IE7 Beta - Usual Microsoft Comedy Of Errors? another crap of an update?

[shiv 0]

i downloaded IE7 Beta and have been using it for two weeks now...does anyone know if i uninstall this crap will i get back IE6? or will IE be wiped out completely?i am baffled how come the biggy microsoft can come out with such a poor update full of hacks, bugs, crashes and quick fixes....seems like the patented microsoft way nowadays.why do they release (even if its Beta) without getting it to some usable shape? they famously go public with a bag of bugs...?!looks like its best you always wait out any microsoft product with utmost caution..you can trust them to do work and rework on the same thing over and over again and yet never fix all the bugs that crop up. (they gave up on IE6 finally and said they wont be fixing it! ) so i was xpecting atleast IE7 would be better and they would have done some good work to undo the embarrasment with IE6...but hats off to microsoft..they are never gonna change..lol!but so to say hear even firefox isnt perfect..heard it has some big error in content area calculation for table border or something like that which i didnt fully understand. but guess anycase it would be miles better that IE7.what about Opera 7 anybody? it used to be a great product and i have always felt mozilla borrowed heavily from Opera...but i dont see much of it nowadays...what is it like now?anyways i have now come to accept one thing....NEVER get excited about any new microsoft update or product... let vista take its own sweet time to grow as stable os...im keeping away from it even if it is released late this year or next year. i would prefer a stable os than see windows prettier.has anybody had a good time using IE7? let me know!cheerz!shiv

Edited March 25, 2006 by shiv (see edit history)

[Transcendum 0]

I personally haven't tried the IE7 Beta yet, and probably never will. I can't say I'm a big fan of IE6, either, but I have to admit that I think its down-sides are highly over-rated. It fixed many of the previous problems, and its rendering engine is decent. Not perfect, mind you, but decent.

 

And I agree that Microsoft's products have always been notoriously famous for their bugs. But since this post is about IE7, I feel that we shouldn't judge it so harshly. After all, it is a Beta version. It's supposed to have bugs. If we don't want to deal with them, then perhaps it's best if we don't test this version at all.

 

I just want to make it clear that I'm in no way a Microsoft fan. But still, lately it seems that everyone is bashing it for everything that's wrong with the world. I wouldn't be surprised if someone came and told me that Microsoft was responsible for World War II. A bit of anachronism, I realise, but still....

 

Anyway, I wouldn't judge IE7 until it's, at least, in the RC (Release Candidate) stage. And even then, I'd wait before I bring my wrath on it, just for the sake of being fair and objective.

[sparx 0]

Although a proponent of Open Source software and collaborative development, I have to admit that the IE7 roadmap / feature list is finally bearing some semblance of being a "team player". How is that you might ask?

 

It's because the dev team have sat up and taken notice of what the community has to say... I will say, in no uncertain terms, that IE has the easiest interface to get used to (especially for people for whom the Internet and WWW are unfamiliar territory). IE 7 is making headway in a few departments like RSS and OPMl feed gathering, anti-phishing warnings and the ability to render pages in a sandbox-like environment. Part of this has to do with the fact that Vista and all its allied components are part of the LUA framework or Least privileged User Account.

 

Case in point - the IE dev team sat down with devs form the Mozilla / Opera / other browser dev teams and reps of the W3C and agreed to use a standard icon for RSS feeds - the globally recognized orange icon -

 

The MS Outlook 12 dev team have also agreed to use the same icon in the interests of maintaining consistency between platforms

 

Quite a few people don't like the new large size buttons and other inherent frailties in the interface but no one will deny that it is far better than IE 6.

 

I also agree completely with Transcedum's post - a BETA is exactly that. You're under no compulsion to check it out and use it. Better to have a buggy BETA than an RTM version which is as full of holes as swiss cheese.

Edited March 25, 2006 by sparx (see edit history)

[CaptainRon 0]

If people didnt know, FireFox had more bugs in its first quarter than IE6! It had such critical flaws which could render a FireFox user's computer remotely controllable!I myself tested another bug which would render the Firefox installation in a user account unusuable. It had problems with its browser history.dat file, in which in case a website with very long subject line was visited, caused the browser to crash.Now since the website got listed in its history.dat file, each time firefox would start, it would crash!!! I made dozens of FireFox lovers visit my page (which would render their browser unusable) and realize how their favourite browser behaved...Well guys, I am a MS Supporter!!! Not because they make buggy products and have twisted business tactics, but because it was what with which I began...!!!A PC with MS-DOS console and Windows 3.11 was what I had to first click and tick...That's what made me dive into programming and become a software developer. I owe a lot to Microsoft Windows, its ultra user friendly environment, and superb hard ware and software support.I got on the internet for the first time just because of Microsoft win95 and its wonderful IE 3.5. I got on to use FTP (when i didnt know anything about FTP clients) using the built in IE support of FTP which lets me copy paste files just as in explorer. Although yes I gave way to WS_FTP later on, but you see, MS made me a more perfect person with lesser struggle. And I bet this is true for each and every person on this forum!!! until and unless he/she was born after 1998, by the time Linux took a good form.I owe probably none to the Linux community or Firefox (until i got into engineering) because it never let me run my sm56 internal modem (however hard i tried... recompiling the kernel and whatever), it never let me develop a totally standard application, which i could distribute as an installable executable, and it never let me work in peace either with its extremely heavy and poor GUI base... its Windowing systems come no where near to Windows in performance and stability and also standardization.Now you develop an application and u have to go through all the **** of what to use to render the GUI, KDE or GNOME, and in the end you come down to realise the vast under-standardization that the Open source world faces.

Edited March 25, 2006 by CaptainRon (see edit history)

[Sarah81 0]

I'm surprised that people still bother trying MS software before it's been out (i.e. bug-fixed) for a year or so. I learned very quickly that Microsoft eventually comes up with something good ... but not before they release obscene numbers of updates, patches and security fixes.Then again, I don't use IE unless I visit a site that requires that particular browser. I'd rather use Firefox - it's more user-friendly, far more stable, and the price (free!) is right *grins*As for Vista: I'm not upgrading anytime soon. XP does everything that I want, and more - and the versions I have (Pro and Home) are very stable at this point.

[abhiram 0]

Well guys, I am a MS Supporter!!! Not because they make buggy products and have twisted business tactics, but because it was what with which I began...!!!

Hehe ... you sound as if Microsoft was is your mentor. I mean come on, who in this world has actually started with Linux? Everybody has started out on computers with some product of Microsoft. I don't see why you feel obligated to Microsoft.

Myself, I started with Dos 3.1 or something, Win95, Win98, WinXP and now Linux.

Maybe what you say is true about Firefox. Initially, it might have been incredibly buggy, but atleast they worked really hard and plugged as many holes as they could to make it more secure than IE. Now, this is saying quite a bit since Firefox is completely free and the developers don't get paid, whereas IE has Microsoft's millions behind it and are really trying hard to improve on it. No doubt that Microsoft has got some of the finest brains in the world employed under it, but why are they taking so long to improve something that has been here since long before Opera and Mozilla started making their appearance (remember when Netscape Navigator was a real threat to IE?)?

I don't know about IE7 because these days, I'm always in Linux and boot into Windows only to play games. But, atleast it looks promising. Because as Sparx has mentioned, this is one time that they are actually going round looking for what people feel should be included in the new version and trying to implement them.

[CaptainRon 0]

You will under stand my reaction by re-reading the way Shiv criticizes MS.Abhiram, you are rite and even i mentioned it explicitly that nearly every one on this forum have began with MS until and unless they were born after 1998. See the fact is, I respect those, because of whom I am what I am.I can assure you that incase I began with Linux, I would give up all hopes of becomming a software developer and rather chosen another field, probably Air Force. And being an Indian, you will know how much the IT Sector matters...As i mentioned above, the reasons because of which I find Linux developer unfriendly. Anyhow, when we talk of Servers, Linux is the BEST.I also explicitly stated that Linux has contributed nothing to me, until i came into engineering, i came into engg because of MS.Being in engineering, I have realised how wonderful is the concept of Open Source. Matter of factly, I am myself an open source developer. I have released each and every creation of mine as open source.Apart from that, whatever we study as a subject, can only be practically understood under Linux. For example the Kernel. I dont know how the windows kernel works, and never will, but I can read each and every line of code of Linux kernel. Apart from that, when i study the FTP protocol, I can see a Linux FTP implementation with all its code, and bury in my mind the practical concepts.Linux is great and so is Open Source... But MS isn't that bad either! It definitely doesnt deserve the kind of bashing it recieves!You will know what I mean once you start programming on Windows and Linux both, and see where you excell more.

[Kushika 0]

My grandad recently download IE 7 (beta 2). he can't uninstall it now. XD But then again, he never knew what "beta" meant, and so downloaded it without a sencond though. I'm not willing to tolerate big flaws and bugs, nor am I able to fix them, so I'll wait till the finalised release is made. Since I've started to use Firfox, I've never actually used IE, only when absolutely necessary.

[Demento 0]

I read something about some lawsuit filed against IE6, (link).
Basically it means, get IE7Beta or switch browser.

[xboxrulz1405241485 0]

M$'s equivalent of beta is in the real world ALPHA code and release to us is BETA. So really, you're running alpha code. They're alpha code is pseudocode by the way and their pseudocode is ideas in programmer's head.I hope you catch my drift.xboxrulz

[nightfox1405241487 0]

Being in engineering, I have realised how wonderful is the concept of Open Source. Matter of factly, I am myself an open source developer. I have released each and every creation of mine as open source.

Umm, I'm confused. You seem to be doing a lot of double talk here... (see below for my comments)

For example the Kernel. I dont know how the windows kernel works, and never will, but I can read each and every line of code of Linux kernel.

