ActiveMac - The Most Activated mac Resource

ActiveMac

User Controls

New User

Edit/View My Profile

ActiveMac

Articles

Forums

Links

News

News Search

Reviews

News Centers

Windows/Microsoft

DVD

ActiveHardware

Xbox

MaINTosh

News Search

ANet Chats

The Lobby

Special Events Room

Developer's Lounge

XBox Chat

FAQ's

Windows 98/98 SE

Windows 2000

Windows Me

Windows "Whistler" XP

Windows CE

Internet Explorer 6

Internet Explorer 5

Xbox

DirectX

DVD's

TopTechTips

Registry Tips

Windows 95/98

Windows 2000

Internet Explorer 4

Internet Explorer 5

Windows NT Tips

Program Tips

Easter Eggs

Hardware

DVD

Latest Reviews

Applications

Microsoft Windows XP Professional

Norton SystemWorks 2002

Hardware

Intel Personal Audio Player 3000

Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer

Site News/Info

About This Site

Affiliates

ANet Forums

Default Home Page

Link To Us

Links

Member Pages

Site Search

Awards

Credits
�1997/2004, Active Network. All Rights Reserved.
Layout & Design by Designer Dream. Content written by the Active Network team. Please click here for full terms of use and restrictions or read our Privacy Statement.

10 Reasons Why Firefox Could Beat Microsoft Internet Explorer

Time: 12:59 EST/17:59 GMT | News Source: eWeek | Posted By: Robert Stein

Mozilla's Firefox browser might not have the market share Microsoft's Internet Explorer currently does, but as the European Union continues to shift browser choice to Internet Explorer alternatives, it might be Mozilla's Firefox browser that could finally beat out Internet Explorer. Although the Windows Web browser choice screen, which allows European Windows users to choose which Web browser they would like to use, started just a few weeks ago, already Microsoft is losing market share to the competition.

Write Comment
Return to News

Displaying 1 through 25 of 308
Last | Next

The time now is 7:27:20 AM ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us

#1 By 1226 (69.87.156.223) at 3/24/2010 1:34:48 PM

In all honestly does any one really care who has the fastest browser it is not like you are racing around the desktop in the browser race of champions

#2 By 89249 (64.207.240.90) at 3/24/2010 1:48:09 PM

1. That's using substantial quite liberally.

2. This is the main selling point for firefox. I definitely agree this is a big deal.

3. Open Source is not the beautiful bullet point that sells software people think it is. I could care less if something is open source or not, the question is if it's the right piece of software for the job.

4. Security is not firefox's best strong suit of late. I think it's lack of showing in reason 1 is the reason it seems more secure.

5. Speed is important (not as much as some ppl like to say it is) but IE9 seems to be making huge inroads on this one.

6. It's overly trusted imo.

7. What browser isn't readily available.

8. Corporate experts still pick IE. Experts he's referring to are people who don't have to manage systems or don't know how.

9. Someone's fishing for a bullet point.

10. Firefox Mobile is horrible.

#3 By 113862 (74.204.153.254) at 3/24/2010 4:07:10 PM

My "two cents":

1. It all depends on what you mean by 'substantial'. I have both Firefox and IE on my system (Firefox 3.6 and IE 8), and something tells me I'm not the only one, which, in turn, will modulate any numbers to some degree. And I don't think European users are going to 'sell' Firefox all by themselves.

2. Yes, this has been a big 'selling point', and continues to be. But not all Firefox extensions, like not all apps (open-source, freeware or otherwise), are created equal. If you need proof, read these:
a. http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2009/05/mozilla-ponders-policy-change-after-firefox-extension-battle.ars
b. http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9015599/Top_10_Firefox_extensions_to_avoid?source=rss_news50 (this link is to an older article, but the caveats about extensions are worth the read).

3. "Open-source software is widely considered superior to closed applications..." Really? I don't think either open source or closed source is inherently superior to the other. Good software is good software, and bad software is bad software. Period. Declaring open source as inherently superior opens the door to potential 'crapware', not to mention it snuffs out objectivity when evaluating software.

4. Firefox may never be as vulnerable to security breaches as IE. But, as Firefox gains user share (if it does), it'll start to grow a bigger target on it's back (if it hasn't already). And let's not forget about 'poisoned extensions' (which has happened already...here are a couple of links:)
a. http://news.cnet.com/8301-17939_109-10112541-2.html
b. http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2356815,00.asp

5. Hmmm. I've never found Firefox especially fast, and never knew Firefox was noted for its speed (isn't that reserved for Opera?). In fact, Firefox and IE are about the same on my machine. (NOTE: Neither are especailly slow, either). Besides, with today's 'active Web' and 'Web 2.0', the quality and speed of one's Internet connection takes on added significance.

6. I'm not sure what is meant by this....

7. What irks me about the whole EU thing is that Firefox (and other browsers) have always been no more than a few simple clicks away, and it's not a difficult matter to download, install and set as one's default browser--and without any browser choice screen. But what do I know?

8. What 'expert circles'? Where? Besides, I like Firefox, too, but that doesn't mean I've stopped using, or don't like, IE.

9. Again, not sure what the point of this 'point' is. Besides, talk is cheap.

10. No opinion as I've never used Firefox Mobile.

This post was edited by fewiii on Wednesday, March 24, 2010 at 16:13.

#4 By 8556 (173.27.242.53) at 3/24/2010 6:04:53 PM

Microsoft has been too slow to respond to the scourge of pop-under rogue program ads that when clicked on anywhere will attempt to install the nasty bugger. Firefox's Adblock Plus is superior to anything that IE has to offer for blocking the nasty pop-under's that auto install. Half of PC users are happy with XP, at the moment, and do not want to or cannot afford to upgrade to Win7 or buy a new Win7 computer. In Firefox Web of Trust works well in conjunction with Adblock Plus to help XP users keep there machines clean. Many of my customers are low wage earners, some are teachers that are afraid of being laid off due to deep cutbacks. These people will stay with Windows XP as long as possible, but want it to be made more secure. I work to help them keep the machine's clean by Installing Firefox 3.6.2 and the two add-ons mentioned along with ThreatFire set to level 4 out of 5.

Not everyone has the IQ nor the income of most ActiveWin users.

Firefox today can be made far more secure than IE8. Tomorrow is another day, however.

#5 By 143 (216.205.223.146) at 3/24/2010 7:29:57 PM

Opera 10.51 is quick and stable. I've been using it with a smile.

This post was edited by donpacman on Wednesday, March 24, 2010 at 19:41.

#6 By 79018 (67.252.63.217) at 3/24/2010 11:03:49 PM

I used to alternate between IE8 and Firefox, now it's between IE8 and Chrome.

#7 By 2960 (72.205.26.164) at 3/25/2010 10:00:13 AM

I know we don't agree on everything Bob (and there's nothing wrong with that :)), but on this one I'm right there with ya :)

"Microsoft has been too slow to respond to the scourge of pop-under rogue program ads that when clicked on anywhere will attempt to install the nasty bugger. Firefox's Adblock Plus is superior to anything that IE has to offer for blocking the nasty pop-under's that auto install. Half of PC users are happy with XP, at the moment, and do not want to or cannot afford to upgrade to Win7 or buy a new Win7 computer. In Firefox Web of Trust works well in conjunction with Adblock Plus to help XP users keep there machines clean. Many of my customers are low wage earners, some are teachers that are afraid of being laid off due to deep cutbacks. These people will stay with Windows XP as long as possible, but want it to be made more secure. I work to help them keep the machine's clean by Installing Firefox 3.6.2 and the two add-ons mentioned along with ThreatFire set to level 4 out of 5.

Not everyone has the IQ nor the income of most ActiveWin users.

Firefox today can be made far more secure than IE8. Tomorrow is another day, however."

#8 By 13997 (71.193.149.254) at 3/25/2010 10:26:46 AM

#5 #6 Agree

Firefox is not the leading contender anymore, at least until they address some serious design flaws.

Right now Firefox is the most INSECURE browser not only in lack of code quality but in terms of sandboxing itself for unseen threats. Chrome at least tries to address the 'sandbox' concept, but compared to the lower security model of IE protected mode still has some catching up to do.

Firefox is also lacking in terms of performance, and maybe on the Windows platform with Direct2D can get back on track, but this leaves a break in performance on Linux and OSX. They need to build up from the bottom with a unified composer model. Opera is doing some things right, but a better GPU composer would be welcome.

The performance and composer model is important as the world moves to HTML5 with lots of dynamic content and video and SVG and animations, etc.

Chrome is good at processing a page and displaying it quickly, however stalls when it comes to dynamic and animated content because WebKit also lacks any structured composer technology.

(I use composer in a generic sense of a model to utilize the GPU pulling the cycles away from the CPU. Sadly the only platform that offers a 'light' acceleration model is Windows, although there are ways to get it done on Linux and OSX, but with a heavier footprint. Either way, Chrome and Opera and Firefox need to be rocking this movement, because if IE9 continues, the best web experience is going to be IE9 on Win7.)

The other thing not talked about enough is the convergence of the standards, like applying CSS to HTML5 Video and how SVG integrates fully into a page instead of being 'boxed' into a graphical square. Again the IE9 team are raising these questions and the other browser teams need to pay attention as the 30-50 inconsitent mingling of standards they bring up are important and beyond the current scope of just getting to basic standards levels.

#9 By 2960 (72.205.26.164) at 3/26/2010 1:17:53 PM

I'll say it again. I see two dozen spyware tickets a week. Most are the Rogue AntiSpyware variety.

I've never had a single one come from a FireFox user. Every single one is through IE.

Everyone can preach whatever is the most secure browser all they want. The reality is the reality.

#10 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 3/26/2010 2:33:23 PM

#9: There you go again, TL. Trying to scuttle the MS talking points with your "facts" and "reality".

#11 By 228224 (74.59.86.16) at 3/26/2010 4:27:00 PM

IE is thill the standard in large business for one very large reason - it has group policy settings that can lock down IE settings. Firefox [last I check] has no group policy settings [I believe there is a basic group policy settings available from third party].

Haven't touched Chrome in about a year but I noticed two odd things. First [last I checked] it doesn't install in Program Files but in the users own profile. Second, if you disable certain IP addresses or ports that it wants to check for updates, the company's firewall will be bombarded with denys.

You do have to wonder on how secure Firefox is when the original 3.0 release is on it's 18th [so far] update since it was released maybe 2 years ago. That doesn't seem that secure. I'm not saying IE is secure either....

@TechLarry: Errr. If a machine is getting hit with the fake anti-virus crap, it's not an issue with the browser but with the real anti-virus/anti-malware on those systems. Plus you have people who aren't TRAINED not to touch that crap.

Just about everyone I know [these are mostly computer novices] has never hit anything in malware on their systems. I've informed them regularly on what to look for.

#12 By 4240821 (213.139.195.162) at 10/27/2023 9:15:03 AM