General discussion

Locked

Dear IE, I'm leaving you for good

By typemismatch ·
article root

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

41 total posts (Page 2 of 5)   Prev   01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05   Next
Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

IE Makes us..

by lsw In reply to True, but the question is ...

If IE would finally support standards and quit doing their own thing.... we would not have to hack our sites to look good in IE & other browsers.....

Safari, Opera and Firefox all show ms sites closely to the same..... Only IE forces me to add CSS hacks to show what I want.

Collapse -

Standards are often Arbitrary

by dlwaters In reply to True, but the question is ...

Of course I would like to be able to program to a single set of standards. That would be lovely, but I find even Firefox has some pecularities to how it interprets some CSS.

But, in reality, I am a coder and I have never been able to program much of anything that behaved exactly how it has been specified. It angers me that Explorer ignores certain standards, but I hate to say it, but I find *some* of the CSS standards to be oddly chosen. For instance, I would like it if there were a toggle to have containers *contain* floats, or at least the bottom edge of floats so that they don't leak out of their container when they fill up.

But this is just picky. At the heart of it a "Standard" doesn't mean "Correct." A standard is often quite arbitrary and both Microsoft & Netscape have violated standards at times in hopes that Their Standard would become The Standard.

I am deeply suspicious of Microsoft's choice to not release a new browser version. I quite honestly think they are lying through their teeth about this "operating system integration" necessity. Horse poo! They could have easily devoted a small portion of their research budget to an interim update with new features. It is my not-so-humble opinion that they were hoping other browsers would just go away. Well they haven't! Maybe it's the revolutionary in me that likes the Idea of Firefox as much as the implementation. I always like it when the underdog does a better job than the Corporate Imperialist.

But that is also why I am quick to point out Firefox's limitations as well as it's strengths. I find that honest dialog is better than Preaching.

Dean L. Waters

Collapse -

Agreed, MS must be up to something....

by MadestroITSolutions In reply to Standards are often Arbit ...

Given the ever increasing popularity of Internet around the world, I find it hard to believe that Microsoft is not putting any money into it. I wonder what their strategy towards this is.... They must be planning something... WaterFox?

Collapse -

Conspiracy Theories 101

by David Hamilton In reply to Agreed, MS must be up to ...

My 5 cents is that Microsoft are working on a number of proprietary solutions to add extra rich content to the Internet Experience.

However to experience them you will have to be using both IE on Longhorn, and accessing a servers running MS server software. They'll use proprietary protocols owned by Microsoft.

That will crush Linux, Apple, Mozilla, Opera, Apache etc. at a stroke.

Of course, it'll totally remove consumer choice as well, but most consumers have shown themselves not to want that anyway.

/david

Collapse -

True

by MadestroITSolutions In reply to Conspiracy Theories 101

I agree. That is what Microsoft always does, and sadly enough, you are right, consumers stick to Microsoft. (although I am a Microsoft user and love IE and other products, I still don't agree on Monopolies)

Collapse -

heh, the IT world does not belong to MSFT

by gimbal In reply to you're kidding right?

Pardon if this sounds like it's off from "left
field" or what, but, really, if I was Microsoft,
I'd be cringing.

They may be cringing, already.

Obliquely put:

Signs of desperation appear, where the Microsoft
name approaches Linux.

Signs of misunderstanding may appear, likewise,
in a "business" sector that is not really
getting what the heck is going on.

Collapse -

Firefox has bugs too!!

by nathwdavis In reply to Dear IE, I'm leaving you ...

I have Firefox installed and used it quite a bit for a month or so, but I got tired of the frequent crashes, the bugs, and the mis-display of web pages that are XHTML compliant.

Also, it has its own security vulnerabilities as well, they are just not advertised like IE's are because hardly anybody is using or even knows what Firefox or Mozilla is.

Let's be realistic!!

Collapse -

What Security Vulnerabilities?

by David Hamilton In reply to Firefox has bugs too!!

OK, I've looked on the Mozilla vulnerabilities page - there are no unfixed issues:
http://www.mozilla.org/projects/security/known-vulnerabilities.html

I've also listed all open bugzilla issues on Firefox 1.0 and can find nothing against 'security' or 'vulnerability' that corresponds to anything resembling a security bug.

Can you please provide evidence of your statement, otherwise I'll have to assume it is untrue. And that would mean that your statements about crashes, bugs and mis-display would appear to be untrue too...

I await your evidence.
/david

Collapse -

RE: What Security Vulnerabilities?

by nathwdavis In reply to What Security Vulnerabili ...

You are correct: there are no unfixed vulns for the current release.

The current release is about 2 weeks old. That isn't much time to find new vulns.

Also, I like 99% of people don't check for the latest version of my browser every few weeks. So, I have version 0.9.3 - which has about 8 vulnerabilities. It's a good thing I'm not using FF much.

Fortunately IE vulns get fixed by Windows Update, so my current IE is vulnerabiliy-less.

Collapse -

Several unfixed vulnerabilities in IE

by David Hamilton In reply to RE: What Security Vulnera ...

How wrong can you be? There are several unfixed vulnerabilities in IE, the latest of which is:

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1009_22-5457105.html

But in particular, if you're not using XP SP2 (and a lot of the world isn't) there is this particular unfixed nasty out there:

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1009_22-5439370.html

And that's only the one's that they're admiting to - they have a habit of starting arguments with security companies that dare tell the public about problems.

And if you want proof, look at the Microsoft's knowledge-base numbers against the JPEG security patch released in September 2004...

http://www.microsoft.com/security/bulletins/200409_jpeg.mspx

At the time the press praised Microsft for its prompt fixing of the problem - but if you look at their sequentially allocated KB numbers at different story emerges - the first number against the flaw is 830348.

Now if you look back through their history of other patches you find the following fix for KB831527 (after the first JPEG issue report) in <b>November 2003</b>:

http://www.microsoft.com/security/bulletins/200311_office.mspx

Thus my conclusion is that it took at least <b>10 months</b> from Microsoft being aware of the JPEG buffer overrun to releasing a fix. Now I realise it was a big patch, but almost a year?!!!!

Be afraid - be very afraid - if you're still using Internet Explorer!

/david

Back to Desktop Forum
41 total posts (Page 2 of 5)   Prev   01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05   Next

Related Discussions

Related Forums