Firefox or Safari???

custardy

Daniel59 wrote: »

OMG how is that possible?

I just now checked with my friend system there too it shows 3.5.3 only.

I again checked the release notes and it says,

v.3.5.4 Beta (Build 1), released October 9, 2009
Thanks for participating in the Firefox Community Beta Program! Testing beta builds of Firefox helps ensure that they are secure and stable for hundreds of millions of users around the world.

http://en-us.www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/3.5.4/releasenotes/

because you are running a Beta not an official stable release

[Deleted User]

ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/nightly/3.5.4-candidates/build1/win32/en-GB/

Daniel59

custardy wrote: »

because you are running a Beta not an official stable release

Yeah I came to know about this only now after digging for an hour.

I did not warned/asked by firefox about this testing, it just ask me to update.

Marty_J

asininity wrote: »

Its the same thing they gather info from your browsing habits to target adds for you. They say its anonymous etc but it has the potential for more.

Google uses its tracking cookie across its AdSense and DoubleClick networks. Phorm redirected all cookie requests through its own servers and then added forged cookies enabling them to track the user wherever they go.

I'm not saying all is fine and dandy with Google, but I think they're very different systems.

Now I could be called cynical but google could easily have put an inbuilt adblocker in chrome, why haven't they? Will we see one?? Who knows.

The most popular add-on for Firefox is Adblock Plus, with over 500,000 downloads a week, yet there's no ad-blocker included with Firefox. The only reason Firefox has one is because sombody wrote one for it.

Google are working on an extension framework for Chrome, so I'm sure someone will be along to write an ad-blocker for it.

All I know is they'll make more money from a Browser/OS that can track a users browsing habits-target there advertising-have the advertising unblocked.

They make money from other browsers doing the same thing though. You have to use a plug-in to opt-out in Firefox and IE, but you can do the same thing in Safari and Chrome by using the browser's settings. They've made it easier to opt-out with their own browser than their main competitor's browsers.

isofa

Daniel59 wrote: »

Yeah I came to know about this only now after digging for an hour.

I did not warned/asked by firefox about this testing, it just ask me to update.

Ahhh you are running a beta! Perhaps you opted into the Beta and have always been running Betas, so you get offered them first...

asininity

Marty_J wrote: »

Google uses its tracking cookie across its AdSense and DoubleClick networks. Phorm redirected all cookie requests through its own servers and then added forged cookies enabling them to track the user wherever they go.

I'm not saying all is fine and dandy with Google, but I think they're very different systems.

Tracking is tracking as far as I'm concerned. Google still store usage data, and it was in 2007 that they handed youtube user info to a US court. I dont want anyone tracking me across the internet.

The most popular add-on for Firefox is Adblock Plus, with over 500,000 downloads a week, yet there's no ad-blocker included with Firefox. The only reason Firefox has one is because sombody wrote one for it.

I believe Adblock Plus has been around a long time, back when tabbed browsing was new. I'm sure the developers could write one in but would it be as good? Now I've no problem with an addon adblocker, but there isn't one for chrome, SWR Iron proves how easy it is to make one using the same chromium base.

IMO adblockers are a must have of any browser, browsing the internet without one gives me a headache.

They make money from other browsers doing the same thing though. You have to use a plug-in to opt-out in Firefox and IE, but you can do the same thing in Safari and Chrome by using the browser's settings. They've made it easier to opt-out with their own browser than their main competitor's browsers.

I said above I dont mind installing an addon, and TACO, Track Me Not, and Ghostery cover a lot more than google.

isofa

asininity wrote: »

I said above I dont mind installing an addon, and TACO, Track Me Not, and Ghostery cover a lot more than google.

Are these worth installing on top of NoScript? Like the remit of TACO very much.

asininity

isofa wrote: »

Are these worth installing on top of NoScript? Like the remit of TACO very much.

I believe NoScript will block the things that Ghostery blocks but I have it there anyway. I never used to use NoScript as it takes a while to configure because some sites dont work for obvious reasons, which I found annoying having to tell NoScript everytime I went to a new site.

I used to swear by TMN as I liked the way it worked:

TrackMeNot runs in Firefox as a low-priority background process that periodically issues randomized search-queries to popular search engines, e.g., AOL, Yahoo!, Google, and MSN. It hides users' actual search trails in a cloud of 'ghost' queries, significantly increasing the difficulty of aggregating such data into accurate or identifying user profiles. To better simulate user behavior TrackMeNot uses a dynamic query mechanism to 'evolve' each client (uniquely) over time, parsing the results of its searches for 'logical' future query terms with which to replace those already used.


It does so not by means of concealment or encryption (i.e. covering one's tracks), but instead, paradoxically, by the opposite strategy: noise and obfuscation. With TrackMeNot, actual web searches, lost in a cloud of false leads, are essentially hidden in plain view. User-installed TrackMeNot works with the Firefox Browser and popular search engines (AOL, Yahoo!, Google, and MSN) and requires no 3rd-party servers or services.

Ghostery I like because it simply tells you whats tracking you for instance Google Analytics is tracking everyone on this site (apart from me:D). I use TACO and Better Privacy as well. Depends how paranoid you are:D.

isofa

asininity wrote: »

I believe NoScript will block the things that Ghostery blocks but I have it there anyway. I never used to use NoScript as it takes a while to configure because some sites dont work for obvious reasons, which I found annoying having to tell NoScript everytime I went to a new site.

I used to swear by TMN as I liked the way it worked:

Ghostery I like because it simply tells you whats tracking you for instance Google Analytics is tracking everyone on this site (apart from me:D). I use TACO and Better Privacy as well. Depends how paranoid you are:D.

Thanks, interesting stuff!

I've kept Google Analytics blocked in NoScript I've taught NoScript since it was released from scratch and I since the site lists with my other PCs and Macs, tedious in the early days, now I rarely have to add a site unless it's very new.

suzanne

OK So its Firefox as the winner then?????