Firefox Lead Engineer On Origins, Security, And More
An anonymous reader writes "ZDNet has an interesting interview with Ben Goodger, the lead engineer for Firefox. When asked to comment on critics' claim that Firefox has a better security reputation than IE because it doesn't have enough market share to attract trouble, Goodger responded with a one-two punch. "Firefox is better designed in a number of ways -- we have no "mode" that allows untrusted content to be executed automatically, for example -- no "safe zone. Another reason -- market share does not predict security. Apache has more market share than has Microsoft IIS, which has more holes than Apache." On Longhorn, he believes it will be a tough sell for Microsoft because of backward compatibility issues."
I just had a customer tell me he deleted Firefox because the latest version of Nortons told him it was a security risk, so he's back to IE, and blamed ME for compromising his system
The Mozilla Firefox team was able to look at all the wrongdoings of Microsoft and avoid them from the ground up. Firefox is a great app and I use it everyday. I cringe when I have to use IE at school.
Microsoft could always ditch IE and use firefox code to develop their "new and secure" browser, but they've been pissing OSS for too long to take that route.
The browser wars are starting back up again. IE hasn't changed in years because it hasn't had to. Now everyone is screaming to use firefox over IE. This hurts Microsoft because they need to keep the image that they're the best of everything.
I hope firefox kills them in the browser wars. They have a better product. It was designed with usability and security in mind.
Both W3Schools.com and CNET News.com report that Firefox users make up 18% of their audience. Techie-oriented sites, I know, so doesn't speak much for mainstream, but Google was a techie-oriented engine at some point as well.
Boy I wish I had mod points. Clueless people going on about things they don't know anything about.
ActiveX is native code, essentially, specially modified DLL's that run unsandboxed with the same permissions as the parent process. This opens up all kinds of fun things you can do to someones system. On top of this interesting feature there are IE zones, which give different default execution permissions. For instance, the Internet zone causes a prompt to be shown when an unsafe ActiveX control is trying to execute. Unfortunately it is relatively easy to trick IE into thinking an ActiveX control is coming from a trusted zone, which doesn't prompt before executing an unsafe ActiveX control. And another problem is that many ActiveX controls are marked safe, but are in actuallity, unsafe.
So how is the above similar to XPI? You always get a prompt from XPI files. Even if an XPI is signed you get a prompt. What's similar?
Sorry my bullshit sensor overloaded.
Bundling did play a factor yes. And bundling is what has kept them in the lead for so long.
But the parent is totally right in saying that Netscape 4 - 4.5 sucked donkey balls. It was slow, bloated, and incredibly hard to develop HTML for because of its goofy layers system. Even if MS had never bundled anything, I am quite convinced that Internet Explorer 4 (and later 5) would have gotten the majority market.
After that it becomes more grey. If IE had never been bundled, IE6 vs. Netscape 6-7-Mozilla is much more difficult to call.
Less Talk, More Beer.