IE7 beta 2 preview refresh - released march 20th

[Son Goku]

OE is working here... Perhaps something peculiar is still going on for which it is still in beta Hmm... Not sure why your OE is a problem tbh... That said, the installer upgraded my IE but not my OE which is still ver 6, just checked...

Edit: They changed something in version 7... Lets just say that my ad filter in IE 6 worked just fine with Windows Update... Some change in IE 7 no longer makes this the case; which means IE 7 is doing something different from IE 6 which is causing it to get pegged as an ad. Ironic it wasn't an issue in ver 6, hmm...

[SavagePaladin]

I am well aware that just about anything can break things. Hell, I've had pretty bad luck with antivirus programs that everyone else tells me are great...

However, I've seen it happen FAR MORE because of either crappy drivers or crappy applications, with newer OSes. I'm a PC technician. It's PEBKAC until proven otherwise. :)

Though I fully admit that's an overly limited viewpoint, it usually works. So I'm not going to mess with it.

I honestly don't think that developers are only slacking on x64 because they're waiting for Vista. Changing tools to ones that do 64 bit code, learning those tools, and learning the changes in the OS certainly won't happen overnight. For one example... http://getright.invisionzone.com/index.php?showtopic=237

[Son Goku]

I am well aware that just about anything can break things. Hell, I've had pretty bad luck with antivirus programs that everyone else tells me are great...

However, I've seen it happen FAR MORE because of either crappy drivers or crappy applications, with newer OSes. I'm a PC technician. It's PEBKAC until proven otherwise. :)

Well, tbh, I'm more a person who has gotten a computer networking degree (graduated last fall) and who's plans had switched from computer science to computer engineering for my second degree. Had already begun taking some of the engineering classes. Not exactly the typical user; though when the person in question is of an unknown quantity, it can leave one scratching there heads sometimes. Of course there's also the disadvantage that I was here to see the before/after, etc...

What I can definitely say is that no software or drivers had changed, which could serve to isolate any potential cause. Without that, there are too many unknowns and too many potential causes. But here's the stink of it, the only thing that changed was moving my data folders (mind you no apps were installed on my e: drive, just data) to the d: drive and then formatting for use in Linux (slamd64 specifically, which is a 64-bit port to slcakcware Linux). Before I installed Linux everything was fine, and after installing Linux on a second HD, I booted into Windows and "oh my".

However, and all said I can see no logical basis for how installing Linux on a seperate physical hard drive could have affected Windows XP in that sense, and that is the only thing that changed from the before to after. But as an isolated variable, it makes no sense whatsoever, and I really don't buy it. At least it spontaniously settled itself down however, so that this rapid increase in kernel memory isn't occuring like it did at first; and again just as spontaniously Tis screwy though and I'm at a loss to try to give a logical explanation that even I can buy tbh...

I honestly don't think that developers are only slacking on x64 because they're waiting for Vista. Changing tools to ones that do 64 bit code, learning those tools, and learning the changes in the OS certainly won't happen overnight.

Well, here's the thing. winXP had come out sorta late in the game, and as you mention development does indeed take time. Would people really want to take the time to put a whole hearted effort into a 64-bit port to a 5 or so year old OS, knowing full well that a new version will be comming out soon?

In the case of Vista, people are going to have to develop support for Windows Vista, and if Vista does move the gfx rendering back into user mode (as NT 3.51 had it there, for those who remember); this sizeable change in the OS will almost invariably require they take time to create new drivers and what not for the new OS. While they're having to do it anyhow, they might be more willing to take the time necessary to develop both 64 and 32-bit versions of their given driver or what not. It's not the same of asking one to re-develop something for a port of a 5 year old OS, even while their time is being spent on trying to support the upcomming OS as well.

It might also be why Microsoft might very well begin phasing out winXP support sometime after Vista comes out. They don't want to invest the time/resources to continue supporting the old, when they're going to have to support the new as well...

