+ Post New Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 23
General Chat Thread, More marketing BS from M$ in General; Your Browser Matters Billy boy is trying to spread more FUD by rating your web browser's "security" rating. My results ...
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    138
    Thank Post
    0
    Thanked 19 Times in 10 Posts
    Rep Power
    37

    More marketing BS from M$

    Your Browser Matters

    Billy boy is trying to spread more FUD by rating your web browser's "security" rating.

    My results are (all tested on windows)
    Opera - We can't give you a score for your browser
    SeaMonkey 2.0.13 - We can't give you a score for your browser
    Konqueror 4.7.0 - We can't give you a score for your browser (are you starting to detect a theme?)
    Safari 5.0.4 - We can't give you a score for your browser
    Lynx - We can't give you a score for your browser
    Firefox 7.0 - 2/4
    Chrome - 2.5/4
    IE7 - 1/4
    IE8 - 3/4

    Apparently, if you test it on IE9 you get a perfect 4/4, but I haven't bothered to download IE9 yet. However, Opera pretending to be IE - 4/4 - Result! My browser passes the Microsoft test - so I'm safe after all.

  2. #2

    Hightower's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Cloud 9
    Posts
    4,920
    Thank Post
    494
    Thanked 690 Times in 444 Posts
    Rep Power
    240
    Would like to know what's 'BS' about it? Microsoft has defined some standards that it feels browsers should meet in terms of security, and then has tested a few browsers to see how they compare. I'm sorry, but if I have a product worth sell you can bet your bottom dollar I'll be comparing it to competitors to show how mine stands out.

    Standard marketing practice if you ask me. Can't see any BS in there. But maybe that's your biased opinion of M$, being a 'unixman' and all.

  3. Thanks to Hightower from:

    bossman (12th October 2011)

  4. #3

    webman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    North East England
    Posts
    8,374
    Thank Post
    625
    Thanked 951 Times in 653 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2
    Rep Power
    318
    Quote Originally Posted by Hightower View Post
    Standard marketing practice if you ask me. Can't see any BS in there. But maybe that's your biased opinion of M$, being a 'unixman' and all.
    The BS is that if you tell your "insecure" browser (Opera) to pretend it's IE9, then it miraculously passes the test.

    So it's not actually testing the security of the browser. It's looking at the User Agent string and telling you that non-IE9 browsers are less secure than IE9.

    Additionally, I reckon there are other numerous security features that Opera, Firefox and Chrome have that IE don't, which MS aren't bothering to include.
    Last edited by webman; 12th October 2011 at 09:33 AM.

  5. Thanks to webman from:

    bossman (12th October 2011)

  6. #4
    tommej's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Lincolnshire
    Posts
    637
    Thank Post
    35
    Thanked 121 Times in 91 Posts
    Rep Power
    75
    The problem is they have created these standards which then cannot be tested against other current browsers and are then somehow suggesting their browser is superior.

  7. #5

    SYNACK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    10,692
    Thank Post
    824
    Thanked 2,570 Times in 2,187 Posts
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    731
    Whatever the rest of your post says is kind of offset by your claims about 'Billy boy' or more politely Bill Gates who has not been in control of the company for ages. If you can't even get your insults right it throws up questions regarding the rest of your statments. At least insult Balmer with the standard vitriole about throwing chairs, keep your insults up with the times otherwise you'll have to give up your trolling badge.

  8. 4 Thanks to SYNACK:

    bossman (12th October 2011), CAM (13th October 2011), GrumbleDook (12th October 2011), Roberto (12th October 2011)

  9. #6
    cromertech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Cromer by the coast
    Posts
    731
    Thank Post
    177
    Thanked 109 Times in 97 Posts
    Rep Power
    53
    That seems to be a good comparison site to me. If you look at the detailed breakdown, IE does not score a perfect 4/4, there are some crosses in there. What is convenient however is the way they've grouped the items to get the 4/4. This is marketing but not BS marketing.

  10. #7

    Hightower's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Cloud 9
    Posts
    4,920
    Thank Post
    494
    Thanked 690 Times in 444 Posts
    Rep Power
    240
    Quote Originally Posted by webman View Post
    The BS is that if you tell your "insecure" browser (Opera) to pretend it's IE9, then it miraculously passes the test.

    So it's not actually testing the security of the browser. It's looking at the User Agent string and telling you that non-IE9 browsers are less secure than IE9.

    Additionally, I reckon there are other numerous security features that Opera, Firefox and Chrome have that IE don't, which MS aren't bothering to include.
    So just because the site doesn't actually test the browser (would you be happy if it did?!) it's BS? Perhaps M$ hasn't included features held by other browsers. Perhaps M$ doesn't class those features as important. But I fail to see the BS here - it's just good marketing.

  11. #8


    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    8,202
    Thank Post
    442
    Thanked 1,032 Times in 812 Posts
    Rep Power
    338
    Quote Originally Posted by Hightower View Post
    So just because the site doesn't actually test the browser (would you be happy if it did?!) it's BS? Perhaps M$ hasn't included features held by other browsers. Perhaps M$ doesn't class those features as important. But I fail to see the BS here - it's just good marketing.
    If it doesn't actually test the browser it is proof that it is just a marketing tool and that the site doesn't test the browsers at all.
    Besides -the score is largely irrelevant anyway:
    Of note in the Windows Team post is that the latest Microsoft Security Intelligence Report discovered that 0-day exploits account for a mere tenth of a percent of all intrusions. Holes in outdated software and social engineering account for the majority of successful attacks.
    Microsoft Says IE9 Blocks More Malware Than Chrome - Slashdot

  12. #9

    Hightower's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Cloud 9
    Posts
    4,920
    Thank Post
    494
    Thanked 690 Times in 444 Posts
    Rep Power
    240
    Quote Originally Posted by CyberNerd View Post
    If it doesn't actually test the browser it is proof that it is just a marketing tool and that the site doesn't test the browsers at all.
    This might not test the browser, but I'd be pretty miffed if M$ tested it. What they have done though is tested these browsers themselves and then are linking the results to what your browser claims to be. I'm not saying it's not a marketing tool. I'm saying it's marketing, and good marketing at that.

  13. #10


    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    In the server room, with the lead pipe.
    Posts
    4,534
    Thank Post
    271
    Thanked 752 Times in 590 Posts
    Rep Power
    218
    Even were it a proper test that accurately assesses browsers it fails the impartiality test - they have a vested interest in a certain browser succeeding.

  14. #11


    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    8,202
    Thank Post
    442
    Thanked 1,032 Times in 812 Posts
    Rep Power
    338
    Quote Originally Posted by Hightower View Post
    This might not test the browser, but I'd be pretty miffed if M$ tested it. What they have done though is tested these browsers themselves and then are linking the results to what your browser claims to be. I'm not saying it's not a marketing tool. I'm saying it's marketing, and good marketing at that.
    They don't even provide evidence that they tested the browser at all?!!? Perhaps I just have a low BS threshold, if I came up with my own site and claimed the opposite then there would be plenty of people here claiming it was BS. I this case it is clearly BS because Microsoft themselves say that 1/10th of a percent of intrusions are actually browser holes, so the difference between a hypothetical 'score' of 2 or 4 is meaningless.

  15. #12

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    17,096
    Thank Post
    511
    Thanked 2,310 Times in 1,786 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    803
    Quote Originally Posted by Hightower View Post
    So just because the site doesn't actually test the browser (would you be happy if it did?!) it's BS? Perhaps M$ hasn't included features held by other browsers. Perhaps M$ doesn't class those features as important. But I fail to see the BS here - it's just good marketing.
    The BS is this - Microsoft define their standard of what is 'secure'. That's the first red flag. Then they simply check User Agent strings to compare with a limited database, meaning that they don't actually check to be sure that their tests are relevant to the end user looked at their site, they just assume the browser is completely the same as their test model - an assumption you shouldn't make on the net.

    They also don't make their meteorology or provide proof of their claims.

    Finally, they have grouped things in such a way as to promote their own browser over the competition.

    All of those things make it BS. It is unreliable, unscientific and borders on false advertising.
    Last edited by localzuk; 12th October 2011 at 10:00 AM.

  16. #13

    MK-2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Nottingham
    Posts
    3,237
    Thank Post
    149
    Thanked 581 Times in 307 Posts
    Blog Entries
    8
    Rep Power
    199
    Quote Originally Posted by localzuk View Post
    It is unreliable, unscientific and borders on false advertising.
    Haven't Apple and other companies thrived for years doing this?

  17. #14

    SYNACK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    10,692
    Thank Post
    824
    Thanked 2,570 Times in 2,187 Posts
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    731
    Quote Originally Posted by MK-2 View Post
    Haven't Apple and other companies thrived for years doing this?
    I thought he was describing any and all current news items, is this not simply the status quo in the post moral, all profit, all the time world.

  18. #15

    Hightower's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Cloud 9
    Posts
    4,920
    Thank Post
    494
    Thanked 690 Times in 444 Posts
    Rep Power
    240
    Maybe this is just me being naive, but I class this as perfectly acceptable marketing practice.

SHARE:
+ Post New Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. More Quality Journalism From The Daily Mail...?
    By DaveP in forum General Chat
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 1st July 2011, 08:05 PM
  2. More crazy ideas from the Coalition
    By AngryITGuy in forum General Chat
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 29th May 2010, 12:05 AM
  3. Making the procurement forums more visible? (Split from another thread)
    By SimpleSi in forum Comments and Suggestions
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 13th May 2010, 07:56 AM
  4. More APC Savings From Computer Products Ltd!
    By CPLTD in forum Our Advertisers
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 10th November 2008, 01:12 PM
  5. More fantastic software from OPSOFTWARE
    By GrumbleDook in forum General EduGeek News/Announcements
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 3rd September 2007, 02:24 PM

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •