Is Firefox a new religion?

Computing zealotry is everywhere, of course, but one of the hottest new forms of it has congealed in recent months around the Firefox browser—or so says this entertaining little editorial (thanks General Ares.)

Comments closed
    • chobo321321
    • 15 years ago

    I use Firefox for the following reasons

    1. tabbed browsing (something that I find essential now that I’ve been exposed to it)

    2. Extensions – There are some really cool, and useful extensions which add a lot to the browser. I could not live without the web developer extension.

    If IE 7, or any other company came out with a browser that had my favorite extensions, and features that were better then firefox, I would switch in a heart-beat. Same goes for processors, OS’s etc… I think not using products because of “brand loyalty” is stupid, and you miss out on a lot of things.

    PS – I hope IE 7 will follow web standards more closely this time around, it’s such a chore finding hacks to make things display properly in IE 6.

    • gtoulouzas
    • 15 years ago

    The deal-breaker for Firefox, as far as I was concerned, has been the developers’ stubborn refusal to support the mht file standard for web page archiving.

    Many users have been screaming bloody murder with regards to Firefox’s lack of mht support for months now, but the programmers will simply not include this. Allegedly, the standard has been developed by Microsoft, and since Microsoft is “the debil” :rolleyes: Firefox users will have to do without any non-dodgy method for archiving web pages. (dodgy methods include a decidedly malfunctioning 3rd party plugin and the “bad ole” method of filling your PC with folders and subfolders to save a single page)

    I don’t need this “we didn’t develop the standard, so we won’t support it” attitude — especially not from a community purporting to “give the web back to the user” and all that jazz..

    The Firefox developers’ dismissive attitude towards the many users asking for a simple way to save webpages into a single file has broken the deal for me ; as well as deflate the whole “we’re all about giving the web back to the user” marketing.

    Just my 2 cents on the matter. I appreciate the usability and speed of the program, but don’t feel like sacrificing what I consider to be critical functionality simply in the name of “sticking it to bad MS”.

    Feel welcome to correct me if I’ve gotten my facts wrong.

    • Porkster
    • 15 years ago

    It’s the Chip-On-Thy-Shoulder syndrome and is highly accounted in AMD population, Linux-population, and now Mozilla community. Usually patients are of the teenager type.

    I can’t see why Firefox is anything special. It’s got flaws, it’s not as good as Opera for Mozillia browsers, it’s the plain jane browser and incompatible with many sites.

    .

      • crose
      • 15 years ago

      What is “Opera for Mozillia browsers”? A Opera theme for Gecko-based browsers??

      • Convert
      • 15 years ago

      Up to your old tricks again.

      It’s the Chip-On-Thy-Shoulder syndrome and is highly accounted in Intel population, Windows-population, and now IE community. 😉

      There are fanboys on both sides. Being your ignorant self again I see.

      q[http://ieview.mozdev.org/.<]§ Is what you meant to say.

    • d0g_p00p
    • 15 years ago

    I was a IE user only because i hate adding software that I don’t really need. UI switched to Firefox a few months ago when I had to reinstall (reinstalling is when I test all new apps) I love it, if only for two reasons. One, tabbed browsing is awesome and two all the different extensions (ad block is one of the best). If IE added this, I might still be using it.

    Yeah though, that article and that web site and both stupid and retarded.

    • Popobumm
    • 15 years ago

    It’s really the ‘open-source’-ness (I don’t know too much about it, so I’ll make up that word) of Firefox that makes it so interesting to me. There are so many little add-ons and extensions available. I like the fact that it’s just a browser (not email, etc) and then you can add on whatever YOU want. I’m sure many other browsers do this as well, but judging from my experience using Firefox since it was called Firebird, I don’t really have many complaints.

    Besides, who says you can’t use two browsers? I use Firefox mostly, but if I run into a site that is a bit wonky, I load IE. No big deal. Best of both I guess…

    • ScythedBlade
    • 15 years ago

    Even though I use Firefox, I found out that not ALL pages are as fast on it than IE. But, most pages are, since most just use a plugin or so…

    I also found it particularly annoying because Firefox isn’t truly reliable in coding, since almost everything is built for IE. (Xanga.com props sometimes still show up wrong)

    And just like Windows and Linux and Macs. Oh no, there are less viruses for Macs and Linux. It’s because hackers don’t target people with the lesser used internet browsers. For the current time, Internet Explorer still has about 90% of the use, and so people devoted much time into exploiting it. Not many people care much about Firefox … but I guess if anyone did really start caring, there would be a lot more exploits for Firefox. Still, it probably won’t be as much as IE, but that’s not the point.

