 navalpatel
join:2003-07-28
Lubbock, TX | Patches Galore! But IE users just love all the patches that Microsoft comes out with! * rolls eyes * - please switch to a real browser Mozilla Firefox | |
|
 | 
Matt
Gone playing Dragon Age Origins
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
 ·North State Commun..
| Re: Patches Galore! said by navalpatel  :
But IE users just love all the patches that Microsoft comes out with! * rolls eyes * - please switch to a real browser Mozilla Firefox
Don't be so smug. Firecrap has patches too.
--
TripOnThis.net Administrator
"Security by obscurity is no security at all. Don't believe the hype." (c) MntlCase | |
|
| | B
Premium,MVM
join:2000-10-28
| Re: Patches Galore! Yet amazingly it's not "integrated" with the OS and so it isn't directly affected by 87% of Windows patch requirements.
In any case, I continue to recommend the Mozilla suite over the standalone Fireweasel.
-- B
--
In a realm outside causality and function | |
|
| | | |
| | | | B
Premium,MVM
join:2000-10-28
| Re: Patches Galore!I disagree. I almost NEVER apply Windows patches. I really don't see a need to, unless there's a specific bug to address or unless the machine (server) is directly exposed to the Internet.
I could say, if you're running a generic Windows workstation without personal firewall software and without protection from an external NAT router or firewall, you have a much larger problem than what patches you've applied. 
-- B
--
In a realm outside causality and function | |
|
| | | | 
Seven1
join:2002-07-24
Lexington, KY | IE zealots.. what a joke.  | |
|
| | | 
SpitefulCrow
Insert Witty Tag Here
Premium
join:2003-06-04
Berkeley, CA | Firefox and Thunderbird!
What would I want the overhead of the entire suite for when I can have two separate and lighter apps to do the same thing? | |
|
| | | | B
Premium,MVM
join:2000-10-28
| Re: Patches Galore!
Because the total is about the same anyway, and because the full suite is a more mature and stable product that doesn't require excessive extensions?
(Talking out of butt -- don't know resource footprint numbers.)
-- B
--
In a realm outside causality and function | |
|
| | Jonbo298
join:2004-01-12
Council Bluffs, IA
| said by Matt :
said by navalpatel :
But IE users just love all the patches that Microsoft comes out with! * rolls eyes * - please switch to a real browser Mozilla Firefox
Don't be so smug. Firecrap has patches too.
That's a given. Every single thing has patches. The Mozilla team fixes patches infinitely faster then MS ever will. MS basically says "our users aren't having problems with this exploit" then a week later hell breaks loose and then a month later MS gets a fix out. | |
|
| | |
| | | 
Rhobite
Premium
join:2002-02-24
Cambridge, MA
clubs:
| Re: Patches Galore! said by jplove71 :
If I recall correctly, IE is still susceptible to phishing!
Um, phishing is a social engineering attack. Any browser is susceptible, given the right user.
--
Jimmysquid.com - I take pictures. | |
|
| | | | B
Premium,MVM
join:2000-10-28 | Re: Patches Galore!
I believe the reference is to IE's willingness to display false information in both the URL box and the status bar.
-- B
--
In a realm outside causality and function | |
|
| | | | |
Rhobite
Premium
join:2002-02-24
Cambridge, MA
clubs:
| Re: Patches Galore! said by B :
I believe the reference is to IE's willingness to display false information in both the URL box and the status bar.
Oh, that's sort of true. The glaring URL box issue was fixed several months ago but that was a big snafu by Microsoft, it went unpatched for an inexcusable amount of time. The status bar text can be changed in IE but that's not a huge vulnerability. Many of the issues with UI spoofing and window resizing have been fixed in SP2.
--
Jimmysquid.com - I take pictures. | |
|
| | |
| | Trivista
join:2003-11-11
Longview, TX | And what is it that you do not like about FireFox? | |
|
| bob000001
join:2004-02-20
Bellingham, WA | It ain't surfin' till the fat lady sings! Opera, by far the best! | |
|
| | 
Combat Chuck
Too Many Cannibals
Premium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA
| Re: It ain't surfin' till the fat lady sings! I just love how the makers of Opera have successfully convinced their users that a product that doesn't handle unexpected situations (non standard HTML) is somehow better than one that does. It would be like GM marketing a vehicle on the premise that it will explode if it drives over a pothole and this makes it standards compliant.
--
Windmills do not work that way! Good Night! | |
|
| | | bob000001
join:2004-02-20
Bellingham, WA | Re: It ain't surfin' till the fat lady sings! I have not ran into anything yet that Opera could not handle. | |
|
|
File Quit
Mac Geek
Premium
join:2002-11-28
| Finally... all can see the light which is the path to a new browser. I really hope one of these browsers has great surges in popularity.
--
Mozilla Firefox. Switch today to rid yourself of IE and its flaws. »www.mozilla.org/firefox | |
|
dragonhorse
join:2004-06-30
Ottawa, ON | anti-IE!!! I agree with anti-IE... IE have too many problems and a lot of the times the fixes are slow or sometimes open up a different hole somewhere else instead (its true)
dragonhorse.... | |
|
| 
_NotMe_
@dslextreme.com
| Re: anti-IE!!! I use Firefox more than anything else, but I do still occasionally use IE. In my opinion, if you want people to try other browsers, don't bash IE, just tell them about your experiences with another browser.
However, IE's weaknesses are not just because it is popular. The problems stem from two bad decisions:
(1) ActiveX controls, which can run native code with admin or even system permissions (in the default install of IE) without asking for permission from the user. (Spyware / adware / and a lot of pop-up ads depend on this.)
(2) Tying the browser into the OS, so that unforeseen "channels" open deep into the core of the OS from the browser. They didn't intentionally write flawed code. Instead, they took a mishmash of code from disparate sources (including some of the original NCSA Mosaic code written by one of the founders of Netscape when he was in college) and bonded it to the heart of the operating system.
MS should undo those two decisions and rewrite IE from scratch, like the Mozilla project did. It really improved Netscape and other Moz browsers, and I'm sure it would help IE. | |
|
| | dragonhorse
join:2004-06-30
Ottawa, ON
| Re: anti-IE!!! yeah activeX in IE and mime-x in outlook...."what else?!" someone is going to ask I guess 
I was a bit tired when I wrote that first post...sorry if I seem to be bashing but I didn't really meant that totally.
I think that we can say this.. "if you have to bundle this with that then its probably bad design by chance" and automobiles fell that for a few times in history as well.
and hey how about most users working on their xp computer under 'admin' which is one red alert already (compare that to also using linux in 'root' all the times I think) or umm am I wrong - sorry?
dragonhorse.... | |
|
inteller
Sociopaths always win.
join:2003-12-08
Tulsa, OK
| Wrong focus. as a web standards organization they should be spending time on promoting STANDARDS, not bashing other browsers.
At any rate, I thought we already have a web standards body, it is called the World Wide Web Consortium. I don't see why we need another one. | |
|
T0rn
Premium
join:2001-05-11
USA
1 edit | Blah, blah, blah... Even simple sites with JavaScript do not appear correctly with Firefox. Also, you have a far better chance of pages operating correctly if you are using Internet Explorer rather than those other piece of crap 3rd party browsers.
IE is more comptabile, more integrated, more practical, and faster. More programs, that I've used, are designed to work with IE.
Thank you. I'll be sticking with IE.
(Try changing the directory for your History, Favorites, Cookies, and Temporary Internet Files with Firefox.)
(Start typing the shortcut name of a Favorites entry, and select it. Wait, can't do that in Firefox.) | |
|
| 
bit_junkie
join:2004-05-04
Maricopa, AZ
| Re: Blah, blah, blah... on the opposite side, i use firefox all the time, ive never had one page load incorrectly except for one...windows update,its the only thing i still use IE for otherwise every single program i use uses firefox just fine.
dont know exactly what problems your having with java script,but on my system with firefox it works flawlessly.
not trying to put anyone down for using IE, but for me personally i prefer and think firefox is the better,faster,and more secure browser.
i think in the end security issues aside it all comes down to personal preference | |
|
| 
Goober
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
 ·Comcast
·WOW Internet and C..
| said by T0rn :
Even simple sites with JavaScript do not appear correctly with Firefox. Also, you have a far better chance of pages operating correctly if you are using Internet Explorer rather than those other piece of crap 3rd party browsers.
IE is more comptabile, more integrated, more practical, and faster. More programs, that I've used, are designed to work with IE.
Thank you. I'll be sticking with IE.
(Try changing the directory for your History, Favorites, Cookies, and Temporary Internet Files with Firefox.)
(Start typing the shortcut name of a Favorites entry, and select it. Wait, can't do that in Firefox.)
Agreed. | |
|
| Plldwnyrpnts
join:2003-04-19
Chicago, IL
| It's all about the crappy coding website designers are doing. I use Opera and yes I have some java script issues. Is it Opera's fault? Nope. It's the low budget web designer's.
And with IE being as forgiving with code errors, who wouldn't say that it's easier to use. Would you use notepad for your resume? It's easier, faster, more practical and universal. That's the bomb right there!
Sure many program vendors use IE. Because they're too cheap to pay the designers to make their software work on anything other than IE. Our company website was designed with functionality in mind. Our designer tested the website thoroughly with all sorts of new and old browsers to ensure our customers would not walk away dissatisfied by a lack of functionality. Ask these software companies if they considered that. You'll get a resounding, "why should we bother. Everyone has IE. We'll MAKE them use it." That's a good business moto right there. | |
|
| | 
Taurus333
join:2001-04-06
Ohio
| Re: Blah, blah, blah... If you try to design a site with all of the other browsers quirky flaws and glitches in mind you will end up with the equivalent of your resume done in notepad. That is why so many sites out there have that one little phrase on them "best viewed in IE". They may work in other browsers but there will be some aspect that doesn't look or work right in some but not all of the other browsers. IE seems to be capable of getting all aspects of a browser correct while each of the others seem to be lacking in some way. If it was IE to blame they would all have the same problems and that is just not the case, each one has its own unique problems. | |
|
| hescominsoon
join:2003-02-18
Brunswick, MD
·Comcast
·Verizon Online DSL
| really? which simple sites? the only sites that come up weird for me are the ones written by a MS app specifically for IE.
easy..jsut edit the .js file in the mozilla profile folder then move your data.
the bookmarks in mozilla are every bit as easy to use. But for those who wish to use IE..ahppy surfing..I am not here to bash IE..that said any client that i can get to do so immediately gets migrated to mozilla from IE/Outlook. | |
|
|
| |
Rhobite
Premium
join:2002-02-24
Cambridge, MA
clubs:
| FireFox is better OK, FireFox is better and it's what I use. But I consider them both to be good browsers. Are there any outstanding issues with IE6 SP2? I believe the latest version of IE is sufficiently secure, meaning there are no current bugs that allow a malicious page to execute code.
Of course if we're basing our decisions on Microsoft's past history, we probably shouldn't trust the latest IE. But that's a much weaker argument than this site is making: they're saying "IE can make your computer unsafe," then linking to four very nontechnical newspaper articles as their only justification for making this claim. Two of the articles are about vulnerabilities, one of which is an unpreventable spyware/ActiveX attack (made much more difficult by SP2's ActiveX blocker) and the other one was patched by MS04-025. The other two newspaper articles are about non-security "quality of browsing" issues such as popups.
I'm not pretending that IE is better than FireFox. Indeed it's much worse. But the claim they are making is "IE can make your computer unsafe" and as far as I can tell, they have not backed up that claim. If you don't agree with this post, go ahead, flame away but I will not respond to personal attacks.
--
Jimmysquid.com - I take pictures. | |
|
| 
Dewi
Premium
join:2001-09-28
united kingd
·BT Broadband
| Re: FireFox is better Well according to the register, the first IE SP2 vuln was found on August 20th:
The first new vulnerability affecting Internet Explorer on Windows XP with SP2 has been discovered
The vulnerability allows malicious websites to place an executable file in a user's start-up folder when a user drags or clicks on a program masqueraded as an image. http-equiv of malware.com, a so-called White Hat hacker, has posted a sample exploit which demonstrates security weaknesses in the drag and drop function of IE that give rise to the exploit.
Even though this demo depends on the user performing a drag and drop event, it might be rewritten so a user need only perform a single click on an image instead, according to security firm Secunia.
