Dangerous Dave's Dlog

As You Like It

, , , , ,

In this day and age, everybody wants you to use their stuff, and will advertise and cut prices as much and as low as possible to convince you to use their product. This includes Operating System makers and Browser developers. You may think it would be better if we all used the same browser and all used the same OS, but the only people who should think that are the companies who make them. You are given a choice, and this is a good thing.

The majority of my argument will come down to one thing: Unwanted Programs. Viruses, worms, malware, adware and spyware (and no Mr spell checker, I did not mean to write "Viruses, worms, enamelware, camaraderie and Spacewar").

When you get 95% of users using one operating system, and 90% of users using one browser such as in the 90s, you get on big virus explosion. If you find one security hole in one browser, suddenly the world is at your feet. These days, viruses are everywhere, and everyone thinks they are doing enough to prevent their computer getting a virus, yet over 80% of spam is sent by "botnets", hundreds or thousands of computers that are being used to send the spam without the owners knowledge.

Viruses generally spread themselves. If we could stop viruses from spreading by themselves, we could dramatically reduce the risk of contracting a virus. Fortunately, viruses have one Achilles heel: they almost always require a certain operating system. Windows viruses can't attack a Mac, and vice versa. This is for reasons ranging from the inability to run a Windows program on a Mac, to the fact each security vulnerability is usually operating system specific. A huge percentage of viruses are designed to run on Windows, huge as in 99%, maybe more, and the sole reason is that it is the only operating system that has enough users that a virus spreading itself can guarantee it can find another Windows computer to spread itself to.

Mac and Linux users often don't bother with antivirus software, because the chances of them becoming infected are slim at best. I personally have ClamX, an OS X implementation of Clam AV, but I have only ever run it twice, and it's mostly just because I'm intrigued whether it would find a virus. It never has. The reason for this is not because the operating system is more secure, as many zealots would have you believe, it's primarily due to their low market share.

Imagine if Linux, Mac and Windows each had 33% market share. The chances of a self spreading virus finding another suitable host is suddenly significantly reduced. Now enter Solaris, Chrome OS, and the many netbook-designed OSs out there. The viruses aren't even given a chance, it almost makes you feel sorry for them. Almost.

Now even if we greatly reduced their spread, how about we prevent ourselves getting the virus in the first place. How do viruses reach our computer? Primarily from the web, through exploits in the browser. Each browser is different, so at the moment most use Internet Explorer exploits to get onto your computer, since 70% of people use it. What if we could reduce this number, something web developers have been wanting to do for years, but we can't just throw them all onto FireFox. FireFox is already regarded as "the new IE", and not in a good way. We need more spread, and that's something we can do now. The more browsers in mainstream use, the better protected everyone will be. Firefox currently has about 25%. Good for it, but lets keep it there. In fact, if IE dropped to 20%, Firefox dropped to 20%, Opera rose to 20% and Safari and Chrome got 20% each, we would be a long way towards reducing viruses from a real threat to a group of crazy guerrillas who hide in the bushes and throw rocks through our windows occasionally.

Now I know what you are thinking, you don't want to go to the game store and have to choose between 5 or 6 different version for your OS. Well despite the fact you already do this (PC, Mac, XBox OS, PS3 OS, Wii OS, etc) I have the solution for that too, or more specifically, Google does. What is one non-proprietary platform that can run on any operating system? The Web. The majority of everything you do on your computer could potentially be done on the web, much of it is already possible to do on the web. Google Docs allows you to use an Office suite on the web, Adobe has it's own suite of programs too. Anything has the potential to be done on the web. In the next 10 years, computer power will likely reach the point that anything can be done via interpreted languages such as Java, Flash and most of all, Javascript.

If all browsers followed web standards (hint hint) and all web developers adhered to web standards (Try any big website, they sometimes come close, but usually fail: facebook, nearly 300 errors for the Microsoft home page ( no surprises there), a couple for Apple, 60ish for Twitter. I think you get the point).

If they adhered to webstandards, you could use any standards compliant browser you wanted. On the other hand, if enough browsers gain a little market share, these site will be forced to become standards compliant.

So off you go, go get yourself a lesser known browser. Something with less than 5% preferably (as that's every browser except Firefox and Internet Explorer). And make sure it's up to date, so it supports the most recent web standards and has the highest security.

Such as these:
Opera
Safari
Chrome

Or any of these.

-Dave

website statistics

Time Rift Build 15: Now with Ninja Speed Run!Time Rift Final Released

Comments

Unregistered user Wednesday, October 7, 2009 3:18:28 AM

Obj_control writes: Well said/done ;)

DesertDweller Wednesday, October 7, 2009 3:37:47 AM

I know lots of Mac users like to use the no-mac-virus argument on me. I tell them that it's because so few people use it; and that it should be a GOOD THING to them. If nobody uses a superior product, be happy. p

Good luck trying to get everybody to follow web compliancy standards. smile

I use Chrome when FF doesn't work. I'm liking FF less and less, because there have been lots of issues with videos not working and PDF files not being displayed...

