IE 7 Setup: Secure From the Start

Hi, my name is John Hrvatin and I'm the program manager for Internet Explorer setup. I'd like to share some of the ways setup in IE 7 helps keep you more secure and IE running smoothly.

Prior to installing IE 7, setup runs the Windows Malicious Software Removal Tool to clean your system of known malware and help prevent problems installing IE 7 or running it for the first time. If you keep your computer up-to-date using Windows Update, which hopefully everyone does, you will already have the latest version of the cleaner. In that case, setup will re-run the installed version; otherwise, it will download and run the latest version.

Setup also makes sure you have the latest-and-greatest by downloading and installing any available IE updates.  In previous versions of IE, users had to install updates after IE installation and anyone who didn’t was out-of-date. In IE 7, setup takes care of the updates so you can get right to using IE 7.

Here’s a screen shot:

Setup screen

Note to IT Professionals: setup uses the Windows Update Agent to handle download and installation of updates. Therefore, if you're using Windows Server Update Services (WSUS) and have your clients pointed to an internal Windows Update server, setup will use that server and only download approved updates.

A few additional items:

  • Setup verifies that your copy of Windows is genuine.  This guarantees you have access to the latest features, updates, and support. Read more about the benefits of genuine Microsoft software here.
  • Installation of IE 7 will require a reboot.  IE is a core piece of the Windows platform, depended on by many applications as well as OS services. These dependant services and apps must be shutdown to replace IE binaries and certain OS services can only shut down during system shut down.
  • For those of you trying out IE 7 Beta 2 Preview, you can find information about basic setup troubleshooting in the release notes and the newsgroups.

Thanks for your interest in IE and I look forward to hearing your comments!

 - John

Comments (92)
  1. PatriotB says:

    Screenshot isn’t showing up πŸ™‚

  2. ieblog says:

    That figures. πŸ™‚

    The funny thing is that the HTML was correct in the source when I put it up for John but got munged back somehow.

    It is fixed now. Thanks for the pointer.

    – Al Billings [MSFT]

  3. Matt Sherman says:

    Hi there, I realize that IE is a platform, not just an app, but as a developer I would benefit *greatly* by a scenrio where I could run IE 6 and 7 side by side on the same machine. I think a lot of developers would tell you the same thing.

    Would it be possible for you to develop that scenario, somehow? Even if the user experience is not ideal, as long as it was workable by the developer community, it would really help adoption.


    – Matt

  4. ieblog says:


    IE is an operating system component and has been so since it first released. IE has never supported side by side installation though people have hacked together things that make frankenbrowsers that accomodate getting most of IE running in a side by side fashion.

    We have no plans to support doing this because IE installation replaces core system components used by other applications, such as WININET.DLL. Having multiple versions registered and running on the system would cause tremendous problems for other applications and could lead to a lot of instability.

    This request has come up in other comments on previous blog entries over the last few weeks.

    – Al Billings [MSFT]

  5. Mike Dunn says:

    I distinctly remember some version of IE ran side-by-side with the previous version. The installer had a checkbox that said something like "don’t replace the existing IE". Might have been v4 which ran along side v3.

  6. Sven Groot says:

    As I’ve indicated here before, here you can get some of those "frankenbrowsers":

  7. Fiery Kitsune says:

    I thought Vista would do away with system restarts…

  8. r miller says:

    IE7 comes embedded in Vista.  You never have to install it.  This discussion is about replacing IE6 with IE7 on XP.

  9. I know I hijack these threads with design comments all the time, but it seems it needs to be done… that graphic is horrible. I won’t coin apple with the wet floor technique, but they have made it popular as of late — though it’s growing tired — though the gradient is a bit harsh and not a gentle balance.

    But seriously, blue and yellow gradient? <a href="">I‘ve ranted on this recently</a> and much in the previous IE 7 posts — that’s not attractive. On any level. Who keeps approving or leading the art direction of this marketing, it is not professional! Dark blue text on a blue/yellow background?! That’s an inexperienced designer giving up and giving into the fact that they couldn’t think of a solution to the problem.

    Serious, how can you push a design ideal, Mix 06 again comes to mind, without walking the path?

  10. A reader says:

    What if we want to use something OTHER than Microsoft products and don’t want to use the Windows Malicious Software Removal Tool? I like to use other more reliable software packages than that tool so can I install the updates without it? Do I have to do that separately via Windows Update after initial installation? Please don’t shove products down our throats that we may not don’t want.

  11. ieblog says:

    "A reader",

    You can use whatever tools you would like. Simply run them after installation. The option above is for customers who don’t have other tools or wish to run the removal tool in addition to anything else. It certainly doesn’t restrict you from running your own tools as well.

    – Al Billings [MSFT]

  12. game kid says:

    "that’s not attractive. On any level. Who keeps approving or leading the art direction of this marketing, it is not professional! Dark blue text on a blue/yellow background?!"

    Sounds like a minimal rant, but I had trouble reading the dialog with the odd colors too.

    "What if we[…]don’t want to use the Windows Malicious Software Removal Tool?"

    The uncheck-able checkbox is your friend.  Or something.

  13. Peter says:

    The black borders around the buttons look very ugly. I hope that you will improve this.


  14. cooperpx says:

    I don’t care if you wrap it in a pink tu-tu, I’m looking forward to these much needed fixes and improvements coming in IE7.

