IE7 Final released

Jipcy · Post by **Jipcy** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 4:33 pm

http://msdn.microsoft.com/ie/releasenotes/default.aspx

I'm not going to download it. I'll just wait until it becomes a critical update in November. It might have some security fixes by then.

Oskar_Hanberg · Post by **Oskar_Hanberg** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 5:30 pm

I hope they fixes the menu bar problem by then. We have to use it for certain stuff at uni and its, well.. ANNOYING!!

Clements · Post by **Clements** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 6:09 pm

Installing it broke a lot of my icons including the icons for my disc drives and many of the start menu options. I uninstalled it with no luck. Even system restore did not work. Any way to fix the standard icons to default?

Edit: Nevermind - Thank the heavens for TweakUI.

PHoNyMiKe · Post by **PHoNyMiKe** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 12:14 am

Clements wrote:Edit: Nevermind - Thank the heavens for TweakUI for breaking my windohz in the first place and allowing me to blame internet explorer just like all the firefox fanboys who dream of sucking on the penis of a real live fox but instead just jerk off to dog porn.

I'll have to find a way to bypass whatever legit shit they got, cause I'm still using the windows xp that was released 30 days before it hit retail.

Clements · Post by **Clements** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 12:23 am

Actually, after I installed IE7 overwriting a previous installation and got the problem, I googled reset icons to default and found a forum post suggesting to use TweakUI - which I downloaded and installed. TweakUI was not on my system when I got the issue. So your 'assessment' was totally wrong.

Deathlike2 · Post by **Deathlike2** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 12:43 am

Clements wrote:Actually, after I installed IE7 overwriting a previous installation and got the problem, I googled reset icons to default and found a forum post suggesting to use TweakUI - which I downloaded and installed. TweakUI was not on my system when I got the issue. So your 'assessment' was totally wrong.

It is certainly great for the fucked up icon issue. Sometimes a diff app associating with a file doesn't appear to update/use the correct icon.

snkcube · Post by **snkcube** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 2:04 am

IE7 hasn't messed up anything so far for me.

franpa · Post by **franpa** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 2:06 am

nor has it screwed anything up for me aswell

and oskar what menu bar bug? did it disappear on you? if yes then thats fixed

Oskar_Hanberg · Post by **Oskar_Hanberg** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 6:50 am

franpa wrote:nor has it screwed anything up for me aswell and oskar what menu bar bug? did it disappear on you? if yes then thats fixed

Well.. its not there from the start, I have to activated through a checkbox, the problem is that it won't place itself on top but UNDER the "back" and "forward" buttons.
Though I guess it doesn't really matter because they're working on a solution that will work in Firefox as well.

funkyass · Post by **funkyass** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 7:27 am

Oskar_Hanberg wrote:
franpa wrote:nor has it screwed anything up for me aswell and oskar what menu bar bug? did it disappear on you? if yes then thats fixed
Well.. its not there from the start, I have to activated through a checkbox, the problem is that it won't place itself on top but UNDER the "back" and "forward" buttons.
Though I guess it doesn't really matter because they're working on a solution that will work in Firefox as well.

thats not a bug.

franpa · Post by **franpa** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 8:42 am

i cant move it that high up, nor can i move the address bar lower... thus i think that either a) its changed the the stable release or your using a hack.

Oskar_Hanberg · Post by **Oskar_Hanberg** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 10:06 am

funkyass wrote:
Oskar_Hanberg wrote:
franpa wrote:nor has it screwed anything up for me aswell and oskar what menu bar bug? did it disappear on you? if yes then thats fixed
Well.. its not there from the start, I have to activated through a checkbox, the problem is that it won't place itself on top but UNDER the "back" and "forward" buttons.
Though I guess it doesn't really matter because they're working on a solution that will work in Firefox as well.
thats not a bug.

so.. Microsoft suddenly decided that having the menu bar on top is not a good idea anymore?

darkbenny · Post by **darkbenny** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 2:22 pm

I will stick with Firefox I think.

Cyrus · Post by **Cyrus** » Sat Oct 21, 2006 1:15 am

DarkBenny wrote:I will stick with Firefox I think.

I was considering that as well but recently Firefox seems somewhat broken in various ways so I think I'll give IE7 a shot.

franpa · Post by **franpa** » Sat Oct 21, 2006 1:23 am

oh, lol oskar i thought you meant under as in behind

anyways... thats how its been for ages.

Oskar_Hanberg · Post by **Oskar_Hanberg** » Sat Oct 21, 2006 1:36 am

franpa wrote:oh, lol oskar i thought you meant under as in behind anyways... thats how its been for ages.

Did they give an explanation why?

franpa · Post by **franpa** » Sat Oct 21, 2006 5:02 am

not to my knowledge... eh its ok... i still use mozilla firefox for everything tho

Oskar_Hanberg · Post by **Oskar_Hanberg** » Sat Oct 21, 2006 12:28 pm

Sure, me too. but what the hell got into microsoft thinking its a good idea to have the MENUBAR at a lower position?? hmm.. maybe they're just trying to be cool? anyway.. I tried it some.. everything "New" are old news from other browsers.. and their rendering of div boxes is.. not as ie6, nor as w3c standards.. so if you want to make your site look nice for ie7 you need YET ANOTHER haxx workaround in the css file... thats just gay.

franpa · Post by **franpa** » Mon Oct 30, 2006 9:53 am

for tho's interested in having IE 7 with the "classic" IE 6 interface... http://www.byteburn.com/2006/10/30/how- ... y-like-ie6

edit: theres some small bugs like the "manage add-ons" shortcut and possibly others wont work in the old interface... and the "windows update" item forces it to open in ietab in firefox -.- same if i type in www.windowsupdate.com

SquareHead · Post by **SquareHead** » Mon Oct 30, 2006 10:04 am

On everything I tried to install IE7 on it was a royal bitch.

On all my XP home systems, I had to boot into safe mode with networking and install under the hidden administrator account. Everything else would fail.

Oskar_Hanberg · Post by **Oskar_Hanberg** » Mon Oct 30, 2006 10:30 am

SquareHead wrote:On everything I tried to install IE7 on it was a royal bitch.

On all my XP home systems, I had to boot into safe mode with networking and install under the hidden administrator account. Everything else would fail.

Same with me. svchost would eat 100% cpu time wile installing "ie7 core components" or something like that, in safemode however, it worked.

PHoNyMiKe · Post by **PHoNyMiKe** » Mon Oct 30, 2006 11:34 pm

you silly firefox fanboys with your silly plugins and shit. IE7 doesn't need plugins like shitty firefox. just install IE7, and you're done! quit fucking with it, if it ain't broken, don't fix it!

info you didn't know: microsoft has a global advertising campaign, and is in the homes of millions. where as firefox just has stupid sig pics and banners on shitty fanboy websites. microsoft wins! you got an issue? here's a tissue. deal with it!!

franpa · Post by **franpa** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 4:17 am

my bad that "fix" aint gonna work

sorry about that...

Oskar_Hanberg · Post by **Oskar_Hanberg** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 8:10 am

phOnYmIkE wrote:you silly firefox fanboys with your silly plugins and shit. IE7 doesn't need plugins like shitty firefox. just install IE7, and you're done! quit fucking with it, if it ain't broken, don't fix it!

info you didn't know: microsoft has a global advertising campaign, and is in the homes of millions. where as firefox just has stupid sig pics and banners on shitty fanboy websites. microsoft wins! you got an issue? here's a tissue. deal with it!!

Even though this is obvious flamebait, I would like to inform you about the acid 2 test, that shows how well a web browser complys with w3c's web standards. try the link below in a variety of browsers, then tell me wich one seems more broken compared to the reference design?

http://www.webstandards.org/files/acid2/test.html

why does this matter? well.. if you knew shit about html-writing writing you'd know what a pain in the ass it is to allways have to use various hacks in the css code to make sites look decent in ie, just because people are retarded or too lazy to get a fucking decent browser.

Jipcy · Post by **Jipcy** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 8:53 am

Oskar_Hanberg wrote:w3c's web standards

Those aren't standards! The only standard that's important is for a webpage to work in IE.

</sarcasm>