Comparatively Speaking...

Monday July 1st, 2002

Linux Online recently compared the major Linux browsers, including the Mozilla-based trio of Mozilla 1.0, Netscape 6.2 and Galeon. Reviewer Michael J Jordan praises Mozilla's stability, tabbed browsing, rendering and customisation.

As mentioned by fondacio on our forums, the International Herald and Tribune took a look at Mozilla, Opera and NeoPlanet (note that the site doesn't seem to work in some builds of Mozilla). Reviewer Lee Dembart says that "Mozilla is impressive and has it all over Opera." He especially likes the ability to block pop-ups, tabbed browsing and pipelining.

UPDATE! tuxracer writes: "I've put up a browser comparison list, comparing various features that affect usability and W3C standards compliance. It compares Mozilla 1.0, Netcaptor 7.01, Internet Explorer 6.0 (Windows), and Internet Explorer 5.x (Mac)."

#115 Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: No

by kristen

Wednesday July 10th, 2002 1:21 AM

You are replying to this message

"If that's not enough to convinve you that this worm infects MS servers"

I have never disputed that. I'll break it down for you in more simple terms, though.

Let's forget for a moment the exponential growth rate of the email form of NIMDA and focus solely on web surfers who browsed during that period of time with IE. How many are you suggesting became infected with NIMDA via browsing with IE? 25%/50%/100% of all those infected? Whatever number you come up with it is miniscule compared to the number of IE surfers during the same period of time.

The problem is that you want me to believe that it is a very high number. So high, in fact, that it discounts what I said to arielb. The problem is though that you have nothing to convince me otherwise. You can cite 'experts' saying that NIMDA is dangerous, has infected web servers, etc. I don't disagree with that in the least. What I do know is this (and no CNET 'experts' are required to come to this conclusion). I do know that Melissa and ILOVEYOU were extremely contagious due to them sending themselves out to peoples address books to gain trust so a recipient would be more likely to execute an attachment. I know that NIMDA is even worse in this regard in that a user doesn't have to manually execute anything. Via some simple common sense I can deduce (again without a CNET 'expert') that if Melissa and ILOVEYOU were so successful then NIMDA would be even more so. I don't need an 'expert' to tell me how and why NIMDA spread so fast. Have you ever wondered how NIMDA would have fared if it didn't infiltrate email? (That was rhetorical) ;)

"then I guess we're back to agreeing to disagree."

That's for sure. ;)