What is Digg?Sponsored by Sony Pictures
Adam Lambert sings the 2012 theme song, “Time for Miracles” view!
whowillsurvive2012.com - Watch the Adam Lambert music video for the 2012 theme song. See 2012, in theaters Nov 13
69 Comments
- ASFx, on 07/20/2009, -10/+38I dislike Internet Explorer.
- dxprog, on 07/20/2009, -10/+38People still leave that comment?
- Khast, on 07/20/2009, -11/+34Personally, I use Firefox because of the lack of ActiveX. ActiveX is the biggest security flaw of Internet Explorer, and unless Microsoft completely kills all access to the kernel and OS, it will always be a security problem.
(Don't give me the BS that "they fixed the exploits" IF it can access the kernel, it is a security loophole. If Microsoft can access the kernel, read files in the system, ect...what is stopping someone who has malicious intentions?) ... Windows Update still requires an ActiveX plugin, as do most online anti-virus systems. - PatrickBrown, on 07/20/2009, -2/+24It isn't just Firefox. There are many, many browsers that are much better than IE across all categories, even after considering Microsoft's recent attempts to make the browser more respectable.
- oinker262, on 07/20/2009, -2/+20Misread "antitrust" as "AntiChrist" at first. confused the hell out of me
- interfect, on 07/20/2009, -8/+24Imperfect Exploiter
- coldeh, on 07/20/2009, -4/+19Even if IE8 was a really good browser, I wouldn't use it because of what IE6 put me though while developing websites.
- Tyrax, on 07/20/2009, -6/+20NSAPI plugin are the moral equivalent on Firefox and other browsers. There is actually very little difference between the plugin models. The difference with IE was that in IE6 all native windows COM objects that marked themselves as 'Safe for Scripting' and 'Safe for Initialization' were allowed to be loaded by arbirary webpages. This was addressed in IE7, as well as sandboxing the entire browser (plugins and all) into a process with the lowest possible permissions to system resources.
So claiming that you use Firefox because of the lack of ActiveX seems like a misunderstanding of what ActiveX actually is and how it works. There are a lot of reasons to like Firefox, but that claim is just ignorance. - ttamshadbolt, on 07/20/2009, -3/+15It also changes the default search engine to bing too - freakin annoying...
- RedShoulder, on 07/20/2009, -4/+16Not delusional. Just part of a growing user base, not a declining one.
- LuckyASN, on 07/20/2009, -12/+24Do people still use the number one web browser for both home and work? Yeah, I think they might.
- carbonetc, on 07/20/2009, -0/+7Ditto. I want Microsoft out of the browser game, either by adopting webkit/gecko, or by withdrawing completely. They've had years to prove themselves and they've failed repeatedly. Enough is enough.
- Zippo, on 07/20/2009, -0/+7IE8 is a step in the right direction, but still has a ways to go when it comes to web standards and speed.
- Myztry, on 07/20/2009, -3/+9The naive are a HUGE market that provides Microsoft's profit. That's why I believe Google ChromeOS Internet devices (netbooks/setboxes/etc) will be a huge threat to Microsoft.
They don't want a computer or care about a brand related to computers. They just want to get on the Internet, and Google IS the Internet from the naive point of view. A highly recongnizable brand that would appeal to the naive market could well sweep the feet from under Microsoft. - schoate09, on 07/20/2009, -7/+12Mod me down, but at least listen to what I have to say:
IE8 blends perfectly with Vista, and IN MY OWN OPINION/IMPLEMENTATION, it's the smoothest to integrate into my workflow. I use CommonSenseAntivirus 2009(TM) (it's free, try it), I only touch ActiveX if I know what it is (by default it stops all without user approval). In protected mode, it's fine.
