Slashdot Mirror
Mozilla Foundation Meets The GNOME Foundation
An anonymous reader writes "The board of directors of the GNOME foundation recently met with a few representatives of the Mozilla foundation - discussing how they could collaborate a little closer in future. A number of interesting things were discussed, including XAML/Avalon and the future of Firefox in GNOME/Linux. Check out the minutes of the meeting on the Gnome mailing list."
Really, I don't.
IT'S GOMZILLA!!!!!
I apologize, I have nothing.
WWJD.... for a Klondike bar?
Who cares? I mean really....
they're from the moon
I've used Firefox before and think its a great browser, but I have a number of worries about it. I mentioned a few of them before. I've looked into it a bit more now, and the more I discovered the more worried I've become. Basically Firefox has the capacity to give very bad press to many more Open Source products, to tar them with it's dirty brush, should certain features of the browser be publicised widely.
That's a contentious point, so before you moderate me as flamebait please give me an opportunity to explain. My previous post on this subject resulted me in getting terrible karma because people unfairly called me a troll. If it is trolling to point out potential problems that we should all be wary of then, yes, I am a troll.
A brief summary of my previous post would be to say that certain features of Firefox make it too easy to misuse the web browser to surf for pornography. It was rightly pointed out at that time by respondants that the power to misuse came from the individual, not the computer program. But I've since discovered that actual Mozilla supported extensions such as this one, "Magpie" or this one "Prev/Next image", which are actually given web space and bookmarked by default by the Mozilla developers themselves can only be useful in the context of searching for and downloading hardcore or violent pornography . For the Mozilla developers to support these two extensions is similar to them offering a "Porno" button theme. If they would not support a sexually explicit theme on their homepage, why are they giving space to extensions which allow you to easily fetch pornographic pictures? Let me reiterate: these extensions are only useful in that context. What is the difference? Does this not give indirect approval of these activities? I think it does.
Pornography is destroying the Internet and the moral health of this nation. By offering openly these functionalities, by publicising and supporting them as mainstream, the Mozilla Developers are commiting a grave moral error. How long is it until some paid Microsoft shill notices them and publicly calls Firefox "the browser of the perverted"? That would be an entirely supportable conclusion. And it would reflect badly not only on Mozilla, but other Open Source projects too.
Check out the extensions for yourself and try to justify them as anything other than porn gatherers. Then join me in mailing the Firefox team, to help them back on the right path (No reply as of 04/24, and it has been about a month). Having a major open source project associate itself publicly with perversion and pornography, with the exploitation and degradation of women, is no way to gain respect.
Meine Schwester ist sehr, sehr reizvoll - Nietzsche
Does Tokyo get stomped?
Oh, I'm a Republican
I got a small schling
I like to bomb niggahs
and make a lot o' bling
I got a bunch o' friends
in high up places
They helps me get dem
government graces.
You think I'm smart
I just know who's who
I couldn't run a fruit stand
without the red white & blue
I fancy myself
A brilliant tactician
But neither me nor m'buddies
Could even pass basic trainin'
See, I'm above all that
A fightin' and shootin'
I just say "Sic em!"
Then run the other direction
Don't need no history
Don't need no schoolin'
I got my ideology
To keep me a shootin'
If I get caught screwin'
Or tellin' wicked lies
"Hypocrisy!" I holler
And that justifies the crimes
Liberals! Faggots!
Commies and queers!
Socialist hippies
Full o' pussy tears!
I'll drop some crap
about Jesus the Christ
You'll buy it all
and vote for me twice
'Fact, Jesus is comin'!
Real soon, now!
So we gotta prop up Israel
That ol' sacred cow
Propaganda's m'friend
But I calls it "fact"
Even though I don't read
'Cept for Chick tracts
Facts? No! Don't need em here!
We're conservatives! We work on FEAR!
Don't like what we say?
Well FUCK YOU, bud!
We'll shove it down yer throat
and tell ya it's good!
If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
Gnome let post first. Or not.
I met my friend Bob. Didn't discuss much, I was in a hurry, but we agreed we should get together for a beer some day.
Any news outlet wants to publish that? Both Bob and I are available for interview and TV appearances.
Better to standardize on Firefox rather than have the desktop environment people keep churning out half-assed browsers like Konq and Nautilus.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
This post appeared within minutes of the story posting, complete with links and proper formatting, so it is quite probable that this is a karma whore.
has to be this:
"We need to slow the upgrade to Longhorn, and since that is relatively costly to businesses, if we can make cross platform applications work well, there is an opportunity for Linux migration"
A psychopath can't tell the difference between right and wrong. A sociopath knows the difference - he just doesn't care.
That's quite an facile editorial but you can't expect better from normal users. My screenshot looks better than yours. Evolution is better than KMail, GNOME looks more polished than KDE and so on. I do use XChat, Abiword, Rhythmbox.... ...usually you get stuff like these from normal users. And this is ok since you can't blame them for stuff they simply don't know about or don't have a slighest knowledge about.
Such editorials are hard to take serious since they are build up on basicly NO deeper knowledge of the matter. Most people I met so far are full of prejudices and seek for excuses or explaination why they prefer the one over the other while in reality they have no slightest clue on what parameters they compare the things.
If people do like the gance ICONS over the functionality then it's quite ok but that's absolutely NO framework to do such comparisons.
I do come from the GNOME architecture and spent the last 5 years on it. I also spent a lot of time (nearly 1 year now if I sum everything up) on KDE 3.x architecture including the latest KDE 3.2 (please note I still do use GNOME and I am up to CVS 2.6 release myself).
Although calling myself a GNOME vetaran I am also not shy to criticise GNOME and I do this in the public as well. Ok I got told from a couple of people if I don't like GNOME that I simply should switch and so on. But these are usually people who have a tunnelview and do not want to see or understand the problems around GNOME.
Speaking as a developer with nearly 23years of programming skills on my back I can tell you that GNOME may look polished on the first view but on the second view it isn't.
Technically GNOME is quite a messy architecture with a lot of unfinished, half polished and half working stuff inside. Given here are examples like broken gnome-vfs, half implementations of things (GStreamer still half implemented into GNOME (if you can call it an implementation at all)) rapid changes of things that make it hard for developers to catch up and a never ending bughunting. While it is questionable if some stuff can simply be fixed with patches while it's more required to publicly talk about the Framework itself.
Sure GNOME will become better but the time developers spent fixing all the stuff is the time that speaks for KDE to really improve it with needed features. We here on GNOME are only walking in the circle but don't have a real progress in true usability (not that farce people talk to one person and then to the next). Real usability here is using the features provided by the architecture that is when I as scientists want to do UML stuff that I seriously find an application written for that framework that can do it. When I eye over to the KDE architecture then as strange it sounds I do find more of these needed tools than I can find on GNOME. This can be continued in many areas where I find more scientific Software to do my work and Software that works reliable and not crash or misbehave or behave unexpected.
Comparing Nautilus with Konqueror is pure nonsense, comparing GNOME with KDE is even bigger nonsense. If we get a team of developers on a Table and discuss all the crap we find between KDE and GNOME then I can tell from own experience that the answer is clearly that GNOME will fail horrible here.
We still have many issues on GNOME which are Framework related. We now got the new Fileselector but yet they still act differently in each app. Some still have the old Fileselector, some the new Fileselector, some appearance of new Fileselectors are differently than in other apps that use the new Fileselector code and so on. When people talk about polish and consistency, then I like to ask what kind of consistency and polish is this ? We still have a couple of different ways to open Window in GNOME.
- GTK-Application-Window,
- BonoboUI Window,
- GnomeUI Window,
Then a lot of stuff inside GNOME are hardcoded UI's, some are using *.glade files (not to mention that GLADE the interface buil
Vision like this could only come the linux community.
It is really odd that Gnome opted for Epiphany as a default browser in 2.x, when Galeon is a better and more featureful choice. I've read that the reasons were that Galeon did not follow some UI guidelines (this could surely be worked out?), and that Epiphany is simpler to use.
I just find it hard to believe than anyone would pick Epiphany over Galeon, even considering simplicity, since Galeon mostly works like Mozilla. Galeon seems simpler to use to me - Epiphany doesn't look or feel like any other browser I've used.
Jeff mentioned that Firefox and GNOME aren't perfectly integrated - in terms of user interface guidelines, preferences, .. Jeff suggested if it was possible for Epiphany to become the official Linux port of Firefox.
In Aussieland they integrate Jeff into the trash.
KDE in all this?
This has nothing to do with this topic!
and sweaty man love ensues.
isnt avalon the new windows Quartz extreme knockoff?
The war with islam is a war on the beast
The war on terror is a war for peace
And I can't see it...
On one hand, it is good that open source foundations are meeting to discuss/set directions.
On the other hand, directions are typically acted upon by volunteers, at individual discretions.
