For the last couple of weeks I have been using Firefox 1 as my main browser, and on my home PC also am using Thunderbird as my email program. So far there have been pluses and minus points for both.

The Big plus for Firefox is that there have been less new items of spyware thatn would have been the case with IE. Although what I have previously sia is correct, I recently read an in depth analysis of Firefox in which it stated that the improved security is mostly down to Firefox not yet being popular enough for most spyware creaters to bother with as yet.

The negative is that Firefox is great for read only web sites but seems to cope poorly with interactive sites, such as one were you have to fill out online forms etc. My car insurance is due in a few weeks, so I have been trying to get some online quotes (a frustrating business when you live in Northern Ireland), and have found that in most cases I have had to use IE as the forms do not work in Firefox. Also I was looking at second hand cars on the Auto Trader website and found that the writing and pictures are all mixed up in Firefox. So in short much as I would like to use Firefox excusively it is only up to about 70% of my web needs. It is not ready to be a fully viable alternative to IE just yet.

Thunderbird also seemsto be weak compared with Outlook. It will only allow you to use one outward server, meaning I am forced to send my Uni emails out via Tesco (as the out server for my Uni account will not let Tesco.net emails go via it. Also despite the claims for anti-spam capabilities it lets everything through, whereas Outlook 2003 blocks at least 2/3 of the spam junk.

Not another IE vs Firefox thread

Two words: "web standards". Sites that know what they are work in firefox, safari, opera and everything else. Other sites are designed for IE's interpretations (and extensions) to the standards. Beats me why people think FF is broke because it tries to display pages properly...

firefox. great plane.. **** browser.. tried , deleted, forgotten.

The Thunderbird junk filter is supposed to be adaptive, and I admit I haven't spent much time "training" it, but I agree, William, it doesn't seem to stop much.

Microsoft must have started on a tab capability in IE by now. When that comes out all the others will be playing catchup again. The popup blocker is already there in IE, if you turn it on.

I fairness ffelan, Firefox 1 is a fair bit better than version 0.9 which I first tried and then rejected. I was also right when I said it was slower, the same article I mention above said it was apprx 30% slower than IE at loading images etc.

Thunderbirds junk mail controls do work but you have to train them with a fair few mails We use it at work and it filters out around 99% of the 200 or so junks I get per day which is fine by me:D

Thunderbird also seemsto be weak compared with Outlook. It will only allow you to use one outward server...

Not so. Go into Tools - Account Settings. Go to the account of your choice and click Server Settings. Click the Advanced button and a box will pop up. The tab on the left enables you to set the outgoing server for that particular account.

Also despite the claims for anti-spam capabilities it lets everything through, whereas Outlook 2003 blocks at least 2/3 of the spam junk.

I don't really use the spam blocking facilities in Thunderbird as I have Mailwasher, but I believe the filters learn over time as you mark particular messages as junk.

The one thing I don't like about Thunderbird is the fact that you can't just drag and drop attachments onto messages. Otherwise, I'm quite satisfied with it. The only other disadvantage used to be that each account had to have a separate inbox, but that changed with version 0.8.

Microsoft must have started on a tab capability in IE by now. When that comes out all the others will be playing catchup again. The popup blocker is already there in IE, if you turn it on.

They havent, but they have encouraged third party companies to write tabbed browser facilities for IE. Examples of this would be Avant browser and Maxthon. They arent without their bugs but they are pretty decent. I'm amazed so few people seem to know about these...

I've been using Firefox 1 for a few weeks now, and have mixed opinions of it. Even tweaked, its not much quicker than IE, if any quicker. Clicking back doesnt always take you where you were in the original page, on some sites. Tooltips often stick to the screen and fail to disappear. Some pages fail to render correctly. The browser needs lots of configuring to get the best from it. Its pretty slow to load too. It has its plus points, like skins and the sheer configurability of it, but then so do some alternatives, including the tabbed IE frontends.

The constant argument given for Firefox is "standards" this and "standards" that, when people complain that it fails to render pages correctly. That is as maybe, but the end user does not care about standards. They wish to use a product that works for them. And in this case, whether it be standards or not, IE works and Firefox doesnt. People say that IE is forgiving of bad code. Well yes, it may well be, but it will be this forgiving nature that will ensure it stays THE dominant browser for a LONG time to come.

I have not really found too much to dislike about Firefox, but nevertheless I may well go back to an IE based browser because for me, they just seem the slightly more consistant option. Your mileage may vary....

As for thunderbird, I've also started using that. However, for my particular uses I have not found any advantages over Outlook Express. In fact, I think I'd go so far to say that its a bit slow and clunky compared to OE. Again, I'm sure its more secure, stable, whatever... but I aint had any problems with OE. I'm almost certainly going to ditch Thunderbird...

I worship firefox

i cant use IE coz its broken anyway... i scan my machine daily for viruses, and weekly for spyware.. and guess what, havent had a single shred of spyware since i started using firefox.

and for people who say sites that dont work in it... ive never come across one (except natwest - who are too short sighted to develop for it)

also theres a plugin for firefox available that is a button that will open the current page in IE...

heres the stats for briskoda this month

IE 6.0 65.37 % (225,798)

IE 5.5 or older 0 % (0)

Netscape Versionen ab 6.0 0.434 % (1,501)

Netscape older versions 0.133 % (461)

Opera 1.149 % (3,970)

Mozilla and compatible 13.26 % (45,831)

Firefox, Firebird, Phoenix 10.68 % (36,902)

Safari iCab 0.966 % (3,337)

Scooter 0.003 % (12)

Lynx 0.000 % (3) q

Konqueror 0.093 % (322)

HotJava 0.000 % (2)

Other 3.357 % (11,596)*

Yup firefox has been excellent for me. I was using Mozilla for about a year or so, then saw Firefox advertised and gave this a bash and I have not looked back at Micro$oft. IE blows donkeys as far as i'm concerned.

The one thing I don't like about Thunderbird is the fact that you can't just drag and drop attachments onto messages. Otherwise' date=' I'm quite satisfied with it. The only other disadvantage used to be that each account had to have a separate inbox, but that changed with version 0.8.[/quote']

Yes you can;)

You cant drop them into the message body but if you drag them into the address / subject area then they get attached..

The constant argument given for Firefox is "standards" this and "standards" that, when people complain that it fails to render pages correctly. That is as maybe, but the end user does not care about standards.

The point of web standards is pretty simple though - if you build a web site using them, they should be universally accessible; in IE, firefox, opera, safari and all other browsers, including screen readers; some browsers people elect to use, others they have no choice (a blind user is unlikely to use IE or FF)

Unfortunately, if you use the xhtml/css route which is becoming more popular, and stick to the standards, many versions of IE will interpret them differently to other browsers (margins within containers being one example). These problems can be solved with simple CSS hacks though, and the page should display correctly on all browsers.

The problem is designers start off building for IE and then try to bodge the page to display "ok" in other browsers. Turns out that it's usually easier to design with the standards (so FF etc will work) and then add a few hacks to get IE to display correctly, and then everyone's happy.

For browsers not using the CSS (e.g. screen readers), the page should appear in a useable fashion. Check out the screenshots of a site I'm playing around with - 1st is with my stylesheet, 2nd is with it turned off.

I agree with you though - most end users don't care or understand about "standards" and will pick the product that works best for them, which is fair enough.

Not so. Go into Tools - Account Settings. Go to the account of your choice and click Server Settings. Click the Advanced button and a box will pop up. The tab on the left enables you to set the outgoing server for that particular account.

I don't really use the spam blocking facilities in Thunderbird as I have Mailwasher' date=' but I believe the filters learn over time as you mark particular messages as junk.

The one thing I don't like about Thunderbird is the fact that you can't just drag and drop attachments onto messages. Otherwise, I'm quite satisfied with it. The only other disadvantage used to be that each account had to have a separate inbox, but that changed with version 0.8.[/quote']

Thanks I had cottoned on that it allows you to define more than outgoing server, but could not figure out how to get it to actually use any other than the first.

Yes you can;)

You cant drop them into the message body but if you drag them into the address / subject area then they get attached..

Thanks for that. I was just dragging them to the wrong place!

I only found it by mistake!

With regards to the title of the thread. I think its a bit of a general statement. Firefox is not ready to replace IE because IE is built into the OS so it cannot be applied as the IE engine operates the file browsing function of the OS. Firefox cannot browse files unless there is a plugin for it.

Firefox is ready to be an alternative for online browsing. I have found one fault with it so far and it wont operate my BT webmail properly, so i dont use bt webmail in work for replying, just for checking junk.

My ebanking throws a message saying its unsupported, i continue and it works perfectly.

I have firefox pluggedin to the eyeballs and it runs VERY fast (i have tweeked it with the 30 page requests at once, and set the prefetch delay for images to 0). It even loads faster than IE - but then i have got it as a prefetcher in the windows\prefetch folder

Also i find if on briskoda and i type a quick reply, and it messes up for some reason on the next page, i click back and all my text is still there, unlike IE

Maybe its because i am not afraid of change.