Slashdot Mirror
Redmondmag on Dumping IE
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."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
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.
Redmond used to be called MCP Magazine, as in Microsoft Certified Professionals. I got a free subscription when I got my MCSE, and the magazine has certainly had a focus on Microsoft certification. Much of the advertising is related to training boot camps and testing aids, and there are monthly statistics on certification. The name change is very recent, as I guess the magazine is trying to broaden it's appeal.
Don't forget that Friday is Hawaiian shirt day.
Internet Explorer is the Swiss Cheese of software--it's full of holes.
I'd think it was more like the Limburger of software - it stinks.
Every time some guy I've never heard of working for some online e-zine I've never heard of writes an article bashing a Microsoft product, is it really worthy of attention?
What does Roland Pikapuile think of all this? Please include a link to his blog in the submission.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
It's nice to see an article about this. All we're witnessing here is the natural evolution of the internet browser system... A monoculture gets decimated by pathogens, and that opens up niches for newer species. This is what any monopoly leads to when it's not protected by some level of government.
"Wow. Now THAT'S a lot of angry Indians." - Lt. Col. George Armstrong Custer
The article points out that Microsoft may add popup blocking to IE... is it just me, or did that already happen with WinXP SP2?
What better way to evangelize IE than to encourage its own rabid userbase to try out competing browsers? They will try it out, get turned off by the minor differences (such as tabs), and then switch back to IE and be able to say "I've tried the alternate browers, and they are CRAP".
I'm not trying to stereotype microsoft users, I am merely presenting a "devils advocate" viewpoint.
Feed the need: Digitaladdiction.net
... I discovered the voice mode of Opera (win2k/XP only, sadly) last night. The thing accepts voice commands: hold down scroll lock and tell it things like "reload", "back", "close window", "zoom in", etc.
You can even select a bunch of text and tell it to "speak", and it will read it to you.
Incidentaly, I had just discovered WinXP's onboard voice synth. A group of people were at a Krystal's and wanted to contact a friend.
We realized that:
--Nobody had a cell phone
--Krystal's has wifi! (I boot up my laptop)
--Our friend wasn't on AIM or similar
--I have a VoIP client... we can call him!
--We have no microphone
--WinXP has a voice synth!
So, with a little mixer tweaking, I routed the voice synth output into Skype's input, called the poor schmuck, and had Microsoft Sam read him a message. (which was, if I recall, "We will be playing Starcraft at ten o'clock and such-and-such a place. Interested?")
With a required OS upgrade to get the latest features and security, can one consider IE "free" ?
-Randy
One thing the author claims is:
My Web site uses Google AdSense to display context-sensitive ads to my users. The AdSense administration site works only with IE
This seems dubious. The google site claims that you just need javascript. Can anyone who uses AdSense verify this? I'm guessing the popup blocker in firefox thwarted this guy's limited computer savvy.
From the article:
Which brings me to the real question: Can you live without IE? I try to use Firefox as my main browser, but I find myself firing up IE from time to time out of sheer necessity. My Web site uses Google AdSense to display context-sensitive ads to my users. The AdSense administration site works only with IE...
Well, I've been using Adsense for about 2 months now, and I have yet to open it in IE. I've only used Firfox so far, both on Windows and Linux, and never had any problems.
The Mozilla guys should patent "tabbed browsing", allowing royalty free use in any browser who requests it. With one exception, of course (IE)...
ummm.. yeah.. nevermind that OPERA HAD IT FIRST
#!/
The darned thing still does not have tabbed browsing for god's sake. How long does it take MSFT to copy that one.
"I don't think it's selfish, to eat defenseless shellfish." -NOFX
But corporate users don't spend a lot of time playing with DirectX-based games, listening to Windows Media Player, or checking e-mail with Outlook Express.
I don't think they know the same corporate people that I know.
Wanted: witty unique signature. Must be willing to relocate.
So your saying the Mozilla foundation should be run by a bunch of assholes instead of people just trying to do a good job?
"I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
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....
got this from the bottomAlternative browsers may not offer perfection, but they offer plenty of features, though with less manageability. Last I checked mozilla allows much greater manageability of cookies, images, popups, downloads...hell i can't think of anything EI does that is easier to manage.
Time to Dump IE?
Internet Explorer is a hacker's dream. Can you (and should you) drop it right now?
October 2004 by Don Jones
Internet Explorer is the Swiss Cheese of software--it's full of holes. Holes in software are never good, but when the browser is so integrated with the OS as to be as one--you've got problems. Add to that the sheer ubiquity of the Microsoft browser, and it's no wonder IE has become the hackers' No. 1 playground.
Now we're beset by increasingly common--and dangerous--security vulnerabilities. We knew IE was integrated with Windows, but we didn't have any idea how integrated it was. Even Microsoft doesn't seem to have a firm grasp on IE's internals, judging from the weeks it took to deliver an actual fix for the recent Download.Ject Trojan.
Not to say an integrated browser is all bad. To a developer, an integrated browser is cool because it gives you a built-in HTML rendering engine. You can then write apps that use HTML, knowing that the OS can render that HTML for you. IE can begin to take over the regular Windows Explorer shell and, in fact, has become so tightly integrated with Windows Explorer that it's a bit difficult to see where the shell ends and the browser begins.
The downside is a real downer. With a regular Web browser, a security vulnerability might let someone crash the browser. With an integrated Web browser they can crash the whole operating system. The tight ties to Windows means that the slightest IE security issue becomes an OS-wide panic. It's not just IE, either: Windows Media Player, Outlook Express, and even DirectX, are all, in my opinion, overly integrated and give hackers too much access to core PC functions.
But corporate users don't spend a lot of time playing with DirectX-based games, listening to Windows Media Player, or checking e-mail with Outlook Express. They do spend a lot of time in IE, and the more they surf the more they're vulnerable to its eccentricities. That's why more than a few corporations, not to mention individual users, are looking at alternatives--any alternative--to the built-in browser.
Browsing the Alternatives
Despite dire predictions from Netscape (now a unit of America Online, which, weirdly, continues to bundle IE with its software), the market for non-Microsoft browsers didn't go away. It sure as heck got small, though, with Microsoft now commanding around 95 percent of the market, according to some sources. But the times, they are a-changin'. San Diego Web metrics company WebSideStory recently reported IE losing 1 percent of that market, the first time IE has stumbled. IE is now down to 94 percent. Who's gaining? Mozilla.
The open-source code base of the Netscape browser, Mozilla offers a couple of browsers. Mozilla 1.7 is its base product (1.8 is in beta as of this writing); Firefox (currently at 0.9) is the next-generation browser. Both are available from www.mozilla.org. Netscape also offers 7.1 of its venerable browser based on Mozilla code. It's available from www.netscape.com, but you'd better hurry: It'll be the last Netscape-branded browser AOL produces.
There's also the well-known Opera Web browser, currently at version 7.53, available from www.opera.com. All of the Mozilla products, including Netscape's browser, are completely free. Opera offers a free, advertising-supported browser as well as a $40 version sans ads. And those are just the Windows browsers (see online extras for more on browsers for other OSes). While these are the major contenders, others exist: Search Download.com for "Web browser" and you'll get 356 results, many of which are small-footprint, self-contained Web browsers. Be aware that some of these simply throw a new cosmetic face on Windows' built-in IE objects, meaning you're still using IE. Others are completely self-contained and count as true alternatives.
Pros and Cons of Straying From the Pack
Forgetting security for a moment, there are functional
Create Windows installation CDs that won't install IE (and/or many other things, like Outlook):
A howto + files for Windows 2000
Free (as in beer) software with no howto for Windows 2000, 2003, and XP
Laptop: $1500
Wireless Access Point: $80
Broadband Internet: $40
VOIP Service: $20
Calling your tinfoil wearing, goverment conspiracy theory lovin' friend with a computer generated voice to play a game of strategic conquest: Priceless.
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.
My parents, after tons of proding from both my brother and I, finally gave alternative browsers a try (being the scientific sort, we had them try Mozilla, Firefox, AND Opera), and they like all three better than IE. They took to the tabs instantly, and I never hear any complaints about Pop-Up ads. Nor do they have any trouble with plugins for Flash, etc. And while my dad is relatively computer savvy, my mom repeatedly needs to be reminded of how to download/upload attachments. Really, I think all three browsers were well designed with a general population in mind.
Live free or die
I have been using AdSense for well over a year, starting a month or two after it was released. I have never seen any IE specific features. I first started using AdSense with Mozilla, more recently with FireFix. Seems like he may be having other problems, and jumped on the blame Mozilla scapegoat. Maybe he disabled JavaScript.
-Pete
Soccer Goal Plans
"See? We don't have a monopoly! See! See! Now, go ahead and make your little browsers while we lockdown digital media. And seriously, Fuck Apple. No really, fuck'em."
This is what Microsoft must be afraid of: cross-platform user interfaces with pluggable scripting languages and super-easy application deployment. This is why they originally fought Netscape - they were afraid that Netscape would become a "platform" independent from the operating system layer. And now exactly that is happening, thanks to open source. The people who designed this stuff were some true visionaries.
The Spread Firefox initiative may seem like a trite marketing effort. But in reality, it is one of the best ways to enable people to switch to other platforms tomorrow. I really hope that the Firefox hackers will get SVG support ready soon, as this is one of the other key features that can have immediate amazing benefits.
Very interesting.
Opera had tabs ages before mozilla, and that is very recent history. That in the context of browsing, of course, tabs are a ubiquitous interface.
Anyhow, you should remember that software patents are really evil, more evil than Microsoft, and they need to be destroyed much more than IE. IE only hurts their users, but software patents hurt everyone!
My title above is a disclaimer. I am a Mac user, and only use a PC via VNC to view webpages in IE. That said, I found this article pretty straightforward about the pros and cons of IE and alternative browsers from a Windows point of view. The guy make valid points about centralised management of IE vs. the standalone path of Firefox et al that would be a question in mainly Windows environments.
That said, all of these problems can be overcome by a good admin who thinks creatively, and I seriously doubt that much active development is going into ActiveX using sites these days.
Management in this case being enterprise management of IE configuration, rather than the ability of the end user to manage their cookes, etc.
Really, IE is just so out of date I can't imagine anyone using it unless they have to. I'm still showing off Firefox at my work, but only have 2 others using it. Now that it's about to go 1.0 it should be easier, I love the RSS feature, the Https 'yellow' highlighting and the find-as-you-type new features of 1.0.
All in all I think the only thing that IE is good for is to cause my Mom's Dell to download viruses and trojans so I get the Support call!
CB@#$%^&
free ipod and free gmail!
On a somewhat related note, is there a way to disable altering "connection settings" by regular users in Firefox? We run on a filtering proxy and that's how it's set up to restrict access.
Then it is not a good setup..
You are looking for the wrong solution. You should NEVER trust the settings of $application on a client machine for a security purpose. What you need to do is block all outgoing port 80 traffic for everything but your proxy server(s) (or setup a working transparent proxy solution which will eliminate any client config). Any and all web browsing clients trying to bypass the proxy will be stopped.
Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
I've downloaded it several times already, but always something happens that makes me open Safari again and forget about FF.
I've installed it on my wife's Portable (XP) though, and feel a lot better. Her IT guy seems to be quite good, but it's always me trying to keep her PC up to date, so that's one less worry.
I've noticed that FF behaves a lot better on a PC than on the Mac - compared to the alternative. Doesn't crash, is faster and overall renders better.
If it weren't for Safari, I'd probably be using Firefox too. I'm curious how much marketshare FF has on the mac.
I think, therefore I am...I think.
Of course, you could use MSI repackaging tools for easier deployment through SMS, Group Policy or some other tool, but it's a shame that these vendors haven't realized the market potential and made their products more accessible to corporate IT departments.
Now, to be honest I have no idea what an "MSI repackaging tool" is. Like an RPM packager or something? Maybe someone can explain. Anyway, it sounds like it might be relatively easy for someone who has this tool to do, and (if they're feeling in the spirit) make the package available. Or heck, maybe even sell and support it! It sounds like this might have a major appeal to corporate IT departments, who usually have some money to toss around.
Sorry, there is no Fud and the article is no flamefest. The magazine as others pointed out was until a while ago a total Microsoft laptop. And all the points people have risen in the past about IE. (Swiss cheese of browsers, not standards compliant for newer standards after 1997, lack of security and numerous other things are valid.) The article in my opinion was pretty good from a Windows admin perspective. It raises valid points which can concern the average windows admin.
The only time I ever use IE is when a site won't let you past a 'best viewed with IE' screen.
Once you go in with IE, you can find the real target URL, and 9 times out of 10 it works fine in Firefox. If I care about the site, I just bookmark the inside page.
I suppose there are tricks I could do to set Fox to pretend to be IE, but I'm too lazy for that. If I were on Linux fulltime, I suppose I'd have to, but I just periodically import my Firefox bookmarks from Windows into the Linux version.
Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
Three words for you, my friend:
User Agent Switcher.
Haec merda tauri est. Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.
By switching to IE, then you are jumping through the hoop the website developers have set in front of you. I recommend you just ignore the site and move on. There's plenty of other content on the web that's not obfuscated from visitors with browser requirements. Maybe over time, the developers of said sites will realize they can increase their page hits if they open up their site to W3 standards.
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
Yeah, so you are counted as one more IE user. May work in the short term, but it will contribute to shift the statistics towards IE, what is we *definitly* don't want.