View Full Version : IE faces serious competition
Ioman
10-06-2004, 09:49 PM
Netscapes Marc Andreessen says that Internet Explorer faces some serious compeition from smaller browsers. Of course this is nothing new to us. I am surprised by how many people are using FireFox. I am still using IE, but occasionally I use Netscape 7 when browsing.
I predict that Microsoft will release a new IE with tabbed browsing and other features to compete - and free of course.
Here is the story from Cnet News: http://news.com.com/Andreessen+IE+faces+one-two+punch/2100-1032_3-5399954.html?tag=nefd.top
Excuse ME:
BUT iwndows will have to CLOSE THE BACKDOORS, before everyone is half way happy.
spankers
10-07-2004, 04:46 AM
I'd bet Firefox will gain market share. The benefits of Firefox go WAY beyond the tabbed browsing features. The extension framework for Firefox has generated a large amount of community support. Pop-up blocker, adblock, page translation, image zoom, mini-applications (calendar, photo browsers, etc.), ad infinitum...
https://update.mozilla.org/extensions/showlist.php?category=All
The thing that has driven/will drive people to Firefox or other alternative browsers though, is what ECA mentioned. Insecurity in IE. IE insecurities have burned enough people to the point where IE has a very bad reputation and a bad reputation, as all know, is hard to overcome.
The concern I have with Firefox is the very extensibility that makes it so neat. I've a feeling that extensions will be an Achilles Heel in it's future. Some nefarious character will write or modify extensions to do very bad things.
Time will tell. As it stands I enjoy using Firefox as my primary browser.
Tschüss!
Ed
znaps
10-07-2004, 05:08 AM
I just started using Firefox on XP at work. It's really slick - pretty much perfect. I've been using Mozilla at home for a long time now for its email client, and before that I used Opera...haven't used IE for a couple of years now.
NOW,
The funny thing about this is THE MORE ppl LEARN about windows, the LESS they want to use it..Dont CARE how perfect and stable IT SEEMS. Once the flaws are seen and esperienced(and they KNOW what caused it) PPL look for alternatives..
And Firefox is QUICK and fiast and has TIME to create a GREAT browser, while IE sits and suffers.
Ioman
10-07-2004, 08:55 AM
But don't you guys think that as FireFox gains in popularity, the number of security hacks will increase? It could be that the only reason why IE has so many insecurities is becaused its hacked so much.
I have never been a fan of Opera, but I do like Netscape 7.1 since it appears to be the most compatible with sites other than IE.
znaps
10-07-2004, 09:36 AM
Security attacks will definitely increase on Firefox, but I still think IE is insecure due to design - security in IE was an afterthought for Microsoft, but an important design constraint for Firefox.
spankers
10-07-2004, 10:50 AM
Like I said, time will tell which browser is more/less secure. I believe the alternate browsers will enjoy a security advantage over time for both of the reasons above. Browsers like Forefox/Mozilla will enjoy a security advantage just because they don't have the installed base that IE has. When one of the alternates (probably Firefox) achieves enough of an installed base, perhaps it will have its share of compromises.
One of the things that makes it oh so easy for Windows/IE to be compromised is that most home/non-corporate Windows boxes run with admin privileges out of the box. Hell... even in corporate environments I've seen most user accounts have more privileges than necessary. How many worms/viruses/trojans could have been avoided if Windows forced the creation of a normal user account without admin priviledges? Despite Microsoft's blather about security initiatives and "Trusted Computing", they only take half measures when it comes to Windows security. Of course, if they did lock down Windows, half of the known world would be screaming because their computer would no longer be as easy to use. Catch-22.
One of the benefits of Linux/BSD/UNIX is the strict enforcement of file permissions. An ordinary user cannot change system files and should only have write permissions to his/her home directory. Of course, you occasionally run into some nutcase that likes to run as root. Bad, Bad, Bad....
znaps
10-07-2004, 01:45 PM
It helps that on many Linux distributions pretty much all the software you need can be pre-installed, so users won't need to modify dirs outside of their home dir.
Of course on Win boxes commercial software reigns supreme so your everyday Joe has to be able to install it himself, so he needs admin privileges.
Another Thought:
The service windows supplies for "TRUSTED" sites SUCKS... Shouldnt even have been STARTED. It costs $200 for a licence, can be PLACED on any site, and MS DONT FOLLOW up on it.
Pay the $200 and setup a site to BANG IE to death. Trojans, virus, Adult site, anything I WANT.
This is like walking in for a drivers licence and they HAND it to you, with out TESTING.
This is like SPEEDING down the freeway, and NOT getting a ticket.
IMO, that LICENCE was there for SECURITY.
When IE sees that Licence, or EVEN WHEN WE DO, we THINK, its a trusted site. That MS KNOWS about the SITE and MAY have some control on it.
spankers
10-07-2004, 03:50 PM
It helps that on many Linux distributions pretty much all the software you need can be pre-installed, so users won't need to modify dirs outside of their home dir.
Of course on Win boxes commercial software reigns supreme so your everyday Joe has to be able to install it himself, so he needs admin privileges.
In Windows you can still have separate accounts... use one account for conducting admin business and another for day to day stuff. The problem lies when you do your day to day stuff (i.e. browse, email, whatever....) with admin privileges.
