perhaps not but why take a chance? during the uninstallation of Beta, you will be asked if you wish to delete the directory, I said NO. The new installation retained all bookmarks and previous settings. Only the extensions were incompatible so we'll have to wait for updates on those. Everything A-OK ! ps It seems the new release is faster than Beta. I know this is always claimed but it really seems faster.
1) FireFox Pros And Cons For an industry built on logic--- at their deepest level, computers are logic circuits--- blatant illogic somehow manages to cloud many issues. Take FireFox http://www.mozilla.org/products/firefox/ , for example, a very nice browser from Mozilla.Org http://www.mozilla.org/ . It's free, Open Source, and the result of literally years of development. It's also a cross-platform application, available for Windows, Mac, and Linux--- a huge plus in computationally diverse environments because the configuration and training/learning curve is basically the same, no matter what platform the browser's installed on. Its human language support also is extensive, with versions in everything from Afrikaans to Welsh. No question: it's impressive software. Some also like it simply because it's not from Microsoft. I think this approach has some merit: Whenever Microsoft loses serious competition in any software category, it grows complacent, and the pace of innovation slackens. IE6, for example, came out in 2001; an eternity ago, in computing terms. Except for a boatload of security updates and patches, it's still basically the same browser it was then. But, US-CERT (United States Computer Emergency Readiness Team), a partnership between the Department of Homeland Security and the public and private sectors that impartially tracks all manner of security issues in operating systems and major applications, shows that the list of IE's current vulnerabilities is shorter than those for FireFox, Mozilla, and the other alternate browsers. Likewise, it also lists fewer Windows' vulnerabilities than for the other OSes. The last time I mentioned a similar US-CERT finding, by the way, Linux partisans leapt up to tell me that US-CERT didn't know what it was doing. Linux *couldn't* have more security flaws than Windows! Everyone *knows* that Open Source software is so much better than anything from Microsoft-- - right? Well, to the dismay the more rabid anti-Microsoft partisans, reports from other independent observers corroborated CERT's findings. For example, between July 1 and December 31, 2004, Symantec documented 13 serious vulnerabilities affecting Microsoft Internet Explorer, but found 21 vulnerabilities affecting each of the Mozilla-based browsers. But don't take my word for it--- read the reports for yourself, see the methodologies for yourself, and decide for yourself: The article posted now (free!) at http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=160900911 has all the details and links you'll need. I wrote that article to try to help readers interested in FireFox in particular and Open Source in general to make an informed decision. There are many, many excellent, proven, objective benefits to switching to Open Source software--- but there's also a lot of misinformation, and some very, very *bad* reasons to switch. For example, the "common knowledge" that FireFox is "more secure than IE" simply is false. Switching to FireFox for that particular reason--- in the belief that you'll magically and automatically be more secure--- is just plain wrong. But again, don't trust me, or any third party: Come see the source material for yourself, and make up your own mind. It'll only take a few minutes, and one way or the other--- whether you agree or disagree with me- -- you'll have the facts at hand, and so can make an informed judgment, rather than one based on "common knowledge." Click on over to http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=160900911 ! SUBSCRIBE (it's free!): <a href=" http://langa.com/join_langalist.htm ">
FireFox is more secure, no question about it. The reason? Would be hackers are not as interested in it, because it's market-share it still quite small ~ 9%. Enjoy it while you can, but the information above about how it's no safer than IE is a load of crap. I don't need any "expert" to tell me what I have or have not experienced after months while using FireFox. I have not experienced a single hijacking, no toolbars, no changed home page; it's simply safer - for now. Mozilla engineers will face the same heartaches MS is when or if they ever become a major player.
You don't appear to have read the referred to article. I would certainly believe the security team at CERT before I believed either my experience or yours. You are falling for the "small sample" error --- hopefully you don't do that when trading or you will really have a saturnine disposition PS. FWIW I run Firefox as well and my main mail client is Thunderbird. But the best browser (and now I see the most secure) that I have used is Avant.
I expected an attempt at a clever post, but was a little disappointed. You my friend are falling for the "These are experts, it must be true" BS. I sincerely hope your trading isn't similar to this example, else you might be the type take hot stock tips from talking heads on CNBC or even worse, a broker under the belief that they might actually know what they are talking about. I am in the IT professional by trade, whether that means anything to you or not I do not care, I did however feel that it was important to point out that FireFox IS more stable, and currently safer than IE. Start a poll on users' experiences, we will see if you are singing the same tune. Who cares what those clowns say when a startling majority will testify to its merits. It is a more robust browser hands down, and until attacks are targeted more at them directly it will remain the same. Are you working for Bill? Friends, use FireFox....
The article is low grade FUD - fear, uncertainty and doubt. It purports to have the aim of making people think about security issues, but it's subtext is to sow doubt into the minds of prospective users of Firefox and other open source software. I thought the crowning glory was the reproduction of some email claiming downloads don't work with Firefox. Fairly unlikely. There is no serious discussion of security issues at all. totaling up CERT advisories is a nonsense for many reasons not the least being that the open source community is far more forthright in reporting security issues in a timely manner. Another being the enormous volume of free software than comes with Linux distributions. If you total up all the vulnerabilities in all this free software and conclude that Linux (or BSD) is less secure than Windows you are at best an idiot, but more likely pushing an agenda with dishonest arguments. The reality is Microsoft has a terrible track record with security. Period. Yes, it is improving but it's still poor. Witness the squillions of Windows boxes normally running under user id's with administrator privileges. There's even quite a few Windows applications that won't run without admin privilege for no good reason. This is a direct reflection on Microsofts historical attitude to security. Unix on the other hand, always encouraged 'respect the root' - ie admin authority should only be used when essential. That is just one example of a security issue that this type of hack journalism doesn't have the wit to address.
LOL, very good Saturnine. I guess that attempting to add light to anything in the Microsoft/Open Source discussion just brings strongly held beliefs out of their dark corners. For the record, I don't/haven't worked for microsoft or any affiliated co. Nor have I sold their stuff. In my former life I was a Comms professional in a company that competed with Microsoft. As I said, MS is not my preferred browser (front end) or mail client. I suspect that my opinion is less biased (lol ... IMHO) FWIW Cert information frequently comes from sources other than the supplier ... sometimes even successful hackers pass it on. And the anecdotal nature of those emails was commented on quite clearly in the article so its hardly cause to shoot the "expert." ______________________ The things people believe in are usually just what they instinctively feel is right; the justifications and arguments are the least important part of the belief. That's why you can win the argument, prove them wrong, and still they believe what they did in the first place. You've attacked the wrong thing. So what do you do? Agree to disagree. Or fight. - C. Zakalwe.
1. I have no experience with the Avant browser. 2. I have been using Firefox for a year and I can tell you that there are no 'problems and bugs' in the program, at least none that have affected me. Thunderbird, the email client, is prone to some problems, but Firefox has never done anything but make my browsing easier and safer. You most emphatically do NOT have to be a geek to run this s/w. 3. The possibility that 'the list of IE's current vulnerabilities is shorter than those for FireFox' is low, IMO. Use Firefox and get a sense of the ideas the developers are trying to implement. These are the strength of the program.