Paul Thurrott calls for ie boycott


Recommended Posts

I see a lot of fanboy comments but I have yet to hear a credible reason "not" to use Firefox.

586314451[/snapback]

I have not seen a credible reason not to use IE.

also, its the type of situation where you have to choose youre poison.

STV

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have not seen a credible reason not to use IE. 

also, its the type of situation where you have to choose youre poison.

STV

I suppose you could say - IE does not support Alpha Transparency in PNG's, so don't use it if your site relies on that design element.

You could also say - IE does not properly support the latest CSS implementations, so if your site relies on CSS features past version 1, don't use it.

Seems reasonable, no?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suppose you could say - IE does not support Alpha Transparency in PNG's, so don't use it if your site relies on that design element.

You could also say - IE does not properly support the latest CSS implementations, so if your site relies on CSS features past version 1, don't use it.

Seems reasonable, no?

586315271[/snapback]

i dont run into that problem (I haven't come across it). therefore, I still don't have a reason "not" to use IE.

STV

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i dont run into that problem (I haven't come across it).  therefore, I still don't have a reason "not" to use IE.

You may personally not have encountered these, but I think they demonstrate that there may in fact be credible reasons not to use IE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It really doesn't matter in the end. Of course no one will boycott IE, especially not since 99.9% of people don't know Paul Thurrott and most people use IE simply because its the official Microsoft browser that came with their computers, and don't know what other alternative browsers there are , why they are great, and where to get them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It really doesn't matter in the end. Of course no one will boycott IE, especially not since 99.9% of people don't know Paul Thurrott and most people use IE simply because its the official Microsoft browser that came with their computers, and don't know what other alternative browsers there are , why they are great, and where to get them.

Sums it up nicely. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have not seen a credible reason not to use IE. 

also, its the type of situation where you have to choose youre poison.

STV

586315221[/snapback]

Are you afraid of change? Are you afraid that you might actually like it? Does your life depend on using only MSFT sanctioned products?

Credible reasons to not use IE:

- Poor Standards support

- Poor CSS support

- Poor PNG support

- many potential exploits.

You still have not given any credible reasons not to at least "try" firefox.

It works, is cross platform compatible and a quick download and install.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so that users can actually use crucial websites, such as online banking sites, written for microsoft's ******ized version of the standards....

Honestly, i thought the point of releasing IE7 was to destroy firefoxes momentum... If it doesn't have the ability to pass all the ACID tests i can't see it even blowing much wind out of it's sails. IE7 will be nothing more than an entertaining/disturbing destraction.

I see a lot of fanboy comments but I have yet to hear a credible reason "not" to use Firefox.

586314451[/snapback]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so that users can actually use crucial websites, such as online banking sites, written for microsoft's ******ized version of the standards....

Honestly, i thought the point of releasing IE7 was to destroy firefoxes momentum... If it doesn't have the ability to pass all the ACID tests i can't see it even blowing much wind out of it's sails. IE7 will be nothing more than an entertaining/disturbing destraction.

Firefox is such a lean download, I guess it seems that folks could run both IE and Firefox on their rig without much trouble, getting the best of both worlds, eh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Security:

Both browsers are equally bad (Firefox & IE 1,2,3,4,5,6 & 7). IE 6 was pretty solid when it was first released, then hackers got their way with it over time. Firefox, back in the beta days - also pretty damn solid. Nowadays, it is more popular so hackers spend more time on it to find exploits. So, Firefox is suffering the same fate as IE 6 (And soon to be IE7) in that respect. MS release security patches quicker than Mozilla - I'll let you finish that sentance because it seems pretty obvious where I'm going with that.

Web standards:

Web standards are there so that web devs should just be able to code by the book and EVERY browser SHOULD understand it and render the page correctly. Most browsers do. IE - the most popular browser, doesn't. See the problem there? Web devs have to bend over backwards to compensate for IE's lack of intelligence as far as technologies such as CSS go. That is why many people don't see examples of it: Web devs realise that Joe Public probably uses IE - seeing as it comes built into the Windows operating system. If their sites didn't work in IE - they are throwing away potential customers.

Web devs would be much happier if IE would just understand the damn standards set by the W3C (the Gods if you will of defining web coding standards). Many IE users couldn't give a rats ass about web-devs bending over backwards for websites to work in the rubbish browser - simply because they aren't aware.

Many people were expecting IE7 to be the change for IE's lack of intelligence. But from Beta 1, we can tell that it's not. MS are still going off on their own little journey, annoying web-devs. Sure, it's only a beta. But do you really thing MS are going to rewrite IE's rendering engine in the time between Beta and Final? Of course they aren't! They're too focused on security. Which will no doubt flop horribly. Making something secure and claiming it as secure will only motivate hackers into finding exploits for it.

Basically, if web-devs decided "screw IE - I want to code by the book. I'll just show a messege to IE users that says "Get a decent browser" then that would be it. People will start getting annoyed at MS because the browser they supplied them simply doesn't work - it won't allow users to browse the internet (properly) and it'll be nobodies fault but MS's.

Edit:

Just as sum up of browsers really:

IE = as good security as the next browser - but doesn't follow the web standards which is disapointing

Firefox = as good security as the next browser, slightly better than IE because it hasn't been exploited as much yet - does follow web standards, so there is nothing wrong there - does fail the Acid test though.

Konqueror = the only browser I've heard of that actually passes the Acid test. Bare in mind the Acid test isn't actually written in valid CSS though. It's slightly different to see how well browsers compensate.

Safari = I don't know enough about it to comment.

Opera = same as Safari.

Edited by mouldy_punk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well he's not lying. Everything that he says there is truth.

If you are a web developer you know that IE is not good. :no:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well he's not lying. Everything that he says there is truth.

If you are a web developer you know that IE is not good. :no:

Yeah, but you can in some development packages choose the "target for IE browser" option and it auto-adjusts, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've seen several people say now that Firefox and IE are equal as far as exploits. That is totally wrong. Keep your eye on a 0-day exploit site for a month. What will you see? I'll tell you the highlights of last month. I seen eight exploits that worked for IE6 patched up to date. I tested them all to verify they worked. I seen three exploits for Firefox. The catch is, the Firefox ones were all for 1.0.4, and they were all released AFTER 1.0.5 was released.

You will find that most exploiters report the problem to the vendor before they release the exploit publically. The problem is Microsoft doesn't take any action until after the exploit is released into the wild and starts causing problems. In general, exploiters have more respect for Mozilla/Firefox because they fix things when they are reported.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Instead of boycotting why not help the problems with the browser and work with them instead of against them?

586313890[/snapback]

Helping Microsoft is like helping a hamster fly...

Go Paul!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll use whichever browser has/is/does the following:

1.) secure (relative to other browsers.)

2.) render most sites correctly, and allows me to access gov't/corporate content

3.) allow me to display bookmarks on side pane while I surf in main window (IE and FF do this easily)

4.) customizable toolbar/icons

5.) tabs (although this is a minor one with me . . .)

6.) as fast/faster than IE 6

Other than those, I don't really care which browser comes out on top. If IE 7 will do the above job reasonably then I might as well use it when it is released. It'll save me a download, at least, since it'll already be there.

The only reason I don't use IE 6 is because of popups (although that can be remedied) and security issues, and also because Firefox looks a little better. Thats about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, but you can in some development packages choose the "target for IE browser" option and it auto-adjusts, right?

586315786[/snapback]

And if like me you write your sites in notepad using XHTML and CSS you have fun trying to make them both Firefox and IE compatible, what fun. :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And if like me you write your sites in notepad using XHTML and CSS you have fun trying to make them both Firefox and IE compatible, what fun. :unsure:

I prefer to use standard HTML - like version 3 - and no XML or CSS or what not. Image Maps work in HTML 3, so do forms Good enough for me. :)

I'm a function over form kinda guy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I prefer to use standard HTML  - like version 3 - and no XML or CSS or what not.  Image Maps work in HTML 3, so do forms  Good enough for me. :)

I'm a function over form kinda guy.

586315945[/snapback]

I always learnt to use Strict or Transitional XHTML and seperate CSS stylesheets to control the visuals. Each to his own. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always learnt to use Strict or Transitional XHTML and seperate CSS stylesheets to control the visuals. Each to his own. :)

I started with Notepad before CSS was even around if I remember right, so I didn't even know about that stuff.

When it started to get all complicated, I just said "Meh" and figured it's much easier to control exact positioning with an image map on a fixed graphic, when possible, and it works in both IE and Mozilla.

Kinda like how I still use Acrobat 4 to make PDF files. I know everybody with the 4.x reader and newer can read 'em.

I'm such a dweeb. I need simple to keep my simple mind happy. :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guess we need to boycott all browsers then. There isn't a single available browser that is "standards compliant".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After reading this topic, it reminded me of a picture Ive seen before.

image removed, I posted it without thinking it though and didn't take into account that my sense of humor is different than others.

Edit: My point to this isn't to make fun of special needs children, it is to point out that this topic will never end and that no one will ever see some one else's view about this.

Edited by hitechoutlaw
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.