MozillaZine

Request From MZ

Monday September 13th, 1999

There has been mention in a previous forum that IE's rendering engine on the Mac (Tasman) utilizes Mozilla code. However, no proof was given of this (and we find it hard to believe, to tell you the truth). We're interested in knowing one way or another, so if someone could provide more information, we'd appreciate it. Until then we'll view this as nothing more than rumour.


#1 Request From MZ

by Anon

Monday September 13th, 1999 5:03 PM

Reply to this message

Maybe Mozilla uses Microsoft's rendering engine code. Ever thought about that?

#3 Request From MZ

by Anon

Monday September 13th, 1999 7:33 PM

Reply to this message

Now how would they get that information? Last time I check no one from Microsoft is dishing out tons of code.

#5 Request From MZ

by Anon

Monday September 13th, 1999 10:32 PM

Reply to this message

<laugh> Nah. Gecko's code is much too clean to have come from our favorite punching bags in Redmond. :)

#6 Request From MZ

by Anon

Monday September 13th, 1999 11:38 PM

Reply to this message

I agree the gecko code would have to be much bigger to come from m$ because look at ie5 it is like two time's as big as even n4.5

#2 Ask MOSR or AppleInsider

by BlueGecko8

Monday September 13th, 1999 5:06 PM

Reply to this message

Mac OS Rumors <http://www.mosr.com/> or AppleInsider <http://www.appleinsider.com/> would probably be willing to smuggle you debug symbols for comparison, or at least get you in contact with someone who could. They would probably be the best ones to ask.

#4 Request From MZ

by Jake <jake@bugzilla.org>

Monday September 13th, 1999 9:56 PM

Reply to this message

There's this nifty little thing called reverse engineering... of course, it is illegal... but then so is stealing code (and it would be stealing if they used it w/out acknowledging that fact).

I really can't wait to see how this turns out, but until we know for sure, I'd caution people about spreading this too far (slander is punishable by law).

#7 Request From MZ

by Anon

Tuesday September 14th, 1999 12:02 AM

Reply to this message

I'm not a lawyer, but I'm quite sure that reverse engineering is not illegal, in the US anyway.

There is, of course, the problem of shrink-wrap licenses. :-(

#8 Problem?

by thelem

Tuesday September 14th, 1999 6:32 AM

Reply to this message

AFAIK you do not have to agree to a licence to download IE, only to run it. Because you have not agree to any licence you cannot break it. Plus there is the issue of wheather they are legally binding or not.

#12 Trick Reverse Engineering...

by SomeSmartAss

Tuesday September 14th, 1999 11:48 AM

Reply to this message

The Trick to reverse engineering is to have two groups of people.

The first, who use the product, actually have abide to the shrink-wrap agreement. What they do is document every nuance of the initial product, how it works, what it seems to do, and what the quirks are... etc. very descriptive, but not *NECESARILY* for the purpose of reverse-engineering (perhaps its for an ill-fated third party "learn xxx in so-many days" type book" that never makes it to print).

The second group, who *HAPPENS* upon this wonderful documentation, and who (and this is the important part) *HAS NEVER COME INTO CONTACT WITH THE ORIGINAL PRODUCT* then goes about building a new product to the exact specifications that were spelt out.

That's reverse engineering in a nutshell.

#9 Who the hell...

by Anon

Tuesday September 14th, 1999 7:36 AM

Reply to this message

Who the hell is going to want to even look at this 'open source' code with all the flak that is spewing out over this. MZ should have let that topic die but nooooo they had to go make an entire new article spolighting the 'possiblity' that MS 'may' be using mozilla source as a POC for one of their products. And look at all the shit! Man, if I was an independent developer or corporation that wanted to use MZ source, I'd think again after seeing these threads. It's OPEN source, so keep an OPEN MIND to whomever wants to use it. SHEESH

-Chris

#11 Who the hell...

by arielb

Tuesday September 14th, 1999 10:58 AM

Reply to this message

well if they are using it then we should have the modifications and bug fixes too. Otherwise it's stealing! New stuff is something else (such as doczilla's sgml and neoplanet's shell). That can be closed. But we should have the changes to the original mozilla stuff

#14 MZ is NOT Mozilla

by Anon

Tuesday September 14th, 1999 12:45 PM

Reply to this message

MozillaZine is not Mozilla so whatever is said here doesn't reflect the views of Mozilla

#10 It would make me more inclined to use moz source

by mozineAdmin

Tuesday September 14th, 1999 8:42 AM

Reply to this message

You seem to think that I was pronouncing judgement on MS. Far from it. I *went out of my way* to state that I'm not inclined to believe it.

You seem to assume that I brought the issue to people's attention in order to denegrate MS. Well, if they did indeed use Mozilla code without proper mention (as the license dicates), then their own actions indict them.

However, those actions would also, I think, be a benefit to Mozilla. If MS uses the code, then obviously the work that the mozilla team doing is worth checking out. (It is under any circumstance.)

I personally think that if MS is using Mozilla code, they should continue to do so. It would aid greatly on issues of cross-browser compatibility. If they aren't using Mozilla code, then that's fine too (although I personally don't know why they would continue to pour money down the drain when they can contribute to a great cross-platform standards-based project).

If a company wants to use the code without paying heed to the licensing agreements, then they should indeed think twice before using the code. Please tell me - Why anyone should be able to ignore the NPL and MPL? It may be Open Source, but licensing agreements still apply even in Open Source land.

#13 ...

by Anon

Tuesday September 14th, 1999 11:58 AM

Reply to this message

All I am suggesting is that we should not get over excited about this (maybe you haven't read all the other talkbacks under the other article?) until MS actually releases something for real instead of just a showcase of something they are working on. You are right, you should be welcoming microsoft with open arms if they want to use mozilla source, for then they would be using the same codebase and same standards compliant base as netscape will. But, people ARE jumping to conclusions, it's a god damn witch hunt, and that I don't believe that's helpful or projects a good image to other development shops that may want to use raptor for non-web related applications. But hey, what do I know.

-Chris

#15 If this is true....

by Anon

Tuesday September 14th, 1999 12:52 PM

Reply to this message

If this is true I'd have to congratulate Microsoft completely for making a sensible decision as long as they abide by the terms of the NPL and don't keep it a secret that they are using Mozilla code then I congratulate them.

We can then be part of a world where web pages can be written to follow the standards and will display the same in the two major browsers. MS can then add extra features to the IE branded 'Mozilla' just like AOL will to the Netscape branded Mozilla. However I hope MS does engage in the open source spirit and even if they don't want to open source any of their own stuff (such as Outlook Express) then I still hope they'll contribute a few coders to Gecko (which'll be the part of Mozilla, if any, they use) because AOL will probably pull the plug on the Netscape developers if they thought MS was leeching off their code.

So please let's hope this be true. If Microsoft do this it'll show that perhaps they are committed to standards and we can then choose between Netscape 5.0 and IE based on features as they'll both be standards based. All the web developers in the world would really love this and it would be good publicity for Microsoft as well as Mozilla.

#16 Let MS know what you think

by Anon

Tuesday September 14th, 1999 1:44 PM

Reply to this message

Suggest to Microsoft that they should use Gecko as the IE rendering engine because then they can compete with Netscape on features and usability and ensure that the end user can have a browser that meets the current standards. Heres a link you can click to give your support to Microsoft using Gecko. MS feedback: <http://www.microsoft.com/MSWish/Default.htm> It'd be so cool if they were using it, everyone would have standards compliance.

#17 I don't think so...

by mozillaBob <mozillaBob@digitalswamp.net>

Tuesday September 14th, 1999 2:09 PM

Reply to this message

I think where this rumor may have come about is from a comment some MS IE5 engineer made, I can't seem to find a link to that quote but maybe someone else will remember it. The quote essentially said something to the effect that IE5 Mac was going to be like Mozilla. I didnt get the impression from that quote that it was _like_ in the code sense but _like_ in the standards compliance sense. From everything I've read about the MS Macintosh Business Unit they are dedicated MacOS developers, not "reconstituted windows developers". Many I believe have contributed to popular Mac shareware in the past (present?), but I don't remember specifics. I think what it comes down to is that the MBU has been given a lot of latitude to do true mac software and if that includes Mozilla code so be it, IE5 isn't even released yet, so if that is the case give them some time for proper announcements and crediting. I'm sure a move like that would require some extra thought by the marketing yahoos and proably legal too.

#18 I don't think so...

by mozillaBob <mozillaBob@digitalswamp.net>

Tuesday September 14th, 1999 2:10 PM

Reply to this message

I think where this rumor may have come about is from a comment some MS IE5 engineer made, I can't seem to find a link to that quote but maybe someone else will remember it. The quote essentially said something to the effect that IE5 Mac was going to be like Mozilla. I didnt get the impression from that quote that it was _like_ in the code sense but _like_ in the standards compliance sense. From everything I've read about the MS Macintosh Business Unit they are dedicated MacOS developers, not "reconstituted windows developers". Many I believe have contributed to popular Mac shareware in the past (present?), but I don't remember specifics. I think what it comes down to is that the MBU has been given a lot of latitude to do true mac software and if that includes Mozilla code so be it, IE5 isn't even released yet, so if that is the case give them some time for proper announcements and crediting. I'm sure a move like that would require some extra thought by the marketing yahoos and proably legal too.

#19 stupid rumor

by Anon

Tuesday September 14th, 1999 3:26 PM

Reply to this message

Please dont give any credit to this rumor. IE will never use any of the Mozilla code.

I guess their rendering engine is the same for the Win32, Mac and Unix code.