Alternatives to Internet Explorer, Outlook Express, Uninstaller

[WaiWai]

I would not like to use Internet Explorer(IE) and Outlook Express anymore. Are there any alternatives for me to choose?

1. About internet browser, I would like to do the following:

a. Enable me to do the following:
Move the following folders:
- history and cookies [you said yes!]
- favorites
- temporarily internet files

b. And allow me to disable the above if needed.
c. "tabbed" and "new windows" browsing
d. use less memory and system resource
e. can automatically AND correctly choose the display language codes (eg Big5, ISO, unicode) used in the webpage [NB: IE fails to do so sometimes]
f. have some methods (no matter built-in or not) transfer files and settings from IE

2. About alternate Outlook express(OE),
a. I hope it uses less memory and system resource
b. I mainly use it to read newsgroups
c. it has some methods (no matter built-in or not) transfer files and settings from OE
d. maybe someone can introduction me to some good functions, which are helpful

3. I usually get one problem. My computer gets messed up by some programs/software. When I use their own uninstallers, they don't really delete everything. Instead they leave a lot of rubbish in my folders, registry etc.

Is it possible to *safely and completely* uninstall the program? Any good software to introduce?

Or is there any method to monitor the installation when a program install? So later if I wish to uninstall, I know what changes the program made, and undo all the process easily.

 

[Crusty]

Mozilla FireFox
Mozilla Thunderbird

Both work great, and can transfer settings from IE and OE.

 

[Jiggz]

I used Mozilla FireFox and Calypso Email, although it's been discontinued but it's safe not to have Outlook since most worms are based on Outlook.

 

[WaiWai]

In the http://www.mozilla.org/, I found out 3 products.

- Firebox
- Thunderbird
- Mozilla

Do you know what's the difference between "Firebox + thunderbird" and "mozilla"?

Which should I choose?

 

[CTho9305]

Originally posted by: WaiWai
Do you know what's the difference between "Firebox + thunderbird" and "mozilla"?

They look different. At present, Mozilla browser + mailnews will share ram, and Firefox + Thunderbird won't, but I think they're working on fixing that. Besides, what's an extra 30MB when you have 512 or a gig?

 

[WaiWai]

Hi, CTho9305:
As what you said, so mozilla can be regarded as the same as Firebox + Thunderbird" (both get the same functions, right?). Even more, mozilla should be better since Firebox and Thunderbird has integrated together to form mozilla. (One you said is the RAM sharing)

>what's an extra 30MB when you have 512 or a gig?

Do you mean the size of Mozilla is 30MB larger than Firebox + Thunderbird?


By the way, how much RAM will I need to use if I open one more windows of the following browser:
- Firebox
- Mozilla
- Opera

Thanks so much for your answer.

 

[TennBikeBerk]

Firefox is a browser, and a browser only. No added extras or anything. Smaller size, and somewhat quicker load.

Mozilla is a whole system. HTML Editor, chat client, web browser, e-mail, etc., etc. A little slower, but still way better than IE.

Thunderbird is a e-mail client.

It all depends on what you want. For me, I don't need all the extras of Mozilla, so I am running Firefox.

 

[daveshel]

Forefox rox, but I don't think it is worth the risk to use an installed mail client any more. I have used only web-based mail for several years - let somebody else take the risk. (Unless you are stuck with dial-up access.)

 

[pitupepito2000]

Originally posted by: MCrusty
Mozilla FireFox
Mozilla Thunderbird

Both work great, and can transfer settings from IE and OE.

I second MCrusty

 

[pitupepito2000]

Firefox is a web browser only.
Thunderbird is a mail client only
Mozilla is a suite of apps that includes mail client, irc client, mail, browser and a few other things.

I used to use mozilla, but as soon as firefox and thunderbird came out, I tried them, and haven't looked back since. They are a whole lot better than mozilla. They have newer feautes.

 

[WaiWai]

Originally posted by: pitupepito2000
Firefox is a web browser only.
Thunderbird is a mail client only
Mozilla is a suite of apps that includes mail client, irc client, mail, browser and a few other things.

I used to use mozilla, but as soon as firefox and thunderbird came out, I tried them, and haven't looked back since. They are a whole lot better than mozilla. They have newer feautes.

The only features I need is web browsing and newsgroups. I don't actually need mail client (I never use it before). Occuping less resources is what I want since I need to open a lot of browser windows at the same time. IE is quite a resource-eater and lots of RAM are used. If I can use less RAM to open each browser windows, it is very great!!

I took a look at another web browser - Opera (http://www.opera.com/). Seems get a lot of functions, but not suit me. It should somewhat resource hunter. :X

 

[pitupepito2000]

Opera and Firefox can both do the jobs. Firefox and Opera use modular Engineering, meaning they build things in little blocks. Then it's up to you to choose which blocks you want in your web browser. They are both excellent browsers, with very different approaches. Opera tends to be more user friendly and tries to take all the RTFM from you by providing you enough modules than you would need. Firefox on the other hand expects you to be a smart user and read, and find out which extensions work the best for your needs. To me it seems that firefox seems to be what will work best for you. Firefox comes with the bare minimum functionality, and you can add what suits you best. With Opera you have to remove what you don't want.

Also remember Firefox is a free download vs Opera which you have to pay or you can get the version that comes with ads (the ads are a very small bar on the top of your browser. I have tried both. I would personally recommend you try Firefox, but download the "Tabbrowser Extenstions," this extension will make your browsing a whole lot better since you are going to view a lot of things at once.

