I've just left Firefox for IE7

[PolishOX]

Guys, chill we are really all friends here...

And for the record you're not allowed to say this:

 

sounds like you're in what...about 2nd grade?!?

 

And then this...

 

I'll not argue with ignorance.

 

Hahaha

 

But I think we all need to relax and understand this is a community...

Note the suffix of the word: UNITY

[Azurael]

What's the point arguing about which browser is better anyway? Better is subjective and means different things to different people. For example, to me, better means not infecting my computer with spyware and having uncompliant page rendering, but to other people, as you've realised, better might mean faster launching (though can't you just leave it open? I'm sure 8 seconds per day isn't the end of the world if you prefer the browsing experience with FF.)

 

The point is that you get to use your computer and I get to use mine, thus your choice of browser has no impact on me, so what's the point getting all zealous about it one way or ther other. Immature name calling is not really going to encourge more people to read & post on this forum!

 

And for the record, I use Firefox w/AdBlocker and Fasterfox on Windows and Linux and Safari with Saft on MacOS. Yes, I miss the speed of Firefox on the Mac, but I don't like how 'un-mac-like' Firefox is, though Camino's coming along well these days!

[domino]

What's the point arguing about which browser is better anyway?

 

I think you missed the point of the bickering along the way. The bickering was about one person saying he doesn't like to wait more than a second for a browser to open when there is a native browser that does the job for him. The other person is saying you need to upgrade to a dual core if you want the browser to open faster. The bickering was off topic from the point the the member advised to upgrade a P4 3Ghz system with 1.5gig of ram in order to launch Firefox almost instantly or at least the same launch time as IE.

 

to me, better means not infecting my computer with spyware and having uncompliant page rendering.

 

Let's get the myths out of the way. It's not the browser's fault that a person got tricked into download a dialer, code injection, and what not. Name one professional site that do such thing and you'll not see it for very long.

 

better might mean faster launching (though can't you just leave it open? I'm sure 8 seconds per day isn't the end of the world if you prefer the browsing experience with FF.)

 

You expect everyone to have the same behavior as you on the computer. This unit is a work horse that earns capital booting into Linux and XP several times a day, not counting the testing and learning on my own spare time booting into OS X and Vista. Lets add VMware XP while in Linux, and VMware Linux while in XP.

 

how is the IE7 RC1? I saw the link but i didnt want to mess with it becuase if it breaks down, then i cant update windows.... are you liking it so far?

 

I had a little problem with the beta not visible in the add/remove application content. I had to uninstall the beta from the command prompt, restart the unit and install RC. So far no problems. Of course I tested it on vmware/XP before upgrading on native. It needs a bit of polishing up before it goes prime time though. One annoyance I have is the "Find" feature that closes when you browse to another page. You need to hit Ctrl+F again in order to fine the same word on a different page.

[KJY9]

..The other person is saying you need to upgrade to a dual core if you want the browser to open faster. The bickering was off topic from the point the the member advised to upgrade a P4 3Ghz system with 1.5gig of ram in order to launch Firefox almost instantly or at least the same launch time as IE.

...

 

 

I don't see where anyone said you needed to upgrade to a dual core rig on this thread?!?

Are those hallucinations coming more frequently now?

I just stated if your FF was taking 8 seconds to load, it's not the browser's fault.

It takes my rig less that 2 secs to load the first time I open it, and less than that the second.

So, either you need to upgrade your dinosaur rig (get into the 21st century), or take those 15 tray icons out of your startup.

I'm certain either one will speed things up for you, but to complain that it's FFs fault that it's taking 8 seconds to load up when other machines are doing it in 1/4 of the time, well that's just an ignorant statement (not calling you ignorant, just that statement).

[Azurael]

Unless the code which launches Firefox happens to be very well multithreaded, I can't imagine upgrading to a dual core machine would make much difference anyway...

 

Incidentally, Firefox makes it's first launch (after a fresh boot) on this machine in about 2-3 seconds, and it's only an 'old' Pentium-M 1.6GHz/533FSB with 'only' 512MB of RAM and a 'slow' 4200RPM drive, what do you have running in the background to make it take 8 seconds with a decent 7200RPM desktop drive?!

[KJY9]

Unless the code which launches Firefox happens to be very well multithreaded, I can't imagine upgrading to a dual core machine would make much difference anyway...