In Unix/Linux it helps that there are mechanisms to elevate privileges temporarily to admin the system... e.g. su and sudo (Super User and Super User DO).
As far as Linux applications and admin chores go... I probably spend as much time as anyone doing that stuff. My laptop is a weird assortment of Debian Unstable and packages compiled from source.
Many people are saying that Linux is ready for mass consumption, but I'd say it lacks a few odds and ends, mostly user configuration tools that don't require a lot of brain sweat and the use of intemperate words.
Until those tools are available, Microsoft, secure or not, will not have any competition on the desktop.
znaps
10-07-2004, 05:37 PM
I wonder when a Linux distrib will match OS X....
spankers
10-07-2004, 06:41 PM
To be honest, I don't think it will be anytime soon. I've been using Linux for the last seven years and I think Open Source and Free Software are pretty awesome, but there is a downside to all the different competing projects out there... particularly in the desktop arena. You have KDE, GNOME, XFCE, and a handfull of other desktop environments available... and they compete.
Apple has one desktop environment... on one hardware platform. It is a much more focused product. All of the people that build the BSD kernel based OS and GUI work towards a common goal and work for a common boss at some point in the food chain.
This doesn't happen with GNU/Linux + X Window System + Desktop Environment. For one thing you have a huge supported hardware base... processors from IBM S390 mainframes to embedded processors in cell phones... and the almost infinate number of combinations of IDE controllers, video cards, memory busses, ad nausium. Another is the development model.
The FOSS/Open Source development model is software Darwinism. Competition. I think in the long run the software base built around this model will blow everything else out of the water, but in the short term I wouldn't look for anything quite as friendly as OS X.
If you haven't read it there is an essay called "The Cathedral and the Bazaar" by Eric S. Raymond... it compares the philosophical differences in software design between closed proprientary stuff like Windows or OS X and the software built by chaotic long haired hippy radicals from Hell.
http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/
Oh,
I agree...
But if a group gets together, and decides to BACK an OS, as linux. They COULD make some good money making premire software.
Even consider that 60+% of games MADE ARE/WERE designed under linux and THEN ported to directX. And MOSt were NEVER released under Linux.
Because THEY DIDNt see a MARKET...
spankers
10-07-2004, 08:24 PM
Oh... as far as making money goes I don't believe there is a big market for selling software for Linux, at least not in the traditional sense. The only company that I think would make a bundle selling software would be Microsoft, if they were to port their Office suite to Linux.... and I'm not holding my breath on that. Microsoft, however, may lose out bigtime to Open Office if they don't. I've been using OO quite a bit, and while it doesn't do everything Microsoft's Office does, it is a damn fine piece of software. Considering the cost difference between the two, I can do without a few bells and whistles. One nice thing about Open Office is that, like Firefox, it is multi-platform and will run on Windows, Linux, Solaris, BSD, and Mac.
http://www.openoffice.org/
And of course, there is the game market. Games will sell on any OS. (Speaking of which, two days ago id Software has released a Linux Open GL version of their latest title Doom3... too bad my hardware isn't quite good enough)
The profit model for Linux has and will be based on support services as in the case of Red Hat. They no longer sell a distro for home/personal use and are concentrating on the corporate/enterprise market. It seems to be a more fair pricing strategy, selling a service vice selling a license.
Microsoft has said in the past that Open Source, particularly software released under the General Public License, is "viral" in nature and is eroding software intellectual property value and to an extent they are right. As the "free" software base continues to grow, there will obviously be less demand for pricey, proprietary software. I think this is a good change... when you consider that up to 20% of the cost of a PC is going into Microsoft coffers just for an operating system.
Weel Spank,
I can see you AINT as OLD as I...
As I REMEMBER the OLD days of REAL freeware, and REAL shareware, and WHEN a prog was created it was made for ALL the OS's... Multiplan(first Linear Spreadsheet prog) was on EVERY computer from the C64, apple, Mac(OLD MAC), 286/386, Linux, CPM, EVERY place...
And companies were only looking at 1% of the market... And 1% of the MARKET NOW, is like 10% THEN.
NOw they wont make a game for an OS, without 10+% of market.
We had so much FREE/Share ware, that it was hard to even have copies of EVERYTHING...
When a 1 gig drive could HOLD it ALL, and that was 10,000+ programs...
znaps
10-08-2004, 05:53 AM
Microsoft has said in the past that Open Source, particularly software released under the General Public License, is "viral" in nature and is eroding software intellectual property value and to an extent they are right. As the "free" software base continues to grow, there will obviously be less demand for pricey, proprietary software. I think this is a good change... when you consider that up to 20% of the cost of a PC is going into Microsoft coffers just for an operating system.
Eroding software intellectual property (at least somewhat) is definitely a good thing. Did you read about the Sun $96 million pay off to Kodak for some BS patent violation.
spankers
10-08-2004, 06:55 AM
Weel Spank,
I can see you AINT as OLD as I...
As I REMEMBER the OLD days of REAL freeware, and REAL shareware, and WHEN a prog was created it was made for ALL the OS's... Multiplan(first Linear Spreadsheet prog) was on EVERY computer from the C64, apple, Mac(OLD MAC), 286/386, Linux, CPM, EVERY place...
And companies were only looking at 1% of the market... And 1% of the MARKET NOW, is like 10% THEN.
NOw they wont make a game for an OS, without 10+% of market...
