Slashdot Mirror
IE And Mozz Collaborate On RSS Icon
sylverboss writes "The Microsoft Team RSS blog is reporting that IE7 is adopting the RSS icon used in Firefox. They all agreed that it's in the user's best interest to have one common icon to represent RSS and RSS-related features in a browser.
The increasing collaborative efforts between the browser vendors in the last few weeks is an honest attempt to create a standard Web interface for everyone, no matter what browser is used."
I hope MS adopt other features. IE will only get better through competing with a stronger player.
Why UNIX?
that competition between standards were good.
I wouldn't call it that. IE's trying to share the icon with Mozilla, so when IE7 comes out, it's easier for Mozilla users to migrate back to IE.
That's a FAR more important issue than, say, intrepreting W3-standards in one common way amongst all browsers. Really. I'm glad they cooperate in fields that tremendously important.
:%s/Open Source/Free Software/g
YTARY!
Now if they could just adopt the same standards for developers !
You're just jealous.
In other News, IE 7 will utilize Mozilla's Tabber Browsing, Improved Pop-up Blocker and security model... ... In-house inovation from microsoft includes... um.... um.... An improved looking Blue E. More details to follow.
sales of down-filled parkas skyrocketed in hell, Israel and Palestine agreed to merge and form one country under UN supervision and evangelical christians in the United States, along with the Vatican, admitted that Christmas should more properly be celebrated sometime in the summer.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
Do some benchmarks and test out each browser on all levels, html display, exploitability, memory footprint, etc. Last browser standing wins!
Or we could just agree on similar icons.... *yawn*
I meta-moderate because I care.
Embrace: The company publicly announces that they are going to support a standard. They assign an employee or employees to work with the standards bodies, such as the W3C and the IETF.
Extend: They do support the standard, at least partially, but start adding company-only extensions of the standard to their products. They argue that they are trying only to add value for their customers, who want them to provide these features.
Extinguish: Through various means, such as driving use of their extended standard through their server products and developer tools, they increase use of the proprietary extensions to the point that competitors who do not follow the company version of the standard cannot compete. The company standard then becomes the only standard that matters in practical terms (a de facto standard), and it allows the company to control the industry by controlling the standard.
Pessimists will say that it will make it more likely for people to switch back to IE, but for people like my parents, now that they've got Firefox, they really like it and are unlikely to go back. However, switching from one to the other leads inevitably to "what does this symbol mean" here and there - and if that's eliminated, then it makes it even easier for me to move people to firefox, because it's not that radically different from what they used to see.
Join the Empire! http://www.empirereborn.net/
Why not work with Apple on this and use the one Safari implements? It's obviously more clear to the user about what the function is and seems to have inspired the placement in the address bar by both the current release of Firefox.
Yeah, I hate those guys that have a desperate neediness to click the next slashdot story as soon as its up, and then troll about the userbase. Dirty fuckin trolls.
I'm worried that conformity in this issue area will reduce competition and stifle innovation.
The increasing collaborative efforts between the browser vendors in the last few weeks is an honest attempt...
And you know that it's honest because...?
And it's genuineness, or artificiality, is relevant because?
Now could the office teams please agree on a file format?
Pretty please?
Pretty please with sugar on top?
It takes one to know one. :)
Honestly I think it's great that IE and Mozilla are "working together" on this one. However, having read the original posts some months back when the IE team was still deciding on an icon to use, they really didn't present a better alternative. What they did have was a mozilla-esque RSS feed icon and users were very happy to point out the similarities between the two. Out of the 5 or so icons they presented, the one that really seemed to catch on was the one that was most like Mozilla.
The icon just seems to work, and I applaud their decision to use it.
And the Mozilla button looks an awful lot like the Engadget logo.
-----
|RSS|
-----
There you go, mock that baby up in photoshop and we're good to go!
