has firefox had its day..

[Bri]

...as the best browser. I've just been doing some comparisons, out of force really. Ive come to realise that I'm missing a lot of content and clarity from certain web sites using Firefox and will now slowly be going back to using explorer. I'm using this forum through firefox and will trial it tomorrow or later in explorer.

Anybody have the same feelings/experiences?

 

[Subbynet]

I still don't understand why you're considering the change? What are you missing out on using Firefox?

 

[NextPoint]

It's not that Firefox doesn't work, it's that websites you are viewing haven't been developed properly - this is due to some developers being lazy and not to do with Firefox not working. Internet Explorer is a very poor browser - Microsoft made it not to display web pages properly, meaning websites that work in every other browser have to be tailored to work in Internet Explorer and lazy developers make websites that only work properly in Internet Explorer.

Now that we're seeing usage of Internet Explorer falling close to 50% (some sources show less than 50%), we will start to see a lot of websites catering less for Internet Explorer.

 

[cmcp]

I have to agree with Nextpoint, I'm not sure it's the browser at fault, more the standard the websites are built to.

As a front end developer, Firefox is such an asset. It's so much more than just a browser, by extending with plugins and addons it's an essential building tool for the web.

I'd be surprised to hear of any front end developer who doesn't think Firefox is an asset.

 

[Bri]

I still don't understand why you're considering the change? What are you missing out on using Firefox?

Content as nextpoint quite rightly said above, web developers are being lazy. We were looking at a competitiors website for example earlier, I was on firefox and he was using explorer. I couldnt open pages and branded the website a joke whilst he was able to access the full content.

And I also gather future versions of explorer wont support XP.

 

[zomex]

As others have said the problem is unlikely to be with Firefox. Personally I cringe at the tought of going back to Internet Explorer because Firefox is such a great browser, granted a little CPU intensive in comparison but more features to show for it.

Jack

 

[DotNetWebs]

Chrome is my primary browser nowadays, followed by IE, then Firefox.

The main reason I use Firefox is for it's extensions but that is happening less and less now as more extensions are becoming available on Chrome.

Personally I think Firefox has peaked so in that regard it has "had it's day!

Regards

Dotty

 

[Experienced IT guy]

I like Opera: it has in line spell checking as I write. For debugging web sites then Firefox with firebug add in etc. If I'm having trouble downloading a file then IE usually works. Did I mention Chrome? There are some Microsoft MSDN stuff that responds to Chrome like no other.... Microsoft support are actually known to say "well try opening it in Chrome" (if deleting browser history did not cure the access problem)

Now where is that copy of Netscape 2.0....

 

[weareable]

I dont understand how it could have had its day or peaked as it is not a final product. Its organic, evolving and open source. As for web standards, Mozilla and Internet Explorer development teams work together to some extent on compatibility and validation issues.
The way the two render websites are more inline with each other now than they ever have been.
That aside With a single right click I can load pages in IE thanks to a nifty Firefox add on. Internt explorer wont offer me that kind of tool and if it does i have missed it.
Many of the pages that don't show well in firefox are MS Office-exported html pages.

IMO If your using Firefox to its full potential going back to IE would be like swimming with no legs. I want todays tools now. I would have to wait until IE are good and ready for a new version launch.

 

[DotNetWebs]

I dont understand how it could have had its day or peaked as it is not a final product...

By "Peaked" all I meant was that it's market penetration growth has peaked, it's no longer THE alternative to IE - Chrome is a viable (and for many) a superior choice.

Also desktop browsers as a whole have also peaked IMHO. Increasing numbers of people are doing the majority of their browsing through mobile devices which in many cases bypass the web altogether!

Regards

Dotty

 

[dingbat]

I still use Firefox as my main browser but there have been times when it's not opened links or not shown confirmation letters correctly and I've had to use IE or even Google's Chrome.

The worst thing on this particular PC install is the ASK.com re-direct. I've removed the Ask plug in and removed all masked Ask.com software on add/remove programs but it still bloody reverts to ask.com. If I didn't bother to add .com before in the hyperlink window it autmatically assumed it, now it goes to Ask.

