| 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 |
 |
Monthly Microsoft Patch Hides Tricky IE 7 Download | |
|
||
| Time: 06:02 EST/11:02 GMT | News Source: eWeek | Posted By: Kenneth van Surksum | ||
|
Opinion: Microsoft used the January 2007 security update to induce users to try Internet Explorer 7.0 whether they wanted to or not. But after discovering they had been involuntarily upgraded to the new browser, they next found that application incompatibility effectively cut them off from the Internet. For some people who ran Microsoft's January 2007 security and products updates, including me, clicking on the familiar gold shield icon was not much different from getting suckered into opening an e-mail message infected with a virus or a worm Trojan. That's because unless you checked before you clicked, you were unwittingly giving permission for Microsoft to install Internet Explorer 7.0. And in too many cases, users are experiencing application crashes or Web site incompatibilities that are rendering IE 7 and your computer useless for Web browsing. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 161 Last | Next |
The time now is
4:59:22 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 6859 (206.156.242.36) at 1/24/2007 7:50:08 AM |
|
Yep, that's exactly what happened here...luckily I knew IE7 was coming, and before we rolled it out via WSUS I installed it manually on a test box and loaded up our own company's main page...lo and behold, it looked like crap! MS would have done well to impliment an IE6 compatibility mode for IE7, which would have fixed the issue (at a slight cost of speed). As it stands, IE7 is one of the most hated pieces of work yet that MS has decided to give the world.
Final note: Blocking via WSUS is fine for companies, but there is a way to stop it for personal users, it's called the IE7 Blocker Toolkit, but the important thing to know is the registry key of HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\Setup\7.0 is where all the "magic happens." This fiasco alone may be responsible for Firefox's sudden rise in popularity. Nice going MS, you futzed up again. This post was edited by Cthulhu on Wednesday, January 24, 2007 at 07:50. |
| #2 By 2960 (24.254.95.224) at 1/24/2007 8:15:12 AM |
|
I'm sorry, but as much as I hate many of Microsoft's practices, this is a load of BS.
You have TWO opportunities to NOT install IE7. 1. You can uncheck it from the list of updates. It's not like it's hidden away. It's in plain site. 2. Even if you do leave it checked, and it is downloaded, it does NOT install before you accept the installation via a totally separate dialog that appears when windows update hits that part of the install routine. IE7 IS a security update. Anything that replaces that swiss-cheese known as IE6 has GOT to be a security update. Finally, don't get the idea I like IE7. I hate it worse than any browser ever released for a variety of reasons, and prefer to use FireFox 2.0 (with the 'open in IE' add-in for those few pages that don't open correctly in FireFox). I do have IE7 installed, for security reasons, but rarely use it. TL |
| #3 By 6859 (206.156.242.36) at 1/24/2007 8:38:57 AM |
|
Indeed, IE7 is a security update, but security updates need to (a) not break existing applications (especially ones from the same vendor); and (b) be more secure than the previous iteration. IE7 violates both those simple premises. It's not "playing nice" with some of MS' own stuff (violates "a"), and is not any more secure than IE6 (violating "b").
All around, IE (as a whole) is going down the tubes. If MS wants to recover from this mess, they need to roll out IE 7.5 / 8.0 to address these wrongings. Let alone, they need to explain why their own product cannot display simple pages properly that were written specifically for IE6. IE7 should not have been rolled out without that backwards functionality. Hell, we'd be using it here if that were the case. |
| #4 By 23275 (68.17.42.38) at 1/24/2007 9:11:11 AM |
|
Ok - first, #2, is right and demonstrates clear objectivity - doesn't necessarily like MS/IE, small mamals, etc... but certainly capable of objectivity.
#1, 3 - here's where I get confused... a lot of people who have a good deal of knowledge write articles, post to forums and dicuss the shortcoming of Microsoft, IE, and small mamals, etc... - in so doing they demonstrate great technical skill and as skillfully, either scare people, or raise concerns that should not be there. All the while, the same learned and skilled people ignore the science and technical details as published many months ahead of IE 7 - reference the IE 7 readiness toolkit - http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=D13EE10D-2718-47F1-AA86-1E32D526383D&displaylang=en Many of the stories and posts read the same... "in our super huge company populated with a staff of xxxx experts we have a....." then into IE 7 and Microsoft bashing 8 months later - ignoring the toolkits, or even simpler fixes - like the use of "Conditional Comments" where a site can call a compatible rendering in IE - see, About Conditional Comments, http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/workshop/author/dhtml/overview/ccomment_ovw.asp So rather than do what they allege their jobs are - or pass tools and information up/down to those that do - they do nothing and then complain about IE. It is not as if Microsoft did not and does not routinely support the people that use its sowftare - devs and IT/MIS Pro's and Partners most especially. So if a person has a site that is not ready for IE 7, I say, "it is your own dang fault" - if a user of IE 7 has an issue with a site, at this point they need to blame the site admin and operator - not IE 7. People cannot hold out some great expert power and insight and at the same time prove they have not done a thing about the very "thing" they are complaining about. "The maximum effective range of an excuse is ZERO Meters..." |
| #5 By 2201 (212.117.228.133) at 1/24/2007 9:55:21 AM |
|
I completely agree #4 & #2
It's hardly's Microsoft's fault that they decided to actually fix some problems of IE6 rendering. The problem here is clearly the site admins that completely ignored all the IE7 betas then complained when their websites "broke". That website linked to above is talking rubbish, seeing as you have to actually approve the IE7 installation before it's on your system. He sounds like yet another person who ignores what's placed in front of him, then complains about it. So once again, more FUD. Move along, nothing to see here. This post was edited by testman on Wednesday, January 24, 2007 at 09:55. |
| #6 By 6859 (206.156.242.36) at 1/24/2007 10:04:23 AM |
|
(1) MS broke neutral technology in IE6
(2) This forced devs to "fix" (markup) their pages specifically for differing browsers (3) MS then fixed their fix by releasing IE7 (4) IE7 doesn't display the content the same way that IE6 does (5) This requires a repeat of step #2 Yeah, that's progress. NOT. Had MS made a "gender neutral" browser in the first place, this would not have become an issue. Like it or not, and argue or not, this is exactly what MS did when IE6 came out, and then they did the same thing again for IE7...all the while saying it would be more standards compliant. "Talking our of both sides of the face" comes to mind. I have a page for our company that displays properly in every browser except IE7 (Opera, Firefox, Safari, Epiphany, etc.) Every other company got it right, MS didn't, that's the bottom line. Our devs should not have to waste more of their already strapped time fixing a fix which was futzed in the first place. |
| #7 By 8241 (206.210.98.95) at 1/24/2007 10:06:14 AM |
|
I would have read his article, but IE 7 "effectively cut me off from teh interwebs oh noes!!1@one!"
I love "rendering IE 7 and your computer useless for Web browsing"... AND YOUR COMPUTER! Like wow, my whole computer has asploded into a fine pink mist of fleshy refuse! I'll have to go out and buy a brand new system and make sure IE 7 doesn't get anywhere near it. |
| #8 By 32132 (64.180.219.241) at 1/24/2007 10:25:05 AM |
| And next month eWeek will lick the *ss of Mozilla for forcing FF 2.0 on people without any chances of saying no. |
| #9 By 23275 (68.17.42.38) at 1/24/2007 11:05:49 AM |
|
#8, Did you ever have a customer that reads eWeek like it's the Bible?
It can actually be good for a person - to build and support a network, systems and software opposite that sort of perspective.... because by comparison... every other client will seem really easy. This post was edited by lketchum on Wednesday, January 24, 2007 at 11:06. |
| #10 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 1/24/2007 1:21:21 PM |
| #8: Yep, that's how it happened for me. I was happily running Firefox 1.5 when a pop-up came up telling me there was a new major version of Firefox. Just then, the Mozilla employee that stands in my office 24/7 sprang into action and literally forced my hand to click the big Yes button. |
| #11 By 32132 (142.32.208.238) at 1/24/2007 3:36:16 PM |
|
#10 "I was happily running Firefox 1.5 when a pop-up came up telling me there was a new major version of Firefox. Just then, the Mozilla employee that stands in my office 24/7 sprang into action and literally forced my hand to click the big Yes button."
Thats exactly what eWeek is saying about IE7! Isn't that amazing! Do you have the Microsoft employee in your office too? |
| #12 By 2201 (62.252.0.9) at 1/24/2007 4:43:00 PM |
|
#6 So you'd rather Microsoft left their browser broken? They fix the problem and you complain. Some people are never satisfied.
Had web developers been using the alpha, public preview, beta, RC1 way back when they were first released, they wouldn't have this problem now. Only people to blame is themselves really. |
| #13 By 6859 (206.156.242.36) at 1/24/2007 5:00:40 PM |
|
#12 By testman (118 Posts) at 1/24/2007 4:43:00 PM
#6 So you'd rather Microsoft left their browser broken? No, they need to not release "fixes" that are nothing more than "go and change the tags in your HTML." MS broke things, they need to be the ones to impliment the fix in browser. |
| #14 By 3653 (68.52.143.149) at 1/24/2007 6:51:20 PM |
| just for the record OneStat reported a drop of 0.46% market share for FF, BEFORE this "forced ie upgrade". I state that plainly, only because i know the msft haters will try to distort that fact in a few months. |
| #15 By 102276 (71.8.215.162) at 6/13/2008 6:51:59 AM |
|
Top Internet sites
Archive site: [url=http://ax010.axspace.com/06/index.html]problems sty eye b[/url] to save valuable electronic content threatened with extinction. [url=http://go112.gofreeserve.com/16/index.html]toilet unclog a a[/url] These two examples: Internet archive billions of years since 1996 in the old (new) [url=http://drill212.100webspace.net/30/sitemap.xml]vise drill press u map[/url] on the site in groups and Google, this message in early [url=http://s010.siam108site.com/22/index.html]baby motrin overdose u[/url] 2005 to provide more 845000000 from Usenet News / discussion forum. [url=http://dhdhdh.vwebhosting.com/vw/pearson-dental-supplies/index.html]pearson dental supplies x[/url] Blogs (or blog) site: Post [url=http://loancarloan.freehostingz.com/under/19/sitemap.xml]map orlando quest b map[/url] online diary site commonly used in a panel discussion may be [url=http://dfjdehdeh.00freehost.com/glaucoma/sitemap.xml] glaucoma z map[/url] (for example, Blogger is, xanga). Content: Business website original content creation and distribution (for example, the list of candidates, about.com). Web site: used to provide background information about the company, [url=http://filipinatits.gofreeserve.com/manor-care-nursing-home/sitemap.xml]care nursing manor u map[/url] organization or service. Commercial site (or e-commerce sites): goods, [url=http://kotik.memebot.com/18/index.html]cabinet kitchen custom u[/url] such as buying, amazon.com. Community site: [url=http://ltdfak.servmn.com/oxycodone/index.html]oxycodone h[/url] Web sites with similar interests who are communicating with each other through chat and bulletin boards in many [url=http://cutehairlongpicturestyle.7u.cz/sex-masturbation/index.html]sex masturbation u[/url] cases, for example, myspace. [url=http://bladderleakin.webcindario.com/free-downloadable-full-version-of-spyware-software/sitemap.xml]downloadable full free l map[/url] The database web site: web site, and its [url=http://my112.myhosting247.com/07/sitemap.xml]bailey bailey perrin n map[/url] main purpose was to find specific databases and display such as the [url=http://nbnbnbnbn.byethost17.com/deck-portable-electric-generators/index.html]electric deck portable s[/url] Internet Movie Database or political We will be glad to see you |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 161 Last | Next |
The time now is
4:59:22 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
