Monday, May 16, 2005

IE vs. FireFox

One thing that I have noticed is that a lot of people complain that Internet Explorer has a lot of updates for security holes. People tend to complain about them a lot, but what I don’t understand is that Fire Fox has had quite a few security holes so they have released updates to patch them, but people sing and dance when they have a new release.

Is this not what Microsoft does? Why is it because a program is open source it is automatically better and can exist without updates, but if there is one who cares. We live in a world of stupid double standards in the fact that Microsoft is persecuted by people because of security updates that because they care they fix. Yet people celebrate when open source releases an update.

Also that leads me to another point. I hear a lot of people say that you should use open source software because it is better. There are less problems, and bugs. Things of that nature. What I find truly interesting is that the most popular open source product on the market today has had some of the worst security problems in the browser market. Hmm lets think about that. It does go to show that the more popular something becomes the more it is targeted so maybe Microsoft isn’t that bad after all. Hmmm.

Buddy Lindsey.

4 Comments:

At 10:10 AM, May 17, 2005, Blogger davey said...

opera is the way to go
come on know

 
At 2:38 PM, May 20, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Try netscape, it has both firefox and ie engines

 
At 8:00 PM, June 26, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Microsoft only recently started the plethora of IE security patches; it started around the same time Firefox started to become popular.

"We live in a world of stupid double standards in the fact that Microsoft is persecuted by people because of security updates that because they care they fix. Yet people celebrate when open source releases an update."

This is not quite accurate; it is not a double standard. The reason being, is Microsoft is a company that produces a product for SALE (even in the case of IE, because it is intertwined to the use of any current Windows OS). The majority of open source products are FREE (as in speech, AND beer).

As a consumer, I'd expect a company to stand behind their product, and fix issues that might be wrong with it. The open source software, developers are releasing updates and patches for the sole purpose of creating a better end product.

"Also that leads me to another point. I hear a lot of people say that you should use open source software because it is better. There are less problems, and bugs."

Open source isn't really "better", but it does provide a unique type of debugging. Bugs and security issues are found, and reported quickly. And developers can then put out an update.

The maximum amount of developers working on this project is roughly the number of developers - worldwide. The maximum number of developers in a closed source project, is rather finite, usually being limited to the number of developers the company can afford to have.

Which brings us back to the cost of the product.

 
At 12:26 AM, November 06, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Greetings from North Cack-A-Lacky! I enjoyed your thoughts, although I give Firefox even a little more credit than you do, I think ;) See what I mean here: internet explorer support

 

Post a Comment

<< Home