[SavagePaladin]

Think of it this way. XP x64 support may not have a lot of immediate gain, but it'll keep your driver writers more aware of the issues that will pop up when they're writing Vista drivers. So it really depends on the company. Do they want to just jump into something completely foreign when all they're used to doing is 2000/XP? Especially considering that Vista is going to have a LOT bigger uptake than x64, it'll be a LOT of angry users if you slack off instead of a few annoyed ones.

I just think it'd be more prudent to have them working on something newer already, which will, if not quite the same thing, be some preparation for that time. There's always cause for being better prepared...

BTW, is Windows Server 2003 5 years old? I can't remember. XP x64 is based off that, though they obviously added quite a few things to make it look like XP.

[Son Goku]

Think of it this way. XP x64 support may not have a lot of immediate gain, but it'll keep your driver writers more aware of the issues that will pop up when they're writing Vista drivers.

Perhaps, but...

So it really depends on the company. Do they want to just jump into something completely foreign when all they're used to doing is 2000/XP? Especially considering that Vista is going to have a LOT bigger uptake than x64, it'll be a LOT of angry users if you slack off instead of a few annoyed ones.

I suppose we don't entirely disagree here. Vista is where the support will be widely seen. On the one hand one might argue the number of angry customers, on the other one might argue the amount of development resources put into XP-64 when they need to look at Vista (considering that developer time isn't an unlimited resource, and when putting a team on one project...); but the effect can be much the same.

From the consumer's standpoint, and from the standpoint of one recommending an OS, XP-64 might not make as much sense now. I don't know, speaking for myself, buying another version of XP at retail (OK, my MSDN CDs were shipped, but an MSDN subscription itself was not free); just to turn around and buy Vista in possibly < 1 year almost seems silly to me.

As to recommending to a company, I'm not sure I'd recommend they upgrade all their desktops to XP-64, only to upgrade to Vista shortly after. Companies, as well as individuals might prefer to save the dime where they won't get a return on the expenditure for very long. That said, companies won't see this as much of an issue anyhow until around the time of Vista, given the prevalence of Intel CPUs (such as in Dell branded d'tops) in their organizations, and that until Conroe is released they're talking x86-32... Once Conroe is out, I would probably almost invariably recommend (if I were asked) that one wait for Vista if it would come out a month or 2 after... That itself is a little separate though.

I just think it'd be more prudent to have them working on something newer already, which will, if not quite the same thing, be some preparation for that time. There's always cause for being better prepared...

Given that Vista beta is already released, and many of these companies have access to the beta; they might be working on Vista drivers already. Albeit working off the beta code. Case in point, nVidia:

Vista-32

http://www.nvidia.com/object/winvista_x86_87.15.html

Vista-64

http://www.nvidia.com/object/winvista_x64_87.15.html

Some companies other then nVidia might be working on beta drivers already...

BTW, is Windows Server 2003 5 years old? I can't remember. XP x64 is based off that, though they obviously added quite a few things to make it look like XP.

Server 2003 is probably closer to 3 years old... Hadn't checked specifically on it's release date, when we were messing around with it in the Active Directory class I took last fall...

[SavagePaladin]

I agree. With Vista shortly, I can't recommend XP x64 at all anymore.

Build 5342 kicks a lot of ass. Except for my lack of sound drivers, I'd try to use it all the time.

[SLippe]

Is IE7 final version not going to be available for Windows XP Pro 32bit?

[jaws]

Is there a reason why the back button skips over pages?

[Nutty]

Mine doesn't.

I installed this updated version and I cant for the life of me, make it open popups on tabs without having to hold CTRL down. I've turned 2 pop up blockers off and it still wants me to hold it down on every friggen link I click... *sigh*

[Nutty]

Nevermind, sorted now.
For some reason google toolbar went all weird with this updated version and refused to let any link open without CTRL held.. it never did that before.. :confused:

[SavagePaladin]

Aint betas fun...I should swear off em :D