Firefox is crap with vista...

Dolph said:
By that logic, the several hundred million IE users certainly can't be wrong ;)
Click to expand...

The IE users didn't all choose to download IE, and how many of them know about Opera, Firefox or Safari...

Numbers are meaningless, because there's no way to tell:
  • How many installed it then removed it, or never installed it in the first place
  • How many installed it on more than one machine
  • How many got it from somewhere else (bundled with linux distro, the Mozilla FTP, FileHippo or any other mirror site)

AMO pings looks like there's ~100 million Firefox users, so 8 million Fx3 downloads isn't quite the big deal that's being made of it...
 
tolien said:
The IE users didn't all choose to download IE, and how many of them know about Opera, Firefox or Safari...

Numbers are meaningless, because there's no way to tell:
  • How many installed it then removed it, or never installed it in the first place
  • How many installed it on more than one machine
  • How many got it from somewhere else (bundled with linux distro, the Mozilla FTP, FileHippo or any other mirror site)

AMO pings looks like there's ~100 million Firefox users, so 8 million Fx3 downloads isn't quite the big deal that's being made of it...
Click to expand...

Indeed, that was kind of the point, simple usage rates have no bearing on the quality or perceived quality of software.
 
Been using Fx3 with Vista x64 since beta 5 with no problems whatsoever. Maybe try creating a new profile, or closing any programs you have running to see if anything conflicts with Fx?

Or use IE, if you don't mind a browser with laughable standards compliance and a library of add-ons that seems to amount to one :)
 
I take it when you upgrade to Firefox 3 from Firefox 2 it keeps all your bookmarked pages and passwords etc etc...noobish question i know but i just wanted to be sure :D

As for the IE v firefox v opera v safari. Well i had no idea why people kept saying Firefox was better. So decided to try it out alongside my IE and i found firefox to be faster and easier to use. I would have kept using IE if i had not decided to try firefox out.

So yea i think numbers are just pointless and PC with windows comes with IE standard most people will just use it because they know no better
 
Last edited:
Yeah, I went from FF2 to FF3 and everything like Bookmarks just got moved over automatically. It then searched for all the compatible updates for my plugins/extensions as well.

But it doesn't do any harm to make a backup of things like bookmarks, seeing as it's so easy to do :)
 
aye i was planning to backup everything first but if it moves everything and updates my addons brilliant :D

Cheers for the info.. Firefox woo !! :p
 
FF3 is great, i would have thought there would be plenty of bugs and i would have had to put FF2 on but that was not the case, its fast and super efficient, saved my bookmarks and cookies etc... with no problems.
 
was it just me or did someone say IE7 is more secure....
I really actually did fall off my chair laughing at that one :)
activex and secure ??? wtf
 
3dcandy said:
was it just me or did someone say IE7 is more secure....
I really actually did fall off my chair laughing at that one :)
activex and secure ??? wtf
Click to expand...

It is, both in numbers of vunerabilities (taken from independant sources, usually countered by people quoting mozilla or firefox fan sites claiming it's all lies) and in terms of what a compromised IE7 can actually do vs a compromised firefox, due to protected mode.

http://www.cenzic.com/pdfs/Cenzic_AppSecTrends_Q4-07.pdf
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Brow...rer-vs-Firefox-vs-Safari-vs-Opera-83045.shtml
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060925-7818.html

Just because firefox's obscurity has led to less attacks against it, does not make it more secure, and it's certianly not as secure out of the box as IE7.
 
Dolph said:
in terms of what a compromised IE7 can actually do vs a compromised firefox, due to protected mode
Click to expand...

Is that not dependant on you having UAC enabled though?

I'd still take FF over IE due to functionality. Microsoft really missed out on extensions.
 
z0mbi3 said:
Is that not dependant on you having UAC enabled though?
Click to expand...

