Group Test: Firefox 3 vs IE 7 vs Safari 3.1

A few short years ago the browser war seemed dead and buried. After Microsoft's Internet Explorer usurped Netscape's Navigator in the late 1990s, it's domination of the Internet seemed complete, over 95 percent of us using a version of IE.

Those days are gone. The guts of Navigator were reborn in 2004 as Firefox, a browser that has been drinking more and more of IE's milkshake ever since. Firefox now owns at least 18 percent of the market, with some estimates giving it more than a quarter. More recently, Apple has threatened to start a three-way fight, using the software updater included with iTunes to slip its Safari browser onto PCs. While its market share is miniscule – less than one per cent among PC users and around three per cent overall –Safari offers a PC users a credible third choice.

Meanwhile, IE 7 is groaning under the weight of bad press, criticised for its instability and sluggish performance. Apple is trumpeting Safari 3.1 as the world's fastest browser, while Firefox 3 – which is now out of beta and into the Release Candidate stage – is claimed to be over twice as speedy as its predecessor.

View: Full Article @ GadgetZone

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Microsoft Patents Proactive Virus Protection

Next Story

Microsoft Moves Closer To Hyper-V Rollout

95 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

I agree that the article is the worst browser comparison ever.

I prefer FF for the addons, not the speed. That's why i use it as my default browser.

IE7 is really good but the thing i really hate is the lag when you stop a loading page o the lag when opening new tabs. This is bad for IE, but it is tru that the virtualized environment it runs on is the most secure approach.

Safari for windows is bad looking as hell. Apple really needs to get the design team fired. And the speed? i didn't notice a thing. For most users, all browser feel the same in terms of speed.

Also, the author says "Safari is the browser of choice of Mac users" or "FF is the connoisseurs choice" like he is the holly trinity or something.

That says it all.

It runs beautifully on OS X.

You need to clarify that it's the Windows version of Safari you're talking about.

(LTD said @ #36.1)
It runs beautifully on OS X.

You need to clarify that it's the Windows version of Safari you're talking about.

They make IE 7 for OS X?

um, as far as I can remember, the recent press regarding browsers was FF 2 having security issues (various, i'll send sources if required) and Safari being maliciously installed without consumers consent...

IE hasn't had a mention in IT press for ages to my knowledge - other than lack of news on IE8. (And I read Neowin and The Register!)

I generally use IE7 - and always when running Vista. IE7 is inherently more secure on Vista due to the sandboxing and privillage escalation. FF is a great browser, and if it's nearer to my cursor on a XP box then it's a winner. Same on Linux - nothing by FF will do.

Safari is truly awful and I personally can't stand Apple - stick with building your pretty boxes and leave the software to the big boys.

Yeah, Firefox had security issues. Which they rapidly fixed.

IE, on the other hand, is the all-time record holder for most flaws and longest time between flaw being known and time to a fix.

Which would you rather use?

(Airlink said @ #35.1)
Yeah, Firefox had security issues. Which they rapidly fixed.

IE, on the other hand, is the all-time record holder for most flaws and longest time between flaw being known and time to a fix.

Which would you rather use?

That is IE6. Microsoft has obviously changed their browser market strategy. Nice try though.

My set up, so as for screen space??


that being said foxfox 3 rc1 is nothing but hassle, pages wont load videos fail and I'm a staunch firefox user
but I find myself going back to IE7 just to see wot i wanna see

oh and by the way i get sick of reading "BOO HOO HOO my ways better then your way" grow up

Opera was forever tainted to me as it was not initially a free browser per se - the downloadable edition had this huge obtrusive banner.... I think they pay the price now of that limited insight at the time.

(ecstasis said @ #33.1)
i totally agree and it's rare that that fact is ever pointed out

And Opera became free just like Netscape became free Firefox. Don't see why something so far back in the past would matter with today's versions. Don't take software so personally.

A few short years ago the browser war seemed dead and buried. After Microsoft�s Internet Explorer usurped Netscape�s Navigator in the late 1990s, it�s domination of the Internet seemed complete, over 95 percent of us using a version of IE.

Those days are gone (why?, firefox is more popular?). The guts of Navigator were reborn in 2004 as Firefox, a browser that has been drinking more and more of IE�s milkshake ever since. Firefox now owns at least 18 percent of the market, with some estimates giving it more than a quarter. More recently, Apple has threatened to start a three-way fight, using the software updater included with iTunes to slip its Safari browser onto PCs. While its market share is miniscule � less than one per cent among PC users and around three per cent overall �Safari offers a PC users a credible third choice (And opera?).

Meanwhile, IE 7 is groaning under the weight of bad press (yes, for example this kind of news), criticised for its instability and sluggish performance. Apple is trumpeting Safari 3.1 as the world�s fastest browser, while Firefox 3 � which is now out of beta and into the Release Candidate stage � is claimed to be over twice as speedy as its predecessor.


one word :fanboy!!!.

Addons aren't just organizing, securing, and streamlining my surfing. Addons are completely changing the way in which I experience the internet and what I expect from it.

(Burned said @ #28)
I choose Firefox for the addons. I cant stand surfing without the addon NoScript.

+1

I can't even attempt to use a browser without noscript and adblockplus. And foxmarks and fireftp and chatzilla and ietab and tabmixplus. well then.. i seem to have quite a bit of addons.

Opera is very quick... but it can't do have the pages I load. Missing images, miss-aligned text, etc... are always problems with it.

I used to love opera too... back in the day when I actually paid money to use the ad free version... but they really need to work on rendering if its going to become more popular.

I've never had any problems with Opera. It renders pages just as it should. I think the quirks mode bit could be worked on, but I'd rather not have any quirks mode at all. Of course, if there was no quirks mode, it would be even more unpopular because it would try to render things in a standards-compliant fashion, causing half of the sites on the Web to break and the browser would most likely die out as a result. I hate trade-offs like that - sacrificing compliance to preserve compatibility... Then again, I'm also a heavy advocate of breaking the current Web in favor of creating a REC-compliant and semantic Web. Unfortunately, the problem with the idea is that nobody can possibly project just how long it will remain broken! As a result, we are forced to preserve compatibility and keep table-based layouts created using old versions of Photoshop working.

(shockz said @ #27)
Opera is very quick... but it can't do have the pages I load. Missing images, miss-aligned text, etc... are always problems with it.

I used to love opera too... back in the day when I actually paid money to use the ad free version... but they really need to work on rendering if its going to become more popular.

Agreed. On occasion I like its speed, but lately there's barely any difference, speed wise, between Firefox and Opera. (IE7's rendering is still slow to me for some reason.) Plus the page quirks on my frequently visited sites: for instance, the RTE editor in the forums never works properly. Either the text field freezes and prevents text input, or it inserts two extra paragraph breaks instead of one, etc. Or in Netvibes where the feeds reader is always squashed in half, and up until a few months ago the web page viewer flat out failed.

I still find Opera to be the speediest browser on any computer I've ever used. Sad it wasn't in this benchmark because I really wanted to see how it puts up these numbers.

Anyways, this test was pathetic, because it has 1 freaking benchmark. This is perhaps the worst comparision I've ever seen in my life. Whoever wrote it fails very hard.

(tsupersonic said @ #26)
I still find Opera to be the speediest browser on any computer I've ever used. Sad it wasn't in this benchmark because I really wanted to see how it puts up these numbers.

Anyways, this test was pathetic, because it has 1 freaking benchmark. This is perhaps the worst comparision I've ever seen in my life. Whoever wrote it fails very hard.


The author of the test should really go see how hard they fail at http://www.youfail.org/ ROFL
BTW, the music, in case someone is wondering, is from "Wizards in Winter" by the Trans-Siberian Orchestra. ^_^

I feel sorry for anyone that purposely uses IE anymore, it's not a good browser and you should really try out one of the few better alternatives

"Safari offers a PC users a credible third choice."
No it doesn't. The "credible third choice" has always been Opera, unless that's someone's first or second choice. Just because Apple tried to force Safari on it's Windows iTunes users doesn't mean it's a good product.


"Meanwhile, IE 7 is groaning under the weight of bad press, criticised for its instability and sluggish performance"
Source? I'll wait while the author tries to find it. Won't hold my breath though.


"Apple is trumpeting Safari 3.1 as the world�s fastest browser"
Shocking. They also claim to have the "most advanced" operating system. Microsoft makes similar claims. Mozilla makes similar claims about FireFox. That doesn't mean any of them are absolutely true. What is Apple going to do? Trumpet Safari as the world's most average browser?


"Firefox 3 is claimed to be over twice as speedy as its predecessor"
So what? As browsers advance they improve. IE8 will be faster than IE 7. Safari 4 will be faster than Safari 3. Not a hard thing to figure out.

All of the "top" browsers today are pretty fast and if you are on a high-speed connection the speed difference between them all is not significant. What really matters is the style, function, usability, and user's preference. And even then it's pretty close. They all have "tabs" now, they all have a little search box, they all work and look very similar.

Some people think that FireFox, for instance, is safer than Internet Explorer. Not even close to true but if you believe it and feel better using FireFox then go right ahead. If you like Apple's style then get Safari. It's not like you have to pay for any of them, if you aren't a happy surfer try something else.

If you skip past the bias in the article, you will realize this is all just common sense.

(C_Guy said @ #22)
All of the "top" browsers today are pretty fast and if you are on a high-speed connection the speed difference between them all is not significant. What really matters is the style, function, usability, and user's preference. And even then it's pretty close. They all have "tabs" now, they all have a little search box, they all work and look very similar.

It's not the page downloading speed that was in question in the article, but rendering speed. In this there are significant differences. IE is quite slow, so is FF2. Opera is blazing fast (in fact it's still the fastest), FF3 is almost as quick and Safari is also very close to Opera. Rendering times are felt especially if you use mouse gestures. Delays going back and forth between pages do get annoying.

While Safari is an excellent (albeit not that feature packed) browser on OSX, in my experience it's a terrible browser in Windows. Unstable, buggy, not conforming to operating system looks and usage paradigms (funny how Apple breaks their own design guidelines when it comes to Windows versions).

I'm currently using Firefox 3 RC1 on both Vista and OSX. At the moment it's the most quirk free browser IMO. I used to be a devout Opera fan but nowadays the 9.5 betas have too many quirks and more importantly don't offer much over Firefox3. I can get almost all the features I like in Opera (Speed Dial, mouse gestures etc) as extensions for FF3 so for me there is little need to use Opera anymore. Compared to FF2, I think Opera is way ahead and they will probably always be the most innovative browser company. It's a shame they can't seem to work out the little annoyances and make Opera integrate with other programs better. The user shouldn't have to deal with MIME types to set applications to open certain files and using an external RSS reader should be basic functionality. Opera even has a few extra usability problems on OSX.

Getting back to IE7, I think the biggest problem with Microsoft's browser is that it just isn't updated often enough aside from security patches. Even IE8 will most likely be totally behind FF3 and Opera 9.5 in features. I think IE7 is actually a really nice browser visually, but the backbone is lacking. It's slow, can often just plain stop loading pages until you refresh and most things are more awkward to do than they should be. To me just having tabs isn't enough in a good web browser.

Some people think that FireFox, for instance, is safer than Internet Explorer. Not even close to true but if you believe it and feel better using FireFox then go right ahead. If you like Apple's style then get Safari. It's not like you have to pay for any of them, if you aren't a happy surfer try something else.

Firefox/Opera/Safari is safer, since most malware is developed to abuse IE bugs and ActiveX extensions. Of course it's the users fault if they download some virus/trojan .exe file and run it. No browser helps for that. I'd also say that the people who use browsers other than IE tend to be more knowledgeable about how malware works. In Vista IE7 is less of a security risk due to protected mode and Vista's security improvements.

Where's Firefox 2, Opera, IE8, and whatever version Safari that's in beta? Very odd choices in the poll...

"Meanwhile, IE 7 is groaning under the weight of bad press, criticised for its instability and sluggish performance."

Really? I didn't notice. The speed and stability are fine for me, and I haven't really seen any 'bad press' for it other than a few blogs.

Opera?!?! Almost none of the people I know (namely average users) have ever heard of it, so no wonder why it was excluded.

But as for me, the only web browser I refuse to use is Internet Explorer, due to its bugginess and weird layout (in IE7, that is). As for which is better between Safari and Firefox, I find that both are necessary on a Mac, since Flash applets tend to run better in Firefox and certain websites require the use of Safari.

Right now I'm using FF3 as the main browser, and IE8b1 as a RSS reader :nuts:

Might switch back to IE8 when it's out of beta. The dev beta's a little buggy for regular use.

Can't live without Roboform I'm afraid, and Opera refuses (or should I say, Roboform refuses to support Opera) to work with that platform. Besides, FF is way faster than the lot of them, with better add-on support.

Right because the best browsers are the ones that can load the fastest right :rolleyes:

Where the HELL is Opera.

If you look at Windows-only browser share, Opera is a lot more than Safari...

1. Opera is the fastest browser around.
2. It uses the smallest memory footprint
3. It's more customizable than Safari

And yet safari gets rated, but not opera?

Right.

(shen said @ #14.1)
well it really wouldn't have been a contest if the big O had been involved, would it? ;D

Mabye that's what happened...

- ****, Opera beats my favorite browser... hurry, remove Opera from the test!.

2. It uses the smallest memory footprint

Why people think this is a great is beyond me.... the reason you have memory is to increase speed so things dont have to be wrote to the hard drive all the time. Using lots of memory is not a bad thing... unless you have lots of other applications open. For instance if you just have one browser window open your pc it should be allowed to use most of your memory - why restrict it down?

(plastikaa said @ #14.3)

Why people think this is a great is beyond me.... the reason you have memory is to increase speed so things dont have to be wrote to the hard drive all the time. Using lots of memory is not a bad thing... unless you have lots of other applications open. For instance if you just have one browser window open your pc it should be allowed to use most of your memory - why restrict it down?

*written

And because your memory is probably better put to use in memory-intensive programs such as 3D-modeling applications, software development environments, etc. I always have a browser open to look up something or other and I'd much rather that memory be put to better use by my 'main' application, not my browser.

And because your memory is probably better put to use in memory-intensive programs such as 3D-modeling applications, software development environments, etc. I always have a browser open to look up something or other and I'd much rather that memory be put to better use by my 'main' application, not my browser.

Yes... but most memory tests are done with only a browser open and running (and background tasks). If you are 3D-modeling, rendering, etc. the memoery used by a browser is probably insignificant to your machine / likely to cause you many problems if its using a tiny bit more than another browser. Of course theres no need for unneccessary memory usage.

Ive never had an issue with Firefox + Photoshop handling huge poster size files anywhere up to a GB big, or rendering architectural models with Mentalray in 3DStudio several containing several thousand faces. Im running on a laptop nearly 3 years old, has 2Gb of ram and 3.4Ghz P4 HT processor so Im not running some super machine either.

Saving a few MB of ram from one browser to the next really shouldnt be an issue on any machine moderately new. Its not like they use a GB or ram... firefox for me with 10+ pages open and half a dozen extensions etc. only uses around 100mb.

(plastikaa said @ #14.3)

Why people think this is a great is beyond me.... the reason you have memory is to increase speed so things dont have to be wrote to the hard drive all the time. Using lots of memory is not a bad thing... unless you have lots of other applications open. For instance if you just have one browser window open your pc it should be allowed to use most of your memory - why restrict it down?

I wasn't saying that its a bad thing or a good thing, just stating a point =/

Not sure if this is true for FF3 but FF2 and 1 suffered from memory leaks, there are posts showing people with FF using over 1gb ram. Nothing something you really want your browser to be doing is it?

(Dakkaroth said @ #13.1)
IE8 is out in beta? Wasn't aware. Must certainly give that a go.

LOL IE8 Beta 1 been out for a couple of months at least. It isn't quite ready for serious testing, but it seems to have almost the exact rendering as the Firefox 3 prereleases (which includes the betas and RC1 at the time of this post). For the record, it makes Microsoft Update look weird, and a lot of things don't work in it. Even if you switch to IE7 emulation mode, it still didn't help things like Google Maps render properly, unless my installation went wrong. :P

Maybe this will be the version of IE that I can finally get things to easily work in, even if I need to use a ridiculous meta element extension to do it with. The only problem I have with it is the fact that there still seems to be no support for even the XHTML 1.0 recommendation while work toward the HTML5 draft is being performed. I have hope for IE8 other than that XHTML/HTML problem.

(rpgfan said @ #13.2)

LOL IE8 Beta 1 been out for a couple of months at least. It isn't quite ready for serious testing, but it seems to have almost the exact rendering as the Firefox 3 prereleases (which includes the betas and RC1 at the time of this post). For the record, it makes Microsoft Update look weird, and a lot of things don't work in it. Even if you switch to IE7 emulation mode, it still didn't help things like Google Maps render properly, unless my installation went wrong. :P

Maybe this will be the version of IE that I can finally get things to easily work in, even if I need to use a ridiculous meta element extension to do it with. The only problem I have with it is the fact that there still seems to be no support for even the XHTML 1.0 recommendation while work toward the HTML5 draft is being performed. I have hope for IE8 other than that XHTML/HTML problem.

Guess I must've missed all the IE8 news posts. :redface:

(LipSmacker said @ #13)
Why exactly did they use a beta of Firefox and not a beta of IE? Seems slightly slanted to me.

RC1 might (have) been the final firefox 3. As it stands, a couple of show-stopping bugs have been found and so there'll be an RC2 (which then might be the final RTW build)

Opera isn't included because it's market share still stands at < 1%. The three most used browsers are *Shock-Horror* IE, Firefox and Safari.

Regardless, that article is still terrible.

(El Sid said @ #12)
Opera isn't included because it's market share still stands at < 1%. The three most used browsers are *Shock-Horror* IE, Firefox and Safari.

Regardless, that article is still terrible.

Safari only has the userbase it does in Windows due to it's trojan like spread via Apple Updater.

(oufc_gav said @ #12.1)
Safari only has the userbase it does in Windows due to it's trojan like spread via Apple Updater.

But to get browser share, people must be visiting websites with it.

(El Sid said @ #12)
*Shock-Horror* IE,

It's actually Shock and Ahhhh (This is SHOCKINGLY slow and Ahhhh... that is how I got infected)

I doubt it's really < 1%. If it is, why do all download sites show Opera and Firefox having comparable number of downloads?

For instance, at Download.com:

Firefox: 13,668,262
Opera: 7,336,919

[deXter
said,#12.4]I doubt it's really < 1%. If it is, why do all download sites show Opera and Firefox having comparable number of downloads?

For instance, at Download.com:

Firefox: 13,668,262
Opera: 7,336,919

I downloaded Opera but don't use it. :P

Safari doesn't count as a browser when it comes to Windows Browsers. Opera is surely the 3rd choice as many others have claimed before me. Firefox is the true leader in the race and only growing with its latest version 3. With a plethora of add-ons to choose from, its truly up ahead of IE. IE on the other hand is pretty good too, but slow and sluggish none the less. Safari surely doesn't even come in the race.

Opera would have been my 3rd choice for the test, why does it always seem to get left out? And why oh why do they always want to do comparative tests between released and beta products?

Should've been a test using the 4 browsers, no doubt. No need to test wanna be addons like Maxthon, or any of those things.

Personally,
Firefox is my DEAD LAST choice of browsers! Addons up the wazoo are absolutely ignorant! Safari for Windows, even being as new as it is, blows Firefox away!!

They tested a release candidate, not a beta. The only one that could be hurt in having their product being tested against other browsers is Mozilla. The very fact that they seem to hold up so well though really says something about Firefox 3. Hell, I've seen people on the forums too talking about how much better they like it, and how some non-Firefox users are giving it a go.

(cork1958 said @ #10.1)
Personally,
Firefox is my DEAD LAST choice of browsers! Addons up the wazoo are absolutely ignorant! Safari for Windows, even being as new as it is, blows Firefox away!!

No one says you HAVE to use addons. Hell, I didn't when I first began using Firefox...

I've been using firefox for like around 5 years and I never install add-ons. They have a lot of potential but since I use firefox in a LOT of different computers it wouldn't make any sense to install the same add ons on each and every one of them.
FF still rocks.

(Antaris said @ #10)
Opera would have been my 3rd choice for the test, why does it always seem to get left out? And why oh why do they always want to do comparative tests between released and beta products?

Because it's the only browser without a bandwagon riding, hype-filled fanbase.

(just kidding. :] )

(cork1958 said @ #10.1)
Firefox is my DEAD LAST choice of browsers! Addons up the wazoo are absolutely ignorant! Safari for Windows, even being as new as it is, blows Firefox away!!

Hmm... what makes you think Firefox 3 isn't any much of an improvement over version 1 back in 2004?

(Julius Caro said @ #10.3)
I've been using firefox for like around 5 years and I never install add-ons. They have a lot of potential but since I use firefox in a LOT of different computers it wouldn't make any sense to install the same add ons on each and every one of them.
FF still rocks.

Julius: got a USB key? Take your extensions (prefs, history, signons, ...) with you!

http://portableapps.com/apps/internet/firefox_portable

Full disclosure: I don't use this because my laptop goes everywhere with me anyway but it's a simple solution to your problem. No one should be without the niceness of extensions

(Sakesaru said @ #7)
Safari offers a PC users a credible third choice.

Has this idiot not heard of Opera?

+1. I mentioned this in an earlier post. Opera probably has a bigger market share than Safari as well. Opera is by far the fastest web browser, but I use IE7. Mainly because, I like the look of it, I don't like having a download manager or a download tab, and the search aliases aren't easy to create in Opera. If you use IE7 with IE7Pro, it's a walk in the park! I've got a YouTube search (type in "yt" then what I'm searching for), a quick access entry to Wikipedia (type "wiki" then what article I want to view), and I've also got search aliases for Mininova, Demonoid, and The Pirate Bay.

I don't see anyone contending Firefox... Firefox's greatest assist are the add-ons, and no way any other browser will have as many (and as useful) add-ons as Firefox...

(zaidgs said @ #6.3)
That nobody ever used, which are not useful nor abundant?! IE addons are jokes!

Have you heard of IEpro? IEplus? apparently not. I cant stand people that bash things without knowing what they're talking about.

(darkpuma said @ #6.5)

Have you heard of IEpro? IEplus? apparently not. I cant stand people that bash things without knowing what they're talking about.

I tried IEpro when I first saw it. Broke the browser so I've been really weary on trying a newer version. :\

(darkpuma said @ #6.5)

Have you heard of IEpro? IEplus? apparently not. I cant stand people that bash things without knowing what they're talking about.

And in reply you should also think about your response.
IEpro and IEplus and the like aren't add-ons really, they do add on to IE but they are in essence a new browser that simply uses IE at its core. Usually to run these you need to run a different exe from iexplore.

IE does not implement add-ons in any way like FF. There are simply very few true add-ons.

(ghos said @ #6.7)
And in reply you should also think about your response.
IEpro and IEplus and the like aren't add-ons really, they do add on to IE but they are in essence a new browser that simply uses IE at its core. Usually to run these you need to run a different exe from iexplore.

IE does not implement add-ons in any way like FF. There are simply very few true add-ons.

Sounds a lot like IETab to me.

IE's "addon's" just don't compare to FF addons.

Is it just me, or does IE7's new look seem ugly? Which, also makes Vista look ugly as well.

I've picked Firefox 3 for both doing features via extensions right and finally (after Fx 2) maintaining both good speed and performance. I find IE 7 lacking primarly in speed, and Safari in performance (from my tests, even worse memory-wise after a while of browsing than IE 7). Opera is also nice for my uses, but I keep coming back to Firefox for its excellent customization support through the hordes of extensions. It's not that I fill it up with them, I only use 3-4, but they match my needs perfectly to fill gaps I feel in other browsers.

I completely agree with you. I like testing out new browsers and such and even have Opera installed, but the lack of extensions really does keep me coming back, especially with the features introduced in FF3. What's funny though is that I did not get Firefox for the extensions initially; just needed a better browser. Who needs extensions right? Heh, now I can't live without them. Things like the Save Image in Folder addon really save time, which definitely makes up for the lack of speed by far in my opinion.

(for those clicking on the link, ignore the 1 star vote by Dimatodd as he seems to not like the addon simply because it doesn't recognize alt-code characters on folders)

This article makes Safari one of the browser contenders... I'm sorry, but it's only been out on Windows for a very short time, while other popular and powerful browsers aren't even mentioned... Opera anyone?

why the plural? it's ONLY opera that is missing.
and Safari 3.1 for windows is actually a great contender. Not as mature as the others, but definitely worth considering

(Vandalsquad said @ #2)
Biased much article? IE7 is fine speed wise.

+1. They shouldn't have used Safari, anyway. That's the worst of the 3. They should have put it up against Opera, and the others would have been thrashed in speed (I'm an IE7 user, BTW).

(Davebo said @ #2.2)

Sure it's fine. It's also slow.

"IE7 is fine speed wise."
"It's also slow."

Answer does not compute.

(GreyWolfSC said @ #2.3)

"IE7 is fine speed wise."
"It's also slow."

Answer does not compute.


lol..... how is ie slow? its certainly faster than FF, dunno about safari, dont use it regularily, but safari doesn't count as a browser anyways.

lol... It is simple. Slow is when one thing takes longer to do something then another. If you think IE is faster then FF then it sounds like you haven't tried FF in a very long time. Safari (WebKit) is also much faster then IE but FF3 is now faster then Safari which will be released shortly.

Try FF3rc1 from here:
ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/fir...2.installer.exe

I religiously used IE for a long time. I have tried tons of browsers and a bunch of IE wrappers but as of the release of FF2 I have been using FF and will never go back. FF has so many features that IE doesn't have and you can add even more with it's plugin system. Adblock Plus, IE Tab and Tab Mix Plus are my favorite.

yeah, i'm not really as bothered i would think about the speed the page is rendered. ie7 does it fast enough for me.

ie7 just seems to take up less space at the top of the screen i'm sure i can completely change that, but i can't really be bothered.