MozillaZine

Mozilla Browser of Choice for Playboy Lifestyle

Saturday December 14th, 2002

I Read The Articles writes: "The January 2003 (print) edition of Playboy has a glowing review of Mozilla in its Living Online section on page 36. It starts: 'Microsoft's Internet Explorer is the most popular browser in the world. But it's not the best. That title belongs to Mozilla...' If you were waiting for an excuse to go buy Playboy, now's your chance."


#1 Did any of the bunnies...

by robdogg

Saturday December 14th, 2002 10:21 PM

Reply to this message

Did any of the bunnies list being a moz developer as one of their turn-ons?

#2 I subscribed

by mischief

Saturday December 14th, 2002 11:56 PM

Reply to this message

Just in case they do any follow-up stories :0)

#3 thanks

by quarsan

Sunday December 15th, 2002 1:03 AM

Reply to this message

i need to keep abreast of the latest trends.

#4 Quotes?

by Gerv

Sunday December 15th, 2002 1:52 AM

Reply to this message

I would never buy that magazine, so I won't be able to read the article unless anyone wants to quote bits of the article for review purposes under "fair use"...

Gerv

#9 You can't be serious???

by DeepFreeze3

Sunday December 15th, 2002 2:38 PM

Reply to this message

You have to be joking ...

#12 Re: You can't be serious???

by mozzmike <mikeweezer@interair.com.br>

Sunday December 15th, 2002 3:40 PM

Reply to this message

Why? I'm not really keen on magazines like that, and I know of many people for personal/religious/philosophical reasons would rather not buy magazines like that. I don't mean to speak for the original poster, but just pointing out that it's hardly an absurd stance.

#16 Sure he can be, and for many reasons.

by jesusX <jesus_x@mozillanews.org>

Sunday December 15th, 2002 8:35 PM

Reply to this message

It's great when you're 15 and want to see b00bies, but after that, you realize that's it's really just crap. Airbrushed/edited to hell and back, all the girls look a like (right down to the fake blonde hair 70% of them have), puerile jokes, fluff articles, etc. If you like breast implants, then it's your magazine. If you want thought provoking articles that are controversial, look elsewhere (Time, NewsWeek, even FHM has good articles). If you want a sex magazine, look elsewhere. Substantial, Playboy is not.

If you're averse to it for social, political, philosophical, or religious/moral reasons, that's a built-in way out. They carried a short story by my favorite author a couple years ago. I wasn't about to reward that stack of pablum for making a single decent choice, so I waited till I could find it elsewhere. We can do the same for this Mozilla article. (As it turned out, the story was crap too...)

#20 Do you walk on water?

by DeepFreeze3

Monday December 16th, 2002 5:32 AM

Reply to this message

FHM? Yeah, I've heard of that magazine. They've make a habit of having intelligent, beautiful women pose for them. Summer Altice, Lisa Marie Scott, Pamela Anderson, Brooke Burke ... there are SO many!! The first just got her degree from UCLA, the second just became a paralegal. And what about those last two? WOW!! To think that they can each have two kids, be full time moms, have successful careers outside of entertainment and find the time to model and look that good is just amazing. Of course, being that they've also all posed for Playboy, I guess I'll have to stop liking them now, huh? And what about those Playboy & FHM subscriptions? DRATS!! I'd better get rid of both of them!! Wouldn't want anybody to think I like to read magazines that are packed with sluts & hussies, now would I? I do have a reputation to uphold.

But, seriously ...

Excluding one or two minor things, FHM & Playboy are the same magazine. Both offer thought provoking artices, irreverant humor, great stories, jokes and photo layouts of some of the most intelligent, interesting & beautiful women out there. How anybody can claim otherwise, I will never know. Especially since FHM literally ripped off Playboy concept line for line. No biggie, though. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. ;-) Ignorance? That's another story. I don't think a certain female friend of mine would appreciate your "Playmates are are mindless, bleach using, plastic surgery-loving bimbos" attitude. She is, you see, a well-known Playboy Playmate who was a highly successful stock broker in a prestigous firm on Wall Street before walking though the gates of Playboy Mansion West. She's highly intelligent, silicone free, and a redhead. She's also a columnist for numerous newspapers & magazines across the country. I hope you never bump into her someday. If you did, she'd probably bitch slap you across a room.

#26 Change is a part of life ...

by DeepFreeze3

Monday December 16th, 2002 2:39 PM

Reply to this message

Actually, everybody else is going down the tubes. Hell, Penthouse is on the verge of bankrupcy!! (I hope they cease to exist soon). And Playboy? They're kicking butt!! That largely has to do with Christie Hefner (Hef's daughter & CEO of Playboy, Inc.) changing the focus of the magazine. In my opinion, she's done a pretty damn good job. Go, Christie, go!! That chick rocks!!

#24 Re: Sure he can be, and for many reasons.

by salmo

Monday December 16th, 2002 12:13 PM

Reply to this message

Eh. No. Ok, Playboy isn't real pr0n. But it has had some incredible photographers amongst its ranks through the ages. For example, one great Pop Art piece that is often cited is "The Girls of Mel Ramos" (Chicago: Playboy Press, 1975). And it has had some of the best interviews I have read. Paul Simon's best interview was for Playboy, just to name one <http://www.medialab.chalm…tar/simon.interview6.html> . Also, when was the last time you read something controversial in Time or Newsweek (excluding articles that usually poorly represent the results of a scientific experiment/study)? But in some ways you're right, the Playboy of today is not the Playboy of the 1970's. But neither is Rolling Stone or some of the other great interesting magazines. The sad thing about it all is that I'm not seeing anyone come up and replace them. It's a lot like radio now, where all the stations are Top 40 of whichever decade or musical genre. Anyway, I'm rambling.

#13 It's the perfume samples ...

by Tarraccas

Sunday December 15th, 2002 3:49 PM

Reply to this message

*cough cough* ... they make my eyes water too.

#17 Is their site IE specific???

by superfly <superflysuper@netscape.net>

Monday December 16th, 2002 12:05 AM

Reply to this message

Actually, the playboy.com site works fine in Moz and N7. However, they did move a bunch of their videos off the regular site and created a new site PlayboyTV.com, which I am afraid does not seem to like Moz or N7. I have complained.

#21 Re: You can't be serious???

by Gerv

Monday December 16th, 2002 5:44 AM

Reply to this message

I am completely serious. <http://www.gerv.net/christianity.html>

Gerv

#22 Playboy = Not Me

by orrin

Monday December 16th, 2002 9:17 AM

Reply to this message

I totally agree with Gerv. Not everywant wants to read that magazine. Go Gerv for standing up for what you believe!

#25 Playboy = Hip, funky, on the cutting edge :-)

by DeepFreeze3

Monday December 16th, 2002 2:19 PM

Reply to this message

Do the words "sitck in the mud" ring any bells? I bet you guys read Scientific American. ZZZZZZZZ!!!

#27 nope

by orrin

Monday December 16th, 2002 4:36 PM

Reply to this message

No..

If you must know... ever heard of HM Magazine... that is my fav periodical. <http://www.hmmagazine.com>

#15 Is their site IE specific???

by Kaos

Sunday December 15th, 2002 7:13 PM

Reply to this message

Has anyone checked to see if their site is "Mozilla Friendly"? Or is it one of those IE only Monopolosoft lovin' holes in the web's wall? I haven't checked myself. I can't afford the distraction. I'm trying to compile Phoenix for Darwin/Fink.

#18 Re: Is their site IE specific???

by gwalla <gwalla@despammed.com>

Monday December 16th, 2002 2:55 AM

Reply to this message

Works for me. Er, I mean...it um...I contacted the webmaster...and he says he supports Mozilla. Yeah. That's the ticket.

#19 Is their site IE specific???

by Kaos

Monday December 16th, 2002 3:54 AM

Reply to this message

Yep!!! A friend of a friend of my brother-in-law told him that it works too.

#28 Re: Nice work

by flacco

Monday December 16th, 2002 5:22 PM

Reply to this message

Gerv, WWJD?

I think he'd probably pop his cork over a playmate, that's what.

#5 Re: Playboy

by DJGM2002

Sunday December 15th, 2002 2:10 AM

Reply to this message

Of course, most people that buy Playboy magazine, only buy it for the articles . . . ;-)

#6 Image Rendering

by Kaos

Sunday December 15th, 2002 6:59 AM

Reply to this message

I believe they chose Mozilla for its impeccable image rendering capabilities.

#7 Re: Image Rendering

by WillyWonka

Sunday December 15th, 2002 9:55 AM

Reply to this message

But of course, it uses libPr0n <http://www.libpr0n.com/>

#8 Re: Re: Image Rendering

by Kaos

Sunday December 15th, 2002 11:56 AM

Reply to this message

I just KNEW that big ol' lizard was up to something! Not only is Mozilla for free soft, but it's also for freedom of expression and de-compression.

#14 LibPr0n: home of the Mozilla porn rendering librar

by roman

Sunday December 15th, 2002 5:53 PM

Reply to this message

Quoting the site: "home of the Mozilla porn rendering library". He-he-he. How timely... Playboy... porn rendering library... LOL

#10 Hef likes Mozilla!! :-)

by DeepFreeze3

Sunday December 15th, 2002 2:46 PM

Reply to this message

If Hef and the funky people over at Playboy think Mozilla is cool, then it must be. Glad to hear that they've chosen to recognize the innovation that Geko brings to the table.

#11 My guess

by irve

Sunday December 15th, 2002 3:09 PM

Reply to this message

I guess it's because of the libpr0n...

#23 Why Guys Read the Articles

by joegrossberg

Monday December 16th, 2002 9:42 AM

Reply to this message

After using Playboy for its primary purpose, you are too tired to move, and you've got a magazine in front of you. Might as well ...

#29 Ironic...

by kb7iuj <ajvincent@hotmail.com>

Monday December 16th, 2002 6:55 PM

Reply to this message

Perhaps that article will be what finally starts the move to Gecko-based browsers.

Techs aren't the only people who read that thing.

And no, I don't read it either. But I do appreciate the sheer size of its audience.