Friday, November 25, 2005
Happy Thanksgiving
Day late and a dollar short, but I still hope my avid readers (all 3 of you) had a wonderful and pleasant thanksgiving. Wait, 2 of you are Canadian, so I'm more like a month late and a dollar short :Þ)
Friday, November 11, 2005
The Good, The Bad, The Browser
I'd like to take an odd moment out to talk about web browsers.
There's a few of them out there (and yes, this will be PC centric, as I have no access to a mac). Most of them are free (although a couple either have ads built in, or ask for a donation, or both). Doesn't make them not as good, just, well, you know, we dont' like ads usually :) (that rant is for another post on another day).
So I'll review a couple I have used/regularly use:
Internet Explorer: The current "existing uncle" of the browser world. It's original iteration was the first web browser (I forget what it was... Safari, maybe?). Microsoft bought the rights to the browser and from it was culled IE. Affectionally called "Internet Exploder", even by it's advocates. It's really not that bad, but a] it's loose html rendering engine spawned a generation of lazy web page designers. On the other hand though, it allowed for people with little/no experience to create somewhat working webpages (although, for years, anyone who used the free web space from their ISP and a pirated copy of "Frontpage" (or the free "Frontpage Express" that came packaged with IE4) decided they could call themselves a web page designer and tried to charge money to do so) and b] being Microsoft's Internet Portal, it was (and still is) the main target of hacker/trojan/virus attempts. Is it really more vulnerable than other browsers? No. That's just a myth. But when 999 out of every 1000 hackers are targeting it specifically because of it's popularity (and the "fight the man/big corporations" attitude), it sure seems so.
It's still a good browser, but now it's finally getting some worthy competition. I am looking forward to IE 7, as it incorporates not only tabbed browsing (something Microsoft had actually considered previously, but decided against it. Then Firefox and Mozilla suddenly made it popular), but especially proper PNG alpha transparency support! Yes, PNG's are larger generally than gifs and jpgs, but they are lossless, utilize alpha channels for transparency (which is many, many times better than gif transparency, which utilizes a straightforward "pick the color to be transparent". Alpha transparency can 'fade out' graphics, and no more jaggies!).
Firefox: This is the current popular "IE Killer". It's actually not, but it's the only browser with a growing market. It's at about 10% of the market right now. Not too shabby for a relative upstart. It's basically a slightly watered down version of the Mozilla browser. Same rendering engine. Tabbed browsing. I use it about 95% of the time. Up until the Windows XP service pack 2 upgrades for IE, it was the faster browser (and since my computer is such a dinosaur, I adopted it for the speed. Now, I still use it just out of habit). Although it is still being promoted for internet safety, Firefox is now beginning to get noticed by the hacker community. It just proves the point that popularity breeds resentment.
I'd also like to point out, that Firefox, and too a (seeming) lesser extent, Mozilla, support user created themes, addons and extensions. Some of them are very handy, some of them just take up unnecessary space. Of course, the nice thing is, you have control over what you install. This makes Firefox extremely versatile.
Mozilla: I mentioned Firefox, so it's only appropriate I mention Mozilla. To be honest, I can't really tell the difference. It's also a good browser, a touch slower (on my comp, at least) than Firefox or IE. It is the creator of the "Gecko" rendering engine that it, Firefox, (as of version 6)IE, and several other browsers run on. The main difference between it and IE is IE still renders some of those "coding discrepancies" that it used to, Mozilla is a little stricter. It's an open source browser, and is constantly being "fiddled with" (in a good way).
AOL: the Aol(hel)L browser is actually built upon IE. A fact made all the more ironic considering how they bought out Netscape a few years ago. I haven't had extensive use of it (but it did come free with my Road Runner service), and have tried it out. It well... sucks. I mean, for web pages it's okay, but even though it's a *pay* service, it's still riddled with ads. It's bad enough web pages contain pop up ads, but when your PAID FOR browser is constantly popping up ads (mostly for it's own related services) in addition, it's not pleasant. Also, the main window is kind of a 'tray' where all the other services (like Aol Instant Messenger, and other AOL "helper windows" sit very awkwardly. Even if you're an AOL member, I'd recommend using another browser (except for AOL specific content). Even for email, AOL has another option. They usurped the "Communicator" email program they acquired from Netscape and created "AOL Communicator". It's basically a prettied up version of the Netscape program, only problem is you must first have an AOL account to download and use it.
