What browser do you use (again)?

JediToren · Post by **JediToren** » 2005-03-12 03:10am

Where are all these IE-only websites? Those who dogmatically defend Microsoft over its vastly superior competitors always reference "all those sites where you need IE," yet in five years of not using IE (except to test my websites) I've never found one. Those who claim that there are lots of sites where IE is required never post links. The most I've found are minor iritations, like on the official Star Wars Celebration website, the navigation button images don't line up perfectly.
Even Microsoft's own websites renders just fine in other browsers. Assasin, if you're going to claim that "alot of sites arent compltible," then you better fucking prove it. By prove it, I mean post some real websites like businesses or schools, not two or three "Joe Blow's Geoshities page."

The notion that competitors' products have fewer/no viruses or security hacks because they are a minority is a baseless argument. If Firefox has 5% of the browser market, how come 5% of the hacks aren't for Firefox? How come Apache, which serves 67% of the websites doesn't account 67% of the successful hacks? Where is Apache's equivelant of Code Red? Why does Microsoft's IIS, which only hosts 20% of websites, account for 60% of the sucessful hacks?
I don't mean to drag this thread off topic by bringing up web servers, but this is a problem that runs through all of Microsoft's products. They have way more than their fair share of exploits and viruses.

Your argument reminds of a post I saw years ago when the Q3A vs. UT debate was hot shit. A gamer defending Q3A's lack of new game modes, weapons, features, etc. claimed "Quake is better because its Quake. It's just quake. Who cares if there is nothing new, the mod community will take care of that."
IE is always behind the times when it comes to new features. All other browsers have had tabbed browsing and built-in pop-up blockers for YEARS. IE's rendering speed is glacial at best. This is akin to someone re-inventing the Wright brothers aircraft and then proudly declarig to the world that they have discovered the secret of mechnical flight.

Assassin X · Post by **Assassin X** » 2005-03-12 05:17am

Actually as for Active X you can choose to disable it so things just dont auto download or auto run. Mines set so it ask's. And if i say NO i usually cant access a site or it still can access a site but theres like an ad missing or something so it doesnt bug me.

As for trying other browsers i tried Firefox because my nephew said he liked it. I didnt see any thing special about it. Same with Opera which i also tried. I already had Ad Blocking and other programs like that...etc. PLus its other feaetures are just that...extra junk. All i need is something to go to websites and save favorites not a super customizble thing with lots of gadgets and stuff on it.

And as for problems with IE. I can honeslty say i havent had any since i got XP. XP isnt crap if you configure it and mess around with it right. I got a totaly stable system and IE runs perfectly.

As for hackers. Im sure Firefox or Opera is better. but honestly if a hacker REALLY wants in he'll get in. Everyone knows that. Doesnt matter how good the security is or what kinf of pc you got or what your browser is. Same goes for viruses. I havent had a virus through IE in well over almost year and a half. Although once every few months i get one in an email.

Anyways theres really no need to argue over whats better. I was just going by what other were saying about the new IE coming up. I might switch to a new browser anyways and give them a better chance. But i still have to figure out which ones better.

Dillon · Post by **Dillon** » 2005-03-12 05:50am

Assassin X wrote:As for hackers. Im sure Firefox or Opera is better. but honestly if a hacker REALLY wants in he'll get in. Everyone knows that. Doesnt matter how good the security is or what kinf of pc you got or what your browser is. Same goes for viruses.

Yeah, seriously man. This applies to so many situations. For example, the U.S. military. Why bother armoring its naval vessels. Might as well makes them out of wood, since if an enemy wants to destroy it, he'll find a way.

JediToren · Post by **JediToren** » 2005-03-12 07:53am

Assassin X wrote:PLus its other feaetures are just that...extra junk.

So any features that rival software has are useless or irrelevant, at least until Microsoft copies it for their software, "there by making it even better."

Assassin X wrote:As for hackers. Im sure Firefox or Opera is better. but honestly if a hacker REALLY wants in he'll get in. Everyone knows that. Doesnt matter how good the security is or what kinf of pc you got or what your browser is.

So it's either totally secure or useless and a complete waste of time? I guess that means you don't use a firewall since it isn't perfect, and there is no sense in running an anti-virus program since it won't catch everything. And why bother keeping winblows up to date since even the few security holes it patches won't make the system perfectly impenatrable.

So IE is better because it has fewer features and less security, because added security and featuers are useless anyway.

Assassin X · Post by **Assassin X** » 2005-03-12 02:20pm

JediToren wrote: So any features that rival software has are useless or irrelevant, at least until Microsoft copies it for their software, "there by making it even better."

No. Then IE will have the use less features too. Then it will be "better" likes everyone says. Im not saying the features are useless for everyone, i just find them useless for me. I like things simple i dont a thousand applications on my computer to run it. Like my friend has IE and as a fancy toolbar installed with all these fancy buttons that do all these fancy thigns that open up diffrent programs like a clock and a calculator and a audio player. Thats just gizmos i dont want.

JediToren wrote: So it's either totally secure or useless and a complete waste of time?.

No. My system is secure.... really secure but i still know im not invincible. I hear people online talk about all there fancy firewalls and top notch security and really it its useless if someone really wanted to get it.

Now im saying HAVE security. Obviously. But just remember if somebody really wanted to get its not impossible. We dont have PCs like the FBI. We can hold off hackers unless one of them really wanted to get in. So as you see im for security (duh) but i know its still bypassable.

darthdavid · Post by **darthdavid** » 2005-03-12 03:15pm

Assassin X wrote:Now im saying HAVE security. Obviously. But just remember if somebody really wanted to get its not impossible. We dont have PCs like the FBI. We can hold off hackers unless one of them really wanted to get in. So as you see im for security (duh) but i know its still bypassable.

Concession accecpted. You just admitted that it was good to be more secure and you've alreadly admitted that firefox and opera are both more secure than IE. You loose smacknuts.

Praxis · Post by **Praxis** » 2005-03-12 03:27pm

As for hackers. Im sure Firefox or Opera is better. but honestly if a hacker REALLY wants in he'll get in. Everyone knows that. Doesnt matter how good the security is or what kinf of pc you got or what your browser is.

Brilliant reasoning!!!

Lets apply that logic. If someone wants to break in your house and rob you of everything, they'll find a way. So lets leave your door unlocked. And your car. And hey, if someone wants to steal your wallet, they will, so just leave your wallet lying around everywhere!

Praxis · Post by **Praxis** » 2005-03-12 03:31pm

Assassin X wrote:The new IE is going to have all the features of those other brwosers and then some. There by making it even better. I didnt really believe it but im reading about it more and more. The most recent artivle was (last months?) Popular Science which compared the Browsers. It said IE was bad bet the new version would make IE the best ranked one when its released.

WRONG! I can say that, because I AM USING the next version of IE. At least the current version.

Popup blocking is there. The new GUI is HORRIBLE, but hey, its an alpha, GUI always changes. And I'll ignore bugs, those'll be fixed. And performance issues.

But guess what? No tab browsing support. No extensions. No ad blocking. No image blocking. NOTHING that IE SP2 doesn't have other than CSS2 support, PNG-24 support, and a few other little things.

I finally went and installed FireFox on my computer running the Longhorn Alpha.

AND THE ULTIMATE RESPONSE TO YOUR "IE7 OWNS ALL" RANT:
IE7 is for Longhorn. Not XP. Go buy a new OS.

In the mean time theres alot of problems with the other browsers like alot of sites arent compltible with them which is a big problem with me because i have a lot of sites i like to go to that say they dont work with other browsers.

Name one.
A lot have that disclaimer, but look at Yahoo. It says, "Will not work with Mac or UNIX based OSes or non-IE browsers" in the games section.

I go on my UNIX-based Mac, running the Safari browser, and play the games. ROFL.

darthdavid · Post by **darthdavid** » 2005-03-12 03:40pm

Praxis wrote:

AND THE ULTIMATE RESPONSE TO YOUR "IE7 OWNS ALL" RANT:
IE7 is for Longhorn. Not XP. Go buy a new OS.

Not to nitpick, but I seem to remember Microshaft announcing that IE7 would be for XP too. But that doesn't detract from your other points in the slightest.

Praxis · Post by **Praxis** » 2005-03-12 04:08pm

Interesting, kinda of like they announced they would be back-porting WinFS. I hadn't heard that on IE7 though.

But if they do the same thing as they announced for WinFS, IE7 for XP won't come out until AFTER Longhorn has been released (i.e. 2007). So its a long way off.

They'll probably use IE7 as a reason to upgrade, and then back-port it

Assassin X · Post by **Assassin X** » 2005-03-12 07:31pm

Boy you people sure pick on people alot for their opinions.

I hate microshit. I use IE. I just find it easier then Firefox or Opera. Its my own stupidity if i want to use it and its new upgrade coming out so dont try and convince me otherwise. Anyways i mentioned i might switch because i want to give them another chance.

And as for the security thing again like i said. I didnt say DONT have security, you put those words in my mouth. I just said HAVE securty but no matter what nothing is invincible. I didnt say leave your PC open. Please protect it make it harder for those pricks that want to hack inside it but remember theres always that one guy out there that REALLY wants to get inside bad enough he will and no matter how good the security is he will get inside and it sucks.

See thats all im saying. It suck that are security isnt good enough to stop a relaly good hacker that REALLY wants in. But thne again the odds of a REALLY good hacker REALLY wanting in are rare it could still happen.

Ace Pace · Post by **Ace Pace** » 2005-03-13 12:13am

Assassin X wrote:Boy you people sure pick on people alot for their opinions.

Okey, thats just stupid, read the fucking sentence at the top of the forum.

Get your fill of sci-fi, science, and mockery of stupid people

Their doing their job.

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2005-03-13 12:47am

Assassin X wrote:
And as for the security thing again like i said. I didnt say DONT have security, you put those words in my mouth. I just said HAVE securty but no matter what nothing is invincible. I didnt say leave your PC open. Please protect it make it harder for those pricks that want to hack inside it but remember theres always that one guy out there that REALLY wants to get inside bad enough he will and no matter how good the security is he will get inside and it sucks.

See thats all im saying. It suck that are security isnt good enough to stop a relaly good hacker that REALLY wants in. But thne again the odds of a REALLY good hacker REALLY wanting in are rare it could still happen.

that's idiotic reasoning. the vast majority of all "hackers" out there are what is otherwise known as script kiddies. these have little to no real programming skills, but use programs others have created to break into peoples' systems to make themselves feel "l337". someone who's skilled enough to work around a good amount of the blockouts in place on most secured PCs isn't going to want to waste his time fucking with some random end user's system without a reason.

but, having a well protected system and using browsers that don't have the numerous security holes that IE has will keep out the majority of script kiddies. otherwise any 14 year old with a modem could fuck up your system. these are the ones that you'd want to keep out.

Assassin X · Post by **Assassin X** » 2005-03-13 12:57am

I got the point already:

Opera and an other browser but IE = Safer then IE will ever be
IE = More holes(security holes) then cheese and unsafe.

I know im unsafe but dont care. Like i said my pcs as secure as i can get. Only thing it needs to be any more secure is a better browser but im not that worried because the odds of a hacker actually picking my computer are slim. But seeing as how im getting a new browser probably i guess that wont matter.

Praxis · Post by **Praxis** » 2005-03-13 01:21am

You ever read about the experiment? Connect a PC to the internet, open IE, leave it running online for a day or two. It'll be hacked.

The odds are better than you think.

Vertigo1 · Post by **Vertigo1** » 2005-03-13 02:19am

Mozilla 1.7.5 and FireFox 1.0.1

I use Mozilla at home while I keep FireFox on my thumbdrive while surfing on campus. I absolutely refuse to use Idiot Exploiter more than I absolutely have to. (windows update)

Ace Pace · Post by **Ace Pace** » 2005-03-13 07:11am

Praxis wrote:You ever read about the experiment? Connect a PC to the internet, open IE, leave it running online for a day or two. It'll be hacked.

The odds are better than you think.

There was another survey, I think on PC magazine, of a test.

A new Red Hat equipted Linux PC, a Mac OS 10, a Windows XP SP1, Windows XP Sp2.

The SP1 got hacked in 30 minutes, the SP2 in 2 days, the Red Hat in 10, the Mac OS, I forgot.

All those were running standerd config, no changes, so its pretty much what most people use.

JediToren · Post by **JediToren** » 2005-03-13 04:51pm

Assassin X wrote:Boy you people sure pick on people alot for their opinions.

You made several assertions in your first post in this thread and you are expected to defend them. You claimed that "New browsers are a bad idea," and that IE isn't less secure than Opera or Firefox (which you have admitted was incorrect). You also claimed that IE7 was the best and that there were lots of sites that only worked in IE.

Assassin X wrote:And as for the security thing again like i said. I didnt say DONT have security, you put those words in my mouth.

You claimed that in spite of the fact that Opera and Firefox have superior security to IE, that is no reason to switch because nothing is totally secure and if someone really wants to they can still break into your system. We simply applied your logic to other situations to demonstrate the absurdity of that argument.

althornin · Post by **althornin** » 2005-03-15 12:11am

Ace Pace wrote:
Praxis wrote:You ever read about the experiment? Connect a PC to the internet, open IE, leave it running online for a day or two. It'll be hacked.

The odds are better than you think.
There was another survey, I think on PC magazine, of a test.

A new Red Hat equipted Linux PC, a Mac OS 10, a Windows XP SP1, Windows XP Sp2.

The SP1 got hacked in 30 minutes, the SP2 in 2 days, the Red Hat in 10, the Mac OS, I forgot.

All those were running standerd config, no changes, so its pretty much what most people use.

Ok, leaving IE running has fuck-all to do with whether or not you get hacked.
If you arent BROWSING with the browser, it isn't causing extra vulnerabilities.

A system without IE running and one with IE running with www.google.com open are the same, security wise, from the outside.

Most "hacks" occur because people don't patch the OS. period.

note: written from Firefox, because I use my browser - and there are vulnerabiliteis that can be exploited when visiting sites using IE.