Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
The Internet Internet Explorer Mozilla

Firefox vs. SP2's IE? 238

Posted by Cliff from the as-microsoft-slowly-improves-their-products dept.
Anonymous Coward asks: "I was at my grandpa's house today, and I came across a somewhat unsettling issue. He is a user of Internet Explorer. I was talking about Firefox with him, and it turns out that he has had no trouble with popups since SP2 came out, he doesn't multitask enough to benefit from tabbed browsing, and he doesn't care about safety/privacy concerns. On top of that, I ran a test and found no difference in load/download speeds between the two browsers on his computer. This brought me to an interesting point. For someone like him, is there any benefit to be gained from using Firefox? On top of that, are there any people who are actually better off sticking with IE?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Firefox vs. SP2's IE? More

Firefox vs. SP2's IE?

Comments Filter:

  • Security/Privacy issues (Score:5, Insightful)

    by rogueuk ( 245470 ) on Wednesday December 22, 2004 @04:43PM (#11162128) Homepage
    The way I see it, if you don't care about security or privacy issues, then I don't think that there is a real reason for you to switch if you aren't going to benefit from any of the other enhancements that Firefox brings

    However, once you get nailed with some bug/virus that exploits an IE security hole, then you will probably care enough to switch

    • Re:Security/Privacy issues (Score:5, Informative)

      by LordEd ( 840443 ) on Wednesday December 22, 2004 @04:49PM (#11162182)

      I used to use IE with SP2 up until a few weeks ago. I went to the wrong website and wound up spending a day trying to remove a persistent spyware app off of my system. I had to drop down to a repair CD and physically erase specific DLLs that kept recreating themselves.

      You may not have privacy/security concerns, but you start noticing it when your CPU is running 99% on spyware.

      I haven't had any problems since switching to firefox.

    • Of course he doesn't care about security... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by dscho ( 819239 ) on Wednesday December 22, 2004 @04:55PM (#11162246)
      ... because whenever something bad happens, he'll expect you to fix it!

      • Re:Of course he doesn't care about security... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by TheCarp ( 96830 ) <sjc.carpanet@net> on Wednesday December 22, 2004 @05:45PM (#11162750) Homepage
        This is why when the issue comes up with people I know I tell them this:

        "You can do what you want, but I recomend you use firefox, if you continue to use IE I will refuse to help you when your computer gets infected with viruses"

        That said, everyone that I have had try firefox has loved it and begun using it exclusivly. Normally I just say "here let me do some setup for you", install firefox, take ie off the desktop and the start menu, and then explain the new web browser to them. Often I just tell them "I upgraded your web browser, its called firefox now"

        I know to you or I this sounds very deceptive, but I realised something: its just abstraction. Forget the details of code base and who puts it out. I believe firefox is a better browser, these people don't even know what a "web browser" is. Thats why its called "The Internet" on the desktop shortcut and not "IE" - because "IE" or "firefox" is more detail than most people want.

        If you try to tell them "I installed firefox, this is what to use now because ie is bad", then you have a few problems.

        1. They don't know what you are talking about anyway so they are scared

        This means they worry "oh god is this going to be harder to use?" You can try to tell them its not, but they wont believe you because they saw you do all these weird things and so they know your idea of easy and theirs is way different.

        2. They may have used ie before and s far as they are concerned it is great. So when you say "its bad" (or however else you want to qualify or expound upon that) it doesn't jive with their experience, so they assume its just stuff they don't need to care about, or you are just being esoteric...they go back to point 1 and figure this is going to make their life harder for benefits that mean nothing to them anyway.

        So all in all, you save both your you alot of trouble by abstracting away "firefox" and "ie" and just going to "I upgraded your web browser" and when they sa y "whats that?" you say "Your internet is better and more secure"

        And yes I am being a little bit flip here, with my phrases but I also hate doing windows support and using it for anything other than gaming (tho it is fairly usable with a link to the cygwin port of X in the startup and xterm on the launcher menu)

        -Steve

        -Steve
        • Exactly, that is what I do as well.

