Giveaway of the Day Forums

Giveaway of the Day Forums » Topic: IE/FF? http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/topic/870 Giveaway of the Day Forums » Topic: IE/FF? en-US Sun, 12 Feb 2012 02:44:38 +0000 http://bbpress.org/?v=1.0.2 BuBBy on "IE/FF?" http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/topic/870/page/2#post-6507 Mon, 04 Jun 2007 03:22:34 +0000 BuBBy 6507@http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/ open source doesn't mean hackable... the more protected it is, the more fun to un-protect it!! That is an entirely different subject. The prevalence of exploits and the motivations of hackers is still up for debate. One school of thought says hackers are motivated by the challenge (a difficult target is more attractive). A second school of though says hackers are motivated by exposure and public recognition (perhaps overlapping with the first concept, "hacking a difficult target = public recognition"). In terms of comparing Apple OS X and Microsoft - I believe the motivation to create a virus on one of those platforms in the past appears to be based on "Where can my virus create the most damage and get the greatest exposure" (This is also affected by the availability of development tools) The logic that "the absence of exploits means a platform is secure" is like saying "a green ferrari is the safest car in the world to drive, because they were not involved in any road fatalaties over the last 2 years." Developers can only fix the bugs and exploits they know about. Just because there are no known bugs, doesn't mean the software cannot be exploited or used in a way never intended by the developers. Where "open source" has it over "closed source" (in theory at least) is the potential for a greater number of eyeballs to look over the code and spot flaws that "somebody" can be made aware of to fix. The reverse is not true - clearly if closed source made something secure - there would be no such thing as "reverse engineering" and the Windows platform would be exploit free. Closed source has far more to do with protecting commercial and intellectual property than it has to do with security. alexiussg on "IE/FF?" http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/topic/870/page/2#post-6486 Sun, 03 Jun 2007 08:11:57 +0000 alexiussg 6486@http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/ i agree with Mapi and Swan, and open source doesn't mean hackable, compare Microsoft vs Apple OS X, who has more viruses attacking?? or abt MS Mobile for PocketPC vs Symbian?? the more protected it is, the more fun to un-protect it!! we hav DVDs that r protected, but people found a way to decrypt it! now so with HD-dvds [snipped] BuBBy on "IE/FF?" http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/topic/870/page/2#post-6196 Sat, 26 May 2007 05:27:44 +0000 BuBBy 6196@http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/ @alexiussg - but in IE u can copy mp3/videos files, which is embeded into a webpage via Adobe flash, onto yur desktop frm the "Temporary Internet Files" folder. In firefox, I use the "CacheViewer" Extension available from <a href="https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/2489" rel="nofollow">https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/2489</a> alexiussg on "IE/FF?" http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/topic/870/page/2#post-6192 Sat, 26 May 2007 04:41:48 +0000 alexiussg 6192@http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/ i suppose IE7 settings page is more complicate to use as compared to firefox where they categorised everything and u can't press Ctrl+Shift+Del to clear yur private data in IE7?? oso, u can't add/change themes to IE7. but in IE u can copy mp3/videos files, which is embeded into a webpage via Adobe flash, onto yur desktop frm the "Temporary Internet Files" folder. BuBBy on "IE/FF?" http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/topic/870/page/2#post-5556 Tue, 08 May 2007 03:46:43 +0000 BuBBy 5556@http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/ Firstly, my intention is not to "prove Internet Explorer is a terrible browser" - because it isn't. But I draw the line at someone trying to demonstrate how Browser A is a good browser because Browser B has some issues. You sell each product on its own merits, not on the weakness of the competition. This tactic I have noticed more and more in political election campaigns - rather than demonstrating why a candidate is worthy of votes - they decide to campaign solely on why the opposition is a bad choice - on polling day you still don't know what you are voting for - only against what you are fearful of winning. In this case putting forward myths, misunderstandings, generalizations and assumptions against Firefox - but refraining from demonstrating the positive qualities of Internet Explorer. Every product has shortcomings and tradeoffs. The advantage (as I see it) with Firefox is that you can "config" or "extend" your way out of these. If someone uses Internet Explorer and they are happy with it - then that's great. Same with Opera and Maxthon. They don't become any less a person by making "the wrong choice" (as some see it). What is important it that they make that decision in an informed manner and not out of ignorance. I am the first to say that to use Firefox to its full potential you will need to make some simple changes - because the default install isn't best for all people on all systems. But that flexibility is a strength of Firefox in my view - to someone who is not willing or doesn't know how to tune Firefox's settings to suit their browser usage or their memory requirements - they may view the same flexibility as a flaw or liability. Some Extra Opinions (from Computerworld). <a href="http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9005614">Browser Smackdown: Firefox vs. IE vs. Opera vs. Safari</a> Michelle on "IE/FF?" http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/topic/870/page/2#post-5555 Tue, 08 May 2007 02:20:44 +0000 Michelle 5555@http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/ I use Firefox mostly. Swan on "IE/FF?" http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/topic/870/page/2#post-5553 Mon, 07 May 2007 23:50:12 +0000 Swan 5553@http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/ Hello Bill, Firstly, I'm pretty annoyed and take great umbrage at the names you've called me and others who prefer Firefox over Internet E. IF you were technically minded, you'd be able to present an argument without resorting to name calling - this behavior is just elementary school boy tactics. "Also lots of anti-spyware doesn't check anything coming through FireFox, like Ad-Watch for example." I've been using the Ad-Watch add-on for Firefox for about a year and it works in real time perfectly - so you're mistaken Bill. Plus, I'm able to use McAfee Site Advisor in real time as they will have pre-tested the site and can report detailed information about any website I choose - especially any malicious programs available for download and right down to how many emails they received after registering with the website and what kind of sites they link to. On top of that, I also use the Firefox plug-in for No-Script. <blockquote> "Winner of the "2006 PC World World Class Award", this tool provides extra protection to your Firefox. It allows JavaScript, Java and other executable content to run only from trusted domains of your choice, e.g. your home-banking web site, and guards the "trust boundaries" against cross-site scripting attacks (XSS). Such a preemptive approach prevents exploitation of security vulnerabilities (known and even unknown!) with no loss of functionality... Experts do agree: Firefox is really safer with NoScript ;)" </blockquote> So I feel pretty safe with Firefox Bill - especially after Bubby posted all those fantastic links. (Thanks again Bubby!) My husband is a software programmer for an international company - and even he and others in the development department choose Firefox. I really don't know what you're on about - hasn't Bubby convinced you yet? If not, I'd be happy to loan you my glasses. ;) ~ Swan BuBBy on "IE/FF?" http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/topic/870/page/2#post-5544 Mon, 07 May 2007 15:25:46 +0000 BuBBy 5544@http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/ @Mapi - Arg. Look at the difference between Firefox and IE: Please check that your claims can be backed up with references to your sources, or else state that the claims are personal opinion only. Many of your claims as they stand are dubious in accuracy. BuBBy on "IE/FF?" http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/topic/870/page/2#post-5542 Mon, 07 May 2007 15:16:44 +0000 BuBBy 5542@http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/ I was not going to mention the AdWatch comment, as it is not really a reflection on Firefox or AdWatch but only demonstrates that there is some confusion as to what Ad-Watch actually does. AdWatch. 1. Can block cookies. (Not really a threat - AdAware treats these as a "Negligible Risk") 2. Can detect and block known spyware/trojan ActiveX installs. SpywareBlaster does the same. Firefox by default does not use ActiveX technology (Many consider ActiveX a security risk). 3. Can detect bad processes. The Windows process list is independent of the browser being used. 4. Can detect and block changes to the registry settings. This is independent of the browser being used. Most good security software isn't dependent on protecting only while you are running a certain browser or version of software. Good security software operates on a level apart and provides security protection for any application that is running. This is the case for almost all Antivirus, Firewall, AntiSpyware or Proxy Servers. If your "security software" only protects you when you run a certain piece of software (like a browser) that is not a flaw in the protected software, but an obvious limitation in the design of the security software (eg If your antivirus software only protected against viruses in Office documents - is the limitation/problem with the AntiVirus, or the Office Suite?) Mapi on "IE/FF?" http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/topic/870/page/2#post-5541 Mon, 07 May 2007 14:34:55 +0000 Mapi 5541@http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/ BillW50 wrote: Also lots of anti-spyware doesn't check anything coming through FireFox, like Ad-Watch for example. Yet Ad-Watch protects you in real time with IE and Maxthon, but not with FireFox at all. While you believe that most IE users don't know where the security slider is at, which I don't believe for a second. And I believe most FireFox users are too dumb to know that much security software out there does nothing when you are using FireFox. In some points you are right. But in IE this is possible because it's not secured against unwanted plugins. THey can just connect and read all ur dataz on Internet Explorer. In Firefox security software can't just plugin. Only a few like ZoneAlarmPro and McAfeeSiteadvisor, but in this case you are getting warned and the extention will be blocked when it contains known spyware. Firefox has got a build-in phishing filter since version 1.0 (or maybe even before, but those weren't complete). Google if you arn't satisfied or got questions, you'll always find it Mapi on "IE/FF?" http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/topic/870/page/2#post-5540 Mon, 07 May 2007 14:28:45 +0000 Mapi 5540@http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/ Arg. Look at the difference between Firefox and IE: -Look at Google! They support Firefox 'cause they believe it's way better than IE. Google is more powerfull than Microsoft (finance.google.com) -IE has got ActiveX, better just call it full access to your computer. -Out of research 70% didn't even knew what ActiveX was. -IE has got lot's (what do I say? Bunches!) of leaks, all Firefox leaks will be fixed withing days, IE leaks within weeks or in IE6 her case: years. -Still need IE? Use IE-Tab extention for Firefox! IE in Firefox environment. -Memory leaks? Yes, at fragmented, spyware-full, no-free-hdd-space computers. -Firefox 2 is also for Linux, Mac and some other OS'ses. -Firefox 2 uses Gecko, which is proven to be better than IE. -Download.com check all software. Firefox had a WAY better rank than IE7. -Firefox 2 takes on an averages machine ~10 MB ram, IE7 the same. -Firefox 2 can run on 32/64 MB ram pieces, IE7 should at least have 256 to work fine. -Firefox 2 is WAY faster. -Firefox 2 takes ~10 seconds to install. IE7 takes about 20 -minutes!