More than anything else, this means that Netscape now has money to take on Microsoft, and I say it's about time. AOL has expressed the desire to let NS, and Mozilla, basically alone, and now that NS is no longer broke I can hardly wait to see what happens.

The funniest thing about NS and the whole open source thing is that MS forced NS into it by trying, successfully, to kill them and their revenue flow. Now that the open source floodgates have opened, friends and neighbors, I think it's time for the Mozilla (with Linux and DOJ in tow) to chomp on some MS hiney! Can you say hallalluja (however it's spelled!)!

Nailing the coffin...

Unfortunatelly, Netscape has already failed in its Open Source tentative. Just think how much externally developed code was checked in. I'll tell you: close to 0. How many subprojects/modules are being managed by non-Netscape people? None. Just compare that with true open source projects... And the main reason is the unmeasurable arogance of Netscape developers - they are THE BEST!!!

And while Microsoft is delivering an excellent product in just 6 days, Netscape developers are very, very busy reinventing the wheel. They are rediscovering COM, writing a cross platform Widget Set, and so on.

Just think about this: IE 5.0 is READY. What about Commuincator 5?!?!? There is not even a pre-alpha usable build! That crippled Viewer is the only running application. And don't even get me started about Apprunner...

And with all those innovations being included, and with all the cool things being written, I am pretty sure that the release date for 5.0 is somewhere after Q3 2000. And you know what will happen then? All that standard compliance will be useless, because the only standard, already installed everywhere will be Internet Explorer.

I'm going to cry in my pillow now...

I couldn't agree more with you C.R.

I don't think Mozilla's dead, and I don't think many are going to even notice IE5. I've used it, and there is not much difference, and where is the support for new standards? 'sides, you aren't seeing the difference here--NS has courted bankruptcy for quite a while, and they now have endlessly deep pockets--and thus a great deal more room for mistakes.

And with Windows 2000 over TWO YEARS LATE, Windows 2001 or later (consumer version) still years away, and Amiga crouched to pounce with a new system that will reinvent multimedia as we know it, no one is going to give a rat's arse about Microsoft anymore--and that's not counting the companies that are leaping off the NT bandwagon in droves for Linux--a free OS with increasing stability and ease of use that businesses can pay their own IT depts. to fix rather than having to A) pay for a bloated and fragile OS with closed source code that creates B) having to pay MS's exorbitant rates for service and C) deal with MS's marketing strategies (IE, for instance) unnecessarily clogging up their OSs--MS's server share is dropping and it has only just begun.

In short, most people only use IE because it comes with their computer, and in tomorrow's world, once AOL drops IE (even if it takes until 2001), and MS is disallowed to sign exclusive agreements like it has in the past to force IE on computer makers anymore (and that will be the LEAST thing that happens from the DOJ case this summer), IE will dwindle because, in the end, people like NS better.

And as for reinventing the wheel, if the darned thing is square then it should be reinvented. What I've learned from MS if nothing else is that stacking new code on top of old code only works for so long, eventually you wind up with a house of cards begging to fall over, or at the least a slow monstrous program that slows down your system like IE does. Lastly, one basis for Mozilla 5.0 is a program that can be easily ported to any OS--including the new Amigas. Some extra time spent making sure this happens now will save a FORTUNE in the future.

In conclusion, don't weep for dying cancer patient NS when it just went into final remission!

I dunno.

I've been against this whole AOL/Netscape buyout merger thing from the beginning. AOL's got quite a reputation as a lowest-common-denominator, priprietary-lovin' company with a penchant for stifling free speech (see www.aolsucks.com). Worst of all is their merciless, inhumane onslaught of disks and CDs! In contrast, Netscape was such a GOOD thing for the Internet...

So now AOL buys Netscape's portal and soon, for millions of people, they will control in one package (1) the ISP, (2) the portal, and (3) the browser. That's REALLY scary. It reminds me of the early 1920s, when the movie studios controlled the whole entertainment pipeline from development to production to distribution (back then, the studios "owned" the writers, the actors, the films, even the theatres!). The government wisely broke that system up in 1948.

I don't like the idea of AOL owning so many levels of the user's online experience either. It suggests to me that AOL can leverage and "embrace and extend" that power any way they want. Couldn't they load their CDs with their branded versions of Mozilla, "extending" the standards, and just blitz America with it? (Correct me if I'm wrong, but the NPL will let them do this, won't it?) AOL's version will probably be THE distribution of Mozilla for most people-- The official "Netscape" Mozilla 5.0-- but will it have a few proprietary "enhancements" and "extras"? Who knows what AOL will feel like "extending" into it.

You can argue that the source is open, so there will be lots of mozilla distributions to compete, and AOL will want to keep their version open. But as any independent filmmaker or struggling novelist knows, distribution is EVERYTHING. You can have written the best book in the world, but if you can't find a distributor, it doesn't matter; the world will never know about it. (I mean, even if you put it free on your home page you'll get some readers maybe, but it's not the same as having it promoted by Amazon.com)

Like a movie studio on a May opening weekend, AOL can saturate the hell out of us and, with the marketing power of their PORTAL and CDs, drown out the competition.

Except for Microsoft, of course. But our solution to the microsoft monopoly shouldn't be to create MORE Microsofts.

Phew. I feel like a struggling novelist now! Well, I hope that all made sense.

AH

I hear you. But for better or worse, consolidation is a global thing. And remember that is in AOL's best interests to distance themselves from Netscape and Netcenter, because not doing so would alienate those, and there are many, who do not like the paternalistic "fambly" image of AOL. Have you ever checked out Netcenter's porn listings (under lifestyle on netcenter)? Not that you should, but that it exists there at all shows how different the audiences are for the two--AOL knows that and won't do anything to scare away Netcenter's clientelle. The two portals (three if you add ICQ in there) do not overlap and generally, Netcentarians are not into AOL's watered-down content.

As for AOL distributing NS--they did so in the past and there is no real change in that. It was one of NSs largest distribution channels and that is specifically why MS went after it. Reversing that will simply revert NS back to a 70 market share...poor IE.

I should qualify all of this by saying you may well be right, in the end, but in the short run, the industry, and NS, need this to happen. Netscape would be chapter 11 without it.

I agree with J R. MSIE's rankings is only scary because of AOL. We need AOL more than anything

Hmm, interesting position ("we need AOL") So you'd think that AOL will support Netscape's failures only because it is a part of it? Seriously?! AOL is a company. A company looking for money. What will happen when the end of '99 comes, IE is everywhere and Netscape fails to deliver? Heck, they will just terminate the project. It's the logical business decision.

We need AOL?! Hahaha!!! I think Churchill said "We need Stalin to defeat Hitler" :))) The rest is history...

Come on, guys, wake up! A bit of realism in here, please. Let's stop speculations. The truth is AOL will *NOT* distribute Netscape Comm as the AOL web client. Steve Case said it: they need that AOL icon on the Windows desktop. And that will stand even when Communicator 5.0 will be available!!!

Currently, IE 4x is definitely a supperior product to Comm 4x. People like stil use Netscape because they are biased against MS, not because of better quality. What will happen when that gap will increase (IE5x vs. the same old Comm 4x? Netscape's market will decrease dramatically.

Normally, that would still be ok. Because a good product can regain market. But take a look at Raptor. It has a completely nonrealistic approach (just check the RDF usage!!! :)))). In an independent company that would work. Not in AOL. AOL wants results. They will either terminate the project or require a premature release. And that would be the end: another inferior product.

And no, external developers will not continue the Mozilla project. Mozilla is Netscape's child. Its development is really far from open.

I'm really bitter about Netscape: I belived in them and I hated when they sold to AOL. However, my last hope is that I'm completely wrong and you guys are right. Of course, I'm too cinical to actually belive that...

I have to say I disagree with you, C.R., on several counts. First, I think you underestimate the business mind of Steve Case.... You don't become a multibillionaire by making extremely stupid business choices (noting that stupid and noncompetitive are two entirely different things). I really doubt AOL will have bought Netscape for the princely sum of $4 billion just to cut off the product that made the company popular. Also, I think that you underestimate the power of standards-compliance to motivate people. IE 4 isn't better than Netscape 4.51 (The difference is like night and day in terms of stability.... IE 4 crashes all the time for me, and Netscape 4.51 hasn't crashed once since I got it). IE 5 is hardly an improvement over IE 4.... Really, IE 5 should be IE 4.5. In any case, I think that developers will wait for full standards-compliance that runs on about 20 platforms. As to the development process, do you monitor Mozilla's newsgroups? The patches newsgroup has been contributed to almost solely by outside developers. The only real reason that it seems that Netscape is doing all the development is because Netscape's developers get paid to do it.... I've contributed by filing bug reports which I've seen get fixed, making Mozilla a better product. And, finally, Stalin WAS necessary to defeat Hitler. It may not seem like it to those people who only look at the Western theater (D-Day, the invasion of Italy, and Northern Africa). But without Stalin, Hitler's armies would have probably had sufficient strength to stop D-Day. Stalin's armies managed to hold off the Germans until the winter finally did them in. Certainly, Yalta and the Cold War weren't good results, but given the alternative (a world largely ruled by the Nazis), I think that allying with Stalin was a good idea.

i run linux, with netscape, and i like netscape... but it is NOT stable...

when i did run windows, i ran ie3 because it was faster and more stable then netscape (never had it crash on broken tables)

and 4.5 is a tad better, but still is pretty bad... it locks up frequently, and sometimes just disappears if i look at the wrong page...

however, i don't run windows, so this may be just be the result of a poor unix port, i really don't know...

regardless, i have to agree somewhat with CR that mozilla hasn't been quite what i expected..

nglayout is great, but xpfe seems like it will be a great stalling point, and i think that maybe a native fe would be faster and more stable. but i guess that is an option given ng's modular design..

but hopefully development will move a bit more quickly, MS already has a stable advanced version of ie5(6?) that will be released with w2k, i'd hate to see netscape fall behind by 2 releases...

I think re-writing NS 5.0 from the ground up is a good idea. New ways of doing things can be written that can 1) Speed things up, and 2) Stabilize the browser. Things are actually starting to come together with Mozilla.org. Upon downloading the 3-12-99 nightly build, I discovered several additions: mail/news (not functional), the new status bar, and some Bookmark functionality. Of course this all takes time. If MS were re-writing IE it would take just as long, if not longer. But instead, MS just piles new code on old code time after time. I for one can't wait for the new NS 5.0 browser....it will showcase just what Netscape and Open Source are capable of.

Hey! If anyone is not happy at the "slow" development of mozilla, get involve ( or if you are already involve get someone else involve), complaining here isn't going to change much.

Ditto, basic!

Taking a quick peak at the Mozilla website and/or newsgroups is enough to convice anyone that the project is moving at anything but a slow pace. So I'm not sure what everyone is complaining about.

Remember everyone: the purpose of the Mozilla project isn't to beat Microsoft's release date. The purpose is to create a superior browser. Isn't it better to make sure everything is working and in order rather than rush along and release buggy products? I always thought so...

Thank you DR! Just like Sega vs. Nintendo--Sega always puts out first but Nintendo always puts out best. I personally wouldn't want IE 5.0 on my system, God knows what it will do to my registries, will this version blow up Quicktime completely?

In the end, CR, if you honestly think Windows is going to keep its dominance in the industry for much beyond this year you are sorely wrong--the new Amigas come out this year and Windows next consumer version is an embarassing two years off at least. Also, I think you are overestimating the anticipation level for IE 5. What made IE 4 so popular was A) AOL and B) Windows 98--but what is there for IE 5? AOL doesn't give a rat's arse, they won't change anytime soon. And since there is no new version of Windows coming out soon, the only distribution MS has is voluntary d/ls, and I think relatively few people care or even know that IE 5 is coming out. You are also not taking into account the trial! MS has admitted FAKING videotape evidence, and the latest bout ended with the judge actually yelling at one of MSs witnesses! They won't win on appeal, the DOJ has a significantly stronger case than they had with AT&T, and even if DOJ wasn't ripping MS a new one huge companies everywhere--Intel, HP, IBM, Sun--are all investing in Linux, much to MSs horror--because they are sick of being bashed around! It's over!

PS, I wish I could get in on development for Mozilla, but I am not a programmer, I build web sites and graphics, etc. and I am a writer. (http://www.bigfoot.com/~anakin301)If NS wants help with content, I haven't heard it.

sorry that's a bad link somehow, let's try again... IF NS wants help, I haven't heard it. http://www.bigfoot.com/~anakin301

Formerly JR, J. Russell, I give up all, I'm a member now...

To C.R.,

C.R. Wrote: "The truth is AOL will *NOT* distribute Netscape Comm as the AOL web client. Steve Case said it: they need that AOL icon on the Windows desktop. And that will stand even when Communicator 5.0 will be available!!!"

Ya, AOL also said that Netscape5.0 will be the base for AOL5.0, which will be released in the 4th quarter of 1999.

Right now, AOL uses a proprietary format called "rainman". If AOL uses Netscape5.0 as the base, then AOL can use HTML as the standard format AOL uses. This is what AOL wants. So instead of advertisers making Ads in some other format, then can use HTML. Second, AOL rather have it's own browser, instead of relying on IE??

I don't think AOL wants to rely on Microsoft..

C.R Wrote: "Currently, IE 4x is definitely a supperior product to Comm 4x. people like still use Netscape because they are biased against MS, not because of better quality. What will happen when that gap will increase (IE5x vs. the same old Comm 4x? Netscape's market will decrease dramatically."

Well, IE5.0 doesn't do any thing new or better than IE4.0, so Netscape users will just stick with Communicator. Why instill a browser that takes up over 100 megs? Ya, IE starts up 5 seconds faster than Netscape, but IE slows your whole computer down what's the point of useing it??

You can't take IE off your computer.

These things i just don't like.

C.R. Wrote: "Normally, that would still be ok. Because a good product can regain market. But take a look at Raptor. It has a completely nonrealistic approach (just check the RDF usage!!! :)))). In an independent company that would work. Not in AOL. AOL wants results. They will either terminate the project or require a premature release. And that would be the end: another inferior product."

AOL wants results? I am sorry, but they bought ICQ for 300 million, and ICQ has yet to earn AOL 1 dollar?? Look, i own AOL shares and Netscape shares. I know AOL's business strategy...

I guess since you know AOL so well, they are going to terminate ICQ, cause it hasn't shown any results, huh?

Let me ask you this question...Why did AOL buy Netscape if they didn't believe in their product? Steve Case would be a petty dumb businessman to buy a company for 4.2 billion then terminate their main product..

If AOL wanted a portal they would have bought a better portal like Excite or Lycos. They already had a 10-15% stake in Excite..

C.R. Wrote: "And no, external developers will not continue the Mozilla project. Mozilla is Netscape's child. Its development is really far from open."

Far from open? Supporting 100% standards sounds good to me...

C.R. Wrote: "I'm really bitter about Netscape: I belived in them and I hated when they sold to AOL. However, my last hope is that I'm completely wrong and you guys are right. Of course, I'm too cinical to actually belive that..."

I'm sorry, but AOL isn't going to turn Netscape into this bad company. If any thing, AOL will help with it's marketing experience and market power. AOL has better marketing then Microsoft in my opinion. AOL has the person who started "I want my MTV!"