Arrrgh! I only wish I was still a youngster, gramps!
What about the Commodore PET (Personal Electronic Translator)... or the Heathkit "roll your own" microcomputer with hex keypad? How about the HP3000 mini running MPE/IV?
Yea verily, back in the days of yore, when men were men and needed not more than 32K of RAM to solve non-linear equations, all programs were ported to all platforms. Hrrmph! Given the program was not written in assembly it was not a huge task to port an application... you primarily had to change the code segments dealing with I/O (disk, screen, keyboard, etc...).
These days with all the pretty GUI stuff people expect, unless a project starts with the plan of being multi-platform, it is a fairly daunting task to port from one system to another. If you take a look at the average app out there today, a majority of the code bulk is in the GUI vice in the code that actually does the work.... and with the number of desktop environments/window managers/GUI toolkits out there it becomes a bit of a chore porting.
One of the neater things I've seen lately is GTK (Gimp Tool Kit... the GUI/widget library GNOME and XFCE are based on) on Windows. It makes porting free software to the Windows side of the house much easier. I recently installed a free dictionary program originally written for Unix/Linux/X/GTK called Star Dict on my girlfriend's Windows laptop and it works like a champ.
This is one of the reasons I think Microsoft will lose in the long run. They have not made the effort to be truly interoperable with other architectures, environments, filesystems, or file formats. For example, with Open Office I can import a wide variety of Microsoft documents, but is the reverse true? Can I import Open Office/Star Office docs into MS Office? Not the last time I checked. With Linux I can mount Windows network shares, but can Windows natively mount a Unix NFS volume? No. Will Windows run on an Apple Mac? No. But Linux/X Window/GTK will.
The only thing that may keep Microsoft from losing its dominance in this country is the screwy intellectual property laws we have, particularly software patents. Remember Amazon.com and their One-Click patent? Horrible. Mayhap I will patent the method of wiping one's posterior in the Western fashion (Asians, for the most part, uses an alternate method... and for the most part (in SW Asia) ignore U.S. IP laws). I'd only charge US $1.00 per month for a license per person, with site licenses available (cost dependent on volume). One could argue "prior art" all day long.
spankers
10-08-2004, 07:18 AM
Eroding software intellectual property (at least somewhat) is definitely a good thing. Did you read about the Sun $96 million pay off to Kodak for some BS patent violation.
Yup... not a good sign. The one that I read on /. yesterday was even bigger though.... and Honeywell may be justified in extracting fees from the manufacturers, although it kinda sucks that the companies named do not make LCD's and don't directly infringe... they do sell the laptops though and that makes them liable.
http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/04/10/07/1843203.shtml?tid=155&tid=17
In the OLD days...
The software designers for games the progs, Stole/Borrowed from each other.
The progs were always getting BETTER, NEWER, stange Ideas always poping up.
NOT, Just CHANGE the charactors and publish it, NOT BIGGER/PRETTIER graphics and RELEASE...Add more options RELEASE...
I know, its all been done before and theres NOT much to Improve the Original idea of the games/progs.. If thats TRUE the ORIGINAL copyright goes to those OLD guys..
Atari is RE-releaseing there OLD games.. Little C64 systems, and to Celphones... They are making MORe money on DEAD software. That should have been RELEASED to the open market YEARS ago.
timex Sinclear 1k???
I BELIEVE that there should be a 5 YEAR restriction on ssoftware...ANYTHING over 5 years is FREEWARE. Progs are coming out fast enough to cover this with each VERSION release.
Pet PEEVES:
EUROPE has a 10 to 1 release rate OVER the US... WE will never see 90% of that software..
Moo(master of origion), MOO 3 SUCKED, totally different programmers and company made it CRAP.. 1 FIX 1 year after release and the modders have fix it up, pretty well.
RE-RELEASE Frontier ELITE(ELITE 2-3) with BETTER graphics, PLEASE... I'll spend another 5 years playing it, EVEN SP....
ELITE series sold over 1,000,000 copies(1985), and that AINT hacked versions... they been dragging there feet for over 5 years. they want to release on 5-6 environments and make it interlink ALL together, including xbox, PS2, Linux, MAC.......
But the company has been spending to much time with OTHER progs, like ROLLER COASTER TYCOON....
PS,
some game companies have found a trick with LINUX and windows...
They can DROP Win and run a Linux background to RUN there games... In the long run I think the LOSS of DOS has made this HARDER for this to happen.
znaps
10-08-2004, 12:15 PM
IAtari is RE-releaseing there OLD games.. Little C64 systems, and to Celphones... They are making MORe money on DEAD software. That should have been RELEASED to the open market YEARS ago.
Which is precisely why it wasn't released, and they're entitled to making a few more bucks out of it.
I BELIEVE that there should be a 5 YEAR restriction on ssoftware...ANYTHING over 5 years is FREEWARE. Progs are coming out fast enough to cover this with each VERSION release.
I don't agree with that at all. Companies spend lots of money and developers spend lots of time building software. Should all books be free to read electronically after 5 years?
YES...
For developement of NEW ideas in that software area....By OTHER companies with INTERESTING IDEAS...
Do you WANT a WIn95 BOOK??? WOULD YOU WANT a win95 book??? wouldnt it be NICE to get it CHEAPER then $200 per BOOK?? for 6 BOOKS???
Insted of HOGGING there copy right and releaseing little patches and updates with THEIR ideas of what you want and NEED... LET OTHERS add to it.. LIKE modding GAMES. Add there bells and whistles, and FIX your product.
I remember beinag able to set a 1/64 margin in a word processor, and being able to FLIP my graphic if it needed it, and NOW try it in WORD for windows... YA CANT!
znaps
10-08-2004, 01:41 PM
YES...
For developement of NEW ideas in that software area....By OTHER companies with INTERESTING IDEAS...
So do these other companies get to charge for the codebase that they've conveniently got for free and added a few nice features to?
I remember beinag able to set a 1/64 margin in a word processor, and being able to FLIP my graphic if it needed it, and NOW try it in WORD for windows... YA CANT!
Well why hasn't anyone modified Open Office to allow those functions? Maybe they have?
Anyway, the consumer has a choice between Open Source (and the many licensing schemes) and commercial software. I think companies and individuals should have the right to release their software under whatever license they want, and let the consumer decide what to buy.
YOU REALLY think the consumer KNOWS about open scource?? Linux??
NOT!
ALL a consumer knows is "whats put in front of him", and "WHAT he is told". NO MORE then that. PERIOD.
If the consumer had ANY knowledge on computers INTELL and MS wouldnt even be a dream...
Lets look at the 286/386 era...
Computer #1...
Goes beep bop boop, 256 colors, has Dos and window version 2 or 3 and video card less then 500k
Computer #2
Has 8 bit audio, midi, 4096 colors, 1meg video, and runs a windowing OS, based on Linux, parrallel processing, and RISC processor.
Computer #2 was AMIGA
Computer #1 was Intel..
99% of computer USERs cant tell you the chipset in there machines, Im not talking the CPU.
40% CAN tell you what video card they got, but NOT how it works.
10% can give a GOOD guess on how much RAM a scanned image will USE. But dont know if they have ENOUGH ram.
60+% buy a DELL, compaq, HP, for around $600 and dont KNOW it has 32 meg video, 128 meg ram, and a 40 gig drive, with a 2.4ghz CPU, and XP Coughing and choking in the background.
WOULd you use this system with WINDOWS??? How about ANY video games of the last 4 years??
NOT....!
My CHOICE is to run Video games....WHAT choice of OS do I have???
znaps
10-08-2004, 02:52 PM
OK, now you've lost me.
Maybe it's because it's Friday and I've just done a 55 hour week at work.
Ioman
10-08-2004, 03:52 PM
I don't agree with that at all. Companies spend lots of money and developers spend lots of time building software. Should all books be free to read electronically after 5 years?
I agree with Znaps on this one. I don't think software should ever go free after a certain period of time.
ECA, run spell check before posting, it would help others understand what you are saying.
Ok, try this...
IF TRIBES 2, MP interface, NOT the game... Had been released...
And OTHERS could copy or include it,
then the MP interface for Wolfenstein, would be MUCH better.
Its easyier to LEARN from what other have done to the RE-WRITE something that LOOKS the same...... Many companies THINK...
If it LOOKS the SAME it IS the same, and take each other to COURT to prove them WRONG.
AFTER 5 years, it SHOULD be obsolete anyway. We are NOT talking about RE-writeing the WHOLE CORE, OR Changeing 20 lines to make the SAME game, WHICH IS NOT PART of the COPYRIGHT LAWS...YOU CAN and its considered a NEW game..
RELEASE it so others can MAKE BETTER...
It wasnt this bad until about 20 years ago. When ALL companies became SUE happy.. OR MONEY RICH.
We might even SEE alot of REMAKES that WORK..
But about 2-3 companies BOUGHT them all up..ALL the old games belong to 2-3 companies.
spankers
10-09-2004, 05:09 AM
Ok, try this...
IF TRIBES 2, MP interface, NOT the game... Had been released...
And OTHERS could copy or include it,
then the MP interface for Wolfenstein, would be MUCH better.
Its easyier to LEARN from what other have done to the RE-WRITE something that LOOKS the same...... Many companies THINK...
If it LOOKS the SAME it IS the same, and take each other to COURT to prove them WRONG.
Ah, ECA... and I thought I was the resident software and intellectual property radical. There can be many sticky legal problems with open sourcing game or application code. Many game engines use licenced technology from third parties, so it's not just a matter of slapping an open source license on the code and pushing it out the door.
In addition, some of the older game engines are still producing revenue for the original companies by licensing to third parties (modified Quake3 engine for Castle Wolfenstein, Unreal engine for Rune, etc.)... and as the game industry can be a brutal place to maintain a consistant revenue stream, I can understand them not giving away their product.
Having said that however, id Software, the gurus responsible for Quake 1, 2, and 3, have opened the source code for Quake 1 and 2, and are planning to do the same for Quake 3 shortly. Cool stuff.
One of the best things I have seen done with Quake 1 is the Darkplaces rewrite. Open GL, dynamic lighting, etc. If you download the darkplaces mod in addition to the engine, you get a whole new experience playing an ancient game. The original Quake game maps are required as the game content has NOT been released for free.
http://icculus.org/twilight/darkplaces/
Even the tribes and tribes2(soon) are being released.
Whats funny tho,
Is the Company that MAKES the game ISNT makeing the money..
MOO3, is made by one group, but ATARI makes the money. Atari is buying up software companies and games.
