Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft confirms IE10 won't run on Vista, millions of IE9 users shrug

engadget.com

1–10 of 53 posts

Re: Microsoft confirms IE10 won't run on Vista, millions of IE9 users shrug

#2
IE9 not supporting XP at least had some sort of justification, regardless of whether it was a good decision. Vista was a large platform upgrade/rewrite, and they mentioned particular features IE9 was using that they didn't want to bother re-implementing for XP (graphics stack, security). But Win7 is not such a drastic upgrade over Vista (architecturally, anyways). So what's the explanation for this?

Re: Microsoft confirms IE10 won't run on Vista, millions of IE9 users shrug

#4
post #2

IE9 not supporting XP at least had some sort of justification, regardless of whether it was a good decision. Vista was a large platform upgrade/rewrite, and they mentioned particular features IE9 was using that they didn't want to bother re-implementing for XP (graphics stack, security). But Win7 is not such a drastic upgrade over Vista (architecturally, anyways). So what's the explanation for this?

The explanation is probably, "We want to sell licenses for the latest version of Windows".

Microsoft played the lock-in game too well and they can't even get their customers to upgrade to new versions of the same software. Since Windows is a one-time purchase, if no one is buying the new versions of Windows, Microsoft is making much money off of these new versions.

Re: Microsoft confirms IE10 won't run on Vista, millions of IE9 users shrug

#6
Well that's a disappointment. Since Vista and 7 share so much of the same architecture, I'd be inclined to believe this decision is completely political, which reflects poorly on Microsoft's leadership. This is hardly helping Microsoft to stay competitive with Firefox and Chrome, and it needlessly makes Vista a sub-par web development platform.

Re: Microsoft confirms IE10 won't run on Vista, millions of IE9 users shrug

#8
I feel like Microsoft should have branded IE10 as a completely new piece of software and not as the newest Internet Explorer.

Then it would have become a feature of Windows 7 instead of just another browser. It would have also given them the chance to try some new things without feeling like they had to keep any kind of IE legacy.

Yes, they would have had to support 2 different browsers for a time, but they have the resources to do that.

They could have taken the opportunity to compete more aggressively with a lighter weight browser. Microsoft is full of brilliant people, if they were given a mission that said "Make an HTML5 browser, give it the fastest, most rock-solid JS interpreter you can, and oh yeah, include the DLR by default" that they could probably deliver something pretty interesting without having to deal with the IE legacy.

Re: Microsoft confirms IE10 won't run on Vista, millions of IE9 users shrug

#9
post #8

I feel like Microsoft should have branded IE10 as a completely new piece of software and not as the newest Internet Explorer. Then it would have become a feature of Windows 7 instead of just another browser. It would have also given them the chance to try some new things without feeling like they had to keep any kind of IE legacy. Yes, they would have had to support 2 different browsers for a time, but they have the…

Considering the differences between some versions of IE, they effectively end up supporting more than two different browsers at a time anyway.

Re: Microsoft confirms IE10 won't run on Vista, millions of IE9 users shrug

#10
post #8

I feel like Microsoft should have branded IE10 as a completely new piece of software and not as the newest Internet Explorer. Then it would have become a feature of Windows 7 instead of just another browser. It would have also given them the chance to try some new things without feeling like they had to keep any kind of IE legacy. Yes, they would have had to support 2 different browsers for a time, but they have the…

Considering the differences between some versions of IE, they effectively end up supporting more than two different browsers at a time anyway.

Yeah, you're totally right.

I probably should have said that they would have to maintain two separate teams working on browsers; but I imagine they do that as well given the number of people that work on browser teams.

Post reply on HN