Just how would this gap be matched, or even narrowed, puzzle me.
Grand plans can only work when there is a meeting of minds, isn't it?
Does this mean that Mozilla will be integrated into GNOME? If yes, then isn't this doing the same thing as IE into Windows which everyone on /. says is evil?
Indeed, as parent poster, I must admit I had written this down as some thoughts for inclusion in my journal at some point. But when I saw the front page, I felt I could post this as a warning, where it might be more visible. Is this a crime?
I am surprised you say it is a karma whore. In fact, I expect I will take a karma HIT for saying what is a contentious point. It's something I feel strongly about, so I post whether you approve or not. But next time think more carefully before branding me as a "whore" please. The term Karma solicitation should be used anyway, as it doesn't have such woman-hating connotations. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Hmmm interesting story, but this happened last year... Just check the date of the message and the members of gnome foundation...
Ohhhhh nooooo, they say it's bloated and slow... GNOMEZILLA!!!! /BOC
Does anyone else find it funny that A Dragon type creature, and that a gnome can end up being friends? This just keeps reminding me of shrek, and I hope that gnome never becomes an annoying jack-ass. I will leave that title for SCO.
je suis parce que j'aime
Gnomzilla! Everyone run for their lives!
You must be kidding. While replacing epiphany (the current gnome-browser) with firefox would be a good idea imho, calling the filemanager Nautilus a browser simply is anything but insightful.
Oh, and Konq is pretty awesome as a file-manager and has greatly improved as a web-browser.
Such is the case here. The need to more closely integrate the web rendering model and the desktop model is clear, and Microsoft is probably on to something compelling with Avalon/XAML. ActiveX was a disastrous first brush with integration but its clear they see a need and there is a need. Safe local applications integrated with the network do make sense.
On the open source side someone will have to lead to get this done - and not be afraid to leave some groups out. Epiphany should be an early victim - a "default" app no one uses.
GNOME Foundation / Mozilla Foundation Meeting Minutes Wednesday, April 21 2003
This was last year!
"Brendan spoke about the need for innovation, and not just clinging to web standards."
This is heading towards proprietary extensions territory, a la Netscape/IE. Even if the implementations are 100% free software, this might lock out other apps and projects. It would take a major undertaking for them to comply with the new 'standards'.
OLPC Australia
Konqueror, Nautilus, Epiphany, Galeon, Firefox, Mozilla et etc.. I have to agree that its getting kind of ridiculous.
Ok, choice is nice and all, but this duplication of functionality and work is probably extremely unproductive as a whole for the progress of open source software. It should be enough with 2-3 choices for browsers instead of 20: one or two lightweight ones á Firefox, and one or two "fully featured" like Mozilla.
Isn't the whole point of open source that there's as many choices as there are people to invest the time and energy? Shouldn't that broaden the possibilities of a given piece of software, if each is trying to bring something new to the table?
That being said, I agree that it would probably be best to focus efforts on the more mature technologies. But I wouldn't go so far as to say it's unproductive: rather, they're producing something, but there may be a lot of overlap between it and any other browser-type app out there.
And I prefer Stan Wagon's new invention, the xheel over the old wheel. Sure, they're square, and new roads will have to be build to accomodate them, but think of all the new jobs that will be created. I can't wait for the IPO.
Funny, yes. Informative, hardly.
... just wait until I metamod this.
The double-slash in 'GNU/XAML//GNU/Avalon' should have tipped you off even if the rest didn't.
What's the chances of GNOME adopting XUL for interfaces? I mean, we've got SVG graphics coming down the pipe. Why not define our interfaces in XML, too?
This moving UI to XML can be a powerful concept that will make writing desktop applications easier and more robust putting Linux (at least GNOME) ahead of Microsoft in the development tools game.
Please, please, please let this fail. The last thing I want is my favorite browser family tied to freaking GTK or Gnome.
REM Old programmers don't die. They just GOSUB without RETURN.
The meeting suggested innovation - what about this:
Tie XForms together with email. The purpose is to allow forms to be sent with email, as alternative to HTTP POST. Integrate it with mail clients so that clicking a link opens the compose window, which will load the form, show it, ready to fill in. When clicking send, the form is evaluated and sent. This is much nicer than filling in an order form in a browser, since you get to keep a copy in the outbox. Actually, I am surprised I don't see this already. Of course, it needs to be standardized, but you have to start somewhere. Is there perhaps already an RFC in progress?
Ah yes. Trashing. An Aussie's favourite sport. Though not usually done in cowardice, usually most Aussies are quite happy to take the flames that result.
:(
Ooooo... IHBT! IHL
Mozilla is already technically better than IE. Evolution is already technically better than Outlook. So why isn't the majority of the market using these products? The problem is not a technical problem, and all the new programming languages and acronyms are not going to make the average joe want to use them.
here's an idea, lets all pitch in and try to make a commercial for one of the OSS project. Lets take OpenOffice for example. We all see the MS Office commercials constantly throughout the day. Imagine if those were OpenOffice commercials instead. Maybe a snappy ad in Cosmopolitan magazine.
I really wish that there was as much marketing innovation in OSS as there is development innovation....
mp3's are only for those with bad memories
...mozilla wants to collaborate closer with GNOME and that they asked for it first, according to the release of the minutes of the meeting. Cool Beans. Something that I like, more focused direction on unification for a polished product. *Choice* is good,but it's subjective without some sort of rational goal, choice by itself is mostly used as a buzzword, there must be a *goal* in making the choice and having multiple choices, not just that there *are* multiple choices extant.
And my choice and I bet millions of others would be a "linux thing" that worked cohesively together, and that just won't happen very quickly with thousands of directions taken, many of them just parallel trails with each other.
I most certainly would *chose* an operating system/distribution that worked all well together. A choice of a chaotic mish mash of thousands of incompatable apps and a so-so functionality is not much of a choice if you want quality over quantity.
Slashdot. News for nerds. Stuff that mattered.
Page title is wrong. The date on the message headers say:
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2004 21:44:36 +1200
The really odd thing is the GMT +1200 time zone stamp... Is that Hawaii?
What exactly is lightweight about Firefox? With the right plugins, it runs everything that me *brrr* IE used to, plus the popup-stopper, tabs, etc.
It doesn't have a built-in email client, but then that's what thunderbird or other apps or for.
Some people do have problems getting Java support going though, but I've had good success running sun's Java under firefox more recent.
Thank you for pointing out an obvious TYPO. Whomever modded you down should try reading the linked archive. Since the previous meeting minutes in the thread were marked 2004, I can only assume that this was a simple typo.
;)
In the spirit of open-source, does anyone know of a link where I can submit a change to this all-important piece of info (ie Glynn Foster's email)?
And in the real spirit of open source, I should point out that KDE would never make such an inexcusable mistake. (joking!)
Don't you ever get tired of your obsession: ranting about GNOME? Dude, please. Instead of your whining -which the developers don't take serious anymore- go do something USEFUL instead.
OSS developers tend to push the rather silly 'it's cheaper so they'll switch if we offer a similar solution' battle plan. No thanks. I'm still using Windows (actually, Mac primarily) although Linux is cheaper because Windows and Mac provide me with a whole lot of ease of use that Linux lacks, for what is relatively a small amount of money. (When you consider I work on these things 8 hours a day!) When Linux provides ease of use at more than a superficial level (no, having a GUI doesn't automatically mean "easy to use") then I'll think about switching.
Apple was smart when they took an attitude of "we don't *CARE* what Microsoft is doing, we'll just carve our own markets and create compelling value". This strategy works, because Apple isn't constantly trying to catch up with Microsoft. Instead, they're working on the best possible solution for *their* customers, not Microsoft's. They have a very good understanding of who their customers are, and which customers they're likely to switch over. They've done research on this.
What Mozilla should have learned by now is that the browser just isn't that important anymore. "Our browser is better than yours" will hardly cause end users to switch in boatloads. Developers, however, are more open to switching and more keen on using these technologies in their own apps. Yet, despite this, they say that embedding and the GRE are not priorities until FireFox 1.0 is released. So their focus is on making a good browser, which MS already has. (Don't start about the benefits of Mozilla over IE, I know what they are and most users neither know nor care.)
Their real potential growth market is in embedding, where Windows/Linux/Mac apps can share a similar rendering engine, in tools like Quicken/TurboTax. XUL is an added bonus. But embedding is not a priority nor is it easy to do. So while they could be getting Mozilla/GRE dumped on all sorts of desktops via third-party apps, they've chosen to focus on converting end users, a majority of whom just don't care about which browser they use.
Another great growth area would be Composer, which is already a decent contender to FrontPage, but which most people don't even know exists. Again, a compelling selling point for Mozilla (and embeddable!) but it basically gets ignored. In fact, I think editor embedding is actually a killer app for Mozilla - how many apps work with HTML these days? And unlike with the browser, Mozilla has very little competition here. FrontPage and Dreamweaver are expensive, and they don't offer a real, compelling benefit over Composer.
Instead of pursuing these opportunities, now it sounds like they're going to dump bunches of resources integrating with GNOME and trying to beat Microsoft at its own game (good luck, you're not the first to try!). Also, sounds like they're going to try reinventing portions of wxWidgets/wxWindows internally to provide a "native" XUL, like OpenOffice is now in the process of doing with their own toolkit. Talk about collaboration! It's a wonder we haven't tore Microsoft a new one yet...
It's sad to just see someone advocate telling open source developers what to do and not do. It's even sadder that such a statement is moderated as insightful.
People should be allowed to write whatever they want, as long as it doesn't hurt any person. Period.
You know, the 1rst Foundation mets the 2nd Foundation, at last !
Where is Hari Seldon when we need him ? Wait, we've Eric Raymond. Damn, if only Google/Gaia eats them and convert all the people to a single colectivity entity knowed as Googalaxy ! All we'll be happy.
From what I hear the following things are being discussed:
1) Having Mozilla and Gnome look alike
2) Integrating Mozilla and Gnome features
3) World domination
Oops, ignore that third one.
"Epiphany to become the official Linux port of Firefox"
I hope this never happens. Firefox is so much better than Epiphany.
I think this is super!
I have really missed being able to fully make use of my Desktop space. I really hope that gnome adds the ability to use any application as the desktop. I really am not pleased with Nautillus and I would mutch prefer to run ximian's evolution as My desktop or render a PHP-based web interface there so that I can manage my life from my desktop. Being able to take care of my finances, to-do list, and scedule, map my news and email would be great, but as far as I know there is no construct for doing so. If I'm wrong, please point me to HOW-TO's on how to replace the desktop host application.
Also, is there a way to run an application as the default desktop, like specifying a diffferent chell in windows, this would be optimal for Linux-POS *solutions*
Can I be a Luddite too?
Yes, I mentioned tabbed browsing in my previous post. However, if you had read this one - I've moved on. Perhaps in your reply to my next post on this subject you will reply to this posts points, yes? Personally I enjoy writing replies to the post that is actually in front of me rather than the last one on the subject. I find it less confusing. Still, each to his own.
As for your lovely strawman argument about tabbed browsing, well...yes, that is what people originally said. And I agreed with them. To paraphrase your fine self "Your attempt to use one narrow aspect of my whole post is misleading enough that it probably has its own term." And that term is : strawman.
Perhaps your post could explain some of the actual points I raise. Please let the words drip from your keyboard and tell me how the functionality of Magpie can be used for something other than pornography?? Note: Magpie, not tabbed browsing.
In fact, it is revealing that you try to answer the question I don't ask, rather than the one in front of you. Have you found yourself defending the indefensible?? Please note: my problem with this is that they are Mozilla supported extensions. perhaps you would actually like to also address that point, yes?
Really, all that hot air boils down to one point: You are using excessively emotional language. Guilty as charged. As you may have realised from me repeatedly mentioning it, it's something I feel strongly about.
~SO
You say, first, that Linux is hard to use because it's tools are superficial. Then you say that Apple did it right because they chose to carve their own market.
Linux has already done this. It's current market is full of geeks who don't think that Linux is hard to use. I think Windows is hard to maintain, and that's why I use Linux. The Linux community is now trying to expand their market to people like you, who don't see the elegance of how things are handled in a unix-ish OS.
Is my response elitist? A little bit, but it's true. I think you're original post was ignorant. I've been tossing the idea around in my head that maybe it would be better if Linux -wasn't- the most used OS. It'll end up like Windows.
:wq
... then we would have KNOMzilla.
On a more serious note, imagine if KDE/GNOME/Mozilla all joined forces and worked under common leadership towards a common goal. That's an environment I would like to see someday! Throw in the WINE project and we're talking some major software muscle.
-- Stu
/. ID under 2,000. I feel old now.
A tiny dinosaur fishing in the pond at the bottom of the garden?
Free Firefox news reader.
It is more disgusting than goatse.cx. Please moderate down!
The current problem with Mozilla is that it is a monolith suite. Where Mozilla succeeds is where they allow Mozilla functionallity to be imported into other applications.
One of Gnome's greatest strength is that developers can pick and choose which libraries to include to build their applications.
The Mozilla people need to extract from their code useable libraries that anyone can use. This alone will lead to integration with Gnome, as has been the case with the HTML rendering.
