homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Become a Pro Member

Home / Forums Index / Browsers / Firefox Browser Usage and Support
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: incrediBILL

Firefox Browser Usage and Support Forum

This 59 message thread spans 2 pages: < < 59 ( 1 [2]     
FireFox Burning Brightly

 1:57 pm on Feb 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

Large mainstream US daily papers get into the FireFox act:


People can replace nearly all the major programs on a Windows PC with "safer, less expensive open-source alternatives,"



 8:25 pm on Feb 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

FireFox provides far better security than IE

Only if they abandon their foolish association with G$.

Until then, thoughm G$'s vert privacy-invasive tactics makes FF wholly untrustworthy.

While surfing-security is a good FF feature, they violate your privacy-security by associating with G$ who is an admitted privacy-security-violator. (G$ admits they invade your privacy with the toolbar, for example.)

So, until FF dumps G$, they are lying and it is propaganda to say or imply that surfers can trust the FF browser, security-wise.

It may be a different form of security, but it is still a matter of security. Indeed, privacy is the biggest form of security to protect, when you really think about it!


 8:38 pm on Feb 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

MultiMan, have you noticed that Google isn't the ONLY search engine the search-bar supports? It's only one of hundreds. I don't see how you can single out Google as being somehow a "special" association, unless you're talking about Ben Goodger being hired by Google, which certainly does not mean he is putting in some sort of Google privacy-invading stuff into FireFox.

Anyway, FireFox is open source. If it were violating privacy, anyone would be able to look and see that it was happening. So far I haven't heard anything about that kind of thing though.


 10:14 pm on Feb 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

With regard to the comments about how quickly the browser opens, and how it handles Java content, and other performance issues:

Before you complain about the browser, complain about the field in which it is planted.

Of course it performs differently that the MS product on an MS system using hardware "designed for MS". What do you think those things mean?

They mean that the hardware itself is set up to use the MS way of doing things, not their competitors. This necessarily means that there is no level playing field, and MS products will almost always perform better than the competition. (I say "almost", because some competitors write such elegant code that their extreme performance characteristics allow them to operate on par or better than MS products, even in a MS-biased environment.)

Give FF a whirl on a Mac or on Linux or on a box you built to be with the BEST hardware, and not just hardware that's GOOD ENOUGH for MS. You will notice the differences, I assure you.

As long as 90% of all computers are based in the muck of MS, you'll hear people complaining that "this isn't as fast as MS" or "it doesn't work as well as MS". Because MS doesn't want them to, and their #$@% OS gets in the way, every time.

Just ask Sun or Real ... or the courts in Europe.


 12:59 am on Feb 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

I was just about to be willing to re-consider my view about FF, and then...

The following just now appeared on the front page of WebmasterWorld:

GoogleFox or FireBot?
Posted by Brett

No "special association," huh?

Given the similar amount of blind, unconstrained worship for FF as similar to that of G$, it is becoming even clearer to me that FF seems to be simply copying G$'s cult-method of Orwellian doublethink "freedom is slavery" style of mind-control rhetoric.


 1:29 am on Feb 5, 2005 (gmt 0)


As it's already been pointed out, Firefox is open-source. If you think there might be something weird with Firefox, download the source code and check it out:


Believe me.. if there is "something afoot", someone will notice it quite quickly, because there are a lot of people that analyze the source code of products like this as soon as it's released.

If there's something really wrong with Firefox, then show us. I'm not a "Firefox worshipper".. I simply think it's the best browser available for my needs. Once it's not longer the best, I'll switch. I could care less if Google and Mozilla form sort of partnership as long as it doesn't adversely affect their browser. However, if that partnership becomes something that I don't like, then it may be reason enough for to stop using Firefox, Google, or both. At this point, I don't see any adverse effects, either from using the program or looking through the source code.

Again, if you think they do.. then show us, don't just keep claiming that it's so.


 1:35 am on Feb 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

<Average Joes approve any installation anyways. I've seen it happen myself. A website would ask if he/she wants to install this piece of software and users would just click Yes no matter what. Just to get rid of the window, without even reading what it says. So if Average Joes will start using FF, they will confirm any kind of downloads too.>

I might have agreed with this a year ago, but not so much anymore, and definitely not a year from now. A year ago, the average Joe didn't know what spyware was and didn't know that they had to keep their antivirus software updated (they thought that version of McAfee that came with their computer four years ago was sufficient indefinitely).

