Latest Microsoft security update - caution

[RogerS]

Just installed these. Downside was that my browser (Firefox) lost all its' history and so I'm not a happy (Easter) bunny.

Might just be my set-up. You all know how quirky Windoze software is :wink:

 

[LyNx]

You keep your history? mines deleted as soon as i close the browser window 8)

Andy

 

[RogerS]

You keep your history? mines deleted as soon as i close the browser window 8)

Andy

Guilty secrets then ? :wink:

 

[Anonymous]

No issues with IE

Ever!

 

[RogerS]

No issues with IE

Ever!

Your clearly too clean living and not cruisin' around those dodgy drive-by sites :wink:

 

[LyNx]

Guilty secrets then ?

Nothing like that, i just don't want anyone turning on my work PC, just "having a look" :roll:

Andy

 

[Barry Burgess]

Roger I did the lastest Microsoft updates this morning and had no problems with Firefox ( 1.5.0.1) .
I run Evidence Eliminator once a week to cleanup all types of trails but it does not do Firefox but great with IE, outlook, outlook express etc

 

[Anonymous]

Why do people use Firefox? Because it isn't written by Microsoft?

There was a 'browser war' a while back and IE reigned supreme. Now, it is well known that Firefox does not work properly with some websites whereas IE works with most (all?).

With IE being free and working very well indeed, why not use it? Whether people like them or not, MS do write some pretty good software. I am no great fan of the company, but their programs are generally head and shoulders above other offerings.

Spite, bite, nose and face spring to mind :lol:

Edited to correct typo, oops!

 

[wizer]

I think we've had this conversation before. I AM a fan of MS, I agree that their operating system and office suit 'just work' and I was against Firefox for a long time. Somehow I converted to FF and now can't stant IE. It is a personal thing and I have heard a lot recently avout FF not working with sites? I have not found a single FF related website problem for a good 6 months or more. Each to their own tho. Like anything in life, each has their ups and downs.

 

[Alf]

A few reasons here. I tried it first 'cos I was so sick of spyware I was getting, now I like it for the tabbed browsing and the customisation available using extensions. If I need IE I use the IE tab extension and get it opened up in a Firefox tab. :lol: To be fair I think you have to give it a try before you say it's not worth it - it's free too, so it won't cost ya.

Ooo, edited to add I've not had any trouble with security updates - but then 'cos of all my 'puter troubles I've been backing up all my Firefox and Thunderbird data, including history, with MozBackup anyway (I recommend that one)

Cheers, Alf

 

[RogerS]

Why do people use Firefox? Because it's written by Microsoft?

There was a 'browser war' a while back and IE reigned supreme. Now, it is well known that Firefox does not work properly with many websites whereas IE works with most (all?).

With IE being free and working very well indeed, why not use it? Whether people like them or not, MS do write some pretty good software. I am no great fan of the company, but their programs are generally head and shoulders above other offerings.

Spite, bite, nose and face spring to mind :lol:

Mmm..don't I remember reading somewhere that Microsoft did not adhere to the rules and so IE went off on a tanget.with specific non-standard features - which means that when duff webdesigners only design websites for IE then the rest of us (sensible :wink: ) can't render the pages?

Getting me coat...

 

[wizer]

That's how I assumed it was too Roger. Of course the original war was with Netscape and that was a horrible time for web design because neither of them could really get it right.

 

[Anonymous]

OK, seems some people love it. Time to try it out. As I said, I don't see a need for it yet as IE does everything I want and works (but an open mind is a good thing along with a willingness to try new stuff).

Not sure if I'll get the advantgaes though as I don't really visit many websites and have concept of 'browsing' or 'surfing ' the web.

If Alf likes it, does that mean it was made before 1900 and has a lovely patina on it?

Downloaded and the trial begins.

 

[Alf]

OK, seems some people love it. Time to try it out. As I said, I don't see a need for it yet as IE does everything I want and works (but an open mind is a good thing along with a willingness to try new stuff).

Se what 'Rat ownership can do for you? Everything is worth trying.

If Alf likes it, does that mean it was made before 1900 and has a lovely patina on it?

