Comment Re:Reinvent this, reinvent that. It's all still sh (Score 1) 266
" Maybe you should go back and use that and tell me if Firefox is any better than that version."
Nope, because WWW didn't leak memory like a fucking sieve. Firefox 32? Just like every iteration before it, from XP to Win 7, is a straight up piece of swiss cheese when it comes to memory. I actually moved back to IE.
"we might still be using that original version which was pretty crappy and difficult to use."
Funny, having installed it in a Windows 3.1 VM and tested it out, it's nowhere near as bad as you think, assuming you have the brains and intuition to find stuff.
"Thanks for playing."
Oh please, you weren't even a player in the first place. You were just a pawn.
I think you are getting a little confused.
Firstly if you are seriously suggesting that Firebox is worse than Tim Berners-Lee's original WorldWideWeb brower, you are seriously deranged. The original WWW had no image support, and no bookmarks, to name just two features.
Ridiculous to suggest Firefox is not a massive improvement.
Secondly I genuinely would like to know how you managed to get a program designed for the NextStep platform to work on Windows 3.1. Here is a hint. You didn't.
The original WWW was developed in 1990 and was developed for the NextStep platform, Windows 3.1 came out in 1992. So you were probably using Mosaic if you indeed setup Windows 3.1 in a VM to make a point! Well done on that. Thanks actually for completely proving my point, Mosaic is significantly easier to use than the original WWW program. Go back and use the original WWW and compare the two.