As You Like It
Wednesday, October 7, 2009 2:17:30 AM
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


Unregistered user # Wednesday, October 7, 2009 3:18:28 AM
DesertDweller # Wednesday, October 7, 2009 3:37:47 AM
Good luck trying to get everybody to follow web compliancy standards.
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:
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
Originally posted by DesertDweller:
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
Originally posted by DesertDweller:
Sounds like an issue with the plugins rather than the browser. You should try reinstalling them
Unregistered user # Wednesday, October 7, 2009 9:41:33 PM
Unregistered user # Wednesday, October 7, 2009 10:01:20 PM
Dangerous DaveDangerous_Dave # Thursday, October 8, 2009 1:02:17 AM
Originally posted by anonymous:
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:
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:
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:
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 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:
Make a template page, and make sure it validates, then just copy it for the rest
Originally posted by anonymous:
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
Unregistered user # Friday, October 16, 2009 11:06:28 PM
Unregistered user # Sunday, October 18, 2009 4:21:41 AM
Dangerous DaveDangerous_Dave # Monday, October 19, 2009 3:30:17 AM
Originally posted by anonymous:
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:
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.