MozillaZine's ChromeZone Now Open!
Monday May 24th, 1999
Steve Morrison, creator of the XULTool, has joined MozillaZine (as some of you may already know). He has been hard at work getting the XULTool working on our site, and we're pleased to announce that the ChromeZone is now online.
Now, with a simple form, you can change the look and feel of Mozilla, and create your own themes! You can also choose from some ready-made themes we have available. You can also send your own themes to ChromeZone for addition to our site.
So, fire up apprunner and head over to the chromeZone.
We got a lot of great entries for our little "name our new chrome area" contest, but in our final vote, "ChromeZone" came out on top. A number of people submitted the name "ChromeZone" or a variation for our contest. Clayton Scott was the first, however, and his prize is a stuffed Mozilla doll from Netscape. I know we didn't promise any prizes for the contest, but we wanted to give something to the winner.
Thanks to everyone for you contributions, and if you have any suggestions for the chromeZone, let us know.
#265 Re:MozillaZine's ChromeZone Now Open!
Tuesday June 1st, 1999 6:34 AM
You are replying to this message
You said, "There's a big difference between the Netscape Communicator UI that's resolved at compile time vs the Mozilla UI which is resolved at runtime."
And yet, again, you refuse to explain what those differences are. And why is that? Because there's no way you can - there is no final implementation of XPFE to compare against a native UI, therefore your argument has no basis in fact, and no method to verify your claim. But still you persist in making it.
"A XUL implemented UI will *not* outperform it's native counterpart. What I would like to know is, since I assume you're a developer, how could you possibly think otherwise?"
If you had been paying attention, Dave Hyatt is one of *the* guys at Netscape programming the XPFE. He wrote most of the new XPFE docs that are available now.
And, from his post, part of your argument is moot - the XUL interface has to be as responsive as the non-native interfaces of NN4, not as a native UI - simply because the UI of NN4.x has not led people to choose IE. And Dave seems to think that that's completely possible that Mozilla's UI will be that responsive - and he should be the one to know.
You, however, have based your entire theory entirely around the "possibility" that Mozilla's XPFE will be slower than a native UI. And you persist in that argument, even though you have no data to back you up, except the performance of a pre-alpha browser.
"So, Mozilla will be released in a 70%+ IE market when Win98 is 1 1/2+ years into release. Office2K will have been out for at least 6 months and more than likely Win2K will have been released."
Interesting. You argue that Mozilla needs to compete in a situation in which the cards are stacked against it by MS's blatantly anticompetitive practices. I believe that if Mozilla fails, it is going to be more a result of MS's anticompetitive practices than anything. And that argument will be much easier to verify than your "slower interface" argument.