Well I have just downgraded to the 1927 version (0.0.0.0.IV) - the sepia look is nice... :lol:

Cheers, Alf

 

[Neomorph]

You should have played with IE 1... Distinctly disgusting and Netscape ruled supreme. It was the same with Win95 being a good idea but buggy as hell and don't get me started on Win98 v1. That pipper killed off my PC totally and then MS CHARGED for Win98 v2 that fixed many of the bugs in v1.

Then it all changed with XP. Damn thing installed perfect for me and automatically did things in the lan setup that took ages to do manually in 98v2. It was since then that I started using IE because it was there and worked ok for what I wanted (plus it even rendered pages that had author probs - remember people using forward slashes by accident?).

One part of XP that people didn't like was the auto updating but for me I love it. I have a home server on 24/7 and for the most of it the thing keeps itself updated, checks viruses and generally does the Duracell Bunny

Mind you I did install Firefox the other day... to try and get those side menu tabs working on the woodworking channel but it didn't either. I got in touch with the broadcasters and they told me it was Norton Security Suite but as I only use Norton Antispam and Ghost it wasn't that... then the next day the menus worked fine in IE so they must have fixed it themselves

 

[mr]

There was a 'browser war' a while back and IE reigned supreme. Now, it is well known that Firefox does not work properly with some websites whereas IE works with most (all?).

The browser war involved Netscape and IE, Netscape was even more duff than IE hence IEs victory. Firefox works properly with 99% of site which are standards compliant the inverse is true of IE.

With IE being free and working very well indeed, why not use it?

Firefox is also free and works better than IE with well made websites. Why use anything else? (I suppose so you can use poorly designed sites - most govenment portals etc)

IE is getting better, more secure etc and its support for standards compliance is improving but not there yet. There are still "issues" with version 7 though these may be sorted by the time it emerges from its beta phase. In itself this will cause some problems as the majority of well made sites involve hacks to allow the pages to render well in IE, obviously these hacks will have to be removed now that IE is moving closer to standards compliance in order that the sites still render well. As a developer of websites I regard Firefox as my reference edge so to speak, from there I compromise so as to make sites useable with IE. Seems to me that IE despite its market penetration (diminshing) is the flawed product rather than Firefox so its not really a case of noses and faces.

 

[Anonymous]

mr

That is very interesting.

A good friend of mine has been developing for the web (client and server side) as a professional programmer since the very earliest sites appeared but says the opposite to you about IE and FF.

I only write stand-alone code but we do talk a lot about programming and he has mentioned this many times.

 

[Jake]

The browser war involved Netscape and IE, Netscape was even more duff than IE hence IEs victory.

I thought Netscape was ripped off Mosaic, which was a fine program, and that Mosaic still persists, in the form of.... Firefox.

 

[mr]

I thought Netscape was ripped off Mosaic, which was a fine program, and that Mosaic still persists, in the form of.... Firefox.

TO a certain extent, Firefox is a fork of the Navigator part of Mozilla. So it has some connection to Netscape. NOt least because Mozilla itself is owned by AOL Netscape. The issue I think is really that since the introduction of recommended standards (not mandatory) in the mid 90s by the w3c / wasp all browsers have been moving towards compliance at their own pace, even IEs developers recognise IEs lack of standards compliance and implicit in their movement towards compliance is a recognition that the IE browser is flawed in its emphasis on proprietary "standards" rather than standard "standards".

While IE in its current implementation offers some though not full support for standards (HTML 4.01, CSS Level 1, XML 1.0 and DOM Level 1) it also bolts on proprietary extensions meaning that pages using these extensions can only be viewed properly in IE. MIcrosofts own terminology for this strategy is "embrace, extend and extinguish", by which term they mean to control vendors and therefore users. Netscape also adhered to this practice though less successfully than Microsoft. In business terms probably a good thing for Microsoft, though in terms of the product itself a bad thing I would have thought.

In any case none of them are made of wood.

 

[Alf]

In any case none of them are made of wood.

Well actually there is a Walnut "theme"...

I'll get my coat.

Cheers, Alf