So, the original persons HAVE NOTHING.
And NO-ONE is placeing software in the Public domain. They hold it like PLATINUM ingots.
And WHARe do we learn BEST and MOST.. From what OTHERS have done. By using there examples to create BETTER programs and interfaces...
Just cause FORD makes a GREAT head light, dont mean I CANT improve it. But I dont WANT the CAR just to get a copy of there work.
there is a BETTER bumper on the market(for cars), it has past all the tests and would make a 30 mph colison Almost nothing, and No damage to the car.
Car manufactours dont WANT it.. Because THEY didnt think of it.
The inventor of the LCD PANEL(now used in Laptops) tried to sell his invention to the US computer makers, Compaq, Apple, HP, Dell....No one wanted it. He sold it to Taiwan.
Ioman
10-09-2004, 11:53 AM
Wow Spankers, those screenshots are awesome. Its amazing what a little litting can do to help a game.
ECA, uou have lost me here man! :D
If the companies SHARE there knowledge, we can have BETTER games.
Why rework the WHEEL, when its already done.
Let them have there profit/margin for 5 years, but then let it out on the market, so others can SHARE it.
spankers
10-09-2004, 02:47 PM
Wow Spankers, those screenshots are awesome. Its amazing what a little litting can do to help a game.
Ya... quite nice. There's a Quake1 mod called Tecnox that also does some interesting things (new weapons up to and including nuclear... launch it and run like hell).... it uses the Darkplaces engine. I have to compile Darkplaces from source (for Linux) but it looks like LordHavoc has been kind enough to provide precompiled binaries in the zip file for the Windows crowd.
If you happen to have a dusty old Quake 1 CD sitting around it might behoove you to give Darkplaces/dpmod/Tecnox a whirl.
llbbl
10-12-2004, 07:30 AM
Excuse ME:
BUT iwndows will have to CLOSE THE BACKDOORS, before everyone is half way happy.
Which ones are you talking about? Does Firefox / Mozilla fix these ?
llbbl
10-12-2004, 07:32 AM
OK, now you've lost me.
Maybe it's because it's Friday and I've just done a 55 hour week at work.
We need to send you the ECA decoder ring :D
spankers
10-12-2004, 07:52 AM
Which ones are you talking about? Does Firefox / Mozilla fix these ?
The Firefox developers seem to have security in mind more than the IE people do. For example, a couple of weeks ago they made some good changes to the extension framework that denies loading extensions from sites unless you deliberately allow those sites. Their release schedule is much more aggressive than their IE counterparts... although this may be a drawback to the average user who does not update unless forced.
Then of course, there is the fact that Firefox is not yet a target of the 3v1l h4x0rs. Firefox will have it's fair share of insecurities in the future but for now I think it is a MUCH better browser.
But as you know, if you don't update your software, it doesn't really matter what browser you use... you've got your fleshy bits exposed and are asking for a good spanking.
spankers
10-12-2004, 08:12 AM
Oh... and as far as back doors go... just do a search for IE SSL security issues. I believe it was about a month ago that the latest and greatest IE was targeted with some nastiness... intercepting information between the browser and the SSL layer. Hmmm... all your online banking passwords in the hands of evil villains?
More info... readable by laymen.
http://www.theworldjournal.com/special/nettech/news/iesecurity.htm
IE has HOLES in it CREATED by MS... they WANt to seel those to Business for Adverts and popups.
Only problems is that it takse NOTHING to get permission to do it..
It costs $199 for a site Licence, that Licence that POPS up for IE, that checks VALID sites... there is NO protection from it. And 1 Licence can be put on 1,000's of machines with NO recourse from MS.
If you find a BAD/imposter/FAKE one there is NO recourse.
MS dont chase down bad Licences.
Firefox has found expired ones and TOLD me... I have NEVER had IE do this.
Ioman
10-12-2004, 10:25 AM
IE has HOLES in it CREATED by MS... they WANt to seel those to Business for Adverts and popups.
Only problems is that it takse NOTHING to get permission to do it..
It costs $199 for a site Licence, that Licence that POPS up for IE, that checks VALID sites... there is NO protection from it. And 1 Licence can be put on 1,000's of machines with NO recourse from MS.
If you find a BAD/imposter/FAKE one there is NO recourse.
MS dont chase down bad Licences.
Firefox has found expired ones and TOLD me... I have NEVER had IE do this.
How do you know this is true ECA? Do you have links to other sites that say this? Where is your proof!! :D
llbbl
10-12-2004, 10:55 AM
How do you know this is true ECA? Do you have links to other sites that say this? Where is your proof!! :D
Here I will help out, to be nice to ECA :D
Internet Explorer
http://secunia.com/graph/?type=sol&period=all&prod=11
http://secunia.com/graph/?type=cri&period=all&prod=11
Firefox
http://secunia.com/graph/?type=sol&period=all&prod=3256
http://secunia.com/graph/?type=cri&period=all&prod=3256
llbbl
10-12-2004, 11:00 AM
Looks like security wise, Firefox is superior ... We all know ease of use is superior
spankers
10-12-2004, 11:05 AM
Nice... quantitative stuff. Thanks!
most of its experience.
Has IE every ASKED you...
Do you want this popup?
do you want to BLOCK this advert?
WOW, someone is sending DATA on a channel that ISNT USED, do you want it.??