          And I make sure I rename the "Mozilla Firefox" desktop shortcut to "Mozilla Firefox Internet" so they know what it's for :)

        • Re:Of course he doesn't care about security... (Score:5, Interesting)

          by Dr. Spork ( 142693 ) on Wednesday December 22, 2004 @08:44PM (#11164142)
          My strategy? Ask people "Hey, do you want me to install a plugin that keeps you from downloading all these stupid ads that show up on web pages?" Believe me, nobody says "no" most are amazed that such a thing could ever work. Then I install Firefox and import my block strings into Adblock, making sure the user figures out that they will not be using IE anymore.

          When I get asked about this, I try to look surprised and say "bah, you mean you thought Internet Explorer could do somehting this cool? No way! What you need for this sort of thing is an optimized browser - you know, optimized for speed and useability and all sorts of other cool things. You want me to show you some? Watch this... suppose I want to go back to the previous page [mouse gesture left]. Cool, eh? Wanna see how I did that?"

          The lesson is: install some extensions as well as Firefox. It's mind-numbingly easy, and it gets new users really interested in customizing their Firefox further. Once they start with that, they'll never go back.

      • Of course he doesn't care about security...

        ... because whenever something bad happens, he'll expect you to fix it!

        If you actually provide technical support for this computer, then you should be concerned, even if he isn't. SP2 isn't the end of IE vulnerabilities, MS security holes, trojans, etc. You are just having a temporary reprieve while the virus writers catch up and find the new holes.

        If you have to support this box, get IE off it now, before it causes your grandfather grief. He may not care ab

    • and he doesn't care about safety/privacy concerns

      He may not care, but when he (and thousands of others) is infected with viri and malware and spewing out thousands of hits that clutter up my firewall logs I care.

      There is no good reason for anybody to continue to use Internet Exploited. There are now at least three great alternatives for Windows; Firefox, Mozilla Suite and Opera. Each has certain advantages and disadvantages, but they all outshine the Microsoft POS browser.

      IE was added to Windows a

      • Once people stop coding their web sites using ActiveX and other IE only technologies, then there will be no reason not to switch. Until then, its a necessary evil.

        • Re:Security/Privacy issues (Score:4, Insightful)

          by Dan Ost ( 415913 ) on Wednesday December 22, 2004 @05:14PM (#11162463)
          The number of sites using ActiveX seems to be on the decline. I'd like to
          think that polite emails sent to webmasters is raising the overall awareness
          of what technologies are acceptable to use in a web page, but I suspect that
          it's happening because webmasters are starting to use non-MS web authoring
          tools.

          Either way, I like the trend.

      • IE was added to Windows as an afterthought, and it really shows. M$ wanted to jump in on this Internet thing that Bill Gates, himself, said would never take off.

        Just one minor correction:

        :s/IE was added to Windows as/Security in IE was/g

        IE was added to Windows to kill Netscape. When Bill Gates saw that Netscape was making lots of money on the Internet and saw that the Internet and cross-platform standards might threaten the existance of Windows, MS bought Moziac Spyglass, molded it into IE, ordered PC

        • When Bill Gates saw that Netscape was making lots of money on the Internet and saw that the Internet and cross-platform standards might threaten the existance of Windows, MS bought Moziac Spyglass, molded it into IE, ordered PC vendors not to bundle Netscape, gave it out for free (browsers weren't free at the time), and finally soldered it into Windows 98 and subsequent Windows releases, which led to the death of Netscape.

          And of course the stupidity of Netscape in embarking on a complete rewrite at the tim

          • And of course the stupidity of Netscape in embarking on a complete rewrite at the time and the utter suckiness of their 4.x browsers had _nothing_ to do with it, right ?

            Netscape was their own worst enemy in a lot of ways and they made stupid decisions that hastened their demise. Otherwise, what the fellow you quoted said was accurate. The truth is that as long as IE was "good enough," only geeks were going to go through the trouble of downloading another browser over a 56k line when IE came bundled

    • the way I see it, i don't really care if you do or don't care about security issues. because when you get infected and unknowingly (and uncaringly) start spreading it, the internet and network admins across the country are the ones that suffer.

      So, as i've told anyone who uses any computer that i have responsibility for, you'll use whatever software combines the most security with the most amount of practical usablitiy.

      for now, as far as browsers go, thats Firefox.

    • Re:Security/Privacy issues (Score:4, Insightful)

      by walt-sjc ( 145127 ) on Wednesday December 22, 2004 @05:11PM (#11162415)
      then you will probably care enough to switch

      I doub't it. Some people never learn. Frankly, who gives a rip? If someone wants to run IE, let em. Some people still smoke too despite all the evidence of health problems, huge cost, etc. You can't cure stupidity.

      • Re:Security/Privacy issues (Score:4, Insightful)

        by itwerx ( 165526 ) on Wednesday December 22, 2004 @05:28PM (#11162583) Homepage
        If someone wants to run IE, let em. Some people still smoke too despite all the evidence of health problems, huge cost, etc.

        This analogy is unfortunately all too accurate. Not only does the rest of the insured/tax-paying population have to shoulder the health-care costs of smokers so too does the rest of the Internet-using population have to shoulder the cost of spams/viruses/wasted bandwidth etc. perpetuated by IE users.
      • As a former smoker, I can tell you never were one and thus should be silent on this issue since your talking out your ass.

        Smokers continue to smoke because it is an addicition akin to that of the strongest narcotic drugs. Unless your counting teenagers, nobody smokes because they want to, they smoke because their addicted and quitting is something much harder than anything a non-smoker is ever likely to endure.
        • But there are still plenty of stupid people who start smoking despite the risks.

          Just wait until the IRC kiddies start using IE because it is badass..."s417 f00 I's 1337...I can stop the v1ru5"

  • In the big scheme of things... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by erykjj ( 213892 ) on Wednesday December 22, 2004 @04:45PM (#11162140)
    I would say it makes no difference which browser you use if you do not keep up with all the security updates for the browser and/or OS.

  • He's not alone on the net... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by AlexeiMachine ( 604654 ) on Wednesday December 22, 2004 @04:47PM (#11162160)
    If he becomes infected with a virus or a trojan that transforms his PC in a spam zombie, he then becomes a threat/nuisance/liability to others.

    He might not care if he's infected with a bunch of crapware, but if his PC gets zombified and participates in criminal activities, he might object to that.

    At least make sure he doesn't run MSIE as an Administrator on his PC.

    • "Grandpa, how would you feel if this were not your computer, but your house?

      "You might say, 'I don't need to lock my doors --I know all my neighbours in this small town, and it's such an unnecessary hassle to have to lock the doors. No one else lives with me, I don't have anything worth stealing, and anyway, I only use basically the one bedroom and the kitchen.'

      "Once in a while you come home from the grocery store, and the door is open or stuff isn't where you left it. Probably some nosy kids poking aro
  • IF YOU TURN OFF ACTIVEX.

    Open Internet Explorer, go to the tools>options menu item, click the security tab, set security to "high", and customize the options so that it will not run activex, signed or unsigned, for any reason.

    There, now IE is approximately as secure as Firefox. They might both have bugs, but now IE is as secure as Firefox by design.

    • Re:IE XP SP2 is as safe as Firefox (Score:3, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Except you can't run Windows Update anymore without ActiveX... :-P
    • There, now IE is approximately as secure as Firefox.

      And approximately as useful as Firefox, with respect to ActiveX-requiring sites. Anything else can probably be rendered equally well by the two of them.

      Incidentally, how do you plan on running Windows Update without ActiveX? And apparently Flash and so forth require ActiveX in IE...I had to manually lower security settings on a computer to get to a Flash game the other day. I think this comp had SP2 installed, and the installer got a bit overexcited.
      • And approximately as useful as Firefox, with respect to ActiveX-requiring sites. Anything else can probably be rendered equally well by the two of them ... Incidentally, how do you plan on running Windows Update without ActiveX?

        Glad we're on the same page.

        I had to manually lower security settings on a computer to get to a Flash game the other day. I think this comp had SP2 installed, and the installer got a bit overexcited.

        Whoops. This security thing starts breaking down when you turn it off.
    • The obnoxious thing about turning off active X in IE is that EVERY DAMN time a page loads with even the tiniest active X control... IE pops up a warning box telling you about all the things you're missing.

  • Browser Benchmarks (Score:3, Insightful)

    by vasqzr ( 619165 ) <`vasqzr' `at' `netscape.net'> on Wednesday December 22, 2004 @04:47PM (#11162164)

    Does anyone do these anymore?

    I remember back in the days of IE vs Netscape, magazines would often publish page loading/rendering times. I'm not talking loading Yahoo, and hitting REFRESH while watching a stopwatch, but a real benchmark suite like you'd use for Microsft Office or a graphics card.

    I'd also like to say that the newest IE is a lot better than the old ones as far as pop ups go. Tabbed browsing keeps me on Firefox even though there are ways to do it in IE. I've noticed Firefox hangs up on pages that IE handles fine, and I'm not really sure Firefox is 'faster', although it seems like it on slower machines.

    Most people think Firefox is faster because they've got so much spyware etc infested in Internet Explorer. IE has always been 'fast'. A fresh install, at least.

    • The benchmarks I have read have suggested that Firefox is faster. It seems to be a lot faster too and takes up a lot less memory (you can have thousands of windows or tabs open where as MSIE usually crashes if you get close to double figures).

      Also, so what if MSIE is not so slow initially? So is MSWindows XP--it usually is fast for the first day and then gradually declines until one usually has to reinistall after a few weeks. What is the point in having to re-install your OS (either becuase of IE probl

      • Bullcrap. I use FF and love it, but it suffers from some serious memory leaks. I've had to terminate the FF process a few times. I've seen it hit 60MB of memory usage, hardly what I'd call good performance.

        I love FF for its security, and peace of mind, and it's pretty much reduced the amount of calls I make to people's homes to do spyware removal, but it isn't a be-all-end-all solution.
    • Ever read about how msn.com was engineered to make it look like Opera had a bug -- but only Opera? Ever notice how some pages refuse to work on Firefox, but work fine on IE?

      If the pages were designed for IE in the first place, and not for the standards, they won't work well on Firefox. The hope is that Firefox will become popular enough that people can't afford to have a page that doesn't work on it, NOT that firefox will get some "be like IE" patch.

  • Doesn't care? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by esme ( 17526 ) on Wednesday December 22, 2004 @04:48PM (#11162178) Homepage
    ...and he doesn't care about safety/privacy concerns

    Right.

    So you're telling me he's using a computer with no sensitive personal information on it, has a complete trusted offline backup, and he could easily wipe his machine, install from original media and restore his backup?

    If he's not concerned about the safety/privacy problems of IE, then he hasn't given it much thought.

    -Esme

    • Old folks are usually the type of people that don't use their computers for much more than information gathering. What's on TV in two hours? What's the weather tomorrow? With only that sort of stuff going on, that type of user really wouldn't have any problem with reformatting and cleanly installing from a rescue disc; it's just that the operation itself would be a hassle.
    • If he's not concerned about the safety/privacy problems of IE, then he hasn't given it much thought.

      Exactly. Most non-techies don't give it much thought and therefore don't care. Welcome to the real world.

      You and I both know that they should give it some thought, because it does matter. Good luck with trying to convince the general public. I gave up long ago.

  • Probably not (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Satertek ( 708058 )

    Extensions and themes are nice as well...But if he dosn't have any interest in tabs, he probably not find any of those useful either.

    I'd still use Firefox anyway, as you never know when a new IE vunerability will be found.

  • Three main benefits (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Planesdragon ( 210349 ) <`slashdot' `at' `castlesteelstone.us'> on Wednesday December 22, 2004 @04:49PM (#11162183) Homepage Journal
    For someone like him, is there any benefit to be gained from using Firefox?

    Four main benefits, in order, for Firefox over IE6
    1. When the web browser crashes, it doesn't kill part of the user environment.
    2. Security holes are fewer, farther betwee, and quicker to be patched
    3. Type-ahead-find is GREAT
    4. The web pages are standards-based, which will make the web run better for everyone.
    • When the web browser crashes, it doesn't kill part of the user environment.

      It does what? IE hasn't crashed recently in my memory, and I've never seen Active Desktop Recovery from an IE crash. Besides, you're always running IE in the form of Active Desktop and so forth.

      Security holes are fewer, farther betwee, and quicker to be patched

      He doesn't care. Who's going to hax0r his computer for the information on it? At worst, they'll try to stick an open relay on, but he should have a firewall anyway, since
      • . Besides, you're always running IE in the form of Active Desktop and so forth.

