ie8 fix
madison

It's time to stop using IE6

By | January 16, 2010, 5:30am PST

If your organization is still using Internet Explorer 6 on Windows XP, just stop. Stop it now.

The marketplace is filled with credible alternatives to IE6, including Mozilla Firefox and Google Chrome. If you need to use Internet Explorer because it’s required for compatibility with specific websites or apps, you have alternatives from Microsoft itself. IE6 was replaced with the newer, more secure Internet Explorer 7 in October 2006, more than 40 months ago. And Internet Explorer 8 was released in March of 2009, nearly a year ago. Both browsers have large improvements in usability, including tabbed browsing, but their biggest selling point is security.

Any IT professional who is still allowing IE6 to be used in a corporate setting is guilty of malpractice. Think that judgment is too harsh? Ask the security experts at Google, Adobe, and dozens of other large corporations that are cleaning up the mess from a wave of targeted attacks that allowed source code and confidential data to fall into the hands of well-organized intruders. The entry point? According to Microsoft, it’s IE6:

At this time, we are aware of limited, targeted attacks attempting to use this vulnerability against Internet Explorer 6. We have not seen attacks against other versions of Internet Explorer.

[…]

Newer versions of Internet Explorer and later Windows releases are at reduced risk to the exploit we have seen due to platform mitigations explained in the blog post below.

Under the “Mitigating Factors” heading, the Microsoft Security Response Center specifically notes that the exploit used in this case does not run under IE7 and IE8 in Windows Vista or Windows 7. You’ve got one extra layer of protection if you use IE8, even under Windows XP Service Pack 3, thanks to Data Execution Prevention, which is enabled by default.

The accompanying blog post from Jonathan Ness of the Microsoft Security Research Center Engineering group is even more blunt:

I want to make one thing perfectly clear. The attacks we have seen to date, including the exploit released publicly, only affect customers using Internet Explorer 6. As discussed in the security advisory, while newer versions of Internet Explorer are affected by this vulnerability, mitigations exist that make exploitation much more difficult.

If your organization is still forcing you to use IE6 on Windows XP, send this blog post to your CEO, your CIO, and every member of your company’s Board of Directors. Be sure to include this graphic:

Yes, this vulnerability will be patched, probably within days. But the next one is just around the corner, or perhaps an exploit is being deployed right now. In 2010, with multiple alternatives available, there is no excuse for continuing to use an insecure Internet infrastructure.

IE6 users, it’s time to move on. Your IT staff has had more than three years to come up with alternatives to IE6. If they can’t handle it, maybe it’s time to replace them, too.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Ed Bott is an award-winning technology writer with more than two decades' experience writing for mainstream media outlets and online publications.

Disclosure

Ed Bott

Ed Bott is a freelance technical journalist and book author. All work that Ed does is on a contractual basis.

Since 1994, Ed has written more than 25 books about Microsoft Windows and Office. Along with various co-authors, Ed is completely responsible for the content of the books he writes. As a key part of his contractual relationship with publishers, he gives them permission to print and distribute the content he writes and to pay him a royalty based on the actual sales of those books. Ed's books written prior to fall 2011 have been distributed by Que Publishing (a division of Pearson Education) and by Microsoft Press. As of November 2011, Ed is a partner in the independent publishing company Fair Trade Digital Exchange, which exclusively publishes his books.

On occasion, Ed accepts consulting assignments. In recent years, he has worked as an expert witness in cases where his experience and knowledge of Microsoft and Microsoft Windows have been useful. In each such case, his compensation is on an hourly basis, and he is hired as a witness, not an advocate.

Ed does not own stock or have any other financial interest in Microsoft or any other software company. He owns 500 shares of stock in EMC Corporation, which was purchased before the company's acquisition of VMware. In addition, he owns 350 shares of stock in Intel Corporation, purchased more than two years ago. All stocks are held in retirement accounts for long-term growth.

Ed does not accept gifts from companies he covers. All hardware products he writes about are purchased with his own funds or are review units covered under formal loan agreements and are returned after the review is complete.

