mozilla.org Releases 0.9.2.1
Tuesday August 14th, 2001
mozilla.org today released the source code for 0.9.2.1, which is the code that matches Netscape 6.1. This comes from the 0.9.2 branch, and is being made available both as part of the MPL license requirement, and as a way for third parties to easily use it to write compatible plugins and addon features to Netscape 6.1, as well as Mozilla.
#79 Re: get serious!
by mhearn <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Monday August 20th, 2001 3:28 PM
You are replying to this message
Hiya macpeep, hope I didn't piss you off too much. It's just personal opinion remember! Anyway, here are some answers (presumably you would like them):
"Microsoft plugins are no more proprietary than Netscape plugins."
"Second, Microsoft plugins have nothing to do with .NET *AT ALL* and everything to do with Active/X controls, which have been the component model in Windows since God knows how many years back. Just about EVERY plugin on the net is implemented as an Active/X control these days, with the sad exception of Quick Time, which Apple says is going to come out as Active/X soon."
Actually you're wrong. MS has announced that from now on plugins will be implemented as .NET objects. ActiveX and COM are (theoretically) things of the past.
"And AOL is going to the trouble of writing Mozilla and giving it away for free because.. what? They want to wrestle the control to them."
And how would they do that? Actually AOL is funding it mainly because it is a legacy of Netscape and they want a browser yes, but they don't control it. Mozilla basically controls the browser.
"It takes about 50 lines of C/C++ code to read an .ICO file."
I know that, I was talking more about platform design issues. For instance, MacOS X uses very different icons to Windows.
"If they make a bad browser, nobody will use it even if it IS bundled with the OS."
On the contrary this is exactly what happens. IE is not a good browser. If it was it would render web pages correctly. And the Department of Justice disagrees - they say bundling with the OS is important.
"Lots of people use Outlook (not OE) or Netscape or Eudora for email because they don't like Outlook Express (me for example)."
The Love bug spread because lots of people -do- use Outlooke Express. Mainly because it is bundled. I use it, 'cos it's still better than Mozilla Mail (at the moment).
"If you think that they just wrote something crappy for the sake of control, you're just wrong. They paid a lot of attention to making it a GOOD browser. If not, it's kinda sad to see that a browser that wasn't even made to be good, is still superrior to Mozilla - 4 years down the road."
Superior in what way? I tried very hard to be specific about what the differences are between Mozilla and IE. You haven't, just saying IE is "superior" isn't good enough. On standards complience and security it most certainly is not. On OS integration it is. Take your pick.