It is very realistic, you can't make any determination of what the average user visits period.
This shows me you don't even know what "average" means. It's funny that the trolls always state they are much older than the person they are arguing against and that they have far superior experience. Then they make statements like that.
What large sites test with now "may" change to include IE it is far from guaranteed. The one thing that is certain is that all the sites have been tested in IE.
It is inevitable that some will. It doesn't matter anyways. The whole "incompatibility" thing is confined to much less than 15% of important sites and even less that actually prevent a user from browsing the site. We are talking only a few % at the end of the day. If you do have compatibility issues then use this http://ieview.mozdev.org/
Huh? Of course they matter, if they don't work with Firefox people will use IE.
Learn to read, I said *majority* don’t matter. You said “All people care about is if a site works period, not standards.” So the majority of incorrectly coded sites are rendered in firefox only show unimportant differences that means it doesn’t matter. All people care about is if a site works. Not works perfectly because in order for it to be perfect the website would have to be coded to standards!
How old are you and what do you do for a living? I'm much older then 17.
I am older than you and I make more money than you do. That is all you need to know
All of this is of course just nonsense BS, you completely ignored the statement.
I agree no one should take advice from young uneducated (you misspelled uneducated
) Fanboys such as yourself. Considering I am not an Firefox fanboy, am educated and much older then you with real world experience, my advice should be taken. You do realize that just because someone defends a product against frivolous (misspelled frivolous
) claims does not make them a fanboy of it?
See I can turn that argument around too. You make this too easy.
Are you brain dead or just incompetent?
I've more then proven the facts but it requires comprehension aparently beyond someone such as yourself for how these things work for you to understand it.
Dancing around the issues again.
This is not even remotely proven.
Who said it was proven on ALL audiences? No one did so stop making BS up. I said from what I have seen, I said this because the data conflicted with what Hellokitty said. He/she (no idea) said that firefox was slower.
Myths? Are you in denial? Six security issues plus the one listed above. Propaganda only works for so long.
Who said that they didn’t exist? No one, stop making BS up. The key words here are “extremely serious
security issues”. I don’t know what he considers “extremely serious” but if that's how he rates moderate problems then I can show you some much more serious IE problems.
Nothing like a halfassed product that works with 99% of the web. LMAO!
Nothing like a half assed product that has a history of major security issues. LMAO!
You know what is funny is cleaning client's computers of Viruses after they were told they could uninstall their AV because they started to use Firefox or showing them the 100+ spyware items that the Firefox Spyware remover missed on their PC.
You know what is funny is cleaning client’s computers of Viruses after they were told SP2 eliminates all these problems so they could uninstall their AV and spyware tools. Or showing them the 100+ spyware items that got onto their PC from using IE.
Tachyonic Karma: Future decisions traveling backwards in time to smite you now.