Browser War. Pcworld test to see who is the best browser. Guess who won?
- Thread starter EricB
- Start date
- Status
http://www.computeruser.com/articles/2401,3,6,1,0101,05.html
http://www.computeruser.com/articles/2401,4,41_1,1,0101,05.html
this copy and paste is a little off topic, but it is related
* Tech Agenda
Internet Insider
* Internet Insider
Courtesy of the Colmbus dispatch
MicrosoftÂ’s spending priorities questionable
Monday, January 10, 2005
Phillip Robinson
KNIGHT RIDDER NEWSPAPERS
Microsoft spends more than $6 billion a year on research and development. It has come up with such wonders as the digital toilet (and as Dave Barry might say, IÂ’m not making this up).
And last month the company returned $32 billion to its shareholders, confessing that it doesnÂ’t have a better idea of how to spend that wad of money.
I can suggest a few for 2005:
• How about a firewall for every Windows owner?
Firewalls block hackers from invading your computer. Without a firewall, youÂ’re open to hackers every second youÂ’re on the Internet. They might just poke around in your files or they might change or steal what they find. Want your tax returns, online banking info, passwords and personal photos circulating on the Internet?
Microsoft added a firewall in the most recent versions of Windows — a lame, halfway firewall. And in the new update to Windows XP (Service Pack 2), that firewall is actually turned on, instead of off. But what about the tens of millions using older versions of Windows? Why do they have to find, figure out, and install a firewall from some other company? Why are they faced with paying extra for something that should have been in Windows in the first place?
And even if you think it was reasonable to leave the firewall out back then, why wonÂ’t Microsoft spend a few million now to provide protection to those people who trusted the company with their personal data? Talk about an obvious step toward customer comfort.
• How about anti-virus protection for Windows?
Somehow all of that R &D seems to have missed viruses, which have cost Windows users billions for years and years. Windows still doesnÂ’t come with any anti-virus protection, none, despite the danger that viruses can cost you time, money, your credit rating, and could be part of a cyberterror attack on the U.S. economy.
Despite that, nearly every virus attacks Windows, not Linux or Macintosh. (Of course, maybe spending a little to make Windows less virus-friendly would be a good idea, too, along with the virus fighters and blockers.) Door locks arenÂ’t an extra-cost option on cars. Why are anti-virus programs an extra-cost item for Windows computers?
• And how about spending some of that cash to help us against spyware and adware?
There’s more of this ‘‘malware" threat every month. And nearly every spyware attack is aimed at Windows, which gives spyware makers convenient built-in tools for taking control of your computer. That’s how a homepage can be hijacked to show porn ads and search offers. And how your keystrokes can be logged and emailed to crooks who want passwords.
• How about investing in technology that stops spam?
Because not all of us love spam.
Well, Bill Gates claims that the computer industry — with Microsoft a leader — is ‘‘halfway to solving spam." Surely you’ve noticed the 50 percent cut in your spam load? No? Well, neither did I.
Maybe itÂ’s because you havenÂ’t been using the advanced spam-filtering option that comes with every copy of Windows and Outlook Express? Oops. My mistake. ThatÂ’s actually in the free Thunderbird e-mail software from Mozilla.
Funny how a few people shipping a free program offer better anti-spam technology than the worldÂ’s largest software company spending billions every year on research. Funny.
• How about adding a new R &D department called ‘‘What People Actually and Desperately Need."
Alongside the billions for digital toilets, way-complicated-watches and other such wonders, this department could direct a few million to get us protection here, now, today from real threats and dangers.
But then, that wouldn’t sell more copies of Windows, Office, Internet Explorer, or Outlook Express, would it? It would only fix what Microsoft has already sold. And when you ‘‘own" customers who think they can’t go anywhere else, why spend more money just to make those customers safer and happier?
At least the other R &D spending has some chance — even if it’s only 1-in-abillion on the toilet thing — to sell more stuff at some point in the future, making more money that can be given in dividends to those shareholders.
http://www.computeruser.com/articles/2401,4,41_1,1,0101,05.html
this copy and paste is a little off topic, but it is related
* Tech Agenda
Internet Insider
* Internet Insider
Courtesy of the Colmbus dispatch
MicrosoftÂ’s spending priorities questionable
Monday, January 10, 2005
Phillip Robinson
KNIGHT RIDDER NEWSPAPERS
Microsoft spends more than $6 billion a year on research and development. It has come up with such wonders as the digital toilet (and as Dave Barry might say, IÂ’m not making this up).
And last month the company returned $32 billion to its shareholders, confessing that it doesnÂ’t have a better idea of how to spend that wad of money.
I can suggest a few for 2005:
• How about a firewall for every Windows owner?
Firewalls block hackers from invading your computer. Without a firewall, youÂ’re open to hackers every second youÂ’re on the Internet. They might just poke around in your files or they might change or steal what they find. Want your tax returns, online banking info, passwords and personal photos circulating on the Internet?
Microsoft added a firewall in the most recent versions of Windows — a lame, halfway firewall. And in the new update to Windows XP (Service Pack 2), that firewall is actually turned on, instead of off. But what about the tens of millions using older versions of Windows? Why do they have to find, figure out, and install a firewall from some other company? Why are they faced with paying extra for something that should have been in Windows in the first place?
