September 30, 2004 4:00 AM PDT
Planning to dump IE? Think again
- Related Stories
-
Microsoft: To secure IE, upgrade to XP
September 23, 2004 -
Firefox beats million-download deadline
September 20, 2004 -
Latest Mozilla releases fix 10 security flaws
September 15, 2004 -
Firefox drawing fans away from Microsoft IE
September 15, 2004
The problem is that many Web developers create their sites so they work best with Internet Explorer (IE), but not to work as well with browser software used by relatively tiny groups of potential visitors.
Sites subject to complaints from Firefox users include Web travel site Expedia and Microsoft's MSNBC news site. Even Shutterfly, the online photo service backed by Netscape Communications co-founder Jim Clark, warns visitors that it supports only a limited set of browsers.
These incompatibilities between browsers are as big a headache for developers as they are for Web surfers, some professionals say.
"It's definitely a problem," said Noel Briggs, a developer at Web design company NetTensity. "The time we waste on addressing browser incompatibility problems easily amounts to a significant percentage of our payroll."
The biggest reason why most people can't dump IE, however, is Microsoft itself: The software giant's Windows Update site blocks out non-IE browsers completely. That means anyone running Windows who wants to download and install the latest security updates from the Web will have to keep IE close at hand. Some consider that ironic or worse, given that authoritative groups such as Carnegie Mellon University's Computer Emergency Response Team now warn people to stay away from IE because of its myriad security problems.
While some people are downloading alternate browsers out of frustration with IE, which last had a significant upgrade three years ago, others may be swayed by grassroots Internet campaigns urging Web surfers to dump IE.
These include the Web Standards Project's Browse Happy site and the Mozilla Foundation's volunteer-based marketing site, Spread Firefox, which it launched alongside the preview release of Firefox 1.0.
Most IE alternatives support World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) standards, which give Web developers all the tools necessary to build fully compatible sites. Nevertheless, Microsoft has created proprietary elements within IE to support some enhanced Web page features, such as multimedia. Web developers who decide to use these features may effectively lock out surfers who use non-IE browsers.
Corporate Web developers frequently write code to work with IE rather than to Web standards, because their clients want to use Microsoft's proprietary CRM (customer relationship management) and ERP (enterprise resource planning) features. Since IE dominates the market so thoroughly, some companies simply balk at the cost of tests that would help ensure cross-browser compatibility.
The situation has some Web developers shaking their heads in disbelief.
"Sites as large as Expedia and MSNBC should be able to cater to just about everybody who wishes to use the site," Briggs said. "If certain TVs weren't able to reliably render the MSNBC cable news channel, I am sure that the network would take the issue seriously."
News.com writer Paul Festa contributed to this report.
59 comments
Join the conversation! Add your comment (Log in or register)
It's free, and you can completely remove IE from Windows, if you so desire.
Be well..........
Mike
In addition, my mortgage company only supports IE or Netscape. If I want to pay my mortgage online, I have to run IE.
Netscape/ Mozilla is for free you know.
You just download it, try to connect to your website, and if it works, be happy and surf safely.
If it doesn't work, complain till they make their website standards compliant. If they care for the online security of their customers, they should.
As a side note I hear theres a standalone program now to run Windows Update without the need for IE?
I am using Mozilla for 4 years now, in combination with a virus scanner, and a good firewall at my gateway.
When a really critical update is needed, I download it manually from the M$ website, and install it. The only ones I consider are networking vulnerablilities (blaster and stuff)
I couldn't care less for IE vulnerabilities, and all other junk. Every 6 months or so, I run a spyware scan, and the results are neglectable.
I also use common sense, when downloading things, or receiving weird emails.
Never had much security issues, data loss, crashes because of missed patches.
So, you don't need IE for anything. If a website only works with IE, I send them an email to fix their website, and I know I will never visit them again.
Everyone in our company hase been using Netscape and Opera for years. Recently we switched to FireFox because it is faster than both of the mentioned, and far more secure than IE. The only infected machines we have ever had were due to violations of the 'don't use IE on the net rule'.
In the US presidents are impeached.
In California Govenors are recalled.
All it takes is the will of the people to break the monopoly.
Every user of any currently supported version of Windows has Internet Exploder -- it's a price of entry to run the OS, so there is no suprise here at all.
To suggest that a person has spyware just because they choose to use IE is ignorant and foolish. And assumes that the user is also ignorant and foolish.
I've never been infected with spyware or a virus, and Microsoft has done an excellent job of patching nearly every single vulnerability in IE before an exploit is ever released.
Sorry I'm not supporting the minory trend here... but the facts are that systems running IE can be just as secure and stable as systems running any other browser. Plus, you get the ability to run Microsoft's proprietary software alongside standards-based software. And, there is no installation or configuration costs on IT departments because the dang thing is already installed on every machine and works reliably with little to no configuration.
"My company, with one of the most secure IT infrastructures in the country"
Which contradicts:
" there is no installation or configuration costs on IT departments because the dang thing is already installed on every machine and works reliably with little to no configuration."
Due to the fact that IE is an insecure rotting POS out of the box. Yes if you tweak your group policy and set security to uber high (Which breaks some of the afore mentioned proprietary sites.) and install a 3rd party popup blocker, and have a solid anti-virus package then yep. You are right. IE can be secure. But the notion that there isn't any configuration involved is asinine. And the simple fact of the matter is that you may very well be an advanced enough user to know how to surf the web securely without dealing with adware. Either that or you go to mainstream sites that have a vested interest in maintaining an adware free site. (cnn, msnbc, news, zdnet, etc.)
I can honestly say of the 175 users in the office I admin prob 40%-60% have some form of adware on their systems. I can't set security to high because of the nature some sites work. (You do so and it breaks the functionality of many sites.) And I've yet to find a solid package for blocking popups. We are currently evaluating a few products from Symantec and NA. So saying that no configuration is necessary and that IE is a solid browser. Well&
I've come to the conclusion you are either full of crap or just don't know what you are talking about.
With a lot of effort, time, and diligence you can secure IE, sure. But why go through all that trouble when the alternatives are secure "out of the box"?
And if you dont beleive IE has security problems try this: Fresh install of Windows (pick your flavor) and IE: leave the default settings and apply all available patches. Start surfing and avoid mainstream websites. Within 24 hours your computer will bog down to a crawl from all the spyware, within 48 hours it will die.. horribly.
Ive seen it far too many times.
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.webheat.co.uk/firefox.php" target="_newWindow">http://www.webheat.co.uk/firefox.php</a>
If are brave enough to try this please let me know how it goes.
Not that I make any money from it but I just love getting more hits :)
I'll be working on a Firefox 1.0PR version of the .msi file soon, I just want to give it a chance to stabilise a little, make sure any important bugs get squashed before I make it.
The files used to make the install are included in the zip file so if anyone else wants to use that to make their own 1.0 version go for it.
Worked wonderfully for me... not the largest test environment for my company though.
It'll kick ass if I help Firefox make it into corporatations default browser.
:)
(www.webstandards.org) such as Firefox, Opera, Safari and
others. Browser developers, such as Microsoft, and Web
developers who design sites specifically for Internet Explorer are
doing the Internet community a huge disservice.
browsing options here:
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://browsehappy.com/browsers/" target="_newWindow">http://browsehappy.com/browsers/</a>
Avoid sites that only support IE!
Government exploded into a fredom of information access &
exchange for the public. Waiting in the shadows like the snipers
they are, MS was the last major "player" in the Internet Age. But
instead of JOINING the public utility of the Information Highway,
they chose to give IE away for free, killing legitimate businesses
& monopolizing the Internet with FRONTPAGE web site coding
that works on IE ONLY.
Greedy Tollgate Monopolist at their worst.
The only solution to this is to go OPEN SOURCE / back to "old
school" coding to do an end around play to gain our freedom
back.
MOZILLA / MAC OSX SAFARI / Netscape / AOL / etc. are the
answers. Using Safari with the preferences set on "IE emulation" I
have the ability to access 99% of the WEB just fine. They other 1%
I either send a report to Apple Safari team to have them do a
work around or I use IE for Mac & send an email to webmaster &
company that I will not travel to their site in the future nor
sponser any of their banner advertisements if they refuse to
allow any OTHER browsers of choice by the public.
CITIZEN GATES: YOU DO NOT OWN THE INTERNET, IT IS A PUBLIC
UTILITY DEVELOPED BY THE GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE, NOT
AN ILLEGAL MONOPOLY.
power to the people (Netizens)...
- Eyes wide open in Seattle -
Same with Flash or Shockwave - unless Macromedia is paying your company - why are you giving them FREE ad space on your website?
Sites that MSNBC, UPS or Tommy Bahanana's obviously don't want my business or YOURS - just stop going and tell them why.
If you're going to write an article, at least include facts. To say that your shutterfly.com website doesn't work in Firefox is absolute rubbish, simply because it works perfectly out of the box, no additional settings/modifications required.
Either the hang up is farther into the site or they probably fixed it once they caught wind of the problem. I dont think CNet would indulge in slander theres no benefit to it.
Stupid microsoft so greedy
So we'll see, and once I know both systems I will let you know which one I decided to stick with.
Esk
Also, this article fails to mention that IE is an integral part of the O/S, which means that if there is a security flaw in IE your entire system is MUCH more likely to be at risk of being breached. As opposed to a browser that is self contained and has security flaws (what decent size program doesn't?), it is more likely to only jeopardize it's own integrity, and not so much your financial information from last year's Quicken report, for example.
Let's see reinstall Mozilla...or use IE and be at risk of losing my private information, be used as a spamming station, and then have to reinstall the entire O/S...your choice.
A) Those are the best 100+ end users I've ever heard of.
B) The administrator doesn't know what kind of problems he really has.
It's virtually unheard of, and while IE has plenty of security flaws, it's no mystery that the majority of infections (of any type) are the result of users shortcomings as much as the software. The big problems are just beginning to plague us. The recent JPEG exploit comes to mind.
It is not unforeseeable to me that the day will come where businesses that are NOT running certain MS technologies will gain a competitive advantage by the way of reduced administrative costs. This is not to say that all MS software is bad. To the contrary, I really like most of the MS software I use. There are just certain tasks that are too risky to depend upon IE.
who come to your site:
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://web.nickshanks.com/ie/" target="_newWindow">http://web.nickshanks.com/ie/</a>
One thing that constantly annoys me is MS's reluctance to use standards, rather prefering surfers to embrace a Microsoft only vision of the web. I am worried that they'll try to get rid of xhtml, css etc. which is the only way I program for the web now. They clearly don't want to share the web with anyone else.
And lastly, I don't want every computer I own to connect to the web anyway. I use a standalone computer for the web to avoid viruses getting onto important files - and a web connection can cause performance issues e.g. video editing.