Opera, Firefox browsers in general

Since Mary and a few others have been discussing Opera and Firefox, I wonder if a discussion could be started on the advantages of these browsers.

I must admit, I knew nothing about either until I read some of the threads on this forum. When searching for help setting up CSS pages for pbase, I came across the references again.

Is there some advantage to either of these over IE? Can both live on my PC? What is their purpose? Is IE sufficient as a standalone?

Sorry to be so undereducated on this subject and if my questions are irrelevant, please delete this post.

Bev

Bev Sampson said:

Since Mary and a few others have been discussing Opera and Firefox, I wonder if a discussion could be started on the advantages of these browsers.

I must admit, I knew nothing about either until I read some of the threads on this forum. When searching for help setting up CSS pages for pbase, I came across the references again.

Is there some advantage to either of these over IE? Can both live on my PC? What is their purpose? Is IE sufficient as a standalone?

Sorry to be so undereducated on this subject and if my questions are irrelevant, please delete this post.

Bev

Click to expand...

Well, funny you ask LOL. Today I had problems trying to download the firmware upgrade for my 5D. I have a big shoot coming up and need it to correct a problem with the STE2 (wireless master for slave flashes). The Canon page had a note about turning off popup blockers to download the file (which I do each time I download anything) but that didn't work. I asked for some suggestions on another forum and one was to dl another browser and use it for situations like this. So--I did a quick dl of Firefox, installed it (easy install). I started it---it imported my bookmarks--and had no problem dling (with disabling popup blocker on FF too) the Canon file.

Its quite a bit faster than IE on my machine (PC) and is living comfortably, it appears, with IE. One of the things I like about it already is the ability to set 'tabs' for those sites I visit frequently--like OPF. I'm not sure of other advantages--I understand it deals with popups better--but the speed is wooing me.

Diane

Bev, there are many advantages to both Opera and FireFox over Internet Explorer.

In my set of priorities, the biggest one is security. Over the years Microsoft has fixed quite a few of those holes--the latest got a patch just last month. And then, after that, it was no longer the latest.

There is now an exploit hole in it that a hacker could use to take over your machine.

So far Microsoft hasn't offered a patch for that. The only thing I open IE for is to go to the Microsoft website--and I try not to go there very often. I'm running Windows XP and I have it set for automatic update.

When I resorted to Firefox early this morning, before I figured out that my copy of Opera had become corrupted, I was very impressed with its easy user interface. For one thing, there's a quick check-list set-up to let Firefox use your own preferences as a sort of skin over the various web pages. I was able to specify 14 pt Arial Bold black on a white background--which made reading those color calibration articles a pure pleasure to my old eyes.

You can do that in Opera, but you have to write the specifications elsewhere on your HD and point Opera to them. So, point one to Firefox for ease of use.

Opera may be slightly more secure than Firefox, when configured optimally. At least, that's what the geeks who test these things say.

Opera, like Firefox, has tabs. It gives you choices on how to invoke and display your windows, lets you store your personal data for quick filling-in of submission forms, and, for my money is certainly faster than Internet Explorer. Well, of course, so is FireFox.

I think between the two it mostly comes down to personal preference.

But either is highly desirable, compared to IE, because of the recurring and continuing security holes in IE.

HTH

Mary

As in other areas of life, I think we can easily overdo things in the name of "security." (I type this from my Boston hotel room having gone through the latest iteration of U.S. Airport Security v6.11b2 build 38.) And I say this without having so much as looked at either Firefox or Opera (at least not in the last couple of years of so), so it's no particular criticism of them in particular — they might be great.

But look what Opera just put you through because it apparently wasn't compatible with that site. Was that aggravation really any better than a virus? Are multiple deadbolts really such a good idea when you can't get them open to get out your burning apartment?

Yes IE has security holes. Yes Windows has security holes. From what I read, so do FF and Opera and everything else. But isn't that what our *security* software and hardware is for?

Just how miserable are we willing to make ourselves — and how much freedom are we willing to give up — in the name of "security?"

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

Nill, what happened to me wasn't Opera's fault. My copy of the app got corrupted, somehow.

Any file can get corrupted. Evidently the code in Javascript controlling the check-box for the Error Console (I had it unchecked) is what bit the dust.

My machine's fault, not the fault of Opera.

That said, I have to admit I'm gun-shy. My younger sister--with not much cash to spare--had to buy a whole new Desktop computer in May, 2002, because of the worm that Outlook Express's preview pane let in; all the while that MS had been saying its preview pane set-up was not vulnerable.

Learned my lesson vicariously from that and have been super-vigilant ever since. If I hadn't trusted Andrew Rodney and believed it was his website, I would never have tried to use their "contact us" function. But the Javascript file was most likely already corrupted when I enabled it.