Biography

Ed Bott

Ed Bott is an award-winning technology writer with more than two decades' experience writing for mainstream media outlets and online publications. He's served as editor of the U.S. edition of PC Computing and managing editor of PC World; both publications had monthly paid circulation in excess of 1 million during his tenure. He is the author of more than 25 books on Microsoft Windows and Office, including the recently released Windows 7 Inside Out.

169
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: It's time to stop using IE6
FAULKNE 13th Oct
Good day to confirm this comment I would appreciate T h e b e s t o f Z D N e t d e l i v e r e d your website very nice to everyone Yes, Oracle is the only one with shared-disk architecture, but that is there advantage. It means you can add or remove nodes and the database lives on. In a shared nothing architecture, if you lose a node, you lose the system. I'm sure Oracle appreciates EMC highlighting their advantage.I also desire to signal in your RSS feeds. Thank you as soon as once again and maintain up the great operate Awesome post! Thank you very much || thanks for nice content this is really benefit to me.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
If you work for a corporation that is still using IE6 on XP or Windows 2000, why? Have you asked your IT staff why they haven't moved to a more secure browser?
0 Votes
+ -
The UK's National Health Service
NortherngeekUK 16th Jan 2010
These guys should be concerned about the security of their files....

The NHS, the largest employer in Europe, refuses to upgrade to IE7, and deliberately downgrades PCs to Windows XP without upgrading the browser. This is blamed on compatability and finances, and to be fair the companies who make a lot of software for Primary Health Care have done little to make switching easy, if anything. Costs on the other hand is ridiculous, the NHS is a sinkhole for money already this would save time and money.

Security issues have been pointed out and flat out denied by the IT departments. Often the decision to upgrade or not is made by the Health Care Trust in charge but I can say from experience that I haven't seen an NHS machine in the North West of the UK using anything past XP and browsers other than IE6 are discouraged at best.

* I write this as a Junior doctor working in Hospitals and General Practices. My family is in healthcare and we are constantly reminded that we aren't "allowed" to upgrade.
0 Votes
+ -
It started as a bunch of documentation tags. It was never designed to be an APP framework to meet nowadays online app development requirement. The current HTML5 is loaded w/ backward compatibilities that just don't fly at all.
0 Votes
+ -
Partly . . .
JulesLt3 19th Jan 2010
I'd agree with the basic point - that HTML/CSS was never, originally,
designed to be the one true presentation layer (at the time it was
conceived, that was probably DisplayPDF).

However . . . the history of IT in the last few decades is that we don't
really get a choice in what technology is used. Windows was the worst
available GUI system (compared to GEMM, OS/2, X-Windows,
AmigaOS, MacOS, and NeXT) - but it thrived.

With Web apps, I've seen my teams productivity become a quarter of
what it was a decade ago - but it is what people demand.

On the other hand, HTML 5/JavaScript 5 do at least approach things
from the perspective of application development, rather than a static
document focus. And far from being backward compatible, HTML 5
deprecates earlier HTML elements (browsers, of course, need to
remain backwardly compatible with earlier specs).

And I can't think of any security problems with HTML itself - as
opposed to, say, CSS Expressions, or some of the flaws that are
inherent in JavaScript's defined behaviour (which V5 will correct - the
ability to protect your objects from modification or access by third
party scripts).

The other alternatives (Flash/Flex) have their known security problems
too.
0 Votes
+ -
To think we should move away from web apps, web
services etc is foolish. Its become a highly
portable, very capable platform for delivering
applications via a network. It also makes the
concept of server deployed apps far more
feasible, easier to manage and deploy. The
problem are companies that are lazy about
upgrading their applications and more so,
companies like Microsoft for not enforcing an
expiration of these older legacy browsers. We
are heading into an age where web standards are
finally reaching some cohesion. Even Microsoft
is following suit with IE8. For years many web
developers have been pleading to get people off
of IE6. Hopefully this time some IT managers
and users will wake up to the problem and
upgrade.
0 Votes
+ -
Typical Government SNAFU.
Agnostic_OS 17th Jan 2010
I have written before* about the complete ineptitude of UK government projects that are specified and planned by the non-technical bureaucrats. This is just another example of stupidity that will cost a lot to fix (at government prices and tax payer expense.)

*http://talkback.zdnet.com/5208-13604-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=73115&messageID=1417953&tag=content;col1

SNAFU = Situation Normal All F#%ked-Up
0 Votes
+ -
Don't know of many governments
John Zern 17th Jan 2010
that are are void of those types of problems happy
0 Votes
+ -
Our main customers are
timiteh Updated - 16th Jan 2010
Noone in my company uses IE6 besides for testing purpose. However most of us are stuck with Windows XP and this is seriously becoming annoying if not painful. Fortunately, we should start a full migration toward Windows 7 this year. Most of our servers are already running on WIndows 2008 and Windows 2008 R2.
Our main customers on the other hand, are still using XP and IE6 on many of their computers. One of them has reccurent security problems linked to how outdated is their Information System. As both their software provider and solutions consultant, we have been trying since several years to make them upgrade their system. Unfortunately some of their main IT managers are fighting our efforts with a passion. Fortunately, they are considering upgrading to Windows 7 before the end of the next year. So with some luck they will be almost up to date for 2012.
0 Votes
+ -
re
jimk_z 22nd Jan 2010
I don't understand why these IT managers don't at
least want to upgrade people to IE7 or better yet
IE8, Chrome, Firefox etc. I know one of the
reasons is that they may have old internal web
apps that were built specifically for IE6. If
thats the case, don't they realize if they upgrade
to windows 7 (a good thing) there is no way to go
back to IE6? I don't get the logic?
0 Votes
+ -
Intranet sites & testing
LeoD 16th Jan 2010
I've found the excuse is usually web apps and Intranet sites, often in a semi-abandoned state, where there are fears that changing browser will break them.

Nobody wants to put up the budget to even test the sites to see if the fears are valid, let alone the budget to fix them if required.

It's gotta happen one day, though...

Corporate IT is usually extremely short sighted, at least at most of the large organisations I have worked. It's always seen as a drain on the organisation's budget, a necessary cost that needs to be minimised, rather than something that if you spent and plan wisely can boost your company's performance by providing good tools (e.g. NOT Lotus Notes, heh).
0 Votes
+ -
lol lotus notes
jimk_z 22nd Jan 2010
I would probably be close to committing suicide if
I had to use lotus notes =P
0 Votes
+ -
Nope
Cylon Centurion 16th Jan 2010
We're still running Xp for now but, have switched to Firefox for student browsing.
0 Votes
+ -
It's time to stop using IE
T1Oracle 16th Jan 2010
I fixed your title.

IE has been the bane of web standards for far too long, it needs to die. It doesn't even have a Firebug equivalent in this world of AJAX. How are you supposed debug AJAX in IE?
There fixed your messup.
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
HP server management tools
symbolset 17th Jan 2010
HP Server, network and SAN management tools still require IE6 to manage servers (iLO Advanced with virtual media, Virtual Connect Manager, and so on), so I keep a VM with XP around for that purpose - severely locked down of course. The VM has DNS resolution turned off and has to be configured with a static IP appropriate for the management LAN.

I keep another one for twisted partner portals and management tools that require it, similarly locked down.

Some enterprises embraced .ASP and .NET (and MS Java) very early, and enthusiastically hired contractors to build them line-of-business applications around those technologies to migrate away from mainframes. Now they have neither the source code nor the skills to migrate away from IE6. No matter how much they wanted to adopt Vista they could not - and they did want to top to bottom and bottom to top. They will be among the last to adopt Windows 7 - and they will build in dependency on Microsoft platforms again, forcing a skip of the next generation of OS as well when dependencies for W7 prevent migration again. That's fine for Microsoft though because they're all on SA and are buying the licenses regardless. Sometimes IT is a theatre of the absurd. I have no doubt that the refresh of the HP management tools will require IE8.

These VMs and browsers are special purpose tools like SAE wrenches. They're not for every day use but handy when you need them.

The trap of IE6 continues with IE7 and IE8 BTW, and will continue to do so with ensuing versions. The nonstandard features of Microsoft browsers serve only to create dependency on Microsoft web platforms like Sharepoint and .NET - to our detriment. They ensure that I'll need VMs with version specific browsers from now until my IT career is done. It's sad, really.

There's no excuse for this nonsense. People who aren't Microsoft should know better than to implement web applications as browser dependent tools. They should have known this a decade ago. They get paid to know these things - it's just not professional. There are good standards and they work fine - see Google Maps for a nice example. If your app needs an interface more sophisticated than that it probably should be a client/server app rather than web based. I can see why Microsoft's partner portal requires Silverlight - but I can't see why any non-Microsoft website on the Internet or web management tool does. It's plain laziness.
0 Votes
+ -
Because...
Fred Fredrickson 17th Jan 2010
they were silly enough to create browser-based applications that used ActiveX and they only work in IE. Also, there is no compelling reason to move beyond XP other than the insecurity of IE 6.

Security is dealt with by seriously limiting what you can access from corporate desktops - no web mail, no social networking sites, no site classified as entertainment, sport, finance, etc. There are a few exceptions, e.g. reputable banks sites are accessible.

And some of us run Firefox with a few well-chosen add-ons.
0 Votes
+ -
AFAIK, ActiveX was used...
Earthling2 Updated - 17th Jan 2010
because everyone at the time wanted light-weight web-based apps that looked like desktop ones and the browsers were lacking in UI to the degree of utter ugliness. The Java applets did too, to less extent, but they were slow, buggy and relatively difficult to develop for.

Another example why native code was used: try to use Firefox 2 on an old computer and visit a modern site with advanced UI (slashdot.org or gizmodo.com). How fast are they? So, using standard features of old browsers wasn't just enough. IE provided a solution that customers liked; Netscape just died.

So one point to look at it is a pay-off for getting ahead of the standards and not planning for consequences.

By the way the same continues with Flash. Nearly every site uses Flash one way or another, and it introduces another source of vulnerabilities.
0 Votes
+ -
I find that there are quite a few GOOD reasons to migrate to Windows 7 from XP, namely the DirectAccess, BranchCache, and Federated Search features.
Yes, they require an orgaization update most of its server infrastructure to Server 2008 R2, but I think these would be good reasons to upgrade.

With that in mind, I wouldn't go to Win7 as a "Blanket" upgrade, but perhaps as I am replacing workstations.
0 Votes
+ -
I was one of those people that was really upset
with Vista. I felt there was no need to migrate
from XP. When I got windows 7 installed on my
workstation at work I immediately noticed it
was far more stable, less resource intensive
then Vista. Like Vista it was more secure out
of the box. In fact there are many things that
are disabled or not installed by default.
Unlike Vista the UAC is not annoying and can be
modified. Windows 7 is very stable. My only
issue is that moving large number of files and
folders still seems faster in XP.
0 Votes
+ -
Yes
beoz 19th Jan 2010
Legacy applications galore. Lots of it is probably bad programmming (makes bad assumptions about the browser) but it's pretty locked in.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: It's time to stop using IE6
maguay 16th Jan 2010
I only use IE6 for testing websites ... in XP Mode. And it's crazy people still have to do that. I haven't used IE6 for day-to-day browsing since 2004 or so!
0 Votes
+ -
It's time to stop reading Ed Bott
gfryesc@... 16th Jan 2010
Obviously he hasn't worked in any reasonable sized
organization before. If he ever had he'd know how silly
a recommendation it is to suggest we forward his blog
on to our CEOs and CIOs. Maybe in his lone wolf world
of slinging snarky scorched-earth comments all over
such rudeness is acceptable. Such things in the real
world lead to job-loss.

The real blog post should be sympathy for these
companies that were sold on proprietary Microsoft
technology and built their Intranet sites on it. Now that
Microsoft has yanked support for those technologies
they're stuck. The CEOs and CIOs know this all too
well and they don't need Ed Bott, who is responsible
for nothing, ankle biting.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
Gee, thanks
Ed Bott Updated - 16th Jan 2010
Ever heard of anonymous e-mail?

And no, Microsoft has not "yanked support" for IE6. They continue to support it, as I noted in the last paragraph, and will do so for several more years. But they actively encourage customers to upgrade to newer browsers (especially as part of OS upgrades).

