Internet Explorer Drops WGA Requirement

Kelson writes "The Internet Explorer team has updated the installer for IE7. Mostly they've adjusted a few defaults and updated their tutorials, but one change stands out: The installer no longer requires Windows Genuine Advantage validation. Almost a year after its release, IE7 has yet to overtake its predecessor. Was WGA holding back a tide of potential upgrades, or did it just send people over to alternative browsers?"

Market share beats anti-piracy

[Anonymous Coward]

It's finally clear where Microsoft's priorities lie. You can pirate until they have a dominant place in the market.

Re:

[Jugalator]

IE already have a dominant place, but yeah.

Re:

[shird]

Wouldnt that mean IE7 should have had no WGA requirement, then the WGA requirement added.. rather than the other way around?

Re:

[Ilgaz]

Wouldnt that mean IE7 should have had no WGA requirement, then the WGA requirement added.. rather than the other way around?

As a current OS X and ex Windows user, I know the scheme. You can check this comment later in months about it.

Somehow, some programmer made a huge mistake in current version of IE 7 and it creates a huge security issue. The update covering that issue may/will require WGA (later version) for applying.

Re:

[MyLongNickName]

Pfft. Firefox has the same business model.

Re:

[ajs318]

Except that with Firefox, you get the Source Code. Unless you speak fluent Pentium assembly language, there's a world of difference.

Re:

[jallen02]

Even if you do speak it.. it takes a lot more effort to say the same thing some source code does.

Re:

[jkrise]

It's finally clear where Microsoft's priorities lie. You can pirate until they have a dominant place in the market....

I agree with this market share thing, but I think it's about the operating system, not the browser that Microsoft is worried about... let me explain.

People who get fed up of Windows try Linux... but most office apps still need some Windows componenets. MS Office existing licenses account for lots of installations. So it's not that simple to move the entire OS - but the browser is easily the

Most people...

[MrNemesis]

...wouldn't have known it was there. The WGA requirement means that you actively have to log into Windows Update and say "yes, I want IE7" or actively locate an IE7 installer. Your average computer user won't even know which version of IE they're using, much less will have any idea there's a new version out and why they should bother installing it.

If IE7 doesn't have the WGA thing, then presumably it's going to be automatically installed with the rest of the updates whihc most users have set to automatic (since that's how the computer came configured).

So yes, expect the installed base to increase significantly, and I imagine a reasonably increase in usage as well - alot of people will find it better than any other browser they're using (stupid, uncustomisable button layout notwithstanding).

Re:

[jkrise]

If IE7 doesn't have the WGA thing, then presumably it's going to be automatically installed with the rest of the updates whihc most users have set to automatic (since that's how the computer came configured).

Well spotted! After the sneaky update on XP and Vista, it looks like IE7 will be the next sneaky update on 'pirated' XP as well. I get a feeling most antivirus and spyware kits have got the hang of IE6 by now; but IE7 is very messy, confusing and downright irritating. I simply gave up after an hour.

I

Re:

[MrNemesis]

Heh, I'm another Opera user who switches to FF when he has to.

Whilst I agree that IE7's interface is irritating, it's a shitload better than the fustercluck of sploits (albeit with a more "standard" interface) that's IE6. That said, I'm 95% Linux at home these days so IE is rarely even an option for me.

I'm just hope I can get promoted to project/acquisition management in the near future so I can veto company apps that require certain flavours of IE to work properly.

Re:

[MMC Monster]

I'm running a valid WindowsXP license at work. I am still using IE6 because our IT department requires an activeX component to run a citrix component to log in remotely to another office.

(Of course, I use Firefox for everything else at work)

Re:

[edwdig]

When IE7 initially came out, it was marked as a critical update. I've got Windows Update set to prompt me when new updates are available and IE7 showed up along with the normal patches. I don't see why it wouldn't have installed automatically if your computer was set up that way.

and menu bar enabled by default (finally!)

[MojoStan]

I think the re-enabled (by default) menu bar is just as important as the dropped WGA requirement. For novice/intermediate Windows users, IE7's hidden menu bar (revealed by pressing "Alt") was needlessly confusing. Every time I've checked a friend's IE7 setup (on both XP and Vista), I've asked if they wanted the menu bar back. Not surprisingly, the answer has been "YES" every time.

I'm guessing Microsoft wanted IE7 (and some of their other apps) to follow Office 2007's lead and get rid of the menu bar. This made sense for Office because the new contextual ribbon interface negates the need for a menu bar. It was hard to believe at first, but Office 2007 really does work better without the menu bar.

However, removing the menu bar from IE7 made no sense IMO. IE7 didn't implement a ribbon interface (which wouldn't work for this app anyway), but they still removed the menu bar and seemingly tried to put all important functions on the button bar. Requiring a keyboard shorcut ("Alt") to access the menu was annoying to me and probably frustrating to novice/intermediate users.

I think this simple change will significantly improve usablility. I'll still be an Opera man, though.

IE7 on MS VirtualPC

[Allicorn]

As a web developer I've been using Microsoft's own VirtualPC doodad which they provided - for free - with a working XP Pro image that had IE6 installed on it. Since you can't really run IE6 and 7 on the same machine this was useful. One IE on my real drive, the other in the virtual machine. The problem was, I really did not want to put IE7 on the real machine.

So anyway, I figured I'd just download IE7 on the virtualized XP Pro. Imagine my surprise when that copy of Windows, freshly downloaded from microsoft.com, failed to pass WGA validation! :-/

Tredosoft came to the rescue of course with their various clever ways of getting different versions of IE to play (moderately) nicely together, but it still wasn't ideal.

Now I guess I can get IE7 to work on that XP image.

Re:

[compupc1]

It fails because that copy of XP is meant ONLY for testing IE 6 -- it's not a fully liscenced copy of Windows. There is a separate image available with IE 7 already.

StarForce?

[LarsG]

It is rather common for game manufacturers to remove StarForce or other cd-tethering protection after the game has been out for a while. So, like, MS issued a no-cd patch for IE7 then?

Oh, now I see...

[1001011010110101]

...why I got last night another proposal to install MSIE7.
I was like "WTF, I already said NO. And dont remind me again AGAIN".

Hope it finally listens =)

Good! Well maybe...

[Thyamine]

Just the other day I was trying to repair a PC where IE7 was having a variety of issues. I installed Firefox, explained the benefits, and then attempted to use Firefox to download IE7 since he needed it for some apps for work. However, the WGA was failing with all the same problems that IE7 was failing with. The irony (yes yes, not the right word) of it was I was actively trying to get IE from Firefox, and MS wouldn't let me do it without getting a validation code from all the WGA nonsense.

He was happy to hear about Firefox and plans on using that now instead, and after uninstalling IE7, found IE6 to be functional enough for those few times he needs it. So, while WGA is a pain in the ass, it helped convert one more person to Firefox. So I don't know how I feel about them removing it. ;-)

Re:

[Professor_UNIX]

The irony (yes yes, not the right word) of it was I was actively trying to get IE from Firefox, and MS wouldn't let me do it without getting a validation code from all the WGA nonsense.

Didn't there used to be an application you could download to manually validate the system though? After that you'd be able to grab IE7.

Re:

[Thyamine]

Yes, and that's what I was attempting to run via Firefox. However it was failing with similar errors that IE7 was having. Since IE7 wasn't working, and I couldn't get WGA to validate through Firefox, I couldn't even download IE7 from MS to repair/test the IE installation. I finally did find a copy that Yahoo was hosting, but it was branded of course with their info. In the end we told MS to piss off and never reinstalled IE7.

Windows 2000

[tji]

So, does this mean it can be installed on Windows 2000?

I use Win2K in a virtual machine, and have never had the need to upgrade to XP or Vista.

One of the few issues I have run into with staying on Win2K is the inability to run IE7. Not that I want to run it.. I am quite happy with Firefox. But, some projects I am working on have www components that I would like to verify with IE7. So, this would be nice to have.

Download a Virtual PC image

[friedegg]

Microsoft offers an XP SP2 + IE7 Virtual PC image [microsoft.com] for testing. It has a date expiration, so you do need to download new ones every few months.

Re:

[Nimey]

So upgrade to XP or Vista, then. 2K is going to be EOL'd in a few years anyhow. Or do up a second VM with XP and then you can test with both versions of IE and not have to worry about the VM expiring.

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

Q: Does this work on Windows 2000?

A: "Upgrade" to XP or Vista.

Do you work for Microsoft?

To answer the question posed: They still say XP, Vista or Windows Server are the required OS's. But, people have hacked it to work in Windows 2000 in the past by bypassing windows validation. This version should make that even easier.

If you're just running Windows in a VM, avoid upgrading to XP or especially Vista at all costs. Their resource requirements are MUCH higher than Windows 2000, and when running under Lin

monopoly violations

[Floritard]

I don't use IE hardly at all. Only when the occasional website screws up in Opera and I for whatever crazy reason decide it's really worth whipping out IE. I know I don't have the latest version so I didn't even know it required WGA. How do they get away with that anyway? I thought part of the DoD's monopoly complaints had to do with how integrated the browser was with the OS. I suppose the WGA requirement only shrinks their install base for IE, but it also doesn't go a long way in separating IE from the OS

Re:

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Probably a legal liability issue...

[evilviper]

With IE being part of the operating system, and commercial software companies being required by law to provide free security updates, I imagine Microsoft was opening themselves up to all sorts of legal liability.