 

Incidentally, Firefox makes it's first launch (after a fresh boot) on this machine in about 2-3 seconds, and it's only an 'old' Pentium-M 1.6GHz/533FSB with 'only' 512MB of RAM and a 'slow' 4200RPM drive, what do you have running in the background to make it take 8 seconds with a decent 7200RPM desktop drive?!

 

In one of hos posts (scroll back) he states that he has 15 ..."tray apps that need to load plus run services."

 

That wouldn't have anything to do with it at all now would it?

[domino]

In one of hos posts (scroll back) he states that he has 15 ..."tray apps that need to load plus run services."

 

That wouldn't have anything to do with it at all now would it?

What kind of idiot are you? Do you not think I am aware of how much memory each of those tray items take? You can have 30 hidden tray items and still have 500mb left for the system if you have 1gig memory. You are insinuating there is not enough rescources? Quit trying to sell your point as it is mute and acting like some blind child nagging to be noticed doesn't help your case. Your argument carries no weight to my decision to switching browsers. You haven't proven anything to me other than reminding me how ignorant some people actually are. Go troll the other thread you created about some old news you really believed that OS X got hacked into. That thread alone already proved how much thought process you actually spend.

[KJY9]

What kind of idiot are you? Do you not think I am aware of how much memory each of those tray items take? You can have 30 hidden tray items and still have 500mb left for the system if you have 1gig memory. You are insinuating there is not enough rescources? Quit trying to sell your point as it is mute and acting like some blind child nagging to be noticed doesn't help your case. Your argument carries no weight to my decision to switching browsers. You haven't proven anything to me other than reminding me how ignorant some people actually are. Go troll the other thread you created about some old news you really believed that OS X got hacked into. That thread alone already proved how much thought process you actually spend.

 

 

ROFLOL and you've proved nothing by your useless diatribe, except that other people are launching FF just fine and yours is taking 8 seconds to do so. How many other variables are there. You say your system is fast enough...fine....you say that loading 15 tray icons is not the cause. I believe there is only one other variable to consider...the pilot?

You pick, but don't blame the browser that's taking 8 seconds to load on your machine when others launch it in 2 secs or less.

Is that really so tough to understand that you may be the cause of it and not FF??

[domino]

You speak of other as to say 99% of the market are using Firefox? don't lie to yourself. And quit reading mythes about how one application works better than the other. You are those types of people that have 2gig of memory and only use 25% of it. But hey I guess bragging rights get you through life.

 

When you actually learn how to use a tool for the proper job and just not play Ms. Pacman on your rig because you don't want to use up all your memory and cpu cyles, you may debate all you want. Until that time, arguing and speculating how much memory are actually used on a system you have never even used is something someone that just got a new computer would say. I bet you are the type that would re-install instead of trying to fix the problem.

[KJY9]

You speak of other as to say 99% of the market are using Firefox? don't lie to yourself. And quit reading mythes about how one application works better than the other. You are those types of people that have 2gig of memory and only use 25% of it. But hey I guess bragging rights get you through life.

 

When you actually learn how to use a tool for the proper job and just not play Ms. Pacman on your rig because you don't want to use up all your memory and cpu cyles, you may debate all you want. Until that time, arguing and speculating how much memory are actually used on a system you have never even used is something someone that just got a new computer would say. I bet you are the type that would re-install instead of trying to fix the problem.

 

 

ya know..thoughout this entire thread you've attacked me personally without addressing any of the issues that I've brought up and continue to put words in my mouth.

You have no idea what I use my rig for, and obviously it's more than what you use yours for if it's taking you 8 seconds to launch FF.

Is your idea of "fixing the problem" saying "screw FF, I'm going with IE7"??

I'm glad I don't treat problems with the psychotic behavior that you seem to.

Whoever said "ignorance is bliss" had yet to meet you.

I'll not argue any further with an unarmed man.

Peace out

[gwprod12]

Honestly, I've always found the load time on FireFox to be unacceptable. I dont know about the amount of time, but on every computer I've ever used it on, it seems to take a good 30 to 45 seconds. I've also never found FireFox to be any more secure than Internet Explorer. FireFox also has behaviors I dont like, though I suppose they could be fixed, such as inferior support for inbedded mime types. On the mac, Firefox is better, because Safari is what I compare it to; Safari being complete garbage.

 

Anyways, my 2 cents.

[Azurael]

OK. Let's set the record straight. Yes, in an ideal world, nobody would have to open webpages which exploit IE's security flaws, but we don't live in an ideal world.

 

In an ideal world, Microsoft would create a standards-complaint HTML & CSS rendering engine, so web developers wouldn't have to create pages which don't render well on 'real' browsers just to support Internet Exploder. Again, we don't live in an ideal world.

 

In an ideal world, people wouldn't blame Firefox for launching slowly when the actual reason the load of un-necescary, resource-hogging tripe running in the background (if you think your percentage of free RAM and pretty little processor usage bar having plenty of spare capacity means your computer will necesarily run fast, you clearly don't understand the concept of thread & process switching and why they're such an issue for modern processors. Run less threads/processes, get more performance. It doesn't matter how little CPU time those threads/processes use, it's switching between them which makes things slow! Thread switching is much faster than process switching, but generally, Windows is process heavy versus Unices, which are thread heavy.)

 

I'm sure the majority of people on this forum would be perfectly able to use IE6 with no 3rd party addons and avoid filling their computer up with spyware. That's just because you only have to use your common sense to avoid these things. However, isn't it better to lose 8 seconds of your precious time each day use a browser that doesn't have those vulnerabilities in the first place rather than complain about it to other people, who quite frankly have better things to be doing than defending an innocent piece of software? (You can probably save more than 8 seconds on your startup time by removing some of that junk, by the way!)

 

To make a reasonable comparison, in an ideal world, George Bush wouldn't be an idiot, and neither would Islamic Extremists. Starting to get the idea?

 

Oh, and by the way, of course IE launches faster than Firefox. IE is part of Windows. It's running all the time, in the background, hogging yet more of your poor 'old' computer's resources!

[domino]

In an ideal world, people wouldn't blame Firefox for launching slowly when the actual reason the load of un-necescary, resource-hogging tripe running in the background..

 

You are implying that people should remove to disable ActiveSync, bluetooth tray, sound applet, wifi applet, network tray applet, av applet, thunderbird tray, feed daemon tray, super ad blocker tray, TV capture remote, and just about all the run process needed to be productive on a daily basis just to accommodate the way i think an application should start? I should just not think about the other applications I use, including Thunderbird and dreamweaver, that have no problem loading almost instantly? The only application the loads slower is Photoshop, but not by much.

 

However, isn't it better to lose 8 seconds of your precious time each day use a browser that doesn't have those vulnerabilities...

 

I'm not going to get into which is more or less proned to vulnerabilities since Secunia does a pretty good job at squashing those myths. You seem to think I like downloading any application I think that's "cool". Every tray applet is used to help me do my job and half of them are there to support the hardware.

 

Oh, and by the way, of course IE launches faster than Firefox. IE is part of Windows.

 

That was already pointed out on the first page.

 

To make a reasonable comparison, in an ideal world, George Bush wouldn't be an idiot, and neither would Islamic Extremists. Starting to get the idea?

 

GW will always be an idiot and so will any extremist. You can't recode people and ideology so it's not a very good example.

[Azurael]

When I used to actively maintain a desktop PC, I had practically nothing running in the background. You don't need any vendor supplied wireless tray applets, Windows Zeroconf is fine and has to be running anyway. Aside from bluetooth hardware and activesync for PPCs (which you should probably quit when you're not using it anyway, in my experience it's the most unstable pile of junk Microsoft have ever supplied, which is impressive going really), I can't think of anything else you'd actually need a tray applet for. Yes, FYI, I do always turn off the ATI/nVidia ones because they don't do anything useful I couldn't do without them anyway.

 

 

And even if you really do believe Secunia is the be-all, and end-all of security information, try this:

 

Mozilla Firefox 1.x

 

Most Critical Unpatched

The most severe unpatched Secunia advisory affecting Mozilla Firefox 1.x, with all vendor patches applied, is rated Less critical.

 

Affected By 36 Secunia advisories

 

Unpatched 8% (3 of 36 Secunia advisories)

 

Microsoft Internet Explorer 6.x

 

Most Critical Unpatched

The most severe unpatched Secunia advisory affecting Microsoft Internet Explorer 6.x, with all vendor patches applied, is rated Extremely critical

 

Affected By 106 Secunia advisories

 

Unpatched 18% (19 of 106 Secunia advisories)

 

ActiveX is the biggest security hole, slowdown and inconvenience in IE (and probably the whole of Windows, come to think of it), which thankfully, Firefox doesn't support!

