Microsoft plans to discontinue the use of the SSLv2 (Secure Socket Layer) protocol in the coming Internet Explorer browser refresh. In its place, he company will fit the stronger TLSv1 (Transport Layer Security) protocol into IE 7 as part of an overall plan to improve the security and user experience for HTTPS connections.
that it would take a small miracle to get me back on IE from FF…that very could be coming soon though. FF has fallen short of its security promises; if MS can nail plugin support (and security issues) I’m back on board.
Boggle.
goggle.
fallen short of its security promises
What, you mean fixing problems as soon as they appear, instead of leaving the browser to stagnate for five years?
Ohhh, you must mean those other security promises, whereby any OSS app will be 100% secure and invunrulble – even from social engineering attacks!
I don’t know, but they could promise to stop the annoying memory leaks.. then I would go back. Using Konqueror in the meantime.
“Using Konqueror in the meantime.”
As long as it _isn’t_ IE then that’s good. I don’t get this whole Opera vs Firefox crap. As long as Joe-Public isn’t using IE I don’t care.
Mozilla are doing the same thing. http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/gerv/archives/2005/09/ssl2_must_die….
one of the compelling reasons to use FF is the wealth of extentions. If MS could make IE secure and create a good means for extentions, along with people making some, then it might start to look like a better reason to switch back (despite being very platform dependent.).
This is good, as Mozilla narrowed down the list of SSL2 sites down to a few thousand and have been evangelizing to them to get the sites upgraded as Mozilla want to drop SSL2 support completley too. With Microsoft doing the same for the next version of IE, this will give Mozilla more leverage in convincing those sites to upgrade.
I’d rather see CSS2 and complete standards to be obeyed for once, as soon as I see an Acid2 test get passed by Internet Explorer, then it will be better.
Security is a long term goal, so many things to fix, so little time.
I’d rather see CSS2 and complete standards to be obeyed for once, as soon as I see an Acid2 test get passed by Internet Explorer, then it will be better.
Not even Firefox has proper CSS support. Check my blog ( http://cogscanthink.blogsome.com ) on FireFox, IE, Opera, Safari and Konqueror. Check the big header, and tell me if it has a shadow underneath. If it doesn’t, it means you’re either using Firefox, IE or Opera.
Only the khtml/Webcore browsers do it properly, so the fact that IE has fcuked up CSS support isn’t really an IE-only problem.
Check my blog ( http://cogscanthink.blogsome.com ) on FireFox, IE, Opera, Safari and Konqueror. Check the big header, and tell me if it has a shadow underneath. If it doesn’t, it means you’re either using Firefox, IE or Opera.
Just checked it with Konqueror 3.4.2 and saw no shadow under the big header.
so the fact that IE has fcuked up CSS support isn’t really an IE-only problem.
There is a difference between “fcuked up” and incomplete. IEs CSS support is “fcuked up”, the others are incomplete but quite close compared to IE.
Just checked it with Konqueror 3.4.2 and saw no shadow under the big header.
I’m using Konqueror 3.5b2, so that might explain that difference.
It doesn’t matter whether it is incomplete or fcuked up. The result for the end user is the same. Fcuked up.
It doesn’t matter whether it is incomplete or fcuked up. The result for the end user is the same. Fcuked up.
It matters to the end user when one is “fcuked up” many times more than the others. For example, what would you prefer, me to hit you over the head 10 times, or once?
The end user doesn’t care as long as he doesn’t know. Of course it’s a different issue for developers, but no browser does atm. support CSS2 properly.
Personally I prefer to stick with HTML4 Strict with a few elements from HTML4 Transitional. Most issues arises from people trying to do ‘nice tricks’ (fancy stuff) – and ‘nice tricks’ should generally be avoided.
“The end user doesn’t care as long as he doesn’t know. Of course it’s a different issue for developers,[…]”
Browsers are used by both end users and developers.
“[…] but no browser does atm. support CSS2 properly.”
Now your circular logic is back at square one, i.e. where the two types of non-proper CSS2 support were distinguished.
Just checked it with Konqueror 3.4.2 and saw no shadow under the big header.
Actually it has (3.4.1 here). It is around the big text.
“Actually it has (3.4.1 here). It is around the big text.”
Yep. 3.4.2 here. At first I thought I can’t see it either, but then I loaded the same page with Firefox, and indeed it didn’t render the text the way Konqueror did.
My understanding has been that the big problem with MSIE is ActiveX. You have to make your PC completely vulnerable, or you can’t use it.
I’m not sure that msft is closing the right security holes.
Am I wrong?
“My understanding has been that the big problem with MSIE is ActiveX. You have to make your PC completely vulnerable, or you can’t use it.”
Agreed. Unless ActiveX is gone, IE7 is a no-go for me. I don’t need a web browser to run arbitrary native code. The same thing applies to managed code for that matter– keep your Java and .NET away from my web browser, please.
You’re right on about acive x being the big issue–especially concerning malware. People who disable active x or use FF avoid most of the nasies on the web. Of course if you disable active x you can’t use Windows Update or Office Update. IE 6 made it relatively easy for most people to avoid unwanted active x, but the whole thing should be tossed out. Of course many businesses utilize it on the intranet so it won’t be gotten rid of anytime soon.
I also just checked it with Konqeror 3.4.2. The letters have shadows, not the graphic.
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A//cogscanthink.blogsom…
perhaps before showing your example you should have valid markup to start with, especially as you are claiming to be using xhtml, which if served with the correct mime type would result in your page not displaying.
likewise your CSS isn’t valid either.
http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?uri=http%3A//cogsc…
Good for you, I’d rather see a secure browser with fixed rendering bugs. Which is exactly what IE7 is.
I think you just want to complain about something else that Microsoft is doing them instead of saying “Ok, they are actually doing something good here”.
Hell, the developers, from the begining, have said quite explicitly that they are not support new standards in IE7, but rather fixing what they currently do support and beefing up security.
Now, what’s in store for 7.1? who knows.
I read the blogs MS had on IE7. If they can deliver on the root problems behind IE’s CSS model (badly broken inheritance, lack of support for most of CSS2 selector syntax and pseudoselectors), correctly support BUTTON, image-based OBJECT and nested OBJECT…
… and get it to just work without requiring the rest of us to recode already compliant pages, I for one will be very happy, because I code university websites for a living. Three years ago when we redesigned our site we couldn’t use margin:auto because IE5 didn’t understand it properly. The only reason I can use CSS-based dropdown menus is because a tiny JScript .hta behavior hack rewrites IE6 to recognize :hover can apply to all child elements of BODY, not just A.
However, most of us know that in order to make IE7 fully CSS2 compliant, many existing pages coded for IE5/6 against lax standards will break in IE7 unless IE7 can somehow detect them and revert or compensate. Tables which were horizontally centered with text-align:center will no longer center because text-align:center doesn’t apply to block-level elements.
And Microsoft’s track history on making improvements which break compatibility with hacks/undocumented behavior is pretty consistent, because admitting they made a mistake is not in their vocabulary.
That said, IE6 does some things more correctly than Firefox. It correctly permits CSS to style form controls more completely than Firefox. When a DTD is in effect, it enforces measurement units in CSS and JavaScript, as should other browsers. Its XSL parser is slightly shrewder than Firefox’s and IMO its XSL/XML errors are more informative for debugging. It doesn’t refuse to parse an XSL file if it isn’t served with XML MIMEtype (not a default on our Apache servers).
These are good things, but not decision makers.
Nice post! Anonymous.
This good news to hear, about. I look forward to the day I only have to use one web-browser. Firefox has it’s advantages, but I still have to browse some sites through IE.
Looking forward to the new version!
Or a better version of Firefox on windows <_<;
Yeah, the “View This Page in IE” plug-in is mu most used plug-in.
It would be easier if webdevelopers were better at sticking to well-supported standards.
Most websites not working in FF is written specifically for IE, and relies heavily on broken implementations.
Or – like a couple of danish government ‘controlled’ TV-stations they are using Windows-only technology combined with heavy use of non-standard elements.
But most sites I visit works equally well in FF as in IE. The difference mostly being having tabs in FF and not in IE.
My Java in FF won’t even work correctly. It says the applet started, but it doesn’t display anything.
Moves, too, are a big problem.
Well that still dont stop the tons of fixes IE has had in the last weeks, but Firefox?, no they get fixed fast. I dont see OSnews making a fuss about IE lately since there been a load of security issues with it.
Just because Firefox has a few security issues OSNews likes to make light of it, with a barrage of articals comparing it to IE. Now we have this artical claim “more Security Goodies” when IE has yet more holes plugged. Double stardards of reporting on this website, i’ve always known it to be pro Microsoft.
Double stardards of reporting on this website, i’ve always known it to be pro Microsoft.
Yeah, I’m very pro-Microsoft. I never use any MS products other than MS Office:Mac, but yeah, I just kiss MS’ ass!
Get a life, sonny.
No offense, but with your last “Oh Bill Gates almighty, I bow to you” article you posted, not to mention dumb comments/replies, you don’t really expect us to believe this, do you? Some might need to get a life I guess, but some need to learn how to report
There is one basic rule in journalism which you obviously still don’t understand.
Your answer dont mean shit, claiming you use other OS’s or products is not a valid answer. Reporting FUD even though you know it is what your good at and your responce just shows.
Well, Thom. You did goof a bit in regard to the ODF discussion. But then you didn’t goof that much.
Yeah, I’m very pro-Microsoft. I never use any MS products other than MS Office:Mac, but yeah, I just kiss MS’ ass!
Get a life, sonny.
Wow Thom. Your Dutch arrogance is rearing its ugly head again…misschien moet je het wat rustiger aanpakken…
Thom, those kinds of comments go with the job of being an editor, whether they’re true or not won’t stop them from being said.
Trying to have a news site that sits on the fence between OSS, Microsoft and Apple means that people from every camp will listen and then criticize you don’t seem perfectly impartial or if you don’t seem to favor them. It’s like trying to pet two cats at once, miss a stroke on one by accident and it’ll glare at you out of jealousy for the other.
Better start working on your pro-Linux and pro-Mac articles before it gets too late 😉 .
Glad I don’t have your job.
“Get a life, sonny.”
Thom,
How dare you talk to someone like this!
This person had a valid comment regarding MS coverage on OSnews.com and you take a childish poke at him in rebuttal?
Very unprofessional.
Just goes to show you how biased YOU are.
On this website, OSNews, if you even mention OSS and it’s not in a good light (just say OSS and not praise OSS) you get a -5 mod.
Oh yeah, that’s a huge Microsoft bias there.
+1 for you
That’s exactly how this place is.
Brian, you are a tit
Gone are the days when this site was visited by people that actualy have a bit of brain and use it. Instead, here come idiots posting mostly under anonymous “name” bashing the news poster for something they didn’t even wrote! WTF people, get a freakin’ grip. These news are just linked here,if you don’t like it go to another news site, is that simple. Go there, where the article actually originates and freak the author monkey if you don’t like the punctuation marks from that story.
What a bunch of loosers!
I don’t know if this is correct or not, but it seems that after Eugenia left people spent more time giving the editors (almost always Thom) a hard time. I think this may simple be resentment because he isn’t their former favorite editor.
You’re right though, why is it people have to keep criticising the editors when all they did was link to someone else’s article.
It’s called viewing comments posted only by registered members. That, and threading really makes a difference in the readability of OSNews.
http://snapshot.opera.com/windows/w90p1.html
to much bickering here
what many of you are failing to take into consideration is that this is a win win situtation regardless of what camp you fall in (ie or firefox or whatever)
If IE7 is in fact as good as they say it is that will just force firefox and others to come back with something better……… then MS comes back with a better IE and the cycle continues
competition is good, in the end All major players will have better products and the end consumer will be the winner
so…… if you’re in the firefox/opera/konqueror/safari camp, no need to worry.
Yes, all browsers aren’t completely compliant, but the majority of CSS code will usually look the same across all the browsers, APART from IE, which still needs hacks and other code to make it look right.
Microsoft have admitted to a 10year plan with security, that’s slack.
It’s not like there is 1 department looking after IE, there will be one department looking after the security fixes, the other should be handling the CSS and other standards and fixing it.
The fact they are still refusing to make it compliant when it go’s final is rubbish, at least Safari, Firefox and Opera are all on their way and very close to passing the Acid2 test, same with Konquerer etc.
What a waste of bandwidth this thread was……. Next.
Most of this website is a waste of bandwidth.