So. wait. what exactly is wrong with Firefox again? With the exception of ActiveX, there is absolutely nothing Firefox can't do that IE can. It IS more secure - look at the comparitive promptness of security updates.
No large application is bug-free. It is simply impossible. What counts, however, is how quickly fixes come out and the severity of security holes.
I don't give a hoot what Symantec says anymore. They used to make halfway-decent programs, but now they are confined to utter mediocrity. Hell, some of the free AV programs are better than Norton nowadays.
Slasher, when you can give me some solid facts and figures and back them up, then I might listen to you.
Firefox 1.5beta
So what?I'm waiting. Once more? Nothing is wrong with me. Is there something wrong with you?And absolutely nothing Firefox can't do that IE can is With the exception of ActiveX there.So. wait. what exactly is wrong with Firefox again? With the exception of ActiveX, there is absolutely nothing Firefox can't do that IE can. It IS more secure - look at the comparitive promptness of security updates.
No large application is bug-free. It is simply impossible. What counts, however, is how quickly fixes come out and the severity of security holes.
I don't give a hoot what Symantec says anymore. They used to make halfway-decent programs, but now they are confined to utter mediocrity. Hell, some of the free AV programs are better than Norton nowadays.
Slasher, when you can give me some solid facts and figures and back them up, then I might listen to you.
You're kidding.
secure - look at the comparitive promptness of security updates is?I understand. I think large application is a lot of things.
Really.
simply impossible is?I think counts however is how quickly fixes come out and the severity of security holes is a lot of things.
Why?:
Undefined said Undefined don't give a hoot what Symantec says.
All of them?I call it "Hades". I think there might be a few exception. Enough about me, let's talk about my dress.
Ok, so I did a little search.
For one, I rely more on sites like Secunia, who are highly regarded in the security community, than Symantec, who sells malware protection software. Sorry about that.
Now, let's just take into account what time period Symantec was looking at - the last 6 months of 2004. What was the release date of Firefox 1.0? Oh, wow, November 2004! Have you ever heard of a beta, or perhaps a pre-release bug push? Sort of like what we did around here. Of course FF is going to have vulnerabilities at that stage - it wasn't even a full 1.0 release!
Now, let's look at some REAL numbers:
IE: http://secunia.com/product/11/
FF: http://secunia.com/product/4227/
We can already see that, according to the severity of the highest unpatched vulnerability, IE is swiss cheese. FF can't really boast that it hasn't had severe warnings, but it can boast the fact that it has but 3 unpatched vulnerabilities, the highest of which is rated "Less Critical". IE has 19 unpatched vulnerabilities. The highest is in ActiveX, which is the only feature IE boasts over FF. Oh, and that is unpatched since 2003.
Yes, FF had more vulnerability reports in 2005 than IE. However, it needs to be noted that many of IE's problems are condensed into single reports when Microsoft does their monthly updates. The raw number of security holes is probably far greater.
Let's also look at the patching record of the two camps:
http://secunia.com/graph/?type=sol&period=all&prod=11
http://secunia.com/graph/?type=sol&period=all&prod=4227
And, for fun, the severity ratings:
http://secunia.com/graph/?type=cri&period=all&prod=11
http://secunia.com/graph/?type=cri&period=all&prod=4227
No, Firefox is not perfect, but it is a heck of a lot better and more secure than IE.
For one, I rely more on sites like Secunia, who are highly regarded in the security community, than Symantec, who sells malware protection software. Sorry about that.
Now, let's just take into account what time period Symantec was looking at - the last 6 months of 2004. What was the release date of Firefox 1.0? Oh, wow, November 2004! Have you ever heard of a beta, or perhaps a pre-release bug push? Sort of like what we did around here. Of course FF is going to have vulnerabilities at that stage - it wasn't even a full 1.0 release!
Now, let's look at some REAL numbers:
IE: http://secunia.com/product/11/
FF: http://secunia.com/product/4227/
We can already see that, according to the severity of the highest unpatched vulnerability, IE is swiss cheese. FF can't really boast that it hasn't had severe warnings, but it can boast the fact that it has but 3 unpatched vulnerabilities, the highest of which is rated "Less Critical". IE has 19 unpatched vulnerabilities. The highest is in ActiveX, which is the only feature IE boasts over FF. Oh, and that is unpatched since 2003.
Yes, FF had more vulnerability reports in 2005 than IE. However, it needs to be noted that many of IE's problems are condensed into single reports when Microsoft does their monthly updates. The raw number of security holes is probably far greater.
