Microsoft is not planning an upgrade to Internet Explorer until at least 2006, when the next version of Windows is released. The company is busy building and testing a faster (and more secure) version, and Jim Allchin, head of the Windows platform division, says, “We have a very, very innovative set of capabilities that we’re putting in the next version.”
Microsoft Delays a New IE Version
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
With all the features axed from Longhorn, releasing an updated version of IE before releasing Longhorn would give people and companies little use to upgrade to Longhorn in the first place…
Yeah, innovative features like Tabbed browsing and popup blocking? They’ll probably copy features from Firefox and Opera and release it as the next best thing since sliced bread and everyone will be using it with their shiny new Windows computer. Bye bye Firefox.
It’s just too bad they didn’t realize their ‘XP Reloaded’ campaign was prophetic more than anything.
Honestly, I do hope they have a lot of innovative features in the next release, and this is coming from an exclusively open source user (not even Flash or Java). As long as Microsoft is innovating, so must Mozilla. A little competition is a good thing, even if it has to come from Redmond.
XP reloaded was merely SP2 and WMP10, which I’m sure we’ll see boxed versions of replacing the older versions.
element: IE already has pop-up blocking.
Tabbed browsing is just about the only thing that IE doesn’t do (not including the render engine) as compared to Firefox.
As opposed to IE, which has a lot of features geared towards businesses that Firefox just does not have.
There is room for imporvement on both ends… Firefox is not perfect.
Personally, I really don’t want IE to get too secure
I mean, think about it … once IE introduced a popup blocker in XP SP2, the commercial scum had to find ways around that, hence the annoying CSS layer popups that I see occassionally even in Firefox with the popup blocker turned on. If IE got too secure, then the commercial scum would have to work extra hard in order to annoy web surfers, which is probably going to affect the rest of us. Along those same lines, if we get too many people using alternative browsers, then the commercial scum will actually give a shit about Firefox/Opera and will target their ads accordingly. Personally, I don’t want to get into a ‘cat and mouse’ game with these bastards, whereby they introduce some huge annoyance, we find away around that, then we block them again, etc. The way I look at it, I guess the best option would be for them to eat shit and die. But since that’s probably not going to happen, I’d rather them concentrate on IE and leave the rest of us the hell alone.
PS – It’s late, so this post has not been checked for typos.
XP reloaded was merely SP2 and WMP10, which I’m sure we’ll see boxed versions of replacing the older versions.
Yeah, I know that… XP Reloaded, prophetic, Longhorn… nevermind.
“We have a very, very innovative set of capabilities that we’re putting in the next version.”
Capabilities we need or capabilities they think we need?
As opposed to IE, which has a lot of features geared towards businesses that Firefox just does not have.
You are right, what would businesses like lop.com do if IE did not provide features that cater to them?
I don’t understand this company, I really don’t.
Don’t they hear their users blaming?
Don’t they feel administrations fleeing?
Don’t they see alternatives growing?!!
If they wait XP2/Longhorn to force people to upgrade, I’m afraid it will be too late.
LongHorn will be awesome…I hope.
New ideas and software improvments are great.
If it isn’t then HURD will be awesome…I hope.
I’m afraid it will be too late.
I hope so. We won’t lose much but gain a lot..
“element: IE already has pop-up blocking.
Tabbed browsing is just about the only thing that IE doesn’t do (not including the render engine) as compared to Firefox.
As opposed to IE, which has a lot of features geared towards businesses that Firefox just does not have.”
It is also missing:
1) Pipelining
2) Find as you type
3) Increasing font size via keyboard. XP updated version of IE allows fonts to be increased in size. Anything older than XP doesn’t allow for the increase insize to 400 percent.
4) IE isn’t as moduar as FF. Examine all the plug-ins from Ad-Blocking to User String Agent switchs to what ever. Yes, the User String agent and various other forms can be done by editing the registry, however its not as east as typing:
“about:config” and making your changes. Nor does the registry support reverting it back easily. Moz or FF just require a right click and select reset. Since IE is so tightly intergrated, several changes require a reboot. No so in FF/Moz.
“There is room for imporvement on both ends… Firefox is not perfect.”
No its not perfect, however, its better in my humble opinion. I still prefer Moz to FF. The one thing for me is the start up times when first launching the browser. I think its the xul framework that slows it down.
Either M$ is absolutely clueless or they have some killer things coming that makes them feel comfortable that they can erase any market share gains for the Moz crowd.
My bet is that the answer is both. They have tons of innovations, well, innovations in the minds of Microsofties, but they are clueless that anyone will share their opinion that they are truly innovative. And the secuirty holes will continue.
It’ll be: Internet Explorer, MS Bob Edition
Naval Gazing Innovation and being clueless at the same time. That about summaries MS nowadays.
Just look around yourselves and you’ll see that people don’t even see an operating system there. Windows is like the air they breath, there can’t be any alternative. Suggesting a switch to most home users is just like suggesting them to breath methan. I once had someone in the office (Banking IT support function in the UK no less) asking wether Firefox was compatible with the web. For him, IE was the ONLY way in existence for web access.
So it’s little wonder why MS is in no hurry to innovate. They also know it is going to be extra hard to make people upgrade from XP, since people where not amused by the XP upgrade experience and that a lot of todays computers will still be enough for web browsing and video phoning in 2/3 years time and that XP preinstalled is by and large stable.
They also know that they can only be displaced (and only slighlty) by a concerted and deep pocketed marketing effort from would be challengers and they are quite right to feel very relaxed about that. It’s not happening anytime soon, since their current marketing budget is probably a few times bigger than the combined budgets of their nearest challengers.
So all in all, it no surprise at all.
>Honestly, I do hope they have a lot of innovative
>features in the next release, and this is coming from an
>exclusively open source user (not even Flash or Java). As
>long as Microsoft is innovating, so must Mozilla. A >little competition is a good thing, even if it has to >come from Redmond.
Michael,
Are you sure you understand what the point of open source
is? Open Source software doesn’t need Redmond in order to
“compete”. The whole point of open source software is if
YOU don’t like what it does then YOU can
modify it to your heart’s content.
And even if YOU don’t know how to program, there
are OTHERS who can and will do so.
To give you a simple example of this, I used to use
xmms to play my ogg files because that was the best player
available for my Linux box. Well, I don’t use it anymore
because I’m now using Rhythmbox on some days, Amarok on others, and JuK on occasion. Why? Because different folks
figured they could do better than xmms and then went ahead
and made their own audio players, and you know what? They’re actually pretty good. And why? Because they had
a standard (xmms) to compete against, and they competed.
There was no need to introduce Redmond into this equation.
Now, let’s look specifically at mozilla. Why doesn’t mozilla need Redmond? Because mozilla has itself to compete against. The tabs feature didn’t come from imitating Redmond, neither did the pop-up blocker, noR the quality of the source code, nor the effort to write
security minded software.
Mozilla didn’t get to where it is because of copying Redmond — Redmond got to where it is by make cheap knockoffs of others software.
No, that is not necessary. We don’t need Redmond for competition.
MS are once again, totally clueless – but the question has to be asked – what if they make an IE browser with tabs, with security and basically the same as Firefox, but IE. Then what?
There would be no reason for anybody to change and firefox would be screwed, but this two year period fox has now been given is the time it needs to be spending gaining up to a 50% market share. When longhorn is released, firefox needs to be making a huge dent on the Internet or it won’t survived, pre-installed IE pointlessness.
“He said the biggest computer-security vulnerability is the person using the computer, so people should exercise caution and make sure their systems are patched and kept up to date.”
sarcasm {
OMGOMG It’s all my fault then?
Now I understand! Thank you for clearing that up…
}
It’s like putting a ‘disclaimer’ on the box like: “90% of the faults caused by this software are actually caused by the user himself and we have nothing to do with that. screw you!”
They’re missing some major, vital parts of their brains methinks.
*if* MS would come up with the same standards compliance it woruld be really good.
Haven’t they said for long there wont be any more stand-alone versions and that the next one would come with Longhorn? So how is this “delays”?
..or any security issues for that matter. I just wish they fixed the most glaring css erm.. shortcomings in IE 6. It doesn’t have to be bleeding edge, just give us something to work with, Bill. Thanks. I knew you’d understand.
Well considering that Microsoft will no longer support Windows 2000 or lower with a standalone version of IE, I think that Firefox will do the build.
I’ve been using Firefox/Mozilla for over three years now and I will not go back to IE. IE is full of so many security bugs that Microsoft cannot get it out there fast enough. Microsoft is so far behind the times that Hackers know more than Microsoft.
Basically, I think the best thing about firefox/mozilla is the open ended plugin architecture. Gestures, google thumbnails, auto-highlight text urls, advanced adblock, webdeveloper, and so on. The possibilities are trully endless. I like to get rid of every single toolbar/icon (except for address and search) and menu item in firefox (thanks compactmenu) and then use gestures/shortcuts for everything. IE is also only available for Windows/x86 and mac (m68k/ppc).
I think it seems like MS wants to EOL the web browser someday but they just haven’t figured out how to do so yet. Anyway, I agree. The browser concept should be killed off and we should switch to a more component agent based software platform, and it looks like that is what will happen. This firefox/mozilla/opera/ie debate is somewhat shortsighted. Fortunately the Mozilla foundation is working towards the component agent model, it just seems to be sidetracked by the success of firefox atm. Mozilla still seems to like large applications, frameworks, and apis instead of many smaller components working together. The complexity of adhering to w3c standards may be the reason for that.
“Mozilla didn’t get to where it is because of copying Redmond — Redmond got to where it is by make cheap knockoffs of others software.”
Well, to be honest, Mozilla did get to where it is because of copying Opera! And that’s proprietary. The Mozilla guys learnd every memorable feature they have from it, like tabbed browsing, mouse gestures and so on.
It’s true that the OSS model makes it easy for people to innovate, but it is from it’s roots on (copying unix) based on reimplementing existing software. The features Mozilla reproduced where years old.
But one can notice that this is slowly changing as the movement grows and as some goals (mainly creating alternatives to known proprietary software) are yet reached OSS begin to create own innovative solutions. So in the end, you’re kind of right with your opinion. This is still an unfinished progress, just look as nowadays “everybody” copies the style and feel of apple.
Let’s see their innovations.
Blocked file downloads.
Blocked images in html.
Can’t download or open any attachments in email.
Idiotic Security Center that annoys the hell out of people with stupid pop ups.
Lame ass firewall turned on by default so you can’t do any LAN networking.
But spyware and virus are welcome.
The whole situation is truly sad.
Well, they did come up with doctype switching. First implemented in IE5 Mac, I believe.
Not to be contrary, but, IE has a tremendous plug-in manager with SP2.
Pipelining is not that big of an issue, first off, the server end has to support, second, if supported it is only truely effective on dial-up.
firefox has increasedits penetration in browser’s market 13 points. In january 2004 it was just 8%, now it’s 21%, so I think IE will begin to lose territory in favour of another browsers like Opera, Mozilla, etc etc. People is not stupid at all
http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
but hey atleast ya get to play your partypoker =D
“He said the biggest computer-security vulnerability is the person using the computer, so people should exercise caution and make sure their systems are patched and kept up to date.”
Whilst I agree Windows should be more secure out of the box I think if you took the word Microsoft out of the equation most people here would agree with the above statement.
I’ve learned that when Microsoft speaks of features they rarely apply to users but usually apply to developers. So he’s probably talking about a new client scripting language for the browser, a plugin system allowing you to stick anything in IE and IE in anything; absolute ability to control all IE settings through a library entirely for that (.net compat of course) and probably the void kitchen_sink(void) as well.
Congratulations Anon, your astute observations and carefully researched points have swayed the entire world… into realizing you’re a 6 year old who just learned to type a web address…
Oh yeah, a real “master-debater” if I ever saw one.
Actually the main problem for me is that IE is not an html browser so far. It just can show “somehow” an html context. There are plenty of things in html which it doesn’t support so we can not use it. Back to the 2001 IE6 was the most compatible browser, but should we wait to 2007 to get… what? I just wont care in 2 years could IE user see my page at all!!! FireFox is free so I’ll defintly put an icon of firefox to my page saying “this is an html page, so please use an html browser to see it”. Again talking about preinstallation to the PC in 2 years MANY PCs and notebooks will go with Linux (That is true for some regions NOW!) So why people will need to change their FF to IE7? 😉
Cheers
What if MS just left the browser market to somebody else like they should have done from day 1 and concentrate on Longhorn instead…
Another child who doesn’t understand Linux and goes running back to Bill Gates screaming and crying makes HER presence felt….
Does anyone know which browser Bill Gates uses..?
Are we to guess that the remaining 3.4% is split between Konqueror, Safari, OmniWeb, etc..?
People seem to forget that those browsers ID as Mozilla.
