Jump to content

For what do you use IE?


aleksanteri

Internet Explorer  

29 members have voted

  1. 1. What are you using Internet Explorer for?

    • For nothing, it's just lying on the dark side of my drive
      4
    • Just to see what my webpage looks like in another's browser
      17
    • Checking my most often watched pages and forums
      1
    • Regular usage
      4
    • What are you talking about? IE's the best!
      3


Recommended Posts

I only have IE, I haven't experienced ANY downside with it myself. :) (only the absence of CSS2/3)Maybe someone could come up with its lack of security towards malware, but that is actually up to your security software, not the browser, my opinion. And I have a strong security, never had any problems with either IE or my software.Besides malware, I also never had any unsolvable problems with css or markup. It just does what I want :) There isn't more to it is there?
That sounds like me before I had anything else. My sig used to say "Why complain? IE is fine." that was before justsomeguy converted me to the dark side. :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 68
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I used ie for a while as an average net surfer but after i started designing web pages i noticed there were other browsers that did things better than ie. there are a bunch of little things that i dont like about ie. especialy from a website design standpoint. I found that FF and Opera are much faster and can be customized much better for my needs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do you mean by that? What CSS are you having problems with in Firefox?
I have this stylesheet:
a:link {color:"blue"; text-decoration:"none"}a:visited {color:"blue"; text-decoration:"none"}a:hover {color:"green"; text-decoration:"underline overline"}a:link.2 {color:"blue"; text-decoration:"none"; font-weight: "bold";}a:visited.2 {color:"blue"; text-decoration:"none"; font-weight: "bold";}a:hover.2 {color:"green"; text-decoration:"underline overline"; font-weight; "bold";}a:link.3 {color:"black"; text-decoration:"none"}a:visited.3 {color:"black"; text-decoration:"none"}a:hover.3 {color:"green"; text-decoration:"underline overline"}a:link.4 {color:"red"; text-decoration:"none"}a:visited.4 {color:"red"; text-decoration:"none"}a:hover.4 {color:"green"; text-decoration:"underline overline"}body {scrollbar-3dlight-color:#000000; scrollbar-arrow-color:#FFFFFF; scrollbar-base-color:#000033; scrollbar-darkshadow-color:#000000; scrollbar-face-color:#000066;scrollbar-track-color:#000099; scrollbar-shadow-color:#000033}

Now, I know that the bottom code for editing the scroll bar doesn't work in other browsers, which is not really a problem, but does anyone know how to get the rest of it working with firefox?Because now of my pre defined hyperlink styles work?And also to add to that, I doesn't use the font's I use sometimes, I mean I only want Arial?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You need to swap the pseudo-classes with the classes. It is example, like this: a.myclass:hover :)Besides, the values of properties must not be quoted, only family names in the font when they include spaces :)
I sort of get you, but can you change it for me please?And then I can just replace it! :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You will not be able to get the scrollbar stuff to work outside of IE...they are IE only attributes not supoorted or recommended by W3C
Aren't we going VERY offtopic here? Oh... I knew this would happen.Besides, he already said:
Now, I know that the bottom code for editing the scroll bar doesn't work in other browsers, which is not really a problem, but does anyone know how to get the rest of it working with firefox?
By the way, here's an idea: try to rename the class names so that they don't start with a number. For example use "a1" instead of "1".
Link to comment
Share on other sites

a:link { color:#0000ff; text-decoration:none; }a:visited { color:#0000ff; text-decoration:none; }a:hover { color:#00ff00; text-decoration:underline overline; }a.2:link { color:#0000ff; text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold; }a.2:visited { color:#0000ff; text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold; }a.2:hover { color:#00ff00; text-decoration:underline overline; font-weight:bold; }a.3:link { color:#000000; text-decoration:none; }a.3:visited { color:#000000; text-decoration:none; }a.3:hover { color:#00ff00; text-decoration:underline overline; }a.4:link { color:#ff0000; text-decoration:none; }a.4:visited { color:#ff0000; text-decoration:none; }a.4:hover { color:#00ff00; text-decoration:underline overline; }body { scrollbar-3dlight-color:#000000; scrollbar-arrow-color:#FFFFFF; scrollbar-base-color:#000033; scrollbar-darkshadow-color:#000000; scrollbar-face-color:#000066;scrollbar-track-color:#000099; scrollbar-shadow-color:#000033; }

