The first webpage was served off a NeXTcube at CERN, Switzerland, developed by Tim Berners-Lee. He also wrote the first web browser, confusingly named WorldWideWeb - the world of web browsers has come a long way since then, more or less turning into a platform of their own. This puts increasing pressure on web browsers to be really really good pieces of software, and as such, ZDnet has a 7-page comparison of the world's major web browsers, comparing Internet Explorer, Firefox, Opera, and Safari.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2006-01-16
Member since:2005-07-06
You have to admit there's a little disparity when it comes to amount of time/changes between FF3 Beta5/RC1 releases and Opera Beta1/Beta2 releases...
As a personal sidenote - when it comes to my usage pattern, I'm not particularly worried how long it takes for the browser to render page/etc. I'm more interested in how many tabs can I open simultaneusly and how long the browser can run without any problems showing up (both of these are somewhat related to poor state of how bookmarking works). Opera, in my experience, exceels in those two categories (and Seamonkey comes pretty close, but strangely not FF...)
PS. Isn't it a bit weird to make changes ending in "major" speed improvements between late beta and RC1?...
(edit: typo & PS)
Edited 2008-06-01 02:22 UTC
Member since:2005-08-29
Member since:2005-11-21
You assume correctly. There have been some major improvements in SVN. I've no doubt that at WWDC they'll have some update for general consumption.
Member since:
2006-05-02
The value of such comparisons is somewhat reduced by using outdated builds of one competitor. As someone in the comments section of that site already mentioned, the Opera build that was used was beta 1 instead of beta 2 which might explain the pretty bad results for "the fastest browser on earth".