<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Internet Explorer 7 Readiness Toolkit</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.webstandards.org/2006/07/13/internet-explorer-7-readiness-toolkit/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.webstandards.org/2006/07/13/internet-explorer-7-readiness-toolkit/</link>
	<description>Working together for standards</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 Mar 2013 12:19:03 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alex</title>
		<link>http://www.webstandards.org/2006/07/13/internet-explorer-7-readiness-toolkit/comment-page-1/#comment-8852</link>
		<dc:creator>Alex</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Oct 2006 22:36:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.webstandards.org/2006/07/13/internet-explorer-7-readiness-toolkit/#comment-8852</guid>
		<description>That&#039;s exactly the problem - a browser should not be tied into an OS.  The legal fees MS has had to pay over the years defending their bundling of IE with Windows should keep them from repeating the same mistake.  Just look at the heated debate over having their search engine as the default. 

I also think it&#039;s unfortunate that non-Windows developers (operating purely in Linux environments, for example) are forced to purchase a copy of Windows merely so they can test their sites and applications in IE.  

The primary reason the majority of Internet users use the less well designed, less secure, and less stable IE over far more sophisticated alternatives based on the Gecko and KTHML engines is because historically IE was bundled with Windows.  That marketing induced differential aside, the best performing, most secure, and standards compliant browsers would be dominating the market today and making a web developer&#039;s life (and a user&#039;s) a whole lot easier.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That&#8217;s exactly the problem &#8211; a browser should not be tied into an OS.  The legal fees MS has had to pay over the years defending their bundling of IE with Windows should keep them from repeating the same mistake.  Just look at the heated debate over having their search engine as the default. </p>
<p>I also think it&#8217;s unfortunate that non-Windows developers (operating purely in Linux environments, for example) are forced to purchase a copy of Windows merely so they can test their sites and applications in IE.  </p>
<p>The primary reason the majority of Internet users use the less well designed, less secure, and less stable IE over far more sophisticated alternatives based on the Gecko and KTHML engines is because historically IE was bundled with Windows.  That marketing induced differential aside, the best performing, most secure, and standards compliant browsers would be dominating the market today and making a web developer&#8217;s life (and a user&#8217;s) a whole lot easier.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe</title>
		<link>http://www.webstandards.org/2006/07/13/internet-explorer-7-readiness-toolkit/comment-page-1/#comment-8766</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Oct 2006 09:44:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.webstandards.org/2006/07/13/internet-explorer-7-readiness-toolkit/#comment-8766</guid>
		<description>&quot;I can’t see why Microsoft don’t allow you to run multiple versions side by side like firefox or opera. It’s just frustrating for us developers who Microsoft don’t seem to care enough about.&quot;

Oh, please. Take a look at the myriad of developer resources Microsoft offers for free and then see if they care about developers. And if you can&#039;t understand why you can&#039;t run both of them side by side, you obviously know very little about IE. It&#039;s tied deep in the operating system. It functions as much more than just a browser.

It&#039;s not a matter of Microsoft &#039;allowing&#039; you to do something. It&#039;s a matter of something simply not being possible. If you were one of &#039;us developers&#039;, you would&#039;ve understood that.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;I can’t see why Microsoft don’t allow you to run multiple versions side by side like firefox or opera. It’s just frustrating for us developers who Microsoft don’t seem to care enough about.&#8221;</p>
<p>Oh, please. Take a look at the myriad of developer resources Microsoft offers for free and then see if they care about developers. And if you can&#8217;t understand why you can&#8217;t run both of them side by side, you obviously know very little about IE. It&#8217;s tied deep in the operating system. It functions as much more than just a browser.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s not a matter of Microsoft &#8216;allowing&#8217; you to do something. It&#8217;s a matter of something simply not being possible. If you were one of &#8216;us developers&#8217;, you would&#8217;ve understood that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Asp_net_2_0_Rocks</title>
		<link>http://www.webstandards.org/2006/07/13/internet-explorer-7-readiness-toolkit/comment-page-1/#comment-6467</link>
		<dc:creator>Asp_net_2_0_Rocks</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Sep 2006 17:58:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.webstandards.org/2006/07/13/internet-explorer-7-readiness-toolkit/#comment-6467</guid>
		<description>I’ve installed IE7 beta3 and then have standalone executables for IE6 and IE5.5 but they dont run together very well. any ideas?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I’ve installed IE7 beta3 and then have standalone executables for IE6 and IE5.5 but they dont run together very well. any ideas?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Wayne</title>
		<link>http://www.webstandards.org/2006/07/13/internet-explorer-7-readiness-toolkit/comment-page-1/#comment-4252</link>
		<dc:creator>Wayne</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Sep 2006 02:53:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.webstandards.org/2006/07/13/internet-explorer-7-readiness-toolkit/#comment-4252</guid>
		<description>The problem that I have with installing virtual PC is you need to have a licence for windows. This is why microsoft are giving virtual PC away for free. They want you to buy another copy of windows. I can&#039;t see why Microsoft don&#039;t allow you to run multiple versions side by side like firefox or opera. It&#039;s just frustrating for us developers who Microsoft don&#039;t seem to care enough about.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The problem that I have with installing virtual PC is you need to have a licence for windows. This is why microsoft are giving virtual PC away for free. They want you to buy another copy of windows. I can&#8217;t see why Microsoft don&#8217;t allow you to run multiple versions side by side like firefox or opera. It&#8217;s just frustrating for us developers who Microsoft don&#8217;t seem to care enough about.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris Hester</title>
		<link>http://www.webstandards.org/2006/07/13/internet-explorer-7-readiness-toolkit/comment-page-1/#comment-3765</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Hester</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Aug 2006 09:59:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.webstandards.org/2006/07/13/internet-explorer-7-readiness-toolkit/#comment-3765</guid>
		<description>Note about Virtual PC: &quot;It runs on Windows XP Professional and Windows 2000 Professional.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Note about Virtual PC: &#8220;It runs on Windows XP Professional and Windows 2000 Professional.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeremy</title>
		<link>http://www.webstandards.org/2006/07/13/internet-explorer-7-readiness-toolkit/comment-page-1/#comment-3659</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeremy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Aug 2006 01:09:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.webstandards.org/2006/07/13/internet-explorer-7-readiness-toolkit/#comment-3659</guid>
		<description>In the excerpt, you have written &quot;The Toolkit requires a genuine registered copy of Windows Vista, Windows Server 2003, &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; XP.&quot;

