Timeline for answer to What technical reason did Microsoft give for no Internet Explorer 9 on Windows XP? by Patrick
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
Post Revisions
23 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 5, 2011 at 14:22 | history | edited | Peter Mortensen | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 54 characters in body
|
| Mar 17, 2011 at 17:54 | vote | accept | Karim | ||
| Mar 17, 2011 at 13:26 | comment | added | Powerlord | @BobbyAlexander: Or Vista, but IE9 is on Vista anyway. | |
| Mar 17, 2011 at 9:16 | comment | added | James Love | I had to upvote Bobby there, it made me chuckle. As true a point as it is, it was just funny to see that one, short comment there after that debate xD | |
| Mar 17, 2011 at 8:53 | comment | added | bobbyalex | And the pinning thingy is not possible in XP. | |
| Mar 16, 2011 at 23:36 | comment | added | Patrick | @Phoshi exactly, there isn't any good reason (in microsoft's opinion) to put the effort into enabling IE9 on XP | |
| Mar 16, 2011 at 23:33 | comment | added | Phoshi | I don't think anybody's saying MS couldn't make it work on XP, just that the technologies it's built upon don't work on XP. Sure, they could special-case it for XP, but why? Additionally, DirectX has no problem running on your processor, albeit less quickly, so even if your card isn't a powerhouse you can still use the more advanced technologies. It's a case of scaling up to better tech, rather than only catering to the bottom line. | |
| Mar 16, 2011 at 23:31 | comment | added | Patrick | @Karim The graphics improvement isn't just for actual images, it's also used for text, css & javascript handline. I don't think they are actually going to lose any browser marketshare because of this decision though. Most people using IE, I believe, will probably stay on IE 8 and not necessarily switch to another browser. | |
| Mar 16, 2011 at 23:27 | comment | added | Karim | @Patrick that is right. but the graphics is not the best part of IE9. i mean most websites wont be using any features to show the power of GPU. so microsoft could have supported Winxp in order not to loose their market share of browsers (by writing software renderers if Direct2D and directWrite is not available as Firefox does) :) | |
| Mar 16, 2011 at 23:21 | comment | added | Patrick | @Karim I believe IE9 is about more standards compliance, more security, and faster operation. | |
| Mar 16, 2011 at 23:18 | comment | added | Karim | @Connor W IE9 is not about Faster Graphics, there is javascript,css and other stuff which dont need a graphic card.this is a web browser, not crysis!!! | |
| Mar 16, 2011 at 23:15 | comment | added | Connor W | @Synetech inc. Exactly, so what would XP users gain from upgrading to IE9? If it brings no improvement there is no point releasing it for XP. Also, I'm pretty sure most fairly modern (read: last 4 years) graphics cards support DX10, so hardware acceleration is quite a major plus. | |
| Mar 16, 2011 at 23:11 | comment | added | Patrick | @zzzzBov I agree with you there. :-) | |
| Mar 16, 2011 at 22:58 | history | edited | Tamara Wijsman | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 65 characters in body; deleted 3 characters in body
|
| Mar 16, 2011 at 22:49 | comment | added | Synetech | @Patrick, I don’t see how D3D/DW have any bearing since many people run Windows 7 on a video card that does not support DX10, so they are still unavailable anyway. Besides, acceleration isn’t really a technical reason since without it, pages could still run albeit slower (read the same speed as they have for the last 20 years). | |
| Mar 16, 2011 at 21:03 | comment | added | zzzzBov | @Patrick, i agree that pushing people to the latest/greatest does have advantages, my point was that microsoft also gains financially which makes it a win-win situation for them. | |
| Mar 16, 2011 at 20:42 | comment | added | Patrick | @zzzzBov true, but many of the programs today that run on top of Unix or Linux would not run on the earlier versions of their respective OS. And even though XP SP3 came out just a few years ago, the underpinnings of the operating system are 10 years old. Imagine trying to run the latest software on Ubuntu 4.10, which btw, Canonical stopped supporting in 2006. | |
| Mar 16, 2011 at 20:21 | comment | added | zzzzBov | @Patrick, XP SP3 came out in 08 if i remember right. I believe you may have heard of an operating system called Unix that is still being developed/extended. Netscape source became a browser I currently use. It makes all the sense in the world to keep extending/improving stuff that works. | |
| Mar 16, 2011 at 20:18 | comment | added | Patrick | @zzzzBov Who would continue to write new software and updates for a decade old software package? It makes no sense from a management, technical, or financial overhead POV. | |
| Mar 16, 2011 at 20:09 | comment | added | zzzzBov | Also, microsoft stands to benefit by releasing a newer browser on their newer operating systems, as users who are interested in the security benefits will need to upgrade operating systems, leading directly to sales of microsoft products. | |
| Mar 16, 2011 at 17:51 | comment | added | Patrick | @ChrisF I think Microsoft is starting a determined push to get people to stop using their outdated software. Between writing some of their newer software only for Vista/7 to actually encouraging people to stop using Internet Explorer 6 they are getting serious. | |
| Mar 16, 2011 at 17:44 | comment | added | ChrisF | I'm surprised at the Direct2D part - but perhaps it's a specific version. | |
| Mar 16, 2011 at 17:41 | history | answered | Patrick | CC BY-SA 2.5 |