, where Linux is the product of a handful of neckbeards and used only by snobby masochists. It would be funnier if it weren't so sad and deluded.

Linux is usable as a desktop, and in the ideal case it is on par with other desktop OSes. However, where it really excels is in the ability to script the OS and tinker with the internals. Car analogy: if you're only ever going to drive on the highway, you don't need the off-road vehicle. If you're not going to want to get under the hood, buy something that's designed for that. Linux is the OS where setting up a web server takes a couple dozen keystrokes. Windows is the OS where you say "web server" and people get vague, confused expressions.

Microsoft has an entrenched market position; very few people use Windows because they like it. In point of fact, most people dislike it, especially because the only time that the OS draws attention to itself is when something goes wrong. And it's obvious that you have no experience with supporting Windows in the enterprise, or you wouldn't be talking about stability. It doesn't even make sense to discuss: no matter what software you have, there is some combination of factors that will break it: updates, other software, bit flips, or the endless creativity of the end user.* Fixing issues with Windows is bread and butter to millions of people.

Linux is ready for the desktop -- certainly in the enterprise environment. Linux is far more useful as a server, development platform, or HPC platform, but it can also be used as a desktop. It's probably not worth it for home use unless you think tinkering with your OS is fun. Hopefully it will never see mass-market adoption, but perhaps with the current learn-to-program initiatives it will eventually get to 5% marketshare. Trying to become Windows in an effort to gain marketshare would be throwing away the most useful parts of the OS.

* In most cases you can't even get it to tell you what's wrong; Microsoft seems to think the purpose of error messages is to hide information from the end user. Network problems? "Sorry, Windows couldn't fix your error. Try contacting someone who cares."

Re:Hairyfeet, champion of ignorance

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft has an entrenched market position; very few people use Windows because they like it. In point of fact, most people dislike it, especially because the only time that the OS draws attention to itself is when something goes wrong.

Um, yeah so the countless *DAILY* threads on Linux forums about shit not working are from people who love Linux?

The reality is most users dislike their OS, unless you're already brainwashed. Windows users are mostly ambivalent towards their OS. Linux users are the so religious where everytime someone dares to point out shit doesn't work, cheerleaders like you on Slashdot jump to blame the user.

It doesn't even make sense to discuss: no matter what software you have, there is some combination of factors that will break it: updates, other software, bit flips, or the endless creativity of the end user.* Fixing issues with Windows is bread and butter to millions of people.

Go hangout on some Linux forums buddy. Tell them they're all stupid and no such problems exist.

Re:Hairyfeet, champion of ignorance

[Anonymous Coward]

Apparently in your world saying Microsoft has issues is equivalent to saying Linux is perfect. Fascinating.

Re:Hairyfeet, champion of ignorance

[Anonymous Coward]

Then Linux cheerleaders should stop their usual FUD when their proposed "solution" is *ALSO* a turd.

Re:Hairyfeet, champion of ignorance

[Anonymous Coward]

Or maybe there was a nuanced argument being made which you ignored so you could try to score points. As a personal user, Linux will be most useful if you're a programmer. Most of the time noobs won't be hurt too much by a Linux Mint install either. For enterprise use, Linux has some advantages in terms of software delivery and general administration, but I'm not sure if there's a Linux solution quite as polished or comprehensive as the Group Policy mechanism. Users would love to not have to waste time restarting for updates, but app availability would be a concern. You'd probably have fewer admins but pay them more. The one thing that would really drive Linux adoption in the working world would be Office availability, which is probably why it will be a cold day in Hell before Microsoft releases that.

Every (non-trivial) piece of software is a turd. That's why people keep writing software. If you can't evaluate a piece of software on its strengths and weaknesses because of ignorance and emotional investment, and won't listen to anyone else, then you and hairyfeet would make a cute couple.