And even if you think it was reasonable to leave the firewall out back then, why wonÂ’t Microsoft spend a few million now to provide protection to those people who trusted the company with their personal data? Talk about an obvious step toward customer comfort.
• How about anti-virus protection for Windows?
Somehow all of that R &D seems to have missed viruses, which have cost Windows users billions for years and years. Windows still doesnÂ’t come with any anti-virus protection, none, despite the danger that viruses can cost you time, money, your credit rating, and could be part of a cyberterror attack on the U.S. economy.
Despite that, nearly every virus attacks Windows, not Linux or Macintosh. (Of course, maybe spending a little to make Windows less virus-friendly would be a good idea, too, along with the virus fighters and blockers.) Door locks arenÂ’t an extra-cost option on cars. Why are anti-virus programs an extra-cost item for Windows computers?
• And how about spending some of that cash to help us against spyware and adware?
There’s more of this ‘‘malware" threat every month. And nearly every spyware attack is aimed at Windows, which gives spyware makers convenient built-in tools for taking control of your computer. That’s how a homepage can be hijacked to show porn ads and search offers. And how your keystrokes can be logged and emailed to crooks who want passwords.
• How about investing in technology that stops spam?
Because not all of us love spam.
Well, Bill Gates claims that the computer industry — with Microsoft a leader — is ‘‘halfway to solving spam." Surely you’ve noticed the 50 percent cut in your spam load? No? Well, neither did I.
Maybe itÂ’s because you havenÂ’t been using the advanced spam-filtering option that comes with every copy of Windows and Outlook Express? Oops. My mistake. ThatÂ’s actually in the free Thunderbird e-mail software from Mozilla.
Funny how a few people shipping a free program offer better anti-spam technology than the worldÂ’s largest software company spending billions every year on research. Funny.
• How about adding a new R &D department called ‘‘What People Actually and Desperately Need."
Alongside the billions for digital toilets, way-complicated-watches and other such wonders, this department could direct a few million to get us protection here, now, today from real threats and dangers.
But then, that wouldn’t sell more copies of Windows, Office, Internet Explorer, or Outlook Express, would it? It would only fix what Microsoft has already sold. And when you ‘‘own" customers who think they can’t go anywhere else, why spend more money just to make those customers safer and happier?
At least the other R &D spending has some chance — even if it’s only 1-in-abillion on the toilet thing — to sell more stuff at some point in the future, making more money that can be given in dividends to those shareholders.
TheMajor
PowerQuest / Opera
- Messages
- 10,176
- Location
- Netherlands
You can make Opera look exactly the way FireFox looks. Just in case any of you do not like its bars/panels/menu's etc.
TheMajor
PowerQuest / Opera
- Messages
- 10,176
- Location
- Netherlands
Wow. I am on the Opera forums, and they have millions of add-ons, extra buttons like open in IE, scroll down, newsfeeds, zoom etc: http://nontroppo.org/wiki/CustomButtons
They have calendars etc.
They have calendars etc.
jord4952 said:
they spy on you more than IE does. they invented spyware.
that's not to mentioned they are crooks. millions of people have a class action lawsuit on them. you have to change your bank account when you quit them as they will keep taking money out every month
I downloaded FF several months ago because so many people were rating it so much higher than IE and I wanted to see what the fuss was about.
It's all right, I suppose, but IE will always be my main browser. FF's menus are glitchy, and it's slow and it can't even display some of the simplest, most base code that works without a hitch in IE. I could probably put up with all of its annoying quirks except for the fact that the program takes forever to open up and to open new tabs whereas I could have had about 7 new IE windows open in that time. I'm a keyboard person and am so used to Alt+Tab-bing through my open programs that reaching out for my mouse to switch to a different tab in FF is a bother.
Firefox is nice to have when I'm checking web pages for compatibility, but other than that... ...IE just works better.
It's all right, I suppose, but IE will always be my main browser. FF's menus are glitchy, and it's slow and it can't even display some of the simplest, most base code that works without a hitch in IE. I could probably put up with all of its annoying quirks except for the fact that the program takes forever to open up and to open new tabs whereas I could have had about 7 new IE windows open in that time. I'm a keyboard person and am so used to Alt+Tab-bing through my open programs that reaching out for my mouse to switch to a different tab in FF is a bother.
Firefox is nice to have when I'm checking web pages for compatibility, but other than that...
...IE just works better.Funny how a browser that 7% of PC users have can have this amount of devotion from its users.
I have both firefox and IE and to be honest, I use IE mostly because firefox messes my 'trade' sites. (e-trade, ameritrade, etc).
Firefox is a bit faster... so, If I am quickly logging to browse magicthegathering.com or worldofwarcraft.com or something, I'll use the fox.
If only Opera were free too, it would be the "best" In my opinion...
They are all overrated anyways...
I have both firefox and IE and to be honest, I use IE mostly because firefox messes my 'trade' sites. (e-trade, ameritrade, etc).
Firefox is a bit faster... so, If I am quickly logging to browse magicthegathering.com or worldofwarcraft.com or something, I'll use the fox.
If only Opera were free too, it would be the "best" In my opinion...
They are all overrated anyways...
- Status