Tiny Problem

Post Reply New Topic

I'd be more specific in the title, but I can't quite explain it in a heading.

Anyway, on most computers, when the mouse hovers over a link, it will tell me on the bottom of the window what that link is. Today I noticed it's not doing that on my computer...

I've recently downloaded Malwarebytes Anti-Malware, Trojan Remover, and AVG onto my own laptop after reading and following directions on how to get rid of the "Spyguard 2008" malware from a friend's computer.

This is a brand spanking new Sony Vaio with Windows Vista. I'm a big fat n00b, and don't understand very much in the way of computers, but can follow directions (sometimes!)

Thanks!

[edit] I just hopped on my old laptop, and the link's full name appears on the bottom of the screen, however, I'm not sure if that's because it's using an older version of IE or what.

Switch to Firefox.

How exactly is FF better than IE? Is there a succint way to explain it? Pro/Con-wise, IE vs. FF perhaps?

Firefox is secure, IE is not.
Firefox is standards-compliant, IE is not.
Firefox is open-source, IE is not.
Firefox is more extensible/customizable than IE.
Firefox is faster than IE.

That's all that I have off the top of my head. Security is probably the biggest thing. Running IE is basically begging for malware to infest your computer.

Have here a look:

http://www.webdevout.net/browser-support-summary

or here:

http://www.acidtests.org/

---

Have also a look to

http://www.opera.no

Opera is very reliable browser.

You may want to check a-squared, it's a anti-malware/spyware program http://www.emsisoft.com/en/software/free/

Get Firefox or Opera and stop using IE. If you're using IE, you're just asking for something bad to happen.

maybe this can explain it.

Since an overwhelming majority of users out there have IEEE!! !(sounds like a scream, donnit?..
hackers, script kiddies, and others of that ilk concentrate their efforts on hacking it.

Since Mozilla, Opera, and other programs aren't as prevalent, you get a lot less flack coming your way.

There's other reasons, but this is the one that swayed me to Firefox...

One of the most important feature of firefox is NoScript:

http://noscript.net/

A free-source firefox extension to block the execution of scripts (eg.: javascript) and plugins (e.g. flashplayer) on all web pages, except those you trust. This is a most important security feature and shall be installed on a ll browser, because you never know what is going on in the scripts of an unknown server.

Exactly the reason I use it with FF. Years ago someone told me that Java Script could not be used maliciously by a website and that it was restricted to a "sandbox". However, last year I read that someone had done a proof of concept using Java script to escape the sandbox and do whatever they wanted on a target computer. Apparently the exploit is impossible to block without disabling common key features of java script. I don't know if there are any exploits out in the wild yet.

If in doubt only allow the sites you trust to use java script. With NoScript this is very quick and easy.

Seconded. Why bother with IE when Firefox exists.

Interesting. With the four graphic browsers I have installed at present, I got some interesting results... which I don't think correspond quite with the "lore" going around.

I usually use SeaMonkey, but occasionally Firefox (but I miss havng my email client bundled). In both cases, the extensibility it the main reason for using them. I //need// AdBlock, NoScript, WebDeveloper, etc.

Opera I've only toyed with. It is quite good, but I miss the tools that I've cme to expect in a browser, plus I find some of it's defaults irritating.

Konqueror I rarely use, though I do like it.

=========
Version data:

SeaMonkey 1.1.12 Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-GB; rv:1.8.1.17) Gecko/20080829 SeaMonkey/1.1.12 (Ubuntu-1.1.12+nobinonly-0ubuntu0.8.04.1) Mnenhy/0.7.5.666

Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-GB; rv:1.9.0.5) Gecko/2008121621 Ubuntu/8.04 (hardy) Firefox/3.0.5

Opera/9.27 (X11; Linux i686; U; en) (slightly out of date, but what comes direct from the Ubuntu repositories)

Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; Konqueror/3.5; Linux) KHTML/3.5.10 (like Gecko) (Kubuntu)

========

They all were perfectly happy with Acid1.

=========

Opera and Konqueror got Acid2 perfect. Firefox made a mess of the eyes. SeaMonkey was a bit of a disaster.

========

On Acid3, none got it right. However:

Firefox scored 70/100, with the squares all shades of grey, rather than coloured. There were a few spurious bits shown, as well.

SeaMonkey scored 54/100, but the display was severely mangled, and nothing really came close to showing the line of boxes.

Opera scored 47/100, but there was no trace of the boxes.

Konqueror... well... it managed to overwrite its score, so I thought I couldn't say what it was, but the popup worked, so I could figure out that it actually scored 42/100.

===============

It might be interesting to hear what IE scores, and Google Chrome, etc.

No current browser passes Acidtest-3.

You have an quite old version Opera - 9.63 passes Acidtest3 to 85%.

IE is much worst, even IE7 does not pass acidtest2. A good overview about the comparabilities of browsers with the current web standards can be found here:

http://www.webdevout.net/browser-support-summary

That's why I said I had quite an old version of Opera. It is the current version offered via the Ubuntu repositories. I don't use it very often (except for things like this) so I have no intention of getting involved with manually upgrading it.

With an older version (9.55) of Amaya (the W3C browser), for the same rationale as the above, I get disasters for Acid1 and Acid2, an no JavaScript, so no Acid3.

I may give version amaya_wx-11.0-0ubuntu1_i386 a go, later.

My tip:

Uninstall the ubuntu-version of Opera and install Opera's own version. You can download it from ftp.opera.no as a tar.gz-file.

---

There is no reason to rely on the version the distributions deliver. It takes often weeks, if not months, till new software is incorporated into the distribution. To keep the system a little bit up-to-date is necessary to bypass the package managers of the distribution and make your own set-up.

I am not relying on the version the repositories contain, as I don't really use Opera, and do not particularly like it, it is not open source, and I do not intend to use it, as it is not as extensible as the Mozilla browsers. (I think I've already said all this.)

If Opera were to provide a repository for their product, I would add that repository. I can't be bothered with manually updating stuff. I got bored with that game a long time ago. If it's not in a repository, it would have to be something I desperately wanted, to persuade me to keep track of it.

==========

I have just had a try of Amaya 11.0, which now gets through Acid1. Acid2 is still chaotic and it still doesn't seem to provide for JavaScript, so Acid3 can't even start.

They actually have nice Ubuntu-specific .debs for the latest version, but like Lau, I say why bother? It's proprietary and it's not something that I desperately need or want, so I'm not going to go to any effort to get it. Either it's spoon-fed to me from the repos or I don't bother with it. But since you gave me the link, I'll go ahead and put it on, since I can always use another back-up browser and disk space isn't currently an issue.

My only current gripe with the Ubuntu distribution is the massive delay in adding OOo3 to the repositories. But, OOo2.4 and AbiWord/Gnumeric are plenty good enough, so I'm not too concerned about it.

EDIT: I feel so dirty putting Opera on Ubuntu. Aside from things I actually *need* like proprietary Flash plug-ins (to be replaced by Gnash as soon as is feasible) and my Broadcom wifi driver (again, hopefully to be replaced someday) I don't use proprietary software in Ubuntu. It feels like I am soiling the purity of my system with this freeware.
EDIT2: But at least their EULA isn't horrendous, as most EULAs are. I can accept those terms even though they do not match my ideal licensing terms (GPL). Plus it's short. I hate long EULAs because it's obvious they don't intend for you to actually read it, but I always insist on reading any legally binding document before agreeing to it.