Going to use Chrome for a while and see how that goes.

 

[aidan1980]

...as the best browser. I've just been doing some comparisons, out of force really. Ive come to realise that I'm missing a lot of content and clarity from certain web sites using Firefox and will now slowly be going back to using explorer. I'm using this forum through firefox and will trial it tomorrow or later in explorer.

Anybody have the same feelings/experiences?

never had a single problem wth internet explorer so never need to look elsewhere

 

[smbchamp]

I use chrome at home. in my offices certain website render only in IE and certain render only in Firefox/chrome. So I would definitely swipe chrome for Firefox. I also see that chrome is faster. its been almost 6 months since I used Firefox for my regular browsing. I only use it for the rank checker plugin

 

[sidera]

I use Chrome for surfing because it isn't the memory hog that Firefox can be. FF will eat up all your RAM if you let it
Of course, when I'm developing websites, I use Firefox and Firebug which is such a lifesaver.
Chrome and Safari also have developer tools - even IE has them now, but I'm just used to Firebug.
It's true that sometimes I'm forced to use IE to view a website, because it was developed by a bad web developer who didn't use standards or cross browser check.
If Firefox manage to solve the memory leak issues, I might go back to using it for everyday browsing...

 

[ecenica]

"Has Firefox had it's day?".

I wish we could say the same about the horrendous Internet Explorer 6.

Or ideally any version of Internet Explorer, but that would just be greedy.

^R.

 

[blloyd]

It never ceases to amuse me how many people moan about Internet Explorer's lack of W3 standards support/poor performance/general anti-Microsoft stance and then use that as an excuse for their own poor testing and development habits. Just because someone doesn't like a product themselves doesn't alter the fact that IE remains the most popular web browser in the world.

Then of course one has to question whether security is more important than adherence to web standards. Firefox has lost it's crown regarding malware security to IE, choosing instead to hide behind the "it's just better" myth to increase market share. I am not a Microsoft fanboy and so even I was shocked to see the latest NSS Lab test results.

Has Firefox had it's day? Probably not, but it is going to have to get it's act together instead of relying on some kind of open-source moral superiority to continue it's growth in market share.

 

[sinclairsea]

Firefox all the way (although I am a partial to Chrome and Opera as they look nice )....I use CSS3 methods on my site, which IE8 don't support yet. They may by IE10!

 

[HolidayRQ]

I'm all about Chrome at the moment - when I use FF, it feels much slower than Chrome in terms of startup and page render speed.

I get the feeling that FF is slowly bloating - adding the themes functionality was the last straw for me.

 

[Marshall Mather]

Firefox is well known for its amazing speed, at least when compared to internet explorer. I think the main reason why fire fox is much faster than IE is because it simply has less bells and whistles, and the program coding is more efficient as well. Also, even when you have multiple tabs running, Firefox still runs amazingly fast. When you start opening more than 3 or 4 tabs in internet explorer, you will definitely notice that the program will start to bog down, even on faster PCs. Also, another awesome thing about Firefox is the fact that they make a LOT more nifty plugins and tools bars when compared to internet explorer.
The security is handled by Firefox like no other browser. It blocks Spyware and malware installation whereas internet explorer Microsoft components love Spyware, viruses and pop-ups. In Mozilla Firefox tabbed browsing allows us to open multiple documents in the same window . This feature has only been newly applied to IE7.
Mozilla Firefox provides extensive control over the page content. You can block ads, JavaScript and images. You can have power over the fonts and color of the websites default settings.
So definitely Mozilla gains much of the popularity than Explorer.
I hope you choose the best for yourself and I hope you get what you need.
Regards
Marshall

 

[da8iwr]

And I also gather future versions of explorer wont support XP.

Why on earth are you using XP or even talking about it, thats not supported by microsoft anymore and has major security holes in it. I find that a little worrying you are choosing to keep your clients details on a computer that has such large issues that a hacker can just walk into it.

IE has real major issues on how it displays websites, especially V6 and V7.

• It doubles all margins so, if you specify a box with margins of 5px, it will actually make it 10px. This means if you have a gap of exactly that space with 2 boxes side by side, they wont fit and they will end up on top of each other messing your layout up totally.
• Complex layouts can trigger a bug where the last few characters of a floated element can appear on the cleared element below.
• IE6 can only apply CSS hover effects to <a> tags.

Thats three i can remember of the top of my head but i know there others that have bugged me many times in the past.

FF, Chrome and Opera display the page correctly according to the W3 rules. IE doesnt work correctly, a bit like thier operating system... even the current version.

 

[Bri]

Why on earth are you using XP or even talking about it, thats not supported by microsoft anymore and has major security holes in it. I find that a little worrying you are choosing to keep your clients details on a computer that has such large issues that a hacker can just walk into it.

I use XP as my PC wont accept 7, dont ask me why, Ive done the MS compatibility check successfully but Ive had to reload XP back on everytime.

Youre not one of my clients so dont worry.

 

[Subbynet]

It never ceases to amuse me how many people moan about Internet Explorer's lack of W3 standards support/poor performance/general anti-Microsoft stance and then use that as an excuse for their own poor testing and development habits. Just because someone doesn't like a product themselves doesn't alter the fact that IE remains the most popular web browser in the world.

IE is not the most popular browser in the world, its the most used. Its much like steering wheels, if your car comes with a steering wheel you'll probably use it, but if you had to choose a steering wheel, would you really choose the same one which came with the car? (Would the same amount of people pick the same steering wheel?)

The answer has to be no.

Then of course one has to question whether security is more important than adherence to web standards. Firefox has lost it's crown regarding malware security to IE, choosing instead to hide behind the "it's just better" myth to increase market share. I am not a Microsoft fanboy and so even I was shocked to see the latest NSS Lab test results.

Have you read the reports? They speak of "Socially Engineered Malware"... For example, when you use Google and click a dodgy result, the site is flagged as being dangerous - right?

What has this got to do with the actual browser security? Nothing! ... Its a Black/White list from Microsoft, or Google, or someone else... So Microsoft had the best database of dodgy sites, it does not say IE is the most secure browser.

(PS... The "Time to Block" element - that is the time a dodgy website is found to the time its added to a Blacklist had Firefox come out top!)

Has Firefox had it's day? Probably not, but it is going to have to get it's act together instead of relying on some kind of open-source moral superiority to continue it's growth in market share.

It doesn't need moral superiority, it just needs people to read the test results instead of the headlines.

 

[JDX_John]

It's not that Firefox doesn't work, it's that websites you are viewing haven't been developed properly - this is due to some developers being lazy and not to do with Firefox not working. Internet Explorer is a very poor browser - Microsoft made it not to display web pages properly, meaning websites that work in every other browser have to be tailored to work in Internet Explorer and lazy developers make websites that only work properly in Internet Explorer.

This is a stupid argument. Users use the browser that works, they don't care about all this standards crap. If the anti-IE crowd wants to gain users they can't blame IE when sites don't work in their browser, because Joe Public will just say "Firefox is broken on this site"

Also, "IE" isn't a web browser. Any comments about "IE is..." are inherently stupid because IE 6,7,8 & 9 are fundamentally different applications just as FF2 and FF3 are. IE 6 is terrible by modern standards (but was good when it was released), 7 a non-event, 8 is pretty good and 9 looks to finally be bringing a fresh challenge to FF & Chrome.

Also that 50% thing is very flawed. Looking at sites frequented by web-developers is silly. And are you making sure to note mobile devices which are a special case?

FF is a browser traditionally used by techies since it has plugins and is open source, and has great developer tools. But now, Chrome has sprung onto the scene with incredible speed and appears to be stealing users from FF more than IE... it's a very cool application. FF should be far more scared by Chrome than IE at this point.

 

[JDX_John]

Why on earth are you using XP or even talking about it, thats not supported by microsoft anymore and has major security holes in it. I find that a little worrying you are choosing to keep your clients details on a computer that has such large issues that a hacker can just walk into it.

