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

By on April 14, 2011, 3:35 PM
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.

Microsoft has now confirmed that this is by design, and not just limited to the platform preview. "Windows Vista customers have a great browsing experience with IE9, but in building IE10 we are focused on continuing to drive the kind of innovation that only happens when you take advantage of the ongoing improvements in modern operating systems and modern hardware," a Microsoft spokesperson said in a statement.

Redmond dropped support of Windows XP with the release of IE9. Now the company is dropping support of Windows Vista with the release of IE10.

On the one hand, this is a good trend because it means Microsoft is not limited to older technologies when it works on the next version of its browser. It also helps push users to upgrade their browser version. On the other hand, the company is the first major browser vendor to drop support for Windows XP and Windows Vista. Furthermore, users who aren't upgrading Windows are less likely to upgrade their browsers anyway.

In short, most Windows XP and Windows Vista users will have to stick with versions of IE that are becoming more and more outdated. Alternatively, they will use browsers like Chrome or Firefox if they want to keep up with the ever evolving World Wide Web.




User Comments: 32

Got something to say? Post a comment
Guest said:

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.

Emil said:

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

treeski treeski said:

...if they want to keep up with the ever evolving world wide web.

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.

Gars Gars said:

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?

Vrmithrax Vrmithrax, TechSpot Paladin, said:

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.

ET3D, TechSpot Paladin, said:

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.

EXCellR8 EXCellR8, The Conservative, said:

no reason to use IE anymore

Kibaruk Kibaruk, TechSpot Paladin, said:

More reasons to use Chrome or FF =)

yukka, TechSpot Paladin, said:

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

Emil said:

yukka said:

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

No, not according to numbers I trust.

Emin3nce said:

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

Guest said:

.....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.

lawfer, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Emil said:

yukka said:

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

No, not according to numbers I trust.

I've read somewhere it did. Only in the U.S. though.

Guest said:

If "Windows XP" were in stores, then It would still selling it.

Guest said:

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)

:)

Lokalaskurar Lokalaskurar said:

Guest said:

If "Windows XP" were in stores, then It would still selling it.

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.

nickblame said:

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.

Staff
Per Hansson Per Hansson, TS Server Guru, said:

nickblame said:

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.

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

Leeky Leeky said:

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?

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.

Archean Archean, TechSpot Paladin, said:

@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.

Coodu Coodu said:

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.

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

fpsgamerJR62 said:

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.

grumpiman said:

"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!).

ET3D, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Leeky said:

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.

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.

Arris Arris said:

I only use IE for work and testing/troubleshooting software/website issues.

Generally I use Opera and Chrome.

I can't think what would be the reason for cutting off Vista support (other than, for want of a better analogy, one would wish to cut off a gangrenous limb). Probably used some Win7 only .net/silverlight/system dlls when implementing it.

Guest said:

Understandable, as DX 12 will be only supported on Windows 7+.

Staff
Per Hansson Per Hansson, TS Server Guru, said:

Guest said:

Understandable, as DX 12 will be only supported on Windows 7+.

Really?

Man that sucks

The DirectX echosystem is divided enough as it is!

Mizzou Mizzou said:

Looks like Microsoft is out to put Vista and XP in the rear view mirror. Hard to believe that IE 10 couldn't be supported on Vista, even if it took a service pack to get it done. While I can understand that it's time to pull the plug on XP, it seems a bit too soon to be bailing out on the folks running Vista.

T77 T77 said:

I have Win7......

Mizzou Mizzou said:

I have Win7......

Same here, but if I were still on Vista I wouldn't be very happy with this announcement.

Guest said:

Tis , OK... There are other very good web browsers that will run much better than Internet Exploder on many different operating systems...

Tis funny to watch Steve Balmer shoot himself in the foot again, but maybe this is only a rumor to see how it plays in the press or on wall street greed...

Google Chrome, Opera, and Firefox to name three cross platform web browsers, and there are more if you take the time to investigate...

JR

cmbjive said:

This comment brought to you by Chrome.

Load all comments...

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.