Why do the majority of you still use Internet Explorer?

[Humph]

Ah right, now I'm ready to claim victory:

Did I mention firefox was small?

I want to be able to install the bare minimum I need and no more.

Any bloat I really resent as it degrades system performance

Really?

Let's see.
Program install folders:

Maxthon/MyIE2: 1.79 MB (1,887,513 bytes)
MS IE: 1.02 MB (1,076,023 bytes)
Firefox: 13.7 MB (14,429,194 bytes)

! Looks like mozilla Firefox is more than TEN TIMES bigger! Now that's what I call bloat!

RAM usage? Let's see...
All browsers had one window/tab open, all viewing www.google.co.uk

Maxthon/MyIE2: 16,560k
MS IE: 20,724
Firefox: 23,376

Once again, it seems that firefox hogged the most resources.

So much for your oh-so-efficient Firefox!

 

[SoldierBoy]

pld hump!

 

[subZ]

Humph, do you actually believe that Firefox's installer/.exe being bigger than the others, (of which I highly doubt that IE is that small, according to the download of it), has anything to do with efficience?

 

[Humph]

The file sizes posted are the sizes of the installation folders. (C:/program files/xxxxxxxxx)

 

[Humph]

Installer.exe file sizes are:

Maxthon 1.81MB
MS IE: 480KB < tiny!
Mozilla 4.7MB

Sorry to break your rose-tinted glasses, but Firefox is obese.

 

[subZ]

Now let's see the same results on my own computer, between Internet Explorer and Mozilla Firefox, full installation:

Internet Explorer
(Quote from microsoft.com)
Windows XP:
32 MB of RAM minimum
Full install size: 12.0 MB

Mozilla Firefox
(Quote from mozilla.org)
"for Windows, English (4.7MB)"

--

Now, you say Internet Explorer's installation file is 480 KB.
You're right, but what about the files it downloads from the installer file itself?
The installer is maximum 12 mb, so I now wonder where the last 11,520 kb went.
The Windows folder? I bet they did. So you can't use the Internet Explorer folder only.

Firefox's folder is the same place. The folder itself is 13,7 mb.

--

RAM usage upon immediate opening of both browsers with the startpage as www.google.com

Internet Explorer: 11,296 KB
Mozilla Firefox: 14,117 KB

I know which browser I would use. As long as you do the same.

 

[Humph]

Now let's see the same results on my own computer, between Internet Explorer and Mozilla Firefox, full installation:

Internet Explorer
(Quote from microsoft.com)
Windows XP:
32 MB of RAM minimum
Full install size: 12.0 MB

That's still smaller than firefox is when it's installed.

And then you say the Mozilla Firefox folder is 4,7 mb? Wrong. The installer is 4,7 mb. The folder itself is 13,7 mb.

No I didn't. I said the folder was 13.7 and the installer was 4.7. I suggest you actually read posts before stating that information in them is false.

Internet Explorer: 11,296 KB
Mozilla Firefox: 14,117 KB

I use Maxthon - it owns them both.

 

[Mido]

Installer.exe file sizes are:

Maxthon 1.81MB
MS IE: 480KB < tiny!
Mozilla 4.7MB

Sorry to break your rose-tinted glasses, but Firefox is obese.

oh no, 4 mb

 

[Humph]

oh no, 4 mb

Indeed, but when there's a bunch of people whining about effiency and bloat, you just have to tell them the truth and throw it back in their faces.

The fact remains, there are nicer browsers than Firefox.

 

[sobo]

is there tabbed browsing in IE ?
if so ill consider switching to Manthox or what its called once I reformat and can get SP2.

Atm Im using such a bad copy of Win XP that I cant install any SP

 

[Humph]

Maxthon has tabbed browsing

 

[Martz]

If it still uses IE, it's still a bugy and slow piece of shit.

Every major security firm out there says to ditch MS IE - and use something else. Doesn't matter what it is, as long as it's not IE.

 

['//3iRd(o)]

idd; if you're after peace-of-mind then it's generally best to use software that isn't targeted by everyone trying to find exploits in it.

I still use IE however; since it's a lot faster than firefox. Ffx takes 3x longer to load up on my box at work, whereas a percentage of the files required for IE will probably be loaded up with the o/s.

IE may be bloat, but if the o/s is designed with IE integratable then surely it's going to be faster than _any_ (decent) additional software.

 

[dog]

Oh man, I gave up reading all these posts... I use firefox on pc, safari / firefox on mac.

One thing I don't get, is that MS have actually succeeded in lowering peoples expectations to a OS to the point, where they will happily defend MS for it's security flaws(which are most aboundant in its built in mail / browser applications). Come on ffs, ofcourse it's not "microsofts fault" if you get a virus, trojan, worm og some crappy spyware of sorts installed.. But it's definitely THEIR fault, that it's so bloody easy... And why should you be worried about which site you browse? You people are happily accepting your computer setting limitations for your behavior.. I just don't get it. It's not as if all sites "advertises" their bad behaviour, yes, you may deem russian goat porn unsafe, and get it elsewhere than www, but most likely, you will STILL get spywares etc, installed.. why? Because IE allows it.

No wireless drivers for linux? Come again, pls. Is this kindergarden? I have a lappie right here that will happily boot VIA it's wireless... sheesh

The whole browser war, for those ancient enough to remember it, resulted in a attitude towards html rendering that has basically cost the 'net ALOT of it's theoretical accessibility, the fact that MS will to this day STILL not provide a standards / recommendation compliant browser... Sad.

