Login:
Password:
Lost Password?
Print this article  |  E-mail this article  |  Comment on this article

Microsoft Announces IE7+ for Vista

By Nate Mook, BetaNews

May 26, 2006, 6:58 PM

In order to differentiate between Internet Explorer 7 on Windows XP and Vista, Microsoft on Friday announced "IE7+." The special branding is designed to highlight the additional features IE7 will receive in Vista, including Protected Mode, parental controls, and improved network diagnostics.

"There are no feature differences between IE7 and IE7+ beta 2 other than the ones I mentioned above; we have, however, fixed a bunch of bugs between the two releases," explained IE team member Tony Schreiner. "As always, I’d love to hear your feedback on this naming as well as the product. We’ll have more information on how to sign up for Windows Vista beta 2 with IE7+ shortly."

Add a Comment (75 Comments)

BetaNews reserves the right to remove any comment at any time for any reason. Please keep your responses appropriate and on topic. Foul language and personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Name (required):

E-mail (required):

Enter Your Comment:

By jamesweb

edited Nov 28, 2008 - 2:33 AM

i have problem with ie7 so can not run with flash

Score: 0

By jamesweb

posted Nov 28, 2008 - 2:37 AM

from www.khmerwebs.com

Score: 0

By philosopher_dog

posted Oct 21, 2006 - 10:52 AM

Ok... I installed it. Bye bye Firefox. IE7 rocks! Just compare resource use and speed, and you'll be sold. The only real thing missing is support for extensions, and mouse gestures (which you can add using a 3rd party program). I'd also like a bit more control over the toolbars (as in IE6). I don't need a huge wide address bar. I'd like to put other elements beside the address bar, such as the menu bar. I'd also like to be rid of the integrated search window, since I prefer google's toolbar, though the integrated search looks not bad. The one thing I love about IE7 is that we can finally actually zoom all websites. IE6 had very poor zoom control, and Firefox does it, but the page is a mess after. I did notice a bit of a bug in the zoom feature. I found that a tab I had zoomed was a bit messed up when I came back to it. I had to refresh it. Not sure if this is a general problem though. Opera 9.02 looks nice too. Low system resource use and snappy. Thing I don't like with it is that there's no support for Roboform, and you can't send pages directly from the browser window like IE. A very sweet feature.

Score: 0

By yogui

posted Jul 31, 2006 - 9:41 PM

I have no problem with Microsoft calling it IE7+ for Vista--although it is unnecessary IMO.

Bye
http://www.alegsa.com.ar

Score: 0

By gizmo123

edited May 31, 2006 - 4:21 AM

i like ie7 but you did not say if wold work with mcaffe and it wold not respond with mcaffe do you have that fixed yet this i want to know i have removed ie7 beta so my mcaffe wold work please let me know about this and will it work with mcaffe

Score: 0

By John_Bedin

posted May 30, 2006 - 6:44 PM

What is going on ! No IE7 for Windows Me ? Shame on you Microsoft ! Your best Windows ever and no support for your best browser ever

Score: 0

By Rawhide67

edited May 31, 2006 - 10:51 AM

Windows ME was/is the same as the ones before it.
Just like the others....Billy sells us "Broken Windows". Surly you jest when you say it's the "best one ever".
IE7 should be renamed IE7-xp and for Vista it should be renamed IE7-V

Score: 0

By barcrest

posted May 31, 2006 - 10:44 AM

That is probably the funniest thing i have heard on here for ages...

Score: 0

By wincement

posted May 30, 2006 - 8:23 PM

ROFL!

I didn't know you could be funny. Nice one.

Score: 0

By truck87bp

posted May 30, 2006 - 12:02 PM

When General Motors reached 60% of the market 35 years ago, the U.S. Government threatend them with having a Monopoly and was going to require them to split. Where's our Government today with respect to Microsoft and their Monopoly? When the corruption gets cleaned up in Washington, maybe someone will get off their fat butts and do something thats been on the books for a long time. I too am looking at PClinuxOS. Tried it and it works great!

Score: 0

By aredo

edited May 30, 2006 - 1:07 PM

You mean that your "Democrats Heroes" like Clinton that allowed Bill Gates and Microsoft to kick IBM out of Federal Depts and offices and force them to use NT then 2K and XP,2K3 after that should be our saviours ? Geez! Yeah, sure.. of course, wow ! From the same '68s gang,already helped Mr.Gates become a monopoly in the first place and they should stop him now, right ? Yeah, yeah, right.