I wonder if MS is considering opening IE or possibly even giving up on development of it. While you might fall over laughing at that and think "Oh, just another OSS fan boy" here's my reasoning. There is nothing left to fight for in the browser war. MS used the browser to get Windows on every desktop. They have done that now. They won, so why maintain their weapon (IE). In fact just look at the situation they have got themselves into. They didn't want to maintain IE so for x (7 IIRC) years they have just not really touched it. If FF hadn't come along I doubt they would have ever touched it again. After all, it didn't directly make them any money. What good it did to their bottom line had already been done. Personally, I think this update to IE is an egg on face stopper rather than a real update. Once they have done this update they then have a good two or three years to announce that they will no longer be updating IE. The great thing about that from MS's point of view is that they can abandon IE without loosing face.
What would be great is if they stopped development of IE and put some effort into FF. After all they are likely to be playing catch up for ever against FF simply because of the way it is developed and released. The only thing that would stop MS from doing this is pride. They won't admit that OSS can actually produce decent software.
I used to have a better sig but it broke.
Microsoft honest? Thanks, I needed a good laugh.
we will end no whine before its time
Now we can really stick it to Safari for using that goofy blue RSS icon. What was Apple thinking?
...move along now.
401 - Attention span not found
Consider this if the IE team chose a vastly different icon:
IE is the dominant browser. The people who are most likely to be using Internet Explorer are also the people who are most likely to not realize that Firefox might have originally created the icon or even care about it.
All they will see is that when their friends try to switch them to this "newcomer" browser, it uses a different icon and poor old IE user gets confused and don't feel like switching. The less barriers, the less little things that add up, the lower the learning curve for people to switch. While it might not seem like much, these things pile on top of each other for someone who only knows IE as "the internet" and was not previously aware that there is something else out there.
"Progress comes from the intelligent use of experience."
While I think this is a 'good thing' for all concerned, I would not be sharing that icon for free. Microsoft should be required to license it from the Moz folks. I'm not talking anything uber-subtantial, but a reasonable donation for the rights to use this icon should be something the parties can figure out together. Sorry, but as an IT Director, I see how much money Microsoft sucks out of my company, and I think it only fair and rational for our friends at Mozilla to benefit from this. Pete
So, does this mean IE7 will support XUL? Because that'd be really cool. Being able to create rich web apps using XUL would be nice.
Oh, wait, but if they supported XUL, then no one would need their XAML. So I suppose that's still just a dream...
You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
Are you sure it's Mozzilla they're collaborating with? Maybe MS is really branching out and collaborating with this company.
Their art department doesn't have to waste time and money developing their own icon and they get credit for "working together".
I mean, what is the point in Microsoft having its own web browser when there is a free and open alternative (other than to steer users away from free and open cross-platform standards)?
...so in November, Amar and I took a visit down to Silicon Valley...
A trip....from Washington...to California...for an icon? I wish I could make trips around the country for such trivial purposes.
How about this instead?
----
From: jane@microsoft.com
To: john@mozilla.org
Subject: RSS icon
You: RSS icon.
We: Need RSS icon.
We coo?
-Jane
----
From: john@mozilla.org
To: jane@microsoft.com
Subject: Re: RSS icon
Sure.
-John
----
Honestly, 800+ miles to talk about a 28x28 pixel icon. God save their accounting department if they want to collaborate on something like those darn pesky standards.
:wq
Once Microsoft started making web-apps one of their core strategies, browser compatibility immediately came to the forefront. Why? Because they looked at the trends. Eventually, Joe Public will wonder why everyone is using that Firefox thing, and will want to know how they can use it. Microsoft can't sell web-apps effectively, especially to the consumer level, if IE is the only browser that supports them. They would be alienating a huge amount of potential customers (the Mac users, or Linux users, or just windows users tired of IE shooting themselves in the foot), and considering that group is only growing, they must have realized it's just a plain stupid move.
