LanderBrowse

I know another browser that's fast and also weighs in a less than 16MB's. Come to think of it, it weighs in at 4.8Mb's. Stumped yet? SAFARI! --Swordman

Dead Link everyone - Devs website also no longer up on the web.

It isn't talking about hard drive space- we're talking about memory (RAM) footprint here. I'm on a wintel at schoo but if memory serves me safari weighs in at a min of 20MB/instance...usually more depending on how it's set up. Why release this early? Clearly this isn't an attempt to dethrone Safari or Firefox. This is a browser for those of you who may have had to use ExPostFacto to install Mac OS X. This is implied by the authors comments. If you have a G4 or above this browser was not made for you. If you have something G3 or slower or limited RAM then you might like this browser. Ed Disclaimer: I don't know this developer, nor have I ever used this browser.

I know another browser that's fast and also weighs in a less than 16MB's. Come to think of it, it weighs in at 4.8Mb's. Stumped yet? SAFARI! --Swordman

Oh God, another one.

While LanderBrowse may be small and fast, it's so severely crippled by it's lack of features that it's really a pain to use. One can't set ones own home page....the preset homepage is Apple.com; upon launching LanderBrowser one is, currently, immediately greeted by those two Apple dorks going, "Hello, I'm a Mac.......and I'm a PC....", which is extremely annoying. There's no bookmark feature....a MUST for any browser, nor are there most of the amenities that make any browser user friendly. There aren't even any browser preferences to choose from. I'm just wondering why the developer chose to make his creation available so early in the developmental stage. The developer still has a long way to go before this browser can even be considered ready for prime time.