IE8 is ACID 2 compliant, compatible with much of the modern internet. As for ACID 3, that's far off from being much of what's on the web, but MS is comitted to getting there. They've done a lot of work improving to 7, and a lot more improving to 8, so I have hope for it. It's the lightest on resources of FF/Safari/IE. I dislike Opera and Chrome's interfaces too much for me to give them a try. So before everyone hates on IE, I at least encourage you to look at what IE8 has to offer, and at least understand that it's no longer stagnant. - Hattrick, on 07/20/2009, -1/+6The core of IE is rotten.
Compliance and memory footprint aside, I support a web application that deals with large content items in XHTML with a ton of JavaScript listeners. I am talking 10 to 30 MB files here. IE is utterly unable to deal with these items due to what I can only guess is a poor rendering/JavaScript engines. An item can take upwards of 5 min in IE6,7 and 8 (all tested). The same file in FF2,3 or Chrome take less than 5 seconds; even quicker in FF3.5. Can you imagine having to wait 5 seconds for a page, much less 5 minutes.
I can only assume that either Microsoft hasn't made any significant changes to the performance aspects of the rendering or JavaScript engine in IE for the last 5 years or the legacy support for certain capability has crippled their ability to update the engine. Throwing some tabs and other "collaboration" tools on top of the worst performing browser doesn't equal progress in my book. - HonoredMule, on 07/20/2009, -0/+5Hm...that wouldn't have confused me at all.
- uberduger, on 07/20/2009, -1/+6Your number of diggs/buries says that approximately 50% of Digg thinks that
Default Windows Browser == Best Browser
which I find a little unnerving. - kewlceo, on 07/20/2009, -8/+12Yes, 70% of online users are lazy sheep.
- LightSpeed4, on 07/20/2009, -14/+18firefox fanboys must be pretty delusional. 70% of online users use IE.
- inactive, on 07/20/2009, -6/+10Who uses IE besides housewives and old people who only use the Internets for "the email" and "the chat"?
- 1shawn, on 07/20/2009, -9/+13Internet Exploder
- motters, on 07/20/2009, -0/+3Entirely agree. For me IE6 was really the last straw.
- inactive, on 07/20/2009, -1/+4Why do I have to 'Add Search Providers to Internet Explorer' for all providers but not for Bingg?
- RedShoulder, on 07/20/2009, -15/+18Default Windows Browser != Best Browser
- KibibyteBrain, on 07/20/2009, -0/+3I mostly don't use IE 8 for its slower performance in certain areas, but I have to admit that browsers that have new nifty superfast javascript engines like Firefox and Opera seem to have gotten there at severe cost to stability and security. Now IE 8 is far more stable than my FF 3.5 install(zero crashes per day vs. at least one in my usage), and that ain't cool, even if I still use FF 3.5 for extensions+speed.
- blr419, on 07/20/2009, -0/+3I think oinker262 said said the same thing 6 hours ago
- Elranzer, on 07/20/2009, -0/+3Not only are they still using IE, they're still using IE6.
Saddens me, but it's true. - Tyrax, on 07/20/2009, -0/+2@SwampyUK you are correct, I misspelled the name of the acronym is NPAPI more information here: http://www.mozilla.org/projects/plugins/
@WoollyMittens Firefox addons would have kernel access if someone wrote an NPAPI plugin that has kernel access. This is the same API that Flash and Quicktime use as well - Zippo, on 07/20/2009, -0/+2Sadly, yes. The majority of people on the net don't even know what Internet Explorer or Firefox is... they just click on the big blue E
- ww3ace, on 07/20/2009, -0/+2What the ***** is so wrong with including their own browser in their OS? I don't get this antitrust case.
- Zippo, on 07/20/2009, -0/+2Agreed. Trident was garbage in 2001 and it still is.
- doctordbx, on 07/20/2009, -8/+10Whilst I do not use Internet Explorer on my PC, I do think the EU ruling is a load of Bollocks. I do not think in this instance Microsoft is being anti-competitive or violating any trusts. If Firefox is better than IE, or Safari is better than IE, than they need to work on getting this message out to the customers (which I think they're doing a good job of), not relying on a regulator to create a state of ambiguity and leading to consumer confusion about their choices.
