V-Flyer

Just to say that I have had notification tyhe Firefox 1.0.7 is now available for download

It's been out for a couple weeks actually..

Installed it last week, seems to be robust.

I've heard a lot about Firefox and am wavering as to whether I should install it or not. What are the pros and cons? Can I uninstall it if I don't like it without upsetting Windows XP?

Originally posted by honey lamb
I've heard a lot about Firefox and am wavering as to whether I should install it or not. What are the pros and cons? Can I uninstall it if I don't like it without upsetting Windows XP?

Although I wouldn't mind discussing the pros and cons with you, we had a little discussion about this a couple months ago, so I shall cheat and copy and paste my answer from there!

"Firefox not only has many more available features than IE, but it is probably 100 times safer. In the entire time I have had firefox, I have had no viruses, no spyware, no adware, and my computer has not crashed. But before I had firefox, my computer crashed about 5 times. Note that I did have google toolbar and stuff for IE, and still viruses and spyware were able to penetrate my computer. Firefox is definately the way to go. Really, the faster you get it, the safter you'll be."

And yes, firefox is just a normal application, you can still use IE with firefox installed and you can uninstall firefox at any time (but you won't want to!).

Hmm currently would have to disagree about it being safer... http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/09/09 ... rity_flap/

ZDNET posted a review a while back which tended to support Decker's post, I have a link to the report here

Not sure if you may need to be a subscriber to access it though as my system is set to remember passwords for sites such as this.

This article seems to confirm the worldwide slowdown of it's take-up too.

I installed it when it first came out, but it caused too many problems with sites - where I work, internet banking, etc.

I re-tried again 4 months ago, but still wasn't impressed. IE may allow sloppy coders to get away with murder on sites, but at least it DOES allow it.

Firefox is a little too strict for my liking. With a decent firewall/router setup and a few add-ons to IE, I struggle to see what I really gain by using Mozilla - maybe the rest of the world is beginning to see it too [:0][B)]


(For all the anti-MS posts that are naturally going to follow, I use Mac OSX at home with Safari )

Despite that security problem it's still much safer and more secure than IE. And if you read the report thoroughly you would see that 1.0.6 was vulnerable, that's why 1.0.7 came out in the first place, to stop that and other vulnerabilities. If you don't like firefox than try Opera, less users use it so it's not target as much as firefox now. Paul, what do you mean when you say strict? If you mean that less sites support firefox I must disagree, I am witnessing more and more sites become firefox compatable each day.

Originally posted by VS-EWR
Paul, what do you mean when you say strict? If you mean that less sites support firefox I must disagree, I am witnessing more and more sites become firefox compatable each day.

That's what I mean - websites are having to re-code themselves to fit in with the strict adherence of Firefox to standards.

It's not a bad thing on it's own, but when most websites have conformed to an existing "standard" (IE - rightly or wrongly), they have a big set of hurdles to get over...

My office are currently 'testing' 1.0.7 as we all use Firefox here, having been lured to the dark side when Mozilla launched it.

In addition, I run IE & Netscape as I do a lot of testing for our website (and I need all for the comparison purposes).

Firefox gets my vote every time because of the tabbed browsing and the extensions, there are lots of useless/useful things you can customise your browser with (such as the developer tools) which is why my company jumped on the Firefox bandwagon. (which I ballsed up last week by ordering myself a funky biometric MS keyboard that doesnt work with Firefox!! )

Shame on you all - nothing wrong with IE. And IE7 is even better.

And big tut-tut for HighFlyer for ordering a biometric keyboard for an office - you know they don't work in a domain environment right as they are deemed less secure?

Thanks,
Richard

Originally posted by RichardMannion
Shame on you all - nothing wrong with IE. And IE7 is even better.

Thanks,
Richard

The only reason IE7 is better is because they copied all the stuff that firefox has had since it started. Nothing wrong with IE, HA haha..haha.ha....ha..ha....[B)][n][n][n][n][n][n]

And big tut-tut for HighFlyer for ordering a biometric keyboard for an office - you know they don't work in a domain environment right as they are deemed less secure?

Yes i know ... but i wanted one so i ordered one for 'evaluation purposes' It provided much fun and amusement in my dull office for an afternoon ... and i have a funky flashing finger scanner to look at

Ahh well one of the new gen HD family using a laser for the optics should keep you amused, as the damn things will then work on glass!

http://www.microsoft.com/hardware/highdefinition.mspx

And everyone is entitled to their opinion, I've been using IE for over 10 years and am happy with it

Thanks,
Richard

Originally posted by preiffer
That's what I mean - websites are having to re-code themselves to fit in with the strict adherence of Firefox to standards.

It's not a bad thing on it's own, but when most websites have conformed to an existing "standard" (IE - rightly or wrongly), they have a big set of hurdles to get over...

Witness the difference in appearance of my countdown lines between IE & FF.....displays perfectly in FF, but is all over the place in IE.

This is the thing for me - standards exist for a reason, not just for developers to disregard them in whatever implementation they want. Of course, now that IE is a "standard" (in the loosest possible terms), developers design pages that look good in IE, but if you run them through FF they render appallingly (or for greater giggles, pass them through the W3C HTML validity checker!) [:(]

I'm depressed to say that my own website has only had a holding page (created with FP for speed) since I transferred to my webhost. I didn't want to create an FP-bloated site again (I once ran my old FP site through the validity checker - with horrendous results), so am waiting til I get the time to learn some more before finishing it off in DreamWeaver.

Originally posted by HighFlyer
Firefox gets my vote every time because of the tabbed browsing and the extensions,

Absolutely [y][y][y] I so miss FF at work, where "corporate IT standards" enforce use of IE [:(]

Cheers

Michael

Originally posted by mcuth

I'm depressed to say that my own website has only had a holding page (created with FP for speed) since I transferred to my webhost. I didn't want to create an FP-bloated site again (I once ran my old FP site through the validity checker - with horrendous results), so am waiting til I get the time to learn some more before finishing it off in DreamWeaver.

Ah, ya whimp. Dig out your copy of Notepad (Simple Text on the Mac). That's how V-Flyer is written. WYSIWYG is for girls.

Pete

I did my website on notepad, although it is rather a small website so it wasn't that difficult. I cheated and made the stuff I couldn't do into a flash file.

Originally posted by pixuk
Ah, ya whimp. Dig out your copy of Notepad (Simple Text on the Mac). That's how V-Flyer is written.

Oh I wish I could - I just don't know enough HTML to do that at the moment (as with most things I want to get into, it's a time thing *sigh*)

WYSIWYG is for girls.

LOL!

Cheers

Michael

Originally posted by pixuk

WYSIWYG is for girls.

Pete

Pete's never been the same since Windows 3.1 came along.

Absolutely I so miss FF at work, where "corporate IT standards" enforce use of IE

Was the same at my workplace Michael, until i changed the policy There are some advantages to having control over your company's IT

Originally posted by AlanA

Originally posted by pixuk

WYSIWYG is for girls.

Pete

Pete's never been the same since Windows 3.1 came along.

Ah 3.1, I remember that operating system.

3.1 was a program not an O/S. [}:)]

Just my 2cents...I use FF for all sites 'cept yahoo fantasy football,the stat tracker is not compatible with FF..
The wife refused to change over till we went to 20 sites then ran a scan for spyware..mine had none,her's came back with like 20,now for sure these were cookie's,but it was enough to get her to change.

Of course I will take a look at the new IE and if I like it who know's I may change again.

Originally posted by Decker
3.1 was a program not an O/S. [}:)]

That's true, was it DOS 5 or 6?