SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678
Results 176 to 198 of 198
  1. #176
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    4,328
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Wait a minute...

    Quote Originally Posted by benlowry
    Statistically it doesn't look like Firefox is going anywhere. Based on the last 6 months of statistics from an impartial site tracking a wide range of sites...
    ...and advertising one of them. There's a big Microsoft ad near the top right corner of the page. So much for your "impartial" site.

  2. #177
    SitePoint Wizard bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Vancouver BC Canada
    Posts
    2,037
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by akashra
    I frequently can't stand seeing this argument just sheerly because of what a load of BS it generally is.

    ~~~~~~~~

    The number of time I've found apps I like for the most part that are OpenSource, but there's a few things that suck and I want to improve, but can't, because the coding is either so poor or the structure is just so obscure that you need a week to figure out their design is just crazy. Add to the fact it usually has little or no documentation or comments whatsoever.


    ~~~~~~~~
    That's an interesting observation and certainly one shared by many of those oposed to things that don't fit in the Microsoft box. It's quite the opposite of my experiences. Maybe I'm lucky because I've had pretty good experiences with Open Source apps and the code that I've used.

    *I am also quite familiar with MS Development products as well and began writing VB in version 3. I'm still an avid user of MS technologies however I think variety is the spice of life and don't believe in keeping all of my eggs in one basket.

    What I can't understand is why so many IE fans or MS fans or whatever they are get so bent out of shape about Open Source applications or the Open Source model of development. The reason I got involved in development in the first place (1979-80 8 bit assembler) was to build applications. If I want to share my code base with a community and perhaps have others extend it and make it better isn't that progress?

    My opinion is biased being more towards the Open Source point of view but it seems to me that Open Source advocates present a well thought out discussion for the use of applications that they feel are an improvement. Whereas the 'extreme' MS proponents come back furious and with fierce determination to squash any reference to the conversation that might have people look at alternatives regardless of the facts. It's quite uncivilized, lacks any fact based discussion and doesn't shine a very bright light on their intellect.

    * It's a bit like watching someone with their eyes closed and ears plugged, dancing around yelling "la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la.... I can't hear you la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la.... "

    Geosite: Your points are valid and it seems you have done some decent research that checks out but unfortunately they aren't getting through to your debating partner. His mind is made up and that's that.

    POINT: I must comment about browser flaws and security and that is that of all of the flaws reported for IE vs. FF last year more flaws in IE were at a critical level than those in FF, most recently December 13th 2005 LINK

    To say that IE didn't have any flaws in 2005 would be a gross misstatement as pretty much every month IE gets patched and there are still important flaws open. Here's the history for one of my machines over 4 months:
    Dec 14 IE patch
    Oct 15 IE patch
    Oct 14 IE patch
    Sept 8 IE patch
    Sept 8 IE patch
    Andrew Wasson | www.lunadesign.org
    Principal / Internet Development

  3. #178
    SitePoint Evangelist
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    515
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by DelvarWorld
    I'm probably one of the 1% of Sitepoint who actually prefers IE. It runs faster for me, I really have no use for tabbed browsing, and actually I've found that Firefox displays more webpages incorrectly than IE does, but that's probably just me. And I've never had any spyware problems. It's been said, it's not the browser, it's the user. Just don't be stupid. To me, FF is like the rubber covers on the sockets. I don't mind them being there, but I'm not gonna go licking any sockets if they aren't there.
    It seems to me webmastesr prefer firefox...they tend to have this "stick-it-to-man" type of mentality. I notice with webmasters, opensource is always suppported...

    I like IE like the 90% of the world that uses it. has anyone been to bloggins sites like myspace, blackplanet and those types of site? Like 99% of those pages are designed for IE...

    Standard this and standard that. Why isn't the 90% standard? That's seems whack to me. It seems to me like it's a "I'm better than you because I can code this type of standard so you should use a browser that displays my standard correct coding"

    As long as you don't do stupid things like go to porno sites all day long and download everything that popups at you, IE is okay.
    FlyffWorld.com - Online Gaming MMORPG
    AdTalks.com - Publisher/Advertising Network Review
    Cursors - Cursors-4U.com

  4. #179
    morphine for a wooden leg randem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    .chicago.il.us
    Posts
    957
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    We found that Firefox is not necessarily a more secure browser implementation. It simply has fewer features to attack.
    Fewer features? How about these: http://www.xulplanet.com/ndeakin/arts/reasons.html
    ----Adopt-a-Sig----
    Your message here!

  5. #180
    SitePoint Wizard bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Vancouver BC Canada
    Posts
    2,037
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by azn_romeo_4u
    Standard this and standard that. Why isn't the 90% standard? That's seems whack to me. It seems to me like it's a "I'm better than you because I can code this type of standard so you should use a browser that displays my standard correct coding"
    I'd like to try to shed a little light on the whole standards thing. IMO, for some it may be a bragging rights thing but I believe for the vast majority who write standards based code it's to simplify and improve accessability.

    The reason business' use standards is to reduce the complexities of dealing with each [insert vendor's name here] issues on a per/instance basis. This works in the world of finance, manufacturing, medical, mining, etc... Every business abides by standards that are pretty much set in stone.

    The W3C regardless of personal opinions is the group who set the standards for the web. It is comprised of industry player members including Microsoft, Apple, IBM, Sun etc... who all have a part setting the standards.

    IE does a poor job of following the standards which often require stylesheet-hacks so that it renders correctly. Mind you, if a standards based site is set up so that it views well in IE, it'll damn near view correctly in any browser.

    Quote Originally Posted by azn_romeo_4u
    Why isn't the 90% standard?
    If I undestand this to be "Why doesn't IE set the standard" then I'll have to admit the question kinda floors me. It's like asking the fox to guard the hen-house for one thing. For the other, it's because the 90% doesn't even follow it's own standards. Try IE on Mac OS9, then try it on OSX, then Win2K, then XP. I guarantee it will be a different experience. At least with that pesky Firefox consistency is pretty much a given.

    *Also the 90% hasn't kept up with the times. There is an image type called a PNG that will provide far superior transparency over the standard GIF however IE amongst other things, doesn't quite understand how to handle it yet.

    Personally, from a development POV, I find it much easier to build a site based on standards, testing in FF then either IE or now the IE tab. Sure sometimes I'll add the odd IE hack but it's certainly easier than building a site tested in IE and trying to fudge it so that it looks good on other browsers. If it's coded to standards and runs well on FF/IE it will more than likely be consistent on any browser/platform without any hastle.

    *Except IE 5 on Mac
    Andrew Wasson | www.lunadesign.org
    Principal / Internet Development

  6. #181
    Non-Member lostseed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Zurconion Soon!
    Posts
    1,549
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I suggest use FireFox or dont use the internet :P

  7. #182
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Mesa, AZ
    Posts
    10
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'm not going to read all 8 pages of this topic, so this has probably been said already.

    Why do I recommend Firefox over IE?

    Because I've tried it. I use it. And it's very stable for me. It also has features I like, especially tabbed browsing. And it operates on the real "box model" for table padding, etc.

    Firefox has actually crashed on me numerous times. Many of those times, interestingly, occurred while a Windows Media file was trying to load--but not always. And Firefox hogs more memory than I'd like: typically ~250 MB on a computer running with 1 GB. But it crashes much less often than IE crashed on me, and it runs faster.

    Plus, say what you will of the illusion of security, but in my IE days, running Ad-Aware every few weeks would result in hundreds, if not thousands, of malicious files/results. Since operating primarily under Firefox, I can go months between running Ad-Aware and find only--MAYBE--a hundred such things. Probably less.

    Do I tend to sing Firefox's praises? Yes. But my praises are of the pragmatic sort--Firefox just works, and I dig that. If it's an ideology to appreciate software (or anything) that just works, regardless of theoretical weaknesses, than call me a zealot.

  8. #183
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy Jeremy W.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    9,123
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by awasson
    At least with that pesky Firefox consistency is pretty much a given.
    There are actually hundreds of differences in the renderer, in the UI, in the shortcut keys, etc. They are different apps, because there isn't a unified codebase. Yes, it's more consistent than IE is on Mac vs Windows. This isn't an attack on FireFox, it's just the truth. Anyone who believes it's the same on both platforms has never had a power FireFox/Win user try and use FireFox/Mac
    SVP Marketing, SoCast SRM
    Personal blog: Strategerize
    Twitter: @jeremywright

  9. #184
    SitePoint Wizard bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Vancouver BC Canada
    Posts
    2,037
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Perhaps more differences in the shortcuts between Mac/PC because Mac has a command key and the PC uses Control keys but an experienced power user will know to substitute one for the other. It's the same issues that you'll run into using an Adobe or Macromedia product between Mac/PC.

    In my experience the diffences in PC vs Linux are less and not numerous. For instance the commands I often use without a second thought are the same; ctrl+enter, ctrl+t, ctrl+n, ctrl+a, ctrl+x, ctrl+c, ctrl+v, ctrl+z, ctrl+d, alt+left, alt+right, F11, ctrl+r, ctrl+u, ctrl+o, ctrl+s, ctrl+p.

    I take consistency of frequently used commands for granted though (along with the Mac command key exceptions) and I haven't noticed a great difference. What I was really referring to was the gross differences between html rendering that occurs across different platforms with IE vs. Firefox.
    Andrew Wasson | www.lunadesign.org
    Principal / Internet Development

  10. #185
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy Jeremy W.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    9,123
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    awasson: Ever tried Alt+D on FireFox for Mac? Or Shift+Home?

    The reality is that the FireFox team chose to emulate commands based on the popular key combinations for that platform. Which is probably the right choice. But, there are dozens of key shortcut differences, all of which are documented (and, obviously I'm not talking about Control/Command key differences, as those are obvious).
    SVP Marketing, SoCast SRM
    Personal blog: Strategerize
    Twitter: @jeremywright

  11. #186
    SitePoint Wizard bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Vancouver BC Canada
    Posts
    2,037
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    No admittedly, there are differences between mac/pc however most of the ones I use are the same changes in keyboard not withstanding.

    It's too bad that alt + D doesn't work on the mac but again not a big deal for my use. When I'm using the address bar it's generally after a ctrl + T and at that time the cursor is ready for an address. I've never even given it a second thought. I suppose it's one of those ignorance is bliss things

    Same for Shift + Home. I never use it so don't miss it. If I did, I could see how it would bother me though.
    Andrew Wasson | www.lunadesign.org
    Principal / Internet Development

  12. #187
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy Jeremy W.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    9,123
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'm not saying the team made a bad decision, merely that there are a huge number of differences between the two apps - in response to someone else saying that FireFox on Win/Mac was identical when it clearly isn't.
    SVP Marketing, SoCast SRM
    Personal blog: Strategerize
    Twitter: @jeremywright

  13. #188
    SitePoint Wizard bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Vancouver BC Canada
    Posts
    2,037
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeremy W.
    I'm not saying the team made a bad decision, merely that there are a huge number of differences between the two apps - in response to someone else saying that FireFox on Win/Mac was identical when it clearly isn't.
    Huge difference between platforms/OS's but do you think it's a huge difference between the app on the different platforms?

    Personally I don't find there to a be a huge difference and I find it consistent. But, I only use the handful of commands I listed and am more concerned with a common visual and user experience. It's probably more noticeable on your side as a power user.

    For me it's very important that the sites we put out view consistently on IE, Netscape and FF Mac/Win. As MS dropped IE support on Mac a few years ago it's not such a huge deal, there was no consistency there to begin with however with FF (and netscape) there is a consistent user experience.
    Andrew Wasson | www.lunadesign.org
    Principal / Internet Development

  14. #189
    Non-Member Washere's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Croatia, Europe
    Posts
    65
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    THANK YOU

    I recently got FireFox as my dominant browser, to tell you the truth, it is bad. A couple days ago, I got a virus or whatever it is, it was definatly because of FireFox. I do not like the FireFox browser at all, did not like it from first and I don't like it now at all. I am currently using my brothers hard drive for everything, FireFox is stupid and over-rated because some kids hate IE so much.

  15. #190
    SitePoint Wizard
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Grand Rapids, MI
    Posts
    1,284
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Igor Martic
    THANK YOU

    I recently got FireFox as my dominant browser, to tell you the truth, it is bad. A couple days ago, I got a virus or whatever it is, it was definatly because of FireFox. I do not like the FireFox browser at all, did not like it from first and I don't like it now at all. I am currently using my brothers hard drive for everything, FireFox is stupid and over-rated because some kids hate IE so much.
    Igor I can tell you with 99% certainty that Firefox did not give you the virus. I can also tell you with 99% certainty that IE did not give you the virus either. You had to in some way act to get the virus, they just don't appear. Please do not attack Firefox for a situation that you did not investigate and have no formal basis for. We do not know that Firefox gave you the virus. Perhaps the virus was on your machine before you installed it. You have to realize their are a lot of factors at play here. And Firefox is not over-rated because kids hate IE so much. As a matter of fact, I like Firefox because it is open source software. I don't hate IE, I just like Firefox more.

  16. #191
    SitePoint Wizard Keriam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Colorado, USA
    Posts
    1,178
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Frankly, I am with Ben on this and I am not a Firefox fan. Browsers to not cause viruses. A virus may attack your computer by way of an exploit in a browser, but the browser itself does not give a virus.

    I will reiterate something I said back towards the beginning of this thread. Safe surfing is like safe sex - protection is required. Use a good antivirus program, a firewall, a good anti-spyware program; keep them up to date and run regular scans; and you will most likely never get your system infected regardless of your choice of browser.
    Never put off until tomorrow what you can do
    the day after tomorrow. ~ Mark Twain

  17. #192
    SitePoint Member Fate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Security in web browsers

    According to network security outfit Scanit , Explorer is by far the least secure browser on the market. Scanit tracked three browsers over a year -- IE, Opera and Firefox -- noting the days on which they were "known unsafe." IE: a remotely exploitable security vulnerability had been announced, but had not yet been patched. Turns out IE was safe on only 7 out 365 days during 2004. In contrast Firefox was safe on 309 days and Opera on 300. An astonishing metric, even for those expecting the worst, and one that presents a very strong case for ditching IE if you haven't already.

  18. #193
    SitePoint Wizard holmescreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Northwest Florida
    Posts
    1,707
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    From personal experience, Firefox is unstable (for the most part) on both OS/X and XP platforms. But, I put it a couple notches above the ol' Netscape browser -- ugh, "lets build a browser where the whole page has to load before it displays anything."
    intragenesis, llc professional web & graphic design

  19. #194
    SitePoint Wizard holmescreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Northwest Florida
    Posts
    1,707
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Btw, on the XP side, I would rather wrap SlimBrowser around IE than use either. On the Mac side, I really don't have to worry about it, Safari just kicks ***.
    intragenesis, llc professional web & graphic design

  20. #195
    SitePoint Wizard bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Vancouver BC Canada
    Posts
    2,037
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Fate: Good info! I remember seeing that study too. Really interesting numbers. I initially switched to Firefox over Opera, IE and Netscape because out of the four browsers it seemed to work the best for me. Netscape is really similar but not as fast to start or use. Eventually I continued to use it because I felt it was safer.

    * After pulling Adware, trojans & virii from family computers (brother inlaw, father inlaw, uncle and cousins) I install FF and make it their default browser. Now when I check back periodically everything is clean. One computer had more than 60 instances of Adware on it before I cleaned it up. As an extra deterent I install MS AntiSpyware (beta). Probably the best thing Microsoft has come up with in years.

    It suprises me that people report instability in XP or Mac for that matter because I'm running it on 3 XP machines, one Panther and one Fedora Core 3 without issue. Safari's a nice slim browser and really solid too.

    Actually I can make it crash in XP sometimes when I'm using IE tab and I make it open a new window via JavaScript but otherwise it's been solid as a rock.

    Cheers,
    Andrew Wasson | www.lunadesign.org
    Principal / Internet Development

  21. #196
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy Jeremy W.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    9,123
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Erm... FireFox still has vulnerabilities that haven't been patched since 0.5... I'm not saying it's more or less secure. Largely because I don't think there is any such thing. Any hole is an exploitable hole, after all, and it only takes one hole to hijack a browser or computer.
    SVP Marketing, SoCast SRM
    Personal blog: Strategerize
    Twitter: @jeremywright

  22. #197
    SitePoint Evangelist
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    515
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    isn't opera more secure than firefox?
    FlyffWorld.com - Online Gaming MMORPG
    AdTalks.com - Publisher/Advertising Network Review
    Cursors - Cursors-4U.com

  23. #198
    SitePoint Wizard bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Vancouver BC Canada
    Posts
    2,037
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by azn_romeo_4u
    isn't opera more secure than firefox?
    Could be... Any stats?
    Andrew Wasson | www.lunadesign.org
    Principal / Internet Development


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •