Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Internet Explorer Mozilla The Internet IT

Microsoft Launches New "Get the Facts" Campaign 524

ko9 writes that Microsoft has re-launched its "'Get the facts' campaign, in an attempt to promote Internet Explorer 8. It contains a chart that compares IE8 to Firefox and Chrome. Needless to say, IE8 comes out as the clear winner, with MS suggesting it is the only browser to provide features like 'privacy,' 'security,' 'reliability.' It even claims to have Firefox beat in 'customizability.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft Launches New "Get the Facts" Campaign

Comments Filter:
  • by Shome ( 621324 ) on Friday June 19, 2009 @08:02AM (#28387839)
    now give me the story!
    • The story is, quite simply, that it is appallingly easy of companies to shamelessly and flagrantly lie, to produce the most obvious falsehoods, and for absolutely no one whatsoever to bother stating the obvious fact; that they are appalling liars.

      It's not even deceptive wording, or qualified phrases we're talking about here. Most companies and organisations just come right out an lie nowadays. Some choice selections from the article. Note that the tick marks in the article next to browsers are replaced by stars here.

      Security - IE8: * FF: CR: - Internet Explorer 8 takes the cake with better phishing and malware protection, as well as protection from emerging threats.

      A lie.

      Privacy - IE8: * FF: CR: - InPrivate Browsing and InPrivate Filtering help Internet Explorer 8 claim privacy victory.

      A falsehood.

      Web Standards - IE8: * FF: CR: * - It's a tie. Internet Explorer 8 passes more of the World Wide Web Consortium's CSS 2.1 test cases than any other browser, but Firefox 3 has more support for some evolving standards.

      A barefaced, shameless, utterly false lie. For you see, there is no W3C CSS 2.1 test suite. There is a Pre-Alpha CSS 2.1 Test Suite [w3.org], but upon further investigation it can be seen that the IE team themselves have submitted at least 3221 of the 3708 test cases [msdn.com], or at least that was the case last August 18th.

      Perhaps some would argue that these are merely exaggerations or omissions, not lies. I beg to differ. Taking these statements as truths would lead one to believe that IE has less exploits, less chance of exposing private data and a higher or equal chance of rendering web pages correctly that either Firefox or Chrome. All three conclusions are false. These are lies.

      Some will believe them, but even sadder, more will not accept them as lies.

      My reply text is being squashed into a 25 character wide column to the right of a mass of grey. It would be great if Slashdot rendered properly these days.
      Perhaps I'll try it in IE8!

      • by TheRaven64 ( 641858 ) on Friday June 19, 2009 @09:34AM (#28388893) Journal

        My reply text is being squashed into a 25 character wide column to the right of a mass of grey. It would be great if Slashdot rendered properly these days.

        It appears that this is due to a bug in the CSS which prevents proper line breaking in the grey line under the comment title ('by ObsessiveMathsFreak...'). I see this quite often, but can't work out why it happily line-wraps on some but doesn't on all. If you make your browser window wider, eventually you will get to the point where it all fits on one line and then the comment suddenly displays correctly.

      • by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 19, 2009 @09:44AM (#28389045)
        Microsoft is widely misunderstood. People think Microsoft is a software company that is often abusive. But it isn't. It's an abuse company that uses software to deliver abuse. Like for example, deliberately releasing faulty versions of operating systems.

        Microsoft got as big as it is only because it was possible to take advantage of the ignorance of the average person about computers.
      • by ground.zero.612 ( 1563557 ) on Friday June 19, 2009 @10:09AM (#28389419)
        Citation needed. It's easy to call someone a liar and rant on and on about how much of a liar they are without rebutting any of the supposed lies. You've done the easy part and written a page long rant, now do the hard part and back up your hearsay with a point by point rebuttal. Otherwise feel free to keep wasting peoples time with anti- rhetoric.
    • by derGoldstein ( 1494129 ) on Friday June 19, 2009 @09:26AM (#28388797) Homepage
      You've gotta love it that they keep pushing the word "Fact" into their FUD.

      This is pathetic and infuriating at the same time, which is common with MS propaganda. As I went over the list (as well as the mythbusting [microsoft.com] bit) I laughed in a "black humor" sort of way -- it reads like a parody, kind of like something you'd read on TheOnion.