Before locking IE7 up with WGA, they could avoid fixing huge security holes in older versions of the browser, telling everyone to upgrade to the latest version, or shut-up and live with it. With WGA routinely denying legitimate users, and apparently no method provided for users to have problems wit

Re:Not likely

[NekoXP]

Well, I think this is a push to increase security; it's harder to get any of those crappy ActiveX exploits through IE7 because of it's insane "please confirm installing a plugin 3 times" methodology. With WGA enabled you have all your legitimate Windows users using IE7 (or at least having it installed, remember IE7's browser components are used throughout XP - help files, embedded in other apps..) but everyone pirating it still uses the previous versions with no security updates installed.

You could easily claim (and be right) that disallowing the vast majority of pirated Windows copies the latest security updates contributes to the spread of viruses, trojans and generally misappropriation of networks.

After all, until Firefox implements some kind of MSHTML.DLL replacement scheme (would this be so difficult, really?), it is not possible to completely remove Internet Explorer from a standard Windows system (WinXP Lite etc. notwithstanding) and have it still function the same way.

Someone should port the Wine MSHTML.DLL back to Windows.. and have it use Gecko, in order that we completely reduce the requirement of Windows on the obvious things. I think it'd have to be modified to use ActiveX controls though, there was a project for this once, I really can't work out why they abandoned it though (ActiveX security policies may be easily broken etc. but it would have the happy benefit of enabling everyone with IE-requiring internet banking etc. to use those sites, too!)

I basically think if the guys at Firefox were really serious about putting themselves as a true alternative to IE, they would focus a little more on truly replacing IE rather than just being installed side-by-side.

Re:

[speaker of the truth]

but everyone pirating it still uses the previous versions with no security updates installed.

Microsoft should not support and help pirates. If people want to pirate, and then spew forth lots of spam, they should be prosecuted for pirating and whatever laws there are that make distributing viruses and spam illegal.

Re:

[NekoXP]

You could also say that Microsoft should not support virus authors and DDoS-happy blackhats and so on by giving them 80% of the world's computers to easily crack. It's not always easy to find the guy who is hammering your servers or your corporation with spam, packet floods or spreading credit card information from your customers or whatever. Maybe you can find out what systems he used, but his address, to prosecute him? That could take forever.. or be never.

It's a lot more responsible to stop him from doin

Re:

[Waffle Iron]

Criminal prosecution and civil liability are largely orthogonal. Even if someone managed to track down and prosecute spammers and virus writers (yeah, as if), Microsoft would still be liable for writing and distributing shoddy merchandise that's trivially used as an attack vector. Their EULA won't protect them from attack victims who aren't Microsoft customers. The potential damages from a DOS attack on a major business or industry could be huge, even by Microsoft standards. With this in mind, it's in Micr

Re:

[speaker of the truth]

Wait, someone STEALS (and I'm deliberately using the loaded and inaccurate term here) from Microsoft, and Microsoft is liable for something that happens when they use the STOLEN product? Wow, I'm all for consumer rights, etc, etc. But you're not a consumer if you've broken the law in obtaining the product.

Re:

[Waffle Iron]

The victims of a botnet attack would not necessarily buy, pirate or use any Microsoft product. The people who STOLE [sic] and ran Microsoft's attack vector are *not* the ones I'm talking about. It's the people who were targeted by those attacks that could sue, and they're going to sue the responsible party with the money, not 2-bit downloaders.

Re:Not likely

[ajs318]

That is no excuse. You can load up a computer with all the software you're likely to need [ubuntulinux.com] without ever paying a single penny for it, and without going against the wishes of the copyright holders.

As an aside, using serious alternatives to Microsoft products will most certainly annoy Microsoft far more than using pirated copies of Microsoft products ever could.

Re:Not likely

[thegnu]

While I was not 'just a kid' in a developing country (being a white american), I grew up and worked in IT in a developing country, and here are the problems with your argument:

1. I can get a Windows XP VLK disc from a friend. I have to download Ubuntu's installer over 28.8k (on a good day)
2. Preparatory schools will require Windows and many Windows applications without exceptions
3. I can't think of any other ones, but having three bullets is the least I can have for the desired visual effect.

But really. I think Ubuntu is an excellent alternative for those who can pull it off, but you have to get a Windows computer with a CD burner, get it online, set up a download manager, download Ubuntu over the course of a few days, then install a new OS that you don't know, and access the support community from a slow-ass Internet connection. So I think 'I live in a developing country' is a quite reasonable excuse.

In Mexico, once Microsoft introduced product activation and it failed a couple times for me, causing hours and hours of extra labor, I started suggesting to people that they not pay a week's salary (these are not the super poor people, mind you) on some crappy software, and instead just pirate the crap. It's a more user-friendly experience if you pirate it. You can install MUIs if you pirate the corporate version. It's really a no-brainer. Plus, nobody's going to investigate a dry patch of dirt in Mexico for software piracy.

Re:

[Hemogoblin]

3. I can't think of any other ones, but having three bullets is the least I can have for the desired visual effect.

Classy. Made my morning :)

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

I think Ubuntu is an excellent alternative for those who can pull it off, but you have to get a Windows computer with a CD burner, get it online, set up a download manager, download Ubuntu over the course of a few days

Or you could request [ubuntu.com] a CD be sent to you free of charge?

Re:

[petermgreen]

"ShipIt is currently closed while we prepare for the Ubuntu 7.10 (Gutsy Gibbon) release. We'll be back in a few days."

but other than that afaict you can only get the latest ricer release, I don't think you can get the alternate CD (needed to do upgrades from CD afaict) and in some countries there can be issues with customs.

and if you aren't in the US it will probablly take a week or so whereas you can have the windows XP pro VLK CD and key the same day.

Re:

[thegnu]

and if you aren't in the US it will probablly take a week or so whereas you can have the windows XP pro VLK CD and key the same day.

Yeah, don't ship anything important to Mexico. Customs requires them to open and examine every piece of electronics to make sure it is up to their standards. Which is laughable. And I don't mean any disrespect to Mexicans, I mean disrespect to government agencies. All the Mexicans I worked with thought it was pretty damn laughable, too.

It used to be if you shipped anything

Mozilla ActiveX control

[tepples]

After all, until Firefox implements some kind of MSHTML.DLL replacement scheme (would this be so difficult, really?)

It's so not difficult that it's been done [www.iol.ie], though I don't know how old this is.

What has happened to /.???

[cayenne8]

Speaking of IE.

Like many...I'm stuck using IE6 at work. Something must have changed overnight with Slashdot...maybe some weird new CSS?

Whatever it is...it is really messing up. It is hard to read any article....many comments don't appear to even have a reply button on them.

That..and I'm afraid it looks like /. has implemented a automatic PAGE REFRESH mode? I hope not..I like to keep a browser open on /. all day...but, if it starts auto-refreshing, that can look like too much surfing at work.

A the top of pages I see it autochecks an option to "Try new Slashdot discussion system". I try unchecking it each time to no-avail. I checked my preferences...and it is also set to NOT use the new system, but, it appears the new system is still being fed to me.

Please fix this...it was bad enough that the firehose page has recently been made unusable by IE6...now the normal pages are really screwing up.

I used FF, Safari, and the native KDE browsers at home...and they seem to work fine, but, I've got NO choice at work. Please make /. work like it did before. Simple HTML and CSS are just great....we don't need an ajax Slashdot..it is the content and the people that make the site.....not the fanciness of the site. Especially with all that added 'zing' messes up on a majorly used (unfortunately) browser.

Re:

[Ilgaz]

I will sound horribly outdated,old fashioned but did you try cleaning your cache? Browsers cache mechanisms really lost it after the recent "speed race" and they tend to cache anything which doesn't say "do not cache me". In case of IE, it would simply ignore it, it is the IE you know...

Re:

[Hemogoblin]

I'm getting this too, but I'm on Opera. At least the new moderation system works moderately well on it.

Re:

[Uksi]

They are forcing the buggy new comment system (Which I don't like) on us. I can't uncheck it either.

Re:

[AVee]

After all, until Firefox implements some kind of MSHTML.DLL replacement scheme (would this be so difficult, really?), it is not possible to completely remove Internet Explorer from a standard Windows system (WinXP Lite etc. notwithstanding) and have it still function the same way. Someone should port the Wine MSHTML.DLL back to Windows.. and have it use Gecko, in order that we completely reduce the requirement of Windows on the obvious things.

Shouldn't MS be the one fixing the problems in MS software? I can see why there aren't many people volunteering to solve what is not their problem in the first place.

Re:

[j-pimp]

After all, until Firefox implements some kind of MSHTML.DLL replacement scheme (would this be so difficult, really?), it is not possible to completely remove Internet Explorer from a standard Windows system (WinXP Lite etc. notwithstanding) and have it still function the same way. Someone should port the Wine MSHTML.DLL back to Windows.. and have it use Gecko, in order that we completely reduce the requirement of Windows on the obvious things.

Shouldn't MS be the one fixing the problems in MS software? I can see why there aren't many people volunteering to solve what is not their problem in the first place.

It is their obligation. However, some people might want to solve Microsoft problems because Microsoft won't and it benefits them.

Re:

[quaketripp]

I basically think if the guys at Firefox were really serious about putting themselves as a true alternative to IE, they would focus a little more on truly replacing IE rather than just being installed side-by-side.

I'm not sure what you even mean by that? The only reason I can't run Firefox alone on a box is because some sites will only code to support IE. How is that Firefox's fault? Does that not show that Microsoft just has an unfar advantage on the market? I mean, I can't even use NetFlix' View NOW! feature through Firefox because you absolutely must use IE for whatever reason, I could go research that part, but coffee drive hasn't kicked in...I digress. The point is Firefox w/ NoScrips and ABP (sssshhhh, d

Re:

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

With WGA enabled you have all your legitimate Windows users using IE7 (or at least having it installed, remember IE7's browser components are used throughout XP - help files, embedded in other apps..) but everyone pirating it still uses the previous versions with no security updates installed.

Not necessarily. My home machine is 100% legal and always has been, but I have declined to install IE7 for the simple reason that I maintain a web site and more of my visitors run IE6, so that's my default testing ground. Someone mentioned this thing about standards and problems with not following them, but I can't remember what it was...

(I use other browsers for my personal browsing, and just fire up IE for testing things. Since I haven't yet found a way to have both IE6 and IE7 installed on the same m

Re:

[Ilgaz]

With WGA enabled you have all your legitimate Windows users using IE7 (or at least having it installed, remember IE7's browser components are used throughout XP - help files, embedded in other apps..) but everyone pirating it still uses the previous versions with no security updates installed.

Not necessarily. My home machine is 100% legal and always has been, but I have declined to install IE7 for the simple reason that I maintain a web site and more of my visitors run IE6, so that's my default testing ground. Someone mentioned this thing about standards and problems with not following them, but I can't remember what it was...

(I use other browsers for my personal browsing, and just fire up IE for testing things. Since I haven't yet found a way to have both IE6 and IE7 installed on the same machine, and I have only one machine available, IE7 loses out for the reason above.)

I purchased MS VPC and XP Home edition just because I got sick of people's complaints about the sites I maintain. It was cheap here...

I refused to give any (unique identifier style) data to MSFT while using paid XP Home on a complete weird setup (Quad G5 running it) so I didn't update to WGA.

I heard the news so I updated. You must be glad you (still) refuse to install IE 7 since you would have figured MS is basically lying about "better W3C compatibility" without any shame.

One site misses a huge, important

Re:

[Dhalka226]

If you so desired, you could install IE 7 as your primary browser and use Multiple IE [tredosoft.com] to install a standalone version of IE 6 for testing your webpages out.

wga was broken anyways

[Psychofreak]

I updated IE on my wifes computer (M$ xp), as she needs it for work, before the service pack that included ie7 in it was released, wga broke and no updates could be installed till I followed this voodoo ritual of purging I found on the Microsoft support site. This removed IE7 so I could install updates and the new service pack which included IE7. I'd call it bass ackwards but that would be an insult to all bass and bass fisherman out there.
Removing wga probably improves stability overall, I just tried ch

Re:

[petermgreen]

i'm sure lots of people "pirate" (I put pirate in quotes because a lot of people have legit licenses but use dodgy copies of corp because they can't be assed with all the activation and bios locking bullshit) windows yet stick with IE as the familiar browser.

also there have been some scare stories about wga rejecting legit copies so some people even with legit copies may have just decided not to risk it.

Re:

[Chatterton]

In my company, all the web based application that doesn't work well in IE7 and firefox were application developed with IEism and activeX components... Some have some minor displays bugs but vastly due to some IEism corrected in IE7 in the interpretation of the CSS :/

Re:The real reason uptake is slow...

[MrNemesis]

Same problem at my work. Loads of shitty web-based corporate apps rely on IE6-isms that won't work in IE7, resulting in the entire enterprise being forced to use IE6 (plus severe update lags due to inefficient and ineffective testing of patches). As such, we've had a couple of breaches via 0-day exploits targetting unpatched IE6 installs.

Yay for the Intranet Microsoft Built.

Oddity: IT staff don't eat their own dog food, and everyone uses FF whilst telling the users they can't have it because intranet apps "don't work with firefox". However, bring IE into the equation and the same staff will tell you "the app is shit and won't work with IE". Odd how such a pro-MS shop changes the burden of proof depending on whether the target is asociated with Linux or not

Re:

[RMH101]

Oddity: IT staff don't eat their own dog food, and everyone uses FF whilst telling the users they can't have it because intranet apps "don't work with firefox".

As an IT guy in a big organisation, via the marvels of SMS2003 I've been shown to have Firefox on my machine. I've been asked to remove it on grounds of security...sigh.

(There is *kind* of a point to this in that we're ultralocked down for most stuff - can't change proxy in IE etc, and FF isn't centrally managed the way our standard software is. In this case it's just a particularly amusing example..)

Re:IT guys installing their own software

[Baron_Yam]

Err... rebuild your machine and install TrustNoExe, then block the SMS client from running along with your domain logon scripts, etc.

Really useful little utility, and a good way to stop users from running unauthorized crap on their machines. The ability to block logon scripts and SMS snooping is just a nice little bonus.

Re:

[Nimey]

...and then you could be fired for cause. Brilliant.

Re:

[AVee]

As an IT guy in a big organisation, via the marvels of SMS2003 I've been shown to have Firefox on my machine. I've been asked to remove it on grounds of security...sigh.

Your boss calls you an IT guy, but doesn't trust you with a computer? Does he also send you to customers? "Hey, I won't trust him with one of my PC's but you can hire this briliant IT guy for $500/h".

Re:

[Nimey]

MSI builds of Firefox: http://www.frontmotion.com/Firefox/fmfirefox.htm [frontmotion.com]
They're configurable with Group Policy, or at least that's what the website says.

Of course, you'll need to get your SMS admin to agree to this.

Re:

[Ilgaz]

MSI builds of Firefox: http://www.frontmotion.com/Firefox/fmfirefox.htm [frontmotion.com]
They're configurable with Group Policy, or at least that's what the website says.

Of course, you'll need to get your SMS admin to agree to this.

What is the point of not shipping Firefox packaged in MSI installer file? It is the native install method of Windows. Same goes for Apple OS X. They also refuse Installer.app method of installing and provide a non functional "Applications" link having drag drop file. What happens as result? OS X remote desktop having users/companies get hassle. In future, it will be a more hassle since Installer.app is evolving to become MSI like thing.

If they are boycotting (?) Windows, they should boycott alltogether. Th

Re:

[Nimey]

I support some users with brain-dead web apps like that as well, and other run-on-machine apps that use mshtml.dll. I have some others whose app first required .NET 1.1 & would crash if 2.0 or 3.0 was installed, then the new version requires 2.0 and crashes if 3.0 is installed, but at least the new version also works with IE7.

How, in the name of all that's crufty and evil, do you code an app that breaks if a .NET runtime newer than what you wrote against is even *installed*? FTM, I thought that .NET 3

With ies4linux? A couple minutes

[Nicolas MONNET]

IES4Linux [tatanka.com.br] installs IE on wine in a matter of minutes, no WGA required ... :)

In fact, I ran WGA a few months ago under wine, it validated my non-existent Windows license :)

Re:

[Echolima]

Now none of us are gonna be able to get windows updates for our WINE!

sheeesh

PS: IE4Linux is pretty awesome, that was the selling point to get the wife on Linux.

Re:With ies4linux? A couple minutes

[skoaldipper]

IE on linux? But isn't that like duct taping kite string to a wii controller and running it to your xbox?

Re:

[Hemogoblin]

No no, it'd be more like a car that ... forget it.

Re:With ies4linux? A couple minutes

[mdm-adph]

Almost like that....except it has to be an Xbox360, the Xbox wouldnt pick it up - thats the only way I got it to work. Some College websites require IE and only IE....IE4Linux saves the hassle of windows.

I can relate with you there, but wouldn't a simple plugin like User Agent Switcher [mozilla.org] for Firefox work for you? It could fool a website into thinking that you're running IE, and I'm pretty sure that's all you'd need, because as far as I know, getting ActiveX to work under linux, even with IE4Linux, is a pain in the ass, and there's no guarantee that it'll work every time.

Re:

[ArwynH]

The main reason I have IE installed is to make sure my sites work correctly under it. Stupid IE always has rendering problems. Some are due to non-standard compliance, others are just stupid. EG if in a xhtml document you have a <script ... /> tag IE6 will only display the page background, but none of the contents. You have to write it in the html way <script .. ></script> for the contents to show. It has no problem with using the short-cut with any other tags though, only the script one.

Re:

[TemporalBeing]

I can relate with you there, but wouldn't a simple plugin like User Agent Switcher for Firefox work for you? It could fool a website into thinking that you're running IE, and I'm pretty sure that's all you'd need, because as far as I know, getting ActiveX to work under linux, even with IE4Linux, is a pain in the ass, and there's no guarantee that it'll work every time.

That doesn't always work. I've got a few IE-only websites that I have to go to on occasion and the User Agent Switch won't do it. I think t

Re:

[Ilgaz]

Now none of us are gonna be able to get windows updates for our WINE!

sheeesh

PS: IE4Linux is pretty awesome, that was the selling point to get the wife on Linux.

You know what? If they kept maintaining and updating that closed source evil junk, they would be very comfortable against various EU courts and perhaps even to webmasters who doesn't touch anything they produce.

They are so childishly "competing" with other operating systems so they even abandoned Mac IE which was ages ahead of Windows one. It is like "you don't use my OS? There you go, browse my exclusive partner sites now!"

Just imagine IE 7 shipped for Linux/FreeBSD/OS X right at same time with same featu

Re:

[Ilgaz]

Sorry for any confusion, I am speaking about the orphaned IE for Unix. Yes, MS had such thing.

Re:

[SolitaryMan]

PS: IE4Linux is pretty awesome, that was the selling point to get the wife on Linux.

WOW! Somebody uses this for things other than testing site layout in IE?

Re:

[Esion Modnar]

(I'm replying to this because I can't find how to reply to the main article under Slashdot's new interface. Where da buttons?!?)

Anyhow, I noticed today that as I was doing all the latest Windows updates on a new system I'm building, IE7 is no longer listed as a critical update. At least I could not find it. I wonder what else I can't find today.

Re:

[larry bagina]

(I'm replying to this because I can't find how to reply to the main article under Slashdot's new interface. Where da buttons?!?)

Look at the floating panel on the side ("xx Comments"). At the bottom right side is the reply link. Also, the "more" link loads up new comments without doing a page refresh.

