Microsoft Says Firefox Not a Threat to IE 1306
KillaKen187 writes "A CNET article claims that 'just days after the launch of open-source browser Firefox 1.0, Microsoft executives defended Internet Explorer, saying it is no less secure than any other browser and doesn't lack any important features.' It's also interesting to note that these statements made by Steve Vamos, Microsoft Australia's managing director, come with no knowledge of what Firefox has to offer as he admits not even installing or using Firefox."
They can now see the Web sites that IE chokes on (Score:5, Interesting)
Catch 22 (Score:3, Interesting)
Today, we have someone from Microsoft who says they haven't installed Firefox. This is decried as shameful -- how dare he criticize the application if he hasn't tried it?
Poor Microsoft. They're damned if they do, and damned if they don't. Damned if I care, though; I use Opera [opera.com], myself.
Re:Tabbed browsing not important (Score:5, Interesting)
Say what you may (Score:5, Interesting)
sometimes you gotta wonder (Score:5, Interesting)
If Microsoft really wants a dog in this race.... (Score:2, Interesting)
Now, I don't know about you, but the notion of Microsoft allowing their current IE offering to stagnate while developing on their next offering with the big feature being security improvements.... That just strikes me as wrong. They need to take care of their current customers who have already thrown their load in with MS, rather than set them up for future sells based on improvments that should never be labeled as a "Feature"...
Selling security improvments on a browser is like improving selling new gas tanks designs on a Ford so they would be less likely to explode.
Re:The real reason it's not a threat (Score:5, Interesting)
Oh really? (Score:3, Interesting)
Thank you, Microsoft, for helping me determine what is, and what is not, my priorities for an enjoyable web browsing experience.
Thank you, Open Source, for opening the eyes of these huddled masses of consumerism, and showing them a better alternative.
Bravo.
Well, then (Score:3, Interesting)
- dshaw
Re:Lets face it (Score:4, Interesting)
I was flipping channels, and saw some news show (damn if I can remember which one) was talking about it briefly. Something like a open source browser being TV worthy is something.
Heck, even a lot of the non-geeks at my work have heard through the grape vine that Firefox is the way to go. They are installing it, and loving it, and spreading the word.
Of course, you were only trolling.
...they would have told the company about it (Score:5, Interesting)
First MS will lose the small 'at home' and business customers. Once these people are comfortable with the competition, the competition will seep into the big MS customers, for whom the 'small customers' are employees.
No, I'm not going to post this directly to you Steve, as I reckon you will ignore it.
XUL (Score:5, Interesting)
Using XUL, you can develop full-blown user interfaces that aren't limited to HTML-style text boxes, radio boxes, drop-down boxes and so on. Instead, you get access to trees, grids, menus, groupboxes, SOAP and XML-RPC client access and so on; a sizeable subset of what e.g. VB has to offer. It also understands CSS, so you can make XUL interfaces visually attractive if you're unlike me and actually have the patience to do so...
It's quite easy to develop XUL code as well, if somewhat time-consuming because there isn't yet a good, stable IDE available.
MS knows there's a market for this stuff, because it was developing XAML which meets broadly the same requirements. However a solid XAML implementation is currently a few years away at least, so XUL has a window of opportunity.
In case it's not obvious, here's why you'd use XUL instead of e.g. VB to develop application front-ends:
- easy to deploy to clients (i.e. install e.g. Firefox, and that's it; no mucking around with DLL versions)
- easy to maintain (i.e. tweak the code on a server rather than tweak and redeploy to every client)
- already cross-platform (Windows, Linux, Solaris, Mac, BSD,
- no dependence on ActiveX or Java to give the "rich client experience"
- supports CSS and works with HTML, so competent Web designers should be able to pick up XUL without great difficulty. Someone please please please create an IDE to make this easy!
- works with existing Web servers (e.g. Apache, IIS) without difficulty; after all, XUL is just XML text and Web servers have been serving text since day 1
Re:First they ignore you... (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Firefox saves buying new laptop (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:The real reason it's not a threat (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:The real reason it's not a threat (Score:5, Interesting)
All she'd known is that her machine had been running slow. She did some thinking and came to the conclusion that it had come from some lyrics site that had nailed her with popup windows. As I floated the word "Firefox" across the office, the coworker who had installed Firefox happily piped up, "I haven't seen a popup all day!"
Peer pressure, that's where it's at.
Have you ever.... (Score:1, Interesting)
XUL already under assault by XAML!!!!! (Score:5, Interesting)
What needs to happen?
Make a XUL plugin for everything that browses!! But espceially makea n XUL plugin for IE that lets you run XUL stuff inside IE, basically a sort of embedded Mozilla engine. Then work up a few killer apps to make people download and use the plugin.
If a few good uses of XUL can become widespread over the next six months or so, it has a good chance to take a hold before XAML can squash it. And with enough visible support big companies like IBM might jump on the bandwagon.
Developers are customers too... (Score:5, Interesting)
As a web developer there are plenty of features I would like to see [webstandards.org] along the lines of CSS/XHTML/ECMAScript standards compliance. I would say that my payment of sweat and tears with workarounds to these problems more than qualifies me as a customer.
Re:IE? (Score:2, Interesting)
Well I couldnt help it, I had to install Office XP so I bought crossover office ( rebooting every time I need to use powerpoint is irritating
Lucky for me I have the IE icon, now that it has been proved (by the MS spokesperson) that IE is more secure
Re:Tabbed browsing not important (Score:5, Interesting)
Well, duh! This is like claiming that snow isn't important to people living in the middle of the Sahara. If you can't use something, have no access to it, have no knowledge of it, then you won't consider it important, because you won't know about it to consider it important!
Re:Tabbed browsing not important (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm trying to think of something similar... hmm...
James reiterated that a feature like having a handle on both sides of the door is simply not important to someone who is only on their way out
Actually its a great statement. It covers most classes of Microsoft software users:
1.) The stupid ones
They couldn't use tabbed browsing even if they tried. No. Its true. I tried it with my mum (bless her) and she simply couldn't understand the concept. Sure, opening loads of browser windows everywhere was also confusing and cluttered the desktop, but hey.
2.) The ignorant ones
Is there any other browser than IE?
3.) The Microsoft zealots
If IE doesn't have it, then it isn't worth having.
4.) The wannabes
They just discovered computers and don't want to look different by using a browser that isn't pre-installed... until someone else does and tells them its cool.
5.) Those who just don't care
They have a browser installed. Why have another one? Heck, the whole OS stinks, so why try to polish a turd?
Re:The real reason it's not a threat (Score:5, Interesting)
I think if other companies want their browsers to be used, they should give them a name that has INTERNET in it. That way people will know that you're going on the internet. What the hell has Firefox got to do with the internet? Same goes for Netscape, Opera, and Safari.
Tabbed? (Score:2, Interesting)
Why do I want downloaded files to automatically saved to my desktop - what's wrong with "My Documents/Fire Fox/Downloads" so I don't get clutter all over my desktop?
I have pop ups blocking (xp sp2)
I do not load "harmful ActiveX controls" but I want to load "useful" ones. In fact as a smart user I wonder how to make them work in FF? If a client of mine tries to use my web form (activex) doesn't see it he will get the shits with me - not his browser.
At least in IE (after SP2) I get a message allowing me to CHOOSE to run control.
Google is part of my toolbar.
I have the "Features you are used to" because I got used to them in IE.
Nothing I want. (Score:1, Interesting)
It's very simple... (Score:3, Interesting)
The reasons why Microsoft is not worried?
1) Firefox will never be integrated to the OS (or Office). There will always be functions that Windows or Office will call IE for.
2) The vast majority of people will not use anything other than the software bundled with their system. I have had no end of trouble convincing people to try either Mozilla or Firefox. When I tell them that the programs are made by the same people that made Netscape in the past, some will be willing to give it a try.
3) They'll figure out a way to kill Firefox, legal or otherwise, and will stall and wheedle in the courts long enough to make sure that the dagger is good and twisted. Until our legal folks realize that Microsoft is a monopoly and it has no incentive to play fair with competing products, it will continue to destroy the competition.
Could though (Score:3, Interesting)
Or if a number of prominent programs started bundling Mozilla as an HTML display engine instead of hoping the right IE was in place?
There are a lot of ways Mozilla/Firefox can make pretty dramatic inroads quickly, once they reach ciritcal mass - even just 10% (I believe the current goal) would make most web designers have to think strongly about testing a site with Mozilla and make most banks support it by purpose instead of by accident.
Re:firefox will never be a threat to ie (Score:2, Interesting)
I work at a retail chain, we'll call it "Really Good Buy". Note that I was a software developer and systems administrator prior to my ahem... dismissal.
Anyway, I have had several customers coming in over the last fer weeks looking for Firefox, asking questions about it, or just mentioning it.
Granted that the affect of the new release probably won't be apparent for the next several months, but to hear "Really Good Buy" customers asking about it... to me that is something.
-Coach
Re:Tabbed browsing not important (Score:5, Interesting)
no features? just as secure? (Score:3, Interesting)
And yes, I realise most everyone who has replied to this post has commented on this phrase alone. But hey, who am I not to jump on the bandwagon?
I got two words for "doesn't lack any important features" and those are Tabbed Browsing, and just one word for "is no less secure" and that is SPYWARE
I work for a university fixing computers for students. These days, "fixing computers" generally means "get computer, run virus scan, run spyware scans, clean up the mess, return to student". After a month or so of seeing the same students time and time again for the same problems I got fed up and started installing Firefox on their computers. When they show up to pick up their computer and I tell them about Firefox, explain to them that Firefox does not allow spyware to get onto their machines (at least the ones that would normally go through IE), and show them tabbed browsing, they are SOLD. Now I get students coming in with their computers regularly asking me to install Firefox for them. Not one of the students whose computer I installed Firefox on has returned to me for virus or spyware related problems. Not one.
On an only slightly related note, some have asked me if there is a way to get tabbed chatting for their AIM conversations, at which point I simply uninstall AIM and install the windows port of GAIM. Again, once I show them tabbed chatting, and the ability to see their "buddies" away messages by just hovering the mouse cursor over the buddy name, they will never turn back. It doesn't take much to convince a user to switch, just show them the little things that kill and they will go for it.
One Day I switch that out (Score:4, Interesting)
So I come back a awhile later to help the teacher with some new computers.. Still seeing kids using IE.. So what did I do.. I installed firefox. Put it in the dock. I changed the Icon to the internet explorer one. Then promptly deleted IE. No one ever noticed. (I only did this on one mechine. The rest have safari. This was just a test mechine)
Oh the new computers.. Overkill.. Lets see iMac G5, Powermac G5, and a Dell pc. For each Workstation.. For a highschool. Wish I had that at home.
Firefox is becomming the #1 browser where I work (Score:5, Interesting)
I'd say 1 out of 10 or fewer people so far have wanted to go back to MSIE... and the reason is usually because they are just used to doing things a certain way but it doesn't take long to get used to the new one anyway.
These steps are important because my company's goal is to dump Microsoft and any product that depends on a Microsoft operating system. Moving people to Firefox, and getting people to use OpenOffice has, so far, been a welcome improvement for most of my users. (We need to write PDF files from time to time and only OpenOffice does that... sure we could buy and install adobe acrobat... expensive... no point in that when they get what they want for free with OpenOffice.) And once they are all used to seeing OOo and Firefox in their faces, changing the OS from beneath them becomes a LOT more trivial than it would be to go about it the other way around.
Truly, the migration path from Windows to Linux is in the applications... get the apps we need to run under Linux and we're golden. So far, OOo and Firefox is paving the way nicely and presenting a very favorable impression for using OSS in the workplace.
Re:The real reason it's not a threat (Score:4, Interesting)
It even works through my school's 'security'. Excellent
Re:Tabbed browsing not important (Score:2, Interesting)
Is that patent valid?
wouldya rather be a mule (Score:3, Interesting)
You get your car back and there's oil on the steering wheel - builders track cement all over your yard - or a teacher that is obviously not fully grasping the subject he or she teaches, as is prone to happen from time to time - your son or daughter gets an essay question marked wrong that you think shouldn't have been marked wrong.
Furthermore, as an intelligent, caring, curious human being, you are fascinated with computers and the internet, and it bugs you that people expect you to just shut up and consume whatever they feel like shoving down your throat, and it also bugs you when others suggest that you should just "make like a pig" and "be happy" in your stupidity. Arrrgghhhh! Why am I so annoyed???? See... it's 'cause you're smart and you see the BS where it lies.
No, we are not stupid. We are smart. We pick the lint off your shirt. We're never satisfied. And you know what? We're proud of it. It's what makes us human beings.
It's not about knowing less about computers or automobiles or building or anything... it's "Hey, you got oil all over my steering wheel and my car is still making that noise" - or something along those lines.
Pigs might be able to just be happy, or maybe clams, better yet, you know... "happy as a clam" - when it comes to using IE, but being nitpicky is, to a greater or lesser extent, human nature - it's what human beings do. It might be right or wrong, but I think it's in some way, shape, or form, "better" than being a pig.
This can only be attributable to human error.
Re:The real reason it's not a threat (Score:5, Interesting)
Managers != developers (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't understand why managers goes out of their way to say silly stuff. I wonder if it comes with the job.
The Microsoft IE Dev team is pretty up to date - see their wiki here.
http://channel9.msdn.com/wiki/default.aspx/Chan
There's a lot less marketing junk - and the wiki format makes it easy to make comments and discussion constructively.
