Microsoft: No IE10 for Vista users

ie10

Microsoft announced on Wednesday that the company's latest browser, Internet Explorer 10, will not be available for Vista users. Just a day after announcing the Platform Preview for IE10, Vista users will not be able to install the Platform Preview, nor the final release of Internet Explorer 10.

Both the release notes and installation process mention that the IE10 Platform Preview 1 requires Windows 7 32 bit or 64bit for installation. According to Computerworld, Microsoft also made it clear that when Internet Explorer 10 launches, only Windows 7 users will be able to install the latest version of the browser.

The Internet Explorer Platform Preview requires Windows 7 (x86 or x64) Operating System. Platform Preview 4 and later require updates to be installed on Windows 7 systems, after which your computer will require a restart.

Microsoft ended support for Windows XP with Internet Explorer 9, which just launched last month on March 14. Following this trend, the next version of Internet Explorer will not support Windows Vista.

A Microsoft spokesperson notes the reasoning behind dropping Vista support in Internet Explorer 10 is to focus on innovation on a modern operating system and modern hardware. As market share for both Windows XP and Vista quickly fall, more and more products are likely to be limited to Windows 7.

Thanks to Mephistopheles for pointing this out on the forums!

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Valve reveals specific Steam features for Portal 2 on PS3

Next Story

Improved Windows Phone developer tools coming with Mango

113 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

IE 10 will be windows 8 and windows 7 compatible, it's only natural to use windows 7 , vista was a wake up call for OEMs and developers to adopt a new platform, i never saw it as a long lasting version.

RvXtm said,
IE 10 will be windows 8 and windows 7 compatible, it's only natural to use windows 7 , vista was a wake up call for OEMs and developers to adopt a new platform, i never saw it as a long lasting version.
+1

This is all about marketing, nothing to do with if an OS supports the software. Microsoft wants to sell more 7; that's it and that's all.

However, shooting themselves in the foot is all they are doing. User will just give more market share to FF and Chrome. I look at this as a failure for Microsoft, not users.

Everybody knows, when you push users away, they flock elsewhere. And with more choice in OS flavors these days, it all spells B-A-D for Microsoft. End of the Microsoft era? Time will tell.

I'm not surprised. Windows XP obviously won't be supported and Windows Vista is slightly above 10% in worldwide market share. That number will continue to drop as Windows 7's market share increases which is currently 24.17%. That's about 3% away from being half of Windows XP's current worldwide market share.

Vista wasn't that bad as some make it out to be. Windows 7 definitely is better, but Vista wasn't bad.

This move by Microsoft is stupid, because the 2 operating systems are so much alike. All this does is cause people to use another browser instead of IE. Then Microsoft wonders why they don't have as many people using their browser.

IE9 is as buggy as can be for me. I hate it, as half the web pages don't even render all the stuff on them. Yet Firefox or Chrome display those same webpages just fine. The ONLY reason I even use IE9 at all now is to get the Bing toolbar reward points. Soon as I get my accumilation of Bing search points for the day I quickly exit out of IE9 and run Firefox.

jd100 said,
Vista wasn't that bad as some make it out to be. Windows 7 definitely is better, but Vista wasn't bad.

You can't say that on Neowin. Most people around here still live in 2007 when it comes to Vista.

jd100 said,
Vista wasn't that bad as some make it out to be. Windows 7 definitely is better, but Vista wasn't bad.

Say what?.

Vista have a serious performance issue related with memory, harddisk and video card management. Vista SP1 solve some problems but generated a new ones, in fact, some benchmark show than vista sp1 is a bit slower than vista.
And the worst was Vista SP2 with some real and nasty performance issues (some users if not all users).

Windows 7 solved all this problem and even more, it feel a lot snappier than Vista but the UI is almost the same.

Magallanes said,

Say what?.

Vista have a serious performance issue related with memory, harddisk and video card management. Vista SP1 solve some problems but generated a new ones, in fact, some benchmark show than vista sp1 is a bit slower than vista.
And the worst was Vista SP2 with some real and nasty performance issues (some users if not all users).

Windows 7 solved all this problem and even more, it feel a lot snappier than Vista but the UI is almost the same.

LOL!

Well you just destroyed whatever credibility you might have had. Vista SP2 being the WORST compared to Vista RTM and Vista SP1? Failure on so many levels.

