IE10 talk and stuff

You can have as many profiles as you want, they are just tied to user accounts. (I hope you were being sarcastic in implying this was something major).

 

I was being sarcastic, yes. If I were to complain between Vista support and profiles support, I'd pick the latter.

Yes, they could... probably... support it, if they wanted it. They don't want to, and that's something we'll have to accept. Now, what we shall not accept is lack of profiles!! Let's fight for this! lol But, it's actually one of the things that still keep me away from it.

 

I want to bring to light a few things:

The DWM in Vista uses only D3D9, this is true. In Windows 7, hardware acceleration does NOT require a DX10 card. It can use D3D9, which means the D3D9 mode can and will work with Windows Vista if MS wants it to.

And direct API calls to DirectX and Direct2D have almost nothing to do with DWM. All games run in windowed mode with Direct3D 11 rendering on Vista even though DWM supposedly supports only D3D9. This is because the actual application's API calls have next to nothing to do with what DWM is doing.

Microsoft can make it work, there are very few, if any, architectural changes required. But the fact is that they don't want to. Anyway, it's a moot point but I wanted to clear the air about DWM.

{Direct2D and DirectWrite are supported the same as in Windows 7 and DXGI calls for Windows 7 work with windows Vista though they do not use hardware acceleration. So, it works but will be slower}.

This is not a valid reason since no architectural change is required on this front to get it running. If there is a change required, it is somewhere else.

BTW, the platform update has been updated as recently as August 2011, suggesting that Microsoft does want developers to have a common development platform for Windows Vista and 7. So where does the problem lie? Let's ask MS

In fact, the only "kernel" improvements in Windows 7 are those related to speed, efficiency and multithreading (better allocation of threads to certain multithreaded processors). Most of the "features" mentioned in the wikipedia article are not "kernel" improvements.

A "kernel" implies a basic paradigm of OS structure: e.g. Windows 95/98/Me had the Windows 9x kernel, Windows NT 4.0 has a kernel, NT 5.x kernel, etc.

The feature differences between Windows releases may not necessarily be kernel changes.

There are articles that confirm this:

http://www.pcworld.com/article/153624/under_the_hood_windows_7_is_vistas_twin.html
http://searchwinit.techtarget.com/news/1315206/Mixed-reaction-on-keeping-Vista-kernel-for-Windows-7
http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/ne...-for-windows-7-same-requirements-as-vista.ars

That basically means the "core architecture" is the same, and there is no reason why an application built for Windows 7 shouldn't at least run on Vista. It is clear why MS is doing this, though.

It's like a new Intel or AMD processor - it's faster and better, but there's virtually nothing that you cannot run on the older hardware.

 

Like I said, same kernel and same architecture. It's a matter of porting the API. All an API is (I'm sure some of you know) is a way to access classes etc (a bit more complicated but not by much) and if you've already created the API for what's essentially the exact same kernel (and Vista and 7 have essentially the same exact kernel, definitely not changed enough to make any difference) you can port it without any effort.

EDIT: And you're correct, they could simply have IE9 run with its own methods. Thank for clarifying, I figured that in the MS world there needed to be some kind of "coherence" with DWM (some kind of medium) but I really don't know as I've never developed a legitimate application especially with DX.

 

Enhanced Memory Protections in IE10

http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/archive/...mory-protections-in-ie10.aspx?Redirected=true

A long but interesting read.

 

The ForceASLR looks really good. I would love to see more applications built with that flag. If I understand it correctly, if you were to compile a program (let's say Firefox) and then run Firefox in Sandboxie it would force Sandboxie to use ASLR as the .dll is then part of the Firefox address space... I think? lol Not positive.

Enhancements to ASLR are nice.

I was wondering what the details were about the improvements and this definitely sheds light.

 

From what I gathered it should work in the same way as EMET, forcing any DLLs to use ASLR, which I think is what you said.

After reading this I've also decided to remove EMET, I'm not sure if it might be forcing an "older" ASLR, I can live without it for now.

 

I believe pseudo-ASLR only activates when it's not already supported - you're not at risk of using any old system.

I'm not sure if EMET would force Sandboxie to use ASLR if it were only injected into Firefox. Not sure.

