Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Redmondmag on Dumping IE

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the go-on-everybody's-doin'-it dept.

nSignIfikaNt writes "Here is yet another article discussing options to using IE. This one is from redmondmag.com who claims to be the independent voice of the microsoft IT community."

5 of 442 comments (clear)

  1. should read "Alternatives to..." by carcosa30 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Options to using IE? Should be "Alternatives To..."

    And besides, IE is not even an option for anyone serious about, well, serious about anything.

    --
    Intolerance for ambiguity is the mark of the authoritarian personality.
    1. Re:should read "Alternatives to..." by pbranes · · Score: 5, Insightful
      This is what I tell everyone that I help support. If you are a serious web user, you need to be using Firefox. The mantra that I repeat is: firefox reduces spyware, viruses, and security holes in your system.

      With the latest version of firefox, it checks for program updates automatically, it downloads program patches, and it attempts to find necessary plugins for pages and install them if you tell it to. Firefox is about to reach the point to where the adoption rates start increasing exponentially.

  2. When was this article written? by NCatron · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The article points out that Microsoft may add popup blocking to IE... is it just me, or did that already happen with WinXP SP2?

  3. Why doesn't by hackstraw · · Score: 5, Insightful

    MS just give up on the browser, and add some "ie like features/extesions" or some other specific windows features/native gui like Camino for OS X to mozilla and/or geko that are optional to make some broken websites work until the websites get standards compliant and be done with it?

    To my knowledge, MS only makes money off of IE by licensing it to people like AOL (and that is a wierd thing, and another discussion), but they make nothing off of having it bundled with the OS, and would loose nothing by bundling some other browser.

    It seems evident that there are issues with having a webbrowser tied so closely to the OS. Most of people's issues with switching from IE is that 1) ie is just there, so what else is there to use, and what else is better? 2) There are a few too many broken websites that end users blame the browser for if the website does not work properly.

    And if someone feels like adding a completely off topic tangent here. What is up with the IIS websites and those damn "go to # on this page" links or whatever? They are annoying because I don't know what they are doing, and they sometimes break (even in ie) if I open them up in a new window or tab. Grrrrr....

  4. Fallacies or misconceptions? by 0x461FAB0BD7D2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Netscape also offers 7.1 of its venerable browser...It'll be the last Netscape-branded browser AOL produces.
    What about Netscape 7.2? Technically, it is Mozilla 1.7, but it does have AOL-produced add-ons.

    For example, Mozilla issued a patch that stops the browser from allowing an attacker to execute applications on a Windows system--something we're used to dealing with in IE.
    For those of us that remember, the shell: vulnerability was because Mozilla passed it on to Windows to handle, and Windows failed at handling it. That's why Mozilla "patched" it.

    Anything ActiveX-based won't work
    There is an ActiveX addon for Mozilla.

    Interesting too that he brings up the issue that non-IE browsers would be harder to manage using Microsoft products (ISA Server, etc.). I wonder why that is so.