Discussion:
Best Browser?
(too old to reply)
Dominique
2018-03-25 20:36:56 UTC
Permalink
Since a few weeks now It looks like my Firefox install is possessed by the
devil. In Facebook, it ramdomly refreshes when I barely touch the mouse,
but I don't really want a solution.

I'd like to know which browsers should I try. Chrome "always" try to
install itself if I'm not careful when I update some utilities but I'm not
sure about Google.


Facebook seems to work normally in Internet Explorer but some videos won't
play.

If I install Chrome, is there some parameters that I should be aware?

I have SuperAntiSpywarePro but it only finds the usual "tracking cookies".

I'm on Windows 7 SP1 - 64 bits

TIA
Big Al
2018-03-25 20:44:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dominique
Since a few weeks now It looks like my Firefox install is possessed by the
devil. In Facebook, it ramdomly refreshes when I barely touch the mouse,
but I don't really want a solution.
I'd like to know which browsers should I try. Chrome "always" try to
install itself if I'm not careful when I update some utilities but I'm not
sure about Google.
Facebook seems to work normally in Internet Explorer but some videos won't
play.
If I install Chrome, is there some parameters that I should be aware?
I have SuperAntiSpywarePro but it only finds the usual "tracking cookies".
I'm on Windows 7 SP1 - 64 bits
TIA
I've started finding reputable download sites stuffing an install of
Google Chrome in some of their installers lately. So yes, you do have
to watch out, but that should be said for all downloaded software.

I'm not aware of any issues with Chrome or special parameters. There
are the preferences/settings you should dig through to make sure it's up
to your wishes. I like it as well as Firefox but have drifted to
Firefox lately since the new Quantum has come out.
And yes, I find a few quirks still in FF and have to jump to Chrome now
and then but Facebook works for me. I guess nothing is perfect.

However, all that said, I am running Linux and both browsers are not
Windows versions of course.
Stan Brown
2018-03-26 00:38:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Big Al
I've started finding reputable download sites stuffing an install of
Google Chrome in some of their installers lately.
Not just lately. Avast did it to me a couple of years ago when I
downloaded and installed an update -- an update!
--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://BrownMath.com/
http://OakRoadSystems.com/
Shikata ga nai...
Mayayana
2018-03-25 21:16:03 UTC
Permalink
"Dominique" <***@domain.net> wrote

| Since a few weeks now It looks like my Firefox install is possessed by the
| devil. In Facebook, it ramdomly refreshes when I barely touch the mouse,
| but I don't really want a solution.
|
| I'd like to know which browsers should I try. Chrome "always" try to
| install itself if I'm not careful when I update some utilities but I'm not
| sure about Google.
|

It's really a matter of preference. Firefox keeps changing.
I've been sticking with v. 52. If you're concerned about
spyware... Google *is* spyware. So whether you want
to use Chrome really depends to a great extent on whether
you mind Google knowing everything you do.

There is a cleaner version named Iron. I haven't
tried either one.

Edge/IE. Well, that's Microsoft. They've even broken
compatibility with their own browsers. IE11 is a kind
of in-between monstrosity. It no longer works like IE
unless you set compatibility mode for specific websites.
Yet it's still IE, which has never been compatible with
anything else.

If you stick with Firefox you might try this:
Go to about:config and set accessibility.blockautorefresh
to True. That will stop pages from updating by themselves
while you're trying to read. I don't know, though, whether
that has anything to do with Facebook updating according
to mouse movements.

There was interesting news this week about the
Austin "serial bomber". They tracked him down by
getting his Google searches and cellphone location data.
Pretty creepy, even if they were catching a murderer.
It's a simple example of how much you're being
tracked if you're not making an effort not to be.
Google arguably puts together more pieces of the
puzzle than any other entity. Their Doubleclick
ads are on most commercial sites. They track through
gmail. Through Google searches. Through Chrome.
Through Android. They even teamed up with retailers
to coordinate shopping data with individuals' online
activity, to get evidence for their online ads being
effective.
Big Al
2018-03-25 21:52:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mayayana
| Since a few weeks now It looks like my Firefox install is possessed by the
| devil. In Facebook, it ramdomly refreshes when I barely touch the mouse,
| but I don't really want a solution.
|
| I'd like to know which browsers should I try. Chrome "always" try to
| install itself if I'm not careful when I update some utilities but I'm not
| sure about Google.
|
It's really a matter of preference. Firefox keeps changing.
I've been sticking with v. 52. If you're concerned about
spyware... Google *is* spyware. So whether you want
to use Chrome really depends to a great extent on whether
you mind Google knowing everything you do.
There is a cleaner version named Iron. I haven't
tried either one.
Edge/IE. Well, that's Microsoft. They've even broken
compatibility with their own browsers. IE11 is a kind
of in-between monstrosity. It no longer works like IE
unless you set compatibility mode for specific websites.
Yet it's still IE, which has never been compatible with
anything else.
Go to about:config and set accessibility.blockautorefresh
to True. That will stop pages from updating by themselves
while you're trying to read. I don't know, though, whether
that has anything to do with Facebook updating according
to mouse movements.
There was interesting news this week about the
Austin "serial bomber". They tracked him down by
getting his Google searches and cellphone location data.
Pretty creepy, even if they were catching a murderer.
It's a simple example of how much you're being
tracked if you're not making an effort not to be.
Google arguably puts together more pieces of the
puzzle than any other entity. Their Doubleclick
ads are on most commercial sites. They track through
gmail. Through Google searches. Through Chrome.
Through Android. They even teamed up with retailers
to coordinate shopping data with individuals' online
activity, to get evidence for their online ads being
effective.
Don't do any social networking huh?! :-) Facebook knows everything
you like and shop for, and they do a good job of targeting ads.
I try to use Duck-Duck-Go now. At least it gives me some sense of
privacy if nothing else.
I found an add-on that would strip some extra info from bookmarks. I
looked at a few of mine and sure enough, not that it's tracking info,
but more credit to the web page you got the link. Like
walmart.com?came from google.com
Not that this is a proper example but the add-on would find the stuff
after the ?something and strip it. It was pretty good. Not sure
where the add-on is/was or even if it was FF. Since I've move to
Quantum, it would be useless now anyway. I just wrote a C++ program to
look for such instances and print them to a file so I could manually
edit them in the browser. Bottom line was every time you clicked that
bookmark you were giving the source web site credits for sending you
there. I don't mind once, but over and over and over??? nope!
Mayayana
2018-03-25 22:43:38 UTC
Permalink
"Big Al" <***@invalid.com> wrote

| Don't do any social networking huh?! :-) Facebook knows everything
| you like and shop for, and they do a good job of targeting ads.

Maybe they know about you. :) I not only don't
use FB and never have, I've got the following in my
Acrylic HOSTS file:

127.0.0.1 *.fbcdn.net
127.0.0.1 *.facebook.net
127.0.0.1 *.facebook.com
127.0.0.1 *.fb.com

I also block Twitter and have never seen Snapchat
or the others. I don't see any reason to let a sleazy,
for-profit spyware company middleman my social life.
And I certainly don't see any reason to hang around
at a website where no one says anything that can't
fit into a one-liner. Though I do end up seeing reprints.
Much of the mainstream media have degraded themselves
to the point of just making up news by stringing
together wiseacreing snippets from Twitter. In fact,
it's so intrusive that I added code to userContent.css
for Pale Moon to remove them from the Washington
Post:
.twitter-tweet {display: none !important;}


| I try to use Duck-Duck-Go now. At least it gives me some sense of
| privacy if nothing else.
| I found an add-on that would strip some extra info from bookmarks. I
| looked at a few of mine and sure enough, not that it's tracking info,
| but more credit to the web page you got the link. Like
| walmart.com?came from google.com


I know what you mean. Google's been that way for
awhile. I usually clean up their links if I use them at all.

Recently I had a copy of an email from an acquaintance
who emails political links. She gets various political news
emails sent to her and sends many of the links on. I was
amazed at how much data was in her links. One had her
name, email address and home address all encoded as
base-64 and tacked onto the links that she was sending
on. She had no idea. Inflammatory politics is a category
all its own.
Big Al
2018-03-27 23:17:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mayayana
| Don't do any social networking huh?! :-) Facebook knows everything
| you like and shop for, and they do a good job of targeting ads.
Maybe they know about you. :) I not only don't
use FB and never have, I've got the following in my
127.0.0.1 *.fbcdn.net
127.0.0.1 *.facebook.net
127.0.0.1 *.facebook.com
127.0.0.1 *.fb.com
I also block Twitter and have never seen Snapchat
or the others. I don't see any reason to let a sleazy,
for-profit spyware company middleman my social life.
And I certainly don't see any reason to hang around
at a website where no one says anything that can't
fit into a one-liner. Though I do end up seeing reprints.
Much of the mainstream media have degraded themselves
to the point of just making up news by stringing
together wiseacreing snippets from Twitter. In fact,
it's so intrusive that I added code to userContent.css
for Pale Moon to remove them from the Washington
.twitter-tweet {display: none !important;}
Hey I like the .twitter-tweet thing. That's going in my Content.css I
just so love Trump messages.
Post by Mayayana
| I try to use Duck-Duck-Go now. At least it gives me some sense of
| privacy if nothing else.
| I found an add-on that would strip some extra info from bookmarks. I
| looked at a few of mine and sure enough, not that it's tracking info,
| but more credit to the web page you got the link. Like
| walmart.com?came from google.com
I know what you mean. Google's been that way for
awhile. I usually clean up their links if I use them at all.
Recently I had a copy of an email from an acquaintance
who emails political links. She gets various political news
emails sent to her and sends many of the links on. I was
amazed at how much data was in her links. One had her
name, email address and home address all encoded as
base-64 and tacked onto the links that she was sending
on. She had no idea. Inflammatory politics is a category
all its own.
Wow, I have seen email addresses in this links but not that prolific.
Doesn't surprise me though. However if I were to paste a link in an
email, I'd fur sur see that kind of garbage and edit.

PS: just a friendly jab about the 'you don't do any social networking'.
Mayayana
2018-03-28 02:01:50 UTC
Permalink
"Big Al" <***@invalid.com> wrote

| PS: just a friendly jab about the 'you don't do any social networking'.
|

Actually I didn't even get the joke. I took
it literally. But not to worry. I'm not easily
offended.
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2018-03-28 08:03:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mayayana
| PS: just a friendly jab about the 'you don't do any social networking'.
|
Actually I didn't even get the joke. I took
it literally. But not to worry. I'm not easily
offended.
He might have meant "you're here, aren't you?", i. e. _this_ is a social
network. (Of a type [and of course I'd say quality!] yer average
Twitterbook user doesn't know exists.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

To give you some indication, opinion polls suggest that people who
passionately hate or love country [music] are utterly indifferent to Marmite.
- Eddie Mair, Radio Times 11-17 February 2012
Wolf K
2018-03-28 13:19:20 UTC
Permalink
[...]
Post by Big Al
| I try to use Duck-Duck-Go now.   At least it gives me some sense of
| privacy if nothing else.
| I found an add-on that would strip some extra info from bookmarks.   I
| looked at a few of mine and sure enough, not that it's tracking info,
| but more credit to the web page you got the link.   Like
| walmart.com?came from google.com
    I know what you mean. Google's been that way for
awhile. I usually clean up their links if I use them at all.
   Recently I had a copy of an email from an acquaintance
who emails political links. She gets various political news
emails sent to her and sends many of the links on. I was
amazed at how much data was in her links. One had her
name, email address and home address all encoded as
base-64 and tacked onto the links that she was sending
on. She had no idea. Inflammatory politics is a category
all its own.
Wow, I have seen email addresses in this links but not that prolific.
Doesn't surprise me though.   However if I were to paste a link in an
email, I'd fur sur see that kind of garbage and edit.
PS: just a friendly jab about the 'you don't do any social networking'.
Those political groups wnat all the data they can get. Watch out: if
they ever get into power, they will use those ID details to hunt down
the "undesirable elements" that oppose them.

FWIW, I use DuckDuckGo too, but AFAIK its non-tracking is limited to
your search history. Once you click on a link, DuckDuckGo loses control.
You're on your own.
--
Wolf K
kirkwood40.blogspot.com
"The next conference for the time travel design team will be held two
weeks ago."
Mayayana
2018-03-28 13:25:51 UTC
Permalink
"Wolf K" <***@sympatico.ca> wrote

| Those political groups wnat all the data they can get. Watch out: if
| they ever get into power, they will use those ID details to hunt down
| the "undesirable elements" that oppose them.
|
And that's also what the whole Facebook/Republican
spyware scandal is about: finding out as much as possible
about peoples' leanings, triggers, etc. The example I
came across was left-wingers. And Obama's win has
been attributed in part to his superior techies.
Dominique
2018-03-26 23:35:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Big Al
Facebook knows everything
you like and shop for, and they do a good job of targeting ads
Yes and they're a little stupid. The other day I bought a room humidifier
on-line and right after, when I went to Facebook, they offered me exactly
the same humidifier. Why do they show you something you've just bought?!
:-)
Big Al
2018-03-27 23:19:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dominique
Post by Big Al
Facebook knows everything
you like and shop for, and they do a good job of targeting ads
Yes and they're a little stupid. The other day I bought a room humidifier
on-line and right after, when I went to Facebook, they offered me exactly
the same humidifier. Why do they show you something you've just bought?!
:-)
I view products that 5 friends of mine think are fabulous and want me to
look at and/or comment on. SO now I get targeted ads just for looking.
It's hell ain't it.
Wolf K
2018-03-28 13:24:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Big Al
Post by Dominique
Post by Big Al
Facebook knows everything
you like and shop for, and they do a good job of targeting ads
Yes and they're a little stupid. The other day I bought a room humidifier
on-line and right after, when I went to Facebook, they offered me exactly
the same humidifier. Why do they show you something you've just bought?!
:-)
I view products that 5 friends of mine think are fabulous and want me to
look at and/or comment on.   SO now I get targeted ads just for looking.
 It's hell ain't it.
That wasn't your friends sending the post, it was a bot.

The only certain way to contact your friends is the phone or snail mail.
I like snail mail.

BTW, every other FB visit, I click off all the suggested groups/pages,
and mark my reason as "Not relevant" or "Other". I also click off all
"People you may know".
--
Wolf K
kirkwood40.blogspot.com
"The next conference for the time travel design team will be held two
weeks ago."
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2018-03-29 12:40:23 UTC
Permalink
[]
Post by Wolf K
Post by Big Al
I view products that 5 friends of mine think are fabulous and want me
to look at and/or comment on.   SO now I get targeted ads just for
looking.  It's hell ain't it.
That wasn't your friends sending the post, it was a bot.
The only certain way to contact your friends is the phone or snail
mail. I like snail mail.
[]
I would too, except that - in UK at least - it is now a significant
cost, compared to electronic: the cheapest second-class stamp (see
https://www.royalmail.com/personal/uk-delivery/stamps/) is 58p (small,
"from" 79p large; first class 67p and "from" 1.01 large).
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

No sense being pessimistic. It wouldn't work anyway.
- Penny Mayes, UMRA, 2014-August
masonc
2018-03-25 22:31:29 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 25 Mar 2018 20:36:56 -0000 (UTC), Dominique <***@domain.net>
wrote a question: best browser???

I have used Opera since it was first sold (now free).
I have MSIE, Chrome, Firefox, and Safari - primarily for my website
testing.
I cannot tolerate the user interface and crap on other browsers.

I do not understand Opera's limited popularity.

(Opera sometimes fails in part on a website, then I try Chrome.)
(Historically, Opera was strictly conformist which some websites,
(.g.some banking) were (and are?) not.
Mayayana
2018-03-25 22:52:36 UTC
Permalink
"masonc" <***@frontal-lobe.info> wrote

| I do not understand Opera's limited popularity.
|

It's not one thing. Originally it was an independent effort
with lots of config options. But these days only the name
is the same. The browser is a version of Google's and
the product is owned by a Chinese company.

I liked Opera back when it was an honest effort, but
it did have some problems with display, so I never used
it very much. I thought the developrs were stubborn.
They had ideals about how the Web is *supposed to*
be rendered and they stuck to their guns, even if it
broke webpages.

| (Historically, Opera was strictly conformist which some websites,
| (.g.some banking) were (and are?) not.
|

Exactly. But conforming to standards can be done
with flexibility. That was the original idea of the Web.
Both HTML and browser rendering should degrade
gracefully. In other words, if it's not proper HTML the
browser should just do its best. If a web developer
wants to use script they should write the page so
it still works without script. Many people don't follow
those guidelines anymore. The Opera people never did.
masonc
2018-03-25 23:18:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by masonc
wrote a question: best browser???
I have used Opera since it was first sold (now free).
I have MSIE, Chrome, Firefox, and Safari - primarily for my website
testing.
I cannot tolerate the user interface and crap on other browsers.
I do not understand Opera's limited popularity.
(Opera sometimes fails in part on a website, then I try Chrome.)
(Historically, Opera was strictly conformist which some websites,
(.g.some banking) were (and are?) not.
AND now there is * Vivaldi * created by some abandoned Opera's
It's worth considering.
T
2018-03-28 02:01:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by masonc
wrote a question: best browser???
I have used Opera since it was first sold (now free).
I have MSIE, Chrome, Firefox, and Safari - primarily for my website
testing.
I cannot tolerate the user interface and crap on other browsers.
I do not understand Opera's limited popularity.
(Opera sometimes fails in part on a website, then I try Chrome.)
(Historically, Opera was strictly conformist which some websites,
(.g.some banking) were (and are?) not.
Try

https://brave.com/
mechanic
2018-03-26 11:31:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dominique
I'd like to know which browsers should I try.
Edge.
Mayayana
2018-03-26 12:23:32 UTC
Permalink
"mechanic" <***@example.net> wrote

| > I'd like to know which browsers should I try.
|
| Edge.

Edge is not available for Win7. Strangely,
MS have made a phone app version for iOS
and Android.

I guess the idea is that Microsoft are trying
to say you shouldn't be asking for desktop
software anymore. But that's a self-fulfilling
loop: It only runs on Win10 and has about a 4%
share. That makes it like Safari. Only the most
dedicated web designers are going to bother
to specifically accomodate a niche browser.
So such a browser *must* mimic the popular
browsers closely. But MS have never done that.
Therefore people are unlikely to support it.
Therefore it's likely to become increasingly
incompatible. Even if they make it the most
compatible browser, few people are likely to find
out.

On top of all that, Microsoft themselves are
so insecure about Edge that they spoof the userAgent.
This is typical:

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like
Gecko) Chrome/51.0.2704.79 Safari/537.36 Edge/14.14393

Note that while it says "Edge" it pretends to
be both Chrome and Firefox.

Microsoft have come out with the ridiculous view
that webmasters should check for support of
functions, not browsers. Easy for them to say. They
don't have to write all that spaghetti code to make
a webpage work with different versions of MS
browsers.
CRNG
2018-03-26 12:32:15 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 08:23:32 -0400, "Mayayana"
Post by Mayayana
| > I'd like to know which browsers should I try.
|
| Edge.
Edge is not available for Win7. Strangely,
MS have made a phone app version for iOS
and Android.
I guess the idea is that Microsoft are trying
to say you shouldn't be asking for desktop
software anymore. But that's a self-fulfilling
loop: It only runs on Win10 and has about a 4%
share. That makes it like Safari. Only the most
dedicated web designers are going to bother
to specifically accomodate a niche browser.
So such a browser *must* mimic the popular
browsers closely. But MS have never done that.
Therefore people are unlikely to support it.
Therefore it's likely to become increasingly
incompatible. Even if they make it the most
compatible browser, few people are likely to find
out.
On top of all that, Microsoft themselves are
so insecure about Edge that they spoof the userAgent.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like
Gecko) Chrome/51.0.2704.79 Safari/537.36 Edge/14.14393
Note that while it says "Edge" it pretends to
be both Chrome and Firefox.
Microsoft have come out with the ridiculous view
that webmasters should check for support of
functions, not browsers. Easy for them to say. They
don't have to write all that spaghetti code to make
a webpage work with different versions of MS
browsers.
+1
--
Web based forums are like subscribing to 10 different newspapers
and having to visit 10 different news stands to pickup each one.
Email list-server groups and USENET are like having all of those
newspapers delivered to your door every morning.
Gene Wirchenko
2018-03-26 19:12:14 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 08:23:32 -0400, "Mayayana"
<***@invalid.nospam> wrote:

[snip]
Post by Mayayana
Microsoft have come out with the ridiculous view
that webmasters should check for support of
functions, not browsers. Easy for them to say. They
don't have to write all that spaghetti code to make
a webpage work with different versions of MS
browsers.
It is a consequence of that nonsensical Postel's Law being widely
accepted.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko
mechanic
2018-03-27 10:24:23 UTC
Permalink
|> I'd like to know which browsers should I try.
|
| Edge.
Edge is not available for Win7. Strangely,
MS have made a phone app version for iOS
and Android.
Yes, sorry about that, wasn't aware that Edge wont run on obsolete
systems.
Mayayana
2018-03-27 12:44:24 UTC
Permalink
"mechanic" <***@example.net> wrote

| > Edge is not available for Win7. Strangely,
| > MS have made a phone app version for iOS
| > and Android.
|
| Yes, sorry about that, wasn't aware that Edge wont run on obsolete
| systems.

By obsolete you mean computers that run compiled
desktop software and don't have Metro for hanging
around at the Microsoft Store? There are still a few
of those around. Some people do work on computers.
We can't all just shop and play at putting dog snouts
or kittie ears on selfies.

But why are you spending time slumming in a
Win7 group if you think it's "obsolete"? Maybe you also
didn't notice that you're not in a Win10 group?
mechanic
2018-03-27 17:45:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mayayana
But why are you spending time slumming in a
Win7 group if you think it's "obsolete"? Maybe you also
didn't notice that you're not in a Win10 group?
Yes I sometimes wonder that myself - perhaps it's a public service,
pointing out that there are better, more modern MSFT systems
available. I feel the pain of Win7 users though, once I was one
myself.
pyotr filipivich
2018-03-27 22:10:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by mechanic
Post by Mayayana
But why are you spending time slumming in a
Win7 group if you think it's "obsolete"? Maybe you also
didn't notice that you're not in a Win10 group?
Yes I sometimes wonder that myself - perhaps it's a public service,
pointing out that there are better, more modern MSFT systems
available. I feel the pain of Win7 users though, once I was one
myself.
Considering that I do not really believe that MSFT has actually
"improved" my "Computer user experience" with Win7, and the number of
complaints I've read about Win8, I am not exactly eager to see what it
considers "new and improved" in WinX.
--
pyotr filipivich
Next month's Panel: Graft - Boon or blessing?
Mark Lloyd
2018-03-27 23:32:56 UTC
Permalink
On 03/27/2018 05:10 PM, pyotr filipivich wrote:

[snip]
Post by pyotr filipivich
Considering that I do not really believe that MSFT has actually
"improved" my "Computer user experience" with Win7, and the number of
complaints I've read about Win8, I am not exactly eager to see what it
considers "new and improved" in WinX.
I'd say that it's noticeably better than Win 8, but that isn't saying
much. Win 7 is still a lot better than either.

