Which New Browser Is Best: Firefox 2, Internet Explorer 7, or ...
|
|
|
Comments (7)
ET, shame on your subliminal message
devnet -
That was one line in the entire article. By and large, Opera got the best review, followed by Firefox. IE7 trailed.
And -- It's hard to argue with the logic. Just remember that it's one thing to be a target and another to be a target you can hit.
That was one line in the entire article. By and large, Opera got the best review, followed by Firefox. IE7 trailed.
And -- It's hard to argue with the logic. Just remember that it's one thing to be a target and another to be a target you can hit.
Oh, I definately agree...opera is a better browser and firefox got a good nod over IE7
Now if we can get all webmasters to agree on this and conform to xhtml transitional strict we'd be set.
Now if we can get all webmasters to agree on this and conform to xhtml transitional strict we'd be set.
For me, the trump card is what dcparris pointed out: Firefox is free/libre software. That's the nuclear warhead that deals with all the pretty fireworks either of the others can show off.
>And -- It's hard to argue with the logic. Just remember that it's one thing to be a target and another to be a target you can hit.
Or, in IE's case, a target full of holes.
Or, in IE's case, a target full of holes.
The article's (relatively few) mistakes:
Features at a Glance chart:
1.Opera is skinnable. It's just called "Skins", not "Themes" 2.Both Firefox and Opera include Bookmark functionality, which again is just differently named while serving pretty much the same purpose 3.(And, if Opera got a mention of GNU Aspell, shouldn't Firefox benefit from the extensions - there's at least one for recalling sessions.)
As for the rest, I didn't see any errors that would've caught my eye. But the mistakes on the chart are pretty damn obvious ones... (The usability verdict is pretty much right)
1.Opera is skinnable. It's just called "Skins", not "Themes" 2.Both Firefox and Opera include Bookmark functionality, which again is just differently named while serving pretty much the same purpose 3.(And, if Opera got a mention of GNU Aspell, shouldn't Firefox benefit from the extensions - there's at least one for recalling sessions.)
As for the rest, I didn't see any errors that would've caught my eye. But the mistakes on the chart are pretty damn obvious ones... (The usability verdict is pretty much right)
I didn't fully read it, but I browsed over the article. I found it amusing how he talked about the ease (or lack thereof) of adding a new tab.
I kept thinking, "um. I just use ctrl+t in firefox for that...".
Of course, I realize that that's me, and your average user probably doesn't have a clue about doing things without the mouse.
Still, he could have at least mentioned the options in the file menu (assuming they're still there in the ff beta) for launching a new tab or window.
Post a comment
A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.
Your message:Markdown: **bold**, *italic*, [text](https://link), - lists, > quotes, $x^2$ for math. Formatting help
Sign up and post (it is free) or Log in and post

Yes! It's bound to! Just like Linux and Macs will become more insecure as they begin to proliferate! Afterall, popularity automatically equals hackability right?
How about, it may become a prime target for hackers. Bottom line is, IE was made to be a part of the OS...and tools were programmed in to make this a reality. ANY browser that isn't built with the intent to make changes to the operating system will always be innately more secure. And, there is no getting around that.