Microsoft has ruled out putting Internet Explorer 9 on Windows XP, leaving millions of PCs open to Mozilla and Google browsers providing hardware-accelerated rich-internet. Ryan Gavin, senior director of IE business and marketing, said Microsoft would not put IE9 hardware acceleration features in the current version of its …
"You don't want to differentiate on HTML5 - [as a coder] I want to be able to write this mark up once and it runs across all browsers,"
After what they've done to HTML1,2,3, & 4, it's rich coming from them...
Enable security breaches through desktop integration. Nice.
What a great turnaround
Forget a vibrant, competitive, standards-based, cross-platform browser ecosystem that drives innovation and choice. It's IE9 and Windows 7 for me. I need fast fish, any other consideration is beyond me.
"Clunk" goes the Gauntlet...
"IE9 will never run on Windows XP"
That sounds like a challenge to me! :p
How do you get a "great" web experience?
As it not being available on XP, boo hoo I'm so sad!
Nor will it ever play the violin again
Somehow I don't think this will be enough for XP users to upgrade..
Oh no not again
"and though features like Jump Lists, which make the browser "invisible" and let web sites and apps run outside the browser directly on the Windows desktop"
Can't you just see how this will be used by malware writers to spoof real warnings etc.. to get people to click on stuff and install it? Surely Microsoft have learned by now?
Typical MS Security Shambles
YOUR COMPUTER IS INFECTED, DOWNLOAD AND BUY SUPERHAPPYFUNTIMEANTIVIRUS NOW!
Have a hard time explaining, if != avast / avg / symantec warning then do not want!
I'm also worried about the combo search / web address box. What would it take for someone to hook a rogue search provider in there instead of "bing!" / google, the end user enters "www.ebay.com" -> invokes a search on the rogue engine which redirects to "http://ebay.superhappyfuntimemalware.com"
The minimalist interface concept will be thrown out the window anyway as every piece of software now wants to install its own browser toolbar, some IE example I have seen look more like a grey set of venetian blinds with half the screen taken up by toolbars.
As for XP support, I am amazed that it has lasted this long. Windows 3.1 only had a shelf life of 3-4 years before it was usurped by 95. XPs stay of execution was that Vista was a disaster. I too was sceptical about Windows 7 aka 6.1, thinking it was a Vista reskin, but am actually pleasantly surprised (and I don't usually compliment Windows, more of a Linux fan anyway).
I can't get IE7 or 8 on my Windows 2000 laptop (the only laptop I have that has a serial port for console access), but am happy enough with Firefox.
Laptop serial port?
Why not just buy a 10 quid USB to serial adapter and use whatever OS on whatever laptop you like?
re: Laptop serial port?
"Why not just buy a 10 quid USB to serial adapter and use whatever OS on whatever laptop you like?"
Because in my experience they are mostly broken. A bit like USB to PS2 adaptors.
I prefer using my serial port enabled laptop for console work anyway.
I wasn't complaining, I am happy enough using Firefox on any of my Windows and Linux machines, my comment was tinged in irony, I can't get IE 7 and 8 on 2000, I can't get IE 6 on Windows 95 and 3.1, those who are lamenting the passing of the latest IE on the 9 yr old 2nd previous generation of Windows need to realise that development priorities move on.
Yes there are many companies using XP, but in my experience they are also corporate locked down on IE6 anyway, Windows 7 and IE 8/9 will come along with the next round of upgrades.
are complete shite. Where I work, there are a bunch of research scientists who need to connect their laptops to various elderly (sorry, apparently I mean *legacy*) measurement devices, and of course none of the laptops we're allowed to buy have serial ports. I have to light black candles and sacrifice chickens to dark gods to get those bloody USB-to-serial adapters to kind-of, maybe work, some of the time, if the wind's favourable.
Buy a USB console cable
You are doin' it wrong
I use them every day. 10 years ago they could be a problem but not now. TARGUS are well worth the money.
In many research institutions there is indeed legacy equipment (often connected to "legacy pcs" because they cannot "talk" to anything more advanced) and the reason for that is very simple. In my lab, for example, we have an old Dell connected to the control systems of a high pressure liquid chromatography rig. Those control systems need software that will not run on anything later than Win2k. Why have we not replaced it? Answer; because we would have to replace the _entire_ rig, pumps, columns, the sample feeders ect. ect. _in addition to_ the control systems and the pc. Ask the manufacturers of scientific equipment why there is so little reverse compatiblity. Oh and by the way, as you no doubt have begun to suspect given my little rant, yes replacing the whole system (which still works fine actually) would cost a fucking fortune.