Firefox isn't a perfect browser, but it seems to be the least bad of them.
--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"I don't believe in a God that doesn't exist" - Marilyn Manson
pyotr filipivich
2018-03-28 01:17:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gene Wirchenko
[snip]
Post by pyotr filipivich
Considering that I do not really believe that MSFT has actually
"improved" my "Computer user experience" with Win7, and the number of
complaints I've read about Win8, I am not exactly eager to see what it
considers "new and improved" in WinX.
I'd say that it's noticeably better than Win 8, but that isn't saying
much. Win 7 is still a lot better than either.
My "issue" is less how things hare handled "in the back office"
(Behind the glass, I don't really care if it is electrons or elves),
but with the interface. From XP to 7 was like moving into a new work
space - nothing is in the "right" place (i.e., where I reach for
it.). If I had had the time to "play" with it and figure it out, I
might not be so grumpy. "To each his own". Some days, I miss
Windows 3.11 for workgroups.
Post by Gene Wirchenko
Firefox isn't a perfect browser, but it seems to be the least bad of them.
I switched to Palemoon, a fork from Firefox. Loads faster (at
least it seems so to me) and it doesn't irreversibly change the
layout. E.G. "tabs on bottom".
--
pyotr filipivich
Next month's Panel: Graft - Boon or blessing?
Wolf K
2018-03-28 13:26:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gene Wirchenko
[snip]
    Considering that I do not really believe that MSFT has actually
"improved" my "Computer user experience" with Win7, and the number of
complaints I've read about Win8, I am not exactly eager to see what it
considers "new and improved" in WinX.
I'd say that it's noticeably better than Win 8, but that isn't saying
much. Win 7 is still a lot better than either.
Firefox isn't a perfect browser, but it seems to be the least bad of them.
"The least bad" is what all design is about.

That's life.
--
Wolf K
kirkwood40.blogspot.com
"The next conference for the time travel design team will be held two
weeks ago."
Ken Blake
2018-03-28 16:54:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wolf K
Post by Gene Wirchenko
[snip]
    Considering that I do not really believe that MSFT has actually
"improved" my "Computer user experience" with Win7, and the number of
complaints I've read about Win8, I am not exactly eager to see what it
considers "new and improved" in WinX.
I'd say that it's noticeably better than Win 8, but that isn't saying
much. Win 7 is still a lot better than either.
Firefox isn't a perfect browser, but it seems to be the least bad of them.
"The least bad" is what all design is about.
That's life.
My view is somewhat different. We all have different likes and
dislikes and do what we do in different ways. So a browser (or any
other kind of software) that I might call perfect is one that you
might find terrible, or vice-versa).

So the manufacturer of a browser (or any other kind of software)
either designs it for what it thinks the majority wants, or else
designs it as a compromise between the many different views of what is
perfect. The result is that nothing is perfect for everyone.

So I agree with Mark Lloyd that "Firefox isn't a perfect browser, but
it seems to be the least bad of them." Of all the browsers I've tried
(and I've tried most, if not all, of them) FireFox is the closest one
to being perfect. But if I were in charge of designing it, I would
make several improvements that would get it much closer to what *I*
would consider perfection.

If I got those "improvements" made, would everyone think it was closer
to perfection? No, of course not. There are those people (and I know
several such people) who think Chrome (ugh!) is much better than
FireFox, and even those who think Edge (double ugh!) is the best of
them all. We're all different.
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2018-03-29 12:51:31 UTC
Permalink
[]
Post by Ken Blake
Post by Wolf K
Post by Mark Lloyd
Firefox isn't a perfect browser, but it seems to be the least bad of them.
"The least bad" is what all design is about.
That's life.
My view is somewhat different. We all have different likes and
dislikes and do what we do in different ways. So a browser (or any
other kind of software) that I might call perfect is one that you
might find terrible, or vice-versa).
So the manufacturer of a browser (or any other kind of software)
either designs it for what it thinks the majority wants, or else
designs it as a compromise between the many different views of what is
perfect. The result is that nothing is perfect for everyone.
[]
You also have to take into account, for free software (are there any
non-free browsers left? I've been at this long enough to remember when
Netscape [now Firefox] wasn't free; the last one I remember being not
free was Opera, but I think that now is), that the "majority" whose
wants are considered is the majority of _sponsors_, rather than _users_.
(The users' desires are taken into account only to the extent that
they're considered when market share drops _significantly_.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

No sense being pessimistic. It wouldn't work anyway.
- Penny Mayes, UMRA, 2014-August
Mayayana
2018-03-29 13:59:56 UTC
Permalink
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-***@255soft.uk> wrote

| You also have to take into account, for free software that the "majority"
whose
| wants are considered is the majority of _sponsors_, rather than _users_.

Firefox is open source. It's allegedly a non-profit.
Some others are as well. Unfortunately, they made
a deal with the devil in accepting hundreds of
millions of dollare per year from Google in exchange
for giving them the search bar.

I don't know anything as an insider, but it looks
to me like there's still a lot of idealism at Mozilla,
and they don't exactly have sponsors. They've just
got hooked on a *very* big income and are forgetting
their roots.

Another factor is that they're in an awkward spot.
Along the lines of what Ken is saying, they could
decide not to remove settings, not to enable geo-tracking,
etc. They could make various changes to provide more
options and easier configuration. But simple shopping
apps is the way the market is going. Most people prefer
Google crap because it works well, it's simple, and it's
easy to use across devices.

On the other hand, there's nothing stopping Mozilla
from issuing 3 or 4 flavors, aimed at various people.
It's not as though they have to feed money to
stockholders.

A friend just sent me what she thought was an
ominous article yesterday, about how creepy Facebook
and Google are. She sent it from her gmail account,
on her iPhone. :)
She's probably using Chrome because Google somehow
shoehorned it onto her devices when she wasn't looking.
I don't know. But she probably doesn't know either.
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2018-03-29 14:51:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mayayana
| You also have to take into account, for free software that the "majority"
whose
| wants are considered is the majority of _sponsors_, rather than _users_.
Firefox is open source. It's allegedly a non-profit.
Some others are as well.
In theory, yes. Unfortunately, for something this big, there are very
few of us with the time, inclination, skills, tools (compilers), and
machines (I understand it needs quite a big machine to compile it) to
actually work on it; I know you are a lot more still into software
creation than I am (since I've used some of your utilities!), but even
you I suspect wouldn't get into working on a browser. (A thankless task
at best, too, since users are unforgiving! [Including me at times, I'm
sure!])
Post by Mayayana
Unfortunately, they made
a deal with the devil in accepting hundreds of
millions of dollare per year from Google in exchange
for giving them the search bar.
I don't know anything as an insider, but it looks
to me like there's still a lot of idealism at Mozilla,
and they don't exactly have sponsors. They've just
got hooked on a *very* big income and are forgetting
their roots.
Similar _practical_ result, unfortunately. I'm glad you've seen signs of
idealism there; I haven't, really, for some while, to the extent that I
now rarely post in their newsgroup.
Post by Mayayana
Another factor is that they're in an awkward spot.
Along the lines of what Ken is saying, they could
decide not to remove settings, not to enable geo-tracking,
etc. They could make various changes to provide more
options and easier configuration. But simple shopping
apps is the way the market is going. Most people prefer
Google crap because it works well, it's simple, and it's
easy to use across devices.
I wouldn't mind the Google search bar, and all the rest, being there -
even as the default (as you say, that's what _most_ users _do_ want, and
for that purpose it _does_ work well); it's just the increasing
obscurity, and eventual removal of, the ability to remove/change certain
settings (third-party cookies being the most obvious example).
Post by Mayayana
On the other hand, there's nothing stopping Mozilla
from issuing 3 or 4 flavors, aimed at various people.
It's not as though they have to feed money to
stockholders.
Hmm. Is there? Like yourself not being an insider, I can't know, but I
have a strong _feeling_ that the Google (etc.) sponsorship might be
conditional on _not_ doing that.
Post by Mayayana
A friend just sent me what she thought was an
ominous article yesterday, about how creepy Facebook
and Google are. She sent it from her gmail account,
on her iPhone. :)
(-: [Did you point the irony out to her?]
Post by Mayayana
She's probably using Chrome because Google somehow
shoehorned it onto her devices when she wasn't looking.
I don't know. But she probably doesn't know either.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