    As to the side by side thing, that’s rubbish. It’s COM for crying out loud. Microsoft just doesn’t want to support aging browser versions … and that I can definately understand. good riddens I say!

  15. ngnu says:

    Will there ever be a version of IE for linux? I am a firefox user, its just that i need to test my designs in internet explorer. Sure theres wine, but it doesn’t work  and microsoft may disable that eventually, and no sign of ie7 ever working on wine.

  16. ieblog says:

    There are no plans for an IE version for Linux.

    – Al Billings [MSFT]

  17. Matt Sherman says:

    Al, thanks for the straightforward reply regarding side-by-side versions of IE. Virtual PC may be the way to go…

  18. Jamie Anderson says:

    @Mike Dunn,

    I seem to remember that IE5 had an option to allow it to run side-by-side with IE4 on Win98.

    @Al Billings [MSFT]

    I disagree that IE was designed from the start as a system component. IE7 maybe, but up to (and including) 3.0, IE was just another application. It’s only with IE4 that MS started integrating with Windows.

    Considering that all of the new components have to be backwards compatible (for supporting all of those apps that host the browser control or use WinInet), is there any reason why previous versions of the browser control can’t live beside the new one? (For example, having MSHTML.6.0.dll with its own ClassID, MSHTML5.5.dll with its own ClassID, etc.) The layout and scripting DOM are the parts that web developers really worry about, not which version of WinInet is installed.

  19. Michael says:

    I agree with the poor readability on the IE installation screen. For me, the content is readable on the left-hand-side where the yellow background is supported, but as the text moves to the right, the text is much harder to read.

    Overall, the text looks messy and unprofessional, almost like the text was just written and left as default without any further design consideration.

    The Vista OS from what I’ve seen is highly clear and far more readable then its OS predecessors, however, this IE screen doesn’t compare at all to the Vista visuals. Please make the IE installation live up to the high-quality and expectations of Vista.

  20. PatriotB says:

    Jamie Anderson:

    It was with IE 3 that they first made IE as a set of resuable system components.  It was with IE 4, if you installed the Desktop Update, that Windows Explorer would use the IE components.  But the integration did start with 3: you could, for example, type c: in your IE3 address bar and browse your hard drive.

    Regarding side-by-side: It’s not as simple as renaming a DLL and giving it a new CLSID.  Then, when each new version came out, my app which hosts the browser components would need to be rewritten to use the new CLSIDs.  I would either have to have separate versions of my app for each IE version that I want to support, or extensive run-time IE version checking.  Plus, it removes the possibility of my app seamlessly being able to take advantage of new featurea and fixes introduced in future versions.

    That said, Windows XP’s side-by-side technology (WinSXS) *does* allow you to have multiple versions of components *with the same CLSID* installed.  I’m guessing that rearchitecting IE to use WinSXS would be too big a task, with too little payoff.  However, we don’t really need the entire IE to be SBS – MSHTML would be the most important part, for rendering issues.

  21. steve miller says:

    "# Setup verifies that your copy of Windows is genuine.  This guarantees you have access to the latest features, updates, and support. Read more about the benefits of genuine Microsoft software here."

    You must have copied this from a marketing blurb. This makes no sense. How does updating IE require a check of genuine Windows for "the latest features, updates, and support"? Can’t you just be honest and say, "We block you from installing IE7 on copies of cracked Windows."

    You think we don’t see through this?

  22. Xepol says:

    First off, a complaint about the "malicious software removal tool".  Yes, I know, that is a different department, but you guys have the inside track where we don’t, and since you are making it part of the install, you should have a voice (and an ear for complaints).

    The MSRT has ZERO feedback.  I’ve never known if the damn thing has actually run, if it found nothing, if it removed something.  Not a freaking clue.  Frankly, I need one.  If you found anything on my system, I need to know so I can a) determine if my current protection has failed (for whatever read) b) remind me that I need protection (too many people I know bought a virus scanner 5 years ago and think they are still protected) c) decide if I need to hunt for OTHER things on my machine to kill off as well (just like cockroachs, if you see 1…)

    So ya, find someone and tell them that even just a simply dialog box would do, but there has to be SOMETHING.  For all I know, it is a version of hello world that’s been redirected to nul:

    Secondly, IE is NOT a system component.  It is an ActiveX control with a few libraries.  There is zero reason why it could not run in a side by side mode (wininet.dll is designed to be backward compatible, so either use manifests to control dllhell or just always use the newest one for all the activex instances).  The IE team re-uses the same GUID for progressive versions of the activeX control, and this is the primary reason that it can’t run in a side by side mode.  If a second guid existed for every version of the activeX unique to that version, then indeed we could specifically target those versions while the system used the "generic’ guid to always get the newest and greatest version.

    Calling it a system component overstates IE’s role in the grand scheme of things.  

    That said, I find the integration with the shell to be interesting, even if it is the first thing I turn off because of all the screen space it wastes and delays and bloat it causes as I wander for files.  (which in and of itself proves that IE isn’t a "system component" so much as a prefered, optional UI feature)

  23. Xepol says:

    Oh, and while I question actually calling IE a system component, it does have great value as a shared component for third party applications (heck, even my UPS management software uses the ie activex control).

    But again, 2 guids – one for the newest version, one for specific versions would still allow it all to work in a ‘side by side’ mode smoothly.

  24. "Setup verifies that your copy of Windows is genuine.  This guarantees you have access to the latest features, updates, and support."

    I always laugh when I read that. It’s funny, because everyone, including Microsoft knows that (apart from certain things being blocked), using a legit version of Windows gives you NOT ONE advantage, other than the lack of a feeling of guilt. Copying someone’s CD and nicking their serial key (which is so easy, I don’t see the point of keys) is so widespread because it’s so reliable! An exact copy is just as good as the original. [I still forked out a fortune for XP Pro though…]

    Obviously, I know that MS don’t want people to copy their software, because… well for obvious reasons, so of course they have to bang on about copying. But I do think that their reasoning for not copying software is a little untrue…..

  25. ryan joyce says:

    People that /need/ security don’t tend to use Windows, let alone IE – The public focus has shifted away from security and onto standards compliance as people become aware of the other options.

    The IE7 beta, which i have no doubt is more secure than IE6 and /is/ only a beta, still takes the traditionally esoteric IE approach to standards, picking the easy bits – or at least the bits that won’t impact the browser operation – and ignoring logical steps (:first-child but no :last-child?)

    Yes, IE7 has to still be compatible with IE6 sites, since getting people to code for the browser is very much MS’ bag, but surely not at the expense of future sites?

    Anyway, i’ve rambled waaay off topic here. Still, the ActiveX thing is massive, i’m really impressed you guys have done something about it πŸ™‚

  26. ryan joyce says:

    @Paul Freeman-Powell:

    Obviously it’d be tantramount to commercial suicide for them to publically state as much, but i don’t think MS really care too much about casual piracy – Windows success (and continuing success) depends on it being ubiquitous.

    Compatability (or an approximation of ;)) with most of the other PCs & PC software on the planet is Windows’s unique selling point, everything else is just a variation on *cough* traditional OS features.

  27. Stephane Vinuesa says:

    IE7 doesn’t allow anymore download of files or RSS. I think this is related to the Microsoft Updates released yesterday. Does anyone else has the same issue?

    Even RSS Feeds doesn’t work anymore: "This feed download was interrupted."



  28. Ross says:

    I think this approach is a good one. WGA is a reality from those ‘up top’ and there isn’t much to do about it.

    In regards to the interface design, I am assuming this is just a rough mockup. I can live with the new IE Icon (though the more visually different it looks than the old one the harder it will be to find onscreen), and can kinda live with super-saturated photoshop plugin-fest background (lense flare? uhh? that was whack in the 90s!).

    I don’t really get the low-res-scaled green tick icon though, and how it’s reflecting off a surface, but there is no surface for it to reflect off there is just a flat verticle plane behind it!

    Oh and no doubt those awful bevels around the the buttons will be gone too right?

    Basically, I’m pretty sure this is just being done by an inhouse developer and not by a designer, until the style guides for aero are complete? When it comes live it’s going to look nice like Aero right? If not then you better get the Aero guys to have a look over your shoulder and get this looking right.

    Otherwise this will be visually a "frankenbrowser" πŸ˜‰

  29. Lax says:

    Paul freeman-powell…you make me laugh as well, Microsoft just doesn’t want to be cheated at…how would you feel if you had a company like Microsoft and suddenly, you find out that people are illegaly copying your product…..wouldnt you be offended? (cos you wont be getting much of the profit and money).

    ….geez its common sense…get some..yeah yeah! YEAH!

  30. Lax, if you read what I said, I was in no way condoning software piracy and I even stated that I understand why/agree with Microsoft wishing to prevent it. However, my quirk was with the *way* in which they try to dissuade it.

    Rather than being economical with the truth and trying to pursuade people that it disadvantages the consumer (directly) to use copied software, they (IMHO) would be better off saying something like, "Software piracy harms developers" or something like that, basically give the pirates a bit of a guilt trip and say "if you use it, pay for it!"

    Obviously, I would be very p!$$ed off if someone nicked source code for any of our products and didn’t pay. So I understand the ethics, economics and morals of it – and that’s why I bought a fully licenced copy of WinXP Pro πŸ™‚

    Anyway, enough ranting off the topic of the IE7 setup πŸ™‚

  31. Dao says:

    > and ignoring logical steps (:first-child but no :last-child?)

    :last-child is a CSS3 selector. Apart from this, I agree, it could/should be implemented right away.

  32. Josh says:

    Why does the checkbox cover both updating IE and installing the Maliciious Software Tool? I would like to know that my version of IE is up to date, but I don’t want to install unrelated software just to do that.

  33. lelion says:

    This is maybe a sidequestion, bt I am not sure where to report a (possible) bug?

    (If anyone knows, please, give me an URL on the MS website, thx!:-)

    I am a webdesigner, and currently creating the following website:

    In IE 6 all is OK. In Firefox 1.5 all is OK. In Ie 7.0 beta 2… THERE’S A HORIZONTAL SCROLLBAR?

    Why’s that? The content is SURELY not wider than the viewport! It’s only 750px, to be precise! XHTML validates, CSS validates…

    …any ideas, anyone? πŸ™‚

  34. In IE7, click Help-Send Feedback

  35. Dao says:

    lelion, you make pointless use of position:relative and position:absolute in the #header container. That somehow confuses IE7.

    Besides, #quicknav {position: absolute; top: -9999px; left: 0; width: 1px; height: 1px;} is also nonsense. display:none would do.