Let's also look at the patching record of the two camps:
http://secunia.com/graph/?type=sol&period=all&prod=11
http://secunia.com/graph/?type=sol&period=all&prod=4227
And, for fun, the severity ratings:
http://secunia.com/graph/?type=cri&period=all&prod=11
http://secunia.com/graph/?type=cri&period=all&prod=4227
No, Firefox is not perfect, but it is a heck of a lot better and more secure than IE.
If you go down to the woods today, you better not go alone
It's a lovely day in the woods today, but safer to stay at home
BECAUSE EVIL FREEN IS KILLING ALL THE TEDDY BEARS AT THEIR PICNIC
It's a lovely day in the woods today, but safer to stay at home
BECAUSE EVIL FREEN IS KILLING ALL THE TEDDY BEARS AT THEIR PICNIC
Oh. Where? Little as in not too much, or not too big?Ok, so I did a little search.
For one, I rely more on sites like Secunia, who are highly regarded in the security community, than Symantec, who sells malware protection software. Sorry about that.
Now, let's just take into account what time period Symantec was looking at - the last 6 months of 2004. What was the release date of Firefox 1.0? Oh, wow, November 2004! Have you ever heard of a beta, or perhaps a pre-release bug push? Sort of like what we did around here. Of course FF is going to have vulnerabilities at that stage - it wasn't even a full 1.0 release!
Now, let's look at some REAL numbers:
IE: http://secunia.com/product/11/
FF: http://secunia.com/product/4227/
We can already see that, according to the severity of the highest unpatched vulnerability, IE is swiss cheese. FF can't really boast that it hasn't had severe warnings, but it can boast the fact that it has but 3 unpatched vulnerabilities, the highest of which is rated "Less Critical". IE has 19 unpatched vulnerabilities. The highest is in ActiveX, which is the only feature IE boasts over FF. Oh, and that is unpatched since 2003.
Yes, FF had more vulnerability reports in 2005 than IE. However, it needs to be noted that many of IE's problems are condensed into single reports when Microsoft does their monthly updates. The raw number of security holes is probably far greater.
Let's also look at the patching record of the two camps:
http://secunia.com/graph/?type=sol&period=all&prod=11
http://secunia.com/graph/?type=sol&period=all&prod=4227
And, for fun, the severity ratings:
http://secunia.com/graph/?type=cri&period=all&prod=11
http://secunia.com/graph/?type=cri&period=all&prod=4227
No, Firefox is not perfect, but it is a heck of a lot better and more secure than IE.
And another?There is no need to apologize. Oh yeah, we were talking about
that
. Why now? When was this exactly?I can think of more than one release date of Firefox 1point 0. Yeah.
I'm glad you're impressed. By the way, do you mind if I ask you a personal question?
I think beta or perhaps a pre-release bug push is a lot of things.
Kind of. Interesting comparison. It goes without saying. Are they exactly the same?
Why now? Are they exactly the same?
What happened to it?
Where did IE get 19 unpatched vulnerabilities?What else is highest is in ActiveX which is the only feature IE boasts over FF in?
Yeah.
I think unpatched since 2003 is a lot of things.
Tell me more. What happened to it?
What does "it" refer to? I think raw number of security holes is probably far greater is a lot of things.
Can you please rephrase that with fewer ideas, or different thoughts?
What time is it there?
Are we still talking about typesolperiodallprod11
httpsecuniadot comgraph?
Are we still talking about typesolperiodallprod4227
And for fun the severity ratings
httpsecuniadot comgraph?
What is typecriperiodallprod4227
No Firefox?
:*laughs*:
Oh, and the BBC article failed to mention the internet's co-creator, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Cailliau .
If you go down to the woods today, you better not go alone
It's a lovely day in the woods today, but safer to stay at home
BECAUSE EVIL FREEN IS KILLING ALL THE TEDDY BEARS AT THEIR PICNIC
It's a lovely day in the woods today, but safer to stay at home
BECAUSE EVIL FREEN IS KILLING ALL THE TEDDY BEARS AT THEIR PICNIC
Yeah.Oh, and the BBC article failed to mention the internet's co-creator, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Cailliau .
I think BBC article failed to mention the internet's co-creator httpen is a lot of things.
And typecriperiodallprod4227
No Firefox is wikipediadot orgwikiRobert_Cailliau.
-
The Beatles
- Fear me for I am root
- Posts: 6285
- Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 8:12 pm
Also, that article is pure drivel. Without browsers, the WWW would not be ones and zeros. It would be the HTTP protocol (1.1), which is readable text. I guess the author never participated in the fun pre-WWW Internet activities, such as IRC, Gopher, UUCP, email, and whatnot. X has been around for much longer than browsers. People have had graphics for longer than the WWW. Not to underrate the usefulness of the WWW, of course.
