The 30mb size was related to people complaining about the .net framework. (hurr, and java's framework doesn't require additional binaries too?)
Now, I can't speak for bloatvista, but when I right click on the Internet Explorer folder in the program files folder on my Windows Server 2003 install, the file size for the entire contents is 4 mb.
Increasing my development time is because things that work with less code, don't work as expected in the other browsers. I agree that they need a standard rendering engine. I'd like the beautiful sites I make to work in all browsers and look the same, but align=right in firefox seems to not mean what it fuckin means unless I specify it in 3 diff fuckin ways.
As for another browser, I say anything but firefox because if everyone is using firefox, it's just as targetted as internet explorer. Don't push security through obscurity, that's just plain retarded. Infact, it's much more easier for crime organizations to hire people to inspect the open source code for firefox and simply find the problems and not report them. Open source is a double edge sword, it's probably best example. Hell they could even work in some bugs as "fixes".
I say google chrome because it actually adheres to strict process/thread control. Which firefox has never been able to do because of it's multi-crapform abilities. Chrome is still afflicted by the open source issues, however in browsing the net it SEVERLY limits the attack vectors. Where-in the issue of plugins and third party apps that make everything so damn vulnerable.
Those microsoft updates you see? Those are mostly activex kill bits, which is microsoft's way of turning off 3rd party vendor GARBAGE that allows those insecurities to come through.
Either way, as long as people still use difficult to read languages such as JS / C++ / C there will be issues. As long as random, potentially untrained, people are able to add code to projects, there will be issues.
My response was in regards to you claiming firefox to be invincible. It's not.
Re: This was mewonka4500November 4 2008, 19:24:36 UTC
I figured that it was you replying to that anon. comment Alexi, but I must say that the comment to your first comment wasn't mine as you implied in your last sentence.
But for the 90-95 percentile mark, I'll agree with him/her/it, but I'm not a coder, I can't make any claims as to who renders what and how.
Now, as for Firefox, I'm gonna pull a quote straight from the above anoyn... "Nope, Firefox isn't Immune... It's LESS VULNERABLE."
I agree with this statement completely and was something I should have pointed out in my original post. No browser is completely secure or safe, especially if the user has tapioca pudding for brains, but MOST do a better job than IE.
And I also will say that I disagree with your, for lack for a better term, jab, at the open source community. Two words poke a hole in your argument: code review.
Yes there are rootkits and virii available for Linux/Unix, but they are next to unheard of and very few can do much damage and I have yet to hear of one that can install itself totally unbeknown to the user.
Besides with all these "untrained, random people" that have code in projects (after review) you'd think there would be more security issues (eg. - anything made by Microsoft may (should?) be used as an example) but there is not, because no matter how badly that program was coded, or what bugs may be found, *nix is inherently more secure than Windows because it was MADE that way.
I'm gonna wander out on a limb and say that you seem to think that close source (security by obscurity) is the bee's knees.
So, I offer a challenge, prove Windows/IE ISN'T swiss cheese compared to any *nix flavor of your choice and you won't hear another word from me.
P.S - I suspect IE is "4mb" because the entire thing is irrevocably interwoven into the OS so the MB consuming parts of it are spread across different folders and different areas.
P.P.S- I have tried Chrome, it's koool! Too bad I won't use it extensively until the Mac version pops up lol!
Now, I can't speak for bloatvista, but when I right click on the Internet Explorer folder in the program files folder on my Windows Server 2003 install, the file size for the entire contents is 4 mb.
Increasing my development time is because things that work with less code, don't work as expected in the other browsers. I agree that they need a standard rendering engine. I'd like the beautiful sites I make to work in all browsers and look the same, but align=right in firefox seems to not mean what it fuckin means unless I specify it in 3 diff fuckin ways.
As for another browser, I say anything but firefox because if everyone is using firefox, it's just as targetted as internet explorer. Don't push security through obscurity, that's just plain retarded. Infact, it's much more easier for crime organizations to hire people to inspect the open source code for firefox and simply find the problems and not report them. Open source is a double edge sword, it's probably best example. Hell they could even work in some bugs as "fixes".
I say google chrome because it actually adheres to strict process/thread control. Which firefox has never been able to do because of it's multi-crapform abilities. Chrome is still afflicted by the open source issues, however in browsing the net it SEVERLY limits the attack vectors. Where-in the issue of plugins and third party apps that make everything so damn vulnerable.
Those microsoft updates you see? Those are mostly activex kill bits, which is microsoft's way of turning off 3rd party vendor GARBAGE that allows those insecurities to come through.
Either way, as long as people still use difficult to read languages such as JS / C++ / C there will be issues. As long as random, potentially untrained, people are able to add code to projects, there will be issues.
My response was in regards to you claiming firefox to be invincible. It's not.
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
But for the 90-95 percentile mark, I'll agree with him/her/it, but I'm not a coder, I can't make any claims as to who renders what and how.
Now, as for Firefox, I'm gonna pull a quote straight from the above anoyn... "Nope, Firefox isn't Immune... It's LESS VULNERABLE."
I agree with this statement completely and was something I should have pointed out in my original post. No browser is completely secure or safe, especially if the user has tapioca pudding for brains, but MOST do a better job than IE.
And I also will say that I disagree with your, for lack for a better term, jab, at the open source community. Two words poke a hole in your argument: code review.
Yes there are rootkits and virii available for Linux/Unix, but they are next to unheard of and very few can do much damage and I have yet to hear of one that can install itself totally unbeknown to the user.
Besides with all these "untrained, random people" that have code in projects (after review) you'd think there would be more security issues (eg. - anything made by Microsoft may (should?) be used as an example) but there is not, because no matter how badly that program was coded, or what bugs may be found, *nix is inherently more secure than Windows because it was MADE that way.
I'm gonna wander out on a limb and say that you seem to think that close source (security by obscurity) is the bee's knees.
So, I offer a challenge, prove Windows/IE ISN'T swiss cheese compared to any *nix flavor of your choice and you won't hear another word from me.
P.S - I suspect IE is "4mb" because the entire thing is irrevocably interwoven into the OS so the MB consuming parts of it are spread across different folders and different areas.
P.P.S- I have tried Chrome, it's koool! Too bad I won't use it extensively until the Mac version pops up lol!
Reply
Leave a comment