Good luck,
pitupepito

 

[CTho9305]

Originally posted by: WaiWai
Hi, CTho9305:
As what you said, so mozilla can be regarded as the same as Firebox + Thunderbird" (both get the same functions, right?). Even more, mozilla should be better since Firebox and Thunderbird has integrated together to form mozilla. (One you said is the RAM sharing)

Other way around. Firefox is a browser split out from Mozilla, and Thunderbird is a mail app split out from Mozilla.

>what's an extra 30MB when you have 512 or a gig?

Do you mean the size of Mozilla is 30MB larger than Firebox + Thunderbird?

No. Mozilla will likely be a little smaller.

By the way, how much RAM will I need to use if I open one more windows of the following browser:
- Firebox
- Mozilla
- Opera

Thanks so much for your answer.

Don't know, I have 512MB, and the browser swaps out what it isn't using so it's mostly irrelevant.

Originally posted by: TennBikeBerk
Firefox is a browser, and a browser only. No added extras or anything. Smaller size, and somewhat quicker load.

Mozilla is a whole system. HTML Editor, chat client, web browser, e-mail, etc., etc. A little slower, but still way better than IE.

Only slower to load, not to render pages.

Originally posted by: pitupepito2000
Firefox is a web browser only.
Thunderbird is a mail client only
Mozilla is a suite of apps that includes mail client, irc client, mail, browser and a few other things.

I used to use mozilla, but as soon as firefox and thunderbird came out, I tried them, and haven't looked back since. They are a whole lot better than mozilla. They have newer feautes.

It's personal preference. I prefer moz. They've been adding a few of the FF features back into moz (the good ones )

Originally posted by: WaiWai
The only features I need is web browsing and newsgroups. I don't actually need mail client (I never use it before).

Thunderbird is a mail & news client. Mozilla's "mailnews" is... a mail and news client

Occuping less resources is what I want since I need to open a lot of browser windows at the same time. IE is quite a resource-eater and lots of RAM are used. If I can use less RAM to open each browser windows, it is very great!!

You'll get used to using tabs instead of windows. Anyway, the per-window overhead should be *very* low for Mozilla (and Firefox).

I took a look at another web browser - Opera (http://www.opera.com/). Seems get a lot of functions, but not suit me. It should somewhat resource hunter. :X

It isn't free either.

 

[WaiWai]

>what's an extra 30MB when you have 512 or a gig?

Do you mean the size of Mozilla is 30MB larger than Firebox + Thunderbird?

No. Mozilla will likely be a little smaller.
So what so you mean by "what's an extra 30MB when you have 512 or a gig"?

By the way, how much RAM will I need to use if I open one more windows of the following browser:
- Firebox
- Mozilla
- Opera

Thanks so much for your answer.

Don't know, I have 512MB, and the browser swaps out what it isn't using so it's mostly irrelevant.

If you don't mind, you could first press "Ctrl + Alt + Del". A Windows Task Manager should open. Then click on the third tag (proformance). You will see a PF usage. It provides some ideas about RAM usage.

You can try to open a window and see if how much MB is raised.

 

[CTho9305]

So what so you mean by "what's an extra 30MB when you have 512 or a gig"?

If you prefer Firefox + Thunderbird, you're probably paying a penalty that's around 30MB (maybe more, maybe less. I don't know. I was asking, "What difference does 30MB of memory usage make, if you have a gig or half a gig of ram?".

If you don't mind, you could first press "Ctrl + Alt + Del". A Windows Task Manager should open. Then click on the third tag (proformance). You will see a PF usage. It provides some ideas about RAM usage.

You can try to open a window and see if how much MB is raised.

As I expected, 0MB. I went from 81MB, to... 81MB (well, it changed a little bit after the new web page loaded, but by <1MB). The way Mozilla and Firefox work, a new window doesn't really add that much extra (just a few more objects to track).

 

[WaiWai]

Originally posted by: CTho9305

So what so you mean by "what's an extra 30MB when you have 512 or a gig"?

If you prefer Firefox + Thunderbird, you're probably paying a penalty that's around 30MB (maybe more, maybe less. I don't know. I was asking, "What difference does 30MB of memory usage make, if you have a gig or half a gig of ram?".

If you don't mind, you could first press "Ctrl + Alt + Del". A Windows Task Manager should open. Then click on the third tag (proformance). You will see a PF usage. It provides some ideas about RAM usage.

You can try to open a window and see if how much MB is raised.

As I expected, 0MB. I went from 81MB, to... 81MB (well, it changed a little bit after the new web page loaded, but by <1MB). The way Mozilla and Firefox work, a new window doesn't really add that much extra (just a few more objects to track).

One said that by opening 10 firebox, you might see 1 MB rising.
Very impressive result!!!!

Do you know how much RAM is raised when I open 1 more IE browser?
It is 8MB.

Firebox will save me lot sof money because my IE occupies lots of my RAM resources. And my 512 MB is not enough. Now with firebox, I'm sure I may have 256MB more free. A very big difference!

So regret why I not switch to it earlier. It will cause me less headaches.
And it also supports tabbed browsing. Good! No need to open a new windows all the time with IE.

Hopefully, thunderbird will use the same small RAM.

After all, thanks for your help.

 

[sharq]

Eudora for mail.
Mozilla for browsing.

 

[screw3d]

Why didn't anyone recommend Firefox and Thunderbird? :|:|:|

 

[tooltime]

i switched to mozilla firefox a few months ago and and it works pretty good...it reminds me of when i used netscape years ago

...there is an interesting article at the inquirer about firerox and ie++

 

[WaiWai]

Originally posted by: screw3d
Why didn't anyone recommend Firefox and Thunderbird? :|:|:|

so what do you recommend?