Did the browser wars finally end in 2014?

I have tried all the major browsers and many of the minor browsers (i.e. Slimject, Pale Moon, IceDragon, etc.), including multiple portable versions and by far the fastest and best for me in Maxthon. I've been using it for over a year and I keep trying new ones and keep coming back to Maxthon.

 

Haha lol. Tabs on top is at the top, tabs on bottom (for me) is below the addess bar. Tabs down near the windows taskbar...can be called tabs in basement.

I want tabs on bottom because that's usually where my cursor is around the bookmarks bar, and not on top which is further away. So having them that faaaar down close to the taskbar would be even more annoying. I can't get used to having them on top, so having them in the basement would be impossible as the cursor would need to travel all over the screen. up and down, up and down, up and down....

 

Industry standard is this.. I never heard of anyone wanting tabs alone the task bar?

 

And I thought that tabs on bottom (or in basement) were weird only to me. I don't think that I could get used to having them down under.

 

Yes, but as he said most part of Chrome is open source (Chromium & Google Update; well, though Google's "open source" has a bit of problem, maybe you know), and it seems Google don't put strong obfuscation to rest proprietary part, besides while we can sniff Chrome I haven't seen any report that Chrome phoned home in any undocumented way. So as to Chrome on desktop PC, I can't find much of privacy threat (personally, I inclined to say "unless you link it to your Google account") though I don't use it for sensitive browsing just as a precaution.

While his referrer and UA are no relevant, blocking script makes sense. see this.
And clearing history data completely deletes HSTS setting.

Yes, will do at least for some people. I mean they have clear privacy policy and at least apparently looks like are following it. I know some company which have much worse privacy practice, though I don't name them as maybe not a few people here are using their product.

You can't apply that example to coding and vuln (BTW as a side note, there's medical research which suggested that those who appears not healthy and somewhat hipochondric tend to live longer than apparently healthy and powerful people. One hypothesis was the latter don't notice coming grave danger. Maybe you have to make better example) Any such complex software will have bugs (nobody knows total bugs in a program) and those browsers are not much the same, much difference in code size, not all browser are built by the same language, etc.
Besides, only comparing simple number of bugs is nonsense. Let's see this, do you directly compare 270 vuln in Fx, 245 in Chrome, and 126 in IE? You should notice it says "including" Windows. While IE is only for Windows, Chrome have many different versions, for Android, for iOS, for Linux. Fx currently lack iOS version. Also severelity of vuln and time to patch much more matter than number. IE don't have that rapid release you accused, but MS are veeerry slow to patch while Mozilla patches within 48h and Google in most case within 24h.

I don't deny ill-effect of rapid release, but it doesn't directly mean their code is not thoroughly audited, time is just one factor and even with enough time there can be many serious escaped bugs, you'll see them in IE or Java.

 

But IE is only for Windows while Chrome covers many OSes (Android, iOS, Linux)

Completely agree! I would still use Blink Opera if it was still Opera, but I didn't expect it. I think each person has his own reason to use Opera while there'll be not much difference among Chrome user about his reason to use it. We no more can make custom permission w/out addon. No more Opera:config. No more customizable UI and now even with extension we can't custom UI much.

 

Do you say nonsense? It is a strong indicator that can hardly be suppressed.
According to the PR spin theory the more patched bugs a software has the more secure it is compared to other software where far less bugs have been discovered as yet. According to this spin, Chrome, Adobe products and Java are among the most secure software we can think of.
BTW, according to this theory in 1913 Google Chrome was also the most secure browser with 295 vulnerabilities followed by Firefox with 155 vulnerabilities as second secure and Internet Explorer on place 3 with 138 vulnerabilities. The most insecure browsers were Safari with only 8 vulnerabilities on desktop + 4 on mobile and Opera (Presto) with 9 vulnerabilities. Opera (Blink) is very likely affected by the vast majority of Google's Chrome vulnerabilities.
A clever PR spin can turn everything topsy-turvy. Funny isn't it?

Time is a very important factor.
Auditing is an automated process. There is special software for that. Do you really think that a security team is auditing hundred of thousands lines of code manually?
That automated process will catch only a part of existing bugs.
The ultimate step is to release the software into the wild. What do you think alpha and beta versions are meant for?
The more you decrease the alpha and beta testing periods the more chances to offer buggy software as final release.
You don't agree? All you have to do is to ask any developer and hope for a honest answer.

 

Yes I agree.

 

Windows is by far the least secure OS and IE runs only on Windows.........................

Not long ago Google alerted MS to a Windows vulnerability yet 90 days later MS had no fix. Yes, so secure.

 

Yes, I agree, on the other hand Chrome OS is the most secure.

 

I think so too. No, Rasheed is the first user that I hear prefer to have them at the bottom of the screen, I would never ever get used to that.

 

Well, I had not even heard of it being possible to place them down there until yesterday, but it surely sounds weird yes. Nope having them down under in Australia would never work for me. Even Chromes terrible "on top" position sounds more pleasant and easy to use.

 

My advice is to use the latest browsers with their default settings. The only settings I would change are related to security/privacy.

Don't go on changing the GUI with addons/extensions. Do none of the tweaking. Have an open mind and most of all be flexible. Loose your old habits and adapt to what needs.

 

Well patching bugs is a good thing, this "PR spin theory" is only indicative, what really matters:.
1) The quality of the process and software architecture, indicated by the errors per 1000 lines of code (KLOC)
2) The (be nimble) attitude of the dev/test team towards re-use of code and tests
3) Develop with testing in mind (making it easier to run regressing test automatically)

To my knowledge Google sets the standard and Microsoft is doing better as the industry averages, so not surprisingly Chrome and IE often rank one and two in the annual Own2Pawn contest. Firefox can't keep up with this, Opera has decided to piggy back on chrome. Indeed the browser war is over.

http://blog.chromium.org/2012/04/fuzzing-for-security.html (3)

 

Agreed.
Changing settings is unpatriotic and therefore browsers should become dumbed down to a level were it is impossible to make changes anymore.

Agreed.
Be flexible and do what big corporations are imposing on you. What's good for their business must be good for you too.

Agreed.
Habits are mostly resulting from knowledge and experience. Both can be dangerous.
Get brainwashed and adapt to what big corporations are considering you need. It will make you feel free and happy.

 

What I don't understand is not your individual points, but your too simplistic view. Your saying sounds like only number of bugs and time to release new verion are determining factor to software's security. It might not be your genuine intention, but I interpret your comment as such.

Jave is not secure, rather Java, especially after Oracle bought it, is security nightmare but this is not simply because it have numerous bugs, but because of their terrible security practice. Contrary to Google, they are slow to patch, sometimes it seems they even don't have a capability to patch, and new patch introduces new vulnerability which AFAIK never occurred in Google. There're still many other evidence to suggest Oracle don't take security seriously.

I appreciate Kees (Windows_Security) that he bring some important factor up with clear & plain words, though there're still some things to consider left.

Let me give too simplistic example, say program A have 300 mediocore vuln discovered but all of them are patched within 24h, while program B 100 serious vuln and their patch need a month to patch. Which do you think is secure overall?

It is true that they mostly use automated tool to find bugs, as you said it's well known. But program like Chrome are also audited by many efficient people all over the world, not only security experts but some programmer also "enjoy" looking their code, and I know a case such programmer happend to find serious vuln which even experts missed. Some of those experts seems to also manually examine code. IE on the other hand is proprietary and most of audit are responsible to Microsoft only. Security through obsucurity is completely another story. So number of people who examine the code is another important factor. And of course what language was used is also important and this is one reason Moziila developed Rust. I can ask some developer anytime, and what I know so far is they don't have thorough security audit process like Google though their software don't have such rapid release cycle.

 

You missed what I tried to tell. On a purpose wanted most likely.

It was about that people should accept the new interfaces of browsers. Adapt to them.

Sure some want to bring their old menubar back, when it is gone. And also the traditional ways with bookmarks they were used to.
The meaning of my post is they should be stayed away. From security point of view. All the old habits. And to adapt to mainstream GUIs.

I suspect there is also some security risks involved with using them same time with browsing. I am not sure why Chrome does not allow a right clicked link to become active, or the middle click browser one? It could be a general safeguarding thing or maybe just against something that browser can't safely handle? The meaning of my post was to use just bare browsers, what ever you use.

I do like Firefox, no mistakes in that. What I dislike is people stuck in their old ideas how things should be. And resist the change. Usually the changes made are both for usability and for security.

Stay away from skins and addons at all cost and use your spartan browser. No mouse gestures etc. fancy added if you care any about your security!

What yuki told about Java, I totally agree. It is maybe the most used programming language and many apps use it installed. It is then imbedded to that app. It does not need embedded to your browser in anyways!

 

How about this browser? Would you like it?
It's modern, streamlined and simple - aka dumbed down for idiots.

 

LOL, I got your back, it's one of the dumbest things I ever heard.

LMAO, my point exactly.

I will respond in the other thread.

 

Thinking that all users ought to adapt to the Chromium way of doing things is kind of ridiculous, Jarmo. To me, it would be uncomfortable not to be able to have tabs not on top, the bookmarks sidebar window, the status bar, the home button for the start page and the menu bar. Those are functions that I require.

In Firefox, the browser allows you to make the changes or I get them all back with 1 addon. If I had to use one addon to get each function back, perhaps it would bother me a little but thats not the case. I only use 3 or 4 addons in each of my computers. Thats nothing to get my browser functioning as I want it and more secure.

If all browser were like Chrome, it would be black and gray, boring. In my opinion, the guy who designed the old browsers is the genius. He found and implemented the perfect way of how to make the computer browser function. I tip my hat to that guy or group of guys who invented it.

Bo

 

Yes, but I don't care about other operating systems, Windows for life!

 

Despite Yahoo rebounding since the Firefox search takeover - I'm not more compelled to use a Mozilla product now than I was before.

 

I always say that Opera is the most sleek, gorgeous and attractive browser

 

The Presto one or the Chrome wannabe one?

 

If we disregard their depth of custom options and we will evaluate them only by how they look, then it doesn't matter. The both are prettiest by far, imho.