A Bat-fellow, Marck D Pearlstone, wrote on Saturday, 17th August 2002 at 21:06:06 (GMT +0100), which was 22:06 in Bratislava --
> Mozilla is a far more stable and compliant browser [than Opera] in > all respects from my POV (although even it is quirky and only IE has > the all round compliance and stability). I had an Opera code guru > try to help me sort out why it was giving me so much trouble and > even they were unable to improve things for me. It's a shame, > because the theory is good. I am surprised that anyone would accept > the kind of poor performance I experienced from it every time I ran > it up. All I hear by way of excuse is "at least it's not MS". > <sigh>. That is not my "excuse". Your all-round compliant IE can't even open links in background, let alone via a keyboard shortcut. Pfui. There are about 35 more similarly convincing reasons (such as zooming in and out of webpages and, in a lightning flash, mouse-gesturing your way back and forth in each window's browsing history). I wouldn't be using IE if I was paid in dollars for doing so -- not because it's Microsoft's product but because it's a poorer, less efficient product than Opera. No time for playing around here: I need a browser for my daily work, and Opera facilitates work better than IE. -- Yours, Alex. of Slovakia www.avenarius.sk [flying with The Bat! 1.60c under Windows 98 4.10 Build 2222 A amd k6-2 500 mhz processor with 128 mb ram] ________________________________________________________ Current version is 1.61 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
