Biased Browser Reviews

[FlibbyFlobby]

Am I the only one who's getting sick of these bogus reviews that keep appearing on supposedly credible websites? It seems wherever Firefox and Internet Explorer are involved people just can't help calling loyalty over logic. A good example is CNets review:

http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-10442_7-6656808-1.html?tag=lnav

1: Installation between the 2 is going to be different since IE7 is a component of the Operating System and Firefox isn't. Also, how many other applications require reboots after installation? Plenty I'd say.

2: Look and Community. These 2 shouldn't even be in the same section. Both the interfaces aren't that brilliant anyway. Firefox's default interface takes up too much space and IE7's is all over the shop.

3: Tabbed Browsing is more intuitive on IE7. Why because when you open 100 tabs you can view thumbnails of them, and the new tab button is their by default.

4: RSS feeds in live bookmark form are no better than as a rendered page. With IE7's feed reading you can search the articles too.

5: They pretty much did this part off the history of the vendor and not the current product. IE7's phishing filter, whilst not as elegant looking as Firefox's does a much better job.

Did I mention that review is how they decided their Editors Award, no mention of Opera 9 then (even though its miles ahead of any other browser out there!).

I might add at this point I am a Firefox 2.0 user, and I really like it, but my point is that a lot of these websites are misleading casual users by giving their own personal opinions and tastes rather than the facts. Will logic ever prevail over brand loyalty in the browser wars?

Edited November 6, 2006 by ziadoz

[Leddy]

That review is pretty wtf. I'm sorry, Firefox, but your tabs suck.

[primexx]

yea that review is kinda....off...

[Farstrider]

Will logic ever prevail over brand loyalty in the browser wars?

One camp will always be diametrically opposed to the other! :whistle:

[halcyoncmdr]

I still love how people think that firefox was the first to support tabbed browsing. I know it wasn't, but so many think that it was; it's so annoying when they disagree too. :( :no:

[Denis W. Veteran]

Read it a few days ago, linked from here.

If you receive Download.com newsletters you wouldn't be too surprised by it. Every damn issue there's always something about Firefox - usually it's about their favourite extensions.

[FlibbyFlobby]

Read it a few days ago, linked from here.

If you receive Download.com newsletters you wouldn't be too surprised by it. Every damn issue there's always something about Firefox - usually it's about their favourite extensions.

Glad to see that I'm not the only one who thought that about it. I think websites like this need to be boycotted until they become objective and reasoned, instead of opinionated and biased. After all their suposed to be technical and knowledgable people in a position to inform those who aren't, yet they give retarded comments about IE7 needing a reboot after install, without explaining why. :no:

On the topic of biased reviews, the BBC Technology page had an article about Firefox 2 and IE7 and they concluded the RSS support in Firefox 2 was much better than IE7. Nothing to do with them having their news feed included in the default setup of Firefox then? Did I forget to mention they didn't explain the reboot situation either? :rolleyes:

[GEIST]

Most reviews of any kind are mostly influenced by the reviewers' personal bias, some more, some less. That's why I don't give a fart about reviews.

These CNET folks either have no clue at all, or are intentionally playing witty and dumb (roflmao gene sequencing haha) in favor of Firefox, but if I want a professional and spot-on review, I'll look somewhere else.

[ToneKnee]

Firefox was the first major browser to support Taps. Other browsers had little market share and weren't really noticed. Thats why people say Firefox was the first to have it.

[FlibbyFlobby]

Firefox was the first major browser to support Taps. Other browsers had little market share and weren't really noticed. Thats why people say Firefox was the first to have it.

Firefox didn't invent tabs, so people shouldn't claim they did, its that simple.

[C_Guy]

That review really made me angry. It was completely biased and very little of it was relevant. Was there a benchmark test? No. Was there a features comparison? No. Do people choose a browser based on the "community"? No.

All this review does is make me wonder whether c|net is getting some cash on the side from Mozilla (which, not everyone realizes, IS a for-profit company) or whether Microsoft did something to p*ss them off???

That article was total garbage and nothing close to a relevant or meaningful review of web browsers.

[morebaker]

Here is a so called unbiased benchmark test.

http://www.howtocreate.co.uk/browserSpeed.html

[halcyoncmdr]

Technocally firefox wasn't the first major browser to support tabs. It was the first browser to support tabs that became popular, ther is a difference. Besides, jsut because the flaming ferret became popular doesn't mean its any better or worse than other browsers. They all have their strong points and their weak points. It just so happens that most reviews don't compare them fairly.

[Slimy]

Here is a so called unbiased benchmark test.

http://www.howtocreate.co.uk/browserSpeed.html

This article is now retired. It was a tough decision, and I know that many of you have come to depend on the information in this article, but I have faithfully maintained it for nearly two years now, and the time has come.

[ToneKnee]

Technocally firefox wasn't the first major browser to support tabs. It was the first browser to support tabs that became popular, ther is a difference. Besides, jsut because the flaming ferret became popular doesn't mean its any better or worse than other browsers. They all have their strong points and their weak points. It just so happens that most reviews don't compare them fairly.

Firefox is still the second most popular browser around, which makes my comment still stand. I never said they were the first browser to support tabs, but the first major browser to actually support it. Firefox isn't a small minority like Opera, Netscape etc.

[tony-inpo]

One thing about this review - the two standard complaints with firefox are Memory usage and start time. Neither were tested in this review. They tested what they wanted in this review

[+Nik Louch Subscriber²]

Exactly. If I reviewd all the good points and ignored the bad - I could create a good review of anything and not tell a word of a lie. But omissions only go to make the review baseless.

[cork1958]

Firefox didn't invent tabs, so people shouldn't claim they did, its that simple.

Simple is way over most simpleton's heads though. Just like all the simpletons that follow each other to using Firefox thinking it's the greatest invention since the wheel.

I think all the seperate forums, like on this site, for browsers should be abolished. Just use what you want to use and STFU! :sleep:

[bibutteryboy]

until I can figure out why IE7 runs horribly slow and seems to lock up on me often then I have no choice but to stick to FireFox

[HawkMan]

when firefox was released with Tab support, Opera was far larger than firefox, you know.. since firefox didn't exist yet.

You can't come and say that firefox invented tabs because it later became the second most popular browser. That's extremely flawed logic. Heck even Opera didn't invent tabbed browsing, but before that the only brower that had it was some 1 user experiment thingy.

Heck firefox doesn't even support tabs yet. it has buttons that allows you to switch between browser windows, but it doesn't have proper tabs support, evident by the fact that minimiing a tab will allways bring up the tab next to it. NOT in the proper tab history way that they should work.

[htwho]

Why is everyone getting worked up over this? Doesn't it all depend on each user experience? To me, I used ie6 till firefox came out and two months later, I downloaded Firefox and used it. I wasn't completely satisfied so I switched to Opera. Yes, Opera does look amazing and you can select different colors to the theme you select. I liked the overall appearance and functionality of the browser but I missed Firefox. To me, Opera was too confusing to use. I switched back to Firefox 1.5 and never looked back since... I don't really think there is a difference between ie7, opera and firefox. To speak for the people, I think the only thing that looks different is the appearance and placement of buttons.

[+shift. MVC]

Agreed, FF2 is good but not THAT good. I would have given IE7 a few higher ratings, especially in the installation page.

[ViperAFK]

Agreed, FF2 is good but not THAT good. I would have given IE7 a few higher ratings, especially in the installation page.

The installation takes unacceptably long for a web browser AND requires a restart, I don't see why it deserves better in that particular category.

[FlibbyFlobby]

The installation takes unacceptably long for a web browser AND requires a restart, I don't see why it deserves better in that particular category.

IE7 requires a restart because its an integrated part of the operating system, whereas Firefox isn't. Its pretty unfair to compare them, I'm fairly certain Microsoft wouldn't include a reboot if it wasn't necessary.

[abc@home]

No big deal. Anyone can write his own review and host somewhere.

The one you find the best is the best, to you ;)