TechSpot

IE10 will only work on Windows 7 and up, no Vista support

By Emil
Apr 14, 2011
Post New Reply
  1. When Microsoft released the first platform preview of Internet Explorer 10 earlier this week, our readers pointed out that it only appeared to work on Windows 7. A quick check in the release notes showed that IE10 would indeed not support Windows Vista.

    Read the whole story
     
  2. Dang it! This sort of sucks. Anyway I'm on Vista but I always update my browsers so "Furthermore, users who aren't upgrading Windows are less likely to upgrade their browsers anyway." definitely does not apply to me. I'm on Vista anyway because I don't have the money currently to buy another copy of 7 after I bought one for my laptop. Oh well I don't use IE that much anyways.
     
  3. Emil

    Emil TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 154

    Yes, it does not apply to most tech-savvy users, but I believe it does for the broader user base.
     
  4. treeski

    treeski TS Guru Posts: 877   +130

    They should upgrade OSes if they want to keep up with the ever evolving state of home computing :p
    I sympathize though... It can be pricey.
     
  5. Gars

    Gars TS Enthusiast Posts: 228

    IE9 will not support XP
    IE10 will not support Vista
    IE10.1 will not support 7 SP1
    ....
    i agree with the ""back drawings" for supporting oldest W/OS"es
    but
    thats the power that keep IE6 in use. right?

    the XP is still the most OS in use

    my question here is:
    How Chrome and Firefox make it and IE dont?
     
  6. Vrmithrax

    Vrmithrax TechSpot Paladin Posts: 1,286   +232

    Just another reason I'll continue to rely on Chrome and Firefox for all of my browsing needs. I haven't used IE for years, except for those rare (and highly annoying) times that an external program called IE directly, rather than my choice for default browsing, for online help and such.
     
  7. ET3D

    ET3D TechSpot Paladin Posts: 978   +31

    The question is whether there's anything technical preventing IE10 from running on Vista. I can understand excluding IE9 from XP, because XP is missing many display technologies which Vista and 7 have (DirectWrite, Direct2D, ...). On the other hand, Microsoft has been pretty good in keeping Vista up to date with these technologies, so I have to wonder if restricting IE10 to 7 is a marketing move only.
     
  8. EXCellR8

    EXCellR8 The Conservative Posts: 2,278

    no reason to use IE anymore
     
  9. Kibaruk

    Kibaruk TechSpot Paladin Posts: 1,242   +79

    More reasons to use Chrome or FF =)
     
  10. yukka

    yukka TechSpot Paladin Posts: 721   +30

    Didnt WIndows 7 overtake XP as the most common version of windows?
     
  11. Emil

    Emil TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 154

    No, not according to numbers I trust.
     
     
  12. Emin3nce

    Emin3nce TS Rookie Posts: 129

    I'm not going to upgrade a $120 OS to use a free browser that isn't as good as the competition.

    Good luck holding any major numbers in the race micro-douche-soft
     
  13. .....and Windows in some cases....I recently installed Ubuntu 10.10 and it was easier to do than Windows and required no additional drivers to fully work the wifi, sound card etc. And it boots and shuts down far faster. I still have an XP machine and Win7 machine but I wonder how long it will be before I stop using Windows completely just because of their short-sighted policies.
     
  14. lawfer

    lawfer TechSpot Paladin Posts: 1,272   +91

    I've read somewhere it did. Only in the U.S. though.
     
  15. If "Windows XP" were in stores, then It would still selling it.
     
  16. Why not only for Windows 8 ??? ...Then, the OS upgrade would be one and for all... And everyone would have the same "Windows 8" ...Would not it be really great ??? (sarcasm)
    :)
     
  17. Lokalaskurar

    Lokalaskurar TS Enthusiast Posts: 616

    Yeah, but they've been phasing out the XP OS greatly. There was a huge commercial disaster in Russia when Microsoft decided to remove Windows XP from the shelves. The Russians didn't want Vista...

    Regarding the most common OS in use: as for personal computers, according to numbers I've seen (and trust) - Windows 5.1 is the most common version (that being XP) outside of the US. In some countries, XP dominate like crazy, such as in China for instance - with (note: ) estimations that XP has more than 80% majority.

    In the US, later versions of Windows are still more popular.

    In the city in which I currently reside, *Windows 2000* is still the most common OS, it's more or less a disaster at municipality-level. And some cash are being funnelled into upgrading to Windows XP.

    As for Internet Explorer; the show must go on. And not developing current technology is simply ridiculous in my opinion.
     
  18. nickblame

    nickblame TS Rookie Posts: 41

    yeah right... who cares?
    this reminds me the dx11 not working on windows xp which in the end of the day only made dx11 less popular.
     
  19. Per Hansson

    Per Hansson TS Server Guru Posts: 1,930   +126 Staff Member

    Exactly, I don't really care if MS wants to kill their browser by not making it available for the biggest percentage of their user base.

    But as for DirectX the sad state we are at now is partly due to the fact that XP only supports DX9.
    The other half of the part is that the XBOX also only supports DX9.
    It makes me quite sad really :(
     
  20. Leeky

    Leeky TS Evangelist Posts: 4,378   +98

    There could well be technical reasons (well beyond my understanding) but the impression I get is more that Microsoft would like to gently persuade (note as almost force the unknowing) into upgrading their OS, so they can make some more money.

    If every other browser effort can backwards support other OS' I see absolutely no reason why the company that made the OS and browser can't do it - other than the financial gain to be had from it.
     
  21. Archean

    Archean TechSpot Paladin Posts: 6,053   +76

    @Leeky
    But fact of the matter is every software company does that i.e. make more money, after all that is one of the major objectives of their business; so I am not bothered by the money part.

    My concern is most software companies sell their software at much higher prices, hence, they inadvertently help escalate piracy. IMO MS should not sell its OS beyond 60-75$ price point (for a new user) and 30-40$ (for upgrade), in the longer run it should help reduce piracy. Other positive out of such pricing can be faster platform adoption.
     
  22. Coodu

    Coodu TS Enthusiast Posts: 179

    This is about right with how I feel on the issue. Firefox 3 and now 4 have done me very well. I only use IE at work and even then only on client repair machines! The masses seem to not trust the good alternatives :)
     
  23. fpsgamerJR62

    fpsgamerJR62 TS Rookie Posts: 489

    It's actually not a big deal if Microsoft's newest in-house browser will support only Windows 7 and newer versions of the OS. Aside from Firefox, Chrome and Opera, there is a whole bunch of lesser known alternative web browsers available to users of older versions of Windows. From Microsoft's viewpoint, cutting browser compatibility with older versions of Windows would probably make sense in the area of browser security since a significant portion of their users, i.e. office workers and home users, are not likely to use a web browser other than the one that was preinstalled in their PCs. From this perspective, it would be logical for Microsoft to insist that these users will be using the latest and most secure version of their browser.
     
  24. grumpiman

    grumpiman TS Rookie Posts: 19

    "It also helps push users to upgrade their browser version."

    I don't see why I should feel compelled to upgrade my browser if it's not supported on my OS.

    I think what the article meant to say is that it helps push users to upgrade their OS and hence more money for Microsoft (why am I not surprised!).
     
  25. ET3D

    ET3D TechSpot Paladin Posts: 978   +31

    While I'm sure the idea of making people upgrade plays into this, the commercial reasoning is probably more along the line of not wanting to invest time and money in supporting OS's what it's currently selling.

    Microsoft could support previous OS's, but it has less incentive than other browser makers. Browser companies, like Mozilla or Opera, can't afford to not support an OS. Microsoft on the other hand offers the default browser for Windows, and the default browser matters most on the currently selling OS. Most people who still use previous OS's are either naive users who probably never upgrade the browser, or power users who probably don't use IE anyway.
     


Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.