vs.


To start off the battle to the death, let's compare Requirements to see if the browsers are compatible with the average system.

Aweb 2.0 Voyager 1.0 WB : 3.0, 3.1 3.0, 3.1 MEM : 2 Megs 3 Megs 680?0: 68000 68000, 68020 version SOFT : DTYPES DTYPES, MUI
Aweb doesn't require any version of MUI to be installed, which means it takes less hard drive space. Aweb also olny needs 2 megabytes of RAM where Voyager needs 3, this means AWeb is more compatable with machines. Voyager includes a 020 optimised version of their software which greatly increases the speed, AWeb on the other hand doesn't need an optimised version, it flys compared to Voyager. I've done a speed test on scrolling, window resizing, and graphics processing and AWeb does all of these functions at least 2x as fast as the Voyager 020 version.

As for HTML3.2 functions, AWeb supports more of them then Voyager, many people who tried AWeb 1.2 said that it was terrible as it didn't support any HTML3.2 standards. And they were right, but don't let that bias your opion of AWeb 2.0, it does backdrops, background colors, transparent gifs, link colors, line sizing, 'virtual frames'. I could list all of the two browsers functions, but that would take pages of text. Instead I will show the differences betweeen the two.

Voyager does not support line sizing, (see Voyager screenshot and Aweb screenshot) where AWeb does, however Voyager does support Telnet by calling an external program to handle it. At the moment AWeb does not. Both can do the 'mailto:' function with plugins, and both will do FTP, Voyager internally and AWeb with the FTP plugin. One function that Voyager lacks and is 'vitural frames' AWeb supports this. It is not actually frames like you would see on Netscape, but instead it recognizes the frame command and will give you links to the different frames so you aren't missing any information. Voyager completely ignores the frame command.

As for graphic display, both will look similar displaying inline gifs and jpegs as both use datatypes on your computer. With v43 of the datatypes both will use a 64,000 color palette (When using our Picasso card, with AGA it will use a 256 color pallete, and a 16 color pallete for other chipsets). As for the Icons for navigating with the browser, it depends on personal preference. Voyager has large attractive icons, and AWeb has more compact 4 color icons. One other neat function in AWeb is if you click on the lightning bolt icon it will give you a display of what network activity is currently happening.

Configurability is another subject where AWeb rises above Voyager, in both you can configure your Fonts, proxies, cache sizes, but AWeb will let you choose your own screen mode straight from the program. In Voyager this must be done through MUI. AWeb also has 3 different HTML settings, 'Strict' 'Tolerant' and 'Compatible', to adjust what AWeb will display and accept. If AWeb meets a command it does not recognize in 'Strict' mode it will disregard it.

Final Ratings

Speed

Aweb outruns Voyager by atleast 2 times at everything it does, from graphics processing to window resizing. Although Voyager is speedy it doesn't come close to AWeb 2.0

AWeb : 96% | Voyager : 83%

Graphics Display

If you have the v43 datatypes both of the displays are the same, however if you have older versions of datatypes Voyager will actually look better for some pages. But AWeb's speed almost makes up for this in scrolling.

With v43 datatypes
AWeb 97% | Voyager 90%

Without v43 datatypes
AWeb 84% | Yoyager 87%

HTML3.2 Support

AWeb does more HTML3.2 commands then Voyager, but sometimes you have to really look for them. Yoyager does a whole bunch, but not quite as many or as well as Aweb

AWeb 96% | Voyager 86%

Features

Voyager does FTP internally, and Mail and Telnet by calling external programs. AWeb will also do FTP, Mail, Telnet, and some other functions through the plug-in modules. AWeb also has more features to configure, such as the HTML compatibility settings and screen mode settings. You can also change more font's with AWeb.

AWeb 96% | Voyager 90%

Overall

Since AWeb is quicker at all functions, and has more configuraibilty and compatibility, it works out to be more user friendly and simply a better program. I though Voyager was the best browser when it was released, but now AWeb has far surpassed it. Sorry Voyager.

WINNER! AWeb 94%

Voyager 87%