Fastest browser I've ever seen.

**kewlcat** · 5 June 2001, 15:19

Hey guys,

Couldn't resist.

I not only use Windows and IE, but also Linux and Konqueror/Netscape/Mozilla. But let's keep this to Windows to start with.

I have a pretty fast machine, so IE, Mozilla and Netscape come up just as fast. This is especially so after the first time, since Windows puts the app in its disk cache. SO disk startup is not an issue.

I still use IE. I prefer to use those DLLs that are undoubtedly loaded when Windows starts up. It works fine, with no crashes. I use Download Accelerator which integrates fine with IE. (My only complaint would probably be that IE just stops responding when I load a slow FTP site -- no way to cancel the process either. For that reason, I use a separate FTP client for browsing FTP sites.) Since the vast majority of Internet sites these days are designed for IE (or so it seems anyway), I use IE. I am used to it, it works for all the stuff I do and it's stable for me. I switched with IE 4, and haven't looked back since.

Netscape is just out of the question in this day and age. The only reason I use it sometimes on Linux is because I need 128-bit encryption for my online banking. Somehow neither Mozilla nor Konqueror work.

Mozilla is a great idea. I just wished it would translate into practice. It's getting there, but it's no lean and mean browser like Opera. Add to that the fact that it has been almost 3 years in development, still has plenty of useability bugs, and doesn't start up as fast as the integrated IE, and that makes it hard for me to use it on Windows purely on technical grounds.

Even on Linux, I don't use Mozilla. I use Konqueror, which is integrated into KDE (like IE into Windows). It is fast and quick to load as well. Galeon is probably the best option for Gnome users. Once these two brosers mature, I have serious doubts about Mozilla's ability to compete with them on Linux, where one would expect the technical best to rule, not the one that comes installed on your desktop.

Opera I have to pay for or watch ads. Out the window.

So in summary: IE for Windows, Galeon/Konqueror for Linux. For me.

And to each his own.

-Rahul

------------------
Abit KT7, Duron 700@900, G400 32MB DualHead, 256MB RAM, 2xMaxtor 20 GB, SBLive! Value.
Running RedHat 7.1 and Windows 2000 Professional.

**Technoid** · 6 June 2001, 03:50

Oh...

And I who thought that I was on the verge on getting "Troll" Status.

On the discussion...

If I like Mozilla Better then I will use it and Anyone else can use whatever they want..

The First browser I used was Mosaic and after that Netscape and as such I will continue to use Mozilla because I feel the most at home.

I havent read a CHM helpfile in months and I spend about 50 hours at home in fron of my screen only 15-20 of them is online.
So I still think that the integration of IE into windows is pure marketing, even MS programmers didnet want the integration when w98 was in development.

MS poured a couple of milions of $$ into the development in IE.

Mozilla is opensource developed by voulanteers and they don't get paid..

Bottom line:

I know that I cant "convert" Xortam nor can he "convert" Me.

**Pace** · 6 June 2001, 16:21

We're not trying to convert you...just show you we're right

I think the main point is

The First browser I used was Mosaic and after that Netscape and as such I will continue to use Mozilla because I feel the most at home.

As I feel the same way about IE, even pressing Ctrl+Enter for .com addresses I miss - don't notice how much I use it until it doesn't work!

However, the fact that Microsoft have spent more on the programmers than Mozilla...erm, how does that translate into a better browser?

P.

**Marshmallowman** · 6 June 2001, 16:52

opera 5.11 2.1MByte download
java from sun 3 Mbyte.

full install includeing disk cache 30MB

IE 5.5 >30mb for normal install not icluding cache.

Opera is tiny compared to any other Decent Browser, but it is a very efficent browser, it has very good response, which gets even better if you tweak your disk/mem cache, It does not run a few (5%) of web pages properly.
Usually to Javascript errors (MS java incompatibilities.

it is a lot faster than ie5.5 or NS4.7

win 2k, duron 980,256mbytes,IBM 40GGXP60

**Technoid** · 7 June 2001, 12:08

Pace,

In that case you would understand why I refuse to only use IE.

Besides, My headache for tomorow is about a client who has gotten the briliant advice from his ISP to reinstall windows and then reinstall IE5 but as he dont want to reinstall whole windows and ofcourse thinks that I should do it, without losing any of his data,settings,installed programs....

If it had been any other browser I could if anything else dident work have done the "A1" (Wipe folder, reinstall,done) deinstall and Reinstall Easly..

**xortam** · 7 June 2001, 12:29

Its easy to port your IE and OE settings and data between systems. I just got doing this between my old and new Win98 systems and from the old Win98 to W2K system. IE transfers your favorites (and cookies if you want). OE transfers your accounts info, mailboxes, and address book. The apps support porting directly through their menuing system. No problem.

You might also want to simply try reinstalling ("upgrade") the OS on top of itself. That will clean up many botched systems.

**Technoid** · 7 June 2001, 13:55

Originally posted by xortam:
Its easy to port your IE and OE settings and data between systems. I just got doing this between my old and new Win98 systems and from the old Win98 to W2K system. IE transfers your favorites (and cookies if you want). OE transfers your accounts info, mailboxes, and address book. The apps support porting directly through their menuing system. No problem.

Yes but all other things on the system?
Read My post again!

You might also want to simply try reinstalling ("upgrade") the OS on top of itself. That will clean up many botched systems.[/B]

Sorry Xortam, that suggestion hust cost you a lot of "Q" points on my scale!!

IE 5 does fix some IE4 stupidities on othervise stable systems.

*BUT*

IE above ver3 Replaces a LOT of system files!!

That Links to a lot of also uppdated systemfiles.

Your suggested fix on a win95 box that has IE4 or uppwards is a nightmare of "X.exe need X linked function of X.dll" abnormal program ending.
Windows install program has a wacky way of deciding if a newer wersion of a file should be overwritten or not producing above describer errors!

I have even encountered that in w98 boxes that has had IE 5.5 and the user has tried your "fix"

AND WORSE OF ALL WITH THAT IDEA:

Windows due to uppgradability *keeps* every setting from the registry BAD as Good.
It do add missing BUT it dont correct bad or delete korrupted ones.

IE might be the fastest most compatible Browser but that comes with the price of system stability!!!

Loving IE is one thing BUT sounding like a ISP suport line help is .......

**Pace** · 7 June 2001, 14:21

I know, I was agreeing with you about "what you're comfortable with" - just use what you always have used. However, I'm surprised so many people stuck with Netscape through 4.7x etc, as, although I prefer the IE touches anyway...NS sucked bad at that time

Xortam: Oh no, please don't encourage anyone to perform a reinstall without a format I've actually saw systems with Win98 installed over Me...now that's fun

Technoid: IE5 upgrades essential files, such as TCP/IP-networking, so you can't criticise it for that.

And the fact that Windows is in DLL hell is not because of IE, but because of MS playing with their DLLs constantly, and changing them for reasons unknown to me...

I wonder how much, time and (hence) money was spent on optimising existing Windows code, IE code and Office code for the WinXP and OffXP releases - it seems like they are trying to alienate technical consumers even more, at a time when Linux could start to pose a real threat on the desktop.

Is it too much to ask for a system as neat and tidy as NT4, with the multimedia of Win2k/9x, and the GUI of Whistler? (not XP)

I guess so...

P.

**xortam** · 7 June 2001, 15:05

First of all, no one mentioned Win95. I was discussing Win98. I have no experience with Win95. Secondly, I'm talking about reinstalling the same version of the OS on top of itself (thus the "upgrade" comment). I just got doing this to my W2K system to fix the ECDC deinstall fiasco. W2K setup does actually refer to this resetup as an upgrade. Yes, this doesn't always fix your problem but it might and its an easy way to get your system running without backing up your app data and settings and doing a fresh install. I keep all of my app data in its own file structure which makes it easy to backup/restore as well as share between my different OSes.

**xortam** · 7 June 2001, 15:24

P.S. AFA "Q" points Technoid ... no worries, I'm not looking for your approval. Grow up a little.

**Jorden** · 7 June 2001, 15:46

Well, this has grown into quite a slugfest of my browser is better than your's, so you should use the same one I do
So, let's try again to stick to Rob's original topic on page two...

I've downloaded the newest build of Mozilla, uninstalled my old one, reinstalled the new one, and it's still very fast

The plus point of Mozilla is it's Bugzilla. If you happen to get a crash at any point, go to Bugzilla and post the crash, if it hasn't already been posted, that is. Most of my bugs weren't posted there, so I got a couple of good bugs behind my name
The way Bugzilla works is that you post the bug and actually get a response
Unlike bugs in IE that you have to find in the MSKB or if you tell MS about it they tell you to download a huge Service Pack which either makes things worse, or repairs your bug and gives you 20 others...

I'm sticking to Moz. I liked it from day one when Mike pointed us to the site. I downloaded Milestone-18 and was sold. Been testing it on and off for the past months, and everything I found I posted in Bugzilla.

Now, I could try for Opera, as it has a nice download size as well. But I won't. Not for the moment.

Besides, any site I can't load with Mozilla (and to be honest, I haven't found any yet), I load with IE. That's the non-SP'ed IE5 from WinME.

I did find a couple of pages that you cannot download with IE though
I'll look into which they were, but since I'm typing this in Moz, and it hasn't updated the links to my IE bookmarks, I cannot check at the moment. Will be back, tomorrow orso

Jord.

[This message has been edited by Jorden (edited 07 June 2001).]

**xortam** · 7 June 2001, 16:22

Jorden, you can always find web pages that will only load on a specific browser. That's not the point. My point is which single browser is most likely to support the content of the web sites that you visit?! IE is the most widely supported browser on the net so its likely that IE is the browser that will fit your needs. You may have special needs: 1) You need to use a browser that has a minimal download size. Most people rarely download a browser and/or have a high-speed link which makes this trivial. 2) You visit specific sites which are not supported by IE. Chances are the reverse is true so you're now stuck with multiple browsers which many people can't be bothered with. 3) You need a browser that uses a minimum of system resources. Judging by the systems that people describe here I don't think many MURCers really are in this situation. This may be more of a desire rather than a need. 4) You need a stable browser with good technical support. This is an arguable topic of discussion. I very rarely have any problems with IE. Again, don't forget that you've already got IE when you install Windows and its integrated into the desktop. If you're using some other browser, you're just adding complexity and storage requirements to your Windows system.