Yes, but no-one with an understanding of what UAC is and what it's for should be disabling it. Put it into silent mode perhaps, but disabling it is like taking off the cover for a big trapdoor in the floor because 'you know it's there'. Unfortunately the kind of people currently turning UAC off are also the kind of people that led to be it being needed in the first place (namley those who think running as Admin the whole time is good practice)

I'd still take FF over IE due to functionality. Microsoft really missed out on extensions.
Click to expand...

And I'd still take opera over either of them, despite the fact that opera has more reported issues than either of the others. It's an informed choice that I'm willing to make, although anything important or potentially risky generally gets done in IE7.
 
ok..maybe I should have said it a bit better...
on xp, with a careless user, ie7 and activex can be a real security risk....
I see so many problems where there are 20 x toolbars installed because they clicked on the activex bar at the top....
I use both, like both, prefer FF3, or Opera or even Safari....have all installed to test sites out for people and IE7 is probably the worst on reflection. not by much, just seems the worst
 
Dolph said:
Yes, but no-one with an understanding of what UAC is and what it's for should be disabling it. Put it into silent mode perhaps, but disabling it is like taking off the cover for a big trapdoor in the floor because 'you know it's there'. Unfortunately the kind of people currently turning UAC off are also the kind of people that led to be it being needed in the first place (namley those who think running as Admin the whole time is good practice)
Click to expand...

Agreed, I have UAC on all the time. Don't see any problems with a few extra clicks now and again.
 
3dcandy said:
ok..maybe I should have said it a bit better...
on xp, with a careless user, ie7 and activex can be a real security risk....
I see so many problems where there are 20 x toolbars installed because they clicked on the activex bar at the top....
I use both, like both, prefer FF3, or Opera or even Safari....have all installed to test sites out for people and IE7 is probably the worst on reflection. not by much, just seems the worst
Click to expand...

Any software with bad users can cause problems, just as a good user can minimise the risks of using software with known issues.

What makes FF seem better to some is that most FF users have some understanding of computers and good practice, whereas those who use IE because it's there (as opposed to because they prefer it) tend not to and therefore tend to make more mistakes. it's these users that make up the large bulk of PC users these days, and it's these users that really don't want to be using software with more security flaws in.
 
Dolph said:
It is, both in numbers of vunerabilities (taken from independant sources, usually countered by people quoting mozilla or firefox fan sites claiming it's all lies)
Click to expand...

In fairness, vulnerability counts are as worthless as user numbers - it makes no allowance for criticality or time to fix, and not everyone plays by the same game at reporting the vulnerabilities they fix internally (especially Opera). Some reports cover multiple vulnerabilities too.
 
tolien said:
In fairness, vulnerability counts are as worthless as user numbers - it makes no allowance for criticality or time to fix, and not everyone plays by the same game at reporting the vulnerabilities they fix internally (especially Opera). Some reports cover multiple vulnerabilities too.
Click to expand...

Well, I did present two different, independant reports from different groups that came to the same conclusion. It's far from the be all and end all of the issue, but the idea that firefox is inherantly more secure than anything else certainly isn't verifiable.

The Symantec article (the softpedia link) does discuss criticality and group vunerabilities by threat levels, and it doesn't change the result, in fact it shows FF having more 'medium' vunerabilities than IE7 (neither had any high risk vunerabilities) as well as more vunerabilities overall. This document scores opera as having the fewest vunerabilties

The Cenzic pdf puts opera as the worst, but puts FF as less secure than IE7 again. Different methodology, same key result for the point under dispute.

The real point is that recommendations to use firefox to an inexperienced user because it's more secure simply don't hold up to scrutiny.
 
fair point about the users, that's probably the real sticking point about browsers as the majority of people don't realise that other browsers even exist. my point about activex is that it is inherently insecure and can wreak havok if misused. however, I still stand by the argument that in my experience, with the users I see, that Firefox appears more secure. that point however is clouded by the fact that I see quite a few macs and they suffer very rarely from website malware and mostly they use safari, and another high percentage still run ie 5.5 or 6!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom