Sometimes it seems hard to take an impartial stand! Sorry - this is rather long
Here's an example of a recent exchange on the Coffee &
Chat mailing list. Any member can join the list (which includes the notes from
each meeting) by visiting
http://www.tip.net.au/mailman/listinfo/candc
GregB kicked off with: To defend your PC against
unwanted pop-ups and other security threats that propagate on the Internet, your
best bet is to install a Web browser other than Microsoft's Internet Explorer
(IE). Brian and I recommend the excellent Mozilla Firefox <http://www.mozilla.org/products/firefox/>,
From Brian Livingstone's latest newsletter :-) Greg
PaulH said: I've been using Firefox for a couple
of weeks now and it does most things reasonably well, albeit with a few niggling
idiosyncrasies. But don't throw away Internet Explorer yet or you will lose the
ability to access the odd Web application that may be of use to you, such as
some ComSuper applications.
My particular jury is still out on whether Firefox's idiosyncrasies prove to be
a lesser burden than Internet Explorer's reported failings (of which I am
apparently lucky to have avoided to date). Paul.
CharlieK wound it up a notch with: I agree 100%
with Paul.
I ran Firefox for several weeks before going back to IE, not because of any
major problems, but a few niggles, plus I couldn't see any benefit other than it
uses less memory than IE, and that really didn't have any noticeable effect on
my machine.
All other claimed benefits were of no value to me - eg:
tabbed browsing, ( I do that with IE by using a software add on called
"Switch"),
popup stoppers, there are oodles of them available including Google and of
course IE has its own with SP2,
and the so called "safety from viruses etc". Never had a problem - and
neither has anyone else who practices safe browsing.
All the FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) promoted by the anti Microsoft brigade
remind me of the winning tactics of Howard and Bush. Create enough fear
............ Apologies for the political rant.
Regardless of that, it is very much a case of horses for courses. I have
nothing against Firefox and I'll try it again when Version 1 is released, but
for now I'm happy to stick with the product that works (for me).
Charlie K
AlK chipped in: All authors have their own views
and methodology. All programs have their idiosyncrasies. It would be most
interesting to hear what idiosyncrasies of Firefox "niggle" Paul. And, of
course, don't throw away any old thing, as long as it does not occupy too much
space.--
Kind regards, Al
Then Al Responded to Charlie: So Charlie agrees
with Paul. Great to see some agreement!
To me it is intriguing how much emotion any new or different software seems to
generate in some people. FUD ? There is no problem with viruses? There is no
problem with spam? There is not problem with pop-ups? Amazing!
Of course, Charlie and anyone else are welcome to stay with their beloved piece
of software - no problem. But why be so angry with pro-choice in software?
After all, we are only talking about a piece of merchandise which you either buy
or you get it free, you may use it, you may not use it.
It seems to me, that the beauty of PCUG is that people help each other in their
use of computers PCUG facilitates the exchange of information about PC's.
Similarly, the Free/Open Source movements enables programmers to exchange
information about programs. PCUG and OSS seem to be very compatible to me.
There is no "anti Microsoft brigade". Personally, I am ambivalent to MS and I
will continue to use Windows for certain applications, where it would cost me
to change to another OS. As far as browsers are concerned, I find "Konqueror"
far superior to any other browser that I know, but that is my preference.
Regretfully, it is not available for any variety of Windows.
Just why non-MS software irritates some people, I fail to comprehend - and I am
truly intrigued by it.
After all, we have different tastes. We profess to like variety. Why is
software different? Why some people seem to see red on even mention of
different software?
Hang in there, Charlie - and may your IE never let you down in anything you do!
Kind regards, Al.
JeffC chipped in: The recent exchanges
about IE etc make for interesting reading and Iagree such debate is appropriate
for CnC. But I plea for specifics rather than simple blanket prejudices. For
example I also have had absolutely no problem with any version of IE over many
years and would very much like to learn about problems that others are having,
particularly with the latest
version.
My general policy is not to change anything unless the change is likely to
produce some significant benefit. Of course I am interested to learn about
alternatives but to repeat, I am even more interested in significant benefits
associated with alternatives. For example give me some significant bases for
preferring or avoiding particular alternatives as for IE and Firefox and hence,
to use that word again, a significant reason to switch. Jeff
Al then said: I changed the Subject to "Why
change", because "Rubbishing" is unnecessarily emotive and it is uncalled for.
A different opinion is not "rubbishing", it is merely different.
As to the changes - if you happy with your system, don't change it. What ain't
broke, needs no fixing.
I will be happy to occasionally point out to you an expert's opinion. It is up
to you what to believe and what to dismiss or even consider "rubbish". Just as
long as we stay within the accepted limits of civil exchange, there should not
be any reason to complain about.
Kind regards, Al
And again Al said: Jeff, I just found what you
may or may not consider factual information. I quote:
The threat posed by a critical flaw in Internet Explorer has been ratcheted up
by the release of a program designed to exploit the vulnerability, security
researchers warned on Thursday. (end of quote).
The above is quoted from the following URL:
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1009_22-5439370.html
Incidentally, this particular freely accessible publication is often critical of
other OS's and in this particular article it stresses the importance of
Service Pack 2.
Kind regards, Al.
CharlieK came back with: Folks,
I really don't want this to degenerate into a browser wars discussion, but I do
just want to clarify my position as Al seems to see me as some sort of anti OSS
zealot.
I just want to make it very clear, that I am not advocating any product over any
other.
All I did was to point out what is my preferred choice at this time. There is
no emotion attached to that, there is no anger, and there is no irritation if
someone uses one product rather than another. Everyone to their own.
The concept and practical implementation of OSS is excellent and I hope it
thrives - and if in that process it denies Bill Gates some of his billions, then
there will be no tears from me.
I am very happy to see people promoting OSS products, but it does annoy me when
the evangelists do that by spreading fear and alarm amongst commercial product
users and Microsoft products in particular.
There are some good and bad MS products, as there are some good and bad OSS
products and of course the same applies to all other commercial products.
No Al, I don't have any virus concerns, because I run an up to date virus
checker.
SPAM has got nothing to do with any particular product, MS or otherwise, so that
is a red herring.
Pop ups have never been a problem because I used the Google popup blocker, but I
now use the IE pop up blocker.
I am not expressing any concerns about Firefox, but I found it annoying that
there were sites I could not access ( you can go on all you like about
standards, but reality prevails for me) and I didn't find it quite so
configurable to my preferences as IE.
I did like the smaller memory footprint, and that may win me back.
In summary, I really don't care what product anyone else uses, and I am very
glad that we have choices, but I do get annoye when OSS supporters preach FUD.
I appeal to everyone to now discontinue this discussion - not just so that I can
have the last word - but let's agree that we can all make our own decisions.
Of course I am sure that won't stop anyone who has a new slant to throw on the
issue!!
JeffC replied to Al: Al
I am sorry you found my "Rubbishing" offensive. I enjoy debate but think
it important for supporting information rather than what may otherwise seem to
be simply an expression of prejudice. Hence my "But I plea for specifics rather
than simple blanket prejudices".
Your reference
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1009_22-5439370.html is a good example of the
supporting information I ask for. Note particularly the last sentence of the
second paragraph of this reference:
"The threat posed by a critical flaw in Internet Explorer has been
ratcheted up by the release of a program designed to exploit the vulnerability,
security researchers warned on Thursday.
"Security information provider Secunia raised the buffer overflow flaw to
its highest rating in a new advisory. The vulnerability, which was made public
on Tuesday, could be used to make Internet Explorer trigger a malicious program
when the Microsoft browser loads a specially formatted Web page. The flaw does
not affect Windows XP Service Pack 2, Secunia said."
And the Related Link: "Major browsers bitten by security bugs" that gives
the sentence "Chris Hoffman, director of engineering for the Mozilla Foundation,
said the flaws should be fixed in Firefox by the time Firefox 1.0 ships, in the
next
couple weeks".
Also for examples of what I call blanket prejudices see the section
TALKBACK in this same reference.
All suggests to me that IE is not so bad and Firefox not so good, at least
for the "next couple of weeks".
Jeff
JohnK responded to Jeff: Now Jeff didn't you know
there is an inherent prejudice by some people for anything that comes out of
Microsoft and they will knock it for any reason. I suppose it gives them some
sense of satisfaction. Fortunately I am quite prepared and thick skinned enough
and refuse to respond to their blandishments. Like you, I have never had any
reason to doubt Microsoft Software. I find it very good and as I correspond
with many people often transferring quite large files I find Microsoft software
to be excellent.
Whether we like it or not many of the advances we accept as normal today are due
to either the huge research capabilities they have or the mighty dollars they
have been able to generate to purchase additions that will improve the
proficiency of their products and platforms to the benefit of most of us.
While I have concerns about their monopolistic tendencies the US legal system
will always be sufficient to keep any potential for excesses under control.
It is interesting most of the problems people report are due to them not having
followed the elementary procedures of keeping their software up to date along
with not running effective anti-virus and firewall software.
It's like the people who report virus infections and some of my associates who
swear by Mac's because of their lower susceptibility to Viruses, so far the only
computer of mine that has ever been infected by a Virus was a Mac.
John
Al said: Jeff,
I am really glad you read the article. The journal that I referred to is free
and I subscribe to it. Of course, it is careful to present both sides of any
argument. IMHO, this journal is not anti MS. I am not anti anything, as long
it does not hurt me or mine. The paper that I referred to and that you quote,
also says i.a., and I quote:
The U.S. watchdog for Internet threats, the Computer Emergency Readiness Team
(CERT), has also warned government and industry users about the Iframe flaw.
According to the US-CERT advisory, the problem is caused by how Internet
Explorer handles certain attributes of frames, which is a way of displaying Web
content in separate parts of the browser window.
The US-CERT alert notes that other programs using the WebBrowser Active X
control, could be affected by the vulnerability. These programs include
Microsoft's Outlook and Outlook Express, America Online's browser, and Lotus
Notes. (end of quote).
I think it is useful for all PC users to consider such information.
Like you, I have never been infested by any viruses, but I have seen people
whose computers were full of viruses of every kind, even when they told me that
they had the advice of their son/cousin/uncle, "a professional, who really knows
all about computers".
Anyway, I would hope that you found this discussion useful - I have.
As far as Mc's are concerned, I think that they are
great computers, though I would not buy one. It just shows that there are more
ways than one to skin a cat.
Charlie, I am sorry that you did not yet have the last word. There is still a
chance for you now!
Al.
Finally Al wrote again: An article that discusses
"Firefox". By Chris Sherman, Associate Editor
November 8, 2004 ,
has the following introduction and I quote:
Firefox has emerged as the first browser in years to seriously challenge
Internet Explorer—with good reason. Firefox has superior security and anti-scumware
features, it works on Windows, Linux, MacOS X and other operating systems, and
it's free. (end of quote)
The URL for the article is as follows:
http://searchenginewatch.com/searchday/article.php/3431931
The article does not "knock" anything or anybody, but discusses the emergence of
new, high quality software.
Kind regards, Al.
Now I can have the last word!
I do like to see some robust discussion on our mailing lists from
time to time! Hope you found it interesting if you persisted with the whole
thing.
Anyone who is involved with almost any newsgroup will know that we are extremely
civilised at CnC!
If you want the occasional really robust discussion - you don't need to go past
canb.general newsgroup sometimes....
All the best - John Saxon 17 Nov 04