  36. IE7 is just trying to catch up to Firefox.

  37. ieblog says:


    We have stated many many times that we will not be supporting IE in a side by side install situation. Eric Lawrence and others have given greater and lesser technical details about why it is not a good situation for users and for support. We will have to agree to disagree here.

    We have heard the feedback but there is, at this time, no plans to support IE in a side by side install scenario.

    Really, we do understand what you and others are saying but we truly do believe that it both creates a hodgepodge browser using components from different versions of IE and also causes a huge supportability issue. There are also lifecycle issues as well as a number of versions of IE are no longer under support and security patches or updates for them are not being released.

    – Al Billings [MSFT]

  38. Tony M. says:

    On topic: Good feature. Keep up the good work (but I agree that the choice of colours is not the best…)

    Off topic (but regarding some posts in this thread about running 2 different versions of IE side-by-side): the Firefox guys should understand that MSFT has concerns about support. *Support*, OK? You know, that thing the consumers don’t have when using an Open Source app… πŸ˜‰



  39. Another Web Developer says:

    @Al Billings

    I just want to confirm this.

    As a Web Developer, I can currently check my code/site on XP, in IE6, Mozilla(x.x) Firefox(x.x), Opera(x.x) etc.

    This is good, because I can get a good sense of any design issues.

    Now, I go out and buy Vista (when it arrives), which will have IE7 on it.

    I will then be able to legally test on all the above, except IE6.

    So, to test in IE6 (which will be required, because we know it will render much different than IE7 will), I have to setup a VMware session to "simulate" an IE6 envrionment.  To do this legally, I need to make the image of WinXP/2K/??.

    So, long story short.  If I go buy a new PC when Vista comes out, to do proper web development, and test in IE6, I need to buy a license for the older version of the software, at the "unbundled price".

    Please tell me how this will work, because I have a hard time ATM trying to buy say, Win98SE, or Win2K.

    Will MS be providing free VMware images of all their legacy OS’s so that we can test compatibility?



  40. Chief Wigum says:

    @Tony M.

    Support for Firefox has ALWAYS been there.

    a.) The Developer community is everywhere, and always willing to help.

    b.) They have an open bug tracking system (unlike  this Blog’s owner)

    c.) They have phone #’s for support, email, etc.


  41. Rogério says:

    I have some suggestions about some features for the final release of IE 7.

    – A Retractile Find Frame

       Just like Visual Studio Immediate Window, wich can be docked at bottom, top, left or right

       That`s better than dialog boxes… And… I suggest a feature "List Occurrences" which lists in a treeview or listbox, every occurrence of the string sought in the page. When the user clicks in any item, the selection moves to the occurrence.


    – Moveables Tabs

       The IE Tabs shoud be reorganized by draggin them. And some nice features like arrange by name or load status would be very handy.

       And a context menu item, called "New Horizontal Tab Group" or "New Vertical Tab Group" (like Visual Studio 2005 feature).



    – A list of Handy PlugIns

       – Translators

       – Voice Readers (like the Microsoft Agent Engine)

    Well… I loved this Beta 2, it improved a lot. (sorry my poor English…)


    Rogério Hirooka

  42. James says:

    I agree with the Moveable Tabs.  I love that feature in FireFox.

    Also in Firefox you can turn on "Begin Finding When You Begin Typing."  I love that feature

    So far Beta 2 hasn’t seem to improved the Find area at all.  Firefox 1.5 does a fantasic job in the Find area.

    IE7 does seem a lot faster than Firefox 1.5 however, but without the ability to move tabs I dont think i would use IE7.

  43. PatriotB says:

    Xepol: "That said, I find the integration with the shell to be interesting, even if it is the first thing I turn off because of all the screen space it wastes and delays and bloat it causes as I wander for files."

    Um, you can’t turn off "shell integration."  Up through IE6, IE and Windows Explorer use the same code for navigation, frame, toolbars, etc.  That is what "IE shell integration" refers to.

    You seem to be referring to webview/taskview, which has very little to do with the shell integration, except for the fact that some IE components were used to implement webview/taskview prior to XP.  As of XP, the view portion of Windows Explorer doesn’t use IE anymore.  But the frame integration is still there.

    Interestingly, the frame integration, sharing of navigation code between the two explorers IS going away with IE7.  At least the XP version.

    Oh, and yes, it is a system component.  It’s implemented as a set of system DLLs, rather than as a monolithic application like IE1 & 2.  If IE’s DLL’s don’t qualify as system components, then what does?

  44. Arjan says:

    I found another error.

    Type in url about:blank

    Now zoom to 1000%

    What is that thick border doing in my about:blank page.

  45. game kid says:

    "Also in Firefox you can turn on "Begin Finding When You Begin Typing."  I love that feature

    So far Beta 2 hasn’t seem to improved the Find area at all.  Firefox 1.5 does a fantasic job in the Find area.

    IE7 does seem a lot faster than Firefox 1.5 however, but without the ability to move tabs I dont think i would use IE7."

    IE7 does need a Find Dialog that doesn’t block the window.  It DEFINITELY needs movable tabs too.

  46. LinWinOverlord says:

    I know that a MS person has already said that they will not support Linux, but here is the thing: IE is available for UNIX…. All you need is a SPARC emulator, IE5 for UNIX, and Linux. Voila! You have IE for UNIX. IE6 is the first version not to have a UNIX version… IE7 could have Linux support by means of Mainsoft, the same company that ported IE to Solaris/SPARC originally. Since the IE team is most likely using Visual Studio, use a copy of Visual MainWin and Fedora Core 4 (I am sure you guys have access to both ;)) Then build an RPM that is LSB compliant… If you do not want to distribute it, at least try it! And tell us how it works out… If I am right, and I usually am, then the Linux version of IE7 will work nicely in Linux….