Tsk. This is clearly not because the Vista platform isn't capable. It's because Vista was a train wreck and Microsoft wants to put it behind them. Pretty harsh for consumers who fell into the marketing trap of wanting "clarity in their world" and now have to pay the price for it.

I suspect Microsoft may get their hands forced on this and may have to either demonstrate why IE10 can't work on Vista.. or pony up.

Chicane-UK said,
Tsk. This is clearly not because the Vista platform isn't capable. It's because Vista was a train wreck and Microsoft wants to put it behind them. Pretty harsh for consumers who fell into the marketing trap of wanting "clarity in their world" and now have to pay the price for it.

I suspect Microsoft may get their hands forced on this and may have to either demonstrate why IE10 can't work on Vista.. or pony up.

Exactly. Vista wasn't great in all honesty, it was a step forward but it wasn't ready! I don't really care as I use Chrome

Guys, to end up this thing....
XP users -> it's time to move on. XP was a very nice OS, but its end is coming.... Move on!!
Vista users -> your time will come. This OS is a mess, a mistake from Microsoft, like Windows Me.
I'm very glad with this news...
Since IE9, I have abandoned ShitFox and Chrome. I just use Chrome at work because here they still use IE6 (oh my god!!)

BetoSobreira said,
Guys, to end up this thing....
XP users -> it's time to move on. XP was a very nice OS, but its end is coming.... Move on!!
Vista users -> your time will come. This OS is a mess, a mistake from Microsoft, like Windows Me.
I'm very glad with this news...
Since IE9, I have abandoned ShitFox and Chrome. I just use Chrome at work because here they still use IE6 (oh my god!!)

if it was like me

windows 7 wouldn't be NT based anymore

ROFL. They are FORCING to you to upgrate JUST for the browser!. LOL.
Another reason to stick with the free alternatives, that are better than this ****, free and multi platform

ThePitt said,
ROFL. They are FORCING to you to upgrate JUST for the browser!. LOL.
Another reason to stick with the free alternatives, that are better than this ****, free and multi platform

They aren't forcing anyone to do anything. If someone is still using Vista in 2012 or 2013 I very much doubt they care about what version of IE they have.

This will happen because IE 10 will be based on DirectX 12, which will only be available on Windows 7 and 8. It's progress, man, you cannot stop it...

vvtunes said,
This will happen because IE 10 will be based on DirectX 12, which will only be available on Windows 7 and 8. It's progress, man, you cannot stop it...

Nice and clever answer!

let's see if MS is brave enough to pull this on office products too.Like Office 2010 to stop supporting XP.I didn't think so...hypocrites

muratoner said,
let's see if MS is brave enough to pull this on office products too.Like Office 2010 to stop supporting XP.I didn't think so...hypocrites

You did not compare Office and IE, I mean seriously? One creates documents and is it a pay product which actually has support contracts with businesses.

The other is a web browser which is free and generates no content of its own.

muratoner said,
let's see if MS is brave enough to pull this on office products too.Like Office 2010 to stop supporting XP.I didn't think so...hypocrites

just wait , Office 2014 well

hardware accelerated word processor

Ci7 said,

just wait , Office 2014 well

hardware accelerated word processor

You're pretty stupid in my opinion.

Office 2010 already supports hardware acceleration.

Business' use XP a lot because they feel it is more stable. Most of those business' don't have those systems hooked up to the internet anyways. So I suppose irrelevant to a large portion.

I don`t think the leap between IE9 and IE10 is going to be anything like the stride made when going from 8 to 9. The engine will be tweaked for better performance and there may be some other goodies added, but i doubt another rewrite is going to happen.
I maybe wrong bit i doubt many Vista users (probably not that many when it ships) will really care or know much about it anyway!

Riggers said,
I don`t think the leap between IE9 and IE10 is going to be anything like the stride made when going from 8 to 9. The engine will be tweaked for better performance and there may be some other goodies added, but i doubt another rewrite is going to happen.
I maybe wrong bit i doubt many Vista users (probably not that many when it ships) will really care or know much about it anyway!

I hoppe they work more on the web standards compliance, cause although IE 9 is better in this, it just ain't enough yet.

On the other hand, IE is continuing to lose market share and in the future web developers will stop caring about IE's lower web standards compliance and IE users will eventually become 2nd rate web citizens...

JohnnyMartins said,

I hoppe they work more on the web standards compliance, cause although IE 9 is better in this, it just ain't enough yet.

