MozillaZine

Shock as MozillaZine Readers Turn to Slashdot for Accurate Information

Thursday October 31st, 2002

For our last poll, we asked you where else you go to get Mozilla news. 848 of you answered with Slashdot getting 30% of the vote, almost twice as much as its nearest rival, MozillaNews, with 17%. The third-placed 'None of the above' option was favoured by 16% of you, which frankly tells us very little. FUD specialist MozillaQuest came in fifth with 8% of the vote, which concerns us slightly. 5% of you rely on mainstream tech news sites such as CNET's News.com or eWeek while 4% of you prefer the weblog style of Blogzilla. Newcomers Planet Mozilla and MozFan didn't do so well with 1% and 0% of the vote respectively. NewsForge, with 1%, also did surprisingly badly, especially considering the amount of news we steal from them. Finally, 14% of you just go wherever telnet to port 80 will take you.

For our next poll, we'd like to know what your favourite Phoenix theme is. The options are taken from the lists at the mozdev Themes project and David Tenser's Phoenix Help so don't blame us if your favourite theme isn't listed. Go and vote now or just sit on the fence and watch the latest results.


#1 I don't use Phoenix

by redvine

Thursday October 31st, 2002 3:39 PM

Reply to this message

I don't use Phoenix, but most of the listed themes exist for Mozilla as well, so I voted based on my favorite Mozilla theme.

I really don't have a problem with the Phoenix project. As with Beonex, K-Meleon, Galeon, Chimera and other Mozilla based products -- that's what open source is all about. But I also don't understand Mozillazine's adoration of the project to the exclusion of all other similar projects (I just listed some of them in the previous sentence), and to some extent to the exclusion of Mozilla itself. Personally, I like the attitude of the Mozilla developers more than the Phoenix guys, and I like the Mozilla product better too.

While I am venting: I don't see the Phoenix speed enhancement everybody is always talking about. Sure the custom interface thing is nice, but not at the cost of all the other flexibility that has been lost because the Phoenix developers think they know better than I do about how I want to browse (tab order, key mapping, etc.).

Anyway, switching is moot as I can not live without mail. I just want to know why Mozillazine is becoming more and more Phoenixzine? Maybe the Phoenix guys should snap up that url and start a magazine there?

#2 Re: I don't use Phoenix

by AlexBishop <alex@mozillazine.org>

Thursday October 31st, 2002 3:49 PM

Reply to this message

"I just want to know why Mozillazine is becoming more and more Phoenixzine?"

Is this a commonly held view? Do other readers think that we're concentrating on Phoenix too much?

Alex

#7 Re: Re: I don't use Phoenix

by Tanyel <tanyel@straightblack.com>

Thursday October 31st, 2002 5:06 PM

Reply to this message

I think so. I was convinced that Phoenix was the name of the next version of Mozilla because this site only seems to mention Phoenix.

#8 Re: Re: I don't use Phoenix

by Sn4xx0r

Thursday October 31st, 2002 5:31 PM

Reply to this message

IMHO mozillazine reports news on mozilla.org related projects. Most news is now coming from Phoenix, so it's not surprising to read a lot on that project. For current Mozilla developments I check the buildbar talkback forum. No, I don't think you're concentrating to much on Phoenix. I think many Mozilla users are eying Phoenix, and waiting for news about their favourite feature before deciding to switch or even just try.

#10 Re: Re: I don't use Phoenix

by xander

Thursday October 31st, 2002 7:30 PM

Reply to this message

I don't think there's "too much" Phoenix news. It's what's producing news right now. There's not too much going on with Mozilla it seems. Although I wouldn't have minded a full colour exposť on the toolbar grippies being removed from Mozilla.... :)

I think MozillaZine is doing its job... Phoenix is most definitely Mozilla related and a lot of its new features will hopefully end up in Mozilla soon.

So I'm very happy with the current level of coverage... Don't change a thing! :)

xan...

#14 Wishing and hoping...

by SubtleRebel <mark@ky.net>

Thursday October 31st, 2002 9:53 PM

Reply to this message

"Phoenix is most definitely Mozilla related and a lot of its new features will hopefully end up in Mozilla soon."

That would be nice.

#11 Re: Re: I don't use Phoenix

by ccurtis

Thursday October 31st, 2002 9:05 PM

Reply to this message

I felt this way. I realize that news may be slow for Mozilla though and I'm just waiting for it to pass or something merge-like going on. I'm sure once 1.2 is out new things will be popping up in the tree, but Phoenix does seems to engender a certain prominence that other Mozilla based projects do not. Why is Phoenix it's own thing, rather than just clumped in when all the other projects release updates? Or maybe I'm just missing something never having used Phoenix...

#23 MozillaZine concentrating on Phoenix too much? YES

by peterlairo <Peter@Lairo.com>

Friday November 1st, 2002 2:40 AM

Reply to this message

Definetely. We (I) are far more interested in Mozilla because it: (A) has the features we need (mail), (B) the development process is more "communal" and less elitist (which is their right, BTW), (C) we have established a loyalty to Mozilla.

There are many exciting things happening in Mozilla that receive little to no coverage here (but should): - spam filter (very cool & promising feature) <http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=169638> - multiple signatures <http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=73567>

Also, there are may issues users are very interested in that MozillZine should address: - status of (or call for help on) spellchecker for 1.2 ? <http://spellchecker.mozdev.org/> - Calendar (improving by leaps and bounds) <http://www.mozilla.org/projects/calendar/> - Enigmail (why is GPG still unusably complicated for end users? - yes, we should be helping to fix that!) <http://enigmail.mozdev.org/> - MozOdffice has just kickstarted out of hybernation. <http://mozoffice.mozdev.org/> - "Long strings in mail or news header" are more broken than before. Someone should address comment #218. <http://bugzilla.mozilla.o…how_bug.cgi?id=91662#c218>

There are so many newsworthy items and *issues* that could be brought to our attention and discussed here. After all, isn't MozillaZINE not in _some_ ways similar to a MagaZINE?

You almost only inform us of new releases and articles. How about also bringing up some internal points of interest and friction?

#32 Re: MozillaZine concentrating on Phoenix too much? YES

by Blake <blaker@netscape.com>

Friday November 1st, 2002 6:34 AM

Reply to this message

> We (I) are far more interested in Mozilla

I'm not sure why you bothered saying "We" when you acknowledged that you meant "I". I point to the Phoenix forums (as compared with the Mozilla forums) as evidence of the high level of interest in Phoenix.

> (A) has the features we need (mail)

Mail is not a feature. It is a program.

> (B) the development process is more "communal" and less elitist

communal: Marked by collective ownership and control of goods and property.

This is not the way to develop a program. Collective ownership leads to neverending bickering in bugs which ultimately leads nowhere. It doesn't work, and Mozilla is testament to that. Phoenix is communal in the sense that we strongly encourage users (and non-users) to give us feedback in our forums. Yup, we don't grant checkin access to anyone under the sun. Imagine that! We still take patches from experienced people. And the process is very obviously working well.

> There are many exciting things happening in Mozilla that receive > little to no coverage here (but should): - spam filter (very cool > & promising feature) (LINK) - multiple signatures (LINK)

Your entire argument is that Mozillazine covers Phoenix too often. But Mozillazine does not cover every feature that gets added to Phoenix -- in fact, to my knowledge, it has never done so. So why would Mozilla get that treatment?

> There are so many newsworthy items and *issues* that could be > brought to our attention and discussed here.

So submit a coherent article. Mozillazine is largely run by its fans, who submit articles. In that sense, the articles you see are largely the result of fan interest.

#40 MozillaZine concentrating on Phoenix too much? YES

by peterlairo <Peter@Lairo.com>

Friday November 1st, 2002 8:10 AM

Reply to this message

Too bad you chose not to respond constructively and with an open mind. Therefore, I shall stoop:

>> We (I) are far more interested in Mozilla

>I'm not sure why you bothered saying "We" when you acknowledged that you meant "I".

Because I wanted, without using even more words, to convey that there SEEMS to be more interest in Mozilla than in Phoenix (in ADDITION to MY interest being higher).

> I point to the Phoenix forums (as compared with the Mozilla forums) as evidence of the high level of interest in Phoenix.

I point to the entire mozilla project, all mozilla newsgroups, all outside articles written, the number of bug participants, etc. as evidence of the MUCH HIGHER level of interest in Mozilla.

>> (A) has the features we need (mail)

> Mail is not a feature. It is a program.

Attacking a (less relevant) detail and (deliberately) ignoring the obvious message is a dastardly way of avoiding an inconvenient topic. I see this with politicians and extremists; but I am repeatedly discouraged when seeing it in our "community".