        Active Desktop is rather easily turned off. In fact, for 2k and XP it's a good idea to go ahead and turn it off; even in non-NT systems, it's only left on because the user wants to be able to use compressed bitmaps for their wallpaper.

        He doesn't care. Who's going to hax0r his computer for the information on it? At worst, they'll try to stick an open relay on, but he should have a firewall anyway, since there are more attack
    • Your #1 is invalid.

      When running on Windows 2000/XP, an IE crash does not "kill part of the user environment". IE runs as the same process as Explorer.exe in Windows 9x only.
      • Well, I'll be darned.

        So, instead of being the same process that crashes your main UI element, it's a seperate process that crashes your main UI element.

        • I guess you didn't quite get it...

          On Windows 9x, IE runs in the same process as explorer.exe. So when IE crashes, Windows Explorer (the "main UI element") crashes as well.

          On Windows 2000/XP, IE runs in a seperate process. When it crashes, it does not affect Windows Explorer. In fact it behaves the same way as Firefox crashes.
          • I don't know what IE you're using, but I've had IE crashes on XP and Win2k3 Server take out the taskbar and desktop icons; I had to Ctrl-Alt-Del to Task Manager to get them back.
      • Even though in principle it's not, I've had IE bring the Windows Explorer down with it. I think this happens when Explorer is rendering "web content" and thus using the IE backend. I think you can specify in the Folder Options to "Launch folder windows in a separate process" which will stop this from happening, but the option is not enabled by default. Firefox is immune from these issues, and I believe it's a better all-around browser anyway.

    • Re:Three main benefits (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Otter ( 3800 )
      There are other advantages I'd point to in Mozilla (I haven't used Firefox much): a better Find dialog, better bookmark handling, better cookie and password management...

      On the other hand, this grandfather is unlikely to value a good cookie manager any more than the other features in which he had no interest. Look, if the guy values not having to relearn his browser over any and all of Firefox's features, that's his choice. So be it.

    • 5. Browse-alicious extensions!! :)

  • Yes (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 22, 2004 @04:52PM (#11162213)

    For someone like him, is there any benefit to be gained from using Firefox?

    Internet Explorer is holding the web back. As long as a lot of people use Internet Explorer, nobody can get the benefits of advanced web development.

    CSS 1? Eight years old and still broken in Internet Explorer. PNG 1? Eight years old and still broken in Internet Explorer. HTML 4? Six years old and still broken in Internet Explorer. HTTP 1.1? Five years old and still broken in Internet Explorer. CSS 2? Six years old and still broken in Internet Explorer. Nothing works properly in Internet Explorer.

    If he's using Internet Explorer, he's part of the problem. Ask him to stop being part of the problem. Other people might still hold back the web, but at least he won't be.

  • The only downside I see to Firefox is that it has bugs where some pages won't display correctly compared to MSIE (and I'm talking about basic HTML display glitches, not obscure MS-specific ActiveX junk). Plus side? Built in popup killing. Also, the Firefox folks seem like nicer guys to support than the MS folks.
  • Sorry, you lost me at:

    "... he doesn't care about safety/privacy concerns."

    I'll bet he's also the guy who is OK with requesting someone's e-mail password over the phone, or just leaving his credit card for anyone to use. Not to mention he doesn't wear a seat belt, since he doesn't conern about safty either.

  • Think of the future (Score:3, Insightful)

    by mopslik ( 688435 ) on Wednesday December 22, 2004 @04:55PM (#11162242)

    For someone like him, is there any benefit to be gained from using Firefox?

    Well, IE seems to have some semi-major security issue every few months, whereas Firefox has them once or twice a year. Given that record, it sounds to me like you'd have less upgrade/update issues with the Fox.

  • Compare with this site (Score:2, Interesting)

    by titaniam ( 635291 ) *
    Try comparing my site iconsurf.com [iconsurf.com] using Firefox and IE. The difference is striking both in download speed and icon rendering.

  • Load times? What about the other nasties? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by RevAaron ( 125240 ) <revaaron AT hotmail DOT com> on Wednesday December 22, 2004 @04:58PM (#11162276) Homepage
    Who cares about load times? I mean, while it's definately good to use a fast browser, I didn't know the difference between the current browsers was great enough to be teh main issue. No matter how fast IE is on desktop Windows, I wouldn't use it. What's at stake isn't the second you wait; rather, it's the life of your computer. There are exploits left and right, malware and spyware. They pretty much all come in through IE. That is the reason for not using IE.