On the other hand, IE is continuing to lose market share and in the future web developers will stop caring about IE's lower web standards compliance and IE users will eventually become 2nd rate web citizens...


Please realize there's a difference between standards compliance and feature bragging. IE9 is actually doing better on some HTML5 features than the competition. Microsoft's goal is to support HTML5 features that are ready for the web and not just half baked features that don't even conform to the standard. This is why tests like html5test.com are misleading, because they only test the existence of features rather than if they work according to the standard specifications.

Shame, because Vista SP2 + Platform Update + Supplement to the Platform Update was a very rock solid OS, almost aligned with Windows 7

Vista IS a modern operating system though. =/ And as far as I know it supports all of the graphics libraries as Windows 7 does. Maybe there will be WDDM 2.0 in Windows 8? I can see then why they wouldn't want to back port it to Vista. Since it will go out of mainstream support next year.

Great for Microsoft, **** for developers. Now we have to support IE9 exclusively as long as Vista is widely used, same as IE8 on XP. We've only just stopped having to care about 6.

hotdog963al said,
Great for Microsoft, **** for developers. Now we have to support IE9 exclusively as long as Vista is widely used, same as IE8 on XP. We've only just stopped having to care about 6.

don't worry about vista

it has only 10% of market

a year untail it vaporize

Microsoft needs to make money. They make money by releasing new OSes and encouraging everyone to upgrade. Nothing to see here, move along.

ScottDaMan said,
Microsoft needs to make money. They make money by releasing new OSes and encouraging everyone to upgrade. Nothing to see here, move along.

Its not encourige its a force to people who thing IE is a good browser, and there is no other options. Shame you MS...
(Thats why i thinking to use Linux more)

Jack@l said,

Its not encourige its a force to people who thing IE is a good browser, and there is no other options. Shame you MS...
(Thats why i thinking to use Linux more)

Those who think IE is the only option most likely don't know there are new versions made. IE9 is a good browser, it's your problem that you're ignorant.

It's beyond my wisdom to fathom this stupid move by Microsoft. Hey look.. I can't install IE 10 on my computer, so I am going to buy Windows 7.. LOL.. If the person is knowledgeable enough to understand the difference between browsers then he/she would have either installed FF, Chrome, or even Opera as an alternative to IE. No normal user will miss anything special with IE10 which they can not achieve same or far superior functionality from alternate browser.

No IE10 for Vista? Thats just retarded. Its just a way for them to push people off of Vista, but I guess its OK.. I mean Vista was crap. Though technically I wouldn't see it wouldn't be possible to run IE10 on it maybe if you had IE10 files and registry it could work..

Techno_Funky said,
... we have Chrome, Opera and Firefox.

Which are all slower and clunkier than IE9. Just wait until IE10 comes out...

PlogCF said,

Which are all slower and clunkier than IE9. Just wait until IE10 comes out...

Which are all faster and much much more secure and web compliant than IE9

alexalex said,

Which are all faster and much much more secure and web compliant than IE9

Agree 110%...
In fact, it's a step foward into pushing more users out of IE into better browsers like FF, Chrome...

I don't know why a lot of people are complaing about IE10 not supporting vista. Last time I checked it wasn't a popular operating system. Also IE9 worked on only 2 OSs (Windows 7 and vista) and may be by the time IE10 releases Windows 8 will also be ready. Hence then also IE will work on two most recent OSs (Windows 8 and Windows 7).

Yes, and the upgrade to windows 7 was what? $29. If you couldn't afford this then you might as well go on Welfare. Wait, Welfare bums could afford the upgrade when it was $29usd. Students now can get the upgrade to Win 7 for $29 (for a limited time).

Honestly, Do we have to keep limiting technology in the pc/browser sector because XP users want to sit 10 years in the past?

Microsoft allowed vista users and XP users to upgrade to windows 7 easily, If you're an XP user and want to stay in the cobwebs, just use an older browser for an older system.

RIP Windows XP , about time.

I stopped trying to keep up with Computer technology for the most part. back in the older days, 80's-90's, we would hear the latest software on the horizon. Techonolgies didn't come so fast and so furious. I even remember the anti-trust suit against MS bcz they incorporated IE into the OS. Now with the web as it is, one CANNOT stick around with a certain new technology because a year or so later, it will be antiquated anyway. Can't keep up with the tech on one hand and I can see companies need revenues or profits so as one tech is rolled out, they are working on the up coming already. like windows 7. when I got it, my wife and I were floored they were working on 8 already. how do you tech people keep up???

Pay up or lose out. That's the Microsoft way, didn't you guys know that already? All those brand spanking new Windows 7 machines wont ever see IE11/12+. Don't bother even trying to explain it, Microsoft can drop support for your OS on a whim.

Flawed said,
Pay up or lose out. That's the Microsoft way, didn't you guys know that already? All those brand spanking new Windows 7 machines wont ever see IE11/12+. Don't bother even trying to explain it, Microsoft can drop support for your OS on a whim.

You've said that... a few times. How is this different from any other company that sells operating systems? Besides, Microsoft announces well in advance when support will end for their products. And in three years when IE12 comes out the Windows 7 machines that've been out for over a year now won't be anywhere near brand-spanking-new.

Flawed said,
Pay up or lose out. That's the Microsoft way, didn't you guys know that already? All those brand spanking new Windows 7 machines wont ever see IE11/12+. Don't bother even trying to explain it, Microsoft can drop support for your OS on a whim.

All Companies do this. Apple loves to do it worse. Apple doesn't tell you well in advance because they don't want to tell you what they are working on or about to release....too secretive.

Support for Vista ends April 2012, 2017 for business editions. IE10 isn't going to be released until Windows 8. This also keeps into they current thing of "no more than 2 OS's back", so XP is two behind 7 and IE9 isn't supported.

That's it.

First XP with IE9 and then vista with IE10? IE's most direct competitors work on xp and vista just fine. Though vista is not as important as XP tbh.

Julius Caro said,
First XP with IE9 and then vista with IE10? IE's most direct competitors work on xp and vista just fine. Though vista is not as important as XP tbh.

Try running the html5 fish demoes in competitors browsers on XP and tell me how they work 'just fine'.

The browsers may work fine for the current web. MS are working with design professionals to build the next web, and it's beautiful.

dotf said,
The browsers may work fine for the current web. MS are working with design professionals to build the next web, and it's beautiful.

lol

Julius Caro said,
First XP with IE9 and then vista with IE10? IE's most direct competitors work on xp and vista just fine. Though vista is not as important as XP tbh.

The more you support an aging OS, the longer it will take for the people to stop using it. If you can't afford to adopt the newest OS then don't wine about it.

dotf said,

The browsers may work fine for the current web. MS are working with design professionals to build the next web, and it's beautiful.

LOL, MS walking miles behind the concurrent browsers design and new features in html design.

Because Vista was nothing but a huge blemish for them, they're going to pull the plug early and let it die. Or it's just a fluke.

CASE CLOSED

Educated Idiot said,
Because Vista was nothing but a huge blemish for them, they're going to pull the plug early and let it die. Or it's just a fluke.

CASE CLOSED


This. And to reply to an earlier post, I doubt IE11 will only support Windows 8. I expect they'll keep Windows 7 support for a fair while longer.

Wise decision. Moving forward, delivering better products.
By the time IE10 is out (let's say Spring/Summer 2012) Windows Vista will be a nearly 5 years product old. Also IE9 is brand new and is not going to limit Windows Vista at all.

manosdoc said,
Wise decision. Moving forward, delivering better products.
By the time IE10 is out (let's say Spring/Summer 2012) Windows Vista will be a nearly 5 years product old. Also IE9 is brand new and is not going to limit Windows Vista at all.

better products?
Vista doesn't exactly stand in the way...

It's just an artificial limitation anyways...

GS:mac

Glassed Silver said,

better products?
Vista doesn't exactly stand in the way...

It's just an artificial limitation anyways...

GS:mac

With the new DXGI and WARP-kind implementation coming in Windows 8, even Windows 7 might miss some features.
The DW/D2D plus WARP will become part of a greater low-level pipeline which is going to produce unified GX code.
Heck even Windows 7 might need additional support to be on par to what IE10 is going to deliver.

manosdoc said,

By the time IE10 is out (let's say Spring/Summer 2012)

Don't even think about it. It's a long waaaay to go, bro

Jose_49 said,

Don't even think about it. It's a long waaaay to go, bro

Not really, the IE team is stepping up, I expect they'll be on a yearly release cycle from now on

Thats not fair since mainstream support for vista hasn't ended yet and XP got IE8 when mainstream support ended

I guess this means IE11 will only support Windows 8 and higher

LimeMaster92 said,
Thats not fair since mainstream support for vista hasn't ended yet and XP got IE8 when mainstream support ended

I guess this means IE11 will only support Windows 8 and higher


IE10 won't be released until Windows 8 ships. By then mainstream support for Vista would have ended.

LimeMaster92 said,
Thats not fair since mainstream support for vista hasn't ended yet and XP got IE8 when mainstream support ended

I guess this means IE11 will only support Windows 8 and higher

Doubt it. Im not saying this because i brought win7 because i havent just saying that its very popular and will be around for ages yet awsell

LimeMaster92 said,
Thats not fair since mainstream support for vista hasn't ended yet and XP got IE8 when mainstream support ended

I guess this means IE11 will only support Windows 8 and higher

I think Windows 7 has a longer life cycle, if not, there I don't see support for Windows 7 being cut until IE12/lucky 13.

LimeMaster92 said,
Thats not fair since mainstream support for vista hasn't ended yet and XP got IE8 when mainstream support ended

I guess this means IE11 will only support Windows 8 and higher

just as razor said.

Windows 7 mainsteam support is till 2015

so it will recive plenty of upgrades

LimeMaster92 said,
Thats not fair since mainstream support for vista hasn't ended yet and XP got IE8 when mainstream support ended

I guess this means IE11 will only support Windows 8 and higher

just as razor said.

Windows 7 mainsteam support is till 2015

so it will recive plenty of upgrades

Vista mainstream support ends in 2012. Basically they don't want to extend support for it and of course they want to sell more copies of Windows 7. It's not a technical limitation but a marketing one.

TRC said,
Vista mainstream support ends in 2012. Basically they don't want to extend support for it and of course they want to sell more copies of Windows 7. It's not a technical limitation but a marketing one.

I agree that there are good marketing reasons. There are also good technical reasons. Either argument alone may not sway it but my guess is with both together, it makes sense. Microsoft has every right to choose to support whatever OS it likes!

That said, restricting upgrades like this will ultimately hurt Web developers, as it will make older versions of the browser live on longer. Maybe Microsoft are shooting the Web in the foot again after all.

ozzy76 said,
Crazy to imagine, but, XP might outlast Vista.

Kinda doubt it. I expect XPs market share to fall even more since you cannot install IE9 on it.

techbeck said,

Kinda doubt it. I expect XPs market share to fall even more since you cannot install IE9 on it.

Like those who still use XP care about having the latest version of *anything*...

MafiotuL said,

Like those who still use XP care about having the latest version of *anything*...


XP users have the latest Firefox 4, Chrome, and Opera. Including hardware acceleration. Unless your "anything" is just referring to Microsoft software?

Flawed said,

... Including hardware acceleration...

Really? Since when Windows XP is hardware accelerated?
The fact is that hw acceleration on those browsers for Windows XP is a complete lie.
Firefox and Chrome come just with partial hw acceleration on Windows 7. No way they have this feature on Windows XP.

Flawed said,

XP users have the latest Firefox 4, Chrome, and Opera. Including hardware acceleration. Unless your "anything" is just referring to Microsoft software?

Partial harware acceleration.

DaveGreen said,

Really? Since when Windows XP is hardware accelerated?
The fact is that hw acceleration on those browsers for Windows XP is a complete lie.
Firefox and Chrome come just with partial hw acceleration on Windows 7. No way they have this feature on Windows XP.

Can you play with games in WinXP that uses hardware acceleration?

BoyBoppins said,
I cant understand this

To force people to upgrade/buy a new PC. Though, why anyone would prefer IE to Firefox or Chrome is beyond me.

BoyBoppins said,
I cant understand this

Me neither. Vista, for me, was the most hyped MS OS, which at least have several updates for it...

Flawed said,

To force people to upgrade/buy a new PC. Though, why anyone would prefer IE to Firefox or Chrome is beyond me.

Yeah, agreed on both statements. But need to know that IE9 is doing his job...

Flawed said,

To force people to upgrade/buy a new PC. Though, why anyone would prefer IE to Firefox or Chrome is beyond me.

Why the **** would anyone need to buy a new computer? Just upgrade. There is also alternatives so you don't _need_ to upgrade.

Flawed said,

To force people to upgrade/buy a new PC. Though, why anyone would prefer IE to Firefox or Chrome is beyond me.

I prefer IE over anything... why? it is a part of the OS, so it works better and it supports "Full" hardware acceloration. The other browsers don't. As for the stupid addons that FF has.....I want to feel that I am using the internet and not the browser. The internet is becoming an application these days, so why have all of those clunky addons.

jesseinsf said,

As for the stupid addons that FF has.....I want to feel that I am using the internet and not the browser. The internet is becoming an application these days, so why have all of those clunky addons.

lolololololololololololol. *facepalm*

jesseinsf said,

I prefer IE over anything... why? it is a part of the OS, so it works better and it supports "Full" hardware acceloration. The other browsers don't. As for the stupid addons that FF has.....I want to feel that I am using the internet and not the browser. The internet is becoming an application these days, so why have all of those clunky addons.

You are a very funny person. If its not a joke, its disquasting to try people persuade for this ****.

jesseinsf said,

I prefer IE over anything... why? it is a part of the OS, so it works better and it supports "Full" hardware acceloration. The other browsers don't. As for the stupid addons that FF has.....I want to feel that I am using the internet and not the browser. The internet is becoming an application these days, so why have all of those clunky addons.

If that's truly how you feel, all I can do is feel bad for you. Because the reality is that Internet Explorer is slow and most websites break when you use it.

TokyoKiller said,

If that's truly how you feel, all I can do is feel bad for you. Because the reality is that Internet Explorer is slow and most websites break when you use it.

Excuse me - IE has been at least as fast as Firefox on load and site speed since version 9 came out, and most sites are tested well in it. True, it lacks some refinements that as a Web designer I appreciate in Chrome (gradients and so forth) but to claim that it breaks websites is just rubbish. To claim that for IE 6 or even 7 might be accurate. Maybe you should upgrade yourself...

TokyoKiller said,

If that's truly how you feel, all I can do is feel bad for you. Because the reality is that Internet Explorer is slow and most websites break when you use it.

Wow, how can you be this mis-informed or do you just have some subversive bias?

IE9 is faster than Chrome, Firefox, and Opera... How on earth can people not have read this somewhere with all the news about IE9. In things like Javascript, some tests favor Chrome, some Opera, some Firefox, some IE9; however, these differences are micro seconds at best on even the most complex pages.

Where IE9 blows all the other browsers away is in the acceleration features that cover everything from layering out aspects of the page, treating page information more like 'code' and using JIT techniques on the web pages, where other browsers only use JIT for scripting.

Search for a site called: IETestDrive

There are tests based on HTML5 and CSS3 using highly dynamic graphical rendering, that is the basis of what HTML5 and CSS3 is trying to achieve, as they are more on par with applications using web standards, rather than older static web pages.

If Chrome and other browser do not catch up to IE9 on these type of tests, then we should just throw HTML5 away, and go back to depending on Flash and other similar technologies for RIA.

If IE9 is slower on any of the graphical tests, then it is falling back to software rendering, and you have a problem with outdated video drivers or a problem with your GPU that you should look into fixing, as more and more software will be using more advanced GPU features and GPU computing features that are outside of what is common in gaming alone.

BTW, depending on your CPU as the other browsers are CPU bound, the difference between IE9 and the other browsers can be 10 times faster and up to several hundred times faster.

This is not a few 0.0x% differences as you find in the javascript tests, this is the difference between the HTML5 based page being usable and performing well enough that it is usable.

I get so tired of the IE bashing. Ya, IE6 sucks, but IE7 and IE8 were not bad, and IE9 is a complete rewrite of the engine that is doing things that no other browser is currently doing, by treating all aspects of a web page as code and threading it, using Async concpets, and modifying the web page content to run as close to code on the CPU and GPU as possible.

PS Back when IE6 was 'new' if you take ANY browser from that timeframe, they are also just as sucky as IE6 compared to today's browsers. The difference is people wouldn't dream of running Firefox from 2001, yet everyone things 'IE6' when they think IE.

jesseinsf said,

I prefer IE over anything... why? it is a part of the OS, so it works better and it supports "Full" hardware acceloration. The other browsers don't. As for the stupid addons that FF has.....I want to feel that I am using the internet and not the browser. The internet is becoming an application these days, so why have all of those clunky addons.

I don't know about preferring IE over anything, but I don't bother changing it from NOT being my default browser, even when updating Seamonkey or Opera, I make sure those browsers DON'T become the default one's.

