alexander Posted February 7, 2005 Report Share Posted February 7, 2005 In this thread, I'd like to, aside from ranting on and on about the worthlessness of IE and microsoft standard evasion, also discuss the use or rather need of use of both browsers, so without further redo.... First and foremost, I'd like to say that if you still havent switched to Firefox and are readin this message from the IE window, switch immediately after you read this line and only then come back and finish reading the post ;) (http://www.getfirefox.com) Secondly, if there are any microsoft representatives reading this, I'd like to say that no matter what you come up with for Longhorns web browser, you will never beat Firefox, don't spend your time trying, just try to convince your boss to finally follow internet coding standards with HTML, dont come up with new ones, cuz you stink at it... Thirdly, for those who already use Firefox, but still have a need for IE for online movie viewing, flash-game playing and flash viewing, (https://addons.update.mozilla.org/plugins/) is a great source of firefox-made plugins that allow you to do all that, also check out firefox extensions like bugmenot, allow right-click, and word count here(http://extensions.roachfiend.com/index.php#bugmenot) Also, check out some other cool extensions like FlashGot, ForecastFox, vBrowseIt and Url2NewTab (https://addons.update.mozilla.org/extensions/?os=Windows&application=firefox/) Well, if you do online banking, you're stuck too. Most online banking sites are hardwired to IE. Fortunately however, they are not usually sources of spyware infections. Always try Firefox first, but don't delete IE just yet (you can! in spite of what MS has said!). Use the option to make it your default browser instead of IE....Only use IE when a site you *have* to use says "sorry charlie." If you don't *have* to use those IE-only sites, take your business elsewhere. (did I get all this right alexander?) Have you tried IE View if you run Windows? Anyways, here's a really cool addon that spoofs such pages from realizing that they are talking to mozilla into thinking that its being viewed in IE (https://addons.update.mozilla.org/extensions/moreinfo.php?application=firefox&version=1.0&os=Windows&id=35)try it somewhere where you know Firefox is not allowed, but do share the results, maybe its the solution... But don't get me started about standards. I've got a couple of programmers who say we shouldn't bother to make our program work with IE, even though it still has 90% market share. It *shouldn't* but unfortunately it does, making it easy for the banks to tell their Mac users: "sorry, but you can do your banking elsewhere"... (alexander: you have my blessings to rant on this topic too, but lets open another thread for it!) This is it Buffy, let the ranting start ("Let rant go oon, let rant go oon" anyways, I'd like to hear a remake of that Aerosmith song in a similar context, would be pretty funny ;) )I hate Microsoft for that kind of (well i would have said "crap", but i guess "thing" should suffice as i dont want to get banned for bad language). Why dont they EVER follow any good standards and have to invent their own? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zadojla Posted February 7, 2005 Report Share Posted February 7, 2005 snip...Why dont they EVER follow any good standards and have to invent their own?This hubris isn't new thing. IBM used to do the same thing in their heyday (e.g. ASCII vs. EBCDIC). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexander Posted February 7, 2005 Author Report Share Posted February 7, 2005 Yeah, but they defined their standards whereas microsoft says "oh look your stuff doesnt work cuz we think that this thing here needs to be changed to microsoftize and make it worse, i meant better, i mean, yeah umm...." Yes, i agree that some standards need to be changed from time to time, but changing HTML or ansii standards is beludicrous as they are constantly refined. For example, in one of the threads earlier there was much discussion about the object tags not working in Firefox, (i cant remember the thread name, but we were discussing it with Tinny) it turned out that what tinny was using was a microsoftized standard that assumed things that needed to be defined and passed on to the tag. Aside from that, Just read on Slashdot (http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/02/07/1323206&tid=172&tid=113&tid=154&tid=95&tid=1)About browsers IDN problems, it turnes out that IE doesnt even natively support IDN... what a surprise... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgrmdave Posted February 7, 2005 Report Share Posted February 7, 2005 I've used four different browsers - IE, Netscape, Firefox, and Slimbrowser. I hated Netscape, IE was too buggy. The only ones that were okay were Firefox and Slimbrowser. I find Slimbrowser to be the best, even if it is less known. You can find it here: http://www.flashpeak.com/sbrowser/ - it's free. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queso Posted February 7, 2005 Report Share Posted February 7, 2005 gotta love macs Safari :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffy Posted February 7, 2005 Report Share Posted February 7, 2005 IE on windows sucks. IE on mac sucks much worse! We don't like IE, unfortunately, M$ has the market share and if you build web apps, you have no choice but to "code around" IE's, uh, "quirks." That being said, in spite of Firefox being "more" standards compliant, there *are* bugs in it, so the reality of web development is not that you just write standard code, but you write it with lots of "if (IE) else if (Firefox) else if (opera) else if (etc. ad nauseum)" Oh well! Mozilla/Netscape and Firefox are different code lines, and we actually find that the Mozilla line is much more robust, but it is a lot bigger and slower, and Firefox is getting there quickly. It is good enough to use in production.gotta love macs Safari :)Safari has got some major holes. Fine for home use. Does not have the IE spoofing capability that alexander mentions above that's available for Firefox (warning, those are plug ins, and you have to download them from the mozilla/firefox site *separately*: they are not embedded in the basic release, and are not that heavily tested). For corporate users, it completely ignores host proxy aliases, so I know a bunch of big shops that do not allow it to be used internally. Its definitely slick though, and eventually Apple will make it a good solution. We all worry that they'll "lean it proprietary" the way that Microsoft has though, so it will have lots of "unique" features that cause programmers' headaches.... Cheers,Buffy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alxian Posted February 7, 2005 Report Share Posted February 7, 2005 this debate should be more maxthon VS firefox, mainly since IE should not be used. and in and of itself [iE] has no real features to compete with FF (especially pipeline enabled FF) to make a proper debate MS needs to release a new browser altogther.. IE 7 would seem too cheesy and wouldn't hold little water against the FFs and maxthons.. i'm also thinking given the amount of work MS put into GAS (antispyware) that MS could easily rewrite IE [from the ground up] with what they know now. (incorporating GAS 1.0 into IE, if they continue using IE and don't go for an entirely new name, i.e. directx 10 (dxx) will be called avalon.) what should MS call an entirely new browser to compete with MAX'thon FIREFOX SAFARI... internet explorer is far too bland even for MS to get away with using it for much longer. also.. would such a super browser be incorporated into longhorn as avalon will be inspiring more antitrust allegations? (**oops silly me i do believe i phlubbed.. avalon won't make it into longhorn... i must be tired to have let one that big get by me) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffy Posted February 8, 2005 Report Share Posted February 8, 2005 Actually, IE as we know it is probably dead. The mac version has been completely desupported by M$, and the next version of Windows will have the browser melded directly into the Windows interface: that is, the merger of "Windows Explorer" (the file manager interface) and Internet Explorer (the web browser)--hints of which you've probably noticed in XP--will be complete. The real issue is that will a given html/js page render in a predictable and portable manner. Features are overrated though. I personally love tabbed browsing, and I live and die for the Javascript console and debugger for FF, but they're not something that most people will notice much. I think if M$ could get away from insisting on leaving all these horrible security holes in IE (especially ActiveX, which is what virtually all spyware uses to get into your system), you wouldn't need Gas... Cheers,Buffy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alxian Posted February 8, 2005 Report Share Posted February 8, 2005 but GAS is so pretty and allows you to feel so important knowing you can kill unsigned and unknown BHOs.. which is like hunting pheasant. click click boom but they did an odd thing with GAS.. it has no quarantine that you can walk through summarily executing those digital intruders like the good old days. besides using GAS is not solely based on your browser its also for those of us using IMs and helper apps... messenger plus 3 with the msn 7 beta ect, which makes GAS have kittens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexander Posted February 8, 2005 Author Report Share Posted February 8, 2005 gotta love macs Safarinope, no, no, no, no, no, you got it all wrong, gotta love lynx is the line... :)Lynx is awesome for any kind of browsing, i guess that you cant really do much online banking with lynx, but i dont think you really need to when you run GUIless browsers like that...Actually, IE as we know it is probably dead. The mac version has been completely desupported by M$, and the next version of Windows will have the browser melded directly into the Windows interface: that is, the merger of "Windows Explorer" (the file manager interface) and Internet Explorer (the web browser)--hints of which you've probably noticed in XP--will be complete. The real issue is that will a given html/js page render in a predictable and portable manner. Features are overrated though. I personally love tabbed browsing, and I live and die for the Javascript console and debugger for FF, but they're not something that most people will notice much.What a horrible thought... as if its not already a clump of junk 40 million lines of code long all melted together in an unstable and unreliable matrix of scattered mumbo jumbo... i guess though that if FTP is already built into explorer, IE should go that way very shortly... and i thought that porting KDE to windows was a horrible idea...I think if M$ could get away from insisting on leaving all these horrible security holes in IE (especially ActiveX, which is what virtually all spyware uses to get into your system), you wouldn't need Gas...I think that M$ leaves the security holes in windows (as well as other products, and not all holes, but certainly a few) for the purpose of the government's ability to now get into anybody's computer and trace and track anything that is done on it, be those people terrorists or other countries government organizations who ran across pentagons road and are now under survailance...Oh and P.S. gotta love ActiveX, why dont we just let other people install any kind of software on our machines through an internet browser, yeah such a bright microsoft idea (oxymoron) in the first place... hey guys (buffy, tormod, and others, but buffy and tormod especially), i dont know whether you've been up on slashdot lately, but (http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/execmail/2005/02-03interoperability.asp) here is a letter by bill gates against open-source, perhaps we can discuss it in a separate topic but it is funny how you can manipulate the truth to suit your point... P.S. I really like how he proclaims that it was microsoft that made it possible for windows to talk to linux, its almost as bad as if he proclaimed that he invented the GUI... lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nemo Posted February 13, 2005 Report Share Posted February 13, 2005 I think that M$ leaves the security holes in windows (as well as other products, and not all holes, but certainly a few) for the purpose of the government's ability to now get into anybody's computer and trace and track anything that is done on it, be those people terrorists or other countries government organizations who ran across pentagons road and are now under survailance... On that point, you may be correct - this article discusses that outcry over the infamous NSA key inside Windows CryptAPI (http://www.cnn.com/TECH/computing/9909/03/windows.nsa.02/). The other side of this coin may be that the developers are being given their orders by the marketing department. I have been in circumstances where I was writing code for the sole purpose of living up to someone's boast in a board room - things get impossible real quick. If Microsoft had avoided Napoleon's Guide to Business Ethics and teamed with Netscape (or Corel or any of a number of competitors who had viable products at the time), I think their market dominance would have grown slower, but their code base would be far more solid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexander Posted February 14, 2005 Author Report Share Posted February 14, 2005 but their code base would be far more solid.how much more solid can you get with over 40,000,000 lines of code, lol just kidding...as to proprietary software developement, i think that many companies at one or more times have experienced a similar happening, where the developers have been rushed to develop. I view programming as an art, actually i prefer reading code over poetry because i think good code is more poetice than much of poetry, and thus coding is an artform, and as most agree, art can not be rushed, or else, you get bad art. That is the beauty of open-source, programming is viewed as art, as it should be, there is not as much rush as good code production. Lets compare 2 companies with same views on hackers (the real meaning of the word) and coding environment, and completely different views on the actual coding, procedure, time... Take Google and Microsoft, although it they treat their employees in a similar fasion, offices, long breaks, with maybe an exception that google workers get a day for their own pet projects, have recreational sport activities after lunch and have flexible time, but time restrained coders of microsoft produce a search engine, and although it works, what do they have in there that is so special or different from other search engines out there, except for bugs ofcourse? now take google, their well worked out GFS (google file system) that from what i hear is super awesome for trying to find stuff, their mail system, froogle, their perfectly worked out search engine, BTW they just released a Python API for Google, isnt that awesome, and a whole bunch of other google functionalities that we can only imagine, but dont bother to find out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zadojla Posted February 14, 2005 Report Share Posted February 14, 2005 how much more solid can you get with over 40,000,000 lines of code, lol just kidding...z/OS, the latest and greatest version of the mainframe operating system MVS, is about the same size. A bit more solid, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexander Posted February 14, 2005 Author Report Share Posted February 14, 2005 ok difference: MAINFRAME operating system - 40,000,000 lines of code = ok, cuz its mainframe, it has to manage a huge ammount of stuff, + its unix based probably so its ok by my books windows - also called windooze - personal OS, loaded and overbloated with loads of junk that doesnt belong and should never be there, 40,000,000 lines of code = unacceptable, undeasonable, unreliable... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C1ay Posted February 14, 2005 Report Share Posted February 14, 2005 IE is the one and only reason I can't do my banking from Linux. I can't believe the extent to which the banking industry has hardwired their interfaces to IE with the neverending security issues. Is it possible at some point that banks will have set themselves up for a class action lawsuit since there are other secure options to choose from? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alxian Posted February 14, 2005 Report Share Posted February 14, 2005 they'll have the case thrown out by explaining that internet banking is by definition unsecure and that using it is mearly a convenience, since IE is an exstablished OS it obviously the mest and most secure option, or something even more obtuse Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexander Posted February 15, 2005 Author Report Share Posted February 15, 2005 Online banking is not more secure with IE than it could be with firefox, its sad that banks settle for that IE junk thinking that their protocols are "secure"... i do my banking at the bank, and i still realize that it is less secure than i'd like it to be, especialy with that new act that says that scanned checks are as good as regular ones, but yet again, i dont beleive in paper and the analog way of doing things either, so i guess its a loose-loose, cuz i refuse to use IE... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.