"IE6 with sp2, yadda yadda yadda" - Come on, it's still an insecure browser, it still doesn't provide you with tabbed browsing(a absolutely MUST HAVE once you get into it), it's still basically a bloated piece of shite software.. get real. I regularly clean up computers that haven't browsed anything but boring, work related shit, are protected beyong most homeluser computers, updated to the max, AV, etc... and they still attract spyware like cowdung attracts flies on a hot summer day..

You know what? You lot stick to IE, you deserve no better

 

[Humph]

it still doesn't provide you with tabbed browsing

Maxthon does...

 

[Joko]

Indeed, but when there's a bunch of people whining about effiency and bloat, you just have to tell them the truth and throw it back in their faces.

The fact remains, there are nicer browsers than Firefox.

As usual, humph can't see the wood for the trees.

1. He assumes ur running Firefox on a windows platform.
2. 480KB installer for IE - true - now, factor in downloaded files to actually get a working browser, plus all the usual plugins to get it to an acceptable level of working, plus all the security fixes to fix basic vulnerabilities caused by sloppy coding, and finally factor in all the dependent files IE spews into /system, /system32 /windows and so on, and guess which browser is far and away the biggest. That's right, IE.

Back to the drawing board bumfro...

 

[Humph]

Back to the drawing board bumfro...

Not really - Mozilla is still bigger and slower.

 

[Andy]

Re:

why do u really care who uses what, do u care what underwear they have?

IE may be full of security holes, but it displays what i want so im happy
Firefox is fine i just didnt like it
Opera i liked and used for a while, but when i reinstalled i didnt put it back and i dont miss it

so in conclusion IE is for lazy fuckers

 

[doh]

Internet Explorer: 11,296 KB
Mozilla Firefox: 14,117 KB

Now let me just follow up on this for humpos sake..

Try open 5 tabs or windows in firefox and load a page.. i often have 5 tab open at the same time..
Then open 5 pages with IE..
Now besides from having your taskbar clogged up with IE's, take a look at your task manger now..
Oh, by the way, the 5 IE processes you will see are not the same, and they also dont share each others memory heap, eg, you have to add up the memory usage from every one of them.

I wont even comment on the program install folders.. I wouldn't even be suprised if IE still works after you delete its install folder

Indeed Firefox might be slower at loading, (no wonder when its not all memory resident constantly like IE) but once its open its just as fast in my experience..
Solution to the problem dont close your Firefox, just open new tabs and tabs and tabs and... Its not like it starts a new memory globbing process for every page you have open....

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.

Well, what can i say.. Looks like you have no idea what you are talking about here, first things first..

As pointed out before, a script kiddie doesnt know anything about coding, and usually just "scripts" or exploits the real code.

"Windows is a thing in life that you have to accept"
Yeah, indeed you have to accept it being that. But that doesnt mean you have to use it..

"linux is not feasable"
Why not?

"there aren't even any wireless network drivers"
Uh.. bullshit?

"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."
This doesn't really say anything about Linux, but more about your knowledge on the subject, doesn't it?

Now about this ASP/PHP thing... Last time i checked ASP and PHP didnt have anything to do with HTML and rendering.. then how exactly can it be "uncompliant" to other browsers?

 

['//3iRd(o)]

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.

Oh.. my ... fucking ... god.

Now I realise they don't teach things like server side scripting in schools - but surely they teach you that you must always try to get your facts right before you try to enter a discussion (/argument)?

It's taken me a while to recover from the hysterics on this one. I'd give you green rep for making me laugh if it didn't cancel out the fact you must be truely ignorant.

Where to start with this; in fact is it even worth contending?

Firstly; Microsoft did not create ASP to contend with PHP. Every coder knows that they must use the best, suitable, tool for the job (as with any trade). Having the option to use one language over another aids to your ability to be dynamic.

I think you'll find that ASP was first announced before PHP had even become a language in itself (if my history serves me correct, PHP started off as just an extension of perl).

Secondly; since when has ASP (Microsoft) ever "contended" with MySQL? Do you even know what these "things" are? ASP and MySQL entwine quite nicely.

Finally... The bit that just tops off the icing on the cake. (so much so; I just need to requote it...)

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.

Now I think I gave away the clue in my first line here... But if you were to find out exactly what ASP stands for then you'd realise how moronic you've been... Actually, to save you the trouble I'll just tell you:

ASP = Active Server Pages.. (Maybe this needs to be a bit bigger?)

Active Server Pages (how's that?)

Now I realise it may have been hard to distinguish the relativity of event processes by looking at the word PHP (which for many has always been dubbed "Personal Home Page Tools")... But come on; the key is in the name here; I can't think how much clearer they could've made this without bashing you over the head with the concept.

ASP, PHP, Perl, CGI, Coldfusion... whatever takes your fancy... These are in essence, all Server-side languages. (Please say I don't have to explain this to you... but to save me posting any more, I will anyway)..

This basically means that all the work of processing and preparing data to be transported to the client is done server side; and any data to be sent to the client can be prepared in any shape or form... the most popular of course being HTML.

If an ASP page does not work correctly in another browser; it is not the fault of the language ASP... It will most probably be a flaw in the HTML/Javascript/whatever coding embedded in the page; which for all intents and purposes could be written in any server side language to be given the same effect.

I'd like to go on... but quite frankly I think I've wasted enough energy embarassing you on this occasion.. Please don't make this a habbit; in future think before you post.

~Merry Xmas~