FireFakes ? [Archive]

View Full Version : FireFakes ?

LeftEyeNine

04-12-2007, 11:48

The following site claims to nullify the urban legends about Firefox which has always been famous for being the secure and faster way to surf the web.

Whaddaya think ?

Here goes (http://mywebpages.comcast.net/SupportCD/FirefoxMyths.html).

AntiochusIII

04-12-2007, 12:15

Whaddaya think ?

Here goes (http://mywebpages.comcast.net/SupportCD/FirefoxMyths.html).Bah. Propaganda.

Yes, I've read it. Yes, there's a lot of myths about Firefox and this site points out quite a few flaws and, well, myths about it. But if you read carefully it's clearly very petty-minded.

Example: the comparison of systems requirement. It claims that Firefox requires a higher system requirement than IE, then proceeds to prove itself wrong. It compares Firefox's recommended to IE's minimum and then call it on Firefox! WTH!?

Or the market share thing. It puts the point about IE regaining market share, short and sweet with no trace of doubt, then proceeds to question Firefox's share as may be we should take it with a grain of salt. :no:

Though I must admit references to Opera's capability is quite interesting. Ah well, it's not like I need more than one browser type. :juggle2:

Tran

04-12-2007, 12:16

Here goes the battle between IE maniacs and Firefox addicts!

By the way, I smell fire...I should leave immediately! :laugh4:

AntiochusIII

04-12-2007, 12:18

Here goes the battle between IE maniacs and Firefox addicts!

By the way, I smell fire...I should leave immediately! :laugh4:IE sucks. ~;)

Mind you, there are really cool browsers out there that nobody knows like Opera and M...something (not Mozilla) and all that. But IE? Naaaahh...

LeftEyeNine

04-12-2007, 12:54

Mind you, there are really cool browsers out there that nobody knows like Opera and M...something (not Mozilla) and all that. But IE? Naaaahh...

LOOK ! THAT'S AN EMO BRITNEY SPEARS ! NO THAT'S A JOHN-WOO-SLOWED FLYING KICK ! OH NO, THAT'S VINCE CARTER ON VIAGRA ! NO, NOT ANY OF THEM !

THAT'S MAXTHON ! MAXTHON ! MAXTHON !

AntiochusIII

04-12-2007, 13:20

THAT'S MAXTHON ! MAXTHON ! MAXTHON !Ah, finally!

That's what I was thinking. Thx. ~:)

Stig

04-12-2007, 13:25

Heh, do I care. I use Firefox because it's more user friendly imo

caravel

04-12-2007, 13:31

Example: the comparison of systems requirement. It claims that Firefox requires a higher system requirement than IE, then proceeds to prove itself wrong. It compares Firefox's recommended to IE's minimum and then call it on Firefox! WTH!?
Considering most of IE is already running anyway, as it's part of the OS and just uses the explorer process for it's UI, it is pretty obvious that Firefox is going to be bigger than IE. The rubbish about running IE6 on a 486 is laughable. You would need to run on Windows 95 anyway, because 16MB of RAM and a 486/66 is just too low spec for Windows 98/98SE/ME. The "faster from a cold start" claim is also ludicrous, as IE6 is always running anyway. I'm not claiming that FireFox blisteringly fast, because it definitely isn't. It has been getting progressively more bloated like the Mozilla Suite before it.

TevashSzat

04-12-2007, 14:57

Firefox IMO is much better simply because my school computers are awful and takes like 5 min to get onto googel using IE, but it is about 500% faster when firefox is used

Husar

04-12-2007, 17:46

Crazed Rabbit

04-12-2007, 18:51

I've run the older (v6, I think) IE and firefox, on a 180MHz, decade old machine. Both run about the same, but firefox has built in pop-up blocker. Win: firefox.

IE7 helps a lot into pulling microsoft even, but this myth page looks like a hack job.

CR

Alexander the Pretty Good

04-12-2007, 20:43

What a dumb article. I'd never heard people claim most of these "myths" and some of them are quite petty (the marketshare of 10% vs. 9.6% is a great case in point).

And opera is for girls. Because only girls like, uh, operas. ~;p

Beirut

04-12-2007, 21:07

Husar

04-12-2007, 22:01

What a dumb article. I'd never heard people claim most of these "myths" and some of them are quite petty (the marketshare of 10% vs. 9.6% is a great case in point).
You must've missed the 180 or so security issues of Firefox compared to Opera's 5...
Yes, the article has some superfluous points, but if you read only the important ones, you get the picture.:juggle2:

Sasaki Kojiro

04-12-2007, 22:06

THE FIREFOX GOD WILL SMITE THEM!

Or at least he will if their claim that it is a religion is true.

Pannonian

04-13-2007, 00:53

Most of you somehow missed that...

Opera

is clearly superior to IE and Firefox concerning speed, security and almost everything else as well.:oops:

I was about to quote all the relevant parts, but I'm gonna let you search them yourselves.~;)
Opera is superior to Firefox in performance, but Firefox is more customisable. I usually start with Firefox, then switch to Opera if the page doesn't work on FF. It says a lot that I recently saw a screenshot and didn't recognise the browser. Then I looked closer and saw IE's e in the corner. It's been a few years since I last used IE (thanks to a certain worm), and I haven't missed it.

Xiahou

04-13-2007, 02:35

Pannonian

04-13-2007, 03:02

Sounds like the guy is cherry-picking some of his statistics to me. He seems to compare IE6&7 to Firefox 1x & 2 interchangeably into whatever combination gets him that results he's fishing for.

Firefox is no panacea- but I've been far happier, far more secure, and have gotten far less spyware (pretty much none) since I moved to Firefox w/NoScript & AdBlock. I keep meaning to check out Opera, but it's tough to leave Firefox- when it aint broke, don't fix it.

Does anyone know if Opera has any widgets that parallel NoScript and AdBlock?
My version of Opera is 7.23, so things may have changed since then. Opera 7.x can disable javascript by function and has an inbuilt popup blocker, but one cannot customise them as much as Noscript and Adblock. Opera also has mouse gestures (which was where I first encountered the concept), but the equivalent FF add-on I'm using can customise those gestures.

Add-ons I've currently installed:
Greasemonkey - enables scripting, download or write your own scripts to taste.
Chromeplus - allows easy editing of chrome files to customise the browser.
Adblock plus
All-in-one-gestures - mouse gestures
Filetitle - saves webpages by name of the page (on titlebar), rather than the file name which can often be something like index.php. An IE feature I missed in Opera and Firefox.
Fasterfox - optimisation.
Flashgot - integrating downloads with download managers.
Forecastfox - weather on status bar.
Imagezoom - zoom in specified images.
Paste-and-go - the Opera option of paste and go in one click. Petty, but I missed it when I switched to FF.
Linkification - turns text links into clickable links.
Menu editor - for even easier editing or browser menus. I might dive back into chrome to clean a few things up though.
Noscript
Session manager - remembers sessions. A feature I missed from Opera, especially when FF 1.0.x kept crashing, but it's been executed even better here so it's worthwhile even with the stable FF 2.0.x.
Show image - Stop loading page to avoid waiting, then show specified image from shown placeholder. An IE feature I missed from Opera and FF.
Stop-or-Reload button - combines stop and reload buttons into one. Another petty thing I missed from Opera.
Switch Window Mode - tabbed browsing was done much better than in 2.0.x, but this clears up any remaining problems and raises it to Opera levels.

AFAICS, there aren't any Opera or IE features I wanted that haven't been replicated by my add-ons. However, Opera has a much smaller footprint and runs faster, not helped by my gazillion add-ons.

x-dANGEr

04-13-2007, 08:22

Just one thing.. I use IE6, and never really had "big" issues with it. What's it with sites being slow.. I never notice any slowdowns.. err... (Or do you guys count speed by ms's, because if you do.. As if it matters)

sapi

04-13-2007, 12:11

Considering most of IE is already running anyway, as it's part of the OS and just uses the explorer process for it's UI, it is pretty obvious that Firefox is going to be bigger than IE. The rubbish about running IE6 on a 486 is laughable. You would need to run on Windows 95 anyway, because 16MB of RAM and a 486/66 is just too low spec for Windows 98/98SE/ME. The "faster from a cold start" claim is also ludicrous, as IE6 is always running anyway. I'm not claiming that FireFox blisteringly fast, because it definitely isn't. It has been getting progressively more bloated like the Mozilla Suite before it.
I'd also like to point out that that's just because IE is prefetched by default; ff isn't

Husar

04-13-2007, 16:27

I'd also like to point out that that's just because IE is prefetched by default; ff isn't
That's why he points out that Opera still starts faster than ff.~;p

Phatose

04-15-2007, 03:34

To be honest, I'm having trouble believing there are all that many occasions where browser speed, not simple connection speed, will be the limiting factor in browsing speed.

As for the security claims, I have to wonder if reported issues are a good metric of actual security. Somehow, I doubt there are really all that many people out there looking with criminal motivation to find security holes in Opera, since it's such a small target. Fewer users will find fewer holes, and malicious software is generally going to attack the richest grounds. I'd reasonably expect Opera to have very few documented holes, firefox to have more, and IE to be buried in the things - which, if I'm not mistaken, is exactly what we see.

As for Opera - well, I haven't had enough issues with firefox to merit switching to another browser. It even took me a good while to ditch IE, which was burdened with issues thanks to it's market-leader bullseye. Additionally, the claims of it being standards-compliant worries me - in practical terms, I don't give a baboon's buttocks whether or not it complies to standards that aren't really standards since they're the only ones who follow them, but whether or not it complies to the way things are actually done in the wilds of the intarweb. Standards compliant would seem to imply that it's doing things differently then IE, and simple reality is that many, many more webpages are designed for IE then for WC3 standards. How well does it deal with pages designed for IE?

Rilder

04-16-2007, 04:40

There both equal imho, ive used both and prefer IE over it, what bothers me is all these Firefox fanboys thinking that only a moronic moron of moroningham would use IE.

Besides the only reason firefox has any users is because its named after some anime chick according to Uncyclopedia.

AntiochusIII

04-16-2007, 06:46

Besides the only reason firefox has any users is because its named after some anime chick according to Uncyclopedia. :inquisitive:

Rilder

04-16-2007, 08:33

:inquisitive:

http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Firefox

(Removed hotlinked pic. Please host the images on your own, prefer providers like Imageshack, Photobucket etc. - LEN)

caravel

04-16-2007, 13:08

@Rilder: You had to link that that place didn't you??? :shame:

I went browsing around and found some hilarious articles, and have been in fits here. My work colleagues must think I've gone completely mad. :embarassed: :laugh4:

AntiochusIII

04-16-2007, 22:31

http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/FirefoxOh, I know what the uncyclopedia is, but...

:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

Awesome article. It probably takes someone with a familiarity with anime magical girl/moe cliches *bows head in shame* to fully enjoy the explanation, though.

Xiahou

04-18-2007, 04:45

http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Firefox

“In Soviet Russia, Mozilla Firefox keeps tabs on YOU!!!”

~ Russian Reversal on Mozilla Firefox :laugh4:

That was the first Yakov Smirnoff knock-off joke in a long time that I actually thought was funny. :beam:

edyzmedieval

04-18-2007, 09:45

All your IE are belong to Firefox. ~;)