Pffffff :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know, somehow when I visited holmedwa's page, I saw my scrollbar colours change (strange)Well, I though this would be IE discussion? I don't like too much threads going off topic...Also I might fix the option "testing my site" (if I am able to)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And also to add to that, I doesn't use the font's I use sometimes, I mean I only want Arial?
Is that a question?You can specify that your page uses a specific font as well. It makes sense to put something like that in the body, and you can change it for specific classes if you want to use different fonts elsewhere.body{font-family: Arial, sans-serif;}
Well, I though this would be IE discussion?
That's not a question either! A question mark does not a question make!Any discussion about IE eventually turns into this type of thing, where people start giving reasons and examples for liking or not liking it. Actually, it's usually people giving reasons for liking it, and other people pointing out why those reasons aren't valid. :) Take Dan for example:
Maybe someone could come up with its lack of security towards malware, but that is actually up to your security software, not the browser, my opinion.
Dan is trying to argue that it is acceptable for a browser to allow malware to attack your computer, because the responsibility of preventing that is not with the browser. I respectfully disagree, and think that any piece of software that provides a user interface to something (such as the internet) is responsible for the security of that interface.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, it's not a question at all. It's a statement with a question mark on the end. This is a question:Why do all threads about IE end up being flame wars?Notice the use of the word "why" to begin the sentence. Questions typically begin with who, what, which, when, why, where, do/does, or how. The sentence "I though this would be IE discussion" is a statement, he is stating what he thought. Just slapping a question mark on the end of a statement doesn't make it a question.OK, that concludes this grammar lesson. Resume the IE discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, it's not a question at all. It's a statement with a question mark on the end. This is a question:Why do all threads about IE end up being flame wars?
OK, sorry for my Bad English :) but could this thread start being IE discussion again?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ justsomeguy: I wasn't stating a browser should not be secure, but the security must at least be with the security software. The does of the one doesn't always mean the doesn't of the other. But nevermind.. :)(compare it to black and white, it is not just those two, there is also a way in the middle.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ justsomeguy: I wasn't stating a browser should not be secure, but the security must at least be with the security software. The does of the one doesn't always mean the doesn't of the other. But nevermind..(compare it to black and white, it is not just those two, there is also a way in the middle.)
There definately is a way in the middle. I would argue that a browser IS security software. Most modern browsers have plenty of features to alert you when they detect a malicious website, so a lack of security is no excuse for a browser. Look at what Microsoft did with service pack 2 on XP, or Windows Server 2003. The default settings for IE pretty much disable everything in the browser that is useful (active scripting, plugins, etc). They have to disable everything by default because it is so insecure to begin with. Opera and Firefox use Flash, Javascript, etc and don't have anywhere near the number of vulnerabilities that IE does. But I'm not just saying that, I can back that up with statistics:This page is very telling: Secunia advisories for IE6.x from 2003-2006:http://secunia.com/product/11/?task=statisticsIt's a little confusing though, the box on the right claims there have been 105 advisories, with 18 of them currently unpatched, but the graphs cover 89 advisories. But look at the numbers:Only 2/3 of vulnerabilities have been vendor patched. The rest are either unpatched, or a workaround (for example, to "solve" a Javascript vulnerability, Microsoft's solution was to disable Javascript).Nearly half (46%) of the vulnerabilities are either extremely or highly critical. 33% are extremely critical.99% of the vulnerabilities are remote exploits.The two highest levels in the "impact" graph are System Accces (34%) and Security Bypass (16%).That type of data is hard to argue with. It's pretty obvious that IE has major problems. Compare that against Firefox 1.x:http://secunia.com/product/4227/?task=statistics35 advisories, 86% patched, 3% extremely critical (31% highly critical), 20% system access. Compare that with Opera 9.x: 0 advisories. Or Opera 8.x: 15 advisories, all of them patched.http://secunia.com/product/4932/?task=statisticsSafari 1.x clocks in with 15 advisories, and Safari 2.x with 5 advisories.The bottom line, and my point, is there's no reason for IE to be so insecure when everything else is much more secure. One simply cannot argue that the responsibility of security does not rest with the browser.This is why I chose option #1 on the poll (see that? I'm on topic!)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There definately is a way in the middle. I would argue that a browser IS security software. Most modern browsers have plenty of features to alert you when they detect a malicious website, so a lack of security is no excuse for a browser. Look at what Microsoft did with service pack 2 on XP, or Windows Server 2003. The default settings for IE pretty much disable everything in the browser that is useful (active scripting, plugins, etc). They have to disable everything by default because it is so insecure to begin with. Opera and Firefox use Flash, Javascript, etc and don't have anywhere near the number of vulnerabilities that IE does. But I'm not just saying that, I can back that up with statistics:This page is very telling: Secunia advisories for IE6.x from 2003-2006:http://secunia.com/product/11/?task=statisticsIt's a little confusing though, the box on the right claims there have been 105 advisories, with 18 of them currently unpatched, but the graphs cover 89 advisories. But look at the numbers:Only 2/3 of vulnerabilities have been vendor patched. The rest are either unpatched, or a workaround (for example, to "solve" a Javascript vulnerability, Microsoft's solution was to disable Javascript).Nearly half (46%) of the vulnerabilities are either extremely or highly critical. 33% are extremely critical.99% of the vulnerabilities are remote exploits.The two highest levels in the "impact" graph are System Accces (34%) and Security Bypass (16%).That type of data is hard to argue with. It's pretty obvious that IE has major problems. Compare that against Firefox 1.x:http://secunia.com/product/4227/?task=statistics35 advisories, 86% patched, 3% extremely critical (31% highly critical), 20% system access. Compare that with Opera 9.x: 0 advisories. Or Opera 8.x: 15 advisories, all of them patched.http://secunia.com/product/4932/?task=statisticsSafari 1.x clocks in with 15 advisories, and Safari 2.x with 5 advisories.The bottom line, and my point, is there's no reason for IE to be so insecure when everything else is much more secure. One simply cannot argue that the responsibility of security does not rest with the browser.This is why I chose option #1 on the poll (see that? I'm on topic!)
Thank you for this interesting link, enabling comnparison of browsers. Safari seems quite vulnerable, although only from 5 advisories. If you're using Mac OS X Camino is a good bet with none, as is Opera. Both are very pleasant browsers to use. Firefox seems to work for most sites, as does Safari. I can usually get into any site with at least one of these.Another interesting comparison would be how various OSs stand up to malicious attack. Mac OS X is reputedly quite secure. The more open source something is the more likely it is to be sound, as more people have a chance to check it out and make sensble changes. By that argument Linux must be even more secure. Any comments?It always occurs to me, and it has arisen in this discussion, that people often use a system because it is there, and maybe do not even have the opportunity to compare it with another. Time and workplace are two main constraints on our choice of computer. Also these points only matter a lot if you spend a lot of time using the computer.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here are some OS pages:Windows 2000 Pro:http://secunia.com/product/1/?task=statisticsWindows XP Pro:http://secunia.com/product/22/?task=statisticsWindows XP Home:http://secunia.com/product/16/?task=statisticsWindows Server 2003 Standard:http://secunia.com/product/1173/?task=statisticsRed Hat Linux 9:http://secunia.com/product/1343/?task=statisticsUbuntu Linux 6.06:http://secunia.com/product/10611/?task=statisticsFedora Core 5:http://secunia.com/product/8808/?task=statisticsFreeBSD 6.x:http://secunia.com/product/6778/?task=statisticsApple Mac OSX:http://secunia.com/product/96/?task=statisticsSolaris 9:http://secunia.com/product/95/?task=statistics

It always occurs to me, and it has arisen in this discussion, that people often use a system because it is there, and maybe do not even have the opportunity to compare it with another.
Yep, that's exactly why Microsoft has been sued over bundling things like IE and Media Player with the OS.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It sux, but many people use it, so I guess I`ll only have to use it for compatibility checking, but since Opera is similar from this point of view, Firefox is my only worry.
Opera is not like IE (although it does have IE compatibility mode...gross).Opera is more like FireFox than IE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here are some OS pages:Windows 2000 Pro:http://secunia.com/product/1/?task=statisticsWindows XP Pro:http://secunia.com/product/22/?task=statisticsWindows XP Home:http://secunia.com/product/16/?task=statisticsWindows Server 2003 Standard:http://secunia.com/product/1173/?task=statisticsRed Hat Linux 9:http://secunia.com/product/1343/?task=statisticsUbuntu Linux 6.06:http://secunia.com/product/10611/?task=statisticsFedora Core 5:http://secunia.com/product/8808/?task=statisticsFreeBSD 6.x:http://secunia.com/product/6778/?task=statisticsApple Mac OSX:http://secunia.com/product/96/?task=statisticsSolaris 9:http://secunia.com/product/95/?task=statistics"It always occurs to me, and it has arisen in this discussion, that people often use a system because it is there, and maybe do not even have the opportunity to compare it with another."Yep, that's exactly why Microsoft has been sued over bundling things like IE and Media Player with the OS.
Hmmmm, what would the statistics say when Vista is released :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...