IE7 To Ship With Windows Patches Tomorrow [Not] 293
An anonymous reader writes, "Microsoft plans to push out Internet Explorer 7 as a 'high priority update' when it ships security patches tomorrow, according to Washingtonpost.com's Security Fix blog. That means anyone who has Windows configured to download and install patches automagically from Redmond will be greeted with IE7 next time they boot up their machines. In related news, it appears IE's worldwide market share actually increased a couple of points since July, despite a number of high profile zero-day attacks this year." The article notes that the IE7 "containment wall" protected mode will not be available on XP, but only to those who purchase Vista.
Update: 10/09 21:26 GMT by kd : An anonymous reader points to this Microsoft blog posting where it is revealed that the article linked above is incorrect. IE7 will not be pushed tomorrow.
Update: 10/09 21:26 GMT by kd : An anonymous reader points to this Microsoft blog posting where it is revealed that the article linked above is incorrect. IE7 will not be pushed tomorrow.
Means Nothing (Score:1, Insightful)
As long as the average user doesn't take security into consideration on their computers - which a majority of them do not - then the number of zero day attacks mean nothing. I really don't think that would have any bearing on IE's market share increasing or decreasing.
A proposal that cannot be rejected? (Score:2, Insightful)
The biggest inconvenience (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Thank God (Score:2, Insightful)
Because it's good enough for them.
Am I The Only One Concerned? (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm sure IE7 is a positive step from IE6, but how big of a resource hog is that shinny new interface? When I updated to Windows Messenger Live (yes I'm aware of the alternatives, but 99% of my friends use it) I couldn't believe how much resources the thing ate up. Right now it's sitting at a ridiculous 48 MB of memory usage.
More to the point, how much of IE7 is integrated into the kernel and how much memory does it consume when I'm not even using it? How does it affect boot times? I'm unlikely to use it for anything I don't have to so I think I'll be avoiding it for as long as possible.
Re:every time I try firefox, I go back. (Score:2, Insightful)
You are right. I didn't dig deep in obscure menus to kill this annoyance that (1) should not be the in the first place and (2) should have a turn off option right on the pop-up. I know, it's an old glitch. Netscape has had it going WAYYY.... back.
Re:Yay for CSS! (Score:3, Insightful)
sure it is better than IE6, but don't assume your valid CSS will work OK in IE7, it probably will not.
Re:Good or bad news for the web developers? (Score:2, Insightful)
"... I wonder how you manage with CSS? I personally use dreamweaver
Says he with 20 validation errors on his website.
Why so cagey? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:every time I try firefox, I go back. (Score:3, Insightful)
HIPAA stands for Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. It is so commonly misspelled that the link you provided redirects to the appropriate link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HIPAA [wikipedia.org]
Re:Yay for CSS! (Score:3, Insightful)
No, it won't. IE7 doesn't improve CSS support that much. Yes, they fixed it a bit, but it's mostly the same.
IE7 = tabs + new UI
What I don't understand is why it took them so much time to release this crap. I guess that because IE is tied into XP and so many things depend on it they spent most of the time trying to track down regressions from crappy 3rd progarms
Re:Actually, 'Yay!' (Score:3, Insightful)
That depends on "the job." For Firefox 1.x and Opera 7-8, if "the job" required WYSIWYG text editing or heavy AJAX functionality, then Firefox was the best tool. If "the job" involved highly advanced CSS, then it would have been Opera.
Don't assume everyone uses the web the same way you do. That's the same mentality behind the "Oprah sux b/c it don't have no extenshuns" attitude.