Topic: Stupid messenger service pop - ups return!

[Pestalence]

I dunno on that.. I don't use Mozilla.. IE has all the Mozilla plug in built in by default.. and since it was built for web browsing and all web languages and 99.9% of web page formats, IE is the best for me.. everything else is trying to match it in functionality and failing... IE has Netscape plug-ins, Mozilla Plug-ins, Opera uses the IE plug in's but is still not fully functional with the web the way IE is...

Plus IE is designed for Windows and is an integral part of Windows, Outlook Express and Windows / MSN messenger... Why mess with something that is not specifically designed for your system and is an integral part of your system??? Now those on Linux.. most people I know on linux use Opera or IE.. and of those people over 75% use IE because it can see the web correctly and fix common HTML / Javascript errors on web pages so that they display properly.
 

[Praxis]

Dunno...you say it was working and now isn't?  Very strange.

Quote:
I dunno on that.. I don't use Mozilla.. IE has all the Mozilla plug in built in by default.. and since it was built for web browsing and all web languages and 99.9% of web page formats, IE is the best for me.. everything else is trying to match it in functionality and failing... IE has Netscape plug-ins, Mozilla Plug-ins, Opera uses the IE plug in's but is still not fully functional with the web the way IE is...

Riight...come on, IE is the ONLY browser on the planet that does not support 8-bit PNG (I believe that was the format)...it doesn't follow the XML codes properly, and allows web designers to be sloppy (auto correcting the code to what it thinks should look right).

The result?  A web designer can be incredibly and extremely sloppy, and it looks fine in IE, and terrible in anything that ACTUALLY FOLLOWS THE STANDARDS.

Quote:

Plus IE is designed for Windows and is an integral part of Windows, Outlook Express and Windows / MSN messenger

Which means that there are holes in IE that allow a hacker to tear right into your entire system.  Watch TechTV sometime, they usually recommend to new users to immediately dump the Microsoft products and get Mozilla immediately as IE is filled with holes and is vulnerable to all sorts of spyware.

Quote:
... Why mess with something that is not specifically designed for your system and is an integral part of your system???

1) The Win32 version of Mozilla IS specifically designed for Windows...
2) Internet Explorer is NOT an integral part of your system.  Microsoft just tries to make it look integrated, but a couple of college students were actually able to uninstall Internet Explorer from Windows (by hacking it, since Microsoft tried to make it impossible and claimed in court that they wouldn't take it out), with absolutely no problem.  The problem actually is CAUSED by IE being integrated into windows- that means that if something screws up IE, then the whole computer can get screwed up from it.

Quote:
Now those on Linux.. most people I know on linux use Opera or IE.. and of those people over 75% use IE because it can see the web correctly and fix common HTML / Javascript errors on web pages so that they display properly.

 
Okay, two things.  Firstly, Internet Explorer will display HTML and Java errors as if they were written correctly, which is NOT helpful, but rather encourages programmers to get sloppy since they think it works fine.

Secondly, you apparently don't know many people who use Linux.  How the heck will Linux users use Internet Explorer?  It's not like Microsoft makes an IE for Linux, you know.

Since you say that 75% of Linux users use IE, one can only assume you really don't know what you're talking about  




EDIT:  Post Number 2000!  Whooo!

[Pestalence]

Quote:
Dunno...you say it was working and now isn't?  Very strange.

Quote:
I dunno on that.. I don't use Mozilla.. IE has all the Mozilla plug in built in by default.. and since it was built for web browsing and all web languages and 99.9% of web page formats, IE is the best for me.. everything else is trying to match it in functionality and failing... IE has Netscape plug-ins, Mozilla Plug-ins, Opera uses the IE plug in's but is still not fully functional with the web the way IE is...

Riight...come on, IE is the ONLY browser on the planet that does not support 8-bit PNG (I believe that was the format)...it doesn't follow the XML codes properly, and allows web designers to be sloppy (auto correcting the code to what it thinks should look right).

The result?  A web designer can be incredibly and extremely sloppy, and it looks fine in IE, and terrible in anything that ACTUALLY FOLLOWS THE STANDARDS.

Quote:

Plus IE is designed for Windows and is an integral part of Windows, Outlook Express and Windows / MSN messenger

Which means that there are holes in IE that allow a hacker to tear right into your entire system.  Watch TechTV sometime, they usually recommend to new users to immediately dump the Microsoft products and get Mozilla immediately as IE is filled with holes and is vulnerable to all sorts of spyware.

Quote:
... Why mess with something that is not specifically designed for your system and is an integral part of your system???