So in other words, they'll only cooperate insofar as it helps their web-app strategy. Will we see XUL in IE? Nope, because they won't be making anything with XUL, and thus it would only help the competition. There's the trick right there; find a way for microsoft to make money and you'll spur them into action every time.
You decide.
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
Sounds like a great idea, but Firefox and Mozilla themes usually replace the RSS/Atom/feed icon with something that matches that theme. I mean, I know that IE doesn't support themeing yet (AFAIK), but what's the big deal about having the same icon?
In other news, Microsoft (MSFT) reported today that they are boosted earnings estimates by 0.00000000047 cents per share for the current quarter. Chief Financial Officer Christopher Liddell indicated that the earnings boost arises from a reduction in expenses made possible by a collaborative effort with the Mozilla Foundation to create a new standard logo for RSS feeds.
It looks like a singnal strength indicator. In fact (besides being orange) it looks like the icon my weather radio alarm clock thing uses to show atmoic time sync singal. Wtf does the icon have to do with an RSS feed?
-Xen
Some Microsoft developers post a few icons on their blog. Many blog comments express that they like icon #4 (which is what is already used in Mozilla). Icon #4 is adopted. How does this get spun into collaboration? Geez. Granted they 'met' with some folks at Mozilla, but I'm sure only so MS could get 30 pages of legal documents signed to agree they are allowed to use the icon.
Not necessarily...many utilize Linux or Mac instead of Windows. There's no IE anymore on the Mac, and Linux doesn't have it. So far Opera and Firefox are the only mainstream multiplatform browsers.
Mercy was given to me by Christ...I must give the same to others.
Microsoft and Morissey?
You know, I wish when I story was rejected, you could see who was the person who rejected it.
2005-12-15 16:29:46 Standarized RSS Icon For Mozilla and IE 7 (Developers,Mozilla) (rejected)
Executive ability is deciding quickly and getting someone else to do the work. --John G. Pollard
Microsoft trademarks, patents, and copyrights the RSS icon.
I think the point is just to say that it wasn't an MS innovation.
Firefox is innovative even without tabbed browsing. IE on the other hand, it's more of a question. Even the things that MS says are their own innovations often aren't, but they just try and claim it as such anyway.
Firefox, NetCaptor, etc, on the other hand, do not go around claiming every single thing they include in their application is their innovation, and innovation drives the market, and nobody else is as innovative, etc etc... But on the other hand, nobody speaks about innovation as much as MS does.
This is why people are sarcastic, and whenever MS includes something that has obvious prior art, they joke about MS claiming it as one of their own innovations.
It is a joke, it's sarcasm, and the point is not to say Firefox is the most innovative, but just to joke about MS saying that they'll try and claim it as one of their own innovations when it comes time for them to write a press release and speak about features that are new to their product, not new in general. Chances are there will be the word "innovative" in there, and chances are MS will want others to think it is them doing the innovation. It is a press release from public relations, which is basically an advertisement.
Twinstiq, game news
Every time I hear one of these things, I think about how user customization is being ignored. IE had a feature in accessibility to allow the user to psecify a CSS to override sites CSS, not as a general user customization, but relegated to accesibility. In fact most of what Microsoft relegated to accessibility should be general user customization. Digging through my Firefox settings, I don't see a CSS override option, but colors and fonts are general user settings, but its a use on sites that don't specify or all sites option, not a goups of sites or specific sites options. I want to easily specify what icons get used for everything.
So will IE also take over the icon for RSS in all the different themes for Mozilla? Because my rss iocn doesn't look like the default one at all.
>> security through obscurity
Ask Merck about MS recording the fact that they deleted the damaging portion of the report on their drug to the FDA.
Never trust a man wearing a coat and tie!
Start to sue them!
If anything, it looks like an antenna signal strength. Most of the people I know that use Firefox have no idea what that button's for and the first thing they say is, "I thought it was for wireless or something..."
If I take a quick look on history Microsoft already cooperated with IBM on OS/2 and later with Sun on Java.