Surely Microsoft have learned by now
a fresh sucker is born every second.
clearly you are doing it wrong!
I work in a lab doing exactly the same think, have multiple serial to USB adapters (even up to rack mounted 16 way ones!) many of which have been working 24/7 for the last 3 years, so you are doing it wrong!
VMware is your friend! You can even present specific PCI cards to VMs now. I personally think that one of it's major strengths is allowing you to virtualise legacy equipment. You can run it on Windows or Linux base OS or even (hardware allowing) use the ESX hypervisor although this is more of a datacentre tech. The big advantage is that once you've virtualised your Win2k image it's portable, so in the inevitable event of hardware failure, you can move your VM to shiny new hardware with no loss of functionallity.
Are you serial? =D
Couldn't resist ^_^
With you 100% on the toolbar thing though - I believe apps that install their own toolbars result result in a lengthy jail term and some knuckle breaking...
MS make a product stupid to promote their "latest version"
Like Office 95 on Win95 but deliberately made to not work on Win3.11 So they had to patch NT3.5 to NT3.51
Well.. Those majority of people with XP may just use Chrome and Firefox forever.
Explain me again why a browser should use HW acceleration at all, like this?
Office 95 was basically Office 4.3 with OLE2 and Long Filename Support, so required Win95.
NT3.5.1 supported these with it's Win32 Win95 compatible system, in fact it could also run Office 97 (this is why the 97 interface was slow, as it drew them itself). Still strange to see such a "modern" app running with 3.1 style Window frames.
To be expected, I suppose
Windows 7 is good and is an improvement on XP. Lets just pretend that Vista <spit> never happened, if you do, there's no reason to cling to XP.
I'm not so sure about that
No reason to cling to XP?
Well, no, I'm not clinging to XP by any means, although the PC I'm typing this on is an XP runner. But then that's the crux - if my system does everything I need or want it to do, then why change it? That's effectively the question that you need to answer whenever this crops up.
On a cursory glance of everything that IE9 has to offer, both hype from Microsoft and in spite of them, my own response is "So what?" Sorry, but I'm likely to keep my plethora of machines, including the works XP, my home W7 and anything else where it is right now.
XP Versus Seven
Just take a look at the published AutoCAD specs to see why XP is superior. Their published requirements note that you need more RAM and a much faster processor if you want to run on Windows 7. Kinda shows the lie in the "fastest Windows ever" statement that MS trots out with every new version.
*has the potential to be* the fastest windows ever - considering you would have much faster hardware to run it on
RE: XP Versus Seven
"Just take a look at the published AutoCAD specs to see why XP is superior. Their published requirements note that you need more RAM and a much faster processor if you want to run on Windows 7. Kinda shows the lie in the "fastest Windows ever" statement that MS trots out with every new version."
Oh come on - of course it's faster - it's faster because of the new PC you had to buy to run the damn thing :)
Runs beautifully on a machine with 1GB RAM and an old AMD XP 3200+ socket A CPU. It loads faster than XP and things are just as snappy if not snappier. Now I'm just a plug doing business type work with very little video stuff going on but them that wasn't mentioned was it? And I just bought my grandson a Toshiba minibook with 2GB RAM and an AMD 1.7GHz CPU. A tad slow to load but hey, once loaded it does very well. So I guess the slow and deliberate old farts like me can be satisfied with having a slooooow Win7 machine just so long as we got a fast hot woman ... which I have. After all, the computers are cold boxes with no life. My bride is a, well... better not go there. But you get the picture.
"...no reason to stick with XP"?
Are they giving out Windows 7 free now? With guaranteed support for legacy hardware and software?
Weird, because I thought if my PC worked, and did what I need, spending a hundred quid to update the OS and potentially loosing access to old apps was a bad move?
IE9 will never run on Windows XP
and this is a bad thing because?
Why would I want IE9?
With so many better choice today on the web browser market, I wouldn't care less if IE9 can't run on XP, as I wouldn't use any IE as a browser on any platform.
No going back
When i got my new laptop i wanted to stay with XP, but they're all on Windows 7 now so after 2 months of searching i eventually gave up and got Win7.
Except for the poor search function, it's a massive improvement.
I couldn't go back to XP now, Win7 all the way =]
"Except for the poor search function..."
What, do you miss that stupid dog thing? Search in Windows 7 is far superior to the search in XP.
