| 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 |
 |
Internet Explorer for UNIX Discontinued | |
|
||
| Time: 14:33 EST/19:33 GMT | News Source: ActiveWin.com | Posted By: Robert Stein | ||
|
We sincerely apologize, but Internet Explorer technologies for UNIX are no longer available for download. Visit the Internet Explorer Web site for more information on Internet Explorer. For Support options, visit the Internet Explorer for UNIX newsgroups at news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsoft.public.inetexplorer.unix. Note: Microsoft employees do not monitor these public newsgroups. Or, search the Microsoft Knowledge base. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 301 Last | Next |
The time now is
3:32:03 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 3653 (63.162.177.140) at 9/20/2002 3:48:27 PM |
| "Mozilla is waaay better." that comment speaks volumes about the low expectations you have in the Unix world. |
| #2 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 9/20/2002 4:25:32 PM |
|
beeyp - Well technically it was just for Solaris and HP-UX, not really Unix in general. A lot of Linsux munkies don't know that.
Mozilla was released some 3-4 years after IE for Unix was available. You probably weren't aware of that either. |
| #3 By 2960 (68.100.157.191) at 9/20/2002 4:31:55 PM |
|
#4,
Now THAT's a stretch... TL |
| #4 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 9/20/2002 4:39:50 PM |
| Sodablue, if I'm not mistaken it was more then 4 years after the first releases of IE for Solaris/HPUX that Moz 1.0 was released. So if we want to do a little comparing, um, beeyp is saying that Netscape 4.4 (I believe the then current version) was superior to the then current Solaris or HPUX version of IE. I find it hard to believe that anything was inferiror to Netscape 4.x. I may be biased in my opinion though. |
| #5 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 9/20/2002 8:56:21 PM |
|
bryank1, no, completely wrong. The MacBU developed the OS X IE from scratch. Microsoft cuts them off from other groups--Office, Internet, etc... (but not WinMedia and Office has abstraction layers) and makes them do it from scratch. The Nix version came from the Windows Internet group... so I suppose technically there is still a Unix version... but there is too much Mac specific code to be of value to the Nix community.
On the other hand, Apple will probably be releasing their own browser within a year based on Mozilla (they hired the developer of Chimera); so that could piss Microsoft off and end IE for OS X eventually. This post was edited by sodajerk on Friday, September 20, 2002 at 21:02. |
| #6 By 6253 (12.237.219.240) at 9/21/2002 4:36:15 PM |
|
sodajerk is right about the code bases. The Unix versions of IE used about 98% of the Win32 IE source code, along with the Mainsoft libraries which implement Win32 on certain Unix platforms. At the time IE for Unix was released, Mainsoft only supported Solaris and HP-UX. Today, they also support AIX, but they still don't support Linux yet (announced for 4th quarter of this year).
Mainsoft talked about supporting Linux for years, but they didn't consider it worth their while until there was enough mature plumbing which could be consistently found across distributions. This is the true reason that there was never an IE for Linux; Microsoft's goal was to address Netscape's cross-platform argument but not at the cost of major development work. Using Mainsoft, it took a very small handful of people to port the Win32 IE to Solaris and HP-UX. The most work was just spent on testing and setting up support resources within PSS. I don't know how much Microsoft paid to license Mainsoft, but Mainsoft has always had a close relationship with Microsoft due to Mainsoft providing SourceSafe for non-Windows platforms. Mainsoft also pays Microsoft to license Windows source code, so Microsoft might have gotten a license for the libraries merely by offering a discount on Mainsoft's Windows license fees. If Mainsoft had supported Linux, I'm fairly sure Microsoft would have released an IE for Linux knowing full well that no real Linux user would be caught dead running it, but it would have scored huge points in the press and with analysts. Since Linux is already x86 architecture, the port would have been even easier than with Solaris and HP-UX, and it would have cost virtually nothing to set up PSS with the resources to support it for one or two major distributions. Bristol, Mainsoft's only real competitor, does have a product which supports Linux, but it really was never an option for Microsoft to use Bristol. Relations between Bristol and Microsoft were cold after September 1997 when Microsoft raised the price on Bristol's license for Windows NT source code (as well as Mainsoft's) and Bristol filed suit. Bristol did get a Windows source code license in 1999 and released their Linux product shortly thereafter, but Microsoft released IE for Unix in February 1998, and the lawsuits were not settled until February 2001. (Microsoft won the first trial in front of a jury, but got a hostile judge in the second case and paid something like $4M to settle.) |
| #7 By 6253 (12.237.219.240) at 9/23/2002 1:04:55 AM |
|
#18, the only Unix ports were binaries for Sun SPARC processors and HP's PA-RISC processors. Those CPU architectures are completely different than x86.
Theoretically, plug-ins would work if they were ported under Mainsoft's libraries just like the rest of IE. I don't think anybody ever did such a thing. Mainsoft was not an "emulator" or a "virtual machine." The IE source code was actually compiled to native SPARC/PA-RISC instructions, except that the Win32 calls were implemented by Mainsoft (but also in native SPARC/PA-RISC instructions), so you really couldn't take a binary plug-in built for x86 and use it as-is. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 301 Last | Next |
The time now is
3:32:03 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
