Amusing Firefox 1.0PR review by ZDNet UK

[edesignuk]

Link.

Firefox seems like a decent browser, but I had a heck of a time getting it up and running without crashing. I think I probably spent 4-5 hours on it before it finally worked right.

The problem arose from installing one of the themes from the Mozilla web site. Once it was installed, Firefox would no longer run, even after uninstalling and reinstalling. I had to search my hard drive and the Internet multiple times to figure out where the file was that needed to be deleted. It was a mess.

Though it is touted as being more secure than IE, there was also several news stories detailing several security holes in earlier versions. More secure than IE? Probably. But not 100% secure. If you use Firefox, you may be getting a false sense of security.

I can see why it is still in Beta. It does seem fast, and highly compatible with most web sites. And I like the extensibility of it. But for me it has not been reliable enough to make it my primary browser.

Now, what makes this worse is that the man who some how managed to apparently take 5hrs to sort out a problem he probably created (I'd imagine he installed a theme not certified for 1.0PR, there are only a few for 1.0PR and I've tried them all!) is a "Software Developer", so, "Doug Johnson", you sir, are an idiot!

 

[AmigoMac]

That's a very stupid review... if he got a program and then applied haxies and themes which are not supported, what can you expect? ... Imagine, someone writing a review of Mac OS X saying it was a mess with the OS and that it's crappy because he installed a theme for the OS and everything was messed up... Whose fault? ... Stupid user = bad products ??? ... ...

 

[t300]

OMG, I couldn't stop laughing...What is that guy's problem?

But I guess if I lived in "Orem, UT" I would be bored out of my mind as well and sit around and write crappy reviews, too.

 

[Abstract]

"Looks like someone has a case of the Mondays"...

 

[Dr. No]

PC Mag

Anyone seen this one?


http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1641593,00.asp

 

[t300]

Anyone seen this one?


http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1641593,00.asp

Hey, if you looked like this:

And your name was this:

Lance Ulanoff​

Then, you too might write an article like that.

 

[dotnina]

Though it is touted as being more secure than IE, there was also several news stories detailing several security holes in earlier versions. More secure than IE? Probably. But not 100% secure. If you use Firefox, you may be getting a false sense of security.

I'm concerned that this man is allowed to be a reviewer because:

- "There was also several news stories ... "

- "several news stories detailing several security holes ... "

- All other points already mentioned in this thread