>> (B) the development process is more "communal" and less elitist

> communal: Marked by collective ownership and control of goods and property.

That was the THIRD DOWN definition. The SECOND definition is more how I see it: "A group of people having common interests".

> This is not the way to develop a program. Collective ownership leads to neverending bickering in bugs which ultimately leads nowhere.

Yes, and the peasants really do need a king, too. NOT! Please stop oversimplifying. A degree of hierarchy is always needed AND the masses need some level of control. This is what makes a healthy society (efficiency comes AFTER humanity - i can't believe I have to point this out).

> It doesn't work, and Mozilla is testament to that.

Really? I think Mozilla is working greatly.

> Phoenix is communal in the sense that we strongly encourage users (and non-users) to give us feedback in our forums.

Yes, and the peasants don't need more than 10% of their earnings either...

> Yup, we don't grant checkin access to anyone under the sun.

Neither does Mozilla. That is implied slander (A false and malicious statement or report about someone/something).

> Imagine that! We still take patches from experienced people. And the process is very obviously working well.

Completely OT! The topic is "MozillaZine should report MORE on other aspects of Mozilla".

>> There are many exciting things happening in Mozilla that receive little to no coverage here (but should): - spam filter (very cool & promising feature) (LINK) - multiple signatures (LINK)

> Your entire argument is that Mozillazine covers Phoenix too often.

Wrong! My point is that MozillaZine covers OTHER ISSUES TOO LITTLE!

>> There are so many newsworthy items and *issues* that could be brought to our attention and discussed here.

> So submit a coherent article. Mozillazine is largely run by its fans, who submit articles. In that sense, the articles you see are largely the result of fan interest.

I might, but that is not the POINT of my post! I'm sure those that copy/paste an article to MZ don't just post ALL articles submitted. There is likely some SELECTION PROCESS. My point is that THE SELECTION PROCESS NEEDS SOME RECONSIDERING.

#48 MozillaZine's selection process

by AlexBishop <alex@mozillazine.org>

Friday November 1st, 2002 11:00 AM

Reply to this message

>>> There are so many newsworthy items and *issues* that could be brought to our attention and discussed here.

>> So submit a coherent article. Mozillazine is largely run by its fans, who submit articles. In that sense, the articles you see are largely the result of fan interest.

> I might, but that is not the POINT of my post! I'm sure those that copy/paste an article to MZ don't just post ALL articles submitted. There is likely some SELECTION PROCESS. My point is that THE SELECTION PROCESS NEEDS SOME RECONSIDERING.

Actually, MozillaZine posts most of the valid articles that get submitted. We get quite a lot of requests for help, bug reports and messages that were intended for the forums etc. but when you take all that away, we post the majority of the articles we receive. There isn't really much of a selection process. It's mainly just a decision of 'Is this submission about Mozilla and does it meet a few minimum standards (enough actual content, accurate etc.)?' In my experience, the only articles that I have to think about for a bit before accepting/rejecting are usually those that are only sort-of related to Mozilla (e.g. stories about Web standards).

Tell me if any of this doesn't make sense or you want further clarification.

Alex

#72 MozillaZine's selection process

by peterlairo <Peter@Lairo.com>

Saturday November 2nd, 2002 10:13 AM

Reply to this message

Alex,

that makes a LOT of sense, and I am VERY glad to hear it.

I am now much more motivated to consider submitting an article.

Thanks for elicidating how articles get into (onto?) MozillaZine. :)

#53 Re: played with it today.....

by Blake <blaker@netscape.com>

Friday November 1st, 2002 12:13 PM

Reply to this message

> Attacking a (less relevant) detail

It is entirely relevant. The fact that mail isn't a feature but an application goes to the heart of Phoenix and its entire purpose.

> A degree of hierarchy is always needed AND the masses need some > level of control.

The Phoenix masses have plenty of control. I've already stated unequivocally that we read and incorporate user feedback into every release.

> Really? I think Mozilla is working greatly.

Mozilla is not working "greatly" when 3 people can go off and speed it up by 40% in a matter of weeks.

> Neither does Mozilla. That is implied slander

No, it's entirely true. I sit in on the super-reviewer meetings where we discuss issues like this (giving out too much checkin access). What's your source?

#73 MozillaZine concentrating on Phoenix too much? YES

by peterlairo <Peter@Lairo.com>

Saturday November 2nd, 2002 10:28 AM

Reply to this message

>> Attacking a (less relevant) detail

> It is entirely relevant. The fact that mail isn't a feature but an application goes to the heart of Phoenix and its entire purpose.

No, it is not relevant to THIS thread. The topic is why I think there should be MORE coverage of Mozilla, and one of the reasons I am more interested, is bcause Mozilla has Mail (feature or whatever).

>> A degree of hierarchy is always needed AND the masses need some level of control.

> The Phoenix masses have plenty of control. I've already stated unequivocally that we read and incorporate user feedback into every release.

Then our ideas of "level of control" differ. That's fine, but it is yet another reason why I am MOR interested in Mozilla.

>> Really? I think Mozilla is working greatly.

> Mozilla is not working "greatly" when 3 people can go off and speed it up by 40% in a matter of weeks.

40% of what (minute?) aspect? Stripping something down to bare bones functionality and then having ONE criteria perform better is no great reason to contend that Mozilla isn't working greatly. Just because Poenix is great in many ways doesn't mean that Mozilla isn't great in many (other?) ways also.

>> Neither does Mozilla. That is implied slander

> No, it's entirely true. I sit in on the super-reviewer meetings where we discuss issues like this (giving out too much checkin access). What's your source?

Then you might not know what "anyone under the sun" means. I think you were generalizing again to make your point (more) valid.

#42 Attitude

by SubtleRebel <mark@ky.net>

Friday November 1st, 2002 9:03 AM

Reply to this message

"This is not the way to develop a program. Collective ownership leads to neverending bickering in bugs which ultimately leads nowhere. It doesn't work, and Mozilla is testament to that. Phoenix is communal in the sense that we strongly encourage users (and non-users) to give us feedback in our forums. Yup, we don't grant checkin access to anyone under the sun. Imagine that! We still take patches from experienced people. And the process is very obviously working well."

Sounds like, according to Blake, Mozilla is a failure. However, I would say that Mozilla is a testament to how successful an open source project can be. I believe that many people would agree with me in saying that Mozilla is the best, most robust, web browser available. Obviously there are people who believe Phoenix has the potential to be better than Mozilla, but where would Phoenix be without Mozilla?

Although I have heard plenty of lip service about encouraging users to give feedback on Phoenix, it seems like every time someone posts some criticism it is met with harsh, arrogant, overly defensive comments which often include personal attacks against whoever dared criticize Phoenix.

#51 Re: played with it today.....

by Blake <blaker@netscape.com>

Friday November 1st, 2002 12:01 PM

Reply to this message

Mozilla in general is not a failure. But yes, when 3 people can go off and make it up to 40% faster, there is a problem.

I have no idea what you're talking about with regards to the forums. We read the forums religiously and make changes in direct response to the feedback posted there. The only cases where we are naturally defense is where the person is making unfounded statements or speculating about something that we have emphatically stated to be untrue already.

#67 Where would Mozilla be without Phoenix?

by mpthomas

Saturday November 2nd, 2002 1:04 AM

Reply to this message

"Mozilla is a testament to how successful an open source project can be."

No, Apache is a testament to how successful an open source project can be. It has 60 percent market share <http://netcraft.co.uk/survey/> , despite its main competitor (Microsoft's IIS) being bundled and integrated with Windows server operating systems. Compare that with the tiny market share of Mozilla, whose main competitor (Microsoft's Internet Explorer) is bundled and integrated with Windows client operating systems.

What Mozilla *is* a testament to is the robustness of the open source model -- demonstrating that an open source project can produce somewhat functional software, despite having many flaws in its development process. (Phoenix and Chimera are avoiding these process flaws, which is the next best thing to fixing them.)

"Where would Phoenix be without Mozilla?"

It would be at the top level of the mozilla.org Web site, rather than in the projects/phoenix/ subdirectory. And, I think, it would have several times as many users as Mozilla has now. (But that's just my opinion.)

"it seems like every time someone posts some criticism it is met with harsh, arrogant, overly defensive comments"

Perhaps, but that's somewhat understandable. Imagine that you, like Blake and Asa, had been slogging through the mud of the Mozilla development process, which is not nearly as fun as it could be (see also Mike Shaver's comments from October 30 <http://off.net/~shaver/diary/2002/10/> ). Eventually, you manage to set up a project which has a much better development model, to produce a much better browser -- only to be by confronted by whiners complaining that your new browser doesn't have the same development process, UI flaws, and bloat as Mozilla does. Wouldn't you be just a *teeny weeny* bit infuriated?

-- mpt

#25 Re: Re: I don't use Phoenix

by sipaq

Friday November 1st, 2002 3:17 AM

Reply to this message

Definitely not. Due to the fast pace with which Phoenix is progressing it gets a lot of news coverage. That's no bad thing. People who whine about "Project XYZ isn't getting as much coverage as Phoenix" should simply shut up and start submitting stories.

#26 Re: Re: I don't use Phoenix

by zreo2 <aa@globecom.se>

Friday November 1st, 2002 3:21 AM

Reply to this message

I agree that the focus on Phoenix is to much. But not only from Mozillazine but also from Mozilla.org...

Their status updates are not filled with updates on the browser... some of them are only filled with phoenix related news. In my eyes that says: "so the development of Mozilla is over!" And we all now that's not the case.. or well.. I do hope that.

I have no idea who or how many that are working on Mozilla vs Phoneix or both. Can someone explain more about how it works ?!

#30 Unfortunately, yes...

by Sander

Friday November 1st, 2002 6:13 AM

Reply to this message

"Is this a commonly held view? Do other readers think that we're concentrating on Phoenix too much?"

I'm sad to say this, but yes, I do feel the focus has shifted just a tad too much. I think it's great that Phoenix exists; it serves a market and gives me hope for the idea of a plethora of browsers each targeting a different kind of user (something I think either David Hyatt or Blake Ross wrote about in his weblog a few months ago). And I think it's great for the people working on Phoenix that they've found a new toyproject to play with. I mean, jay! Good for them. But I don't care about Phoenix. I think this previous comment says it best: "Phoenix developers think they know better than I do about how I want to browse." Well, they don't. Thus, "Phoenix is not for me." More important however, whenever someone brings up a point against this, trying to argue for why some changes are not liked, he's ridiculed. The Phoenix developers have every right to run the project as they see fit, to be as authocratic as they want and post silly pics in their weblogs or vent their frustration with idiot user suggestions in whatever way they want. But that means it's not a project I want to be part of. Mozilla is. (I think that might just be the biggest problem with Phoenix; it was born out of frustration.)

With Mozilla I know what's going on. If I want to discover the reasoning behind changes, I go and query for the bug. There are lots of decisions I disagree with, some of them even big enough to make me try and help with getting them undone. With Mozilla, that is something you can do - argue against changes. It far too often gets way out of hand, with too many people not seeming to realize when discussion is over. Other times, it's the clashing of too big egos that both have too much power. I loathe the politics and personal dislike I see cropping up every so often. But still, despite all that, if you can bring truly good arguments to the table why you feel something should be done a certain way, you have a chance of having a real effect. With Mozilla, I'm _glad_ to do things like duping the umptieth bug by someone who hasn't queried, because I am giving back to a project that has not only provided me with the browser I prefer above all others, but also appreciates my contributions in making the browser even more useful.

Mozilla is a community project. Phoenix isn't. It's a great project, and I hope at least some of the developments from Phoenix (customizable toolbars, perhaps satchel) will be brought over to the trunk, but overall it's developing in a way that makes it less and less like a browser I might want to use. And with Phoenix being as 'elitist' as it is, I think it does indeed get too much attention here.

#38 Well said Sander (n/t)

by SubtleRebel <mark@ky.net>

Friday November 1st, 2002 8:04 AM

Reply to this message

Well said.

#45 Re: Re: I don't use Phoenix

by dmarner

Friday November 1st, 2002 9:33 AM

Reply to this message

No, you are not discussing Phoenix too much.

Although people often criticize public forums by saying "You are talking about X too much!", what they usually mean is "I don't like X". On a news site like this it is trvially easy to ignore news items that don't interest you, at least at the current rate of posting. Given that, there is NO reason to talk LESS about anything. Readers who aren't interested in Phoenix can just not read those articles. Folks who try to get you to create fewer of those articles are really just trying to stifle those of us who ARE interested.

Now, if they would care to argue that you should talk MORE about something else, that is almost a valid viewpoint. I say "almost" because on a site like this, if you feel there needs to be more articles about something, all you have to do is submit them.

Only if it becomes a significant burden to filter out the "undesired" topics should you consider cutting back, and then only if a real majority wants that to happen; not just a vocal minority.

#49 Ratio of Phoenix/Non-Phoenix Articles

by AlexBishop <alex@mozillazine.org>

Friday November 1st, 2002 11:08 AM

Reply to this message

I'd just like to clarify something. MozillaZine doesn't run Phoenix articles in preference to other Mozilla-related news. It's not like we think, "Should we run Blake's update on Phoenix 0.4 or that article about XUL?" We never drop an article because we've got too much news. As far as I'm concerned, the more articles the better. So if the concensus is that MozillaZine is concentrating on Phoenix too much, the only real solution - barring a sudden increase in news relating to other Mozilla projects - would be to reduce the number of Phoenix articles that are featured.

I don't think that would be a good thing.

Alex

#3 Re: I don't use Phoenix

by kerz <jason@mozillazine.org>

Thursday October 31st, 2002 3:56 PM

Reply to this message

I think you'll find that we cover what's hot at the time. Right now that's Phoenix mostly. Chimera and other projects have slowed down a lot in recent months, and stuff like Beonex and K-Meleon rarely have updates. We take what news we get from contributors, and right now, people are contributing Phoenix stuff.

#15 Phoenix vs Chimera

by SubtleRebel <mark@ky.net>

Thursday October 31st, 2002 10:08 PM

Reply to this message

Hmmmm, when I have suggested that Chimera development was progressing slower than Phoenix development, I received a heated response claiming that that was not true.

Perhaps now would be a good time to renew my position that Phoenix should consider officially supporting the Mac platform. Since Phoenix does seem to be leading the pack in various ways, Mac users are somewhat left behind. I realize that there is an unofficial Mac OS X build of Phoenix, but without official support for Macs there is no guarantee of future compatibility.

The idea that Mac users get Chimera instead of Phoenix really fails to satisfy the need for a truly cross platform browser environment. Phoenix and Chimera do not coincide feature for feature and it is unlikely that they ever will; various Phoenix themes and add-ons are not going to be available for Chimera users.

#21 Phoenix on Mac would be awful

by mpthomas

Friday November 1st, 2002 12:12 AM

Reply to this message

I have to admit, there are days when I wish someone would make a Mac build of Phoenix, because I'm one of those old fogeys still using Mac OS 9 (just like those old fogeys still using Windows 98). Chimera only runs on OS X, and Mozilla is excruciatingly slow -- so I'm stuck on Internet Explorer, wondering what a browser 40 percent faster than Mozilla feels like.

However, the fact is it's simply not worth having an official port of Phoenix to the Mac OS. Mac users tend to be quite finicky about user interfaces, and the Mac's user interface is *different* from that of Windows in many important ways. <http://developer.apple.com/ue/switch/windows.html> (Some of these differences can be overcome using XUL overlays, but not all of them.) So any browser with a UI designed for Windows -- such as Mozilla or Phoenix -- will suck pretty badly on the Mac, and vice versa.

So the number of Mac users who would use *any* XUL-based browser, rather than Chimera (on OS X) or Internet Explorer (on OS 8/9), is very, very small indeed. A `truly cross platform browser environment' is not a feature; it's a bug.

-- mpt

#37 Out of the loop?

by SubtleRebel <mark@ky.net>

Friday November 1st, 2002 7:52 AM

Reply to this message

Actually there is a rogue OS X build of Phoenix available ( <http://www.kmgerich.com/misc.html> ) and it is not slow at all.

You ought to upgrade to Jaguar and check it out.

#47 Re: Phoenix on Mac would be awful

by bugs4hj <bugs4hj@netscape.net>

Friday November 1st, 2002 10:00 AM

Reply to this message

What was it, Matthew? Say, do you like to try OSXilla for MacOS9?

<http://multizilla.mozdev.org/>

take a look at those screenshots and let me know if that's make you more happy.

Oh god, you're the one that didn't like tabbed UI's. Ok, sorry, forget about it :-)

Cheers mate, /HJ

#68 Excuse me for a moment ...

by mpthomas

Saturday November 2nd, 2002 1:21 AM

Reply to this message

... I just looked at those screenshots. I'm going to the bathroom for a moment -- if you hear retching sounds, please don't panic.