Also, in 5 years computers aren't going to the main device people use to connect to the internet. PDAs, Cell phones, TVs, cable boxes, gaming machines will all connect to the net. All these machines will outnumber PCs connecting to the net and most importantly they will need a browser...

hmmm...i wonder which one they would use??

Sony's upcoming console might use Linux. I wonder which browser they could use? I know IE doesn't work on Linux. So if Sony uses Linux, then they could use Netscape as there browser (sinse Netscape will support standards 100%). Right now, over 50 million households own a Sony Playstation. Probably around 40-70 million will own a Playstation2.

Maybe, these are just some of the reasons AOL bought Netscape?? Hmmm...

I mean, Mozilla is working on making their browser small enough to fit on a floppy. Or small enough to fit on a PalmPilot. I know IE's 40 megs wont fit on a hand-held computer, but Mozilla will.

I can tell you one thing...more devices will be connecting to the net and they wont be using a M$ OS. People are sick of Microsoft.

IE5 is nothing to write home about kids. Even the guys in Microsoft know that. The reason Office 2000 hasn't shipped yet is because the whole damn thing is tied to IE and IE is broken, or so say the folks in Microsoft's QA department.

I'm not arguing that Netscape can let the project keep slipping, but they're not going to suddenly lose some huge portion of their market share when IE5 gets officially released.

Re: XPFE.

This is most exciting part of the product from my point of view. DOM/CSS/XML compliance are all evolutionary advances. A cross platform UI built to be completely customizable is revolutionary.

I've got faith.

So, as tomorrow is Monday and a new very busy (for me) work week is starting, here is my last post on this issue.

It was definitely a very interesting thread. Some postings made me laugh to tears because of their lack of realism, others changed my opinion on things. However, all that we did was an attempt to guess the future, in the most unpredictable and changing world: Internet. We have figured out quite a few possible scenarios. Now all we have to do is see which one is going to be the right one... So, sit back and enjoy the show, here with us on MozillaZine!!!

Aren't we all forgetting one detail? The fact is that AOL has decided to collaborate with Sun on a "new" browser (HotJava 2.0?). Then AOL would have rights to 2 browsers, sort of a conflict of interest. Maybe Sun and AOL should add to the Mozilla effort, maybe some sort of collaboration. They could probably really help out with the Mozilla JIT, or even possibly speed ElectricalFire development enough to have it in Mozilla itself (is that too hopeful?). It would be in Sun's interest to help with development of Mozilla, as if they don't, IE will be ahead of Netscape moreso with regard to market share once 5.0 is released (nerds and geeks make up a large market share, and they/us download the latest stuff all the time). And if IE gets that far ahead, they will probably face more and more legal woes with regard to the Pure Java vs. J++, like actually getting Pure Java engines to replace J++. And bad news - I am part of the AOL beta program, and right now they have IE5 in beta. So IE5 will increase with market share via AOL's force feed method with CD installs. AOL and Sun had better rethink their HotJava strategy and should breathe some more life into Mozilla. Maybe even route some developers to Netscape's offices. More hoepful thinking...

No, the Sun AOL partnership is a Sun, AOL, Netscape partnership. The result will be a browser compatible with all 3. AOL is not using NS right now because IE has a componentized browser and NS does not. Believe it or not, it takes time to crank out AOL 5.0, and in any case AOL is looking to have three major portals, and hoping that everyone will have one of the three AOL, Netcenter, or ICQ. Wiping out ICQ or NS would wipe out a large audience AOL could be advertising to--it's NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. There is virtually no overlap between the three, and people on NS or ICQ generally do not want to be on AOL and vice-versa. AOL reaches a larger audience this way. ICQ has like 26 million subscribers, plus AOL's 16 mil., plus Compuserve's 2 mil., etc. etc. Killing any one portal would be STUPID, and killing the one browser that just about everyone can identify on sight of the little starry wheel would be tantamount to $4 bil. being flushed down the toilet. THEY ARE NOT THAT STUPID.

