Most hardware makers (excuse my bad english on this one), are making drivers just for Windows because they assume it's the leading OS, as if it was the only one that was worth to care of. So no surprise if windows' drivers database is huge.
I'm sorry mister COMPETANT USER, i must not be very competant since i managed to crash Win2k the 10 first times i tried it. I just seemed to be too fast for the machine, its access time to the local network was pitifully long compared to the speed of the network on ME. And it's been advertised that it's great for networking ? Then blame my local network that worked way better with Windows ME and SuSE 7.
Or maybe do i have to bow before Micro$oft and invest in a more recent local network just to fit Win2k's ENORMOUS need of memory (512 Mb, dual P3 700 procs, and it's still slow), just like i've spent hours on the net to download newest drivers.
Back to Mozilla topic, i can just praise the people who are doing it like it's being done: free, open-source, cross-platform. And i don't care with the possible bugs, because when Mozilla bugs, it doesn't bring me to restart Windows...
And on a last note, i find it a bit bold to reply "use win2k and ie 5.5 !", because i wouldn't change my ways and change my OS just to be able to browse some POORLY designed websites. (hell, i've seen even business sites without tags)
Slashdot Mirror
Most hardware makers (excuse my bad english on this one), are making drivers just for Windows because they assume it's the leading OS, as if it was the only one that was worth to care of.
So no surprise if windows' drivers database is huge.
I mean, without tags.
I'm sorry mister COMPETANT USER, i must not be very competant since i managed to crash Win2k the 10 first times i tried it. I just seemed to be too fast for the machine, its access time to the local network was pitifully long compared to the speed of the network on ME. And it's been advertised that it's great for networking ? Then blame my local network that worked way better with Windows ME and SuSE 7. Or maybe do i have to bow before Micro$oft and invest in a more recent local network just to fit Win2k's ENORMOUS need of memory (512 Mb, dual P3 700 procs, and it's still slow), just like i've spent hours on the net to download newest drivers. Back to Mozilla topic, i can just praise the people who are doing it like it's being done: free, open-source, cross-platform. And i don't care with the possible bugs, because when Mozilla bugs, it doesn't bring me to restart Windows... And on a last note, i find it a bit bold to reply "use win2k and ie 5.5 !", because i wouldn't change my ways and change my OS just to be able to browse some POORLY designed websites. (hell, i've seen even business sites without tags)