[gwprod12]

Stuff running in the background isnt the problem. It's FireFox itself, cleaning out it's cache, and all the other BS it does before you get a window.

[domino]

When I used to actively maintain a desktop PC...

 

Yet another one of those "lets be stingy with our 2 gig memory" my applications will load faster. It has little to do with whether I have 4 or 15 zeroconf try applets running. Minus the tray apps that windows provides, i actually have 4 that need to run. Rss reader for my clients' news sites. Disable NOD32 tray is out of the question. Including my RSS reader, there are actually no more than 4 applications which includes Salling Clicker, Styler, Supper Ad Blocker, NOD32. All the rest are native to windows.

 

I get it now. Lets disable activesync and BT so I can't sync my 800 dollar Blue Angel. I'll just manually input every email contact, new contacts, and schedules. The only reason i'm still on windows IS activesync to outlook and using the remote for the capture card. You seem to be an expert on PocketPC. What other alternatives are there to sync information to OOo under Linux or a reliable application to sync WM5 on Mac? In fact, what other sync applications are available in Windows? I should also forget about using my BT headphones to call clients on skype or gtalk. Instead i'll just use the headphones that plug into the audio connection. Not going to happen.

 

You link to the Secunia page as if you have proven a point that Browse X is safer than Browse Y. The only thing you have proven is no browser is secure and your earlier comment about spyware on IE is more likely as oppose to no spyware on Firefox is nonsense.

[Azurael]

My, that was an over-reaction if I've ever seen one... Disable Activesync when you're not using it is what I believe I said, not throw away your PPC, and I think I said that your BT tray applet is one thing you probably do need running!

 

You wouldn't need super ad blocker if you didn't use IE

 

And considering the insincerity of the outstanding security problems with Firefox versus those IE, I don't think your last comment was in any way valid. In IE, set to the highest security zone, arbitrary execution of code is possible just by visiting a page which looks like innocent HTML to the user with no option or warning given. To me, that sounds like a 'slight' security problem. What's to stop such a page being opened by a 'legitimate' website that's been hijacked, considering the number of security holes in the average commercial PHP-based web-portal system. And I've seen it happen, so I do know that it's possible. As far as I know, no parallel attack is possible with Firefox.

 

Anyway, I give up arguing with somebody who's so clearly set in their ways. As I said, what browser you use is your choice. I was just trying to make it clear that your slander of Firefox wasn't quite accurate.

[domino]

I suppose I shouldn't cradle my PPC when I'm at home? The season why I installed AS in the first place is so I wouldn't have to charge and sync manually. If you have another way of using your hardware, then good for you. Don't dictate how others should use there own.

 

Sure, I'll stop using IE's third party ad blocker if you stop using Firefox's third party ad blocker plug-in along with all the other plug-ins that aren't normally distributed with Firefox when installed. The last time I read and experienced with Firefox was that plug-ins also contributed to Firefox's lagging load time.

 

Don't confuse convenience with security issues. The point of my thread was the convenience of IE7 loading much faster than Firefox under windows. It also boils down to browsing habits isn't it? Who are you to tell people what browsing habits they should have. If I did experience any security threats warned under IE, then I would still be using Firefox in Windows. I don't put myself in a situation where a threat might be possible on my production system. That's why there are applications called Web Appliances for virtual environments. If you want to prove your point that Firefox is more secure than IE7, then go start a new thread and I'm sure most people will agree with you.

 

I believe I pointed out on the first page that it was my "preference" that I switched from Firefox to IE7. I never suggested to anyone, in any way, to abandon Firefox because IE was better. My opinions and preferences is only subjected to me and no one else. This thread was my opinion of Firefox's load time preference not security issues versus another browser.

[xtraa]

I hate to say that, but let's face it: IE7 is fast and it is a good browser by now.

 

Also Microsoft is cooperating with the mozilla foundation to make it even better.

According to Mitchell Baker they don't see a competitor for FF in the IE7. This is because

a.) FF is not a commerical business, and b.) the main goal of Mozilla is to make browsing

secure and simple. Let's see how it will do in the next months.

 

If IE7 is a good browser I have no problems with that.