And did you happen to read the story saying Sun just gave $30,000 to help finance Mozilla? One more time-NS is not going anywhere. Just because AOL hasn't switched yet-I mean, the merger doesn't come up at NS board til March 17, give it a little time, and be rest assured that NS 5.0 WILL change the face of the Internet again, and MS will be left scrambling to rewrite NS again. Poor babies. I'll bet Billy's been doing a lot of screaming in Redmond lately.

Ditto Kovu.

Think brands. Think toothpaste and deodorant soap. Steve Case does.

To AOL, lots of brands are good because this his how you get market coverage.

On IE5 and America Online:

The only reason that AOL is doing is because they need to know if AOL will be compatible with IE5 or not (of course can figure why they need to do this). When IE4 came out AOL kept with IE3 on all their CD's and stuff. Same here.

If AOL didn't check if IE5 worked properly, that would be forcing some people to stay with IE4. Obviously I don't think AOL wants more people to hate them.

Too true. If AOL doesn't check for compatibility, MS sure as hell won't. And I sincerely doubt AOL would put out AOL 5.0 just to add IE 5, unless they had to rewrite the code because MS botched things up bad enough, which is all too possible.

Holly Molly, you must be joking! I cannot belive that you are serious. Are you people living in a paralel universe?

"AOL is not using NS right now because IE has a componentized browser and NS does not." ??????

Read my lips: AOL link on Windows desktop. THAT is the reason. And that will be the reason. AOL will keep bundling IE as long as it gots that HUGE advantage from Microsoft. No, AOL is NOT going to use Gecko for the browser, unless that deal ends.

"If you honestly think Windows is going to keep its dominance in the industry for much beyond this year you are sorely wrong--the new Amigas come out this year and Windows next consumer version is an embarassing two years off at least."

Amigas?!?!?!?!? No, really, Amigas?!?!?!?!? Can you hear me laughing? Is that you next OS?!?!?!? Jesus, do you know anything about OSs?! I run Linux, I love Linux, and I still do not belive it will replace Windows. But Amigas?!?!?!?!

"Sun just gave $30,000 to help finance Mozilla?"

I'm still laughing! Do you have any idea how much a software project costs? with 30k you can't even *start* to look for a programmer. What can I say, GREAT help!

"I'll bet Billy's been doing a lot of screaming in Redmond lately."

Yeah, I'm screaming too. And laughing my a** off!

"I mean, Mozilla is working on making their browser small enough to fit on a floppy. Or small enough to fit on a PalmPilot. I know IE's 40 megs wont fit on a hand-held computer, but Mozilla will."

Dream on, my friend, dream on. Just try to download a daily build from mozilla.org And running on portable devices? You should read the source&newsgroups from time to time: the technologies currently used in Gecko make that IMPOSSIBLE.

And the list could go on. Guys, get a clue... I'd bet none of you is a programmer, or you will know more about these issues.

I think some of you guys are on crack. Statements like "Amiga will blow Windows away". Wake up and smell the rehab. It ain't gonna happen. How will an OS with absolutely no applications blow Windows away (and please don't count Commodore64 PacMan as an app). BeOS is a great OS, yet I don't see many people going out and buying it. Another statement: "...if you honestly think Windows is going to keep its dominance in the industry for much beyond this year you are sorely wrong...". Oh, really!? And what do you think is going to take its place? If you are thinking Linux, you are dead wrong - even with KDE & Gnome GUIs. Right now over 90% of the consumer market is Win98 with the rest being Macs. A product can't just come out of nowhere and totally take over. Let's also examine the oft-repeated fallacy that large companies are investing in Linux (IBM, Sun, HP, etc...). Exactly what is it that they invested. Some of them announced that they'll ship Linux if a user requests it. Who are they kidding? Some of the other companies made a sacrificial offering and "ported" (e.g. recompiled a Unix product to Linux) one or two of their products to Linux. That is not commitment to me - it is jumping on the bandwagon, so you got a seat in case the things heat up. Real commitment to me is seeing a linux PC at the local electronics store.

Regarding NS 4.x being stable - it is about as unstable as IE4.x.

Lastly, all these people telling us that in 4-5 yrs PC will go the way of the dinosaur and be replaced by the palm pilots, CE and toasters that email me when the LEGOs are done. In other words, devices that specialize in one thing and one thing only. Every 7-8 months a new fad comes out and everyone jumps on the bandwagon and it even has a semi-celebrity pushing it. Remember, network computers (Ellison)? How about push technology? The result: several companies went belly up. Such is the state of this fad. Here is an idea - device that does word processing. Oh, wait, it already exists: it is called a typewriter.

Think past the hype.

Uh, Amiga will support standard APIs, that's how. To those of us who pay attention, the future becomes clear. And yes, AOL made the initial deal with MS to get the place on the desktop, but they had the option to pull out of that deal this year and haven't yet, and won't, until NS is up to punch to replace it. Windows 98 is the last bastion of MS tyrancy, and if you don't like it, get off the Mozilla advocacy channel. Open source will wipe their closed code asses off the map because, as AOL has proved, free software that works is better than $200 software that doesn't.

Ok, I this is at least the fourth time someone is repeating this here: AOL will not use Netscape, not even it will be ready. I personally heard Steve Case saying somethig like "the place on desktop is too valuable, so we won't be using Gecko as long as we still have this deal" (very approximative quote). And that's very understandable, he's not stupid!

Hey, are you kidding me with Amiga?! What standard APIs? In an OS??? What the hell are you talking about? POSIX? Win32? Which standard? And a few postings ago you were said "reinvent multimedia as we know it". How does that go with standard APIs? So, is that OS Open Source??? Look, the whole idea is too ridicule (or "on crack" as rgelb wrote:))) to even consider it. So, please, just let it go.

As for "Windows 98 is the last bastion of MS tyrancy" I suggest you take care, because you are going to be very disappointed in the years to come. It will take much, much longer. And lots of work, not words.

If my position upsets you, I apologise. But you know, ignoring the hard truth will not make it go away. The only way is to face it. That's why I post here: as an devoted Mozilla supporter, I think that it is extremely important to have the real picture about the situation. I am trying to show the weaknesses, not only praise the merits.

For any interested, the somewhat vague Amiga Inc.'s (owned now by Gateway) targeted features for the NG Amiga are below. They intend to have a lower level system out by year's end, and if you think the weak-ass iMac, which doesn't have a one of these features (well I shouldn't say that) can sell, well this should top it. They are using QNX as their base OS, not BeOS, as some might have expected (see www.amiga.com for more details) because QNX is small enough to run credit card machines and yet is a fully real-time OS. I really think these guys have a chance this time, and if you don't well I'm sorry.

The Amiga Developer system, an extremely high scale x86 machine, should be out within a couple of months, and then let the convergence begin. Neither Gateway nor Amiga is stupid enough to put out another machine that will be killed by lack of support-if you can't beat 'em do it better.

As for Windows, projects like Mozilla are designed specifically to make OSs IRRELEVANT, because of MS abuses. It is MSs worst nightmare and the reason they crushed NS with IE and tried to make Java Windows dependent. Once this happens, with the "write once run anywhere" fully engaged, hopefully, the last OS anybody will want to use is Windows.

Finally, you are once again not taking into account the DOJ trial, which looks to be over this summer. MS has done HORRIBLY in court, whether they admit it or not, and there is every indication that A) get broken up or B) have to license Windows or C)have to stop writing exclusionary contracts. In any of these cases, MS loses, and the industry wins. And this is all likely to happen by next year, over a year before MS could possibly put out another consumer OS.

And as for $30,000 not being enough, the point is not the one-time donation, it is indicative of the industry leanings. SGI is financing Open-GL development on Linux, Intel is financially assisting in helping Linux work best with their new chips. HP and IBM are not merely putting up machines for those who ask for them, they are developing lines based on them because, in the end, they are SICK of paying over-inflated prices for a nightmarishly bloated OS that is bottle-necked by all of MSs marketing stategies, MB after MB after MB. The DOJ commissioned a program that removed IE from Win98 completely, and allowed them to install Netscape in its place--and lost NO functionality. I really wish I could get that program, and do my Windows a favor.

AMIGA NG FEATURES: Operating System Core Features

Scalable and modular design Fully Protected Preemptive Multitasking; with processes and threads Efficient and compact OS (under 4MBs) Full 32 bit True RTOS Virtual Memory support ROM-able Multi Processor support Distributed processing support Open standards architecture Support for industry standard API's

Multimedia

High performance 3D (Open GL) Full 24-bit true color Support standard TV, SVGA and resolutions up to HDTV Multi-Media Gaming centric Real-time animation (audio/video/graphics)

Internet/Networking

Network centric architecture High performance Internet solutions Full Java support Consumer networking Convergence

Support new digital interface standards Amiga convergence API's where no standards exist Support leading convergence processing hardware

As for AOL and Steve Case, the Windows agreement is up in Jan. 2001, and AOL is hard at work on AOL 5.0. By 2001, I'm sorry, the Win98 desktop is going to be worth about as much as my grandmother's old hair dryer.

George, You mention non-PC based appliances etc. as a huge new market, and potential platform for Mozilla... Well, I can say you're right. I'm Director of R&D at a startup that will be using Mozilla in a "Webphone"...

Yes, a wireless phone, with a touch screen and a webbrowser. And it won't cost much either... Several multinational telcos have already indicated their interest.

As for S.T: Just how long do you think having an AOL icon on the Windows desktop will be enough of an advantage for AOL? PC's in general, and PC's running Windows in particular will in a couple of years be only a small percentage of the web enabled devices. Most will be too small to run Windows, much less Internet Explorer.

But Mozilla is easily adaptable, and writing a custom front end that's specially targetted at a particular type of device is easy (in our case that means touchscreen instead of mouse, for instance). And the result is small enough, since you don't have to bother about a bloated OS like Windows.

Vidar Hokstad Director of R&D Screen Media

Just as long as Windows will still have over 60% of the market. I do not belive that small web devices will be relevant for the browser wars. That is because currently the computing power (cpu+memory) you need for simple browsing is huge. And the requirements will get higher, as new standards (XSS, HTML 5, DOM 2) and media types are emerging. Internet is bleeding edge, so a browser is more and more becoming a full emulator for a virtual medium. That needs computing muscle.

So, the PC is here to stay. And Windows will not go aways too fast either.

And unfortunatelly, M$ is much closer to that desiderate. Their browser is already modular and easy to rewrite. Plus they have Win CE already ported, so the API is there.

Good luck to Amiga. QNX is a damn cool piece of code. Of course is a long way from that to win a market, but our Kovu is a beliver... :)))

yes, indeed I am. If our threads keep up at this pace, they might have to go to a skeletal structure so that each page does not take EONS to load. :)

"Small" web devices won't have any problems... Computing power is cheap. Computing power is *NOT* a relevant aspect when it comes to cost of a web device these days - LCD display or touch are the real cost issues.

Our WebPhone will most probably have an x86 core of some sort (we look at a few other alternatives too), with computing power equivalent of a reasonably fast pentium. It's a requirement since we won't only do web browsing, but also telephony/video telephony both over IP and ISDN, MP3 streaming, and more.

Cost? For the consumer almost nothing, as it will be bundled and subsidized with internet access etc.

As for WinCE, Internet Explorer for Windows CE is severely crippled. It lacks most of what modern browsers should have, which places it at a severe disadvantage in this market.

For us Internet Explorer would be useless because it lacks too many features. Windows CE + Internet Explorer would also cost us way too much, and is too complicated for our main market.