That said, the best computer security is between your own two ears. Always keeping in mind that each of us is fallible, and me more than most.

As to airport security, and U.S. national security policy in general, in my humble opinion, all of the current approaches are for the pits. We may actually lose our status as a republic dedicated to the practices of liberty and justice through democratic management and go the way of the old Roman Republic into Empire, if things continue much further down the path we are now on in my country.

Mary

Nill Toulme said:

As in other areas of life, I think we can easily overdo things in the name of "security." ...

Just how miserable are we willing to make ourselves — and how much freedom are we willing to give up — in the name of "security?"

Nill

Click to expand...

I completely agree that examples of excessive reactions in the name of security are all too easy to find.

I ask an inverse question: How long must I endure the presence of security issues/risks, and the absence of ease-of-use features in Internet Explorer? I find Firefox noticably faster and substantially easier to use than IE. IE still lacks a number of significant features other browsers incorporated literally years ago, e.g., tabs. (Tabbed browsing showed up in Netscape 7.0 in 2003.)

Better than 95% of my use of Internet Explorer is to retrieve and install Microsoft's updates. The remaining 5% is for those very, very few Web sites whose functionality is crippled or fails in browsers other than IE. I even use Firefox to browse Microsoft's Web site, and it functions there just fine.

I strongly recommend people at least try an alternative to IE. For years I used Netscape. Then I ran Firefox alongside Netscape, basically using them interchangably, starting 14 months ago, and I've now pretty much switched to Firefox.

Now, Firefox is only a Web browser. The desigers chose to focus on a single function/activity. Netscape, on the other hand, offers not only Web browsing but email, newsgroups, AIM instant messaging, etc.

Pretty much any or all of these browsers can coexist on a single machine. I've even installed and used multiple versions of Netscape on a single machine when I needed to test site compatibility across various versions.

The statistics found on at least once site suggest that Firefox is second to IE in popularity: IE: about 57%; FF: about 27%; Opera: 2%. Another site supports that suggestion, with usage rates as follows. IE 6 (the current version): 81%; Firefox 10%; Safari 2%; Opera 1%; all others at less than 1%.

Bob

Well said, Bob.

I cut my teeth on Netscape. A lot to be said for it.

At one time I had four browsers available to me on this machine. (When I was running Win95 on an old Compaq 440, 3.2 GB HD, 32 MB RAM, I had two: IE and NetScape.)

Today I have IE--as with you, used only for MS pages; and in my case not even for updates, since I update XP SP2 automatically; and I can't think when a website appealed to me enough that I would open it in IE rather than just forget about it.

The other two browsers on my machine at present are FireFox and Opera.

I stay with Opera because I like some of its features a bit better than FireFox. But that's my personal taste, I guess.

Tabs are the greatest thing since sliced bread, aren't they?

Mary

Easy Scripting Control With Firefox

A link all Firefox users should follow and then install:

https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/722/

This gets a you a Firefox addon called NoScript and gives you finer control over where Java and JavaScript run.

enjoy,

Sean

Nill Toulme said:

Yes IE has security holes. Yes Windows has security holes. From what I read, so do FF and Opera and everything else. But isn't that what our *security* software and hardware is for?

Click to expand...

As an ISP I can tell you that IE has been a security disaster, and all your firewalls and Norton/McAfees don't do anything to prevent most of it. I've had my computer infected itself a couple times just by mistyping a URL (eg goggle.com) or clicking an old bookmark where the domain has expired and been taken over by a mal-host. These infections tend to be very nasty and difficult to remove. And nothing has really improved much with the monthly security updates - my wife managed to get our home laptop infected just two weeks ago despite auto-update and all that crap. In their effort to defend against NS and the anti-trust suit MS coupled IE so tightly to the OS and added so much unsecured integration (eg asp) that without a total rewrite (maybe IE7?) it'll never be secure. Not to mention the fact that MS seems to have to safe programming practices in effect - ever think to check a buffer length before plopping a string into it? Evidently not. These shoddy programming practices have also been in effect on MS server products which is why I've avoided IIS and .net like the plague.

As I web developer I can also tell you that IE is a disaster. It is full of bugs and failures to follow the standards. This isn't apparant because since IE is so dominate, developers have learned to work around and sidestep all the mis-behaviour. Years ago NS quirks were the developer's nightmare but not Moz and FF are very well behaved and IE is the nightmare.

Now, do you want to know my opinion of Microsoft?

- DL

Rob Peterson said:

The statistics found on at least once site suggest that Firefox is second to IE in popularity: IE: about 57%; FF: about 27%; Opera: 2%. Another site supports that suggestion, with usage rates as follows. IE 6 (the current version): 81%; Firefox 10%; Safari 2%; Opera 1%; all others at less than 1%.

Click to expand...

It varies hughly by site. My own site (lashier.com) is about 50/50 (IE/FF-NS) while our regional info site is 80% IE, 15% FF-NS. Interest thing is that NS-FF on weekends is much higher (maybe ~35% NS-FF) while IE is more dominant during the week. This tells me that people are much smarter about their home computers than corporations which stupidly follow the MS line despite the security expert's advice two years ago to dump IE. Internet Explorer has been gradually declining for the last several years - it used to be over 95%.

- DL

1. Neither Opera nor Firefox are incompatible with [well-written, standard-compliant] sites.*
2. Never blame user faults on software.
3. Opera and Firefox are much faster than IE.
4. While it is no problem to set up IE to be as secure as Opera and Firefox ...
5. ... both the latter are much less intrusive.**
6. Opera and Firefox are both highly customisable [with Opera in the lead].
7. Opera is the smallest and less obtrusive installation of all [although it does not fit anymore on a floppy disc].
8. Statistics on browser usage are skewed. Some detection scripts ignore anything but IE and Mozilla [the latter even being in the ID string for IE!], some ignore anything after the first browser name [in cases where, say, a browser IDs as 'Internet Explorer 6, Opera']. Since v9 Opera can - and has to for some idiots in code writing - be masked as another browser, meaning it loses its own name in the ID string.
9. Any page coder arguing by numbers should be shot on site [before anyone points out a spelling error: Don't]! By the same argument roads should only be built for the most sold car, in Germany a VW Golf, not as wide as any Mercedes above the A-class.
10. The best way to decide if a program is right for oneself is trying it out. Luckily Firefox and Opera are free [for desktop/laptop use].
11. If you are not on a Windows machine IE is not a viable alternative at all since it isn't developed beyond roughly v5 [Mac-IE v5.5 is comparable to Windows-IE v5]. Anybody having to use Mac-IE on those sites that have too stupid a developer: Have fun!

BTW, while I agree with Don's evaluation of IE I don't extend that to Microsoft in general. I am neither a fanboy nor a basher in that respect.





*Most perceived incompatibilities are bad browser detection scripts. With Opera it is easily tested by setting its ID to something else, in some supposedly [by their authors] more sophisticated detection cases Opera has to be masked as another browser. Actually Opera has been rendering much more pages correctly than IE since v7.54 for me.
**Since several applications, like the Encyclopeadia Britannica, and a handful of very idiotically written Web sites need IE I do have it installed. It is set up not for highest security - that would mean to cut my umbilical cord to the world - but for sensible one [actually MS's defaults aren't as bad today as they are said to be]. The downside is that for every single JS on a page, for every Flash movie, for every Java applet etc. you get a warning message with the question Y/N. With today's pages and advertisers relying heavily on Flash and JS that is totally unacceptable.

Dierk, I totally agree, if your a web developer always use firefox as the method for testing your output. IE is not a true W3C browser. It often goes into "quirks mode" if it doesn't understand code. Then there's the classic box / margin problem.

However, when I look at my sites stats over the last couple of years >70% use IE, but thats changing.

Don't believe all the marketing

I also use FF for all my browsing needs. The only time I use IE is for the windows update operation. Having said that, don't believe all the marketing BS. Just because Mozilla claims it is safer or more secure does not make it so. I know we all know this about marketing, but try to think about it consciously before claiming it to be so.

The latest report from Symantec actually shows that FF had more vulnerabilities during the period of Jan-June '06 than IE did (report is here). Of course, Mozilla patched them much more quickly than MS patched IE, but it just shows that it is not so clear cut. Even if FF once really was much more secure does not mean it is now or will be in the future. If you visit some of the hacker forums, you will see quite a few of them claiming that FF is not more secure at all. Add to this the thousands of extensions available for FF that are not tested for vulnerabilities but people install indiscriminently. Those are, of course, optional but there is something quite comical about people who claim to use FF because it is more secure and then go ahead and install a hundred untested extension.

Browser security had become a new religion, just like Apple vs. MS, Java vs C, and the browser security discussions are usually just as full of FUD as any other "religion". Don't believe everything you read


Opera? What's that? Seriously, I have tried every major release since the very beginning and I never liked it. Can't say why exactly though...there's always something that irritates me about it.

John_Nevill said:

Dierk, I totally agree, if your a web developer always use firefox as the method for testing your output.

Click to expand...

So if your custom developed web application only runs on IE*, you should still rely on FF for QA???

I agree that IE is a nightmare to code web applications for, but sometimes you simply have no choice. I used to have the exact same problem with Netscape.

*Because the customer has standardized on (and only allows) IE.

Kris, I tend to use FF to validate layout etc and then put the site through a W3C validator.

I agree its not possible all the time to use FF. The organisation I work for will only deploys IE and all the main sofware vendors we deal with have a major headache delivering browser based apps (GIS & telemetry systems).

BTW, I dont believe FF is safer in terms of security but its defintely more code compliant.

Oh no, not the "holy browser wars" again...

Hi everybody,

Before getting ourselves into a religious discussion about the virtues of our favourite browsers, let's see whether the original questions of Bev have already been answered or not .

Bev Sampson said:

… Is there some advantage to either of these over IE? …

Click to expand...

Yes. I think that particularly Dierk, but also Mary and the rest have provided valid answers to this one already. I personally use Opera already for more than 5 years and I like many (nowadays not so) unique features such as tabbed browsing and privacy controls.
Mind you, all browsers have certain unique features and advantages that are lacking in other browsers. They all have their own plusses and minuses. At the end of the day, if you choose to use one or the other, it is a personal preference you end up making and there is no need to feel ashamed or anything just because some other folks might belittle your choice.

Bev Sampson said:

Can both live on my PC?

Click to expand...

Yes, definitely. Try to install them and experiment to see if one or the other suits you better. I still run IE and FF next to Opera. There are certain on-line banking sites that refuse running under Opera and require IE. Also, our company standardises on MS software so on my business laptop I use IE only.

Bev Sampson said:

What is their purpose? Is IE sufficient as a standalone?

Click to expand...

Their purpose is to show (render is the technical term) web pages, just like IE does. IE is sufficient as a standalone. You need neither FF nor Opera if you have IE. The other way around is not always valid unfortunately (see the previous paragraph).

I should say that I personally agree with most of the arguments presented by other before, be it pro or contra IE. If it works for you and you are happy with it, then fine. If not, try other avenues.

Cheers!

Cem

KrisCarnmarker said:

I agree that IE is a nightmare to code web applications for, but sometimes you simply have no choice. I used to have the exact same problem with Netscape.

Click to expand...

Anything that is standard-compliant or which runs alright under Opera should work in IE. Full stop.

Cem Usakligil said:

I personally use Opera already for more than 5 years [...]

Click to expand...

Hah, child! I run it since 3.41 came out, closing in on 10 years now!

Dierk Haasis said:

Hah, child! I run it since 3.41 came out, closing in on 10 years now!

Click to expand...

I wrote "more than 5 years"since I did not know for sure. I am pretty certain that I have used Opera version 2 at some stage. You see: I win, you loose !!! (nyah, nyah, nyah!) (LOL)

Cem
(who refuses to take himself too seriously)

Dierk Haasis said:

Anything that is standard-compliant or which runs alright under Opera should work in IE. Full stop.

Click to expand...

Well, maybe it should. But it doesn't. Full stop.

Standards compliance test page:
http://www.webstandards.org/action/acid2/

See how well IE runs for yourself.

FF does not pass the test either.

Went there.

Took the Acid 2 test.

Opera 9.02 renders perfectly.

Mary
(who runs Opera)

Well OK I'll try them. ;-) I did try one or the other a while back and didn't see what the fuss was about. Neither seemed faster to me, and I didn't see the advantage to tabbed browsing vs. link buttons and new instances, which I use liberally.

But I will try them.

[/olddog]

[olddog]

...and I shouldn't add this without knocking wood hard, so I'm knocking away, but we run 2000 seats at work and AFAIK we've never had an IE-based incursion, and I run six seats at home (including wife and non-computer-hygienic kids), likewise.

[/olddog]

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

Nill, to each his own.

As I posted earlier, I'm a bit gun-shy after seeing friends and close relatives get peppered.

Mary
{who is perhaps a timid old grandma)

KrisCarnmarker said:

Well, maybe it should. But it doesn't.

Click to expand...

The significance being?

You pointed out that clients ask for Web sites to be tested with Ie. My point was that any site being standard-compliant should work with any browser - that's why we have standards. To my knowledge Microsoft does not claim the opposite, neither does the Mozilla Foundation or Opera Software.

Using a non-recommended technology on a Web site - not recommended by the W3C - is at the risk of the owner, not the software companies. You put on anything hindering me from viewing and using your site, you lose. Only very few companies can allow themselves to not play by the rules, Google and Amazon come to mind. Actually one of the successes of them is to let everybody in, not just the majority [exception: Lynx users perhaps].

If IE does not render standard-compliant pages correctly it is not the fault of W3C, Opera Software, Mozilla Foundation, or an intelligent Web coder.

BTW, isn't the duty of any kind of consultant, including programmers, advertising agencies, photographers etc., to tell the client when he goes wrong?