Microsoft has drawn some criticism after confirming that it will not make the next version of Internet Explorer available to users of its Windows 2000 operating system.
In a blog posting at the end of last week, a Microsoft employee confirmed that the company would not be releasing IE 7 for Windows 2000, as this would involve a lot of work for an operating system that is in the later stages of its lifecycle.
"It should be no surprise that we do not plan on releasing IE 7 for Windows 2000. One reason is where we are in the Windows 2000 lifecycle. Another is that some of the security work in IE 7 relies on operating system functionality in XP SP2 that is non-trivial to port back to Windows 2000," according to the blog posting.
Although Windows 2000 will be supported until 2010, at the end of June of this year Microsoft will no longer accept requests for design changes or new features for the operating system.
A number of Microsoft blog readers were unhappy to learn that IE 7 would be unavailable on Windows 2000.
One reader, known as Garry, said it was contradictory for Microsoft to offer support for Windows 2000 until 2010, but not to offer its users an up-to-date browser.
"An important point, as I see it, is that Microsoft is committed to provided extended support to Windows 2000 through 2010. I consider that (an) acknowledgement by Microsoft that businesses and consumers will be using Windows 2000 until at least that time, however, come 2010 they will still be using IE 6 SP1 which will surely be obsolete by that time," said Garry.
Microsoft was also criticized for building a Web browser that cannot run independently of the operating system.
"What kind of silliness is this--to build an insecure Web browser that is so tightly screwed into the nitty gritties of an operating system that it can neither benefit from the updates made to itself on another flavor of the same operating system, nor can it be taken out of the operating system," said one posting.
IE 7, which will be available in beta this summer, will offer improved security features and basic tabbed browsing. It is also expected to offer improved standards support, including enhanced support for CSS 2 and PNG transparencies.
I switched back to Windows 2000 from XP on my laptop (because I want to use it). Why would I want IE if I can just use Firefox? The choice is especially obvious since the IE in 2000 doesn't have the enhanced security of the XP version.
Now I pity the company that tied their intranet to some ActiveX applet, but even then they can just default to IE for those sites that require it.
So thanks Microsoft, I don't need IE 7. I also find it amusing that people are worried that IE 6 SP1 will be obsolete when IE 7 comes out. Isn't it obsolete right now?
Wow so they want to make IE7 more secure and wowee "tabbed" browser! Something that should be in a browser these days. Microsoft is definitely not being proactive but reactive. They are no more the innovators I thought they would be, unless they are focusing whey to much innovating other things than their OS. I tried Longhorn, no big deal, I personally am doomed to stay on Windows XP for the rest of my life.
It's funny, I don't understand why anyone would even want to use IE to begin with. I think the majority of people would be using alternative browsers if they were more supported by the market. The thing is, IE is on all windows pc's no matter what, and currently, basically all the plug-in's are guaranteed to work with IE. So people start out using IE and get used to its interface and don't want to change. Because when you compare IE to Mozilla, Firefox, and other alternative browsers, IE's features don't even come close. This problem will greatly lessen as the world starts its slow evolution to Linux.
Microsoft wants you to upgrade to their latest version of Windows. That's all they care about. The sooner thay can users to move to XP or longhorn, the more dough they have in thier pocket.
You would Microsoft would be experienced busines decision makers. Do you realize what is going to happen if they don't update Windows 2000 users to IE7, they will then be forced to use and install firefox in order to be secure and safe, thus giving firefox a bigger advantage. I think this is definitely a decision that will hurt Microsoft. Probably when they come out with Longhorn soon they will stop making browsers for Windows XP because "its so obsolete". There is no future for Microsoft and its operating system. If I was Apple, this would be the perfect time to port their OS over to X86.
It isn't stupid to not support it on old systems. Apple users that use OS 9 are setting themselves for failure too with all the new products. That is why they build new OSes. It is like saying that car companies should install everything their new cars have into the old ones for free. Here is your DVD player, your GPS system, your anti lock brakes, your four wheel drive into your 25 year old chevy citation for free. Does that make sense to you? I don't think so.
Apple on X86? Don't believe the hype. Not to mention, what good would that do for the hundreds of millions of users with custom Windows apps that are part of their daily workflow. It's a stupid comment, please leave Apple out of this discussion.
