Uninstall Internet Explorer 8

[Apokalipse]

If you use any version of IE now, it should be IE 7
That said, I think Firefox 2 and 3 are better browsers

 

[KSoD]

The difference?

Firefox and Unbutu = free
Vista = $$$

IE= FREE
IE6 is old. It has more flaws in it than Windows 95. People NEED to update to be secure. That is why IE7 was released. That is why IE8 is being worked on. The people who wish to use IE6 should be treated the same way that those who want to run Windows 95 or Windows 98 are treated.

Tell them to update cause they are running out of date software that is insecure.

I dont care about "Well we dont like IE7" To bad. Use some other browser. There are tons out there.

Sorry but i can not agree. IE7 is out it shoudl be used. Those who still use IE6 should be told to update just like every other OS vendor does. Microsoft is not evil cause they do it to. This is just another cop out for people to bag on Microsoft for no good reason. With IE being free to upgrade why not? It was free when people upgraded from IE5 to IE6. It is still free to download and install. Just like FIrefox. People should update.

If you use any version of IE now, it should be IE 7
That said, I think Firefox 2 and 3 are better browsers

I fully agree. I am not saying that IE is the best out there. It isnt by a long shot. But IE6 is over 7 years old now. It is older than the latest version number of IE. I use Opera. Another yet free browser to use. I have Firefox installed as well as Chrome on Windows.

 

[Trotter]

Your cage, easy rattle it does.

 

[KSoD]

Sometimes yes. I just hate to see things go beyond pointless. Using IE6 is pointless and useless. It is old tech and it doesnt serve a purpose anymore. People should upgrade. If they dont why bother making new stuff.

 

[DoubleHelix]

Some medium-large companies also haven't updated beyond Internet Explorer 6. The costs to test and modify web-based applications is simply too high especially in this economy.

The reality is that approximately 25% of computers are still using Internet Explorer 6. Depending on what type of site you're running and who your customers are, it is simply not good business sense to alienate that large of a market.

 

[CalcProgrammer1]

My stance on updating is that if the update is free, run the latest software. Ubuntu users have no reason to be using 7.x because they can update to 8.04 for absolutely nothing and get all the feature and bug fixes that it brings. Same with Firefox, what does it matter if they stop supporting FF2, you can update to FF3 for free. Same with IE as long as you're on Windows, as you can upgrade to IE7/IE8 for free. People have no excuse to be using old software when free updates are available. When the update is XP to Vista, on the other hand, and you need $300 to do a full update, then you should definitely not be required to do so. Forcing people to buy updates by obsolescence is what big evil companies like Microsoft do to squeeze money out of unwilling customers. It should be up to the customer if they want to update or not, due to new features not incompatibility.

 

[KSoD]

Some medium-large companies also haven't updated beyond Internet Explorer 6. The costs to test and modify web-based applications is simply too high especially in this economy.

The reality is that approximately 25% of computers are still using Internet Explorer 6. Depending on what type of site you're running and who your customers are, it is simply not good business sense to alienate that large of a market.

Almost everything that worked in IE6 works in IE7. IT was created that way. I have very few if any sites that i have seen that do not work in IE7 from IE6. This is just compaines not wanting to spend the money for the IT people to upgrade them.

Calc i can understand your point somewhat.

Microsoft isnt forcing people to update. Windows XP is still for sale. Has been for the past 2 years since Vista's release. They are stopping sales on it now. That gave companies 2 years to get the version of Widnwos they wanted. Now they are stopping sales on a 7 year old product cause they know they will have a yet even newer one out in the next year or 2.

This is just smart business. All it would do is clutter up their own market to leave XP on sale and then have Vista and the start to sell Windows 7. The martket would be flooded and saturated with OS's for sale. So they stop the sales on teh oldes one first then leave Vista and Windows 7.

Yet again Windows doesnt force anyone to upgrade. I have yet to see a Microsoft Guru come to my house and tell me to run just Vitsa. I have yet to see a forum or newsgroup that is run by Microsoft where they say use Vista. They still support it. They just dont sell it. Not a single place do you see Microsoft forcing anyone to upgrade. It is their option. This is yet another one of those common misconceptions. Yeah they may not help you cause they dont sell XP anymore and only have Vista for sale. But no one complained when Windows 95 or 98 was no longer for sale. I dont see or hear anyone raising a stink cause those are not available anymore.

People didnt want to upgrade to XP. Now they dont want to upgrade to Vista. They are just scared.

 

[DoubleHelix]

This is just compaines not wanting to spend the money for the IT people to upgrade them.

Yes, Mak. That's exactly why. Making changes costs money. These are very tough economic times. Changes have to be supported by a business justification. Some general statement about a potential security risk is not going to cut it. Managers need to see specific risks and costs. It's an incredibly difficult argument to make especially if a network is protected by high-end firewalls, corporate-level anti-virus protection, and web browsing filters.

 

[KSoD]

But it isnt that hard to upgrade. It is a critical file now. So it should be installed long before they even update to SP3. Windows Update can do it and it isnt that hard via a network either to install.

So really it would be nothing to do it overnight or after people leave work for the day. Can even do it in batches. They keep the systems up to date then they should be able to get IE7 installed easily.

I can understand teh economy. I live in it myself daily. We are scrapping by cause i can not find a decent job to even pay me $8 an hour to work. I need at least that to cover for day care.

Plus it isnt just a security risk. It is thousands of security risks. IE7 isnt jsut a few security risks better than IE6. They havent even put out updates for it since Ie7 was released. I have not seen any IE6 updates since IE7 became the norm on Windows Update. Which means even that all flaws that have been found in browsers would most certainly affect them. Cause they are running outdated IE6 which hsant been patched to cover for the flaws.

I can see your point. But as i have pointed out there are plenty of cost effective ways to get it implemented. I dont care how many security measures they have when there are flaws in the browser that allow people to take over machines and get onto their network. I wonder if any of these companies bothered to read about the DNS flaw and do something about that.

Risk versus reward. The risks are very high to run IE6. The reward to run IE7 is much greater than the risk.

 

[DoubleHelix]

The cost isn't in the actual upgrade process. Obviously that can be scripted to run overnight with no user interaction. The costs are in testing and validating applications. This is huge. When you make this kind of change in a medium to large company, the risks of not upgrading need to be specifically defined. That means describing the real dollar costs of previous security breaches directly caused by not upgrading.