Next IE will ship before Longhorn

MarineCorps

Explosion!
Joined
Jun 26, 2003
Messages
8,187
Location
Cape Cod
Version seven of Internet Explorer will be launched before Longhorn, as security problems force a Microsoft U-turn



Reversing a longstanding Microsoft policy, Bill Gates said on Tuesday that the company will ship an update to its browser separately from the next major version of Windows.

A beta version of Internet Explorer 7 will debut this summer, Microsoft's chairman and chief software architect said in a keynote address at the RSA Conference 2005 in San Francisco. The company had said that it would not ship a new IE version before the next major update to Windows, code-named Longhorn, arrives next year.

In announcing the plan, Gates acknowledged something that many outside the company had been arguing for some time -- that the browser itself has become a security risk.

"Browsing is definitely a point of vulnerability," Gates said.

Mike Nash, an executive in Microsoft's security business and technology unit, said in an interview that Microsoft has not determined how or when the final version of IE 7 will ship, but that it is planned ahead of Longhorn.

Nash said it has not been decided whether IE 7 will come with a different Windows update, such as a security revamp.

"We'll be updating Windows on a regular basis," he said. "How the browser gets packaged -- whether it's with a service pack -- has not been nailed down. There is going to be a Service Pack 3 [for Windows XP]. That's not a surprise. How that relates to [IE 7's release], we haven't figured out yet."

As recently as August, Microsoft said that no new stand-alone version was planned before Longhorn, and the company reiterated back then that its plan was to make new IE features available with major Windows releases. "At this time, there are no plans to release a new stand-alone version of IE," a Microsoft representative said.

In November, Microsoft opened the door slightly to improving IE before Longhorn, though it indicated that improvements might come through add-ons to the browser, rather than through an updated version of IE.

Analysts attributed Microsoft's change of heart to the progress of the Mozilla Foundation's Firefox browser, which has made incremental but steady market share gains against IE in recent months. In a survey conducted late last year, Firefox nudged IE below the 90 percent mark for the first time since the height of the browser wars in the 1990s.

"I think it's a response to both the delay of Longhorn and the challenge of Firefox," said NPD Group analyst Ross Rubin, who added that Firefox was probably the sharper spur. "Were there no Firefox, they'd have more leeway to sit on it until Longhorn."

Bart Decrem, a founding member of the Mozilla Foundation, former head of its marketing and business development and current volunteer, said that Microsoft clearly was responding to the group's work.

"I can't think of a better validation of the success of Firefox," said Decrem. "The success of Firefox is forcing Microsoft to improve IE. The only surprise is that it took them this long to make that announcement."

Nash would not say whether Microsoft hopes to stem defections or gain back share lost to Firefox.
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/windows/0,39020396,39188053,00.htm

Now I wonder if this will actually stop the lose of users for IE. Persoanly I don't think IE is ever going to gain any users back from Firefox. I use Firefox at school and Mozilla at home and I don't think I could ever go back to IE. :love:
 
Well, if I.E. Introduces tabbed browsing and popup stoppers that actually work then i might take a look, until then, i'll stick with firefox and it's ocasional hogging of 400mb of my ram and all my cpu power :mischief:

Plus i hear that longhorn's I.E. will be a 70k shell program, :confused:
 
The way I see it, anything that improves the current situation is a good thing. If IE7 is actually an improvement over IE6 (I'm very skeptical that it will actually improve the security situation, though), then that is good for everyone.

Certainly doesn't mean I'll stop using Mozilla any time soon, though. ;)

edit -
@Broken_Erica:
All the versions of Internet Explorer since 4.0 have been a small executable (I think IE6's executable is somewhere in the area of 50KB), which is basically just the user interface. The actual Internet Explorer rendering engine, the program which actually interprets HTML is a DLL file in Windows\System32. (I think...)
 
No mention so far of getting ie to meet current web standards, or tabbed browsing, or a built-in download manager, so I doubt I'll be switching back to it. :
 
Thrawn said:
No mention so far of getting ie to meet current web standards, or tabbed browsing, or a built-in download manager, so I doubt I'll be switching back to it. :
According to a person working in the security division, yes tabbed browsing is a feature that will most likely be added in. Their top priority is security, which he said that they have quite a few "innovative" ideas that will be implemented.

Web standards should be fixed in the next version. PNG Transparency support might be available. Various other features are in the works, too. It's hard to get a definite supply of details on all the items that are going to be upgraded or added on because they aren't supposed to give out any specifics as of yet (company policy). However it seems that they are really listening to what consumers want and are trying to implement them all.

More competition is good :)
 
They had better update to the latest web standards.

I am sick of testing my site in IE and having to "hack" my pages so it works correctly in that browser. Web standards are there so I don't have to do that. But IE proves that, with a big monopoly, it can set its own pseudo-standards and web designers have to follow suit with them.
 
hbdragon88 said:
They had better update to the latest web standards.

I am sick of testing my site in IE and having to "hack" my pages so it works correctly in that browser. Web standards are there so I don't have to do that. But IE proves that, with a big monopoly, it can set its own pseudo-standards and web designers have to follow suit with them.
Or you could just let it be and put a link to firefox on your page. ;)
 
MarineCorps said:
Or you could just let it be and put a link to firefox on your page. ;)

Try telling that to a professional web designer whose audience is 90% Internet Explorer.

My pages are simple enough that I run into relatively few problems, but I know of a lot of other people who have to take much more extreme measures.
 
hbdragon88 said:
Try telling that to a professional web designer whose audience is 90% Internet Explorer.

My pages are simple enough that I run into relatively few problems, but I know of a lot of other people who have to take much more extreme measures.

Well when they come to meet with you tell them about Firefox and how it is more up to date in web statards then IE.
 
MarineCorps said:
Well when they come to meet with you tell them about Firefox and how it is more up to date in web statards then IE.
That doesn't really matter though. You see, business want their websites to be accessible to everyone. Consumers are the target market out there, and considering that 90% of the browser market is still Microsoft's, businesses are going to want to have their sites displayed properly in every browser.

It is currently Microsoft's intentions to develop the next browser with W3C standards incorporated.

Microsoft isn't stupid either. People give them less credit than they deserve. They know that in order to stay on top they need to change and adhere to consumer demands. By developing a browser that does just that, they can keep their stake in the browser market. They also realize that if they ignore the demands of the consumer, they will lose that very market - no business can ignore this.
 
Jeratain Microsoft isn't stupid either. People give them less credit than they deserve. They know that in order to stay on top they need to change and adhere to consumer demands. By developing a browser that does just that said:
Fully aware Microsoft isn't stupid. However along with W3c standards they also have to worry about all the holes that IE has.
 
Until they divorce IE from the OS, it isn't worth using. When I can go delete IE and not have it respawn before my eyes I might use it.

Probably won't though.
 
MarineCorps said:
Fully aware Microsoft isn't stupid. However along with W3c standards they also have to worry about all the holes that IE has.
Which is why they are supposedly re-writing the code from scratch.
 
First off, regardless of what the w3c says(which hasn't mattered in YEARS), anything a company who controls a 90% market share does IS the standard. If IE does something one way, then 90% of the market does. The 10% listening to the w3c hardly constitute a majority ;)

IE has some big security holes to fix, some features to add, and is in need of some form of makeover. It probably will align itself with 'web standards,' not out of need, but out of the fact that it's cheap marketing and kills a major complaint of the anti-IE crowd.

Or you could just let it be and put a link to firefox on your page.

I saw a study once where they attempted to do an analysis of just how often this leads to browser switching. I think the number was damn near zero.
 
gonzo_for_civ said:
First off, regardless of what the w3c says(which hasn't mattered in YEARS), anything a company who controls a 90% market share does IS the standard. If IE does something one way, then 90% of the market does. The 10% listening to the w3c hardly constitute a majority ;)

IE has some big security holes to fix, some features to add, and is in need of some form of makeover. It probably will align itself with 'web standards,' not out of need, but out of the fact that it's cheap marketing and kills a major complaint of the anti-IE crowd.

Ok, no, it's not a standard. It's a pseudo-standard and quite regrettable that it is so. MSIE Is dragging the web behind due to the damn fact that every web designer has to spend time to conform to IE's pesudo-standards and horrible rendering. Also, Microsoft is a member of the W3C. It is SUPPOSED to conform to the standards but refuses to.

The W3C does matter. The W3C has been trying to lead the web to standards and conformity and increase accessibility. I am grateful that my pages will work in every major browser, rather than having to write pages to conform to each browser's pseudo-standards. It doesn't have the teeth to force its recommendations, which is a problem, but I'm still grateful that there is an organization attempting to set some standards.
 
hbdragon88 said:
Also, Microsoft is a member of the W3C. It is SUPPOSED to conform to the standards but refuses to.
Thank you for pointing this out, I was just thinking about posting that before I got to your post. Bill Gates came down on the IE development team and said that he wants W3C standards to be the standard for IE, so it is assumed that it is what consumers will get with IE7.
 
Ok, no, it's not a standard. It's a pseudo-standard and quite regrettable that it is so. MSIE Is dragging the web behind due to the damn fact that every web designer has to spend time to conform to IE's pesudo-standards and horrible rendering. Also, Microsoft is a member of the W3C. It is SUPPOSED to conform to the standards but refuses to.

What I'm simply pointing out is that microsoft will determine what goes on the majority of the time. The W3C certainly has the legitimate face to declare any standard they want, but it's hard to justify something with a 10% market share as "standard" by any definition. "Pseudo" standard or not, whatever ms does is going to dominate any W3C standard, regardless of whether or not ms is supposed to conform.

I certainly am glad that Bill is back as the software architect, and seems to be determined to align with W3C standards, and it certainly does seem to be the case that IE 7 will be aligned with those standards.

Oh and for arguements sake:

Standard: Something, such as a practice or a product, that is widely recognized or employed.

Widely recognized or employed seems to describe IE perfectly, not so with W3C standards at the current time ;)
 
If IE had tabbed browsing I would use it. Simple as that. I also think it would be more convinient if they just maintained the standards they already set.
 
Back
Top Bottom