 

So, in the developer preview (in the first post in this thread) you can see there was a force 64bit option, this has been removed in the Consumer Preview. For a while now I've been WTFing as to what would be the cause of this, and I assumed it was because they broke the 64bit build and didn't want anyone using it.

Today I discovered the 64bit option hasn't been removed, it's been merged into the "Enhanced Protected Mode" option in the "Advanced" section of the Internet Options. This is probably because the enhanced protections are 64bit only (e.g. improved ASLR)

Metro IE can only be run in 64bit mode and has Enhanced Protected Mode forced onto it, unfortunately enabling Enhanced Protected mode on the desktop is the *only* way to run the 64bit version of IE.

Whilst this may not seem like an issue, it means IE is back to square 1 as far as plugins are concerned. Plugins will need to be updated to support IE's Enhanced Protected Mode if you want to run the 64bit version of IE. As if we hadn't waited long enough for 64bit versions of plugins, now we need to wait again.

I haven't tested Java yet, I'll do that later today. But the flash plugin definitely doesn't work. Hopefully this will be sorted before IE10 is released to Win7/8 users.

 

Plugins will definitely update quickly though. They all want to be compatible with IE. By the release we'll likely see those versions out, or at the very least in beta.

 

As noted in other threads, the latest version of IE 10 in the Windows 8 Release Preview comes with a built in version of flash which is optimized for performance, and which works in IE10's 'Enhanced Protected Mode'.

Benchmark wise it improves its scores on the latest version of tests262, failing only 7. (Keep in mind that test 262 is frequently updated, I've made sure to show the date in the screenshot)




On the 64 bit version, it also shaves nearly 100ms off it's total run time of SunSpider when compared to my original post using the same hardware, totally noticeable! (I was too lazy to test the 32 bit version)

 

Translation: BUY OUR NEW STUFF NOW AND MAKE US RICHER!

also: WE DON'T CARE ABOUT THE PIG'S EAR WE MADE OF VISTA WHEN IT WAS FIRST RELEASED AND WERE EVENTUALLY FORCED TO RELEASE WIN 7!

Anyway, like quite a few people, I have discovered I can't run IE 9 on my Vista notebook (neither can I run it on my big Toshiba laptop). So many Windows Vista customers just haven't had a great browsing experience with it.

This is all about Micro$oft desperately still trying to distance itself from the whole 'Vista fandango' & pushing Win 7 until it can push Win 8 concomitant with a strong-arm tactic on convincing manufacturers to make more compatible tablet devices for its OS. You'd have to be Helen Keller not to see this.

No biggie though, as both Vista machines run Firefox, SeaMonkey, Chrome, Opera, Maxthon 3, Maxthon 2 & SRWare Iron perfectly. I can even run Safari.

 

Microsoft: Sites using IE 10 and HTML5 load 30 percent faster

 

I quite like IE 9. I don't use it a great deal, but the 64 bit version is fast, safe & relatively easy & un-annoying to use. What I really want to know is just how good will IE 10 be on Win 7? Will it function like on Win 8, or will it be a substandard version for those of us who want to stay with Win 7? Although, with Waterfox & now Opera 12 (64 bit) this will be less of a problem for me.

 

Under the Hood: Bubbles

 

Microsoft helps get your site tablet ready with IE10

 

Developer Guidance for Web Sites with Flash Content in Windows 8

 

Join Neowin and Internet Explorer for a chat, ask your questions now!

Very interesting..

 

I like that Microsoft is changing thing's with Internet Explorer (Security, Standards, Features, Etc.)

But, the restriction thing with Operating System versions is a huge drawback.
I agree, it's BS.

 

this must have slipped under my radar. a 'new' version of IE 10 was released on May 31.
http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/Info/Downloads/Default.html

i'm gonna give it a try.
-----------------------
edit:
seems like i have to install Windows 8 to try it out.

tnx but no tnx

 

That platform preview is more related to the Metro version of IE10. They will release the desktop version of IE10 to Windows 7, don't worry. lol

 

do we have an ETA for that?

 

I don't know of one. Read this post for an interesting way to ask questions to the MS IE Team (responsible for the development of IE) with assurance of answers. I already made some questions related to the InPrivate Browsing feature.

 

it's no rush really.
i'll try it when it's there.

i reckon it (IE10) will probably be released about the same times as Win8.

 

Sounds reasonable....