<i>I guess it's good for the average non-computer savvy user, but I'll be sticking with Mozilla after all </i> --c_l

Every option available in Mozilla also exists in Firebird. Use about:config for example, or hand-edit the chrome files yourself. Real "computer-savvy" users don't mind such things, I think. Firebird = Mozilla - crap. I don't want to load a composer I never use and a mail client I don't need every time I load my browser. Other than removing the bloat and changing the interface to make it less sucky and crowded, Firebird and Mozilla are the same program.

<i>^_~ I tried it too, and I agree with you, it sucks. :/ It doesn't support css or tables. T_T;</i> --Star

What? Yes it does. Firebird is more standards-compliant than IE anyways. The way IE displays CSS is wrong. The people who wrote CSS (the specification) wrote it to work a certain way, and IE doesn't do it right. It's just that so many people in the world blindly use IE that everyone writes sucky, buggy, stupidly-coded websites, and then good browsers choke on it. I have no idea what you're talking about with tables. I've never seen a site where tables display wrong in Firebird.

Mozilla and Firebird use the same rendering engine, so if you don't like how Firebird displays sites, don't bother trying Mozilla.