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.

#332 Re:MozillaZine's ChromeZone Now Open!

by hyatt <>

Tuesday June 8th, 1999 1:49 AM

You are replying to this message

One of the things to realize about Netscape is that it really is a cross-platform company, with a substantial number of engineers with experience on UNIX and on Mac.

In the old world of MozillaClassic, there were three full front end teams (one for Mac, one for Windows, and one for UNIX), and each of us crafted the native UI doing redundant work on each of the three platforms.

We could have continued to follow this model, but the primary problem is that we simply didn't have the resources to re-write the UI from scratch in a timely fashion with our resources split in three.

The solution we reached was that we needed to eliminate redundancy and to make the most out of the resources that we had. Hence a cross-platform solution, where each engineer would be coding for all platforms rather than just one.

So practicality largely motivated the decision to attempt a cross-platform UI.

I still don't quite understand what your objections are to the UI we're developing using XUL. I understand your concerns about speed, and I've mentioned what we're doing to address those issues, but I'm not really following your argument about the look and feel of the UI.

It would be helpful to me if you could cite specific examples of where you see our XUL UI violating Windows UI guidelines. I could then let you know if the violation is simply a bug (which could be contributing to a false perception that we're doing something wacky and non-standard).

I do maintain that it is acceptable for a Windows application to define its own chrome. This has been a regular practice on the Windows platform for some time now. New Microsoft products even partake in this practice with regularity.

Note that I'm not even talking about wizzy programs like Winamp. Our UI is fairly conservative. A button is still clearly a button. Speed issues aside, what specifically is bothering you?

Without specific examples, this argument isn't constructive. With specific examples, then we can work to alleviate any concerns you have about XUL.