Re:give them a few months to make it silently upgr

[tomstdenis]

Good thing my "windows" machines don't run windows. :-)

yeah I know it's cliche to post about running another OS, but honestly, what's the motivation to run windows anymore?

I recently swapped gentoo for ubuntu on my laptop, and out of the box ubuntu booted up to Gnome, had a bunch of useful software installed, was easy to add more OSS to it, it detected my wireless card, and even found my access point right away, sound works, etc. If I take an XP SP2 CD and put it in my laptop, it will fail to find my wirel

Re:

[suv4x4]

yeah I know it's cliche to post about running another OS, but honestly, what's the motivation to run windows anymore?

If you can't figure it out after this being the topic of discussion every single day on Slashdot, at least accept people have different needs from each other and stop asking the same question like a broken record.

Re:give them a few months to make it silently upgr

[tomstdenis]

Sometimes it's worth repeating because it's a valid rhetorical question.

You can edit documents, run spreadsheets (even multiply correctly!), design software/hardware, compose music, etc, just as easily in an OSS OS as Windows. And if people stopped worshipping Redmond they'd actually realize that *they* have the power to choose, not the producers.

Why isn't photoshop ported to GNU/Linux? Because customers aren't demanding it enough. Watch people hold up updating CS, demand Linux ports, and you'll probably see it happen. But if you just blindly do what they tell you, you get less options. And in certain cases the alternatives are better. I'd rather use OO.o than MS Office. I'd rather use firefox than IE7. I'd rather use pidgin than the MSN client, I'd rather use lilypond than Finale, I'd rather use mplayer than WMP, I'd rather use a lot of things than their "traditional proprietary" counterparts.

I'd suspect for 99% of computer users out there (home users included) they could get by just as well or better with a good Linux distro than Vista. Certainly my experience with Ubuntu has been such that if you can't figure out how to use/install it, you probably won't get much out of owning a computer anyways. It's just so damn simple to use, not to mention free, and gives access to an entire library of OSS software.

Tom

Re:

[tomstdenis]

No, because serious Photoshop users couldn't care less about running it on Linux. They need it to Just Work, not waste time tinkering with it.

Right... because absolutely no time is spent getting Windows to work. That's why people are migrating BACK TO XP from Vista in sufficient numbers as to have MSFT extend the life of XP.

Right, Windows "Just Works" ... gotcha.

Re:

[suv4x4]

Right... because absolutely no time is spent getting Windows to work. That's why people are migrating BACK TO XP from Vista in sufficient numbers as to have MSFT extend the life of XP.

Right, Windows "Just Works" ... gotcha.

You have some serious issues. Most businesses don't upgrade to Vista for the same reason they don't switch to Linux.

In your mind it's The World versus Windows + Microsoft, and Vista is still Windows.

However in people who don't have time to waste on fighting windmills, it's Solutions that

Re:

[jalefkowit]

honestly, what's the motivation to run windows anymore?

• It came installed on your new PC and you're too lazy to install something else
• Your boss makes you
• You like to play games

Seriously, that's the complete list these days as far as I can tell. Not good news for Microsoft.

Re:

[petermgreen]

lets add a few more possible reasons

* you do photo editing seriously and want to use the standard proffesional photo editing tool (yes it is availible for the mac but they have their own problems like having to pay well over £1000 for a machine capable of supporting a matching pair of monitors) on an OS it is supported on.
* you program PICs and want to use microchips debugging tools
* you have internal buisness applications that require windows and don't work properly under wine.
* you have to work with

Force.

[Zombie Ryushu]

You have to realize that in Microsoft's landscape, Windows Users are not entitled to "choose" anything. Making the choice to use Linux is insanely difficult. You grow accustomed and comfortable after a while but its still really hard. There is no free market in computers. Proliferation of IIS and ActiveX will force people to IE.

Re:

[tomstdenis]

I choose to use OSS for the myriad of benefits. It has the downside that I can't play many of the popular games. OH BIG WHOOP. I have consoles for games if I really want to play something.

People aren't forced to do anything they don't want to. You don't have to take that job at $BIGCORP where they use all the wrong software/tools/etc. You don't have to buy a PC with Vista installed, you don't have to keep it installed if you did anyways. People run Windows because they're too lazy and ignorant to sort

Re:

[TheVelvetFlamebait]

yeah I know it's cliche to post about running another OS, but honestly, what's the motivation to run windows anymore?

You know what else is a cliche? Pointing out that windows is the "safe" option in terms of hardware compatibility and support, as well as the only decent gaming platform for PC. It also has some good software that only comes on windows, and doesn't yet have any decent linux-based competition.

Re:

[ajs318]

Why would you switch away from Gentoo? I'm not trolling, I'm genuinely curious. As a long term Debian user {formerly a Mandrake user}, I tried a brief fling with Gentoo a year or so back. It did everything Debian did, but it didn't really seem to do it any better than Debian. The biggest difference seemed to be that "apt-get install foo" was replaced by "emerge foo". I put up with it till the HDD in the box died the death, then went back to Debian for its replacement.

