[yankeeDDL]

TechieXP,
I stopped using IE in 2001. That's when I caught the virus by looking for lyrics. IE5 was the browser available back then.
You're right when you said that Netscape was not a good software: I truly disliked it, but was safer than IE and had the nice feature of multiple identities. I must have been one of the few using it 'cause it disappeared with Netscape. Since 2004 I'm on FireFox. I looked at IE every now and then. I have to use it in some website that use IE-specific tools for work. Other than that, I stay clear of it.

You said already you use IE and have no problems with it. Good for you. You also said people should not browse for torrents or other "dodgy sites: you don't and you're safe. IE doesn't work for me. Nor it works for people looking for extra safety (noScript) and extra efficiency (add-on).
I said this already. There's no perfect browser. This article is not only about sceurity. I believe FF can be superior to IE in terms of security. I have experienced it on my PC. Until something stunning happens, I'll stick to it. It has worked in the past 8 years. I'm not changing. That's my opinion.

I simply am not going to discuss the pros of a browser that is AT LEAST as secure as IE and offers a huge set of add-on over IE. It's like wasting words.

And this has nothing to do with interoperability. Yes, it is a nice conveniency to be able to use the same exact software across multiple platforms. I value that. Others may not. But even if FireFox was a Windows-only browser, it would still be, by far, MY browser of choice because it is simply more effective for my needs. If you have different needs than mine (and you probably do), then you're right to stick to any other browser. Frankly, I don't care.

[RickPan1337]

Who knows how safe it really is but i like firefox's saved passwords alot - makes my day alot easyer.
Plus ctrl-T is where its at for tabbing!

[yankeeDDL]

Techie,

you''re trying to justify the un-justifiable.
IE is NOT a standard. E did not introduce a standard format de-facto. IE8 CANNOT render websites designed for IE7! It needs to integrate two rendering engines: the new one and th eold one, to be able to render properly websites designed for the same browser.
That's as far as one can get to a "standard"; being open source or proprietary, money or free, has nothing to do with this.
Here: http://www.neowin.ne...nder-correctly.
Over 2400 MAJOR sites that IE8 cannot render correctly.

Having options has forced MSFT to work "a bit harder to stay ahead"?!?!?! Dude, have ou read any of the posts other than yours or rasmasyean?
I'm notbashing MSFT. I have no interest, nor anything to gain in doing so. If MSFT comes up with a good product, I'll use it. But this has nothing to do with this discussion. IE is and has been a mediocre software. It improved only during the "war" against Netscape. IE was superior to Netscape from a usability point of view and won that war hands down. But that was at least 10 years ago. Things have changed. IE has consistenly lagged behind other browsers. In terms of speed it's only now starting to catch up with the others, and it's still 2~3X slower. In terms of features it keeps copying others. In the end, even if it inntroduces some features (and it did), otherd copied more quickly, and improved them. I don't want to start the discussion all over: I have already written a few post explaining why I think FF is far superios to IE: I'm not going to repeat myself.
I also already told you in other discussions that your arguments about "commercial" software being superios to "Free" software is pure nonsense: there too: I'm not going to repeat myself. You're convinced otherwise and that's fine by me: the world is nice cause people can have different opinions. I stand by mine and I haven't seen any discussion that comes remotely close to making me change my mind.

[rasmasyean]

Actually many advanced browser functions were initiated by IE, albeit in a "non-standard" way. That's why it has captured a lot of market share. Yes, yes...people did get used to it and stuck with IE because that's what they were familiar with at their jobs too. However, much of the "browser-as-a-platform" technology and concepts were developed by Microsoft. The unseen part is that much of it was also used behind closed doors and hence was why it had potential "security holes". But that didn't really matter on the intranet behind firewalls, etc. These "holes" allowed you to run all sorts of intranet applications, which were much more functional than what you know now as Web 2.0. Even Mozilla used this as an argument point to sell the security of FireFox back then. Incidentally, I actually heard it from them...in person! Maybe IE has gotten a bad rap because of this, but I don't think they regret it. By favoring the business sector over the consumer (especially since that was where most of the computing took place) they have secured a large footprint in the industry. Of course now there are many more computers in the hands on consumers and the smart thing is to start catering to them too...if just to maintain a future of their back-end products.
Just a little bit of behind-the-lines story that might help you see it from a different perspective.

[goodone121]

Actually, though they have some things for the consumer, they are still mostly about business. Case in point: the IE Blog is for web developers.

[yankeeDDL]

Rasmasyean,

in some way you're rigth. Each browsers did introduce some new features and, typically, if popular, propagated to the other browsers quickly. I believe it was Opera to introduce the tabbed browsing, followed shortly afterwards by Firefox and IE7. I may be wrong: I don't know the exact chronology and it doesn't really matter.

And yes, IE does support more functionality and it is even somewhat more integrated iwth MS Office (you can open a Visio file in IE with a plugin). I think today there are less and less website that use them, because there are standards to do the same thing. I need to use IE on a website for resource management because with Firefox I cannot bring up a pop-up calendar correctly. It's the simplest thing, yet, it has been designed with custom IE commands, so FireFox does not understand it. Now, I know at least 20 other websites (think online booking, flight search ...) which have the same exact functionality but follow a standard format and FF has no problem opening them. So that "feature" of IE which, perhaps, simplifies how a celendar can be generated, is not at all a feature to me. It's an inconvenience, a pain in the neck. Of course it's not all like that, but still.

I do disagree on the popularity of IE being due to use in corporations. I work for a company with >10K employees and FireFox is the recommended browser by our IT group. They had hundreds of virus issues related to IE and they just cannot stand it. They have no reason to enforce any corporate policy via IE so the only feature that is unique to IE is not neede/used.

I think th eone and only reason why IE is the most popular browser is because it is embedded in Windows (and it has been for ages) and most users don't care to look elsewhere. At least not until something bad happens to them. Using IE does not necessarily mean you'll have problems. I never said or implied that. I'm sure many people get by without any issue. And I'm sure that there are also people with FF that experience security issues. But this is notthe point in argument. I think that Firefox has more potential, features, flexibility, speed and security of IE. Today. Adblock and noScript are simply the best tools to browse the internet: I cannot imagine seurfing without them. Yesterday the story was different. Tomorrow .. nobody knows. But today that's the situation, and until it changes, I will stick to Firefox and I think that everybody that does not have a specific reason to stick to IE, should do the same, to enjoy a betterweb-surfing experience.

[novartis]

Enough said, you say.

Sarcasm aside, but most people wouldn't read that very lengthy epic on your rants against MS and IE.

Wow. I log in after 10hrs and see almost 30 messages, most of them of desperate IE fans trying to defend their belowed browser.

It seems like you're the desperate and defensive one here, with your bible truth (?) on FF. Quite lengthy for a succinct defense, I might say.

Most ordinary enterprise users don't care THAT much and/or not that GEEKY to really rant on the eternal browser war issue. What's important to them it they get to log on to the websites that they visits and transact business on the web every godforsaken day of their lives. They're NOT THAT PARTICULAR.

Please. With the news of MS being a monopolistic entity being public property, it's no biggie for most users that they use IE and MS products. Heck, they're not that technically crippled as to be unaware of other browser choices. They're AWARE that there are choices, but they simply ignore that THERE ARE CHOICES out there, simply because ORDINARY USERS LIVE MEANINGFUL LIVES as to consider which browser to use as, simply put, QUAINT and IRRELEVANT. Besides, if the software they use CAN DO THE JOB, it's IRRELEVANT which software to use.

Microsoft may be rich, but NOT THAT RICH enough to buy off or pay countless hundreds of millions of people who find MS products that suit their needs. If it's

a. Free (comes with the system, no installation issues whatsoever )

b. Familiar (forget the lame defense of laziness and ignorance here. What's the point of using software that kills the learning curve and requires retraining? The features the other software will offer will more often be minimized by the counterproductive effect retraining requires)

c. GETS THE WORK DONE. (No further explanation needed.)

then why bother with other software?

Finally, it is all right to air one's opinion here, as this is a forum, but please remember that courtesy should be the primary rule in a forum like this. We respect your opinion, and we expect the same from people like you. It really is RUDE to lambast people for CHOICES they choose to make.

[rasmasyean]

bq. "yankeeDDL wrote: I do disagree on the popularity of IE being due to use in corporations. I work for a company with >10K employees and FireFox is the recommended browser by our IT group. They had hundreds of virus issues related to IE and they just cannot stand it. They have no reason to enforce any corporate policy via IE so the only feature that is unique to IE is not neede/used."

Well, then your company is the minority. Because stuff like this article is a common theme. It also depends a lot on how sophisticated and pervasive of an IT you need I would guess.

Analysts: IE entrenched in the enterprise
news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10108852-93.html

[yankeeDDL]

@Novartis,

I did not try to be sarcastic, and most definitely notto be rude or offensive against anybody. If you or anybody else felt that way, my apologies.

What you say with respect to the reasons why people use IE makes sense and I agree 100% that it's the reason why IE is the most popular browser today. However, marketshare was not covered by the articles, nor, as far as I noticed, by any of the replies in this discussion.
And it doesn't change the whether one browser is better than another.

I would like to answer your question though: "Why bother with other software?"
I find several reasons. I will list some, but there are plenty more:
A) Scenario A: I have several friends who don't have DSL. Because of this they seldom update their systems. There are highly technical articles that indicate how a fully patches IE is as secure as a fully patched FF (without noScript). BUt what about un-patched FF vs un-patched IE? Perhaps on an un-patched Windows?
This article (http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9132045) explains that there are millions of old/unpatched Windows systems out there, full of bugs ready to be exploited. These systems, using an old version of FireFox + NoScript would be much safer than using an old version of IE. That's a fact.
Conclusion: all "average" users that don't regularly update their PCs are better off using FireFox

B) You use IE and you're OK with it. It satisfies your needs. Then why changing? Tell me, do you think people buy a new cell phone because the ones they have no longer satisfy their needs? Or perhaps because they have more features? More battery life? Maybe a camera? Maybe an organizer?
Or let's say you had won a lottery and got a freePontiac Grand-Am. Decent car. Sporty. Above average. Somebody comes to you and offers you a free Porsche. Fully loaded. Do you say "No thank you, the Grand-am satisfies my needs"? Fact is, FF is more customizable, has tons of extra features, tricks, that can make your browsing experience safer and more enjoyable. And it comes at no cost to you. And please, learning curve ... to use Firefox (or IE for what matters)? Come on: if you know how to use "a" browser you can immediately use any of them. It may take a few days to learn all tips and tricks of each browser but that's hardly a learning curve.
Conclusion: all "average" users could take advantage of FF features. So why not doing so?

[yankeeDDL]

@Rasmasyean
> Well, then your company is the minority. Because stuff like this article is a common theme. It also depends a lot on how sophisticated and pervasive of an IT you need I would guess.



Analysts: IE entrenched in the enterprise
news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10108852-93.html

[/quote]

Probably. Doesn't change what I said: I disagree that the popularity of IE is driven by corporations. I think it's by far due to the fact that IE comes with Windows and people are just too lazy, or settled, or don't care to look for alternatives. See the message I just wrote to Novartis for details.
IE is the most popular browser. No question about it. The article that we're commenting on though, and the comments to it (at least mine) did not mention market share: only quality and performance.

[WinTard]

Why must there be a deathmatch?

I use IE8.0.6001.18702, FF3.0.10, and Chrome1.0.154.59.

Each one has its advantages, and not-so good points...

In 99.99% of cases, IE does the trick for me. I mainly use FF onto non-Windows platforms. And am getting warmed up about Chrome.

All the BS about the superiority of one browser over another, or vulnerabilities, pisses me off. My own intellect and experience indicates FF is no more secure than IE. The only nice thing is the open-source concept, and portability across heteregeneous platforms. The most secure browser to date is Chrome, because it was engineered that way from the ground-up. Unlike IE or FF which has its roots in the Netscape Navigator, which was pure crap.

Are people simpletons, meat-and-potatoes only, or burger-and-fries and a beer? What about sushi, caviar, champagne and strawberries?

Why restrict ourselves?

It is much harder to achieve an open-mind.

PS: I like imported beers too!

~~~~~~~~~~
To the man who only has a hammer in his toolkit, every problem looks like a nail.
~ Abraham Maslow

The hammer shatters glass but forges steel.
{Russian Proverb}

Vive la difference!
{French Proverb}

[glassmaster]

All I know is this: I had been using IE 7 (Vista SP1 64-bit, Core 2 Duo
T9300, 4 GB Ram), then IE 8 for a few months in one of its beta forms, then back
to IE 7 a couple months ago because my web surfing was slow and my laptop kept
disconnecting from my broadband connection (wireless, but tried Ethernet hard
wire to modem too), but I kept getting disconnected. Finally, a couple weeks ago I settled on IE
8 and stayed there, but the problems persisted. I'd surf for 10 minutes or so
and suddenly I had no connection, then had to go to great lengths waiting for an
OS reboot to get my connection back. I went to Dell support 3 times over a couple
of months and all 3 separate techs couldn't fix it. I also hassled with my
broadband provider (Cox) a few times, performed all kinds of virus and malware
scans (found nothing), took on Microsoft support, and spent hours feverishly
combing the web looking for answers, but to no avail, (although I found other
users with the same problems.) Becoming extremely disgruntled, I was considering
shipping my laptop back to Dell (still under warranty) and demand a new one that
worked, or else.

Then I got the bright idea to try Firefox, an idea that for some inexplicable
reason eluded me for months. Quite coincidentally, I also tried uninstalling the
free ZoneAlarm firewall I had used for years and installing Comodo's free
firewall. Success! The browser and firewall changes snapped my laptop back to
life, speeding up not only my web browsing, but my entire system as well. And
most importantly, I have had absolutely NO internet disconnections. Zip.

I'm not taking a stand on which is the better browser, or which is the better
firewall, I'm just conveying my experience. I hope this will help others
who have had the same problems.

[WinTard]

I had similar problems with IE7 and IE8 under Vista x64 and Panda antivirus. After ditching Panda in favor of free Avast x64, all problems gone! Yet I could in a CMD shell ping google all the time...??? I never bothered trying FF under Vista x64. My bad. But the root cause was the Panda AV and its heuristics to detect unknown viruses... Similar to yours with ZoneAlarm?

My logic is if you can use TCP/IP to ping a site, you have connectivity. The fact something blocks the browser, comes from somewhere else? Thus my attempts at changing AV. What led me to this conclusion was first uninstalling Panda, and everything worked quick and flawlessly. However, I am too chicken to cruise the Internet on one of my main gaming systems without any kind of protection...

I also find malwarebytes.org excellent at detecting any kind of malware, overlooked by Avast, or other online scanners. Yet it is unobstrusive, as it is run on demand.

And BTW, I still use Panda on x86 platforms, with impeccable results. Now I wish if a protection mechanism blocks something, a feedback message of sorts would indicate so...

[glassmaster]

Quite the conundrum, no? I knew someone would respond to my post. The really funny thing is you can't find an answer on the web anywhere, at least I couldn't, and no one at Dell or MS had a clue. Go figure.

Yes, Avast is good. I have been using it for a couple years, so my successful combination is Avast and Comodo with FF. I had used Panda a few years back, circa 2003, but had too many probs with it also.

Thanks for the link for the malware scan...

[yankeeDDL]

@WinTard,

I can give you a couple of reasons for using only one browser should be preferrable:
a) Better use of resources.
I did a little experiment (by no means this wants to be a performance comparison, but should give us some ballpark figures to talk about.
Start IE7: uses ~23MB of RAM (note: no RSS feeds, no add-on: it's "clean").
Load 9 tabs on IE (these are my default tabs that I open every time I start Firefox): memory consumption goes to ~208MB and stays there.
Start FF3.010: uses ~37MB of Ram (all add-ons on, 24 RSS feeds active)
Load the same exact 9 tabs: memory peaks at ~150MB and drops to ~134MB after a couple of seconds (possible explanation for delta, other than efficiency in memory management, is that I have AdBlock on FF which prevents advertisements from loading: saves bandwidth and memory)

My conclusion: any browser would require a noticeable cunk of your ram (I'd say >100MB for 'regular' use) and most certainly some % of your CPU time. Using 2 browser introduces some obvious inefficiency and uses more than the minimum resources that you can get by with. I value my resources: normally I have several programs running and on a laptop having extra free ram makes a big difference.

b) Practicality and efficiency
I do a heavy use of a browser (at least that's they way I see it: don't really have many references): I have several RSS Feeds, tabs with webmail (Gmail, Yahoo), Streaming stock quotes, some Web 2.0 websites (some of which support web-based IM): and that's the baseline. Normally there are quite a few extra tabs.
Using one single browser allows me to easily get an overview of what is being updated. FF also has add-ons that allow you to get a quick overview of all open tabs (check this out: https://addons.mozil...fox/addon/8879) which is quite convenient.

I said in a previous post that competintion is beneficial. The 'war' between IE and Netscape ages ago brought several advances to the browser. After Netscape was defeated IE sat on its IE5 for years, till FFcame along. And yet, Opera and even Chrome brought much innovations in the last few years, for everyone's to benefit. But this was beyond the point being discussed in the article.

[shekharc]

@rasmasyean

Quote

Maybe you think they all look the same...but China is not Korea.
http://www.digitimes...90421PD201.html

>

Quote

And considering that US is the number 1 spam generator (where FireFox has the most popularity)...
http://www.marshal8e..._statistics.asp

>

Quote

Botnets have little to do with browsers.

>

Quote

First...get your facts straight instead of making things up.

I can't imagine if someone can be so stupid to make this comment. To get your understanding corrected, think of the following:

The S.Korea is on No.6 for producing spam, somewhere 5% of the worldwide spam (2009 data). How about the number of computers S.Korea has?? Take a look at this link: http://www.nationmas...com/red/pie/medpercom-media-personal-computers
This says that it is 3.3% . Besides, this is 2004's data. Given that number of computers are around double of what used to be in 2004, the share of Korea becomes somewhere around 1.7% of the total computers worldwide.

Conclusion:: Infected computers in S.Korea are around 3 times more than the average.

And this is all because of high adaptability rate of the insecure IE in S.Korea.

For the number of firefox usage in USA/Europe, you are comparing absolute numbers. Think that in terms of "worldwide" %, not the % usage in that country itself.

Quote

And make sure you know what you are talking about. This is not MacWorld where most ppl don't know anything about computers. ;)

Well dude, only thing I would say here is you have half-baked knowledge of the things....this is dangerous than having no knowledge. refrain yourself from posting comments unless you really understand the things....otherwise, you will be ridiculing yourself in front of the world....and M$ won't come to save you.

And yeah, this is not MacWorld...this is PCWorld, where half-knowledgeable M$-fanboys exist, like you do.

[novartis]

@shekarc

Thank God for enlightened persons like you, without whom pallid, boring and lifeless fora like this one wouldn't be alive. Thank God for self-righteous, Bible-toting persons like you, who consider opinions not similar to yours treasonous, with people expressing those very different opinions automatically imposed the death penalty.

FYI, Mr Mozilla FANBOY, we respect your fanatic zeal for anything anti-Microsoft, but that doesn't mean other people are like you. You keep on insisting and edifying the concept of CHOICE, with high praises for your browser of CHOICE, but the way you put it sounds like you are IMPOSING your choice on helpless and ignorant people around you. You criticize MS and characterize the hapless people who use its products as stupid. You praise the virtue of having choices OTHER THAN MS, yet the fact that you parade your CHOICE among others while BELITTLING/MOCKING their CHOICE is a tantamount to imposition (read: MONOPOLY), the very thing that you accuse MS of doing.

You don't have to use IE or any MS products for that matter. MS can never force you to do that. As you keep on ranting, you HAVE the CHOICE NOT TO. But leave them in peace, those people who are HAPPY with what MS offers.

I shouldn't be giving your comments on poor M$ fanboys a cursory thought, but your apparent RUDENESS and KNOW-IT-ALL attitude incites me to respond.

It's a choice people make, that you make, and that's it. The author simply expressed his opinions on which browser he prefers to use. You are FREE to express your opinions, but that does not give you the RIGHT to express those very same opinions at the expense of belittling and mocking other people whose opinions differ from yours.

[TFerguson]

With all due respect it sounds like you guys were paid off to write this review. I'm actually a proponent of MS IE. I thought 7 was great! But 8 is a little terd! I'm a power user so I won't waste clock cycles on a GUI. My cpu has to work not look good. Try ie8 with windows classic themes. What a joke. Ie8 will not 'back up' with less than 2 clicks half the time. Now throw in the complexity issue. Surfing the web should be safe and simple. Ie8 adds sooooo much unnecessary BS. I can see people who aren't power users like my parents starting to get confused with all the setup and options and little crap that is always popping up. COMPUTERS ARE SUPPOSED TO MAKE LIFE EASIER M$!!!! Where's the simple 'point and click' version? I couldn't care less about 'compatability mode' and 'accelerators'. I WANT A SIMPLE OPTION!!!!!

[rasmasyean]

So let me see. You're claiming that Korea jumped up from 2% to 5% of world spam in 4 months...without any proof.
Then you're using 2004 statics of PC's to make an agument and trying to extrapolate some hypothetical number...without any proof.
And your assumption is that Koreans (the most advanced online civilization maybe match by only Japan) never bought an extra computer in 5 years while the whole world doubled their usage.
And you're telling ME that I have to improve my understanding of statistics??? This is what we call a denial and evading defense. LOL. Whatever man. Go back to school!
EDIT:
Also, nice try in fudging your data. The lastest that site's data has is 15.9% for Korea, and that's in 2005! Did you get away with cheating your way through school? You must have had some dumb teachers then...which explains a lot, anyway.
www.nationmaster.com/red/pie/med[uper[/u]com-media-personal-computers&date=2005]

[shekharc]

Quote

So let me see. You're claiming that Korea jumped up from 2% to 5% of world spam in 4 months...without any proof.

Well, dude, take a look at the link [ http://www.marshal8e..._statistics.asp ] you provided. This is up-to-date statistics, until last week. It says that S.Korea was the 4th biggest spam producer country closing to 5% of the total world spam.

Quote

Then you're using 2004 statics of PC's to make an agument and trying to extrapolate some hypothetical number...without any proof.

Hmmm....2004, a bit old. Take a look here: http://www.c-i-a.com/pr0109.htm . This is the statistics until end of 2008. It says that the South Korea owns 2.93% of the world computers.

Quote

And your assumption is that Koreans (the most advanced online civilization maybe match by only Japan) never bought an extra computer in 5 years while the whole world doubled their usage.

You need to think in broader terms, dude. The S.Korea is a kind of "saturated" country in terms of computers. You also somehow justified it by saying that it is the most advanced online civilization of the Earth. Even if they buy few, it's not going to affect the numbers so much. On the other hand, the rise of countries like China, India, South-east Asia are going to influence the statistics more. This was the basis of my extrapolation based on 2004's data. But it seems to be taking 2-3 more years before to realize it.

Quote

And you're telling ME that I have to improve my understanding of statistics??? This is what we call a denial and evading defense. LOL. Whatever man. Go back to school!

>

Quote

EDIT:
Also, nice try in fudging your data. The lastest that site's data has is 15.9% for Korea, and that's in 2005! Did you get away with cheating your way through school? You must have had some dumb teachers then...which explains a lot, anyway. http://forums.pcworl...ticons/wink.gif
http://www.nationmas...com/red/pie/medpercom-media-personal-computers&date=2005

That 2005 data is WRONG and that's pretty OBVIOUS. And since you couldn't figure it out, let me give you a hint. Can any country own 136% of the total world computers?? Take a look on that 2005 data. There, the USA does :-) [By the way, did you pass your maths exams by cheating?? I am now pretty sure of that!]
That's why, I had given you link to the CORRECT 2004 data.

So, here is the conclusion: The S.Korea owns 2.93% of the total world computer but produces 5% of the spam worldwide. And, as one can predict, this is because of high adaptability rate of the insecure IE in that country.

Well, as the conclusion is established properly, you need to do a homework I give you: Do some elementary maths, especially, problems related to calculation of %. And more than that, refrain yourself from making comments on global forums, to prevent yourself being looked ridiculous.