Firefox takes the lead (on isoHunt)

Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2007 8:27 pm

Quite cute there, but I was referring to the fact that I've never had Firefox rammed down my throat with things like these Firefox Myths.

-update-
After emailing Andrew K. and asking about why he included the fact that David Hammond has never dated and such, he blatantly disregarded my question simply because I use Linux even though it has no bearing on my question:

Mochtroid-X wrote:

In accordance with your emailing rules:

I ran into this page a while ago but recently someone at a forum I visit mentioned it and posted content from it (they just said to type in "Firefox Myths" into Google and click the first link), so I visited it once again.

I certainly hope you won't give me any flak because I use Linux and Firefox since they have no bearing on this, I simply wanted to ask a question; what does the fact that David Hammond/Nanobot/Nanobe has never dated and that MrFlibble/Basil Brush/FreewheelinFrank smokes marijuana have to do with being a fanboy, a spammer, or anything relating to your web page?

Andrew K. wrote:

I am in no way surprised Linux users still cannot resist sending me emails.

Seems that he truly is an asshole since I, a Linux user, am not worthy enough to ask the great Andrew K. a simple question.

Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2007 10:29 pm

I could go through that post and pick apart everything you said with a magnifying glass, but the fact is, I don't have to. And I shouldn't. Nothing I've talked about has been proven even slightly off.

But I guess as a bonus to the facts I was trying to present we get a heaping side order of philosophical blather... mmMMmm. I like mine fried. Very Happy

Besides, I think enough Opera has been injected into this thread for me to say "mission accomplished". If you bring more attention to it (like your doing) thats just icing on the cake.

Oh well, enough of this. We aren't being constructive anymore. I hope you have fun with your credibility attacks, name calling and charachter assasinations.

And I do truly hope that my initial post and one response to your "troll talk" (baiting) wasn't enough to derail this thread. Surely isohunt isn't that fragile....surely you aren't. Embarassed

P.S.
On Debian and Fedora (my two other installs) Firefox is awesome! Konqueror is great too! More responsive, less resources taken. Its just all around great. Opera, although, good, just doesn't quite "have it" on linux. Exclamation

Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 4:39 pm

Mochtroid-X wrote:

To be honest I've never run into any Firefox fanboys, only Opera fanboys, and I get real sick of them trolling their elitism around every time they see or hear the name "Firefox" anywhere. I don't care about Firefox, I only care about the philosophy of open source. Hell, I prefer Konqueror over Firefox any day, I just find KDE too unwieldy for me to use on a casual basis.

For the record, I don't consider using Opera as an elitist. I think of us more of a rare breed, rather than anything royal. I also started using Opera before Firefox 1.0 was released (that's right! I used Opera browsers with 'banner ads') I do suffer Opera not being able to navigate web sites that are tailored to IE, but all in all. The browser is still cute to use for me comparing with Firefox. Though, I haven't checked out Firefox 3.0.

As for open source movement, I am all for it. Have yet to setup a Linux box. For some reason, I just can't bring myself to use Firefox. It might have something to do how badly later versions of Netscape browsers turned out....

XR

p.s. It is just me, or Opera myths page is shortest of all the pages? Perhaps there are fewest flaws with Opera browsers? Razz

Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 7:42 pm

I would love to disable Ad-block for this site, but the second I tried it, I got several extremely annoying animated ads.

I don't mind low-key (I don't block Google text ads at all), but I will not accept any animated ads or ones that disrupt the normal flow of the page (including garish colors). A perfect example of that was the flashing red any yellow gif that showed up when I tried turning off Ad-block. It clashed horribly with your nice blue-gray color scheme.

I see ad-block as an essential tool for web surfing, to the point that a large part of the internet would be unvisitable without it. Or, to put it more bluntly, if I was unable to block the garish and/or flashing ads on this site, I would not be here.

Please let me know when it is safe to lower the deflector shields.

Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2007 8:31 am

Wow, this really turned into a brutal browser war...

