Mac Needs an Alternative to Mozilla?

Monday August 30th, 1999

Apparently there is a bit of dissension in the Mac ranks over the state of Mozilla on their platform. According to one post at MacDiscussion, Mozilla is called "less than desirable in terms of the resources it uses and the general speed of the browser". Another post describes an average start time of 3.5 minutes (it should be noted that this is on a slower machine - a 180Mhz 604e). This is surprising to me, because this isn't the case on the Windows platform. If Mozilla actually is slow on the Mac, does anyone know why? Are these issues being addressed? I'm usually wary of posting comments like these so early in the development process, but these experiences run contrary to my experience with Mozilla, and I'm curious to know if others have the same issues on the Mac.

Thanks to George for this news.

#13 Slower than, well, slow.

by Anon

Tuesday August 31st, 1999 11:24 AM

You are replying to this message

I've got a B&W G3/300, and it takes a good minute and a half of total innactivity (it looks like it has crashed in every respect) for pretty much every version to start up. I saw a note that one of the versions was some great percent faster, but this must've only applied to the PC versions, because it got no speed increase on the Mac that I could notice. Every action is slow once the browser has started up, and even loading and drawing pages is slow (and I've got a cable modem!) What is with this?

I wouldn't go so far as to say the Mac needs an alternative. You can't need an alternative to something that doesn't exist yet. If it performs at release as it does now, yes, an alternative will be in order. But I think it would suffice to remind developers that the browser has a version on the Mac, and it is so slow as to be unusable, and needs optomisation.