So I’d like to see better stats that really break down the OS Platforms and more unique identifiers to measure what client is requesting.
Well, consider that there’s basically Gecko and KHTML besides IE, and most other browsers are based off of that. Sure there’s Dillo and the Links family, but those aren’t on the same level. Yeah, I’d say that if you need competition to drive innovation, there isn’t much besides IE, but I’m not really that familiar with Konqueror and it’s engine, either.
Can Mozilla itself inspire Mozilla innovation? I don’t know, but I suspect not unless there’s a high level of competition between developers. Otherwise, I’d expect apathy, and thus stagnation.
And even if Mozilla doesn’t need competition to remain innovative, it sure doesn’t hurt. And as long as Microsoft is strong, they’re certainly going to remain competitive, innovative or not. Would I rather see Microsoft fold? Of course, but unless they do, I’d like to see them help drive innovation.
By the way, I never came close to stating that the Mozilla Foundation ripped off anything from Redmond.
I’m staying proprietry on this one. Go Opera, go.
As long as they innovate and support open standards. The day they don’t will see me walking to another browser.
IE, hell install your browser of choice, change the desktop icon and name it IE and Joe Public would be none the wiser but they would have less spy ware and popup crap. I have done this in public web access situations and when the odd person has clicked to the fact they’re not using IE they are quite impressed. Especially in a printing context where Opera is great and IE is absolute garbage.
“Well, consider that there’s basically Gecko and KHTML besides IE, and most other browsers are based off of that.” And if course Opera’s engine. What’s it called, Presto? Or was that the name for O7 as a whole?
> The tabs feature didn’t come from imitating Redmond,
No, they just imitated Opera 🙂
Seriously. If they only competed with themselves, they would not get anywhere. That’s the problem with Internet Explorer.
RE: Firefox Rules
> In january 2004 it was just 8%, now it’s 21%
Please note that these numbers were extracted from W3Schools’ log-files. Most people who visit those pages are more technically aware and not comparable to the average user. To compare, you could take a survey of OS News’ visitors. You would probably find that the share of users of alternative operating systems would be high, but the numbers would only say something about the users of this site.
Actually you could turn it around and say why over 70% of W3Schools’ users still use Internet Explorer? They are intersted in Web standards and should know better. This only shows how hard it is to make people change.
RE: Will it be “html compatible”?
>There are plenty of things in html which it doesn’t support so we can not use it
IE’s support of HTML is excellent. They support all of the required HTML tags. Their problem is that they have not done anything about CSS for many years.
Well, it depends of what html is.
Html obsolete many of the TAG properties in css favor. What about PNG transparence? I agree it is not an html, but GIF has 256 color limit and has no a-canal (true a-canal and not just a transparent color). Embedded images – for dinamic programming I’d prefer to embedd some icons directly in html within THE response (by the the way this IS html specs). There are lots things like these… I do not care from which camp my browser came I just want it is a standard based.
P.S. I do not like the “Microsoft is a standard”.
And if course Opera’s engine. What’s it called, Presto? Or was that the name for O7 as a whole?
You’re right, everyone always forgets Opera. Of course, it neither has much market share, nor is it’s rendering engine open source, so it’s not that much of a factor. Still, I suppose I should have mentioned it.
Seriously. Firefox has most “killer” features that are known in the browser world. What now?
They have the oppurtunity, as I see it, to really get inventive. Of course this shouldn’t just be the developers, this should be the entire community. I think xForms are a big step but what beyond that? I really don’t know but I know some things that I would love to see. The ability to do drag and drop functionality would be one, but, how would they do this if it’s not standardized?? This is the tricky part. Do they just focus on features to make the current web easier and nicer (like tab browsing) or do they work the the standardization process to make the web itself better (but without IE this has difficulties of it’s own).
The thing ff really needs now is to get companies support. Hopefully this would come both in the form of extensions and compatibiltiy. Secondly they need OEM partnersips so that ff will come out on most new computers. Thirdly they need to try and get university partners, University trying to standardize on ff, like the one recently, would make a big deal. That’s a lot to do, and wouldn’t be easy, but as long as ff depends on manual downloads then it’s marketshare is restricted.
If I had to guess what the new IE copabilities are (if they really are nothing more than vapor) then I would say they are tighter integration with MS’s own technologies. MS is busy integrating everything so closely that there won’t be much room for competition. We’re hitting a crossroads here. Either OSS will catch on enough that this will hurt MS or MS will have lockout like never before (this would be a good time to mention, again, how worthless the DOJ is).