This implies that you need a copy of all three. Shouldn&#039;t it read &quot;The Toolkit requires a genuine registered copy of Windows Vista, Windows Server 2003, &lt;em&gt;or&lt;/em&gt; XP.&quot;?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In the excerpt, you have written &#8220;The Toolkit requires a genuine registered copy of Windows Vista, Windows Server 2003, <em>and</em> XP.&#8221;</p>
<p>This implies that you need a copy of all three. Shouldn&#8217;t it read &#8220;The Toolkit requires a genuine registered copy of Windows Vista, Windows Server 2003, <em>or</em> XP.&#8221;?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brad Seo</title>
		<link>http://www.webstandards.org/2006/07/13/internet-explorer-7-readiness-toolkit/comment-page-1/#comment-3123</link>
		<dc:creator>Brad Seo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Aug 2006 11:32:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.webstandards.org/2006/07/13/internet-explorer-7-readiness-toolkit/#comment-3123</guid>
		<description>Perhaps it is still early days but I am quietly happy with what IE have produced this time around particularly in the area of standards. It could have been a lot worst. I&#039;ll still continue to use Firefox though.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Perhaps it is still early days but I am quietly happy with what IE have produced this time around particularly in the area of standards. It could have been a lot worst. I&#8217;ll still continue to use Firefox though.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jamie</title>
		<link>http://www.webstandards.org/2006/07/13/internet-explorer-7-readiness-toolkit/comment-page-1/#comment-3082</link>
		<dc:creator>Jamie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Aug 2006 15:29:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.webstandards.org/2006/07/13/internet-explorer-7-readiness-toolkit/#comment-3082</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve installed IE7 beta3 (and beta2 prior to that) and then have standalone executables for IE6 and IE5.5.  There&#039;s no need for registry hacking and they happily all run at the same time.

I don&#039;t use IE7 with force though, also have FireFox for my day-to-day internet browsing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve installed IE7 beta3 (and beta2 prior to that) and then have standalone executables for IE6 and IE5.5.  There&#8217;s no need for registry hacking and they happily all run at the same time.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t use IE7 with force though, also have FireFox for my day-to-day internet browsing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ivan</title>
		<link>http://www.webstandards.org/2006/07/13/internet-explorer-7-readiness-toolkit/comment-page-1/#comment-2293</link>
		<dc:creator>Ivan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Jul 2006 10:19:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.webstandards.org/2006/07/13/internet-explorer-7-readiness-toolkit/#comment-2293</guid>
		<description>I was checking designs on my other pc with ie6 and sometimes calling my friend to check it with older IE .... sad :(</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was checking designs on my other pc with ie6 and sometimes calling my friend to check it with older IE &#8230;. sad :(</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nick Fitzsimons</title>
		<link>http://www.webstandards.org/2006/07/13/internet-explorer-7-readiness-toolkit/comment-page-1/#comment-2265</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick Fitzsimons</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 Jul 2006 15:26:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.webstandards.org/2006/07/13/internet-explorer-7-readiness-toolkit/#comment-2265</guid>
		<description>Not only is Virtual PC available on Windows, but Microsoft have just made it a &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.microsoft.com/windows/virtualpc/default.mspx&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;free download&lt;/a&gt;!

@Emil: on a number of occasions, the &lt;a href=&quot;http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;IE Team&lt;/a&gt; have said in response to comments that they recommend using Virtual PC for testing multiple IE versions, and that side-by-side installations of different versions are not supported. Personally, I&#039;ve not had any problems running versions 5 and 5.5 alongside 6 for testing, but getting 6 and 7 to co-exist hasn&#039;t really worked out for me (yet). But as VPC is now free, it makes sense to use that from now on.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not only is Virtual PC available on Windows, but Microsoft have just made it a <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/windows/virtualpc/default.mspx" rel="nofollow">free download</a>!</p>
<p>@Emil: on a number of occasions, the <a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/" rel="nofollow">IE Team</a> have said in response to comments that they recommend using Virtual PC for testing multiple IE versions, and that side-by-side installations of different versions are not supported. Personally, I&#8217;ve not had any problems running versions 5 and 5.5 alongside 6 for testing, but getting 6 and 7 to co-exist hasn&#8217;t really worked out for me (yet). But as VPC is now free, it makes sense to use that from now on.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic page generated in 0.354 seconds. -->
<!-- Cached page generated by WP-Super-Cache on 2013-05-02 13:03:35 -->