Why do the majority of you still use Internet Explorer?
- Thread starter Martz
- Start date
-
Hey - turns out IRC is out and something a little more modern has taken it's place... A little thing called Discord!
Join our community @ https://discord.gg/JuaSzXBZrk for a pick-up game, or just to rekindle with fellow community members.
I moved over to using MyIE for a while, prefered the tabbed browser, and popup blocker stuff, but kinda drifted back to IE, especially after SP2 added the popup blocker.
I have been using IE since ... well, since it tried to take over from Mosaic and then Netscape joined in ... hehe, for many a year. I know its not great, but well, its inoffensive I think is the best description. I probably will try out Firefox at some point, but not got round to it yet.
I have been using IE since ... well, since it tried to take over from Mosaic and then Netscape joined in ... hehe, for many a year. I know its not great, but well, its inoffensive I think is the best description. I probably will try out Firefox at some point, but not got round to it yet.
Using MYIE2, which is essentially IE with a load of plugins shoved on.
Mozilla is hugely overrated imo. Tried several different versions of it - didn't like any of them.
Mozilla is hugely overrated imo. Tried several different versions of it - didn't like any of them.
Firefox gives me less spyware, at least from what Adaware reports after a scan.
Oh and that tabbed brwsing is really hard to go away from after you have become used to it.
Oh and that tabbed brwsing is really hard to go away from after you have become used to it.
Using Firefox.
Why?
1. Smaller;
2. Faster;
3. I can see source code if I want/build my own version;
4. Its free - don't see why I should pay for a browser, but quite happy to contrinute if it is voluntary;
5. Did I mention it's small?
6. All the other reasons mentioned by the posts above this one.
Also trying to gradually wean myself of Microsoft Software. I just fundamentally object to their business model, especially product activation. As someone who buys all their own software legitimately, I object to product activation which is basically saying "you're guilty until innocent". It also removes my freedom to use my PC hardware and software in accordance with my wishes, and allows remote rooting by MS. No thanks.
Sure, I could download wareZ copies/keygens/etc, but why bother when there is fundamentally better software out there available for free, legitimately?
I'm currently evaluating my software needs and the games I'm likely to play to see if I can get away with an all *nix solution, or if I'll need to retain a vestigial XP install for some games - and it would literally just be used for games.
Did I mention firefox was small? My approach to computing is getting more zen-like as time goes on. I want to be able to install the bare minimum I need and no more. If I need something, I can always install it later. Any bloat I really resent as it degrades system performance for what I need to do, and damned if bloat is going to be allowed to reduce my frames per second!
Why?
1. Smaller;
2. Faster;
3. I can see source code if I want/build my own version;
4. Its free - don't see why I should pay for a browser, but quite happy to contrinute if it is voluntary;
5. Did I mention it's small?
6. All the other reasons mentioned by the posts above this one.
Also trying to gradually wean myself of Microsoft Software. I just fundamentally object to their business model, especially product activation. As someone who buys all their own software legitimately, I object to product activation which is basically saying "you're guilty until innocent". It also removes my freedom to use my PC hardware and software in accordance with my wishes, and allows remote rooting by MS. No thanks.
Sure, I could download wareZ copies/keygens/etc, but why bother when there is fundamentally better software out there available for free, legitimately?
I'm currently evaluating my software needs and the games I'm likely to play to see if I can get away with an all *nix solution, or if I'll need to retain a vestigial XP install for some games - and it would literally just be used for games.
Did I mention firefox was small? My approach to computing is getting more zen-like as time goes on. I want to be able to install the bare minimum I need and no more. If I need something, I can always install it later. Any bloat I really resent as it degrades system performance for what I need to do, and damned if bloat is going to be allowed to reduce my frames per second!
Thuringwethil said:
Because you want to be able to put your hand on your heart and say that you stole from Microsoft.
Martz said:
I find it funny that microsoft has no solutions of it's own for spyware, merely reroutes you to other peoples products (adaware owns though.) They make the problems but cba to fix them, pathetic. I'm also sick of their inefficient code wasting my memory, msn messenger 7 beta is a prime example, it devours memory relentlessly. Don't even talk to me about how bad the longhorn betas are (my mate's dad is in the msndn so he gets the latest betas), you need 512 mb like me to barely load the os, 1gb if you actually want to do anything with it. Open source leads to much more elegant and efficent coding so doesn't waste half your ram on one program. Yet another reason why freeware is the best ware. If you never even try firefox or opera (preferably both) then you are missing out badly.
How many Operation Systems come with a full firewall, anti-virus and anti-spyware stuff? And why is it bad to "reroute" to other products? Everybody knows MS Paint is basicly useless so people use Photoshop or whatever, is that bad? Plus... why "reinvent the wheel"?-=Dark_Shadow=- said:
Microsoft didnt make the spyware or those problems. If someone installs a program and the installer adds spyware you cant blame MS for that.-=Dark_Shadow=- said:
Nobody has their source code, so you cant judge that.-=Dark_Shadow=- said:
It was/is a BETA, meaning its not done yet... dont bash non-finished products yet.-=Dark_Shadow=- said:
So switch to a free OS and all their free products. Nobody is forcing you to use Windows or anything from MS. If you run Windows then you are a hypocrite.-=Dark_Shadow=- said:
Everybody is always bashing MS.. getting a bit tired of it. Dont like it? Dont use it!
Last edited:
Lex like I said, my mates dad is in the msndn so before you go saying that I don't have access to source code then consider again. My mate himself is a script kiddy so he knows how crappy the coding is. Windows is a thing in life that you have to accept, linux is not feasable, there aren't even any wireless network drivers, belive me, I have a linux partition but when I can't even use the internet on it then it's appeal is always going to be limited.
The reason I knock messenger 7 beta is simple, it wont change, I've been through four builds now and if anything the memory drain has got worse. It was the same with msn 6 and the respective beta versions, more memory every time. I don't see how it is hypocritical to use windows when there is no feasable alternative, I even use star office as an alternative to ms office, belive me, I'm far more commited to the cause of freeware than most users are. Ask any knowledgable coder, you don't need the source code to know that ms code is inefficiant.
I also find microsofts attempts to strangle any competition irritating, by creating asp they tried their very hardest to destroy php which was open source, they tried to destroy mysql which was also free. They delibratley made sure that asp was as uncompliant as possible with other browsers to make sure ie had the upper hand at least for a while. Problem for microsoft is that the other browsers have not only caught up, they have overtaken ie, just waiting to see what microsoft will pull out of it's sleve next to try and destroy opera and firefox. Then of course there were their attempts to stifle other media players with the wma and wmv formats and all that drma nonsense. Microsoft's existance as a simple company is against the interests of computer users.
The reason I knock messenger 7 beta is simple, it wont change, I've been through four builds now and if anything the memory drain has got worse. It was the same with msn 6 and the respective beta versions, more memory every time. I don't see how it is hypocritical to use windows when there is no feasable alternative, I even use star office as an alternative to ms office, belive me, I'm far more commited to the cause of freeware than most users are. Ask any knowledgable coder, you don't need the source code to know that ms code is inefficiant.
I also find microsofts attempts to strangle any competition irritating, by creating asp they tried their very hardest to destroy php which was open source, they tried to destroy mysql which was also free. They delibratley made sure that asp was as uncompliant as possible with other browsers to make sure ie had the upper hand at least for a while. Problem for microsoft is that the other browsers have not only caught up, they have overtaken ie, just waiting to see what microsoft will pull out of it's sleve next to try and destroy opera and firefox. Then of course there were their attempts to stifle other media players with the wma and wmv formats and all that drma nonsense. Microsoft's existance as a simple company is against the interests of computer users.
If hes a script kiddy he knows fuck all about coding... thats the term script kiddy.
I don't see how it is hypocritical to use windows when there is no feasable alternative <== If there is no feasable alternative why not bitch, bash and moan that other stuff? since its gotta be a lot worse then..
By creating asp they tried to destroy php. <== You cant "destroy" other products. Only way is by making a better product so that customers will switch to that instead. Are you telling me thats bad? Woe me for better products..
They delibratley made sure that asp was as uncompliant as possible with other browsers to make sure ie had the upper hand at least for a while. <== How do you know it was delibrately? Could be because of crap coding on other browsers.. other browsers are always kinda iffy with standard plugins like flash. So prolly the same with anything else new, like asp. Not MS's fault that other browsers dont support asp, those browsers + coders need to take care of themselves.
Microsoft's existance as a simple company is against the interests of computer users. <==
They are _pouring_ money into development and research, unlike any other company. Latest thing they made i guess was that HomeMediaCenter-thingie, which will surely but slowly get into homes and other companies will prolly _follow_. Microsoft is always busy creating and making new stuff, trying to have an edge over competition.
Freeware hardly has money, because of the simply reason its free. So they can never spend money on research. So they will prolly just lag behind and walk after big companies who _do_ innovate.
I don't see how it is hypocritical to use windows when there is no feasable alternative <== If there is no feasable alternative why not bitch, bash and moan that other stuff? since its gotta be a lot worse then..
By creating asp they tried to destroy php. <== You cant "destroy" other products. Only way is by making a better product so that customers will switch to that instead. Are you telling me thats bad? Woe me for better products..
They delibratley made sure that asp was as uncompliant as possible with other browsers to make sure ie had the upper hand at least for a while. <== How do you know it was delibrately? Could be because of crap coding on other browsers.. other browsers are always kinda iffy with standard plugins like flash. So prolly the same with anything else new, like asp. Not MS's fault that other browsers dont support asp, those browsers + coders need to take care of themselves.
Microsoft's existance as a simple company is against the interests of computer users. <==
They are _pouring_ money into development and research, unlike any other company. Latest thing they made i guess was that HomeMediaCenter-thingie, which will surely but slowly get into homes and other companies will prolly _follow_. Microsoft is always busy creating and making new stuff, trying to have an edge over competition.Freeware hardly has money, because of the simply reason its free. So they can never spend money on research. So they will prolly just lag behind and walk after big companies who _do_ innovate.
tried switching to firefox today but i couldnt get used to it.. i like opera too much 
I do use it when i need to leech lots of stuff from 1 page tho 
I do use it when i need to leech lots of stuff from 1 page tho 
Humph said:
Err, I thought that the point of stealing was nickin' stuff which is valuable/worth something. In which case, why on earth would I want to nick anything from Microsoft?
@Lex - I don't think you can say that microsoft has poured millions into innovation. They have, for the most part, simply made their own adaptations of other people's inventions - windows comes from Xerox's Palo Alto Research Centre work on GUIs way back when (as do all GUIs), DOS they bought in, etc etc.
Their products have achieved such widespread use not by being the best, but simply because, due to a large helping of luck, they have become the default option. And, as this thread so ably demonstrates, 90% of all users can't be arsed changing once they get set in their ways/used to the default.
<sarcasm>The main bitch about Linux is the steep learning curve, but if it was supplied as the default option on all new PCs, I imagine we'd have a situation the reverse of the present - namely that everyone continued to use linux despite this much better OS, WindowsXP being out there.</sarcasm>
Last edited:
can someone tell me how to make firefox open links which open in a new window, open in a new tab instead, middle mouse works but i keep forgetting
Oh har har, microsoft is worthless! Oh how funny!Thuringwethil said:
XP Pro is probably worth 100 quid (I wouldn't know, I've never seen a genuine copy).