Dangerous DaveDangerous_Dave Wednesday, October 7, 2009 3:48:02 AM

Originally posted by DesertDweller:

I know lots of Mac users like to use the no-mac-virus argument on me. I tell them that it's because so few people use it; and that it should be a GOOD THING to them. If nobody uses a superior product, be happy.


It sure is because so few people use it (rather than the more used "it's more secure" but there is a downside to so few people using it. Over here in NZ, I can't walk into a store and buy a Mac game. There's not enough market for it so no one stocks Mac games. Hopefully that will be solved once halo gets rewritten in javascript p.

Originally posted by DesertDweller:

Good luck trying to get everybody to follow web compliancy standards.


No one does because no one has to. Browsers auto-correct errors. But there is a culture amongst us younger generation that we try to adhere to web standards, and hopefully that will carry through to jobs in the future. Half of the professional web developers now likely learnt their stuff before the standards were written. Microsofts is probably build like that so that IE users can see it properly p.


Originally posted by DesertDweller:

I use Chrome when FF doesn't work. I'm liking FF less and less, because there have been lots of issues with videos not working and PDF files not being displayed...


Sounds like an issue with the plugins rather than the browser. You should try reinstalling them wink. Also, if you are using a nightly build, don't. Try a stable one. If you are using a stable build, try a nightly wink.

Unregistered user Wednesday, October 7, 2009 9:41:33 PM

Drazzke writes: I think Google is heading in the right direction, completely. They're focusing on making advanced applications that run online, on everyones computer. I think the future of computers is in the web. As far as browsers go, I used to use IE. Then I decided it was horrible a few years back, and switched to Fire Fox. About 8 months ago I switched to chrome. I like chrome because it's simple, runs fast, and does everything I need it to do, and nothing more. I'm not sure about which OS I would prefer to use. I use Windows, simply because it's the computer that I happen to have (My Dad bought it about 8 years ago as the family computer.. then it sorta turned into the programming computer...). I think Linux is pretty cool, though it isn't exactly well known... If I ever started doing more graphical stuff with photoshop and illustrations a mac would be nice, but then I still want Windows for things that only Windows can do... Maybe I should get Windows, and then dual, no.. tripple, boot to Mac and Linux as well! :P Can you do that with Mac? I know people can dual boot Windows and Linux, not sure about Mac though. Anyways, I'm straying really far. I agree with your points completely.

Unregistered user Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:01:20 PM

Drazzke writes: I also try my best to keep up with the web standards. I'm sure that the current version of GameCOG doesn't (GameCOG v2 doesn't even run in IE6, and wont show up in IE 8 unless you're running in compatible mode). v3 is a bit better, though I know there are a few errors. I find with websites that big, it's really difficult, throughout the PHP, javascript, ajax, html, etc, to set it at the standards. Sites that are much smaller (like my portfolio) are much easier, as they're often just 3 or 4 pages with small amounts of scripts. However, when your site becomes as large as say, Facebook, I think it's a good idea to keep with the standard. It makes you seem unprofessional (to the people who go using the w3 validate site! :P), especially when you have millions of dollars and 20+ pro web designers and programmers behind it.

Dangerous DaveDangerous_Dave Thursday, October 8, 2009 1:02:17 AM

Originally posted by anonymous:

I think Google is heading in the right direction, completely. They're focusing on making advanced applications that run online, on everyones computer. I think the future of computers is in the web.


But it begs the question of whether you would trust your data to the cloud. Not having your files on your own computer means A) in the future we may see a significant decrease in hard drive size, rather than the current increases, and B) you can't access any if you don't have internet access. And then there's security issues.

Originally posted by anonymous:

I like chrome because it's simple, runs fast, and does everything I need it to do, and nothing more.


Chrome or Safari are the browsers I would suggest to the average user. As you can see from the post above, I think IE has too much market share, and I think Firefox is heading that way. Chrome and Safari are the only browsers that for the most part work on just as many pages as FF/IE, Opera is heading that way, but it's still a little dodgey here and there.

Originally posted by anonymous:

If I ever started doing more graphical stuff with photoshop and illustrations a mac would be nice, but then I still want Windows for things that only Windows can do...


I've never understood this. Why do you think a Mac would be any better for photoshop/design stuff than Windows? And Apple would argue you can install Windows on your Mac, I tend to tell anyone buying a Mac just to install Windows not to waste their time. Windows runs, but not well. For example, I deal without a delete key when in windows. I use Windows for games and Game Maker, that's it. As a result, I don't even bother with a virus scanner; no problems yet.

Originally posted by anonymous:

Maybe I should get Windows, and then dual, no.. tripple, boot to Mac and Linux as well! p
Can you do that with Mac? I know people can dual boot Windows and Linux, not sure about Mac though.


Yes, you can do that, but only (legally) if the machine you do it on is a Mac. Not by default, usually the boot loader can only do Mac and one Windows. Installing rEFIt can increase that to as many as you like.

Originally posted by anonymous:

I also try my best to keep up with the web standards. I'm sure that the current version of GameCOG doesn't (GameCOG v2 doesn't even run in IE6, and wont show up in IE 8 unless you're running in compatible mode). v3 is a bit better, though I know there are a few errors.


I was making Pointed, and every browser I tried it in it looked different. I ran it through the validator, fixed the errors, and now for the most part it all works great in most browsers. To be honest, I haven't even tried IE. I just assume it works enough for someone to use it. In the past I've just had out by a pixel errors with IE and that's about it.

Originally posted by anonymous:

I find with websites that big, it's really difficult, throughout the PHP, javascript, ajax, html, etc, to set it at the standards.


Make a template page, and make sure it validates, then just copy it for the rest p.

Originally posted by anonymous:

However, when your site becomes as large as say, Facebook, I think it's a good idea to keep with the standard. It makes you seem unprofessional (to the people who go using the w3 validate site! p), especially when you have millions of dollars and 20+ pro web designers and programmers behind it.


I think it's likely they tried to keep it validating while they were building it, it was almost working great and the deadline was approaching, so they threw in a few hacks that made it run great on almost every browser but stopped it from validating. Time is money.

Unregistered user Thursday, October 15, 2009 10:33:38 PM

sargunster writes: I agree completely... Google is heading in the right direction.

Unregistered user Friday, October 16, 2009 11:06:28 PM

Drazzke writes: "I've never understood this. Why do you think a Mac would be any better for photoshop/design stuff than Windows? And Apple would argue you can install Windows on your Mac, I tend to tell anyone buying a Mac just to install Windows not to waste their time." Well, the main reason is I like the mac interface more then windows, when it comes down to it. Windows doesn't seem like the right system for that sort of stuff. Maybe I've just been told that constantly and it's kinda sunk in :P "Make a template page, and make sure it validates, then just copy it for the rest ." I do that, but it gets more complicated. Like, for the WIP V3 of GameCOG, I have easily over 50 pages, and probably another 30 to add. It starts becoming more and more difficult to make sure everything is perfect :P I should probably sit down after the site is complete and go through every page and make sure it's all valid. "But it begs the question of whether you would trust your data to the cloud. Not having your files on your own computer means A) in the future we may see a significant decrease in hard drive size, rather than the current increases, and B) you can't access any if you don't have internet access. And then there's security issues." I was taking to my Dad about Google, and he said the same thing - except he was explaining from when people were taking about this stuff 8 years ago, when it was less of a reality. Though I personally wouldn't want to trust all my files completely online on a place like Google, I still think it's reasonably safe. To be honest, I hear more people losing all their files to viruses because they don't know how to protect their computer, rather then losing files on a place like Google. :P

Unregistered user Sunday, October 18, 2009 4:21:41 AM

~Zi writes: I think that I'm going to end up linking a lot of people to this page. It's a pretty solid argument.

Dangerous DaveDangerous_Dave Monday, October 19, 2009 3:30:17 AM

Originally posted by anonymous:

Well, the main reason is I like the mac interface more then windows, when it comes down to it. Windows doesn't seem like the right system for that sort of stuff. Maybe I've just been told that constantly and it's kinda sunk in p


I don't really see many differences between the two. If Windows had Expose, I would say there were none that mattered. Mac has dock, Windows has quick launch. Mac has window=document, Windows has window=application, but most people don't care. Mac has 20 second start up time (clean install, mine takes nearly a minute now), Windows 7 is getting closer, also at around a minute (clean install)(but I broke my Windows 7, every since I started my bootcamp partition in a virtual machine it now spends a full minute sitting on a black screen before suddenly showing the desktop (in addition to the normal minute). I don't really care because I hibernate Windows, boot into Mac, shut down Mac, resume Windows. Startups are for Windows Updates). Ah, where was I... any other changes are tiny. Sure the Finder can be used for FTP, sure theres the menu bar at the top, but they aren't that different.

Originally posted by anonymous:

I was taking to my Dad about Google, and he said the same thing - except he was explaining from when people were taking about this stuff 8 years ago, when it was less of a reality.
Though I personally wouldn't want to trust all my files completely online on a place like Google, I still think it's reasonably safe. To be honest, I hear more people losing all their files to viruses because they don't know how to protect their computer, rather then losing files on a place like Google. p


At the moment, security efforts are based around home computers. If everything moves to the cloud, that wont be a worry anymore (my girlfriends laptop comes with an instant-on button, it starts up a stripped linux kernel and a stripped firefox, and takes about 5 seconds to do this from cold start. They claim it to be virus proof, and it probably is considering you can't run any other applications, can't have files on your own hard drive, etc. Of course the laptop also has Windows).

What happens when hackers start trying to hack google instead? Sure they have billions of dollars to spend on security, but so do Microsoft.

Overall I would consider it much like Vista's UAC: Good for the majority of people, and the ones that don't want it wont use it.

Write a comment

New comments have been disabled for this post.