And we all know how these cooperations ended.
Is it right? Not?
When there's only 3 letters, why not use a simple box with those letters instead of creating some arbitrary symbol that is non-obvious?
In Opera 8.1, the rss icon is simply a small blue rectangle with white "RSS". When I first saw this box, it was abundantly clear it meant RSS.
I'm not so sure the same can be said about an orange square curved lines inside.
Anyway here's to Firefox, IE, and Opera all surviving and continuing to compete with each other--make sure you do your part by continuing to switch to whichever product happens to be the best at the time.
We all know what happens to software when people are too lazy to switch to a clearly better one.
That is just another thing that microsoft will embrace, extend and extinguish.
...
... incompatible color? ... hum no ...
... a proprietary bit in each pixel? ... hum ...
...
How they going to pull off that one I don know thought
well I'm sure they're gonna find a way
It's not really a collaboration; Microsoft just chose to use Firefox's feed icon. Now, the real question is: does using the icon, which is under the MPL, require Microsoft to do anything different? (Like, if they modify it.)
Since when is "we'll just use yours!" collaboration?
-g.
This is just another example of a cumbersome commercial developer chasing Free/Open Source Software developer's tail lights.
-Peter
All long walks starts with a modest first step.
Boot to the head!
You've got it all wrong - RSS is a pathetic imitation of nerdishness. (I'd like to work in a link to Winer's site too, but I have better things to do)
I used to switch back and forth between Firefox and IE until I found Avant Browser, which seems to be the best of both worlds. With programs like this freely available, why would MS waste their resources?
You are right of course - which explains why Microsoft wants to use it. They have never been one to pick something simple when there is something obscure and confusing that can take it's place.
Find coupons in Greeley
It is about time. I can't count the number of times I have gone to a site that only works under one browser, and one OS. Why should you have to have a specific OS to visit a website? That is quite insane to write a broken website like that. One example is the Agent login on budgetphone.com, it doesn't work at all.
If it works under firefox, then 99 percent of the time it will work under IE, with the exception of CSS pages. Hey, Im on a Mac, and I prefer using Firefox over Safari, or IE.
I love the RSS features on Firefox, along with the plugins you can use to manage them. Hopefully we will see MS incorporate RSS into their OS in some way as we have seen Apple do it with Tiger, like the RSS screensaver that displays Slashdot headlines. Hopefully MS won't create their 'own' proprietary so called standards then try to take it over.
When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. - Jefferson
Hate to ruin the fun, but that little icon isn't for RSS feeds.
It's for Firefox's Live Bookmark feature.
Everyone was complaining about how you should use a more obvious icon for RSS feeds, but in fact... most people do. Firefox doesn't have an icon. Its built-in RSS reader is its Live Bookmark feature, which is what the icon is for.
So... carry on.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
They'll use a standard icon to represent something which they won't implement in a standard way?
Of what benefit is this to anyone??
NOw, if they implemented it in a compatible way, I'd say a compatible icon makes sense. But this seems to me to be complying with the wrong standard, while knowing they'll bust the right one.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
They all agreed that it's in the user's best interest
This is Slashdot. Here we use "it's" to mean the possesive, and "its" to mean "it is". Please keep this in mind.
One simple rule for its versus it's
RSS is lame anyway, wow a real technical achievment there. CSS is much more important to the average user's experience and for giving developers more time to spend on things other than handeling browser quirks.
Blar.
How is this collaboration? It looks like IE is just using the icon that Firefox already uses. Seems like copying to me.
I don't get why Microsoft thinks "RSS" would be more confusing than "dot with quarter circles". Just use "RSS" like Safari does, make it blue, orange, whatever.
When I first saw that icon I didn't have any idea what it meant.. I thought it meant "connected to the internet". It's WAY too subtle and doesn't convey ANYTHING. At least "RSS" is the *name* of the technology.