However, now people are starting to realize that they have to keep their antivirus software up-to-date, and pop-ups are a huge annoyance caused by software that has somehow snuck into their systems. It will definitely take education. But with an equally educated person, a Windows computer running Firefox is much safer than a Windows computer running Internet Explorer. Even with IE and all of it's updated patches, you will get spyware that you'll either need a tool to prevent or remove. With Firefox, and the same care, you will not have spyware automatically installed into your system.

Or, we could just think that people will always remain stupid, and they'll always click the "Yes" button when something asks them a question. If that's the case, then no system can be secured, security patches and scanning tools are useless, and this entire discussion is moot.


 1:42 am on Feb 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

Here, i am sitting and thinking that IE does not have the majority share at the WebmasterWorld crowd... how silly of me.

IE fanatics shock me with their logic. "Just because Firefox is good product, and lot of folks fanatically like it, I am going to hate Firefox and stick with the good ole IE, though i know IE sucks.." ah!..



 1:51 am on Feb 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

One aspect not mentioned is that it is not just Firefox versus IE: on my machine I don't have access to IE at all, because I'm running Linux. In the vast majority of cases, Firefox (or the Mozilla suite) is the de-facto default browser for Linux systems.

With Linux just starting to nudge its way towards the mainstream - with the stagnation in Windows development, the security issues which plague Windows in general and the fact that development of not just Firefox but OpenOffice, Evolution, KDE and Gnome has progressed in leaps and bounds over the last couple of years - Firefox will take pride of place in the offering. It's a reasonably secure, fairly bug-free, cross-platform offering which is getting better all the time.

MultiMan, ease up on the incessant trolling dude, the anger can't be good for your blood pressure ;)


 2:05 am on Feb 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

The problem is that G$ has become more diabolically and purposely evil to its own users and supporters than what M$ has purposely done to its own users.

Any upstart company that is stupid enough to associate with G$ now instead shows they are not smart for the long-term.

Once FF grows, we can all expect G$ to do something to all FF users, to blackmail their users into some further privacy invasion or whatever.

So, the issue is not the open-source concept (which by itself would be great, I concur). Instead, it's just better to not get involved in the first place with such a stupid company associating with an evil G$ (trying to increase their own brand with association with such an evil company.)


 2:24 am on Feb 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

MultiMan, ease up on the incessant trolling dude, the anger can't be good for your blood pressure

LOL, thanks for the humor! I appreciate it. :)

Seriously, my posts are simply correcting the G$ cult-worship (and apparently now the FF cult-worship) that spread the lies and propaganda.

Also, yes, I do make positive informative contributory posts. For example today, my Msg#4 just today at


 2:51 am on Feb 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

To be read as humor, NOT sarcasm:

Let's take a look at our choices for browsers:

First, we have Mozilla, FireFox, K-meleon, Netscape, and the rest of the Gecko clan. They all look pretty good . . . fast, pretty well secure, and - Whoops, can't trust them, they have built-in Google search capabilities. Google sure is evil these days. So those browsers are out.

Ah, but we have Opera! Surely that one is good! Oh, no, forgot, they have Google text ads in their free version. Decline those, and they serve graphical third-party ads. Forget the handy features, Opera is out too.

Now we come to Internet Explorer. Yes, that must be a good choice! Why, the folks at Microsoft are so careful of our privacy that, besides keeping the source code top secret, they won't even let IE be uninstalled! That, and they allow anyone who wants to, add their own custom changes to the program. How nice! Of course, IE simply must be the way to go!

In all seriousness, don't you think that even Joe Coder, who builds his own browser, might not get a kick out of gathering some usage data from its users?


 3:45 am on Feb 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

>>on my machine I don't have access to IE at all, because I'm running Linux. In the vast majority of cases, Firefox (or the Mozilla suite) is the de-facto default browser for Linux systems.

I feel ya! It really sucks that I have to fire up the win machine to test websites :(

>>FireFox Burning Brightly

That's great news! Whether you use it or not. Goodbye to the days of "Best viewed in Internet Explorer".

PS: Too bad my fav browser isn't getting the props. Opera still blows FF away.


 5:18 am on Feb 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

Ummmmm..... multiman, I don't have ONE DAMN THING on my FF browser windows etc. which is "trolling" google - period.