So who doesn't know what they're talking about?
0 Votes
+ -
Ed, you're the clueless one
Info-Dave 16th Jan 2010
IE6 may be supported, but IE7 and IE8 are not backward compatible
with IE6. Web applications written for IE6 are broke with any other
browser. Microsoft hoodwinked the corporate world into
implementing proprietary web based solutions, and then abandoned
them. XP Mode is not a solution. it prolongs the agony.

The fear-mongering in your article is actually worse than you
describe, but it goes against the premise of your article. Go look up
Microsoft Security Advisory 979352. The recent Chinese hack of
Google has been responded to, and all versions of IE and all versions
of Windows are affected. Microsoft is the swiss cheese of the
computer security world.

I have a plan to stimulate the economy that is better than anybody in
Washington has suggested. Microsoft should pay to have all IE6
applications rewritten to open standards. The corporate world could
then update, returning much of the money to Microsoft. Web
developers would be infinitely more productive not having to support
IE6, or IE7 for that matter. The world would be a better place.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
Speaking of clueless...
Ed Bott 16th Jan 2010
You tell me I should "Go look up Microsoft Security Advisory 979352..."

Hello? Did you read this post? The quotes and graphics I provide are from that advisory. What color is the sun in your parallel universe?

Sheesh.
0 Votes
+ -
You conveniently left this out
Info-Dave 16th Jan 2010
"Our investigation so far has shown that Internet Explorer 5.01 Service
Pack 4 on Microsoft Windows 2000 Service Pack 4 is not affected, and
that Internet Explorer 6 Service Pack 1 on Microsoft Windows 2000
Service Pack 4, and Internet Explorer 6, Internet Explorer 7 and Internet
Explorer 8 on supported editions of Windows XP, Windows Server 2003,
Windows Vista, Windows Server 2008, Windows 7, and Windows Server
2008 R2 are vulnerable."

What is it you don't get? Back atcha Ed.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
You missed...
Ed Bott 16th Jan 2010
...the section entitled "Mitigating factors." IE8 enables DEP by default, which causes this exploit to fail. In addition, Protected Mode in Vista and 7 substantially reduces the privileges available to any code that might be executed.

All vulnerabilities are not the same. Although this vulnerability exists in all versions of Internet Explorer, the ability to exploit it is dramatically different.

I'm not missing a thing. I actually took the time to read and study all the information, including assessments from independent researchers, who agree with this conclusion.
0 Votes
+ -
"All vulnerabilities are not the same. Although this vulnerability exists in
all versions of Internet Explorer, the ability to exploit it is dramatically
different."

I can agree with that, However, I would credit Windows more than IE for
this security. Windows is segregating IE from the rest of the system.
Perhaps your article should have been titled, "It's time to stop using XP
and IE6".
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
Hmmm
Ed Bott 17th Jan 2010
I think that is what I said in the very first sentence! "If your organization is still using Internet Explorer 6 on Windows XP, just stop. Stop it now."

I have argued for a long time that security improvements in recent versions of Windows are important and substantial. This example seems to confirm that.
0 Votes
+ -
Troll feeding
symbolset 17th Jan 2010
Ed, you're better than this. Let it go.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
No, it's not
Ed Bott 18th Jan 2010
If you follow the thread you'll see that we end up agreeing. It's a pointed debate but ultimately productive.
0 Votes
+ -
Clueless companies sticking with IE6
Tom12Tom 16th Jan 2010
You can't stick with ancient web browsers, and ancient web applications, forever. Get over it.

You can't expect an ancient web browser to be as secure as a modern web browser.

In a variety of ways, IE8 is clearly more secure than IE6. IE8 is even more secure when run in Vista/Win7 Protected Mode.

As for general web usage, I use IE8 on many, many, web sites, and have not had it "break" a single on of them.
0 Votes
+ -
Hoodwinked???
Patanjali Updated - 17th Jan 2010
MS provided a lot of extra bits to the IE6 DOM to make it of better use as a programming GUI target, BUT they explicitly and CLEARLY indicated in the documentation which bits were not standard (in currency at the time).

Many IE6 front ends were to intranet apps and B2B and so were NOT dependent upon the rapidly changing 'standards' of the time. To many enterprises, IE6 was more of a standard than so-called 'standards', because none were completely implemented by ANY browser. They were 'standards' because some had agreed to them in theory, but they were far from standards in practice.

IE6 became so intertwined with many corporate processes that even MS themselves had (and still has obviously) much difficuty getting them to update. In this, IE6 is like XP, and this is a significant reason why they both were left for so long before MS made replacements.

Enterprises willingly entrenched IE6-specific functionality because it worked for them, implementing practical workflows, rather than just being an interesting tool with which to look at content, for which most other broswers seem to be content.
0 Votes
+ -
And move on to things that work with ALL browsers, not just IE6!
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
Thanks for the heads-up (nt}
Ed Bott 16th Jan 2010
...
Any thoughts of retracting yourself?
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
The original comment...
Ed Bott 16th Jan 2010
...was rude and obnoxious. I assume a moderator will delete it soon enough.
trying to get messages you do not like deleted.
Good the moderators do not always listen to your
whining.
0 Votes
+ -
Look at you
John Zern 18th Jan 2010
talk about not be able to take the heat, you come close to having a stroke when asked to answer a simple question.
insults come in a close second.
more secure browser. That is VERY good advice.

But, he should take it farther and make the point
that there is no justification for continuing to
use Windows either.
0 Votes
+ -
IE6
lars626 16th Jan 2010
I've worked in large and small IT shops. Some look forward and some look back. Computers are tools. The company with the most efficient tools has the advantage.

If your shop can't or won't move forward you better be updating your resume. Nobody supports old products forever. Don't expect MS to. If you can't understand this you should go back to finding parts for your Edsel.
0 Votes
+ -
Nor does Canonical, RH, or other FOSS companies
Cylon Centurion 17th Jan 2010
No one supports a product forever. Especially in the technology field. I find it silly that people call MS foul names because they're hanging up XP. Can I call Canonical names too, since they don't support Ubuntu releases nearly as long as MS supported XP and Vista?

You either have to upgrade, or take the chances if you don't want to. They're part of life.
The browser is not the only problem.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
If security is important...
Ed Bott 16th Jan 2010
Don't use computers at all.

Everything's a trade-off, Donnie. There's no such thing as a secure computer system, regardless of who makes it.
reason every year to use Windows, just like there
is no good reason to use even any version of IE.
0 Votes
+ -
You do know...
wolf_z 16th Jan 2010
...that trying to FUD a product that everyone really *likes* (ie Windows 7) makes you look like a loon, right?

Windows 7+IE8+properly configured group policies = very very secure.

Our company, while mid-sized, hasn't used IE6 in years. Our intranet applications portfolio consists of exactly two applications--both static read-only web pages! happy

Save for some 3'rd party vertical market applications we're a pure MS shop, in a high-security industry, and have never been hacked.

Bottom line, whatever your tech, know how to use it, instead of being the crazy prophet of doom prophesying the end of the world on City Hall's steps.
security problems are quite expensive.
0 Votes
+ -
Windows 7 hasn't had a problem
Cylon Centurion 17th Jan 2010
That's all those old XP systems people are getting into trouble with.
0 Votes
+ -
Right in one, NStalnecker!
Lerianis10 17th Jan 2010
Windows 7 has had SOME vulnerabilities (so have OSX and Linux).... HOWEVER, all the ones in Windows 7 with UAC turned on..... MILD and sometimes, don't work at all.
0 Votes
+ -
Good day to confirm this comment I would appreciate T h e b e s t o f Z D N e t d e l i v e r e d your website very nice to everyone Yes, Oracle is the only one with shared-disk architecture, but that is there advantage. It means you can add or remove nodes and the database lives on. In a shared nothing architecture, if you lose a node, you lose the system. I'm sure Oracle appreciates EMC highlighting their advantage.I also desire to signal in your RSS feeds. Thank you as soon as once again and maintain up the great operate Awesome post! Thank you very much || thanks for nice content this is really benefit to me.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix
ie8 fix