A Good Read.
I must answer only one thing to the system requirements myth:
About the fast-faster thing...is that page sponsored by Micro$oft or what??I am not saying that they are not right, but where's the proof for those words?
Apart from these, the rest they say there it's pretty true...I use also Opera, Maxthon and Avant, and I must agree that each one has its strengths and its weaknesses.
Here's what sources have to say for themselves (Emphasis mine - Nanobox is the source for the "Myth - Firefox fully supports W3C Standards");
Several quotes are used on the page from various people. As with the misrepresentation of several sources, some people are also quoted incorrectly or out of context;
Firefox Myths - "...Good stuff - give it a read." - Asa
Original comment - "Robert Accettura has a nice response to the poorly constructed & mostly worthless article Firefox Myths. Good stuff - give it a read."
Firefox Myths - "It's an interesting read..." - Robert A.
Original comment - "Someone looking for their 5 minutes of fame (obviously not worth 15 minutes) decided to post some Firefox Myths. It’s an interesting read, though has a few oddball statements, that really don’t make sense.."
Mastertech has also been banned on countless boards for using aliases & self-promotion. For a confirmed list of Aliases & IPs proving that see;
Even on Evil Avatar he's been exposed;
I've mentioned some of this on the Blog over a month back in fact;
I've updated the previous post with several new items covering Mastertech's deceit.
What a cracking post TS l Thomas.
Thanks for the info.
with all the firefox hoopla, people forget Mozilla also has their great Mozilla suite browser and now the seamonkey project. Personally I don't care for firefox, I use mozilla suite.
I'll have to take a closer look see....got it installed just fine but no
clue how to migrate from FFox/T-bird.
Tedster! How The Hades are you?
Hope you're makin your way to the end of CIVIL services ok.
Opera it is then.
I actually introduced my supervisor at work to Opera yesterday. Tabs were a revelation to her (Normally she'd have several IE windows open at once, along with numerous other processes, i.e. she's scrolling the taskbar a few minutes after loading up in the morning ). I'd have preferred to use Firefox myself as it's easier for me to work with (Search plugin creation & the like) than Opera but there's some wierd issue with 1 of the Intranet apps not functioning correctly when it comes to loading updated data into a pop-up window with Firefox. Opera (Version 9 anyway) works Ok for some reason. That said I've got the error logs so I hope they'll fix it shortly.
Moot point in a way though as I've now left that department so I'm able to switch back once more.
Yea tedster how is the whole military thing going? (i really hope it was you that is in the military or i just sounded like a fool)
So apparently this Mastertech guy has been trolling every forum on the net with his stupid anti-firefox crap. lol
Myth- posting a link to your dumb site in every forum you can will increase your traffic and get people clicking on your ads.
just reported to 1st CAV division HQ at Fort Hood (ugh- hate Hood, love Fort Bliss)
going to the sandbox in the fall....
I don't see what all the hoopla is over firefox, it is far inferior to Mozilla suite browser.... yeah, it may be a little smaller in size, but its functionality is quite limited when compared to Mozilla suite (now seamonkey).... actually seamonkey is another browser based on Mozilla suite.
I use firefox mostly because the other kids in computing make fun of me for using microsoft stuff like interenet explorer and outlook (not express - which is apparently fine because its free). Should I give in and stop being a corporate tool or should I continue to use ms software? I wont suggest, as a compromise, using ms stuff which isn't paid for (******, copied etc.) because i'll get banned like the other guy.
Also firefox is good but sometimes you have to click twice and it crashed on the chocolate buttons website. I like the tabs.
Myth - Firefox is more secure because it doesn't use Active X
Reality - An ActiveX control can be an extremely insecure way to provide a feature. Because it is a Component Object Model (COM) object, it can do anything the user can do from that computer. It can read from & write to the registry, & it has access to the local file system. From the moment a user downloads an ActiveX control, the control may be vulnerable to attack because any Web application on the Internet can repurpose it, that is, use the control for its own ends whether sincere or malicious... Designing for security is important because an ActiveX control is particularly vulnerable to attack - Source Microsoft
So much for that particular myth! Firefox, Opera & any other non-ActiveX supporting browser IS more secure by not supporting ActiveX.
I've decided to cease posting updates to this thread; all debunking of Firefox Myths will carried out in this detailed, fully sourced, thread;
Be sure to check out the Quotes
Active X controls are a good thing. IE prompts you before you start one so the only way you could get an virus though an active x control would be to allow it in yourself. A lot of good things on the web use active x. It is what windows update runs off of. I have seen it be used to detect what drivers a user would need to download and install them from right in the webpage.
I like good free software. But Internet explorer is also free. I think the new version of Internet Explorer (still in beta) will bring a lot of people back from firefox. Firefox is a memory hog. It that guys picture it was using up 400mb.
400 mb? thats a load of crap
I run multiple firefox browsers on my p3 laptop with 128MB of RAM.
ActiveX controls had good intentions no doubt but secure? No. I've posted up reasons why in Firefox Myths Debunked - short version;
ActiveX controls can do anything & be called from *any* website once installed - Most recently Sony's DRM Rootkit uninstaller had an ActiveX exploit that could plant any file(s) on your PC - hidden.
Washington Post - Buggy, Flawed ActiveX.
Wikipedia - "The embedding of COM into the Internet Explorer web browser (under the name of ActiveX) created a combination of problems that has led to an explosion of computer virus, trojan and spyware infections. These malware attacks mostly depend on ActiveX for their activation and propagation to other computers. Microsoft recognized the problem with ActiveX as far back as 1996 when Charles Fitzgerald, program manager of Microsoft's Java team said "If you want security on the 'Net', unplug your computer. ... We never made the claim up front that ActiveX is intrinsically secure."  ActiveX as it is currently implemented is intrinsically insecure and is the biggest weakness of Internet Explorer not addressed by Windows XP Service Pack 2."
SANS/FBI top 20 Vulnerabilities - "Most of the flaws in IE are exploited through Active Scripting or ActiveX Controls...."
Internet Explorer isn't exactly "free" - It's tied to Windows & there are Windows requirements to run IE, e.g. IE 7 will not run on Windows 2000 or earlier - only XP+. Enhanced IE 6 security is not available unless you have XP Service Pack 2 & so on.
Look at that image that the other guy posted. Look where it says firefox.exe Then look over to where it says memusage. 394852k. That is only 4mb away from 500mb.
And to the last poster:
For me, active x controls are not a problem. I’m not going to random sites and accepting active x controls. They can turn the web from text and images to a full featured program. The site logmein.com uses active x controls to allow you to use your computer from anywhere with a browser that supports active x. If a browser lacks active x it is taking a lot of functionality out. I prefer functionality over security.
Indeed - some people do. Those same people though (not nessecarily inclusive of yourself) tend to be the ones thaqt come running to places such as these forums and complain about how their computer is infested.
Furthermore - your entire premise is wrong - Java (etc...) can do much the same in many ways, as can browser plugins (a feature employed by most browsers).
In terms of the high resource usage of firefox, there were some problems for about 10% of firefox users a little while ago with a CPU usage issue, which are resolve now I believe. In terms of that screendump, I've had some pretty sever memory leaks in IE at various times, even in the latest version - just as bad as that one - it depends on how long you leave it leaking for. I've never had one in firefox myself.
If Firefox consumes what you would call "too much" RAM, it's normally an issue on that machine. I've never seen Firefox use more RAM than what I would call out of the ordinary.
Is it faster than IE? Not that I can tell, but it's not slower.
Does it do a better job of stopping Spyware, Adware, pop-ups and other items I would deem "unwanted". Yes. Certainly. Especially with extensions such as NoScript.
NoScript will solve 90% of your problems (obviously if you allow scripts on a page and click something you shouldn't or download some file that is full of malicious code then it's your own fault). Popups are 99.9% eliminated and so are scripts, except for those sites that you click to accept scripts from. It's easy and quick. In my opinion it is THE solution to stop most problems and will do the job better than anything else out there (NoScript).
Yes, there are alternatives to active x like java but none of them will provide as much functionality as active x. Active x allows you to use your web browser as more of a full featured program. It allows a web site to communicate in ways that would let it find updates for your software, pinpoint what driver you need, and allow you to remotely control your computer from another computer. I like internet explorer. I like active x. I have never gotten a virus. This is because I know how to browse the web safely and I know what to click and what not to click. Many average users do not and they accept the active x control from dodgy site and give their computer a virus.
I sincerely doubt that there are many people in your position of having never obtained a piece of malware (doesn't have to be a virus) through IE and activeX.
The difference between a bad activeX and a bad browser plugin, as that an activeX is directly liked to the COM.
Besides this, MSIE is so closely integrated with windows that it can cause problems in itself - take the recent WMF exploit and vulnerability. In firefox - no problem unless you specifically agree to a download because of the way firefox is built. In IE, infection was automatic.
While even a badly written browser plugin can be dangerous, at least it tends only to have limited exploitability, but a badly written activeX can be an easy entrypoint to the whole system (for example, the Sony DRM activeX exploit mentioned by Thom.).
I use MSIE6SP1 myself, as well as Firefox. I've rarely had a problem with MSIE either. but I've had substantially more of them when compared to firefox.
Given that I'm a reasonably seasoned internet user, I'm not at all of the opinion that MSIE is a bad browser per say - but I am of the opinion that it's a bad choice for people who aren't quite as internet savvy as youre average computer orientated person. For such people (ie, most people) firefox is without doubt a safe(er) choice.