  47. Adam says:

    Um… Hello?  Where’s the new blog today?  We got kind of spoiled with all of this information coming in on a daily basis.  You guys didn’t run out of stuff already did you?

  48. Xepol says:

    Al Billings -> All interesting points, but none of them provide technical reasons why it could not be done, rather it provides business reasons.  The point I was making was that it could EASILY be done technically, but that the reasons it isn’t done are business reasons.  You have basically validated that point.  At some point, however, the customer is always right.  

    PatriotB ->  If you go to folder options, and select "use windows classic folders", you will get straight listview controls with no integrated IE active Control taking part.  This is how you turn it off.  Easy and effective.  Control panel, switch to classic view.    As for dlls being system components, anyone can make DLLs, that doesn’t make them system components.  Word is chock full of DLLs, and that CERTAINLY doesn’t make them a system component.  GDI32.dll, now THERE is a system component.  I’ll leave you to examine the differences in msdn to examine the differences.

    I suspect that if WinInet.dll was a true system component however, I could open a file handle to "" and read the webpage like a file.  (now THAT would convince me it was a system component)

  49. Bruce Morgan [MSFT] says:

    Xepol, making IE7 run fully side-by-side and 100% compatible is probably technically possible, although we’ve never tried to make it 100% compatible. I can absolutely, 100% guarantee you it can not be be "easily" achieved.

    We use the .local trick internally, and there are a number of difficult-to-solve problems we know about when using that.

    Arguing whether or not IE is a system component is really pointless. It is a "true system component" for a number of reasons.  

    But to address your point about opening a file handle: the handle model isn’t really the right model; the file system model and file handle operations like seek etc. don’t really work translate to the transport layer implemented by WinInet.

    You can, however, easily download to a local file with UrlMon’s UrlDownloadToFile.

  50. user says:

    If MSFT guys will continue blocking pirate copies of Windows in installing IE7, they will suddenly find out that Firefox has 50% of market share, and IE7 has 10%.

    It was the MSFT’s democratic politics on pirating that helped widespread adoption of MSFT products. If they will block pirate copies in installing IE7, they will shoot themeselves in foot.

  51. Chris H says:

    Bruce Morgan [MSFT] >>

    making IE7 run fully side-by-side and 100% compatible is probably technically possible.


    I know you’re probably getting board of these questions, but I feel the need for it is really high.

    The thing is, I doubt there is anybody who’d want "fully side-by-side and 100% compatible" versions if IE. The only people who may need such a thing is web site developers who need to cater to users who have IE 5, IE5.5, IE6, and soon to be IE7. The only reason for this is to see how their web site is presented, (usability and accessibility) and hence, the only aspect required is the visual rendering engine and script usage of IEs past, which I’m under the impression is handled by the MSHTML DLL (please correct me if I am wrong)?

    When browsing the web, doesn’t IE just call on the MSHTML dll when it is required to visually build the web page being requested? If this is the case, is it not possible, to have multiple versions of the MSHTML.dll file on the system, and use a switcher within IE to call a particular version to draw the web page, in the sense that when a page requires rendering, IE uses the pseudo-code:

    if  IE 5.5 view is required: call ie55mshtml.dll;

    else if IE 6.0 view is required: call ie6mshtml.dll;

    else use the default: call mshtml.dll; (current IE version)

    Are the older versions of MSHTML which shipped with the older browsers available to you? If so, could this not be added as an extra to IE (ideally, via the IE developer toolbar, as everyday use of such a thing for the average user will of course not be required)?

    Obviously, I have no idea how IE and Windows are coded, and the processes used to render a single web page could be much more complicated. It’s just the ability to have an easy to use official add-on to see how a web page looks in older versions of IE would be such an advantage, considering how wide-spread these different versions of IE are in use today.

    The .local trick is well and good, but having this as an IE add-on could make the whole process of building a web site so much better for the developer, and in turn the end user. With the addition of tabs and the quick tab view in IE, being able to have tabs replicate the main tabs web page using the older rendering engines would be an absolutely fantastic feature ( just an a simple example). Having the first tab contain the current web site a developer is working on, having the second tab render the same page via the IE 6 rendering engine, the third in the IE 5.5 rendering engine, etc and each time the main tab is reloaded, the copy tabs also reload.

    Anyway, that’s my two cents. Like I said, I have no idea how IE and Windows are put together, but if there is any possibility that the past (and still widely used) rendering aspects of IE can be made available as an IE-add on, then I feel the web as a whole would greatly benefit.

    – Chris

  52. Ed says:

    Is it just me, or are the fonts bleeding?

    Since intalling Beta 2 all my fonts seem darker and slightly blurred.

  53. Chris H says:

    Ed, that will probably be cleartype. If you go in to ‘Tools’ then ‘Internet Options’, select the ‘Advanced’ tab and look for the ‘Use ClearType’ option (about half-way down). Untick this, click apply then OK, close and re-open IE, and see if that makes things any better.

  54. Xepol says:

    Ed -> Regardless of your system settings, IE 7 uses cleartype.  To turn it off, you must go to your internet options, go to the advanced tab, scroll down to multimedia and uncheck cleartype.   Then close all instances of IE and it should be gone.

    Then you can join the rest of us pestering MS to honour the system-wide cleartype setting instead of adding their own app specific setting, rendering the system-wide setting a bad joke (esp. if the trend expands and more apps follow suit).

    Sadly, according to the MSDN site, the mechanism to turn on cleartype for just 1 application is not multi-threading friendly as it actually sets the system wide flag while it renders and then sets it back to whatever it was pre-rendering.  This means that a context switch while rendering could cause artifacting in other applications.  Cleartype settings per applicaiton aren’t just a bad idea, but can cause undesirable, random artifacting (even if the chances are very low that it could happen, it CAN happen).  

    [Response. -Raymond]
  55. PatriotB says:

    "If you go to folder options, and select "use windows classic folders", you will get straight listview controls with no integrated IE active Control taking part.  This is how you turn it off."

    That doesn’t remove the fact that IE & WE (Windows Explorer) use the same code for browsing, navigation, frame, etc.

    Yes, from IE4/Win98 through IE5.5/WinME, the "web" shell view *did* host IE components which in turn hosted the list view.  Turning off that option would cause the straight list view to be used.  But the integration I mentioned is still there.

    We could argue back and forth forever about what exactly constitutes "integration".  What you refer to is "visual" integration.  What I refer to is the fact that both explorers use the same fundamental code; witness how you can use the same frame window to browse between folders and web pages.  Though this is apparently going away with IE7.

  56. game kid says:

    "Sadly, according to the MSDN site, the mechanism to turn on cleartype for just 1 application is not multi-threading friendly as it actually sets the system wide flag while it renders and then sets it back to whatever it was pre-rendering.  This means that a context switch while rendering could cause artifacting in other applications.  Cleartype settings per applicaiton aren’t just a bad idea, but can cause undesirable, random artifacting (even if the chances are very low that it could happen, it CAN happen)."

    Not to mention that people like Ed are considering this a bug.  IE should use system type settings for the sake of its own marketshare.

    "It was the MSFT’s democratic politics on pirating that helped widespread adoption of MSFT products. If they will block pirate copies in installing IE7, they will shoot themeselves in foot."

    Yes.  My PC’s definitely using a legal copy though.

  57. LinWinOverlord says:


    The integration code is not gone, just masked… In Windows XP, the code is well-masked with the look of IE6, but the biggest hint that the code still is the same is if you had locked toolbars before installing, afterward, they were unlocked. Since the IE process is still tied to explorer (though restricted), theoretically it is still possible to overload IE and release the process from Protected-Mode in Vista or lockout from system controls…. The only way to fix this is to create a new explorer engine…. If the IE team convinces the Vista team to change the style of Explorer code to function without Internet Explorer (meaning it uses a separate Webdisplay engine), then IE’s vulnerabilities are essentially nullified…. M$ project "Nashville" is still hurting us today, in Vista and XP…

  58. JD says:

    Maybe too secure? I noticed after installing Beta 2 that it broke all of the passwords I’d put into Digital Persona for the Microsoft fingerprint reader. Kind of a pain, having to go back and recall the dozens of passwords I’ve gotten used to just using my fingerprint for. There is also a strange duplication of the fingerprint icon going on.

    I know this is an issue being reported on the IE feedback site (, but I thought I would drop a note here to see if this is now on the ‘known issues’ list and will be fixed in the nest update.

  59. Olivier says:

    I think that it’s boring for finding all the existing strings to have to type : "Ctrl+C" -> "Ctrl+F" -> "Ctrl+V". Could you implement a "Ctrl+F3" like in Visual Studio ?

    Moreover the Mozilla find window which allows to jump directly to the right words while typing the search word is really a great feature.

  60. Arthur says:

    Good Evening,

    I believe that some of you may have experienced similar difficulties after the application of the recently released Microsoft Patches, (MS06-004, 005, 006, 007, 008, 009, 010).

    I have installed IE7 upon several systems and have not experienced any difficulties, either during the installation or the operation.

    After the application of Microsoft patches MS06-005, 006, 007, and 008, (004, 009, and 010, were not needed nor applied),it was noted that IE7 failed to launch correctly, effectively crashing when the browser window was displayed.

    This action was noted upon several different machines, with the patches applied. But on the machine with only MS06-005, 006, and 008 applied IE7 functioned normally; this was due to the failure to download MS06-007 correctly – an issue identified by Microsoft.

    Because the removal of IE7 invokes a system-restore, it was necessary to re-apply MS06-005, 006, 007 and 008 and conduct a system reboot prior to the re-installation of IE7. Once this had been accomplished IE7 appears to function normally.

    Whilst the issue could have been caused by an incorrectly downloaded MS06-007 patch; I would be grateful if anyone could please confirm my findings, and whether the "problems identified with MS06-007" could have contributed to the cause of IE7 to launch correctly.

    Grateful for any assistance

    Thank you


  61. game kid says:

    No crashes on mine, Arthur.  Thankfully.

  62. Mats Åhlberg says:


    I installer IE beta 2 and all advanced preferences are gone and none of the settings from the first start page works it just says could not save settings.

    And when i try to reset al preferences to standard IE 7 craches.

  63. Claude says:

    1st off…I would like to applaud Microsoft for opening up to the public for input into there new operating system,and being far less secretive as they were in the past..I would like to report a bug…in IE 7 when using your e-mail feature,as You begin to type and when You make an error,when You try to backspace and remove the  error,things don’t happen like they did in IE6…There is most definately a problem there.Your attention to this would be greatly appreciated,Thank You.

