Firefox is not ready for primetime

[RipVanWinkle]

I started using Firefox two weeks ago. I love its speed and it eliminates
pop-up ads better than any pop-up blocker I have tried. But Firefox is
clearly not compatible with a whole bunch of websites and that's a darn
shame. I am told that the problem is that Microsoft broke some of the
standard HTML rules and the websites that use these non-standard
Microsoft-only rules will not display properly with Firefox. Does that
means that Microsoft wins the game? Why can't the brilliant programmers at
Firefox work around this? Maybe someday Firefox will be a better browser
but right now it's just not reliable for surfing unknown websites. I will
keep it on my computer and use it as my first choice for regular websites
that I know are compatible. But for web-surfing I must sadly return to the
definitely inferior, but always compatible, Internet Explorer.

Rip, NYC

 

[John Corliss]

I started using Firefox two weeks ago. I love its speed and it eliminates
pop-up ads better than any pop-up blocker I have tried. But Firefox is
clearly not compatible with a whole bunch of websites and that's a darn
shame. I am told that the problem is that Microsoft broke some of the
standard HTML rules and the websites that use these non-standard
Microsoft-only rules will not display properly with Firefox. Does that
means that Microsoft wins the game? Why can't the brilliant programmers at
Firefox work around this? Maybe someday Firefox will be a better browser
but right now it's just not reliable for surfing unknown websites. I will
keep it on my computer and use it as my first choice for regular websites
that I know are compatible. But for web-surfing I must sadly return to the
definitely inferior, but always compatible, Internet Explorer.

There are actually TWO main problems that are responsible for not
being able to access IE only websites.

1. Browser identification - If certain websites determine that you're
using a non-IE browser, they will refuse to load. The Prefbar
extension for Mozilla allows you to "spoof" a browser type and that
usually gets around this problem.

2. ActiveX modules - that's the problem that you're talking about.
There are workarounds, but ActiveX is a security hazard and is part of
the reason why IE contains so many unpleasant security
vulnerabilities. If this is the reason that you can't access a
website, then it's probably better to not go there. However, if you
must, then what I do is to make an exception and to use IE to view it.
However, such exceptions are rare.

 

[default]

I started using Firefox two weeks ago. I love its speed and it eliminates
pop-up ads better than any pop-up blocker I have tried. But Firefox is
clearly not compatible with a whole bunch of websites and that's a darn
shame. I am told that the problem is that Microsoft broke some of the
standard HTML rules and the websites that use these non-standard
Microsoft-only rules will not display properly with Firefox. Does that
means that Microsoft wins the game? Why can't the brilliant programmers at
Firefox work around this? Maybe someday Firefox will be a better browser
but right now it's just not reliable for surfing unknown websites. I will
keep it on my computer and use it as my first choice for regular websites
that I know are compatible. But for web-surfing I must sadly return to the
definitely inferior, but always compatible, Internet Explorer.

Rip, NYC

More to the point; some websites aren't ready for prime time?

I haven't had any problems using firefox. If it needs activeX it is
clearly not a site that recognizes browser standards, but I haven't
encountered one myself.

 

[PB]

Firefox is clearly not compatible with a whole bunch of websites

Wrong. "A whole bunch of websites" are actually not HTML-compliant.
That's why Firefox, and even Opera, can't view them properly. Such
sites are made by their webmasters to be IE-specific. That doesn't
mean Firefox and Opera are "not ready for primetime" -- that's like
saying a big car is no good for driving because it can't park in
small car spaces!

Maybe you could list some example sites for us? I have been able
to visit all sites (except Microsoft ones, because they obviously
code them specifically for IE) with no problem with Firefox.

 

[Lowen H.]

I started using Firefox two weeks ago. I love its speed and it eliminates
pop-up ads better than any pop-up blocker I have tried. But Firefox is
clearly not compatible with a whole bunch of websites and that's a darn
shame. I am told that the problem is that Microsoft broke some of the
standard HTML rules and the websites that use these non-standard
Microsoft-only rules will not display properly with Firefox. Does that
means that Microsoft wins the game? Why can't the brilliant programmers at
Firefox work around this? Maybe someday Firefox will be a better browser
but right now it's just not reliable for surfing unknown websites. I will
keep it on my computer and use it as my first choice for regular websites
that I know are compatible. But for web-surfing I must sadly return to the
definitely inferior, but always compatible, Internet Explorer.

Rip, NYC

This has been my experience also and problems (for me) seem to be limited to
banking sites. I too like Firefox so much that I have continued to use it
for general surfing, while I grudgingly recognized I still have to rely on
IE.

LH

 

[ms]

I started using Firefox two weeks ago. I love its speed and it eliminates
pop-up ads better than any pop-up blocker I have tried. But Firefox is
clearly not compatible with a whole bunch of websites and that's a darn
shame. I am told that the problem is that Microsoft broke some of the
standard HTML rules and the websites that use these non-standard
Microsoft-only rules will not display properly with Firefox. Does that
means that Microsoft wins the game? Why can't the brilliant programmers at
Firefox work around this? Maybe someday Firefox will be a better browser
but right now it's just not reliable for surfing unknown websites.

The Firefox Bookmark Manager will not properly edit a large bookmark file, and it
loads a large bookmark file very slowly. Other than that, it works very well and
has become my default browser.

Mike Sa

 

[wald]

This has been my experience also and problems (for me) seem to
be limited to banking sites. I too like Firefox so much that I
have continued to use it for general surfing, while I grudgingly
recognized I still have to rely on IE.

Please, let your bank know that they shouldn't be uniquely relying
on IE for their online banking purposes. The series of recently
discovered vulnerabilities in IE makes it utterly unresponsible of
them not supporting safer web browsers.

The more push there is towards safer alternatives, the sooner they
will implement it.

Then again, my bank officially doesn't support FF or Mozilla, but it
works splendidly nonetheless. I'll be bombing their mailboxes the
day that it doesn't work anymore.

Regards,
Wald

 

[Aaron]

Technically, most of these sites will display just display poorly. The
exceptions are if they use IE only tags/ DHTML specfic to IE only etc.

Sites displayed by newbies are often poorly coded, malformed, etc. In such
an event, the standards do not dedicate how the site should be rendered.
Unfortunately, most people use only IE to check whether their site looks
"okay". There is no way Firefox or another browser can guess how IE will
react to a malformed website. So while it will look okay in IE, it will
look horrible in other browsers.

A unrelated problem is the way IE renders proper w3c validated webpages. In
such a case, in theory, all browsers should render such webpages the same
way, but IE has certain quirks in the way it does it, while other browsers
tend to follow the standards.

There are actually TWO main problems that are responsible for not
being able to access IE only websites.

1. Browser identification - If certain websites determine that you're
using a non-IE browser, they will refuse to load. The Prefbar
extension for Mozilla allows you to "spoof" a browser type and that
usually gets around this problem.

Except some sites are not so easily fooled

2. ActiveX modules - that's the problem that you're talking about.
There are workarounds, but ActiveX is a security hazard and is part of
the reason why IE contains so many unpleasant security
vulnerabilities. If this is the reason that you can't access a
website, then it's probably better to not go there.

Some bank sites use this, though they are rare. Antivirus online scanning
sites, Windows update, that's about it.

 

[wald]

I started using Firefox two weeks ago. I love its speed and it
eliminates pop-up ads better than any pop-up blocker I have
tried. But Firefox is clearly not compatible with a whole bunch
of websites and that's a darn shame.

It's a shame that those websites exist.

I am told that the problem
is that Microsoft broke some of the standard HTML rules and the
websites that use these non-standard Microsoft-only rules will
not display properly with Firefox.

It goes way further than HTML, but essentially, you've been told
the correct story.

Does that means that Microsoft wins the game?

If you swap back to IE, then yes, Microsoft wins the game.

Why can't the brilliant programmers at Firefox work around this?

Because they choose to develop a standards-compliant web browser,
and not to work around the non-standard mess made by others.

But for web-surfing I must sadly return to the definitely
inferior, but always compatible, Internet Explorer.

The problem is, IE is at the extreme *incompatible* end of the web
browser spectrum. Ever heard of web standards? W3C? W3C are the
guys that define and maintain the specs of a bunch of
internet/network related technologies (HTML, CSS, XML, you name
it).
The intention is to get everyone to comply with these standards,
as it simplifies every form of communication on the internet. They
basically say "Let's all speak the same, clear language so we can
focus on the message, rather than the spelling".

