I have been using Mozilla Firebird lately, and I do like it. I like ctrl click for a new tab a LOT, I like macro links a lot, and I like that it doesn't feel heavy - don't ask me to define that, just see for yourself. But I liked IE well enough, so why the switch? A lot of people comment on Mozilla being the best for standards implementation, which a) I don't actually belive, and 2) don't actually care about much anyway. But the real reason I switched, is that due to flash MX 2004's pixel loving interface. I've had to increase the number of pixels on this monitor well past 1024 just to get the stage visible again ; ). This caused all those sites that define their fonts as pixels to become unreadable (the fonts became too small) in IE - which makes a pixel a pixel, as it is supposed to. Firebird, on the other hand, breaks the rules and put in a zoom feature, which makes all those sites readable again. So I've pretty much switched, just for that reason.

It is fashionable to blame web designers for using pixel settings, and even more fashionable to blame Microsoft for not doing something like zoom, but actually they are both just following the rules. So this must be asked - who the hell allowed pixels to slip into the html spec?!? I assume that would be the W3C. Not that standards aren't a good thing in general, just not all standards are a good thing. It is important to keep a little perspective. Not only are the W3C human, they are humans organized into committees. You really have to reserve the right to reject stupidity when you see it, even if you can only see it when squinting.