Slashdot Mirror
Chrome Complicates Mozilla/Google Love-In
Barence writes "Mozilla CEO John Lilly has admitted the Firefox maker's relationship with Google has become 'more complicated' since the company launched its own browser. Mozilla is dependent on Google for the vast majority of its revenue and has previously worked closely with the search king's engineers on the development of Firefox. But that relationship appears to have cooled since Google released Chrome in the summer. 'We have a fine and reasonable relationship, but I'd be lying if I said that things weren't more complicated than they used to be.'"
It's not like Mozilla has some trade secrets to hide from their partner. All the secrets of making a browser seem to be released regularly as source code.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
I don't think they're evil, but this is a good point for Mozilla to review their funding options. From the article:
[Mozilla CEO John] Lilly admits Mozilla will have to wean itself off its dependence on Google dollars. "Our goal is to be an advocate for the web for 50 or even 100 years, and you can't depend on any one organisation," he added.
No, not really. Considering Chrome is open-source. They are just taking longer than they should to release it for Macux.
If you otherwise like Google Chrome, then SRWare Iron is the browser you should be checking out: http://www.srware.net/en/software_srware_iron.php
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
I'd love to see some information as to what browser current Chrome users transitioned away from.
Here you go!
Except for an independent-process, one-tab-dies-the-rest-of-it's-fine browser that doesn't suck?
The only thing keeping me on Firefox is AdBlock Plus. The second that's in Chrome (or Chromium), I'm gone.
"You can either have software quality or you can have pointer arithmetic, but you cannot have both at the same time."
Actually MS taking over VirtualPC was as much to protect Windows as anything else.
Without VirtualPC, OS X suddenly lost the ability to run Windows.
Virtual PC was working of a version for OSX on Intel.
Parallels hadn't been announced yet, let alone released.
VMWare hadn't entered the market.
Bootcamp hadn't been released as "beta".
Suddenly with the MS acquisition, the Intel version of Virtual PC was shelved indefinitely.
It was a calculated attack at OS X which was starting to gain market share as an alternative platform to Window, that could also run Windows if you needed to for an App or two.
Not the same but Privoxy or blocking using your hosts file serve the same purpose. http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm
Personally, I can't wait until Chrome is available for Mac. I will be switching from Firefox pretty quickly. Firefox has never worked well on the Mac, although the current version is much better than the horrid mess that was Firefox 2.0.
May I ask if you have tried/considered Camino (formerly Chimera), the Mozilla project's native Mac OS X browser? (Same engine, just a native GUI)
http://mozilla.org/projects/camino/
You know, Microsoft's street address also says a lot about their mentality.
Also it's now a non-Beta-product, with a 1.0 version-number.
New things are always on the horizon
Devil is probably in the details. I'm constantly running Flash constantly in Firefox both at work and home. I'd say "no crashes" except I think Firefox did drop out on me once last month.
That's not to say its not happening to you (or even a bunch of folks). That's the nature of these things. But I'm willing to guess that its not happening to everyone.
And again - it probably has to do with your environment; said details I noted before. Since I mentioned details... I don't have the details for my home environment handy (other than its Debian Unstable) but my work laptop is as follows:
Flash:
Shockwave Flash 10.0 r12
Firefox:
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.0.4) Gecko/2008111318 Ubuntu/8.10 (intrepid) Firefox/3.0.4
VirtualPC was bought way before apple started to use x86.
VirtualPC was more likely bought to port to the xbox360 (at least parts of it) to emulate the old xbox so that the xbox 360 could claim being backword compatible. Which the xbox360 uses PowerPC, the same ISA that VirtualPC was originally coded for. Now how much code they used is another question.
They also bought it since it was ported to windows. Which just so happens to be on x86. While I am sure they could use this code on the x86 version of osx it wasn't really planned since apple didn't announce that yet.
It wasn't really a direct attack on apple. Microsoft still released it for the mac. It just became part of the office suite.
Now when apple went with x86, other developers found they would use visualization instead of emulation which is what virtualpc does