Buddy, you need to take a deep breath and go outdoors, kick dirt, scream at the sky, and then pretend google doesn't run your life.

You WILL live longer that way.


 6:57 am on Feb 5, 2005 (gmt 0)


First off, Mozilla isn't a company.. it's a group of people writing free software -- Big difference.

Webmasterworld has Google employees that post here. Does that mean that Webmasterworld is associating itself with Google? To take it a step further.. that means that you posting on Webmasterworld is just as bad as me using Firefox; we're both only two-degrees seperated from Google.

Okay.. so that previous paragraph was mostly sarcasm, but hopefully got a point across. You may think that Google is magnitudes more evil than Microsoft, and you be right. But I think this discussion is geared more towards the products that the organizations create (i.e. the Firefox browser) and less to do with the organizations.

So far, Firefox (and all of the Mozilla products) are heading in the right direction.. as I've been following them for quite some time. Again, the products are completely open-sourced.. so feel free to use the Firefox browser. And if at some point in the future you see something in the code that doesn't look right (or someone else sees it and brings it to your attention) feel free to discontinue using it.

Perhaps you don't like the product because you don't like the practices of the organization that creates it. And that's fine. But don't confuse that with the quality of the product itself, which is clearly superior to Internet Explorer.


 1:50 pm on Feb 5, 2005 (gmt 0)


I am glad to stand corrected when appropriate. If Moz is not a company, but a group, then I am glad to concede my mistake on that. My point of the G$-association problem is not diminished by the semantics of my mistaken entity-description there, though. Whether a company or group, any entity that associates itself with the $G brand is thinking short-term and foolish.

If FF adding G$ was only a matter of "adding 100s" of SE capababilities, that would be different. But when the G$ association is "big news" at WebmasterWorld, and G$'s hiring of an FF dev is "big news," then we're talking more than a mere addition among 100s. If such "news" is important enough to be treated as "big news" and all the cult-worship hoopla that followed it, then more is definitely going on.

As such, the fact of it being made out to be "big news," and all the subsequent cult-worship and hoopla about it, make it clear that this association between G$ and FF is intended to be considered as "big."

That's where the problem lies. If it is that "big," then FF (Moz) has chosen to associate itself with a brand that can "do only evil." Associating with evil at that level of "big news" makes the one associating evil too. (Placing a clean hand in the filthy mud does not make the mud clean -- it only makes the hand filthy too.)

That brings us to your humorous point here, which I did appreciate.

There is a difference between the associating between FF and G$ vs. the fact that GoogleGuy and AdWordsAdvisor also post here at WebmasterWorld.

WebmasterWorld is supposed to be a forum where news, information, and even feedback is exchanged. Although I have at times suspected that G$ may have some power over Brett in control of WebmasterWorld, I have also seen other SE employees here too, e.g. Y!'s Tim and M$'s msndude.

Because they all post here and so do I, all of us in such an open forum, that obviously does not make me "in association" with them.

Frankly, it is precisely because they are here that I make my posts. My posts on SE issues are trying to communicate back to applicable SE's the necessary feedback that any non-evil company would recognize they want. I do not expect everything I say to always be executed or implemented, of course. I am simply making feedback to educate the SEs about the consequences of their decisions and what they might do to make positive corrections or adjustments.

The problem about G$, though, is that they see all the impacts (from feedback such as from myself and others) which they have done to so many honest webmasters and developers, yet G$ continues to "do only evil" at every decision they make, no matter what it is. They currently refuse to listen to such feedback or to ever correct their evils to honest people. That only demonstraes the increased level of their current evil, which also shows that the bigger they become, the more and more evil they will become.

Now, G$ also has an additional and larger-picture form of feedback, adding to all the individual feedback comments in my posts. That is, in the larger picture, they can also see that they now have an internet professional who is adamantly selling against them at every opportunity -- telling everybody at every opportunity all the evil decisions G$ makes. Not only is that occuring here, but they will also realize that that is happening with others "in the real world" too, outside of WebmasterWorld. Not only do I tell people here these issues about the G$ evil, but I also do so at every opportunity with all my real-world customers, acquaintences, friends, and family.

The fact is, I used to be a very adamant supporter of G$ back when they treated webmasters honestly and had useful honest SERPs. It is actually my intent that they would return -- although maybe they have gone so far into their true evil these days that there might not be any hope for them. But I am hopeful person for anyone's self-corrected, repentant redemption. Yet, even if they do not, other SEs can also learn from the feedback of my posts in order to be better compete and maybe help destory the G$ evil.

So, not only are my posts to educate others about the evil of G$ currently, and not only are they providing feedback to G$ (and as feedback for other SEs here to learn as well), but my posts are also done with the hope that maybe one day G$ might change the error of their now evil ways, and return to who they used to be.

That clarification then brings us back to FF.

Just as I am providing feedback to G$ with my posts, I am doing the same with FF.

FF could very well be excellent. But when it comes to marketing, one has to be careful with with your own brand. Smart long-term thinkers know this. Brand maintenence is especially important with regard to trust in the marketplace. It is a no-brainer that you never associate your brand with a brand that cannot be trusted.

Just as most smart business people would not want their own brand associated with the brand of Enron as run by its former corrupt leaders, the same is true for an entity like Moz associating their FF brand with the evil brand of G$.

So, just as I have hope that the feedback I am giving with my posts will educate G$ to stop its evil and errors and return to being a legitimate SE again, in that same way, my posts about FF seek to educate anyone who might be close to Moz to learn as well.

Indeed, I would be ecstatic to see both G$ and FF be as perfect as they could be! But if FF associates with the untrustworthy and evil G$, then I cannot and do not trust the FF brand either. (FF sticking their clean hand into the filthy mud of G$ makes their hand filthy too.)

And through it all, anyone and everyone else is being informed by my posts here of the current problems with both.

As such, regardless of one's opinions of any or all of my posts either way, I am providing quite a direct contribution and service to WebmasterWorld and all involved here. And that's all I am trying to do. :)


 2:00 pm on Feb 5, 2005 (gmt 0)


Any chance of an ignore user feature? - they tend to go away when people ignore them. I don't mind differing opinions but blatent and extreme trolling like this has no place in a professional forum.


 2:20 pm on Feb 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

How is a sincerely made post to clarify one's purpose with positive intent to provide educating feedback an act of trolling?

You wrote,
they tend to go away when people ignore them

If that's what you think I am, then why don't you follow your own advice and just ignore me? ;)


 3:18 pm on Feb 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

I'm not sure if MultiMan is a troll, but he is definitely a FUD Monster. His ad hominem assertions that Google is somehow evil makes that much perfectly clear.

And frankly Multiman, that is all that your claims are, and attempt to spread Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt.


 3:32 pm on Feb 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

ya - chill out and get back on topic please.


 3:53 pm on Feb 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

I would assure everyone that I am fine, not fuming at the mouth. LOL

If my intelligently-presented and logical arguments showing the evil of G$ (etc) should be silenced, then the same should just as much be said about the illogical and actually ad hominem cult-worship and progaganda should likewise be silenced.

But as this forum is about feedback and information, neither really should be silenced.

With that said, I heartily agree with Brett - let's keep this thread on-topic.


 5:49 pm on Feb 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

ya - chill out and get back on topic please.

Unfortunately, at this point, the thread has been a bit hijacked with 9 conspiracy theory posts. (There's no reason to post basically the same drivel 9 times unless you have a serious axe to grind) It was annoying when the second and third ones were posted. After 9, the thread is quite dead now.

Aside to Brett... I, too, would appreciate an ignore user feature for events such as this. Or, perhaps, a scoring system a la Slashdot or other thread management software.

I mean, really, he's posting the same thing in multiple threads. We *get* it already... he thinks Google does "only evil" and is the spawn of satan...


 6:39 pm on Feb 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

The orignal article in USA Today [usatoday.com] says this:

These open-source programs represent an unconventional challenge for Microsoft, Granneman says. For one thing, there's no competing company it can sue or buy out. Open source "is a movement, an idea. It's a social concept," he says.

That's quite an angle for the mainstream press to be noting. They then go on to talk about OpenOffice and all the governments who are moving to it.

The idea that open source projects present a challenge to Microsoft's regular business approach is spot on to me. It's just not "competition as usual".


 7:03 pm on Feb 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

The orignal article in USA Today says this:

These open-source programs represent an unconventional challenge for Microsoft, Granneman says. For one thing, there's no competing company it can sue or buy out. Open source "is a movement, an idea. It's a social concept," he says.

That's quite an angle for the mainstream press to be noting. They then go on to talk about OpenOffice and all the governments who are moving to it.

The idea that open source projects present a challenge to Microsoft's regular business approach is spot on to me. It's just not "competition as usual".

Quite right, Tedster. It does seem that the mainstream press is "getting it" more often these days... though definitely not every time... rather than just spouting the FUD that Microsoft et al feed them. Firefox has helped immensely in that respect. The entire open source concept is getting a much-needed boost from Firefox' growing popularity (not to mention its solid user experience).

There are now somewhere between 40 and 60 million people in the world using a Gecko-based open source browser... which is just huge.


 7:13 am on Feb 19, 2005 (gmt 0)

Multiman, I've enjoyed reading your polemics, which is all I take them for, but in this case I simply can't follow your reasoning:
You don't want to use firefox because Google is evil. From this I assume you don't want to use software produced by evil companies. Ignoring the fact that google doesn't produce firefox, there's a slight - well, ok, it's not slight, it's a yawning canyon - gap in your reasoning here. MS is without any doubt, by any standard, if you follow their legal history, which is pretty interesting, the single most evil software/os company on the planet. They have no competition at all in that area. Yet you appear to be completely satisfied typing away in MSIE, using MS Windows. How can you explain this? It makes no sense at all.

If you want to choose what software you use based on ethical or moral grounds, you clearly would have abandoned IE years ago, but here you are, still using MSIE. There are lots of other choices out there, you could be running a Mac with Safari, you could be running Linux with Konqueror, but you aren't.

This is leaving aside the fact that Firefox, Konqueror, Opera, Safari, are all excellent alternatives to MSIE, on any level. Either Opera or Firefox are significantly superior developer tools. The connection between Google and mozilla is really just a working thing, and is very new. I switched to Gecko based browsers something like 4 years ago, one of the reasons I switched was because it makes no sense using products from a company that is in fact really evil, so I stopped using it. Keep in mind that MS produces IE, directly. Google may or may not be developing a Firefox version Google branded browser, that's something we'll see in the future. Google also has other agendas, aside from the evil ones you're fond of pointing out, some of which Brett Tabke pointed out, technical spidering matters. They also have a pretty large debt to pay off to the open source community, they owe them, big time, so it's just barely possible they are simply trying to help pay off a tiny fraction of that debt, it's hard to say. But what's not hard to say is that if you don't want to use products made by evil companies, what on earth are you using MSIE for. That's just plain ridiculous.

I'm not fond of the Troll designation, never have been, but I am having problems following your attempts to justify why you keep using MSIE, that just doesn't make any sense.


 1:21 pm on Feb 19, 2005 (gmt 0)

From this I assume..

When you start with an incorrect assumption, all that follows then becomes misguided and even irrelevant.

Rhetorical Tip: Do we hear from any M$ cult worshippers multiple times a day here, routinely showing up as WebmasterWorld front-page news when it's not even news, and telling us how M$ can do no wrong under any circumstances?

As I said before,
With that said, I heartily agree with Brett - let's keep this thread on-topic.


 10:52 pm on Feb 19, 2005 (gmt 0)

"you start with an incorrect assumption"

Oh, ok, then I won't even try to make sense of what you're saying, I thought maybe you'd just made a small error in your reasoning, I was wrong, sorry.

Bringing it back on topic, give firefox a try, browse their extension libraries, install some, give it a test drive, you may find that it becomes an invaluable addition to your developer toolkit. Or you may not like it.


 11:41 pm on Feb 19, 2005 (gmt 0)

you may find that it becomes an invaluable addition to your developer toolkit

That's exactly what happened for me. I still prefer Opera (I paid for it - both to eliminate ads and to support an independent browser company) as my regular browser. But with just a few extension, FireFox has replaced a whole bunch of other applications that I used regularly for R&D in the past.

So now, most of the time, I have both browsers open -- Opera for my regular browsing and FireFox for ripping apart competitor's pages.


 11:09 pm on Feb 20, 2005 (gmt 0)

Do any of the FF extensions work with Mozilla 1.7 / 1.8?


 9:27 pm on Mar 3, 2005 (gmt 0)

Firefox is good because it allows users to use proxys, most others dont have that option.

This 59 message thread spans 2 pages: < < 59 ( 1 [2]
Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  

Home / Forums Index / Browsers / Firefox Browser Usage and Support
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved