Firefox Commercial

[RadioGaGa 162]

http://www.firefoxflicks.com/flick/index.p...d=19542&c=false

nice!

[kovalchuk71 212]

LOL, niiice

[Vapor 0]

my safari icon is mad

[Fonya 0]

Haha, the IE one was funny. I love firefox.

[kovalchuk71 212]

What makes it better?

[Vapor 0]

well, its a dumber browser. Thats not a bad thing either. It dosent assume many things, like IE does. It dosent support Active X controls which is how most exploits in IE are exploited. For these reasons and more, its more secure. It is open source, which means anybody can edit the source code to make impovments. The code is FAR supperior and less bloated than any browser out there. I can go on for days, but its just better.

[analog999 0]

It doesn't do as much extensibility wise and it doesn't support all the standards that 95% of the world uses. Granted there are plugins that enable the browser to act like a whole different program entirely (like a newsreader or something), but the fact that it doesn't run activex is a big let down. It also doesn't support the same subset of javascript that ie supports, making it break some of my pages. I get calls now and then from customers who want to use some of my build your own packages and I just tell them to use IE - they are happy to do so.

[Vapor 0]

are you kidding me? it supports at least 95% of true web standards. Just because they are microsoft standards, does not make them web standards. The lack of Active X means it is a SAFE browser. And there are contless extensions for firefox. It supports standard java, not microsoft branded java. Maybe you should be coding your site to internet standards, and not ie standards. Then your site will work on all browsers.

[analog999 0]

are you kidding me? it supports at least 95% of true web standards. Just because they are microsoft standards, does not make them web standards. The lack of Active X means it is a SAFE browser. And there are contless extensions for firefox. It supports standard java, not microsoft branded java. Maybe you should be coding your site to internet standards, and not ie standards. Then your site will work on all browsers.

I run internet explorer EXCLUSIVELY and have had no problems. Anyone who says firefox is SAFE is kidding themselves. It is only a matter of time before someone finds a loophole in the OPEN source code and makes mincemeat out of all the users. Saying it is safe is akin to saying Macs are safe - there just isn't enough reason to go writing viruses/trojans that affect only 5% of users. If 95% of the world used firefox then you would be saying IE was safe!

I run Sun java in my browser without problems. Extensions that are written for Firefox have are not extensions that most people would use, and you *have* to admit that. Let's see a "Grocery List Generator" ... yeah that is right on the top of useful browser extensions! Well at least it appears to be from Firefox's point of view as it is the featured extension today.

[Vapor 0]

omg. seriously, do you have any idea what you are talking about? I am very into technology, and programing, and I keep up on what is new in the field. I know what I am talking about. Ask any technologicly inclined user what broswer they use, and they will say firefox. I dont think you get what open source means, so I am not going to even bother explaining it. A LARGE number of users use firefox (I do not currently have numbers), but it outnumbers the mac vs. windows argument. Do not tell me that IE is safer than Firefox. It dosent really have anything to do with browser exploits (which ie has had countless issues with), it has to do with the way it handels data and the allowences it makes, which makes it much easier for a virus or spyware writter to get around. Not to mention the bloated code which boggs down speed. And you, obviously, are VERY ignorant with this whole matter. There are thousands of firefox extensions, anything from sessoion saver, to an extension which lets you drag text boxes to your prefered size, etc etc. Firefox supports W3C supported sun java. Microsoft is the one using propietary technology.

[Vapor 0]

http://www.masternewmedia.org/news/2004/12...xplorer_has.htm

this article is 2 years old... I will find a more recent one. Firefox has at least 20% of the market.

[Vapor 0]

http://www.rediff.com/money/2004/nov/11tech.htm

yeah, read this too buddy

[analog999 0]

You know absolutely nothing about me, and your ignorance is clear in your statements. I have a CS degree from the University of Washington and I used to teach Java for a community college in Seattle. I used to work with and on browser extensibility when I worked for a speech recognition company in Redmond, WA. I may not be a browser expert, but I think I have some idea of what I'm talking about. I actually used the original Mozilla before IE was even around, and I have seen the handful of competitors to IE come and go.

