Just read that here too: http://mezzoblue.com/archives/2006/07/27/priority/
If the timing is as Dave suggests, that doesn't leave much time to get everything behaving in IE7! Time to start stressing!!! On 28/07/06, David Dixon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Actually, Microsoft are going to be pushing IE7 as a high priority update through Windows Update. http://news.com.com/Microsoft+tags+IE+7+high+priority+update/2100-7350_3-6098500.html So for many people (at those who have automatic updates turned on), IE 7 will be installed automatically.... but then of course youve still got the crowd that dont even have SP2 installed, so its a good bet that IE6 will still be a heavily used browser for XP users (not to mention the people still using 2000/ME/98 etc). Also, while I have no evidence to back this up, I sincerely doubt that the XP/Vista products will have any differences that will effect developer/designers.... sure that may have different security implementations, but from a basic CSS/Javascript point of view, these should be platform independant and simply be a feature of IE7 itself, as with IE6. (now, if IE 6 is different on 2000 than XP, I'll probably end up eating my words :p) Thanks, David. Jason Foss wrote: > Yeah... can't really say this is good news. Most people on XP won't > upgrade to IE7, so we'll have to test IE7 on XP for a realtively small > percentage I expect. > > That won't be bad if it behaves the same on XP as it does on Vista > mind you, but if has differences on Vista as opposed to XP then that > will be a bit of a pain. Shall have to wait and see. > > And yes - there are a gazillion bootleg copies of XP out there - all > from the corporate edition that don't require activation. Got my hands > on one way back when XP was only a few months old! At least this time > legal copies of Vista Beta are readily available for testing, that > will probably go a long way towards reducing demand for bootleg > versions. > > On 28/07/06, Christian Montoya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On 7/27/06, Paul Novitski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> At 09:46 AM 7/27/2006, Christian Montoya wrote: >>>> Are there any stats on how many users have a bootleg copy of Windows >>>> XP? I have a feeling it's a huge number. >>> Maybe I'm being naive, but I thought you "can't" bootleg XP because >>> each copy of the software gets registered to a single computer. When >>> I moved from desktop to laptop a few years ago, and then six months >>> later moved to another laptop, I actually had to persuade a dubious >>> human being on the phone at Microsoft that I wasn't pirating their >>> operating system. Like all security systems this is no doubt >>> hackable (by spoofing the software id and/or whatever adds up to be >>> the computer id), but I imagine that's too sophisticated a hack for >>> the average computer geek, much less for the average user. >> I would take your word for it, but I know people who have bootleg copies. >> >> -- >> -- >> Christian Montoya >> christianmontoya.com ... portfolio.christianmontoya.com >> >> >> ****************************************************** >> The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ >> >> See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm >> for some hints on posting to the list & getting help >> ****************************************************** >> >> > > ****************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ******************************************************
-- Jason Foss http://www.almost-anything.com.au http://www.waterfallweb.net Windows Messenger: [EMAIL PROTECTED] North Rockhampton, Queensland, Australia ****************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ******************************************************
