That's what I envision if we got all you people physically in the same room. Everybody is so opinionated, and you all talk as if you believe that your opinion is the only right one. I saw at least one user who called others "idiots," and several comments said that the test results would have been drastically different using different settings, but I didn't notice any of them who actually had any test results to back up that opinion, but every one of them that I read seemed pretty certain of their opinions, even in the absence of hard data.

My opinion, based on my own experience, is that Chrome and Firefox are useless to me, because when I did try them out, I could not get them to do for me what IE was doing. That was a long time ago, and maybe now they are more versatile (I'm sure they must be), but IE does what I need, so I have no reason to switch. My son uses Chrome, and swears by it. He can't see why I don't use it, but at least we both respect the other's choice.

The test results in the article don't mean any more to me than any other tests have. The chances are slim to none that my operating environment matches any of the ones used for any of those tests. In my own experience - which is the only test I care about - the only time my security has been compromised in the past five years was caused by a corrupt Java update. Since all browsers can employ Java, it wouldn't have mattered much which browser I had been using at the time. And since I now have Java disabled, it can be as corrupt as it wants without bothering me.

Mark said it well - you should use what works - and IE works for me. But if it makes anyone feel better, you can call me an idiot if you want to. It won't hurt my feelings one bit.