firefox vs internet explorer

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.
Apr 26, 2002
3,895
632
113
#1
this may sound like a stupid question, but i REALLY don't kno, but wuts tha pros and cons of goin with one or the other? i take it that firefox bloccs more pop ups? BUT i heard that there's alot uv programs that u cant use with firefox that u can use with i.e. can ya'll explain this to me? thanks. fold.
 
Dec 25, 2003
12,355
212
0
71
#7
Better security, less likelihood of trojans, viruses, spyware, etc. More browsing features.

But I still prefer IE since I'm lazy as fuck and don't wanna fuck with two browsers.
 
Apr 25, 2002
6,082
2,253
113
48
#8
Myth - "Firefox has lower System Requirements than Internet Explorer"
Reality - Internet Explorer 6.x has much lower minimum System Requirements than Firefox 1.x.

Myth - "Firefox is the Fastest Web Browser"
Reality - Opera (now 100% free) is the fastest Graphical Web Browser in Windows.

Myth - "Firefox is Faster than Internet Explorer"
Reality - Internet Explorer 6.x is clearly faster than Firefox 1.x overall and is significantly faster from a cold start. The argument that components of Internet Explorer may load during Windows Startup is nullified by Opera's start times.

Myth - "Firefox is Secure"
Reality - Firefox is anything but Secure with multiple unpatched vulnerabilities allowing exposure of sensitive data to local users. You only need one vulnerability to be insecure. Since Firefox was released users have been exposed to 26 security vulnerabilities and counting. 6 of which were market as Highly Critical.
"In the excitement that surrounded its launch last year, Firefox was unreasonably portrayed by some as having unbreakable security, but the vulnerabilities that have been detected in recent months are injecting a dose of reality into this myth, analysts say."

Myth - "Firefox is a Solution to Spyware"
Reality - This is very misleading and can lull users into a false sense of security. Use Secure XP to properly secure your system and get a REAL solution to Spyware. Firefox is nothing more than a Web Browser. Installing Firefox does not clean your system of existing Spyware infections or prevent you from manually installing anything in the future, including Spyware. These can come from Downloads, Email Attachments, File Sharing and by other means. You can still easily get infected with Spyware using Firefox as this exploit demonstrates.

Myth - "Firefox Blocks all Popups"
Reality - Firefox does not Block all Popups. PopupTest shows the "Drop down Popup" and the "Sticky Popup" are not blocked. Other types of Popups continue to get through.

More and sources cited here: http://mywebpages.comcast.net/SupportCD/FirefoxMyths.html
 

DJ Mark 7

djmark7.com
Jul 18, 1977
14,924
82
0
48
www.djmark7.com
#10
the ONLY thing that sux about using somethin like Firefox or Opera as opposed to IE, is that alot of pages won't show the same way they're supposed to cause they were designed FOR IE...If it werent for that I'd kick IE
 
Apr 16, 2003
14,731
1,366
113
google.com
#11
It's because alot of web designers code incorrectly, bastards. There is no fucking way IE is faster. Shit takes way longer to load up even. Also I never ever have popups with Firefox. It's far superior.
 

Psilo707

Complete O.G.
Jun 25, 2002
7,421
62
48
42
Gimcheon, South Korea
www.seoulhunter.com
#12
All those facts posted are crap. It must have taken a few hours for microsoft chumps to write them up and find some vague information to base their statistics on.

I do web sites and graphics to pay my rent and im on this motherfucker' hours and hours every day, and im telling you, Firefox is overall at *least* twice as good as Internet Explorer. Its faster (FACT), its equally secure (FACT), and it doesnt hog system memory.
 
Jun 15, 2005
4,591
14
0
#14
...the only way i would ever think to open IE is if the page absolutely wont work unless I'm using it...other than that, catch me on Safari and Firefox...Firefox's extensions are ill...
 

Psilo707

Complete O.G.
Jun 25, 2002
7,421
62
48
42
Gimcheon, South Korea
www.seoulhunter.com
#17
No proof needed. All I have to do is double click on the icon and watch how fast some of my extremely html-heavy and detailed links load up, as opposed to IE's 'string' method of refreshing each picture,icon, and block of text in a linear method. Meaning it waits until each piece of data is loaded before it proceeds to the next section of code. Firefox does it all at once and if something doesnt work (due to the shitty programming of the web designer), it simply says Fuck it.

Any site that doesnt work on Fox is shitty code, plain and simple. Nothing ive put up has ever had issues like that.
 
Dec 25, 2003
12,355
212
0
71
#20
Psilo707 said:
Any site that doesnt work on Fox is shitty code, plain and simple. Nothing ive put up has ever had issues like that.
Well this holier-than-thou shit don't help when I'm trying to look at a certain site and it's fuckin up. Also, do sites you put up contain complicated java, php, etc?