Opera: I'm actually typing this post up from Opera right now. Opera 8, to be precise. I have tried Opera versions 4 and 5 previously. This is one of the browsers I mentioned above that had ads built into the interface. I say "had", because it seems version 8 doesn't have them. v.8 also incorporates tabbed browsing, but some of the options are a little less obvious than other browsers. Status bar? you have a few options, but if you leave it visible, 98% of the time it's just a blank bar on the bottom that serves no real purpose (at least in Firefox, you have plugins/add ons that can be useful, and take up residence in the status bar). Opera 8 supports skins (I don't know if 6 and 7 did though). The biggest issue I have with opera, is the "Identify as" feature. You can choose to identify the browser as Opera (duh), IE, or Mozilla/Netscape. Certain types of coding (especially javascript) have browser specific (supported) syntax. As such, most codes have "if browser=" type commands, that act according to what browser you're viewing the page in. This is actually Microsoft's fault, as early in the inception of Javascript, Microsoft tried to usurp it, and make it MS-centric. They then started instituting a whole slew of codes that, while it fit in with the javascript command queue, was not actually created by it's developers. Netscape (being the lead browser at the time) was having none of it. So from then on, javascript became a two-part entity, with the "general commands" supported by all browsers, and the Microsoft-only commands, supported by Internet Explorer. So browser identification is important for properly viewing pages online. Now, for those using Opera, I'd recommend leaving it set at "Identify as Internet Explorer", as that will cover most of the internet. But some codes (like the navigation menu on my main site, for example) just won't show when identifying the browser as Opera. But the menu works fine when identified as IE or Netscape. What gets me about this is, obviously it *can* view the code just fine (when id'd as IE or NS), but as Opera, it *won't* view the code. It's still rendering it, just not showing it to you. I find this odd and not very user friendly. Even if it's the IE specific javascript, Opera is still interpreting it. So why not view it normally?
Netscape: Honestly, I don't know if this is even still around. I have used Netscape 3, 4 and 6 (I even briefly checked out NS 5, but they were trying something completely different. It was right around when AOL bought them out, and it was so horribly bad, they never went beyond beta, but started on a new version, using Gecko, and went right to version 6. So publically, there never was an official "version 5"). I didn't mind this browser, although it wasn't my favorite (I was an IE advocate for a long time, since even when NS had the market share), but it wasn't horrible. I think the thing I disliked the most was, NS couldn't properly interpret nested tables. Even with proper coding. I started doing web design back when tables were everything. So NS was not my friend (it always seemed to view other sites I'd created just fine, but for my own homepage? It almost always had an error. IE seldom if ever had a problem with it). NS however, was not targeted much by hackers (although there were a few that didn't receive much attention), and was considered "safe". Again, the same as before. IE came in when hackers were really starting to come into their own, and was the perfect target for many of them. NS really wasn't much safer than IE, just a less popular target. A few years ago, AOL bought out Netscape. Oddly, AOL never used Netscape as the base for their own browser. when IE 6 came out, all the major browsers used the Gecko html rendering engine. So there really wasn't a reason for AOL to use IE as their base anymore, but they still did it. AOL, as I did mention above, did bastardize Netscape's Email program, Communicator. But it's still not AOL's default email client. Last version of Netscape I've seen was 7.2, but since 6, it's basically been a clone of Mozilla. So if you want NS, I'd say stick with Mozilla. It's the same thing, minus the AOL stench.
Neoplanet: Not really a browser unto itself, it's actually a 'skin' for IE. More than a skin really (it adds a small degree of extra functionality, rather than just merely changing the appearance). It can be a little resource unfriendly, so it's not really necessary unless a] you have a higher end computer, and b] you absolutely must use IE, but absolutely can't stand the interface. Considering how almost every other browser now has built in skinning functionality, I don't really see a need for this. I will give it credit, as I believe it was an early adopter of tabbed browsing (see: added functionality), but again, the other browsers (even the soon to be released IE 7) has tabs now too, again it's moot.
I covered a few browsers here, and have explored them rather extensively (although I haven't used Neoplanet in a few years), so if you have any specific questions, feel free to ask. If you want to add your two cents, or recommend another browser for me to check out, please let me know (use the comments feature, so everyone can see and try!).
