Performance Comparison of Mozilla 1.3 Beta and Safari v60

Friday February 14th, 2003

Mac bystander writes: "Interesting article comparing Mach-O Mozilla 1.3b on OS X to the new Safari beta. Sounds like the whole perf thing is not as clear-cut in that comparison as it is when comparing Safari to Chimera (off the 1.0 branch) or Netscape 7 (1.0 branch) on a broadband in-lab connection... ;)"

#16 Appeal Not Destroy

by Tarraccas

Friday February 14th, 2003 1:18 PM

You are replying to this message

If people want to use a different web browser, great! Better to have variety than none. Mozilla appeals to me and to a lot of others but not everyone nor should it ever be expected to. Forcing a "choice" on people serves only to create resentment. That said, I've never used Konqueror or Safari as I currently run neither Linux or Mac (which tend to make up approx. 3% of my web stats combined). However, I have had sites that Konqueror users complained that they couldn't use (probably due to DHTML). I, myself, still have to pull up IE to use some sites but that's becoming less and less as Mozilla gets better and better. The bottom line for me is that Mozilla gets the job done well even if it takes a little extra time to do so. If an iota of speed in someone's browser is more important than it's support then they have nothing to complain about if a page looks like crap or doesn't function at all. Use what is necessary to meet your needs.