**Jorden** · 7 June 2001, 16:48

Okay, let's judge the things you said, xortam

1) You need to use a browser that has a minimal download size. Most people rarely download a browser and/or have a high-speed link which makes this trivial.

I don't have a highspeed link, so it might make it trivial "Most people rarely download a browser..."? How do you know? Did you ask most people on this planet? Or did you ask your friends and conclude from there?

Btw, if you re-install your IE, it will ask you to re-install Flash and a couple of other integrated services from around the net anew. Why not put that in the install file?
My Moz is 8.2Mb big and I didn't see additional screens popping up asking for Flash installs or anything. It's all integrated in the software package. 30 minutes of downloading on a v.90 modem

2) You visit specific sites which are not supported by IE. Chances are the reverse is true so you're now stuck with multiple browsers which many people can't be bothered with.

Again the many people. Take a look above and try to answer how you come to that conclusion, then take a look at page one, skip all of Technoid's posts and tell me how many people there say they use(d) multiple browser

3) You need a browser that uses a minimum of system resources.

How many resources have you got left after you opened up IE? How many do you have left after opening up two times IE? Crucial question: How many resources does your IE give you back when you close it?
Crucial question: How much memory does IE take up? (including swapfile and all that) Crucial question: At what point does your IE tell you it cannot open another window because the resources are low, and how low are they then?

Judging by the systems that people describe here I don't think many MURCers really are in this situation. This may be more of a desire rather than a need.

You say that the more memory you have, the more resources you have? Or what did you say? I can tell you that with 256Mb of memory and a large swapfile, my resources might be staying where they are. They don't
But closing Moz, gives me back the resources, after I filed a bug against that. It's repaired overnight.

4) You need a stable browser with good technical support.

Tell you what
I got one. Stable, rocksolid support.

Again, don't forget that you've already got IE when you install Windows and its integrated into the desktop.

Ah, but who says I like IE? If one car is sold in the colour grey only, and you want it in red, because you like that colour, will you buy this grey coloured car?
Maybe not a good comparison, but it's late here, so (for)give me something

If you're using some other browser, you're just adding complexity and storage requirements to your Windows system

You do so as well by installing games, a wordprocessor, and anything you can come up with. So what you just said is: Do not install any additionals, just leave Windows Windows and all will be fine. It won't crash (much) on you, you won't need help then

Oh and the thing you started with?

IE is the most widely supported browser on the net so its likely that IE is the browser that will fit your needs

is wrong.... IE was forced through our throats by MS, when they included it in Windows98. Long before that we had the option to use other browsers. IE was sold for money at that moment, and MS saw Netscape go off tinto the horizon with all the browser users. So they integrated IE in their next Windows, because Bill didn't want to lose!!

If you think the story is different, ask around, check some news-sites. It's only the most supported site at this moment, because people couldn't do so much else.

Jord.

**fds** · 7 June 2001, 17:40

This is getting ridiculous. So many false claims about IE that I don't even know where to begin.

IE critical fixes do not require you to download anything big. They're available as a tiny download on Windows Update and are also available as an old-fashioned download elsewhere.

Most people not upgarding their browsers: access logs prove that perfectly.

Flash did not come with my Mozilla download. It asked me to go to a plug-in page to get it when first encountering a page using it.

IE, and even Office XP, also offer you to send a bug report to Microsoft when a fatal exception occurs. (Your serial number and other details included. )

Having an integrated browser and HTML rendering capability is the only way forward for any operating system. Application developers love it. The vast majority of web designers are very satisfied with IE. The same cannot be said of Netscape.

How much memory IE uses? Its Mem Usage is at 12 MB with 6 seperate sites opened. Mozilla eats 18,3 MB right away just by starting it without ANY sites opened.
My IE never ever tells me that I'm low on resources. IE cleanly gets out of the memory if I quit it.
Your problem is Windows 9x/Me. They do suck, badly. Don't blame that on the browser.

IE wasn't forced on anyone. You can't force people to use something which is inferior to their current choice, if their former choice is still available. Web developers embraced IE because it's much more rewarding to create sites for it than it ever was for Netscape's awful renderer.

This is isn't a question of "my browser is better than yours." This is only blind Microsoft bashing without reason.
You are free to use whichever browser you wish to but quit using false claims to justify your choice.

We do not love or have an emotional bond to IE. There's absolutely no reason to. It's only natural that you use the browser capability of your operating system.

**Galvin** · 7 June 2001, 18:30

You're forgetting that IE is part of windows. Of course it's not taking as much memory because most of it's interface has already been loaded with windows it's self. This is why new version of windows gets larger microsoft keeps building in more crap all the time. IE is not like Netscape a seperate program from windows. IE is part of windows not a seperate application. That's the only correction I needed to make, continue on ;P

Fastest browser I've ever seen.

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment