YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/04/28/_ie_firefox/

Not much to say really, don't shoot the messenger! :disturbd:

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2005/04/2.gif
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2005/04/2.gif
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2005/04/2.gif
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2005/04/2.gif
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2005/04/2.gif

i think that sums it up for me :D

good to hear it's on the increase, even the peolpe who don't like it have to admt it's forced ie to adapt and improve, can only be a good thing.

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

And why should I admit that? I'll never use FireFox, I'll stick with Avant for as long as it lasts.

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

a damned good browser it may be, but it hasnt taken off in anything like the same way as firefox. this is a question of economics more than anything else.

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

avant, greenbrowser, maxathon and the like are not browsers, they are simply alternative front ends to IE and therefore subject to the same exploits/flaws of the same.

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

This is great news. And yet in my job I am still being approached by companies selling browser-based communications technologies that work in IE only. They usually have 'Microsoft Partner' logos proudly emblazoned on their sales material as well.

I am always delighted to tell them that I do not do business with companies that blindly re-sell M$ technology that abuses the first principles of the internet. And with FF taking an ever-increasing share of the market, I expect others will be delivering that message too. Hopefully we will soon see a cascade effect that will force these companies to start adhering to standards, which in turn will further open the possibility of more people switching to FF - or any other browser for that matter.

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

There may be a way around this... Most of the IE only corporate end stuff I have seen uses ActiveX, which Mozilla supports. There is now a plugin for this, for Firefox.

ActiveX is no end of trouble though... Its the main thing that makes it so insecure.

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

No ActiveX for Mac though, AFAIK. :grind: It's still a restricted, proprietory technology and distinctly un-internet in spirit.

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

There is no way i would go back to using IE.

Its Firefox all the way for me.

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

Or for any other system (discounting Crossover Office on Linux systems). Sadly, ActiveX is the thing that make it easy for people to rapidly create browser based applications which is why a lot of people are out there trying to sell their products based on it. Interestingly ActiveX is officially a platform-independant component architecture, it's just that there's only one architecture it's produced for.

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

1 of every 10 users is a significant amount, when you consider how many 100's of million people use the net every day.

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

True, so I'll enjoy it for a while then fickle old me will go elsewhere :)

I like the sig by the way, I might try that command out :D

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

"Janulaitis cautioned that Firefox's reputation for security would likely be eroded as the browser becomes more widely used and hackers increase their attacks"

likely is different to definately

I think that it's an inevitibility that FF will be more under attack as time goes on.
However, I'd rather have a standards compliant swiss cheese than a bloated corporate beast swiss cheese.

No browser will be "secure" as such, at the moment though FF is the best of the bunch.

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

What I really want to see is security through diversity. I don't want to see 95% of the world using FF any more than I want to see that number using IE. If the world's desktops are evenly split between several browsers, then firstly the developers all have to comply with standards, instead of pushing their own mutated versions of standards, and more importantly it becomes far harder for hackers to get what they want - notoriety- because they can't affect the entire world simply by trying to exploit a weakness in one single browser, as IE allows them to do now.

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

I'd strongly suggest you don't do it on a mission critical box ;)
__________________

Bloated? In what way? As a browser it uses no more memory than firefox and looking at my program files/internet explorer folder, takes up 1.21mb of disk space.

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

Now that would be because the rest is built into Windows. :D
(c:/windows/system32/mshtml.dll for example)

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

Presumably because great chunks of IE masquerade as system processes or something? Not that I'm any expert, but haven't I read that somewhere?
__________________

Hey, I was right :D

Thanks Richard.

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

OK, why do people keep saying IE is so "insecure"? Avant runs off the Trident engine, which also IE runs off. But, Avant has given me no spyware whats so ever and I have had no problems with these so called "security risks".

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

All 2.8mb of it

Here's IE and Firefox, one window open on each, both google.co.uk

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

The download of Explorer for Max OS X is 6.7 MB, Firefox is 8.6...

Edit: that is Explorer 5 though...

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

Ahem <cough> Opera ???

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

Actually the total size of IE6 is 76.74MB, Firefox is 4.7MB.

Proof:
http://browsers.evolt.org/?ie/32bit/6.0
http://www.mozilla.org/

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

Most of that is probably system files being updated that you'd be running in the background regardless of what browser you're using, look at the task manager screenshot I posted, IE uses less memory than Firefox, FACT.

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

Opera (without Java) is 3.8 meg. And it doesn't require extensions to make it usable (apart from Java for some sites).

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

A bigger executable can mean faster execution, though I'm not saying whether that is true or not for firefox. Maybe I'll just start using Konqueror.

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

You'd have to concede though, that IE has more of an advantage in that a lot of its files are used by XP itself so as a stand-alone process, it doesn't need to load as much.

Firefox has practically nil integration with the OS itself so needs to load all its components... which takes time and RAM.

Not saying whether or not it's an advantage- in any case this is practically a duplicate argument.

BTW Bifta... your screenshot has just made me change XP to olive green as well. Can't stand the bloo and I was getting bored of the silver, so I dunno where I'll go next... probably back to silver...

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

not fact. go into windows explorer (without ie running) and go to google by typing it in the address bar. on my system, explorer only grabs another 4 meg or ram...

i don't know how much ram ie actually uses, i can't say for sure if its more or less tha firefox, but it's just not that simple ;)

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

:confused: on what planet?

You get faster execution if code is efficient, the smaller the better.

If you can pre-load your executable in memory before someone uses it, then it can artificially shorten load times yet still be a big slug of an application (*cough* acrobat reader *cough*)

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

Oh goody, another FF v IE flame war. :D

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

(*cough*Nutscrape Navigator*cough*)

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

Hardly. I use firefox, mainly because of its speed, but also because it's still a minority browser. If as many used FF as do IE it would still be a target for exploits in as much as IE is now.

Netscape is bloated FF, Avant is skinned IE, and Opera has the annoying ads. There's no real IE alternative except FF, sadly.

:D

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

You havn't used it then have you? :rolleyes:

Avant is the fastest browser ever made, it's download is 1.3MB, it has an pop-up blocker, ad-blocker, built-in search bar, tabbed browsing, plugin support, theme support, and many others that I can't think off the top of my head.

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

Try a gcc -O3 optimisation, the code you get executes faster but with a larger executable (although O3 often causes the program to crash). Obviously uneeded code (code bloat) is going to slow down an application, but other tweaks can have the opposite effect which is why I said can mean faster execution. As an example, one of the GCC optimisations is to 'unroll loops', what this does is, if any while/for loops in your application can have their iterations determined at compile time the loops is removed and replaced with a sequential set of instructions. This results in slightly faster execution as the overhead of loop checking is removed, though the code compiled code is larger than it otherwise would have been (think about the difference that that can make in large applications). Of course, having larger programs resident in memory can result in slowdown, which all goes to show that program performance is far more complex than just looking at memory usage can show.

---------------------
Edit: GCC is a compiler :D

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

Nothing that can't be done by adding extra bolt-ons to IE then?

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

So what if it runs off IE? I have no problem with IE, just that it lacks the support of saving websites that I lasted visited when I close the browser.

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

Actually what you're running there is IE - that's how deeply it's embedded into the OS.
And while I'm at it, I'll mention that Windows Help, Outlook, Outlook Express and numerous other apps use IE for rendering content.
Right click any Windows Help page and you'll see an IE dialog popup.

Avant, which is a modification of the IE GUI, is 1.3MB and it's not a browser in it's own right.
It has the same speed, security issues and memory leaks that IE has, because it is IE.
You obviously don't know enough about browser technology to provide a worthwhile contribution so I suggest you stay out of it.

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

mmhmm, thats kinda what i was getting at (but managed not to explain very well...)

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

Well code reuse is a good programming practice ;)

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

...assuming it's good code :p:

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

You obviously don't understand that some security risks have been fixed in Avant. Such as SpyWare, I get 0 SpyWare from Avant ;)

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

Play nicely now people, you all know that Netscape Navigator 0wnz a11 j00r b453 :D

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

How did I see that coming! :D

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

I thought 1337 speak was only used by AOL lamers? :D

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

That's most uncalled for, especially from an admin :(

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

Be quiet j00 l4m0r :PP:

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

y0u 5\_/c|<.

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

:notopic:

Back on topic please guys/gals :)

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

close it if you want... nothing constructive going on here

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

What was the topic again? :):angel:

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

IE runs much faster on my machine than FF - also, the FF plugin for Flash seems much more unstable. Untill these two things change then FF will only be used for occasional testing by me.

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

Forget it m8 :rolleyes:

Any mention of Opera here is ignored :dozey:

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

Easy tiger....;)

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

Not at all, I've tried it based on recommendations from users here but just couldn't get on with it, I couldn't find any fault with it either though (which is more than I can say for Firefox), I just prefer to use IE, in a browser usage league table for me it'd be

1. IE
2. Opera
3. Not use a browser at all
4. Firefox

Re: YAFT (yet another firefox thread) - dedicated to RichardM
 

I would use it but I don't because:

a) It has an advert in the window.
b) Any page that I develop is tested in Firefox so if it renders correctly in that, it will render correctly in Opera because both browsers are standards-compliant so I have no need for another browser.