Firefox opinion

Think · Post by **Think** » Tue Feb 08, 2005 9:27 am

Not a big deal and don't see the point of having to install all these damn extensions so it ends up functioning like IE.

Spellbound features don't work, hyperlinking occassionally works ( but sometimes ends up being a blank page ). No Active X support.

It's not faster IMO.

Popupblocker no biggie, just install google toolbar

ASPELL works perfectley on IE. Spellbound does not work.

It goes on and on and on.

I don't have time to tinker and solve Firefoxs problems.

As far as security holes are concerned, I don't buy it - with so many users using Firefox these days, I would rather place my faith in Microsofts ability to find these vulnerablities easily and efficiently then hope that Firefox has the man power to resolve these problems.

I'll still keep both on my system and play around with Firefox but I'm finding it rather frustrating to work with at times.

drdoug99 · Post by **drdoug99** » Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:30 am

yea, why I dont have any need for the spellchecking, Firefox does have a few quirks.

it's why im using slimbrowser now...for some reason, firefox refuses to show the navigation menu for SG..I"ve restarted firefox, the menu doesn't show up, yet other sites work fine. Usually a reboot of the computer will bring it back to normal, but I dont want to reboot.

ALso, it's actually slower for me. Running the SG Speed Test, my speed usually comes in at 0.8-1.0 mbps...this is after tweaking firefox with all the network tweaks I have found, which supposedly is supposed to make it faster.

Running the speed test with Slimbrowser, the couple times I have tried it, it came it at 1.1-1.2mbps....

Yep...just ran the speed test with both browsers....IE (slimbroswer) was 1.19mbps
Firefox 0.98mbps

YARDofSTUF · Post by **YARDofSTUF** » Tue Feb 08, 2005 12:07 pm

No active X support LMFAO, you weren't seriously looking for that were you?

Extentions ara nice way to customize stuff, but if u're installing them to make it look liek IE then you should probably stick to IE.

greEd · Post by **greEd** » Tue Feb 08, 2005 12:11 pm

Think wrote: I would rather place my faith in Microsofts ability to find these vulnerablities easily and efficiently then hope that Firefox has the man power to resolve these problems.

Wait ... ok nevermind, its not worth it.

cyberskye · Post by **cyberskye** » Tue Feb 08, 2005 12:22 pm

greEd wrote:Wait ... ok nevermind, its not worth it.

:2cool:

TrevGlas · Post by **TrevGlas** » Tue Feb 08, 2005 12:48 pm

Trying to make something like IE. THeres the problem!

NEVER had a firefox problem. Yes it IS faster, noticably, especialy if you put the pipelining tweaks in the user.js

YARDofSTUF · Post by **YARDofSTUF** » Tue Feb 08, 2005 12:54 pm

ya the pipeline tweaking really helps.

SG speed test

3.495 firefox

2.675 IE

Note that IE is not tweaked, just up to date.

Think · Post by **Think** » Tue Feb 08, 2005 1:05 pm

Hey what can I say. I'm comfortable with IE and believe you me, I've fooled around with Firefox for the last few days and found it frustrating at times.

Here's an example. If I go to http://www.famousplayers.com, they have upcoming movies that will travel along but this will not work with Firefox.

Blah...more tweaks just to make it work faster is a headache.

I bow to your happiness

YARDofSTUF · Post by **YARDofSTUF** » Tue Feb 08, 2005 1:19 pm

Think wrote: Blah...more tweaks just to make it work faster is a headache.

So you don't tweak IE?

Basically people that are happy with IE shouldn't go looking for something else, firefox is jsut an alternative for those that don't like IE.

I dont get what ur talking about with that site? Edit: NM I see, quicktime.

cyberskye · Post by **cyberskye** » Tue Feb 08, 2005 1:38 pm

To each his/her own ~

As far as security, you have an application whose sole purpose is to download (and in the case of ActiveX, actually run code) from the internet. This app is integrated into the kernel. It will ALWAYS be a greater security risk because it has more access than non-IE browsers. Dept of Homeland Security has recommended against using IE on gov't machines beause it cannot be secured under it's current architecture.

You mentioned not wanting to have to tweak FF for speed/functionality. These links tels you how to tweak IE to make it less the gaping hole it is. I'd prefer security by default rather than speed, but that's me.

Some of IE's lead developers left MS to work on Moz/FF, btw. And popular opensource projects have more developers than MS puts on a flawed (by design) product.

It's a personal decision and I don't want to talk you out of, nor into, anything. Just make your decision on correct data. IE is certainly not secure.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&c2coff=1&q=Dept+of+Homeland+Security+IE&btnG=Search

Skye

greEd · Post by **greEd** » Tue Feb 08, 2005 2:33 pm

Well put skye. I couldn't have typed it any better.

Think · Post by **Think** » Tue Feb 08, 2005 3:25 pm

cyberskye wrote:To each his/her own ~

As far as security, you have an application whose sole purpose is to download (and in the case of ActiveX, actually run code) from the internet. This app is integrated into the kernel. It will ALWAYS be a greater security risk because it has more access than non-IE browsers. Dept of Homeland Security has recommended against using IE on gov't machines beause it cannot be secured under it's current architecture.

You mentioned not wanting to have to tweak FF for speed/functionality. These links tels you how to tweak IE to make it less the gaping hole it is. I'd prefer security by default rather than speed, but that's me.

Some of IE's lead developers left MS to work on Moz/FF, btw. And popular opensource projects have more developers than MS puts on a flawed (by design) product.

It's a personal decision and I don't want to talk you out of, nor into, anything. Just make your decision on correct data. IE is certainly not secure.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&c2coff=1&q=Dept+of+Homeland+Security+IE&btnG=Search

Skye

I didn't know that and again, very well put.

Ok then, I'll think about it

cyberskye · Post by **cyberskye** » Tue Feb 08, 2005 4:24 pm

Cheers

CableDude · Post by **CableDude** » Tue Feb 08, 2005 6:37 pm

Somedays It's great and others it's not. Of course I use specialized builds.

jmw1137 · Post by **jmw1137** » Mon Feb 14, 2005 9:50 pm

What problem do you have with Spellbound? I've been using it for a while now with no problems.

Think · Post by **Think** » Tue Feb 15, 2005 8:03 am

jmw1137 wrote:What problem do you have with Spellbound? I've been using it for a while now with no problems.

When I tried to install the program, it wouldn't work. However, a member at there forum suggested that I download the programs and drag drop them in extension area; it worked.

I still encounter some other mishaps at certain sites but decided to try and resolve the problems instead of giving up on the program - namely because of cyberskye comments.