Score: 0

By blakegrover

posted May 30, 2006 - 9:54 AM

Those who are complaining and are still using Microsoft this week Ubuntu comes out with their new version of linux. I have been using it since march on my laptop, work computer, home computer, and 10 other machines here at where I work. It works great and is so easy on my laptop to switch back and forth from wired networks and wireless access points. If anyone wants to download the release candidate its http://www.ubuntu.com/testing

Score: 0

By Icecooldesign

posted May 28, 2006 - 6:34 AM

I don't get it. Half of you complain the whole time about Microsoft and then they bring out a load of free betas and free upgrades to an OS for 5 years, and you just moan. Msft is not just attracting the corporates: why do you think they are bringing out 5 versions. It is to attract Joe Public and businesses.
STOP MOANING BOUT MSFT

Score: 0

By crashoverride

posted May 30, 2006 - 12:42 AM

The thing is that some people just aren't happy unless they are moaning.

Score: 0

By The Man

posted May 29, 2006 - 12:44 PM

what free upgrades?
you mean the security fixes? most companies do that, keeps people buying their product.
if you're talking about IE or WMP, they have to offer free upgrades, or people will just use the free alternatives.
and why the hell would i pay for a beta?

i like moaning about MS, they deserve it.
and yes, i use windows, not much of a choice if you want to run most programs. guess that's my problem with MS. need a different windows compatible OS, but that would mean MS would have to loosen their grip a little.
greedy Ba$tard$, they buy what they can't create, just so no one else can compete.

Score: 0

By AaronDobbins

posted May 30, 2006 - 9:20 AM

That happens in business, not just with Microsoft. Look at Oracle buying PeopleSoft to get market share, or how about all of the wireless and phone companies combining. Why reinvent the wheel if you can afford to buy it, slap your brand on it, and make tweaks and improvements. No need to start from the ground up. Hell, Apple's OS isn't built from scratch either.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

edited May 30, 2006 - 9:02 AM

Wait...

that's my problem with MS. need a different windows compatible OS, but that would mean MS would have to loosen their grip a little.

Let me get this straight:

You're upset because Microsoft isn't allowing their competition to copy them?

Wow...

greedy Ba$tard$, they buy what they can't create, just so no one else can compete.

Name one product they've purchased that they have not either improved, or increased the market-share of by giving it the MS brand. Name just one product they've bought that has been *hurt* in terms of market-share directly related to MS buying it.

I'm betting you can't.

Score: 0

By John_Bedin

edited May 30, 2006 - 6:49 PM

None of your comments make any sense so butt out

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

edited May 30, 2006 - 6:54 PM

This, coming from Italy's very own Forrest Gump.

Find another rock to hide under, you ignorant troll.

Score: 0

By The Man

posted May 30, 2006 - 10:43 AM

maybe i can set you straight:

"You're upset because Microsoft isn't allowing their competition to copy them?"

depends what you're thinking of as copying.
no, i don't think anyone should replicate windows. but hey, why would you want to?
i do think they could allow code out to let windows made programs run on other os's.
that's my issue
i'm not saying they should be copied, just allow for compatability.

"increased the market-share of by giving it the MS brand. "

that's the other problem
you thinking we should have one brand name of every kind of product?
maybe sony could patent the picture tube, lcd and plasma screen, pioneer could have patents on all the stereo equipment, radios, home theatres, and speakers, we'll let phillips have computer hardware, optical drives, hard drives, sdram. we could even let this fall into other area's, we'll let chrysler patent car's(they do make the best one's).
this way we don't need to worry about which brand to buy, because we'll have no choice!

patents on execution code, or data code, don't make sense.
honestly, how on earth did they convince the patent office to lay a patent on math equations?
THAT'S NOT ART, it's math. they gonna patent scientific principles next. wait till a pharmasudical company discovers (or buys) the cure for cancer and patents it to sell it, or maybe holds onto the patent to create market share.

try thinking a little further than lining your pockets. makes me sorry i live on a planet with bigots like you and the MS corprates that think they can OWN ideas and principles.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

edited May 30, 2006 - 11:25 AM

no, i don't think anyone should replicate windows. but hey, why would you want to?
i do think they could allow code out to let windows made programs run on other os's.
that's my issue

I don't get the logic. Letting windows apps run on other platforms simply makes that platform another version of windows and takes away MS's market-share. It would be business suicide to do such a thing. It makes no sense.

