In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> People switched from NS to IE a few years back because IE was more stable,
> faster, and more feature rich. It was better. Like many others I had NS 4.x
> and IE 5 on my machine and had been a long time NS user who eventually
> admitted that IE was better. If Moz could be made sufficiently better then
> some of those users would switch away from IE.
My observations were that people didn't "switch" as much as the tidal
wave of NEW users chose IE because:
- Microsoft stuck it in Windows and made them use it for other things
anyway.
- MS gave it away for free (something Netscape eventually had to follow,
resulting in NS loosing a lot of income and therefore financial means to
fund more browser development).
It wasn't until long after this momentum occurred that IE could have
been called "better" than Netscape 4.x. And even then, many people who
started off with Netscape stuck with it despite... for the same reason
that people already familiar with IE will be hard-pressed to switch
browsers, even if you and I know that the other browser is "better".
This is like medicine and candy. Medicine is good for you, but candy
tastes better. MS is handing everyone candy and telling them that it'll
brush their teeth, cure cancer, and grow back hair. This leaves
Netscape/Mozilla with the formidable challenge of producing REAL
medicine AND making it taste like candy... because the masses, just like
a bunch of little kids, are not likely to listen to reason and just want
the candy.
