Slashdot Mirror
Firefox Reviewed in the Globe and Mail
Eric Giguere writes "Today's Globe and Mail has a Firefox review titled A bug-free surfing zone in its Friday review section. Slashdot readers probably won't like the last phrase, though: 'Until Firefox finds a way around that, you might have to keep Internet ExplORer around -- just for emergencies, of course.'"
Perhaps these websites should move from building apps with ActiveX? just a thought
Microsoft used Firefox in a press image they sent out promoting their MSN Search.
In Soviet russia, only old Koreans profit from pictures of Natalie Portman stored on Beowulf Clusters.
You might have to keep IE around? What else are you going to do with it? It's integrated into the OS. The only way to get rid of it completely is to uninstall Windows. What's not to like about that statement? It's certainly worth a chuckle.
Windows Update is the big reason Firefox users keep having to use Internet Explorer. There's an ActiveX plugin for Firefox out there, but I don't know if (with masquerading the user agent) it will run Windows Update. Anyone tried this? There's also an extension that adds Windows Update to Firefox's Tools menu.
How am I supposed to fit a pithy, relevant quote into 120 characters?
Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, START
I haven't used IE to surf since I got firefox. And I have spread it around campus and have received only one complaint. Long live open source!
This is another way of starting a sig with this and ending it with that.
It isn't about using Firefox or Internet Explorer. Some of us don't have a Windows machine, so we don't even have the option of running Internet Explorer.
And why would I object to it? It's a pretty well known fact that there are pages that just won't work with anything else than IE.
At work, for instance, I can't use Firefox for certain tasks because the Java-based admin pages (finances and grading) at our University won't work with it. Java apps load and work to some extent, but the layout is so screwed up in a Firefox that the pages are essentially useless. In Linux the pages won't work at all because of some weird Java problems (I thought Java was supposed to be platform independent?).
Complaining won't help, because IE is such a de facto standard that, according to the people who maintain the admin software, there is no support for "non-compliant" software such as Firefox and never will be.
The owls are not what they seem
Yes, it's another entirely ironic aspect of Windows: you have to use their insecure web browser to update their buggy OS. I'm really surprised that the detaching of WU from IE wasn't part of some antitrust settlement.
That being said anyone have recent penetration statistics. FF was gaining 0.5% every two weeks through Mid Decemeber but this is the last data I have seen. Anyone tracking this on their own site, the absolute is maybe less important the the trend.
Help fight continental drift.
Never mind Active X. How about all those crappy sites that use Javascript to check the browser by name/version instead of using professional methods that check the browser's capability?
One day (in the far distant future, no doubt), Javascript (/VBscript) will have either been seen to be the quick/dirty solution and deprecated with dynamic pages being server based or, the DOM will have been agreed as a proper object model with an agreed API. Perhaps then, a decent script language that is consistent across builds/OSes and even the same build on different OSes will act the same way.
I'm not holding my breath tho'...
Erm it does. You must have disabled it.
Tools -> Options -> Advanced -> Tabbed Browsing -> Warn when closing multiple tabs
Auto-check your UK lottery lines
I work in a shop that is exclusively IE. In fact, they have a militant attitude to anything non-MS. Needless to say, I downloaded Firefox onto my workstation and opened up our corporate intranet site, the thing was a mess. Turns out the developers decided to use non-standard HTML and CSS along with sloppy coding practices. Of course, I'm sure someone got a huge contract for developing the site, but I fear that heads will roll once IE catches up to actually implementing standards.
I only wish I didn't submit my resignation last week, because it would have been fun to watch the IT head honchos get it when IE 7 comes out. Of course that assumes that IE 7 might implement standards. Not holding my breath though!
My big complaint with FF isn't that you can't use Active-X. It's the massive memory leaks with tabbed browsing. FF routinely gets up to 350MB of memory usage. I use the internet *heavily* for research and reading news, so I open and close a huge number of tabs a day. Having to bookmark all the pages I have open every night so I can close down FF is a real pain (if I didn't, it would truely eat all my vm space). They really need to work on that...
(It's been a known issue for a long time, but nobody seems to be able to fix it)
I think it's a question of how the system (which is used in every one of our national institutions such as universities and government) was specified to begin with. I suspect that in order save money the compatibility issues were limited to Windows and IE only. The poor code-monkeys have just taken the easiest, specification compatible route.
The owls are not what they seem
Is this a joke?
,Evene in firefox 1.0).
:- IE is much faster than Firefox to open files in my hard disk.(WinXX).
I was going to ignore it thinking it was, but just incase you're serious I will respond.
The last phrase isnt that bad as you said.Nothing wrong in keeping Internet explorer for emergencies.I have seem quite a few pages that refuse to work in netscape - apart from those sites whose contents get juggled ( Yes
You're right here, this happens. MSIE is VERY good at rendering malformed HTML. Some have speculated that this was done to prevent HTML standards from being followed by most developers, but in any case, the HTML you're seeing messed up *is* malformed. At a fundamental level it's the website's fault. If you do have to use one of those pages, do make sure you e-mail the maintainer. Often they will fix it. As FF's marketshare increases, expect this to change.
Next,The start up time when I double click a html file in my hard disk
This is because MSIE is preloaded in RAM. I'm not familiar enough with windows to tell you how to preload FF at startup but there is a way. You can use about:config changes in firefox to speed up page rendering if you'd like. You should look into both of these if you are often opening files from the hard disk.
Firefox needs to have a confirmation box when its main window containing the tabs is clicked for close.many a time i have accidently clicked the close and all the tabs are gone!
Ahh, finally to the reason I think you are joking. This is the default behavior in Firefox. If your copy isn't doing this it is because you turned it off. Turn it back on and once more it will ask for conformation.
Previous place of employment: Me: Can I switch to Firefox? Boss: What's that? Me: A browser that is much better than IE. It's open source and doesn't suffer from all the malware that IE does. Boss: No, its open source so it might be insecure. We've always used IE, we need to stick with that. Me: Can I install Thunderbird? Boss: What's that? Me: An email client that's much better than Outlook Express. It's free too! Boss: Definitely not. Me: What about OpenOffice.org? Boss: What's that? Me: An open source, easy to use Office suite. It's free and the database inside the spreadsheet is really powerful. You can save things like you are in MS Office, but it doesn't suffer from a lot of the problems, like broken AutoCorrect. Boss: No way, it could be hard to uninstall. Me: Fuck it, I quit.
First, I use FireFox probably 99% of the time now. Due to quirks of my system somewhere, visiting a few of my favorite Flash-using sites still forces me to use IE from time to time.
That said:
As people will sometimes acidently find them selfs browsing using I.E
How do you "accidently" find yourself using IE? Have I missed something and it can't be quit anymore? Either you're using it to browse the page you're currently looking at and you know it, or you're not using it. And yes, I know about it being integrated with Windows, but it doesn't seem as if you're talking about that.
then when they have finished, will notice all the spyware and maybe infections on their machines.
I used IE exclusively for almost 5 years before I discovered Phoenix/Firebird/FireFox. I still use it from time to time for certain sites. I never had a problem with spyware or viruses. It all depends on what sites you visit, what you download, and what you install.
Perhaps FireFox is better at protecting users from the consequences of their own stupidity, but the browser is not completely to blame.
As they browse they will notice the annoying ad's, they will notice the most annoying and obtrusive things some websites do.
Spend a few minutes to install the Google toolbar or any of a bazillion free popup blockers, problem solved.
once they realise that somesites are forcing them to use internet explorer, they will turn away and shun the site.
People here love to claim how they'll never visit *insert site here* ever again, because they had to use IE/it had annoying animated GIFs/used Flash/etc., but do you really see normal users reacting that way? I'm not so sure.
The extension that adds Windows Update to the menu is just a shortcut to wupdmgr.exe, the same thing you have in your Start Menu. It doesn't add any new features, it just mimics IE's feature of having a shortcut to it right in the browser. It's been a while since I tried, but I don't think the ActiveX plugin supports WU. This plug-in is designed for custom, legacy and intranet solutions and nothing else.
I find it easier just to not use Windows Update. I use Automatic Updates to get all my critical updates. If you're paranoid about AU, use their RSS feed and Security Bulletin Search.
Instead of posting "bitchfest" comments here, perhaps we should politely email the author and help him broaden his understandingof the issues?
Here is what I wrote to him, as an example.
While I am sure it is not perfect, I believe it touches on the matters he clearly does not yet understand.
Emailed to: mingram@globeandmail.ca
Re: Your article:
A bug-free surfing zone
By Mathew Ingram
Friday, January 14, 2005 - Page R31
Hi Matthew.
While I have to thank you for a relatively informative article, I also have to point out that you are still, in many ways "Not getting it"
You have fallen into two fundamental errors of understanding:
First:
" That engine forms the basis for a new browser called Firefox, which is free for Windows and Mac users"
In this you badly missed the point of the Mozilla project.
Firstly the Mozilla project is where various browsers, Gecko based and other, spawn from.
It was an example of the first major project ceded to the Open Source movement.
It was decided that the best way to encourage development, without being tied to a development budget, was to move the development to an Open Source model, where thousands of users/develeopers could adopt and continue the development unfettered by traditional copyright and ownership issues.
By moving the Netscape source to a "copyleft" model this has clearly demonstrated an alternative and much more useful model for ownership and develeopment.
Your second case of misunderstanding:
Adding insult to injury you only mentioned the old (and many say obsolete) Microsoft and Apple environments, and totally ignored the much more relevant and modern Open Soruce communities, such as Linux and FreeBSD.
Thirdly, in the last paragraph you wrote:
"Firefox isn't perfect. It still has some bugs, which isn't surprising considering it only recently came out of "beta" or testing mode. It also can't do much with pages that require features only Internet Explorer has, such as the ability to run Active-X programs."
While I fully agree that Firefox is NOT perfect, the one item you chose as an erxample is not a bug!
ActiveX and similar are not features, but instead are what can be called "malware".
A model for extensions that is so insecure and flawed is not to be supported.
It was a fatal error by Microsoft, and continues to be so.
Nobody is interested in "fixing" this.
If you want an extension model with some practical features, the world has already settled on a few, most notably PHP and Java. These can be secured, and can be considered "safe" extensions when properly implemented.
The only "bug" that is relevant here is the continued dependancy by a handful of misguided developers who are still using ActiveX on web pages.
The severity of this bug is such that the US Dept. of Homeland Security issued an advisory advising people to NOT use Internet Explorer.
Internet Explorer and ASP IS the "bug".
Avoiding it's faults is an improvement, NOT a "bug"
BTW, whether you want to Internet Explorer installed on a Windows system is not a choice you get to make. M$ have integrated the browser into the OS in a fashion that does not allow you to remove it.
All you can do is remove links to it. These are called "shortcuts" in Windows terms.
Maybe next time you foray into this arena, good intentions in hand, you might want to submit your article for peer review in the relevant communities. I will be glad to point you in the directions for this if you like.
Feel free to ask.
BTW, this highlights what is probably the strongest feature of Open Source software: Peer review.
By submitting code, text, and other means of expression to peer review, we utilize a wide community of people to assist in improving our works, avoiding the pitfalls of well intentioned, but misadvised concepts and cases where we simply were not aware of a relevant matter on the topic.
We are all going to make mistakes, but i
Maurice W. Hilarius Voice: (778) 347-9907
Barclays online banking http://ibank.barcalys.co.uk/ works fine with Firefox
-- "I know that this is vitriol, no solution, spleen-venting, but I feel better having screamed, don't you ?"
