CNET Opines on Apple's Choice of KHTML

Tuesday January 14th, 2003

CNET has an article about Apple's choice of KHTML over Gecko for its Safari browser. Featuring a variety of quotes from many high profile figures, the article goes as far as to call the decision a "snub" — a claim that Apple's spokesperson refuses to corroborate.

Update! Mike Shaver isn't too happy about being quoted out of context and Chris Blizzard also has some choice words about the article. MozillaZine founder Chris Nelson isn't quite so subtle. There's also a discussion at Slashdot.

#92 Re: Re: Re: It's been fun watching some of you rea

by asa <>

Friday January 17th, 2003 12:41 PM

You are replying to this message

"It doesn't really matter if /some/ parts are tri-licensed. KHTML is still more open source, just like I said. "

That's just a rediculous statement. How is KHTML "more open source"? How are you measuring open sourceness? What score does Gecko get and what score does KHTML get? The overwhelming majority of Mozilla is tri-licensed. Not only is the MPL an OSI approved license <> but Mozilla is also available under the terms of the older GPL and LGPL licenses for people wanting to use Mozilla code in projects where the MPL would otherwise be incompatible.

"You guys seem inherently slow..."

When was Konqueror development started? How long did it take them to get what they have today, which doesn't support nearly as much of the w3c standards or the real web as Gecko. NGLayout (later called Gecko) replaced the old Mozilla rendering engine on Oct 8th, 1998 <http://www.mozillazine.or…talkback.html?article=129> . It looks like the move from KHTMLW to KHTML happened on Nov 7, 1998 <…;m=91048263807972&w=2> . That sounds to me like they were about 1 month behind Gecko in getting KHTML officially integrated. So the two engines are probably about the same age and Gecko has all kinds of features (support for the standards and the existing web) that KHTML doesn't have. How does that make Gecko development "inherently slow" and "the complete opposite is true for the KDE project"?

"No surprise Apple choose KHTML, it's not weighed down by a project with obvious architectural problems, no foresight, and crappy software engineering. They know what they are doing -- you don't. "

This statement places you clearly in the troll catagory and any further discussion with you would be a waste of time.