Mike Shaver's Response to Computerworld Article
Tuesday October 19th, 1999
#1 amen n/t
Tuesday October 19th, 1999 3:25 PM
#7 amen n/t
Tuesday October 19th, 1999 5:50 PM
Mike is indeed, The Man!
#2 Mike Shaver's Response to Computerworld Article
Tuesday October 19th, 1999 3:42 PM
> modifications to MPL'd/NPL'd code must be made available
I assume you mean "modifications to MPL'd/NPL'd source code must be made available along with executable code", else it wouldn't be a free license. =)
Tuesday October 19th, 1999 3:54 PM
The response article was interesting to read. And IMO, this system more perfect than a non-open source system :)
#4 I hope the idiot read it
Tuesday October 19th, 1999 4:33 PM
I get so ill of hearing the Mozilla death-knell no less than 2 (or so) months from beta time for a browser that will, and already is (developers are using it already) going to change the Internet (for the BETTER, I should specify) and how we see it.
It's really just the case of a journalist who A) isn't interested enough to get to the bottom himself or B) doesn't have time or C) is just plain lazy.
BTW, speaking of open-source, Eric Raymond, who helped convince Netscape to make Mozilla open, is part of an effort to convince Gateway to open source the Amiga OS. http://www.savetheamiga.org.uk/html/casecontents.html (Link sometimes works, sometimes doesn't)
#8 I hope the idiot read it
Tuesday October 19th, 1999 7:18 PM
I, among the other people who submitted a critique to him, received a polite form letter that indicated he was, and stated he was going to write a followup article.
#5 Doing it right
Tuesday October 19th, 1999 4:40 PM
I think Mike S. had a good point when he mentioned the pride of getting things right.
I'm not involved in the mozilla codebase, but I am a developer. And the transparency of the mozilla process (ie, no corporate shields), combined with developer assurances that they want to do this the 'right way' convince me that when mozilla finally hits beta, it will be a good thing
btw, I'm on M10 and can't believe how sweet of an *alpha* product it is. I've seen worse betas in my lifetime, that's for sure...
#6 Mike Shaver's Response to Computerworld Article
Tuesday October 19th, 1999 5:05 PM
MozAdmin - do you have any statistics you could make public about the browsers being used at Mozillazine? I think it would be quite interesting for everybody (preferably split by month over the past few months so we can see a pattern).
I for one was using an M11 build (18/10) all day yesterday, and I still would be if it would start up. Can anyone help here - it started when I tried loading loads of the other execuatbles to see what they do. Viewer.exe used to work but now crashes on launch, everything else just loads then quits. I have deleted the registry.
#10 Moz/Nutscrape Crashing
Tuesday October 19th, 1999 10:14 PM
(pardon the Netscape joke) When I DL'ed the NS4.7 the Talkback.dll from NS4.7 and whatever Mozilla I hade last used were conflicting. I just did find for talkback.dll (not 100% sure if that is the right file name) and deleted them and rebooted. All has been well since. I probably can't send crash data back but oh well. Sandy
#9 Mike Shaver's Response to Prof Cusumano's Article
Tuesday October 19th, 1999 8:45 PM
OK, this seems to be a fine, measured response to a slovenly piece of work, but where besides Mozillazine was this open(?) letter sent?
Did it go to Computerworld? If not, I'd have to suggest sending it there: they have as much obligation to publish it as they have journalistic integrity.
The letter can't do much good if it is only in Mozillazine (see, "Preaching to the Choir"). It's the world outside the open source movement that needs this information. For that matter, the letter should probably go to all the leading computer magazines dealing with PCs.
If I understand the directions on this form correctly, I can only leave my URL within the text: firstname.lastname@example.org
#13 Mike Shaver's Response to Prof Cusumano's Article
Wednesday October 20th, 1999 1:18 AM
I don't know the answer to that, but this article prompted a significant number of responses to the author, including mine. Will they ask about publishing them all?
In a reply to me, and others, the author has said that he will write a followup article. We're waiting.
You can automatically include your email if you register as a member. Your name will become a hyperlink.
#14 Doing It Right: Just be faster!
Wednesday October 20th, 1999 4:36 AM
The largest problem of Mozilla is IMHO the time it needs to get an beta/final version. In the meantime our friends at Redmond are defining the XML standards and are occupying the desktops with IE and XML developer guidelines. Also, they don't have any incentive to use Java 1.2 and Netscape isn't using it either. In the end, 1999 is a year of unchallanged M$ ruling of the Web Space and the future standards of the web. Sorry, but maybe a less than "right" version of Mozilla would be helpfull.
#15 Doing It Right: Just be faster!
Wednesday October 20th, 1999 6:52 AM
But Mozilla.org is not a company and makes no profit. We don't care if everybody has 5 copies of IE on their desktop by the time Mozilla comes out. When it does, I'm guessing they will be willing to replace it when they see, in contrast, how shoddy and half-baked MS's "implementations" of the standards are. People will need and want to run Java...Microsoft is just going to dig its own grave here.
#16 Speaking of Delays
Wednesday October 20th, 1999 2:46 PM
I found both the article and the response interesting. But I must remark that Mozilla is not the only product with sugnificant delays. Can you say [cough]Windows 2000[cough]?
#17 Speaking of Delays
Wednesday October 20th, 1999 4:53 PM
No, but I can say 'Microsoft Windows NT5 will be released late 1998' :-)