Re:XUL (Score:3, Interesting)
I have to admit I went into this with the attitude of "Let's see how far we get. I know we're gonna hit a killer roadblock at some point, but it'll be interesting to see how far we get before that happens". Now, with a demonstrable if unfinished and slightly crappy looking app already built, I can say:
- there doesn't appear to be a roadblock. We've managed to use both XML-RPC and SOAP (had to try them both!) to talk to backend systems, and we've used this for stuff like database and mainframe access which is one area where I thought we'd hit problems. We can do synchronous and async screen updates, which adds a sizeable usability benefit over regular browser apps. We've used JavaScript for client-side data validation, and basically reproduced all the functionality in a fairly typical business VB app circa 2000 without any compromise at all which was a big surprise to me
- writing XUL code is actually a lot of fun. Small amount of effort for a big result, which is always a nice aspect
- there's a lot of possibilities to use XUL "mini apps" as functional test beds for Web services development. Haven't explored this yet, but it seems like that could be an approach we look at in the near future
- it's been pretty easy to get stuff working, but more time consuming to get it looking exactly the way we want. In fact, several times we've forked the code and gone separate ways trying to solve a particular UI problem, which is probably not ideal but certainly quite productive in such a small project where there's no real problem "unforking" once a solution has been identified
Whether this project actually goes the next step and gets some formal testing is another matter. It probably won't, but the app we're reproducing is ripe for replacement and maybe our skunkworks project will be the basis for that replacement.
Re:Tabbed browsing not important (Score:3, Interesting)
Of course, as that column notes, the easiest target to acquire is the one currently under the mouse cursor. Once upon a time (Netscape Navigator 3), right clicking brought up a context menu which always had "Back" as the first entry, so it was incredibly easy to select (it became a sort of "mouse gesture"). Despite efforts documented in bugzilla, attempts to "fix" Mozilla and Firefox by putting "Back" in that location, and to fix the context menus under Windows which don't display the menu until mouse up, have failed, apparently because the developers don't believe "Back" is actually used enough to justify such extravagances, or, in some cases, because they were asshats.
Re:The real reason it's not a threat (Score:5, Interesting)
Congratulations.
I know nothing about motor mechanics; if my car develops a fault, I take it to a garage. Am I dumb now?
Knowing nothing about the mechanics of such an expensive piece of machinery is a quick way to get ripped off. Even compared to a JiffyLube for $20, you can save half by doing it yourself. I may be a network consultant, but I am quite comfortable seeing to the needs of my own automobile and have in the past changed everthing from oil, to spark plugs, to alternators, to oxygen sensors. None of which are as difficult as I or other might have imagined. Pick up a tear-down manual for your car at AutoZone for about $14 and knock yourself out.
I know nothing about building. If I needed an extension built, or a wall knocked through, or whatever, I'd go to a builder. Am I dumb now?
Construction is another area of greatly marked up labor. Basic engineering principles are easy to master and will save you thousands. I learned most of mine working on a low-slope/commercial/industrial roofing crew in the summers in college. I have also picked up carpentry, mansonary, and electrical along the way. Trust me, DIY projects will save you loads of cash and are not difficult to master. Start small, work you way up. That hole in the sheetrock you have a picture hung over is a nice small place to start learning. The most satisfying project I have completed are the two walk-in closets in my master bedroom complete with loads of built-ins.
I know nothing about teaching. I may know the subject, but I know nothing about planning and preparing lessons, setting homework, or keeping a class full of students interested and engaged. Am I dumb now?
I am not a "teacher" but I tutored people in college and also created the format for a 2-week summer computer camp that introducted K thru 4th graders to basic computer concepts. I can say without a doubt I learned more while teaching other people than I ever learned while other people were teaching me.
Because by extending your reasoning to other fields, I am, and so are you, and everyone else here.
People here need to stop being so elitist, and denigrating people just because they know less about computers than some arbitrarily determined minimum level below which the person must be "dumb".
It is not elitest to say someone is far from well rounded. Specialization is the autobaun to obsoletion. My social circle includes no other "computer people" but I have taken the time to learn wines (nice course at a local university), cigars (even though I don't smoke them more than VERY RARLY, being able to talk to an aficionado is a great way to start a conversation with them, a possible future client). I am not inclined to follow pop culture but I read People, US, etc., so I have something to chat up those interested in it about. I have picked up on while living in Miami Beach, Haute Couture, Haute Cuisine, styles of Architechture (followed that through with an Architechture Lecture at a local university, facinating stuff, Miami Beach is the only place you will find Tropical Deco), furniture design, more sports than I can count, and having a best friend that is a film festival coordinator I have learned a load of things (namely occupations) that I never imagined existed. I never knew existed. Computer People need to expand thier world to other things (and that doesnt mean reading about it on the computer, that's cheating, get outside) and non-Computer savvy people most definatly need to learn more about computers as they are a tidal wave on the horizon that will (more than now even) infultrate the very fabric of their existence. I by no means think that I am even close to well rounded, I have a long ways to go before I can begin to consider resting. It is, however, unforgivable for a person to *choose* to remain ignorant.
