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)."

#48 Re: Re: Re: Not my experience

by kristen

Saturday July 6th, 2002 7:18 PM

You are replying to this message

"There are steps that savvy users of Microsoft's insecure email client can take to protect themselves but most users aren't savvy."

Just like an 'unsavvy' Mozilla user could run attachment called 'iloveyou.exe' that they received from someone they know that could cause all sorts of trouble.

I'll be even more clear to sums things up for those that are confused. I keep reading about the 'killer' features of Mozilla. Those being, tabbed browsing and pop-up killing and, of course, security.

Well, when I look at those individually I don't see anything marvelous here.

What is so innovative about opening multiple web documents within the same window? This has existed in a variety of products (both freeware and commercial) for a long time. Pop-Up killing? What is so innovative about that? There are a variety of products, again both freeware and commercial, that can do the same thing, and much more actually.

Finally, the security. Although everything has shifted now to email security (and that's ok with me) what has anyone said regarding browser security as I replied to arielb about? Email is dfferent, it is targeted. I can send an email to you but I can't force you to view a web page. No one at all has offered anything regarding a web page exploiting a reported 'IE hole' and comprising their security. Plenty of people bash IE for this but no one can substantiate it with real world data.

Ok, back to the email. People keep pointing out these top reported worms that require a user to execute an attachment. My point was, and still is, that the attachment could just have easily been an executable that read read a ns4, mozilla, etc address book (under windows, mac, linux, etc), include its own smtp engine, and appropriatley wreak havoc. No one has said a single thing that would inspire me to run off and use Mozilla Mail.

What's kinda funny is that you're talking about the security of a product that in some ways doesn't exist as far as end users are concerned. For testing purposes only. ;)