  64. DP says:

    How long do you spend looking at an installer..? you can read the information given, and it works – simple.

  65. Dan Cutrer says:

    I don’t know if it’s deliberate so as to provide a market for MS anti-virus product,  but McAfee won’t update or reinstall since I installed the 7 Beta.  I’ve worked on it for over a week now … it gets to 58% of the update,  to the point it actually starts using the .cab file,  then shuts down.  Am I the only one having this problem?

  66. ieblog says:


    Issues with McAfee have been reported and we are working to identify the source of the problems. McAfee is aware of it as well. This should be fixed by the time Beta 2 is available.

    – Al Billings [MSFT]

  67. John Hrvatin [MSFT] says:

    Since a number of people commented on the Malicious Software Removal Tool, I’d like to add a couple details about it…

    – MSRT is not an anti-virus program that continually monitors your computer for problems.  It performs a one-time sweep of your system.  After download by either IE setup or Windows Update, MRT.exe remains in %windir%system32.  However, MSRT will not run again until you choose to download an MSRT update through Windows Update or another application like IE setup executes MRT.exe.  The file is only left on the system to reduce download size for future updates.

    – MSRT does not create any entry points on the Desktop or Start Menu.  The only user access is through execution of the file itself in %windir%system32.

    – MSRT reports any malware found as balloon notifications.  If you’ve never seen any notification, MSRT has not found anything on your system.  You can also view the log file at %windir%debugmrt.exe.  

    – You can find a good list of FAQs, and other information, at

  68. Xepol says:

    John Hrvatin [MSFT] -> Thanks.  Good information that I was previously unaware of.  Nice to be able to see the logs.  I would be nicer if there was a ballon popup saying nothing was found – it would just be more comforting from an enduser pov.

    Incidently, speaking of "the start"  does anyone else have IE7 regularilly crash when it starts up.  Oddly, if you ignore the dialog telling you that the app has crashed and asks if you want to send info to MS, you can usually keep using IE.  Very very weird.  I’ve noticed that clicking in the address bar or google’s search box before the first page fully loads seems to be enough most of the time to set it off.

  69. Monty says:

    "This should be fixed by the time Beta 2 is available.

    – Al Billings [MSFT]"

    Are you aware of the confusion generated with this beta naming scheme?  Those responsible should be sacked.

  70. game kid says:

    "Are you aware of the confusion generated with this beta naming scheme?  Those responsible should be sacked."

    It is confusing.  The current IE7 is a Preview of Beta 2, so the assumption is that it’s pre-beta (alpha?).  That takes a while to sink in, but less for me since I tried an VS Express CTP (Community Technology Preview) or two.

    Hopefully Beta 2 will be of Beta quality.  There are still things worthy of fixing–zoomed text, Unicode bugs (black squares in that should be angle brackets), some RSS files that don’t take the stylish IE look ( try some on ) and other things.  

  71. EricLaw [MSFT] says:

    @Claude: The repaint problems when editing text are known and we’re working on them, thanks.

    @Xepol: Do you have the same problem if you start IE in "Add-on free mode" using Start | Programs | Accessories | System Tools?

  72. Joe Black says:

    First of all, not everyone likes to hear the Windows Advantage Propaganda…if you believe it fine, just keep it to yourself since you are the main beneficiary, not us.

    As far as what your customers are telling you, listen to what I am telling you:

    Some of us want:

    -a standalone full download installer, not just something 500 kb that downloads the rest from the web.

    -something that W2000 can also use…if you are doing this mainly for security as you say, consider all these insecure clients.

    -advanced cache management (just duplicate how Opera does it, re different settings xx min/hrs/days for images, etc..)

    -a history mechanism that allows the back button to show what you actually viewed without checking the internet to get an updated page, complete with fresh ads.

    -"paste and go" right-click dropdown menu

    -right-click dropdown menus for: Define,

    Web Search, Open highlighted test as a url.

    -incorporate "send to" as a drop-down menu, for images, etc found on the web.  

    -if you want to allow controls for My Computer zone security, put it outside the browser, not in Internet Options.

    -option to not download favicons.

    -option to alpha-sort favorites on the fly.

    -option to open links in same window


  73. Jon says:

    Anyone have any idea why my links on my toolbar no longer work?  You can push them and nothing happens!

  74. Xepol says:

    EricLaw [MSFT] -> Uh, can’t tell, will play.  Without too much experience with it yet, however, I would say it is unlikely that it will cause the problem, but I doubt that it because the addons are disabled.

    Rather, it is because the startup of IE is so drastically changed to invalidate the exercise.  My main homepage ( is replaced with "add-ons disabled…" nonsense and a "warning bar" at the top.  True, my second homepage loads in the background as normal, but that’s not the point.  The point is that more has changed than just disabling addons.  I don’t even visit the same page.  It would be as effective as setting my home page to about:blank and call it the same process.

    It is nice that there is an option that disables addons, but the way it is implimented is going to invalidate the test here.  We want to know if its the addons or the webbrowser loading the page(which would lead to investigating the page itself and how it interacts with the browser engine), but since both the addons AND the page itself are changed during that critical period, we’re kinda hooped.

    I’ll just manually disable all my addons tommorow & run like that all day (a day with out flash ads & menus. hmmmm, will the internet ever be the same again) and get back to you here.

    Monty -> beta 2 preview.   It’s a preview of beta 2 for tech heads, means that beta 2 is to follow.  When you get a game preview, you expect the game to follow, same linguistic rules follow.  They could have called it a CTP, but that would not have conveyed the fact that it truely represents what we’ll see in Beta 2 (CTPs are notorious for feature boil) with the exception of tweaks and bugfixes and some fine tuning.  We’re getting ready for the big public push on beta 2. Savy?  (I’ll grant that IE7B2p  doesn’t roll of the tounge as nicely as "free stuff", but hey, that’s tech talk for ya πŸ™‚

    Joe Black -> "First of all, not everyone likes to hear the Windows Advantage Propaganda…if you believe it fine, just keep it to yourself since you are the main beneficiary, not us."

    Dude, this is THEIR soap box, not yours.  You wanna decide what topic is discussed, run yer own blog.  Yer a guest like the rest of us, while we all might be a little rowdy at times here, don’t loose fact of that.

    Frankly, the more information flows to us from MS the better.  I would say, except for that faux pas, that your comments had good value as feedback.

    Hate the features, love the information exchange. (pssst, don’t discourage them from talking with us, it’s WORKING!)

  75. Claude says:

    Hi Jon…If You are refering to "Your Favorites" "Link"..These were all set up in IE6.Now that You are running IE7 It’s a whole new ball game!!…Mr. EricLaw can confirm this for You..If this is what You are asking!!

  76. Jon Doe says:

    IE7 seems to steal the window focus whenever a webpage loads in, which is highly annoying. You try to open a link then quickly alt-tab somewhere else and next thing the IE7 window steals focus.

    It doesn’t seem to matter what site I’m going to either, just a global thing.

  77. Lordmike says:

    @Jon Doe–

    I read some posts ago by Chris Wilson I think… well someone at the IE team that the stealing focus thing is a bug and will be corrected in Beta 2 or when IE 7 is released as full version.

  78. Dark Phoenix says:

    > Besides, #quicknav {position: absolute; top:

    > -9999px; left: 0; width: 1px; height: 1px;} is

    > also nonsense. display:none would do.

    Not true.  The difference between top: -9999px and display: none is that the former will react to keyboard events (like :focus), but the latter will not.  I coded a CSS-driven dropdown and used EmcaScript plus that property to allow users to tab through the menu as well as hover over it.

  79. Claude says:

    I would like to report another bug…When logging onto log in page for there wi-fi site…I have to go thru the log-in procedure twice…All the just going thru the log in procedure is slower than normal…I’ve proven this…by immediately shutting off my tester laptop with IE 7… and opening up my other laptop and going thru the same events again using IE 6…with NO problems…This is All happening thru wi-fi. F.Y.I. If You have any questions requarding this…post here…as I check daily…Thank You.

  80. caboolaking says:

    Installed IE7 B2 Preview, install worked fine.  My problem is that the Internet Controls no longer work in VS6.  When I try to add the Microsoft Internet Controls Component, I get an error that is cannot find ieframe.dll1.  The file is present in the proper directory – I don’t know what the "1" is referring to.  When I manually add what used to be the .dll for this component, (shdocvw.dll), I get errors while running applications.  Any help?

  81. Mark says:

    What is the purpose of that screenshot other than to show that someone photoshopped a trendy background onto an otherwise normal wizard screen?

    CSS2 not fully supported by IE7 but the installer looks nice… great.

  82. It’s funny: you wrote "IE 7 Setup: Secure From the Start"

    But not: "IE 7: Secure From the Setup"

    And i think it’s so…

  83. Tony Austin says:

    I am very much looking forward to the final release of IE7, and hope that as many of the suggestions and inssues raised in the various functional topic areas (tabbing, keyboard binding, etc) are resolved to most peoples’ satisfaction — you can’t make everybody happy.

    My question here is about security when you have mnultiple tabs open in a single IE7 window.

    I get the impression from having heavily used IE6 extended via such third-party products as Maxthon, Enigma, Slimbrowser and Avant Browser that if when, in one tab, you log in (successfully authenticate via user identifier and password) to a site that the successful authentication is — in some cases at least — recognized IN THE OTHER TABS.

    I have found htis quite handy in many cases, when you want to open many links from a given site in different tabs without having to reauthenticate to the same site (domain, is it?) each time that a new tab is opened.

    However, especially for the novice/unwary user I see a security exposure here. Say log in and open a few windows (say, at an Internet banking site) and think that you have logged out from the site. However suppose that you have left unclosed one of the tabs from that secure site (without realizing it, since it may be lost in all the :clutter" of having multiple tabs open).

    The somebody comes along while you’re away from your desk and has access to your secure info (becaquse of that one tab being left open without your realizing it).

    Is this a valid scenario for an exposure? What happens with IE7 in such a situation. Or am I worrying unnecessarily?

    Food for thought?

  84. Jim says:

    I think that you have to manage your browsing resposibly whether tab browsing is used or not.  I have not found that I "lose" a tab with any sort of clutter, you just have watch them.  I am really enjoying IE 7 so far with one notable exception.  I with it had a better download manager like firefox.  I get frustrated being only able to download two items at once and each in it’s seperate d/l dialoge box.  This is just about the only area I can say that firefox still reigns supreme in.

Comments are closed.

Skip to main content