The real issue with IE is people running old versions of it. So, Chrome's auto update is significantly safer than IE if your going to install once and possibly never touch the computer again.
The long release cycle for new versions of IE is irrelevant. Internet Explorer security patches get pushed regularly through Windows Update, which Microsoft encourages users to set up for automatic installation. So this problem will get fixed for the average user as soon as Microsoft sends out the patch. It requires no more knowledge than updating Chrome does.
Note that I'm not recommending that anybody use IE. I'm just pointing out that it does get automatic updates, just like other browsers.
One big problem I had with IE was the update cycle. Whereas Chrome (and subsequently other browsers) updated every six weeks or so, non-technical Windows users just had whatever the OS installed by default, e.g. IE6, etc.
So while Chrome might does have quirks and issues, the frequent update cycle compensates for it.
Chrome clearly isn't made for the enterprise. IE has historically been a poor browser, but it gives sys admins quite a bit of control over how and when updates are applied.
Well, the thing is both Chrome and Firefox get updated automatically but IE doesn't.
So the problem will not IE versions that are already old (IE6, IE7) but current versions of IE - even future versions before they implement these new standards.
As these features roll out to Firefox and Chrome, users of these browsers will have to them because of the auto-update pretty quickly.
Eventually IE will implement them, maybe in version 12, and you'll have users still using IE10. Heck, maybe they won't be able to upgrade their IE because it won't run on their aging Windows 7.
Unless IE switches to the auto-update used by Firefox and Chrome, and stops dropping Windows versions in their new IE, I don't see the problem going away.
I wish IE would move away from big waterfall-esque versions-numbers and just go to frequent bite sized automatic updates.
I understand the corporate need for browser version locking but that should be the exception (Active Directory overriding) not the norm.
As an aside the latest versions of IE seem just fine. I no longer have any skin in that game like I did in 2006-2010 where every computer I happened across would instantly have FF installed and IE hidden.
I think a lot of people just don't know enough to upgrade their browser - I see people using IE9 at work even though we are allowed to install whatever software we want...
IE really needs silent auto-update, and to actually release more often...
The funny? thing is that IE has become better than Chrome for a lot of stuff because Chrome keeps dropping support for things that it used to support. The frequency of updates means that your stuff could just stop working one day when it worked perfectly fine the previous day. It requires constant attention to make sure things won't break. The most recent one to get us was the File.lastModifiedDate
I see your point, but wouldn't that concern vanish the moment IE updates silently, in the background, without the user even noticing? If that would be the case, they would start out with an outdated IE, but be automatically updated to the most recent version as soon as they connect to the internet.
I never understood why IE updating lags so far behind. It is free. I understand why updating the OS is a bigger deal. It costs money and is a huge change that involves a lot of work for some.
I suppose Microsoft is partially to blame. You can install any version of Chrome and Firefox on XP, but only up to IE8.
> no concerns about maintaining backwards compatibility
Actually, one of the reasons old IE versions persisted forever is because the enterprise rarely updates. Although I doubt there are many out there that use Chrome at all, they would most certainly block auto-updating, much as they used to block Windows Service Packs until they could be tested in-house - no matter how severe the vulnerabilities they patched.
For what it's worth, recent versions of IE are already evergreen and auto-update by default.
The real culprit behind us still having to support IE8 for some clients is your average enterprise IT department. They'll find ways to lock down updates on any browser. Just as some IT departments have auto updates locked down on Chrome/Firefox already, they'll probably demand a way to do that with Microsoft's browsers too (or find a way to block the updates without Microsoft's support).
Since newer versions are available in windows update it hardly presents a challenge or signals an active choice to update IE any more than trying to keep your system up to date / secure.
Here's the thing, network security needs to be balanced against organizational operations. Internet Explorer has been sold to organizations as a platform where thin client applications can be deployed cheaply. Internet Explorer doesn't update automatically because the last thing Microsoft wants to do to their clients is break all of their web apps through an untested update. Security updates also need to have backwards compatibility, or large firms won't upgrade, since their web apps might break.
Security and usability are at odds. Large organizations (thus far) tend to favor usability. It's a cost-benefit analysis, and the benefit of not redeveloping their web apps outweighs the cost of increasing security.
Internet Explorer doesn't automatically update because every company disables the automatic updates.
Developing for Internet Explorer 8 is my present-day reality too, but if IT departments were instead mandating Firefox 3.0 or Chrome 1.0 I'm not sure how much better it would be.
Hm. Chrome, Firefox, Opera, etc.. release a new version multiple times a year. Microsoft ties IE to OS releases which happen every 5(+/-) years.
Dear Microsoft: I'd love to hear that cosmic resonating pop of you pulling your head out of your ass.
I recognize that the latest version of IE finally has auto-update. It taking Microsoft this long to do what Firefox and Chrome have been doing for years doesn't do anything more than certify that Microsoft Actively makes my job 50% more difficult on a daily basis.
I ended up with IE8 because I ran Windows Update, not because I had some desire to get a new IE.
Exactly. Chrome updates faster because it does it with zero user input. It just happens whenever spare resources are available and politely lets you know when it's done. IE8 needs you to run Windows Update, which a significant number of users don't want the hassle.
Practically every site on the internet has been recommending for years to not use IE for a variety of reasons. I'd be surprised if notions of security could somehow convince IE users to install a better browser.
reply