Maxthon vs firefox

[elaich]

The fact is I am exposed. There is a known vulnerability (who knows is
the big question). I would like to be able to determine wether or not
I wish to take that chance or consider other options.

Do you spend a lot of time in questionable places online in which you might
have a problem? Most people go to the same pages over and over. Unless you
go to warez, porno, or other questionable sites, or fall for a "phish," I
doubt if you (or most of the rest of us) are really in any danger.

 

[omziff]

Actually, Jari, my comment here that you quoted had nothing at all to
do with this burgeoning security/bug/exploit debate.

All I was saying is that, IMHO, people would be better off using a
standards compliant broswer, like FF, KMeleon, Moz, Safari, Konqueror,
Opera, etc..
-- anything but something which runs on top of the IE rendering
engine, such as Maxthon, Avant, Crazy Browser, Green Broswer, et al.

IE and its dysfunctional relatives are the bane of web developers.

I never made an allusion to Geckos/FF having better security. The fact
of that matter, to me, is that anything created in any language, on any
OS can be exploited, ultimately.

 

[omziff]

Actually, Jari, my comment here that you quoted had nothing at all to
do with this burgeoning security/bug/exploit debate.


All I was saying is that, IMHO, people would be better off using a
standards compliant broswer, like FF, KMeleon, Moz, Safari, Konqueror,
Opera, etc..
-- anything but something which runs on top of the IE rendering
engine, such as Maxthon, Avant, Crazy Browser, Green Broswer, et al.


IE and its dysfunctional relatives are the bane of web developers.


I never made an allusion to Geckos/FF having better security. The fact
of that matter, to me, is that anything created in any language, on any

OS can be exploited, ultimately.

 

[null]

Do you spend a lot of time in questionable places online in which you might
have a problem? Most people go to the same pages over and over. Unless you
go to warez, porno, or other questionable sites, or fall for a "phish," I
doubt if you (or most of the rest of us) are really in any danger.

This is true. But what about clickable links in email messages? To
have IE or an IE based alternate browser as the defualt system browser
is unwise. And the use of OE is unwise.

I suggest using a Gecko browser as the system default. This browser
can have Java and Java Script disabled. Then using a sane email app
such as Pegasus or Moz email or Tbird ,,, when you click on a email
message link you'te in good shape.

After many years of avoiding IE like the plague, I've taken to using
it on occasion. I just have it on default medium security. I don't
bother with its Trusted Sites nonsense since any site can be
compromised. If I want to investigate some alleged dangerous web site
I use a Gecko browser, as I do for general browsing.

So it's not a matter of selecting one browser. It's a matter of
selecting which broswer to use for what purpose.

Art

http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg

 

[Mel]

This is true. But what about clickable links in email messages? To
have IE or an IE based alternate browser as the defualt system browser
is unwise. And the use of OE is unwise.

That's not true at all, unfortunately. Although it is a popular myth,
there's no such thing as safe internet sites.
Certainly, the risk of being infected via a browser exploit is
greater if you visit large numbers of questionable sites, but popular
legitimate sites are targeted by hackers for the purpose
of exploiting browser vulnerabilities.

(I've posted this link before)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/11/22/apache_hijack_serves_iframe_exploit/

"The attack on ad-serving company Falk that redirected some Reg readers on Saturday towards a site running malicious code may be
part of a much bigger attack.

Security site vitalsecurity.org reports that a group of hackers - perhaps a criminal gang - is hacking web servers across the net
and installing root kits that dynamically inject code into the pages served from the compromised web servers. The injected code
effectively serves as a "front door" to a series of compromised hosts controlled by cyber criminals. These rogue hosts are running
exploit code that takes advantage of the IFRAME vulnerability in Internet Explorer exploited by the recent Bofra worm." ...

 

[null]

That's not true at all, unfortunately.

Huh? What isn't true?

Although it is a popular myth,
there's no such thing as safe internet sites.

Who said there are??? In fact, if you read my post you'll see
that I said any site can be compromised. Seems you didn't
understand what I wrote at all.

Art

http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg

 

[Bob Adkins]

If I want features, I prefer adding features I use, rather than
complexity for its own sake.

There is no complexity in Maxthon. Just plenty of options for the advanced
user. For most people, the default config is just great.

Most people like choices. I for 1 do not like downloading tedious,
idiosyncratic "plugins" that may or may not work just to do a simple task.

As large as Firefox is compared to Maxthon, it should contain at least as
much functionality. Without a bunch of plugins and configuration, Firefox
is bare bones by today's browser standards.

-- Bob

 

[Bob Adkins]

Avant takes about 2 minutes and is similar (I'd say better) to Maxthon.

Maxthon takes zero minutes if you take the default config, which isn't bad
at all. I'm saying it takes a long time to go through all the config choices
is all. IIRC, Avant is a great shell except 1 or 2 things it wouldn't do
with groups the way I like.

-- Bob

 

[Bob Adkins]

But you just said it takes you two days to configure Maxthon; sounds
tedious to me.

Did you see the smilie?

Actually, it takes me ~30 seconds.

However, it can take you a long time to just to look through all the config
settings. There are probably close to 200 total settings you can change, but
the default config is ~95% to my liking. I really like the search aliases
and group functions. Saves a ton of time in my morning browsing session.

-- Bob

 

[Mel]

Huh? What isn't true?

Specifically this:-

"Unless you go to warez, porno, or other questionable sites, or fall for a "phish," I
doubt if you (or most of the rest of us) are really in any danger."

I'm sorry if I misunderstood your post, but you appeared to
be agreeing with this statement from the previous poster.

Who said there are??? In fact, if you read my post you'll see
that I said any site can be compromised. Seems you didn't
understand what I wrote at all.

Having read it again, I notice you did.

 

[=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=BBQ=AB?=]

There is no complexity in Maxthon. Just plenty of options for the
advanced user. For most people, the default config is just great.

Most people like choices. I for 1 do not like downloading
tedious, idiosyncratic "plugins" that may or may not work just to
do a simple task.

ITYM extensions. The plugins for Firefox are pretty much the same
ones you might want for any brower (java, quicktime, macromedia,
etc.).

But you are right -- if you dislike the choice of installing features
or leaving them uninstalled, but would rather install the whole lot,
Firefox is not for you.

As large as Firefox is compared to Maxthon, it should contain at
least as much functionality.

Firefox is small compared to Maxthon, considering that Maxthon is the
giant IE engine with a new shell tacked on.

Without a bunch of plugins and configuration, Firefox is bare
bones by today's browser standards.

That's by design, and why it is so popular.

 

[Lius]

Groups is the main reason why I use Maxthon most of the time

anyone want my groups or willing to share their groups with me?


Bob Adkins wrote in news:[email protected]

 

[Duddits]

Most people like choices. I for 1 do not like downloading tedious,
idiosyncratic "plugins" that may or may not work just to do a simple task.

All of my "plugins" worked perfectly when installed. Not tedious at all.
Please explain your point.

regards

Dud

 

[Bob Adkins]

Groups is the main reason why I use Maxthon most of the time

anyone want my groups or willing to share their groups with me?

E-Mail?

-- Bob

 

[Fuzzy Logic]

If there were exploits in the wild, we'd know. That's what the
security sites you like to quote are for, e.g. secunia.

So these sites know everything that's happening on the Internet? Obviously
a certain 'critical mass' of machines needs to be attacked before these
sites are aware that the vulnerability is being exploited.

Your credibility is strained. If you thought those pages had been
accessible, why would you have complained about the info on them
being withheld?

I was referring to the fact that the general user is not aware of this
information.

Exploits of unpatched vulnerabilities show up quickly on security
sites, newsgroups, mailing lists, etc. Once the proof-of-concept
exploits for this latest Firefox vulnerability were out, how long
did it take for it to show up at secunia? How long after that did
it show up here?


The fact is that you are not exposed to anything at all in these
cases.

So you are saying that I am not exposed becuase there is a known (by a few
people) vulnerability but becuase hardly anyone knows about it I am not at
risk? Isn't that just security by obscurity?

 

[Bob Adkins]

Yes, that's why Maxthon sucks

If I want features, I prefer adding features I use, rather than
complexity for its own sake.

At least Maxthon doesn't need a configurator!


http://fileforum.betanews.com/detail/FireTune/1111041458/1



-- Bob

 

[Jim Scott]

Groups is the main reason why I use Maxthon most of the time

anyone want my groups or willing to share their groups with me?

Middle click on any Favorites folder and voila all its sites open as a
group.

 

[Jim Scott]

Middle click on any Favorites folder and voila all its sites open as a
group.

Oops - that's in FF of course.

 

[Dick Hazeleger]

On 11 May 2005, Dick Hazeleger wrote

-snip-


Have you tried K-Meleon? It's a bit geeky, but I've been using it as
my default for a number of months now, having switched from FF. (It
does almost everything I need, other than the occasional need to rely
on IE for the usual suspects sites, and it's extremely configurable
if you're not afraid of editing the occasional .ini file.)

Anyway, one of the main reasons I started looking around -- having
used Phoenix/FF from around version 0.7 -- was that the rabid fringe
end of the FF groupies seemed to be taking over. It was refreshing
attitude to find that the attitude the KM developers and the users
was "my browser is not my religion".

(FWIW, KM is gecko-based, but it works largely through macros rather
than XML (?XUL? brain-fart time -- whatever that language that FF
uses...), so it's less vulnerable than FF to certain types of
exploit. That's not my main reason for using it, but it's a good
feature.)

Hi Harvey!

I Have tried that one several years ago, didn't like it at the time
though. Time to have a look at it again... Thanks for bringimg it back
to memory again

Regards
Dick

 

[=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=BBQ=AB?=]

At least Maxthon doesn't need a configurator!

Neither does Firefox.

http://fileforum.betanews.com/detail/FireTune/1111041458/1

<http://www.tweakie.com/> (not freeware)