1. IBM's SWT requires C++ interfaces and it needs gnome in addition to current GTK bindings. SWT is the fastest best API supporting most common platforms it runs 10 times faster than mozilla because it uses native widgets.
;)
2. XUL needs to be mapped to SWT bindings so it has faster native cross platform support. This would be the quickest way to get mozilla to run and look like a native app on most platforms.
With these two changes people can develop cross platform apps with native GUI's either directly in C, Java or using XUL for layout.
3. Once that is done you can clone XAML/Avalon.
If I have any spare time this weekend I will put togethor the neccessary patches
Matt.
while (!asleep()) sheep++
# apt-get install epiphany-browser
Reading Package Lists... Done
Building Dependency Tree... Done
The following extra packages will be installed:
docbook-xml docbook-xsl gconf2 gnome-doc-tools gnome-icon-theme gnome-mime-data libbonobo2-0 libbonobo2-common libbonoboui2-0 libbonoboui2-common libeel2-2 libeel2-data libfam0c102 libgconf2-4 libgnome-desktop-2 libgnome2-0 libgnome2-common libgnomeui-0 libgnomeui-common libgnomevfs2-0 libgnomevfs2-common libnautilus2-2 liborbit2 libscrollkeeper0 libxslt1.1 scrollkeeper yelp
Suggested packages:
gnome-vfs-extras2
The following NEW packages will be installed:
docbook-xml docbook-xsl epiphany-browser gconf2 gnome-doc-tools gnome-icon-theme gnome-mime-data libbonobo2-0 libbonobo2-common libbonoboui2-0 libbonoboui2-common libeel2-2 libeel2-data libfam0c102 libgconf2-4 libgnome-desktop-2 libgnome2-0 libgnome2-common libgnomeui-0 libgnomeui-common libgnomevfs2-0 libgnomevfs2-common libnautilus2-2 liborbit2 libscrollkeeper0 libxslt1.1 scrollkeeper yelp
0 upgraded, 28 newly installed, 0 to remove and 83 not upgraded.
By the way, even if Epiphany does not become the standard browser, I don't like the direction things are headed in with Firefox becoming the default. The designers seem to have outsourced their UI design to Redmond. Here are a few examples of the things I don't like about Firefox that I feel came directly from IE and really don't jive with my habits that come from using NSCP products for 10 years:
And there are many more things I dislike about Firefox, but these are just the ones I feel they took directly from IE. I understand that they want it to be easy for IE users to migrate, but this inflexible browser really doesn't meet the expectations of power users like myself and many of my friends. I've tried to reason with some of the Firefox developers about some of these issues, and they firmly believe that Firefox should cater to the needs of IE converts. They don't want to add preference items for the admittedly minor things I care about because it would confuse people and possibly make Firefox's preferences UI as slow as Mozilla's (XUL doesn't seem very scalable). This is proof that only having one browser is not sufficient, especially if it's a least common denominator one. I haven't used Epiphany, but I can't see how it would be better to remove the choice between Firefox and Epipha
This is GNOME we are talking about.
This is the same GNOME that starts a whole lot of really cool things but never finishes them.
- GNOME vfs - great idea, but none of the modules really work like they should. The ssh, smb, and ftp method are all sketchy at best.
- CORBA-like Object system - another great idea with some great code behind it but hardly implemented in any applications. I should be able to use a web browser object, a emailer object, etc.
The two issues above take the "OBJECT" and "NETWORK" right out of GNOME. I really like GNOME - libxml, atk, bonobo, and gtk are excellent.
I would believe that this is going somewhere if the KDE group announced it, but I have a feeling that this will be yet another great idea that will never really pan out.
On a more serious note, imagine if KDE/GNOME/Mozilla all joined forces and worked under common leadership towards a common goal.
Hey, let me know if you guys need volunteers for the "common leadership" position. I think my leadership abilities speak for themselves.
Cheers,
Darl
Although that might be confusing to people who are used to calling their Mozilla browser Mozilla/Phoenix/FireBird/FireFox.
;-)
Err.... Nevermind.
It bothers me that Firefox has the ok/cancel
buttons inverted when I use it in Linux.
I feel the gnome people wanna try to turn
all Mozilla products into gnome stuff.
It starts with OOo (remember "Openoffice, the gnome office suite)
and now they wanna take over Mozilla.
All just coz they are unable to deliver a decent
browser.
One word: KHTML
You know what I wish for? A visual XUL generator, just like Visual Basic in Windows. I also want the Mozilla team to make Firefox run XUL applications using the currently selected GNOME skins and widgets, so that it integrates cleanly. With that, Linux would have a true RAD environment, and maybe we could get more new developers into Linux.
This being said, I too hope they slow down production on Seamonkey and shift gears, but they're close and they're getting closer every release. And Firebird's already over 90,000 lines different than Mozilla, not to mention fast as hell on both platforms I use daily (Linux + Windows).
"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." G.W.Bush
Is there someone working on Firefox or Mozilla with QT/KDE interface?
Tell me, my friend.
.wav files of Kevin Smith discussing construction of the Death Star. No, the 99.9% are downloading jpegs, and you know it. Oh, I can hear you whining from here. "But you said ALL, not the vast majority". Yes, you have won that rhetorical point. I should obviously qualify my every statement with "evidence suggests", "the majority", or "a sizable percentage". Never mind it would be unreadable. But to get back to your point, by your logic we should allow Paedophilic magazines to be sold in newsagents because you know ONE GUY who buys it to line his budgie cage.
What do you think the majority of people using Magpie are downloading with it? I'd respectfully suggest that they are NOT downloading
But let me explain my "only in the context of downloading hardcore or violent pornography" quote which you lambasted me for previously. Psychological studies suggest that people exposed to pornography become jaded very quickly. Previously stomach churning sights become commonplace, and the subject has to seek out more and more extreme sexual behaviour to get the same initial illicit thrill. Logically, it is easy to see why then Magpie is so dangerous. It encourages the massing of large amounts of porn because it is so easy. Inevitably this will lead to the seeking of more disgusting and depraved acts such as (but not limited to) rimming (male and female), gaping (front and back), anal, bukkake, fisting (front and back), pissing, scat games, Sado-masochism, group orgies, bizarre insertions, bestiality, incest and swimwear. This is proven fact Thus it is an inescapable fact that usage of Magpie will lead to the downloading of these materials. All the psychological evidence to date supports this conclusion.
In regards to your other point "Mozilla is going to support anything that will improve and extend the functionality of their browsers", I would hope you are wrong. I expect that Mozilla would draw the line at (as I originally suggested) a "porno" button theme. They must make moral choices about what they allow to appear! They cannot offer a porno theme on their default bookmarks. You know very well that if I offered them a self created porno theme, they would NOT host it. They would most likely point me to some backwater which could discreetly host it instead. This mental example shows that at some level they must be aware that PR demands they are very careful about what they appear to endorse! It is SO CLEAR, SO OBVIOUS as to be breathtaking that I have had so much stick about this point!
I feel your allusion to Don Quixote is apt. He too was a misguided fool. Perhaps you meant it as an insult to me, to allude that I was no "proper knight". It has backfired.
~SO
It's very anti-Unix though. Remember the old Linux-is-more-secure argument that centered around the difference in how Linux email apps and Microsoft Outlook/Outlook Express handle email attachments? The argument went something like "In Linux, you have to go through extra, deliberate steps to make an attachment executable, so things like PIF and SCR trojan horses aren't possible in Linux." The MSFT/Miguel position is that we'll have content-like apps and app-like content all over, and these will be cross-platform. Welcome to the SCR/PIF attack scenarios. "But, but, but, " Miguel will exclaim, "the sandbox will protect you." Uh-huh. Sure. Maybe you buy that, but when it comes to protecting my local system, I'll take the elegant simplicity of octal permissions settings over tens of thousands of lines of C#/C++ code any day -- have you ever looked at the .NET Framework Configuration control panel in XP???
In Miguel's world, all of us Windows/Linux/MacOS users will be running cross-platform .NET-based virus/malware scanners to protect us from the new cross-platform .NET-based virus/trojan/etc. malware.
Miguel is clever, but I doubt his wisdom.
Why is a list of random Google search results for "Avalon" get modded up?
Here's an actual informative Google search about Avalon:
"msdn avalon"
Amazing what you can accomplish by actually searching correctly.
no one said integrating a web browswer into the desktop was evil.
Yes, they did. Everyone bitched endlessly about the "pointless" integration of the web browser and file browser. How it slowed things down. How it makes things unstable.
Then along comes KDE which takes seconds to load my Home folder. Suddenly, history is revised and "nobody complained" when Windows 98 did it (I guess the fact Windows 98 did it is some sort of persuasive proof that it should be done in the first place).
Pretty soon, nobody will have complained about taskbars and start menus either...even though they did. But as soon as KDE/GNOME adopts it, bam, it's suddenly an okay idea that Microsoft popularized...not a bad idea that got too popular for its own good.
Actually, Linux is just a kernel. This is an important point.
If Linux is "just a kernel," how can FreeBSD refer to both the kernel, the userland tools, the environment, etc.?
Don't tell me you're one of those moronic "GNU/Linux" weenies.
Instead of the Mozilla Foundation, why the hell isn't the GNOME Foundation meeting the KDE Foundation?
Allright, I'll bite. First, just for reference, if you look at this guy's posts, almost all of them are rated (-1). So, his statements aren't merely bad; they are consistently bad to the point where (we must assume) multiple moderators over time thought it was worth it to burn their mod points to take this guy out.
Major premise however, is the question: what's wrong with looking at porn? Honestly. How does looking at pictures of nude (or naked) women (or men) destroy the moral health of a country?
I'm not sure what ``moral health'' is, anyway. But even assuming the US ever had, I think after Wounded Knee, Vietnam, Nisei camps, etc., it's pretty much gone. How does a person looking at porn have a worse effect on a nation's moral character than would killing women and children?
As George Carlin put it: Of all the things you could do to a person, giving someone an orgasm is hardly the worst thing in the world. In the army they give you a medal for spraying napalm on people. Maybe I'm not supposed to understand it!
You don't like Epiphany because it doesn't have the features of Galeon or Firefox? Boy-o, I'm afraid that you are missing the point completely. Epiphany is meant to be a cool, crisp, and simple browser for Gnome. It does that job wonderfully. It's not capable of these things because it's not designed to, following the HIG that proclaims (paraphrasing of course) useability over features. That's the freaking point... an equivilent argument is that that Christians worship God too much.
The Gnome project is different in that respect than the KDE project. I wouldn't say it's better than KDE, that's not really fair. Since I appreciate the care they put towards useablity, and am willing to sacrific some gee-whiz features, Gnome is the right desktop environment for me. Notice how I'm not speaking for anyone else? The KDE folks have a lot of nice apps... k3b for example. They deserve all the credit they get. But I find every application cluttered and ugly -- though rich in features -- it's a matter of personal taste so don't flame me for being honest.
Based on what I just said, is it any surprise now that I *love* Epiphany? It's a delicious browsing experience and one of the best things about the Gnome project. It fits with the general sensibility of the project, and it rocks. Advanced users can install Firefox or Mozilla if they'd like to -- most distros can/do include one of those. This is just about the default browser choice, and they wisely chose the browser that best fits the project.
501 Not Implemented
you think the current system and its participants are being productive?
*** This thread is marked as CLOSED ***
*** Please move on to another topic ***
So when are we going GNOME intergrate Mozilla and have them brought up on Anti-trust violations?
Wow, your post was so stupid that I uncontrollably vomited on my keyboard.
Allright, I'll bite. First, just for reference, if you look at this guy's posts, almost all of them are rated (-1). So, his statements aren't merely bad; they are consistently bad to the point where (we must assume) multiple moderators over time thought it was worth it to burn their mod points to take this guy out.
Yes, it's know as posting bonus, you moron. It comes from having poor karma, not from being modded down on each and every post. Please give us more of your engrossing wisdom! Perhaps you might like give us the benefit of your amazing moderation insights on thorny issues such as:
Posts that are funny are modded "Funny". What's up with that?
There's some sort of strange toggle at the top of the page with -1 to 5 on it. What's up with that?
I've been told I got mod points. What are those?
What's a troll? Where are my shoes? How can AOL fit the Internet in my computer on just one compact disc? Hey - that isn't the real wallet inspector!
Not content with this stupidity, parent then makes the mistake of completely misreading the argument presented. Allow me to emphasise for the hard of thinking. The problem is that these porn gatherers are Mozilla supported and bookmarked by default! There - that wasn't so hard, was it?
I don't know what the greater bloody tragedy is here, that parent got a +2 insightful, or that I have to clean half digested carrots off my keyboard.
~SO
Which brings up the wider question of why are you here if you hate Linux so much? If you want a so-called 'unified desktop' keep on using Windows or OS X and be happy.
Does Epiphany support proxies yet? Last I checked, there was no option.
And, no, GNOME options don't count. I use a proxy specifically because I want to pick and chose which apps are allowed to use the network and which aren't.
Look how they got the Cancel and OK buttons backwards.