DOWNLOAD atarted, that you DIDNT START, do you wish to continue??
CHANGES are being made to system, CONTINUE???
http://soreeyes.org/archives/001077.html
http://www.michaelhanscom.com/eclecticism/2004/05/its_not_my_faul.html
http://www.simiandesign.com/blog-fu/2004/02/further_proof_that_ie_sucks.php
http://www.positioniseverything.net/explorer.html
http://reviews.cnet.com/5208-3513-0-10.html?forumID=104&threadID=38140&messageID=461598&start=-113
http://seclists.org/lists/fulldisclosure/2004/Jul/0452.html
http://www.spacevs.com/index.php?page=iesucks
http://ma.tthew-cox.us/ie_sucks.php
Do this SEARCH.......MS IE SSL
They STILL want to control the Standards for the Internet.. they dont want to ADJUST for anyone..
http://swforum.sun.com/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=45997&tstart=210
http://www.lists.aldigital.co.uk/apache-ssl/msg03928.html
http://www.mail-archive.com/modssl-users@modssl.org/msg02479.html
MORE if you want it..
spankers
10-12-2004, 11:28 AM
Cough... wow! I'm not sure if I'll be reading all of the links... I get the point. You're preaching to the choir....
http://www.homoexcelsior.com/archive/technology/msg04165.page
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=12931
http://www.infoworld.com/article/04/06/11/HNieholes_1.html
http://pcworld.about.com/magazine/2008p049id101753.htm
http://www.techstuff.ca/archives/496.html
NOTHING THEY CAN DO???
http://humorix.org/articles/2004/07/blame/
Just Funny...
http://secunia.com/product/11/
http://secunia.com/graph/?type=adv&period=all&prod=11
http://secunia.com/product/3256/?period=2004
http://secunia.com/graph/?type=adv&period=2004&prod=3256
llbbl
10-12-2004, 11:45 AM
Man those links would take hours to read... Pretty graphs tell the story much easier.
llbbl
10-12-2004, 11:47 AM
Secunia rocks. I'm glad you guys know about it now. I found them a couple months ago. Those images will update in real time BTW if secunia updates the number of security issues. Cool huh.
NOW, IF...
Ie would BREAK there Browser up, into the parts needed, and ref to EACh as needed, it would be easy to update, change, augment, modify, customize, and EACh section/part could protect it SELF with its OWN standards.
HTML
SQL
PHP
JAVA
...
...
ALL have there own protections BUILTin..
the browser is ONLy a display engine, USE it that way.
llbbl
10-12-2004, 12:55 PM
NOW, IF...
Ie would BREAK there Browser up, into the parts needed, and ref to EACh as needed, it would be easy to update, change, augment, modify, customize, and EACh section/part could protect it SELF with its OWN standards.
HTML
SQL
PHP
JAVA
...
...
ALL have there own protections BUILTin..
the browser is ONLy a display engine, USE it that way.
They do that already. I don't believe your statement to be accurate.
You have failed to make the right suggestion. They just need to fix all the security exploits, simple as that.
So,
You are saying that JAVA works LIKe java, even under IE...
NOT...
Iv been to to many sites that Java under Firefox wouldnt work, and then ran IE and it DID work.
Being able to LOAD up standards youself would be a hit... Upgrade what you need and want.. IE is NOt compatible with many sites, even Linux and MAC created sites have problems with IE and its Standards.
http://www.positioniseverything.net/explorer.html
znaps
10-12-2004, 01:42 PM
They should definitely remove their Java VM, and treat a Java applet like any other plugin-required area of a web page, just like a Flash animation.
Then again, that would increase Java's popularity wouldn't it? And that's the last thing Bill and Steve want.....thanks Micro$oft.
OK,
OFF topic...
but there NAME SUCKS also...
Should be MEGA SOFT...
I SEE NOTHINg Micro about there software..
llbbl
10-14-2004, 07:58 AM
Java is a seperate issue from HTML, SQL, PHP. That is my point. Who cares what stupid version of java they have as long as it works and is secure.
llbbl
10-14-2004, 08:06 AM
So,
You are saying that JAVA works LIKe java, even under IE...
NOT...
Iv been to to many sites that Java under Firefox wouldnt work, and then ran IE and it DID work.
Being able to LOAD up standards youself would be a hit... Upgrade what you need and want.. IE is NOt compatible with many sites, even Linux and MAC created sites have problems with IE and its Standards.
http://www.positioniseverything.net/explorer.html
Did you install the Java client for Firefox? You got to go to java site download it and install it for some browsers.
These CSS bugs are all found only in Internet Explorer, versions 5 and higher. To see the demos properly, they must be viewed in IE, of course.
The CSS standard is seperate than the HTML standard. It has been accepted since version 4.01 of IE and Netscape that you have to choose a browser and a version and code it to that.
Alot of the new innovations aren't supported by earlier browsers, well so what. These CSS bugs that are on that web page can be fixed by doing it in a different way or not including that code because it doesn't work.
There will always be CSS bugs because people are coming up with new ways to do things. The browser versions will lag behind the newer ways. The programmers will always have to choose the most widely used version of a particular platform (I'm not saying that its impossible to write CSS code that works equally well on both browsers ) and code to that.
llbbl
10-14-2004, 08:10 AM
OK,
OFF topic...
but there NAME SUCKS also...
