Category: Web Browsers

Posted on
by

IE6As reported all over the place, Microsoft has reversed its previous plans and will be releasing a new beta of Internet Explorer this summer instead of keeping it locked to the next version of Windows.

About frelling time.

Of course, there’s no word on whether they’ll actually improve page rendering—all the statements so far have focused on security, anti-phishing, and the like—so we web developers will probably have to continue using hacks to work around buggy rendering and missing features that are so much easier to build for Firefox, Opera and Safari. And even if they do fix things in IE7, they’re focusing on Windows XP (we might get it in Windows 2000, if we’re lucky), and there are still people using on Windows 98/Me who will still be stuck with IE6.

Of course, unlike Microsoft, Mozilla hasn’t stopped working on their browsers. By the time IE7 is out, Firefox 1.1 or 1.5 will be available, and they may be well on the road to 2.0.

Congratulations to Mozilla and Firefox for convincing Microsoft to get back to work!

Competition is good.

Posted on
by

I’ve got to start reading BBspot more often. I wandered in there via Mozillazine and found this post about Microsoft’s new antispyware program removing Internet Explorer.

“It shows how powerful our AntiSpyware program is,” said Weatherbee. “Not only is it able to remove spyware from the system, but also the source of most spyware. Our competitors can’t match that.”

Ah, techie satire!

Posted on
by

There’s a new anti-IE site on the web: Digital Proof [archive.org]. Rather than tell you why you should switch to browser X, or why you should pick one of browsers XYZ, it just collects links to other people’s articles about why you should switch.

The advantage I can see for this campaign is it can collect a wide variety of perspectives. After all, everyone who chooses to install something other than IE has their own reasons. Some want the security, some want the more modern capabilities for design, some want the better usability, some want to promote marketshare diversity, and so on. No one argument is going to work on everyone.

On the other hand, I suspect the target audience is unlikely to wade through all the articles available, even with a top-5-rated list on the home page.

(via Mezzoblue Dailies)

Posted on
by

Firefox – Switch [archive.org] is the first of these sites I noticed. Based on Apple’s “Switch” campaign, it’s aimed at raising awareness of Firefox and convincing people to switch from IE. It has stories of people who have switched, a top 10 list of reasons to switch, and answers to questions about just how you go about this switching thing, anyway.

Stop IE [archive.org] is, as its name implies, a negative campaign. It focuses on the security risks inherent in using Internet Explorer and provides a list of alternatives, though Firefox is the only one it deals with in any depth.

Browse Happy is my favorite of the bunch, because it’s an inclusive campaign. It’s run by the Web Standards Project, so the goal isn’t to promote Firefox or eliminate Internet Explorer, it’s to promote choice and get people away from today’s Internet Explorer. The WaSP’s ultimate goal is to encourage people to build a vendor-neutral web in which you can use whatever browser you want—including IE—and get the same high-quality experience. That’s a goal I can agree with, and that’s why Browse Happy is the one I promote. The meat of the site is stories of people who have switched away from IE, with profiles of four browsers: Firefox, Mozilla, Opera, and Safari.

Firefox. Take Back the Web Stop IE Browse Happy

Update (June 2007): Stop IE is long dead. I’ve updated the links to point to the Internet Archive of the site.

Posted on
by

Here’s an online security story to freak you out: Security firm Secunia has found a loophole [Edit: originally linked to Yahoo! News] in basic browser window handling that can let any site plug its code into a pop-up window generated by any other site. That’s not just ads, that includes pop-up help files, password dialogs, you name it.

They even have a demonstration: Start the code going on their site, open up Citibank, then click on a button on the Citibank site and it’ll open a page from Secunia.

And it works in every major browser, for the simple reason that it uses standard functionality that no one has questioned until now: The ability to open a page in a particular frame or window. All you need to know is the name of that window, and you’re set. As long as it hides the toolbars (SOP for pop-up windows of all stripes), the user will never notice. There is a workaround, at least for Firefox and Mozilla users, but it’s ugly: prevent sites from hiding the location bar.

Actually, the functionality has been questioned before: last July, when Secunia found a similar problem in frames. The solution for that was to prevent a page in one window (or tab) from accessing frames in another. But it’s a little more challenging to decide which pages should be allowed to update a top-level window.

In the short term, sites wanting to protect themselves from being hijacked can probably help by randomizing the names of their pop-up windows. In the long term, browsers are going to have to figure out how to separate windows that should have the ability to load new pages from windows that shouldn’t, knowing that they’ll undoubtedly end up breaking some websites in the process.

(via The War on Spam)

Posted on
by

CNET has posted a write-up of AOL’s new Netscape prototype based on Firefox, as well as a screenshot. It seems to be a combination of Firefox + theme + bundled extensions… plus a mode that embeds Internet Explorer for compatibility.

There are some nice ideas: adapting Firefox’s RSS capabilities to create a headline ticker, for instance, and the Firefox team has been talking about bundling extensions since it was called Phoenix. As for the embedded IE mode… on one hand it provides a convenient solution to the biggest criticism laid on all non-IE browsers: they don’t render pages exactly the way IE does. But it comes at the cost of all the security risks inherent in IE itself. It does remind me of the “View with Gecko” option Konqueror used to have (and probably still does on some systems).

But the clutter… The sheer number of buttons, icons, widgets etc. in that screenshot is staggering. Even after installing the web developer extension I don’t think I have that many buttons on Firefox. 3+ buttons on the tab bar, 3 icons on each tab…. I hope that CNET was just enabling every feature they could find to get them all in one screenshot, but if AOL is trying to bill it as “easier” than Firefox (which was created with a simple user interface as a design goal), they’ve got to try another approach.

Update (via WaSP): It seems BetaNews has more information on the dual-engine setup. Apparently they do have security settings to mitigate the IE issues… but then so does IE, and we all know how well that’s worked. Also, another screenshot, which looks even more cluttered than CNET’s. I think this will be a browser that requires you to run it maximized at 2000×1500. (Also of note: Firefox developer Blake Ross’ Open Letter to Netscape and Henrik Gemal’s collection of screenshots.)

Further Update: MozillaZine has posted a more thorough review.

ยปAll pages site-wide with this tag