Firefox
I really prefer to use Mozilla's Firefox browser instead of Microsoft's antiquated Internet Explorer. I'm an addict for Firefox's tabs. I have it loaded on all my machines, including my Linux server at home. Here's the problem though, the computer lab I spend the most time at (the Mechanical Engineering lab in Reber) still has not installed the program, yet all the general computer labs on campus have it.
I found a solution though. Another organization has compiled a portable version of the application, called of all names, Portable Firefox. I have mirrored the application on my university ftp site here.
The program is able to work without any installation. You can put it on your desktop or a usb drive and run it on any windows machine, even locked down work computers where installing programs is not permitted. I do recommend creating a shortcut though. The folder names once extracted from the zip file really don't like their names changed and the application file is buried two folders deep.
Initially, the program was taking forever to open. I clocked it at about 80 seconds, but after a reboot of the machine, it was down to 6 seconds on my 3.6 Ghz machine. I'm really not sure if a reboot is necessary. I think the computer was just bottle necked up and needed a restart anyway.
In any event, I really recommend checking it out. Enjoy.
posted by Aventius @ 11:47 AM
7 comments
7 Comments:
IE7 which will be packaged with Windows Vista (and is available to developers now) will integrate most of the features currently available to Firefox, including tabbed browsing. It will also include more customizable and enhanced security features (similiar to a firewall) along with greater integration with other products from the MS suite, such as MS Office. Combine that with their new anti-spyware package, etc. and you have a pretty viable, secure competition to Mozilla's products. Now, that being said, it is Microsoft and with all the advances they have made in just the past 2 years I am sure will be undermined with the fact that hackers gun for them specifically. Either way, I commend them. Not only have they done a greater job at securing software (take the 6 hour turn-around last week with a critical update addressing the Windows Meta File vulnerability), but they have made several improvements in feature and functionality with not only their Operating systems and home software products, but their enterprise software implementations, too (which are starting to provide considerable competition considering how cheap they are relative to the other fore-runners: Oracle, IBM, Sybase, etc.)
I still prefer the free MySQL to MS-SQL, Oracle, IBM DB2, and Sybase products. Even when you can get a free personal copy of oracle. MySQL is cheap, free (even for profit), and it's really fast.
Of course it doesn't have all the features of the name brand offerings but it has everything I need.
As for the turn around time, I question the true "6 hour" timeframe. Microsoft is known for keeping vulnerabilities quiet and away from public view until they're able to fix them.
Microsoft isn't the only company to do this. Every for profit company does. To me, it sounds like it was six hours after a third party discovered the vulnerability.
As for Vista, I haven't tried since I got a beta version on bittorrent since um... i think May 2003. But I'm curious as to how it handles administrative functions. I much prefer the approach that unix based systems use.
They have a root account that is the administrator and everyone has separate "user" accounts.
Then, for any administrative function, the user that has root access, can log out of their account, into the root account and then do the required tasks.
Recently, a program called SUDO is used. It allows "root" tasks to be completed under normal accounts. The root account sets up certain accounts with varying levels of admin access.
The key is that to perform any task under SUDO, they must authenticate themselves again while logged in by retyping in their password.
Macs (which are unix based) use a similar process to SUDO.
Microsoft has administrator & limited user accounts but it has issues. Many software programs will not run in "limited user" accounts.
Additionally, while in Administrator, spyware and viruses can run rampant through exploits because no password is required to make changes to the system.
Lastly, I'm curious if Vista will have group-based access for folders on the default installations of their "Home" products.
I've often wanted to create folders that only certain users could view and use. It can be done, I believe, on their server products but not on Home. For example at my parents house, my dad wanted only my mom and dad to have access to a folder of their financial records. They didn't want their children to have access (who knows why we would care about their quicken file but oh well). As far as I know, without third party applications, its not possible.
All of these concerns are things that could be implemented into Vista and I'm curious if anyone knows if they have been. I'm unaware because I left the Windows world two years ago for Mac OS X and Linux.
When I mentioned their enterprise applications, I was speaking to the corporate world not home applications. The free copy of Oracle would not support a large business with high scalablity/availability concerns. For home use, you would be a fool to purchase any software as they are all well outside an individual's price-point no matter what the product is.
As far as MS withholding updates (at least as far as security is concerned), I think that is a ludicrous assumption. It would be pointless for them or any company for that matter to purposely "hold out" on making their product better... especially considering the out-rage that would come from their user community (pretty much everyone) when all of their systems went down. Of course, you are also the person who has a blog entry dedicated to conspiracy theory. You are correct that the threat was found or tipped off by a third party (whether individual, group, or business, I am unsure), but even with that taken into account, the turn-around was within 6 hours of said tip which was still 5 days in advance of the "attack".
And, finally as for Vista, while I cannot speak to the specifics since I have never used it and the last time I read any articles on it was in the summer, I do know that it is a completely re-designed system based on an entirtely new file structure with enhanced encryption and security. The idea of admins and guests, etc. is completely reworked, and if I am not mistaken, is handled much more closely to that of their server products via user groups, domains, etc. which the user sets up; and, I believe this applies to individual folder and even file access. I agree with you, this is a feature that has been missing for a long time; but, like I said in my previous post, you would be surprised at the dedication they have taken to changing the perception of their products and their company as a whole over the past two, and even last, year(s)... especially in the realm of security.
Perhaps I wasn't clear on the topic of fixing faults. I was not trying to say that they hold off on fixing faults.
I was attempting to say that they, and other corporations, hold off on press releases on a problem they are aware of and are trying to solve, until a third party reports it.
The reason I say is that they consistently attack Linux on the topic of security issues and the time it takes for the Linux community to fix the known problem.
Linux problems are out in the open from start to finish by nature of their mailing lists and bug tracking software that can be viewed by anyone.
For example, lets say that both the Linux kernel and Microsoft's kernal has a critical fault. Red Hat notes it in their public bug tracking server, and the press find out immediately. Microsoft notes it in their private bug tracking software and waits to have a press release until a third party reports it.
This way they can claim a faster turnaround time and use it against the Linux community, like I said, they do.
Its not a conspiracy, its sound business strategy. The same could be said for other companies with recalls. Think of the movie Fight Club. Car company has a problem oh lets say with Ford Explorer tires. At first, they pay an out of court cost to the injured drivers but making sure to keep it private. Then after enough people get hurt, the do cost benefit analysis and finally release a press statement issuing a full recall.
As for Microsoft security, I do believe that have truly focused a huge amount of effort to security.
They have a large perception problem with security issues and have gone to great lengths to change it and I look forward to checking out Vista (when it finally comes to market...).
Their security issues stem are problems that stemmed from specific design choices. They made choices on administration and security before the Internet had become so widely popular. I'm talking about the time of when NT came around. They designed a system where there was one user to a machine that was used by one person and was administered by that one person.
At the time, the only security problem was floppy disks with viruses. Now with the internet and the propensity of dumbasses to click on "Win a free iPod" we have spyware, malware, and viruses that took advantage of a feature that beforehand was an advantage during the early 90s that Windows had over Unix and IBM's OS/2.
Furthermore, the design choices were embedded and forced legacy issues that Microsoft could not undo without writing a new operating system and requiring the millions of developers to redesign their software.
Hopefully with this rewrite, they were able to fix the problems that were once advantages.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Post a Comment
<< Home