Netscape Cannot Win
Monday November 6th, 2000
I have recently become convinced that Netscape is fighting a losing battle against third-party micro-managing in their attempt to produce a browser for market.
The first conflict was with the raving loonies of the WSP. The WSP whines and bitches about standards compliance. They create a petition to convince Netscape to switch to development of their "Gecko" rendering engine technology, which promises greater standards compliance. They take credit for the Mozilla project moving to this new technology.
Then, they decide that the WSP is much more concerned about dictating project deadlines than standards compliance, and demand that Netscape release a product before the end of the year 2000, and stop any more work on Netscape 4.x -- including security fixes, apparently. (And read below to see what their fearless leader had to say today).
Now, a guy named Dave Flanagan has determined that Netscape 6 is too non-compliant to be released, although any reasonable, objective assessment of the application would prove that it is much more compliant than any browser currently on the market (yet you don't hear Mr. Flanagan petitioning against the release of iCab or IE6 or Konqueror).
And guess what? Mr. Flanagan has a petition you can sign, telling Netscape to hold off release of Netscape 6! But you can also use his petition to log your dissent.
[Mr. O'Reilly, I'm saddened that you signed an assent to Mr. Flanagan's petition without making an assessment of Netscape 6's standards compliance.
And Mr. Zeldman, I was dismayed, but not surprised, to read your statement in which you backtrack on the WSP's call for product release by the end of the year, when you obviously have not done an honest assessment of Netscape's standards compliance. "Releasing a close-to-perfect standards-compliant browser would be fine. (No software is perfect.) But releasing a browser with seriously buggy, incomplete standards support will not serve Netscape, will not serve developers, and will not serve the cause of web standards."]
I have made it known to a few people that I will no longer be fielding Netscape news on my site. You may see news of product releases, but you will no longer see links to reviews, complaints, rants, or any other information having to do with the Netscape product.
This site is called MozillaZine for a reason. I started it to support the Mozilla Open Source project. Along the way, I tried to be a voice of support for Netscape as it navigated the murky waters of being a commercial contributor to an open project. But what I am confronted with is the fact that if I were to continue posting Netscape news I would be forced to continue posting links to this garbage, giving it more credibility than it deserves. Look what happened when news of Mr. Flanagan's petition hit Slashdot. The petition now overflows with rants against Netscape, and I bet not one of these ravers has done even a modest assessment of Netscape 6's standards compliance. Is that the kind of support you wanted Mr. Flanagan? If you can get lots of people to raise their voices, does the din drown out their ignorance?
In any case, this crap will no longer will find a home in MozillaZine. So, take a good long look. Gaze into Mr. Flanagan's eyes. Because he's the last guy with an axe to grind against Netscape that you will see in these pages. The last armchair-marketer to get a say on this site. You'll have to go elsewhere to get your fix. (However, I allow myself an exception to clobber the hell out of the WSP if they continue to act like pussies.)
Netscape is in the unenviable position of choosing between bug-fixes and product release - the Scylla and Charybdis of software development. They've set their course. Maybe they will stop and reassess. That's up to the Netscape managers and the PDT team. But the waters grow increasingly insipid, and they might just end up deciding that it's not worth the trouble and pack it all up and call it a day. Maybe they can put in the past this peanut-gallery micro-management Hell that they've fallen into.
I'll leave you with a very thoughtful post to the n.p.m.layout newsgroup by Dylan Schiemann.
Tuesday November 7th, 2000 7:35 PM
You are replying to this message
My main comment on this is that I really don't think Mozilla could even survive without something like this. It doesn't look as complicated on the outside as a lot of other programs, but there is just so many faktors involved.
As someone else mentioned, there is like 25+ new bugs reported every day. If that was to be organized through e-mail, you'd need several people hired just for that, and there'd be no standard on what information is in the e-mail and deciphering what they're getting at, etc.
I signed up for it a while ago... wasn't any harder than signing up for any other free service thing.
Then clicked on to submit a bug, filled out the fields and submitted it. They have some sort of wizard system set up to make filing easier, but that didn't even seem that necessary.
After that, a couple of people took a look at it, and asked for more information. I attached some files that demonstrated it better, and they could confirm what was going on, and that it happened on all platforms.
So, it isn't fixed yet, but it is out there for people to see, and any time someone comments on it, I get sent an e-mail automatically.
The fact that every bug has its own area where people can talk about it I think is amazingly powerful, instead of it all being in private e-mails where people can't see what's going on and comment.
And there are already so many duplicates that are posted... imagine if there was no way for anyone to see what bugs had been already submitted, that e-mail address that was mentioned would be totally deluged every time a visible bug came up, having to sort through every one manually.
The search engine is a bit daunting at first, but there are so many bugs listed, you do need a lot of options to actually pin down what you want. Now that I'm more used to it, it isn't that bad to figure out what's going on.
As for the code, unfortunately stuff like documentation does tend to get left behind in most projects.. hopefully that'll get organized eventually...
But I really do think that bugzilla works and has probably made things infinately easier to deal with... If you actually want to do a fix instead of just reporting, I know there is more hurdles to deal with, but with something this complicated and interconnected, I can see the need for caution for patches. Sometimes it is frustrating to watch, but there are already so many regressions...
Anyway... that's my thoughts...