CHRIS WALKEN  I agree that Firefox obviously has the advantage on extensions, but I've found Camino's ad blocking to work quite well.   
(Version 1.5.0.6)

MU5TI  We have several options for adblocking, depending on your comfort/expertise level.

1. hostperm.1 blocking for gecko browsers (Fx, Camino, etc, great for cookies and banners)

2. BFilter proxy. Really good. (system wide) You might also want to try Privoxy, or something similar, though configuration might be a pain. BFilter is set and forget. It is as easy as changing the Network Location from the Apple Menu.

3. Hosts file. (system wide) Resides in /private/etc (or just /etc as there's a link). The big kahuna.

4. usercontent.css (browser-specific, this is not blocking per se, but hiding).

5. AdBlock extension, PithHelmet, SafariBlock, etc (browser-specific, might introduce stability/speed issues)

6. Router configuration, if you have one.

Camino is really nice, considering the limited amount of power behind it, compared to Safari or Firefox. Yes, it doesn't have extensions, this and that, but it is fast. Aqua. Constantly updated as code is taken from mozilla branch.  
(Version 1.5.0.6)

MU5TI  Relative. Everything is relative.

The tabs, yes I'll give it to you, some users love to hate the tab implementation of OW, others swear by it. Comes with a 30-day trial period after which there are lots of ways to use it in unpaid mode if you're so inclined.

As for no advantages over Firefox...full Services support (what? you ask, I know), full access to System dictionary, ColorSync support, editable text fields, slightly lower memory and CPU usage...oh, before all that, OW is built on Cocoa, and it does NOT look like a poor Windows application.

Having said that, no, I don't work for Omni, and I use Camino.  
(Version 5.5b2)

UNSHRA  It says 2.1 now, just takes time that's all.

Thanks to the team at Flip4Mac many of us have been waiting for this for a long time. I can now take quicktime out of Rosetta and run it natively.

Great product and so far the new version seem just as stable as the last one. However because it's now Universal it runs a lot faster on my MBP.

-Unshra  
(Version 2.1)

SUITCASE  I'd say various reasons - iChat is cleaner and simpler, has much better support for advanced features of the AIM network, better integration with other Apple programs, and of course - does video chat remarkably well.

Adium has its uses but it's entirely valid to prefer iChat, I think - Chax just lets it catch up on the advanced bits Apple missed!  
(Version 1.4.4)

MUDFLAPPER  I've been using Adium for about a year, and I absolutely love it. But, and this is a BIG but, file transfers are flaky with Adium. Every time I want to transfer a file reliably, I need to switch to iChat.

To tell you the truth, I would still be using iChat if there was a way to shrink the contacts' rows down so the iChat window didn't take up the entire screen. I have way too many contacts and I don't want to scroll to see them.

So once Chax allows me me control over the size of each row, I'll switch back to iChat. (I'll donate to Chax too.)  
(Version 1.4.4)

ZWS  Well boys I have some top secret info that should affect your future instant messaging. Adium 1.0 which is presently at beta 7, and is on the cusp of public release fixes the file transfer issues outright and offers countless other new features. Do a google search to test it out.  
(Version 1.4.4)

SJK  A smugly superior attitude about something doesn't entice me to try it.  
(Version 1.4.4)

SJK  Re: I would still be using iChat if there was a way to shrink the contacts' rows down so the iChat window didn't take up the entire screen.

Have you experimented with different combinations of Show Offline Buddies, Use Groups, and Use Offline Group under the View menu to make the contacts list more manageable?  
(Version 1.4.4)

SCHMELDING  Because it's a free country. Because I'd rather drink root beer than budweiser. Because I like to pick my nose while driving.

BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO.  
(Version 1.4.4)

BLACKLINT  Because it is iChat AV. Note the Audio/Visual part of the name. I routinely use audio and video chats with iChat, which Adium can't (yet) do. And i'm an Apple fanboy.  
(Version 1.4.5)

MDMUNOZ  There is no reason to use Adium. iChat can access Jabber, and thus can talk to people on MSN, ICQ, Yahoo, and more. And anything not in Jabber gets audio/video. The only possible reason to use Adium would be adding pretty backgrounds to your chats. And we all know how essential that is.  
(Version 1.4.7b1)

VINCELEERS  maybe it doesn't have a single $30 feature, but it certainly has many $5 features. to name a few: shortcuts that don't suck (create shortcuts from any search field with ease). thumbnail tabs. workspaces. url completion that doesn't suck. drag 'n' drop within the app and to/from other apps works much better than in all the other browsers. site-specific preferences. html editor which works quite well (i administer a small website with omniweb). good ad-blocking. detachable fields (perfect for e-mail via form fields, or forum entries). windows are saved, so no need to fear a crash, even with dozens of open windows.

...  
(Version 5.5 beta 1)

HEAVY_BABY  Because my Mac was broken. I have no way to work on my osx project.

Unfortunally I have Windows PC. So I can work on Cabos.

You can download the source code from here:

http://sourceforge.net/projects/acqlite/  
(Version 0.6.4)

IGABE  Thank you for that answer Heavy_baby.

I know I've been curious about that question, surely many others as well.

Best of luck fixing your Mac :) You might want to put a Donation button on your site for money so you can purchase a new MacBook pro =)  
(Version 0.6.4)

JETFIREDX  There IS a need for this. I have had nothing but problems with Stuffit since it hit version 10. Zip files that will open in 9 refused to open in 10. 10 for no explicable reason would decide to set some option where it phones home and would not run until you were able to connect to the internet so it could do so and the program would start so that you could change the preference again.

RAR Expander is a great tool. If you are like me and don't care to have Stuffit installed for whatever reason, RAR Expander is great for when you have the need to decompress a RAR file. (Today I had the need to do just that with a file a friend sent to me and where Simply RAR failed to show me any files in the archive, RAR Expander expanded it without any problem. Great program devs...please keep working on it.  
(Version 0.8.5b1)

MACINSPORE  ZACHWS: Your quite obviously new to computers or Mac's Specifically.

More than one Application Development Project with a similar objective is very good for the platform and computing in general.

Along to your lines of thinking Windows NT has existed for lots of years - why continue to develop the Mac OS??? According too your thinking this would be duplication of effort.

RAR Expander(580 K) StuffIt Expander (32MB) Which is smaller??  
(Version 0.8.5b2)

GIBLOW  Agreed, this is perhaps one of the really most solid of fileshares for Macs out there...but sadly is not being updated with any competency and from the complete lack of response from the new developer, coupled with their own interests in other programs and the way they've basically reverse-engineered LESS flexibility and ease-of-use into the newer versions, I suspect all this boils down to just a push for heavy_baby's "Cabos" program to try and supplant the far-superior older Acqlite versions.  
(Version 0.2.8)