Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Says Firefox Not a Threat to IE
KillaKen187 writes "A CNET article claims that 'just days after the launch of open-source browser Firefox 1.0, Microsoft executives defended Internet Explorer, saying it is no less secure than any other browser and doesn't lack any important features.' It's also interesting to note that these statements made by Steve Vamos, Microsoft Australia's managing director, come with no knowledge of what Firefox has to offer as he admits not even installing or using Firefox."
This will probably be offtopic, but during recent presentation on shares source initiative in Ukraine, the Microsoft representative started getting corruption messages from Powerpoint, and had to run the entire PPT file in OpenOffice, which he conveniently had on the laptop. photo1, photo2, the caption says "Microsoft Shared Source Initiative".
In a previous Slashdot article (a few months ago, I can't seem to find it at the moment), a Microsoftie was quoted as saying he had installed Firefox (among other browsers). Of course, we Slashdotters razzed him for it.
Today, we have someone from Microsoft who says they haven't installed Firefox. This is decried as shameful -- how dare he criticize the application if he hasn't tried it?
Poor Microsoft. They're damned if they do, and damned if they don't. Damned if I care, though; I use Opera, myself.
Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.
In the Longhorn builds that have leaked out onto the internet, IE does in fact have tabbed browsing. However, it also has some STUPID new crap, like a redesigned bar at the top that has....a pointlessly MASSIVE back button. However, it still has just as just as many issues as current IE.
Say what you may, I use Firefox on all my ( windows, Linux, OSX, AIX, Solaris ) systems. I have taught other people such as relatives and firends the joy of Firefox, and they too have switched over too the new browser. Firefox is a revolution of people getting what they want from the web back. With a search bar, adblocking and pop up blocking, and support for all the major plugins ( like flash and java etc ...) Firefox is now the most nicest browser out their. And many websites are fixing themselves to work with FireFox.
They claim that tabbed browsing is not a feature that their clients want, yet if you go to the windows page at microsoft http://www.microsoft.com/windows/default.mspx they have an option there that says "Want Tabbed Browsing, Search Toolbars, and More?". All those options suspiciously being features incorporated into firefox. Maybe they do see it as a threat after all.
Most people don't actually care. The vast majority of people simply don't know what a program is, what an operating system is, what a CPU is or whatever. To them, you click this little button to print, that little button to shutdown, and you click on "Internet Explorer" to "Explore the internet". That's why its such a great name for a web browser, and also the reason why Apple introduced a little "Browse the Internet" icon in MacOS 8 which launched your default browser. The real reason why Firefox is not a threat is because People Are Dumb.
Then Microsoft appears to be wrong. While it's likely true that Internet Explorer is no less secure than Firefox (come on, professional coders at Microsoft probably know what they're doing), the fact is that the Mozilla Project is better at getting fixes. When there was a security vulnerability in Firefox 0.9.3 (I believe) a few months ago, the patch was released within a few short hours. Flaws in Internet Explorer often run rampant for days, sometimes weeks. So while Internet Explorer's code may be no less secure, it is effectively the weaker browser. Saying that Firefox poses no threat to Microsoft is either naive, egotistical, or idiotic.
- dshaw
Browsers come and go, but firefox is making a serious impact here.
I was flipping channels, and saw some news show (damn if I can remember which one) was talking about it briefly. Something like a open source browser being TV worthy is something.
Heck, even a lot of the non-geeks at my work have heard through the grape vine that Firefox is the way to go. They are installing it, and loving it, and spreading the word.
Of course, you were only trolling.
Pretty Pictures!
First MS will lose the small 'at home' and business customers. Once these people are comfortable with the competition, the competition will seep into the big MS customers, for whom the 'small customers' are employees.
No, I'm not going to post this directly to you Steve, as I reckon you will ignore it.
XUL is potentially a huge advantage that Firefox (and other Mozilla-based browsers) have over IE.
...)
Using XUL, you can develop full-blown user interfaces that aren't limited to HTML-style text boxes, radio boxes, drop-down boxes and so on. Instead, you get access to trees, grids, menus, groupboxes, SOAP and XML-RPC client access and so on; a sizeable subset of what e.g. VB has to offer. It also understands CSS, so you can make XUL interfaces visually attractive if you're unlike me and actually have the patience to do so...