1) The Win32 version of Mozilla IS specifically designed for Windows...
2) Internet Explorer is NOT an integral part of your system.  Microsoft just tries to make it look integrated, but a couple of college students were actually able to uninstall Internet Explorer from Windows (by hacking it, since Microsoft tried to make it impossible and claimed in court that they wouldn't take it out), with absolutely no problem.  The problem actually is CAUSED by IE being integrated into windows- that means that if something screws up IE, then the whole computer can get screwed up from it.

Quote:
Now those on Linux.. most people I know on linux use Opera or IE.. and of those people over 75% use IE because it can see the web correctly and fix common HTML / Javascript errors on web pages so that they display properly.

 
Okay, two things.  Firstly, Internet Explorer will display HTML and Java errors as if they were written correctly, which is NOT helpful, but rather encourages programmers to get sloppy since they think it works fine.

Secondly, you apparently don't know many people who use Linux.  How the heck will Linux users use Internet Explorer?  It's not like Microsoft makes an IE for Linux, you know.

Since you say that 75% of Linux users use IE, one can only assume you really don't know what you're talking about  




EDIT:  Post Number 2000!  Whooo!

Just how long have you been out of the loop????

Instructions for installing IE 6.0 on Linux under WinE

http://frankscorner.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=Sections&file=index&req=viewarticle&artid=49&page=1

So I don't know what I am talking about eh?

heck even on the Linux boards.. many people are asking how to install IE 6.0 on their systems and 90% of the sources refer to the site listed above for installation..

Man, i do a lot of research and keep up on tech.. yes IE has holes, but when they are found, they are plugged, and just by changing the security and privacy settings just a little in IE Properties, you close 90% of the holes.. but that requires a little more research on the what to change.. i can post you a guide if you like... and because web developers are sloppy.. or those that are teaching themselves, IE is a wonderful tool for them to use as it will at least build their confidence enough to keep going by giving them visual results... Not everyone can afford $500 to $10,000 for a web site to be built for them.. IE is a fantastic tool to learning web design.. then as they learn more, they can make their pages cross browser compatible...

as for PNG and your mighty Proper Coding Techniques... why then don't they follow proper PNG instruction sets for IE?

as such here is PNG Code support for the source code for html 4.4 for web designers who want PNG to show in IE.. plus PNG is on the books for native support in IE for the next release...

basic Example :
Code:

<html>
<head></head>
<body bgColor="blue">
<!-- This DIV is the target container for the image.  -->
<DIV ID="oDiv" STYLE="position:absolute; left:140px; height:400; width:400;
     filter:progid:DXImageTransform.Microsoft.AlphaImageLoader(
     src='image.png', sizingMethod='scale');" >
</DIV>
</body>
</html>

or this Functional code set :

Code:

<SCRIPT>
var bToggle = 1

<!-- Toggle the sizingMethod property to resize the image.  -->
function fnToggle(oObj) {
    if (bToggle) {                                                        
        bToggle = 0;
        oDiv.filters(0).sizingMethod="image";
        oObj.innerText='Enlarge It';}
    else {
        bToggle = 1;
        oDiv.filters(0).sizingMethod="scale";
        oObj.innerText='Make Normal';}
}
</SCRIPT>
        
<!-- This DIV is the target container for the image.  -->        
    <DIV ID="oDiv" STYLE="position:relative; height:250px; width:250px;         
        filter:progid:DXImageTransform.Microsoft.AlphaImageLoader(
            src='/workshop/graphics/earglobe.png', sizingMethod='scale');" >
        </DIV>

<BR><BUTTON onclick="fnToggle(this);">Make Normal</BUTTON>

Reference :
http://www.msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/workshop/author/filter/reference/filters/alphaimageloader.asp

and also if people used proper coding of XML :

http://theultralist.com/xml/


Sooo.. what is your other problems with IE?
 

[Praxis]

Quote:

Just how long have you been out of the loop????

Instructions for installing IE 6.0 on Linux under WinE

http://frankscorner.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=Sections&file=index&req=viewarticle&artid=49&page=1

So I don't know what I am talking about eh?

Ah yes, WINE.
Why the heck would you WANT to do that?
That's running the Windows version of IE through a compatability layer, aka Wine, using Windows API's.  It's bound to be slower and buggier than even the Windows version!

Most Linux users DO NOT use that.  In fact, a large portion of Linux users DO NOT even have WINE installed!  Let's go ask a few Linux users, eh?  Most of them have Mozilla Firebird, Firefox, Mozilla, or Opera.

I have known many Linux users- NO ONE uses IE for Windows.

IE for windows is recommended there as a test for WINE, which is essentually Windows emulation (I know what Wine stands for, don't worry) without processor emulation like most other emulators.

Quote:
heck even on the Linux boards.. many people are asking how to install IE 6.0 on their systems and 90% of the sources refer to the site listed above for installation..

Yup, people who've just switched to Linux and are used to IE...not seasoned Linux vets that know what IE actually is.
I know a few people that would just shake their head and laugh at you (both Linux and Mac users) for defending IE.

And the only reason IE is so popular, of course, is that it's bundled with Windows.  Most people don't bother to go find another browser with popup blocking, tab browsing, and more advanced features.  Look at the Mac community.

The later versions of Mac OS 9, and Mac OS X 10.0 and 10.1, all shipped with Internet Explorer as the default browser.  Netscape on OS 9 was slow crap, so OS 9 users had to use IE.  Some OS X users switched to Mozilla, but most just used IE, "because it was there," JUST LIKE WINDOWS USERS.

Mac OS X 10.2 comes out.  It ships with TWO browsers- a BETA of Apple's new Safari browser (0.8 I believe), and Internet Explorer.  Safari has popup blocking, tab browsing, etc.  Within a few months, most Mac users were now using Safari instead of IE, but some still had to use IE to view some pages.

Well along came Panther, 10.3.  We're now on Safari 1.2 (I think, lose track with all the updates).  It can view any webpage IE can.

The funny thing is that some banks and pages actually put BLOCKS in place, letting Internet Explorer users in only.  It tells you, "you must have internet explorer to view this site."

So there's a hidden little feature called  debug mode that people started sharing with their friends.  When activated, Safari TELLS web pages that it is Internet Explorer.

The result?  Those IE only web pages, that block out anything else... Don't block Safari users.  And even though they're supposedly IE only, we can see them just fine.

Well, a couple months after the Panther released, Microsoft basicly announced that Safari is a great browser, way better than IE, so they were going to stop developing IE for Mac as there wasn't enough market anymore.

Quote:
Man, i do a lot of research and keep up on tech.. yes IE has holes, but when they are found, they are plugged, and just by changing the security and privacy settings just a little in IE Properties, you close 90% of the holes.. but that requires a little more research on the what to change.. i can post you a guide if you like

Quote:

... and because web developers are sloppy.. or those that are teaching themselves, IE is a wonderful tool for them to use as it will at least build their confidence enough to keep going by giving them visual results... Not everyone can afford $500 to $10,000 for a web site to be built for them.. IE is a fantastic tool to learning web design.. then as they learn more, they can make their pages cross browser compatible...

Please.  What you're telling me, is that it's GOOD that it lets people be sloppy?
What I would appreciate is a browser that tells me WHAT is wrong, and how to fix it, rather than acting like everything's okay.  Why haven't other browsers done this autocorrection stuff?  Easy, if every browser had their own set of rules as to what will go and what can't, we'll have browser wars all over again.

THE STANDARDS WERE SET IN PLACE TO PREVENT THIS!  People don't REALIZE that their pages are Internet Explorer only, because they THINK it works fine, and IE doesn't tell them that their coding sucks.  If Internet Explorer JUST FOLLOWED THE STANDARDS instead of adding their extra stuff, EVERYTHING WOULD WORK TOGETHER.  It's called "leveraging a monopoly,"...simply, Microsoft can make people use IE by putting it in their OS, then by adding little extra bits in IE, they can make web developers 'accidentally' create IE only web pages, getting users *stuck* with Internet Explorer.

Quote:
as for PNG and your mighty Proper Coding Techniques... why then don't they follow proper PNG instruction sets for IE?

Oh, so your solution is, "why don't developers use IE's stuff instead of standard stuff?" Simple- we want to follow the standards.  Why don't YOU follow the proper HTML sets for Mozilla and EVERY OTHER BROWSER?


To quote someone's signature:


If this image has gray backgrounds, you're using Internet Explorer for Windows, the only major browser which does not fully support PNG-24. Use Firefox, instead.

Quote:
as such here is PNG Code support for the source code for html 4.4 for web designers who want PNG to show in IE.. plus PNG is on the books for native support in IE for the next release...

basic Example :
Code:

<html>
<head></head>
<body bgColor="blue">
<!-- This DIV is the target container for the image.  -->
<DIV ID="oDiv" STYLE="position:absolute; left:140px; height:400; width:400;
     filter:progid:DXImageTransform.Microsoft.AlphaImageLoader(
     src='image.png', sizingMethod='scale');" >
</DIV>
</body>
</html>

or this Functional code set :

Code:

<SCRIPT>
var bToggle = 1

<!-- Toggle the sizingMethod property to resize the image.  -->
function fnToggle(oObj) {
    if (bToggle) {                                                        
        bToggle = 0;
        oDiv.filters(0).sizingMethod="image";
        oObj.innerText='Enlarge It';}
    else {
        bToggle = 1;
        oDiv.filters(0).sizingMethod="scale";
        oObj.innerText='Make Normal';}
}
</SCRIPT>
        
<!-- This DIV is the target container for the image.  -->        
    <DIV ID="oDiv" STYLE="position:relative; height:250px; width:250px;         
        filter:progid:DXImageTransform.Microsoft.AlphaImageLoader(
            src='/workshop/graphics/earglobe.png', sizingMethod='scale');" >
        </DIV>

<BR><BUTTON onclick="fnToggle(this);">Make Normal</BUTTON>

 


Reference :
http://www.msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/workshop/author/filter/reference/filters/alphaimageloader.asp

and also if people used proper coding of XML :

http://theultralist.com/xml/


Sooo.. what is your other problems with IE?

Yet, I doubt you can see the image above *properly*...
Don't make me call in my Linux and Mac friends to explain this to you...

[Sirgod]

See what you started Andy? GEEKFIGHT.  

Stephen

[TalonClaw]

Here is an excellent site for tweaks and fixes for Windows XP.  Doug Knox is a Microsoft MVP.

 Doug's Windows 95/98/Me/XP Tweaks and Tips  

[Praxis]

Quote:
 GEEKFIGHT.  

Please, be polite!

I perfer the term NERD    j/k, hehe

[Pestalence]

Here is the XP SP 2 RC 1 site... the changes in functionality was updated and is on the RC 2 site, but I don't think the changes for RC 1 is there any more..

anyhow.. built in pop up blocker, better built in firewall with easy configure, native PNG support, etc is all in the XPSP 2.. I am running RC 2 of this package, but since it is Beta, I can't state all the changes.. only that it is a 287 MB upgrade to MS Win XP, it even incorporates some components of Media Center Edition into XP Pro and XP Home.

If you like you can try out RC 1

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/winxppro/sp2preview.mspx

and check out the changes for yourself... this will be full release in August.

since I am under MS Beta, I can't talk about all the changes, but they are great, and a majority of changes effect Explorer and IE as well as base XP functionality.

anyhow.. as for the PNG above, I can see it just fine.

 

[Pestalence]

OK.. Just as a trial, I got Mozilla Firefox...

I tried it on 10 different web sites.. after having to get 8 different plug-ins (IE I only had to upgrade 2 plug ins for these sites, but the sites work without them.), I quickly uninstalled Mozilla.. reason..

the thing is fricking slow.. it is slower than molassas in winter in Alaska. My god, how can anyone enjoy waiting for pages to load... imagine how it must be on dial-up... IE on dial-up takes no more than 45 seconds on my sisters web site to load in IE on 56K.. I waited over 2 and 1/2 min with Firefox with the same connection and speed....

If that is someone's idea of having a better browser, then count me out.. when i click on a page, I want it to pop up and be fully viewable, not slowly load the images on the page...

To me IE diaplayed the gage more vibrantly, better organized, faster....

besides that people state security.. I have yet to be hacked through IE.. I have yet to get a virus, I have been hit 1 time and 1 time only by a hijack software and even that was fixed in a mere matter of minuites.... plus Hijackers are blocked from my system now with my current settings and tracking cookies are blocked.. IE blocks pop-ups on my end..

and I don't use a firewall, router, etc.. I run 99.9% of the time on wireless or on Cable through USB 2.0, which negates the built in router.. I click on a link and pop.. the page is loaded in under 8 seconds when comiming from sites with big pipes...

Taldren's site just pops up fully loaded for the forums both on Dial-up and Cable.. the only thing that is loading when i am reading on dial-up is the signature images.. and even then they are fully loaded within 30 seconds...

Mozilla can't even compare in speed, plus it looks and feels less functional than IE.. how many plug-ins do you need to get that thing working correctly for all sites anyways? and what sort of connection accelerator do you need for it to be feasable for use on Dial-up?

I mean IE, you can go to 1 of 1000 sites and do 1 or 2 registry tweaks to turn IE into a speed deamon, but even an untweaked IE browser loads the same page 3 times faster than Mozilla.. I know.. I just tried Stock IE verses Stock Mozilla Firefox side by side timing load times...

No wonder when i ask someone if they can see a site or find something on a site and they are not using IE, they tell me that the page is still loading...

then with just a couple of registry tewaks, I pull even more speed out of IE.. *.gif files is the bane of the net, but even those load a lot faster in IE than Mozilla..

