IEBlog

Please comment on the Internet explorer 8 disabling some wireless devices (and in my case disabling internet connectivity for a new lab top).  My broadband service is Cricket Broadband 2008 Diffon Corporation using a Cal-Comp Electronics and Communications Company Limited a600.  Installed your update, and am not able to navigate to any webpage other than my home page.

Thank you

Frederick

@Frederick: The #1 cause of loss of connectivity after IE updates is a misconfigured local firewall.

http://www.enhanceie.com/ie/troubleshoot.asp#firewall

How about the

"Windows Internet Explorer 8 MUI Pack for Windows XP"

that is available by Web ?

BR,

127

I'm also waiting for IE 8 MUI Pack for Win XP and the cumulative Security Pack for Win Xp. Any forecast about the release date?

If this gets even some IE6 users off the web, I will throw a party.

Now that we can start to roll out IE8, does anyone have details of what URL(s) the Smartscreen filter needs access to so that I can ensure they are not blocked?  MS doesn't seem to make it easy to find.

How about some screen shots of what the end users will see once the update is approved. Would prefer to let them know what to do before approving.

I wish my notebook haven't phissing againt and againt. Thank You

Regard

Ridwan Refiadi

@frandom: I think SmartScreen's URL Reputation Server hostnames are in the Corporate Deployment guide, but https://*.urs.microsoft.com/* is the primary exemption you'll need to make.

@frandom: To elaborate further, the specific hosts currently in use are:

https://urs.microsoft.com

https://telemetry.urs.microsoft.com

... but still no SVG support. Why?

Will you please add some kind of standalone IE6, or IE6 mode (kinda like you have an IE7 mode in IE8) so all these lame excuses for not upgrading can go away?

Please, stop hating your developers. Thanks.

@Tom: As a general rule, monthly updates to IE do not introduce new platform features. The explanation of why not has been discussed to death on this blog in the past.

@Kevin: We love developers. On Windows 7, the "XP Virtual Mode" feature allows users to use IE6 for compatibility. For Vista and XP users, we make available free VirtualPCs containing IE6; see http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink?LinkID=70868

When sites host feeds through services like feedburner, a favicon is often not displayed using IE8. I hope the next version of IE will solve this problem as the items on the favourites bar should display a favicon for clearity.

@EricLaw

Hi Eric,

Thank you for your reply.

>>I have no problem with that page in either XP or Windows 7

Here is out test result :

HP + Windows XP (Simplify Chinese) + IE 7 ==> Works

DELL + Vista Sp1 (Simplify Chinese) + IE 7(Norton) ==> Dead

DELL + Vista SP2 (Simplify Chinese) + IE 8(Norton) ==> Dead

DELL + Vista SP2 (Simplify Chinese) + IE 8(Norton)  -extoff ==> Dead

DELL + Windows 2003 Server (English, Trial version) + IE 8 ==> Dead

at least 2G memory, closed Skpy, MSN etc programs.

We have no Windows 7.

Dead means: open the URL:

http://www.jazan.org/vb/showthread.php?t=146570

or

http://www.aldair.net/forum/showthread.php?t=81162

IE will only show title of the page, no response, seems keep loading, in fact if you click on the page area, it will become whiter, show "no response" in IE title. then wait 5-10 minutes, keep the same status, finally we have to kill IE process.

We meet at least 30 URLs that will cause IE dead.

We also user WebBrowser control to visit these URLs , dead too.

If we same the source code of the page,to local, then open the local file in IE on Vista/Windows 2008, dead too!

then if we remove some Arabic text in the local page, open it in IE(there are a lot of Arabic text in these pages), IE works.

We also tried set the options of IE to default, no effect.

How to fix this, dear Microsoft IE team ??????????????

William

According to IEAK 8 documentation "Automatic Configuration" with .ins files are still supported.

But the KB http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/971740/

states that .ins files are no longer supported.

Our testing with IE8 indicates that .ins files does not work. We are now forced to use Group Policy.

Any comments from developers are appriciated.

@noaidi: At present, the KB article is correct (IE8 will not use a .INS file).

If that changes, the KB article will be updated.

A VM image is not a developer friendly solution by any means, especially an image that routinely expires.

I appreciate many of the improvements in IE8 (including specifically the developer tools which even work in IE7 mode). The biggest problem is your continued support of IE6 (I do understand why), but more your lack of a real upgrade path for IT departments and others who really cannot upgrade their systems for various reasons. These installs are sitting on top of internet innovation like a stubborn 20 ton gorilla - and I'm not convinced that's not strategic, on your part.

The most ideal solution, would be either a standalone version of IE6 (please don't tell me it isn't possible), or an IE6 mode for IE8/IE9 (also, don't tell me that isn't possible).

VM images are an especially disrespectful insult. They are not a solution.

Kevin, while most of what you say isn't totally nuts, your conclusion begs for someone to show you what a "disrespectful insult" actually looks like.

Did you by chance study drama in school?

It's amazing to see the power IE6 seems to have over some developers. While nobody really cared about breaking support in old browsers, back in the days when Frames / Javascript / Flash came to be, why do we care about IE6?

Break it, print a notice, let that be the end of it.

According to browsers statistics there are more people using IE6 than IE8 as of July 2009. I hope this development will increase the number of users of IE8.

Unfortunately, getting rid of IE 6 would require making ALL ActiveX controls that don't check IE version > 6 obsolete and not allowed to run on any version of Windows. In short, making it so that only controls that require IE 7 or better can run.

But:

- this would have to be done outside of IE, such as in OneCare (or other antivirus/antispyware etc.): deactivate ActiveX controls that don't require IE 7+. Problem: they are not virus (merely a gaping hole in system security) but this would be a break in policy at MS: Backward Compatibility must be kept at all cost;

- put a killbit in all IE versions (6,7,8) so that they all refuse to run IE 6- compatible ActiveX controls. Problem: users may merely stop updating IE 6 and keep their outdated, but necessary controls running (whoever had the GENIUS idea to make VPN terminal emulators run as ActiveX control that overwrites the HOSTS file needs to be shot dead repeatedly, dismembered, put back together backwards with bolts in its neck, thunderstruck and then killed again);

I agree that the XP mode in Seven isn't a solution to this problem:

- no access to IE 8 debugging tools (and IE 6 has its own share of idiosyncrasies that a debugger would sure help solve) so developers don't enjoy it much (I do know I cringe when I have to start a VM just for IE 6)

- it's not good when one has to work all the time inside a VM: if you spend more than 5% of your time inside it, you might as well keep XP and not install Seven.

Marshall, I didn't, but maybe I should have. :-)

It feels like logical argument is a lot like wrapping your lips around Microsoft's exhaust pipes and blowing really fracking hard, and frankly, I need to vent. Can anyone tell me what rationale exists for why there is no IE6 mode in IE8, or a standalone version of IE6?

Best I can tell, it's either a strategic (which would be an insult, and merit a dramatic response), or an emotional decision at Microsoft (again, merits a dramatic response). ;-P

Kevin, you certainly have a creative imagination.  Put it to work on these puzzlers:

Why doesn't Firefox have a FF1.0 compatibility mode? Why doesn't Opera have an Opera 4 compatibility mode? Why don't Safari, Chrome, and Opera have an IE6 compatibility mode, considering that IE6 has ~500% more marketshare than all combined?

Now, if you still feel that Microsoft is somehow insulting you, I recommend therapy.

Mitch, your remarks made even less sense than usual. You clearly demonstrate that you don't understand how ActiveX works, nor would your "solution" change anything.

Hey IE team, the newly posted IE App Compat images posted today are broken, requiring activation.

Here's a thread with others experiencing this:

http://forums.virtualbox.org/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=21712

The new IE App Compat images:

http://www.microsoft.com/Downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=21eabb90-958f-4b64-b5f1-73d0a413c8ef&displaylang=en

Is this being fixed or was it intentional?

Thanks!

@Adrian: Thanks for the report, we're looking into this. It's possible that one of the download servers has the wrong bits.

Those browsers don't have quite the same compatibility problems version over version, and they have much higher upgrade rates, when they release new software. That's partly due to the strength of their technology (Opera only recently on updates), but also due to the kind of deal a user enters into when they user one of those browsers. Updates are encouraged by providers (many automatic in Firefox - the main reason I switch clients and family to Firefox), and welcomed by users. The same cannot be said for Microsoft and its users of IE6.

Since MS has made long term agreements - which I am not asking be abandoned - some other reasonable solution to the problem is in order - maybe a standalone version of IE6, or an IE6 mode in IE8. Again, why aren't those available (still no answer)?

It costs a lot of time and money to work around problems with IE6 before having to jump through hoops too. Developers aren't stupid, and surely don't appreciate having to deal with outdated often incompatible technology platforms, which seem to be incompatible in many cased, not because there is some technical reason, but because "IE6 has ~500% marketshare" over the competition, and I guess can sit on top of everyone because they can.

It's arrogant to believe that because Microsoft is in the position to push the work and expense off on it's developers, that it should.

We will not agree here, and I've vented enough, so I'll leave you with this - Microsoft has not been innovating in IE - IE7 and IE8 were light clean up jobs, with some welcome, but minor improvements around the edges (like hashChange event). As a technology company, does Microsoft really want to be the lag behind company? The one that always has to play catch up with everyone else, in terms of features and performance? Does MS have no interest in being seen as an innovative company in its shipping products like IE any more? As a vendor that is friendly to its own developers? Come on. Microsoft could do better.

<<Again, why aren't those available>>

I think most web developers would rather see Microsoft invest in CSS3 and HTML5 in IE9, rather than spend time on enhanced life support for IE6.

<<"IE7 and IE8 were light clean up jobs">>

Do you consider EVERY browser a "light clean up job" vs. the original Mosaic for Windows?

I mean, hey, it supported HTML-- Text! Links! Images! Everything else is just clean up, right?

It's hard to tell if you're simply ignorant of what they put in IE7 and 8, or merely combative?

IE 7 WAS a light cleaning job - its engine fixed a lot of bugs that had been festering in IE 6 for years, its interface got frozen, it added a few CSS selectors support and... native tabs (IE6 needed an add-on for those). Yay.

IE6 was an unfinished browser (CSS positioning, selectors and pseudo-elements in it really looked like a half done job) that was delivered as-is, IE 7 actually finished it years later. Dixit Bill Gates: "we screwed up." So yes, IE 7 was a cleaning job. While it was a large clean-up of the IE6 Trident engine, it also took place over 5 years without adding anything really significant - that's rather light WRT the time required. Thus, light cleanup job.

But I don't agree that IE 8 is one: it is rather modern. It's just slow (if you have a sub-GHz CPU, avoid it), doesn't support SVG, DOM events nor XHTML, but it manages the delicate juggling act of keeping quite good backward compatibility while getting a bit better at standards compliance (CSS 2.1 support is rather good, and its HTML support no more looks like a Frankenstein job) and adding good developer tools.

Recent updates also improved speed (the Spybot case) and stability. Using IE now is no longer a cause for unbearable pain, only of slight unease at how slow it is on older machines.

hello, i found there is one typo in http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-au/library/cc289762(VS.85).aspx

In the example code, {linkUrl} is wrong, {link} should be used

The newest IE6 VHD still seems broken -- it prompts for activation and then says the product key is unauthorized or invalid.  Phone activation techs doesn't know what to do since it's a download.

I believe this is related to running the VHD on VirtualBox (fill in your favoriate app here - I've seen complaints about VirtualBox, Parallels, and VMWare) instead of VPC 2007 (as intended) but some cases, one MUST use the VHD on another Virtualization app:

-running both VirtualBox (or whatever) and VPC at once on the same host causes Windows on the host machine to blue-screen

-Virtual PC 2007 crashes when booting many Linux and FreeBSD distributions (I need to test both *nix and Windows compatibility)

-Windows (guest OS) requires re-activation when switching between VirtualBox and VPC 2007 because Product Activation detects a different NIC, Video, IDE Controller, etc.; basically everything except the disk is different.

I should point out that there is no need to convert the VHD to another format as VirtualBox understands the virtual disk as-is.  The problem is WPA breaks.

Is WPA really neccecary since the install "self-destructs" every few months?

If the IE folks could try to get the VHDs reissued without activation that would be great, as I can't even see the sides of this form in the safe mode restricted version of IE6.  There are a lot of folks trying to make websites work on your browsers who cannot run virtualpc.  These images really help, but whatever changed between the last release and today definitely made using them for folks in our situation almost impossible.  Even just reissuing the previous images with a die date extended to Jan 2010 might work and should be less effort.  We can run windows update ourselves :)

Thanks for all of the improvements to IE8!

@Ryan, are you having problems running the images inside VirtualPC itself, or only in a 3rd party program like "VirtualBox"?