IE9 confirmed safest browser - again!

[Digerati]

Not trying to start a war here - just attempting to squash long running persistent false rumors by reiterating what I have been saying all along - you cannot discount IE due to security. And since security trumps all, alternative browser users might want to reconsider their browser of choice and most importantly, technical advisors need to re-evaluate their recommendations, if they regularly suggest the use of an alternative.

Study confirms Internet Explorer 9 is the safest web browser

Needless to say, those results struck me, not only as a bit odd, but also as the opposite of accepted conventional wisdom. So, I downloaded the report (PDF) and studied their methodology. To my surprise everything seemed to be on the up-and-up, with the results well-documented and the conclusions sound. Microsoft Internet Explorer 9 does a much better job of blocking malware sites - who knew.

In ANY event - regardless the browser of choice, users MUST keep their computers updated and patched, scanned with a current anti-malware solution, blocked with a software based firewall, and they must avoid risky behavior - things ALL users must do anyway.

 

[Core]

Good, that's great.

How do I move the Home, Favourites, and Tools buttons from the right side of the URL bar to the left side where the Back/Forward buttons are?

 

[m1r2hud]

thats what i keep saying to people Digerati, i read a lot of threat blogs, everyone of them says using any other browser puts you at risk with hackers, malware, adware and such.
microsoft has come a long way in developing internet explorer. one of the biggest problem i seen people do when they use IE for the first time, they choose the second option for installing. i use to do that, i dont any more. havent had a single problem since.

 

[Digerati]

How do I move the Home, Favourites, and Tools buttons from the right side of the URL bar to the left side where the Back/Forward buttons are?

As far as I know, you can't. UI customization is not a strong point, but I found it very easy to get used to. And I note Links still works so you can really organize your Favorites if you like.

 

[TrainableMan]

Good, that's great.

How do I move the Home, Favourites, and Tools buttons from the right side of the URL bar to the left side where the Back/Forward buttons are?

Hey now, they didn't say it's more convenient or more flexible or even useful. Just that it's most secure

 

[Digerati]

I don't believe those are movable in Chrome either. As far as being flexible, IE is some but not a lot and that did bother me at first. But I soon found IE to be extremely intuitive and easy, convenient to use and with the new search box, I found I did not need or want all those add-ons and extra toolbars cluttering things up. I found that more room for the webpage is better. And I like my buttons on the right anyway.

Convenient? What's not convenient? It does everything I want and expect a browser to do. It opens webpages. And it does it quickly, and securely and that's what I want in a browser. I find it very convenient and definitely useful. And while crashes are very rare, IE's crash isolation and recovery feature is excellent.

I am always amazed at the criticisms that come whenever IE or MS is given credit for something good. They can't catch a break. They are damned if they do and damned if they don't. IE gets slammed for lacking security when it was the badguys that put us here, then IE gets slammed for everything else when suddenly security with the alternatives becomes the issue!

And I point out it is not just that IE is more secure, it is that both Chrome and Firefox continue to have more vulnerabilities discovered too! A quick scan through archives of the Department of Homeland Security's US-CERT Cyber Security Bulletin Vulnerability Summaries will show that to be true (I recommend everyone subscribe to this).

"Look and feel" of the interface is a personal preference issue and not a safety or security issue. Those biases should NOT be interjected in advice, nor should they be used to judge security of a product, unless those features, or lack of features interfere with security.

Is IE perfect? Of course not. But neither are the others. IE, for example, does not have a spell checker - though that is NOT a browser function. However, Speckie is an excellent spell checker add-on that is simple to install. My other add-on is AdblockIE and I am good to go.

I am saddened that biases have driven this topic OT - in spite of the EXTREME efforts in my opening post to put the focus on security and recommendations based on security.

In spite of the fact a machine running IE6 could EASILY and EFFECTIVELY be secured, I concede IE6 was not a very secure browser by default. And I concede that some of Microsoft's business decisions of the past deserve criticism, even a distrustful eye. But neither have anything to do with the product, IE9. IE9 is not IE6 as independent labs have shown, and driving respected folks like Ed Bott to say,

Fully 95% of previously undetected malware is now either deleted or not run by the user. The impact on actual infections is equally profound, with Microsoft data showing infection rates have dropped to 1/20th compared to similar rates for IE8.

This kind of improvement isn’t just a matter of clever code. It takes a tremendous investment in back-end services and a huge commitment of resources—people and money—to do the necessary analysis. This is one feature that other browser makers—especially Google—desperately need to copy.

This topic was to show how Microsoft is no longer passive when it comes to security and because security trumps all, IE should not be so quickly discarded, or discounted.

That's why I posted it in the security forum.

 

[TrainableMan]

Why does our security always come at such a high price? Why do I have to give up so much to get it?

Why can't I have two or three toolbars on one line? What does it hurt? Why does Microsoft try to force everyone to do it exactly their way rather than allow for freedom of choice or simply personal preference. They think everybody is an idiot and should just follow like little clones to whatever direction is Microsoft's flavor of the month. Just like doing away with the start menu in W8 because that's the way it's just going to be and what people are used to or like be damned.

It is sad when companies get so large and powerful and greedy that they stop caring about the wants of the people they supposedly serve: Chase, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, eBay, Microsoft. If you don't give people a choice then others will come along who will: Firefox, Chrome, Opera, etc.

 

[Digerati]

Why does our security always come at such a high price? Why do I have to give up so much to get it?

Why does Microsoft try to force everyone to do it exactly their way rather than allow for freedom of choice or simply personal preference.

Why blame Microsoft? Badguys put us here. Norton, McAfee, Trend Micro failed to stop malware like they said they would. And you do have a choice. You don't have to use IE, just like you don't have to use Windows Backup, Windows Firewall, Windows Defragger or even Windows.

Freedom is expensive.

Now your whole post has absolutely nothing to do with IE9's security but instead is a total slam against Microsoft and now W8.

It is apparent you folks do not want to discuss browser security. So please close this thread.

 

[TrainableMan]

I realize it has nothing to do with the security, IE is secure, so we moved past that into convenience and flexibility and now I'm onto the big business mentality where they feel the customer must take whatever BS they shovel because they are so big they no longer have to care.

You insist on harping about IE's security even though none of the regulars (not anyone that I can recall really) to this forum have said anything against it's security. And some of us feel compelled to point out that there is a heck of a lot more to selecting a browser than the security.

Edit: Closed thread as requested but then reopened because apparently there is interest in extending the discussion beyond security.

 

[Core]

I for one acknowledge that Internet Explorer is a very safe browser. It may even be the most secure of them all.

But for me, security does not "trump all" - there are many other factors. This isn't 1999 anymore; we can expect many things from a proper web browser, and those expectations aren't limited to popping up warning signs when we google Emma Watson.

If someone asks me what is a safe browser to recommend, I may well recommend Internet Explorer - if they're using Windows.

But most of the time they ask me what I think the "best" browser is, and it sure as hell isn't Internet Explorer.

 

[clifford_cooley]

Browser security?? What about Opera? I saw the thread a few days ago but since their was no mention of Opera, I held little interest. Even if Opera had been listed, I'm not sure I would have paid much attention to the details as I'm quite happy with Opera.

As long as I can navigate the web without getting infected, I'm not gonna sweat to much over browser security. To me browser security is not what sells a browser. To me what sells a browser is functionality and I think all browsers have this feature. Many people look for customization, I'm just not one of them. If I can get an address bar, a back button, a forward button, and absolutely no tool bars, I'm good to go.

To me there is not much difference between IE9 and Opera 12 functionality with default setups. I would still be using IE9 if it wasn't for Speed Dial in Opera. This one feature is why I started using Opera. It was (at least for me) less headache than using Jump List or Bookmarks for opening web pages.

As much as you would like for the thread to stay tuned into browser security, when you present a selling point for a product, you inevitably open the doors for all selling points. Especially when the selling point presented in the users mind is one of the less important selling points for using a specific browser. Unless the browser has horrible security issues, I think browser usability will always trump security when it comes to selling pitches.

 

[Dboy352]

I don't discount IE because of any security issues, I discount IE because it is always crashing. I'm sure it's something that I am doing on my computer that causes it to crash, but Firefox and Chrome never crash on me. When I open IE and go to say google.com it immediately crashes and then reopens on google. Then I type something on google and it crashes and opens up again with the results. It does this on both laptops and 1 desktop I have, tried with IE8 and IE9 (and the desktop and 1 laptop are both clean installs as of last Thursday) and still have no resolution. IE is great, just not for me I guess.

 

[Digerati]

But most of the time they ask me what I think the "best" browser is, and it sure as hell isn't Internet Explorer.

But what do you base "best" on? Speed? IE is not the fastest but no browser is fastest at rendering every site and any difference is typically measured in milliseconds, rather than seconds - with a few exceptions for either side of coruse.

As far as being able to move buttons around, okay I'll give you that. But is that anywhere near as important as security? You can still add toolbars and add-ons for just about anything.

Best for what?

Today, it is more like asking what's their favorite color rather than which is best. And that's the point I've been trying to make.

You insist on harping about IE's security even though none of the regulars (not anyone that I can recall really) to this forum have said anything against it's security.

And yet the second I mention IE's security, the regulars pounce (over and over again) at how horrible a company Microsoft is. And so therefore, I guess, so is IE.

But for me, security does not "trump all" - there are many other factors.

I would hardly call you a normal user, but still, it is not normally a wise path to take if it compromises security - unless you are fully aware of the consequences and are prepared to deal with them. In that light, I don't care if users choose Firefox or Chrome over IE as long as they "practice safe computing" - that is, they keep Windows updated, use a decent and current anti-malware solutions, a firewall an don't participate in risky behavior - requirements regardless the browser of choice. That is security of the computer trumps the browser of choice.

But we all know that many users don't practice safe computing - often the case when more than one user uses a computer. And so for them I would much rather have a more secure browser in place.

Security trumps all does mean nothing else matters. It just means it carries the most weight. While it may not for you personally, it sure does to the general public (whether they know it or not), small businesses, giant corporations in all industries, institutes of learning, governments, privacy groups, and me personally, and as an IT consultant in this industry.

I discount IE because it is always crashing. I'm sure it's something that I am doing on my computer that causes it to crash, but Firefox and Chrome never crash on me.

Probably not you, but one of your add-ons in IE as most problems with IE are do to misbehaving add-ons. Java is often the culprit. See if it does it when run without add-ons. IE crashing is a symptom of another problem affecting IE and whether you use IE as your default or not, it should still work correctly.

 

[TrainableMan]

Dboy, you should probably try clearing your browser history. And also try running with no add-ons because more often than not it is the add-ons (which are no fault of Microsoft's) that cause issues. And not every site is coded equally so some sites may work better with other browsers.

Digerati, I never said Microsoft or IE were horrible. I just think choice and flexibility are important and more and more Microsoft is making decisions to force everyone into a cookie cutter mold and I will cheer for choice over "sameness" every freakin' time no matter how much more secure everyone being the same is.

The Taliban wants everyone to be like them and they kill and oppress anyone that thinks differently, even 14 yr old girls; Microsoft is more subtle with their power but they are just as closed-minded with their design direction in the past 5 years. They used to offer choice, now they force-feed changes and you can take it or lump it.

 

[Digerati]

The Taliban wants everyone to be like them and they kill and oppress anyone that thinks differently, even 14 yr old girls; Microsoft is more subtle with their power but they are just as closed-minded with their design direction in the past 5 years.

Comparing Microsoft to armed, cold-blooded Taliban murderers who drag a 14 year old girl out of her school and shoot her in the head in front of all her classmates because she spoke out for Freedom is the most callus, insensitive, naive, ignorant statement you have ever made, TM. And it disgusts me. Its an affront on every serviceman and woman who has, 1000s of miles from the safety of their homes, sacrificed (often their all) for Freedom only to see the tragic stories of that little girl. And it is an affront to all the grieving families of those who came home in a box. I hope none read your post.

Microsoft employees have donated $100s of millions of dollars, matched by the company to many charities around the globe. They donate 100,000s of hours of their personal time, every year helping others. The Gates foundation (with help from Warren Buffet) has donated more to charity, world health and poverty prevention than anyone and you compare the mindset of Microsoft to murdering Taliban terrorist?

Apple is the biggest company in the world - MUCH bigger than Microsoft, worth more than Microsoft and Google combined! And Apple is notorious for a long history of proprietary "their way or no way" "closed-minded" attitude - from software to hardware and every service in-between. But you compare Microsoft to closed minded murdering Taliban thugs???

I started this thread to discuss IE9 security - but YOU did not want to hear that. It did not move away from that discussion. You drove it OT, never even allowing IE or alternative browser security to be discussed. Instead, all you want to do is illustrate your (clearly misguided) hate for Microsoft.

I'm out of here because I got to go puke.

I ask once again to close MY thread. If hate for Microsoft wants to be discussed, please open your own thread for that discussion.

 

[TrainableMan]

I had closed it but since you were the only one in the conversation who couldn't post (mods can post to closed threads), I figured you might like to be able to reply.

Just for accuracy, from what I read they didn't drag her out, they waited till she walked out and got into the school van and it is terrible and wrong (as is the deaths of servicemen) and is so much easier to see in black & white than the harm caused for money by business decisions, not just by Microsoft but lots of Corporations that put profits ahead of people. Yes, I realize it was way out there to compare Microsoft to the Taliban, but if you don't think money drives the world as much or more than guns do then you are naive. It may be more subtle but it is often just as deadly.

For the record, I don't hate Microsoft ... I disagree with a few people there that have most recently made decisions to stifle freedom of choice. Maybe the reason I don't own an Apple product is because they have limited those choices for a much longer time. Apple's control issues are limiting and their proprietary system limits competition and makes their products cost so much. These are good reasons to avoid Apple, not to head towards their business model. Microsoft should continue to offer choice not strive for sameness; profits should not be the only thing that companies value.

Back on to your strict narrow topic of security. What kind of discussion could there possibly be? We agree IE is fairly secure; that doesn't lead to discussion that leads to silence. But it is that narrow view of "all I care about is security" that leads to lack of freedoms and lack of choice, luckily there ARE choices since Microsoft doesn't feel the need to concern themselves with the other issues that matter to many of us.

I have again closed the thread per your request.

 

[Core]

Comparing Microsoft to armed, cold-blooded Taliban murderers who drag a 14 year old girl out of her school and shoot her in the head in front of all her classmates because she spoke out for Freedom is the most callus, insensitive, naive, ignorant statement you have ever made, TM. And it disgusts me. Its an affront on every serviceman and woman who has, 1000s of miles from the safety of their homes, sacrificed (often their all) for Freedom only to see the tragic stories of that little girl. And it is an affront to all the grieving families of those who came home in a box. I hope none read your post.

A) It's an analogy. He's comparing the Taliban's refusal to accept other ways of life to Microsoft's attitude towards their customers and IT culture, which, in light of Microsoft's constant bullying of the FOSS culture seems pretty accurate to me. B) It's an affront to Microsoft, being compared to bomb-strapping nutcases. No one said anything about servicemen, who, by the way, are in Iraq or Afghanistan because they were dispatched there for U.S. political and fiscal interests, and not for any reason as noble as "freedom".

Apple is the biggest company in the world - MUCH bigger than Microsoft, worth more than Microsoft and Google combined! And Apple is notorious for a long history of proprietary "their way or no way" "closed-minded" attitude - from software to hardware and every service in-between. But you compare Microsoft to closed minded murdering Taliban thugs???

He's comparing Microsoft, not Apple, because we're discussing Microsoft, not Apple. Where did anyone say anything about Apple?

For someone who wants the thread to die you sure spend a lot of time misinterpreting and responding to it. I am going to move this to Off-Topic Discussion, which is where these Kool-Aid threads should really be started in the first place.

 

[Digerati]

IE9 confirmed - yadda yadda - here's my problem.

Re: https://www.w7forums.com/ie9-confirmed-safest-browser-again-t15811.html

But first - my sincere apologies to ALL, and specially to TM for me letting my emotions take over. You hit a nerve and I punched the dentist.

And thanks for moving it to this forum and out of the technical side where I try (but failed) to keep it technical.

It's an analogy.
He's comparing Microsoft, not Apple, because we're discussing Microsoft, not Apple.
Where did anyone say anything about Apple?
For someone who wants the thread to die you sure spend a lot of time misinterpreting and responding to it.

Yes, I know it was an analogy - an analogy that compared over-aggressive and/or wrong business decisions made by a few greedy capitalists at the top of a very successful, but generous and law abiding/tax paying (as every loophole will allow) company to the "closed-minded" mindset of brutal child killers - the same people who committed 9/11. The same people who have killed over 8000+ Coalition troops. That was a bit too insensitive of an analogy for an retired military guy from a long-line of military who proudly waves his flag and expresses that military service in his sig's first line.

The irony here is I spent 24 years of my life defending everyone's Right to say what they want. Hm. Guess I am not as hardened as I used to be. Or the Novocaine is wearing off.

I said Apple because that is a much better, and technically applicable example of intolerance for flexibility or user-options in a product - decisions made by corporate decision makers - as the case with Microsoft.

*******

I spend my free time each day visiting many tech forums. Admittedly, I decided to start that discussion about IE9 security here at W7F because I thought it would result in a "lively" discussion. But not like that one. I was hoping someone would come in like m1r2hud, or come in and say, "Yeah, but what about, Google Chrome Picked Best Browser for Security. Or Study: Firefox Most Secure Browser. Or even Opera most secure. I should have been more clear when I opened that post in the Security section that I was hoping to talk about the reality of browser security.

But the thread was immediately "moved past that into convenience and flexibility" and then it was announced (by another person of authority) we were now discussing Microsoft's "business mentality". I had already conceded the browser of choice was a matter of personal preference. The thread was not about convenience and flexibilities, or the business mentality of some company. I noted in my opening post, it is not just browser security that makes a computer secure, saying, "regardless the browser of choice, the user has the same security tasks to perform.

Nothing positive about any other competing product. Nothing about security of any browser. Just slams for IE, but mostly Microsoft. Clifford came in with good positive stuff for Opera and said,

Unless the browser has horrible security issues, I think browser usability will always trump security when it comes to selling pitches.

Perhaps I failed there too. Sorry, it was not a selling pitch. It was meant to be a persistent rumor squasher. I was not accusing anyone of spreading rumors. But the fact remains, there are many who claim and many who believe that the latest version of IE is unsafe, and that they will be safer if they use a different browser.

Security trumps all does not mean you must have the most secure browser any more than it means you must have the best locks on your front door. But it does mean you have to have a good lock, keep it tight and properly maintained, and aggressively control the keys.

Even though Clifford specified selling pitch when saying "usability will always trump security", that is something we will just have to disagree on. I have a problem with "always". If a product is more secure, that's good resume material and reason to use it as a selling pitch.

*****
I was surprised to read, "some of us feel compelled to point out" suggesting there's been some discussion and consensus in the background on countering some things I post. I don't know what to say about that. I try to make sure what I say is true, and substantiate what I say with links to the source, as I did in that opening post. I posted a security issue relating to a specific product, with a link to the source, in the Security section. I don't know what in there "compelled" some of you to counter with anything, let alone the onslaught on Microsoft, the company.

I get that many don't understand the MS MVP program, see my MS MVP and think I speak for or am biased towards (or even work for) Microsoft. None of that is true. Check the sig in my link. I'm a hardware guy.

I almost got in trouble when the Air Force forced us to give up WordStar for Word and was threated with an Article 15 (just short of a Court Martial) before they pried Netscape out of my paws. And Microsoft's volume licensing tactics for small time independent builders who did NOT want to bundle other MS products (like Word) with Windows still leaves a bitter (trust but verify) taste in my mouth for Microsoft too - even though those tactics ceased long ago. So I have no loyalties to Microsoft other than the fact it makes some excellent software! Windows 7 64-bit is a fantastic operating system (and I have used many), IE9 is an excellent browser - but NEITHER reflect on the poor decisions of the marketing weenies and bean counters of a very generous "publicly held" company.

Yes, I defend Microsoft often when falsely accused. It is often because MS is so big. But some of you will note I also defend Intel and AMD warranty policies with just as much vigor - even though what I say is counter to common, but incorrect beliefs. This time just happens to be IE9, made by MS, who just happens to be the same folks who awarded me my MVP. My MVP has been for helping folks fix their computer problems on forums like this one. Not for promoting MS products. In fact, I have also been very vocal about and to Microsoft and some of their schemes - such as their Outreach Teams spamming forums a couple years ago - another misguided marketing plan.

So I hope my MVP badge says I might know what I talking about and not that I am here to promote some MS product. Because I got it (5 years running) for helping folks with their computer problems, networking, and security issues.

I hope my MVP badge does not "compel" staff to immediately come in and point out things they don't like about MS products I post about, or MS itself - or to counter some misperceived selling pitch, or me.

If I have misconstrued the "compelled to point out" comment with my MVP status, then forgive me for mentioning it.

******

 

[clifford_cooley]

Nice read Digs!!

No hard feelings here, I know there will always be disagreement of some kind between two people.

Yeah scratch the word "always", I should have used a different word, I meant it more as "aways win with higher vote from a general audience".

PS - My apologies for being snappy in our last comments on windows7forums. I feel my apologies need to be given from here, since this is where our first conflict originated.

 

[TrainableMan]

I was surprised to read, "some of us feel compelled to point out" suggesting there's been some discussion and consensus in the background on countering some things I post.

No, no behind the scenes thing, I was strictly seeing a common thought in things both Core and I brought up, but I think Clifford probably put it most eloquently when he said ...

As much as you would like for the thread to stay tuned into browser security, when you present a selling point for a product, you inevitably open the doors for all selling points. Especially when the selling point presented in the users mind is one of the less important selling points for using a specific browser. Unless the browser has horrible security issues, I think browser usability will always trump security when it comes to selling pitches.

So I would say I "felt" where Core was going and I agreed and I dare say Clifford "felt" that same way too ... but there was no private communications that I was a part of.

I think Microsoft is making some huge mistakes ripping out personal choices, from W7, from IE, and even more in W8 and I think it is a very bad thing. Huge corporations, not just Microsoft, are loosing sight of the people. So security is great but if I don't want to use the browser for everything else it is lacking, then "most secure" means next to nothing to me.

And your apology is accepted though I feel it unnecessary.