Download here.

downloads

-

**INTERNET EXPLORER

68,000,000 USERS CAN'T BE WRONG**

msleeper wrote:

**INTERNET EXPLORER

68,000,000 USERS ARE DEFINITELY WRONG**

^fixed.

I downloaded it that night it came out or when this original post went up and I'm pretty happy with it; so far bug freeeeeeeeee

But that's probably due to my computer.

Didn't have that with FF2, though...

msleeper wrote:

**INTERNET EXPLORER

68,000,000 USERS CAN'T BE WRONG**

Well, seeing how it comes with the OS that runs on 80% of all home machines, it's all most people know and it since it does get the job done most don't see a need for anything else. I have a friend who didn't even know there __any __browsers other than IE out there. IE7 is a fine product but I prefer Firefox. It's a more secure browser. Think about it; if you want to infect the most machines possible you attack the most commonly used software. Everyone uses a web browser and most use IE so it gets the most attacks. I also like the features. Firefox has always been innovating these things such as tabbed browsing, ad blockers and a host of other really spiffy add-ons available.

My most compelling reason for choosing Firefox over IE: full W3 compliance.

bizob wrote:
It's a more secure browser. Think about it; if you want to infect the most machines possible you attack the most commonly used software. Everyone uses a web browser and most use IE so it gets the most attacks.

First off, I use Firefox as well.

But this is not a valid argument: IE has become a lot better of late about operational security: warning you when you're viewing a phishing site, stopping you from downloading and executing programs without really noticing, etc.

And the business about getting fewer attacks for it because it has smaller market share is a corollary of the idea of security through obscurity. It is not an inherent or effective system of securing a piece of software.

Edit: "inherent system" lolwut?

Hober wrote:
First off, I use Firefox as well.

But this is not a valid argument: IE has become a lot better of late about operational security: warning you when you're viewing a phishing site, stopping you from downloading and executing programs without really noticing, etc.

And the business about getting fewer attacks for it because it has smaller market share is a corollary of the idea of security through obscurity. It is not an inherent or effective system of securing a piece of software.

Good points Hober. Yes IE has gotten tons better at security over the years especially version 7, but I feel it is still not as secure as FF. There are still many IE exploits available, and yes, FF has some (even some of the same ones) too.

I certainly don't buy into the "security through obscurity" bit either. But why are there so many more virus' written for Windows than Mac? Truth is both have vulnerabilities and Macs aren't immune by any means, no OS is, not even the beloved Penguin flavors. I'm just saying it's a __contributing __ factor that the "big dog" will always get the most attention.

Hober wrote:
It is not an ....effective system of securing a piece of software.

i disagree. the BEST way to not get robbed: Don't let people know you got stuff.

lol @ that.
but i never used to use IE, back when ie was (total) crap i used to use Netscape, back when it was basically the only choice. and i switched to firefox for a little while when my ie locked. but then IE7 got some updates and stuff, and i did a full system reinstall (for other reasons, not the IE locking) and it works fine now.
the main reason i like ie7 its basically back boned into XP (and definatly vista)... and i use those. so. i deal with it. i used firefox for awhile and it was great. but some of the way things ran with it i didn't like. so. i have no real need to switch :-/ BOTH firefox and ie7 basically do the things i "need" so either is good enough for me.

That guy is faaast with updates... unlike a certain webcomic I know.