Christian Mattar writes: > Of course no one except a few execs know all the details, but above > mentioned deal is well documented.
So is the technical superiority of MSIE over Netscape. > There were many reasons to go for IE instead for Netscape back then, > yours is only one of them... Two of them. > The main point was, that IE4 did everything NS4 did (many parts better - > Internet security wasn't that much of a concern as it is now), came > preinstalled with Windows and at no cost, whereas companys had to pay > Netscape for a license. Paying for a browser... Foreign concept today, > isn't it? MSIE was much more conformant to W3C standards, at least from version 4 onwards. Netscape 4.x was a complete mess, and its successors were not a significant improvement. In fact, Firefox is the only descendant of Netscape that I've found worthy of the name browser. Currently I'm using it almost exclusively, in fact (a natural shift that happened all on its own, which implies that it's a better browser in most respects). It helps that I don't have to click on "no" to questions about ActiveX on every page--although if I ever catch Firefox running active content behind my back, I'm going to be very displeased. > (Opera excluded of course) I expect Opera to die a slow death. It is inferior to Firefox and MSIE in a number of ways, and you still have to pay for it (or watch advertisements delivered by spyware installed on your machine). > Talking about security stuff: I think the backend provides several finer > grained options than those being presented in the GUI. You can only set > them by editing your prefs manually. > See > <http://www.mozilla.org/projects/security/components/ConfigPolicy.html> > for more information. I'll take a look. -- Anthony _______________________________________________ Mozilla-security mailing list Mozilla-security@mozilla.org http://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/mozilla-security
