Poll: Which browser do you use (most)?

[Coolmario88]

I use IE9 the most cause of ActiveX filtering, and Tracking Protection!

[SpeedyPC]

I am the 100th voter.....I like Firefox because of NoScript 

Congratulations

Let have a drink .......................................................................No beer get the real good stuff

[DavidR]

I use IE9 the most cause of ActiveX filtering, and Tracking Protection!

I use firefox because it has Zero activeX (not just filtering), the same is true of Chrome and Opera. Not sure what you mean by IE9 Tracking Protection, but they all also have Private Browsing I believe.

    IE9 will offer consumers a new opt-in mechanism (“Tracking Protection”) to identify and block many forms of undesired tracking.
    “Tracking Protection Lists” will enable consumers to control what third-party site content can track them when they’re online.

Aside from Firefox 4 also a similar function it/they are currently pointless right now as a) the user has to enable it and b) the third party site has to agree to the policy. If it doesn't there is nothing to stop it from gathering data or tracking, etc.

So currently this feature is a bit of a busted flush.

[Lisandro]

ActiveX as a feature? No! Any other browser, please!

[Asyn]

ActiveX as a feature? No! Any other browser, please!

+1

[Jesant13]

I use Firefox. To be more specific, I use Firefox 4.0.

[Dch48]

I have no problems with Active X and actually think it's been a boon to the computer world. Just because something has been attacked a lot doesn't mean it's bad. It could mean it's good and very widely used so becomes a target.

[Lisandro]

I have no problems with Active X and actually think it's been a boon to the computer world. Just because something has been attacked a lot doesn't mean it's bad. It could mean it's good and very widely used so becomes a target.

Sure. Agree. But the technology of using such a swiss cheese, full of holes, is difficult to understand. Technology could have passed through it as a "bad experience", imho.

[doktornotor]

Sure. Agree. But the technology of using such a swiss cheese, full of holes, is difficult to understand. Technology could have passed through it as a "bad experience", imho.

I absolutely love their killbits "fixes". Oh, there's a giant security hole there, there, there and there? Well, lets add a registry key to "disable" it. Now, all you have to do is to re-enable it. For sure no problem to flip the switch for any malware out there. But it's fixed, see... this KB says it. Fixed. 

[Asyn]

I absolutely love their killbits "fixes". Oh, there's a giant security hole there, there, there and there? Well, lets add a registry key to "disable" it. Now, all you have to do is to re-enable it. For sure no problem to flip the switch for any malware out there. But it's fixed, see... this KB says it. Fixed. 

[FreewheelinFrank]

I have no problems with Active X and actually think it's been a boon to the computer world. Just because something has been attacked a lot doesn't mean it's bad. It could mean it's good and very widely used so becomes a target.

So good and widely used that 40-50% of browsers in use in some markets don;t even support it.

It was very useful for in-house business systems, which is why the British government for one is still stuck with IE6 because they can't afford to replace the in-house systems. For this reason, IE6 is still around and holding up the development of the web.

ActiveX was attacked a lot because it had zero security and allowed 100% access to the host computer- yes, it really was that naive, but remember this is a company that shipped an operating system without a firewall. The attitude was "sure, have complete access to the system, see what you can do." Of course it turned out that that attitude meant their systems were getting pwned and they rapidly had to start thinking about adding security. Even after that security was in place, ActiveX flaws allowed computers to be compromised.

In short, it was bad, it's better now (in that its security, although not 100%, at least is much tighter than it used to be), but it's not widely used on the web any more (who can afford to turn away 40% of visitors?), and some of the institutions who have used it regret it.

[Lisandro]

For this reason, IE6 is still around and holding up the development of the web.

http://ie6countdown.com/

[DavidR]

MS can whinge as much as they like and try to have people abandon IE6. But that doesn't rid them of their commitment to support IE6 (as insecure as it might be) until April 2014 because IE6 was an integral part of XP, which they have to support until 2014 (provided it is running SP3)

[Asyn]

...which they have to support until 2014 (provided it is running SP3)

Well, SP3 also includes updates to the browser.

[DavidR]

Yes it does, but without SP3 no XP security updates and that includes security updates for IE6. I Don't know if XP SP3 update converted IE6 to IE6 SP3 or not...