Leonardo Da Vinci never announced "I'm an artist, what do I care about engineering?"
bookmarks in FireFox (Score:4, Interesting)
-Leigh
Re:Could though (Score:3, Interesting)
Of course, mine gets more net-savvy people. The corresponding numbers for another site I help admin - one that mostly gets non-techie types (adult site):
- 2032 MSIE 6.0
- 201 Firefox 0.10.
- 103 Mozilla 5.0
- 80 Netscape 7.1
- 68 MSIE 5.5
- 57 Netscape 7.2
- 53 Safari 1.2
- 39 Firefox 0.9.3
- 32 Netscape 6.2.2
- 30 MSIE 5.0
- 27 Firefox 1.0
- 23 Netscape 7.02
- 22 Opera 7.54
- 18 Firefox 0.9.2
- 14 Safari 1.0
- 13 Opera 7.11
- 10 MSIE 5.23
Quite some difference in usage levels. But evidently IE does have a threat from Firefox.I always test with both IE and Firefox.
One major weakness of Firefox (Score:4, Interesting)
I've actually offered a US $1000 bounty for anybody who can fix this and incorporate it into the main code base. See Link Here [mozilla.org].
One thing that kills me about this is I spent 6-9 months developing software to work on MSIE and Mozilla. Mozilla would be a very small portion of my client base but I wanted to help promote open source. But since they made this change that disallows you from loading local images, all this work is gone to waste.
Anyways, I guess there are two things:
1. The fact that I developed on a 1.2 browser and the newer versions were NOT backward compatible. This sucks big ass. Imagine investing the time, money and effort on this and have it wasted. I know you could tell me I should have upgraded the browser but the point was that you always need to support the older browsers. I never even suspected that the newer browsers would purposely break something that worked in the older ones.
2. It's not a security issue. What damage can be done by loading an image that is on your computer. The most I could steal (info wise) is the width/height of that image and the fact that that image exists.
3. I wonder how my commercial incentive (the reward) plays out in an open source world. People are either going to be happy or hate it I presume. Either way, if you solve it and get it introduced into the release version, you get $1000.
Re:The real reason it's not a threat (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:One major weakness of Firefox (Score:5, Interesting)
Trust me, you do not want this behavior changed. You see, Mozilla and IE used to allow this. Then the bad guys figured out that you could ferret out the local filenames things were cached under, load your own malicious code into the cache in an innocuous way, then refer to it as a local resource in a dangerous way. Since it was a local resource it could do things a remote resource wouldn't be allowed to do. So Mozilla drew a one-way wall: local resources can refer to remote resources, but remote resources aren't allowed to refer to local resources directly. They looked at being type-selective, but concluded that if they did someone would always be able to finagle a way to turn that into arbitrary access, so the only safe thing was to block across the board based on the local/remote nature of the protocol.
IE tried to avoid this and be more selective. The result has been a fairly steady stream of zone-escalation exploits for it. To put it plainly, you can't open just one hole.
And frankly, if your page is remote, why are you assuming a local file exists at a particular location? You should be referring to your own resources, not someone else's.
This looks like a good place to start (Score:3, Interesting)
They have a section called "xul example" If you copy code fragments into a file.xul file, you can then just load them into Mozilla (or firefox) to play with. I believe hosting the apps would be as simpel as putting the XUL files up on the web.
Switch to Firefox, and stay? (Score:5, Interesting)
I've made it a requirement of friends and relatives that if they want me to look at their machine and fix them that they need to install and use firefox as their primary browser.
There is a problem with the whole thing though - many of them go back to IE because one site of another will not work due to IE dependancies. Of all the people I've converted, only a small percentage kept with it.
We've seen a big spike in FF/Moz usage over the last few months, however, if you'll excuse my pessamism, I think this will eventually drop off as people find one or two sites that don't function properly because they were designed only with IE in mind. A good example of this is my sister, who went back because her son couldn't play a couple of yahoo games which explicitly ask for IE.
I think this is the real reason they say Firefox is not a threat to IE - because despite the superiority of Firefox, most people don't care about the benefits of security. They just want page X to work properly, and when it only works properly in IE, they'll run back.
Doubled traffic from Mozilla based browsers.... (Score:2, Interesting)
Even though Firefox is the classic disruptor in the browser space, Microsoft has such market command that they can (unfortunately) keep any competitor out of market indefinately. So Microsoft is probably not lying: why should they be afraid if they can copy successful program features and wrap them into their next OS release? Has anyone looked at the next version of IE with tabbed browsing and popup blocking?
Re:Don't forget the Opera!! (Score:2, Interesting)
on average IE is competitive enough (Score:4, Interesting)
I went solely Firefox before XP SP2 because I was concerned about my security and hated the popups. However after SP2, just for jumping on the computer and doing some casual surfing, I have no problem with either IE or Firefox; whichever is the most handy will suffice. (Note however that I still miss tabbed browsing in IE so I'd have to say I'm still leaning closer to Firefox instead of standing in the exact middle of the road.)
However as developer or power user or whatever you want to call it, I prefer the flexibility of Firefox. Firefox is more likely to have a cult following than IE, but not among average home users.
If Microsoft keeps adding just the needed features to keep the average user happy and secure, I'm sure they will fend off Firefox with ease. It's unfortunate, but I believe it's true.
Re:The real reason it's not a threat (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Firefox vs. IE, missing features 2.0... (Score:5, Interesting)
As for the answers to certain queries. I'll try to be more accurate in my statements:
* Changing the temporary cache path?
I like storing anything temporary on another drive, not my system drive. That way I can erase the whole thing at the end of my windows session if necessary.
* No option to clear cache when done?
The IE option is to "Emtpy Temporary Internet Files folder when browser is closed".
* Inability to prompt me if I want scripts to run?
I am refering to any scripts, all scripts, whatever scripts. A TV or newspaper isn't capable of running scripts, neither should a browser...in my humble opinion. Yes I love the FireFox Javascript fine-tuning control. I really wish IE had that. Of course I unchecked all the options for Javascript on FireFox.
* Prompted cookie setting control?
Yea, I missed the "Ask me every time" option. Thanks. It wasn't obvious that it was under that dropdown because it is labled "Keep cookies". The word "Keep" gives me the impression that the cookie had already been set.
* Inline images are either on or off. Eg, no ability to prevent animations (gif or otherwise) from running.
(This is frustrating. I want to see the original images, but I absolutely hate animations of any sort.)
Yes apparently FireFox doesn't have this option, even under about:config. The specific IE option is "Play animations in web pages". I have this turned off.
* No Zones feature so that I can configure certain security options for certain sites.
Zones are nice for intranet stuff where you know you are completely in a secured development environment. The restricted and trusted sites are also nice. I think the thing I like about zones is that it completely adjusts every browser setting for each zone. In fact, I would argue that there should be more zones, more user creatable/definable zones. Zones that users can setup and name. Zones are the limited equivalent of sandbox type controls.
* Installed security is to save passwords, allow web sites to install software, save form information, and Java is enabled?
(Of course IE is probably even more open, but the point is that FireFox is supposed to be secure right?)
I don't know about you, but when I end my browser session, I erase everything. I erase history, cookies, temporary internet files, passwords, form data...everything. I even erase the sites in my blocked lists. In fact, whenever I start my browser, I want it to startup as if I had never used it before. In many ways Firefox should have the option to browse similarly, like in Apples Safari browser where the browser does a complete privacy reset when done. I would love that!
* Many other configuration options are missing that would allow me to be prompted if I want to execute or do something.
Obviously I don't want to name them all. Just open up any IE and choose the security tab, then choose a zone. All the promptable settings are there. And yes I can be prompted to prevent active x controls to run. I just wish META refresh was promptable. Arguably it needs to be.
Firefox is a good start. I really don't want to download Mozilla to get more advanced options. I mean what is the point of FireFox then? I want to use FireFox, I just need more browsing control. I do not like a broswer that does things for me. One other annoying thing about FireFox, even though it isn't a biggie...the fonts don't look right on some sites. I hope they fix that.
Thanks for your input. I'm just that much more informed now!
+2
Re:The real reason it's not a threat (Score:5, Interesting)
Clever idea, but it can backfire if they depend on a site that only works on IE. I tried something along those lines with one of my relatives, and his banking website wouldn't work. He was horribly freaked out because he thought I had "broken" his "bank account" and he thought he wouldn't be able to withdraw money while he was on a vacation he was leaving for in several days.
