Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2002 10:58:41 -0600 From: Chip Morton <tech_info@threespace.com> To: FreeBSD Chat <chat@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: [burnscharlesn@hotmail.com: Advocacy help for CS professor] Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20020324105234.0199cda8@threespace.com> In-Reply-To: <20020322191703.3E9D237B400@hub.freebsd.org> References: <20020322013138.A87120@xor.obsecurity.org> <20020322013138.A87120@xor.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 01:16 PM 3/22/2002, David Johnson wrote: >Mozilla or Konqueror versus IExplorer. If all you judge by is the number of >sites that says "best viewed with IExplorer", or the number of proprietary >plugins, then the latter will win. But that only demonstrates the >ubiquitousness of IExplorer, not its quality. But if you judge based on >usability, adherence to standards, etc., then the former two are at least as >good, if not better, than the Microsoft offering. I disagree with this one. I would pay cash to have Internet Explorer on FreeBSD. It would probably cut down significantly on my Windows use. My experience is that IE renders pages faster than any other browser I've used recently (except Lynx) and I never find myself wondering if a page will display correctly. It handles with ease all the "standards-compliant" pages that I've seen. Mozilla, on the other hand, seems to gobble up as much RAM as you have before it goes for your swap space. Konqueror is sweet, but it still doesn't display *all* the pages I visit the way they were meant to be seen. Of course, I realize that a person's assessment of a web browser is only as good as the pages he tends to visit, so opinions are sure to vary here. << Chip Morton >> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4.3.2.7.2.20020324105234.0199cda8>