    Before I switched to FireFox, I was using CrazyBrowser (a very nice tabbeed browser, using embedded IE with other features). This was back before the spyware craze of recent times, though. I don't remember what version of FF I switched- 0.6 perhaps? This was a time when I didn't have any spyware removal tools. Hell, I didn't have any spyware. About the only thing I needed was a pop-up blocker, something Crazy Browser did well. A minor annoyance. Now a days, IE means not minor annoyances but medium to major security issues. Though I didn't use IE at home, where I had a Mac. Maybe the reason I didn't have problems at work running IE on a Win2k PC was the kinds of sites I went to, usually not the kinds of sites that have spyware even today.

    One exception: I use and used IE on Windows CE 3.0 and 4.x. It's a nice browser, and with ftxBrowser you get tabs and lots of other nice features. Unlike the desktop version of 'doze, you don't run into the cornacopia of nasty spywares.

  • Boo-hoo! (Score:2, Insightful)

    by TheRoss ( 28211 ) *
    You're unsettled that your favorite solution isn't the best fit for everyone?
  • and he doesn't care about safety/privacy concerns

    Yeah, my parents told the same things, so I've told them to look for paid tech support and disinfection for their computer.

    It seems they got quite fond of Firefox, after that.

    Robert
    • Totally! I do that too! Truth is everyone I've used that tactic with is glad I moved them over, and didn't put up much of a fuss either. Only one person said "But I like IE..."

      Sure, and I'd like to screw that hot babe with herpes, but I know better...

  • Take it From the User Perspective (Score:4, Insightful)

    by rueger ( 210566 ) on Wednesday December 22, 2004 @05:27PM (#11162577) Homepage
    The latest IE did in fact add a number of things like pop-up blocking that it had lacked in the past. SP2 also added a software firewall.

    I think your grandpa is probably right - IE does everything that he needs and is built right into Windows. If his PC is more of an entertainment than a mission critical business tool there probably is no reason for him to change.

    He has every right to to argue that IE works fine for him, is secure enough to suit him, and to not have a new browser foisted on him.

    Despite all of the holier than thou talk on slashdot, it's his computer, and his choice of a user experience. Although I may find IE irritating and cumbersome, he is entitled to his own choice.
    • Yeah, I agree, mostly. But here are some good reasons to still make the switch:

      1) The way pop-ups are blocked. Using Firefox, only *auto* popups like ads are blocked. A window you want to open by clicking a button or a link will still open, which is a good thing. In IE, even if you want the window to open by clicking a link or button, it will not. That's a really stupid way to block popups.

      2) Stability. When Firefox crashes, it won't take your whole machine with it. IE will. That's bad.

      3) Firefox
    • Well, I've already posted a couple of times arguing for grandpa making the switch, but now I almost feel like sending him to a website I will create to "demonstrate" the latest IE exploit.

      Sometimes the only way to make people this fucking retarted care about security is to flash their firmware with random bits.

  • Sure... Adblock (Score:3, Interesting)

    by linuxkrn ( 635044 ) <gwatson@lRASPinuxlogin.com minus berry> on Wednesday December 22, 2004 @05:45PM (#11162744)
    For anyone who doesn't already know, from the adblock webpage:

    Adblock is a content filtering plug-in for the Mozilla and Firebird browsers. It is both more robust and more precise than the built-in image blocker.

    Adblock allows the user to specify filters, which remove unwanted content based on the source-address. If this sounds complicated, don't worry: it's not.

    Just add a few filters. Every time a webpage loads, Adblock will intercept and disable the elements matching your filters. See?- nothing to it.

    http://adblock.mozdev.org/ [mozdev.org]

    Depending if he uses dial-up, this could make a huge different in performance as it doesn't take the time to load/render the banner ads/flash/etc.

  • Tabs arn't just for multitasking. (Score:3, Informative)

    by RustyTaco ( 301580 ) on Wednesday December 22, 2004 @06:05PM (#11162939) Homepage
    Sure they're great for keeping a bunch of different stuff quickly accessable but tabs are also invaluable for dealing with things one at a time. When I read a news site (TheRegister, cnn, slashdot) I always skim down and pick out the interesting looking headlines and open them in new tabs. When I hit the bottom I close the main page and read through the articles one at a time. No going back and forth, losing your place, skipping over something interesting because you had to rescan the crap laden front page (CNN</cough>), just middle-click click click, done.
    - RustyTaco
  • Of all the great features that Firefox has over IE, the best has to be the adblock extension. I defy anyone who has seen a page rendered by Firefox with adblock installed versus IE not to pick Firefox. Install it and go to some of those obnoxious pages with loads of flashing ads and then show him how to remove them.
    • adblock is a very good "selling point" and a jump off point for people to realize that there are scores of plugins available. That instills a feeling of confidence, in that, "if it doesn't have it, I or someone else can make it" Its enabling and gives a sense of having more control(which it does..)

      MS is catching up in some areas, but firefox is leading on the tech side.

  • why break it. OK so it might not work as far as your concerened but if you put on some auto running adware cleaner then it will, as far as he is concerned, be working well and good.

    Rus

  • I know people who *love* popup ads (Score:3, Funny)

    by digitalgimpus ( 468277 ) on Wednesday December 22, 2004 @08:23PM (#11163975) Homepage
    No joke...

    - fun to try and close them all... like a game
    - funny ads sometimes
    - interesting products

    To the point where they won't update to SP2 because they think even if you disable popup blocker it still stops some of them.

    Favorite App: gator.

    You'd think this was a joke, but some people actually enjoy it.

    I have a friend who collects spam too.
  • Its unsettling that MS is finally starting to improve their browser? I would consider the addition of a pop-up blocker a good thing.

  • ...and he doesn't care about safety/privacy concerns.

    I'm glad he's not on my network, I have enough moron's who don't care about security to deal with and make my life a living hell on a consistent basis.

    Seriously, if you don't care about keeping your machine secure, then you shouldn't be on the net. The whole, "But I don't have anything of value on my PC" argument is total bullshit. Yes you do, its called bandwidth. You have a connection to the net, you are a viable host, a vector for the spreading of eve

  • Most of the people I have moved to Firefox love it. Some prefer IE. With SP2 (and with all the other patches, and with automatic updates on, and blah blah), IE is less of a risk than it used to be - but it's still not as good as Firefox.

    On the other hand, there are legitimate uses for ActiveX (corporate apps, Windows Update and Office Update, legit uses by legit websites) that just can't be dealt with using Firefox. So if you avoid IE entirely, they are closed to you (I know, there's an ActiveX plugin -
  • If you run the M$ software, it will automagically be updated when patches come out. What happens with Firefox? Does it check for updates and warn you when they're available? Or are you expected to remember to check for security patches regularly?

    For the average person this is a huge issue.

  • I recently set up a new PC for Mom. She is still using a dialup connection. I intially set up the PC with Firefox as that's my browser of choice. But I found it didn't play nice with the dialup connection in two ways:

    1. When running Firefox, while it kicked off the dialer and the connection was coming up Firefox wouldn't wait for the connection to be ready and would start trying to load the home pages and would time out before the connection was actually ready.

    2. When closing Firefox it wouldn't a

  • Of Course It's Not a Problem (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Stephen Samuel ( 106962 ) <samuel@NOsPaM.bcgreen.com> on Thursday December 23, 2004 @07:16PM (#11172805) Homepage Journal
    For some people, letting their kids play with real guns isn't a problem either -- until somebody ends up with a bullet lodged in their skull.

    For another analogy, consider seatbelts. If you wait until there's a really good and obvious reason to use them, it's far too late.

    BTW: I don't tell people that IE is bad. I just tell them that it has some severe security problems that make it very possible for nasty greeblies to take over their computer and cause them problems. That usually gets their ears perked. If they don't do an install then, most will do it after their next run-in with virus/spy/add ware.

    I then tell them that there are only a very few sites that absolutely require IE, and that they should seriously think about whether it's worth starting up IE to go to those sites (those kinds of sitea are also most likely to get taken over by MS-script kiddies).

    Like others have said... Once people start using firefox, very few look back.

Slashdot Top Deals

It is easier to write an incorrect program than understand a correct one.

Close