...interestingly, IE7 was listed as a "critical update" according to Windows Update when I just visited. I've been running the BETA version for a while now - so I'm getting the "stable" version.

I like the change - if nothing else...it looks refreshing :D

-Chris

That's just too funny. When is FF2 being released......

I'm trying it out now. Not bad.

---

Well, nah, not 'zippy-er' enough, unfortunately, AFAIK!


----

...Thomas Kristensen, Secunia's chief technology officer, told CSOnline.com that "it is hard to exploit the flaw because it requires the attacker to lure someone to a malicious site, and for the attacker to know what other secure site the visitor might simultaneously have open".

Last year Secunia found the same flaw in Internet Explorer 6, but it remains unpatched by Microsoft....

http://www.theage.com.au/news/biztec...851102498.html

---

Nonetheless, yes, they surely should have caught this because it is a bit embarassing, I think!

Of course, IE6 itself was nothing to be very pround of either!

As I alluded to above, if you've been using IE6, and last I heard about 85% of user were, I strongly recommend promptly upgrading to IE7. While it is not earth shattering in its advancements, it is a fine, current browser, with features one expects today like tabbed browsing, an ability to locate/display RSS feeds, and built-in websearch.

And regardless of the smart arse comments, it indisputedly has far better security compared to its predecessor, including a built-in phishing filter to help users detect and thus avoid malicious sites.

Does the not yet even released Firefox 2.0 even have an integrated RSS reader? Not that I know of!

Again, little doubt that IE7 offers a colossal improvement in the user interface.

Again, concerning security, little doubt that the code auditing with IE7 was far more rigorous than in the past.

IMHO, even those using alternative browsers such as Firefox will still want to trash IE6 by installing IE7, as long as you ever intend to use IE for anything at all. Would anyone dispute this?

Of course, IE7 only works with SP2, so if some some reason you haven't yet done so (and I can't imagine why), you'll need to install that too - also a really good thing IMHO! LOL!!

Have a great weekend

Mark

Based upon? Is your Doctorate in Information Technology? Are you a security expert? If not, how can you make such assertions with such certainty?? The Phishing filter is a good idea... as usual, Microsoft's execution is less than stellar. I agree with comments that it's going to give people a false sense of security... much like the TSA, no? ;)

As for FireFox, it doesn't need an integrated RSS reader and I wouldn't want for it to have one. The beauty of FF and what I wish MS would get 'round their heads is that you customize the browser to do and be what you want. Most people don't need, won't ever use, and couldn't care less about RSS. Yet MS includes that and tons of other features people don't want and need. This creates bloat and potential security flaws.

Firefox? You add what you want. I don't know about you but I'm all for choice and will do a-la-carte any time I can. Especially when it means that someone can knock together a better mousetrap and I'm not stuck with whatever was integrated into the browser. New RSS features come out? Someone'll do a new reader and I just plug it in. It's not perfect and isn't as well integrated into the browser as IE7.

For folks that DO want killer RSS built in along with the kitchen sink? There's Flock.... with an RSS implementation that blows IE's away. You don't have to use all the sharing stuff either.

Oh I think so. IE6 and IE7 render pages differently and some sites that work properly on IE6 will not run on IE7 and need coding changes. Here is a discussion that's pretty enlightening. Our intranet is one of 'em.

There's also stability considerations. Any time you introduce a change into a stable system you run the risk of conflicts that can destabilize and ruin the reliability of a system. How many times have we seen MS patches that broke previously working features/programs/systems??? So yes, I'd think MANY would dispute this.

Yes, unless you have a system running software that is broken by SP2, which is the unfortunate case for some. But, damn the facts, recommend away, please! :)

I am in no rush to download this new version. Afterall, I am happy with FireFox. I wait until early bugs (there will be some) are fixed.

I'd sure like an answer to this question as well! I hope the OP responds.

i'm sick of FF and Opera doesn't work right w/ my center scroll button on my laptop for some bizarre reason.

I'm sadly considering upgrading to this...

----

Thank you for being kind enough to express your opinion.

Please be aware that facts are just that, and that they are not the same as opinions - even if those opinions are yours.

Does one actually need a PhD in Information Technology to have an opinion these days - or to post their opinion on FT?

Surely anyone can feel free to run SP1, even though SP2 has been out for about 2 years now, and MS no longer even supports it!

And anyone can feel free to run IE6, as they now do, even though it is not a very good browser. Its up to them, of course, not to you, or to me! :)

Mark

Yet it appears that a perception problem exists between what is fact and what is opinion! There the problem lies! :) Statements such as "... it indisputedly has far better security compared to its predecessor, including a built-in phishing filter to help users detect and thus avoid malicious sites." appear to me to be a statement of fact. Yet perhaps I misread!

Even if so, on what basis do you make such absolute statements?? Such qualifications or equivalent experience are necessary to be able to evaluate said issues properly. Given that we've already seen a flaw found in IE7, how can you state that it's indisputably more secure? Have you examined the codebase? Were you involved in the testing procedures? The security audit?

Proper security evaluation and assessment is much more than an "opinion!" Of course, I don't purport to be an expert in such areas and never have. I don't recall you having done so as well, hence my question!

If I am to accept advice, I'd like to know on what basis the person putting forward such advice is offering it! Is it based upon professional and/or personal experience or merely gleaned from reading what others have written on blogs and the web?? This is an important distinction!

Ah, yes, of course they can feel free... and are also quite free to break their ability to use software and 'sites that worked previously! While they're free to do so, I'm sure you wouldn't advise this. ;)

Sadly, not all software and websites 'play nicely' with the latest and greatest from our friends in Redmond! :) Sometimes, they even break their own software with updates designed to fix something else! Microsoft makes great products, yet they are not perfect! And no update is right for everyone!

A hypothetical example: Annabelle has a Personal Information Manager she's used since 2001 that's no longer supported and uses a proprietary data format that cannot be imported into modern software! It works perfectly under XPSP1, yet SP2 introduces new libraries that break the software! Surely this is a valid reason not to shift to SP2! And, worse, what if she uses proprietary business software that's no longer supported and no more modern replacement exists!!

Such examples are, sadly, quite common! Thus, why some people still run DOS, Windows 3.11, NT 4.0, Windows 2000, etcetera! So, you see, you may be unable to imagine why one wouldn't install SP2 but very valid reasons exist! And clearly, for our poor Anna, installing it would not be a good thing! JMHO, of course. ;)

---

I'm not under arrest, am I? Is this just an interogation? Should I perhaps call my attorney? :D

Let me first say, to be clear, that I stand behind everything that I've posted here. What seems apparent to me is that some folks seem to think that they know everything, and that others know absolutely nothing! That, of course, is their 'opinion' and they are entitled to have it as I'd said before! ;)

And insofar as I know, hubris is seemingly not a TOS violation, so.... :D

FWIW, while I have software as well as some hardware experience dating back to the late 70's, I'll be the first to say that I do not know everything. It seems however, that you might be well be somewhat shocked at what I know based upon the rather scathing rants you've indulged in concerning my posts and I.

And also, yes, I'm well acquanted with your hypothetical example, and others in real life for that matter. I would surely have had her try to address their issue(s) over the last few years, wouldn't you have?

Or do you perhaps suggest that Anna, and others like her, use DOS? If so, I have a TRS-80 that I can perhaps get them a good deal on! LOL!!

I believe you are now, as you have in the past on many ocassions, showing less than good judgement, unfortunately. Yet that is not my problem, is it?

My personal experience, for what little it is worth, is that people have found IE7 to be a fine browser.

You, and other folks, should use whatever they like of course! :)

Have a great weekend all,

Mark

Firefox has supported RSS since its very first version as live bookmarks and in the sidebar, in fact Microsoft asked Mozilla if they could use the Firefox RSS icon to help create some kind of "standard". If course, if you want a real reader then Kanebear is correct, Flock or even Thunderbird will be a much better choice. The mere fact that it took Microsoft till the last months of 2006 to embrace RSS proves they are waaaay too late for the party.

And of course, unlike IE7 in Firefox you can add one of 100's of RSS enhancing plugins.

OY! The irony of this statement amazes even somone as jaded as me. :eek:



Back on topic: I have to go along with the others here, Firefox is a much better browser. The integration of IE into the OS is too much for my taste. When IE misbehaves (as it often does), it tends to take the OS down with it. Standalone apps (like Firefox and Opera) are just that: apps.

The sad fact remains that even though Firefox and Opera are superior it won't mean much to the 90%+ of Windows users that won't bother to look for something better. Mediocrity rules again.

I am running IE7 right now, not bad, it finally made some improvements.

Avant and even Slimbrowser have had these features before.

I like FireFox, but unfortunately Outlook Web Access doesn't have all it's features when you use it, so I stick to Avant

Although Avant stopped supporting any 3rd party toolbars.

Arrest? Of course not! I can call out the black helicopter fleet if it'd make you feel more comfortable though. :D

Obviously not, you're still with us!

Yet your earlier absolutisms and assertions seemingly belie this point? I would be absolutely shocked and awed to witness a display of such knowledge! Thus far we've only witnessed a disconcerting aptitude for cutting and pasting.

Indeed, I have done so! Now I would probably recommend VMware running the legacy OS/app. In yesteryear it was a boot manager or even a separate hard drive! Sadly, often no budget exists for properly addressing these issues for both home and business users be that budgetary constraint in time and/or money. That's just life in the real world.

Sadly, yes, I am not perfect and have not always shown the best judgment. Can anyone say they are and have? We are but human and all make mistakes.

I, of course, endeavor to improve and when shown the error of my ways certainly try not to repeat those mistakes again or return to prior poor behavior best left behind.

That, sadly, seems to be an area some still struggle with and indeed fail mightily. Yet, we are off topic! Enjoy using IE7, may the Phishing filter not fail you and have a great weekend!