Yeah, in a perfect world, where money wasn't an issue, it'd be great. But we're not talking ideals here, are we?

i'm not saying they should be copied, just allow for compatability.

Google just released Picasa for Linux. I believe compatibility should be up to the developer, not the OS.

you thinking we should have one brand name of every kind of product?

Nope. Didn't mean to imply that. Don't even know how that applies. Perhaps if MS bought *every* product in that market, but they haven't. I don't see your point here.

Patents on execution code, or data code, don't make sense.

So MS should write an OS and then make no money off of it because any Tom, d*** and Harriet can copy the code and give it away? Sorry. All that hard work deserves to be protected. For a while. I admit, I firmly believe 10 years ought to be the limit for *any* copyright or patent, allowing the owner ample time to capitalize on it or not, but I do think they *need* to exist.

wait till a pharmasudical company discovers (or buys) the cure for cancer and patents it to sell it, or maybe holds onto the patent to create market share.

Way off topic here.

They will. And it will be a good thing. Trust me and try to wrap your head around the following off-topic explanation of medical patents:

The Cure for Cancer, if found, *must* cost money, and it *must* be only as expensive as it needs to be to:

1.) Cover the cost of manufacture.

2.) Cover the cost of research (The docs don't work for free)

3.) Keep the demand in check with supply.

3 is the sticky one. If they make it too cheap, people who have years to live will buy it the supply will run out and those who have weeks, or months, will have none left. If they make it too expensive, folks will die while there is still plenty to go around.

Once supplies reach a decent level, prices will drop, generics will come out, and so on.

Again, this is *way* OT and has *nothing* to do with the topic we were discussing.

*grin* Nice derail.

Back to the topic:

try thinking a little further than lining your pockets. makes me sorry i live on a planet with bigots like you and the MS corprates that think they can OWN ideas and principles.

If they didn't, we'd have chaos. There'd be no innovation, no support, and no money in developing tech.

Your opinions stem from idealism and no sense of practicality. While I can't fault idealism, you *need* to realize how shortsighted such idealistic principles are. How can *any* company fund development if they are making no money off of their ideas?

I'm not trying to be offensive, for I applaud your ideals. But that's all they are. They are not practicle when applied.

Score: 0

By stopbuggingme

posted May 31, 2006 - 5:45 AM

how does #3 work from an economic perspective? people who have cancer will buy it as long as they can afford it no matter the price because they need it. charge $1,000,000 per dose, and everyone with $1,000,000 will buy it. you make more selling 1 dose that way than selling 90,000 doses at $10 each, even if it only costs $1 to make each dose. and then, hmm, i wonder if we could make more selling it at $2,000,000 per dose? it has absolutely nothing to do with "only as expensive as it needs to be", it has to do with your marketing team's estimation of the "sweet spot". as long as you have a patent on it, you don't need to worry about competition from generics. prices don't have to drop until your patent expires. folks dying while there's plenty to go around happens every day, and it's irrelevant from an economic standpoint.

Score: 0

By The Man

posted May 31, 2006 - 3:37 PM

thank you
:-)

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted May 31, 2006 - 8:57 AM

The higher the price, the more likely it will go to the people who need it most. Knowing that they have years to live will allow those who don't time to let the price drop.

Trust me. It works for meds, it works for natural disasters.

Think about it: We all knew gas prices were going to rise when katrina hit. If they hadn't, we'd have all been buying it up like there was no tomorrow. The rise in prices kept the demand in check with supply.

Yeah, higher prices suck, but you need to see the bigger picture, especially when the rise is due to a national emergency or a major supply shortage.

This is basic econ, man. When supplies are limited, prices have to be raised so the supplies only go to those who need it badly enough to pay the higher prices.

I suppose an alternative would be rationing, but that never works. It always hits the black market for more than it would have cost had it been done as described above.

