This is my prediction of how this thread will go:
>>1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1
Opera. Haha.
Comedy Lynx Option.
Konqueror. Sometimes.
internet
Actually, Firefox 1.0
firefox 1.0+ (recent tinderbox build), links -g, links
Mozilla 1.7. By refusing Firefox, I can be an early adopter AND a luddite! waha!
Real early adopters never use anything older than week-old CVS snapshots.
i shall now win the thread:
sometimes i browse the text wakachan boards with pocketIE (IE 3.x) on a windows mobile smartphone :)
Firefox 1.0
I'm sorry but I think that this thread sucks because it is more of a "poll" and not a discussion.
>>13
If only my carrier didn't charge an absurd $0.25 per 5 kB.
People are free to start discussing things at any point, yknow?
I'm sorry, on recollection I should have been trying to contribute to discussion and not proclaim that the thread sucks and bash it. I'll try to do better in the future!
IE is no reason to LOL
The internet is serious business!
opera is best
"anything other than IE" is best
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.10) Gecko/20050725 Firefox/1.0.6
Firefox, Konqueror, Dillo, and links (in graphical mode without X thanks to DirectFB)
1.0.6
>>1
For normal business, I use Firefox, Dillo, and Lynx. For testing and development, I use Opera, Netscape, Links, w3m, the Mozilla suite, Konqueror, Arachne, and Amaya besides. I don't use IE because I still can't get it to install on Linux with Wine. (Even if I could, I would use it strictly for testing. It's too dangerous for even mild use.)
Firefox 1.0.6 FTW!
>Firefox nightly FTW!
fixed
I just noticed that in this thread and in my travels around the net that Firefox/Opera users seem to always mention what browser they use. "OMG I USE FIREFOX/OPERA BECAUSE IT IS THE BEST". Interesting enough whilst Firefox/Mozilla suite is #1 here, IE comes in second place. Why isn't there thousands of IE users preaching about how good their browser is? Could it be that they don't care and you do?
Maybe they are emberassed that they still haven't converted yet and are too ashamed to speak about it.
Most don't care. Try asking them if they know what is "Internet Explorer" - you'll get a blank stare.
"Oh you mean that thing you use to go on the web? Oh yeah I have one, I use it every day."
Camino nightly builds here.
You know, the same things can be said about fanatical Mac/Linux criers versus Windows lemmings. You never meet people as excited and willing to "spread" Windows as you do those who wish to do the same with the Mac or Linux. Surely the significance of this is not lost on anyone here.
w3m.sourceforge.net
Geeks vocal about their software choices?
Who woulda thunk?
Yes, and lemmings who don't know and don't care. >>32 speaks the truth. Most of the people I meet in IRL give me a blank stare even if I start talking about Windows. They have "XP" or "98" at home. They've apparently never heard of "Windows". I imagine it's pretty hard to be vocal about something you don't know exists.
What bugs me is that they are content to remain ignorant. Complain complain complain about viruses, slowdowns and crashes, but they'll be damned if they care enough to spend 5 minutes installing something that'll get everything working the way it should.
I realy have never met any one that didn't know what windows was, so you are either exagerating or you need to find some smater people to hang around with.
and the IE users I have noticed don't even know what the internet realy is, sadly when I tell my mom to switch from firefox to IE she resoponds "but IE is the internet, I won't be able to use the internet anymore" then refusing to listen to me when I try to explain it
>>38
>>37 is not exaggerating. Take a job or internship at your local ISP or computer repair shop. Too many people think they have things no one's ever heard of, or think they don't have things they clearly must. They have "the desktop," "the Internet," and "the email;" heaven forbid they should have Windows, Internet Explorer, and Outlook Express. And quite naturally, those are to a great extent the only ones who have problems bonkers enough to drive tech support to the funny farm. Please pardon me now, I just got off work at my ISP and have to pay a visit to Dr. Scratchansniff. (BTW, "but IE is the Internet" is right on.)
> Yes, and lemmings who don't know and don't care.
"Lemmings"?
Time to grow up.
Maybe I should have directed that at Albright.
For two years in college, I helped supervise the on-campus computer labs, and I too attest that >>37 and >>32 speak the truth.
>>41: I won't retract it. To willfully chose Windows over the alternatives is lunacy. It's lunacy that 95% of the population keeps repeating over and over, but it's lunacy just the same.
The "lemmings" want something that simply works, they are not interested in the details. It's like their car, they are not interested in the type of oil used or the brand of the spark plugs.
They want to read their webmail, get some info from the web, buy from the nearby store online, plan their holiday, sell/buy a few things on eBay, and manage their bank account online.
Now, some of these sites are IE-only. This means that when I put Firefox on their computer they are going to be angry at me to have installed a defective product on their machine, or they just silently shift back to IE. Plus, they have memorized the keyboard/mouse patterns for IE, and it's not 100% compatible with Firefox. I tell them to use Firefox in general and IE for those IE-only sites, but after a while they go back to IE because it's inconvenient to switch back and forth.
"Could you come and have a look? I have this program that pops up and wants me to go to this porn site. Also, the computer is very slow and freezes all the time again, I don't understand why."
Lunacy is such a harsh word. Less polemics plz.
For most people a computer is only a tool. They don't care as long as it works (and this is the way it should be). As such, three problems face us: first, they're not going to install their own OS. Second, they want a familiar interface. Third, they want off-the-shelf software (and whatever legacy as well) to run.
Geeks can jerk off to the apparent superiority of the software they use, but that only indicates their method of evaluation is different. The others aren't wrong, they simply have other priorities. E.g.: how much do you know about the law?
As for ignorance? Well, computers aren't their domain, just like cars aren't mine. How many people replace their carburators? How many people care? Is it relevant to them? And what exactly keeps car mechanics employed?
lol, we posted at the exact same time about the same thing, with the same answers. :D
90% of the web works fine with firefox for the most part. In fact in the last year or so I have only found like one or two sites that refuse to run on anything but IE.
>BTW, "but IE is the Internet" is right on.
ummmm no, there is firefox, pluss there are places on the net that have nothing to do with the web(ie: peer to peer, IRC, IM programs) People need to remember that the web is not the net and that IE is NOT the only usable browser, if you want to leave a gaping whole in your system just becausee 2 sites won't work on your computer be my guest.
>>46
Please re-read >>38 and understand that I was responding to the very lack of understanding that you highlight. Too many people fail to even notice what you rightly say they need to remember, and that's the heart of the problem: Too many people use the worst browser of the bunch without ever realizing browser choices exist or that they're even using a browser.
>>46
I should ask to be sure but from what I gathered they were banking sites, online shopping sites, maybe some auction sites too. Yeah they are less of them being IE-only but there still are some, I'm told.
Also they are sites that demand ActiveX, Microsoft being one of them (yeah there are workarounds to get the files but they are non-intuitive for a casual user.)
Some pages show raw html or just a blank screen under Firefox and display fine under IE - I think those were ".shtml" pages, IIRC.
Also, plug-ins like Systran or Atlas work only under IE.
>Second, they want a familiar interface. Third, they want off-the-shelf software (and whatever legacy as well) to run.
Those points lead into a situation where many people only upgrade their software when it's crammed down their throats by a hardware upgrade (OS, CD burning apps, DVD movie players, etc.) or a service bundle (switching ISPs, repair shop technician getting liberal, etc.). They'll put up with changes in interface and perceived backward incompatibility only because they think there's no choice.
There is no such thing as an upgrade that isn't both crippling and terrifying. That being the case, their suffering might as well result in a change for the better, not a change for the worse--or worse yet, no real change at all. The companies and people responsible for cramming upgrades down the throats of the ignorant masses don't appear to subscribe to this logic.
> or worse yet, no real change at all.
That's some strange reasoning you have there.
> don't appear to subscribe to this logic
What logic?
> upgrade that isn't both crippling and terrifying
Yes, but some upgrades are worse than others.
That said, I read though >>49 three times, and I'm still not certain what you're trying to say. Could you summarize it in one sentence?
>Could you summarize it in one sentence?
"If people are only going to learn something new when they're forced to do it, then what they're learning might as well be worth their while." How's that?
>>or worse yet, no real change at all.
>That's some strange reasoning you have there.
Rebranding, minor reorganisation of UI elements (such as Firefox's preferences menu being under Tools instead of Edit on Windows), inconsistent terminology between versions ("directory" versus "folder"), that kind of thing.
Opera 7. Opera 8 did weird stuff to the context menu and removed some stuff that I use all the time, or maybe I just didn't find it any more.
Yep, i still use 7.54. I think I tried 8, and didn't like it.
>I think those were ".shtml" pages
shtml pages work fine in my firefox
>or worse yet, no real change at all.
umm yeah, just because you can not inherently see the changes means that they have not made any changes at all for the better of the code, yup yup, nope they must not have pluged up any security holes. Love the fact that you contridict yourself by saying that it is anoying when they change things that you can see but if they don't change things you can see they evidently have not changed anything.
>There is no such thing as an upgrade that isn't both crippling and terrifying.
oh realy, I upgrade and install programs daily and find nothing either cripling or terifying about it
>>54
Read the rest of the thread. That discussion's obviously talking about people who wouldn't know the first thing about "security holes" and wouldn't care anyway.
ummm no, read that post over, he was making a statement, he said it as a general statement. either way this thread is BS
>>56
Read: >>32,34,37-39,42,44,49-51
kthx
>>54
.shtml is meaningless
Originally I used it whenever i did "server-side" html but I could have just as easily called a site "website.haxor" and it wouldn't make one bit of difference.
Mozilla 1.7.11
Anything Gecko-based FTW ^^
Anything KHTML-based FTW! ;)
i use firefox 1.0.2.
Mozilla Nigthly build.
and sometimes Lynx.
Anything not Trident-based for the real win! ~.^
I like w3m. Seriously, I'm not just trying to sound cool; I use it for almost all of my web browsing these days and prefer it to graphical browsers.
For browsing websites that are inherently graphical in nature, I use Mozilla.