Forum Moderators: open
Bug reports and security warnings have started pouring in just hours after Microsoft released a second public beta of its forthcoming Internet Explorer 7 browser.Security researcher Tom Ferris exposed a vulnerability that causes the application to crash or execute arbitrary code when a user visits a specially crafted website.
Get over it. It's beta. Stop trying to find fault with anything Microsoft.
I haven't had many problems. It did crash on me when I tried to launch Yahoo!Messenger, though.
otherwise, howz it? worth trying?
And this has to be front page news because why?
Seriously. Beta = bugs. IE6 still has critical bugs now and then, so why would you expect that IE7 *BETA* be perfect?
engine, what are beta versions for?
If you're testing it, like me, it's worth keeping track of the bugs and issues. After all, it's a major product.
The news really is about the huge number of folks testing the beta and the swamping. A public beta is for sure going to cause a lot more attention and reports.
I am certainly not bashing MS. Good for them, and let's have more public betas.
Bug Reports on IE7 Already
I'm with everybody else--this headline sounds like serious Anti-Microsoft propgranda.
The word Beta should be in the title, and the word "Already" should be taken out. A better headline would be:
Bug Reports on IE7's Public Beta
I have noticed that this forum seems to love to bash Microsoft while praising Google and FireFox. Personally, I like all three.
Seriously, though, it's kind of like Ford issuing a new 'beta' car that has issues with exploding gas tanks. You'd think that addressing an issue as important and well-documented as holes that allow arbitrary code execution would be a top priority for MS, and would have occupied a much more fundamental position in their code development.
Of course there are bugs ... but why do they look so familiar ...? Have they learned so little?
And you gotta love this dodge:
The browser is also unable to contact several online banking sites. Microsoft attributed this to a browser check which requires Internet Explorer 6 to be built into the online banking application. These issues are unrelated to the browser but require a fix by the bank.
And this remarkable remark, attributed to 'the vendor':
The vendor is also asking website operators to test their sites for the forthcoming browser that is scheduled for release by this summer.
So it's the banks' fault? What if they use Linux to host their apps? No IE7 access?
And the new browser may not render existing pages well?
Oh ... yeah. That's a forward-thinking product I can get behind.
Those of you who are saying bugs-shmugs should check out the blog. There are substantial issues all over the place.
P.S. The 'official' nomenclature for this release is NOT 'beta'. It's 'beta preview'. MS is releasing these versions BEFORE they issue a real 'beta'. Back where I come from, this phase of development is called 'alpha', but MS has never been known to use the normal way of referring to releases. (Remember IE1 or IE2? Of course you don't ... they started with IE3!) Looks better to joe shmoe public if the numbers/terms are more advanced, don'cha know ... real clever.
what I do not like with that software is the default "dithering" of fonts, that makes my sites look fuzzy and I do not like the colors for the default "visited links"...
so far YaB (yet another browser)... the security isses will be solved and new will be discovered, but there a non-webmasters at the keyboards coding the most essential tool for the next few years of the web - for that I do expect a bit more... but they just do not ask me :-)
What I see so far is a glorious mess. I say glorious because I hope it fails and I hope it fails hard. Then the average Joe will see just how bad IE is and they will make the switch to modern browsers instead of hanging on to old, buggy IE. Still not working with the DOM standards since 1998.
What I see so far is a glorious messLOL!
It looks like the blog is filled with around 60% technical/CSS issues, 30% interface/gloriousness issues and 10% 'luvin it' comments. Not too bad, really, for a 'beta 2 preview' release.
What I see so far is a glorious mess
LOL!
Get over yourselves. Do you have any idea what software life cycles are? Have you ever built anything for the web/user in your life? If so, then you know that bugs are a part of the game. If not, then you sound off with comments like those.
Look at Google's history. Look at Norton/Symantec's history. Look at Sun's history. Look at *gasp!* Mozilla's history.
I challenge you to put out a program that has the reach of IE and make it "beta-but-it's-really-v3-or-preview-or-whatever-they-call-it-this-week" and have it meet your level of expectation's comparisons. Amusing.
Look at Google's history. Look at Norton/Symantec's history. Look at Sun's history. Look at *gasp!* Mozilla's history.
Amen brother! :)
Anybody who thinks a preview beta will be bug free has probably never written a line of publicly released code in their life.
otherwise, howz it? worth trying?
Yes, I'd say so. They're doing a pretty good job, in my fairly non technical opinion. For some reason, I can't get it to save and automatically input my passwords the way firefox does - maybe it isn't supposed to do that, but I guess I thought it would.
Other than that, I just have a few small things that I wish it could do. I'm not sure how I like the RSS feed section, but I haven't tried it out enough to complain yet.
The IE7 reports are full of very basic issues that demonstrate MS's lack of understanding of what is important to their users and their inability to integrate lessons supposedly learned in the past with new products under development.
I fully appreciate the work that goes into a product of this scope, and in no way do I fault the grunts in the pressure cooker of the MS product development environment (having met and enjoyed lunch with many of them). The issues on display in any of the bug tracking forums are the result of a crappy information system that has time and time again led to releases of products that are fundamentally flawed. The left hand does not know what the right hand is doing. Simple as that.
Frankly, the first public release should have been a stand-alone version. Get the stinking thing working without forcing your 'beta testers' to risk their entire system.
There was no reason to release this version to the public. All of these issues should have been considered part of the alpha stage, and MS should not have chosen to expose their customers to this product until the security issues were under control. They should be doing a lot more of their own testing. After all, nobody would know if it stunk, inhouse.
I guess it's cheaper to spin the headlines than to task your own workforce.
So let's quit talking about unfair reviews because it is still in beta or being unfair because people love to bash $MS$ the fact is -it is IE and it is going to suck! Plain and simple! You can say what you want but with the amount of time I spend everyday making stuff work in IE when it already works in everything else I can't say I am holding out a lot of hope.
What is it they say when they start breaking standards?
"Inbrace and extend"
Get ready to update a lot of code when surfers come to your site with their brand new IE.
Nothing with Active X plugins is going to be something I ever browse with. It is a browser for internet newbs plain and simple. With a feature list that reads like 5 Mozilla release ago... color me totally unimpressed.