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/microsoft/2002124782_ie20.htm…
For people that want to follow Microsoft more closely I’d recommend http://channel9.msdn.com – a site started by Microsoft employees to talk about the goings-on in Microsoft itself. It has many video interviews with Microsoft people, including IE people.
IMO, the article above outlines Microsoft’s strategy at damage-control (considering Firefox’s remarkable gains recently), and how they string their developers and customers along (much like they do on http://channel9.msdn.com – the amount of side-stepping and diplomatic vague talk by employees is alarming). Propaganda first, results later. They have just recently re-assembled the IE team to update their browser, and as usual they are talking the talk, rarely walking the walk. Just helping to prop up those losing faith.
An interesting thread:
When will Internet Explorer fully support standards?
http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=286#286
…and more good IE-related discussion can be had here:
http://channel9.msdn.com/wiki/default.aspx/Channel9.InternetExplore…
As it is now, they should be worrying. ‘Cause Firefox is far more than just a browser with some usability features, its core is streets ahead in actual http://www.w3c.com standards, as anyone that has ever grappled with CSS and box-model shortcomings with IE (among many other deficiencies) can attest to. IE needs a major overhaul not just tabbed browsing, and with the market share of Firefox growing daily, who knows what the browser market share stats will be like by 2006. One thing is for sure is that actual standards will cause the stagnant IE-only web to move on, at last.
And who knows whether Microsoft will offer their updated browser for older Windows platforms, let alone other operating systems like Mozilla do. Since they have a vested interest in keeping you buying Windows, my guess is not.
IE doesn’t understand abbr at all.
IE doesn’t support link other than the basic including css files.
thanks for playing.
I’ve used different browsers and for now i’m using Opera, firefox just didn’t sit well with me. I still use IE from time to time for some webpages i visit which don’t like Opera that much. It’s no big deal, If the next version of IE is good then we’ll use it, if it’s not then whoever doesn’t want to won’t use it. I’m kinda tired of seeing these types of chats start up about why I should use this over this program or why this program sucks and this one is just oh so great.
This is pretty pointless and most people don’t give a damn about the technical benifits Firefox has over IE or whatever the case may be. People will use whatever just works and unless they really have a problem with something they won’t change. If it doesn’t make you pull your hair out and bitch 24/7 then it’s doing it’s job and it works fine.
If it doesn’t make you pull your hair out and bitch 24/7 then it’s doing it’s job and it works fine.
——–
Ask a standards-based web developer whether or not IE makes them pull their hair out. Or any developer looking to push the envelope a bit. Or not even push it. Just get their job done MUCH faster, beautifully and effectively without resorting to ugly hacks.
There’s more to it than just “what sites work”. Most sites have to work with IE simply because it’s the majority web browser, so you gotta build to it. With IE hacks galore. Or simply a less effective and more bloated website. Important advancements are being held back. Simple things that just work with Mozilla & Opera (and any other decent browser) take AGES or can’t be implemented with IE. Time taken to build websites increases too much because of working around IE’s broken support for basics.
There’s so much more to it than a simple “what works” from a user’s perspective browsing sites (and I won’t even get into spyware). IE is holding back the web right now, and we’re all hurting. Now that its market share is starting to erode, some web developers are slowly becomeing free to think about implementing the latest (or even age-old) cool standards with proper support rather than catering to tired IEisms.
I use several browsers on a regular basis (IE, FireFox, Safari, and Mozilla) and they all have their strengths and weaknesses.
Many web pages render correctly on one browser and not another, and vice versa. This is the primary reason I use more than one browser. Another reason is that certain browers are better on one platform than the others (or not available at all).
Some browsers handle certain tasks better than others. IE handles printing much better than FireFox, for example. It sends pages to the printer 5x faster than FF and renders them more accurately as well. In other cases, certain browsers have features that others lack altogether. One example of this is tabbed browsing, which IE lacks (although Crazy Browser, a free browser based on IE, does support tabs).
I can’t see Microsoft abandoning any market to a competitor. It’s not in their nature to do so. I suspect that instead of updating IE they are instead applying the development resources to a next-generation browser to be released with Longhorn. I certainly hope so, since, if nothing else, this will spur FireFox and the other browser teams to even more innovation.