Had I discovered Gentoo before

Re:

[tomstdenis]

To be honest I got pissed off at some packages that wouldn't update (like gedit, epiphany, etc), also the wireless config changed again. I mean I like gentoo as a concept, but in practice they don't QA enough which drives me mad. It's nice that most problems can be solved via a browse of forums.gentoo.org, but frankly, I don't have time to maintain my laptop all the time.

Now my file server/workstation at home runs gentoo, but that's because I like the freshness of the tools around and it's worth solving e

Re:

[B2382F29]

Well, at least the rendering engine seems to work... http://www.tatanka.com.br/ies4linux/page/Beta [tatanka.com.br]

no, it's the other way around

[someone1234]

M$'s website point-blank refuses to work with any other browser.

Re:

[jonwil]

With the exception of Windows Update, I have yet to see any part of the Microsoft owned websites fail to run in SeaMonkey. Thanks to genuinecheck.exe from MS, I can even download all the WGA protected stuff without the need to install the WGA ActiveX crap and use IE.

Re:

[1001011010110101]

Actually, its not that other browsers refuse to work with it, its that Microsoft uses ActiveX to run Windows Update, and nobody wants to use that in alternative browsers (ActiveX is one of the problems with MSIE security model).

Btw, if you REALLY REALLY want to use an alternative browser to run Windows update, you can always use IETAB and run an instance of MSIE inside a tab in Firefox.

Re:

[shird]

But then thats not really using an alternative browser.. its just hosting the IE browser in a different window. You may as well just use IE.

Re:

[1001011010110101]

Touche. Nothing except MSIE is EVER going to be able to run ActiveX. (Thank God)

Re:

[jonwil]

Actually, there IS a plugin that lets you host an ActiveX control inside Mozilla/Firefox/Gecko. It was written (AFAIK) specifically to host the Windows Media Player ActiveX so that Gecko browsers on windows could play Windows Media content. However, with WMP11, there is now a proper gecko-friendly plugin available I believe.

Re:ALTERNATE

[Foerstner]

Um...no, that's "alternative." If you're going to be a word-usage Nazi, get it right first.

Unless you're trying to suggest that they're switching back and forth repeatedly.

Re:

[Loosifur]

Amen to that. I just dumped Vista to dual boot Ubuntu and XP. I have a feeling that enough people are getting bitten by WGA to make even Microsoft notice. I also have a feeling that they're getting a little worried about the reception Vista has gotten.

Re:

[Gr8Apes]

Amen to that. I just dumped Vista to dual boot Ubuntu and XP. I have a feeling that enough people are getting bitten by WGA to make even Microsoft notice. I also have a feeling that they're getting a little worried about the reception Vista has gotten.

I think they're more than a little worried. The fact that they're allowing "consumers" to buy XP licensed boxes can only mean that consumers were opting for non MS OS installed boxes instead of Vista. Rather than risk their revenue pipeline on forced Vista upgrades, they've opted to continue the flow via XP, hoping to stem the shift to something else.

Then you get to read the stories about DirectX10's massive failure on this round, and you'll see why they're worried. There's not a single reason to upgrade t

Re:

[Ilgaz]

Was WGA holding back a tide of potential upgrades, or did it just send people over to alternative browsers?

Not only alternative browsers, but also alternative systems. OS X and Ubuntu are gaining grounds. And Vista is a serious reason to consider those alternatives!

Funny is, some people and of course MS thinks people who refuses WGA must be pirates. No, some people aren't comfortable sending encyripted (God knows what included) data to a company they don't trust.

I know many people who basically stays away from WGA because of their serious concerns about their privacy. Same people also chooses Opera and flames Firefox for their future plans with "anti phishing with Google".

Trust is a thing to gain. E.g. Apple puts "Send system profile to Apple" to their "System Profil

Re:

[Ilgaz]

Windows has the "Customer Experience Improvement Program," which asks the user this question precisely once after first boot-up. WGA, Windows Update, etc., aren't used to gather this data as part of some type of hidden conspiracy. This has been the case for quite some time. You're an idiot, and a troll.

Windows update has to send the installed device profile from user in encyripted form (over HTTPS) to offer user, the WGA enabled user new drivers. There is no documentation of WGA data since they got DRM-like apology for it.

I think you may have mistaken me with ordinary, Mac only users who doesn't know how Windows and the spoiled dictator company MSFT works.

What about this method to stop idiotic trolls like me:

Use plain text XML for system profile, make it opt-in to send hardware profile without prompting

Re:

[6031769]

Internet Explorer as a whole now has a reputation for being buggy and insecure

I have to say that I am not aware of any time when it did not have (or even warrant) such a reputation.

Uh, here's your sign

[everphilski]

With apologies to Bill Engvall.
How hard is it to click the Bugzilla entry [mozilla.org]?