Comments on: Microsoft and Mozilla Disagree on Browser Security http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2007/12/05/microsoft-and-mozilla-disagree-on-browser-security/ News, opinion, and fresh thinking for web developers and designers. The official podcast of sitepoint.com. Sat, 20 Mar 2010 19:42:52 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: PatrickSamphire http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2007/12/05/microsoft-and-mozilla-disagree-on-browser-security/comment-page-1/#comment-547080 PatrickSamphire Mon, 10 Dec 2007 11:24:48 +0000 http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2007/12/05/microsoft-and-mozilla-disagree-on-browser-security/#comment-547080 Security and standards compliance are both important, but far more important is a browser that doesn't crash all the time. Like azn_romeo_4u, I've found that Firefox crashes all the time on a wide variety of sites. I love the various development plugins I have for Firefox, but I'm switching increasingly to Opera for general browsing. The sooner Firefox sorts the basics out, the happier I'll be. Security and standards compliance are both important, but far more important is a browser that doesn’t crash all the time. Like azn_romeo_4u, I’ve found that Firefox crashes all the time on a wide variety of sites. I love the various development plugins I have for Firefox, but I’m switching increasingly to Opera for general browsing. The sooner Firefox sorts the basics out, the happier I’ll be.

]]> By: kgun http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2007/12/05/microsoft-and-mozilla-disagree-on-browser-security/comment-page-1/#comment-541817 kgun Fri, 07 Dec 2007 17:38:36 +0000 http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2007/12/05/microsoft-and-mozilla-disagree-on-browser-security/#comment-541817 The browser that will be first on implementing more XML technologies may get an increased market share in the future. My ranking of importance: 1. Security. 2. Accessibility. 3. Mobility. 4. XML compatibility. The browser that will be first on implementing more XML technologies may get an increased market share in the future.

My ranking of importance:
1. Security.
2. Accessibility.
3. Mobility.
4. XML compatibility.

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2007/12/05/microsoft-and-mozilla-disagree-on-browser-security/comment-page-1/#comment-541062 Anonymous Fri, 07 Dec 2007 08:30:35 +0000 http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2007/12/05/microsoft-and-mozilla-disagree-on-browser-security/#comment-541062 I am really worried about security. I am also concerned about utility. But I have NO interest at all in functionality for functionality's sake. I'm not a follower of "Top Gear" for computers. I "drive" in the real world, for the prosaic reason of getting from A-B quickly and comfortably. I changed to FF because it works, but mostly because I didn't and don't trust Microsoft. Prior to FF et al MS didn't care about security or even utility. They provided functionality and it was up to users to navigate around their messy, tangled, bloated software. They were a monopoly and because IT was/is the future, and there was nowhere else to go, were making money hand over fist. Without FF et al we would all suffer still. Whether you think MS is "good" or "evil", nonetheless it still remains an absolute truth that "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely". Monopolies are bad! The problem is that the development of the "free world's" consumer protection mechanisms haven't kept pace with the new world of IT in any of its forms or applications. We should support the alternatives to protect ourselves. We will have a free market in IT, and the protection that it affords, when MS alternatives become firmly embedded in all markets vertically and horizontally. Twenty-five years on and we still have to play on the old DOS playing field! Is the new MS-DOS which everything is built upon the internal combustion engine of IT? I found this on wikipedia: "1876: Nikolaus Otto, working with Gottlieb Daimler and Wilhelm Maybach, developed a practical four-stroke cycle (Otto cycle) engine. The German courts, however, did not hold his patent to cover all in-cylinder compression engines or even the four-stroke cycle, and after this decision, in-cylinder compression became universal." Is it the MS patents that are the problem? I am really worried about security. I am also concerned about utility. But I have NO interest at all in functionality for functionality’s sake. I’m not a follower of “Top Gear” for computers. I “drive” in the real world, for the prosaic reason of getting from A-B quickly and comfortably. I changed to FF because it works, but mostly because I didn’t and don’t trust Microsoft. Prior to FF et al MS didn’t care about security or even utility. They provided functionality and it was up to users to navigate around their messy, tangled, bloated software. They were a monopoly and because IT was/is the future, and there was nowhere else to go, were making money hand over fist. Without FF et al we would all suffer still. Whether you think MS is “good” or “evil”, nonetheless it still remains an absolute truth that “Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely”. Monopolies are bad! The problem is that the development of the “free world’s” consumer protection mechanisms haven’t kept pace with the new world of IT in any of its forms or applications. We should support the alternatives to protect ourselves. We will have a free market in IT, and the protection that it affords, when MS alternatives become firmly embedded in all markets vertically and horizontally. Twenty-five years on and we still have to play on the old DOS playing field! Is the new MS-DOS which everything is built upon the internal combustion engine of IT? I found this on wikipedia:
“1876: Nikolaus Otto, working with Gottlieb Daimler and Wilhelm Maybach, developed a practical four-stroke cycle (Otto cycle) engine. The German courts, however, did not hold his patent to cover all in-cylinder compression engines or even the four-stroke cycle, and after this decision, in-cylinder compression became universal.”
Is it the MS patents that are the problem?

]]> By: Arthur http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2007/12/05/microsoft-and-mozilla-disagree-on-browser-security/comment-page-1/#comment-540480 Arthur Thu, 06 Dec 2007 23:21:02 +0000 http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2007/12/05/microsoft-and-mozilla-disagree-on-browser-security/#comment-540480 Quite frankly the war of words about which browser is best leaves me completely cold. As a simple user who wants to browse and put up a small web site of my own, what matters is whether or not I can do what I want and easily. I have both browsers on my computer but I use IE7 most of the time because the size of the text is right for my eyes. Standard FireFox is too small for my eyes and the next size up is too big for my screen. Basically I use it to check that my web pages can be read by avid FireFox users. Quite frankly the war of words about which browser is best leaves me completely cold. As a simple user who wants to browse and put up a small web site of my own, what matters is whether or not I can do what I want and easily. I have both browsers on my computer but I use IE7 most of the time because the size of the text is right for my eyes. Standard FireFox is too small for my eyes and the next size up is too big for my screen. Basically I use it to check that my web pages can be read by avid FireFox users.

]]> By: azn_romeo_4u http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2007/12/05/microsoft-and-mozilla-disagree-on-browser-security/comment-page-1/#comment-540407 azn_romeo_4u Thu, 06 Dec 2007 22:40:12 +0000 http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2007/12/05/microsoft-and-mozilla-disagree-on-browser-security/#comment-540407 my firefox crashed about 15 times last month O_O Firefox ain't the next jesus is all I have to say. IE isn't either, but I gotta give IE some props were doing a pretty damn good job with IE7. my firefox crashed about 15 times last month O_O Firefox ain’t the next jesus is all I have to say. IE isn’t either, but I gotta give IE some props were doing a pretty damn good job with IE7.

]]> By: jms1989 http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2007/12/05/microsoft-and-mozilla-disagree-on-browser-security/comment-page-1/#comment-540279 jms1989 Thu, 06 Dec 2007 21:17:20 +0000 http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2007/12/05/microsoft-and-mozilla-disagree-on-browser-security/#comment-540279 I don't care how many browsers are out there. I use Firefox simply because it's free and it doesn't bug up too much. I don't need a chart to tell me Firefox is safer then IE, just as I don't need a chart telling me Linux is safer then windows. I already know. Just as I don't care if Opera is safer then Firefox, Firefox has more functionality. I don’t care how many browsers are out there. I use Firefox simply because it’s free and it doesn’t bug up too much. I don’t need a chart to tell me Firefox is safer then IE, just as I don’t need a chart telling me Linux is safer then windows. I already know. Just as I don’t care if Opera is safer then Firefox, Firefox has more functionality.

]]> By: wwb_99 http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2007/12/05/microsoft-and-mozilla-disagree-on-browser-security/comment-page-1/#comment-537999 wwb_99 Thu, 06 Dec 2007 00:09:30 +0000 http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2007/12/05/microsoft-and-mozilla-disagree-on-browser-security/#comment-537999 IE.NEXT now <a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2007/12/05/internet-explorer-8.aspx" rel="nofollow">has a name</a>. IE.NEXT now has a name.

]]> By: 200ok http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2007/12/05/microsoft-and-mozilla-disagree-on-browser-security/comment-page-1/#comment-536879 200ok Wed, 05 Dec 2007 12:50:07 +0000 http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2007/12/05/microsoft-and-mozilla-disagree-on-browser-security/#comment-536879 Interesting that neither side wants to admit that Opera <a href="http://weblog.200ok.com.au/2007/01/browser-security-by-fix-rate.html" rel="nofollow">beats them both</a> in terms of its fix record. Interesting that neither side wants to admit that Opera beats them both in terms of its fix record.

]]> By: Gezprila http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2007/12/05/microsoft-and-mozilla-disagree-on-browser-security/comment-page-1/#comment-536321 Gezprila Wed, 05 Dec 2007 06:59:36 +0000 http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2007/12/05/microsoft-and-mozilla-disagree-on-browser-security/#comment-536321 (web)developers should care about both security and improved standards compliance! Everybody should demand secure browsers. This is even more important for the "normal" user. I use and support Firefox, and I think it's foolish to just think of the support for standard compliance, and don't care about security. This is the best way for Explorer to take a bigger share of the market. (web)developers should care about both security and improved standards compliance! Everybody should demand secure browsers. This is even more important for the “normal” user.

I use and support Firefox, and I think it’s foolish to just think of the support for standard compliance, and don’t care about security. This is the best way for Explorer to take a bigger share of the market.

]]>