Yes, I miss that stupid dog - making him bark in meetings, and seeing how long you could do it for before someone complained, certainly killed some time!
Does anyone still run IE on XP?
Made the move to Firefox on XP years ago.
W7 PC at work - Firefox
And you'd be amazed how many corporations specify IE. It's got something to do with being a Microsoft customer or something along those lines.
As an aside...
...I pratted about with w3m yesterday for a few minutes. When IE9 (or any graphical browser) gets close to w3m's rendering speed, I'll be interested. I must also remember to use w3m (or similar) when at location with limited bandwidth/sever usage cap.
IE9 looks like an unnecessary and desperate attempt to drag users to Vista and Windows 7. If all IE9's competition can happily run on XP, so should IE9. As simple as that. Don't give BS graphics reasons. There's GDI, OpenGL and Direct3D on WinXP. XP users don't expect hardware acceleration. They expect a standards compliant browser from Microsoft without the added cost and compatibility hassles of Windows 7.
Its a nag
It would have lost sales of Windows 7.
Oh, Im sorry you cant install/run IE9 sir/madam, heres a copy of Windows 7 for £100 that'll fix it.
Did you pluck that figure out of your backside? Nobody with any nous needs to pay a penny over £30 for Win 7 ;)
You haven't visited a South East Asian country other than Singapore, haven't you?
except those who buy a new PC
I seriously doubt that the wholesale cost portion of the OS for new PCs is less than 30. (Sorry I normally do not use the little pound symbol).
And I seriously doubt that any retailer does not mark up their wholesale costs.
So claiming that nobody pays the high retail price for the Microsoft combination totally lacks any credability at all. When you buy a new PC all idiots pay the retail price. And even if it is a special deal it is more expensive because of the monopoly products forced upon all consumers.
I guess Microsoft salesmen just can not avoid committing fraud.
Foot, gun, ready, aim, fire!
Vista, Windows 7, IE9....
I suspect that Microsoft suffer from the delusion that people want these just because they're the latest thing from Microsoft.
Fifteen years ago, this might have been the case: MS was almost the only game in town and the general standard of software was so poor that new releases brought noticeable improvement. Today, the focus is elsewhere. Most people probably want faster internet and quicker load times for programs. I don't suppose anyone's gagging for HTML5 and DX10 in the browser.
If MS hope people will be compelled to upgrade their OS so they can get IE9, I fear they will be disappointed.
this must be proof positive that companies DON'T learn from thier mistakes.
All they need now
Is an animated IE assistant.
It looks like your searching for porn, would you like help?
Gavin, a man with a curious last name...
Gavin comes 'gabhann' in the Celtic language of your choice and it means 'smith'. Do you find 'Kelly' a curious name for a girl?
Time to replace those glasses?
The article states he has a curious LAST name. I think you'll find Gavin and Kelly are first names. Read the article properly before making your snide comments in future.
Shame = MICROSOFT: IE9 WILL NEVER RUN ON WINDOWS XP
Firefox, Chrome, Opera are obviously more versatile when it comes to running on different versions & different OS's and are truly cross-platform.
Good thing there is so much choice! :)
Silent on ..
No mention of Vista? Journalistic omission or is it the unloved, forgotten child of Microsoft. Windoids can tell me Vista has the same hooks needed for IE9 ... I'm more disappointed that Chrome doesn't run on PPC machines.
Congratulations for the most pointless translation in history.
"Translated: the future is Windows 7, and there's no going back to Windows XP."
Wow, this is the kind of investigative insight that journalists should provide, reading into a company strategy and stating the complete obvious. That the future is an operating system released last year and the ten year old predecessor isn't the future.
Also, put this into a gaming scenario, Call Of Duty Black Ops will come out soon, and wierdly nobody will be supporting the original Xbox or PS2 for it. Why, because its equally as old as XP, yet nobody moans when new products and innovations aren't released for those platforms.
I know people love to hate Microsoft, but to criticise it whenever it innovates is truly hypocritical.
"You don't want to differentiate on HTML5 - [as a coder] I want to be able to write this mark up once and it runs across all browsers," Gavin said ...
Oh how times have changed - thank god for the serious competition!
- Review We have a winner! Fresh Linux Mint 17.1 – hands down the best
- Vid Antarctic ice THICKER than first feared – penguin-bot boffins
- Antique Code Show World of Warcraft then and now: From Orcs and Humans to Warlords of Draenor
- iPhone sales set to PLUMMET: Bleak times ahead for Apple
- HTML5 vs native: Harry Coder and the mudblood mobile app princes