It's quite easy to develop XUL code as well, if somewhat time-consuming because there isn't yet a good, stable IDE available.
MS knows there's a market for this stuff, because it was developing XAML which meets broadly the same requirements. However a solid XAML implementation is currently a few years away at least, so XUL has a window of opportunity.
In case it's not obvious, here's why you'd use XUL instead of e.g. VB to develop application front-ends:
- easy to deploy to clients (i.e. install e.g. Firefox, and that's it; no mucking around with DLL versions)
- easy to maintain (i.e. tweak the code on a server rather than tweak and redeploy to every client)
- already cross-platform (Windows, Linux, Solaris, Mac, BSD,
- no dependence on ActiveX or Java to give the "rich client experience"
- supports CSS and works with HTML, so competent Web designers should be able to pick up XUL without great difficulty. Someone please please please create an IDE to make this easy!
- works with existing Web servers (e.g. Apache, IIS) without difficulty; after all, XUL is just XML text and Web servers have been serving text since day 1
It is for this reason, that the lab I administer has a Firefox link labelled "Internet" and all links to IE have been removed.
They don't care now, but they're starting to. To continue my story from yesterday, one of my coworkers who had asked me about Firefox got a virus. She didn't actually realize it until the IT people came by and told her that the antivirus program had just removed a virus from her machine.
:-)
All she'd known is that her machine had been running slow. She did some thinking and came to the conclusion that it had come from some lyrics site that had nailed her with popup windows. As I floated the word "Firefox" across the office, the coworker who had installed Firefox happily piped up, "I haven't seen a popup all day!"
Peer pressure, that's where it's at.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
Microsoft already has teh XUL killer under development - XAML, a very simialr technology.
What needs to happen?
Make a XUL plugin for everything that browses!! But espceially makea n XUL plugin for IE that lets you run XUL stuff inside IE, basically a sort of embedded Mozilla engine. Then work up a few killer apps to make people download and use the plugin.
If a few good uses of XUL can become widespread over the next six months or so, it has a good chance to take a hold before XAML can squash it. And with enough visible support big companies like IBM might jump on the bandwagon.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
As a web developer there are plenty of features I would like to see along the lines of CSS/XHTML/ECMAScript standards compliance. I would say that my payment of sweat and tears with workarounds to these problems more than qualifies me as a customer.
Well, duh! This is like claiming that snow isn't important to people living in the middle of the Sahara. If you can't use something, have no access to it, have no knowledge of it, then you won't consider it important, because you won't know about it to consider it important!
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
I'm trying to think of something similar... hmm...
James reiterated that a feature like having a handle on both sides of the door is simply not important to someone who is only on their way out
Actually its a great statement. It covers most classes of Microsoft software users:
1.) The stupid ones
They couldn't use tabbed browsing even if they tried. No. Its true. I tried it with my mum (bless her) and she simply couldn't understand the concept. Sure, opening loads of browser windows everywhere was also confusing and cluttered the desktop, but hey.
2.) The ignorant ones
Is there any other browser than IE?
3.) The Microsoft zealots
If IE doesn't have it, then it isn't worth having.
4.) The wannabes
They just discovered computers and don't want to look different by using a browser that isn't pre-installed... until someone else does and tells them its cool.
5.) Those who just don't care
They have a browser installed. Why have another one? Heck, the whole OS stinks, so why try to polish a turd?
Not only are people dumb, but they get used to using one browser. No matter what type of computer they are. For example, my school bought a bunch of iMacs this year. They all run OS X, and all of them have Safari. What browser to people use 90% of the time? Internet Explorer. Which browser is easier to find? Safari. It's in the freaking dock. Where is Internet Explorer? In the Application directory of the hard drive with OS X installed on it. People are so stupid and hooked on Internet Explorer that they spend extra time trying to find it. They don't understand that IE is not the internet.
I think if other companies want their browsers to be used, they should give them a name that has INTERNET in it. That way people will know that you're going on the internet. What the hell has Firefox got to do with the internet? Same goes for Netscape, Opera, and Safari.
hey!
The reasons why Microsoft is not worried?
1) Firefox will never be integrated to the OS (or Office). There will always be functions that Windows or Office will call IE for.
2) The vast majority of people will not use anything other than the software bundled with their system. I have had no end of trouble convincing people to try either Mozilla or Firefox. When I tell them that the programs are made by the same people that made Netscape in the past, some will be willing to give it a try.
3) They'll figure out a way to kill Firefox, legal or otherwise, and will stall and wheedle in the courts long enough to make sure that the dagger is good and twisted. Until our legal folks realize that Microsoft is a monopoly and it has no incentive to play fair with competing products, it will continue to destroy the competition.
Idle, somewhat connected question... has anybody seen any statistics on browser usage for people who have actually tried an alternative browser? I've introduced quite a few people to Mozilla/Firefox, and I don't recall any of them saying "Well yeah, but I still like IE better."
I am NOT a man!
I am a free number!
"Microsoft executives defended Internet Explorer, saying it is no less secure than any other browser and doesn't lack any important features"
And yes, I realise most everyone who has replied to this post has commented on this phrase alone. But hey, who am I not to jump on the bandwagon?
I got two words for "doesn't lack any important features" and those are Tabbed Browsing, and just one word for "is no less secure" and that is SPYWARE
I work for a university fixing computers for students. These days, "fixing computers" generally means "get computer, run virus scan, run spyware scans, clean up the mess, return to student". After a month or so of seeing the same students time and time again for the same problems I got fed up and started installing Firefox on their computers. When they show up to pick up their computer and I tell them about Firefox, explain to them that Firefox does not allow spyware to get onto their machines (at least the ones that would normally go through IE), and show them tabbed browsing, they are SOLD. Now I get students coming in with their computers regularly asking me to install Firefox for them. Not one of the students whose computer I installed Firefox on has returned to me for virus or spyware related problems. Not one.
On an only slightly related note, some have asked me if there is a way to get tabbed chatting for their AIM conversations, at which point I simply uninstall AIM and install the windows port of GAIM. Again, once I show them tabbed chatting, and the ability to see their "buddies" away messages by just hovering the mouse cursor over the buddy name, they will never turn back. It doesn't take much to convince a user to switch, just show them the little things that kill and they will go for it.
One day I went to visit a old teacher from my highschool while there I saw a kid take Put IE back in the dock (I took it out). When I asked the kid what he was doing.. He told me that he made web pages and he knew what he was doing. Further investigation showed was one of those people that would take any microsoft product over something else. (Sheeple I like to call them)
So I come back a awhile later to help the teacher with some new computers.. Still seeing kids using IE.. So what did I do.. I installed firefox. Put it in the dock. I changed the Icon to the internet explorer one. Then promptly deleted IE. No one ever noticed. (I only did this on one mechine. The rest have safari. This was just a test mechine)
Oh the new computers.. Overkill.. Lets see iMac G5, Powermac G5, and a Dell pc. For each Workstation.. For a highschool. Wish I had that at home.
One-by-one as I clean machines with spyware and crap-ware of all sorts, I also install Firefox 1.0 onto their machines and if they want I spend about 3-5 minutes showing them the features that would be important to them. I show them pop-up blocking, tabbed browsing and how to install extensions such as Adblock.
I'd say 1 out of 10 or fewer people so far have wanted to go back to MSIE... and the reason is usually because they are just used to doing things a certain way but it doesn't take long to get used to the new one anyway.
These steps are important because my company's goal is to dump Microsoft and any product that depends on a Microsoft operating system. Moving people to Firefox, and getting people to use OpenOffice has, so far, been a welcome improvement for most of my users. (We need to write PDF files from time to time and only OpenOffice does that... sure we could buy and install adobe acrobat... expensive... no point in that when they get what they want for free with OpenOffice.) And once they are all used to seeing OOo and Firefox in their faces, changing the OS from beneath them becomes a LOT more trivial than it would be to go about it the other way around.
