RSSInternet Explorer 8 can be turned off in Windows 7
By Scott M. Fulton, III | Published March 8, 2009, 1:41 PM
A Microsoft Windows 7 group product manager confirmed in an announcement dated last Friday, though which is only making its premiere appearance over the weekend, that in the latest private beta build, users will be able to "turn off" -- to use his own phrase for it -- a greater number of standard Windows features including Internet Explorer 8.
"If a feature is deselected, it is not available for use. This means the files (binaries and data) are not loaded by the operating system (for security-conscious customers) and not available to users on the computer," writes Microsoft's Jack Mayo. "These same files are staged so that the features can easily be added back to the running OS without additional media."
Windows Media Center, Windows Media Player, and Windows Search (4.0) join Internet Explorer 8 and several other features that users will be able to de-select following installation. While the ability to make installed Microsoft features unavailable seems to imply that the company would be capable of offering users the option not to install these features in the first place, Mayo concluded his post by saying the company made an intentional choice to leave the "turn off" option for after setup. Mayo credited user feedback, once again, as the deciding factor.
"We know some have suggested that this set of choices be a 'setup option,'" Mayo wrote. "Some operating systems do provide this type of setup experience. As we balanced feedback, the vast majority of feedback we have received was to streamline setup and to reduce the amount of potential complexity in getting a PC running. We chose to focus this feature on the post-setup experience for Windows 7."
The notion that Internet Explorer and Windows were irreversibly linked with one another had been used by Microsoft in defense of its "bundling" of the two products, both during the US antitrust action against Microsoft a decade ago and during the recent European Commission complaint last January. And indeed, there remains many elements of shared code -- libraries that both Windows UI elements and IE utilize. But as engineers told Betanews as long ago as last October, when Windows 7 was first officially announced, more elements of the operating system's front end rely on rendering provided by Windows Presentation Foundation, not the HTML rendering engine of IE. So the act of separating the IE front end from the underlying shared components upon which it still relies, may be easier now than before.
The question will inevitably arise, then: Is a Web browser a principal component of an operating system, as Microsoft has argued affirmatively in the past? Like a political appointee telling a Sunday morning talk show host that it's time to "move on" and focus on what "the people" are more interested in, Mayo dismissed this whole discussion -- once the foundation of Microsoft's defense -- as a philosophical tangent that's not worth arguing any more.
"We don't want the discussion about this feature or these choices to digress into a philosophical discussion about the definition of an operating system," writes Mayo, "which is ultimately a challenging exercise (judging by the revision history on the community page), but we do want to improve a feature centered on helping to meet the feedback expressed by some over the summer when this blog started."
What testers discovering the feature over the weekend have yet to reveal, however, is exactly what happens both during and after the "turning off" process. Specifically, does Windows assist the user in seeking other options for a Web browser? Or does it simply leave the user without one? If it's the latter case, then the user will probably want to have downloaded the substitute of his choice, prior to the system's reboot. That may not be as smooth an "experience" as Mayo was alluding to.
But it does seem probable, if not completely clear, that one instigator of this change in Windows policy, in addition to tester feedback, was the EC's latest objections. The turning off of IE, or at least the ability to make the IE front end not a part of Windows, will nullify any argument Microsoft had left that the operating system and Web browser are intertwined. Giving users an option of other brands' Web browsers may not be the company's first choice at this moment, but the likelihood that such an option will appear -- if only in European editions -- has now substantially increased.
So IE8 will be opt-out. Maybe opt-in will happen down the road.
Score: 0
|"In what bizarro world does this even make the slightest bit of sense?"
You're slayin' me, mister. lol
Score: 0
|Forcing software is a normal thing. It is also found in Linux. Just ask you are forced to install internet explorer and windows media player (at least the backend libraries/frameworks for both), you are also forced to install xulrunner/gstreamer in GNOME under Linux.
I haven't used windows or anything written for windows since 2004, but I know what it's like to have software forced on you. it's the same case under Linux. There's no running from this and I don't blame MS for any of these IE issues
Score: 1
|You know what I would like to see, no GUI browser period. Windows should include and force the user to use wget to download the browser of their choice.