That's not true. XP is supported until 2014. Please try to keep your anti-MS zealotry in check and help posters, rather than brainwash them with mistruths.

 

[da8iwr]

That's not true. XP is supported until 2014. Please try to keep your anti-MS zealotry in check and help posters, rather than brainwash them with mistruths.

Oi be nice pal, i made a mistake, i was thinking of Windows 98 and SP1. I don't know where you get off on talking to people like that, but its not called for or needed in a community website.

I wasn't brainwashing or anything of the sort, using a bit of software that has been superseded now about 6 times with all the service packs etc, is not very good practice.

I don't like MS, but at the same time i have good reasons for it. They don't build quality products. You even have to buy a security system from a third party as the security on that software is so poor you cant use in any other way.

Can you imagine walking into car dealership and saying can i buy that car please and them saying certainly sir, you will also need to buy a padlock for the door as well (that we wont provide), as we cant build cars properly and leave big huge holes in the doors people can climb through and just take it when ever they want.... no? well neither do Linux or Apple.

As i have said in other threads in this forum (that you are also commenting on), im just pointing out that Microsoft is terrible and have had an easy ride and now face serious competition that at the moment beet them hands down.

This is a stupid argument. Users use the browser that works, they don't care about all this standards crap. If the anti-IE crowd wants to gain users they can't blame IE when sites don't work in their browser

From a software company that comment is very shocking and makes me wonder what the coding is actually like that you actually make. IE doesn't work properly, it never has, not even the latest stable version of 8. It only has one job to do and that is display html correctly and it doesn't do that correctly. So web designers have to put in hacks to make IE read the HTML/CSS differently from all other browsers that does read it correctly to correct the errors that IE shows.

Or would you suggest that all other browsers should actually put in an error so they also show HTML incorrectly to keep Microsoft happy, so they don't need to bother fixing their browser?? Absolutely ridiculous comment, and from a programmer, that just amazes me!


So im not sure why you say this is a stupid argument, when the entire thread is about FireFox loosing or gaining ground against other browsers and that is probably the most important argument here.

I haven't tried IE9 as it is still in test version, but why has it taken the wealthiest company in the world, with the most intelligent professors and universities under their belt 15 or more years to correct a browser to work properly, that a group of volunteers can do in their own their spare time from home to a much higher standard when they made FireFox?

Then Microsoft merge IE into the OS, so if it every gets (ever gets lol, nearly every one does) hijacked in some way, then the entire operating system is also infected. Absolute madness!

Oh and then Microsoft charge you £200 for the privilege of buying that crap bit of software... but apparently im just being a brain washing anti Microsoft-ist lol!

You tell me one pro that microsoft (apart from market share) can do over Linux or Apple, and for every one, ill give you three reasons to switch away and use one of the other 2.

I promise you will not win.

 

[Esk247]

But designers and developers are stuck in that situation of:

We know other products, FREE products are better than what MS is producing BUT our customers are still using MS products as standard, so we either have to tell them to install our stuff and show them how to use it or make sure that our stuff also works with there stuff which creates an extra level of faffing around.

IE did used to muck up websites a lot, especially when people used to use tables (i still do sometimes) and it used to totally ignore your size preferences and shove everything all over the place to suit what it wanted to do.

Things like Ubuntu and other systems need to start appearing as pre-installed products on new PCs and laptops .. that way the open source community can really hit the mass market and show off..at the moment, the mass market is still persuaded by the flashy MS logos and the 'wow it has pretty colours' appearance over usability and stability.

 

[Bri]

but why has it taken the wealthiest company in the world, with the most intelligent professors and universities under their belt 15 or more years to correct a browser to work properly, that a group of volunteers can do in their own their spare time from home to a much higher standard when they made FireFox?

best thing thats ever been said.

 

[JDX_John]

Oi be nice pal, i made a mistake, i was thinking of Windows 98 and SP1.

So it's my fault you made a mistake?

I don't know where you get off on talking to people like that, but its not called for or needed in a community website.

Yes it is. It's a community website where you are offering advice based on claims you make as fact, which are not accurate... as you just admitted. As a community site you are not just unhelpful, but dangerous to say things from a position of ignorance

I wasn't brainwashing or anything of the sort, using a bit of software that has been superseded now about 6 times with all the service packs etc, is not very good practice.

Again, you got your facts wrong. Not my problem.

I don't like MS, but at the same time i have good reasons for it. They don't build quality products. You even have to buy a security system from a third party as the security on that software is so poor you cant use in any other way.

Again, blatantly untrue.

Microsoft is terrible

MS is a global corporation making hundreds of products. It's sheer zealotry to label such a massive beast with one word, some things are good and others bad, it's effectively many different companies.

From a software company that comment is very shocking and makes me wonder what the coding is actually like that you actually make.

Oh, so if you're going to get personal pleasew tell me your level of expertise in kernel design and systems programming to comment on these things? Or you you think playing with Photoshop and HTML makes you a software expert?

IE doesn't work properly, it never has, not even the latest stable version of 8. It only has one job to do and that is display html correctly and it doesn't do that correctly. So web designers have to put in hacks to make IE read the HTML/CSS differently from all other browsers that does read it correctly to correct the errors that IE shows.

Chrome and FF are not identical in what they output. And any decent web-dev can make sites work great on all modern browsers (leaving IE6 aside, which even MS want to ditch)

Or would you suggest that all other browsers should actually put in an error so they also show HTML incorrectly to keep Microsoft happy, so they don't need to bother fixing their browser?? Absolutely ridiculous comment, and from a programmer, that just amazes me!

I'm a programmer, not an HTML hacker... but if you can't make a site that works on what your customers use, that's your problem. IE is still a de facto standard especially in business use so you can wave your idealism about as you please, it doesn't make any difference.

I haven't tried IE9 as it is still in test version, but why has it taken the wealthiest company in the world, with the most intelligent professors and universities under their belt 15 or more years to correct a browser to work properly, that a group of volunteers can do in their own their spare time from home to a much higher standard when they made FireFox?

You really don't know anything about (open source) software do you? FF is not made by a few bedroom coders. It is organised by many large companies, and many companies pay their employees to work on it and other open-source products... plus FF is paid $millions by companies like MS/Google from ad revenues. Hobby programmers are involved too, but FF is a big business not someone's pet project.

Then Microsoft merge IE into the OS, so if it every gets (ever gets lol, nearly every one does) hijacked in some way, then the entire operating system is also infected. Absolute madness!

I haven't had a virus for years. Most of the people I know would say the same.

Oh and then Microsoft charge you £200 for the privilege of buying that crap bit of software... but apparently im just being a brain washing anti Microsoft-ist lol!

Yes, you clearly have something personal against a gigantic corporation. You can't even get your facts straight and yet you base lame arguments on those untruths. If MS is such an easy target you'd think it would be easy to attack them using well-verified attacks... but you just seem like another brain-washed Linux person who is even ignorant of how open-source works.

 

[JDX_John]

Things like Ubuntu and other systems need to start appearing as pre-installed products on new PCs and laptops ..

this is already possible, if you want to you can - especially on netbooks. People don't, generally speaking.

the mass market is still persuaded by the flashy MS logos and the 'wow it has pretty colours' appearance over usability and stability.

"Pretty colours" is what most equate with usability, both on Mac and Windows. Even (reasonable) Linux people will admit Linux is behind when it comes to providing a glossy, consistent GUI - Mac and Win7 are both now on a level of security and stability that users are not having their PC crash all the time. Mac is having better sales but Linux remains struggling.

(G)UI is historically one area OS projects suffer. Blender, Gimp, OpenOffice... the functionality is there but programmers don't make great UI experts, and UI is a massive part of what consumers consider important.

 

[JDX_John]

BTW: I wanted to edit my long previous post... but I can't see a way. I'm not personally comfortable crossing the line of launching unsubstantiable claims about each others' companies or professional abilities so I retract that barbed comment (regardless if the other guy does the same or not, I only speak for myself).

I still totally disagree that you can generalise a giant company such as MS, and I still think his facts are shaky/wrong... but I got over-enthusiastic in forum warfare which isn't really my style. If I'm allowed I'll edit the other post and delete this one. Just wanted to set the record straight.

 

[blloyd]

Personally I think you were spot on

 

[Esk247]

Remember folks it's only a difference of opinion..no need to get the shotguns and tin hats out over an internet forum disagreement.

 

[da8iwr]

So it's my fault you made a mistake?Yes it is. It's a community website where you are offering advice based on claims you make as fact, which are not accurate... as you just admitted. As a community site you are not just unhelpful, but dangerous to say things from a position of ignorance

Again, you got your facts wrong. Not my problem.

So your entire argument against what i have said, is because i was wrong that XP SP2 is available because i had heard that XPSP1 was now defunct. You see, what i said was incorrect and i and said so, all your needed to do was say, "Actually XP SP2 is still supported and will be until 2014, but all versions below that are not". But instead you didn't, you were just insulting, the thread until then was a good clean banter. That's what i was pointing out.

Oh, so if you're going to get personal please tell me your level of expertise in kernel design and systems programming to comment on these things? Or you you think playing with Photoshop and HTML makes you a software expert?

I developed the software I use for my camera rig which works with the Canon API system and then networks together an unspecified number of machines. The software is used by film and TV companies world wide and will only be accepted if it is bug free. So I have a fair undertsanding of programming in many languages.

Chrome and FF are not identical in what they output. And any decent web-dev can make sites work great on all modern browsers (leaving IE6 aside, which even MS want to ditch)

Your very correct, Chrome and FF won't display identical, but are very close. The display/layout is usually the same if the HTML and CSS validates, it may have slight variations in the aesthetic appearance though, unlike IE which actually shows things wrong, such as doubling borders and making DIV boxes float incorrectly. And we cant leave IE6 to the side, as it is still used by visitors, so websites still need to be produced to work on it.

I'm a programmer, not an HTML hacker... but if you can't make a site that works on what your customers use, that's your problem. IE is still a de facto standard especially in business use so you can wave your idealism about as you please, it doesn't make any difference.

I can make sites that work correctly in all browser, but only by using "hacks" which force the system to show the different style sheets to different browsers.

You really don't know anything about (open source) software do you? FF is not made by a few bedroom coders. It is organised by many large companies, and many companies pay their employees to work on it and other open-source products... plus FF is paid $millions by companies like MS/Google from ad revenues. Hobby programmers are involved too, but FF is a big business not some-one's pet project.

Your right i have no idea about open source coding, in fact never even heard of it.

Ohh by the way, I'm the main speaker for the Joomla Day UK event this weekend (see top left for my little picy), i also run 6 open source projects, one of which has 10,000 members signed up to it. I am also releasing on Joomla day a huge open source project that has taken us 11 months to build so far before it is even released ot the public.

But your right, you know far more than me.

I haven't had a virus for years. Most of the people I know would say the same.

Ok delete your third party AV software and see how it goes, I am using my macbook at the moment, and have never had any issues and have never installed any AV software of any form.

Yes, you clearly have something personal against a gigantic corporation. You can't even get your facts straight and yet you base lame arguments on those untruths. If MS is such an easy target you'd think it would be easy to attack them using well-verified attacks... but you just seem like another brain-washed Linux person who is even ignorant of how open-source works.

[/quote]

Once again, you have picked up on one comment i have made about everything and used that. The issues that MS i have shown, especially the security and browser issues that other OS dont have. This means i have shown facts and got them straight and if i made a mistake, then i have corrected it.

 

[da8iwr]

Just to add, i wrote that this morning but then had to leave and forgot to press post, so just done it now and then seen your appology. I have fored at you or said anything about you at all, what i said was that a programmer saying it is ok to make bad code as long as it looks ok is just not correct in any form what so ever.

 

[da8iwr]

Personally I think you were spot on

Who was that mate, me or john lol.

 

[JDX_John]

If you think FF is developer mainly by coders in their bedrooms, you don't know anything about OSS... the fact you use OSS products doesn't mean you know anything about how they were put together.

And I also would argue that W7 is not inherently less secure than other common OSes. There are annual contests featuring MS, Mac & #nix clean installs where hackers are challenged to do certain things. Last one I heard of, it wasn't a big difference. The moment everyone switches to Linux, guess what system will suddenly get loads of new attacks? What OS do you think all those PHP & forums are running on, that keep getting hacked?

 

[da8iwr]

Im not going to argue with you about how much i do or dont know about Open Source, your just making your self look like a knob to all the other readers if you seriously think i dont understand or know about how open source projects work. Ive put links ot my credentials and involvement, i dont know how you feel I still dont understand it?

What OS do you think all those PHP & forums are running on, that keep getting hacked?

Its not the fault of the OS that gets hacked with Linux, its the bad PHP scripts from bad programmers that allow people to get through it and then make the PHP or MYSQL do something to the server, such as create a shell script.

 

[JDX_John]

Im not going to argue with you about how much i do or dont know about Open Source. Ive put links ot my credentials and involvement, i dont know how you feel I still dont understand it?

Because of the crazy claim you made about Mozilla Corporation being a few bedroom coders when it's a private company with hundreds of employees, annual income of $10s of millions, etc.

Its not the fault of the OS that gets hacked with Linux, its the bad PHP scripts from bad programmers that allow people to get through it and then make the PHP or MYSQL do something to the server, such as create a shell script.

Really? When a cross-platform app has a Windows-only vulnerability all the linux fanboys rush to blame the OS. But of course when it's Linux, it's someone else's fault... that's just double standards.

 

[Bri]

I have to say Ian I am totally impressed with your website and the You tube footage of Nadal, all those cameras..........is one going spare cough....cough!!! If I may ask how much would something like that cost? PM me if you dont want to broadcast it, my stepson is a semi pro tennis player and is looking for someone to practice action shots of him.

 

[da8iwr]

Thanks Bri
To be honest mate it isnt cheep, the nadal 3 day shoot would buy a very nice brand new M5. But i really want to try and use the rig for creative uses, so if you can come up with something that hasnt been done before, and would show photography that the rig can do, i would be happy to do it on a weekend with a small bag of cameras for just my costs (fuel and accom with a few beer tokens i will be happy ).

Because of the crazy claim you made about Mozilla Corporation being a few bedroom coders when it's a private company with hundreds of employees, annual income of $10s of millions, etc.

Just to once again correct you there, FireFox was developed by three guys Dave Hyatt, Joe Hewitt and Blake Ross using part of the code from Mozilla Application Suite. They wanted to build something that didn't have the bloat of the suite, but not the commercial restraints of Netscape.

From what ui remember it weas something to do with Netscape, that was bought out by AOL, three of the staff asked if they could take one of the projects and almost rebuild it. AOL allowed this and Mozzilla was formed as a none profit and AOL invested a $1M in 2003 spread over 3 years to pay for the heardware, software and wages. So it wasnt a massiive funded operations, as it only owrks out at $27K (£18.5K) per month. So even if they are on lets say $4K a month each, thats $12K, and then of course office over heads etc.

Thats very small money, not tens of millions or hundreds of employees.

Really? When a cross-platform app has a Windows-only vulnerability all the linux fanboys rush to blame the OS. But of course when it's Linux, it's someone else's fault... that's just double standards.

I'm not saying they are impenetrable, I'm saying that most hackers, the kiddie ones that do the most damage, usually use bad scripts in old open source code. Hackers can download open source and play with it until they find a problem. They then find places where that version of that script is used and hack it.

Anybody using an old J1.0 site for example will find that they will be hacked one day, as it hasn't had any security updates for many years now and is a real nightmare.

The other way they get in is because they have the wrong permission settings on the files and directories.

It would be hard to determine the servers that have been hacked through the OS and the ones through bad scripts, as there is so many bad scripts out there.