A
Anteaus
Guest
Microsoft inserts Firefox add-on with new updates (was: Surpri
99% of users have no need for Java, and it does pose a measurable security
problem. That said, Java has a legitimate purpose, it's just that its days of
being used by websites are largely over. If you use OpenOffice you may need
Java, but even so you can disable the browser plugin in the settings, or by
editing the FF config file greprefs\all.js if you want to stop people
re-enabling it.
As opposed to toolbars which are an attempt to foist stuff onto the user,
and almost always for reasons which are not in the user's interest.
"98 Guy" wrote:
> glee wrote:
>
> > Although it would be nice if no updates were installed by any
> > company to any software but their own, it can't work out that
> > way.
>
> Yes, it can work that way. Microsoft wanted to do what-ever it could to
> insure that Firefox users might at least stumble upon Bing as a search
> option as they used their browser, thereby increasing there market share
> of the search market and increase their advertizing revenue.
>
> Give me one example of how any of Sun's wayward or inappropiate updates
> were designed to accomplish the same end.
>
> > It amazes me that people get up in arms over a browser add-on that
> > supports an installed toolbar from Microsoft,
>
> How can you say that, when Microsoft is now admitting that they made a
> mistake as to how the update applied itself?
>
> Of course we should be up-in-arms about these instances, because if we
> are not, Microsoft will become accustomed to doing them more often.
>
> ---------------
> Microsoft explains mystery Firefox extension, "fixes" update:
>
> http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/ne...-mystery-firefox-extension-fixes-update-1.ars
>
> "In other words, the update will no longer be distributed to toolbars
> that it shouldn't be added to."
> ---------------
>
> It's too late for those systems that have already performed the last WU
> session. This particular "update" does not show up in Control Panel =>
> Programs and Features => Installed Updates. Furthermore, the Uninstall
> button for the extension is greyed out in Firefox.
>
> Ya sure, you say that it could have been a simple configuration mistake
> for it to apply itself to Firefox when firefox has NO
> previously-installed msn or bing tool bar (who cares if the user's IE
> has such a tool bar - that doesn't mean the update should also install
> itself on Firefox if the user did not install an MS-based tool bar or
> add-on for Firefox).
>
> But when the update intentionally removes the mechanism to allow the
> user to delete or uninstall it, and when MS classifies the update as
> "important", then all together this points to intent to plant a Bing
> search option on the Firefox settings panel that Microsoft hopes for
> casual users to stumble upon it and turn it on. Their motive was purely
> financial. Microsoft's mindset surrounding this update came purely from
> their sales and marketing divisions. It was no mistake the way this was
> rolled out by Macro$haft.
> .
>
99% of users have no need for Java, and it does pose a measurable security
problem. That said, Java has a legitimate purpose, it's just that its days of
being used by websites are largely over. If you use OpenOffice you may need
Java, but even so you can disable the browser plugin in the settings, or by
editing the FF config file greprefs\all.js if you want to stop people
re-enabling it.
As opposed to toolbars which are an attempt to foist stuff onto the user,
and almost always for reasons which are not in the user's interest.
"98 Guy" wrote:
> glee wrote:
>
> > Although it would be nice if no updates were installed by any
> > company to any software but their own, it can't work out that
> > way.
>
> Yes, it can work that way. Microsoft wanted to do what-ever it could to
> insure that Firefox users might at least stumble upon Bing as a search
> option as they used their browser, thereby increasing there market share
> of the search market and increase their advertizing revenue.
>
> Give me one example of how any of Sun's wayward or inappropiate updates
> were designed to accomplish the same end.
>
> > It amazes me that people get up in arms over a browser add-on that
> > supports an installed toolbar from Microsoft,
>
> How can you say that, when Microsoft is now admitting that they made a
> mistake as to how the update applied itself?
>
> Of course we should be up-in-arms about these instances, because if we
> are not, Microsoft will become accustomed to doing them more often.
>
> ---------------
> Microsoft explains mystery Firefox extension, "fixes" update:
>
> http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/ne...-mystery-firefox-extension-fixes-update-1.ars
>
> "In other words, the update will no longer be distributed to toolbars
> that it shouldn't be added to."
> ---------------
>
> It's too late for those systems that have already performed the last WU
> session. This particular "update" does not show up in Control Panel =>
> Programs and Features => Installed Updates. Furthermore, the Uninstall
> button for the extension is greyed out in Firefox.
>
> Ya sure, you say that it could have been a simple configuration mistake
> for it to apply itself to Firefox when firefox has NO
> previously-installed msn or bing tool bar (who cares if the user's IE
> has such a tool bar - that doesn't mean the update should also install
> itself on Firefox if the user did not install an MS-based tool bar or
> add-on for Firefox).
>
> But when the update intentionally removes the mechanism to allow the
> user to delete or uninstall it, and when MS classifies the update as
> "important", then all together this points to intent to plant a Bing
> search option on the Firefox settings panel that Microsoft hopes for
> casual users to stumble upon it and turn it on. Their motive was purely
> financial. Microsoft's mindset surrounding this update came purely from
> their sales and marketing divisions. It was no mistake the way this was
> rolled out by Macro$haft.
> .
>
