IE10: Fast, Fluid, Perfect for Touch, and Available Now for Windows 7

I installed IE10 RP. No problems so far, except that the spell checker didn´t work at first. I uninstalled Speckie and configured the built-in spell checker so that it works in English (I use a non-English Windows version).

Except this, I see no obvious changes in the GUI or in the operation of the browser.

 

I though it was the official release . . . just a preview.

 

Despite what Hungry said in a different thread, I still see little point in IE 10 on Windows 7. If the majority of its enhanced security measures don't work on 7, and little else is there beyond a slight improvement over IE 9, I look at it as "meh". It was obvious MS didn't really care about anyone not on Windows 8 throughout the testing phase of IE 10, so that doesn't help my attitude about it very much. It's for mobile devices and Windows 8, they might as well just come right on out and say it and also say that anyone not on either one of those are an afterthought. I'm probably coming across as an IE/MS "hater", but I'm not one. I just don't care for how MS is handling things at the moment.

 

Double Ditto.....

 

Make that double double ditto

 

By the way, Flash is not built-in on 7 as it is 8, making an upgrade to this "preview" even less worth doing than it was to start with.

 

That's right, I took a look at the Preview edition here.

I wonder if MS will eventually enhance it for Win 7 so it does support Flash built-in and full security utilization of EPM? Maybe too much to hope for

 

https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=335623. I don't hold out a lot of hope for full implementation of the security measures on Windows 7 that can be provided to IE 10 on 8 ((AppContainer of course not being implemented for obvious and understandable reasons.)). As for Flash, that would be the one thing they'd likely implement..though they've sure had an awful lot of time already to do it. At this point I'm still wondering if IE 10 will ever go Final on Windows 7. I have a feeling that's going to be decided based on how well Windows 8 itself is received, which we won't know for absolute certain until after the holiday shopping season at the very least.

 

Yeah, I tend to agree. I'm not that excited by the prospect of IE 10 for Win 7. I'll wait until it works properly before I even consider using it.

I have Opera 64 bit, SeaMonkey & Maxthon. Why do I need IE 10 on Win 7?

 

I realize people wanted to see better security features for the Windows 7 version (being a security forum). But after all, it is a browser. There are major improvements in speed and standards compliance that are well worth it.

So statements like:

Are complete nonsense. There's more to a browser than security, there's... browsing. Now that W7 users will have an upgrade path to IE10 we will see websites embracing new standards a lot faster than if MS had restricted it to W8.

 

Short and balanced review: Microsoft unveils Internet Explorer 10 Release Preview for Windows 7, http://www.softwarecrew.com/2012/11...et-explorer-10-release-preview-for-windows-7/.

 

You would think they would add flash for sure.... wonder why they haven't yet......

 

I'm sorry, but I disagree with you. Plus, I'm not talking "nonsense", I'm speaking my own opinion. Security needs to be the top feature in a browser now before speed tweaks and standards improvements. The fact remains that IE 10 on Windows 7 is not the same as it is on Windows 8. Of course there is more to browsers than security, no one should argue that. But heck Funky, they haven't even given it Flash. Compared to it on Windows 8, on Windows 7 the browser is half complete. Performance improvements ((though slight)) are always nice, but there isn't near enough there to make me consider it much better than IE 9, and sure not enough to make me drop Chrome or even Firefox for it. All this time has passed and Windows 7 has gotten two "previews", and a lot of features are missing still.

Edit: Just in case it is not clear, my comments are towards IE 10 on Windows 7

 

A browsers number one priority should be standards compliance/ compatibility. The second should probably be stability. After that security. And after that Performance. In reality performance is usually weighted heavier than most things.

I don't see why Flash isn't built in. The interface shouldn't be OS specific, it should be browser specific. But I suppose the sandbox for Flash is so they didn't bother because the security benefits would be moot.

 

I don't use IE 9 and version 10 does not sound like it's worth the trouble. "A built in spell check before 2013!" should have been the IE 10 promo phrase.

 

But standards compliance falls on websites too though, right? Consider SPDY, it's a "standard", but nobody is using it, save for Google and its own services mostly. The same with HTML5. Browser support is there, but it's not in heavy use yet ((that I've seen at least)). Performance is about the same in that a really messed up, script-crazy website might choke an otherwise high performance browser. Security though, browser security can not only keep badly designed and therefore exploited websites from exploiting you, but also keep your 3rd party arsenal trimmed way down. I understand your view, I just see the priorities differently.

 

SPDY is used by Twitter and Firefox supports it as well. Compliance is a two way street - a better example would be websites that use -webkit or -moz traits, which are nonstandard and noncompliant.

Generally browsers take responsibility for performance though it is, again, a two way street.

But so is security. Websites can take precautions against XSS attacks, CSRF attacks, Clickjacking, etc.

The responsibilities are always delegated between various parties, I don't think priorities change accordingly.

 

its working much faster than IE-9. but there are some lags. one is while browsing facebook pages, I am unable to like the posts. as I press like, immediately it changes to unlike and the status is not updated. and the second one is g talk chat plugin is not working. and third, even if I read/delete the emails in gmail or any service and re-log into the account, those mails are showing as unread/present in inbox.


chandu

 

I don't like Microsoft's decision Not to include an IE10/Flash-built for the Windows 7 users.
This is part of Microsoft's Windows 8 Promotion Strategy...
I will update my system to IE10 when it will be Officially released.
However, IE10 will Not be my Primary Browser.

 

I agree with you, I have had reservations about Microsoft's developing IE 10 for Win 7 for a while now. From what I can gather it is really is 'half-complete'. I hardly ever use IE 9, the only reason to at all would be to use the 64 bit version. I have Opera for that, & IE 9 just in case. On 32 bit systems there is such a good choice of alternate browsers I can't see what advantages IE 10 would be. On my two Vista machines I have SeaMonkey & Chrome set as default respectively. There will be no IE 10 for Vista, yet MS are going to support it as long as they support Win 7, so they say. As for security; Chrome is probably the safest out of the box & my SeaMonkey set up includes NoScript, RequestPolicy & PrefBar with easy access to denying Java (which I only normally 'check' if I need it), that with ABP & FlashBlock I can't see it being any less safer than IE 10 on Win 7 or otherwise.