Slashdot Mirror
AOL Plans A Standalone Browser
Patik writes "America Online is creating its own standalone browser, aimed at employees who cannot install AOL software at their workstations. The browser will be based on Internet Explorer but will include other features such as tabbed browsing that displays a thumbnail of the page as you pass your cursor over it. The browser will also integrate AOL's media player and will be able to access AOL-only content."
After reading the article, I still don't understand how this is going to help people install the AOL branded special version of IE onto a companies machine. Instead of the AOL software, they still have to install the browser? I doubt that many of the corporate IT guys are going to be willing to install something with AOL in its title on a company machine.
On sticking with an IE based browser, Pearce-Parkins said, "The company stuck with IE so users won't have to make "a leap of faith." Good idea in concept, but honestly I don't believe the users would ever notice there would be a difference between browsers, so why not go with something that would probably be easier to work with?
Guess I better hold out my judgment until the browser gets on the scene, but AOL's massive content library would do well for its subscribers if it wasn't solely tied to their Client.
Stormy
http://www.stormyshippy.com/
Why is everyone assuming that they are not going to use mozilla? We have had a half dozen stories about AOL projects over the last couple weeks, and everyone on slashdot is acting like they are all describing completely independent projects (and thus a waste of duplicate effort), when it seems to me the stories are the product a bunch of blind reporters feeling-up the same elephant.
We already know that AOL has worked to integrate the IE engine into Netscape, has reworked the winamp core into a new AMP player using XUL for the interface, and implemented an AIM client in XUL. That appears to me to be a very consistent plan to integrate all their products / acquisitions into a new internet suite, based on Mozilla XUL.
Their decision to use IE makes perfect sense - it is the best way to ensure compatibility with as many sites as possible, and I would argue that most of the security problems that IE has are how the surrounding shell handles files/scripts/plugins - not the core itself. Lastly as firefox becomes more popular and more sites render correct in both IE and Firefox, they can swap engines out without the users noticing as much as they would now.
I won't comment on whether this will help AOL, or whether people will go for it, but it certainly does appear to be part of a well thought out plan, not a bunch of random uncoordinated actions.
First impressions:
- it is a lot more reponsive than straight IE. The interface could best be described as "crisp"
- The thumbnails are extremely useful. Previews for tabs are a godsend when you have 15+ tabs open
- The zoom feature is amazing. Smooth scaling and fine detail.
- AOL seems to have done something to fix the broken caching in IE.
Having said that, there are still some problems- Form elements aren't fully useable when zoomed. Selects are a real bitch: completely unuseable at any zoom.
- It seems to share a namespace with other instances of IE. Named popups on the same site will cross post between the AOL browser and Explorer.
I find it rather funny that everyone here is slamming AOL for what appears to be well designed and implemented piece of software. The choice of the rendering component might be questionable, but for many people, Internet Exporer is a necessary evil. It's possible the interface is designed to be modular enough to swap Gecko in easily. My hope is that the Mozilla/Firefox devel teams take a good look at this browser without thier AOL prejudices getting in the way. There are a lot of good features to "steal" for Firefox 1.2.The Revolution. Now available as a convienent six tape series from PBS.