Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×
Internet Explorer Software The Internet Linux

Internet Explorer 7 on Linux 234

Posted by ScuttleMonkey
from the fun-and-exciting dept.
An anonymous reader writes to mention WebExpose is running a quick guide to get Internet Explorer 7.0 running on Linux. From the article: "Microsoft conditional comments do work, unlike the standalone version of IE on Windows, so you will be able to develop and test webpages across almost all major browsers (IE 5-7, Firefox, Opera) on one Linux box! Also note that we will avoid Microsoft's Genuine Advantage download validation checks, so pure-Linux users will be able to finish the process without having to find a genuine Windows machine to download the IE7 setup file (the check is avoided legitimately, by the way)."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Internet Explorer 7 on Linux

Comments Filter:
  • by Kelson (129150) * on Monday January 08, 2007 @06:15PM (#17515154) Homepage Journal
    One of the problems I've had running IE6 through WINE (not through ies4linux, just a stock Crossover install) is that the filter-based workarounds to trick IE5.5 and IE6 into displaying alpha-transparent PNG images correctly just doesn't work. IIRC, it's because those methods force IE to display the image through an ActiveX control which isn't present on Linux systems. It replaces the image with a blank one, but doesn't display the alpha-blended background.

    This shouldn't be an issue with IE7, but it does make it difficult to test layouts that use alpha PNG and rely on the IE6 workaround.

    It's good to know that they've got conditional comments working, though. That's always been the trick with running multiple IEs on Windows. You have to tweak the registry, or else each IE engine will parse them as if it were the most recent one installed on the system.
  • Just use a VM (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 08, 2007 @06:18PM (#17515206)
    I only test on the actual OS it will be running on. Even the summary mentions different behaviour on Linux. Sheesh, I would never trust that setup.

    I use VMware or similar to run on the target OS. It's the only way to be sure it will work as intended.
    • Ditto here - for the same reasons. The IE under Mac has official releases have a whole bag of different behaviours than IE under Win, and this method of using IE under Linux suffers the same fate. I've got VM's set up with Win 2k --> Vista, Mac and Linux - each running multiple browsers. I generally only debug using Firefox during development (Firebug ROCKS!) but run the site through the gauntlet before moving it up to production.

      The other significant advantage of VMware is my 'development servers' liv
      • The IE under Mac has official releases have a whole bag of different behaviours than IE under Win, and this method of using IE under Linux suffers the same fate.

        The fate may appear similar in some regards, but the underlying reasons are not the same.

        Internet Explorer for Macintosh doesn't share a codebase with Internet Explorer for Windows, and so, it's unsurprising that behaviors would differ. Running Internet Explorer atop Linux may expose behavior differences compared to Windows despite shared

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by Thuktun (221615)
      It's the only way to be sure
      Nuke it from orbit?
    • by vought (160908)
      No kidding. What's the problem with using a Mac running Parallels? You can install and use all three major OSs (and various flavors of each) running at native speed without undue hackery.

      • by IANAAC (692242)
        What's the problem with using a Mac running Parallels?

        Maybe because nothing in this posting suggests a Mac at all?

        It's nice that that's your solution, but good grief, do the fanboys have to come out at every opportunity to suggest something that's not even being considered in the article?

        The article is CLEARLY talking about IE7 on LINUX.

        • Good point, but you can run Parallels (and a bunch of other commercial & open source VM's) on Linux too, so virtualization is still an option without the Mac part (and is probably the most reliable way to test).
    • That's the only way to be sure.

  • Woot! (Score:4, Funny)

    by Maliron (1026708) on Monday January 08, 2007 @06:19PM (#17515242)
    This is awesome! Now if we can only get people coding html in Winblows to test their pages on firefox we'll be in business!
  • by djh101010 (656795) * on Monday January 08, 2007 @06:22PM (#17515292) Homepage Journal
    Seriously. WHY? Why would I want to do that? What is so compelling about IE7 that I'd want to go through any effort at all? I'm using Firefox 2.0something, it meets my needs. If I were to jump through hoops to install this on my linux box, what would that get for me?

    Jokes aside here guys, but what's the point?
    • by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) on Monday January 08, 2007 @06:26PM (#17515378)

      What is so compelling about IE7 that I'd want to go through any effort at all? I'm using Firefox 2.0something, it meets my needs. If I were to jump through hoops to install this on my linux box, what would that get for me?

      Assuming you, like half of the people here, end up doing some Web development at some point, you get the ability to test those pages in IE7, which has about 50% of the market right now. Being able to do that without having to buy a copy of Windows is a pretty big deal to a lot of people.

    • by Kelson (129150) * on Monday January 08, 2007 @06:27PM (#17515394) Homepage Journal

      From the article summary:

      you will be able to develop and test webpages across almost all major browsers (IE 5-7, Firefox, Opera) on one Linux box!

      If you do your main development on a Linux box, and want to test minor changes in IE as you make them (major changes and final testing should still be done on a native system if possible), it's a lot more convenient to fire up a copy of IE in WINE than to move over to another box or reboot into Windows.

      • by djh101010 (656795) * on Monday January 08, 2007 @06:42PM (#17515698) Homepage Journal

        If you do your main development on a Linux box, and want to test minor changes in IE as you make them (major changes and final testing should still be done on a native system if possible), it's a lot more convenient to fire up a copy of IE in WINE than to move over to another box or reboot into Windows.
        OK, right, I see that, but - how much confidence are you _really_ going to have in an artificially constructed pretty-good-emulation running a Windows binary under Linux? I mean, fine for "does it look OK", but to really validate, I think anything other than the real thing running on the real thing, is iffy at best. In the QA environments I've set up, we had a stable of systems in our QA lab, initially each with a different version of 'doze and IE on them. Later, we went to a vmware setup with virtual machines running the OS and browser to be tested, all repeatable golden clean builds and so on. If it were up to me to design something, I'd rather go with a vmware solution and different OS images to boot into.

        But, I suppose, if it's just to keep on eye on the site as you go along, fine. So is IE7 really _that_ broken that this is needed? Again not trying to flame, it just boggles the fark out of me that they're still doing that.
      • by houghi (78078)
        Virtual manager might be a silution. No need to run under WINE. No need for another box.
    • If one person is creating a web site, he might want to make sure it works in the primary browser (by usage) in the world.
      He shouldn't have to buy a windows OS just for that purpose.
    • If your needs are to test web sites you design and build on as many different browsers you can get hold of, then you just might want this.

      I just browse, so, like you, I just use FF.
    • by compro01 (777531) on Monday January 08, 2007 @06:29PM (#17515448)
      1. web testing to make sure your pages work in IE (this is questionable as the article mentions different behavior"

      2. accessing idiotically designed websites that require Internet explorer to access (with no good reason why they need it. i know of a few that work perfectly fine if you trick them into thinking it is IE, but otherwise they won't let you in.)
    • Web developers should love this. A single box that you can test your web sites with just about every Internet Explorer version in use today.

      Granted most technical people use Firefox, but the world is full of un-informed users that use IE because it was pre-installed on their computer when they bought it.
    • As well as the development reasons noted above, there are still some websites that only work correctly in IE. I normally use Firefox, but occasionally I need to switch to IE to get a website to work. Now if I don't care that much, I don't bother, but if you really want something (info, a product whatever) from these sites you pretty much need to have IE available.
      • by djh101010 (656795) *

        As well as the development reasons noted above, there are still some websites that only work correctly in IE. I normally use Firefox, but occasionally I need to switch to IE to get a website to work. Now if I don't care that much, I don't bother, but if you really want something (info, a product whatever) from these sites you pretty much need to have IE available.

        Good point. My employer's timesheet website for instance. I use IE for that and one other poorly written app (the trouble ticket system, as it happens). Everything else plays fine. OK I can see the "b0rken website you have to use" purpose then, thanks.

      • If a vendor only supports IE I never purchase from them. 99% of the time I'm sure the exact same product is available from a vendor that doesn't cripple their site. Since I'm a Mac user only supporting IE is like telling me they don't want my business.
    • Developers, developers, developers!

      A large chunk of people still use IE so sites have to work for IE.
      • by dosius (230542)
        If they work for Links2 and Firefox they will work in IE. I'd say that's all the testing anyone needs (and all the testing I do).

        -uso.
    • Great question (Score:4, Interesting)

      by tacokill (531275) on Monday January 08, 2007 @06:38PM (#17515604)
      Great question. Seriously.

      Before you flame me into oblivion, tell me what I miss with IE7 when I already run Windows + Firefox 2.0. I ask in all honesty. Let's just say I have some legit XP machines and I have "friends" with illegitimate XP machines that won't bother with WGA as they know they'll fail. They'll happily go on downloading security updates but don't bother with IE7, Media player 10, etc.
      So what.
      Their computers run fine and they seem to be able to do everything that everybody else does - play movies, pictures, music, etc, etc

      So in this case, what does IE7 get for people over the ones who are forever doomed to Firefox 2.0 and IE6? What are the benefits?

      C'mon IE7 supporters, this is a lay-up. Lay it out for me...
    • The only reason that matters is BECAUSE WE CAN.
    • Web DEVELOPMENT (Score:2, Informative)

      by Derivin (635919)
      'so you will be able to develop and test webpages across almost all major browsers (IE 5-7, Firefox, Opera) on one Linux box!'

      I want to write a web page and test it on all the browsers.
      Currently you cant have IE7 and an earlier IE on the same windows machine.
      Here we have 1 machine with all browsers.
      Your other options are having multiple machines or not testing.
    • Seriously. WHY? Why would I want to do that? What is so compelling about IE7 that I'd want to go through any effort at all? I'm using Firefox 2.0something, it meets my needs. If I were to jump through hoops to install this on my linux box, what would that get for me?

      Why would you want to jump through loops to install IE in Linux? If you're a web developer, designer, or programmer you want to make sure what you create will work in the most popular browser being used. If you don't then you're neglecting

    • If you are a web developer or even a hobbyist with a website you will need to code for IE. If you don't want to run windows just to check on changes you've made to a website then you'll want to know how to install Internet Explorer on linux or other operating systems.
  • Well, I guess that is the difference between knowingly voiding the check and stumbling upon the process that voids the WMA check. I wonder which one the lawyers will believe?

    To skip having to authenticate your copy of Windows at the Microsoft.com download site (since we're on Linux and don't have Windows...), make use of Google's nicely customised IE7 installer
    • by creimer (824291)
      Doesn't matter. The attorney for the Microsoft/Novell Linux patents will be screaming the loudest about violations.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by finkployd (12902)
      That is between Microsoft and Google.

      Finkployd
  • Insanity (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Bogtha (906264) on Monday January 08, 2007 @06:24PM (#17515340)

    I just don't see how anybody can think this is a good idea for debugging websites. If you see problems with a design, how on earth are you going to be able to tell which are caused by bugs in Internet Explorer and which are caused by bugs in WINE? I know Internet Explorer is exceptionally buggy, but in my experience, WINE is a hundred times worse.

    If you're going to need to test in Internet Explorer on Linux, then full-machine virtualisation with a genuine copy of Windows is going to be far more reliable than a partial implementation of the Windows libraries. Yes, it uses more resources, but at least it's not likely to make you chase phantom bugs. The article points out that there are already problems with displaying GIFs - how many other problems like this are lurking waiting to be discovered?

    This hack is useful if you really need to use an Internet Explorer-only website, but it just seems crazy to think this is useful for debugging websites.

    • Re:Insanity (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Kelson (129150) * on Monday January 08, 2007 @06:40PM (#17515644) Homepage Journal
      I do most of my development on my personal web projects on my Linux box at home. Every once in a while I will fire up the Windows box and test things in IE. But I have a copy of IE6 installed through Crossover Office that I can use to verify that, say, a CSS change I've just made does what I think it does. The main problems I've encountered are fonts and the filter problem I mentioned here [slashdot.org].

      Basically, I use the WINE copy for (pun not intended) sanity checks, and a native copy for serious testing.
    • I have to agree. Emulating IE is never a good idea. It's unpredictable enough without the emulation.

      For the mac-centric designer at our small company I setup a spare Dell P3 733MHz with multiple versions of IE, Firefox and Opera fore testing. One of those could be had for about $100 on retrobox. Paired with a KVM, it's much more reliable and not expensive for someone developing websites to afford.
    • by vga_init (589198)
      I have to agree with you there. Wine is pretty good, but I noticed that programs tend to render differently than they do in their native Windows environment. How differently depends on which functions are being used, but something as complicated and visually-oriented as a web browser has very little hope of producing the same image.

      IE7 on linux might be useful to an end user; they could take advantage of certain compatible features, but end users have different needs than developers.
  • by cavehobbit (652751) on Monday January 08, 2007 @06:40PM (#17515638)
    Pat Buchannon humping on Charlize Theron?

    Nuts. Now I need brain bleach.
    Can't believe I even THOUGHT of that...
  • Will my viruses run on Linux too?
    • ...although probably not the most-exciting totals-your-LAN smokes-your-box editions.

      What does come across thoroughly is IE7's inability to use IMG-based form controls. I wonder what security measure trigger that little piece of helpfulness?
  • Seriously. I do all of my workstuff on Debian Testing, and keep a windows box running next to me for the sole purpose of IE7 testing (I do IE6 testing over terminal server.) This is a good thing, thanks.
  • Tangent: Safari (Score:2, Interesting)

    I know Slashdotters love Opera, for whatever reason, but I wonder why Safari isn't considered a "major browser" according to the post. There are several different surveys here:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_br owsers [wikipedia.org]
    and, no matter which one you believe, Safari seems to have a much larger share of the browser market than Opera. I wouldn't say this is so much offtopic as it is tangential, but do as you will and mod away as you see fit.
    • by Kelson (129150) *
      There does seem to be a tendency among some Linux users to look at desktop OSes in terms of Windows and Linux, rather than Windows, Linux/*BSD, and Mac. I suspect it's a holdover from the days when most Linux users were expatriate Windows users, installing Linux on their PCs, and Mac was this other thing that ran on totally different hardware.

      As for Safari and Linux, at least you can get a half-way decent approximation with Konqueror. It's far from perfect, of course, since (IIRC) WebKit and KHTML are bei
    • Out of some 80 posts before yours, this is the first one I've seen that even has the word "opera" in it. It's also the firs tyme I saw safari mentioned, so it's 1 for 1 between how many tymes each as been mentioned.

      Falcon
    • As a web developer, the reason I don't test much in Safari is mostly because it's a PITA to do so, and most of the time, Safari just works anyway.

      I have to have a whole different computer setup just to test in Safari. That's all it's used for, testing in Safari, and it's a way across the other side of the desk, and it's not plugged in generally because I need the power socket, and it's quite slow (an old iMac), and it's not even up-to-date because major releases of the browser are tied to major releases of
    • by toddestan (632714)
      Probably for the reason that most people aren't going to bother with the cost of buying a Mac just for testing with Safari, especially since a website that already works right in Firefox, Konquerer, and Opera almost certainly will work in Safari too. On the other hand, IE6 and IE7 are different enough that you pretty much have to figure out a way to test your website with those browsers.
  • by Qbertino (265505) on Monday January 08, 2007 @07:03PM (#17516074)
    Browsercam. [browsercam.com]

    It's a plug, yes. But they deserve it.
  • by fluffy99 (870997) on Monday January 08, 2007 @08:19PM (#17516946)

    For those who have not read the IE7 EULA:

    PLEASE NOTE: Microsoft Corporation (or based on where you live, one of its affiliates) licenses this supplement to you. You may use a copy of this supplement with each validly licensed copy of Microsoft Windows XP SP2 and Windows Server 2003 SP1 software (the "software"). You may not use the supplement if you do not have a license for the software. The license terms for the software apply to your use of this supplement.

    So you need to have a licensed copy of WXP or W2K3. Looks a little vaque whether you have to be running under the validly licensed OS, though.

  • or.... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by cafelatte (99544)
    You can code your web site in compliant HTML 3.2 and not even have to bother browser checking.
  • by MTO_B. (814477) on Monday January 08, 2007 @09:37PM (#17517600) Homepage
    Wow, that's interesting...
    IE7 is on linux even before it is on Win2000.
    Actually, they say it will never come out for win 2000.

    Now... can I run a windows simulator inside my windows in order to run these programs MS is specifically blocking from win2000? Such as IE7, windows live writer (a blog editing program), windows live messenger, etc.
  • I've installed ies4linux but activex applications don't work. Will they work with this IE7 hack? We have a cyclades KVM at work that uses an activex app to launch the viewer ..it works but it's really annoying since we're a 99% nix shop.
  • As the author of ies4linux pointed out in the comment section of the linked site, there's a much faster way to get IE7 to work on Linux:

    ./ies4linux -beta-install-ie7

  • Bad tools (Score:2, Interesting)

    by NineNine (235196)
    A web developer running a hacked-in IE7 on Linux is like an auto mechanic using one of those cheap screwdrivers with changeable-heads to fix cars. I'm shopping for web design right now, and I wouldn't hire anybody who told me that this was how they checked IE7 compatiblity.

Administration: An ingenious abstraction in politics, designed to receive the kicks and cuffs due to the premier or president. -- Ambrose Bierce

Working...