Score: 0

By The Man

posted May 30, 2006 - 12:55 PM

the current state of things doesn't work either.

i'm tired of the wasted millions in fueding over patents and rights for development. meanwhile, the big corps just keep getting richer.
where do you think all this money they throw around comes from? it comes out of our pockets, so they can stifle out competition with the money we give them. i don't like feeding the leeches, makes me feel dirty. i sure as hell am not going to agree with their business practices.

this is supposed to be a free country, but we're told what we can and can't produce.

i don't understand why you don't think people would be innovative without money to drive them. is that the only reason you live? to get rich so you can pay others to live your life for you?

i'm very innovative, even outside of my work. it's not what i'm paid for at my job.(although it does get me raises). i'm paid to produce, not thoughts, but a tangible product. people buy the product, not the idea. if my neighbor wants to produce the same product, he's welcome to, but he has to do a better job of it then i do to drive me out of business. and if he does, so be it, he was obvoiusly better at it than i was. doesn't mean i can't produce other things i'm good at. still makes going to school a good idea too, it'll make you better than your neighbor at what you do.
maybe you don't quite understand the concept of my ideals, or maybe you just want to get rich so you can spend the rest of your life living off others. i really do practice what i preach, i make a good living, am well liked, and i actually do things for others without payment or gratification. i enjoy being innovative because it makes my life worthwhile. living for money creates greed and therefore crime because of such. i'm not saying my ideals would eliminate crime, but it would eliminate the lust for money and a free life that drives a majority of crimes.

i can only hope there's others who believe in each other, and aren't willing to sacrafice morals and honor to get ahead in life.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted May 30, 2006 - 1:02 PM

the current state of things doesn't work either.

I agree. My post above states that I belive it's not working *as it is*.

My quote: admit, I firmly believe 10 years ought to be the limit for *any* copyright or patent, allowing the owner ample time to capitalize on it or not, but I do think they *need* to exist.

i don't understand why you don't think people would be innovative without money to drive them.

Reality. That's my reason.

People need food, housing, and toys. Without income, they could not afford such things. Think of all the folks working 12 hour days at MS, or Apple. Could they do that without getting paid for it? Could MS or Apple afford to pay them if they were not making money off of their ideas?

Yeah, in a perfect world it would work. this ain't such a world.

Got nothing to do with morals, or honor. It's about survival.

Score: 0

By trebor

edited May 28, 2006 - 6:06 AM

hmmm Parental Controls....is that not similar to the Content option that exists in IE6. Then, they're really making friends with parents to exclude this from the IE7 plain vanilla version to run on WinXP and supposedly more secure in general. Analyse this, Analyze that, its IE7 and Vista features for marketing purposes suddenly advertised as IE7+ features.

Score: 0

By tscar12

edited May 27, 2006 - 10:41 PM

I found IE7 slowed down my speed while browsing. Now I don't need all the bells and whistles that everyone, whatever browser you use, talks about. I just want a browser that gets me from points a to b, allows add-ons, and has flexability when it comes to security settings. The rest is, for me, is just shinny junk- whatever browser you use.

Score: 0

By Babylon2x

posted May 27, 2006 - 5:59 PM

I guess the + naming thing works. It is less annoying then them telling us where we're missing when installing it on XP.

Score: 0

By a7knight

posted May 27, 2006 - 11:07 AM

I actually reinstalled Windows XP on my computer yesterday ... I installed IE7, WMP11, and Microsoft Office 2007. Therefore, Firefox and Open Office are out the window. While I like the new interface for IE7 better than firefox, I do miss some of the extensions a bit. But i have no regrets. IE7+ ... whatever.

Score: 0

By donpacman

posted May 27, 2006 - 9:28 AM

Just another update to screw-up someones system.

Score: 0

By Metshrine

posted May 28, 2006 - 5:28 AM

Yes, because changing a product's name always screws up a computer for the users. very nice insight!

Score: 0

By lapytsh

edited May 27, 2006 - 6:16 AM

But they need to launch Windows Vista before we use it !! end of january or later (april). Hey what are you doing Microsoft, give us Vista Final build.

http://www.lapytsh.com

Score: 0

By Metshrine

posted May 28, 2006 - 5:29 AM

Yes, give it to us now, when its unfinished. People whine and clammer at MS for pushing back vista, yet they would whine and complain more if they released it in a far from finished state.

Score: 0

By eunichman

posted May 30, 2006 - 2:04 AM

since windows 95, all 1st GA releases of ms operating environments and systems have been paid public betas. getting a beta 2 product out there to the public as GA and when the bug level reaches a certain numeric value they release SP1 of that os... the sp1 is the real 1st GA product, so whether you release vista now or a year from now you are still getting an "unfinished product", and whether now, a year from now or 10 years from now I wont be touching it. :)

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted May 30, 2006 - 12:02 PM

What's the opposite of a fanboy?

Name one supported OS in major use that hasn't had patches or bug-fixes.

Just one.

They must *all* be unfinished beta products, eh?

Out of curiosity, what OS are you using?

Score: 0

By crashoverride

edited May 27, 2006 - 1:49 AM

Hence the IE fanboys are split into 2 separate factions. Now they can not only argue with the Firefox and Opera fanboys, but each other as well.
I can just see it now "my IE is better than your IE".

Score: 0

By psycros

posted May 27, 2006 - 1:41 AM

It blows me away that some people can't wait till they can start counting the days till release. Microsoft will never release an OS that has any purpose except to create work for the newest wave of MCSEs. Vista brings nothing new to the table as far as interface or performance goes (well, except for even higher system requirements and bloat). But it matters not because Vista is what you'll get on new PCs, and most of the new games will require Vista. Even the browser battle is a lost cause for the moment. IE will continue to dominate until Mozilla's interface catches up with everyone else. At the absolute least they need a bookmarking system that mimics Favorites instead of the useless setup FF has now.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted May 28, 2006 - 12:29 PM

Vista brings nothing new to the table as far as interface or performance goes

Anyone need further proof this guy is an idiot?

Score: 0

By The Man

posted May 29, 2006 - 1:08 PM

i agree, he is an idiot

Vista brings a new face to the gui, and has $hitty performance because of it.

but, he does have a point
i still haven't seen anything special that would make me waste a nice computer on Vista. i get twice the performance with XP, and three times with 2000.
i don't see them making proper use of the 3d gui, it's just a bloated theme right now. kind of a dumb idea without re-working how the gui functions.(to me, it's just a prettier XP)
could have made dx9 web sites too, but we would all need 10 meg connections to browse the web. too much fancy stuff, not enough under the hood. i want my OS to do more with less, not less with more.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

edited May 29, 2006 - 7:48 PM

Vista brings a new face to the gui, and has $hitty performance because of it.

Looks like you'd like to think you have a clue about it.

Too bad you apparently don't.

In Windows XP, the UI is controlled by GDI. An ancient library powered by the CPU.

Windows Vista UI is controlled by DirectX, and therefore is powered by the GPU, freeing the CPU for other things.

Vista brings a new face to the gui, and has $hitty performance because of it.

You get twice the performance out of a twice Service Packed OS vs. a Beta??!?!

*gasp*

I'm shocked. (shocked you can actually make such a comparison with a straight face)

i don't see them making proper use of the 3d gui, it's just a bloated theme right now. kind of a dumb idea without re-working how the gui functions.

Uh... See response to your first. They did rework how the GUI functions. Have you read *any* of Vista articles?

i want my OS to do more with less, not less with more.

Tired cliche. Putting the UI to the proper hardware (GPU vs. CPU), starting from server 2K3 code, rewriting the memory subsystem/stacks for increased performance, stability and security, not to mention the little things such as the rewrite of the audio sub-system, security enhancements like UAP...

Not a prettier XP. A desktop oriented, visually enhanced, and secrity tightend Server 2K3.

It's a decent upgrade from XP for the Server 2K3 code alone. The rest is just bonus.

Check it:

http://www.extremetech.c...2/0,1697,1931913,00.asp

(He includes a link to back up his claims...amazing...)

Score: 0

By The Man

edited May 29, 2006 - 11:14 PM

read your link

still not impressed

don't get me wrong, i've used the beta, but the OS seems to be lacking. (and yes, i realize what beta means)
it's like using xp pre-service pack compared to using xp sp2 with widgets and windowblinds. i don't see what vista does that xp doesn't. sure lots of minor changes to common services, but nothing revolutionary.

this whole thing with dx10 seems to be a marketing ploy at gamers, to get them to buy into the new OS or else face loosing comatability with new graphics features. (just one of those things that piss me off about MS)

now, the idea behind the kernel holds promise, but as they say in your article, we'll see how it holds up in the real world.

in the mean time, i'm content to put up with xp

oh, and a couple comments to yours

"Windows Vista UI is controlled by DirectX, and therefore is powered by the GPU, freeing the CPU for other things."

the UI will NOT be controlled by the GPU, just the graphic display will be. what the hell are you thinking anyway? even in games like FEAR which use every fancy function of the GPU, still need LOTS of CPU power to feed the GPU the info it needs to display the pictures and handle the data flow of the game. all the dx9 gui is doing, is letting the 3d part of vista be rendered on the videocard. THAT'S NOT GOING TO MAKE WINDOWS RUN ANY FASTER! it'll just look nicer
you need to learn a little on what GPU's do and what CPU's do.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

edited May 30, 2006 - 8:47 AM

the UI will NOT be controlled by the GPU, just the graphic display will be. what the hell are you thinking anyway? even in games like FEAR which use every fancy function of the GPU, still need LOTS of CPU power to feed the GPU the info it needs to display the pictures and handle the data flow of the game. all the dx9 gui is doing, is letting the 3d part of vista be rendered on the videocard. THAT'S NOT GOING TO MAKE WINDOWS RUN ANY FASTER! it'll just look nicer
you need to learn a little on what GPU's do and what CPU's do.