- to install. -Firefox 2 is open-source and in way more languages than IE7. -Firefox 2 has got lots of FREE-ONLY extensions, which 0wn IE7's addons / activeX. -Firefox 2 has got a cleaner interface. -Firefox 2 is on the SIM-PC, a computer with Open-Source Linux with Firefox, because Firefox is so secure even 65+ people can work it. -Firefox 2 her print function prints way better than IE7's print function, which throws up the whole page. -Lots of web-developpers use Firefox or Opera, instead of IE because they can't hold itself to the standard HTML, XHTML, PHP, CSS, JavaScript etc norms, Mozilla and Opera can. -Firefox 2 has got ChatZilla (downloadable), a complete IRC client, costing 250 KB more rams when running. -Firefox 2 has got an about:config page containing lots of tweaks. -Firefox 2 has proven security by experts. -Firefox 2, Opera and Safari are rising, IE is dropping fast in popularity. -Firefox 2 has got a better bookmark system. -Firefox 2 can import all IE4 (or even lower maybe) until IE7 her settings, cookies, bookmarks etc. I'm just beginning. Now we've got to look what Microsoft has stolen from Firefox: -Tabs -Safe mode function -Addons (they suddenly rise by 400% when a research tells Addons are important to Firefox) Don't forgot for newbies Mozilla offers _LOTS_ of support to everybody (else ask me :D)! Still not convinced? Firefox can be installed within 10 seconds and uninstalled in 20. Don't forget if you're for privacy, you're for Firefox! <a href="http://www.getfirefox.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.getfirefox.com/</a> For all people who have not tried Firefox, give it a try :) I'm helping Mozilla with the translation of her products to Dutch, so I do know where Firefox stands for! Even Firefox 1.0 didn't have the security holes as IE5+IE6+IE7 has got. That was ment seriously. BillW50 on "IE/FF?" http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/topic/870/page/2#post-5518 Sun, 06 May 2007 03:13:20 +0000 BillW50 5518@http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/ Well I would love to chat with you more about this, but I opened my big mouth and promised a friend I would pour a sidewalk for them tomorrow (since they don't have a clue what they are doing) and then Monday I'm having surgery. No big thing, but I might not be back here for a week or so. See you all later then. And BuBBy, I still think you are great... so don't take any of this the wrong way, ok? BuBBy on "IE/FF?" http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/topic/870/page/2#post-5517 Sun, 06 May 2007 02:04:08 +0000 BuBBy 5517@http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/ No I am frustrated because you have posted so few *facts* but continue to refer to them as such. @BillW50 "The real truth is that FireFox is a bloated pig (like most open source software)" @BuBBy : (oh boy there goes any tech credibility you might've had). Perhaps you would like to justify your generalization then, that most open source software "is a bloated pig". And while you are at it - explain in detail exactly what criteria you are using to identify this "bloated pig". Maybe starting with Linux, Open Office, 7Zip, Gimp, Azureus, Thunderbird, VLC, phpMyAdmin, Filezilla, Keypass... So like most of your comments they come without any supporting references or proof. In fact even your comment on security and open source just shows how little real world experience your "opinion stands up to" <blockquote>@BillW50 - And anybody whom feels that FireFox as safer because it is open source is just full of it. As that is like giving a hacker the combination to the safe. As honest people with the combination to the safe will think and believe it is secure. But hackers and smart people know far better. As you never make anything safer by releasing the source code. Never! </blockquote> I would suggest you read the following from <a href="http://keepass.info/" rel="nofollow">http://keepass.info/</a> <blockquote>Yes, KeePass is really free, and more than that: it is open-source (OSI certified). You can have a look at its full source and for example check if the encryption algorithms are implemented correctly. Perhaps you wonder why I decided to make it open-source. The answer is relatively simple: in my opinion all software that has something to do with security should be open-source. Here's a quote of Bruce Schneier that sums it up pretty good: As a cryptography and computer security expert, I have never understood the current fuss about the open source software movement. In the cryptography world, we consider open source necessary for good security; we have for decades. Public security is always more secure than proprietary security. It's true for cryptographic algorithms, security protocols, and security source code. For us, open source isn't just a business model; it's smart engineering practice. <a href="http://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram-9909.html">Bruce Schneier, Crypto-Gram 1999/09/15</a> </blockquote> If the "closed source" model was the answer to "software bloat" and "security vulnerabilities" then users should not have any concerns when running Microsoft software (or any closed source software)? Security that is open for inspection, review and improvement by everyone will always be preferred to "security by obscurity". Having a hundred locksmiths get together to invent a better lock will always be a better option than just hiding the keys under your mattress. A good lock is well designed when the thief is allowed to know how it works and still cannot open it. <blockquote>The counter-argument you sometimes hear is that secret cryptography is stronger because it is secret, and public algorithms are riskier because they are public. This sounds plausible, until you think about it for a minute. Public algorithms are designed to be secure even though they are public; that's how they're made. So there's no risk in making them public. If an algorithm is only secure if it remains secret, then it will only be secure until someone reverse-engineers and publishes the algorithms. A variety of secret digital cellular telephone algorithms have been "outed" and promptly broken, illustrating the futility of that argument. <a href="http://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram-9909.html">Bruce Schneier, Crypto-Gram 1999/09/15</a> </blockquote> BillW50 on "IE/FF?" http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/topic/870/page/2#post-5516 Sun, 06 May 2007 01:18:58 +0000 BillW50 5516@http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/ "I'm not even going to reply to the post you have made because you have misquoted, misinterpreted, and come to assumptions that I am sure many readers would recognize as being 'a big stretch". -- BuBBy That's right BuBBy. When many find the *facts* disagrees with their own. They pretend the conflict doesn't exist and then tries to paper it over. And/or they try to attack the messenger. Yes I know all about this ploy, it is called cognitive dissonance. BillW50 on "IE/FF?" http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/topic/870/page/2#post-5515 Sun, 06 May 2007 01:06:35 +0000 BillW50 5515@http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/ Less personal? You said: "(oh boy there goes any tech credibility you might've had)." Really BuBBy? I am sorry, but that is just pure nonsense! Plus this has nothing to do with Maxthon, but about IE and FireFox. And *most* FireFox users don't have a leg to stand on and I have proven they have no clue what they are talking about in regards to security. Nor do they know anything about great programming either. As the worst coded browser in the world has to be FireFox bar none. Even MS is known for poor coding and FireFox has MS beaten by far! And the proof is it is the slowest of all browsers and eats up more memory than anything else on the planet. I know FireFox lovers can't deal with the truth. And for that I am so sorry that people are in love with a loser. But anybody with an open and an honest mind can plainly see it. The truth is some can't accept the truth. So what do you want me to do? Lie? Sorry! It is too late as I know better. And I don't care if you want to continue to attack me personally. But you can't attack the truth. BuBBy on "IE/FF?" http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/topic/870/page/2#post-5514 Sun, 06 May 2007 00:11:03 +0000 BuBBy 5514@http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/ BillW50, I appreciate you wanting to contribute to this thread, but if you want to make a point can you at least try to keep it a little less "personal". I don't care that you like Maxthon but this is a discussion on FF and IE. Your description of users as "clueless" and "zealots" makes me believe you are approaching this discussion from an emotive/religious rather than technical viewpoint. For future it helps to back up any claims you make with recent specific references (where available) from reputable sources (if possible), and to distinguish between a personal opinion and a point with technical merit. I'm not even going to reply to the post you have made because you have misquoted, misinterpreted, and come to assumptions that I am sure many readers would recognize as being "a big stretch". This is not a religious war about Maxthon (although I am sure you would love to push that barrow a bit further) - My extended post was simply to demonstrate just how many holes, assumptions, technical flaws, personal motives and bias your previous post had - I never expected that you would reply with more of the same. BillW50 on "IE/FF?" http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/topic/870/page/2#post-5508 Sat, 05 May 2007 20:39:28 +0000 BillW50 5508@http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/ For starters, I disagree that most people don't know that the security sliders exist under Internet Explorer. And yes, a setting of high does lock down IE and does make it secure. Which a lot of supposed experts claim that can't be done. So it is generally the FF zealots are the ones that are clueless, not the IE users IMHO. And yes, a setting of high does lock out useful things from happening too. Well no problem there. If you trust the site, no problem adding it to a trusted zone, now is there? And why do you have a problem with me stating that FF has its own share of security problems and then you list Security Advisories to back up my claim? What was that about? You claim I do know better because I don't use IE. Well that isn't totally true. One computer I have, I only have IE7 installed on it for testing purposes. There are no other browsers installed on this computer. Plus I do use other people's computers all of the time and most of them also only have IE installed too. And if I had a choice of using either FF or IE6/7, I'd use the latter. But then again, I do know better and I know the truth about FireFox as well. Unlike most FireFox users themselves. You claim you don't see any big deal about Maxthon when viewing the feature list. Yet you admit, that Maxthon has them built in while to get something similar under FF, you have to download and install addons. Maxthon also has addons and can use Maxthon or IE addons. FF can only use FF addons. So without addons, Maxthon is feature rich. And FireFox looks as plain as IE itself. Making excuses doesn't change the truth. Also lots of anti-spyware doesn't check anything coming through FireFox, like Ad-Watch for example. Yet Ad-Watch protects you in real time with IE and Maxthon, but not with FireFox at all. While you believe that most IE users don't know where the security slider is at, which I don't believe for a second. And I believe most FireFox users are too dumb to know that much security software out there does nothing when you are using FireFox. Now just read the people having trouble with FireFox vs. say like Maxthon on their own official forums. <a href="news://news.mozilla.org/mozilla.support.firefox" rel="nofollow">news://news.mozilla.org/mozilla.support.firefox</a> <a href="http://forum.maxthon.com/" rel="nofollow">http://forum.maxthon.com/</a> Big difference between the two. Maxthon users doesn't have 1/50th of the problems that FireFox users do. How do you explain this? I can, the answer is so simple. I don't know where you get the idea that Maxthon has to reboot to switch engines. As it works by a tab to tab bases. And while Maxthon covers their butts and claims they won't focus on the Gecko engine. The truth is many are using the Gecko engine without problems. Sure the Gecko engine has a few bugs, but that isn't Maxthon's problem, now is it? <a href="http://img329.imageshack.us/img329/2782/maxthon001sz5.gif" rel="nofollow">http://img329.imageshack.us/img329/2782/maxthon001sz5.gif</a> And claiming my credibility is in question when I say FireFox is bloated and filled with memory leaks? Okay smart guy! This is how stupid many FireFox users are. They try to discredit people telling the truth. I have FireFox opened and it is using 120MB of memory. While I have 12 other applications opened included bloated MS Word and all 12 of them doesn't even add up to one big fat FireFox! This is the nonsense we people have to put up with clueless FireFox users. They just keep denying the truth and make excuses for the sad coding of FireFox. And it isn't because it is a browser. As other browsers, including IE and Maxthon doesn't even come close to FireFox's bloat. Ah FUD! Your sources are wrong! It started before any PCs were built. And it is in the world when IBM only made mainframes. Although today FireFox users make very good use of FUD. As they belittle IE users and make fun of them that are running unsecured browsers, when most malware goes right on through FireFox without any problems (thanks to their