No, it's obsolete because Microsoft said so, numpty. They are not updating its functionality anymore. Crying about how you can't remove IE on XP is pointless.
I am very calm, not sure what you're talking about. If I wasn't, I'd insult him, not the generic bandwagon attitude. On that note, I am not English of origin, and it is the bandwagon I find stupid, not the poster.
And no amount of stupid Vista-fanboy bandwagon is going to force people to buy newer versions and change that. (See how that works? Kind of an asshole-ish thing to say, huh?)
Well no I don't find it really asshole-ish, otherwise I wouldn't have said it.Either way, it's completely wrong because I do not like any version of Windows.
You sound like an insecure twelve year old whose dad works at MS. Seriously. Take a few deep breaths.
I'd consider that more asshole-ish than the above. So, can you do the same? You're the one getting worked up over a simple "anti-vista bandwagon" comment. Take a break and go write a few more paragraphs about it, okay?:)
No, XP isn't relevant at all. It's in extended support phase. Its functionality isn't updated anymore. Removing IE has been done in Windows 7, it's time to shut up about it. Obsolete versions of Windows won't be changed.
No, a lot of third party apps including the ones from their rivals would fail if one truly removes IE. I think that is what they talk about.
No, the interface he's talking about leaves the trident control intact and working, but it removes the IE front end. They still warn you because an OS without a browser is useless, and it's pretty damn hard for most users to get Firefox without any browser installed.
Okay, fine, "IE hasn't had its hooks so deep in the OS since 3 years ago." Do you really expect an obsolete OS (XP) released 8 years ago to be relevant to today's discussion? Vista has been out for a while now, and Windows 7 is going to be out this year. The hooks into the OS thing only applies if you've been living under a rock and never heard of Vista, and even then, the only "hook" is Windows Update, which, may I add, can be used via Automatic Updates, never showing a single IE window to the user.
Care knowing what you're talking about before posting, next time? IE never had its hooks so deep in the OS, you're using an obsolete version of Windows. Furthermore, it's already possible to remove Internet Explorer from Windows 7, so I'm not sure what is left to cry about.
No, the only reference I got is "trust me". I was surprised when I didn't have to reboot after installing network drivers, NVidia drivers, chipset drivers, sound drivers and a few security patches. It feels really weird.
Okay, maybe I worded it wrong (the stupid anti-MS trolls still rated me funny, but whatever).
It's faster in the sense that it does more things than XP *and* manages to go at the same speed (the microbenchmarks were very slightly favorable towards XP as you've said, but nowhere significant).
However, by going for Windows 7, you get a better sound solution (Mixer, for instance), increased security via UAC, a non-IE dependant Windows Update, virtual store, etc., then on top of that you get a lot less reboots when installing software/drivers/updates, faster hibernation wakeup, generally faster disk I/O, and basically just a ton of nice things that XP just doesn't have.
Sure, maybe you'll boot up in 21 seconds instead of 20. But that extra second will get you a hundred features that in my opinion, are worth switching from an old, dead and now worthless operating system.
Will you open source freaks ever read the article before you post your religion crap in here, and realize it's unapplicable when you're trying to make a profit out of your mod?
XP64 never had support for a lot of things but hardly anyone uses it anyway, it's a pretty moot point.
New devices not having drivers for Windows 98 might happen, but I've never had to deal with terrible manufacturers. Mind telling me which devices/platform that was so I can avoid them?
No, it's just that linux has dumbed down IT geeks enough that they think constant crashing, constant malware and constant reintalls actually happen to the majority of users. Guess what? Just using Firefox and an anti-virus prevents 95% of these things.
Slashdot Mirror
No, not at all. A few days after it all happened, MS came out with a fix that allowed the addon to be easily uninstalled.
The .NET one has been updated to uninstall fine.
Are you talking about Project Mayhem, or fi-...
Oh...
It doesn't. It takes about 8 GB on this virtual machine.
every product [...] is still vulnerable,
Fixed.
No, it's obsolete because Microsoft said so, numpty. They are not updating its functionality anymore. Crying about how you can't remove IE on XP is pointless.
Feel free to calm down a little in the meantime.
I am very calm, not sure what you're talking about. If I wasn't, I'd insult him, not the generic bandwagon attitude. On that note, I am not English of origin, and it is the bandwagon I find stupid, not the poster.
And no amount of stupid Vista-fanboy bandwagon is going to force people to buy newer versions and change that. (See how that works? Kind of an asshole-ish thing to say, huh?)
Well no I don't find it really asshole-ish, otherwise I wouldn't have said it.Either way, it's completely wrong because I do not like any version of Windows.
You sound like an insecure twelve year old whose dad works at MS. Seriously. Take a few deep breaths.
I'd consider that more asshole-ish than the above. So, can you do the same? You're the one getting worked up over a simple "anti-vista bandwagon" comment. Take a break and go write a few more paragraphs about it, okay? :)
No, XP isn't relevant at all. It's in extended support phase. Its functionality isn't updated anymore. Removing IE has been done in Windows 7, it's time to shut up about it. Obsolete versions of Windows won't be changed.
No, a lot of third party apps including the ones from their rivals would fail if one truly removes IE. I think that is what they talk about.
No, the interface he's talking about leaves the trident control intact and working, but it removes the IE front end. They still warn you because an OS without a browser is useless, and it's pretty damn hard for most users to get Firefox without any browser installed.
I agree, the version of windows with the largest install base is completely irrelevant
Yes, it is. It reached extended support. No amount of stupid anti-vista bandwagon somehow preventing people to upgrade is going to change this.
Well of course they should warn you, you might be about to remove the only browser on your computer, crippling it.
Okay, fine, "IE hasn't had its hooks so deep in the OS since 3 years ago." Do you really expect an obsolete OS (XP) released 8 years ago to be relevant to today's discussion? Vista has been out for a while now, and Windows 7 is going to be out this year. The hooks into the OS thing only applies if you've been living under a rock and never heard of Vista, and even then, the only "hook" is Windows Update, which, may I add, can be used via Automatic Updates, never showing a single IE window to the user.
Care knowing what you're talking about before posting, next time? IE never had its hooks so deep in the OS, you're using an obsolete version of Windows. Furthermore, it's already possible to remove Internet Explorer from Windows 7, so I'm not sure what is left to cry about.
I guess you can be glad it's already been done, then? The grand parent has probably never heard of Windows 7, let alone tried it.
No, the only reference I got is "trust me". I was surprised when I didn't have to reboot after installing network drivers, NVidia drivers, chipset drivers, sound drivers and a few security patches. It feels really weird.
Okay, maybe I worded it wrong (the stupid anti-MS trolls still rated me funny, but whatever).
It's faster in the sense that it does more things than XP *and* manages to go at the same speed (the microbenchmarks were very slightly favorable towards XP as you've said, but nowhere significant).
However, by going for Windows 7, you get a better sound solution (Mixer, for instance), increased security via UAC, a non-IE dependant Windows Update, virtual store, etc., then on top of that you get a lot less reboots when installing software/drivers/updates, faster hibernation wakeup, generally faster disk I/O, and basically just a ton of nice things that XP just doesn't have.
Sure, maybe you'll boot up in 21 seconds instead of 20. But that extra second will get you a hundred features that in my opinion, are worth switching from an old, dead and now worthless operating system.
Windows 7 is better and faster. It'd be kinda like using Ubuntu 9.04 instead of 6.06.
It's not illiteracy, it's attention deficit. Why read the whole sentence when you can just read
*head explodes*
http://vanish.cs.washington.edu/download_src.html
Are you blind? It's not free but definitely open source.
NASA and google are obviously in a joint venture to cover the moon landing faking! I knew it!
Will you open source freaks ever read the article before you post your religion crap in here, and realize it's unapplicable when you're trying to make a profit out of your mod?
XP64 never had support for a lot of things but hardly anyone uses it anyway, it's a pretty moot point.
New devices not having drivers for Windows 98 might happen, but I've never had to deal with terrible manufacturers. Mind telling me which devices/platform that was so I can avoid them?
See last line of quote. Vista does include generic drivers to counter that issue, but I've never had that problem with any hardware device anyway.
Really? Last time I checked Windows didn't support ARM.
Which, huh, doesn't matter? Every consumer machine is x86, people buying ARM machines damn well know it won't run on Windows.
No, it's just that linux has dumbed down IT geeks enough that they think constant crashing, constant malware and constant reintalls actually happen to the majority of users. Guess what? Just using Firefox and an anti-virus prevents 95% of these things.