Slashdot Mirror
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."
Edge sucks (no ad-block)
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.
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.
What accessibility bug?
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
Nope . There is still something called Flash.
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"
Good people go to bed earlier.
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.
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?
My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
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?
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.
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.
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
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.
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.
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.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
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.
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).
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
http://saveie6.com/
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.
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
Enterprises will continue to do whatever the fuck they want anyway.
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.
> 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.
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.
"The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
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.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
So, you're four years behind on security patches?
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
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.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
Wow, some anger there man. See a psychiatrist.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."