Windows Update is not a reason to keep IE around, I work in an office that has gone to Firefox only browsing to prevent the computers from being filled with adware and spyware and let me too you it has helped 1000%. We use to have to keep IE as an option for Windows Update but now with Automatic Update, Windows XP handles all the downloading and updating without IE or those nasty ActiveX extensions. Seriously Firefox and Windows automatic update has saved well over 100 hours of tech support at work.
I wonder if anyone has lost their job because of Firefox? Downsizing the IT department because there are so many less adware and spyware related calls?
The globe and mail are one of canada's primary newspapers. They are high on my trustworthy list. They aren't tech oriented, but that doesn't mean they aren't trustworthy. You have to remember that this article was aimed towareds untechy people. Despite slashdotters not liking the last paragraph in particular, it was a good explanation to the non-technical why some websites won't work. Overall, i feel it was a good review.
Waffles rock.
Nonsense, Lloyds TSB's internet banking works perfectly across all major browsers and platforms.
Anybody can (and does) make that claim about any news source. Every news source has a bias, since there are people involved and those people, no matter how objective they may try to be, will allow a certain amount of bias through. I'd guess that, assuming you read national news in Canada, you're a National Post reader. You probably don't see them as being particularly biased, because they probably represent your worldview, whereas the G&M does not. That's fine. But the G&M does, for the most part, represent my worldview, whereas a newspaper that thinks an editorial on the merits of creationism is outstanding journalism (just to take a single example from recent memory) does not really represent my worldview, so I tend to consider NP as being "biased".
It's suggested to not rely on any single news source as the only news source.
"You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." -- Albert Einstein
As a client, you should explain to your sales rep the issues at hand and how they are issuficient to your needs (tell em you're going all mac even).
At worst you may be able to negociate a better commission for your sales, at best they fix it.
I'm not saying I'm pro-microsoft. I'm not saying I'm anti-microsoft, either. What I am saying is this:
That one statement made by the author (Mathew Ingram) is complete bullshit. Anyone who actually remembers the start of the browser wars will know the following:
1. Netscape may have been a little startup at one point, but by the time the browser wars began, it was the biggest Internet application around -- and it held enormous weight behind it.
2. Netscape directly challenged Microsoft. Netscape thought that it could create a platform independant API, based around the Netscape software, that would make operating systems all but obsolete. They may not have been directly challenging windows, but they sure were threatening to make it obsolete. The challenged the Windows (Win16/Win32) API, which always has and (at least for the immediate future) always will be microsoft's bread 'n butter.
I'm not saying MS's tactics were fair, or even legal. I'm not saying the browser market couldn't use some fresh blood and some competition. Whether microsoft played fair or not is beyond my current scope. The fact is that Netscape made a direct move against microsoft, and making Netscape out to be the poor innocent victim is really starting to get old. They made a decision to challenge one of the largest and most powerful companies in the world. They lost. End of story.
Martyrs they are not. Examples of what not to do, they are.
/*end of rant*/
/dev/random
You can also tell Firefox to keep some elements of the browser in memory after you close FF, so the next time you open FF it starts up faster. Go to about:config and change browser.turbo.enabled to true.
$ echo "ceci n'est pas une pipe" | sed -Ee 's/(eci n|pas )//g'
I'm playing devil's advocate here, but hey...
Problem: You want to produce a payroll system which is easy to administer centrally, doesn't require the sysadmin to install specific software and should have a rich, pretty interface.
Solution: Make it web based.
Problem: It's 1998. Web based things are a right royal PITA to write if you're using straight HTTP/HTML, particularly if they're stateful. XHTML doesn't exist, Java is patchy at best. JSP has hardly been heard of (did it exist then?)
Solution: This ActiveX thingy looks interesting. The program's still web-based but you've got a pretty good API to work with. Okay, so it's Windows only, but Macs are not exactly in heavy use in payroll departments, and whoever heard of Linux on the desktop? Adware, spyware and other miscellaneous security nightmares in IE are still a distant speck on the horizon.
I believe you can appent "-turbo" to your FF shortcut to enable this behavior as well, at least in Windows.
"C:\Program Files\firefox\firefox.exe" -turbo
Firefox is hardly bug-free. Use it to access my resume and you'll find a really nasty Javascript bug. (The link to my email is generated on the fly, to hide it from spambots. The hover behavior works correctly in IE but not Firefox.) At this point in time, Firefox has a lot fewer bugs (or at least a lot fewer bugs that really matter) than Internet Explorer. But this has as much to do with the increasing flakiness of Internet Explorer as with the improvement in Firefox.
As much as we love to call IE "not standards-compliant," we have to admit that for now, since it has so much of the market share, Internet Explorer effectively is the standard for the web.
Tools such as 'valgrind' are great for catching memory problems like the one you described. However, it is best to use them continuously during development (ideally running automatic regression tests inside them). It's virtually impossible to clean up a huge amount of low quality code after the fact.
Frankly the firefox codebase is the result of 7 years of development done largely without unit tests or even basic QA. As a result, they have leaks, bloat, and severe malformed HTML DoSes that lock up all browser tabs/windows.
The key to good engineering is complete self-honesty, but these days it looks like firefox is being managed by a self-delusional marketing organization with no interest in fixing its serious technical problems.
Linux users are encouraged to run 'valgrind firefox' prior to modding this post down for not towing slashdot's party line.
Automatic Update is a part of XP.
"Is a part of Windows XP" means "costs two hundred dollars" to many users.
You only need to download it on Windows 2000 because it came as part of an SP.
If you're trying to get a Windows service pack without using Windows Update, then don't you need to buy the service pack on CD at a nominal fee?
This is another reason I keep IE around. Open up a new browser window, and you've got a new session, whether you need one to test a web app you're developing or just to be logged into multiple mail.yahoo accounts at the same time. With Firefox the only way to get a new session is to log out of the old one (or close all Firefox windows.) And no, I do not want to mess around creating multiple profiles for something that IE accomplishes with a single click.
Your mailto link would also fail for anyone with JS turned off... including IE users. You can't blame firefox for that.
If you want to hide you emails, convert the letters to their numerical equivs manually, the post.
see here: http://www.wbwip.com/wbw/emailencoder.html
First of all, the mozilla team is working on a better download manager. Multi-session downloading is one of their goals for 1.1 i think. And for your second point, you need this extension: http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?t=1645 13
I did some more research after that post. If you want to run firefox under valgrind you actually need to use 'firefox --debugger valgrind'. With 'valgrind firefox', the startup script causes valgrind to analyze the script, rather than the actual browser process.
Anyway, results with a single blank firefox 1.0 window:
==6273== ERROR SUMMARY: 83 errors from 5 contexts (suppressed: 272 from 3)
==6273== malloc/free: in use at exit: 691499 bytes in 12633 blocks.
==6273== malloc/free: 163851 allocs, 151218 frees, 25635248 bytes allocated.
which IMHO is rather unacceptable for a 1.0 release.
Whaaaa?
I'm using Suse 9.2 Pro and my FF and TB installs can DEFINETLY "crossover" as you describe.
When I click a mailto link in FF it spawns TB for me.
When I click a URL in TB it will spawn FF and open the page for me.
The best part is, I didn't do anything special to make it happen...it just did it.
My wish would be an (optional!) MSIE compatible rendering engine, that would show web pages as they would in IE. Bug-for-bug compatible, if at all possible, and, of course, must run on non-Windows systems as well. It doesn't need to be fancy (like ActiveX etc...), just show HTML+CSS like they would appear on MSIE please!
cpghost at Cordula's Web.