      Isn't it nice that as long as you keep things just ambiguous enough, you can use the word "FACT" in an ad to state just about anything. At some point, if the law doesn't intervene, they will start positioning Google as the "Dark Corporation that spies on you", and Apple as a religious cult. I'm pretty sure they could do that now and they'd be un-sue-able.
  • Sure, Firefox may win in sheer number of add-ons, but many of the customizations you'd want to download for Firefox are already a part of Internet Explorer 8 -- right out of the box.

    Those Grapes are Sour ANYWAY!

    And nothing is worse than this one:

    Web Standards

    It's a tie. Internet Explorer 8 passes more of the World Wide Web Consortium's CSS 2.1 test cases than any other browser, but Firefox 3 has more support for some evolving standards.

    Did you hear that? Because my head just fucking exploded.

    And what the hell does "Manageability" mean? Rate at which the browser is able to be handled or controled? What the hell?! And their little quip for this one:

    Neither Firefox nor Chrome provide guidance or enterprise tools. That's just not nice.

    You know what's not nice? Having to write in my freaking javascript if(IE){ do tons of fucked up shit } else { everybody else's predictable behavior }. You know what else isn't nice? The scourge of websites that will forever taint the web because you couldn't get your shit together for IE6 and then you let it fester for years.

    I am so done with internet explorer in any form. This ridiculous campaign is just here to piss me off. Microsoft has no one to blame but themselves for making me jaded and opposed to any form of IE.

    • by Thanshin ( 1188877 ) on Friday June 19, 2009 @08:11AM (#28387953)

      aving to write in my freaking javascript if(IE){ do tons of fucked up shit } else { everybody else's predictable behavior }.

      We should have started a campaign years ago to change that for:

      if(IE){ } else { display page }

      • by morgan_greywolf ( 835522 ) on Friday June 19, 2009 @08:27AM (#28388089) Homepage Journal


        if (IE) { send_drive_by_download_of_Firefox_with_IE_deleter } else { display page }

        • by Thanshin ( 1188877 ) on Friday June 19, 2009 @08:42AM (#28388249)

          It shouldn't be so hard to:

          if (IE) {
            hack IE
            Download and install FF with IE skin
            Set Desktop link to point FF
            Set default browser to FF
            Open FF to current page
            Close and uninstall IE

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          if (IE) { send_drive_by_download_of_Firefox_with_IE_deleter } else { display page }

          This post is currently modded as Funny, but this should definitely be the strategy of those who care about standards. At least for a while, an attempt to educate the public.

      • by TheRaven64 ( 641858 ) on Friday June 19, 2009 @09:36AM (#28388925) Journal
        Didn't someone write a Gecko ActiveX plugin a while ago? Can't you just wrap your entire page in an object tag for IE users and have them download and install the Gecko ActiveX control for rendering HTML?
    • by tepples ( 727027 ) <.tepples. .at. .gmail.com.> on Friday June 19, 2009 @08:20AM (#28388031) Homepage Journal

      And what the hell does "Manageability" mean? Rate at which the browser is able to be handled or controled? What the hell?!

      I think "manageability" might have something to do with the IT department's ability to control settings on hundreds or thousands of computers in an Active Directory environment through Group Policy objects. Do Mozilla, Opera, and Google provide analogous tools to manage thousands of installations of Firefox, Opera, or Chrome?

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        Sure, in a megacorporation or school environment I could see that being a useful feature. The inhabitants of those environments have little choice over their tools and are easy to extort through the neverending licensing/upgrade merry-go-round. Just the sort of vict^H^H^H^Hcustomer that Microsoft is looking for.

