Plugin Lets Users Turn IE into Firefox

An anonymous reader writes "There is a new plugin available for IE that can make Internet Explorer resemble Firefox by adding tabbed browsing capabilities and an integrated search box. Moreover, the plugin improves IE's privacy and security by integrating a firewall designed to block out Internet exploits, phishing sites, spammers, spyware and worms, with a special HTTP filter that removes private data, and an anti-spyware tool that can identify and remove all pests in less then 10 seconds"

Comments

Wrong Way

[fembots]

What I need is a Firefox-plugin that looks exactly like IE (including the lack of tabs and search box) while still providing the same level of security.

Re:Wrong Way

[DotWarner]

I feel sorry for any of your victims who eventually purchase and want to install software, and the tech support agents who take the call. The software won't install, the customer won't be able to identify the version of Windows, and the agent may never be able to identify the problem.

Perhaps you could identify common locations that are used to identify Windows versions and leave pointers to a text file explaining exactly what you've done. This would allow tech support to determine that the customer has been deceived and has wasted their money, and to point them back toward you for vengeance (and give you the chance to supply an OSS program that does the same thing for free).

Re:Wrong Way

[fatcatman]

No, the man has a valid point.

I love Linux. Use it on all of my servers and maintain hundreds of them for a living. I even have a stuffed Tux hanging from my rearview mirror. But Linux is a real pain in the ass on a workstation.

On a server, I expect to recompile my software occasionally. It's a server. It's finicky. It takes time to do right. I don't mind that.

But I won't do that on my workstation. Screwing with dependencies sucks. 9 times out of 10 when I go to install or upgrade some package, it requires a new version of x, which requires a new version of x, y, and z, which each require a new version of h-i-j-k-l-m-n-o-p, and half of the packages refuse to install and only break my system with I try to force them.

Screw that.

Hey, I'm not defending Windows. It sucks in it's own special way.

Hmm. Now I don't know why I posted this, or what my point even was. Nevermind...

Re:Wrong Way

[Shaper_pmp]

So you're deliberately deleting a working, legitimate Windows install, replacing it with Linux against the wishes of the user, then (when they complain) trying to charge then £120 for another version of Windows, because you deleted the one they already own?

You, sir, are a fucking disgrace. You embody everything the public finds repellent about the "arrogant techie" stereotype, and are unethical, deceitful and (if any money or reward changes hands as a result of your "service") likely comitting fraud to boot.

"All these users are older people who use their computers for web browsing and printing mostly, and I take my experiences so far as a kind of scientific 'evidence' that this class of users can't tell the difference."

So that makes it alright? Supposing one of them goes and buys a new family-tree plotting app, or garden-design program (to choose two examples my aunty recently bought) - what happens then? They're faced with a long, expensive call to tech support, which likely still won't the problem that you caused them. Eventually they (stupidly) turn to you again, and what do you tell them?

"Oh, right, yeah, that won't work - get your money back from the shop, if you can get them to believe that a version of 'Windows' won't run this certified 'Windows' application. Oh, and (if you're exceptionally lucky) here's a barely-maintained buggy-as-fuck butt-ugly hobby OSS version of something so pathetically niche that it'll never attract any kind of decent development community, to replace the version you just spent half your pension buying."

"If you service machines for friends and family try this. Don't ask, just do what is good for them. After all they are putting their absolute trust in your computer knowledge, to do anything less is to fail them in."

More like: "After all, they are putting their absolute trust in your computer knowledge, so to do this is to utterly and arrogantly violate that trust in the worst way possible."

Look, if you're sick of fixing computers for family, friends or others, just fucking tell them. Give them a choice of either switching to (your special version of) Linux or compensating you for the time you waste fixing their Windows boxes.

Alternatively, they can stop coming to you altogether and instead pay to have a computer shop fix it.

Under no circumstances is it ever ethical to violate their trust, especially not because you think you've got away with it so far.

For comparison, suppose you went to the doctor, and he told you you had gangrene. You'd expect some explanation of the options and some (pretty strong) recommendations, but ultimately it's your decision what happens.

You wouldn't expect the doctor to simply club you unconscious, chainsaw off your leg and bandage the stump.

"So what?" he might say - I've prevented it spreading to the rest of your system and killing you! You'll retain the use of your other limbs, and for anything you can't do with them, here's a half-arsed prosthetic replacement for your missing limb. Sure it might look a bit nasty, and doesn't always work too well, and sometimes breaks, but look - you can take the cover off and mess about with how it works inside! Ok, you're not a prosthetics expert, and so probably never will, but this clearly makes up for my complete lack of consultation before my arbitrarily rearranging your entire physiology!"

Jesus. Whatever happened to professional ethics?

You're the kind of person that gives us geeks a bad name.

10 seconds? I doubt it.

[notdanielp]

The article's claims of "and an anti-spyware tool that can identify and remove all pests in less then 10 seconds" are exceedingly hard to swallow.

What heuristics are they using that can find and zap all unmentionables in 10 seconds? Has "anonymous reader" ever run a virus/spyware scan before?

Misleading title.

[RealisticCanadian]

Mods be damned, Scuttlemonkey's submissions are getting more and more similar to mass-media headlines. This title has the express purpose of starting a flamewar on the world's most popular anti-ms site.

It makes IE look somewhat like firefox, and adds some lacking functionality that makes it work somewhat like firefox. The two are neither identical nor interchangable.

Why bother?

[FireFlie]

I don't see the point. If you want it to look, feel, and act like firefox, why not get firefox. Yes that is the redundant part. As for the office (scuttlemonkey's idea for a place where this can be useful): if you're equipment is being held so tightly that you can't install firefox, don't you think installing this will get you fired? Many companies keep really tight control over such equipment. Seriously, this is interesting for any ie fanboys, but I don't see any practical application for such an extension (nor do I envision a market for such a thing).

Re:right...

[linguae]

Yeah, but there are certain occasions where Firefox is of no help (e.g., IE-only web pages, ActiveX stuff, etc.). An IE plugin with these security features would tremendously cut down on some of the major malware problems that many people are currently facing. All without having to switch browsers, too.

Don't get me wrong, I love Firefox as much as the next Slashdotter, but don't we all want a more secure Internet Explorer for our Windows-using friends as well?

IE-only web pages...

[Draconix]

Encouragement to use IE is the last thing we want to give Windows users. If IE weren't the dominant browser, web designers couldn't get away with making pages that only work in IE. If a web page uses ActiveX, and you're not using IE and Windows, you're out of luck.