Well I explained what was wrong, but he didn't believe me so I spent about an hour on the phone trying first to explain how to open the site in IE, then trying to explain how to change the default browser to IE, then even trying to get him to simply delete Firefox. Unfortunately he was too stupid to figure it out, and I had to drive to his house and fix it for him.
As you can probably guess by now, I'm not going to install Firefox on people's machines anymore unless they know what I'm doing. If a luser is too thick skulled to figure out what a web browser is, then they deserve to be stuck with IE.
Not that I'm bitter or anything... :-P
Re:Tabbed browsing not important (Score:3, Interesting)
Anyway, I was chatting with my (non-technical) friend and we were bitching about work, and I was bitching about what a pain IE is when developing webpages. She was vaguely aware that there had been a Netscape at some point in time, but other than that I think she essentially qualified as one of those "there are browsers other than IE?!" people.
So when she asked me what was better, I said that I used Firefox. Never suggested that she convert, or anything. We had a few such conversations and I (without intending to) talked about random features it had that I couldn't live without. I'm not really hostile to IE, it doesn't live on my radar, and I never suggested that she convert.
But convert she did. On her own. Went and downloaded it, bless her. "Oh, I've been using Firefox lately," she said as if nothing had happened, when I mentioned some new IE vulnerability or other that was being abused.
That was maybe 6 months ago. Whenever she's presented with a new computer, by her own admission, Firefox is the first thing she downloads.
It made it easier for her when she got her new laptop -- a Powerbook G4, very nice -- because IE for Macs isn't supported anymore, and she wasn't fond of Safari (for whatever reason). Firefox on Mac OS X does look pretty sexy, I'll admit.
Personally, I'm a diehard GNU/Linux user. I don't care what other people use. I use Firefox because I like it. I've gotten a few people to switch, but never by telling them to switch, or even consciously trying to indirectly influence them. Honestly, if they want to use IE, that's fine with me.
But people switch, of their own accord. Maybe I just have intelligent friends, but I think there are two things at work here: one, Firefox really is a mature product, and frankly, it sells itself. Linux may be for geeks, but Firefox is already at a stage where anyone can use it, easily, with little trouble.
When I first switched to Linux -- must have been 94 or 95 -- I was elated by how cool it was, and I told everyone I could, and not surprisingly, nobody really listened to me. I know, I know, it's come a long way since then, but I think I learned early on that trying to play the "I'm a smart geek, you should listen to me, I know what's best" card doesn't influence people very well. Even if it is true.
People will switch, but they will do so much more readily if they feel like they've made an informed decision on their own. In the case of my friend, I made her curious (without intending to) and she tried it out. She liked it, she stuck with it. When she tries to get other people to use it, I hear her saying a lot of the stuff we all say: "It's more secure, it has tabs, etc, etc" but people often aren't very responsive, because no one likes being told what to do.
Slow and steady wins the race, and all that. Maybe I'm too old-fashioned.
The ayatollahs of open source (Score:5, Interesting)
For all the talk of the cathedral and the bazaar, there are a lot of folks here who seem to believe in the success of conversions driven by submission to secular authority, personal influence or techno-magic.
Don't tell me how Grandad, your kid sister, your lab rats -- one, a young woman, divorced, with two kids and a job to protect -- have all come to love Firefox.
Don't tell me how clever you've been, the tricks you played that make it all seem so easy.
Instead, prove to me that you can make it out there alone in the cold, cruel world of Windows. 300 million users world-wide. Nine million OEM systems shipping each month with IE6 as the default.
Re:The real reason it's not a threat (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm so happy with this setup
Re:The real reason it's not a threat (Score:5, Interesting)
Microsoft itself, for instance, became a success by giving people what they didn't know they needed, or by filling a void that no one realised was there.
<harshing on Microsoft>
Really? When was this? Bill Gates and Paul Allen did a good turn with BASIC back on the Altair, but they were copying the innovation of John G. Kemeny and Thomas E. Kurtz in doing so. DOS was a rip of CP/M. Windows was an attempt to block VisiCorp's VISION and Digital Research's GEM, not to mention IBM's TopView, Quarterdeck's DESQ/View or, say, the Lisa and Macintosh. Flight Simulator came from Bruce Artwick's subLogic. Word came after dozens of other Word Processors. Excel was Microsoft's second attempt at a spreadsheet app after Multimate, which in turn was after Visicalc and Lotus 1-2-3.
The web browser? Tim Berners Lee and Marc Andreesen's team at NCSA, among others. Powerpoint? Purchased from an outside developer. Visio? Purchased from an outside developer. FoxPro? Purchased from an outside developer. C#/.NET? Closely imitative of Java, without all of that icky non-Windows-bound aspirations.