Should be MEGA SOFT...
I SEE NOTHINg Micro about there software..
M$ bashing just for the sake of M$ bashing doesn't get us anywhere. If I was on /. I would rate this post as a Flame.
Ioman
10-14-2004, 08:12 AM
And I would rate you a flame-r :)
TG,
If MS would use the standards for EACH Part of the internet independantly, insted of customizing there use UNDER IE, there would be NO problems..
Each of the formats, HTML, SQL, CSS, Java, ... Have there Formats to use and ARE used under most browsers with little or NO problems... UNLESS it is designed for IE only and its STRANGE programming conventions, they ALL work.
And MOST have there OWN security feature BUILT IN, which IE bypasses. This is the ONLY way Bots and CRAP can be placed on our systems. MS wants the backdoors for afew reasons.
1. Advertising and selling the access to THESE backdoors.
2. So, MS can MONITOR your system and chack for hacks/cracks in there system and SHUT YOU DOWN.
3. Remeber the security chip the gov wanted?? Why not make it SOFTWARE...(sounds parinoid) but this idea works.
Why make Windows so much of a PAIN to work with if not to cover they're own.
llbbl
10-14-2004, 11:48 AM
And I would rate you a flame-r :)
I am trying to improve things by adding factual information and facilitating discussion. I hope that this doesn't turn into a place to rant just for the sake of ranting.
That isn't very useful. If you want to rant than go join a chat forums somewhere to hem and haw about a given topic.
I don't appreciate the other connotation to your post. This certainly is the time or place to discuss such matters on the boards.
llbbl
10-14-2004, 11:56 AM
TG,
If MS would use the standards for EACH Part of the internet independantly, insted of customizing there use UNDER IE, there would be NO problems..
Each of the formats, HTML, SQL, CSS, Java, ... Have there Formats to use and ARE used under most browsers with little or NO problems... UNLESS it is designed for IE only and its STRANGE programming conventions, they ALL work.
And MOST have there OWN security feature BUILT IN, which IE bypasses. This is the ONLY way Bots and CRAP can be placed on our systems. MS wants the backdoors for afew reasons.
1. Advertising and selling the access to THESE backdoors.
2. So, MS can MONITOR your system and chack for hacks/cracks in there system and SHUT YOU DOWN.
3. Remeber the security chip the gov wanted?? Why not make it SOFTWARE...(sounds parinoid) but this idea works.
Why make Windows so much of a PAIN to work with if not to cover they're own.
ECA they are already seperate from IE. You said in your first post that they should seperate them into their own software systems. Here is the actual quote "BREAK there Browser up, into the parts needed "
I get sick of arguing with you because you post in accurate information or information that isn't explained very well, and you never admit your wrong .
Its like my job on here is to endlessly clairfy what ECA meant. ooo yippee
llbbl
10-14-2004, 11:59 AM
"They just need to fix all the security exploits, simple as that."
Just agree to this and STFU about it mmm kay?
llbbl
10-15-2004, 05:51 AM
There are a couple of things businesses can do to protect themselves from the various security threats that are the focus of these patches. The main thing I recommend is that users stop using Microsoft Internet Explorer. While it has 90-percent market share by most accounts, it is a target of hackers and it is not the best browser. In fact it's stagnating.
Will switching browsers hurt Microsoft finances at all? No. While it once foolishly thought that browser technology would somehow hurt its core business, this is not the case. Microsoft generates no income from its browser and the company should hope people go elsewhere.
Its browser should be discontinued or redesigned from scratch.
Microsoft seems to have lost interest in improving its browser once the marketing threat from Netscape turned out to be meaningless. At one time in the past Microsoft was constantly improving MSIE to compete with Netscape. Once Netscape stopped being competitive Microsoft just stopped. Most of its efforts are just to patch the security holes.
The two primary browser alternatives are Firefox [http://www.mozilla.org/products/firefox/] from the open source crowd (Mozilla.org) and the European favorite, Opera [www.opera.com]. Both these browsers are much better than the Microsoft offering. They have more nifty features such as tabbed browsing and both are faster at loading web pages.
Do yourself a favor and download them and try them out.
http://cbs.marke****ch.com/news/story.asp?guid=%7B15A02F4A-1388-45BA-A209-17587D95F5F0%7D&siteid=google&dist=google
WOW,
TG did a flip flop...
Join the party.
I LIKE THIS PART NOW thats YELLING...
Some of the agony might be eliminated if you install the controversial Service Pack 2 (SP2) which is a huge download offered by Microsoft which comes close to replacing much of Windows XP with new code. Currently this upgrade is an option that many people are avoiding.
According to user reports SP2 causes as many problems as it solves. Some reports are horrendous and I personally do not recommend installing it except on a new machine. Lots of applications will not run after it is installed. One fellow reported to me that his 3.5-inch floppy disk stopped working. Others tell tales of complete system failure.
Microsoft (MSFT: news, chart, profile) is aware that a lot of people are not installing SP2 so the company is continuing to patch the old non-SP2 system as best it can. We can expect this to continue for a few years.
You should have noticed by now that most Microsoft patches are part of an effort to keep the machines from being exploited by remote hackers. I do not recall a patch, ever, that actually improves the performance of the computer.
llbbl
10-20-2004, 07:07 AM
WOW,
TG did a flip flop...
Join the party.