As for MS forcing their users to upgrade... good, they should force them to upgrade, I don't really care how it comes about, I just need all of the sheep to get off of IE 5.X first and foremost so we can cut web development costs in half (by not supporting IE 5's ridiculous box model implementation.) Beyond that, lets just hope IE 7 has stellar standards support, otherwise, the whole upgrade cycle is moot.
As for security, if you're waiting for IE 7 to secure your computer, you are really clueless and deserve every virus, trojan, etc. that you get.
Virtually EVERY other operating system in existence is more secure than Windows, and virtually EVERY alternative browser is more secure than IE. Obviously, the world isn't taking security very seriously, if they were, Windows/IE wouldn't represent 95% of the global web browsing population. If you are on Windows, and you use IE, you are of the typical "victim" mentality that poisons our society.
Stop complaining, and secure your computer yourself. Change browsers, or even better change Operating Systems, the myth that you won't be able to work with other people's files should put to bed for good. Email, IM, Office, Music, and Video all work on other platforms. You can exchange files with everyone. All operating systems work essentially the same way. It's time to start educating the masses, there is absolutely no barrier to getting off of Windows and securing your computer.
Oh, and if you're a gamer, get an XBox, PS2, Nintendo, Sega, whatever, and stop muddying the discussion with that frivolous topic.
I have been convinced for some time that by the time Longhorn comes out, it will be irrelevant. It will either have none of the features that were talked up in the past (e.g. WFFS), or it will be pushed out so far that people will have forgotten about it. The one feature likely to be part of Longhorn is treacherous (they call it trusted) computing. This feature will likely make Longhorn useless to many home users (especially hobbyists). Some businesses will likely pick up on it, but many of them are testing alternatives (Mac, Linux). The longer Microsoft delays releasing Longhorn, the less relevant it will be, however, if they release a buggy OS this time around, the results will be far worse than last time (remember Windows 95).
I don't want Microsoft to release Longhorn sooner than they know they can have it developed fully. I had rather have a delayed, fully working and secure OS than a rushed, buggy OS. As of now, I'm still satisfied with Windows XP. I've tried installing Xandros on my PC, but I don't want an OS that is going to need to be babied as much while I'm using it as much as I had to during installation.
why people hate Microsoft, for crap like this. I they are going to be consistent in their "support" of Win 2000, they would make sure that IE worked with it.
No matter, even though I use 2000, I've been surfing with Firefox for months now and I'm not going back anytime soon.
Pretty lazy if you ask me. A company that big should have MORE than enough resources to make IE7 available for a still-significant operating system. Heck, if they cared about their customers, they'd throw in SP2 for Windows 2000 as well.
That's basically why many people dislike Microsoft's decision.
If IE 7 isn't supported by MS for Windows 2000, it certainly gives other browsers like Firefox and Opera an opening.
I think MS understimates how quickly users move to newer operating systems. At my company we still predominately use Win2000 on the desktop and for all of our servers.
Also, the fact that IE 7 is only available in XP and beyond is NOT a reason to upgrade.
Why would anyone wait for a browser that brings you features that are available right now in other modern and secure browsers like Firefox and Opera. Just install one of these two and you will get all the features if not even more then you will get when IE7 comes out. Any by that time there will be new versions of Firefox and Opera out with even more features. And they sure will not stop you to install them on Windows 2000 or force you to pay fo an expensive upgrade to Windows XP (and they say IE is free, yeah right and pigs fly).
It isn't so much that anyone really wants it for a web browser. Most intelligent people have already jumped ship to Firefox or Opera (Don't ask me what this means about the other 80 or so percent that still use IE).
Why IE 7 is so important is that it looks like it will finally be nearly standards compliant. Meaning when someone designs a site that uses W3C standards they also won't have to design a broken one for IE. Also, finally getting full support for PNG means that web site designers will be able to finally use PNG graphics on their sites without having to worry about compatibility.
As for Windows 2000 users. Well things advance, you either advance with them or you get left behind. For those Windows 2000 user's that don't want XP well that is thier problem. Lucky for them they do have the option of using Firefox and Opera.
A year ago, that would have been an issue, but now that other browsers are available, I can't see a problem. I switched to Firefox and find it is an excellent browser. It has some drawbacks, but most of those should be resolved within the next few months. In the mean time, Microsoft is trying to catchup to Firefox with IE7. Judging by Microsoft's delivery history, I doubt IE7 will be delived before the first of 2006 at the earliest and quite likey it will take much longer to get it stable and secure. I wonder where Firefox will be by then????
... MS could decide to quit the 'innovation' BS and write IE 7 as a stand-alone application. IE 6 was written that way for the Mac, and except for the MS mindset at the time, IE Whatever could has been, and should have been a stand-alone application for the PC. As things stand, IE on the PC is now the ONLY browser which is not a stand-alone application.
But, maybe if MS did it right for a chnage, they just might prove that bundling is far from a brilliant idea.
Face it the reason why there won't be backward support for win2k. Money doesnt flow into the coffers if your not spending the dollars on a new os. Its all a sales tactic , oh no I need to upgrade to get IE7. there goes 150 bucks for XP. Right now you can't validate your copy of window 2000...
I don't like Microsoft in any real form, but people put this slant on IE7 like it's some kind of magic bullet.
Why isn't IE7 going to be available on Win2K? Probably because Microsoft doesn't want to continue supporting it when (more like if) longhorn comes out in 2006. How many companies still activily support 2 or three generations old software or OS's?
I'm sure that Microsoft wants you to upgrade to the latest version. I'm sure they could have made IE7 work on Win2K. I'm sure they could do a lot of things they aren't going to, but that's business as usuall for them and many other companies.
Companies that support software for twenty years after the next version comes out are usually out of business. It has been almost five years since WinXP came out and for windows it works just fine. At some point Win2K is going to be in the same boat as Win98. Unsupported software.
target, lazy incompetant programers would rather not code to standards, but after all they are just following their leader; yes master BIll I will be your bater please take my money for your pleasure... bunch of sheep just like the zealots of Mac; Oh I do use windows and Mac 10.3 and yes SuSe Linux .... guess who is winning hearts and minds as well as bringing computer literacy and intelligence back to people again... it sure isn't the "Pirates of Silicon Valley" thats right. At least I'll put Mac a touch above windows since the core change it is a better system but the **** sissy hardware pulleeezzz you know someone is a little light in the loafers they are probably Democraps and windoze is run by Republicants
Well, the Mythology of the internet browser has been recently shattered: there are several viable internet browsers available for the Win XP Pro, XP Home, 2000 Pro & server 2003. Users can use one, or they can use all of them! Firefox, in particular, has a nice support niche on the www.mozilla.org webpage.
These alternative browser products are very good, well developed and tested because they are coming from development organizations committed to customer well being. They obviously went through a System Development Life Cycle with a crew of developers, designers and testers who tackled the Firefox and Opera products with "an eye" on pertinent security risks and issues facing the internet online electronic maze.
Netscape, Firefox Mozilla and Opera each provide the user with a stronger set of controls and ability to configure browser activity within Windows and also have the benefit of being cross-platform as Firefox Mozilla and Opera can be used within a Linux KDE Desktop configuration. Opera provides its users with several excellent productivity features and can facilitate HTML published webpages.
Opera provides an email application which provides a better security features for managing attachments and cntent.
At least we have some choices.
Mary B. Winfield Platinum Precision Software Inc. New York, NY adriaticnyc@yahoo.com
Web giant is spending $120 million to beef up its Mountain View, Calif., headquarters, according to filings with the city reviewed by the San Jose Mercury News.
The Samsung Galaxy Mini 2 S6500 could make its debut at the Mobile World Congress in Barcelona later this month, according to a leaked promotional image.
MIT creates a simulation to celebrate the 50th anniversary of Spacewar. A relic of the early days of minicomputers, it was one of the first computer video games and set the stage for many others, including Asteroids.
Now I pity the company that tied their intranet to some ActiveX applet, but even then they can just default to IE for those sites that require it.
So thanks Microsoft, I don't need IE 7. I also find it amusing that people are worried that IE 6 SP1 will be obsolete when IE 7 comes out. Isn't it obsolete right now?
Microsoft could cure world hunger and they'd still 'draw criticism'.
Here's a thought for Win2k users who want recent software...upgrade your OS to XP. Tada! Problem solved.
That's all they care about. The sooner thay can users to move to XP
or longhorn, the more dough they have in thier pocket.
good would that do for the hundreds of millions of users with
custom Windows apps that are part of their daily workflow. It's a
stupid comment, please leave Apple out of this discussion.
As for MS forcing their users to upgrade... good, they should
force them to upgrade, I don't really care how it comes about, I
just need all of the sheep to get off of IE 5.X first and foremost
so we can cut web development costs in half (by not supporting
IE 5's ridiculous box model implementation.) Beyond that, lets
just hope IE 7 has stellar standards support, otherwise, the
whole upgrade cycle is moot.