Score: 0
|I don't want to turn off IE 8. I just want to be able to run IE 7, as some code, e.g. some Google Gadgets, are not compatible with IE 8, and I'm sorry, but IE has too much going for it for me to drop it completely.
Score: 0
|I'm pretty sure Google will update its gadgets to work with the new version. IE still has the majority of the browser share, so at this point it is stupid for the developers to ignore it.
Score: 0
|well, they should ignore IE5/6, people shouldn't be using outdated versions any longer, it would force them to look for newer versions of alternatives and how is that bad? developers catering to outdated tech are why problems still persist, while Microsoft is on IE7 and soon to be IE8 later this month or early april
Score: 0
|But until Windows Update allows another stock browser to access it, you have to use IE in some form. Unless you think 7 will have no corrections.
Score: -4
|whoa weird, i can somehow get updates without internet explorer under Windows 7, Vista too, its magic
Score: 1
|Haven't used Vista have you? Update is its own app.
Score: 1
|Don't you love people who have absolutely no idea what they are talking about? Especially when they're so vehement about it?
You can't help but laugh...
Score: -3
|I haven't looked in to this, but it's a fairly sure-fire bet that IE components are still used within the Windows Update app in Vista/7.
I presume the OP is an XP user, though.
Score: 0
|If it used mshtml.dll, then yes. If not, I wouldn't be at all surprised to find that it is a completely seperate app (aside from dependencies to other Non IE Windows APIs)
...which sparks an interesting question:
If mshtml.dll is used throughout the OS...is it *really* an IE component...or a Windows component used by IE?
Score: -3
|IE is no longer important. Silverlight, i mean, Silverturd is the future. Microsoft is in a full court press to push their desktop monopoly online via Silverturd. Microsoft realizes they can not have their proprietary formats and protocols be changed into open web standards where they would actually have to compete. Anywhere they compete, they fail miserably because they are too worried about locking people into their proprietary tech than delivering an innovative product.
THe proprietary, patent encombered, Silverlight engine is where all of Microsoft is heading. The vendor lock-in coming from this will make their current desktop monopoly look like childs play. The sad part is, the majority of people out there are idiots and will gladly give Microsoft tons of money to be locked in the deadly grip of Microsoft.
Score: -3
|thats why they are developing Gazelle, supposed to be more secure than any other browser out there as is
Score: 0
|Oh, you mean the white paper someone at Microsoft wrote which really is what the basis of Silverlight is all about? Silverturd is the "web" platform.
Score: -1
|Don't like SIlverlight? Don't use it.
Most devs who have tried it feel it is far superior to the alternative "patent encumbered proprietary" Flash.
But don't let facts get in the way of your ignorant MS trolling. It's so cute...
Score: -2
|Facts? ROFL.. "Most devs..." ROFL. Let me guess...most brain dead, i mean, Microsoft developers think Silverturd is far superior to anything out there. This developer thinks vendor lock-in is bad, therefore, this developer thinks Microsoft sucks. This developer also thinks Flash sucks, but that is besides the point.
Score: -1
|*laughing*
Ask around, bud. Seriously.
Score: -2
|*laughing*
Just asked some of the devs from the Microsofty group here....the majority says....Silverturd sucks.
Score: -1
|Sounds like a reasonable compromise to me. If the EC keeps whining about it now, their going to look like the bad guy (which could well be Microsoft's strategy). I never use IE but I would've been happy with an independently validated web "standards" mode. However, I do welcome the removal of the IE front-end - I can't stand it when an installation or shortcut pops up in a browser that is NOT my default.
Score: -2
|While this is indeed very nice for us users, why, from a business viewpoint, are they doing it?
Is any fine from the EU really going to dent their business so much that IE needed to be uncoupled?
It doesn't make much business sense to me.
Happy days, though.
Score: 0
|Sure it does.
They're making progress to a more modular system. being able to pull out specific components is part of that.
Once programmers get used to people having "turned off" IE, they can start looking at being able to pull out some of the "dependencies" and *actually* decouple it...instead of just staging it.
Score: -2
|"They're making progress to a more modular system. being able to pull out specific components is part of that."
Sure, that's a wonderful idea, but why actually give the option to 'turn it off' (i.e. keep it modular because that's a good idea, but don't allow turning off)? It's part of their business and makes them profit (via means of Windows Live Search integration etc.)
Score: 0
|What's the point of being modular if you can't turn any of it off?
Score: -2
|To stop things causing crashes elsewhere, and to stop buffer overflows effecting everything in sight.
Score: 0
|i think that most, if not all pc users know about the internet browser and will install it and use it, though it won't be pushed with the operating system.
and though i have used other browsers and find them easy to use, i simply cannot rely on any company to ensure and assure a level of reliance as i get from microsoft and the i.e. browser.
all it takes is a compromised browser for hackers to clean out your bank account(s).
Score: -2
|"turning off" is a step.... I would like to see it that i could completely remove IE from windows if i so choose. I never use it so why should it be sitting there on my hard drive cluttering up crap and taking up space...
Score: 1
|...because mshtml.dll is used for far more than just "IE", including a large quantity of third party apps that depend on it being there to be able to function?
Score: -3
|Apple comes with Safari, and Windows comes with ie8, so what? I use FF3.07 with the add-on to view in IE, just in case the site will not render properly. Firefox, SeaMonkey, and Opera are all available by way of an easy download. Portable versions are also available for FF and Opera, and be carried over from computer to computer with great ease.
The real problem nowadays is the lack of education. In many cases people simply want to surf the Net and see all computers as toaster ovens, or a TV. Since it is not a simple appliance yet, it would help matters if people learned how to use Windows, Linux or Mac instead of just turning on the machine and surfing the Net. That said, it is their choice. What happens is they soon get lost, and the help cries are sent out by telephone. By now it would seem most people should have at least tried Firefox or some other browser which bests ie6 & 7. This is the 21st Century !
Score: 2
|The problem is that IE will be enabled by default for ALL new Windows installations, so many/most people will likely just stick with it, instead of searching for another. Thus, this solution does not completely resolve the EC issue.
It would be easy to add a prompt during a Windows install to choose a browser. Perhaps the top 5-10 browsers could be included on the Windows install disk. It doesn't matter if they are not the latest versions, since many/most browsers notify users when a newer version is available.
This solution would ensure users are aware of other options AND it should result in a better distribution of web browsers. Perhaps a similar solution could be used for media players.
Score: 0
|The problem is people like you who think one company should deliver another companies browser to your desktop.
In what bizarro world does this even make the slightest bit of sense?
Score: -1
|Unfortunately, it's beginning to make sense in our world. Not to me--but to the "global community". Bah--best for me not to get started on that...
Score: 0
|It wouldn't be so much of a problem is MS actually adhered to standards (or its attempts to do so weren't so buggy) and wouldn't let their browser development stagnate. As is, it's development hell and hinders progress on the web due to its pervasiveness.
Score: 1
|Wha! Choices make me work harder!
???
You have my deepest condolences.
Score: -1
|LMAO!
Score: 0
|well, i think they made the right choice... XP users can even enjoy eliminating the search bar from the start menu entirely, why anyone would want that i have no idea.
also "does Windows assist the user in seeking other options for a Web browser? Or does it simply leave the user without one? If it's the latter case, then the user will probably want to have downloaded the substitute of his choice, prior to the system's reboot. That may not be as smooth an "experience" as Mayo was alluding to." i had to comment on this, why would windows endorse another alternative considering their OS has a browser by default, if your typical user knows enough to turn internet explorer off, chances are he/she or an admin has an idea about alternative browsers and will download their choice before they mess with this feature, its not like IE is off by default upon install, which is WHY they stated removal was not an option during setup of the OS, you're trying to dig to deep into this betanews, or scott rather.
anyway, all welcome additions to the turn windows features on/off options, oh and while you're on the subject of windows offering various flavors of browsers, maybe charmin ultra soft toilet paper, should also promote soft 'n gentle 1ply :P can't say i agree with what the EU is doing and what MS has done here should be good enough
Score: 1
|