Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 3rd Jan 2006 14:20 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 81298
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: And just what if they let IE die?
by ApproachingZero on Tue 3rd Jan 2006 19:52
in reply to "RE: And just what if they let IE die?"
RE[2]: And just what if they let IE die?
by RenatoRam on Wed 4th Jan 2006 10:29
in reply to "RE: And just what if they let IE die?"
And when a new spyware/trojan horse will exploit a bug and trigger the "safe zone" how will that help?
We've seen it happen dozens of times in these years, why do you honestly think this time it will be better?
I clearly remember a bug in the help system that allowed to execute (through IE, obviously) any script as "trusted code".
And the "allow only signed ActiveX"? As if spyware makers could not simply buy a certificate and sign it!
I hope Vista (with the LUA and the restricted zones) will be better, but let's not have too high hopes, Thom.





Member since:
2005-06-29
They don't need it anymore. It's the embarassment of the browser world now, they're not putting much into it these days and there's a lot of alternatives out there. So what further purpose does IE serve? None at all. MS should let it wither and die, and instead concentrate on improving Vista's security...the project which should be of utmost importance to them.
(supposedly).
IE7 is going to kick back to Firefox majorly, simply because IE7 has all the fancy stuff (tabbed browsing and such) while being in a much safer contained security zone (it's locked down). So, IE might still suck when Vista is released (and judging by the December CTP's version, it sucks big time), but at least it sucks in its own zone where it can do no harm to the system