As individuals, politicians are usually quite charming, so it is quite hard to
dislike them, but in most cases, it is worth making the effort.
- Mark Williams (UMRA), 2013-4-26
Mayayana
2018-03-29 23:04:18 UTC
Permalink
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-***@255soft.uk> wrote

| > A friend just sent me what she thought was an
| >ominous article yesterday, about how creepy Facebook
| >and Google are. She sent it from her gmail account,
| >on her iPhone. :)
|
| (-: [Did you point the irony out to her?]
|

Yes, jokingly. Like most people (including the
article author) she regards the news about Google
as a kind of gossip, without recognizing that she
doesn't have to allow it.
Whatayagonnado, right? They got ya comin' and
goin'.....

mechanic
2018-03-29 18:39:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ken Blake
So the manufacturer of a browser (or any other kind of software)
either designs it for what it thinks the majority wants, or else
designs it as a compromise between the many different views of
what is perfect. The result is that nothing is perfect for
everyone.
My oh my, Steve Jobs where are you now that we need you?
Paul
2018-03-28 00:18:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by pyotr filipivich
Post by mechanic
Post by Mayayana
But why are you spending time slumming in a
Win7 group if you think it's "obsolete"? Maybe you also
didn't notice that you're not in a Win10 group?
Yes I sometimes wonder that myself - perhaps it's a public service,
pointing out that there are better, more modern MSFT systems
available. I feel the pain of Win7 users though, once I was one
myself.
Considering that I do not really believe that MSFT has actually
"improved" my "Computer user experience" with Win7, and the number of
complaints I've read about Win8, I am not exactly eager to see what it
considers "new and improved" in WinX.
Considering the potential for data scraping in Windows 10,
you should not do anything "personal" in there.

Get out a copy of Wireshark sometime, if you need to see
what it's doing. Find an address that doesn't have a reverse
translation in the trace, find a website that offers IP lookups,
and find out it's "vortex" at Microsoft that your machine
is talking to.

Even if, by some definition you "trusted" Microsoft staff,
that treasure trove is going to be shared with others,
either intentionally, or unintentially.

Never assemble a data treasure trove, unless you
expect to lose it, or have it exfiltrated. Ask the
one billion users at Yahoo Mail, how many people
know their passwords. Why, I had to stop using
12345678 as my password because of that.

Whatever gets collected by Vortex, consider that it's "shared
with everybody". It doesn't even have to be "for sale",
to get abused. An agency with a three letter acronym
can ask for a copy, and nobody will so much as blink.

Keep that in mind when you're using Skype too.

Paul
pyotr filipivich
2018-03-28 01:17:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul
Post by pyotr filipivich
Considering that I do not really believe that MSFT has actually
"improved" my "Computer user experience" with Win7, and the number of
complaints I've read about Win8, I am not exactly eager to see what it
considers "new and improved" in WinX.
Considering the potential for data scraping in Windows 10,
you should not do anything "personal" in there.
Get out a copy of Wireshark sometime, if you need to see
what it's doing. Find an address that doesn't have a reverse
translation in the trace, find a website that offers IP lookups,
and find out it's "vortex" at Microsoft that your machine
is talking to.
Even if, by some definition you "trusted" Microsoft staff,
that treasure trove is going to be shared with others,
either intentionally, or unintentially.
Never assemble a data treasure trove, unless you
expect to lose it, or have it exfiltrated. Ask the
one billion users at Yahoo Mail, how many people
know their passwords. Why, I had to stop using
12345678 as my password because of that.
Whatever gets collected by Vortex, consider that it's "shared
with everybody". It doesn't even have to be "for sale",
to get abused. An agency with a three letter acronym
can ask for a copy, and nobody will so much as blink.
Keep that in mind when you're using Skype too.
What is coming out about Facebook & Google:

"Pearls before Swine" for May 21, 2017 makes the point that
"having a microphone on everyone, with a GPS locator" is not needed by
the Government - people are paying for the privilege.
--
pyotr filipivich
Next month's Panel: Graft - Boon or blessing?
Wolf K
2018-03-28 13:29:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by pyotr filipivich
Post by Paul
Post by pyotr filipivich
Considering that I do not really believe that MSFT has actually
"improved" my "Computer user experience" with Win7, and the number of
complaints I've read about Win8, I am not exactly eager to see what it
considers "new and improved" in WinX.
Considering the potential for data scraping in Windows 10,
you should not do anything "personal" in there.
Get out a copy of Wireshark sometime, if you need to see
what it's doing. Find an address that doesn't have a reverse
translation in the trace, find a website that offers IP lookups,
and find out it's "vortex" at Microsoft that your machine
is talking to.
Even if, by some definition you "trusted" Microsoft staff,
that treasure trove is going to be shared with others,
either intentionally, or unintentially.
Never assemble a data treasure trove, unless you
expect to lose it, or have it exfiltrated. Ask the
one billion users at Yahoo Mail, how many people
know their passwords. Why, I had to stop using
12345678 as my password because of that.
Whatever gets collected by Vortex, consider that it's "shared
with everybody". It doesn't even have to be "for sale",
to get abused. An agency with a three letter acronym
can ask for a copy, and nobody will so much as blink.
Keep that in mind when you're using Skype too.
"Pearls before Swine" for May 21, 2017 makes the point that
"having a microphone on everyone, with a GPS locator" is not needed by
the Government - people are paying for the privilege.
That's where Orwell's imagination failed him. That's the effect of
living at time and in a society where privacy was taken for granted. No
one had to "protect" it.
--
Wolf K
kirkwood40.blogspot.com
"The next conference for the time travel design team will be held two
weeks ago."
Char Jackson
2018-03-26 20:18:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dominique
I'd like to know which browsers should I try.
Edge.
That was mean. ;-)
--
Char Jackson
Dominique
2018-03-26 23:39:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dominique
I'd like to know which browsers should I try.
Edge.
I don't have Windows 10. Maybe M$ is trying to send me a message.
T
2018-03-28 02:02:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dominique
I'd like to know which browsers should I try.
Edge.
Dude! You are stirring the pot!
mechanic
2018-03-28 11:32:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by T
Post by Dominique
I'd like to know which browsers should I try.
Edge.
Dude! You are stirring the pot!
Yes, I thought about that and decided it was important to help raise
awareness of some underused browsers (eg Qupzilla now Falkon) and as
we're on a Windows group remind people of the MSFT favourite
emerging (Edge). Still I should have realised that the win7 group is
populated by people living in the past :-).
Paul
2018-03-28 13:32:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by mechanic
Post by T
Post by Dominique
I'd like to know which browsers should I try.
Edge.
Dude! You are stirring the pot!
Yes, I thought about that and decided it was important to help raise
awareness of some underused browsers (eg Qupzilla now Falkon) and as
we're on a Windows group remind people of the MSFT favourite
emerging (Edge). Still I should have realised that the win7 group is
populated by people living in the past :-).
This group is filled with people of erudition and refinement,
who are "looking for the right product". And the "data mining"
of Windows 10, isn't what they're looking for.

They want the convenience of using their legacy software
collection, the software collection that makes them "productive".
But, without the data mining a new OS would have to carry out.

Look at the purchases Microsoft has made.

Tried to buy Yahoo (for the 1 billion email addresses).

Bought Skype, to try to build a social network out of it.
(You only think it's a phone network.)

Bought LinkedIn, as a means of assembling an "upper crust
mailing list".

Microsoft has decided, even if they don't know what they're doing,
that they need a mining operation "like all the cool kids".

And Windows 10 is their data mine.

And somehow, Microsoft thinks they can fool people into
thinking they're "nice guys". They think you can "buy a reality distortion field"
at Home Depot, and just bolt it to the front facade of their
business.