belief that they are protected with like with Ad-Watch and things). Yes clueless FireFox users are the leaders of FUD. No doubt about it. And anybody whom feels that FireFox as safer because it is open source is just full of it. As that is like giving a hacker the combination to the safe. As honest people with the combination to the safe will think and believe it is secure. But hackers and smart people know far better. As you never make anything safer by releasing the source code. Never! You also belittle my opinions. But you can't belittle the truth. And anybody can prove to themselves whether I am saying the truth or not. And you don't need to be a rocket scientist either. Just anybody with the will to learn the truth with an opened mind. Users of FUD, need not apply. BuBBy on "IE/FF?" http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/topic/870#post-5494 Sat, 05 May 2007 02:24:37 +0000 BuBBy 5494@http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/ In response (with supporting references) to some of the opinions expressed and claims made by BillW50. I don't know any shortcomings with Internet Explorer. And I have no idea where people get such an idea. I believe they must be preconceived. As I can't find any hard evidence for it. <a href="http://www.lockergnome.com/nexus/news/2004/06/15/why-you-should-dump-internet-explorer/">Why you should dump Internet Explorer.</a> <a href="http://www.howtocreate.co.uk/wrongWithIE/">... No, Internet Explorer did not handle it properly</a> (read site using Internet Explorer...) <a href="http://www.webmonkey.com/webmonkey/06/06/index3a_page2.html?tw=authoring">Internet Explorer 7 has some inherent shortcomings</a> that will keep it from being the browser of choice <a href="http://loadaveragezero.com/app/s9y/index.php?/archives/77-IE7-Gets-RSS-Right.html">I'm not going to comment on the shortcomings</a> of the latest IE7 beta when it comes to standards... All one has to do is to lock down IE is by setting security slider on high. Which is probably why most people use Internet Explorer anyway. <a href="http://surfthenetsafely.com/surfsafely6.htm">Make Internet Explorer Safer</a> <a href="http://surfthenetsafely.com/ieseczone8.htm">Make Internet Explorer 7 Safer- Configure the Security Settings</a> <a href="http://blog.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2007/01/internet_explorer_unsafe_for_2.html">Internet Explorer Unsafe for 284 Days in 2006</a> "Most" people do not even know about these settings or how to use them. Further more simply setting security to "high" pretty much just disables features that most typical users want - like downloading content. Many otherwise "safe" sites are "broken" by just setting all security to "high". Which is probably why most people who use Internet Explorer don't just "set the security slider on high". It also has nothing to do with not knowing better. Because I know better and I disagree. So that claim can't be true. Yes, clearly you do know better (Considering your preferred browser is not IE) - but I was referring to the population of Internet Explorer users in General. Yesterday for example - I overheard a conversation between two users who "know better" - discussing who they were using as an Internet Service Provider (who they were "going with"). The response came back - "I'm used to be with Google but now I'm with Yahoo". Their concept of who was providing their internet service (when they "ran the internet" by clicking on "the internet icon") was who came up on their "start page". This is a lot more "typical" of end user "knowledge" than you obviously realize. The vocal minority you "hear about the most" aren't in this group - Most internet users don't have a voice because they have not discovered posting to forums, or newsgroups, IRC or writing blogs. For the users like this, who use Internet Explorer - because it's what they get with windows, and IE is "the internet" - Firefox isn't even on their radar screens. <a href="http://kalsey.com/blog/2004/09/why_i_dont_recommend_firefox/">Why I don't recommend Firefox v0.9 (Sept 2004)</a> - Or why many "typical" users use Internet Explorer. One of the claims by a great number of Firefox users is that Firefox is secure. That is not even close to the truth! Firefox also has its share of security holes with it. And this has been proven time and time again. And IMHO, people who makes this claim is no better than conmen actually. Always best to refer back to the facts when making vague claims like this... <a href="http://secunia.com/product/12434/?task=advisories">Firefox 2.x - Security Advisories</a> 3 of 6 still unpatched. (Worst rated=Less Critical) <a href="http://secunia.com/product/12366/?task=advisories">Internet Explorer 7.x - Security Advisories</a> 7 of 9 still unpatched. (Worst rated=Moderately Critical) Now you question whether FireFox is slow or not? Well I have installed FireFox on a number of different computers and the results are always the same. And what *really* brings FireFox to a crawl is running on low physical memory systems. For example, on Celeron 400MHZ with just 192MB running either Windows 98SE or Windows 2000, FireFox can take minutes to refresh a screen. Nobody can tell me that FireFox isn't slow. It just isn't true. If you configured Firefox to run in 192MB of memory - I suspect the results would've been different. Most Firefox users tend to be attracted to the additional power and extendability of the browser. Most wouldn't have the expectations to get Formula 1 performance and features from a ride on lawnmower running on kerosene. It is probably taking "minutes to refresh a screen" because the browser memory settings haven't been configured, and it is paging data back to your hard disk. Also if you are running other apps at the same time - 192MB on a Windows 2000 pc doesn't leave a lot spare for application use. You could turn off some advanced features to free up memory in this case and Firefox performance would improve significantly I expect. Is it fair to generalize that Microsoft Word is a "slow application" because Notepad is faster? Again - it's always best to refer to facts and figures when making performance claims. (note not just the rankings - but just how close most browsers are - in seconds. There isn't really a HUGE difference) Opera seems to be the fastest browser for Windows. <a href="http://www.howtocreate.co.uk/browserSpeed.html">Firefox is not faster than Internet Explorer</a>, except for scripting, but for standards support, security and features, Firefox is a better choice. The real truth is that FireFox is a bloated pig (like most open