IE9 simply screams and will probably make me NEVER bother testing that crap Firefox again and I already know that I won't ever use Chrome (unless it's the SRWare version).

Kind of hard to believe IE10 won't be supported in Vista though. I guess MS has finally realized what garbage it was. No, wait, they realized that a long time ago, didn't they?

jesseinsf said,

I prefer IE over anything... why? it is a part of the OS, so it works better and it supports "Full" hardware acceloration. The other browsers don't. As for the stupid addons that FF has.....I want to feel that I am using the internet and not the browser. The internet is becoming an application these days, so why have all of those clunky addons.

MOST exploited browser EVER. End of story.

jesseinsf said,

I prefer IE over anything... why? it is a part of the OS, so it works better and it supports "Full" hardware acceloration. The other browsers don't. As for the stupid addons that FF has.....I want to feel that I am using the internet and not the browser. The internet is becoming an application these days, so why have all of those clunky addons.

Is it 2003 again?

computerwizkid said,
Ummm why? Last time I checked Windows Vista supported most of the new graphics features in Windows 7 through the platform update.
the word going around is that it's because support for vista ends in 2012

They used this excuse to drop support for XP because they said they couldn't get hardware acceleration to work...then Opera comes along with an alpha build of Opera 11.5 and shows hardware acceleration working on all platforms including XP. This is ultimately Microsoft pushing to get people to buy more licenses which would work if they didn't keep breaking the graphic user interface in all of their products.

JAB Creations said,
They used this excuse to drop support for XP because they said they couldn't get hardware acceleration to work...then Opera comes along with an alpha build of Opera 11.5 and shows hardware acceleration working on all platforms including XP. This is ultimately Microsoft pushing to get people to buy more licenses which would work if they didn't keep breaking the graphic user interface in all of their products.

eh all OS vendors/distributors do this regardless if money is a factor or not. happens in the *unix circles too. they don't want to support old software if they don't have to. too me it looks like microsoft is using IE as a way to sell it's OS, not to gain marketshare in the OS market.

Opera must not be using Direct2d for hardware acceleration then. I don't think its a question whether its possible, but whether or not its worth the time doing.

computerwizkid said,
Ummm why? Last time I checked Windows Vista supported most of the new graphics features in Windows 7 through the platform update.

IE9 -> No XP
IE10 -> No XP / No Vista

FF 4 -> XP / Vista / 7 supported
Opera 11 -> XP / Vista / 7 supported

NO wonder why Mozilla called IE9, not a modern browser !!

Choto Cheeta said,

IE9 -> No XP
IE10 -> No XP / No Vista

FF 4 -> XP / Vista / 7 supported
Opera 11 -> XP / Vista / 7 supported

NO wonder why Mozilla called IE9, not a modern browser !!

I bet modzilla made add-ons that will not work will earlier versions of firefox!! those jerks.. oh wait its common business practice to get people to upgrade.. Microsoft needs a sigle OS again not so many differing ones.

computerwizkid said,
Ummm why? Last time I checked Windows Vista supported most of the new graphics features in Windows 7 through the platform update.

It doesn't stop @ graphic features

computerwizkid said,
Ummm why? Last time I checked Windows Vista supported most of the new graphics features in Windows 7 through the platform update.

Um, you might want to check again, as there are a boat load of technical differences and features of not only how Aero/DWM works, but how WDM 1.x, WDDM itself, and things that get accelerated through the 2D and 3D portion of the GPU.

There is also the differences in how DirectCompute works, which IE9 already is using, but had to be constrained to be Vista compatible.

nub said,
Opera must not be using Direct2d for hardware acceleration then. I don't think its a question whether its possible, but whether or not its worth the time doing.

The labs (or alpha) build only supports OpenGL, they plan on adding direct3d later on...

rajputwarrior said,
eh all OS vendors/distributors do this regardless if money is a factor or not. happens in the *unix circles too.
Have you heard of Debian Stable? Still, this is comparing apples and oranges, because in *nix circles, software usually updates due to fixes and refinement and not a growing feature set. When you update something, it's because it needs to be fixed. If you need additional features, you install a library, and update that separately. You update necessary components, and install additional ones as is necessary, you don't install/update to a new OS revision just because you want a new browser.

Even then, a new OS version in *nix is just a snapshot of what happens to be stable at the time. This is why distributions such as Ubuntu can update every 6 months, they settle on what works best, polish it, and put it out.