In the future, I may cover email clients, and instant messengers.
Lastly, the actual time right now is 7:47pm. I spent over an hour and a half writing this up for your convenience! ;Þ
There's a few of them out there (and yes, this will be PC centric, as I have no access to a mac). Most of them are free (although a couple either have ads built in, or ask for a donation, or both). Doesn't make them not as good, just, well, you know, we dont' like ads usually :) (that rant is for another post on another day).
So I'll review a couple I have used/regularly use:
Internet Explorer: The current "existing uncle" of the browser world. It's original iteration was the first web browser (I forget what it was... Safari, maybe?). Microsoft bought the rights to the browser and from it was culled IE. Affectionally called "Internet Exploder", even by it's advocates. It's really not that bad, but a] it's loose html rendering engine spawned a generation of lazy web page designers. On the other hand though, it allowed for people with little/no experience to create somewhat working webpages (although, for years, anyone who used the free web space from their ISP and a pirated copy of "Frontpage" (or the free "Frontpage Express" that came packaged with IE4) decided they could call themselves a web page designer and tried to charge money to do so) and b] being Microsoft's Internet Portal, it was (and still is) the main target of hacker/trojan/virus attempts. Is it really more vulnerable than other browsers? No. That's just a myth. But when 999 out of every 1000 hackers are targeting it specifically because of it's popularity (and the "fight the man/big corporations" attitude), it sure seems so.
It's still a good browser, but now it's finally getting some worthy competition. I am looking forward to IE 7, as it incorporates not only tabbed browsing (something Microsoft had actually considered previously, but decided against it. Then Firefox and Mozilla suddenly made it popular), but especially proper PNG alpha transparency support! Yes, PNG's are larger generally than gifs and jpgs, but they are lossless, utilize alpha channels for transparency (which is many, many times better than gif transparency, which utilizes a straightforward "pick the color to be transparent". Alpha transparency can 'fade out' graphics, and no more jaggies!).
Firefox: This is the current popular "IE Killer". It's actually not, but it's the only browser with a growing market. It's at about 10% of the market right now. Not too shabby for a relative upstart. It's basically a slightly watered down version of the Mozilla browser. Same rendering engine. Tabbed browsing. I use it about 95% of the time. Up until the Windows XP service pack 2 upgrades for IE, it was the faster browser (and since my computer is such a dinosaur, I adopted it for the speed. Now, I still use it just out of habit). Although it is still being promoted for internet safety, Firefox is now beginning to get noticed by the hacker community. It just proves the point that popularity breeds resentment.
I'd also like to point out, that Firefox, and too a (seeming) lesser extent, Mozilla, support user created themes, addons and extensions. Some of them are very handy, some of them just take up unnecessary space. Of course, the nice thing is, you have control over what you install. This makes Firefox extremely versatile.
Mozilla: I mentioned Firefox, so it's only appropriate I mention Mozilla. To be honest, I can't really tell the difference. It's also a good browser, a touch slower (on my comp, at least) than Firefox or IE. It is the creator of the "Gecko" rendering engine that it, Firefox, (as of version 6)IE, and several other browsers run on. The main difference between it and IE is IE still renders some of those "coding discrepancies" that it used to, Mozilla is a little stricter. It's an open source browser, and is constantly being "fiddled with" (in a good way).
AOL: the Aol(hel)L browser is actually built upon IE. A fact made all the more ironic considering how they bought out Netscape a few years ago. I haven't had extensive use of it (but it did come free with my Road Runner service), and have tried it out. It well... sucks. I mean, for web pages it's okay, but even though it's a *pay* service, it's still riddled with ads. It's bad enough web pages contain pop up ads, but when your PAID FOR browser is constantly popping up ads (mostly for it's own related services) in addition, it's not pleasant. Also, the main window is kind of a 'tray' where all the other services (like Aol Instant Messenger, and other AOL "helper windows" sit very awkwardly. Even if you're an AOL member, I'd recommend using another browser (except for AOL specific content). Even for email, AOL has another option. They usurped the "Communicator" email program they acquired from Netscape and created "AOL Communicator". It's basically a prettied up version of the Netscape program, only problem is you must first have an AOL account to download and use it.
