| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |
| Who Will Get Blessed with IE9 in the End? |
| By special contributor vodoomoth on 2010-09-27 13:10:52 |
| Microsoft has "set up and removed" having Windows 7 Service Pack 1 as a prerequisite to running (or, more correctly, "installing") IE9, in the space of just 2 days. |
| the relevant bit is here |
| By google_ninja on 2010-09-27 13:48:01 |
|
> Microsoft has made many fixes to the Direct2D and Media Foundation APIs that the new browser heavily depends on They are using bleeding edge directx stuff, and dx11 is windows 7 only. |
| This wasn't about Vista |
| By chandler on 2010-09-27 13:54:14 |
|
The requirement originally was that users of Windows 7 would have to install SP1 to get IE9, but it didn't exclude Vista users. Now the SP1 requirement is dropped because many corporate IT departments lag far behind in installing SP's. (My understanding is that 7 SP1 is going to just be a big roll-up release anyway, so there's little risk to it.) XP still won't be getting IE9. It's Vista or 7 only. |
| RE: the relevant bit is here |
| By chandler on 2010-09-27 13:55:31 |
| Wrong. DX11 is available on Vista and supports hardware accelerated text rendering and other needed APIs with the Platform Update. |
| RE[2]: the relevant bit is here |
| By google_ninja on 2010-09-27 13:58:44 |
| Looks like you are right. everyone just ignore my comment, didn't realize they were supporting dx11 in vista |
| RE[3]: the relevant bit is here |
| By vaette on 2010-09-27 14:24:51 |
|
On the other hand IE9 will be available on Vista, thanks to exactly those technology backports from Windows 7. So I am not sure where this thread of arguments are going. What we do know though is that IE9 is more or less a showcase of a lot of the newer Windows features, and as such probably exercise a lot of code paths earlier seldom used, so a baseline patch-level requirement for the OS is probably nothing to be surprised by. As an aside; In many ways IE9 has really been a huge success for Microsoft even if it fails to get any users at all. All IE really does for Microsoft is that it ensures that Microsoft has a hand in making sure that Windows remains a top-tier platform for browsing the web. Adding good GPU acceleration (a key feature developed in the Vista/7 timeframe) nicely showcases Windows in that respect. Firefox adding Direct2D and Chrome being in the initial stages of doing so is really the best possible outcome possible for Microsoft, basically other vendors helping to add value to recent versions of Windows. Luckily it is certainly good news for consumers as well, plus other platforms get some of the advantages as well, making things better for everyone everywhere. Competition and all that :) |
| To answer the question |
| By Shannara on 2010-09-27 14:36:26 |
| Nobody, since it isn't a blessing until it is compliant. |
| same as IE8 |
| By another_sam on 2010-09-27 15:10:49 |
|
IE8 was also introduced as not compatible with XP but eventually it was. MS tries to "scare" (although what they do best is *scare*, not just "scare") people to upgrade to 7. But eventually they'll make it compatible with XP. Say without full GPU acceleration or without some cool kind of integration, but IE9 in the end. Now, once you asked, I really wonder if is there any current IE6/7 user (25% overall, 40% over IE) going to upgrade to IE9. I can imagine IE8 users and discontent Firefox and Chrome users giving it a try, but IE6/7 users? Sigh... could someone make a virus to fix that please? |
| Firefox hardware rendering is also Win 7/Vista only |
| By nt_jerkface on 2010-09-27 15:21:27 |
|
This is because XP does not have Direct2D http://blog.mozilla.com/joe/2010... |
| RE: same as IE8 |
| By nt_jerkface on 2010-09-27 15:30:39 |
|
IE8 was tied to WGA, not an OS. That was a big mistake and they eventually changed their position. |
| speaking of SP1 for 7.... |
| By Jason Bourne on 2010-09-27 16:11:02 |
|
When is SP1 going to be released? Edited 2010-09-27 16:11 UTC |
| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |