Reply to Thread New Thread |
![]() |
#1 |
|
This one is VERY VERY Bad Phiser's are using it already! Digg This so Others can do the Test, Click on the Link and go to the "Start Test" link on the page http://secunia.com/Internet_Explorer...rability_Test/
|
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
|
You sure?
http://www.frsirt.com/english/advisories/2006/0413 Granted yes, there are more IE vulns that Firefox since IE has been released, but in the short amount of time Firefox has been out...it has some issues that are critical and just plain stupid. |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
|
Try this for your systems that arent too fast
Edit your registry for: [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\Curr entVersion\Explorer\BrowseNewProcess] "BrowseNewProcess"="no" Now when launching IE, a new thread will be created in explorer.exe instead of creating a new Iexplore.exe process. I suppose this can save some resources on memory deprived systems... |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
|
Except, will not the whole thing go down when IE crashes?
And IE does crash. Nothing like having your whole screen blank to the desktop color for a few seconds leaving you wondering what you've lost. Firefox is the superior browser. Yes it does tank the CPU sometimes & it may be a little slower but it's only been out for a few yrs. what's IE's excuse? Also, I've noticed that firefox on linux doesn't crash as much (well a lot of stuff on linux doesn't crash as much once you figure out how to make it work) & I've also noted that ripping IE & it's engine out of 2000 or XP makes for a seriously faster PC with hardly any firefox hiccups. |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
|
The whole IE integration in windows slows everything down.
we were talking about firefox so I used it as an example I didn't mean to sound like I was target MS as trying to break firefox. I have taken windows 2000 & built a custom install that removed IE completely from it. At boot time 2000 was suing only 50mb of ram. (I don’t have the website here right now) And it was fairly snappy on a 750 mhz athlon with 383 mb ram running firefox. It was an experiment for the wife when her PC literally had slowed to a crawl with IE. Now granted I was a little brutal & some programs that rely on the HTML engine didn’t work. WinZip for one. But firefox runs like a champ & so does zonealarm free. The wife has had absolutely no complaints & no malware since I’ve done that. Office runs real well also. I also am running a custom “distro” of XP that takes up about 400 mb of space on a HD after install. No IE or much of anything other than free-ware apps. It boots into about 75 MB at start. That’s less than millennium!! I’m running this on a 650mhz Dell laptop with 383 MB of ram. You wouldn’t know it though. And in the month I’ve been running it like that I have had ZERO firefox issues & it runs Civ 3 like a charm. These are just my observations though. I’m have not tried one of these cut down distro’s on my main system yet so I don’t know what may or may not be missing that other apps require. |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
|
nlite for the 2000 one.
I think I wasted 4 cd's before I switched to rewritables to get a system that wasn't too crippled. :lol: And for the xp one, I um found it. :wink: Yaa, that's the ticket. It a very "tinyXP" Only a 150mb .iso. Someone calling themselves eXPerience made it. Office doesn't run on it. But I think openoffice does. |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 |
|
Whithout going to the ms website & making sure i'd say no.
I think the only differences between xp prro & home is dual processor support & advanced networking options. The tinyXP I was talking about won't run Office & winzip. It might run office 97 because that only requires 98. I know open office will run on tiny xp. For a regular user I don't see a reason to swith though unless you need advanced features. |
![]() |
Reply to Thread New Thread |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|