Se proprio vuoi, questo è decisamente più ragionevole
http://nanobox.chipx86.com/firefox_myths.phpSe poi hai tempo, leggiti i commenti all'articolo in questa pagina
http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/asa/archives/2006/01/scum.htmlL'autore del blog ed altri citati come "testimonials" non hanno apprezzato
Uno tra tanti
For those who are defending Andrew [nota: l'autore di quella pagina], you haven't seen firsthand his immaturity, obstinance in the face of constant correction, his arrogance, his frequent employment of malapropisms, his misrepresentations or his simple lies. He has been banned in most forums for hilarious antics like referencing himself, refusing to listen to anyone else, accusing anyone who disagrees with him of being a biased liar... and so on. Even if the article were well-written (which it is not) or contained legitimate myths about Firefox (I believe it has two), his behavior has nonetheless made me completely sympathetic to Asa's response.
Seriously. Don't bother reading the article. You will learn nothing, except possibly that Firefox has higher system requirements than Internet Explorer--not that this is a common misconception--and that it... get ready for this... isn't bug-free. People and websites like this make me sad, more than anything else.
Concludendo: il tipo sostiene cose che non stanno nè in cielo nè in terra.
Esempio: se una persona sostiene che Firefox è "bug free", non ha la più pallida idea di cosa sia un software