source software) filled with memory leaks all over the place. Few people ever speak about this truth. Few people ever speak about it? You aren't serious, are you? <a href="http://vistarewired.com/2007/04/18/how-to-really-reduce-the-memory-usage-in-firefox/" rel="nofollow">http://vistarewired.com/2007/04/18/how-to-really-reduce-the-memory-usage-in-firefox/</a> <a href="http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/ben/archives/009749.html">About the Firefox "memory leak"</a> <a href="http://kb.mozillazine.org/Reducing_memory_usage_(Firefox)">Reducing memory usage (Firefox)</a> It's no secret - It's not because "Firefox is a bloated pig (like most open source software)" (oh boy there goes any tech credibility you might've had). The reasons for the memory use are quite well documented now - and there are several ways to configure the browsers memory use to best suit the conditions it is running in. You just have to change the settings yourself (it's your choice). The known leak issues in 1.0 and 1.5 have apparently been fixed in 2.0. Do some research (it seems every second Firefox user is talking about it). <a href="http://www.google.com.au/search?q=firefox+2+fix+memory+leak" rel="nofollow">http://www.google.com.au/search?q=firefox+2+fix+memory+leak</a> <a href="http://scobleizer.com/2006/10/21/the-great-firefox-2-vs-ie-7-memory-test/" rel="nofollow">http://scobleizer.com/2006/10/21/the-great-firefox-2-vs-ie-7-memory-test/</a> <a href="http://lifehacker.com/software/ie7/ie7-vs-firefox-2--the-memory-usage-showdown-208908.php">IE7 vs Firefox 2: The memory usage showdown</a> The memory leak in Firefox can be reduced by tuning how tab histories are handled - an explanation of why some people prefer to wear a small leak for the improved functionality: <blockquote>here's where IE7 falls down. For example, there should be some way to re-create a previous browsing session. Let's say Windows or your browser has crashed. Now, Microsoft might not like to admit that this ever happens, but in the world that I live in, it happens all the time. You'd like to reopen IE, and re-create the browser session you had before the crash, with all the sites opened in their own tabs. There's no way to do this in IE7. In addition, what if you accidentally close a tab and then realize that you didn't mean to close it? Wouldn't it be nice to reopen that tab to the page where you were? You can't do it in IE7. All these tabbed features, and more, are available in Firefox 1.5 via extensions. And the ability to restore previous browsing sessions after a crash and reopen accidentally closed browser tabs is built into Firefox 2.0, now in Release Candidate 3 (RC3) code. But those capabilities aren't built into IE7, and given that there's not likely to be a flourishing IE7 add-on community any time soon. </blockquote> <a href="http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9004205&pageNumber=2">Computerworld article</a> - so not only can you re-open a closed tab, but you will also still have the tab history with it - so for example you can reopen a closed tab - then for that tab then go back to the third previous page before it was closed. Of course you can reduce the memory assigned to this feature or turn it off altogether. You don't get the feature or the choice in IE7. I know that is so sad as well. As IMHO, it is dead wrong to misled people by using FUD (fear, uncertainty, and deception). ahem... Fear, uncertainty and doubt. Yes it is wrong to mislead people. (By the way the term FUD is synonymous with Microsoft and IBM over OS/2 and Microsoft and Netscape over IE and Navigator) - there is a lot less FUD these days with internet browsers because experienced users have greater access to information and experience with the platforms. (It is very hard to hide behind FUD when facts are available - assuming people are willing to do some reading and private testing). <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty_and_doubt" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty_and_doubt</a> <a href="http://www.cavcomp.demon.co.uk/halloween/fuddef.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.cavcomp.demon.co.uk/halloween/fuddef.html</a> Now advanced users who claim that FireFox is the way to go is dead wrong IMHO. If you want a power user browser, you can't beat Maxthon IMHO! As it has everything a power user needs. And it makes FireFox looking as featureless as IE. All personal opinion and assumptions. (Note this thread is looking specifically at the merits of Internet Explorer and Firefox). I agree that Internet Explorer could be currently considered to only offer the features considered "essential" in any basic browser. For many users - Internet Explorer quite possibly meets their basic needs. Beyond these basics your choices in additional features to match your exact requirements are all but non-existent (with the possible exception of a handful of third party IE plugins/addons/extensions/toolbars). But if taken to the task of Firefox or Maxthon being able to extend and customize the featureset to meet the needs of any "power user" - I would appreciate having someone demonstrate how Maxthon can meet the needs of power users (which I will take to mean users who have requirements considerably exceeding those of "basic use") in a manner which Firefox is unable to match. I scanned down the <a href="http://www.maxthon.com/features.htm">Maxthon feature page</a> and the <a href="http://res.maxthon.com/">Maxthon Resource Centre</a> to see what Firefox users might be missing out on - and I'm thinking that the list must be incomplete. There is nothing there that is not already done by default, or in some cases (where the feature might not be wanted by the majority) the feature can be easily added through a separate free extension (this in itself is an absolute "goldmine" feature - where users can customize and configure the browser featureset exactly to their specific requirements). If wanting to go beyond this and start looking at what is available in the Firefox extension library which grows and is updated every day, or using scripted features such as GreaseMonkey - the Maxthon comparison for power users starts to look bleak for those who tweak. (Maxthon Resource Center is a good start, but certainly nowhere near the breadth of options available in Firefox Extensions). If you don't like the way a particular feature in Firefox works? You can change it, or replace it or add to it. If you are really keen (and this is "power user" to the extreme) - you have the source code to do what you want to the browser. If you really think that Firefox looks "featureless" - you're wearing somebody else's glasses. I'm not saying Maxthon is a bad browser. It's not. Many people are satisfied with what it can offer. But to try to make it sound more impressive by claiming that it better meets the needs of power users because FireFox lacks in features, does nothing other than make you look foolish. (Or demonstrate that a "power user" should know a little more about both products before making crazy comparisons and crazier conclusions). Plus it can use either the Triton (the engine IE uses) and/or the Gecko (what FireFox uses) engines. This is true. Maxthon can use EITHER Triton or Gecko. Firefox can use BOTH. To change between engines on Maxthon, requires the browser to be closed and restarted - all pages will be rendered using the selected layout engine. If you want to go back to the other engine, you need to again restart your browser. With Maxthon it is all or nothing. Firefox can jump between engines, for a single tab or all tabs with just a mouse click - requires no browser restart and both engines can be used at the same time - swapping back and forth as required without affecting any other pages that you might have open at the time. After doing some reading - The Maxthon team have never claimed that the Gecko engine support is anything other than experimental in version 1.x. It is not fully functional. Further if you decide to use the Gecko engine - all of the addons you may have installed via the Maxthon Resource Center are disabled. In firefox, only the affected tabs have extensions disabled - everywhere else, it's business as usual. <a href="http://forum.maxthon.com/index.php?showtopic=1367&view=findpost&p=325012">Straight to the point</a> <a href="http://forum.maxthon.com/index.php?showtopic=1367">The complete thread</a> There is the desire to have fully functional support for Gecko in Maxthon - but it is still very much "in development" and due to the huge difference between the Triton and Gecko engines and the major changes required to the Maxthon code (to talk to two different engines) it is expected that due to the enormous amount of work required - a working Gecko interface may only surface later in a 2.x release (after 2.0 final) but there is nothing even in the "testing" stage yet. <a href="http://forum.maxthon.com/index.php?showtopic=33058&st=40&p=385201&#entry385201" rel="nofollow">http://forum.maxthon.com/index.php?showtopic=33058&st=40&p=385201&#entry385201</a> The only thing that is missing is the Opera engine (which doesn't have a fancy name for it). The Opera 9 layout engine is named 'Presto', which replaced the 'Elektra' engine used in versions 4–6 of Opera. But I agree "Presto" or "Elektra" are nowhere near as "fancy" as "Gecko" or "Triton" :o) Any way back on topic - to IE vs FF BillW50 on "IE/FF?" http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/topic/870#post-5425 Tue, 01 May 2007 17:35:22 +0000 BillW50 5425@http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/ For starters, I don't know any shortcomings with Internet Explorer. And I have no idea where people get such an idea. I believe they must be preconceived. As I can't find any hard evidence for it. All one has to do is to lock down IE is by setting security slider on high. Which is probably why most people use Internet Explorer anyway. It also has nothing to do with not knowing better. Because I know better and I disagree. So that claim can't be true. One of the claims by a great number of FireFox users is that FireFox is secure. That is not even close to the truth! FireFox also has its share of security holes with it. And this has been proven time and time again. And IMHO, people who makes this claim is no better than conmen actually. Now you question whether FireFox is slow or not? Well I have installed FireFox on a number of different computers and the results are always the same. And what *really* brings FireFox to a crawl is running on low physical memory systems. For example, on Celeron 400MHZ with just 192MB running either Windows 98SE or Windows 2000, FireFox can take minutes to refresh a screen. Nobody can tell me that FireFox isn't slow. It just isn't true. The real truth is that FireFox is a bloated pig (like most open source software) filled with memory leaks all over the place. Few people ever speak about this truth. I know that is so sad as well. As IMHO, it is dead wrong to misled people by using FUD (fear, uncertainty, and deception). Now advanced users who claim that FireFox is the way to go is dead wrong IMHO. If you want a power user browser, you can't beat Maxthon IMHO! As it has everything a power user needs. And it makes FireFox looking as featureless as IE. Plus it can use either the Triton (the engine IE uses) and/or the Gecko (what FireFox uses) engines. The only thing that is missing is the Opera engine (which doesn't have a fancy name for it). ;) BuBBy on "IE/FF?" http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/topic/870#post-5420 Tue, 01 May 2007 13:04:18 +0000 BuBBy 5420@http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/ To be completely honest (calling a spade a spade) the real reason why most users use internet explorer - and all the other browsers trail behind - is because users are basically not interested in doing anything beyond what is absolutely necessary to use the internet. Internet Explorer comes with Windows. Users ask, "what do I need another browser for, I already have one". They are not interested in learning something different, because it's just too difficult. In terms of those I would risk calling "web professionals" many are extremely vocal about the shortcomings of Internet Explorer. (They only support it because they have to). Ultimately in terms of sheer popularity it is really just a two horse race between Internet Explorer and Firefox (Opera usually protests that they are up there also - but the statistics over time do not support this claim). Making a statement that Firefox is the slowest is a highly subjective comment - Under certain configurations any software can be made to run slowly. Also tuning the browser could be described as an artform, and the actual steps required would vary depending on how Firefox was configured (apart from a default install - no two installs of firefox are identical). At the end of the day - the best browser is a personal choice and as is demonstrated by Internet Explorer, popularity is no indicator of technical merit. :P BillW50 on "IE/FF?" http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/topic/870#post-5418 Tue, 01 May 2007 12:28:42 +0000 BillW50 5418@http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/ I crashed Firefox all of the time by opening too many tabs. Plus Firefox is the slowest browser out there. Probably why most people don't use Firefox. ;) BuBBy on "IE/FF?" http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/topic/870#post-5338 Thu, 26 Apr 2007 09:24:28 +0000 BuBBy 5338@http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/ hmmm - I'm sure that's the reason why firefox is so popular..... alexiussg on "IE/FF?" http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/topic/870#post-5337 Thu, 26 Apr 2007 09:21:42 +0000 alexiussg 5337@http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/ hmmm.... i heard that u can crash IE6 and older with this script: <script>for(x in document.write){document.write(x);}</script> but not with firefox, which display "prototype". better upgrade to IE7! :+) BuBBy on "IE/FF?" http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/topic/870#post-5323 Thu, 26 Apr 2007 02:30:46 +0000 BuBBy 5323@http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/ The Leak Monitor would be really great if it was obvious at telling you exactly which bit failed (it seems some extensions only fall over when they have the rug yanked out from under their feet by other extensions). Then a nice button to "report this error to the developer of the leaking extension" would be absolutely magic... sadly it's easier said than done. Bobby on "IE/FF?" http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/topic/870#post-5322 Thu, 26 Apr 2007 01:48:01 +0000 Bobby 5322@http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/ Firefox truly spoiled me,too. Since its inception, I've been an avid fan although it took time to learn that some extensions did not play well with others. I have a widget that identifies memory leaks when they occur but it doesn't fix anything .. just adds to the frustration, you might say. It seems no matter what extensions I run on Firefox, that memory leak detector activates. Still, it's better than IE7 .. tabbed browsing is about the only thing I like about that version (the interface is the pits). Opera's speed dial function is fast becoming a favorite, and I like its customization options, but the add-ons I need eat up real estate. K-meleon and SeaMonkey browsers are fast, because they stay loaded in memory. They're stripped-down, utilitarian in appearance .. too bad, because I like something easy on the eyes. I had been using one of them as the default browser, simply because they load so quickly; that's handy when working with an application that briefly needs internet access to finish my task (like some genealogy). Sigh..as with all good things, there is always a catch: I encountered several sites will not recognize either of those browsers. Playing with the Maxthon browser for the last 24 hours has really been fun, and an eye opener as to what one can do with a browser. It is not as awkward as Opera to learn and has even more widgets and goodies available. It's faster, too, I think. All in all, I am leaning more to Maxthon than Firefox .. at least it hasn't set off that cussed memory leak detector! BuBBy on "IE/FF?" http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/topic/870#post-5273 Wed, 25 Apr 2007 06:16:43 +0000 BuBBy 5273@http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/ Gecko is the layout/rendering engine - most of the memory leaks that I have read about seem to originate around user interface features and third party extensions. I cannot say for sure but Gecko is probably reasonably good when it comes to being memory leak free (as could reasonably be expected). Using the Gecko engine is already very popular in other browsers, as you know. (Despite all this talk about memory leaks etc - firefox is still my first choice/preference when it comes to a web browser. Using anything else, I can't help but notice how much I take for granted, when features I swear by (and at) just aren't supported in other products). Bobby on "IE/FF?" http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/topic/870#post-5272 Wed, 25 Apr 2007 05:44:47 +0000 Bobby 5272@http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/ BillW50, thank you for the info about the Maxthon browser. I just downloaded the beta version, customized the skin and took it for a test drive. It's fast! It's loaded! I like it! Now ... if it uses the Gecko engine .. is it going to have the same memory leaks that plague Firefox? Swan on "IE/FF?" http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/topic/870#post-5255 Tue, 24 Apr 2007 16:49:47 +0000 Swan 5255@http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/ Hello Bubby, Thank you SO much for those links! I guess I have some reading to do huh? ;) In fact, since I have some free time today - I'll make that a priority - just have to look after my Firefox! ;) ~ Swan BuBBy on "IE/FF?" http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/topic/870#post-5248 Tue, 24 Apr 2007 15:08:03 +0000 BuBBy 5248@http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/ On the topic of Firefox Memory Leaks: <a href="http://dbaron.org/mozilla/leak-monitor/">Firefox addon - Leak Monitor 0.3.6</a> 24-Dec-2006 <a href="http://kb.mozillazine.org/Reducing_memory_usage_-_Firefox">mozillazine - Reducing memory usage - firefox</a> Last Edit 18-Apr-2007 <a href="http://lifehacker.com/software/firefox/cut-down-on-firefox-memory-hogging-254092.php">Lifehacker.com - Cut down on firefox memory hogging</a> 21-Apr-2007 <a href="http://engtech.wordpress.com/2006/12/02/how-to-fix-the-firefox-memory-leak-firefox-hack/">How to fix the Firefox memory leak (Firefox hack) « //engtech</a> 2-Dec-2006 <a href="http://www.lifehacker.com/software/firefox/?view=full">Lifehacker.com - firefox hacks & tips</a> daily Swan on "IE/FF?" http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/topic/870#post-5217 Mon, 23 Apr 2007 21:51:04 +0000 Swan 5217@http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/ Hi crud3w4re, I use both IE AND Fire fox, do most of you use dual browsers? Some people just hate IE with a passion. By now you know that I use Firefox, but I also use Opera as my backup browser. Like many today, I won't touch IE or Outlook because of its ongoing security issues. I was surprised to read that Firefox has memory leaks, as I've been using it almost since its inception and haven't noticed anything of importance and I'm pretty much a power user. ;) Part of what I do is web design and I do religiously make sure that everything orients property in IE - but I also check with Opera and Netscape too. Hope that answers your question! ;) ~ Swan