The issues people have with Firefox, such as the memory leaks that plague them, are directly attributable to the poor quality of the code base. IE, on the other hand, behaves rock solid, even if it's not compliant with the standards. So, while I have
never seen the IE code base, I can certainly make some assumptions.
You can have spaghetti code that complies and runs cleanly. I don't think it's that safe to make assumptions about Internet Explorer's codebase without actually looking at it.
Certainly you can. However:
1. I didn't say the code base for FF was "spaghetti code". There's a bit of that, but that's not what's wrong with the code base.
2. IE doesn't comply.
3. It's never "safe" to make assumptions.
Yeah, some of those points make me sound schitso
I'm not really making assumptions about IE's code base. I'm making assumptions about the viability of the two browsers going forward. IE has a track record of solid performance (ignoring it's definate issues with standard compliance) and improvements. Firefox,
IMO, doesn't have this track record. So the only thing I can judge the future on FF on is the code base, which is definately not something in its favor.
I'm glad for the competition that's gotten IE to start to move again. I wish there were even better competition. In many ways, Opera is probably better competition, but it's never gained the popularity of FF and therefore has never really been the competition
needed. Besides, I really don't like Opera's UI and suspect that's at least part of what's hindered its acceptance.
Right now, my hopes rest in IE 8, though I've not gotten the vibes I'd like from MS that IE 8 will address standards properly.