Truly, the migration path from Windows to Linux is in the applications... get the apps we need to run under Linux and we're golden. So far, OOo and Firefox is paving the way nicely and presenting a very favorable impression for using OSS in the workplace.
I've got an application on a pendrive I carry around which is just a one-click corrective action. Firefox, Spybot, loads of config changes, runs auto-update. Great.
:D
It even works through my school's 'security'. Excellent
How many people can read hex if only you and dead people can read hex?
Those are basic usage things. Clicking on an icon labeled Internet is basic usage (steering), as is turning it on (Filling up and applying gas), getting email and playing a game (general driving). Defrag, popup blocking, anti-virus and knowing what program does what and how to replace them are not basic usage, just like changing the oil, getting a tune up and whatnot are not basic usage people take it to a garage for that. When i turn the wheel in a car, it turns, but I couldn't even begin to tell you how nor do I care, because I don't need to know how it works to do this. Just like clicking on a link to IE, I don't need to know how it does what it does, or what program it launches in order to use it, I need to know how to click it, enter a url and use google, thats it.
"I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
I don't understand why managers goes out of their way to say silly stuff. I wonder if it comes with the job.
The Microsoft IE Dev team is pretty up to date - see their wiki here.
http://channel9.msdn.com/wiki/default.aspx/Chan
There's a lot less marketing junk - and the wiki format makes it easy to make comments and discussion constructively.
Congratulations.
I know nothing about motor mechanics; if my car develops a fault, I take it to a garage. Am I dumb now?
Knowing nothing about the mechanics of such an expensive piece of machinery is a quick way to get ripped off. Even compared to a JiffyLube for $20, you can save half by doing it yourself. I may be a network consultant, but I am quite comfortable seeing to the needs of my own automobile and have in the past changed everthing from oil, to spark plugs, to alternators, to oxygen sensors. None of which are as difficult as I or other might have imagined. Pick up a tear-down manual for your car at AutoZone for about $14 and knock yourself out.
I know nothing about building. If I needed an extension built, or a wall knocked through, or whatever, I'd go to a builder. Am I dumb now?
Construction is another area of greatly marked up labor. Basic engineering principles are easy to master and will save you thousands. I learned most of mine working on a low-slope/commercial/industrial roofing crew in the summers in college. I have also picked up carpentry, mansonary, and electrical along the way. Trust me, DIY projects will save you loads of cash and are not difficult to master. Start small, work you way up. That hole in the sheetrock you have a picture hung over is a nice small place to start learning. The most satisfying project I have completed are the two walk-in closets in my master bedroom complete with loads of built-ins.
I know nothing about teaching. I may know the subject, but I know nothing about planning and preparing lessons, setting homework, or keeping a class full of students interested and engaged. Am I dumb now?
I am not a "teacher" but I tutored people in college and also created the format for a 2-week summer computer camp that introducted K thru 4th graders to basic computer concepts. I can say without a doubt I learned more while teaching other people than I ever learned while other people were teaching me.
Because by extending your reasoning to other fields, I am, and so are you, and everyone else here.
People here need to stop being so elitist, and denigrating people just because they know less about computers than some arbitrarily determined minimum level below which the person must be "dumb".
It is not elitest to say someone is far from well rounded. Specialization is the autobaun to obsoletion. My social circle includes no other "computer people" but I have taken the time to learn wines (nice course at a local university), cigars (even though I don't smoke them more than VERY RARLY, being able to talk to an aficionado is a great way to start a conversation with them, a possible future client). I am not inclined to follow pop culture but I read People, US, etc., so I have something to chat up those interested in it about. I have picked up on while living in Miami Beach, Haute Couture, Haute Cuisine, styles of Architechture (followed that through with an Architechture Lecture at a local university, facinating stuff, Miami Beach is the only place you will find Tropical Deco), furniture design, more sports than I can count, and having a best friend that is a film festival coordinator I have learned a load of things (namely occupations) that I never imagined existed. I never knew existed. Computer People need to expand thier world to other things (and that doesnt mean reading about it on the computer, that's cheating, get outside) and non-Computer savvy people most definatly need to learn more about computers as they are a tidal wave on the horizon that will (more than now even) infultrate the very fabric of their existence. I by no means think that I am even close to well rounded, I have a long ways to go before I can begin to consider resting. It is, however, unforgivable for a person to *choose* to remain ignorant.
Leonardo Da Vinci never announced "I'm an artist, what do I care about engineering?"
i personally much prefer the management in FF, but perhaps someone could write an extension to simulate filesystem-style bookmarks management. i wouldn't like to see it changed wholesale - i think that it's very much a matter of preference - but this would be a good idea for an extension.
-Leigh
One major weakness I've found for Firefox (and one that ticks me off to no end) is that there is no way for Firefox to load a local image.
I've actually offered a US $1000 bounty for anybody who can fix this and incorporate it into the main code base. See Link Here.
One thing that kills me about this is I spent 6-9 months developing software to work on MSIE and Mozilla. Mozilla would be a very small portion of my client base but I wanted to help promote open source. But since they made this change that disallows you from loading local images, all this work is gone to waste.
Anyways, I guess there are two things:
1. The fact that I developed on a 1.2 browser and the newer versions were NOT backward compatible. This sucks big ass. Imagine investing the time, money and effort on this and have it wasted. I know you could tell me I should have upgraded the browser but the point was that you always need to support the older browsers. I never even suspected that the newer browsers would purposely break something that worked in the older ones.
2. It's not a security issue. What damage can be done by loading an image that is on your computer. The most I could steal (info wise) is the width/height of that image and the fact that that image exists.
3. I wonder how my commercial incentive (the reward) plays out in an open source world. People are either going to be happy or hate it I presume. Either way, if you solve it and get it introduced into the release version, you get $1000.
Sunny
Be my Friend
Firts let me say I'm a huge advocate of mozilla based browsers. In my opinion, they're the only group to get it RIGHT.
I've made it a requirement of friends and relatives that if they want me to look at their machine and fix them that they need to install and use firefox as their primary browser.
There is a problem with the whole thing though - many of them go back to IE because one site of another will not work due to IE dependancies. Of all the people I've converted, only a small percentage kept with it.
We've seen a big spike in FF/Moz usage over the last few months, however, if you'll excuse my pessamism, I think this will eventually drop off as people find one or two sites that don't function properly because they were designed only with IE in mind. A good example of this is my sister, who went back because her son couldn't play a couple of yahoo games which explicitly ask for IE.
I think this is the real reason they say Firefox is not a threat to IE - because despite the superiority of Firefox, most people don't care about the benefits of security. They just want page X to work properly, and when it only works properly in IE, they'll run back.
BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
I went solely Firefox before XP SP2 because I was concerned about my security and hated the popups. However after SP2, just for jumping on the computer and doing some casual surfing, I have no problem with either IE or Firefox; whichever is the most handy will suffice. (Note however that I still miss tabbed browsing in IE so I'd have to say I'm still leaning closer to Firefox instead of standing in the exact middle of the road.)
However as developer or power user or whatever you want to call it, I prefer the flexibility of Firefox. Firefox is more likely to have a cult following than IE, but not among average home users.
If Microsoft keeps adding just the needed features to keep the average user happy and secure, I'm sure they will fend off Firefox with ease. It's unfortunate, but I believe it's true.
Actually, it's worse than that. When you "uninstall" IE, it leaves iexplore.exe on your computer and merely sets its hidden attribute. You can still run the program itself, as well as like you say, all the DLLs which are the real problem.
Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
Thanks for the responses! The about:config really helped. Who would have guessed, a build-in XML type registry.
:)
As for the answers to certain queries. I'll try to be more accurate in my statements:
* Changing the temporary cache path?
I like storing anything temporary on another drive, not my system drive. That way I can erase the whole thing at the end of my windows session if necessary.
* No option to clear cache when done?
The IE option is to "Emtpy Temporary Internet Files folder when browser is closed".
* Inability to prompt me if I want scripts to run?
I am refering to any scripts, all scripts, whatever scripts. A TV or newspaper isn't capable of running scripts, neither should a browser...in my humble opinion. Yes I love the FireFox Javascript fine-tuning control. I really wish IE had that. Of course I unchecked all the options for Javascript on FireFox.
* Prompted cookie setting control?
Yea, I missed the "Ask me every time" option. Thanks. It wasn't obvious that it was under that dropdown because it is labled "Keep cookies". The word "Keep" gives me the impression that the cookie had already been set.
* Inline images are either on or off. Eg, no ability to prevent animations (gif or otherwise) from running.
(This is frustrating. I want to see the original images, but I absolutely hate animations of any sort.)
Yes apparently FireFox doesn't have this option, even under about:config. The specific IE option is "Play animations in web pages". I have this turned off.
* No Zones feature so that I can configure certain security options for certain sites.
Zones are nice for intranet stuff where you know you are completely in a secured development environment. The restricted and trusted sites are also nice. I think the thing I like about zones is that it completely adjusts every browser setting for each zone. In fact, I would argue that there should be more zones, more user creatable/definable zones. Zones that users can setup and name. Zones are the limited equivalent of sandbox type controls.
* Installed security is to save passwords, allow web sites to install software, save form information, and Java is enabled?
(Of course IE is probably even more open, but the point is that FireFox is supposed to be secure right?)
I don't know about you, but when I end my browser session, I erase everything. I erase history, cookies, temporary internet files, passwords, form data...everything. I even erase the sites in my blocked lists. In fact, whenever I start my browser, I want it to startup as if I had never used it before. In many ways Firefox should have the option to browse similarly, like in Apples Safari browser where the browser does a complete privacy reset when done. I would love that!
* Many other configuration options are missing that would allow me to be prompted if I want to execute or do something.
Obviously I don't want to name them all. Just open up any IE and choose the security tab, then choose a zone. All the promptable settings are there. And yes I can be prompted to prevent active x controls to run. I just wish META refresh was promptable. Arguably it needs to be.
Firefox is a good start. I really don't want to download Mozilla to get more advanced options. I mean what is the point of FireFox then? I want to use FireFox, I just need more browsing control. I do not like a broswer that does things for me. One other annoying thing about FireFox, even though it isn't a biggie...the fonts don't look right on some sites. I hope they fix that.
Thanks for your input. I'm just that much more informed now!
+2
Clever idea, but it can backfire if they depend on a site that only works on IE. I tried something along those lines with one of my relatives, and his banking website wouldn't work. He was horribly freaked out because he thought I had "broken" his "bank account" and he thought he wouldn't be able to withdraw money while he was on a vacation he was leaving for in several days.
Well I explained what was wrong, but he didn't believe me so I spent about an hour on the phone trying first to explain how to open the site in IE, then trying to explain how to change the default browser to IE, then even trying to get him to simply delete Firefox. Unfortunately he was too stupid to figure it out, and I had to drive to his house and fix it for him.
As you can probably guess by now, I'm not going to install Firefox on people's machines anymore unless they know what I'm doing. If a luser is too thick skulled to figure out what a web browser is, then they deserve to be stuck with IE.
Not that I'm bitter or anything... :-P
For all the talk of the cathedral and the bazaar, there are a lot of folks here who seem to believe in the success of conversions driven by submission to secular authority, personal influence or techno-magic.
Don't tell me how Grandad, your kid sister, your lab rats -- one, a young woman, divorced, with two kids and a job to protect -- have all come to love Firefox.
Don't tell me how clever you've been, the tricks you played that make it all seem so easy.
Instead, prove to me that you can make it out there alone in the cold, cruel world of Windows. 300 million users world-wide. Nine million OEM systems shipping each month with IE6 as the default.
I considered doing that where I work (school), but I did one better. To get to the web, you have to use a proxy server. Well, not only did I remove all mentions of IE anywhere, but I didn't put the proxy settings in. And the user can't change them. So you can try to use IE all you want, but it doesn't work. But Firefox works great, and it's got no fewer than four links on the computer. Plus I set up a firefox roaming profile for users so the bookmarks/etc. travel with them.
:) Not only do the users HAVE to use Firefox, but they see the name a lot, which, in additon to the good user experience, is marketing for the browser.
I'm so happy with this setup
Microsoft itself, for instance, became a success by giving people what they didn't know they needed, or by filling a void that no one realised was there.
<harshing on Microsoft>
Really? When was this? Bill Gates and Paul Allen did a good turn with BASIC back on the Altair, but they were copying the innovation of John G. Kemeny and Thomas E. Kurtz in doing so. DOS was a rip of CP/M. Windows was an attempt to block VisiCorp's VISION and Digital Research's GEM, not to mention IBM's TopView, Quarterdeck's DESQ/View or, say, the Lisa and Macintosh. Flight Simulator came from Bruce Artwick's subLogic. Word came after dozens of other Word Processors. Excel was Microsoft's second attempt at a spreadsheet app after Multimate, which in turn was after Visicalc and Lotus 1-2-3.
The web browser? Tim Berners Lee and Marc Andreesen's team at NCSA, among others. Powerpoint? Purchased from an outside developer. Visio? Purchased from an outside developer. FoxPro? Purchased from an outside developer. C#/.NET? Closely imitative of Java, without all of that icky non-Windows-bound aspirations.
I'm rather looking forward to seeing Microsoft become a success by giving people what they didn't know they needed, myself. Microsoft Bob surely wasn't it.
</harshing on Microsoft>
- jon
Ganymede, a GPL'ed metadirectory for UNIX
IE is not JUST iexplorer.exe. That is only a small stub file that loads certain COM components associated with Web browsing.
;)
Same with EXPLORER.EXE, it is only a stub that loads the COM controls that deal with file browsing.
There are other COM modules available, such as Network browsers, Picture viewers, and in Win95, there was the easter egg COM module.
the stubs can load any of these COM modules dependent on the content being displayed. Indeed it IS possible to make a HTML COM component based on Mozilla, and the COM/ActiveX component IS available. however, it is stil not possible for the Mozilla COM module to replace IE and its trident engine in this context either.
The point I am making, is that IE is NOT tied to the OS itself, its only tied to the SHELL of the OS.
If you REALLY want to stop IE from starting, even on a Windows XP box, use Program Manager as the shell! It does work.... its progman.exe located in c:\windows\system32
I use progman.exe and Mozilla as the shell on my "guest" account of my XP box, and it works VERY nicely!
Have a nice day!
I don't agree with him, and I don't think his answers tell the whole story (besides, the anti-IE ones don't exactly tell the whole story either), but they don't stop his points being valid.
Up to a point I think he's right. OK, I admit I'd debate the "any less secure" statement, but I do agree that a major part of it is that IE is still so common so it's an easier target.
Though I certainly get the feeling that MS might well be counting the definitive version of Internet Explorer as being IE6 under XP SP2. And that is more secure - just not necessarily the major version of IE being used quite yet.
He also (undurprisingly) doesn't touch on the issue that IE bugs reach further than simply IE. "This bug affects you even if Internet Explorer is not your default browser" always irritates me no end. If I'm not using it then why should the flaw still matter? But the "integration" with Windows is the problem in this case. And if there's a flaw and no current patch you can't even uninstall the software until an update version comes out.
So regadless of the quantity of issues, the nature of the IE flaws is totally different.
This is another point. There aren't a great deal of features that customers "want" that would attract them to switch. Firefox's real strength (in my opinion) is that it has features you that you never thought about, but that keep you from switching back
Up until recently not many non-geeks had probably heard of it, except maybe mentioned by a geek-type. But it's starting to be mentioned more and more in the media, so MS are understandably wanting to stop people making the initial switch.
Besides, many Windows users simply equate "The Internet" with "Internet Explorer" - or, more likely, with "The Blue e Icon". They're not looking for anything different because they don't even know that there are alternatives.
The real danger for those of us interested in the non-IE alternatives is to dismiss anything that comes from MS. Just because they don't say things the way we see them doesn't mean that their poitns don't have merit. Plus we do have to see things from their perspective to be able to validly counter their claims. Because the "M$ are fulla BS" approach isn't really going to get people interested in alternatives. But a reasoned argument about why a Microsoft statement doesn't tell the whole truth might at least get someone to listen.
Tiggs
"120 chars should be enough for everyone..."