Here's final proof why IE sucks

[DarkPhoenix]

Ok, I time to put your money where your mouth is. All I've heard so far is complaints with no proof of anything. I want examples of why Mozilla is better of IE. Something tangable would be nice, but specific examples will be fine.

It really serves no purpose in trying to convince you or show examples to you if you've tried Mozilla yourself and you haven't discovered why it is better yourself.

Display issues - I've already covered this. IE has already set the standards.

That is an ignorant attitude. Saying that IE has set the standard. Says who? Where can you find a validator (like the one on the W3C that can tell that your site is IE-compatible? You can't. Cause there ain't no standard. IE is try-and-fail. Ever tried making a site that uses CSS in IE? You have to add all sorts of weird "tricks" into your CSS to make IE skip some of what it wouldn't understand. Meh. Then I'd rather just give a **** about IE users, and tell them to get another browser -- A true standard has set rules and definitions that must be implemented. In IE it just seems like luck to get things to work properly.

If you want a browser that is compliant with CSS3, give me a good reason why it NEEDS to be.

Right, right. Why do we need CSS at all? Why did 2D games evolve into 3D you think? Because there's a thing called development; evolution. The CSS3 specification will allow people to make even neater-looking pages.. and even more accessible.. only in good browsers though, but yeah. Now people have to use a lot of tables and other weird HTML strategies to get pages to look cool, and by doing that, they make pages severely inaccessible. <sarcasm>But I guess that's no big deal. Who cares about the impaired ones, anyway, huh?</sarcasm> CSS was made to separate the content from the presentation, and is a really good idea.. a redesign only requires you to change the style-sheet.. not the entire HTML code (thus moving content around inside the structural part of the site). but I guess some people like living in the past, with CSS1. (Yeah, that's right. IE can't even support CSS2, which was ready in '98)

As for the rest, I don't care so much. I mostly use Mozilla because I want to be up to date. To be able to view nice sites. Sure, some horribly coded pages don't work. Your example was launch.com.. well, boo-hoo. There are more radio-providers out there. Personally, I use iTunes. And there's always another provider of whatever, if it doesn't work because of sucky HTML code (or server-side code, to cover it all).

[animosity079]

Oh, boy.. Hope I can keep track of everything I was going to say.

Web Browsers:

I agree completely that IE is a horrible browser, and that Mozilla/Firefox/Opera/Just About Anything Else/etc. is the better way to go. I've demoed firefox (I use 0.9) to numerous people, and not one of them has gone back to IE. I personally only use IE in development, because its the browser that is installed on all of the computers in the company I do web development for.

As far as all of those "enhanced" versions of IE that add tabbed browsing are concerned, it all still comes down to the same thing. You're just putting a bag on the side of IE. Its got a horrible base. What a bad idea, writing a piece of software that enhances another piece of software that hasn't been developed in 3 years. Its following the Microsoft way of doing things (building OSes off of the faults of their previous OSes.) Eventually, you are going to hit a brick wall.

I'm not here to claim that standards compliancy is better, or that using a browser which properly displays more pages is better. IE is just an insult. Microsoft gained their 95% market share, won the browser war, stepped back and said "screw you all. We are allocating our resources to win other wars." It was a scorched earth business model. While most of the world is suckling at Microsoft's corporate teat, the rest of the Internet world is maturing, but we have to yank the rest of you away from Microsoft's buxom to make any forward progress, and to allow the Internet community to grow together. How are we supposed to implement new standards? How are we supposed to create new websites that utilize new features?

The fact of the matter is, IE users have to deal with the fact that their browser isn't standards compliant. Everyone else has to deal with the fact that some developers dont have the time, or are too lazy to make their websites viewable in all browsers. 6 of one, half-dozen of the other. There are more things to base your choice on. As long as they have a 95% market share, Microsoft won't give us a better version.

And to whoever said that Mozilla's bookmarks suck, have you taken a look at Firefox's (0.9) bookmark system? Its beautiful.

Operating Systems:

Its been noted that this is off topic, but some things were said that I need to refute. One suggestion is that Windows is somehow inherently more easy to use than anything else out there, and thus, they supply a need to the general public. You are fooling yourselves if you think this is why most desktop PCs run a version of Windows. Fact of the matter is, if you want ease of use, an attractive GUI, and something that is quick to learn and seems more natural to use, then hands down, without a doubt, Mac OS is leaps and bounds ahead of Windows and Linux (which is a misnomer. Linux is just the OS. Criticizing the UI is criticizing KDE/Gnome/etc). An old person or a child would be able to understand a Mac before they would be able to understand Windows or Linux. As a matter of fact, the original Apples were designed to be educational. So that children could easily master the computer as quickly as an adult. If you think Linux can't run Win32 files, again, you are wrong. There is a wonderful program for linux called "wine" that allows Windows programs to run. Specifically, there is a branch of the wine tree called WineX by Transgaming, which supports DirectX 9. It can run Warcraft 3, Max Payne 2, etc. The first time I ever tried WineX I was running Quake 3 at higher frame rates than in Windows (even when it was viewed in a window instead of full-screen.) The idea that Windows is better for the average person is just rediculous. I've had people, who are just barely computer literate, come up to me and ask for Linux because they can't deal with all of the viruses/spyware/adware/etc that cripples Windows machines. I run Red Hat 9.0 on my machine, and I've NEVER had a virus/trojan/spyware/adware. Most people just want an easy to use machine to check email, surf the Internet, write up some documents, and chat on IM. EVERY popular operating system provides that now. I'm not saying that anyone here should use Windows/Linux/Mac. I'm just saying, come up with some better reasons.

The reason most people use IE, and the reason most people use Windows, and the reason most people have been lead to believe that an inconsistant, security flaw infested OS like WinXP is somehow the greatest thing to hit the desktop since 95, is because Microsoft is just REALLY REALLY good at business. The browser war hasn't ended. The OS war hasn't ended. They probably never will. Don't get suckered into the groupthink that propetuates the Microsoft monopoly. Be critical of what you use. Try out Firefox. Try out OpenOffice.org. Try out Linux. Try out Macintosh. Try out The Gimp. And be FAIR. You didn't learn how to get the most out of your Windows machine running IE in just one or two days. Give another piece of software the benefit of the doubt, and you may just like what you see.

And again.. before anyone flames me. I'M NOT SAYING WHAT YOU SHOULD USE. I'm simply saying, try looking at what you use a little more critically. Then, you'll either decide that it sucks, or you'll have a better argument for why you really use it.

[DarkPhoenix]

Wow.. just wow. If that was a poem, I'd say it was beautiful.

I really can't beat that one when it comes to arguments. I couldn't even have come up with so good arguments.

I've told myself that "One day, I'm gonna drop the whole Microsoft crap and switch to Linux" I'm a couple of steps on the way, since I don't use MS' browser, and MS' Media Player... but I'm gonna take the whole step one day. As a matter of fact, I have a 10 GiB unformatted HD partition prepared for Linux, that I haven't had the time to set up yet. I'll get into that some time soon.

The browser war hasn't ended. The OS war hasn't ended. They probably never will.

Amen. The ideal computer world would be a place where everything was compatible, where every OS supported whatever the other OSes supported (intercompability) so one could choose, yet still be able to do all. Of course this'll never be, but it'd be fun. The same goes for browsers.. and as long as MS sets their own standards, this won't work either. It's amusing that MS are the only ones doing this, eh? Netscape did it very early on, but afaik, they try being standard like all others now. Unlike OSes, browsers could all work together in harmony.. just if... *sigh*

[animosity079]

Heh.. thanks.

Actually, now that I look at it, your little uptime thing at the bottom makes me laugh. Your record is 4 days? I've got linux computers running in my house with an uptime of months.

Just to give back a little to all you IE people. I will tell you the ONE thing that I hear as a complaint about Firefox - When you first open the browser, it takes a little longer to open than IE. Big deal. You can actually modify Firefox so that a little remains in memory, so it'll load as quickly as IE. I don't mean page load time. I mean program load time.

[DarkPhoenix]

Actually, now that I look at it, your little uptime thing at the bottom makes me laugh.  Your record is 4 days?  I've got linux computers running in my house with an uptime of months.

Oh..

Well, I'm not really there for an uptime record.. I rarely leave my PC on for more than a couple of days before restarting it or shutting it off, unless I'm downloading something big.

As for Linux, I've got news for you.. I'm downloading a distro right now. It's called MEPIS, a friend of mine told me to get it. He said RedHat was nothing but configuration upon configuration.. which, although I like configuring, is not really something I want at the moment. I'll keep my Windows until I don't feel like I need it anymore, but yeah.. You were the last drop to make me try Linux. Now, feel honoured, or else..

[animosity079]

In my experience, Mandrake is the best beginner's distro, unless you want to plunk down money for lycoris, lindows, or xandros.

But, I've never tried MEPIS.

[SiMoNsAyS]

@DarkPhoenix when i said "best" it doesn't mean what you think it was an ironic expression like "the one that sucks". another time i think the same but repeat the same points as you don't give us more trust.

applied to every IE user: i think u all guys started web browsing with IE because it was the first thing that u found and the main reason why IE sucks it's that u need tools like google bar or MyIE2 to use the same funcionalities that firefox has. i think none have note the posibilities to customize the appearance of firefox (i know that IE-lovers will say that this is not important but i like to see my browser like i want and no like "it" wants). when IE had the same possibilities as firefox (popup blocking, skins, appearance posibilities, multitabs, extensions, format support...) i will move to IE. things like non standart support it doesn't matter for me if are supplied with the half things i can implement with extensions and with no "annoyer-memory-resident-program".

[DarkPhoenix]

@DarkPhoenix when i said "best" it doesn't mean what you think it was an ironic expression like "the one that sucks". another time i think the same but repeat the same points as you don't give us more trust.

Now who's interpreting who wrong here? I said that what you meant by "best" was "most compatible", like you said, "most used", and not actually best. Since it's not. Once again. And if you actually think it is best, then I'm confused, since you go on telling people to see reviews, and taking note of IE always being last. And, uh... I think this sentence are missing a few verbs or something. I don't really understand it completely:

another time i think the same but repeat the same points as you don't give us more trust.

What does this mean? I'm not native in English, and I honestly have no idea what's missing in this sentence, but I sorta know something is.

[neosapience]

DarkPhoenix -

It really serves no purpose in trying to convince you or show examples to you if you've tried Mozilla yourself and you haven't discovered why it is better yourself.

In other words - "I can't produce any real reason not to use IE, I just don't like Microsoft."

That is an ignorant attitude. Saying that IE has set the standard. Says who? Where can you find a validator (like the one on the W3C that can tell that your site is IE-compatible? You can't. Cause there ain't no standard. IE is try-and-fail.

The W3C sets self proclaimed standards. They're no different than MS. Why should the web do as the W3C says? The internet isn't a place for regulation. Do you want the government taxing the internet? Do you want uncontrolable standards? If you want MS to make a better browser, Mozilla and the others need to give people a real reason to switch. Start shipping those browsers with operating systems and new computers. I'm all for competition. I'm all for getting MS to improve IE. If you spent half as much time trying to sell Mozilla as you do bashing IE, you'd find out just how hard it is to make an IDEA work.

Ever tried making a site that uses CSS in IE? You have to add all sorts of weird "tricks" into your CSS to make IE skip some of what it wouldn't understand. Meh. Then I'd rather just give a **** about IE users, and tell them to get another browser -- A true standard has set rules and definitions that must be implemented. In IE it just seems like luck to get things to work properly.

Actaully, I've programmed entire sites using CSS and I've had no problems. I can design a professional site without any fancy tricks or scripting. Maybe you need to upgrade your skillz? Personally, when I visit a website, I couldn't care less what it looks like. So long as it's well designed and the layout is good, I'll like it. Eye-candy only eats up bandwidth and page space. Websites are NOT video games, so don't try to compare them.

As for the rest, I don't care so much. I mostly use Mozilla because I want to be up to date. To be able to view nice sites. Sure, some horribly coded pages don't work. Your example was launch.com.. well, boo-hoo. There are more radio-providers out there. Personally, I use iTunes. And there's always another provider of whatever, if it doesn't work because of sucky HTML code (or server-side code, to cover it all).

That's quite funny, because I have the oposite problem with Mozilla. You've missed the point here, people don't code for Mozilla or the W3C, they code for Internet Explorer. Just because YOU don't like it, doesn't make it wrong.

I really hate peoples lack of foresight. What would happen if another browser were to suddenly become dominant?

Let's talk about security for example -

If Mozilla suddenly became the dominant browser, how long would it remain secure? My guess is, not very long. It's not that other browsers are that much more secure, it's that nobody's looking for their flaws. Heck, if Firefox had been one of the first browsers, instead of IE, it wouldn't be nearly as secure as it is now. If any of the newer browsers are safer, it's because they avoided Microsofts failings. Who would you rather have fixing your browser flaws - A huge, multi-billion dollar company, or Mozilla? The fact of the matter is, MS has addressed almost EVERY single security issue that IE has had.

How about compatibility for example -

Poof, Mozilla is now the dominant browser. OMFG, every web developer now has to alter their websites to be compliant. Can you even imagine how much work is invloved in that? How much trouble that would cause? Change is great, but you can't just snap your finger and expect people to use your browser just because it's 'more compliant' with W3C standards. Real life is more important than ideas.

animosity079 -

I agree completely that IE is a horrible browser, and that Mozilla/Firefox/Opera/Just About Anything Else/etc. is the better way to go. I've demoed firefox (I use 0.9) to numerous people, and not one of them has gone back to IE. I personally only use IE in development, because its the browser that is installed on all of the computers in the company I do web development for.

As far as all of those "enhanced" versions of IE that add tabbed browsing are concerned, it all still comes down to the same thing. You're just putting a bag on the side of IE. Its got a horrible base. What a bad idea, writing a piece of software that enhances another piece of software that hasn't been developed in 3 years. Its following the Microsoft way of doing things (building OSes off of the faults of their previous OSes.) Eventually, you are going to hit a brick wall.

I'm still waiting for examples of why Mozilla/ect.. is better than IE. Anyone can talk smack, let's see some proof.

I'm not here to claim that standards compliancy is better, or that using a browser which properly displays more pages is better. IE is just an insult. Microsoft gained their 95% market share, won the browser war, stepped back and said "screw you all. We are allocating our resources to win other wars." It was a scorched earth business model. While most of the world is suckling at Microsoft's corporate teat, the rest of the Internet world is maturing, but we have to yank the rest of you away from Microsoft's buxom to make any forward progress, and to allow the Internet community to grow together. How are we supposed to implement new standards? How are we supposed to create new websites that utilize new features?

You aren't changing anything by stating the obvious. It's all about competition. If you want MS to make IE better, you have to compete with them. If you don't like them, don't support them. It's hard to do, but it's the only thing that's going to work.

And to whoever said that Mozilla's bookmarks suck, have you taken a look at Firefox's (0.9) bookmark system? Its beautiful

Actually, I have used FireFox's, and I hate it. Bookmarks are contained in a single, NON EASY to use file. I can't browse them in explorer, I can't use my programs to parse them like an INI file, I can't apply conext menu handlers to them, I can't do ANYTHING useful with FireFox's bookmarks.

The reason most people use IE, and the reason most people use Windows, and the reason most people have been lead to believe that an inconsistant, security flaw infested OS like WinXP is somehow the greatest thing to hit the desktop since 95, is because Microsoft is just REALLY REALLY good at business. The browser war hasn't ended. The OS war hasn't ended. They probably never will. Don't get suckered into the groupthink that propetuates the Microsoft monopoly. Be critical of what you use. Try out Firefox. Try out OpenOffice.org. Try out Linux. Try out Macintosh. Try out The Gimp. And be FAIR. You didn't learn how to get the most out of your Windows machine running IE in just one or two days. Give another piece of software the benefit of the doubt, and you may just like what you see.

I hate to tell you this, but Linux has many major security flaws, as well as OSX.

Personally, I use OpenOffice.org and The Gimp, mainly because they're free. MSoffice and Photoshop are for professionals, I don't run an office or create graphics for a living. I've tested (and continue to test) THOUSANDS of programs. I ran a free software site for years and I'm all for alternative programs. I've said it once and I'll say it again - If you find that a program works better for you, USE IT. Personally, I find IE and Windows to work better for me than anything else.

The problem with MS is that people need someone to hate. There's ALWAYS some company or some organization that doesn't do what we want. Even if IE was 99% as good as the other browsers, people would complain about that 1%, just because they like to complain.

I'm done arguing about this. If you don't agree with me, I really don't care. Unless you can provide me with some evidence to support your complaints, I'll pass you off as a whiner.

[DarkPhoenix]

I'm done arguing about this. If you don't agree with me, I really don't care. Unless you can provide me with some evidence to support your complaints, I'll pass you off as a whiner.

I was just about to say the same thing. Although I started this topic, I'm getting dead tired of it, it's becoming redundant; people don't come up with new arguments.. so.. I'm out.

Oh, and talking about whining -- I don't see you do any better. Your so called proof pro-IE are just as bad as mine against it. If you call my reasoning bad, then yours is at least equally so. But anyway, I'm through with this. I won't bother telling you why, once again.. so.. this is my last sentence here.

[neosapience]

Oh, and talking about whining -- I don't see you do any better. Your so called proof pro-IE are just as bad as mine against it. If you call my reasoning bad, then yours is at least equally so. But anyway, I'm through with this. I won't bother telling you why, once again.. so.. this is my last sentence here.

This just proves that you can't read.

I never said IE was BETTER than any other browser. I've said SEVERAL times - if it works for you, use it! IE works better for me than Mozilla/whatever, period.

How the heck can I offer evidence against your whining? You're whining about IE sucking because it doesn't support CSS2+? OMFG, let me alert the press, IE doesn't make your pages look as pretty as FireFox.

Is that it? Is there something else? All I want is some example of why you don't like it. I've offered many examples of why IE works for me and why other browsers don't. Show me a website, ANYTHING that makes you look like more than a whiner.

[ButlerKevinD]

Can't we all just get along???? For the love of God, can't we all just get along?!?!?!?!

[SiMoNsAyS]

@DarkPhoenix it's a language problem, my sentences are not clear or you can't understand me.

what i want to say it's clear IE sucks and microsoft it's expending more time on fixing that buggy thing of browser than improving it features. i think we all miss the point and another time i will not give any more because we touch all of them here (+/-), i'll simply recommend u all to not use IE, go out and check alternatives!! that's what i did and after tests and reviews i have selected mozilla firefox (0.9 version and beats IE in most things) as the best (without quotes ) browser. i will not critize IE because of it's microsoft origin (although i don't like microsoft to much), i'll critize it because i need to go for a windows update every 15 days and if i want to use IE i need to update it, download google toolbar, download multitab support, download a lot of tools that i don't want to and because browsing the web takes me 100 f***** mb of system resources. that's the last time i post in this thread (i think) so hope this long-posts-thread help anyone. see u all in the net and god bless us

[Denney]

On the topic of security bugs and fixes, I'm sure, no, positive, that all the other browsers would have similar bugs.

The reason you have to update IE so much is because IE is hard pressed by all the crackers to find as many exploits as possible. Why? Because IE is the web browser that Joe Blo uses. If everyone started using FireFox, I'm sure crackers could find just as many exploits.

Edit: The only reason I keep posting here is because I LOVE debates. No insults meant at anyone btw.

[animosity079]

DarkPhoenix -

The W3C sets self proclaimed standards. They're no different than MS. Why should the web do as the W3C says? The internet isn't a place for regulation. Do you want the government taxing the internet? Do you want uncontrolable standards?

Okay.. Don't make this into something its not. In logical argumentation, we would call what you just stated a "Straw Man." Arguing that standards in web development are necessary cannot be refuted by saying that government taxation on the Internet is wrong. We aren't arguing that Internet taxation is wrong.

If you want MS to make a better browser, Mozilla and the others need to give people a real reason to switch. Start shipping those browsers with operating systems and new computers. I'm all for competition. I'm all for getting MS to improve IE. If you spent half as much time trying to sell Mozilla as you do bashing IE, you'd find out just how hard it is to make an IDEA work.

To start, the browsers ARE shipped with operating systems and new computers. They are shipped with most Linux distros, and you can get a brand-spanking new Linux machine from Wal-Mart's website. But do you think Microsoft would let some business man buy copies of vanilla Windows, package in OpenOffice.org, and Firefox, and turn around and sell them for a profit? Hell, no. That was the whole point of the monopoly litigation. Do you think Dell is going to risk losing the rate they get from Microsoft on Windows licenses, just because they think Firefox is better? Hell, no.

Actaully, I've programmed entire sites using CSS and I've had no problems. I can design a professional site without any fancy tricks or scripting. Maybe you need to upgrade your skillz? Personally, when I visit a website, I couldn't care less what it looks like. So long as it's well designed and the layout is good, I'll like it. Eye-candy only eats up bandwidth and page space. Websites are NOT video games, so don't try to compare them.

Well, I'm glad you can dish out CSS like its no big deal. Many developers would consider creating a site that uses all CSS and no tables to be a pretty difficult task. But on the rest of your point, I agree ENTIRELY. You and I don't care about bells and whistles. As a matter of fact, I'm starting up a for-profit website as we speak, and one way that I'm striving to be competitive is to reduce overhead, and holding readers attention by providing a simple, streamlined page. But, you and I like it one way, My teenage sisters value something completely different in a web page.

people don't code for Mozilla or the W3C, they code for Internet Explorer. Just because YOU don't like it, doesn't make it wrong.

Ahh, yes. You are correct, but don't imply that your point is any more valid, simply because a majority of people other than him disagree.

If Mozilla suddenly became the dominant browser, how long would it remain secure? My guess is, not very long. It's not that other browsers are that much more secure, it's that nobody's looking for their flaws. Heck, if Firefox had been one of the first browsers, instead of IE, it wouldn't be nearly as secure as it is now.

Woah.. that is a completely baseless argument. Its an "Appeal to Consequences." You are saying that "Hey.. there are an abundance of security flaws in IE, but not as many high-profile flaws in Mozilla. It must be because IE is the market leader." Not so. You can't argue a point you can't POSSIBLY support. The fact is, Microsoft IS the market leader, and IE DOES have security problems. You can't transfer any conclusions over to Mozilla/Opera/etc. And to further refute your argument, people ARE looking for their flaws. Those people are all over the open source development community. Go to http://bugzilla.mozilla.org and click on the "view bugs already reported today." When I checked, 66 had been reported today. How can you possibly argue that nobody is looking for flaws?

If any of the newer browsers are safer, it's because they avoided Microsofts failings. Who would you rather have fixing your browser flaws - A huge, multi-billion dollar company, or Mozilla? The fact of the matter is, MS has addressed almost EVERY single security issue that IE has had.

Okay, yet another fallacy here. This is an appeal to authority. Simply because Microsoft is a multi-billion dollar corporation says NOTHING about their prudence in tracking down bugs and security flaws. Who would I rather have? Personally, I would rather have someone who cared, tracking down bugs. I'm not saying Microsoft doesn't care. I'm just saying that that is my preference. Besides, you are applying the entire wealth of Microsoft to the IE browser. Just because they have hundreds of developers, and billions of dollars does not mean that all of those resources are allocated towards making IE a better browser. And addressing "EVERY singe securtiy issue" doesn't mean a thing. That just means that known bugs are fixed. Furthermore, that is implying that other browsers just don't care about security issues in their browsers. That isn't the case either.

Poof, Mozilla is now the dominant browser. OMFG, every web developer now has to alter their websites to be compliant. Can you even imagine how much work is invloved in that? How much trouble that would cause? Change is great, but you can't just snap your finger and expect people to use your browser just because it's 'more compliant' with W3C standards. Real life is more important than ideas.

I'm not heartless. I'll tell you when I agree with something you say, and this is one of those cases. Better compliancy does not equate to a better browser for the masses. And, if your development methodology is to develop for the market share, then yes.. that is a massive task.

I'm still waiting for examples of why Mozilla/ect.. is better than IE. Anyone can talk smack, let's see some proof.

I didn't say you were wrong for using IE. And examples have been given. If you want examples of how Mozilla is better than native IE, just look at the tabbed browsing, and built in pop-up blocking and Google bar. Sure, there are probably things you can argue that set IE ahead of Mozilla, but it you wanted proof... well.. there it is. And don't cite the enhancements as a source. We are talking about the native browsers here.

You aren't changing anything by stating the obvious. It's all about competition. If you want MS to make IE better, you have to compete with them. If you don't like them, don't support them. It's hard to do, but it's the only thing that's going to work.

As I said before, Microsoft won't allow competition within the Windows arena.

Actually, I have used FireFox's, and I hate it. Bookmarks are contained in a single, NON EASY to use file. I can't browse them in explorer, I can't use my programs to parse them like an INI file, I can't apply conext menu handlers to them, I can't do ANYTHING useful with FireFox's bookmarks.

Okay, so I inserted a little editorial comment. You are right. You like what you like, I like what I like. Point taken.

I hate to tell you this, but Linux has many major security flaws, as well as OSX.

This is true, but your statement doesn't lend any credibility to your argument. The facts are 1.) There are tens of thousands, if not more, viruses/trojans/etc for Windows. 2.) According to the CEO of a top Linux antivirus company, there are less than 100 known viruses for Linux. So, inarguably there are more security issues with Windows. You can't claim that its because Microsoft is more popular. That point isn't supportable. Maybe thats the case, but maybe Linux is just more secure. Or, maybe people don't want to write viruses for Linux. Or maybe its weather patterns.. who knows?

Personally, I use OpenOffice.org and The Gimp, mainly because they're free. MSoffice and Photoshop are for professionals, I don't run an office or create graphics for a living. I've tested (and continue to test) THOUSANDS of programs. I ran a free software site for years and I'm all for alternative programs. I've said it once and I'll say it again - If you find that a program works better for you, USE IT. Personally, I find IE and Windows to work better for me than anything else.

Bravo. I applaud that. I agree that software choices are wholly personal.

The problem with MS is that people need someone to hate. There's ALWAYS some company or some organization that doesn't do what we want. Even if IE was 99% as good as the other browsers, people would complain about that 1%, just because they like to complain.

True, but don't imply that its Microsoft's clout that is making them the scapegoat. It could be anything.

I'm done arguing about this. If you don't agree with me, I really don't care. Unless you can provide me with some evidence to support your complaints, I'll pass you off as a whiner.

AAAAHHH!!! Now, pay attention!! This is where I really have a problem. This is exactly why we need to argue. Its the best thing we can possibly do. The Internet has a memory. Maybe not today or tomorrow, but someday some Microsoft exec or some Mozilla programmer may read this post, and get some good ideas on how to advance the industry. We need to saturate the Internet with discussions like this to let the people who develop our software know that we aren't content. They will realize what we are complaining about, and we'll find new things to complain about. Its natural, and its necessary.