»www.theregister.co.uk/2004/08/20···ng_vuln/ | |
|
| |
T0rn
Premium
join:2001-05-11
USA | Re: FireFox is better I think the hackers have beef against IE. I'm sure they're capable to do the same with any browser. | |
|
| |
Rhobite
Premium
join:2002-02-24
Cambridge, MA
clubs: | True, that's an issue, although relatively minor. It requires the user to drag and drop an image from a web page to a local folder.
--
Jimmysquid.com - I take pictures. | |
|
|
|
Dewi
Premium
join:2001-09-28
united kingd
·BT Broadband
1 edit | Re: oh please.... said by Dennis :
*sigh*
Once everyone starts using Firefox or what have you, then those will start showing more flaws, exploits, bugs, etc.
The argument isn't flaws or bugs so much as time to fix. It seems to take considerably longer to fix IE bugs than Firefox bugs, but the level of complexity between the two is (or should be) the same. The difference here is that Firefox is an open source program, written by many, many hundreds engineers and code audited by thousands; while IE is a closed source program, written by a small internal team with an internal QA department. No programmer derived metric can keep up with open source on a security record. Neither in response, or in net security bugs. The number of eyes to code does not compare.
So while you might classify the number of bugs according to the popularity of the program, it is often, an inaccurate classification. The whole paradigm is different. | |
|
| | 
Dennis
Premium,Mod
join:2001-01-26
Algonquin, IL
·AT&T Yahoo
Host:
Chicago
Users Find Hot Deals
Users find Hot Dea..
Requests for Hot D..
Home Repair & Impr..
| Re: oh please.... said by Dewi :
So while you might classify the number of bugs according to the popularity of the program, it is often, an inaccurate classification. The whole paradigm is different.
Your right, the bigger the ship, the slower it turns. Perhaps the open source development is quicker at fixing bugs. But that only holds true because they serve a smaller group.
The larger, more popular something is, the sooner a flaw will be exposed. At some point, critical mass will be reached and the open source concept will backfire because there are to many cooks in the kitchen.
--
I want to be different, just like everybody else.
Beer Review's | |
|
| | |
Dewi
Premium
join:2001-09-28
united kingd
·BT Broadband
| Re: oh please.... said by Dennis :
The larger, more popular something is, the sooner a flaw will be exposed. At some point, critical mass will be reached and the open source concept will backfire because there are to many cooks in the kitchen.
That's a common (and incorrect) conception of those novice to the open source analogy. Only a very few engineers have commit access to the code, and the repository; and even fewer the ability to cut release branches. You do however, have a lot of people submitting patches to be reviewed that can committed or rejected by the focal group. Regular quality patch submitters become committers by vote. Thus you have a "quality of code" concept appearing in open source project that are woefully missing in closed source projects (like IE).
The cooks in the kitchen has been dethroned many many times before.
The argument IE is "more flawed" because it is "more popular", is a popular, but thin argument in my opinion. It'll be an interesting thing to watch as the story continues, and the popularity continues. Also, Firefox is a cross platform browsers that has broader appeal, while IE only appears on Windows (with MAC support being cancelled). | |
|
Taurus333
join:2001-04-06
Ohio
| If IE is so bad then how come..... ...my website stats show that over 70% of visitors to my site still use IE? And the other 30% is split up over the others with none of them having much of a majority over any other.
I have used other browsers and if you want to see a site the way its supposed to look with everything working (javascript, java applets etc) the only browser that works nearly 100% of the time is IE. All of the other browsers have their own little quirky flaws and glitches in them. Instead of patches they simply put out new versions with a few improvements while attempting to fix problems. And if more people would use the other browsers then all of the problems would be as well known and documented as problems that IE has had are. | |
|
|
See 13 replies to this post |
|
cbrigante2
Cubs 20??
Premium
join:2002-11-22
North Aurora, IL
| Time for bugs The length of time it takes MS to respond to the bugs argument has merit with the IE is too integrated to the OS argument. Being "attached at the hip" has to really slow the reaction time down for MS to make sure the new patches don't break something else. The Firefox folks don't have as heavy a burden on them, only having to worry about fixing 1 application. It might be something for MS to consider with future OS releases? (which I'm sure they have  ) | |
|
antiphishing
Phishing Scam Terminator
Premium
join:2004-06-09
Wilkes Barre, PA
1 edit | Mozilla Firefox I would highly recommend everyone download Mozilla Firefox and then move away from using Microsoft Internet Explorer. Using Mozilla Firefox instead of Internet Explorer six prevented a good majority of the spyware being downloaded onto my computer. Furthermore, Firefox is real stable with no lockups, errors or Windows "Blue screen of deaths"
--
Dslreports.com Forum No-Spin zone starts here.
»www.antihotmail.com
spammers_are_scumbags@antihotmail.com | |
|
Transmaster
Don't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus
join:2001-06-20
Cheyenne, WY
·Qwest.net
| Sounds like a Ford Chevy argument This sounds like a Ford vis Chevy which one is better argument. I like and use FireFox, I also use IE. Firefox is My default browser not because it is safer I like how it works. I like the desktop, file handling, etc. But there are things I like about IE. As for the truck argument everyone who knows trucks knows the Studebaker truck is the best.;)
--
»www.gobpl.com | |
|
Affliction
join:2004-02-19
Delta, BC | Meh. I used Firefox for two reasons: ad blocking and decreased vulnerability to malicious ActiveXes and stuff. IE Service Pack 2 has both, so I switched back to IE. IE really isn't that bad as long as you keep it updated. | |
|
Shotya9times
join:2004-02-15
Staten Island, NY
| Who evers the best Seems to me that all hackers go after whoever is the best .Or all the "haters" in the world go after who's the best.The reason microsoft probably takes so long to release a patch is testing to make sure it doesn't mess up the users computer so we don't see "microsoft new patches messes up my windows" and microsoft is a huge company where mozilla is just a small time company so all they have to do is work on there browser and other software . like i said it's who ever on top like look at all the aol "haters" it's because they are on top . Doing some google searches i found out netscape had it's problems when it was at the top of it's game.Soon we are going to see Mozilla/firefox "haters" when Mozilla comes on top | |
|
BTL
@verizon.net
| Common Sense... Try It Sometime This is all a bunch of crock. Just use some common sense, secure your browser the best you can, and don't go accepting requests to install "virtual vagina plugin" If people just treated the internet like crossing a busy street, there really wouldn't be this huge ruckus. | |
|
|
_NotMe_
@dslextreme.com
|  Re: Common Sense... Try It Sometime
I was at my Webmail site (using KMeleon, which is based on Mozilla) and I kept getting a little dialog box that it couldn't install the IE toolbar. I hadn't asked for it to install anyway. If I had been using IE that day, I might still be trying to remove that thing.
Besides, everyone knows that the cause of most computer problems is the user. I have one friend who is about to do his fourth system restore of XP. Why? He's got a bunch of trialware games he downloads off the Net. Many of these games install unseen companion software, which then slows the computer down and causes other problems as well. | |
|
nixen
Rockin' the Boxen
Premium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA
·Cox HSI
·Speakeasy
| Ever Try to Implement CSS Pages It ain't easy. If you do your pages in a technically correct fashion, they often won't render correctly in IE. This is especially true when using CSS 2.1 and you can out and out forget CSS 3. And don't get me started on lack of real PNG support.
Bleah.
-tom
--
"There are 10 types of people in the world... those who understand binary and those who don't."
"That's only 2 types of people, moron" | |
|
fritzmp
Biker Tux
Premium
join:2001-08-29
Warrenton, VA
clubs:
| pig lipstick IE is pig lipstick for bad code. Put it with a user running as Administrator + that fine registry and you are destine for trouble.
The statement that competition is good, is right on the mark. It forces people/companies to not rest on their laurels. Unless a lax attitude, or pride of importance, or both doesn't get in the way.
The statement about potholes in code is false. The concept of standards is like the painted lines in the road. Your code is bad, your in the ditch. Why reward rendering of bad code? Doing so, is like giving a job to someone that filled out the application with a crayon.
--
"Takin' a trip?""Two of the most famous products of Berkeley are LSD and Unix. I don't think that this is a coincidence."--Anonymous "Get a bike, live life." --me | |
|
|
|
|
|
Browse Happy
·
I use...
The ULTIMATE Authority
Browser Security Problem