Microsoft just doesn't have a fucking clue about usability. Do you really think people are even going to see that icon? It's just more noise on the screen. My computer illiterate mom knows what RSS is, but doesn't even notice the orange icon.
And if you are one of those geniuses who thinks "OH NO, TEH RSS IS CONFUSING LOL!" think about the following: DVD, VHS, CNN...? PEOPLE CAN REMEMBER ACRONYMS. And they can use them to ask questions like "hey computer guy, what's RSS mean?"..
Let's not standardize on a tiny, meaningless icon, please.
What the Mozilla team failed to mention is that the usage will actually force IE7 to be GPL'ed. Suckers!!
Why Mozz? It's Mozilla, not Mozzilla.
Didn't Microsoft just say that two standards are better than one?
Or maybe they have a double-standard about that, too...
When pressed, IE developers admitted that this might not end with RSS icons. "We just have trouble coming up with any ideas of our own period," they were quoted as saying. "Yesterday it was tabbed browsing, today it's an RSS icon.. who knows, maybe one day we'll implement stability."
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
What I love best about Slashdot are all the drooling illiterates. As such Zonk makes many people exceedingly happy.
Please no one tell the retard there's only one 'z' in 'Moz'. It's more fun that way.
People were probably also hoping he's misspell 'IE' but evidently no such luck.
This is an idea so simple I completly missed it.
I work in a store where we have people using the internet. I don't care that they use the internet. I don't care what they are surfing for as long as they do their jobs. But I WISH they would all use Firefox instead of IE.
This just might do it...
Thanks..
--ken
Bitcoin pyramid: Join here: http://www.bitcoinpyramid.com/r/1427 it's FREE!
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&q= usercss+firefox
7 3 o ntentid=181195
yields as its first result:
http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?t=881
which talks about usercss
and http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?c
talks about EditCSS plugin which apparently makes it easier to edit Usercss, but Firefox isn't exactly promoting this ability.
why? you anglophonic baffoon you.
would you be happy with an icon with equivalent letters for R,S, and S written in cyrillic, or greek?
OK, I'll take the trollbait... But only because there's probably a lot of young people here who don't remember the 90's and I don't want them to get the wrong idea by your trolling. You can go back to your dillo if you like it, but it doesn't change history. Netscape was at version 3 by the time IE was at version 1. And IE wasn't even marginally usable until version 3. Really, it was version 4 where IE finally caught up to Netscape.
And yes, Netscape had better support for standards because they basically set them! It's kind of hard not to have better support for standards when you're the reference implementation! Yes, Netscape added a lot of their own HTML, but it didn't make it any less compatible with the W3C standard. Netscape had better HTML and HTTP support than IE for a long time, and Netscape had invented Javascript, so 100% of websites' Javascript worked on Netscape. No one even bothered making their Javascript work with IE until IE hit 4.0.
As far as crashing less, I will concede that Netscape Navigator was a freaking nightmare on Mac OS, but this probably had a lot to do with Mac OS' limitations as much as it was Netscape's fault. They were trying to fit a square peg in a round hole in porting Navigator to the Mac. But on Windows, Netscape would occasionally die (usually because of a bad plugin) and you'd be able to click on "Close" and move on. With IE, you crashed more often and the crashes tended to bring your whole operating system to BSOD and if you got past that, the system became so unstable you had to reboot. This was even worse with Windows 98 when they decided to make IE essentially the OS shell. One bad website could totally hose Windows. Netscape never did that.
IE and Mozilla collaborate on integrating IE CSS bugs in Firefox to improve page rendering consistency.
Let me guess, you're an American who thinks he's worldly, or you're a foreigner who hates America? Either way, you haven't a clue. People who have non-Roman alphabets, believe it or not, can identify the letters RSS. Just like they remember "DVD" or any of the other roman "symbols" they see during their day-to-day business.
And even if they have no clue what what an "R" or an "S" is, how the hell is it harder to remember that symbol than the meaningless "wireless connected" symbol?
It's all about branding. The "rock dropped in an orange juice pool" is just not a good icon, brand, or logo.
PS.. at least one country doesn't mind the word: http://rss.people.com.cn/
At some point, Microsoft needs to stop being so ridiculously anti-open source if they are to survive. They aren't going to win "the battle against the GPL", no matter how big they are. Not only is it not winnable, it's not their fight. Every other major tech company has long since been planning and implementing strategy to coexist with open source, and Microsoft is *still* trying to figure out how to subvert or attack open source. It's just silly.
It's nice to see a few Microsoft people collaborating with open source folks in a (no matter how minor) way to help everyone come out ahead. For once, I can see working with Microsoft without worrying about a knife in the back or a poison pill. The problem is that every time in the past that Microsoft claimed to be working on something "open", they were just trying to figure out some way to screw people over -- with their patent-encumbered SPF alternative, say. It makes people *very* nervous about giving Microsoft an inch.
It's also really nice, no matter how minor to see someone saying something polite and honest in a blog about what is ultimately a competitor. One of the nicest things about open source is that you have a big group of people being open about what they're doing, and often critiquing their project -- everyone in the world can read lkml, and there's often harsh criticism of components of Linux on it. If folks at Microsoft can be honest and say "Hmm, this person was doing something well -- we are going to learn from them", I'm much more inclined to think that they're doing a good job.
Any program relying on (nontrivial) preemptive multithreading will be buggy.
like WWW?
"an honest attempt to create a standard Web interface for everyone, no matter what browser is used."
Standardising the trappings of the browser isn't what the Web is about. It's about common protocols and formats, not UIs, and trying to lock people into kind of viewport onto the Web will just lead to more browser wars and disenfranchised users (e.g., mobile, screen readers, etc.) that the Web -- and indeed RSS (!) -- were intended to avoid.
Surely you've heard of Atom? Do you suggest to display an "RSS" icon for that, too? Or have two icons? What if a site offers both formats?
Nah, a single, neutral icon is the better choice here. Granted, it may not be the most intuitive one imaginable, but it should not mention the technology behind the feed.
Actually, that's an old web wisdom: Don't mention the mechanics. Looks like the Firefox and IE developers got that one right for once.
Figures! =/
This article is a dupe from next monday.
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
Just as using a blunt instrument to add holes to your car makes it go faster, radio waves make your newsfeeds go faster. It doesn't matter whether you are using a dial-up, cable, wireless or satellite internet connection. It's the radio waves on the icon that make your RSS content go fast. It also means that any news received over RSS is more reliable. After all, we all trust the broadcast media. Radio waves are the definition of credibility.
... and then they built the supercollider.
I have been dying to ask someone in your position this question for YEARS, ever since about the Windows ME-era. Please don't take it wrong; I'm very curious but not hostile.
WHY are software vendors using these blasted web-controls for everything? You can't even find an antivirus client on the market anymore that doesn't use an MSHTML for its entire interface. What ever happened to writing a REAL interface, with the widgets the OS provides? Is it so much harder? How did people get by for the entire decade of the 90s without it then?
So you know why I'm asking this question, I propose these reasons why not:
A: Some people might want to remove MSHTML.DLL from their system completely (or deny access with ACLs; I tried this once) to once and for all block all the MSIE-based exploits.
B: Real widgets were designed for application interfaces. HTML was not. That's why your web control uses about 50,000 lines of JavaScript (or is it VBScript?) to mimic the behavior of a real application.
C: Try this. Boot up Win98SE. Horrid kernel, I know, compared to NT. But use its file finding applet. Note how fast and easy it is. Now try the one in, for example, Windows ME or Windows XP. Notice how much slower and awkward it is, and note especially how it adds NO value for the user compared to the old one it replaced (no, the cute puppy doesn't count). I rest my case.
I'd like to hear your side of the discussion, so I can understand why this technique is so popular these days.