Opera: I'm actually typing this post up from Opera right now. Opera 8, to be precise. I have tried Opera versions 4 and 5 previously. This is one of the browsers I mentioned above that had ads built into the interface. I say "had", because it seems version 8 doesn't have them. v.8 also incorporates tabbed browsing, but some of the options are a little less obvious than other browsers. Status bar? you have a few options, but if you leave it visible, 98% of the time it's just a blank bar on the bottom that serves no real purpose (at least in Firefox, you have plugins/add ons that can be useful, and take up residence in the status bar). Opera 8 supports skins (I don't know if 6 and 7 did though). The biggest issue I have with opera, is the "Identify as" feature. You can choose to identify the browser as Opera (duh), IE, or Mozilla/Netscape. Certain types of coding (especially javascript) have browser specific (supported) syntax. As such, most codes have "if browser=" type commands, that act according to what browser you're viewing the page in. This is actually Microsoft's fault, as early in the inception of Javascript, Microsoft tried to usurp it, and make it MS-centric. They then started instituting a whole slew of codes that, while it fit in with the javascript command queue, was not actually created by it's developers. Netscape (being the lead browser at the time) was having none of it. So from then on, javascript became a two-part entity, with the "general commands" supported by all browsers, and the Microsoft-only commands, supported by Internet Explorer. So browser identification is important for properly viewing pages online. Now, for those using Opera, I'd recommend leaving it set at "Identify as Internet Explorer", as that will cover most of the internet. But some codes (like the navigation menu on my main site, for example) just won't show when identifying the browser as Opera. But the menu works fine when identified as IE or Netscape. What gets me about this is, obviously it *can* view the code just fine (when id'd as IE or NS), but as Opera, it *won't* view the code. It's still rendering it, just not showing it to you. I find this odd and not very user friendly. Even if it's the IE specific javascript, Opera is still interpreting it. So why not view it normally?
Netscape: Honestly, I don't know if this is even still around. I have used Netscape 3, 4 and 6 (I even briefly checked out NS 5, but they were trying something completely different. It was right around when AOL bought them out, and it was so horribly bad, they never went beyond beta, but started on a new version, using Gecko, and went right to version 6. So publically, there never was an official "version 5"). I didn't mind this browser, although it wasn't my favorite (I was an IE advocate for a long time, since even when NS had the market share), but it wasn't horrible. I think the thing I disliked the most was, NS couldn't properly interpret nested tables. Even with proper coding. I started doing web design back when tables were everything. So NS was not my friend (it always seemed to view other sites I'd created just fine, but for my own homepage? It almost always had an error. IE seldom if ever had a problem with it). NS however, was not targeted much by hackers (although there were a few that didn't receive much attention), and was considered "safe". Again, the same as before. IE came in when hackers were really starting to come into their own, and was the perfect target for many of them. NS really wasn't much safer than IE, just a less popular target. A few years ago, AOL bought out Netscape. Oddly, AOL never used Netscape as the base for their own browser. when IE 6 came out, all the major browsers used the Gecko html rendering engine. So there really wasn't a reason for AOL to use IE as their base anymore, but they still did it. AOL, as I did mention above, did bastardize Netscape's Email program, Communicator. But it's still not AOL's default email client. Last version of Netscape I've seen was 7.2, but since 6, it's basically been a clone of Mozilla. So if you want NS, I'd say stick with Mozilla. It's the same thing, minus the AOL stench.
Neoplanet: Not really a browser unto itself, it's actually a 'skin' for IE. More than a skin really (it adds a small degree of extra functionality, rather than just merely changing the appearance). It can be a little resource unfriendly, so it's not really necessary unless a] you have a higher end computer, and b] you absolutely must use IE, but absolutely can't stand the interface. Considering how almost every other browser now has built in skinning functionality, I don't really see a need for this. I will give it credit, as I believe it was an early adopter of tabbed browsing (see: added functionality), but again, the other browsers (even the soon to be released IE 7) has tabs now too, again it's moot.
I covered a few browsers here, and have explored them rather extensively (although I haven't used Neoplanet in a few years), so if you have any specific questions, feel free to ask. If you want to add your two cents, or recommend another browser for me to check out, please let me know (use the comments feature, so everyone can see and try!).
In the future, I may cover email clients, and instant messengers.
Lastly, the actual time right now is 7:47pm. I spent over an hour and a half writing this up for your convenience! ;Þ
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)