As for security, if you're waiting for IE 7 to secure your
computer, you are really clueless and deserve every virus, trojan,
etc. that you get.
Virtually EVERY other operating system in existence is more
secure than Windows, and virtually EVERY alternative browser is
more secure than IE. Obviously, the world isn't taking security
very seriously, if they were, Windows/IE wouldn't represent 95%
of the global web browsing population. If you are on Windows,
and you use IE, you are of the typical "victim" mentality that
poisons our society.
Stop complaining, and secure your computer yourself. Change
browsers, or even better change Operating Systems, the myth
that you won't be able to work with other people's files should
put to bed for good. Email, IM, Office, Music, and Video all work
on other platforms. You can exchange files with everyone. All
operating systems work essentially the same way. It's time to
start educating the masses, there is absolutely no barrier to
getting off of Windows and securing your computer.
Oh, and if you're a gamer, get an XBox, PS2, Nintendo, Sega,
whatever, and stop muddying the discussion with that frivolous
topic.
No matter, even though I use 2000, I've been surfing with Firefox for months now and I'm not going back anytime soon.
You listening Microsoft?
Idiots!!!
That's basically why many people dislike Microsoft's decision.
I think MS understimates how quickly users move to newer operating systems. At my company we still predominately use Win2000 on the desktop and for all of our servers.
Also, the fact that IE 7 is only available in XP and beyond is NOT a reason to upgrade.
Why IE 7 is so important is that it looks like it will finally be nearly standards compliant. Meaning when someone designs a site that uses W3C standards they also won't have to design a broken one for IE. Also, finally getting full support for PNG means that web site designers will be able to finally use PNG graphics on their sites without having to worry about compatibility.
As for Windows 2000 users. Well things advance, you either advance with them or you get left behind. For those Windows 2000 user's that don't want XP well that is thier problem. Lucky for them they do have the option of using Firefox and Opera.
Robert
stand-alone application. IE 6 was written that way for the Mac, and
except for the MS mindset at the time, IE Whatever could has been,
and should have been a stand-alone application for the PC. As
things stand, IE on the PC is now the ONLY browser which is not a
stand-alone application.
But, maybe if MS did it right for a chnage, they just might prove
that bundling is far from a brilliant idea.
Right now you can't validate your copy of window 2000...
Why isn't IE7 going to be available on Win2K? Probably because Microsoft doesn't want to continue supporting it when (more like if) longhorn comes out in 2006. How many companies still activily support 2 or three generations old software or OS's?
I'm sure that Microsoft wants you to upgrade to the latest version. I'm sure they could have made IE7 work on Win2K. I'm sure they could do a lot of things they aren't going to, but that's business as usuall for them and many other companies.
Companies that support software for twenty years after the next version comes out are usually out of business. It has been almost five years since WinXP came out and for windows it works just fine. At some point Win2K is going to be in the same boat as Win98. Unsupported software.
Less use == obsolete
IE7 is a new stillborn child of Microsoft
Just try some high definition and high graphic site and some of the xml site/ it only opens in IE, i bet on it?? Wanna try just see for yourself.
Gautam.
Just try some high definition and high graphic site and some of the xml site/ it only opens in IE, i bet on it?? Wanna try just see for yourself.
Gautam.
At least I'll put Mac a touch above windows since the core change it is a better system but the **** sissy hardware pulleeezzz you know someone is a little light in the loafers they are probably Democraps and windoze is run by Republicants
Am I the only one who has noticed this?
These alternative browser products are very good, well developed and tested because they are coming from development organizations committed to customer well being. They obviously went through a System Development Life Cycle with a crew of developers, designers and testers who tackled the Firefox and Opera products with "an eye" on pertinent security risks and issues facing the internet online electronic maze.
Netscape, Firefox Mozilla and Opera each provide the user with a stronger set of controls and ability to configure browser activity within Windows and also have the benefit of being cross-platform as Firefox Mozilla and Opera can be used within a Linux KDE Desktop configuration.
Opera provides its users with several excellent productivity features and can facilitate HTML published webpages.
Opera provides an email application which provides a better security features for managing attachments and cntent.
At least we have some choices.
Mary B. Winfield
Platinum Precision Software Inc.
New York, NY
adriaticnyc@yahoo.com