| 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 |
 |
What's Next For Internet Explorer 7.0? | |
|
||
| Time: 18:12 EST/23:12 GMT | News Source: InformationWeek | Posted By: Chris Hedlund | ||
|
Bill Gates says Microsoft will ship a beta version of its new browser this summer, but the details remain sketchy. Now that Microsoft has disclosed plans to release a test version of Internet Explorer 7.0 this summer, only the details remain. What new features will be included? When will a final release be available? Will IE 7 run on older versions of Windows? When Bill Gates disclosed IE 7 on Tuesday at the RSA conference in San Francisco, he left those questions for others to answer. Microsoft's chairman provided only a general idea of what to expect, saying a beta version would be available early this summer for Windows XP Service Pack 2 and that it would focus on defenses against phishing attacks and malicious software. "Browsing definitely is a point of vulnerability," Gates said. In an online discussion published on Microsoft's Web site, security VP Mike Nash said IE 7 will also include enhanced "privacy protections." And Neil Charney, director of Windows client, says the upgraded browser will fight off spyware better, too. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 228 Last | Next |
The time now is
1:13:50 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 1288 (24.29.7.139) at 2/19/2005 1:14:30 AM |
| I'd bet very little new features -- maybe a few minor things such as new icons, etc. It will probably just be a collection of security patches that they would have normally released on Windows Update and they'll call it IE 7 so people don't think they are falling behind. Obviously this wasn't even on the radar until the success of Firefox got them slightly concerned. Only a few months ago they were saying major development on IE as an app had stopped and the next version will be Longhorn exclusive. I doubt they'll spend time on any cool features like tabbed browsing or ad blocking which are what make Firefox so appealing. I hope I'm wrong but it's obvious this is not something they've been working on for long. We'll see -- bring back the browser wars! |
| #2 By 10022 (67.139.81.110) at 2/19/2005 1:40:34 AM |
| Please put in a spell checker (if not in IE 7, then at least make the Longhorn version do it!) |
| #3 By 61 (65.32.168.114) at 2/19/2005 3:31:42 AM |
|
Tickle: I hope you are kidding, as many new features have been introduced, but anyways...
Flyer: I really don't see how tabs are "cool". How is having tabs in your browser any different than having the pages on your taskbar? I'm hoping for better CSS and PNG support, and perhaps smart tags could be re-introduced? |
| #4 By 143 (68.73.148.15) at 2/19/2005 3:54:50 AM |
| I look forward to IE7 :D |
| #5 By 28388 (82.68.176.164) at 2/19/2005 5:58:52 AM |
|
CPUGuy, tabs are cool and different from programs on the taskbar for a few reasons:
1. If like most people you have the taskbar at the bottom, tabs are much closer to the navigation buttons and URL bar 2. Tabs allow for a finer grain of organisation of your browsing - I find I'm still using multiple windows in FF, but I have one for each topic I'm browsing on and within that multiple pages 3. You can open a new tab in FF with one click and have it not appear in front of what you are trying to view (as opposed to Shift+Click in IE) 4. You can bookmark all currently open tabs in one action into their own folder - especially useful when combined with the approach described above 5. Similarly, you can open all the bookmarks in a favorites folder with one click - I use this technique for viewing my webcomics, since I can just press "Open in tabs" in my Comics favourites folder, then come back in a few minutes when they have loaded and read them all at once. Compare with my IE days, where I simply loaded one after another or clumsily alternated between two windows, reading in one and loading the next comic in another And lets not forget the neat functions you can get with extensions. Particular favorites of mine are the very effective Adblock (filters Flash or images by matching it with a list of regular expressions) and Allow Right Click (stops those annoying prevent right click scripts). I do think Microsoft gets a bad rap in most cases, but I'm afraid that FF is just superior to IE (IMHO). Of course, I'm not about to pretend it's without its faults: rendering is slower than in IE, FF is more vulnerable to malformed HTML, and the supposed security benefits are almost certainly simply due to its lower usage.. I'd have to look at the long term to make a proper judgement about that. |
| #6 By 37 (24.183.41.60) at 2/19/2005 9:00:41 AM |
| junkhead, I had been doing all that YEARS ago with Avantbrowser which is also free. |
| #7 By 28388 (82.68.176.166) at 2/19/2005 10:04:33 AM |
| AWBrian, I can hardly deny what FF offers has not been done before, but the issue here is that of what IE offers (Avant Browser is not IE, though it uses the same core rendering engine), and the point CPUGUy was making was against tabbed browsing in general. |
| #8 By 3653 (68.54.224.219) at 2/19/2005 12:02:37 PM |
|
I hope Microsoft puts Smart Tags into the browser, so that google doesn't monopolize with autolinks.
lol. it was just a matter of time google, before the freedom killers stop your innovation just like they stopped microsoft years ago. http://news.com.com/Google+landgrab+raises+online+ire/2100-1032_3-5582792.html?tag=nefd.lede C'mon msft haters, lets see your obvious double standard. C'mon, defend google. You know you want to. This post was edited by mooresa56 on Saturday, February 19, 2005 at 12:03. |
| #9 By 61 (65.32.168.114) at 2/19/2005 2:05:49 PM |
| My point is that tabs are not some killer feature. |
| #10 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 2/19/2005 6:20:29 PM |
|
The people advocating tabbed browsing should really look into news aggregation... SharpReader, NewsGator, etc.
|
| #11 By 12071 (203.185.215.149) at 2/19/2005 9:18:38 PM |
|
#11 "C'mon, defend google. You know you want to."