        For me, I prefer a browser that is actually standards compliant (to the extent possible since the standards are a fast moving target), cross-platform and easier for ME, the end-user, to customize t

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by smoker2 ( 750216 )
        Why should 3rd parties have to provide tools to make their product work with a competitors product ? Besides which you can easily have a local repo for your customised Firefox and set them to all get their updates from that.. ( about:config app.update.* )
      • by eulernet ( 1132389 ) on Friday June 19, 2009 @09:02AM (#28388475)

        Firefox has a MSI version that can be deployed on a whole domain: http://www.frontmotion.com/Firefox/index.htm [frontmotion.com]

        • by lazyforker ( 957705 ) on Friday June 19, 2009 @10:18AM (#28389547)
          Furthermore it is easy for a competent admin to easily customize and lock down FF. We just started rolling out FF to 10000 PCs globally. We have a Windows PC/Active Directory environment. GPOs were used to force the user's profile locations to be a network share, configure proxy settings etc. For anyone who might be contemplating deploying FF I'd say "Yes - you can use your well-known Windows management tools such as SCCM and GPOs to deploy and manage Firefox. All the settings, configuration etc are very well-documented.".
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by parlancex ( 1322105 )
        Software settings are managed and enforced in Windows domains through a tool called Group Policy. Group Policy modules are nothing more than a collection of registry key settings tied into the Group Policy editor through a relatively simple script that exposes those settings in a more straightforward way. Not only does Group Policy allow you to specify target registry information and data directly, but it also allows you to deploy file system changes en masse to targeted files (like specfiying that an inclu
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 19, 2009 @08:04AM (#28387861)

    I can't find it in the repos.

  • Two wrongs... (Score:4, Informative)

    by Manip ( 656104 ) on Friday June 19, 2009 @08:04AM (#28387871)
    While Microsoft's campaign is rubbish, unfortunately Mozilla is no better. [mozilla.com]
    • Re:Two wrongs... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by dword ( 735428 ) on Friday June 19, 2009 @08:42AM (#28388247)

      Its campaign may be rubbish, but it's working! Also, we have been pounding MS for sticking to IE6 for long enough. Now that they're trying to get users to switch to a better browser (IE8 may not be the best, but it's definitely a lot better than IE6) we pound them again. They may claim what IE8 is better than Firefox/Opera/Safari/Chrome put together, we may hate them for that, but we have to spare a bit of love for the fact that they're finally letting their users know that they can have better than IE6. Now, unless they suddenly stop supporting IE8 and put it in the WGA program, we should be thanking them.

    • Re:Two wrongs... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by ko9 ( 946154 ) on Friday June 19, 2009 @08:44AM (#28388267)
      Like you, I disagree with these "comparison charts" which let the marketing people cherry pick what options they want to show and completely hide all others. However, an important difference lies between the way these two charts are set up. The items on the chart at Mozilla are actually things that the browsers have or do not have (boolean values if you will), and therefore at least the checkmark is appropriate. On the Microsoft chart, they use the same checkmark system for things that are not 'true' or 'false' at all, like "Security" and "Privacy". They use this to suggests not only that IE is better at these fields, but that the others do not have this feature at all. It's a subtle difference that is very important to how people read the chart.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by tcr ( 39109 )

      Not the best FF advert I've seen.

      Having said that, I think it's not desperate and needy like "Okay... how much to use IE8? Ten grand? [microsoft.com]"

  • by TheRaven64 ( 641858 ) on Friday June 19, 2009 @08:04AM (#28387873) Journal
    With FireFox, only the user can customise the browser. With IE, any remote attacker can as well!
  • by rbanffy ( 584143 ) on Friday June 19, 2009 @08:04AM (#28387875) Homepage Journal

    I love my Microsoft keyboard. I love my Microsoft mouse.

    I loved their Z-80 Softcard on my Apple II.

    It's too bad they insist on making second-rate software. Their hardware is excelent.

  • by edeloso ( 665632 ) <edhebert@@@sas...upenn...edu> on Friday June 19, 2009 @08:05AM (#28387877)
    ... you keep on using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by tverbeek ( 457094 )
      If they're figuring customizability based on the number of malicious ActiveX and other BHOs supported, IE8 wins hands-down.
  • what a laugh (Score:5, Insightful)

    by wjh31 ( 1372867 ) on Friday June 19, 2009 @08:06AM (#28387885) Homepage
    web standards? no browser has given me more greif by completely changing the layout of a page which every other common browsr in every common OS displays perfectly fine. Not to mention all the 'made for IE' pages that look like shit in every other browser.

    IE is going to have to work damn hard to get rid of that reputation amoungst developers
    • Re:what a laugh (Score:5, Interesting)

      by billcopc ( 196330 ) <vrillco@yahoo.com> on Friday June 19, 2009 @08:39AM (#28388227) Homepage

      The problem is that for every one of us developers that hates IE, there are 10 more developers who know nothing else and think this Firefox thing is some hippie fad, and are very adamant about it. Frontpage and .Net have caused immeasurable damage to the web with their completely broken markup, but if you're the kind of imbecile who knows nothing but Frontpage, your P.O.V. is that all the other browsers suck.

      No matter how you slice it, it is always easier to support a single platform, than to support all of them. It just so happens that when you develop "for" Firefox, you're usually closer to that cross-browser goal than had you aimed for IE in the first place. But then once in a while, I'll forget to test my template in IE and sure enough, that's the one that breaks.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by sorak ( 246725 )

        The problem is that for every one of us developers that hates IE, there are 10 more developers who know nothing else and think this Firefox thing is some hippie fad, and are very adamant about it.

        That may have been true 10 years ago, but now, I would have a hard time finding a web developer who doesn't take Firefox seriously. Maybe in a large corporate infrastructure where the site is to be used by employees who are not allowed to have any browser other than IE...

      • The problem is that for every one of us developers that hates IE, there are 10 more developers who know nothing else and think this Firefox thing

        Don't you meant that "Foxfire" thing

    • Web standards (Score:3, Interesting)

      by AlpineR ( 32307 )

      What's so great about Internet Explorer 8?

      REASON 5 - See any site easily.

      View sites with ease, even if they were designed for an older browser, with one click on the Compatibility View button.

      The first step on the road to recovery is admitting that you have a problem. Maybe Internet Explorer 8 is a born again standards compliant browser if it needs a special button to render sites designed for IE6.

  • by iCEBaLM ( 34905 ) <icebalm@[ ]balm.com ['ice' in gap]> on Friday June 19, 2009 @08:06AM (#28387889)

    It's pretty hilarious on all of the categories which are ties that Microsoft admits the other browsers are better, but then discounts the reasons why because, according to them, it turns out that the category doesn't matter for some reason or another so, it's a TIE!

  • Just for kicks (Score:5, Insightful)

    by frodo from middle ea ( 602941 ) on Friday June 19, 2009 @08:06AM (#28387891) Homepage
    I clicked the "Download Now" button, and I can't find my operating system in there.
    Compe up with a native Linux/BSD version Microsoft, and then we will talk.
  • by tgatliff ( 311583 ) on Friday June 19, 2009 @08:09AM (#28387911)

    No doubt MS is overrun by business managers, which I am sure is most of their problems. To a business person, the product is the after thought, but the marketing is the most important thing. IE does not have problems because of poor marketing. It has problems because of of countless security issues with the code itself that have in the past left machines very vulnerable to malicious attempts. Any technology person can tell you this, but I bet this will not be presented as a "fact" on their marketing campaign...

  • Hrmm (Score:5, Funny)

    by acehole ( 174372 ) on Friday June 19, 2009 @08:09AM (#28387917) Homepage

    They seemed to take out a couple of categories from the original chart.

    * Browser most likely to cause the user to pull out hair - IE8
    * Browser able to download viruses and malware the fastest - IE8
    * Browser able to crash and take your whole OS down faster than a $2 hooker - IE8

  • by mysidia ( 191772 ) on Friday June 19, 2009 @08:10AM (#28387925)

    They're using the definition of fact that says: "fact : a statement accepted as true as the basis for argument or inference "

    The catch is, it's biased people at MS who "accept it as true" on the "basis for [inherently flawwed] argument or inference"

    Microsoft is becoming infamous for these bogus get the "facts" campaigns, which are really marketing attempts to use Microsoft's truth to distort common belief, replacing the facts with MS' contrived point of view.

  • by 140Mandak262Jamuna ( 970587 ) on Friday June 19, 2009 @08:14AM (#28387987) Journal
    Looks like this campaign is not even aimed at the market. Microsoft announced a lay off. It appears they are not culling the employees by performance and competence. They seem to be lopping off whole programs and letting everyone go in those programs and all the lucky ones who happen to be in the rest will continue employment en masse. This leads to low employee morale as the IE team people go, "my job depends not on my performannce but the kind of contacts my manager has with the higher ups and how well my team's output is doing in the marketplace. IE is steadily losing marketshare. Europe is going to unbundle IE and there will be a push to get IE less Windows in USA too. What is going to happen to my job? Should I bail out?". So the IE Team VP gets the higher ups to show some signs that his reportees will not be left high and dry. Just a product of internal turf war, empire building and palace intrigue within that large bureaucracy. Nothing much to see here. Move along.
  • Javascript (Score:5, Interesting)

    by L4t3r4lu5 ( 1216702 ) on Friday June 19, 2009 @08:26AM (#28388085)
    I use a program called SpiceWorks [spiceworks.com] to monitor the network, run the helpdesk etc which makes heavy use of interactive content.

    I notice that the very last item is about performance.

    I can load up the entire inventory of my network in around 3 seconds in Chrome and Opera. It takes 11 seconds in IE8.

    Not fast at all.
  • "Ease of Use" (Score:5, Insightful)

    by El_Muerte_TDS ( 592157 ) on Friday June 19, 2009 @08:27AM (#28388087) Homepage

    Features like Accelerators, Web Slices and Visual Search Suggestions make Internet Explorer 8 easiest to use.

    I have absolutely no idea what those things are, or for that matter where in IE8 you can find them.

  • Double Blind (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Demonantis ( 1340557 ) on Friday June 19, 2009 @08:28AM (#28388101)
    Why is this even being discussed. Its obviously PR. If you wanted a serious comparison go look on google for one. Honestly you don't trust the sales man to give you the best price on your car. You know he is going to fleece you. Its the same thing here.
  • by WaRrK ( 807996 ) on Friday June 19, 2009 @08:30AM (#28388129)

    Microsoft Launches New "Get the Facts" Campaign

    'Microsoft Launches New Get the "Facts" Campaign' There, fixed that for you....

  • I don't get it... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 19, 2009 @08:33AM (#28388149)

    Fact: Internet Exploiter is PART OF THE USER INTERFACE of every windows operating system since 95.

    Fact: You can't uninstall IE without effecting your core operating system functionality. (Windows updates, programs that use IE's rendering engine for their own user interface - antivirus software, I'm looking at you!)

    Fact: A VAST majority of Windows users have automatic updates enabled by default and will receive IE8 whether they like it or not (and they probably won't care anyway, as most users couldn't even tell you what version of IE they're running in the first place.)

    Fact: Internet Exploiter has nearly always been, is currently and will always be the most used browser on Windows platforms. Yes, suck it up FF/O/Etc fans. We will gain market share, but when you're aftermarket and not OEM, people generally don't care. How many people change the stereo in their car? Sure. You can get an awesome stereo to replace the factory one, but if the factory one functions correctly and lets you listen to music, then why change?

    I have worked in IT for over 10 years in the frontline. I'm tech support at a retail store, so my customers are the general public. We load FF on every PC that comes in and encourage our customers to use it. We load IE8 on every clean install of Windows we do because, and here's a really important point, that's the only safe time to upgrade IE without having the OS get screwed over. When IE8 first became a "Critical Windows update" and customers were installing it, we were inundated with fxxked computers that lost network connectivity, or crashed, or ran dog slow.

    Hell, I recommend customers use OpenOfficeOrg instead of forking money out for Office.

    And you can blabber on about developers. I do some web developing myself and I adhere to the W3C standards - NOT Microsoft standards. But the END USER doesn't care. If the page works fine, then whoopedy-doo! If they run FF/O/etc and the page doesn't work, where do they go? Do they send emails to the website? Do they complain to the W3C? Do they send mail to Firefox? No. They click the shiny (e) icon and try it there. Then what? Most users will continue their browsing experience in IE. Why switch back and forth between 2 browsers? End users see that as redundant.

    This may be a little off-topic, but how about an "Only works with IE" blacklist website where IExclusive (hehe, I just came up with that LOL) websites are NAMED AND SHAMED. Then promote the shit out of the site. Maybe developers who cater only to Microsoft's needs would think twice about firing up Fro... Front.... Frontpa.... damnit, I can't say it.

  • by wjousts ( 1529427 ) on Friday June 19, 2009 @08:36AM (#28388181)

    We'll hide your porn.

  • by rrossman2 ( 844318 ) on Friday June 19, 2009 @08:37AM (#28388197)
    Tested products include:

    Apple Safari v3

    Google Chrome 1.0.154

    Microsoft Internet Explorer v8 (RC1)

    Microsoft Internet Explorer v7

    Mozilla Firefox v3.07

    Opera 9.64

    So they compare a Release Candidate vs "older browsers"?

    Safari is at version 4 as a regular release, not sure about any beta's or RC's...

    I'm using Chrome right now to post this

    Firefox is at 3.5 for a Beta (Or RC by now..)

    Opera is at 10 for a Beta

    They should have done apples to apples. When the IE8 RC was out, so was pre-releases of FF 3.5, Opera 10, as well as Safari and Chrome in more updated versions than they used.

  • by Dan667 ( 564390 ) on Friday June 19, 2009 @08:41AM (#28388233)
    This looks like the same thing that happened when Motorola started hemorrhaging. There were to many middle managers and they were all trying to save their jobs so they did what ever they could to look like they were doing something even if it was not value added or looked ridiculous in the marketplace. If this is not a fine example of that nothing is.
  • by HangingChad ( 677530 ) on Friday June 19, 2009 @08:41AM (#28388237) Homepage

    Who are they aiming at here? Certainly not this group. Definitely not developers. Anyone in IT is going to get a good laugh. It's just surreal.

    It's like this ad campaign was designed when the execs were baked. It sounded good in the hot tub but when reality strikes, they discover that planning ad campaigns when you're high is a really bad idea.

    If there's some super sekret ad strategy at work here I'd sure like to know what it is, because it's hard to see it as anything but a massive waste of time and money. I don't think most people even care and it reminds the development community how much they hate IE.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by PitaBred ( 632671 )
      Managers who tell IT what to do. That's the target... get somebody up the ranks to set the rules down from on high because their golf buddy knows a lot about this tech stuff, and he told them about this site. Besides... it's Microsoft! They're a huge company... why would they lie?
  • Hmmm. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by apodyopsis ( 1048476 ) on Friday June 19, 2009 @08:49AM (#28388317)

    My first thought was to laugh myself silly with a touch of indignant rage.

    But actually I take this a bit more seriously.. There is a well known phenomenon (that I am sure somebody else knows the name of) where people tend to believe what they read and we are not the target audience of this advertising tripe. Many people who will read this (and do not know better) will believe it and follow it and pass it on. And that irritates mes.

    In this fraternity we all sit back and mock the ridiculous claims and statement in their FUD and sales - but at the end of the day they are quietly winning the war with one ill educated person swayed towards their cause after another.

    I sure have no answers, but I do not feel like mocking this kind of crap anymore.

    At work I use FF - but I am forced to use IE for the corporate portal because apparently only IE can possibly work on the portal, so they paid somebody to edit the script to reject all "non-approved" browsers. That is the end result of ill informed high up decisions based on fluff like this.

  • by atfrase ( 879806 ) on Friday June 19, 2009 @08:53AM (#28388359)
    As lame as this clearly is, I can't really fault Microsoft entirely; I think this is just a product of the deteriorating state of advertising and marketing in general.

    Time was, you only had to take an advertiser's claims with one grain of salt, but in the last few decades it seems like there's been a kind of hyper-inflation; now, you can't even read an advertisement critically to filter the hyperbole and extract some useful information, because there isn't any left. After years of being unabashedly lied to by advertisers, we now have no choice but to assume that all advertising is pure, unadulterated lies.