Not talking dx9 here, are we??

From the link:

Developers will be able to stream out data from the GPU and reuse it without needing the CPU to do a single thing, so a lot of the CPU load seen in current graphics drivers and games should be reduced.

also...

DX10 will use much faster dynamic link libraries (DLLs), and won't incorporate older versions of DirectX, as is done today...So right there, without using any new features, DX10 should be more efficient and faster.

You said you read it. Miss that part?

Score: 0

By The Man

posted May 30, 2006 - 10:49 AM

"Developers will be able to stream out data from the GPU and reuse it without needing the CPU to do a single thing, so a lot of the CPU load seen in current graphics drivers and games should be reduced."

we're still talking about making windows look prettier here, not making windows itself run any faster. sure, 3d desktop visuals will run better in vista than xp, but my point is, it won't effect the general speed of the OS except to slow it down with a bunch of (so far) useless visual junk.

and yes dx10 might be revolutionary, but so far its just a vapour product, same as the untested security on vista's modified kernel.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted May 30, 2006 - 11:33 AM

but so far its just a vapour product, same as the untested security on vista's modified kernel.

So we don't have a finished product yet. You are right.

We won't for a while yet.

But yet you still claim it's crap? And then use the fact that it's not out yet to back that up?

Again, based on the 2k3 kernel, it's *already*, without any modifications, better than XP. That's not vapour. 2k3 is out now, and the security/stability is *there*. Now.

The increased speed, stability and security on *top* of that due to the rewrites in the kernel / memory heaps, while not 100% finished yet, hold enough promise for most folks to see it as a *vast* improvement.

Untested != crap. It just means untested. yeah, it oculd be crap, but after doing the research, it "looks" like it will be a major improvement any way you look at it. Definately not anything a simple SP for XP could accomplish.

Score: 0

By John_Bedin

posted May 28, 2006 - 5:29 PM

no! you provide further proof that you, are an idiot.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted May 29, 2006 - 11:28 AM

lmao...

Yeah. Ya know, I don't think there's one person here who takes you seriously anymore, man.

Go hide under a rock or something.

Score: 0

By dvferret

posted May 27, 2006 - 8:26 AM

Dude, your totally WRONG!

Score: 0

By xeroONE

posted May 26, 2006 - 10:36 PM

They should make IE7-(minus) for mac, that way everyone will want vista.

Score: 0

By stuarti

posted May 26, 2006 - 9:57 PM

Well when it comes to browsers it has to explorer, firefox has done well with there lack of vulnerabilities but as they grow hackers will turn to firefox and exploit it just as they do with the market leader IE ?? . And another think it doesn’t matter what Microsoft call there browser IE7 it is far better than there previous IE6. So may be we should thank firefox for something.

Score: 0

By Skyfrog

posted May 26, 2006 - 9:15 PM

Why don't they just call the XP version IE 6.5 and dead end it there, and then they can call the Vista version IE 7. Calling it IE7+ sound dumb and will cause more confusion than it will prevent.

Score: 0

By eclipsingdivinity

posted May 26, 2006 - 9:40 PM

Or what they could do is just make it IE7 for XP and IE7 for Vista without making a name change. People will just know that the Vista version has 'Vista' features built into the browser.

Out of all this talk in IE7 I heard Microsoft may axe MSN explorer. Why? I'm not saying I like MSN Explorer but all my friends and family use it because it's got gigantic buttons that tell you what to do. Just because IE7 has fewer buttons doesn't exactly make it n00b friendly. In some cases it can make it more confusing.

It's just that I feel like MSN KNEW what they were doing when it comes to a simple granny browser. With the birth of Live, and IE7 you are presented with slick tools with fewer buttons for old foggies to scratch their head over. And the first thing they'll be thinking is 'Where's my email button? What's a phishing filter? Where's the cool animated butterfly? What's IE7 Plus and why is the name so long? Why am I using a computer?' etc...

