Comments on: IE 7 bugs abound
Possible security flaw is found; preview release doesn't work with McAfee; and some security tools block browser installation.
Possible security flaw is found; preview release doesn't work with McAfee; and some security tools block browser installation.
January 2, 2010 11:43 AM PST
January 2, 2010 9:41 AM PST
January 2, 2010 6:00 AM PST
Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.
More feeds available in our RSS feed index.
Related quotes
Comcast is the largest broadband provider in the U.S.
Microsoft *must be* going after the Firefox crowd, because it ain't clear that it's going after the IE crowd, unless IE crowd is defined as "anybody but the biggest group jointly using broadband and IE."
I can see the page just fine ... on Mac OS X and FireFox. It does not require Internet Exploder. Period.
not, but I know you don't need IE to view the
site. I'm a Comcast customer and have been for
some time.
First, Comcast's site is worthless, so it's not
likely to be "every Comcast user's home page" -
it isn't mine. It's possible their technicians
might point you to it since Comcast has the
AOL-like delusion that people want content from
them (most want Internet access). However, I
suspect most people have something else.
Even so, the Comcast site works fine in
Konqueror, Safari, Firefox, and the old Mozilla.
To tell you the truth, I've never looked at it
with IE, so I can't say for certain that it ever
worked properly with IE (though I'd suppose so
-- 80% of Comcast's customers use one or another
version of Windows).
Not true, I've used Firefox and Thunderbird with Comcast. Comcast does limit its technical support for these programs, but they do work. Comcast even provides a guide for configuring them to work.
In general - new 'user interface' sucks. It is especially true when I look on non-customizable toolbar width "back" "forward" "refresh" and "stop" buttons. I used to old scheme and I simply wanted IE6 UI with tabs added. Nothing more new about UI. Because of that I will probably stay width Firefox.
I'm not suprised that there are some bugs. Show me a beta program with out bugs and I'll either call you a lier or try to hire away your Ace programmer. :)
and developer, I cringe at the prospect of IE 7 release for the
multitudes that are not aware that they have a choice. Especially
from the view point of working in open source and w3c
specifications for Web page markup. Our team relies heavily on
CSS to manage page display and are weaning our sites from
using tables to force layout. Though we are able to develop our
sites using standard compliant recommendations, IE is by far the
biggest issue that we have in adhereing to these guidelines. It
causes us to go over hours and to hack valid markup. We start
builds on compliant browsers and then once this is refined, we
view in IE to see what whacked-out issues occur there. Funny
that our sites look fantastic on all other compliant browsers -
the only issue is IE. That is a sad state of affairs in 2006.
Meanwhile, we steadily move our clients to Firefox while we wait
for IE to catch up with current browser software. Amazing how
thankful these clients are and how they spread the word to their
friends and family. Other than the neat little enhancement IE
provides MS developers, it is junk to the rest of us. Thankfully,
installing Firefox on Windows is a breeze. I was relieved to read
that the CNET page displayed poorly in IE7 - that means it is not
just our sites that will suffer display issues. Wonder who we
should bill our time to fix issues upon the release? Our clients?
How about MS? Perhaps MS should stick with Xbox which
appears to be a popular item for them. Browser software
obviously is not their gig. Why else would it take so long to
release a new version? Or is it to wait for open-source
developers to write the features such as tabbed browsing. I
would recommend that MS save time and money, grab the
source for FF or Mozilla, slap their remedial UI and brand on it,
and offer it up as IE7. Viola! no more beta and it works
everywhere (with exception to those MS developers that leverage
IE specific features. - the answer for them is to proudly display
that their site ONLY works in IE!) I am certain that a nod to the
developers at Mozilla somewhere in the source is all that they
would need to do to be "compliant"
Seems like an important thing, as I am getting tired of not being able to read the captions. Oh well, you get what you pay for...
Maybe by version 7.5+++ it may be more stable and secure?
Developers are the intended target audience, you know that correct?
complete rewrite, they should have some experience with browsers
by now! If you really want to call any part version 7 of anything
beta, then you have to call everything beta.
Mozilla Firefox History Information Denial of Service Weakness 2005-12-08
Mozilla Firefox Iframe Size Denial of Service Weakness 2005-10-06
Firefox Multiple Vulnerabilities 2005-09-23
Firefox Command Line URL Shell Command Injection 2005-09-20
Firefox IDN URL Domain Name Buffer Overflow 2005-09-09
Firefox Multiple Vulnerabilities 2005-07-13
Firefox Property Manipulation Cross-Site Scripting Vulnerability 2005-07-13
Mozilla / Firefox / Camino Dialog Origin Spoofing Vulnerability 2005-06-21
Mozilla / Mozilla Firefox Frame Injection Vulnerability 2005-06-06
Mozilla Firefox Download Dialog Spoofing Vulnerabilities 2005-05-12
Mozilla Firefox Two Vulnerabilities 2005-05-08
Mozilla Firefox Multiple Vulnerabilities 2005-04-18
Mozilla Firefox JavaScript Engine Information Disclosure Vulnerability 2005-04-04
Mozilla Firefox Three Vulnerabilities 2005-03-24
Firefox "Save Link As..." Status Bar Spoofing Weakness 2005-03-14
Mozilla / Firefox / Thunderbird Multiple Vulnerabilities 2005-03-01
Mozilla / Firefox "Save Link As" Download Dialog Spoofing 2005-03-01
Mozilla Firefox Image Javascript URI Dragging Cross-Site Scripting 2005-03-01
Mozilla / Firefox Three Vulnerabilities 2005-02-08
Firefox / Mozilla / Thunderbird Multiple Vulnerabilities 2005-01-31
Mozilla / Mozilla Firefox Dialog Overlapping Weakness 2005-01-12
Mozilla / Mozilla Firefox Download Dialog Source Spoofing 2005-01-04
Mozilla / Mozilla Firefox Window Injection Vulnerability 2004-12-08
Mozilla Firefox Multiple Vulnerabilities 2004-11-10
Mozilla / Firefox / Thunderbird Downloaded File Content Disclosure 2004-10-25
Face it, when you compare the bugs from IE to FF, IE's are much much worse. Mozilla is much quicker to release a patch or update than MS.
If the final version of IE7 has bugs/flaws then by all means go nuts about stories as they would be deserved. But until then, get a clue CNet.
http://kb.mozillazine.org/Category:Issues_%28Firefox%29
I am reading posting that firefox 2.0 STILL IN BETA has tons of bugs (can't believe that!)
when I get this listing I will post
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/
get your daily dose of the buggy exploitable version of firefox, wow theres tons of bugs on that beta version
Actually, I expect that most of the time that firefox is overall more secure and less buggy. Yes it has bugs of their own. However it is not a core operating system component, like Internet Explorer is, so Firefox users may encounter fewer "system access" vulnerabilities.
Last time I checked secunia, IE 6 was rated "highly critical", while firefox was rated "less critical".
IE: http://secunia.com/product/11/
Firefox: http://secunia.com/product/4227/
If they listen, they'll fix every little problem that people are finding and make ie a worthwhile browser to use. if they ignore people, it'll be the same old thing again.
my first ThinkPad came with OS/2 Warp. Those days were painful!
- Testing
- by wethead February 2, 2006 12:23 PM PST
- Testing. Is this thing on?
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
Showing 1 of 3 pages (100 Comments)