Update: Internet Explorer 9 doesn't require Windows 7 SP1

Update: Microsoft reached out to us via email saying that IE9 will run on either Windows 7 RTM or Service Pack 1. It seems like IE9 could come out earlier than next year, and won't actually require SP1 to work;

I want to follow up to let you know that the TechNet FAQ has been updated to provide further clarification about requirements for Internet Explorer 9.  Internet Explorer 9 will work on Windows 7 RTW and  Windows 7 SP1.  When you install Internet Explorer 9 on a system that has Windows 7 RTM installed, additional operating system components are included as part of the installation of Internet Explorer 9.  Those “additional operating system components” will be part of Windows 7 SP1.  Either way, this will be a seamless process for the user.  Just wanted to make sure you had the latest.

You can view the original article below:

Last week Microsoft released a public beta of its next generation web browser, Internet Explorer 9. The browser was met with great enthusiasm and received positive early reviews for a beta product. Microsoft has also been using some new, obscure feedback gathering mechanisms -- such as Reddit -- to let ordinary users have a say in the new browser.

Ars Technica is reporting that the final edition of Internet Explorer 9 will require Windows 7 Service Pack 1 to be installed, according to the IE9 Beta FAQ;

When Microsoft releases Internet Explorer 9, will it require Windows 7 Service Pack 1?

Yes. Internet Explorer 9 will require Windows 7 Service Pack 1 (SP1). Therefore, organizations must plan, pilot, and deploy Internet Explorer 9 as part of or after a Windows 7 SP1 deployment.

The FAQ also says that businesses should not hold back from deploying for it, and reassures that IE9 will integrate with Windows 7 flawlessly:

Should enterprises wait for Internet Explorer 9 before deploying Windows 7?

No. Microsoft recommends that organizations do not disrupt ongoing deployment projects but continue deploying Windows 7 and Internet Explorer 8. Investments made in this effort will carry forward when they deploy Windows 7 SP1 and Internet Explorer 9 at a later date. With Internet Explorer 8 in place, they will be in a good position to roll-out Windows 7 SP1 and Internet Explorer 9 with minimal effort.

Microsoft continues to push that it's not essential for businesses to wait for SP1 and IE9, but to deploy now and roll out these updates later, when they are released. Microsoft explained on The Windows Blog why users shouldn't wait for SP1 or IE9 to upgrade.

This gives an estimate of when a final IE9 release is expected, since Windows 7 SP1 isn't due out until some time in the first half of 2011, but no specific date has been announced. A beta of Service Pack 1 is currently available.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

New Hotmail updates on the way; shipment tracking, Facebook chat and more

Next Story

Details emerge on earlier Facebook outage

70 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

i'm using the ie9 beta and it has proved to be a good experience for me. my websiets don't have anymore of those yellow triangle error warnings that you'd see on the status bar (java errors) things load correctly... except for one problem... big problem.

google images won't load. it shows the 1st page, but if i scroll down they remain gray boxes. anyone else gettin this?

neufuse said,
yet today they are saying it will require sp1 again?!

Seems there is an internal conflict within Microsoft .... ie ... One department isn't communicating with the other department.

This could explain a lot on why Microsoft software is updated often... One department finds a bug, the department ignores the bug, and another department only patches part of the bug.

Not requiring SP1 would make sense. Vista and Windows 7 share a similar code base. To require SP1, would actually require them to add updates to Vista, which means more work. Not to mention MS would like to forget about Vista....

AndyMutz said,
according to heise.de, they got the confirmation from MS, that the final IE9 version will _indeed_ need SP1 for WIN7... http://www.heise.de/newsticker...m-186461/msg-19187589/read/
guess, we'll have to wait and see who's right.

Considering the FAQ on the offical microsoft site has been updated and changed, I'm going to go with Neowin, and assume that heise got ahold of a confused contact before things had been clarified.

If you think about it, it makes sense.. Most people do not have the SP1 beta, I do because of my work environment. My home computer does not however. When i read this article earlier today I thought what in the world? No one in the real community is using SP1 beta yet they released it to everyone. However let me say this.. MY SP1 Beta machine handles IE 9 a lot better then the RTM machine. At least its not firefox thank god.

1) Have legal Windows 7 on PC
2) My version never had IE on it to begin with.
3) Why would I corrupt any OS by installing Internet Explorer on it?
4) I feel trusting IE to be secure is the same as trusting a pedophile to run a daycare. Never gonna happen

ozyborn said,
1) Have legal Windows 7 on PC
2) My version never had IE on it to begin with.
3) Why would I corrupt any OS by installing Internet Explorer on it?
4) I feel trusting IE to be secure is the same as trusting a pedophile to run a daycare. Never gonna happen

Then you are ignorant. a HUGE majority of problems are caused in PDF, Java and Flash holes. non of which are IE's fault.

ozyborn said,
1) Have legal Windows 7 on PC
2) My version never had IE on it to begin with.
3) Why would I corrupt any OS by installing Internet Explorer on it?
4) I feel trusting IE to be secure is the same as trusting a pedophile to run a daycare. Never gonna happen

Quite possibly the most ignorant post I've ever seen. From a security standpoint, I'd rather use IE, and I've been saying this for years as a Firefox user. Only till the beta of IE9 did that just recently change.

ozyborn said,
1) Have legal Windows 7 on PC
2) My version never had IE on it to begin with.
3) Why would I corrupt any OS by installing Internet Explorer on it?
4) I feel trusting IE to be secure is the same as trusting a pedophile to run a daycare. Never gonna happen

Number 3 and 4 made me lol. Though maybe not so true of IE9 nowadays, I won't touch IE due to those days of automatically installing malware/hijacking on unsuspecting users like 'MyWebSearch' and the about:blank junk (even non-admin users getting it!) - and if memory serves me correctly, Microsoft didn't do stuff all until a year later with XP SP2 and its added security prompts for active-x installations in IE6. I don't think any browser along with a bit of malware could cause as much havoc on your system as that did, but even worse was the lack of updates at the time and because of that, i shall not use IE. I may sound old fashioned, but when ~80% of reported 'broken' computers were due to the un-helpfulness of pre-sp2/pre-xp IE6s back in the day, then i loose trust in the product overall.

I'm sure there's quite a few people out there that think along the same lines, and therefore, IE hopefully will never get the monopoly that it had in 2003/4, which in turn will mean we shall never see a repeat of its events. I also hope that no other browser gets a monopoly neither for that fact. I will await a good flaming for this post .

ozyborn said,
1) Have legal Windows 7 on PC
2) My version never had IE on it to begin with.
3) Why would I corrupt any OS by installing Internet Explorer on it?
4) I feel trusting IE to be secure is the same as trusting a pedophile to run a daycare. Never gonna happen

IE is still there even if it doesn't ship with it

ShMaunder said,

about:blank .

hmm about:blank is just that, blank screen when you load your borwser

Guess what my Home Page is...

A black screen is the best homepage screen ever.. I bet 10 2 1 that my IE loads faster then your do to the fact it load nothing.

MadDoggyca said,

hmm about:blank is just that, blank screen when you load your borwser

Guess what my Home Page is...

A black screen is the best homepage screen ever.. I bet 10 2 1 that my IE loads faster then your do to the fact it load nothing.

It is a blank screen until a hijacker (used to be CoolWebSearch) is downloaded. Though sometimes it were porn. Used to have to run a utility called AboutBuster in conjunction with other utilities to clean it up.

Angel Blue01 said,
Wait, Windows 7 SP1? I thought IE9 was for Vista as well.

It is - Microsoft only said it won't work with XP

All this mess for a damn browser? Two things: 1) Soon or later SP1 will be cracked 2) While that happens there's Chrome, Opera, Firefox, Etc, Etc, Etc.... Actually AFAIK most of people use all of these instead IE

Migra said,
All this mess for a damn browser? Two things: 1) Soon or later SP1 will be cracked 2) While that happens there's Chrome, Opera, Firefox, Etc, Etc, Etc.... Actually AFAIK most of people use all of these instead IE

Why don't u use those "etc etc" or whatever you wish and stop trolling? SP1 is all about making your system more secure and stable, so I don't see a problem here.

Migra said,
there's Chrome, Opera, Firefox, Etc, Etc, Etc.... Actually AFAIK most of people use all of these instead IE

Happen to have any facts to support you obviously false claim?

Panda X said,
I don't see why someone would not use SP1 once it's out. So no biggie in my opinion.

ill wait a good month after it is released before i use it. i need my custom themes and i want to see if it has any negative side effects on windows. im not much of a guniee pig.

SP1 will be out in 1H 2011 so by summer at the latest. SP1 will only add some very minor features, mainly to do with remote desktop and server related functions, they rest will be bug fixes and security fixes. Win7 went RTM around 14 months ago, it will be 17+ months until SP1 is out, way too long in my oppinion.

smooth3006 said,
lets hope the service pack doesn't ruin an already great running system. when is sp1 suppose to come out?

only problem i have with Windows 7 that Vista did not mess up on is the thumbnail cache always deleting itself which is very annoying when you got some folders with lots of pictures in them as it takes quite a bit of time to rebuild.

there's a work around (but it's not a proper fix) but i damn sure hope MS fixes this fairly big issue with Win 7.

other than that Windows 7 has been great for me.

i am hoping SP1 fixes this but i have my doubts.

p.s. i ain't the only one with this issue as checking around online there is more people with that issue. and it's not a program like CCleaner deleting it either. it's definitely windows itself that's doing it. as i made sure that CCleaner does not touch the thumbnail cache etc.

Edited by ThaCrip, Sep 24 2010, 3:15am :

ThaCrip said,

only problem i have with Windows 7 that Vista did not mess up on is the thumbnail cache always deleting itself which is very annoying when you got some folders with lots of pictures in them as it takes quite a bit of time to rebuild.

there's a work around (but it's not a proper fix) but i damn sure hope MS fixes this fairly big issue with Win 7.

other than that Windows 7 has been great for me.

i am hoping SP1 fixes this but i have my doubts.

p.s. i ain't the only one with this issue as checking around online there is more people with that issue. and it's not a program like CCleaner deleting it either. it's definitely windows itself that's doing it. as i made sure that CCleaner does not touch the thumbnail cache etc.

Yes this is very very annoying. No telling when it will happen either. This has been going on since the early builds over a year ago.
SP1 Beta does NOT fix it sadly.

I'm excited about IE9. They should just include IE9 with SP1. Btw, any information why SP1 is taking so long? Wishful thinking...but the secrecy behind SP1 makes we wonder if there aren't some unannounced features.

JohnCz said,
I'm excited about IE9. They should just include IE9 with SP1. Btw, any information why SP1 is taking so long? Wishful thinking...but the secrecy behind SP1 makes we wonder if there aren't some unannounced features.

There aren't, Microsoft's trying to make a point by repetitively proving to businesses that Windows 7 is great without SP1.

Service packs were never designed to bring new features, with Windows XP it was the first time this happened. Windows XP first shipped without wireless so they had to add it in SP1. As with the Firewall in SP2... there's nothing like this needed for Windows 7.

JohnCz said,
I'm excited about IE9. They should just include IE9 with SP1. Btw, any information why SP1 is taking so long? Wishful thinking...but the secrecy behind SP1 makes we wonder if there aren't some unannounced features.

I believe it is being developed in conjunction with Server 2k8 R2 SP1, maybe sharing some code. While there won't be a whole lot in it by way of new features. RemoteFX will change things for Enterprises. Remote Desktop will full UI and media fidelity, i.e. Aero and media playback without compromise on top of rock solid Windows 7 will change the desktop PC game. Ahh, Intel Atoms everywhere. Death to thin clients, long live thin fully manged client PCs.

JohnCz said,
I'm excited about IE9. They should just include IE9 with SP1. Btw, any information why SP1 is taking so long? Wishful thinking...but the secrecy behind SP1 makes we wonder if there aren't some unannounced features.

RemoteFX, Dynamic Memory in Hyper-V. Those are the 2 biggest features in SP1. Though they aren't client side they are for R2. You need SP1 to manage dynamic memory in SP1, and you need SP1 to turn on RemoteFX in RDS. There is a beta out that has been out since early June.

MorganX said,

I believe it is being developed in conjunction with Server 2k8 R2 SP1, maybe sharing some code. While there won't be a whole lot in it by way of new features. RemoteFX will change things for Enterprises. Remote Desktop will full UI and media fidelity, i.e. Aero and media playback without compromise on top of rock solid Windows 7 will change the desktop PC game. Ahh, Intel Atoms everywhere. Death to thin clients, long live thin fully manged client PCs.

It is indeed being developed alongside Server 2K8 R2 SP1, and will share quite a bit of code (as 7 and 2K8 R2 themselves share quite a bit of code, especially the x64 iteration of 7, as there is no x32 version of Server 2k8 R2). RemoteFX and Dynamic Memory are useful in MAP-V (in fact, in virtualization in general) which is why both are included in the beta of SP1 for Windows 7 as well.

NXTwoThou said,

I know I'd prefer it this way.

Yeah, same here. But would Microsoft get in trouble for pushing their browser then? I knot it's ridiculous, but I could definitely see this happening...

M_Lyons10 said,

Yeah, same here. But would Microsoft get in trouble for pushing their browser then? I knot it's ridiculous, but I could definitely see this happening...

Microsoft did indeed try that with a non-9x-based OS Service Pack - the original Service Pack 6 for NT 4 Workstation *required* IE 4 (which was included with it). Never mind that Microsoft was not only making the SPs freely downloadable, but giving the CDs away (I still have two CDs of IE 4/NT4SP5 that I got from Microsoft at tradeshows in 1999), Microsoft *still* got roundly castigated for daring to require the browser be installed as part of the SP. (Amusingly, it turned out that the castigators got high-volume egg on their faces; because of a bug unique to IIS for NT4WS that was actually made *worse* by IE 3.0x, which was the front end for IIS, the browser requirement made sense.)

Not that this will affect any home users. It was already known that IE9 would need Windows 7, now just add a major update on top of that (remembering that it is free)

This affects businesses more, (but in the sort of way as not at all) as they will have to roll out the SP1 update before deploying IE9. This means that the IE9 roll out will have to wait for IT to test SP1 to ensure that it does not break anything. Minding, of course, that IE9 will also have to be tested for compatibility before deployment as well. Most companies, though, wait for SP1 anyways before upgrading to the latest and greatest OS that MS puts out, so it likely is a non issue for many organisations

Sraf said,
Not that this will affect any home users. It was already known that IE9 would need Windows 7, now just add a major update on top of that (remembering that it is free)

This affects businesses more, (but in the sort of way as not at all) as they will have to roll out the SP1 update before deploying IE9. This means that the IE9 roll out will have to wait for IT to test SP1 to ensure that it does not break anything. Minding, of course, that IE9 will also have to be tested for compatibility before deployment as well. Most companies, though, wait for SP1 anyways before upgrading to the latest and greatest OS that MS puts out, so it likely is a non issue for many organisations

Actually, IE 9's beta will install on Windows *Vista* just fine (it does require SP1 of *that* OS); however, any hardware that can run Vista (and that includes any P4 back to the Original Northwood, such as my backup ATX mobo, which I'm running currently until I replace my croaked Celly DC) should run Windows 7 instead. Only XP and earlier, regardless of Service Packs, is left completely high and dry.

FalsePositive said,
The SP will render the current cracks useless so yes SP1 will need to be cracked.

Oh boohoo.
Buy the damn thing already.

FalsePositive said,
The SP will render the current cracks useless so yes SP1 will need to be cracked.

Not necessarily true, and certainly not our problem.

FalsePositive said,
The SP will render the current cracks useless so yes SP1 will need to be cracked.

I wouldn't be so sure about this. The most common crack I'm aware of survived the latest WAP update anyway.

FalsePositive said,
The SP will render the current cracks useless so yes SP1 will need to be cracked.

All you got to do is remove the WAT and it disables the registration of W7.

FalsePositive said,
The SP will render the current cracks useless so yes SP1 will need to be cracked.

Actually it hasn't broken any of my cracks. RemoveWAT still works, IRT still works, and all my BIOS SLIC mods still work.

Well there goes WGA/WAT. . .seems that if you are running a illegal Win 7 you probably won't be able to employ IE9. . .then maybe again. . .

Pam14160 said,
Well there goes WGA/WAT. . .seems that if you are running a illegal Win 7 you probably won't be able to employ IE9. . .then maybe again. . .
And if you have an illegal copy of Windows, you shouldn't get any support from MS.

Pam14160 said,
Well there goes WGA/WAT. . .seems that if you are running a illegal Win 7 you probably won't be able to employ IE9. . .then maybe again. . .

I doubt it will take long for the makers of those tools to update them. People with pirated installations will probably just wait for the tools to be updated before deployment. Crackers always find a way. However having a legit system myself, it is a lot better being able to deploy stuff immediately

Pam14160 said,
Well there goes WGA/WAT. . .seems that if you are running a illegal Win 7 you probably won't be able to employ IE9. . .then maybe again. . .

SP2, WMP11, IE 7 & 8 all presented exactly the same issue upon release for users of unlicensed copies of XP, none posed a problem for long though. Will be exactly the same here IMO.

johnnyq3 said,
And if you have an illegal copy of Windows, you shouldn't get any support from MS.

You can easily just go on Freenode ##windows and get support ;P