Score: 0

By peter4654

posted May 28, 2006 - 10:05 AM

eclipsingdivinity
When you refer to " Old Foggies " I take it you're referring to the people who invented the operating system that you're now using, and can use the first person " I " as a capital and not " i " Time moves at the same speed for everyone, even brainless loud gobs like you. Come back to me when you've had your nappy " diper " changed.

Score: 0

By eclipsingdivinity

posted May 28, 2006 - 11:16 AM

Considering I didn't understand the brick of shi!t you like to call a paragraph, i'll just pointing out that older people like grandfathers and grandmas tend not to understand computer related stuff (as i'd like to put it). I'm defending MSN Explorer for that purpose, because it's VERY easy to use.

Wait nevermind, I cant even respond to that because i'm spending more time trying to figure out what incoherent garble you were spewing out. Maybe MSN Explorer has a feature that deciphers idiotic english on these forums.

Score: 0

By Hellcat_M

posted May 26, 2006 - 11:24 PM

I agree with you, my father likes MSN explorer, he'll be crushed when he finds out its gone.

Score: 0

By zee7

posted May 26, 2006 - 8:16 PM

I'm surprised they're not calling it IE7V. I think all of these different versions are just going to confuse their customers and drive them more and more towards open source alternatives. OpenOffice and Firefox are both free and simple to use. The average Jo and Jolene don't want to have to listen to a 3 hour lecture from a salesdroid about the different versions of Office or Internet Explorer. They just want to buy their stupid Dells and HPs and email their pictures to grandma.

Score: 0

By gman8806

edited May 26, 2006 - 9:23 PM

Or why not IE Live...They seem to like that pretty good..No matter what though I'm using Firefox :-)

Score: 0

By RobertM

posted May 26, 2006 - 10:25 PM

IE Vista 7+ Live .NET, anyone?

Score: 0

By zee7

posted May 30, 2006 - 11:50 AM

I think you guys are onto something!

IE7VdoubleplusgoodLive.NET

Winnar!

Score: 0

By ConceptJunkie

posted May 27, 2006 - 1:32 PM

How about:

Active Visual IE7 Double + Good Live X .NET NT, Millenium Edition

Score: 0

By slack4life

edited May 26, 2006 - 9:21 PM

As 'open' as I can be at times, the truth is the truth.. Microsoft does not care what the average Joe says, they are shooting for corps, plain and simple. It might bug you and me, but as long as the IT guy at -insert major company here- likes it that's all that counts.

Chase, Lockheed Martin, etc. will still buy Dell computers with a pre-imaged version of Windows -whatever- installed, with a few random Red Hat boxes and a few {less} Sun boxes lying around for thier DB's, etc.

For the average Joe it sucks, but that is not where the money is... plain and simple.

Score: 0

By Joe Dirt

edited May 26, 2006 - 8:59 PM

Man you're not kidding.

I heard Vista will have 33 different versions. That's a freaking joke.

I'm not even joking when I say I think there is really something wrong with Microsoft. They are behaving like crackheads.

They are naming all their new software with super long names and I don't understand why.

We went from Word 97 to Microsoft Office Word 2003. Then we went from MSN Messenger to Windows Live Messenger. Now we have Internet Explorer 7 Plus for Vista. Retarded.

Score: 0

By school1012

posted May 26, 2006 - 11:17 PM

1-Windows Vista Home Basic (similar to XP Home)
2-Windows Vista Home Premium (similar to XP Media Center and Tablet)
3-Windows Vista Business (similar to XP Pro)
4-Windows Vista Enterprise (offered exclusively through Software Assurance)
5-Windows Vista Ultimate (available to all)

OK lets see they merged tablet and media center into 1 sku.

Average user gets:
With XP they had 4 skus for the average user
Vista has 4 skus for the average user

Where is 33?

Score: 0

By Joe Dirt

posted May 27, 2006 - 12:40 PM

33 Versions was a joke. I was kidding around. I got it from this joke site.

http://www.bbspot.com/Ne...-multiple-versions.html

Score: 0

By tigger4046

posted May 27, 2006 - 7:14 AM

Will Vista Home Basic have same sys requirements as XP or higher because of it's design?