"you're the one that didn't like tabbed UI's"

Tabbed UIs are a great way of navigating between panels, as long as those panels exist under a few basic conditions, none of which are true for a browser window <http://groups.google.co.n….8D1F9237%40myrealbox.com> ... But, perhaps, this thread is quite toasty enough already without adding a flamewar on tabbed browsing. :-)

-- mpt

#4 Re: played with it today.....

by Blake <blaker@netscape.com>

Thursday October 31st, 2002 4:04 PM

Reply to this message

> But I also don't understand Mozillazine's adoration of the project

MozillaZine, like other fan sites, exists to serve its users. And user interest in Phoenix has skyrocketed (cf. the Phoenix forums, where over 6500 posts have been made in the past couple of months, compared with only 6800 posts in Mozilla's General forum in almost a year. Most of the other projects you listed don't release nearly as often as Phoenix (K-Meleon updates its website like once a year; the last Beonex milestone was in September). It hardly seems surprising to me that Phoenix is getting so much attention.

> I don't see the Phoenix speed enhancement

I don't know why. Maybe your system is so fast that Mozilla can't really get any faster on it? Performance tests certainly see Phoenix speed enhancements.

> not at the cost of all the other flexibility that has been lost

What flexibility has been lost? Does Mozilla have pref UI for this? By "lost flexibility," do you really mean "they changed things I like"? Because flexibility isn't the same as changing defaults.

#12 Lost flexibility

by SubtleRebel <mark@ky.net>

Thursday October 31st, 2002 9:26 PM

Reply to this message

Until Phoenix has UI for all the preferences with a UI in Mozilla, there is some flexibility lost.

#20 Yeah right

by mpthomas

Thursday October 31st, 2002 11:37 PM

Reply to this message

Quite a few of the prefs with a UI in Mozilla are just workarounds for broken behavior which the programmers haven't fixed yet. (For example, having a pref for the auto-complete menu or for view source coloring, rather than making those functions work fast enough that having them turned on doesn't slow *anyone* down.) That's not "flexibility", it's laziness.

I think it's interesting that you haven't given any specific examples of lost flexibility.

-- mpt

#28 Example...

by bmacfarland

Friday November 1st, 2002 5:44 AM

Reply to this message

I can't use my two favorite themes (or anything even remotely similar in Phoenix) -- LittleMoz and Wood.

#29 Re: Example...

by JessePelton

Friday November 1st, 2002 5:55 AM

Reply to this message

That's because the theme author hasn't made the changes necessary to support Phoenix. I don't see how that qualifies as a lack of flexibility in Phoenix.

#33 I'm no XUL developer...

by bmacfarland

Friday November 1st, 2002 6:37 AM

Reply to this message

I'm going to preface this by the fact that I'm just talking out of my well, you know what. It seems to me that themes, because their functionality is abstracted should be able to be implemented exactly the same in Phoenix. If my LiveLizard client can use my LittleMoz theme, then surely something much closer to the Mozilla browser, like Phoenix, should be able to as well, right? If Phoenix doesn't provide backward support for the existing themes (not for early versions of Mozilla mind you, but support for the latest existing versions and/or full blown releases like Mozilla 1.0), then yes, I call it a lack of flexibility for Phoenix. I hate to say anything negative because people will say I'm trolling, but I'm just trying to express healthy criticism.

#34 Re: Example...

by Blake <blaker@netscape.com>

Friday November 1st, 2002 6:37 AM

Reply to this message

That has nothing at all to do with Phoenix. Phoenix would support it if those theme authors updated their themes to work with Phoenix. How about a legitimate example?

#44 Another example?

by bmacfarland

Friday November 1st, 2002 9:30 AM

Reply to this message

This may be an extensions issue more than Phoenix fault, but extensions don't seem to behave the same way in Phoenix as they do in Mozilla. I can't seem to find a way to customize the MouseGestures to use the right mouse button (I don't like to open a new window everytime I select text). There seems to only be the option to uninstall.

I also can't press F8 to hide/unhide the Prefs bar. In fact there seems to be no way to hide it.

All in all though, Phoenix has progressed quite a lot more than I expected. I was disappointed at first because I've been spoiled by Mozilla.

#56 Re: Another example?

by asa <asa@mozilla.org>

Friday November 1st, 2002 1:18 PM

Reply to this message

I can't install the Google toolbar for IE into Mozilla, that's not Mozilla's problem, that's an issue with the Google toolbar for IE which attempts to install itself using mechanisms that don't exist in Mozilla. If an extension attempts to install itself to a toolbar that doesn't exist in Phoenix or a pref panel that doesn't exist in Phoenix then the extension won't function properly. That's not a shortcoming of Phoenix.

That being said, the necessary tweaks to a Mozilla extension to make it work properly in Phoenix are very minor. You can see how minor at <http://www.mozillazine.or…ogs/hyatt/extensions.html> (that might be a bit out of date but the point stands that it's a minor tweak to port a Mozilla extension over to the Phoenix application.)

--Asa

#63 Re: Another Example...

by bmacfarland

Friday November 1st, 2002 10:11 PM

Reply to this message

IE and Mozilla are two totally different and unrelated applications. No one would expect one extention to work for both. However, Phoenix and Mozilla codebases are very largely the same, you admit the modifications are few, why couldn't Phoenix be designed to use the same extension mechanisms as Mozilla? What happens if K-Meleon comes along and says "we require our extensions to use this format"? Then Galeon says the same thing. Suddenly it become such a pain that people say it's not worth it and we are either a) not going to develop extensions at all anymore or b) only going to support one or two variations of Gecko-based browsers. Then you get users picking a browser based on the extensions (for instance I couldn't think of using Phoenix without Mouse Gestures) and not based on the majority of the browser's advantages. This isn't far fetched, this is already occurring.

#64 Re: Re: Another Example...

by asa <asa@mozilla.org>

Friday November 1st, 2002 11:16 PM

Reply to this message

"why couldn't Phoenix be designed to use the same extension mechanisms as Mozilla"

They do use the same mechanism. It's called XPI - cross platform install.

"What happens if K-Meleon comes along and says "we require our extensions to use this format"? Then Galeon says the same thing. "

Um, they have. They explicitely DON'T support any XUL extensions. They are native frontend projects that don't use XUL at all. Not one bit of XUL. I doubt they even support XUL in content (although I might be wrong). You certainly can't install any Phoenix extension into Galeon or K-Meleon that I know of and I've certainly not heard of anyone making a K-Meleon extension work in Mozilla or Phoenix. They are all completely different formats (for one thing, Kmeleon and Galeon have native code frontends just like IE so they're "totally different and unrealted applications" when it comes to frontend extensions). I doubt that any of the "not quite frontend" extensions are interoperable either. Kmeleon and Galeon don't even support the install mechanism for extensions like mouse gestures.

"Suddenly it become such a pain that people say it's not worth it"

Suddenly!!!??? What do you mean suddenly. There has never been any frontend extension that worked in Galeon and Kmeleon or in Mozilla and either of those native frontend apps. There's nothing new here. They're as incompatable with XUL extensions as IE is.

"hoenix and Mozilla codebases are very largely the same, you admit the modifications are few, why couldn't Phoenix be designed to use the same extension mechanisms as Mozilla?"

Phoenix shares a majority of code with Mozilla, that's for sure. It's probably like 95% or more. The problem is that the 5% it doesn't share is the very same 5% that extensions hook into. As far as extensions go, Phoenix is a different app and it's going to get more and more different as Phoenix cleans up more and more of the UI. That some of the extensions sort of work in Phoenix now is because there are still some Mozilla front end files, similarly named files or similar XUL structure in Phonix but that's changing.

What do you suppose a Phoenix extension that installs itself into the customize palette should do when someone tries to install it in Mozilla where no such palette exists? What about a Mozilla extension that tries to install itself into the Windows menu which doesn't exist in Phoenix. The UIs are diverging and so UI extensions that install themselves into pieces of UI which don't exist in the other application can't be expected to work.

The extension authors can probably make the extension smart enough to use an alternate install target ID or something based on which app they're being installed into but I don't think that Phoenix (or Mozilla, for that matter) should carry the weight (usability, performance and size hits) of all of the chrome of the other app just so that all of the extensions will have the same install target on Mozilla and Phoenix.

The architecture is similar so it shouldn't be hard to port extensions between the two apps. Maybe someone can even write a little script that maps locations from one app to the other which could be run on an extension modifying it to work well on the other app. Something like that might help but in the end, Mozilla and Phoenix are different apps with different UIs so UI extensions are going to need to get smarter or they're going to have to make one for Phoenix and one for Mozilla or they're going to exclude one.

--Asa

#5 Re: I don't use Phoenix

by jonasj

Thursday October 31st, 2002 4:19 PM

Reply to this message

"But I also don't understand Mozillazine's adoration of the project to the exclusion of all other similar projects"

Phoenix is backed by mozilla.org; besides Chimera, none of the other projects you mentioned are.

"and to some extent to the exclusion of Mozilla itself."

Phoenix is where most of the interesting front end development is happening. And why should Mozillazine necessarily favor Seamonkey (mozilla.org's current flagship browser-mailnews-composer suite) over other Mozilla projects?

"Personally, I like the attitude of the Mozilla developers more than the Phoenix guys"

The problem is that it's very hard to get UI patches reviewed and super-reviewed since the reviewers (understandibly, IMHO) are often more interested in hacking on C++ code than how the interface looks. The Phoenix way gets things done much faster and is far less bureaucratic.

"and I like the Mozilla product better too."

Well, Phoenix is still alpha. Much will happen still.

"Sure the custom interface thing is nice, but not at the cost of all the other flexibility that has been lost"

Phoenix isn't less flexible than Seamonkey; on the contrary. With Phoenix' extension management, you can (maybe not yet, but eventually) customize any detail of the browser's behavior you want by install various add-ons.

"Anyway, switching is moot as I can not live without mail."

Thunderbird 0.1: Coming soon to a theatre near you. <http://www.mozillazine.or…=11&i=1282&t=1282>

#13 Coming soon...

by SubtleRebel <mark@ky.net>

Thursday October 31st, 2002 9:51 PM

Reply to this message

You really can not legitimately argue with what redvine said by countering with what is "Coming Soon."

He says he prefers Mozilla over Phoenix and you say "Phoenix is still alpha. Much will happen still." So what? Is that supposed to have some bearing on his current preference for Mozilla? Besides, if someone feels like Phoenix is moving in the wrong direction away from Mozilla then saying that more will happen is not going to be very compelling.

Next he was talking about the comparative flexibility of the current versions of Mozilla and Phoenix whereas your argument focused on the hyhpothetical future. Perhaps you should have said "Phoenix may be less flexible than Seamonkey now, but Phoenix has the potential to become more flexible."

Also when responding to his statement that "switching is moot ... without mail" you mention Thunderbird. Well, until Thunderbird is actually available and running as well or better than Mozilla Mail, his point is still quite valid.

#16 The process

by SubtleRebel <mark@ky.net>

Thursday October 31st, 2002 10:31 PM

Reply to this message

"The Phoenix way gets things done much faster and is far less bureaucratic."

Yes autocracy is usually more efficient than bureaucracy.

However, your response to his statement seems to have missed his point. He said "Personally, I like the attitude of the Mozilla developers more than the Phoenix guys" and "Phoenix developers think they know better than I do about how I want to browse." So obviously his issue with Phoenix development has nothing to do with how quickly they get things done.

If someone does not like the decisions being made, pointing out how fast the decisions are being made does not make them more appealling.

#31 Re: Re: I don't use Phoenix

by Sander

Friday November 1st, 2002 6:23 AM

Reply to this message

"Phoenix is backed by mozilla.org; besides Chimera, none of the other projects you mentioned are."

Don't you think this has more to do with the people working on it rather than with its goals or relevance to mozilla itself? To name one example: personally, I find Beonex's increased focus on privacy and security far more interesting and worthy of backing.

#52 Re: played with it today.....

by Blake <blaker@netscape.com>

Friday November 1st, 2002 12:04 PM

Reply to this message

This is a news site. It posts largely news articles. Phoenix releases often; it's unsurprising that it has a lot of articles. Beonex's last release was in September. Yes, Mozillazine could do a random feature about its focus on privacy and security, but this is hardly something to write frequently about.

#54 Beonex's Focus on Privacy and Security

by AlexBishop <alex@mozillazine.org>

Friday November 1st, 2002 12:40 PM

Reply to this message

"Beonex's last release was in September. Yes, Mozillazine could do a random feature about its focus on privacy and security, but this is hardly something to write frequently about."

Oh, I think we could:

Monday: Beonex Focuses on Privacy and Security

Tuesday: Beonex Good Choice for Privacy and Security

Wednesday: Privacy and Security a Priority for Beonex Project

Thursday: Beonex Still Good Choice for Privacy and Security

Friday: Despite No New Releases, Beonex Still Emphasises Privacy and Security

On second thoughts, maybe not.

Alex

#62 How is this a relevant reply?

by Sander

Friday November 1st, 2002 7:43 PM

Reply to this message

>>> Phoenix is backed by mozilla.org >> I find Beonex's increased focus on privacy and security far more interesting and worthy of backing (implied: by mozilla.org) > Beonex's last release was in September.

???

#6 Re: I don't use Phoenix

by mlippert <mlippert255@yahoo.com>

Thursday October 31st, 2002 4:38 PM

Reply to this message

I haven't started using Phoenix yet either. However I really like the direction of the project. All I really want is a browser, I use Eudora for email and XNews for USENET. However from what I've heard so far, I think I'll wait a couple more releases before trying Phoenix. I'm currently very happy with Mozilla 1.2b and I've been switching over my family (from IE) to Mozilla since 1.0 was released. Since they use Eudora for email also, I figure once I think that Phoenix is stable I may switch us all to that.

#17 Re: I don't use Phoenix

by asa <asa@mozilla.org>

Thursday October 31st, 2002 10:58 PM

Reply to this message

"but I also don't understand Mozillazine's adoration of the project to the exclusion of all other similar projects"

Did you know that mozillaZine gets its news items from contributors like you? There's this nice little link over on the right half of this page "submitArticle" where contributors like you can submit news items for any project or topic that intersts you.

What _I_ don't understand is all this news about silly web browsers. Where's the news about Rhino <http://mozilla.org/rhino/> and Mozbot <http://mozilla.org/projects/mozbot/> ??? These are mozilla.org projects too. I don't think I'm going to be reading mozillaZine any more unless the editorial staff can convince me that they care about my favorite mozilla.org projects and will give them equal time with those silly web browsers.

When was the last time you saw a mozillaZine article on ElectricalFire <http://mozilla.org/projects/ef/> or Grendel <http://mozilla.org/projects/grendel/> ? I mean, how biased can you get!? What a joke. Just because there isn't any exciting news about ElectricalFire, just because there was a release of Phoenix this week which got coverage at a dozen other major web media outlets, doesn't mean the mozillaZine editors should scorn EF in favor of Phoenix like this. Equal time!!! I don't care what mozillaZine's readers submit, I want equal time for Grendal and for Mozbot and for Bonsai and for CCK. You don't care about CCK!? How can you call this a Mozilla site when you never talk about anything but web browsers!?

Equal time! Equal time! Equal time for all mozilla.org projects! Stop discriminating on the basis of popularity and newsworthyness.

--Asa

#18 Re: Re: I don't use Phoenix

by Tanyel <tanyel@straightblack.com>

Thursday October 31st, 2002 11:12 PM

Reply to this message

You are incredibly stupid.

#36 Asa's right.

by bmacfarland

Friday November 1st, 2002 6:57 AM

Reply to this message

I didn't even realize half of there projects existed before now. I mean the Mozilla on the Amiga platform?!?! Sounds ridiculous, because there are almost no Amiga users left, but the principle behind porting Mozilla to the Amiga is very interesting.

MozOffice is starting back up again and it's a great thing. OpenOffice is making a good attempt at being cross platform, but I don't know if people even thought about porting it over to the Amiga yet (it looks like a couple actually have). Once again, sounds very ridiculous to talk about MozOffice and Amiga, but it points to a possibility that one day, if you can compile Mozilla on the platfrom, you get a ton of applications on top of it for free. Perhaps I just described part of the OEone vision, except that OEone only runs on Linux.

#19 Re: Re: I don't use Phoenix

by asa <asa@mozilla.org>

Thursday October 31st, 2002 11:29 PM

Reply to this message

And I don't even want to hear the excuse that mozillaZine readers want to talk about web browsers like Phoenix more than webtools like Tinderbox or Mozbot. That's no excuse at all.

Just because there have been 7000 posts to the mozillaZine Phoenix forums in the last 30 days and there have only been about 15 posts on Mozbot since the site was created all those years ago doesn't mean you should give Phoenix more attention than mozbot.

This is a democracy, isn't it? Dammit, and I want equal time for Mozbot! What kind of open source project web site is this? If it was real open source then you'd give eqaul time for all projects and not just the ones people cared the most about. Sheesh!

And what about Mozilla Classic!? What happened to that? I haven't seen any mozillaZine coverage of the classic codebase in years. You editors have some explaining to do. That codebase is great. It was my first experience with Mozilla. I don't care if mozilla.org and the Mozilla development community decided to go a different direction with the new codebase. The classic code is still there in CVS and it's the whole reason I got involved in Mozilla in the first place. This site has no excuse for not having regular news items and updates for Moz Classic. What kind of news and advocacy site is this when all you seem to advocate are popular mozilla.org projects that people want to talk about.

And don't even get me started on the lack of coverage for other Mozilla projects not officially hosted and sponsored by mozilla.org. When was the last time mozillaZine had news items for AmigaMozilla <http://sourceforge.net/projects/amozilla/> or MozOffice <http://sourceforge.net/projects/mozoffice/> ?? I mean, where's the coverage of qBati <http://sourceforge.net/projects/qbati2/> ? How can the editors of this site pretend to be professionals if they won't cover qBati! You'll talk about a Phoenix release that gets coverage on Slashdot and InternetNews but you won't talk about the qBati's QDrawer Proof of Concept 3rd Trial? What kind of site is this?!!!

--Asa

#22 Re: Re: Re: I don't use Phoenix

by Sn4xx0r

Friday November 1st, 2002 1:22 AM

Reply to this message

That felt good, didn't it? :)

#24 You're joking! Right?

by peterlairo <Peter@Lairo.com>

Friday November 1st, 2002 2:58 AM

Reply to this message

Asa,

your attempt at sarcasm unfortunately didn't work. It turned out to be cynicism instead. Why? Because your posts were way too long (much longer than needed to make the point you were (unsuccessfully) attempting to make), because you exagerated too munch, making your argument seem glib and undifferentiated.

Nobody is saying Phoenix shouldn't receive a good amount of coverage. The problem is that many other good issues are receiving too *little* coverage.

#27 Re: Re: I don't use Phoenix

by sipaq

Friday November 1st, 2002 3:29 AM

Reply to this message

Asa is totally right. And if other projects don't get as much coverage as Phoenix does, that'S their fault, because they obviously aren't submitting as much stories as the Phoenix people do. Stop whining and submit stories!!

#50 Re: Re: Re: I don't use Phoenix

by bzbarsky

Friday November 1st, 2002 11:26 AM

Reply to this message

How about "stop whining and submitting stories and do some real work", huh?

#84 Re: You're joking! Right?

by peterlairo <Peter@Lairo.com>

Monday November 4th, 2002 2:48 AM

Reply to this message

> Peter, how many times do I have to say it? MozillaZine posts stories that readers submit.

It's not the *number* of times you say something; it's saying when/where others can receive it.

Perhaps MozillaZine shoud be more clear about its policy on how stories are posted. ;)

Your other points are valid, untill the number of articles starts to "flood" the readers.

#57 Re: You're joking! Right?

by asa <asa@mozilla.org>

Friday November 1st, 2002 1:29 PM

Reply to this message

Peter, how many times do I have to say it? MozillaZine posts stories that readers submit. If you submit a story on Mozbot then it's very likely that MozillaZine will post your story on Mozbot. If you submit a story on Phoenix then it's very likely that MozillaZine will post a story on Phoenix.

What you seem to be suggesting is that because there is a disparity in the number of stories being submitted on Phoenix and on Mozilla (I consider that a measure of "interest") that the mozillaZine staff should stop posting reader-submitted stories on Phoenix to balance things out. I'm suggesting that's a bad idea.

If we ask mozillaZine staff to make sure there are equal numbers of Phoenix and Mozilla stories by way of not posting most of the reader-submitted stories on Phoenix then let's do the same for the other mozilla.org and 3rd party mozilla-based projects. Let's ask them to not post a Mozilla story because they are overwhelming the Mozbot stories or the qBati stories.

I happen to think that more Mozilla-realted news is better than less and that not posting a Phoenix or Mozilla story because there isn't also a near equal number of mozbot and bonsai stories is a really bad idea. It's a lot easier to ignore a story you're not interested than to read a story that never got posted.

--Asa

#9 Missing an option

by FattMattP

Thursday October 31st, 2002 6:29 PM

Reply to this message

There's no option for "I don't like themes and skins."

#35 Re: Missing an option

by Blake <blaker@netscape.com>

Friday November 1st, 2002 6:38 AM

Reply to this message

I don't have a clue what you mean here, but Mozilla doesn't have such an option either.

#39 Get a clue

by SubtleRebel <mark@ky.net>

Friday November 1st, 2002 8:06 AM

Reply to this message

He is talking about the poll.

#41 Re: Get a clue

by Blake <blaker@netscape.com>

Friday November 1st, 2002 8:49 AM

Reply to this message

Then the poster needs to get a clue. If you don't like any skin then choose Classic.

#43 Re: Re: Get a clue

by SubtleRebel <mark@ky.net>

Friday November 1st, 2002 9:11 AM

Reply to this message

Blake, you admitted that you were clueless. Why are you so damned defensive?

Your comments in these forums really make you sound like a spoiled bratty child.

#46 All that bla bla, but the sky is still mozilla :-)

by bugs4hj <bugs4hj@netscape.net>

Friday November 1st, 2002 9:48 AM

Reply to this message

1) install mozilla without all options, what is the size of it, almost the same. 2) do non geeks need a toolbar customizer, No. 3) is it faster, No, because Phoenix is a sort of skinned version of mozilla. 4) do you consider it a theme os skin? It's more like a new skin for mozilla. 5) you don't like Phoenix? I like the Toolbar customizer only, because I'm a geek.

#58 Re: All that bla bla, but the sky is still mozilla

by asa <asa@mozilla.org>

Friday November 1st, 2002 1:58 PM

Reply to this message

1) install mozilla without all options, what is the size of it, almost the same.

No, it's not. Linux Mozilla Browser only install total download size 11.5MB and growing Phoenix 9.1MB and shrinking. That's more than 20% difference. And on disk a Mozilla Browser install is about 28MB and a Phoenix install is about 22MB. That's also more than 20% difference. Lot's could be done to slim Mozilla down but the point is that Phoenix has made significant decreases in size and Mozilla hasn't.

2) do non geeks need a toolbar customizer, No.

I don't think that's correct. There are plenty of non-geek users (ranging from intermediate through 'power-users') that use toolbar customization. If that wasn't the case then Microsoft wouldn't ship toolbar customization in all of it's top apps (Office and IE both have it). If that wasn't the case then Apple wouldn't make toolbar customization a part of most of its apps. Both Apple and Microsoft are courting the hundreds of millions of non-geeks who use computers for work and play. In that group is a range of users from newbies to intermediate to advanced to power users. I'm sure there are plenty of advanced and power users that are not "geeks" that customize applications. If zero non-geeks used simple customizations like for primary toolbars then Apple and Microsoft wouldn't include that as a feature in their applications.

3) is it faster, No, because Phoenix is a sort of skinned version of mozilla.

This is just wrong. Phoenix starts up between 30-40% faster than latest Mozilla. Phoenix creates new windows between 40-50% faster than latest Mozilla. Phoenix is not a skinned version of mozilla. It's mostly new (and designed to be faster) XUL. This new XUL was written by the top XUL hackers on the planet (including the guy that invented XUL) and they know exactly where XUL is fast and where it's not fast. They've taken great care to optimize the UI by using XUL's faster bits and minimizing the use of its slower bits.

4) do you consider it a theme os skin? It's more like a new skin for mozilla.

Are you talking about Phoenix? It's neither a theme or a skin. It's a XUL app. Themes aren't XUL, they're just css and images. Phoenix is new XUL.

5) you don't like Phoenix? I like the Toolbar customizer only, because I'm a geek.

I like Phoenix too. I like toolbar customization too but not because I'm a geek. I like it because it allows me to make simple changes to my primary interface to the web, for example, removing the home button that I accidentally click when I never want to go home.

--Asa

#65 This is only a part of my text, where is the rest?

by bugs4hj <bugs4hj@netscape.net>

Friday November 1st, 2002 11:57 PM

Reply to this message

Asa,

Thanks for the explanation, but the most important part of my text is missing. I guess my copy/paste action failed. Man I really hate this. I was trying to say that a lot of people like to know what the exact file size, startup time and new window opening times are. I even made a test file. I took the time to explain things here but heck, it's gone.

Asa, I made QuickPrefs for Phoenix (<http://quickprefs.mozdev.org>) so I don't hate Phoenix but support it even. I know exactly what Phoenix is, what it can and can't do compaired to mozilla.

Here is a link to a smaller (7.9MB zip file and 15.2MB installed) and faster mozilla version but windows only!. It is based on todays nightly and I called it fastmoz. <http://multizilla.mozdev.org/nightly/fastmoz.zip>

I removed 558 files and 1.725.009 bytes from the comm.jar/en-US.jar and classic.jar in under 45 mins ;) I removed the Sidebar and Side Navigation (links) Toolbar, just like Phoenix did :-)

This is just a little demonstration of yet another 'browser/XUL application' You don't have to be Blake or Hyatt to make your own browser, anybody can do this :-)

#69 Re: This is only a part of my text, where is the r

by Blake <blaker@netscape.com>

Saturday November 2nd, 2002 5:27 AM

Reply to this message

Your browser is larger than Phoenix (and yet has no sidebar, which Phoenix has), doesn't even come close to the speed of Phoenix, and doesn't have any of Phoenix's features. Really, must I go on?

#70 Re: Re: This is only a part of my text, where is t

by bugs4hj <bugs4hj@netscape.net>

Saturday November 2nd, 2002 5:58 AM

Reply to this message

Blake,

1) I did this in 45 mins only.

2) It's pure mozilla.

3) It's faster than the usual mozilla versions.

4) Phoenix removed the sidebar in the first release, right?

5) It's only an example.

6) I'm not trying to copy Phoenix

Do I need to continue?

#74 Re: played with it today.....

by Blake <blaker@netscape.com>

Saturday November 2nd, 2002 1:39 PM

Reply to this message

I have no idea what you're talking about...what are you trying to prove here? We have hard numbers that show how much faster Phoenix is, and we know that the improvements are largely because of the changes we made, not simply because it's browser-only. I don't get what your point is.

#75 Re: Re: This is only a part of my text, where is t

by bugs4hj <bugs4hj@netscape.net>

Saturday November 2nd, 2002 7:26 PM

Reply to this message

"I have no idea what you're talking about...what are you trying to prove here?"

First of all, you guys are doing a great job, but it would be nice to see some improvements on the mozilla front first. You guys working on Phoenix takes times away from mozilla. It may sound weird but I'm only *playing* for bad demon here.

Now, I only made an example, and I'm not trying to proof anything here. I only made this example to show that this is possible with the main mozilla tree. My goal was to work on it for one hour at max and see what could be done. So I played a bit with the jar files, removed junk from it and this is the result:

Size on disk: 14.959.416 bytes fastmoz (stand-alone mozilla) 14.610.881 bytes phoenix 0.5 348.535 bytes smaller

Download size: 8.021.183 bytes 7.64MB (zipped version of fastmoz) 7.398.578 bytes 7.05MB (zipped version of phoenix 0.5) 622.605 bytes smaller

Now, be fair, these numbers are close, right? Yeah right you say, but Phoenix will get smaller. Ok, but so can this! Now you say: "Phoenix starts faster". Ok, fair is fair, but I didn't really focused on that. My goal was to reduce download and installation size first. I only worked one hour on it, remember.

New windows in Phoenix open faster, now thats interesting. How do you guys clock that? Make that available to the public. However, I'm using two 2.5GHz IP4 (overclocked to 3.2GHz) systems, so startup time, and new window opening times are like dust to me.

note: I won't continue this work because it was only an example. Other people might get inspired because of it, or might even start a new mozdev.org project for it, but don't count on me.

"I don't get what your point is."

You don't need to be an expert to make mozilla smaller and faster :-)

#76 Re: Re: Re: This is only a part of my text, where

by asa <asa@mozilla.org>

Saturday November 2nd, 2002 11:13 PM

Reply to this message

HJ, Phoenix isn't taking significant effort away from the trunk. Blake and Hyatt wouldn't be working on the trunk otherwise, they'd probably be gone.

How do we measure performance? With the performace tests that you can find running on half of our tinderboxen. They measure to within about 10ms accuracy and based on those tests we've run comparing Mozilla and Phoenix we see significant gains in Phoenix.

Phoenix has made significant performance increases that would not have been made by non-experts. Trust me on that one.

--Asa

#77 Thanks for the clarifications

by bugs4hj <bugs4hj@netscape.net>

Sunday November 3rd, 2002 7:23 AM

Reply to this message

Asa, I agree with the first two but I'm either an expert or that's not the case and you're wrong. Why? My example show at least some performanche gain in both startup time and opening of new windows!

Now, I have to continue my search for speed after all this info. I just need to know what makes mozilla slower, or Phoenix faster than mozilla. Yeah I know, I am a geek. I looked and compaired every single JavaScript function and XBL binding that was changed for Phoenix, and I tell you this, it's no surprise to me. Not at all.

I still have this IRC #mozilla log file, and that is almost a year old now, where I ask David Hyatt about file access performanche improvements, overlays files and so on. What do you think he did?

So I am an expert, let the game begin.

Who's in favor for a new mozdev.org project? FastMoz will be it's name. Smaller, faster and 100% compatible to all current add-ons, themes and stuff like DOM Inspector, JS Debugger, Chatzilla, Composer, Mail & NewsGroups and Addressbook!

Any takers here?

#78 Note to self:

by bugs4hj <bugs4hj@netscape.net>

Sunday November 3rd, 2002 7:35 AM

Reply to this message

never add comments before having your first coffee :-)

'performanche' should read 'performance' and 'compaired' 'compared'

#79 Re: Thanks for the clarifications

by asa <asa@mozilla.org>

Sunday November 3rd, 2002 10:33 AM

Reply to this message

HJ, perhaps you're an expert. If not an expert then maybe an advanced XUL developer. If you've even been thinking about which parts of XUL and XBL are faster and which parts are slower and how one can gain performance without sacrificing functionality by optimizing JS, finding alternatives to overlays (things like writing a XUL preprocessor so that slow platform overlays can be avoided), cleaning up XBL and even DTD collapsing and other methods then you're a leap ahead of most of the people that have been hacking on Mozilla's frontend.

Also, it may be no surprise to you but looking at the changes that have been made to Phoenix for performance improvements _was_ a surprise to many of the Mozilla developers who have taken a look at it.

Not only that, but no one was doing it. Until mozilla/broser there simply wasn't anyone chopping with broad strokes to demonstrate these kinds of performance and size optimizations. No one was demonstrating that it was possible to add functionality while improving speed and performance. Performance enhancing changes made to Phoenix are already filtering into Mozilla so it's no secret how to make things faster but until the people that know best how this stuff works took a swipe at it nothing was being done.

(Not to mention that Mozilla today is a hell of a lot more performant when it comes to FE than it was say 2 or 3 years ago and the overwhelming majority of those gains were made by this same group of people. I don't think it was a random hacker that took on implementing XUL and JS fastload, or collapsing rdf files, or preventing style resolution on nsXULElement, or created XBL for better and more performant widget building, or implementing image region specifiying, creating outliner to replace tree in certain cases and then upgrading all of those cases, re-writing the mozilla style system, implemented XBL methods brutal sharing, or almost all of the skin cleanup to improve Modern and Classic, or any other of the major FE performance innovations and implementations over the last few years. Experts or not, the ones that have actually created real and testable gains in UI performance and responsiveness are the ones working on Phoenix today.)

And why start a mozdev project? If you think you can find additional performance wins why not contribute those to Phoenix or Mozilla (or Beonex)? What additional gains are you investigating? Are there bugs filed? Patches? Are all of the right people seeing those bugs?

--Asa

#80 the only thing...

by niner

Sunday November 3rd, 2002 11:04 AM

Reply to this message

...that I'm hoping is, that at least most of the enhancments of Phoenix are going back to Mozilla one day. Because as long as Mozilla Mail is the only mail client I want to use I'm bound to Mozilla and will not switch to Phoenix.

#81 Re: Thanks for the clarifications

by Blake <blaker@netscape.com>

Sunday November 3rd, 2002 5:43 PM

Reply to this message

Is there a point buried under all the nonsense you're spouting? Are we supposed to be impressed that you can look at Phoenix's code, make the same changes in your build, and magically have a Phoenix lookalike?

#83 Re: Re: Thanks for the clarifications

by bugs4hj <bugs4hj@netscape.net>

Sunday November 3rd, 2002 9:54 PM

Reply to this message

Blake, a lot of highly respected people call me Sir all day long, what do they call you? I like to be treated the same way here, with respect. I respect people that respect me, but you seem to have some sort of problem with that so I can't help you. You also seem to have a reading problem: "Please keep your comments friendly!" so once again, I can't help you.

#85 Re: Re: Re: Thanks for the clarifications

by Blake <blaker@netscape.com>

Monday November 4th, 2002 6:40 AM

Reply to this message

> Blake, a lot of highly respected people call me Sir all day long, > what do they call you

Usually "kid" or "hey you." High school is rough.

> I respect people that respect me, but you seem to have some sort > of problem with that so I can't help you.

Oh please. Don't come here and imply that Phoenix is almost meritless ("Look! I made Phoenix in 45 minutes...um, by copying its source tree") and not back up your statements, then expect its developers to cordially refer to you as "Dear sir." A person that backs down in a debate because his opponent was "unfriendly" probably had little to say in the first place, or wasn't confident in his assertions.

#87 He never said that

by SubtleRebel <mark@ky.net>

Monday November 4th, 2002 9:26 AM

Reply to this message

I do not see where he ever said anything resembling what you are accusing him of.

Can you quote anything from his posts to back up your accusations of him saying any of the following?

1) Phoenix was "almost meritless" 2) that he had "made Phoenix in 45 minutes" 3) that he had copied the source tree

As for your claim that he backed down from a debate, what debate? Your responses would have to be relevant to his posts in order for the exchange to be considered a debate. Personal attacks are also not appropriate content for a debate. Also, being disrespectful is not the same as just being unfriendly; you can be unfriendly and respectful at the same time. The problem with your side of the "debate" is that your posts are disrespectful, unfriendly, and ignore the points that the opposition was making. Unfortunately that seems to be your typical MO.

#89 Ok, once again...

by bugs4hj <bugs4hj@netscape.net>

Monday November 4th, 2002 1:25 PM

Reply to this message

Blake, I didn't copied the Phoenix tree in 45 minutes, because that would take me less than 5 minutes. Not one single file was copied from the Phoenix tree. In fact, all Phoenix files, or almost all of them, are Mozilla files, not Phoenix.

Also, what do I need to back up, in case I just copied the Phoenix tree? You already downloaded and installed my fastmoz example, at least that is what you wrote in one of your comments, so you had proof of concept.

Again, I like the Phoenix project but I'm disappointed about the lack of mozilla support, that's my point. You couldn't find it but now you know. Why not speedup mozilla in stead of Phoenix? Is that because of a) you don't support Mac or b) you don't have to comply to all Netscape standards or c) pick you choice.

I'm not attacking you nor anybody else in the Phoenix team. I already wrote that in one of my comments, I'm only playing for the bad guy here. You seem to miss that time after time.

Do I want a faster browser? Sure, why not, but I only wonder *if* that will be ever noticeable on a bloody fast system. Do I support the Phoenix team, sure why not? I was a regular visitor on #phoenix and tried to help other Phoenix users, when you and other team members where at sleep. You must have seen me at least several times.

Blake, are you worried that 'someone' can do the same things you do and he/she might even be better than you? Is that why you are so hostile to other people?

Remember, weakness goes hand in hand with an aggressive mind.

/HJ

#86 Re: Re: Re: Thanks for the clarifications

by Blake <blaker@netscape.com>

Monday November 4th, 2002 6:40 AM

Reply to this message

> Blake, a lot of highly respected people call me Sir all day long, > what do they call you

Usually "kid" or "hey you." High school is rough.

> I respect people that respect me, but you seem to have some sort > of problem with that so I can't help you.

Oh please. Don't come here and imply that Phoenix is almost meritless ("Look! I made Phoenix in 45 minutes...um, by copying its source tree") and not back up your statements, then expect its developers to cordially refer to you as "Dear sir." A person that backs down in a debate because his opponent was "unfriendly" probably had little to say in the first place, or wasn't confident in his assertions.

#90 Ok, once again...

by bugs4hj <bugs4hj@netscape.net>

Monday November 4th, 2002 1:27 PM

Reply to this message

Ah, High School, now I see :-)

Blake, I didn't copied the Phoenix tree in 45 minutes, because that would take me less than 5 minutes. Not one single file was copied from the Phoenix tree. In fact, all Phoenix files, or almost all of them, are Mozilla files, not Phoenix.

Also, what do I need to back up, in case I just copied the Phoenix tree? You already downloaded and installed my fastmoz example, at least that is what you wrote in one of your comments, so you had proof of concept.

Again, I like the Phoenix project but I'm disappointed about the lack of mozilla support, that's my point. You couldn't find it but now you know. Why not speedup mozilla in stead of Phoenix? Is that because of a) you don't support Mac or b) you don't have to comply to all Netscape standards or c) pick you choice.

I'm not attacking you nor anybody else in the Phoenix team. I already wrote that in one of my comments, I'm only playing for the bad guy here. You seem to miss that time after time.

Do I want a faster browser? Sure, why not, but I only wonder *if* that will be ever noticeable on a bloody fast system. Do I support the Phoenix team, sure why not? I was a regular visitor on #phoenix and tried to help other Phoenix users, when you and other team members where at sleep. You must have seen me at least several times.

Blake, are you worried that 'someone' can do the same things you do and he/she might even be better than you? Is that why you are so hostile to other people?

Remember, weakness goes hand in hand with an aggressive mind.

/HJ

#71 Re: Re: This is only a part of my text, where is t

by bugs4hj <bugs4hj@netscape.net>

Saturday November 2nd, 2002 6:02 AM

Reply to this message

Oh one other thing, show me the exact ms difference, that would make everybody happy.

You to proof that you did a better job in all those weeks and me because the difference in time isn't exactly that big :-)

1) The download size is close smaller 2) The size on disk is smaller 3) All themes and add-ons still work

with this EXAMPLE!

#55 Why do I use Slashdot more?

by brechmos

Friday November 1st, 2002 1:08 PM

Reply to this message

Honestly, it is because it is updated more frequently and there are more stories. I believe that my view of Mozillazine would change if there were more frequent stories. I do like Mozillazine, though.

B

#59 Is this for real?

by jedbro

Friday November 1st, 2002 2:19 PM

Reply to this message

I'm shocked!!! Never in my Life would I have imagined such sh*t here in TalkBack, and by such reconized names in the Mozilla community (even more shocking). Funny enough this whole argument started out by a comment (critical point of view) by redvine, simple questioning the validity of Phoenix, and why Mozillazine is so Pro-Phoenix.

On a more serious note, as I understand why Phoenix is "in the news", as it is our current point of interest (hell yeah I'm a Phoenix & Moz user) but I do also estime redvine's point of concern.

As much "better" (depending on what you like) Phoenix is, mozilla still is our FlagShip product, and the core technology of Phoenix, heck, if Moz sleeps, phoenix is dead.

It would be nice to get some more updates on current development in Moz, like features, etc. As Mozillazine used to post last year (autocompltee was a big article, etc.). True most articles are "User submited" but was also have a large amount of people who are directly involved with Moz's development who could inform us.

I'm not saying how things "should be", just how I would "Like" things to be... we forget what Talkback is all about, sharing points of views and sharing information.

Just my 2c!

#61 Re: Is this for real?

by Blake <blaker@netscape.com>

Friday November 1st, 2002 6:54 PM

Reply to this message

> heck, if Moz sleeps, phoenix is dead.

This is not true.

#66 If anything ...

by mpthomas

Saturday November 2nd, 2002 12:09 AM

Reply to this message

... The *opposite* is true. :-)

-- mpt

#88 Opposite?

by SubtleRebel <mark@ky.net>

Monday November 4th, 2002 9:58 AM

Reply to this message

What is the "*opposite*" of "if Moz sleeps, phoenix is dead" that you were referring to?

1) if Phoenix sleeps, Moz is dead. 2) if Phoenix sleeps, Moz will live 3) if Moz sleeps, Phoenix will be (more?) alive. 4) if Moz awakens, Phoenix is dead. 5) if Moz awakens, Phoenix will be (more?) alive.

Or something else?

#82 My bad

by jedbro

Sunday November 3rd, 2002 9:44 PM

Reply to this message

Sorry blake, didn't mean it in that perspective.

I guess what I was getting at, is that while Mozilla matures, it is directly reflected in phoenix as it get's it's code from the trunk (correct me if I'm wrong). If progress slows down on Mozilla, phoenix will not "slow down" but nor would it get the core "under the hood" advancements of the trunk. (eg if Type ahead wasn't implemented in Moz, would phoenix have gotten it? don't think so.).

Again, I am not bashing anyone, I personally prefer Phoenix (great job with it Blake!!) although I suffer from Moz's Mail addiction. But in my "point of view" I would like to see some more detailed info on what's going on in Gecko/Mozilla which reflects upon every Mozilla based browser out there, posted here at mozillazine like it was in the 90's and early 2000.

Cheers, and sorry if I offended anyone or anything to that degree!

#60 Re: Re: I don't use Phoenix

by Sn4xx0r

Friday November 1st, 2002 6:25 PM

Reply to this message

Galeon, K-Meleon and other Gecko-browser news on the frontpage. For those who where waiting for it in agony :)