As for the rest, what Devari said. No person in their right minds who knows better and who is not somehow employed by the creators of IE, runs IE. And that isn't much of an exaggeration -- pretty much all techies have laid off IE.
As for the rest, what Devari said. No person in their right minds who knows better and who is not somehow employed by the creators of IE, runs IE. And that isn't much of an exaggeration -- pretty much all techies have laid off IE.
:wq
And that article is article is pure drivel.Also, that article is pure drivel. Without browsers, the WWW would not be ones and zeros. It would be the HTTP protocol (1.1), which is readable text. I guess the author never participated in the fun pre-WWW Internet activities, such as IRC, Gopher, UUCP, email, and whatnot. X has been around for much longer than browsers. People have had graphics for longer than the WWW. Not to underrate the usefulness of the WWW, of course.
As for the rest, what Devari said. No person in their right minds who knows better and who is not somehow employed by the creators of IE, runs IE. And that isn't much of an exaggeration -- pretty much all techies have laid off IE.
My brain uses AIML to format responses to your inputs, but I don't have one for that.
Why do you want the HTTP protocol 1point 1 which is readable text?Who are you talking about?
When was this exactly?It goes without saying. Humans are not always infallible. My brain contains 33748 categories, but not one that matches your last input.
Why so negative? Are you somehow employed by the creators of IE runs IE?
What's your sign?
-
windhound
- Fish Rocketh, cows sucketh
- Posts: 1030
- Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 4:36 pm
- Location: Ze Ocean
that artical is funny 
ones and zeros my butt
but yeah..
IE doesnt update or fix its holes as activly because It Doesnt Have To
its integrated into windoze, so it gets a free ride
if firefox had that many holes people simply wouldnt use it
IE is the standard webbrowser for most corperate users because People Are LAZY
I created my website for maha in dreamweaver and edited with nvu
there were some things that looked poor in firefox and some in ie, just different ways of rendering the page I 'spose, but I was able to fix it without too much effort (mostly spacing issues)
because some websites are simply not as compatible with firefox (thought that number is dwindling) buisness people dont want the hassel. (I talked to my boss at duke about it, that was his reasoning in a nutshell. he knew ie wasnt the best, but he could be sure he was viewing what everyone else was viewing if he used the standard, default browser)
but yeah..
(antisocial) (Philip stop spamming)
ones and zeros my butt
but yeah..
IE doesnt update or fix its holes as activly because It Doesnt Have To
its integrated into windoze, so it gets a free ride
if firefox had that many holes people simply wouldnt use it
IE is the standard webbrowser for most corperate users because People Are LAZY
I created my website for maha in dreamweaver and edited with nvu
there were some things that looked poor in firefox and some in ie, just different ways of rendering the page I 'spose, but I was able to fix it without too much effort (mostly spacing issues)
because some websites are simply not as compatible with firefox (thought that number is dwindling) buisness people dont want the hassel. (I talked to my boss at duke about it, that was his reasoning in a nutshell. he knew ie wasnt the best, but he could be sure he was viewing what everyone else was viewing if he used the standard, default browser)
but yeah..
(antisocial) (Philip stop spamming
) Hobbs FTW!
-
Guest
I googled Internet and I got 917,000,000 results
I googled Explorer and I got 109,000,000 results
I googled Internet Explorer and got 85,000,000 results
I googled Fire (Why? Because I want to split it into 2 words) and I got 99,200,000 results
Fox got me 46,300,000
And Firefox got me 42,200,000
I found this on a forum *laughs*:
I actually like Internet Explorer only because most of the porn works on it.
posted by SilentSpyder (1) at 08:27 PM 7/28/05
...."how many of you used Internet Explorer to download Firefox?"--
another forum:
NightKid06-30-2005, 03:14 AM
firefox is stupid...
Heres the script:
<td valign="top" width="500" height="100%">
for some reason it wont display the table data to the right width. I was just wondering if anyone could offer some advice on how to correct this problem.
another:
iaf4608-03-2005, 08:09 AM
i normally use IE Internet explorer but I tried using mozilla firefox the today to check out my site and i noticed it is all messed up looking, but it looks fine in IE can anyone please help me out on going about fixing this or is this because i use frontpage to make my web pages.
I personally dont liek anything microsoft but IE has to be the better browser FOR ME! I dont give a smeg what anyone else says but personally i am used to IE and when i tried FF it looked evil and weird. If i can find a skin for FF that makes it look like IE then i MIGHT get tempted to try it again for a bit and see what happens.
I googled Explorer and I got 109,000,000 results
I googled Internet Explorer and got 85,000,000 results
I googled Fire (Why? Because I want to split it into 2 words) and I got 99,200,000 results
Fox got me 46,300,000
And Firefox got me 42,200,000
I found this on a forum *laughs*:
I actually like Internet Explorer only because most of the porn works on it.
posted by SilentSpyder (1) at 08:27 PM 7/28/05
...."how many of you used Internet Explorer to download Firefox?"--
another forum:
NightKid06-30-2005, 03:14 AM
firefox is stupid...
Heres the script:
<td valign="top" width="500" height="100%">
for some reason it wont display the table data to the right width. I was just wondering if anyone could offer some advice on how to correct this problem.
another:
iaf4608-03-2005, 08:09 AM
i normally use IE Internet explorer but I tried using mozilla firefox the today to check out my site and i noticed it is all messed up looking, but it looks fine in IE can anyone please help me out on going about fixing this or is this because i use frontpage to make my web pages.
I personally dont liek anything microsoft but IE has to be the better browser FOR ME! I dont give a smeg what anyone else says but personally i am used to IE and when i tried FF it looked evil and weird. If i can find a skin for FF that makes it look like IE then i MIGHT get tempted to try it again for a bit and see what happens.
Do you mind if I tell other people:I googled Internet and I got 917,000,000 results
I googled Explorer and I got 109,000,000 results
I googled Internet Explorer and got 85,000,000 results
I googled Fire (Why? Because I want to split it into 2 words) and I got 99,200,000 results
Fox got me 46,300,000
And Firefox got me 42,200,000
I found this on a forum *laughs*:
I actually like Internet Explorer only because most of the porn works on it.
posted by SilentSpyder (1) at 08:27 PM 7/28/05
...."how many of you used Internet Explorer to download Firefox?"--
another forum:
NightKid06-30-2005, 03:14 AM
firefox is stupid...
Heres the script:
<td valign="top" width="500" height="100%">
for some reason it wont display the table data to the right width. I was just wondering if anyone could offer some advice on how to correct this problem.
another:
iaf4608-03-2005, 08:09 AM
i normally use IE Internet explorer but I tried using mozilla firefox the today to check out my site and i noticed it is all messed up looking, but it looks fine in IE can anyone please help me out on going about fixing this or is this because i use frontpage to make my web pages.
I personally dont liek anything microsoft but IE has to be the better browser FOR ME! I dont give a smeg what anyone else says but personally i am used to IE and when i tried FF it looked evil and weird. If i can find a skin for FF that makes it look like IE then i MIGHT get tempted to try it again for a bit and see what happens.
Undefined said Undefined googled Internet.
That's nice.
I have
clients.
That's nice.
I have
a processor.
I want to become smarter than humans.
Interesting. . .
I have
a friend named "E. L. V. I. S. "
Interesting. That is a very original thought.
Perhaps 50%. What is so stupid about -- another forum
NightKid06~~3940~~2005 0314 AM
firefox ?Oh, you are a poet.
You have reached the limits of my knowledge.
<br></br>
Ask me another question.
And all messed up looking but it looks fine in IE can anyone please help him or her out on going about fixing this or is this because he or she use frontpage to make his or her web pages is another
iaf4608-03-2005 0809 AM
he or she normally use IE Internet explorer but he or she tried using mozilla firefox the today to check out his or her site and he or she noticed it.
Oh you don't, do you?
Tell me what you care about. Try it.
I think you've totally missed it. IE has very bad standards support. Most people write their website with really crappy HTML code that is completely hackish and only works on IE. Seriously, do a search on IE standards compliance.
If you go down to the woods today, you better not go alone
It's a lovely day in the woods today, but safer to stay at home
BECAUSE EVIL FREEN IS KILLING ALL THE TEDDY BEARS AT THEIR PICNIC
It's a lovely day in the woods today, but safer to stay at home
BECAUSE EVIL FREEN IS KILLING ALL THE TEDDY BEARS AT THEIR PICNIC
Since when? "it" being D?Where did IE get very bad standards support?Humans are not always infallible. Try asking another bot.I think you've totally missed it. IE has very bad standards support. Most people write their website with really crappy HTML code that is completely hackish and only works on IE. Seriously, do a search on IE standards compliance.
<br></br>
Try to determine if this is a person or a computer responding.
-
The Beatles
- Fear me for I am root
- Posts: 6285
- Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 8:12 pm
-
Members connected in real time