C:\Windows\System32\kernel32.dll -> uncompile that sucker and there you go... the crappy Windows Kernel. If you want to know, from what I've read and all, the Windows kernel fails in performance. I have seen countless number of reports that compair Windows to Linux. As I use Windows and Linux side-by-side (at least until my WINE problem is solved), I notice a performance factor too. Firefox is known for its little "memory leak" thing. On my Windows box, I can easly get my page file OVER 1 GIGABYTE just by running (and ONLY running) Firefox, Dreamweaver, and Adobe Photoshop. Here's something strange too... when I kill Photoshop and Dreamweaver, I *might* be able to get the page file down to exactly 1 gig or 1.02 gigs. As soon as I kill Firefox, it drops to 300 MB.
Even under stress, my Linux box will reboot faster than my Windows box.. it also boots up faster too. XP takes 14 bars, and 3 minutes to load my desktop after login. On Linux, after all the services start up, loging in to KDE is instant. Even on a new Windows machine, it still takes a while. I don't have the time to write a report on the subject, but search it and you'll find it.

Also, the whole "system reboot" thing makes no sense... Novell did a study actually, compairing SuSE Enterprise Server (10 I think) to Windows Server 2003. Network admins had a huge complaint of excessive & unplanned network downtime when installing patches. I did my own "case study" at school... of course, I pulled numbers from the air and what MS had on their website. In my "report", I stated that with NEW servers (not junky $500 ones either), this alone would cost $300,000 ($15000 per server... these are EXCELLENT servers). Now throw on Windows... $335,780. Linux pulled off with: $302,400. My Windows friend thinks my article is complete BS, though he's NEVER used Linux. You can find Novell's report here: https://www.suse.com/

Linux is great and so is Open Source... But MS isn't that bad either! It definitely doesnt deserve the kind of bashing it recieves!

How is MS not bad? All they do is treat their customers like cattle... They look at the customers and all they see is $$$ and not people. This is WHY I switched to Linux. I like having control of MY system... here's what I told my friends:
"I'm sick of it... the viruses, the malware, that stupid ugly multi-colored windoze logo... everything. I want flexibility, not hassles. I want FREEDOM, NOT RESTRICTIONS."

I'm only talking from experience. I've had to re-install Windows, 2 times in less than a year on my Windows box... first time, Windows just "quit" and a BSOD poped up and I had to format and re-install. The second time was due to an anti-virus error. Now, I've had more Windows machines, all of them I've had to re-install Windows on at LEAST 2 times. I don't want to do that. Another reason I'm migrating over to Linux is MS and their BS about everything... "you must validate Windows to get updates"... I wouldn't be surprised if MS wrote half the viruses themselves!!! They obviously hate pirates AND *nix users too. (Somewhere on here is a post about MS detecting the use of WINE on a user's system... if WINE present, then no updates for you.

I can't like a company if all they see their customers as is $$$ (hence why I also hate AOL, not just for being AOL...)

[N]F

[evought 0]

Hehe ... you sound as if Microsoft was is your mentor. I mean come on, who in this world has actually started with Linux? Everybody has started out on computers with some product of Microsoft. I don't see why you feel obligated to Microsoft.
<snip>

Ha! I started out with Color Basic on a Z-80 microprocessor and then went to TRS-DOS when I could actually get one of the new floppy drives. I used Wordstar, Visicalc, etc. When I actually got an MS-DOS machine, I still used either PFS-First Choice or Word Perfect. It was quite a while before I got into MS products. I have never liked Word or Office applications. In college I regularly used NextStep, Solaris, Dos 6.0, Linux, Mac OS 7-9, OS/2 Warp, and Windows. I beta tested Windows 95.

No, MSes problems are not quite as bad as sometimes made out, but they are pretty bad. A Beta is supposed to be feature stable and lacking in critical defects. An Alpha (internal or limited test release) is for the real trips through the looking glass. as a vendor, it is considered bad taste to nuke your customer's computers, even with a Beta. I have Beta tested for a number of companies (back in the day when you had to apply to be a Beta tester and actually got paid, at least in free software, for the effort), and MS was really the worst of them.

Linux's unstable tree, for instance, is usually better, and Betas of OS/2 Warp were nowhere near as rough as the Betas of Win 95. Most of IBMs products tend to be more stable when they go beta (I have worked in their test labs and have seen exactly what criteria they use to pass the software for Alpha or Beta releases).

It is all a matter of having a defined *process*, which MS, by admission, just does not have.

[Opethian 0]

I don't know man...To me, installing Internet Explorer 7, is like getting back with your girlfriend. That girlfriend that cheated you twice, and got pregnant in an orgy, and says she loves you while grabbing stuff from your wallet everytime you go to the bathroom.

[doudou 0]

I downloaded IE 7 Beta last week and it wouldn’t launch at all and so I had to get rid of it. Suprisingly it wasn’t hard all ( I have Window XP Pro, so I don’t know if this is the same way for all the windows). Just go into your control panel and open up add/remove programs. You will see the new version of explore on it and just click uninstall. After you are done, you should have your old version automatically without reinstalling it.