Donít use Internet Explorer.
What makes other browsers better than IE at protecting vs. spyware and other attacks? Well, itís simple really - most other browsers donít make it so easy to install malicious software on your system without you knowing about it. IE makes it relatively trivial through two features called ActiveX and Active Scripting. These technologies were designed specifically for the purpose of giving websites more control over a userís computer. Unfortunately, as we have seen with exploit after exploit - thatís not always a good thing.
In addition to the spyware issues, IE in general has had a terrible track record when it comes to all types of serious security issues. For years now, itís seemed like every time you turn around there is a new way to have your computer taken over via Internet Explorer. Put ďinternet explorerĒ and ďallow an attacker to execute commandsĒ (with the quotes) into Google and youíll see what I mean.
In IEís defense, many anti-Microsoft types will claim that itís not possible to lock down IE at all. This is not true. It is possible ó but if and only if you have a fair amount of technical know-how on the subject, and the time to do it. My personal view, however, is that tools such as Internet browsers should not require expertise and configuration time to be able to use them safely.
This is likely to get me in some hot water with my fellow security enthusiasts, but I find this issue to be of even more concern than that of IEís security. The Internet works for one simple reason - everything at its core has been built on agreements that bind it together. Whether a computer is connected from California or Sri Lanka, itís going to speak the same language and obey the same rules - the rules defined by standards. If this werenít the case there would be no Internet at all. These agreements are forged by a body of people whose goal is nothing short of designing a better and more efficient Internet for everyone. Microsoft, for some odd reason, seems bent on breaking stride with these agreed-upon standards. Case in point: the next time youíre in a bookstore, head over to the technology section and pick up a book on XHTML or CSS. These are two major web standards that deal with how web pages are displayed to users, and within any book on the subjects you will find one common theme:
The absolute worst browser when it comes to supporting the standards is Internet Explorer.
The spill chick on firefox is enough of a god raison to dumb IE.
For fun, last week I installed IE on Ubuntu. For the first time ever, I could say that I was using IE safely. hehehe. Didn't use it long.
Don't ask questions when you fear the answers --Paulo Coelho
Hate IE, and won't be installing the latest one....
I still love Flock, but then I'm just a Web 2.0 addict.
LDMA - Ajarn Forum Admin
Don't get me wrong - I don't want a 'serious' board but I'd like posts to be either genuinely amusing, informative and/ or thought provoking.
Ian McNamara - July 2000
A clash with the management will not serve the purpose of your inner peace and therefore will deprive you from happiness. Thai Language School DOS, 2009
Only the bad person say the bad thing about the good thing.
Anon. Thai DOS
I think I've figured out how to get updates on a pirate version .. at least it worked on mine last night. I opted for all of them except the IE 7 update and got them without their pop up.
I've been using the 'net since '94 and have always found IE to be total pants.
Netscape was better and now we've got the likes of Firefox.
At best, it was a pathetic attempt to 'own' the 'net before businesses really knew what it was all about.
I don't think anyone will disagree. The fact that IE and your Windows are like peas and carrots makes it impossible for it to function independantly from the OS, so even if Firefox failed, your computer (most likely) will not know it. It will forvever be like that, so even if Microsoft improves IE, which they have, it will still not be as good as loading up an open source browser that has nothing to do with the OS. I have to say though, that Microsoft improved/copied Firefox and is now much better than before. I have IE 7 in my computer and now, compared to IE 6, 7 websites out of 10 that I visit gives me a prompt to deny or accept an ActiveX, or something else. It was a bit annoying for the first few minutes, then I thought , my god all this stuff was getting through with the old IE 6.
Regular people won't bother/care about any of this. IE is already in Windows and IE will still hold 80% (down from 94%)of the market. Grandma really doesn't care. No way to disagree with what is being said here.
I had a simple example with my students on how to make a multi-colour-changing background using a single-pixel animated gif (basically a dot that's animated). In IE, it ran like shit, and the longer the window with the animated pixel was open, the slower IE got, until the computer was almost unresponsive. In all other browsers (namely Firefox and Netscape and Safari on the mac), it ran alright. How Microsoft missed a simple old technology like an animated GIF slowing down it's software doesn't amaze me.
I'm making my students more aware of this and specifically tell them NOT to use Internet Explorer in class or in the computer labs. I've installed Firefox on each computer and have removed the IE icon from the desktops and wherever I can. Unfortunately, Microshaft forced IE upon you by integrating into the system, so you can never really get rid of it - just hide it.
I wish I could afford to make just a dollar a year.
Just Buy a Mac
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Yea, I have a better Idea. Why don't you format and load up Ubuntu or OS/X also, FireFox, Adium, Smultron, VLC, OpenOffice 2.1 and you'll be really preparing them for the real world.
I'll take IE7 and VISTA over any of that bullshit.
I want to see the day when everything is by Microsoft and everyone has Microsoft. Microsoft toothpaste, everything. It'll make connecting the whole world much easier. Open source "superior" shit is not the future, Microsoft is....
The fact that you can "tweak" and do whatever you want with something that is open source is messy and a bunch of crap. Microsoft will continue to stratigically hire professionals from the "open source" community, and purse a way to KILL all these threats like Linux, et al. GOOR FOR THEM! KILL THEM ALL!!
Last edited by mustafarodupthere; 5th January 2007 at 14:44.
Yeah, I want to buy a TV that only has one channel.
PM me, bro. I'm having a validation issue updating codecs for Windows Media Player.Originally Posted by jonny danger
Better yet, is there somethng that'll open wmv files that's free and painless?
I know this is off topic, but get something like VLC player. Search for "all in one player" or "all format player" something like that. there are several out there. Other thing would be to download a torrent with MediaPlayer 11 (no WGA check, then get a good all in one Codec Pack.
Actually, this kind of goes on topic about Microsoft etc. All this codec crap makes me sick. Microsoft, I'm sure, is having countless meetings to figure out how to stay in this Open Source market. How can Microsoft stay alive and not get on the Open Source wagon? I see into the future say in the next 10 years and I see Open Source software maybe at 60%? Not to say that Microsoft will die, I think the plot will be more interesting in that Microsoft will have to get on with it, play nice with the other kids and share. So, things that used to be proprietary will not be anymore.
In my opinion people do not use software because it is Open SOurce, they simply use it because it is better. If Firefox is better than IE, then that is why people use it. The fact that it is free is secondary.
It will be interesting to see Microsoft have to buckle under the pressure and see how they play this game to stay alive. After all, I think Microsoft makes a good product. There is room for improvement, they have started that improvement, but why would people come back if they found something better for free. I think the first revolution and switch to Open SOurce will be in the business sector where they have to pay all these license fees to Microsoft. However, I can hire a programmer that can have me on Linux, write it so that it molds to my needs, plus is more secure than Server 2003, AND I don't have to pay anyone anything.
I think this is where Microsoft better put some effort and quick. Already many countries have made the change to open source. For instace, Geneva among other countries, has already made the decision to switch to Open Source by the year 2009.
The fear, and I think I understand it, is that Technology is becoming such a HUGE part in doing business, and will be more and more in the future, they can no longer rely solely on Microsoft. It has nothing to do with the quality of the product, but what if Microsoft decides one day to stop a certain application, like server or whatever. Then what are they going to do? Why should they risk relying on only 1 vendor if they can load up Linux and hire a couple of Software Engineers to update it, change it and keep it up. I think they have a valid point that Microsoft will not be able to ignore in the future.
Thanks Carlos, I appreciate the help.
To add to the thread, I run Firefox but wouldn't try to bury IE for the simple reason that every now and then I need it for web work, or the rare site that seems to fk up in Firefox.
The default security enhancements and the sophisticated way Firefox handles web scripting are really nice. Some glitches like the recurrent "copy and paste" bug and auto updates that delete your bookmarks, are not. The decision to essentially deprecate the ALT tag, as well as their extremely high-handed defense of same, signal an organization that's as out of touch with reality as WC3.
Still, like a bad Thai girlfriend you can't quite quit, I just like Firefox.