Ian Davey wrote:

> JTK wrote:
> 
>>> Wordstar used to fly on old hardware too. Win 3.11 ran very well in a
>>> 486 environment with 4megs yet Win 95 replaced it despite the fact it
>>> required a Pentium class CPU and at least 16 megs of RAM.
>>>
>>
>> Win95 was a hell of a lot better than Win3.11.  Mozilla is a hell of a
>> lot *worse* than NC4.7x and IE.
>>
> Trolling again? There's no way its worse than NC4.7, and it's nicer than 
> any version of IE I've ever used. You might find a few specific areas 
> where one of those two are better, but overall Mozilla is vastly 
> superior to Netscape 4 and better than IE in just about every area 
> except DOM performance.
> 
> So what in your opinion makes IE so wonderful? So wonderful in fact that 
> you spend a huge amount of your time in the Mozilla groups. If it was 
> really so excellent you wouldn't be remotely interested in Mozilla as 
> you'd have no need for any other browser.
> 
> I'm beginning to think that your relationship with Mozilla is similar to 
> that between those married couples who do nothing but argue and nit pick 
> each other, but love every minute of it. Except in this case the 
> relationship is one way... you're the Log Lady and Mozilla is the log.
> 
> ian.
> 

Wordstar. Now isn't that ancient. At the time, the computers and 
hardware were junk and the specs were terrible.
However, I must admit that Micro$haft's Windows 95(the reboot 
king)really zooms when it come to Windows.

Mozilla zooms!!

Romanator
Don't Get Mad Get Linux


Reply via email to