Hints at Internet Explorer 10 found in final version of IE9

While Internet Explorer 9 was only released days ago, the internet is already speculating on the next version. Today, resources discovered in the final version of IE9 have shown Microsoft is already planning ahead, with references to Internet Explorer 10 hidden inside the browser.

Russian website TheVista.ru has uncovered a dialogue box that references IE10, and Windows8beta.com has managed to find an English language version of the message. It reads:

Internet Explorer 10 is now available

Get the most from the web. Upgrade from Internet Explorer 9 to Internet Explorer 10 for a fast, clean, and more trusted web browsing experience.

Microsoft appears to be using a placeholder image for the logo until the next version's logo has been decided. Other than that, the dialogue reveals very little else, but it does suggest that Microsoft is planning to give IE its own upgrade system separate from Windows Update. 

Neowin has previously reported on rumours that IE10 will come bundled with Windows 8, and it looks like Microsoft has already mapped out a way to make transitions from IE9 to IE10 as painless as possible, showing Microsoft's forward planning in the browser market. IE9 introduced considerable improvements in terms of standards support as well as speed, and it looks like Microsoft is trying not to rest on its laurels as with IE6. The browser market grows more and more competitive daily, and Microsoft will need to try and keep one step ahead of the competition if it hopes to stay in the running.

Image credit: Windows8beta

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Mozilla to revamp development; Firefox 5 in June

Next Story

AT&T to acquire T-Mobile USA for $39 billion [Update]

84 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Having a separate update mechanism for IE is a brilliant idea. In fact the feature to download the latest version of IE automatically should be enabled by default. This will ensure that less tech-savvy people have latest browser automatically. Doing this will save web developers from the excessive trouble of supporting older (less standards-compliant) browsers.

LUser said,
Having a separate update mechanism for IE is a brilliant idea. In fact the feature to download the latest version of IE automatically should be enabled by default. This will ensure that less tech-savvy people have latest browser automatically. Doing this will save web developers from the excessive trouble of supporting older (less standards-compliant) browsers.

+1, we always have the lastest version of Chrome whenever there's new version on server

.Neo said,
Why does Windows 7 still have dialogue boxes style like they're from Windows 95?

It's drawn by ResHacker, and it's just a framework. Does OS X not have a window compositing system?

GreyWolf said,
It's drawn by ResHacker, and it's just a framework. Does OS X not have a window compositing system?

I've seen that old button style actually being used in Windows 7 today. You won't see stuff like that on Mac OS X.

.Neo said,

I've seen that old button style actually being used in Windows 7 today.

Sometimes it's not a choice.
If you program something using .NET and WPF for the GUI, the MessageBox.Show() method (which does exactly what its name implies) gives you a message box with ugly Win95-style buttons

.Neo said,

I've seen that old button style actually being used in Windows 7 today. You won't see stuff like that on Mac OS X.

Maybe on a crappy program that doesn't use the common control library properly. I can assure you that happens on OS X too. Where do you get this information?

.Neo said,

I've seen that old button style actually being used in Windows 7 today. You won't see stuff like that on Mac OS X.

Sure you will - in iTunes, in fact (while iTunes has added a crapton of new features, the UI has, in fact, changed little since Leopard). Also, you can update iTunes separately (not just via Software Update) - that also has ben the case since Leopard.

I guess IE deserves its own Update System. And this will be additional feature I think, Windows Update should also show the update.

Mazhar said,
I guess IE deserves its own Update System. And this will be additional feature I think, Windows Update should also show the update.

Within-app updates isn't a new feature, folks. In fact, Mozilla has an update system within Firefox 4 (as does VMware within their software, for example). Microsoft itself has an identical feature within Security Essentials. The *new* part is that it's within IE.

PGHammer said,

Within-app updates isn't a new feature, folks. In fact, Mozilla has an update system within Firefox 4 (as does VMware within their software, for example). Microsoft itself has an identical feature within Security Essentials. The *new* part is that it's within IE.


security essentials still uses windows update it just does it from within SE.
Same will probably happen with IE. It will still use windows update in the background, but from within the application...
dont update security essentials for a while, new virus definitions etc. will be added to your WU list

Shadowzz said,

security essentials still uses windows update it just does it from within SE.
Same will probably happen with IE. It will still use windows update in the background, but from within the application...
dont update security essentials for a while, new virus definitions etc. will be added to your WU list

However, WU is a *backstop* - updating from within MSE is the default for non-important/non-critical updates for MSE (critical updates for MSE are delivered both ways at the same time).

Like some other MS software (TFS, SQL, VS) they can sometimes have links to check for updates which ultimately just brings you back to the standard windows update window. it's possible they could be doing a similar thing with that, where install would bring it up in Windows Update

Choto Cheeta said,
what happens when clicked "Install" in that dialog box ??

its not made to be used now, its just there, when IE 10 is out, the last IE 9 patch will enable this message. you can code it to work for yourself only (if u know how), but i suspect that the result wouldnt be anything interesting

The placeholder image in the image is not put there by Microsoft: it's the default image used by ResHacker for pictures in dialogs.

JamesNL said,
The placeholder image in the image is not put there by Microsoft: it's the default image used by ResHacker for pictures in dialogs.

I thought about ResHacker too... and how easy it would be to change that dialog to anything and take a screenshot.

I think this is just a notifier that pops up while you're browsing. I can't see any reason they would use a separate update system.

Edited by Eric, Mar 20 2011, 5:50pm :

GreyWolf said,

I thought about ResHacker too... and how easy it would be to change that dialog to anything and take a screenshot.

I think this is just a notifier that pops up while you're browsing. I can't see any reason they would use a separate update system.

Well I do..


Spyware/Malware is famous for turning off windows update. If they do it right, at least for awhile, the new update system would work even on those system and hopefully more users would be upgraded before the black hats can figure the new system out.

Then again, perhaps it would just be better to fix windows update in the first place. As in, dont allow it to be ****ing disable you jack asses!

war said,
Well I do..


Spyware/Malware is famous for turning off windows update. If they do it right, at least for awhile, the new update system would work even on those system and hopefully more users would be upgraded before the black hats can figure the new system out.

Then again, perhaps it would just be better to fix windows update in the first place. As in, dont allow it to be ****ing disable you jack asses!


thats what UAC is for, and the continous notification spam 'your windows is not secure' 'click here to turn on windows update'
have yet to see anyone on Win7 with UAC enabled, that WU got disabled, even if their systems where completely infested with malware.

Speak for yourself. You might not need this.....i do. I've had leaky builds withdrawal symptoms for months now!

Is there really that much of a need for Win8 or IE10?? I mean come on, we won't need this for at least another 4 years.

sava700 said,
Is there really that much of a need for Win8 or IE10?? I mean come on, we won't need this for at least another 4 years.

come on we went another bomb like vista really!

sava700 said,
Is there really that much of a need for Win8 or IE10?? I mean come on, we won't need this for at least another 4 years.

Then skip them and get the versions afterwards. I will happily get Windows 8 when it comes out.

Even more interesting is Dialog 17152, 17153 & 17154 in the ieframe.dll.ui
Hints at built-in software distribution channels. Windows App Store anyone?! =]

rsvr85 said,
Even more interesting is Dialog 17152, 17153 & 17154 in the ieframe.dll.ui
Hints at built-in software distribution channels. Windows App Store anyone?! =]

It's called Marketplace and been there for ages…

Do tell, i had a customer tell me to my face that he dislikes changes so much he still has a windows 95 machine at home because, and im quoting here...."Still works"

AnotherITguy said,
Do tell, i had a customer tell me to my face that he dislikes changes so much he still has a windows 95 machine at home because, and im quoting here...."Still works"

So what ? If it's working for him why would he change ?

DrunkenBeard said,

So what ? If it's working for him why would he change ?

Well, for one, it's like using a condom that expired in 1850...

they should eliminate the option of "dont show this again" and "cancel", only install and this should bug users until they update it... i really hate people who hate changes.. and why are web developer struggling to implement code for IE6? they should just leave those ignorant people wondering why they cant see 99.9% of the webpages they are trying to load... ><

allwynd said,
they should eliminate the option of "dont show this again" and "cancel", only install and this should bug users until they update it... i really hate people who hate changes.. and why are web developer struggling to implement code for IE6? they should just leave those ignorant people wondering why they cant see 99.9% of the webpages they are trying to load... ><

Or at least do what Firefox 4 and Chrome does and update in the background.

Baines said,

Or at least do what Firefox 4 and Chrome does and update in the background.

Agreed, that's probably how it will be done (and should be).

war said,
Agreed, that's probably how it will be done (and should be).

No, which is why i disable google services and tasks planned because i HATE this malware like behaviour.

I was surprised that my FX4 RC updated to RC2 behind my back while FX was not even running.
Another reason to ditch FX as my main browser. I dont want any software to install/update without my permission. Already hate that google chrome does everything 'automatic'.... can't even select which folder to install it to, as my general software i use is not dumped into program files. but crapware like chrome is \o/
give me a proper installer for chrome and stop the malware behaviour. FX4 should STOP trying to be Chrome.

Too bad it doesn't say something like:
"Internet Explorer 10 is now available
Get the most from the web. Upgrade from Internet Explorer 9 to Internet Explorer 10 to experience the newly implemented real add-on system, bringing IE into the current century!"
Then maybe I'd hit Install.. lol

IntelliMoo said,
Too bad it doesn't say something like:
"Internet Explorer 10 is now available
Get the most from the web. Upgrade from Internet Explorer 9 to Internet Explorer 10 to experience the newly implemented real add-on system, bringing IE into the current century!"
Then maybe I'd hit Install.. lol

IE9 has addons AFAIK.

IntelliMoo said,
Too bad it doesn't say something like:
"Internet Explorer 10 is now available
Get the most from the web. Upgrade from Internet Explorer 9 to Internet Explorer 10 to experience the newly implemented real add-on system, bringing IE into the current century!"
Then maybe I'd hit Install.. lol

It has a real addon system, unless you think C++ isn't real compared to JavaScript.

Anooxy said,

IE9 has addons AFAIK.


IE has had addons since IE5 ...
i dont get why people think FX/chrome are the only ones with addons... IE has had them for aslong as i can remember, which is back to IE4/5.5 days

Ugh, how many people are going to check 'Don't show this again', and then click 'Cancel'?

Probably a lot of people, partly due to sheer ignorance.

jamesyfx said,
Ugh, how many people are going to check 'Don't show this again', and then click 'Cancel'?(

Not half as many as those who will just click "Cancel" every day when that dialog appears.

jamesyfx said,
Ugh, how many people are going to check 'Don't show this again', and then click 'Cancel'?Probably a lot of people, partly due to sheer ignorance.

Or because a lot of the dialogue options appear when you don't need them. Far too many of them are distracting and rather useless...

The developers need to find a better way of informing the user of thing like that.

Tpiom said,

Or because a lot of the dialogue options appear when you don't need them. Far too many of them are distracting and rather useless...

The developers need to find a better way of informing the user of thing like that.

I think if they stick to using the new bar at the bottom that should make a world of difference.

Amazingly forward thinking. Who ever would have thought about sticking something in that notifies you when the next version is out. The lack of any relevant info in the notification means MS clearly has all features confirmed and implemented...

Orange Battery said,
Amazingly forward thinking. Who ever would have thought about sticking something in that notifies you when the next version is out. The lack of any relevant info in the notification means MS clearly has all features confirmed and implemented...

At least they are real goals and features and not just saying the next "magical" and "revolutionary" internet browser is out.!

Relativity_17 said,
You mean they're not going to suddenly start counting backwards after IE9?
Nope, but they might start using code names instead.

Tomo said,
Microsoft planning IE10, who would have thought......

I know!! I bet you they are even considering IE 11 sometime after that!

Neobond said,
Update option within IE, genius!

Indeed. Hopefully this will eliminate, or certainly reduce the chances of another IE6 clinging on for years and years. If developers know that their users will all be prompted to update and being given an easy one click method of doing it, they might assign more priority to testing their software on upcoming new versions.

TCLN Ryster said,

Indeed. Hopefully this will eliminate, or certainly reduce the chances of another IE6 clinging on for years and years. If developers know that their users will all be prompted to update and being given an easy one click method of doing it, they might assign more priority to testing their software on upcoming new versions.

Windows Update?

Majesticmerc said,

Yeah I don't see why we need another update mechanism, Windows Update works fine.

Windows Update does work fine but the problem is that few people actually check windows update. That is, the default setting is to just d/l critical/important updates and not any optional ones. So if a new version of IE is a optional install it'll never get pushed out to PC's threw WU.

On the other hand having it as a 2nd option inside IE itself doesn't hurt at all. Plus most things through WU need a restart at the end, I'd like it if IE10 doesn't need me to restart to OS when I install it and any future updates for it.

GP007 said,

Plus most things through WU need a restart at the end, I'd like it if IE10 doesn't need me to restart to OS when I install it and any future updates for it.

They need you to restart because they are replacing loaded DLLs… (or kernel level code) Having an "external" update mechanism - surely just a hidden link to windows update - doesn't change this!

GP007 said,

Plus most things through WU need a restart at the end, I'd like it if IE10 doesn't need me to restart to OS when I install it and any future updates for it.

Unless certain reasons arise, IE9 installs with closing Windows Explorer and a couple other applications and then restarts them and opens IE9. Whenever I choose to install with Bing and MSN defaults, it actually does require a restart. And I bet plenty other reasons too which would require a restart. But the majority of the time, if you allow it to close those applications and restart them after installation, it will not need a full system reboot.

MFH said,

They need you to restart because they are replacing loaded DLLs… (or kernel level code) Having an "external" update mechanism - surely just a hidden link to windows update - doesn't change this!

I know the reasons behind it, I'm saying i'd like it if it didn't need to restart anyways.

Sionic Ion said,

Unless certain reasons arise, IE9 installs with closing Windows Explorer and a couple other applications and then restarts them and opens IE9. Whenever I choose to install with Bing and MSN defaults, it actually does require a restart. And I bet plenty other reasons too which would require a restart. But the majority of the time, if you allow it to close those applications and restart them after installation, it will not need a full system reboot.

Ya, it's a step in the right direction but still not close. If they're serious of detaching IE from Windows fully none of that should need to happen. Look at the platform previews. You can install those and uninstall them without the need for any of that. Why can it be the same for the full version of IE? I think it's about time that becomes the case.

GP007 said,

Windows Update does work fine but the problem is that few people actually check windows update. That is, the default setting is to just d/l critical/important updates and not any optional ones. So if a new version of IE is a optional install it'll never get pushed out to PC's threw WU.

On the other hand having it as a 2nd option inside IE itself doesn't hurt at all. Plus most things through WU need a restart at the end, I'd like it if IE10 doesn't need me to restart to OS when I install it and any future updates for it.

The other thing, is that this functionality will be the real IE6 killer provided it doesn't require Genuine to update. check out IE6countdown.com, the numbers are huge in China because of bootlegged copies of Windows with WU disabled to avoid triggering Genuine.. IE10+ updates without using WU could solve that problem for good!

osm0sis said,

The other thing, is that this functionality will be the real IE6 killer provided it doesn't require Genuine to update. check out IE6countdown.com, the numbers are huge in China because of bootlegged copies of Windows with WU disabled to avoid triggering Genuine.. IE10+ updates without using WU could solve that problem for good!

IE9 and IE10 don't work on XP, and XP is the latest OS that can run IE6. IE9 and IE10 won't help in getting rid of IE6.

Neobond said,
Update option within IE, genius!

Which is why Firefox has done the same within Firefox 4 (first the betas, and now the RC).

It's not new technology - other applications have this - most notably, P2P clients and VMware; however, it's entirely welcome to see it adopted by the faster-moving world of Web browsers.

mrp04 said,

IE9 and IE10 don't work on XP, and XP is the latest OS that can run IE6. IE9 and IE10 won't help in getting rid of IE6.

The death bell for XP has been ringing for quite a while but it just started getting lauder now, first MS stops supporting it with newer version of IE and soon even game devs are. Look at BF3, NO XP support. That'll get people to upgrade.

GP007 said,

Ya, it's a step in the right direction but still not close. If they're serious of detaching IE from Windows fully none of that should need to happen. Look at the platform previews. You can install those and uninstall them without the need for any of that. Why can it be the same for the full version of IE? I think it's about time that becomes the case.

The platform preview doesn't need to restart because it's not updating system files, the "production" builds of IE do replace the system files and therefor need the restart.

GP007 said,

Ya, it's a step in the right direction but still not close. If they're serious of detaching IE from Windows fully none of that should need to happen. Look at the platform previews. You can install those and uninstall them without the need for any of that. Why can it be the same for the full version of IE? I think it's about time that becomes the case.

Nobody said they wanted to detach Internet Explorer from Windows. Why would they? One of the features of IE9 is ***Windows 7 Integration***, like why would they announce that and then in IE10 completely take that away. I love the integration, I love being able to drag websites to the taskbar and make them like webapps. It's much easier.

Restarting isn't a concern. Even Windows Live Essentials requires restarts in certain cases. Never bothered me, as long as I prepared for install and closed things down, it didn't need a complete system reboot. I think you're obsessing...

I noticed in Windows 8 feature wishlists, people obsess about it needing to be more modular. No it doesn't. Windows 8 isn't going to be modular because it is difficult for the consumer to understand what they need and if they did that, then it would be practically Chrome OS at it's core. What could they possibly earn from a modular OS...

Future releases of Internet Explorer will always be as integrated as they are now, simply because they are already very modular right now compared to IE6. Last time I checked, IE6 and Windows Explorer were almost the exact same thing, and it was a big hole for exploits because of that so they had to fix it quick. IE9 isn't Windows Explorer, it's not part of Windows, but it needs certain parts of Windows because hey it's Windows Internet Explorer 9, not Microsoft Internet Explorer 6 anymore. They changed that a long time ago.

If they made Internet Explorer just a browser they make, then anybody on any platform could use it and it would waste them money making it. Right now, you are required to be on a legit copy of Windows Vista or Windows 7 to use IE9. If they wanted to waste their money, they would've wasted money to try and bring it to Windows XP...

But they don't waste their money, you must run Windows Vista or Windows 7 to use Windows Internet Explorer 9 or Windows Live Essentials Wave 4. (Notice the *Windows* part in the two brand names)

Sionic Ion said,

Nobody said they wanted to detach Internet Explorer from Windows. Why would they? One of the features of IE9 is ***Windows 7 Integration***, like why would they announce that and then in IE10 completely take that away.

I'm pretty sure the previous posters weren't talking about integration like Jumplist support. More that a lot of the files IE uses are system files, thus requiring a restart for an IE upgrade, because those system files are in use by other programs. The "integration" they're referring to is that IE and its engine used to be a core Windows component (to the point where removing it completely would render the system basically unusable), which is indeed a bad thing and should be removed.

FISKER_Q said,

The platform preview doesn't need to restart because it's not updating system files, the "production" builds of IE do replace the system files and therefor need the restart.

i remember i had to restart installing one of the IE9 beta's. as it already completely replaced IE8. And IE is part of Explorer/intergrated to. But updating IE9 after didnt require restarts anymore. At least from IE9Beta to RC to RTM. But from IE7/8 to any IE9 requires a restart.

Shadowzz said,
i remember i had to restart installing one of the IE9 beta's. as it already completely replaced IE8. And IE is part of Explorer/intergrated to. But updating IE9 after didnt require restarts anymore. At least from IE9Beta to RC to RTM. But from IE7/8 to any IE9 requires a restart.

Yeah, that's what i was trying to cover with "production" builds.

What i meant was that the IE9 Platform Preview is a standalone build of IE9, it's standalone because it only needs to used in the application (i.e. the platform preview)

With the "production" builds (i.e. both Beta and release) they need to update system files to upgrade the Windows built-in rendering engine, this wasn't nessecary with the platform preview because it was standalone, but it is with the real releases.

TCLN Ryster said,

Indeed. Hopefully this will eliminate, or certainly reduce the chances of another IE6 clinging on for years and years.

Hardly. IE 9, and thus this mechanism, isn't available for XP - the bulk of the IE 6 users. They won't be affected by this step at all.

Northgrove said,

Hardly. IE 9, and thus this mechanism, isn't available for XP - the bulk of the IE 6 users. They won't be affected by this step at all.

Who mentioned Windows XP? Not me. I said another IE6, as in another IE6-like situation. I wasn't talking about IE6 specifically.

GP007 said,

I know the reasons behind it, I'm saying i'd like it if it didn't need to restart anyways.


If you DO know why it ahs to restart, you know why it will (always) have to restart As long as IE is a component based system and other programs on windows can use these components, upgrading IE will result in a need for rebooting…