    Lastly, the statement he was trying to prove wasn’t probably how IE owns Firefox, but rather how all the stuff said is not true. He just finds it irritating for so many people to be chanting Firefox owns and stuff. It may be true. But not to the point where you can say it has some stuff when it doesn’t. If you’re a New Yorker, it’s probably how you feel about missionaries on the train.

      • indeego
      • 15 years ago

      Apache is the most popular web server application, (by far,) yet it’s not targeted by worms/malware or have the exploit capability of IIS. This analogy (oft repeated with little justification other than a few limited examples,) doesn’t always hold upg{<. <}g Also the securina vulnerbilities don't list FF as having a system compromise or elevation/criticality as often IE exploits have.

        • sbarash
        • 15 years ago

        Indeego, I’m just going to keep after you.

        ok, first Apache is quite popular, but not as popular as IIS for corporate or business websites. Apache’s free, so of course the sheer number of sites is going to be high, but most of those sites are pretty irrelevant. What’s your site use?

        Second, look at the security warnings for IIS 6, which comes with Windows 2003. Find any? Pretty sweet record, don’t you think?

        IIS 5 was installed by default and left wide open on every copy of Windows 2000 server and pro. Again, its a numbers game that you can twist how you please.

        Yer bud,
        Stephen

          • indeego
          • 15 years ago

          We run on a managed hosting provider using Apache. Perhaps the irony of this is that we are an Intellectual Property law firm and use quite a bit of linux and open source where we do business. That practice is increasing, if anything.

          The majority of sites use Apache, period, and it’s only increased since IIS6 has been out, mostly because of the maturity of apache, it’s free as in always free status, and it’s ability to be put on a server that doesn’t require reboots. Look, of course 2003 server is better than 2000. MS turned everything “public” off by default, something other OS’s learned long ago and MS finally got right with XP SP2.

          I’d like to see these stats on how IIS is more popular than Apache even for business/corp use. Remember most businesses are small business, host externally, and most hosting providers use a BSD, *nix, or non MS variantg{<.<}g

            • sbarash
            • 15 years ago

            The stats are out there for IIS, if you google around enough. However, I’m sure you could find them for either side. However, I’m pretty certain that IIS wins if you look at the Fortune 500.

            I do like Apache, and am mostly playing devil’s advocate here. I’m the Network Administrator for a major public university in California, and we have everything here.

            I would argue that Apaches increase in popularity is because of Linux’s increase in popularity. Both IIS and Apache are quite mature at this point. And I can’t think of any operation performed with IIS 6.0 that would require a reboot. In fact, the only operation that I can think of with Windows 2003 server that requires a reboot, is the application of some service packs / hot fixs that make low level kernel or driver mods.

            Can you think of any operation performed in Windows 2003 that requires a reboot, that would not require a reboot in Linux for a similiar operation?

            Stephen

    • MorgZ
    • 15 years ago

    I like firefox, thats why i use it. I prefer it to IE and, from a web developing point of view, some of the plugins are v.v.v.handy and useful for xhtml / css validation.

    • Spotpuff
    • 15 years ago

    Go Maxthon

    • mnm222876
    • 15 years ago

    Firefox sucks. No functionality for power users. People who like Firefox probably also like Apple products. Internet nubs. Gay.

    Maxthon owns Firesuxorz!

    • indeego
    • 15 years ago

    The article is riddled with complete bull the first few paragraphs so I didn’t bother reading through the rest.

    “Keep in mind too Firefox has only been out for a year and Internet Explorer is up to version 6. ”
    Gecko. Look into it and it’s history. IE 6 has had far more vulnerabilities year after year than IE 3 or 4. It’s not nessesarily activeX that is the problem, it’s security model of zones and zone transversal that is a problem. IE will continually have zone tranversal issues, for perpetuity– the model of security is *[

      • sbarash
      • 15 years ago

      100% reliablility at stopping popups? I’d think an IT guy would know better. Almost sounds like religious zealotry….

      You better get out and surf with FF more, cause they’ve been bad the last couple of weeks.

      §[<https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=253831<]§ -Stephen

        • indeego
        • 15 years ago

        Guess I stand corrected. I haven’t experienced this until today when I visited those test sites, and they were technically pop-unders, not pop-upsg{<.<}g *sheepish grin*

          • VTNC
          • 15 years ago

          Since the pop-up blocker does allow for windows to be opened via mouse-clicks, some clever people figured out that this could be exploited.

          Unfortunately for them, a certain software which blocks ads has a */popup/* filter that disable the .js that does this

    • VooBass
    • 15 years ago

    I’ve used Firefox 80% of the time for about 3 months now but I’m hardly a fan. IE is vastly superior to Firefox in the way it renders web pages, in the way it allows IE-specific image effects, and in its user interactions (the onfocus borders in Firefox are really annoying and I haven’t found a way to turn them off, which I can in IE, and even simply selecting the address in the address bar is more difficult than IE). And as sbarash mentions, Firefox’s popup blocker just doesn’t cut it. The tabs are nice, but as soon as IE upgrades to a tabbed-browser design I’m toasting Firefox.

      • nerdrage
      • 15 years ago

      Of course IE renders pages with IE-specific code better… but that’s the problem: Since IE is the dominant browser, everyone codes for it (using the proprietary IE extensions). The page isn’t going to look absolutely perfect in Mozilla 100% of the time unless the webmaster uses standards-compliant HTML, though it IS getting better in this regard, it’s still not IE, nor will it ever be.

      Webmasters are unlikely to use standards-compliant HTML unless there are enough people using standards-compliant browsers to make it worthwhile, but surfers aren’t going to use a browser like that because it doesn’t always render properly. It’s a catch-22.

        • sbarash
        • 15 years ago

        Go to SlashDot with firefox. Does that render properly for you? And SlashDots about as pro-firefox a site as you can get.

        Ya, ya, its a problem with the Gecko engine that will be fixed in 1.1.

        Still, it kinda kills kills your arguement.

        Stephen

          • Rousterfar
          • 15 years ago

          Slashdot look ok to me…

          • dragmor
          • 15 years ago

          Actually I would have said it was a problem with the crappy html that slashdot renders. Slashdot may be the OpenSource comunity/discussion web site, but the html sent to the browser is not standards compliant.

          • indeego
          • 15 years ago

          §[<http://indeego.com/ffsd.jpg<]§ Renders better on FFg{

            • Captain Ned
            • 15 years ago

            Indeego:

            Which skin is that?

            • indeego
            • 15 years ago

            Noia 2.0 lite.

            Check out my daughter’s themeg{<:<}g §[<http://indeego.com/gskin.jpg<]§ (scribblieskids theme)

      • Justice
      • 15 years ago

      Want a tabbed IE? go try out avantbrowser.

      §[<http://www.avantbrowser.com<]§

        • VooBass
        • 15 years ago

        I tried Maxon and Deep Net. Maybe I’m wrong about this but my impression was that they were a hybrid overlay on IE 5.5, not IE 6, and hense a lot of the new feel of IE was lost, particularly the superb popup blocker. I eventually went back to IE 6. Does Advant take the same approach?

          • Justice
          • 15 years ago

          Yes. Avant is basically a new shell/ui for IE with some added functionality. Any toolbar/plugin designed for IE will work with Avant.

            • Rousterfar
            • 15 years ago

            Avant is awsome. Faster then regular IE too.

      • fyo
      • 15 years ago

      What is it you find so inferior about the way Firefox renders web-pages? Is it that it actually implements much more of CSS2 and 3? Is it that it has much better (although not nearly perfect) specification adherence?

      Btw, what do you mean by “onfocus borders”? Seriously, this is probably just me being daft, by I really don’t know what you mean.

      > even simply selecting the address in the address bar is more difficult than IE

      huh? ctrl-F6 doesn’t cut it for you? Or using the mouse – just like in IE?

      There are plenty of things I prefer in Firefox over IE – from its fundamental design principles to its adherence to specifications – but there are certainly also “rough edges” aplenty. I could easily name half a dozen bugs I wouldn’t mind seeing fixed in Firefox :/

      Of course, I could also easily mention half a dozen html and css specifications I would love to see IE implement (either correctly or altogether).

      -fyo

    • Convert
    • 15 years ago

    When I first tried Firefox I understood before hand that this browser was a lean stripped down browser. It doesn’t have email or more advanced features out of the box.

