I'm with diomus here: Choice is important and sharpens the appetite on both sides to provide a good product.
I intend, assuming that it turns out to be a reasonable product, to buy Oregano3 and I've indicated so to Richard. My aspirations would be for a capable, RISC OS interface browser with some useful plug-ins, not least a more capable Flash.
I expect Firefox to grow into a capable and usable browser too though I'm open-minded on how RISC OS compliant it will be and expect it to be less well endowed with plug-ins.
However, that's just my uninformed opinion. What's more important is that we have two strings to this (IMHO) vital bow for our platform. I will be glad to use both as I currently use Oregano2 and Webster XL. I'm prepared to pay for both too, though (through Chocky's generosity) one does not *have* to pay for Firefox.
In terms of a waste of resources, either browser could represent such given the existence of the other. However, both actually leverage a huge (relatively) amount of pre-existing work so neither is comparable to what could be achieved by their respective teams if they did something completely different. I guess that neither team would be (for different reasons) so willing to do something different either.
Let's enjoy the choice, not start another version of the editor wars!
Please login before posting a comment. Use the form on the right to do so or create a free account.
Search the archives
Today's featured article
The new apple of my eye Would you swap your dusty Acorn for a polished Apple computer? Martin Hansen has been checking out the world of Steve Jobs and his range of shiny kit. 15 comments, latest by adh1003 on 6/1/09 1:06PM. Published: 17 Nov 2008