I'm rather looking forward to seeing Microsoft become a success by giving people what they didn't know they needed, myself. Microsoft Bob surely wasn't it.
</harshing on Microsoft>
Re:The real reason it's not a threat (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Firefox vs. IE, missing features... (Score:3, Interesting)
You are comparing your highly tuned knowledge of IE with your absolute newby knowledge of Firefox.
But other users here have given you some ideas. Review it again after you try it some more.
I use Firefox, because I don't use an MS OS. For me, FF works much better than IE. And yes, my OS doesn't have a task bar... but it does have icons for applications in use. Try having ten or fifteen pages open, though - tabbed browsing works better for this. And you can still have multiple windows too - each with a different set of tabs.
Re:The real reason it's not a threat (Score:3, Interesting)
Pfttt. IE for public computers? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:One major weakness of Firefox (Score:2, Interesting)
He obviously needs to refer to local image content, and probably want to avoid uploading + dowloading just to preview a site with a different image.
It sorta make sense.
Re:The real reason it's not a threat (Score:3, Interesting)
Opera thanks! In your face! (Score:2, Interesting)
I can open pages in the background so I can continue to read my article, and when I open Opera it goes right back to where I left off opening all the pages open when the program is closed. Email, Chat, and news. What the heck else do I need.
FYI: I first compared IE to netscape a long time ago and went with IE (netscape was frustrating). Then I tried IE and Opera and I fell in love with Opera. Ive installed and tried firefox, mozilla and a few others. None seemed up to snuff. Actually firefox was the closest to keeping up with Opera, but Opera seems so perfect. I hope they don't mess it up in Opera 8.
IE is tied to the SHELL, and not to the OS (Score:5, Interesting)
Same with EXPLORER.EXE, it is only a stub that loads the COM controls that deal with file browsing.
There are other COM modules available, such as Network browsers, Picture viewers, and in Win95, there was the easter egg COM module.
the stubs can load any of these COM modules dependent on the content being displayed. Indeed it IS possible to make a HTML COM component based on Mozilla, and the COM/ActiveX component IS available. however, it is stil not possible for the Mozilla COM module to replace IE and its trident engine in this context either.
The point I am making, is that IE is NOT tied to the OS itself, its only tied to the SHELL of the OS.
If you REALLY want to stop IE from starting, even on a Windows XP box, use Program Manager as the shell! It does work.... its progman.exe located in c:\windows\system32
I use progman.exe and Mozilla as the shell on my "guest" account of my XP box, and it works VERY nicely!
The guy does raise some valid points. (Score:4, Interesting)
I don't agree with him, and I don't think his answers tell the whole story (besides, the anti-IE ones don't exactly tell the whole story either), but they don't stop his points being valid.
Up to a point I think he's right. OK, I admit I'd debate the "any less secure" statement, but I do agree that a major part of it is that IE is still so common so it's an easier target.
Though I certainly get the feeling that MS might well be counting the definitive version of Internet Explorer as being IE6 under XP SP2. And that is more secure - just not necessarily the major version of IE being used quite yet.
He also (undurprisingly) doesn't touch on the issue that IE bugs reach further than simply IE. "This bug affects you even if Internet Explorer is not your default browser" always irritates me no end. If I'm not using it then why should the flaw still matter? But the "integration" with Windows is the problem in this case. And if there's a flaw and no current patch you can't even uninstall the software until an update version comes out.
So regadless of the quantity of issues, the nature of the IE flaws is totally different.
This is another point. There aren't a great deal of features that customers "want" that would attract them to switch. Firefox's real strength (in my opinion) is that it has features you that you never thought about, but that keep you from switching back
Up until recently not many non-geeks had probably heard of it, except maybe mentioned by a geek-type. But it's starting to be mentioned more and more in the media, so MS are understandably wanting to stop people making the initial switch.
Besides, many Windows users simply equate "The Internet" with "Internet Explorer" - or, more likely, with "The Blue e Icon". They're not looking for anything different because they don't even know that there are alternatives.
The real danger for those of us interested in the non-IE alternatives is to dismiss anything that comes from MS. Just because they don't say things the way we see them doesn't mean that their poitns don't have merit. Plus we do have to see things from their perspective to be able to validly counter their claims. Because the "M$ are fulla BS" approach isn't really going to get people interested in alternatives. But a reasoned argument about why a Microsoft statement doesn't tell the whole truth might at least get someone to listen.
Re:Great quote to take out of context (Score:1, Interesting)