And this is why the statistical data spewed out by Google Analytics of the visitors to the Isohunt domain are skewed. The community of geekdom is much more evenly split than the rest of the global community that computes.

Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:00 am

DigitalSciGuy wrote:

Wow, this really turned into a brutal browser war...

Kill him!

Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 1:22 am

Hey guys

I really appreciate that you asked us to disable adblock for isohunt. I'm happy to disable adblock for sites that I support but sometimes I forget to do so. Confused

There are just too many sites out there with ads with sounds, or even ads that distribute malware and viruses using vulnerabilities!

WAKE UP INTERNET EXPLODER USERS, you can be compromised by ads on any site. Get firefox, but remember to unblock isohunt when you install adblock plus Cool

Cheers!

Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 11:47 pm

IH wrote:

...We make best efforts in not showing intrusive or abusive ads, I hope you'd return similar courtesy. ....

When I read this, the banner ad right above this post said "Congratulations! You are the 999,999,999th Visitor, CONGRATULATIONS YOU WON!" "Click 2 Claim".

On top of that said banner was jumping around on the page like crazy. I can't really think of a worse ad to show, apart maybe from outright spyware... do you have no control over these?

I don't mind ads that behave. Still pictures that advertise something - that's fair and honest, and I won't block them. But I don't like ads that move, and I certainly don't like outright scams like the above...

Sorry my very fist post is critical ... but I wanted you to know that I agree in principle that ads are fair and should not be blocked. And I also wanted you to know that I do very much consider above ad intrusive.

Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2007 8:25 pm

I enjoy your site. You said you "were not showing intrusive or abusive ads". I turned off adblock and looked . I turned it back on! I will check from time to time and when your ads are not intrusive or abusive ads, or for porn I will leave it off for your site. The T-shirt ad is ok.

Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2007 9:28 pm

I think the last few posts and comments in general that I've seen elsewhere perfectly illustrate why people have animosity toward ads. For a long while in the file sharring community (warez, who am I kidding), it seems the worst of the worst ads have been unloaded on us. We are the guinea pigs of the internet. Spyware, dialers, rootkits, hardcore sex shots, etc etc). You name it, we've gotten it.

The mentality seems that since were doing what were doing (lets be honest, stealing) that its a free for all and anything goes. This lack of respect and even, in my opion, abuse is what made a large portion of the public and software makers finally stand up and fight back.

And I'm in no way suggesting that isohunt is responsible for or the cause of these events, I'm just describing the landscape and what I feel has made things the way they are.

I actualy applaud isohunt for being one of the least intrusive places on the net for torrents. If you guys want an example of how bad it can be then go check out torrentspy. Yet, people still complain about the ads here! Rolling Eyes

This should let everyone know, who cares, that its a lost cause for a lot of people. Those that actively block the ads aren't going to change for this site or any other site. Its a mindset. The scary thing (for you) is that it might be hard coded. If you touch a hot pan once, chances are you aren't going to do it again. Its subconcious almost. You won't even think about it.

I dunno though, I for one don't find the ads here intrusive at all and don't block any ads anyway from anysite. But then again maybe I'm just jaded. Wink

Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2007 11:56 pm

Razor512 wrote:

I have a question for IH

do you get ad$ for each page load or do you only get it when we click on the ads

usually since I donate I try my best to disable adblock and refresh the page a few times and click on the ads)

my friends also do this

while I will usually keep it disabled when on this site (as all i need to do is click on the adblock icon with my mouse wheel to turn it off or on)

i keep it off while on this site until i hear a ad that has sounds then i will turn it back on

isohunt should start a ad system like on cash lagoon where users can do surveys and the site gets paid and users get a small amount of the money. (but with isohunt, you can make it so you get 100% of the money.

it will be a good way to donate for users like me who don't have a paypal

I can easily do a few surveys, and from using cash lagoon I found that many surveys will pay me $1 while the sites gained like $5

if isohunt was to do it but keep 100%, isohunt would get $6 for each survey we do

It is much easier for users to do surveys like this as most of us have no other way to donate

The ads are a mix of pay per click and per view. The text ads are by click (the Sponsored links targetted to your search queries, the best type and I'd use it anywhere targetted ads are available). Product type (auction, shopping) ads are by click. Otherwise they are mostly by view.

For ads "intrusiveness", true that's a matter of opinion. Ads are geotargetted to run differently from multiple ad networks we employ, so no I can't control quality of every single ad running worldwide on isoHunt. It's the really bad ones that I complain to the networks for removal. And I always look out for alternative ad networks/campaigns that are less intrusive.

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 2:54 pm

Great news about Firefox, even if the sample population is biased towards more computer literate folks.

Regarding Adbltock, I would love to turn it off in support of Isohunt, but I view this site at work and many of the ads are definitely NSFW! For now, I will continue blocking ads although I do occasionally throw a donation Isohunt's way.

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 3:29 pm

I just realized if I become a "supporter" rather than just sending random donations, I have the option of turning off banner ads. Win-Win!

[quote="Liriel"]Great news about Firefox, even if the sample population is biased towards more computer literate folks.

Regarding Adbltock, I would love to turn it off in support of Isohunt, but I view this site at work and many of the ads are definitely NSFW! For now, I will continue blocking ads although I do occasionally throw a donation Isohunt's way.[/quote]

Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2007 1:23 am

I had to sign up just for this. This post needs some serious reflection, rather than mindless fanboyism.

Firstly, why are we all comparing old out-dated software? You claim your browsers are superior due to the following:

Tabbed browsing
Remembered tabs (I'll call it this)
Spell Check
Add-Ons
Anti spam
Anti malware
Anti phishing
Skins
... more I'm sure.

Now before I begin, I have to comment to psyanide. How would IE cause your system harm? It comes preloaded on every windows machine, and WORKS. I suppose maybe one day, static code started THINKING and attacked your computer? Hot.

Anyway, ALL of the above features are available in IE7. Nearly ALL OF THEM right from first install. One of the best add-ons for IE7 has to be IE7Pro.

Additionally, with the advancements made to Windows Vista, IE7 is further secure. The browser runs in Protected Mode, making it IMPOSSIBLE for software to cause havok.

Mike Friedman wrote:

Internet-facing applications such as browsers are inherently at a higher security risk than other applications because they can download untrustworthy content from unknown sources. IE7’s Protected Mode leverage's Windows Vista’s UAC, MIC and UIPI features to boost browser security. In IE7’s Protected Mode—which is the default in other than the Trusted security zone—the IE process runs with Low rights, even if the logged-in user is an administrator. Since add-ins to IE such as ActiveX controls and toolbars run within the IE process, those add-ins run Low as well. The idea behind Protected Mode IE is that even if an attacker somehow defeated every defense mechanism and gained control of the IE process and got it to run some arbitrary code, that code would be severely limited in what it could do. Almost all of the file system and registry would be off-limits to it for writing, reducing the ability of an exploit to modify the system or harm user files. The code wouldn't have enough privileges to install software, put files in the user's Startup folder, hijack browser settings, or other nastiness.

Tis a shame no other browser can vouch for this bonus.

It makes me sad to see blind negativity towards someone or someTHING simply because of where it came from. Isnt that kinda similar to racism? Shake your heads for simply shaming a product based on nothing.

Microsoft does make good software, I bet most of you are using their software now.

I was not paid to write this, nor am I a Microsoft employee!

Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2007 2:34 am

SpeeDemon37 wrote:

Additionally, with the advancements made to Windows Vista, IE7 is further secure. The browser runs in Protected Mode, making it IMPOSSIBLE for software to cause havok.

I almost fell off my chair

SpeeDemon37 wrote:

Microsoft does make good software, I bet most of you are using their software now.

no, and no(well not me anyway). Wink

[EDIT]

http://www.ie7pro.com/

Hey look, microsoft's IE7 can do what firefox could over a year ago, super. As usual the only good things they "create" are stolen, and converted to there secret code, complete crap.