I pulled up some data showing recent transactions on a travel web site I designed for a friend of mine. This data is recent, for the period of one week, showing to roughly 1,000 visitors:

% of total Vistors Using This Browser

78% - IE 6.x

12.3% - IE 5.x

2.64% - Netscape 6.x

There are a number of others at 1.5% and less. There are also four versions of Netscape, IE 4, SE bots and and MSN TV that make up the remaining 8% of web traffic.

So I think I'll stick with developing for IE and not worry too much about other browsers.

By the way, I didn't say that IE was safer than Firefox, go re-read the post. I simply said that if Firefox had the userbase that IE has, Firefox would be looked at as the unsafe "always need to go get a patch" piece of crap that you look at IE as. Besides, who cares? If you are happy with your Firefox, go ahead and be happy with it. Doesn't mean you have to dish crap on IE. I like IE and until I find something that I'm truly happier with, I'm sticking with it. And by the way, yes I have installed and tried Firefox... just didn't really notice any difference when I used it.

[analog999 0]

Oh, and by the way, the commercial was stupid. The reason the icons move is because they're waiting for the items to be downloaded. This bottleneck is your connection to your ISP and the connections between your ISP and the server that is hosting the site you're looking at. Firefox may render slightly quicker than IE depending on your OS, CPU and Memory, but browsing is not inherently faster just because you use Firefox.

[Hockeypunk 0]

WEEEEEE that was rather amusing

[truSteh 0]

You know absolutely nothing about me, and your ignorance is clear in your statements. I have a CS degree from the University of Washington and I used to teach Java for a community college in Seattle. I used to work with and on browser extensibility when I worked for a speech recognition company in Redmond, WA. I may not be a browser expert, but I think I have some idea of what I'm talking about. I actually used the original Mozilla before IE was even around, and I have seen the handful of competitors to IE come and go.

I pulled up some data showing recent transactions on a travel web site I designed for a friend of mine. This data is recent, for the period of one week, showing to roughly 1,000 visitors:

% of total Vistors Using This Browser

78% - IE 6.x

12.3% - IE 5.x

2.64% - Netscape 6.x

There are a number of others at 1.5% and less. There are also four versions of Netscape, IE 4, SE bots and and MSN TV that make up the remaining 8% of web traffic.

So I think I'll stick with developing for IE and not worry too much about other browsers.

By the way, I didn't say that IE was safer than Firefox, go re-read the post. I simply said that if Firefox had the userbase that IE has, Firefox would be looked at as the unsafe "always need to go get a patch" piece of crap that you look at IE as. Besides, who cares? If you are happy with your Firefox, go ahead and be happy with it. Doesn't mean you have to dish crap on IE. I like IE and until I find something that I'm truly happier with, I'm sticking with it. And by the way, yes I have installed and tried Firefox... just didn't really notice any difference when I used it.

Yeah and people who visit travel sites are definitely people who know much about computers.. no offense, but one site.. not even technology related with 1000 visiters a week, doesn't really mean anything at all..

[analog999 0]

It is just as good as any other random site. Everyone travels. When you look at Slashdot you are bound to get 20% or higher of firefox. #1 I don't have their stats and #2 their users are certainly biased. I am sure if you looked at apple.com you would find 90% mac based computers accessing it and if you look at msn.com it is probably 99% pc.

edit - and if 1000 people for a national survey is good enough for most opinion polls, I think it is enough to statistically show traffic data.

[Vapor 0]

the commercial was a joke... but in tests using the same software/hardware config, firefox beat ie hands down. It even beat opera. The old Mozilla Project BLEW. They were in shambles when they were closed source. They went open source, and they have created some woderful apps.

Just because a lot of people use something does not make it supperior. A lot of people use Kazza, and various P2P services which are LOADED with spyware, and leave open critical ports, and leave you open to any host of exploits.

Firefox is safer to use. As a responsible webmaster you should be coding according to w3c standards. But who cares if everybody can view your site, right? Look at the way ie handles ajax. What languages do you write in that IE handles better than any other browser?

[Chadd 916]

Mozilla's open-source Firefox Web browser now has an 8.88% share of the U.S. market, almost double the year-earlier figure, according to Web Side Story, an online marketing firm.

http://www.businessweek.com/technology/tec...stats060208.htm

12% according to these guys

http://www.e-janco.com/browser.htm

[analog999 0]

But who cares if everybody can view your site, right?

pretty much. hah!