Mozilla does have a nicer looking interface, but for funtionality and practicality, it has much to be desired...

I would first integrate Macromedia Plug-ins and Shockwave Plug-ins, and Authorware Plugins from Macromedia.. make them and integrated part of Mozilla... that would increase the speed some and reduce the need for getting plug-ins when going to dites with Macromedia material and content...

Also, it needs an easy to configure security settings controller.. with IE, you just right click the IE desktop icon and click properties. you have security right there.

I looked and looked for Mozilla's and couldn't find them. so how do you block Active X controlls, hijackers, cookies?

anyhow.. just my opinion.
 

[Sirgod]

Quote:

Quote:
 GEEKFIGHT.  

Please, be polite!

I perfer the term NERD    j/k, hehe  

My humble apoligies, to any and all Geeks, Nerds, and whom-ever else.  

Stephen

[Dracho]

Neo-nerds...LMAO    

[Praxis]

Quote:
OK.. Just as a trial, I got Mozilla Firefox...

I tried it on 10 different web sites.. after having to get 8 different plug-ins (IE I only had to upgrade 2 plug ins for these sites, but the sites work without them.), I quickly uninstalled Mozilla.. reason..

the thing is fricking slow.. it is slower than molassas in winter in Alaska. My god, how can anyone enjoy waiting for pages to load... imagine how it must be on dial-up... IE on dial-up takes no more than 45 seconds on my sisters web site to load in IE on 56K.. I waited over 2 and 1/2 min with Firefox with the same connection and speed....

Incredibly strange.

Mozilla Firefox loads stuff about 2x faster than IE for me.  IE is *not* slow at all for me- Mozilla FireFox is just blazing fast.

Well, technically I am using Mozilla FireBird 0.7, it just works so dang well I haven't bothered to upgrade to Firefox 0.8 after the rename...

Quote:
If that is someone's idea of having a better browser, then count me out.. when i click on a page, I want it to pop up and be fully viewable, not slowly load the images on the page...

Something wrong with your PC then...
I just ran a quick test.  5 seconds to load up Apple.com on IE, 3 seconds in Firebird.
6 seconds to load Taldren.com in IE, 4 in Firebird.
Both loaded sgnonline.com in under a second.
Then I clicked on the link to the forum, and it took 11 seconds in IE, 4 seconds in Firebird.
Internet Explorer took 10 seconds to load Darwinawards.com, Firebird took 4.
Internet Explorer took 4 seconds to load netlaughter.com, Firebird took 3.

This is a completely unmodified IE- no spyware (on this PC, the other one is filled because I let relatives use it), no mods, no nothing.

Firebird is BLAZING fast.

In fact, I'm not kidding when I saw that stuff seems to download faster in Firebird.  Perhaps it has some kind of download accelerator, or maybe it starts the download when I hit the button instead of after I choose whether to run or save as.

Quote:
To me IE diaplayed the gage more vibrantly, better organized, faster....  

Also extremely strange.  Not only should Mozilla be faster or at least equivilant speed, it should DEFINITELY display the text better, at least certain fonts.  It supports something (I forget the name, was it text dithering?) that smooths the text and makes it photoshop-realistic.  Very sweet.

Quote:

besides that people state security.. I have yet to be hacked through IE.. I have yet to get a virus, I have been hit 1 time and 1 time only by a hijack software and even that was fixed in a mere matter of minuites.... plus Hijackers are blocked from my system now with my current settings and tracking cookies are blocked.. IE blocks pop-ups on my end..

You are a power user, and have SP2.  Most users don't.  If I gave my mother my computer for two weeks with Firebird, it would probably have little spyware on it (viruses, yes, because if she gets an email from 'microsoft' about new security fixes and it's a virus she'll unknowningly download it, but spyware and those dang IE bar addons no), while if I did it with IE, my computer would be barely working.  You should see what she did to my other PC before I put Firefox on it...

On a side note, on that other screwed up PC I noticed Firefox is slower than IE...could it be that FireFox is slower than FireBird?

Quote:
and I don't use a firewall, router, etc.. I run 99.9% of the time on wireless or on Cable through USB 2.0, which negates the built in router.. I click on a link and pop.. the page is loaded in under 8 seconds when comiming from sites with big pipes...

Taldren's site just pops up fully loaded for the forums both on Dial-up and Cable.. the only thing that is loading when i am reading on dial-up is the signature images.. and even then they are fully loaded within 30 seconds..

As I said above, loaded WAY faster in Mozilla for me.

Quote:
Mozilla can't even compare in speed, plus it looks and feels less functional than IE.. how many plug-ins do you need to get that thing working correctly for all sites anyways? and what sort of connection accelerator do you need for it to be feasable for use on Dial-up?