But with IE, Microsoft has made a deliberate choice to (i) not
implement or (ii) incorrectly implement part of these standards
(example: do a Google search for "IE box model"). Have you ever
tried to develop a website that shows up in the same way in all
browsers? Believe me, it is a *PAIN*, and that's largely caused by
IE's non-compliance to web standards.

Allright. Let me stop ranting here, I could go on for hours

Just stick with Firefox for now, and hey, use IE for those non-
compliant websites. Send a polite email to the webmasters, letting
them know that they don't comply with web standards, and are
forcing the use of an unsecure browser onto their users.

Maybe they'll listen, and you'll have made the world a little bit
better

Regards,
Wald

 

[Podz]

It's a shame that those websites exist.




It goes way further than HTML, but essentially, you've been told
the correct story.




If you swap back to IE, then yes, Microsoft wins the game.




Because they choose to develop a standards-compliant web browser,
and not to work around the non-standard mess made by others.




The problem is, IE is at the extreme *incompatible* end of the web
browser spectrum. Ever heard of web standards? W3C? W3C are the
guys that define and maintain the specs of a bunch of
internet/network related technologies (HTML, CSS, XML, you name
it).
The intention is to get everyone to comply with these standards,
as it simplifies every form of communication on the internet. They
basically say "Let's all speak the same, clear language so we can
focus on the message, rather than the spelling".

But with IE, Microsoft has made a deliberate choice to (i) not
implement or (ii) incorrectly implement part of these standards
(example: do a Google search for "IE box model"). Have you ever
tried to develop a website that shows up in the same way in all
browsers? Believe me, it is a *PAIN*, and that's largely caused by
IE's non-compliance to web standards.

Allright. Let me stop ranting here, I could go on for hours

Just stick with Firefox for now, and hey, use IE for those non-
compliant websites. Send a polite email to the webmasters, letting
them know that they don't comply with web standards, and are
forcing the use of an unsecure browser onto their users.

Maybe they'll listen, and you'll have made the world a little bit
better

This post deserves to be read more than once, so I'm not snipping it.

IE *IS* the problem, not Firefox.
M$ want the online world to play by their rules, and there are a lot of
people who want to play by W3C standards.

The M$ development of IE consists solely of plugging the mass of holes
that hackers find - and don't go blaming the hackers, if the holes were
simply not there, there would be no problem.

The FF development is driven by standards, non-bloated code and a desire
to improve.

A hole in IE is reported - takes months for a fix.

A hole in FF was reported - a fix was available in days.

IE is not by any sense freeware.

FF is open source.

A nice approach to this problem can be seen over at http://binarybonsai.com/

Look at it in IE
Look at it Firefox

Then dump IE

P.

 

[GlintingHedgehog]

The Firefox Bookmark Manager will not properly edit a large bookmark file, and it
loads a large bookmark file very slowly.

What's "large"? I've got quite a few bookmarks and don't have any
problems...

 

[INspire]

[snip]

Then again, my bank officially doesn't support FF or Mozilla, but it
works splendidly nonetheless. I'll be bombing their mailboxes the
day that it doesn't work anymore.

Regards,
Wald

positive reinforcement is nice too

 

[POKO]

"RipVanWinkle" <[email protected]> wrote:

Just stick with Firefox for now, and hey, use IE for those non-
compliant websites. Send a polite email to the webmasters, letting
them know that they don't comply with web standards, and are
forcing the use of an unsecure browser onto their users.

Maybe they'll listen, and you'll have made the world a little bit
better

Regards,
Wald
Wald,
It's not as simple as that. Click on my sig and see how I had to make it
useable for Mozilla. The vast majority of users are still with IE so we
have to make it useable for them, right.
Don't blame the coders, blame the browser clients that won't conform to
standards.
POKO
--
P. Keenan - Webmaster
Web Page Design
Manitoulin Island, Canada
http://manitoulinislandwebdesign.it-mate.co.uk/
(e-mail address removed)

 

[bassbag]

I started using Firefox two weeks ago. I love its speed and it eliminates
pop-up ads better than any pop-up blocker I have tried. But Firefox is
clearly not compatible with a whole bunch of websites and that's a darn
shame. I am told that the problem is that Microsoft broke some of the
standard HTML rules and the websites that use these non-standard
Microsoft-only rules will not display properly with Firefox. Does that
means that Microsoft wins the game? Why can't the brilliant programmers at
Firefox work around this? Maybe someday Firefox will be a better browser
but right now it's just not reliable for surfing unknown websites. I will
keep it on my computer and use it as my first choice for regular websites
that I know are compatible. But for web-surfing I must sadly return to the
definitely inferior, but always compatible, Internet Explorer.

Rip, NYC

Why not install maxthon and let that deal with the popups?.Its faster than
firefox (on my pc anyway).Im probably in the minority here but i see nothing
wrong in IE or IE based browsers as long as they are configured correctly
they are safe enough.You can prompt for or disable active x in ie security
settings and do the same for java and scripting so i dont know what the big
deal is about?.You could put those banking sites ito the "trusted zone" and
active x etc will work for those particular sites but not for any others if
you set it to disabled or prompt.
me

 

[bassbag]

Technically, most of these sites will display just display poorly. The
exceptions are if they use IE only tags/ DHTML specfic to IE only etc.

Sites displayed by newbies are often poorly coded, malformed, etc. In such
an event, the standards do not dedicate how the site should be rendered.
Unfortunately, most people use only IE to check whether their site looks
"okay". There is no way Firefox or another browser can guess how IE will
react to a malformed website. So while it will look okay in IE, it will
look horrible in other browsers.

A unrelated problem is the way IE renders proper w3c validated webpages. In
such a case, in theory, all browsers should render such webpages the same
way, but IE has certain quirks in the way it does it, while other browsers
tend to follow the standards.





Except some sites are not so easily fooled


Some bank sites use this, though they are rare. Antivirus online scanning
sites, Windows update, that's about it.

If you run ie with activex set to prompt , you will get the prompt box
popping up to allow/disallow on practically every site.Many other browsers
load a particular page but certain elements are left off the page that use
activex.You wouldnt notice this till you tried to click on the "dead
link"and nothing happens.An example of this is the site
http://www.makeoversolutions.com/ that my daughter likes to frequent.I
belive if you click the start button at the site nothing will happen as it
uses activex.I believe activex is used at many sites especially the
childrens type sites.
me

 

[Chakolate]

But Firefox is
clearly not compatible with a whole bunch of websites and that's a darn
shame.

The *only* websites I haven't been able to access with Firefox are MS's
own.

Chakolate

 

[fitwell]

Please, let your bank know that they shouldn't be uniquely relying
on IE for their online banking purposes. The series of recently
discovered vulnerabilities in IE makes it utterly unresponsible of
them not supporting safer web browsers.

The more push there is towards safer alternatives, the sooner they
will implement it.

Then again, my bank officially doesn't support FF or Mozilla, but it
works splendidly nonetheless. I'll be bombing their mailboxes the
day that it doesn't work anymore.

Regards,
Wald

Ironic. I switched to FF specifically due to banking online. If it
weren't for that, I might not have. Oh, that and the fact that as of
last January, MS no longer supports Win98SE.

 

[Chakolate]

Browser identification - If certain websites determine that you're
using a non-IE browser, they will refuse to load. The Prefbar
extension for Mozilla allows you to "spoof" a browser type and that
usually gets around this problem.

Got a URL for that?

Chakolate

 

[bassbag]

Ironic. I switched to FF specifically due to banking online. If it
weren't for that, I might not have. Oh, that and the fact that as of
last January, MS no longer supports Win98SE.

Im not 100% here but im sure i read on a langa newsletter that the deadlines
been extended until at least 2006 because something like 28 % of owners
still use 98 including myself i may add.In fact there was a critical update
for 98se only a week or two ago.
me

 

[fitwell]

Im not 100% here but im sure i read on a langa newsletter that the deadlines
been extended until at least 2006 because something like 28 % of owners
still use 98 including myself i may add.In fact there was a critical update
for 98se only a week or two ago.
me

Really?? Thanks! I appreciate that. The trouble is that I have a
PIII, 650 MHz machine with 128SDRAM. I believe XP only works on a
PIV?? But I don't like XP so I'm kind of stuck, at least until I can
find an old W2K, maybe.

Thanks for this. I'll have to hunt that update down.