I wasn't saying that people should continue using IE. You and I were arguing about what they need to do to fix it. Where was the flip flop?
llbbl
10-20-2004, 07:10 AM
Here are some specific examples of current IE bugs.
* VU#291304 - Microsoft Internet Explorer contains a buffer overflow
in CSS parsing
A buffer overflow vulnerability exists in the way that IE
processes Cascading Style Sheets (CSS). This could allow an
attacker to execute arbitrary code or cause a denial of service.
(CAN-2004-0842)
* VU#637760 - Microsoft Internet Explorer Install Engine contains a
buffer overflow vulnerability
The IE Active Setup Install Engine (inseng.dll), which is used to
decompress ActiveX controls stored in CAB files, contains a buffer
overflow vulnerability. This could allow an attacker to execute
arbitrary code. (CAN-2004-0216)
* VU#207264 - Microsoft Internet Explorer does not properly handle
function redirection (Similar Method Name Redirection Cross Domain
Vulnerability)
IE does not properly validate redirected functions. The impact is
similar to that of a cross-site scripting vulnerability, allowing
an attacker to access data and execute script in other domains,
including the Local Machine Zone. (CAN-2004-0727)
* VU#526089 - Microsoft Internet Explorer treats arbitrary files as
images for drag and drop operations (Drag and Drop Vulnerability)
IE treats arbitrary files as images during "drag and drop" mouse
operations. This could allow an attacker to trick a user into
copying a file to a location where it could be executed, such as
the user's Startup folder. (CAN-2004-0839)
* VU#413886 - Microsoft Internet Explorer allows mouse events to
manipulate window objects and perform "drag and drop" operations
(Script in Image Tag File Download Vulnerability, HijackClick 3)
IE dynamic HTML (DHTML) mouse events can manipulate windows to
copy objects from one domain to another, including the Local
Machine Zone. This could allow an attacker to write an arbitrary
file to the local file system in a location where it could be
executed, such as the user's Startup folder. (CAN-2004-0841)
In addition, MS04-038 describes two address bar spoofing
vulnerabilities (VU#625616, VU#431576) that could allow an attacker
to deceive a user about the location of a web site; a vulnerability
involving cached HTTPS files (VU#795720) that could allow an
attacker to read from or inject data into an HTTPS web site; and a
vulnerability in which IE6 on Windows XP ignores the "Drag and drop
and copy and paste files" setting (VU#630720).
Any program that uses the WebBrowser ActiveX control (WebOC) or
MSHTML rendering engine could be affected by these vulnerabilities.
spankers
10-20-2004, 09:19 AM
Wow... three whole pages of IE/Microsoft bashing while I wasn't paying attention. Have we come to any conclusions yet?
spankers
10-20-2004, 09:29 AM
Oh... and by the way, over on /. there is another article on insecurities on just about all the common browsers.... here's the link to the secunia notice for Mozilla/Firefox:
http://secunia.com/advisories/12712/
All browsers except lynx perhaps... you should really try it out, it may be the most secure browser out there. ;)
I wasn't saying that people should continue using IE. You and I were arguing about what they need to do to fix it. Where was the flip flop?
FIX IT???
Called START OVER, Burn the thing and get a good running start...
CUT the fancy bells and whistles.
Stop adding propritary SPIT..DEAl with what others have Already created, and BACK IT.
llbbl
10-21-2004, 10:06 AM
"Called START OVER"
It guess it could happen. That's what I heard they did with the new version of windows. Its highly unlikely thou ...
llbbl
11-02-2004, 06:21 AM
News abounds for Firefox and other Open Source Internet browsers. According to WebSideStory results, both Mozilla and Firefox saw their marketshare grow in the last month. Both browsers from the Mozilla Foundation grew from 3.5% in June, to 5.2% in September and 6.0% in October (3% to each browser). This is compared to Internet Explorer's 92.9% marketshare in October, however, even though IE has lost marketshare 5 months in a row.
http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2004Nov/gee20041102027661.htm
And thats for those that Understand whats happening.
The persons switching KNOW why they want the change.
llbbl
11-05-2004, 05:29 AM
An error in the way IE handles some attributes of the "iframe" and "frame" HTML tags can be exploited to cause a buffer overflow and execute malicious code on a PC. The vulnerability could be exploited via a specially crafted HTML document including an e-mail message or a web page, according to an advisory from US-CERT.
The bug has been confirmed in IE 6.0 on a fully patched Windows XP with Service Pack 1 and IE 6.0 on a fully patched Windows 2000, according to an advisory from Danish security firm Secunia.
Programs using the WebBrowser ActiveX control, including Outlook, Outlook Express, AOL and Lotus Notes, may also be affected.
http://www.computerweekly.com/articles/article.asp?liArticleID=134816&liArticleTypeID=1&liCategoryID=2&liChannelID=22&liFlavourID=1&sSearch=&nPage=1
llbbl
12-29-2004, 08:41 AM
In a CIO Sessions exclusive, Microsoft CIO Ron Markezich shares his thoughts on a range of topics, from Longhorn to security flaws in Internet Explorer to the biggest IT challenges facing Microsoft.
Titled: Microsoft CIO: Finding IT talent still a challenge
http://zdnet.com.com/1606-2-5498205.html
Well maybe that is because all the talented people don't want to work for MS.
vBulletin® v3.7.0, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.