Very few.  I downloaded the shockwave/flash plugin and Java plugin.  Haven't downloaded anything else...

Quote:


No wonder when i ask someone if they can see a site or find something on a site and they are not using IE, they tell me that the page is still loading...

No, they're just on dialup...
BTW, Safari has been benchmarked and proven to load pages 3 times faster than IE.

Quote:

Also, it needs an easy to configure security settings controller.. with IE, you just right click the IE desktop icon and click properties. you have security right there.

I looked and looked for Mozilla's and couldn't find them. so how do you block Active X controlls, hijackers, cookies?

Tools -> Options.  It's all there, and in a simpler interface than in IE.

[Javora]

Quote:

it is slower than molassas in winter in Alaska.

Is that running up hill or down hill?  

Quote:

besides that people state security.. I have yet to be hacked through IE.. I have yet to get a virus, I have been hit 1 time and 1 time only by a hijack software and even that was fixed in a mere matter of minuites.... plus Hijackers are blocked from my system now with my current settings and tracking cookies are blocked.. IE blocks pop-ups on my end..

and I don't use a firewall, router, etc.. I run 99.9% of the time on wireless or on Cable through USB 2.0, which negates the built in router.. I click on a link and pop.. the page is loaded in under 8 seconds when comiming from sites with big pipes...

You don't use a firewall or router?  I can't even begin to think about how lucky you are.  With a dial-up connection I could almost understand it, but not with a Cable/DSL connection.  I realize that most attacks are Email based, but IMHO that is still asking for trouble.  Do you run an anti-virus program and if so what brand?  Do you have any problems viewing certain web sites with the current IE settings that you are talking about.  If you have the time could you PM me those settings?  I would like the chance to look at them myself.

Quote:

Mozilla can't even compare in speed, plus it looks and feels less functional than IE.. how many plug-ins do you need to get that thing working correctly for all sites anyways? and what sort of connection accelerator do you need for it to be feasable for use on Dial-up?

I mean IE, you can go to 1 of 1000 sites and do 1 or 2 registry tweaks to turn IE into a speed deamon, but even an untweaked IE browser loads the same page 3 times faster than Mozilla.. I know.. I just tried Stock IE verses Stock Mozilla Firefox side by side timing load times...

then with just a couple of registry tewaks, I pull even more speed out of IE.. *.gif files is the bane of the net, but even those load a lot faster in IE than Mozilla..

I have been using Mozilla now for a few months, both on dial-up and now on 3000mbps cable.  I haven't noticed any speed difference with either type of connection on IE or Mozilla.  Plus tabbed browsing, once you get used to it makes viewing the web much easer than opening IE a dozen times.  It's nice not having my tool bar clogged full of IE tabs.  When I was on dial-up it was much easer to click a bunch of different tabs and let them load while I was reading another site.  Sure I could do that with IE but with Mozilla It is much easer (a little faster) and I have a lot less screen clutter to deal with.

That is not to say that Mozilla does not have it's problems, downloading plug-in can be a little annoying but once the plug-in is installed you don't have to install it again.  I have only found 4 or 5 plug-ins since I installed Mozilla.  Plus managing bookmarks is easer in IE than in Mozilla.

Quote:

Mozilla does have a nicer looking interface, but for funtionality and practicality, it has much to be desired...

I would first integrate Macromedia Plug-ins and Shockwave Plug-ins, and Authorware Plugins from Macromedia.. make them and integrated part of Mozilla... that would increase the speed some and reduce the need for getting plug-ins when going to sites with Macromedia material and content...

As I said earlier plug-ins are a little annoying but once you install one you don't have to install it again.  I've never found it to be that big of a deal.  But having all the plug-ins compiled into one program would have been much easer.  I have also noticed that reading text in IE is easer than in Mozilla.  Replying to posts/threads in particular is harder in Mozilla.  But for simple web viewing I prefer Mozilla to IE.

Quote:

Also, it needs an easy to configure security settings controller.. with IE, you just right click the IE desktop icon and click properties. you have security right there.

I looked and looked for Mozilla's and couldn't find them. so how do you block Active X controlls, hijackers, cookies?

anyhow.. just my opinion.

IE has the benefit (a benefit that some people say it shouldn't have) of being integrated with Windows.  Something Mozilla does not and cannot have.  That is why it is easer to access security from the IE icon.  That will never change until IE is removed from the OS.  As for controls, I'm not sure about hijackers or Active X controls as I haven't use Mozilla enough yet but the cookie manager is in the tools menu.

I still use IE and I don't see that changing but I am using IE a lot less now.  For simple web viewing tabbed browsing is the best way for me.
 

[Javora]

Quote:

Also extremely strange. Not only should Mozilla be faster or at least equivilant speed, it should DEFINITELY display the text better, at least certain fonts. It supports something (I forget the name, was it text dithering?) that smooths the text and makes it photoshop-realistic. Very sweet.

IMHO I think the reason why people think that Mozilla is faster than IE is that Mozilla displays information on the screen as it recieves the information.  While IE seems to wait until it gets all the information first and then tries to display the imformation all at once.  I think that is where the speed difference is comming from.

I've noticed that Mozilla has a hard time with text, especially text dealing in forums.  I've noticed that small text size like replying to a post has problems dealing with spaces.  Mozilla also has problems drawing buttons and text boxes in the correct size.  IE just lays out text, dialog boxes and buttons cleaner and a little more detailed.  These things IMHO are minor, and will be corrected over time.  I mean look how long IE has been in production compared to Mozilla.  I expect in time Mozilla like Linux will catch up to Microsoft products, IMHO think that can only be a good thing for the industry as a whole.
 

[Praxis]

Just out of curiousity, Javora...
What version of Mozilla are you running?  And is it FireFox/Bird, or normal Mozilla?

Just wondering. TY for the comments.

I wonder about your problems with forum postings.  I never use IE anymore, except if I have a page that specifically blocks anything but IE users (I intend one of these days to try the special Safari debug mode that tells web sites that it is IE...).  Other than once in a while something looking a funny color when I'm typing in a text box (little bug that should probably be fixed, just cosmetic), I don't have any troubles.

[Javora]

I'm using Mozilla version 1.6.  It is not a big deal, I think Mozilla just has problems drawing the correct size on some things.  Certain buttons, text boxes, and proper spacing between word in text boxes like reply box do not display correctly.  Also in Mozilla when you scroll down a page while the cursor is in the reply text box the scroll function stops when you get to the end of the text box.  In IE you can continue to scroll to the bottom of the actual page.  It's hard to describe.

I think the best way is to show you.  Go to the Tech Support Forum and log in and click the reply button in one of the threads.  Do the same thing with IE then look at the difference.  Then copy some text (about a page worth) in each text box for Mozilla and IE.  Once the text is in place click the mouse somewhere in the text box in Mozilla and use the scroll wheel to go down as far as you can on the page, note what happens.  Then do the same in IE.  After that look at each page, to me Mozilla looks small and cramped compared to IE.  Again it is not a big deal, just things that Mozilla need to work on.  Hope this helps.
 

[Praxis]

Well, since  I'm about to go to bed in a moment and don't want to go through a registration process, I'll try it tomorrow.

I'm using Firebird .7, personally...haven't seen any text box positioning problems here.  Though Safari sometimes has trouble with that...

[Pestalence]

Quote:


You don't use a firewall or router?  I can't even begin to think about how lucky you are.  With a dial-up connection I could almost understand it, but not with a Cable/DSL connection.  I realize that most attacks are Email based, but IMHO that is still asking for trouble.  Do you run an anti-virus program and if so what brand?  Do you have any problems viewing certain web sites with the current IE settings that you are talking about.  If you have the time could you PM me those settings?  I would like the chance to look at them myself.

 

OK,

For AV, I use the Online scan from the masters of AV.. Trend Micro.. I use housecalls.. I scan 2 times a week there... I don't have resident AV as I like my programs to respond correctly and install correctly without having to worry about the AV blocking a component or corrupting the entire program or having to go through the hassle of turning the AV on and off for installs and patches.

If a person is careful, then there should be no problems with viruses.. never open an exe in an email, or a *.com program.. I always save them to the HDD without opening, then I scan them with Housecalls when all downloads i am doing are done.. i scan only my downloads folder and not my entire machine.. I can my entire machine 2 times a week...

Trend Micro is the company that makes the definitions for AV for Norton, McAffee, AVG, etc.. I trust them over any other company's AV.. they are always the first to have updated definitions in thier products, such as housecalls...

as for IE settings.. the major things to block trojans, hijackers and active X controlls, it is all in the security settings...


here is a picture of my Security tab Internet Zone :



Notice only 1 setting in the Active X controlls are set to Enable.. this is required for going to new sites to check the Active X controlls.. this is the Internet icon under Custom settings.

now this will make unsigned Active X controlls to not work and Signed Active X controlls to prompt..

This is important as some site actually require Active X controlls, and some do not.. and several sites are forging Microsoft's Signed Controlls in order to get their spyware, trojans and hijackers on to people's systems.

Sites like Microsft (www.microsoft.com) not MSN but Microsoft itself (like window's updates or the MSDN pages) require Active X to operate correctly.. sites like CNN, MSN, Yahoo.. their Active X controlls install tracking cookies, aka spyware cookies..

sites like astalavista, a known wares site, has Hijackers, Porn Dialers, Malware, Spyware, Trojans all using Active X.. some signed (forged) and some unsigned...

the settings above will block unsigned active x controlls and prompt for all the ones that are signed..

rule of thumb, say no to all active X controlls unless you are either on a Microsoft web site like Windows Updare (you have to say yes to Active X for the site to work) or MSDN (You have to say yes or the side link pannel will not work). Other sites, say NO.. then look the page over.. if the links listings do not appear or if content is not being displayed, then refresh the page and click yes and add it to your trusted sites... however 99% of the time, you will see the Active X prompt pop up prior to an ad image loading.. if you experience this and the rest of the site looks good, click No and add it to your restricted sites...

Once you find sites with safe Active X controlls, you just add them to your Trusted Sites security settings in IE (make sure everything in this section is enabled and low security)

that way you don't keep getting prompts....

Other sites that pop up Active X controlls, I say no and check to see if the site works correctly and is displayed correctly...

if the site displays correctly, then the Active X controll is either a Cookie Tracker being installed, or Malware, or a Hijacker.. in which case I add the Site to Restricted Sites and make sure all Active X controlls are turned to disabled.. that way if i ever have to go back to the site, i don't have to worry about prompts for Active X again...

It should only take about 3 ro 4 days to sort out your regularly visited sites..

now some sites have plain ads that just place a tracking cookie.. to block about 90 % of these, click on the Privacy tab in IE properties, Click on the Advanced button.. Check Override Automatic Cookie handling and put First Party to Accept, Third Party (which means Ads) to Block and check Always allow session cookies (needed for Forums).

Now all you need to do is once or twice a week is run Ad-Aware or Spybot to remove the 3 to 8 cookies that will slip through..

That's it.. Your security settings will stop a lot of the security holes.. and also keeping up to date with Windows updates once or twice a month.. New update came out Tuesday BTW...

Anyhow, it seems like a lot, but it actually is very easy to configure and add sites to the safe and restricted zones...

Hope that this helps...
 

[Javora]

Wow thanks for the information, you know your stuff I?ll give you that.  The settings you have in IE are similar to what I had set (I took your advice, thanks BTW).  The last setting ?Script ActiveX controls marked safe for scripting? was the only thing I needed to change.  And you are dead on about Email attachments. In fact the place where my sister works just sent out a company wide posting advising that people no longer read even the Emails itself (let alone attachments) when the sender cannot be clearly identified.  At first I thought this was due to people sending or receiving porn pictures on the web.  But after discussing it with her at some length I am convinced that the policy is in place to protect the network system.

As for cookies I changed the settings concerning both First and Third party cookies as you described.  I am going to take some time and see how effective this is as well as how it effects normal day-to-day web browsing.  Similarly both IE and Mozilla has a way to block cookies by site name.  I think later on I am also going to spend the time and see if it is easer to manage cookies this way.  As I think this is an interesting point of discussion.  It seems to me that once the sites that a person normally visits are entered into the (site) Cookie Manager that cookies would no longer be an issue unless a person visits a new site.  This would also resolve the problem of web sites changing the type of cookies they send out to try and fool IE/Mozilla.  It?s too bad that both IE and Mozilla will not allow you to save the entries in the Cookie Manager to a file similar to the way bookmarks are saved.

I still think running without some kind of Anti-virus and Firewall/Router is a little unsafe.  However you have taken care to keep your system virus free.  I also agree that Anti-virus, Firewall are a pain sometimes and hog system recourses.  And there is a case to be made about the usefulness of Firewalls.  When I switched over to Cable Internet last month, I noticed when I was configuring my router that my old Firewall opened a huge number of ports for ICQ.  I sat thinking if this many ports are open (a range of several thousand) why even have a Firewall running at all.  I have since closed those ports and locked down ICQ even further.  My Firewall also alerted me that I was trying to hack my own system an even gave me my IP address and listed me as a person residing in KS.  Needless to say I was not impressed.

Anyway I?m going to get off my soapbox now, thank you for your information and your time.

Oh BTW SpyBot has just released version 1.3 a day or two ago, you can download it here.
 

[vsfedwards]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
 GEEKFIGHT.  

Please, be polite!

I perfer the term NERD    j/k, hehe  

My humble apoligies, to any and all Geeks, Nerds, and whom-ever else.  

Stephen  

Holy toothpaste you're right Stephen, what have I done!?