Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

This is party time; Internet Explorer 8, 9 and 10 die on Tuesday

thenextweb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 177 posts

Re: This is party time; Internet Explorer 8, 9 and 10 die on Tuesday

#151

Post by yock »

flohofwoe wrote: post #84
al2o3cr wrote: post #81

I really don't get the concept of people being "stuck on XP": Vista shipped in 2007, so if your company wrote software after that that was locked to XP they made a mistake - one they've had EIGHT YEARS to fix. Everything except the most expensive, vertical-market hardware (that might require XP for driver support) has nigh-certainly already been depreciated to zero on the books.

Let me play the devil's advocate: Why should I as a user be forced to upgrade from a system which does it's job just fine only because the system's manufacturer decides that they don't want to spend any more resources on patching up errors in this system? Having bought the system, shouldn't I have gotten a product that is reasonably secure in the first place? How do I know that the new shiny replacement system doesn'…

> Why should I as a user be forced to upgrade from a system which does it's job just fine only because the system's manufacturer decides that they don't want to spend any more resources on patching up errors in this system?

Because by choosing that system in the first place you implicitly chose to tie yourself closely to their support. Both the buyer and the seller have a responsibility to plan for following these support decisions. Scenarios like this should inform future purchase decisions, including whether or not to buy again from the company who failed to keep up.

Re: This is party time; Internet Explorer 8, 9 and 10 die on Tuesday

#152

Post by drdaeman »

jessaustin wrote: post #119
drdaeman wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think they can. IE's (since IE5) is not your usual standalone browser application - it's an operating system component, that's used in a lot of places, starting right from the desktop. Tighter integration and mutual OS-browser dependence means it's not as easy as saying "ok, let's allow IE10 to run on Vista".

...it's an operating system component, that's used in a lot of places... This is a strategy tax, for a strategy that stopped being reasonable a decade ago. Numerous alternate browsers have had no problems competing with an "integrated" IE, for many years now. The DOJ case was settled by a completely different set of executives, so the current bunch don't have to pretend that OS integration is somehow vital to the fun…

They did exactly this with Edge, which - AFAIK - is not a system component, but a standalone application, just like the others.

Re: This is party time; Internet Explorer 8, 9 and 10 die on Tuesday

#153

Post by yuhong »

mkurz wrote: post #114
starquake wrote: post #8

Unfortunately this is not true: "Beginning January 12, 2016, only the most current version of Internet Explorer available for a supported operating system will receive technical supports and security updates." The latest Internet Explorer version that runs on Windows Vista is Internet Explorer 9. So there will still be users using that... Windows Vista will have security updates till 2020.

> Windows Vista will have security updates till 2020 This isn't true. Windows Vista EOL is April 11, 2017. See http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/lifecycle What makes you think it is 2020?

The fun thing is that Server 2008 does, and it is based on the same code as Vista.

Re: This is party time; Internet Explorer 8, 9 and 10 die on Tuesday

#154

Post by jessaustin »

drdaeman wrote: post #152
jessaustin wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...it's an operating system component, that's used in a lot of places... This is a strategy tax, for a strategy that stopped being reasonable a decade ago. Numerous alternate browsers have had no problems competing with an "integrated" IE, for many years now. The DOJ case was settled by a completely different set of executives, so the current bunch don't have to pretend that OS integration is somehow vital to the fun…

They did exactly this with Edge, which - AFAIK - is not a system component, but a standalone application, just like the others.

Sure that's the plan, but it doesn't seem to have actually rolled out to any users yet? Why do they need IE 11 if Edge is ready to go?

Re: This is party time; Internet Explorer 8, 9 and 10 die on Tuesday

#155

Post by drdaeman »

jessaustin wrote: post #154
drdaeman wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They did exactly this with Edge, which - AFAIK - is not a system component, but a standalone application, just like the others.

Sure that's the plan, but it doesn't seem to have actually rolled out to any users yet? Why do they need IE 11 if Edge is ready to go?

Probably because Edge is a Metro/ModernUI app that doesn't work on Vista and 7.

Re: This is party time; Internet Explorer 8, 9 and 10 die on Tuesday

#157

Post by jessaustin »

drdaeman wrote: post #155
jessaustin wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure that's the plan, but it doesn't seem to have actually rolled out to any users yet? Why do they need IE 11 if Edge is ready to go?

Probably because Edge is a Metro/ModernUI app that doesn't work on Vista and 7.

So... not actually standalone. Chrome and Firefox don't have that dependency. I guess that memo still hasn't been sent.

Re: This is party time; Internet Explorer 8, 9 and 10 die on Tuesday

#159

Post by jessaustin »

icebraining wrote: post #115
pjc50 wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The consent decree is a large part of why we have browser (and OS!) choice at the moment. Imagine the world where IE6 won and use of ActiveX controls on websites was routine.

I don't see how that follows, seeing as the IE dominance era came years after the consent decree was signed (2000-2003).

The implication is that absent the consent decree IE would have been more dominant in that era, and that the dominance would have lasted longer than it did. This is plausible, since a world of sites built with non-web-standard crap would have been barren ground for nascent Firefox. It was for that exact purpose that IE has always been the way it has been, and would have been worse without the decree. Yeah, we're grateful for XHR, but that was just the tip of the iceberg.

Re: This is party time; Internet Explorer 8, 9 and 10 die on Tuesday

#160

Post by xg15 »

Eric_WVGG wrote: post #37
xg15 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Out of couriosity: As BHOs were the closest IE had to browser extensions, does that mean Edge doesn't support extensions at all - or is there a different system in place?

Edge will actually support both Chrome and Firefox extensions,,, http://www.theverge.com/2015/4/29/8515771/microsofts-edge-br... But not until later this year.

I'm just skimming this, but this sounds as if they plan to implement the WebExtension spec. That would really be a remarkable step forward and a distinct difference from IE.
Post reply on HN