Ok, let's defend Google because you're obviously too ignorant to distinguish the differences between what Google is doing and Microsoft's SmartTags even though the final result is very similar (if not in many ways identical): a) Google doesn't have a Monopoly (I know that's a difficult term for you MS apologists to come to grips with but try). Now that they have added this feature to their toolbar it won't automatically be used by 90-95% of the world's desktop pc's. Even those users with the Google toolbar installed will have to go and re-download it to have this functionality. b) This functionality isn't on by default - you have to click a button, therefore webmasters cannot complain that Google is automatically modifying their content, Google is giving the user the ability to switch that functionality on. Having said all that, I can see Microsoft bringing back SmartTags in a similar fashion - i.e. where they need to be switched on by the user (rather than by default). If they do that I can't see why they shouldn't be allowed to do it. |
| #12 By 415 (69.245.189.5) at 2/20/2005 1:09:26 PM |
|
Good point sodablue.
I'll add that you can get RSSBandit at http://www.rssbandit.org and have a great news aggregator with tabbed browsing. It's better than SharpReader, and if your going to run a .Net Framework app anyway, it's got much more bang for the MB. |
| #13 By 61 (65.32.168.114) at 2/20/2005 3:56:54 PM |
|
Chris, for one, smart tags were still a beta product when they were pulled out simply because of the uproar from people who hadn't even seen the feature yet.
Second, the website developer had total control of what was displayed on a smart tag, and what got tagged. Also, the user could switch it off. Who knows if it would have been on or off by default by the final product, people automatically just said MS was abusing their power and bitching when they had absolutely no clue as to what the technology even was! |
| #14 By 12071 (203.185.215.149) at 2/20/2005 10:03:42 PM |
|
#17 "beta product"
Yes and Microsoft call their AntiSpyware product a "beta" too even though Giant called it "final" for quite a while. "the website developer had total control of what was displayed on a smart tag" But the point here was that smart tags were on by default, the website developer had to specifically configure the smart tags to be off or to display something else etc. This is what I think most web developers didn't like about the implementation. "Also, the user could switch it off." But it was on by default on every page you went to. Like I've mentioned, I had and continue to have no problems whatsoever with SmartTags - I can think of many ways in which such technology adds on great features. If it was off by default and users had the opinion to turn it on (on a per page/site/whatever basis) then I think you'd find that there would have been a lot less complaining. Having said that there will always be those designers that would have complained that someone else was modifying their content - but you can't please everyone all of the time, and given that this is a user-instigated feature it's no different to the user changing the CSS of the page they are looking at. The number one problem with SmartTags was that they were on by default, and that they would have been on by default on 90-95% of the world's desktop pc's. |
| #15 By 3653 (68.54.224.219) at 2/20/2005 11:46:01 PM |
|
kabuki - "The number one problem with SmartTags was that they were on by default"
no, the number one problem was that MSFT was the pioneer and you bigots couldnt stand it. You folks throw reason out the window with your blind hatred. |
| #16 By 61 (65.32.168.114) at 2/21/2005 1:46:16 AM |
|
It was on by default most likely so it would actually get tested, as it was a beta product.
Also, Antispyware is in beta because 1) Microsoft is furthing development on it, and 2) They are changing all the graphics over. |
| #17 By 12071 (203.173.25.138) at 2/21/2005 5:34:24 AM |
|
#19 Yeah you're right... "us" bigots, "us" communists, couldn't stand "Microsoft The Pioneer". Get a grip and grow up honestly, you're outdoing Parkker these days.
#20 Whatever the reasons behind why it was on by default, the fact remains that it was on by default which is why most people complained about it. If Google was to turn their "Smart Tags" on by default, you'd hear similar complaints even though they cannot penetrate anywhere close to the maker share that Microsoft can by bundling a feature. And sure they are continuing development on it but changing graphics doesn't turn a final product into a beta. |
| #18 By 12071 (203.185.215.149) at 2/21/2005 6:17:52 PM |
| #22 For the last time you ignoramus, I was stating my opinion on Churches and Evangelists (look in a mirror). In some countries stating your own opinion is still regarded as ok, and we don't have to walk the p.c. line all the time, e.g. I say Merry Christmas every year even though I personally don't believe in it, instead I spend that time with my family. I'm not about to start calling it Happy Holidays when the reason for the occasion is Christmas like in certain countries!! You have had a very poor education, which you continue to show off with nearly every comment you make and your general lack of reading, comprehension, debating and logic skills. I personally couldn't care less what or who you choose to believe in (or anyone else for that matter). If it makes you happy, if it gives you some answer you need, fantastic! But that doesn't mean I'm not allowed to have my own opinion about it. And my opinion is that generally speaking, anyone that comes out and tells a group of people that God speak to them, or through them, and they're not doing it as a joke, is a screwball. So I'll continue to use my freedom of speech and opinion thank you very much. If your freedoms haven't been trampled on too much since 9/11 you are just as free to disagree with me and preach the good word or spread your propaganda - whichever one you're actually doing! |
| #19 By 3653 (68.54.224.219) at 2/21/2005 7:28:50 PM |
| For someone with no debating skills, he sure got your blood boiling... |
| #20 By 12071 (203.185.215.149) at 2/21/2005 10:04:56 PM |
| #24 I wouldn't say he got my blood boiling, it's just getting tiresome having to repeat myself over and over again because he can't comprehend simple terms. And what does that have to do with debating skills? Anyone can piss someone else off, it doesn't mean you can debate an issue. |
| #21 By 7797 (63.76.44.6) at 2/23/2005 2:25:17 PM |
| I have reported comment number #22 for violating the terms of use |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 228 Last | Next |
The time now is
1:13:50 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
