Miscellaneous > Applications

Internet Explorer is NOT a webbrowser

<< < (4/4)

Aloone_Jonez:

--- Quote from: muzzy ---Firefox isn't any more secure than IE, you'll learn it soon enough now that it's becoming popular and more worthwhile to attack. It's equally vulnerable, just less profitable target. The latter is changing, the former is staying.
--- End quote ---


The very fact that IE uses ActiveX controls makes it more vunerable.


--- Quote from: muzzy ---SVG support in IE would be really nice, though. I'd love that.
--- End quote ---


You can download an add-on to use SVGs in IE but I'm not going to show you as I'd be breaking the forum rules by helping someone with a Microsoft product. :p


--- Quote from: muzzy ---Oh, and activeX could in theory be secure, too, but that's only theory. Wanna bet microsoft will reimplement the whole activex deal with .NET, and it'll actually be secure this time?
--- End quote ---


Well we'll just have to see about how secure ActiveX is under .NET when they release it. Hopefully if IE's market share is low enough people won't bother using ActiveX controls on their websites anyway - they'll be replace by the far superior Javascript applets.

Hang on, if ActiveX will be implemented under .NET and .NET will be portable does this mean that ActiveX controls will no longer be IE only?

If Microsoft really wants to make ActiveX controls on the web a success then they'll have to become multi-platform even if the developer tools remain Windows only.

muzzy:
Implementing activex-like technology using .NET would mean that it gets multiplatform, yes. Basically, it'd be a total java killer :)

Oh, and merely add-on being available isn't a very good option from a webdesigner's point of view. Nobody wants to install extra crap for a mere website to function, so people will just not view the site.

BobTheHob:

--- Quote from: muzzy ---Implementing activex-like technology using .NET would mean that it gets multiplatform, yes. Basically, it'd be a total java killer :)

Oh, and merely add-on being available isn't a very good option from a webdesigner's point of view. Nobody wants to install extra crap for a mere website to function, so people will just not view the site.
--- End quote ---
Excuse me, but I don't think other devs actually want the scourge that is activeHex in their products.
Also, Java owns activeHex's ass. Sun is a good company, I trust Sun, I love Solaris. Sun puts their shit on other platforms, microHardFallus is trash. Whenever I find a business that only supports IE, no matter how good a deal i could get, i take my business elseware. If it was an important point of business, I usually send a generic letter to the business stating that they just lost my and my clients business because of their lacking support.

Aloone_Jonez:
Oh by the way muzzy I've forgotten something:

--- Quote from: muzzy ---Firefox isn't any more secure than IE, you'll learn it soon enough now that it's becoming popular and more worthwhile to attack. It's equally vulnerable, just less profitable target. The latter is changing, the former
is staying.
--- End quote ---


This is why IE is less secure than FireFox:

Source: the US-CERT agian.

--- Quote ---IE is integrated into Windows to such an extent that vulnerabilities in IE frequently provide an attacker significant access to the operating system.
--- End quote ---

FireFox is separate to the operating system, this makes it a lot safer.

piratePenguin:
Microsoft should ditch Internet Explorer and ship Windows with Firefox.
They could even develop Firefox and (I think) write their name on it, but they'd have to at least release the changes they make to the code to the public (which isn't alot to ask).


Well I think that's what they should do, but it'll never happen 'cause they're such greedy bastards.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page