SillyDog701

[DJGM]

I do have Service Pack 4 installed . . .

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-GB; rv:1.7.8) Gecko/20050511 Firefox/1.0.4

[Pu7o]

After all this time, I finally discovered how to install IE7 Beta 1 in Windows Server 2003 (as opposed to simply running it from an extracted dir, which yields a semi-functional IE only).

First, you must extract the installer itself. Go to the folder where you extracted it, and the update sub-folder. You should have these files:

Code: Select all

eula.txt
ie7beta1.cat
iecustom.dll
iecustom.dll.manifest
kb904942.cat
legitlib.dll
update.exe
update.exe.manifest
update.inf
update.ver
updspapi.dll


First, one would think about just running update.exe, right? Wrong. It will complain saying that it requires Windows XP and bail out. Attempt #1 failed.

In that case, let's try compatibility mode, shall we? Set update.exe to compatibility mode with XP, run it and... error: You need Service Pack 2.

Then, let's change update.inf, to make it require SP0 only instead! Go to the line saying:

Code: Select all

    MinNtServicePackVersion   = 512


And change it to:

Code: Select all

    MinNtServicePackVersion   = 1


Great, now it runs! Except when it should actually install, it bails out again because the CRC fails for update.inf, since we modified it.

So, let's trick it yet again. Leave the service pack version at 1 and run it. Then, AFTER update.exe is running, change it back to 512, and continue installing. There, no CRC error, and the install should finish successfully

- Note that it is still recommended to use a better browser, such as Firefox, Netscape, SeaMonkey, Mozilla, Opera, K-Meleon, Safari, Konqueror, Galeon, Epiphany, Camino, iCab, (...), because even after updating IE to v7 Beta 1, it is still an insecure and exploitable web browser (although slightly more standards compliant)!

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.2; pt-BR; rv:1.8) Gecko/20060106 Firefox/1.5 Firescape/0.1RC1-dev wml/1.3

[James]

Interesting but I suppose the question (in light of your red text warning at the bottom) would still be: Why bother?

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8) Gecko/20051111 Firefox/1.5

[Pu7o]

Well, for those cases where you DO have to use IE (meaning Windows update and stupid sites), it's better to have a slightly safer and slightly more standards compliant version, wouldn't you say?

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.2; pt-BR; rv:1.8) Gecko/20060106 Firefox/1.5 Firescape/0.1RC1-dev wml/1.3

[Don_HH2K]

Here's an interesting idea -- if you can trick the installer via modification of update.inf... is there a field for something like MinNTVersion? If that were set to 5.0, technically we could try to run it on 2000 and see what happens. (Technically it could be set to 4.0 and attempted to be run on NT4, although I'd bet that NT4 doesn't have the appropriate APIs to run it.)

UserAgent: Mozilla/4.8 [en] (WinNT; U)

[Pu7o]

2000 doesn't have the APIs to run IE7, did you see DJGM's old post in this thread?

And yes, it's possible to make it a "Win2000" version, here's the start of the update.inf file:

Code: Select all

[Version]
    CatalogFile               = %SP_SHORT_TITLE%.cat
    LanguageType              = %LangTypeValue%
    MaxNtBuildToUpdate        = 9999
    MaxNtMajorVersionToUpdate = 5
    MaxNtMinorVersionToUpdate = 1
    MaxNtServicePackVersion   = 512
    MinNtServicePackVersion   = 512
    NtBuildToUpdate           = 2600
    NtMajorVersionToUpdate    = 5
    NtMinorVersionToUpdate    = 1
    RebootRequired            = 1
    Signature                 = "$Windows NT$"


If you set NtMinorVersionToUpdate to 0 and change the build number, it should be possible to run the setup in 2000 or even NT 4, but it obviously won't work, and you could well end with a non-working PC, since windows is so dependent on IE's broken engine...

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.2; pt-BR; rv:1.8) Gecko/20060106 Firefox/1.5 Firescape/0.1RC1-dev wml/1.3

[Mandrake]

IE 7 Beta 2 is out (public preview). It requires XP (Home or Pro, 32bit) with SP2.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-GB; rv:1.8) Gecko/20051111 Firefox/1.5

[James]

I hope you will all forgive me! *gulp*

I'm a sucker for new things so I wondered just what this updated browser would look and behave like. Well... as you can see from my user agent string, I've downloaded it. It is verrrrrry interesting. I'm still getting used to the way things are positioned on this browser (i.e. quick tabs, tools, favorites and so forth) and there is a wee learning curve. But I must admit to liking what I see so far. I'm not going over to the dark side... but I am sort of enjoying this thing. Time will tell...eh?!

Edit: I've a question for you. Is there development underway for a new email client to replace Outlook Express? Thanks.

UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322)

[Antony]

From Microsoft's website, features of Internet Explorer 7 (IE 7) Beta 2 Preview are...
cleaner interface without bulky toolbar, tabbed browsing, built-in search, integrated RSS feeds and enhanced security.

I can see Firefox will face some tough competition in the near feature.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/417.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/417.8

[James]

It is cleaner, Antony. And by default, the type is Clear. Right now I've added another tool bar (Links... similar to our Personal bar) but there's still plenty of room at the top of the page. And by default the Classic Menu is set aside in favor of the New Look (i.e. Tools).

I'm not sure I'd go so far as to say Firefox needs to worry at this point in time BUT it would appear that the Giant has stirred and is about to awaken. Things could get very interesting now.

UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322)

[Mandrake]

A new version of Outlook Express, now called "Windows Mail", is being worked on. It'll only be available in Windows Vista though.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-GB; rv:1.8) Gecko/20051111 Firefox/1.5

[James]

Thanks, Mandrake. That's to be expected (and somewhat unfortunate) I suppose.

IE 7 is not perfect by a long shot... but it is certainly vastly improved over IE 6. One thing I've already noticed is in regards to email. Since there is no corresponding email client, I'm using Thunderbird (I tried both Opera's email and SeaMonkey's with the same results). In IE 7 you can set which email client you want as the default. The "problem" I've discovered is this: when an email arrives with a link in it... and you click that link... IE 7 will NOT open in Opera nor in SeaMonkey, but instead Opera's and SeaMonkey's browsers open and take you to the link. In Thunderbird, however, IE 7 DOES open BUT the page you're taken to is a blank one. Interesting... eh?

I sort of thought the best workaround would be to NOT make IE 7 the default browser but instead make it FF (if I'm going to use TB). That way when an email arrives with a link, FF will open and take me to that page.

My question is: what would I lose in browsing with IE 7 if it is NOT my default browser? What exactly does making a browser "Default" add to the browser? Thanks.

UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322)

[DJGM]

I'll put it bluntly ... IE7 is crap. Fair enough, if it's still only in Beta, but it needs a hell of a lot of work.

First thing that needs sorting is that diabolically messed up GUI. What on Earth do Microsoft think
they're playing at, arranging the toolbars of the browser into such a messed up, and virtually
impossible to customise layout?!? It is quite literally a virtual train wreck.

Screengrab here.

That is NOT how a browser should look. Why can't they stick to a proper layout? Like this . . .

[tt]Standard Titlebar
Menubar (File Edit View etc ... )
Navigation buttons and URL bar
Bookmarks (or Links) Bar
Browser Tabs.[/tt]

In IE7, the only thing thats in the right place is the titlebar! And why is the menubar hidden
by default? It's fine for a browser installed on a PC available for public use, such as in an
internet cafe, to prevent certain customers messing about with the settings, but on a
browser that's eventually going to be made for general usage, it is SO wrong!

If the totally messed up arrangement of the toolbars wasn't bad enough, IE7 is still using
the technically obsolete "Trident" HTML rendering engine, that was introduced in IE4.0
back in 1997! It's hardly surprising that a new security vulnerability has already been
found in IE7, less than 48 hours after the Beta 2 public preview was published.

There may well have been some minor improvements to the engine, making it slightly more
standards compliant than IE6.x was (which was barely standards compliant anyway) but
if Microsoft wants Internet Explorer 7 not to be considered a huge joke by those of us
that know better, IMHO, "Trident" seriously needs to be scrapped and replaced.

I don't think the makers of alternative browsers need worry too much about IE7, since
they're all cross platform, while IE7 will be made only for Windows XP/2003/Vista.


In other browser news . . . a vastly superior browser suite called SeaMonkey 1.0,
was officially released a few hours before Microsoft finally decided to publicly
unleash that absolutely diabolical piece of junkware.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.2; en-US; rv:1.8.0.1) Gecko/20060130 SeaMonkey/1.0

[James]

So, I take it you're not overly fond of IE 7, Greg.

I'll agree with pretty much everything you've said in terms of its strange layout and the fact that the Menubar is not visible by default. Of course to access it you need only hit the alt key and there it is. So it's a sort of cool way to buy back real estate.

It's a memory hog. I'm currently running over 85,000 k RAM in just twenty minutes of surfing and four open tabs.

It has a couple of cool features. The Quick Tabs and the Zoom are both pretty slick. Check our Sandy's site to see just how these are supposed to work. http://www.ie-vista.com/

Bottom line: It won't become my default browser. That will probably remain FF (with SeaMonkey a close second). But I like to mess around and I'm going to continue playing with this thing. I've been able to add my Links bar (favorites) so that it's becoming increasingly familiar to me. I know that Acid test shows just how uncompliant it is but it's pretty quick at rendering pages.

UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322)

[Antony]

I'll put it bluntly ... IE7 is crap. Fair enough, if it's still only in Beta, but it needs a hell of a lot of work.

First thing that needs sorting is that diabolically messed up GUI. What on Earth do Microsoft think they're playing at, arranging the toolbars of the browser into such a messed up, and virtually impossible to customise layout?!? It is quite literally a virtual train wreck.

Screengrab here.

That is NOT how a browser should look. Why can't they stick to a proper layout? Like this . . .
[tt]Standard Titlebar
Menubar (File Edit View etc ... )
Navigation buttons and URL bar
Bookmarks (or Links) Bar
Browser Tabs.[/tt]

DJGM,
Somehow I don't quite agree with you.

What's wrong with slightly re-arrange the order?

There's no Windows Human Interface Guidelines (at least I've never heard of) as opposing to Apple Human Interface Guidelines.

There may well have been some minor improvements to the engine, making it slightly more standards compliant than IE6.x was (which was barely standards compliant anyway) but if Microsoft wants Internet Explorer 7 not to be considered a huge joke by those of us that know better, IMHO, "Trident" seriously needs to be scrapped and replaced.

Improvements to the engine is a good thing, regardless of the amount. Thanks to Internet Explorer's market share, they are some kind of de-facto standard... why shall they bother to comply with some other standards? What I am saying is most websites design webpages with MSIE in mind (as first priority at least).

I don't think the makers of alternative browsers need worry too much about IE7, since they're all cross platform, while IE7 will be made only for Windows XP/2003/Vista.

Windows has around 90% on computer markets, and it's Microsoft's interests to encourage people to upgrade to new version of Windows.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/417.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/417.8