I've read a number of reviews comparing Firefox 2 and IE7's RSS capabilities. Every time Firefox comes up short. There's a reason for this though, and it relates to the Firefox philosophy of having enough features, not too many or too few.
In general, we felt that RSS reader was a very personal choice to be made by the user, and that we did not want to compete with existing RSS readers that exist, which are very competent in a variety of ways. Rather, we wanted to allow users to easily subscribe to feeds using their favorite reader. The UI presented is not intended to be one for consuming the content, but rather previewing the content before subscription (since many feeds have non-descriptive titles). I think this is where the confusion arises, because the presentation is similar to Safari's and IEs and so people may expect reading functionality.
Does this represent a shift in philosophy towards RSS then, considering Firefox has a basic RSS reader in the form of Live Bookmarks? Not really, since Live Bookmarks offer something that most other readers don't at this point - bookmark integration and a simplicity that make them somewhat unique (and I have to credit OmniWeb here for developing this approach).
If we did not have Live Bookmarks today, I might hesitate at desiring them now that this simple subscribe interface exists, and I use Netvibes almost exclusively.
Kudos for crediting OmniWeb.