Monday July 1st, 2002
Linux Online recently compared the major Linux browsers, including the Mozilla-based trio of Mozilla 1.0, Netscape 6.2 and Galeon. Reviewer Michael J Jordan praises Mozilla's stability, tabbed browsing, rendering and customisation.
As mentioned by fondacio on our forums, the International Herald and Tribune took a look at Mozilla, Opera and NeoPlanet (note that the site doesn't seem to work in some builds of Mozilla). Reviewer Lee Dembart says that "Mozilla is impressive and has it all over Opera." He especially likes the ability to block pop-ups, tabbed browsing and pipelining.
UPDATE! tuxracer writes: "I've put up a browser comparison list, comparing various features that affect usability and W3C standards compliance. It compares Mozilla 1.0, Netcaptor 7.01, Internet Explorer 6.0 (Windows), and Internet Explorer 5.x (Mac)."
#31 Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Got that right!
Saturday July 6th, 2002 5:18 AM
You are replying to this message
"If the Virus was an exe or com file rather than a VirusBasic file most Windows users would remain clueless about it's nature because Microsoft's default setting is to hide file extensions making it easy for a Windows Virus writter to include a "checkout this picture" message in the message that goes with the attached Windows Virus. This is a known security flaw, yet MS still hides the extensions by default in XP."
I have absolutely no clue as to what you were trying to say there.
"First, 'nix has a habit of warning it's users about the dangers of using the root account for anything except routine maintance."
Of course. Your point being? A non-root user doesn't have an addressbook? Or a non-root user doesn't have information that is valuable to him/her that could be exploited by malicious code if the user ran such code in their own user process?
"You failed to mention Windows 9.x where EVERY user has admin access making ALL 9.x boxes a security hazzard."
Oh please. You failed to mention older versions of Sendmail and Apache, too. And a whole slew of others. ;)
Bottom line is that most of this security talk is a bunch of hogwash. A lame FUD tactic really and nothing more. If not for me, then for at least others (especially regular mozilla users who have to use IE from time to time for whatever reason): Provide us with a list of malicious sites that we should avoid going to. Given all of the constant and relentless bashes I have read regarding IE's security in the past couple of weeks here and in the mozilla/netscape newsgroups, it should be quite easy.
Of the people, by the people, for the people, remember? In otherwords, put your money where your mouth is. With a little bit of luck you can make a web page that will take control of my PC and send all of my quicken data to you. ;)