| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Microsoft Delays Next Internet Explorer Release | |
|
||
| Time: 14:42 EST/19:42 GMT | News Source: eWeek | Posted By: John Quigley | ||
|
Microsoft Corp. postponed the introduction of the next test release of its Internet Explorer 7 Web browser until sometime in 2006, according to comments posted to the company's site for software developers. In a blog posting on the software giant's MSDN developer site, Dean Hachamovitch, product line manager for IE at Microsoft, said that the Redmond, Wash.-based company will post an "updated pre-release build of IE 7 for Windows XP publicly" during the first calendar quarter of 2006. The IE team leader indicated that people interested in gaining access to the browser preview would not need to be members of the MSDN community. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 320 Last | Next |
The time now is
6:03:56 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 7390 (216.223.54.225) at 12/8/2005 7:57:43 PM |
| Was there ever a doubt that this woud happen? |
| #2 By 32132 (64.180.219.241) at 12/8/2005 9:29:18 PM |
|
#1 I hope the IE team avoids the zero day bug like the one in Firefox 1.5.
http://news.com.com/Unpatched+Firefox+1.5+exploit+made+public/2100-1002_3-5987401.html?tag=nefd.top |
| #3 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 12/9/2005 11:45:50 AM |
| #4: since it's such a low-severity bug with an easy workaround, they aren't going to patch it until the end of January when they release the next stable build. |
| #4 By 32132 (207.216.27.238) at 12/9/2005 2:30:59 PM |
|
Buffer overflows that allow code execution are not low-severity.
And yeah, I know that Firefox is denying its a problem ... but I don't believe them. They've had so many security holes lately. What a piece of swiss cheese. |
| #5 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 12/9/2005 2:48:19 PM |
|
#6: OK Parkkker, if you say so. And yes, we're all aware that you don't believe or like anything unless it came from Microsoft.
|
| #6 By 12071 (203.185.215.149) at 12/9/2005 9:11:50 PM |
|
#1 IE 7 Firefox Edition
#3 You can rest assured that the IE team will not only introduce hundreds of vulnerabilities into IE, they will also refuse to fix them even if they have been around since 2002/2003 (http://secunia.com/product/11). Even if they are given all the data they need they will still sit on vulnerabilities for over 7 months (http://www.eeye.com/html/research/upcoming/20050505.html) whilst your pc is exploited until it either hits their profit margins or has enough bad P.R. attached to it - until then you're tough out of luck trying to secure yourself. Finally, if an extremely critical vulnerability is found with exploit code attached, you can rest assured that you will need to wait until the following month's patch cycle before being able to secure your pc (and servers since only in Microsoft-land do servers HAVE to have IE installed on them), and if you're lucky, they won't screw up the patch and won't have to release a re-patch or a re-re-patch as they have done so in the past. |
| #7 By 32132 (64.180.219.241) at 12/9/2005 10:35:26 PM |
|
An alternative thought:
Firefox changes version numbers and names so often since they need to hide the number of vulnerabilities. Since IE 6 came out, the team responsible for then 9 year old Netscape code (and subsequent bandaids) has changed the product name a half dozen times, each one of those has had about 50 version numbers, all to hide the trail of almost 1000 security vulnerabilities. Sure, you can go to Secunia and look up IE 6, but you can't go there and get an exhaustive lists of Netscape 6,7, Mozilla 1.0,1.1,1.2,1.3,1.4,1.5,1.6,1.7, 1.8 , Phoenix .1, .2, .3 , .5 and then Firebird .6 , .7. etc etc vulnerabilities. Each time the name change was preceded by a huge number of discovered bugs. |
| #8 By 9264 (69.176.39.38) at 12/10/2005 1:42:56 AM |
| NotParker, it must be a conspiracy! Quick, where's my tinfoil hat? |
| #9 By 32132 (64.180.219.241) at 12/10/2005 12:19:43 PM |
|
Firefox 1.5: Not Ready For Prime Time
http://internetweek.cmp.com/handson/174907404 "Matt McKenzie, Editor of the Linux Pipeline, recently sent me a screenshot that showed Firefox 1.5's main process (firefox.exe) using 398,108K physical memory and 405,540K virtual memory — way more than is comfortable or necessary. And the number, he said, was rising while he was sitting there. " "Mozilla was supposed to fix Firefox's JavaScript support in version 1.5. What I'm seeing is just the opposite. I'm having more trouble with proper page rendering than I had with Firefox 1.0.x. Some pages just crash or freeze the browser completely. For example, I can't make some JCPenney product pages load properly, and enterprise applications used by my company that worked okay with the previous version of Firefox no longer work as well. " "Firefox 1.5 also tends to freeze up after launch, and during or just after Web page load. I've also experienced very long launch times from links in other programs, such as from a hyperlink sent in email. These three symptoms were also commonly experienced by Firefox 1.0.1, 1.0.2, and 1.0.3 users. The problem appears to be back in Firefox 1.5. " "In addition, PDFs are now a total adventure. Sometimes they work, sometimes they never finish loading. And I'm using the latest version of the Adobe Acrobat Reader" "I'm a confirmed Firefox user, an ardent supporter of this excellent open-source Web browser. But that doesn't mean I'm a lemming. Right now I think you might be better off hanging back if you haven't installed this puppy yet — especially if Firefox is your main browser. There are enough issues people are contending with that — who needs the extra headache?" Gee. I don't have any of those problems with IE 7 beta. This post was edited by NotParker on Saturday, December 10, 2005 at 12:21. |
| #10 By 12071 (203.185.215.149) at 12/10/2005 8:16:36 PM |
| #10 If you ask Parkkker nicely he'll give you a few... he is in no shortage of them! |
| #11 By 32132 (64.180.219.241) at 12/11/2005 12:28:51 PM |
| #12 Thats sad. I post substance and all I get are tin foil hat experts chiming in with their usual garbage. |
| #12 By 12071 (203.185.215.149) at 12/11/2005 5:34:55 PM |
|
#13 Don't lie, you didn't post anything of substance. You posted nothing but a single user's opinion. It may as well have been the opinion of an ActiveWin NBM like yourself! Why not link to CERT recommending that you use any brower other than IE (http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/713878)?
Then you mentioned your usual FUD in the form of: "Sure, you can go to Secunia and look up IE 6, but you can't go there and get an exhaustive lists of Netscape 6,7, Mozilla 1.0,1.1,1.2,1.3,1.4,1.5,1.6,1.7, 1.8 , Phoenix .1, .2, .3 , .5 and then Firebird .6 , .7. etc etc vulnerabilities." This has been debunked so many times it's not funny, but you're still too stupid to understand but I'll try to summarise: - Netscape and Mozilla are different browsers to FireFox, the vulnerabilities than affect the common components cannot be counted twice just because Netscape uses those components, it's still a single vulnerability. If you're going to include those then be prepared to include all the vulnerabilities found in Netscape 8, Avant, Maxthon, Slim Browser, AOL Browser, Crazy Browser, iRider, NetCaptor, Foxie, MinBrowser, DF2K Browser, Master of the Lord Browser etc. - Phoenix etc - well if you're going to count the vulnerabilities found in a beta product then start counting IE1, IE2, IE3, IE4, IE5, IE5.5, IE6 vulnerabilities as well as IE1 beta, IE2 beta, IE3 beta, IE4 beta, IE5 beta, IE5.5 beta, IE6 beta and IE7 beta vulnerabilities! Oh I forgot, you're still to provide us with a link where we can see all the vulnerabilities for beta versions of IE - so much for Microsoft pretending to be open! And finally let's not forget you completely forgetting to respond as to why your browser, that still has known unpatched vulnerabilities from 2002/2003, is superior! |
| #13 By 32132 (207.216.27.238) at 12/11/2005 8:00:01 PM |
|
#14 "You posted nothing but a single user's opinion."
Well, two users actually. http://www.linuxpipeline.com/blog/archives/2005/12/some_pig.html#more "Firefox 1.5, as it turns out, still eats up system memory the way my dog eats his dinner: No matter how much he gets, it goes fast and it's never enough. I got a vivid reminder of this two nights ago, when I gawked in amazement as Firefox tore through more than 400MB of physical RAM and virtual memory on a Windows XP system." "Yet Firefox has reached a point, with its climbing market share and Mozilla Corp.'s nascent efforts to give the browser a real corporate IT presence, where these types of problems can't keep hanging around like some sort of extended family secret that we all hope to see resolved someday. I can also guarantee that Microsoft is unlikely to let these types of problems slide by when it releases Internet Explorer 7, which by all accounts will give Firefox a real challenge in its Web standards support and other features." |
| #14 By 32132 (207.216.27.238) at 12/11/2005 8:02:43 PM |
|
#14 "well if you're going to count the vulnerabilities found in a beta product "
I do if the base code is not in beta. Many (if not most) of the bugs found in the "betas" for Firefox/Phoenix/Firebird also show up in "production" versions of Mozilla. Remember, all those products contain code from 1998 and on. The point I am trying to make, and you are helping, is that all those name changes and version numbers were a con to make you think the underlying code was new and improved. It wasn't. I like the stability of IE 7 beta 1. I really look forward to a finished product. It appears the Firefox 1.5 users ( the honest ones) wished they had a finished product too. This post was edited by NotParker on Sunday, December 11, 2005 at 20:06. |
| #15 By 61 (71.251.77.233) at 12/12/2005 10:28:38 PM |
|
I still get random crashes on FF 1.5 (worse than in the betas).
I've never really seen the memory problem... but I've got 1.5gb, so I'm not usually (ever) running low enough to go look and see what the problem is. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 320 Last | Next |
The time now is
6:03:56 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
