Perdition
Expert Member
Agreed there is money to be made exploiting flaws but it's a double edged sword, if Firefox held the majority market share then hackers would target it. Also how do you get millions of people to keep their Firefox up to date when flaws are found (and they will be)?
IE was being developed at a time when the buzzword was "features" not "security". Sure this has come back to haunt MS but at least they are releasing patches to address the issues and from a user standpoint one can't really argue with that.
You don't need 24/7 connectivity for Windows Update to work well. The only issue I've had is when it was trying to download SP 2 (I'm on ISDN 64k). Other than that my updates have downloaded without me even noticing until it's popped up telling me it's ready to install, it really is painless.
I don't think MS have a grand strategy to thumb their nose at W3C standards, they just wanted to provide features that were not standard at the time IE was created. Besides there is no law that one has to concretely adhere to the standards. It may not be "playing nice" but then there are MANY companies that don't play nice, MS is just the favourite scapegoat.
I have absolutely no problem with MS keeping their code closed to the general public. They do make their source code available to government institutions where security is mission critical. As a software developer myself I wouldn't want everyone having access to my code else what am I working for if anyone can just copy it? I have no problem contributing to open source projects but it is obviously voluntary.
Before you call me an MS fanboy I'm just arguing the other side of the coin. I like Linux but work mostly on Windows. I like FireFox but prefer Avant. People are far too quick to abuse MS when they step out of line but anything open source can do no wrong. Logic like that should stay in the school yard.
At the end of the day you're not forced to use IE so there is no point continually abusing it and evangilising Firefox, let people try both and decide for themselves.
IE was being developed at a time when the buzzword was "features" not "security". Sure this has come back to haunt MS but at least they are releasing patches to address the issues and from a user standpoint one can't really argue with that.
You don't need 24/7 connectivity for Windows Update to work well. The only issue I've had is when it was trying to download SP 2 (I'm on ISDN 64k). Other than that my updates have downloaded without me even noticing until it's popped up telling me it's ready to install, it really is painless.
I don't think MS have a grand strategy to thumb their nose at W3C standards, they just wanted to provide features that were not standard at the time IE was created. Besides there is no law that one has to concretely adhere to the standards. It may not be "playing nice" but then there are MANY companies that don't play nice, MS is just the favourite scapegoat.
I have absolutely no problem with MS keeping their code closed to the general public. They do make their source code available to government institutions where security is mission critical. As a software developer myself I wouldn't want everyone having access to my code else what am I working for if anyone can just copy it? I have no problem contributing to open source projects but it is obviously voluntary.
Before you call me an MS fanboy I'm just arguing the other side of the coin. I like Linux but work mostly on Windows. I like FireFox but prefer Avant. People are far too quick to abuse MS when they step out of line but anything open source can do no wrong. Logic like that should stay in the school yard.
At the end of the day you're not forced to use IE so there is no point continually abusing it and evangilising Firefox, let people try both and decide for themselves.