    Though as I later found out that with the aid of extensions this browser could become much more powerful than I was expecting. This is something the article doesn’t even touch on, extensions is firefox’s best surprise, to this day I am still finding plugins that help me out on a regular basis. If this guy had actually USED firefox instead of rant against it then he would have included it in the article.

    He says IE is just as secure thanks to updates. Who the hell regularly uses windows update?! Well everyone here probably does but not regular Joes. We wouldn’t have so many active viruses if the people would just run windows update. But they don’t and so here we are with millions of zombies out there still trying to spread old infections. You can still get MSblaster variants minutes after you sign on when unprotected. MSblaster came out a long time ago folks and the updates were available for it even before then.

    Who says firefox is 100% secure? This is yet another example of the Chicken Little syndrome. I have yet to hear someone say that myself, it is always “more secure” “far more secure” etc.

    q[http://secunia.com/product/4227/<]§ Compared to: §[<http://secunia.com/product/11/<]§ I think you can get a clear picture of the problem by yourself.

      • NeXus 6
      • 15 years ago

      I’m sure most of the “regular Joes” have Automatic Updates on since it’s that way by default when you install WinXP.

        • Convert
        • 15 years ago

        If that was the case then why are msblaster type viruses still running amok?

        Why did it happen in the first place? The vulnerability that msblaster took advantage of was patched before hand. If people had updated then it wouldn’t have been such a problem.

          • sanderman
          • 15 years ago

          Just so you know, that kind of arguemetns defeats the concept of extensions for Firefox, since how many “average Joes” will bother figuring it out.

            • Convert
            • 15 years ago

            It’s a option, not a requirement. They don’t have to figure it out, it’s just a “surprise”. Please try reading what I type first.

            • sanderman
            • 15 years ago

            And as an option, there is less of a chance that the average person will use it. Which was my point to begin with.

            If you’re nitpicking, “option”, no one said turning off Windows update was a smart choice, but it is a choice nonetheless. Function over security. If you don’t know what you’re doing, better to leave it alone. Much like, extensions for Firefox, for example.

            No harm no foul, just the way the casual users thinks.

            • Convert
            • 15 years ago

            What are you talking about. What I am saying is that extensions are a perk. If you don’t take advantage of them then the basic firefox browser (even without tabbed browsing too) is still better. There are aspects of firefox that are a perk to most users that the original author didn’t touch on. He was too busy telling us the sky was falling that he heard some guy at a coffee shop say firefox is 100% secure and that firefox invented tabbed browsing. OMG!

        • ionpro
        • 15 years ago

        Sure, it’s “enabled” in the sense that it lets you know when updates are available. Most people think it’s another spyware trick though. 50% of the people coming into my work (tier 1 helpdesk for a large university) are still not on SP2.

    • MagerValp
    • 15 years ago

    The article is full of crap.

    “Internet Explorer with Service Pack 2 installed for Windows XP is just as secure as Firefox in relation to Spyware and Pop-ups.”

    Uhuh. IE’s security model is still flawed, and several security holes have been discovered since the release of SP2. Firefox isn’t without its problems, but it stands on a much more solid foundation, and the development team reacts quickly when problems are discovered.

    “ActiveX Installation Warning System”

    Which doesn’t solve the problem, but just dumps the responsibility on the user. Half of all naïve users just click “yes” on requesters they don’t understand.

    “These features eliminate the threat of auto install Spyware. However like anything, Spyware can still infect people via ignoring the warnings or installing applications with bundled Spyware. How many people do you think who are told to use Firefox are told this?”

    Why would they? Firefox is a standards compliant browser with useful features like tabs, that happens to have a solid, secure foundation, while IE is a patched monster with a flawed security model. They need to do a complete rewrite for IE7 to catch up.

    “How many people are told there is a solution to the Spyware problem even without SP2 (though SP2 makes it much easier) by using SpywareBlaster, the Google Toolbar and uninstalling MSJVM manually? I’m guessing zero.”

    As it should be. Uninstalling a system component and installing third party software shouldn’t be necessary just to browse the web.

    • sbarash
    • 15 years ago

    I’ve been using Firefox for some months now. I like it, but I still think it needs some work.

    1. It opens some sites faster, some slower. I would not say its any faster than IE 6.0

    2. Still run into a lot of sites that won’t render properly. I know that’s generally not the fault of Firefox, but SlashDot? Come on! Still have to use IE to administer all of our Cisco networking equipment. The TR forums still do some funky stuff too.

    3. The tabbed browsing is nice, but its implementation is not nearly as nice as what’s found in other products like Netcaptor, Maxor, etc. Yes, I’ve installed all the plugins for additional tabbed browsing features. But, Firefox is still missing a lot here.

    4. What’s with the popups starting this week in Firefox? Did somebody figure out a workaround or find a hole in the built in popup blocker? I know is serves me right, going to the seedy sites I visit. But, I haven’t heard anyone screaming about this, and I’m surprised. IE SP2’s built in popup blocker is now more effective. Navigate around shareprovider.com a bit to see what I mean.

    So, I like it, and hope it improves rapidly. But certainly isn’t an end all worth raving about.

    -Stephen

      • Captain Ned
      • 15 years ago

      I just tried that site you mentioned and got no popups. I won’t cite the link because Kevin won’t like it one bit.

        • sbarash
        • 15 years ago

        If you navigate around a bit, or go to the forums (community) new instances of Firefox will open up. The pop-ups don’t open in a tab..

        Stephen

          • GodsMadClown
          • 15 years ago

          That’s a problem with many more than this site. It’s not a popup ad, but just opeing a new browser window with the content when the user clicks on a link.

          • sbarash
          • 15 years ago

          I could be mistaken. I can’t get it to happen from this box. But, at home last night it certainly was. And I do have the block pop-ups option checked. Maybe need to reinstall at home…

          Sorry,
          Stephen

            • sanderman
            • 15 years ago

            No, it’s pop-unders, it’s happening for me too. I’m getting GoToMyPC ads and I didn’t click on anything that was advertised as GoToMYPC.

            Worse comes to worse or for best solutions, run IE with Firefox for those stubbon sites. But WinXP with SP2 does has one of the best popup blockers I’ve experience. Wish it was a standard upgrade for IE.

            <edit> BTW, try using Windows update under Firefox. 🙂

            But than again, what did you expect.

      • ripfire
      • 15 years ago

      Use IEView extension for Firefox in case the site doesn’t work properly.

        • sbarash
        • 15 years ago

        Very handy, thank you! This will keep me in FF more often…

        Stephen

    • Jazkal
    • 15 years ago

    The writer, Drew, IMO is an ID10T. There isn’t anything wrong with being a FanBoy of M$, we do have Freedom of Religion in the USA. But it is kind of ironic that he is accusing others of being a religious NUT.

    • Rousterfar
    • 15 years ago

    I mostly use Firefox. I like the program a lot, but I am going to be flat out honest here. It’s simply not as “snappy” or “fast” as IE or Opera are. IE loads faster when you first open it up, but the advantages there fade aware after it’s open. Opera is just faster period. Some of the web pages I visit on a regular basis give me weird issues with Firefox too, so that can be annoying. The main reason I use Firefox is the extensions. There are some fantastic ones out there, but I sometimes wonder if adding all the ones I use might be slowing the program down even more…

    As for the security issues. I have found I get a lot less spyware hits with Adaware and Spybot when I am using Firefox. I have not spent too much time with IE since SP2, but from what I have heard it still gives issues in this area.

    There are simply no perfect browsers. They all have advantages and disadvantages. Honestly, the one with the best UI I have seen is Avant Browser, an add-on for IE. The way it handles tab-browsing is simply fantastic.

    • Logan[TeamX]
    • 15 years ago

    To summarize the entire blog:

    WAAAAAAAAH. I think Firefox needs diapers. IE6 with XP SP2 is just as secure.

    /end rant

    Seriously, when your browser depends on an OS service pack to render itself nearly as secure as an open-source development, you’ve got issues. Furthermore, what about all the other “loyal” M$ customers still running Win98SE, Win2K, WinME, and WinNT even? They’re at risk because they won’t shell out the cash for the latest and great M$ bloat-OS and even more OS tie-ins?

    Riiiiight. You just go adjust that sunroof so it won’t close on your head anymore, buddy.

    • Rousterfar
    • 15 years ago
      • Logan[TeamX]
      • 15 years ago

      Drama, drama, drama.

    • LicketySplit
    • 15 years ago

    “Firefox followers can be anyone..but obviously with people with too much time on their hands”…heh…anyone here fit that bill:)

      • 5150
      • 15 years ago

      Yeah, you!

    • curls
    • 15 years ago

    love it! been using it since it was firebird…

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This