But the truth of the matter is, "elephants have long memories".

Microsoft can buy all the burned ash heaps it wants, and it's
not going to buy them any friends.

MSEdge isn't a "new browser". It's an integrated part of
a mining engine. The entire desktop is a browser window
made out of HTML and JS, and the "stuff" sitting on the
desktop, is viewing ports for you to enter your personal
data and track-able ideas.

A real browser has an "about:blank" that actually sticks.

Of all the browsers, Seamonkey is the only one that comes
closest to "not being ruined".

Paul
chicagofan
2018-03-29 11:47:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul
Post by mechanic
Post by T
Post by Dominique
I'd like to know which browsers should I try.
Edge.
Dude! You are stirring the pot!
Yes, I thought about that and decided it was important to help raise
awareness of some underused browsers (eg Qupzilla now Falkon) and as
we're on a Windows group remind people of the MSFT favourite
emerging (Edge). Still I should have realised that the win7 group is
populated by people living in the past :-).
This group is filled with people of erudition and refinement,
who are "looking for the right product". And the "data mining"
of Windows 10, isn't what they're looking for.
They want the convenience of using their legacy software
collection, the software collection that makes them "productive".
But, without the data mining a new OS would have to carry out.
Look at the purchases Microsoft has made.
Tried to buy Yahoo (for the 1 billion email addresses).
Bought Skype, to try to build a social network out of it.
(You only think it's a phone network.)
Bought LinkedIn, as a means of assembling an "upper crust
mailing list".
Microsoft has decided, even if they don't know what they're doing,
that they need a mining operation "like all the cool kids".
And Windows 10 is their data mine.
And somehow, Microsoft thinks they can fool people into
thinking they're "nice guys". They think you can "buy a reality distortion field"
at Home Depot, and just bolt it to the front facade of their
business.
But the truth of the matter is, "elephants have long memories".
Microsoft can buy all the burned ash heaps it wants, and it's
not going to buy them any friends.
MSEdge isn't a "new browser". It's an integrated part of
a mining engine. The entire desktop is a browser window
made out of HTML and JS, and the "stuff" sitting on the
desktop, is viewing ports for you to enter your personal
data and track-able ideas.
A real browser has an "about:blank" that actually sticks.
_Of all the browsers, Seamonkey is the only one that comes __
__closest to "not being ruined". _
Paul
Here! Here!!! ITA with your message, especially the last comment. :)
bj
chicagofan
2018-03-29 15:41:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by chicagofan
Post by Paul
Post by mechanic
Post by T
Post by Dominique
I'd like to know which browsers should I try.
Edge.
Dude! You are stirring the pot!
Yes, I thought about that and decided it was important to help raise
awareness of some underused browsers (eg Qupzilla now Falkon) and as
we're on a Windows group remind people of the MSFT favourite
emerging (Edge). Still I should have realised that the win7 group is
populated by people living in the past :-).
This group is filled with people of erudition and refinement,
who are "looking for the right product". And the "data mining"
of Windows 10, isn't what they're looking for.
They want the convenience of using their legacy software
collection, the software collection that makes them "productive".
But, without the data mining a new OS would have to carry out.
Look at the purchases Microsoft has made.
Tried to buy Yahoo (for the 1 billion email addresses).
Bought Skype, to try to build a social network out of it.
(You only think it's a phone network.)
Bought LinkedIn, as a means of assembling an "upper crust
mailing list".
Microsoft has decided, even if they don't know what they're doing,
that they need a mining operation "like all the cool kids".
And Windows 10 is their data mine.
And somehow, Microsoft thinks they can fool people into
thinking they're "nice guys". They think you can "buy a reality distortion field"
at Home Depot, and just bolt it to the front facade of their
business.
But the truth of the matter is, "elephants have long memories".
Microsoft can buy all the burned ash heaps it wants, and it's
not going to buy them any friends.
MSEdge isn't a "new browser". It's an integrated part of
a mining engine. The entire desktop is a browser window
made out of HTML and JS, and the "stuff" sitting on the
desktop, is viewing ports for you to enter your personal
data and track-able ideas.
A real browser has an "about:blank" that actually sticks.
_Of all the browsers, Seamonkey is the only one that comes __
__closest to "not being ruined". _
Paul
Here! Here!!! ITA with your message, especially the last comment. :)
bj
LOL!!! I got so excited over someone complimenting SeaMonkey ... I
wrote "here" instead of "hear" in my exclamation. :-[

Excuse please ... :)
bj
Mayayana
2018-03-29 12:46:01 UTC
Permalink
"Paul" <***@needed.invalid> wrote

| Of all the browsers, Seamonkey is the only one that comes
| closest to "not being ruined".

Could you explain that? I've used FF and Pale Moon
for years. I've only barely looked at Seamonkey. I'd
assumed it was just FF with email.

Though recently I tried it out for WYSIWYG HTML
editing, for a friend who's trying to migrate from
Front Page. It seems to work for that.... inasmuch
as any WYSIWYG editor works. I thought that was
a very clever idea. What better place to put a simple
HTML editor than in a browser?

And is it really true that Chrome actually won't even
provide the option for a menu bar (or title bar)? It used
to be that rule #1 with software was to respect the wishes
of the end-user. That meant the "chrome", or window
frame, should conform with personal system settings.
Firefox at least still provides that option.

But it's becoming increasingly common for software
to force some version of a stripped-down, kiddie
window that looks like it's designed for 6-year-olds,
comes in any old color the developer thought looked
nice, and appears to be painted on with poster paints.

...Perhaps to soothe what the developers imagine to
be technophobia? It's as though they think we'll panic
if we're presented with functionality.

Maybe I should count my blessings. At least it's not
a black window with chartreuse text, accompanied by
a manifesto about saving energy by not lighting
unnecessary pixels, and a single button that says,
"Click here to visit the only website that matters".
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2018-03-29 13:13:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mayayana
| Of all the browsers, Seamonkey is the only one that comes
| closest to "not being ruined".
Could you explain that? I've used FF and Pale Moon
for years. I've only barely looked at Seamonkey. I'd
assumed it was just FF with email.
So had I. (Not a bad idea; I used to use - at work - Netscape, for both
news and email; it worked well. Until corporate made it all only work
with variations of Outlook, and eventually killed news access
altogether.)
Post by Mayayana
Though recently I tried it out for WYSIWYG HTML
editing, for a friend who's trying to migrate from
Front Page. It seems to work for that.... inasmuch
as any WYSIWYG editor works. I thought that was
a very clever idea. What better place to put a simple
HTML editor than in a browser?
(Ditto for Netscape.)
Post by Mayayana
And is it really true that Chrome actually won't even
provide the option for a menu bar (or title bar)? It used
Yes - at least the title bar, I haven't tried for the menu one. And
there isn't even an _add-on_ that gives you it back, in anything like
the original way [I've found a couple that give you the title, but
overlaying parts of the page]. (The silly thing is that the title bar is
actually there: I can see it during the animation when the window is
being minimised, maximised, or restored, in my non-Aero theme. It just
is suppressed when the window stabilises.)

It even needs an add-on (which, granted, works well [and quickly!]) in
order to make a new tab open as a blank.
Post by Mayayana
to be that rule #1 with software was to respect the wishes
of the end-user. That meant the "chrome", or window
frame, should conform with personal system settings.
Firefox at least still provides that option.
Remember who's paying for it. The end-user's wishes only get really
considered (and perhaps a non-representative subset of users, too) when
market share falls alarmingly. (Which I suspect isn't going to be the
case for Chrome any time soon.)
Post by Mayayana
But it's becoming increasingly common for software
to force some version of a stripped-down, kiddie
window that looks like it's designed for 6-year-olds,
comes in any old color the developer thought looked
nice, and appears to be painted on with poster paints.
Often referred to as "Fisher-Price".
Post by Mayayana
...Perhaps to soothe what the developers imagine to
be technophobia? It's as though they think we'll panic
if we're presented with functionality.
(-: - but it's more than that: fair enough to hide it behind an
"Advanced" bar, or even "here be dragons" - that _does_ protect the
inexperienced user (the majority) from settings that might break
something; however, in a lot of cases, the functionality has been
removed altogether. (In the case of [some?] browsers, control of
third-party cookies being a trivial example.)
Post by Mayayana
Maybe I should count my blessings. At least it's not
a black window with chartreuse text, accompanied by
a manifesto about saving energy by not lighting
unnecessary pixels
(Which of course would be a fib anyway except on CRT monitors.)
Post by Mayayana
, and a single button that says,
"Click here to visit the only website that matters".
(-:
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

And perhaps that's the scariest thing about the modern mob. In social media,
we haven't created a monster. We are the monster.
- Jonathan Holmes, RT 2015/3/28-4/3
chicagofan
2018-03-29 15:57:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Mayayana
| Of all the browsers, Seamonkey is the only one that comes
| closest to "not being ruined".
Could you explain that? I've used FF and Pale Moon
for years. I've only barely looked at Seamonkey. I'd
assumed it was just FF with email.
So had I. (Not a bad idea; I used to use - at work - Netscape, for
both news and email; it worked well. Until corporate made it all only
work with variations of Outlook, and eventually killed news access
altogether.)
I don't know the details of the changeover, but when I lost Netscape, I
got SeaMonkey which I thought was it's replacement, and my [combination]
browser is not like Firefox to me. I downloaded Firefox separately, but
didn't like the constant changes. I just keep an outdated copy for a
backup. I don't know what Mozilla group or programmers are keeping SM
alive, but I hope they don't stop. :)
bj
Wolf K
2018-03-28 13:33:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by mechanic
Post by T
Post by Dominique
I'd like to know which browsers should I try.
Edge.
Dude! You are stirring the pot!
Yes, I thought about that and decided it was important to help raise
awareness of some underused browsers (eg Qupzilla now Falkon) and as
we're on a Windows group remind people of the MSFT favourite
emerging (Edge). Still I should have realised that the win7 group is
populated by people living in the past :-).
You're a neomaniac. The mirror image of the Luddite.

Best,
--
Wolf K
kirkwood40.blogspot.com
"The next conference for the time travel design team will be held two
weeks ago."
Ken Blake
2018-03-28 16:56:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wolf K
Post by mechanic
Post by T
Post by Dominique
I'd like to know which browsers should I try.
Edge.
Dude! You are stirring the pot!
Yes, I thought about that and decided it was important to help raise
awareness of some underused browsers (eg Qupzilla now Falkon) and as
we're on a Windows group remind people of the MSFT favourite
emerging (Edge). Still I should have realised that the win7 group is
populated by people living in the past :-).
You're a neomaniac. The mirror image of the Luddite.
You can call him a neomaniac, if you want, but I'd prefer to call him
an etidduL. <g>
mechanic
2018-03-28 19:27:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wolf K
Post by mechanic
Post by T
Post by Dominique
I'd like to know which browsers should I try.
Edge.
Dude! You are stirring the pot!
Yes, I thought about that and decided it was important to help
raise awareness of some underused browsers (eg Qupzilla now
Falkon) and as we're on a Windows group remind people of the
MSFT favourite emerging (Edge). Still I should have realised
that the win7 group is populated by people living in the past
:-).
You're a neomaniac. The mirror image of the Luddite.
Best,
"Neomania, defined as an obsession with the new, is a hallmark of
American culture."

(https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/290746)
Mayayana
2018-03-28 13:32:56 UTC
Permalink
"mechanic" <***@example.net> wrote

| we're on a Windows group remind people of the MSFT favourite
| emerging (Edge).

Emerging? That's a good one. Edge is at about 4%
share, despite MS trying to force it on people. And
now they're going to force it on people using Windows
mail, regardless of default browser. They've put
all their eggs in the Win10 basket and by doing so
shot themselves in the foot. Edge is a niche browser
that won't even run on their own products. (Win7/8
are still supported. Firefox still runs on XP, except
the very latest version.)
And now they're presenting it as essentially a Metro
browser, for shopping and visiting their trinket store.

It's sort of like Microsoft is saying, "We have this
shiny new shovel that works beautifully, aside from
the broken handle, but you can only get it if you buy
our spyware wheelbarrow with no wheels."

Now that's marketing. :)
T
2018-03-28 01:59:40 UTC
Permalink
Firefox is going through some growing pains at the
moment. They are feverishly working on it and things
will get better soon. The new, somewhat buggy, Firefox is
a ton faster.

Edge in not ready for prime time. It is still in the Alpha
stinker stage. I usually remove it and replace it
with a shortcut to IE. Customers bitch a lot about Edge.

Chromium (open source Chrome) is terrible. Worse than Edge.

Some of my customers adore Chrome. Chrome drives me nuts,
but that is a personal preference, so try it anyway.

On Android tablets, Firefox and Firefox Focus (ad free
Firefox) kick Chrome's ever living butt. Chrome
is much better on a PC.

Opera and Safari have a number of compatibility issues.
I don't see how Appel users don't go out of their minds
with Safari. I install Firefox on Apple anyway. They
say they don't need it, but a months or so later, I catch
all of them using it.

Here is a really fun one I adore (lacks the add-ons of
Firefox) that is nice and snappy. And so far compatible
with everything. Its claim to fame is that it has built
in ad blocking. It is fast too!

https://brave.com/

Try it. You will adore it. I use it as my secondary
go to browser.

I usually install both Firefox (with ublock origin)
and Brave on customer's machines. What I tell my customers
Firefox is my favorite, but use whatever works for them.
If one doesn't work use the other. Just stay off the
Microsoft Browsers as they are virus magnets (IE and Edge).
WayFarer
2018-03-28 04:22:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dominique
Since a few weeks now It looks like my Firefox install is possessed by the
devil. In Facebook, it ramdomly refreshes when I barely touch the mouse,
but I don't really want a solution.
I'd like to know which browsers should I try.
Iridium Browser
Ken Blake
2018-03-28 17:00:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by WayFarer
Post by Dominique
Since a few weeks now It looks like my Firefox install is possessed by the
devil. In Facebook, it ramdomly refreshes when I barely touch the mouse,
but I don't really want a solution.
I'd like to know which browsers should I try.
Iridium Browser
As I said moments ago in another post in this thread, we are all
different. Iridium is another browser I don't like.
WayFarer
2018-03-29 00:22:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ken Blake
Post by WayFarer
Post by Dominique
Since a few weeks now It looks like my Firefox install is possessed by the
devil. In Facebook, it ramdomly refreshes when I barely touch the mouse,
but I don't really want a solution.
I'd like to know which browsers should I try.
Iridium Browser
As I said moments ago in another post in this thread, we are all
different.
The suggestion was directed to the OP
Post by Ken Blake
Iridium is another browser I don't like.
Subjective comment i.e. it's made up entirely within your own mind.
Mayayana
2018-03-29 01:20:53 UTC
Permalink
"WayFarer" <***@nomail.moc> wrote

| >> Iridium Browser

I'm curious what's so good about it. First the download
page malfunctioned because I have javascript disabled.
Yet the page doesn't need javascript. With CSS disabled
it appeared just fine and I was able to download.

Then I unpacked the download and started it up. It
immediately tried to call home without asking:

88.198.180.164

Then I decided to look at the settings. (There's
nothing else to look at. The "hamburger button"
doesn't give me an option to show the menu bar,
so there's literally nothing unless I get to the
settings.
Settings shows "Loading..." Periodically a window
comes up that says "Untitled" failed to load. Kill it
or Wait? I click Kill It. The message window sits
there, unresponsive.

I know that Google think they have the right to
break all rules with software behavior, user
preferences, etc, but I don't see why people doing
an OSS version of Chrome wouldn't get their act
together a bit better. It indicates to me that they
really like Google's stuff and just want to make their
own version of it.

Given that it wants to call home and apparently
won't even let me see a settings window without
logging into the mother ship (!), their boasts about
privacy don't seem to make sense.

On the bright side, I got the portable version, so
it was easy to throw away.
Paul
2018-03-29 02:00:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mayayana
| >> Iridium Browser
I'm curious what's so good about it. First the download
page malfunctioned because I have javascript disabled.
Yet the page doesn't need javascript. With CSS disabled
it appeared just fine and I was able to download.
Then I unpacked the download and started it up. It
88.198.180.164
Then I decided to look at the settings. (There's
nothing else to look at. The "hamburger button"
doesn't give me an option to show the menu bar,
so there's literally nothing unless I get to the
settings.
Settings shows "Loading..." Periodically a window
comes up that says "Untitled" failed to load. Kill it
or Wait? I click Kill It. The message window sits
there, unresponsive.
I know that Google think they have the right to
break all rules with software behavior, user
preferences, etc, but I don't see why people doing
an OSS version of Chrome wouldn't get their act
together a bit better. It indicates to me that they
really like Google's stuff and just want to make their
own version of it.
Given that it wants to call home and apparently
won't even let me see a settings window without
logging into the mother ship (!), their boasts about
privacy don't seem to make sense.
On the bright side, I got the portable version, so
it was easy to throw away.
The IP maps to:

IP address: 88.198.180.164
hostname: ir-191.iridiumbrowser.de
ISP: Hetzner Online GmbH
Country: Germany

So it is calling home. Not a big deal for a Chromium based browser.

For a Chromium family browser, the URL in that call home
should have a unique identifier. My copy of SRWare Iron
wastes no time reporting in to its site.

I don't see how anyone can reasonably expect a source tree
with 600,000 files in it, and God knows how many developers,
how a couple guys in their moms basement can modify the source
for that, and make something "strikingly different".

And if investors have any money to throw at an idea like
this (so you can hire 200 developers to really make something
out of it), they expect a return on their investment. And the
only way to do that is with datamining or advertising tricks.

This makes the whole browser selection process rather simple.

1) Determine which "family" it comes from.

2) Assume minimal changes.

3) Not be surprised when it behaves just like the master
it's cloned from.

And that's why threads like this ones, are doomed
from the start.

It's like asking if there is a "good, mass produced car".
And getting into arguments about whether the chrome plating
on an Audi is thicker than on a Lexus. The general answer
to the question is, "they're all designed the same way,
to maximize profit". That's why you'll find a good mix
of brands, rusting out in some farmers back 40 acres.
Could they make a vehicle that lasts ? They could.
But what kind of businessman is going to do that ?

Now, this is an example of a vehicle that lasts.
It was built in 1946. It's a diesel electric locomotive (little
more than a yard engine), but it still goes. And the guy who
maintained it, spent his whole career doing so. Think how
many times you'd have to take apart that diesel and
rebuild it, between 1946 and 2011. The guy who says
it's still fit to run, is 93 years old.

Loading Image...

You're not going to find a browser-equivalent to that.

Just the fact that there's an HTML5 standard and a DOM
that hoards data, should tell you the game isn't on the
level, and there's really "no escape". We're arguing over
the brightness of the paint, and how soft the seats feel.

Paul
Mayayana
2018-03-29 02:16:17 UTC
Permalink
"Paul" <***@needed.invalid> wrote

| 3) Not be surprised when it behaves just like the master
| it's cloned from.
|
I can see your point, but their website homepage starts with a
giant heading:

"A browser securing your privacy. That's it."

Under that it says:

"Automatic transmission of partial queries, keywords and
metrics to central services is prevented and only occurs
with the approval of the user"

Yet the download page wants to track me with script
and the browser tries to call home without asking. I
don't know whether they're cynical, stupid, or maybe
like the lamebrain Linux fans who say it's OK that
Linux auto-updates without asking because "they're
the good guys".
WayFarer
2018-03-29 02:17:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mayayana
| >> Iridium Browser
I'm curious what's so good about it.
I don't know to respond to subjectivities.

[quote] I'd like to know which browsers should I try [unquote]

I was responding to an specific request made by the OP.
Paul
2018-03-29 02:34:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by WayFarer
Post by Mayayana
| >> Iridium Browser
I'm curious what's so good about it.
I don't know to respond to subjectivities.
[quote] I'd like to know which browsers should I try [unquote]
I was responding to an specific request made by the OP.
To sort browsers, there should be some kind of tests. (And
no, I'm not considering "speed tests" to be one of those.
The P.R. material on "browser speed", seeks to deflect
out attention from stuff that matters.)

Of all the tools here, only one had a supercookie test.
And the supercookie is how they show targeted advertising,
like me continuing to see Analog Devices adverts right after
I tried to track down an Analog Devices *sound driver*.

https://www.ghacks.net/2015/12/28/the-ultimate-online-privacy-test-resource-list/

This is how you build up a profile on someone, until
the day arrives when they enter some self-identifying
information into the browser.

https://samy.pl/evercookie/

And these are the things we don't want browsers doing,
and they *all* do it - to be standards compliant.

All you're doing is picking the car with the nice paint
job, and soft vinyl seats. The cars aren't different
underneath.

So if you want a browser with a menu bar, pick Firefox.
If you want a browser without a menu bar, pick Chrome.

And pick a "vanity name" for your browser, to suit your "personality".

Now I like Iceweasel for some reason, because it seems
to be in keeping with the nature of browser design.

Paul
WayFarer
2018-03-29 03:15:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul
Post by WayFarer
Post by Mayayana
| >> Iridium Browser
  I'm curious what's so good about it.
I don't know to respond to subjectivities.
[quote] I'd like to know which browsers should I try [unquote]
I was responding to an specific request made by the OP.
To sort browsers, there should be some kind of tests. (And
no, I'm not considering "speed tests" to be one of those.
The P.R. material on "browser speed", seeks to deflect
out attention from stuff that matters.)
Of all the tools here, only one had a supercookie test.
And the supercookie is how they show targeted advertising,
like me continuing to see Analog Devices adverts right after
I tried to track down an Analog Devices *sound driver*.
https://www.ghacks.net/2015/12/28/the-ultimate-online-privacy-test-resource-list/
This is how you build up a profile on someone, until
the day arrives when they enter some self-identifying
information into the browser.
https://samy.pl/evercookie/
And these are the things we don't want browsers doing,
and they *all* do it - to be standards compliant.
All you're doing is picking the car with the nice paint
job, and soft vinyl seats. The cars aren't different
underneath.
So if you want a browser with a menu bar, pick Firefox.
If you want a browser without a menu bar, pick Chrome.
And pick a "vanity name" for your browser, to suit your "personality".
Now I like Iceweasel for some reason, because it seems
to be in keeping with the nature of browser design.
   Paul
Good info, thanks.
Mayayana
2018-03-29 12:32:54 UTC
Permalink
"WayFarer" <***@nomail.moc> wrote

| > | >> Iridium Browser
| >
| > I'm curious what's so good about it.
|
| I don't know to respond to subjectivities.
|

What's so complicated? You recommended
Iridium. I looked into it and didn't like what I saw.
So I'm wondering why you recommended it. You
can define your opinion as objective or not.
That's fine with me. They're both your subjective
and my nominally objective, neither of which is
here nor there. :)
Ken Blake
2018-03-29 14:34:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by WayFarer
Post by Ken Blake
Post by WayFarer
Post by Dominique
Since a few weeks now It looks like my Firefox install is possessed by the
devil. In Facebook, it ramdomly refreshes when I barely touch the mouse,
but I don't really want a solution.
I'd like to know which browsers should I try.
Iridium Browser
As I said moments ago in another post in this thread, we are all
different.
The suggestion was directed to the OP
Post by Ken Blake
Iridium is another browser I don't like.
Subjective comment i.e. it's made up entirely within your own mind.
Exactly right. As I pointed out, we are all different and like
different things.
Loading...