13 Reasons To Use Firefox Over IE

zerodamage · Feb 16, 2004, 04:39 AM

"For me, the biggest factor that inspired me to start using a browser other than Internet Explorer was the constant bugs and security fixes that were plaguing the latter, not to mention the tons of plug-ins that took over your browser. Changing your homepage to some paid advertiser, or adding a toolbar that does the worst job possible when searching. The majority of these spyware and vulnerabilities are commonly programmed for Internet Explorer being that IE holds over 70% of the internet browser market. There are other browsers out there that can compete with IE, but Mozilla Firefox (formally known as Firebird) is a complete browser filled with tons of features that’s only light in size. From a built in pop-up blocker that works better than many commercial pop-up blockers, to tabbed browsing, these are just two of the factors that contribute to making Firefox an internet browser’s dream."

Source: Flexbeta.net

EcPercy · Feb 16, 2004, 12:12 PM

wow.. I wasn't aware of that last feature... now i can even kill the little ad windows on some of the sites I go to...

JLP · Feb 16, 2004, 12:15 PM

Yup Firefox is currently the best browser. It is also the default on my computers. Oh and look at the poll. That's some great lead for both Mozilla and Firefox. It looks like people are finaly discovering the best

~~HawK~~ · Feb 16, 2004, 02:25 PM

Yes gone over to Mozilla Firefox aswell..
only regret : why didn't i do this earlier..

oh yeh IE spell doesnt work any more, so please forgive my mispielled words as i will forgive yours..

Nuke209 · Feb 16, 2004, 02:35 PM

OMG, after reading this, I switched over and LOVED IT, thanks

rudedog · Feb 16, 2004, 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by HawK
IE spell doesn't work any more, so please forgive my misspelled words as i will forgive yours..

This is the only reason I use both. wish there was a version of IE spell that supported this browser.

WaltC · Feb 16, 2004, 03:21 PM

This statement caught my eye:

Quote:

Open Source Advantage
The Mozilla project is an Open Source project where thousands of independent programmers can work on finding security holes before they are exploited.

What's really, really scary is that this is the usual mental image people construct for "Open Source" software. It's as if they see this mysterious web of "independent" programmers around the world who, it must be presumed, are all plugged into a Hive Mind and can coordinate their efforts and goals for a given piece of software telepathically without knowing each other, working together, or speaking with each other. Presumably, too, it is the Hive Mind which works to decide what features go into Open Source software and how they are implemented, since according to the Open Source myth there is no application development oversight and there are no production managers. The software just "happens"...

(Which brings me in mind of the most oft-used phrase in the movie Predator 2: "shit happens.")

I don't know which is nuttier: that idea of the "hive mind" process for so-called "open source" software, or the idea that there might be thousands of programmers around the world who joyfully toil day and night for "Open Source" without any regard for personal income, and who do what they do for the benefit of all mankind, and do it all without coordination and guidance from a central source...

It's a wonderful image to be sure, but like so many other half-baked ideas, it doesn't hold water. For some reason it simply never occurs to the author that the nameless, faceless, anonymous sea of programmers he wistfully envisions as the "Open Source" champions, might include many of the same people who write in undocumented back doors, trojans, viruses, and worms. Or some of the same people who write spy and ad-ware, etc. Anonymity is wonderful, isn't it?

In other words, there's no particular "type" of software that is automatically and inherently better than another type: "Open Source" is not inherently better than "Privately Developed," or vice-versa. The quality of the software is determined by the skill of the programmers involved and the resulting fruit of their labor. The one key difference I can see is accountability: private software always entails accountability because the company selling it puts its name on it, and charges money for it, and agrees to support it. If something goes wrong, in other words, the customer knows who to talk to about it. With open source, who do you talk to, and, since generally you don't pay for it, what liability might they have?

The truth is that all software development, private and open source, is conducted in similar fashion. At the core of the process you have a handful of people, or less, who make the key decisions about what code goes into it and what does not, and what features it will support and which ones it won't, etc. Also rest assured that in some fashion, although it may not be disclosed, someone related to it is receiving payment of some type--else you can be sure they wouldn't be spending their time working on it because most of them need to eat...

How many people would feel comfortable about purchasing an "open source" automobile, for instance? How about "open source" housing? Why people should think software development is any different beats me...

But, you kow, if people weren't easy prey for the "something for nothing" idea, con artists around the world would be out of business, and you'd never read stories of people being duped out of considerable sums of money on eBay by falling for scams so transparent most children could see through them.

Saint_K · Feb 16, 2004, 04:00 PM

When i just read this, i am going to give it a try too!

wertret · Feb 16, 2004, 04:09 PM

Well, i've just installed instaled it and looks great but i hate that progessive loading of the sites in wich you start viewing the basic structure...same as opera. WTH they don't fix that?

Logla · Feb 16, 2004, 04:12 PM

I hate that as well, one of the reasons I went back to using IE

ChrisW · Feb 16, 2004, 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by WaltC
This statement caught my eye:

What's really, really scary is that this is the usual mental image people construct for "Open Source" software. It's as if they see this mysterious web of "independent" programmers around the world who, it must be presumed, are all plugged into a Hive Mind and can coordinate their efforts and goals for a given piece of software telepathically without knowing each other, working together, or speaking with each other. Presumably, too, it is the Hive Mind which works to decide what features go into Open Source software and how they are implemented, since according to the Open Source myth there is no application development oversight and there are no production managers. The software just "happens"... (Which brings me in mind of the most oft-used phrase in the movie Predator 2: "shit happens.")

I don't know which is nuttier: that idea of the "hive mind" process for so-called "open source" software, or the idea that there might be thousands of programmers around the world who joyfully toil day and night for "Open Source" without any regard for personal income, and who do what they do for the benefit of all mankind, and do it all without coordination and guidance from a central source...

It's a wonderful image to be sure, but like so many other half-baked ideas, it doesn't hold water. For some reason it simply never occurs to the author that the nameless, faceless, anonymous sea of programmers he wistfully envisions as the "Open Source" champions, might include many of the same people who write in undocumented back doors, trojans, viruses, and worms. Or some of the same people who write spy and ad-ware, etc. Anonymity is wonderful, isn't it?

In other words, there's no particular "type" of software that is automatically and inherently better than another type: "Open Source" is not inherently better than "Privately Developed," or vice-versa. The quality of the software is determined by the skill of the programmers involved and the resulting fruit of their labor. The one key difference I can see is accountability: private software always entails accountability because the company selling it puts its name on it, and charges money for it, and agrees to support it. If something goes wrong, in other words, the customer knows who to talk to about it. With open source, who do you talk to, and, since generally you don't pay for it, what liability might they have?

The truth is that all software development, private and open source, is conducted in similar fashion. At the core of the process you have a handful of people, or less, who make the key decisions about what code goes into it and what does not, and what features it will support and which ones it won't, etc. Also rest assured that in some fashion, although it may not be disclosed, someone related to it is receiving payment of some type--else you can be sure they wouldn't be spending their time working on it because most of them need to eat...

How many people would feel comfortable about purchasing an "open source" automobile, for instance? How about "open source" housing? Why people should think software development is any different beats me... But, you kow, if people weren't easy prey for the "something for nothing" idea, con artists around the world would be out of business, and you'd never read stories of people being duped out of considerable sums of money on eBay by falling for scams so transparent most children could see through them.

I must agree 100%. What most people don't understand is "Open source" can be used as cover to introduce things like back door trojans into your system. When cought, all the author has to say is "it must have been one of the many anonymous contributors that added it...not me".

And don't think for one moment that these programs are secure! These peograms are not attacked by viruses for one reason and one reason only...they are not the target. Virus writers target Microsoft products because it has the largest user base. It has absolutely nothing to do with how it was written. Combine that with the hacker's general hatred of BIll Gates and Microsoft and their desire to have personal control over the largest number of computers possible is the real reason why these products are targeted.

Feb 16, 2004, 04:39 AM	#1
zerodamage HardwareHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: May 2003 Location: Virginia, USA Posts: 3,478 Rep Power: 0 System Specs	13 Reasons To Use Firefox Over IE "For me, the biggest factor that inspired me to start using a browser other than Internet Explorer was the constant bugs and security fixes that were plaguing the latter, not to mention the tons of plug-ins that took over your browser. Changing your homepage to some paid advertiser, or adding a toolbar that does the worst job possible when searching. The majority of these spyware and vulnerabilities are commonly programmed for Internet Explorer being that IE holds over 70% of the internet browser market. There are other browsers out there that can compete with IE, but Mozilla Firefox (formally known as Firebird) is a complete browser filled with tons of features that’s only light in size. From a built in pop-up blocker that works better than many commercial pop-up blockers, to tabbed browsing, these are just two of the factors that contribute to making Firefox an internet browser’s dream." Source: Flexbeta.net

Feb 16, 2004, 12:15 PM	#3
JLP DriverHeaven Lover Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Slovenia Posts: 249 Rep Power: 0	Yup Firefox is currently the best browser. It is also the default on my computers. Oh and look at the poll. That's some great lead for both Mozilla and Firefox. It looks like people are finaly discovering the best __________________ Get Firefox! Get Thunderbird!

Feb 16, 2004, 02:35 PM	#5
Nuke209 DriverHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: St. Paul Posts: 568 Rep Power: 0	OMG, after reading this, I switched over and LOVED IT, thanks __________________ 2006 Subaru Impreza WRX

Feb 16, 2004, 04:09 PM	#9
wertret Still watching... Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Orihuela (Spain) Posts: 1,560 Rep Power: 0	Well, i've just installed instaled it and looks great but i hate that progessive loading of the sites in wich you start viewing the basic structure...same as opera. WTH they don't fix that? __________________ "They who dream by day are cognizant of many things which escape those who dream only by night."

Feb 16, 2004, 12:12 PM	#2
EcPercy HardwareHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Iraq Posts: 1,535 Rep Power: 64	wow.. I wasn't aware of that last feature... now i can even kill the little ad windows on some of the sites I go to...

Feb 16, 2004, 02:25 PM	#4
~~HawK~~ Banned Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 2,092 Rep Power: 0	Yes gone over to Mozilla Firefox aswell.. only regret : why didn't i do this earlier.. oh yeh IE spell doesnt work any more, so please forgive my mispielled words as i will forgive yours..

Feb 16, 2004, 04:00 PM	#8
Saint_K InSaNe Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Den haag, netherlands Posts: 836 Rep Power: 0	When i just read this, i am going to give it a try too!

Feb 16, 2004, 04:12 PM	#10
Logla HardwareHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 3,311 Rep Power: 62	I hate that as well, one of the reasons I went back to using IE