- Khast, on 07/20/2009, -0/+2It is possible to install ActiveX controls without IE being open, you know, by other programs. Besides, how often do you see a critical IE upgrade in MS Update, something to do with ActiveX handles....
Oh, and since Windows depends on IE, other applications can install ActiveX plugins, and a lot of times, you don't get asked. (ActiveX isn't just an IE brainchild...it can be used by other Windows Applications as well.) - WoollyMittens, on 07/20/2009, -6/+8Firefox add-ons have no kernel access. Sorry.
- explodingzebras, on 07/21/2009, -0/+1Safari is practically broken for my Tiger installation on my old Powermac G4, so I use Firefox, and the latest versions speed improvements are a boon to the old beast. I'm mainly a Linux user and having firefox on every machine means i can use Xmarks so i can sync bookmarks between them.
- briLo, on 07/20/2009, -1/+2Just to be fair on this I think the EU has to file antitrust complaints against Apple/Safari and Linux/Firefox as they are the default browsers on those respected OS's!
- YourMaster, on 07/20/2009, -0/+1"Yeah, not buying a company's products because their other products suck is dumb."
Err...yeah, it's dumb. A product should be judged on its own merits, not on some other products merits. It's one thing to say "Car v1 breaks down after ten years, Car v2 promises not to break down after ten years but still does; Car v3 has been out for 5 years but because of v1 and v2 I betcha it'll break down after 5 years even though they promise it won't".
It's another to say "Car v3 has a proven track recond of not breaking down for 25 years on average but I'm going to treat it as though it broke down after 10 years because that's what v1 and v2 did".
Not only is it anti-utilitarian, but it subverts capitalist theory by failing to reward progress. I don't have a problem with that in principle, but if we continue to live in a capitalist society, this creates a culture of severe risk-aversion and stagnation, because change risks bad change and all bad changes inevitably sink the company deeper whereas good changes are of almost no consequence relatively speaking.
It's another thing again to not buy a company's products because of a continuing concern with a different one of the company's problems, in a sort of solidarity show. - YourMaster, on 07/20/2009, -0/+1Adding a popup is easily the worst option of all of those. What a horrible user experience. To paraphrase Raymond Chen, "And now, to demonstrate our superior intelligence, we will ask you a question you neither know nor care the answer to".
OEMs installing a browser is a more reasonable choice, but it does miss the direct-purchase option which increases the barrier to entry to become a technical user. Which some might argue is a good thing, at least for existing technical users, but it is a potential effect. Still, far better than command-line or another damn mandatory pop-up. - Lucid00, on 07/22/2009, -0/+1It's funny, when asked about their Web Expressions app if it uses the Trident engine, Microsoft stated that it runs on a better more standards compliant engine.
So I guess they may be on the same page with us. - AraleNorimaki, on 07/20/2009, -0/+1Saw it coming.
- YourMaster, on 07/20/2009, -0/+1You can install NPAPI plugins without Firefox being open, and without consent being given. They are, in turn, the leading cause of slowdown, memory leaks, crashes, and freezes in FF.
Critical updates in Windows Update for ActiveX might occasionally be a flaw in the system (just as any system has flaws) but usually they are "killbits", a mechanism to turn off plugins known to be bad with the permission of the plugin author who presumably has an updated version ready.
This has nothing to do with Windows depending on IE. IE integration into the OS is a completely unrelated issue. The fact that the plugin model follows a common pattern with other plugin models instead of being a proprietary knock-off is a feature of ActiveX, not a bug (note to any slow person reading this: this is not to be read as a claim that ActiveX is not proprietary; nor that NPAPI is necessarily still proprietary). The main reason NPAPI was used at all is for cross-platform purposes, and nowadays the main reason is source compatibility with legions of extensions. - MWeather, on 07/20/2009, -0/+1No, yes (Samba) and no.
- FKnight, on 07/20/2009, -0/+1Because the big giant letters underneath the "Express" option that said "This will make Internet Explorer the default browser" just isn't explicit enough I guess. Firefox users must not be able to read.
- Lucid00, on 07/22/2009, -0/+1IE8 is the first in the IE series to even be worth using, in my eyes (since it passes the ACID2 test).
But I stick with Chrome, I love it's performance and the way everything is handled.
But I have to disagree with one thing you've said "As for ACID 3, that's far off from being much of what's on the web" that's completely untrue. Acid 3 is far from the a big deal on the web right now because web designers/programmers are limited by IE6s market share. We can't design anything javascript heavy because of IE.
And don't let me get on the numerous features that every major browser has except for IE (Canvas, Video, Audio, etc...) - MWeather, on 07/20/2009, -0/+1Yeah, not buying a company's products because their other products suck is dumb. Wait, not dumb, the other thing.
- Countess666, on 07/20/2009, -0/+1here is the thing, before firefox came along, the browser market has been in a complete standstill ever since Netscape kicked the bucket (10 years earlier!).
MS was basically the only player and they let the browser rot. they didn't improve a single thing, they didnt add new html standers, they didnt add anything innovative. they did nothing but once in a while create a new shell and stick a new number on the browser while adding non-official standards.
the only thing innovating to happen in those 10 years were done by 3de party add-ons like java and flash.
(btw, that falls under happening innovation, and that's illegal in the EU if you are a company with a dominant market position (like MS))
it has taken 10 years for a browser with enough support and new features to stand up and kick MS off its lazy ass.
that's all good, BUT now that MS has gotten off its lazy ass, and is actually catching up to the other browsers feature wise and html support wise, the list of reasons to change your browser is getting shorter and shorter, and it remains to be seen if firefox and others can hold on to their market share now that 90% of new computers will again come with a 'decent enough' browser.
because if they dont hold on to their market share we are right back where we were 10 years ago, and Microsoft is going right back to sitting on their lazy asses.
p.s.
how is the EU wanting a menu where you select the browser you want to install creating a state of ambiguity or confusion?
if you're talking about IE being removed from windows7 in the EU, that was MS's own choice and had nothing to do with what the EU wanted MS to do. - schoate09, on 07/20/2009, -0/+1You touched on another topic I failed to mention, stability. Firefox 1.5 was stable as ever. The latest versions are greatly surpassing IE in terms of JS performance, but for the common sites I view, it's negligible, and it all comes at a severe lack of stability, even on the relatively basic sites I freqent.
Safari, don't even get me started, performance improvements have rendered that browser next to useless. One thing I hated when I used OS X (although the UI and such is actually nice in OS X).
IE, as Microsoft's recent focus seems to be, is very stable. IE rarely chokes, and when it does, it usually doesn't crash, it just shortly hangs. It takes a VERY loaded site to even touch IE's overall stability on my systems. This is a very important thing for me, and another reason I'm still sticking to IE. - MWeather, on 07/20/2009, -0/+1"I'd prefer that my Operating System came with a web browser included rather than having to download one via a command line. "
Why wouldn't? Downloading from the command line is about the only option worse than including an unremovable non-compliant browser by default. Thankfully those are not the only two options. One would be having OEMS install a browser, the way they do a myriad of other software, such as antivirus, DVD codecs, and network drivers. Another option is simply adding a popup asking which browser to download when the user logs in for the first time, giving the user the choice of several popular browsers. This has the bonus of giving all users of the same machine their choice of browser. - YourMaster, on 07/20/2009, -1/+1I think it's still a little before its time. People who use "just the Internet" actually don't just use the Internet, but they don't understand the difference. But they're actually using Word and Excel and Powerpoint, and tax software, and their nephew installed their favourite IM client so they can webchat with their grandkids.
Round up a random assortment of 100 such "naive" users, and I'm willing to bet a good deal of money that if you dig into it far enough you'll find that more than 3/4 of them rely on some software you've never seen or heard of in your life.
I think techies are often naive about how naive users work. They think naive users only need or want a strict subset of what techies use. -
Show 51 - 71 of 71 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is