RE: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] Microsoft: Evil Empire or Suitable Software?

["Ross, Matt" <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

If you put things in tables, it won't load until the table is done loading.
That goes for almost all browsers.  My experience with Netscape is that it
loads the page in clumps, not all at once.  Netscrape doesn't appear any
slower for me though, but it depends on which versions you want to compare.
In 3.x IE was slower, 4.x, NS was slower, 5.x is hard to say, since
Netscrape jumped to the non-functional 6.x series

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Miller [mailto:EMAIL:PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 10:03 AM
To: EMAIL:PROTECTED
Subject: Re: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] Microsoft: Evil Empire or Suitable
Software?


On Wed, 1 Aug 2001, Marcus Semanek wrote:

> Actually it only appears to load them faster than netscape since it
> renders the page as it comes in while netscape waits for the entire
> page to load and then does the rendering.


I'm sure that's it.  So you're saying that the complete page is finished
just as quickly in Netscape as in IE.  I usually don't want to wait for
every little bit of a page to be downloaded before I start to read it.
Therefore, I think the IE strategy is better.  Is there a downside I'm not
understanding?

Mike

--
To manage your subscription, go to http://mlug.missouri.edu/members/edit.php

Archives are available at http://mlug.missouri.edu/list-archives/
--
To manage your subscription, go to http://mlug.missouri.edu/members/edit.php

Archives are available at http://mlug.missouri.edu/list-archives/