Score: 0

By eclipsingdivinity

edited May 26, 2006 - 9:41 PM

I may be getting this mixed up but isn't parental controls similar to content filtering? Because if that's the case, I think Windows Live is going to be releasing a tool for that free anyways. I wonder what other features the Windows Live brand will harbor?
Also IE7 is a step in the right direction so i'm overall satisfied in what Microsoft plans to do with it, Vista or not.

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1009_22-6042502.html
^^
So don't get your panties in a bundle of Microsoft is integrating its safety controls into Vista. Windows Live/Hotmail users will get similar functionality.

Score: 0

By aredo

posted May 26, 2006 - 7:37 PM

Once again Microsoft shows no respect for customers and claims "Plus features" things that could be in every IE7 version just to force users to upgrade and buy the expensive Vista.
People wouldn't care if Microsoft OS consumer license would be just $30-50. The fact is that's way more expensive than that and the "XP Home" like versions of Vista will simply suck and be another way by Microsoft to try to rip people off.

Score: 0

By shy_one

posted May 27, 2006 - 4:26 PM

Ya because Microsoft should keep giving you freebie upgrades for years oh wait they already have.

You want to pay $30-50 bucks for a licence maybe if you hade to buy a new licence to upgrade for every service pack.

Xp has been out for how many years tell you what go buy some software from when XP came out and tell they maker you want the latest and greatest version for free after their done laughing tell us what they say.

Score: 0

By aredo

posted May 30, 2006 - 1:03 PM

Do you work at Microsoft or for Microsoft,perhaps ? It really seems so or you enjoy getting ripped off.

Score: 0

By shy_one

posted May 30, 2006 - 3:04 PM

How am i getting ripped off for only a couple hundred(seen some parts with an oem version gor about 100)for 5 years of freebies and support and will continue after vista comes out.

Like i said practicaly no other paid for software gives away freebies for this long.

Hell even Mac has charged more for upgrades in the last 5 years than a copy of XP costs.

Score: 0

By The MAZZTer

posted May 26, 2006 - 7:54 PM

Protected Mode is integrated with Vista's new security features (with the whole admin password prompt stuff).

Parental features are probably integrated with the same parental features in Vista that can prevent certain users from launching certain rated games.

The network diagnostics are probably linked to Vista's brand new rewritten TCP stack.

These probably aren't things that can be easily backported to XP without turning XP into Vista.

Score: 0

By Hellcat_M

posted May 26, 2006 - 8:44 PM

Thank you for bringing up what I was going to say. People don't understand that its not easy to add stuff to an OS.

IE7+ is fine, but I do agree why use that anyway. Is someone going to buy Vista just because it has IE7+, probably not. By saying it has protect mode, parental features, and netwark diagnostics built into the OS that work also with IE7 and beyond IE7 (The parental featrue to keep kids from launching certain rated games) would be good enough and reason people would switch. By saying these featrues are in IE7 and giving it the name IE7+ makes you think the feautres within IE7+ don't go any further than the browser so it may do more harm than good.

Score: 0

By yogui

posted Jul 31, 2006 - 9:50 PM

MSN Video doesn't recognise IE7, nor do other players on web sites!

Goodbye
http://www.thennews.com

Score: 0

By bourgeoisdude

posted May 26, 2006 - 7:07 PM

I have no problem with Microsoft calling it IE7+ for Vista--although it is unnecessary IMO.

Score: 0

By bassrck4

posted May 30, 2006 - 6:50 AM

MSN Video doesn't recognise IE7, nor do other players on web sites!

Score: 0

Dec 5 - 1:45 AM ET Shazam: eight million songs of the eternal Now

Dec 4 - 7:30 PM ET Comcast to offer bandwidth consumption monitor

Dec 4 - 5:37 PM ET Counterfeiters sing the 'Blue' as Microsoft lawyers up

Dec 4 - 4:40 PM ET Opera 10 alpha shows off new Presto rendering engine

Dec 4 - 2:29 PM ET Apple: Psystar clone-maker is working with unnamed collaborators

Dec 4 - 2:21 PM ET Windows Live rollout sketchy, team apologizes

Dec 4 - 2:20 PM ET Stinging from a revenue shortfall, Adobe to shed workers

Dec 4 - 11:47 AM ET The storm hits AT&T, with a five-digit headcount reduction

Dec 4 - 11:42 AM ET TV sports adopts Web coverage, plays with iPhones

Dec 4 - 11:24 AM ET Microsoft seeks 'community' help to make IE8 Standards Mode work out