Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 13th Aug 2009 22:06 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 378459
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
I prefer to run a lean and mean version of XP with no unnecessary baggage. Going beyond IE6 means installing the .NET bloatware...
I've been doing something similar, but I chose to install IE7 (tab support is always nice.)
My machine does not have any .NET runtime installed, so I know this is possible.
IE7/8 does not require any version of .NET.
Microsoft may heavily promote it, but nowhere during the IE7 or IE8 install process does it even ask to install .NET.
Perhaps Windows Update promotes .NET after you have IE7+? But still, it's not listed as a critical update.
Microsoft may heavily promote it, but nowhere during the IE7 or IE8 install process does it even ask to install .NET.
Perhaps Windows Update promotes .NET after you have IE7+? But still, it's not listed as a critical update.
I installed IE7 not long after it originally came out (did it through Windows Update) and it definitely installed the .NET baggage so I removed it all and went back to IE6. After you posted your reply I decided to give IE8 a try. This time I did the install via the "Download" link on the IE8 website instead of through Windows Update and that install is definitely without .NET as you indicated. Thanks!




Member since:
2009-08-14
I prefer to run a lean and mean version of XP with no unnecessary baggage. Going beyond IE6 means installing the .NET bloatware, which I refuse to do. Besides, for me, IE6 serves it purpose. I only ever use it to access the windows update site and a few other trusted sites that refuse to support Firefox. If I had a choice I would just delete IE6 from my system and use nothing but Firefox.