    It's a little sad; it only took a few companies abusing the consumers' trust to ruin it for everyone.
  • by selven ( 1556643 ) on Friday June 19, 2009 @08:54AM (#28388381)
    Can we come up with some intelligent, thought-out responses against this? I'm picturing myself in the shoes of a non-anti-Microsoft zealot and I'm seeing nothing more than "Microsoft sucks because it does" here.
    • by the_womble ( 580291 ) on Friday June 19, 2009 @09:42AM (#28389009) Homepage Journal

      1) IE8 does much worse at ACID3, so it is less standards compliant.
      2) What IE8 does out of the box covers what a few Firefox extensions do, out of thousands available. Where are Tree Style Tabs? No squint? No Script? Its All text? (to pick a few I like)
      3) Compatibility not that good because there are sure to be lots of sites around that still serve IE7 CSS workarounds to IE 8.
      4) Performance does matter for very javascript heavy pages, which are now quite common
      5) IE8 developer tools cannot match Firefox + Web developer Toolbar + Firebug + YSlow etc...
      6) The others have malware protection. What about MS's generally bad track record.
      7) tab isolation and recovery are not the be all and end all of reliability: how reliable is the rendering engine for example? It is better not to crash than to recover.
      8) Firefox has some terrific ease of use features, as does Opera. The search in the FF location bar, and Opera quick dial come to mind, but there are a lot more.
      9) IE is Windows only, which is also bad for security.

  • by dargaud ( 518470 ) <(slashdot2) (at) (gdargaud.net)> on Friday June 19, 2009 @09:02AM (#28388479) Homepage
    I just witnessed victory at hand when recently I saw someone not very computer oriented boot a random computer and say when looking at the desktop: "damn, there's no Firefox, how do I get on the Intharnet?" while IE's icon was right there.
  • by grolaw ( 670747 ) on Friday June 19, 2009 @09:16AM (#28388671) Journal

    M$ has finally admitted that the Mac Platform runs Windows best?

  • by MadJo ( 674225 ) on Friday June 19, 2009 @09:36AM (#28388919) Homepage Journal

    fact (plural facts)

          1. An honest observation.
          2. Something actual as opposed to invented.
                        In this story, the Gettysburg Address is a fact, but the rest is fiction.
          3. Something which has become real.
                        The promise of television became a fact in the 1920s.
          4. Something concrete used as a basis for further interpretation.
                        Let's look at the facts of the case before deciding.
          5. An objective consensus on a fundamental reality that has been agreed upon by a substantial number of people.
                        There is no doubting the fact that the Earth orbits the Sun.
          6. Information about a particular subject.
                        The facts about space travel.

    Microsoft adds this to the list:
          7. Something Microsoft pulls out of their asses.
                        "Get the facts".

    They have given bogus 'facts' about their software offerings with regards to Linux, and now to Firefox. Do they think we're idiots? Are they really that scared about competition? That they need to resort to outright lying? How can you build a trust-relationship with them, if you can't trust them when they come out with 'facts'? What happened to ethics?

  • Bizzaro? (Score:3, Funny)

    by Canazza ( 1428553 ) on Friday June 19, 2009 @09:43AM (#28389021)

    What is this? Bizzaro World?

  • by awitod ( 453754 ) on Friday June 19, 2009 @09:52AM (#28389193)

    I think Microsoft is over the line with this campaign from a legal standpoint and will get the smackdown from the FTC.
    Fromt the STATEMENT OF POLICY REGARDING COMPARATIVE ADVERTISING http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/policystmt/ad-compare.htm [ftc.gov].

    "The Commission has supported the use of brand comparisons where the bases of comparison are clearly identified. Comparative advertising, when truthful and non-deceptive, is a source of important information to consumers and assists them in making rational purchase decisions."

    If the page "Clearly Identifies" the basis of the comparison, I don't see it.


    "Some industry codes which prohibit practices such as "disparagement," "disparagement of competitors," "improper disparagement," "unfairly attacking," "discrediting," may operate as a restriction on comparative advertising. The Commission has previously held that disparaging advertising is permissible so long as it is truthful and not deceptive."

    As many others have pointed out, several of the claims are, to put it generously, a stretch.

  • Parody (Score:5, Funny)

    by Bill Dimm ( 463823 ) on Friday June 19, 2009 @10:26AM (#28389653) Homepage

You will never amount to much. -- Munich Schoolmaster, to Albert Einstein, age 10