why I still use explorer

I don't want to get caught up in a religious war, but I've tried to love the new Mozilla (that's an open source web browser, mom) and I just can't. I wasn't sure why until I read this Kuro5hin story. Expecially:

Perhaps one of the most ill-fated decisions in the project was the use of XUL (an XML-based system) for the user interface. This results in Mozilla not using a good, standard interface on any platform, and instead of progressing beyond the Netscape 4 UI, which was behind IE and one of NS' weak points at the time, we are still using Netscape designs by default! Now Mozilla does indeed allow you to change your theme, but this does little beyond changing which pixmaps you are seeing instead of your OS' widgets, and the sets which use images of your OS' widgets to emulate a real application seem only to drive home the fact that you are not seeing a real interface when you go to use them. XUL does have interesting possibilities if you are looking for a, "cross-platform toolkit for developing Internet-based applications," but if you are looking for a web browser they amount to little more than a lazy port job.

What that means in English is that the program never feels like a "real" program, interface-wise. Because, really, it's not. It's only faking. Consistent system widgets (scrollbars, buttons, etc.) are required for that feeling of stability and usability, and choosing XUL was a terrible mistake for a consumer browser (if a consumer browser is what Mozilla is trying to be at all).

{ 3:59pm }