It's nice to see Corel helping out the Mozilla and KDE projects this way. Since Nautilus already uses Gecko and now the possibility for Konqueror to use it, we are one step closer to having a more standards compliant web.
Once Netscape 6/Mozilla reach RTM versions, all that really stands in the way of true standards compliance is WinIE. MacIE is already wonderfully standards compliant by all accounts, and hopefully the WinIE team will follow suit.
The problem with those statistics is that they are for a university web server. Now, I'm actually surprised Netscape have such a large market share even there, I'd have thought it would be below 20%.
It's disturbing how few people I know who use Netscape. Two of my friends use Netscape because they refuse to use IE on principle (Which is silly if you ask me, at least until 6.0 goes final), while nearly everyone else uses IE. The only other people who use Netscape are Linux users.
Make no mistake, Microsoft have been bitch-slapping Netscape ever since the release of IE4. The problem is Netscape 4 was a buggy mess and even without desktop integration, IE was more standards compliant and more stable (Until you enabled desktop integration, oops). There are a fair number of people who said it was faster, but I never really saw much speed difference, except in how quickly Netscape would crash;)
1) I have Windows 98 on this machine, and Windows Update has *never* told me that there are any drivers that need updating, and I've been using it since late 98.
I'm not so sure Mozilla taking a "web platform" rather then "browser" approach is so bad. The goal of Mozilla is to be a very portable platform. They want to be able to use it in everything from PCs to set-top-boxes and maybe even as far down as cellphones. Plus it will help them in the long run (Getting to Mozilla 2.0 should be a lot easier than getting to Mozilla 1.0).
Your point about XMLTerm is rather invalid BTW, since it's an outside project. So is the IRC client.
Oh, and one thing I forgot to mention, creating XPToolkit was the only way to ensure a standards-compliant browser. Netscape don't have the luxury of being able to change, say, the Windows toolkit to be more standards compliant while the IE team can.
Firstly, I thing MS have a lot more people working on IE alone than there are on Mozilla. The problem is the Mozilla folk are also trying to create XPToolkit, XPCOM and a few other things which make Mozilla more than a browser. Hell, somebody even made a Mozilla-based IRC client.
Now, you really don't seem to understand Mozilla's history or position do you? Come on, admit it. I tell you what, I'll explained what happened:
1) Netscape began work on Netscape 5 around mid 1997 IIRC 2) Netscape release what they had done so far as Mozilla. 3) In October 1998, after more than a year of developing their version 5.0 product, they scrap the old code and start from scratch using NGLayout (Gecko). This is the real killer, along with the development effort that went into Netscape 4.5. 4) After a lot of discussion, the Mozilla developers decided that to remain portable, they'd have to reinvent the wheel in the form of XPToolkit and XPCOM and XPFE 5) After what is now around 1 and a half years of development *from scratch*, Mozilla is finally maturing into a usable product. 6) There will be a Netscape 6PR2 and probably PR3 before Netscape 6 final. After Netscape 6 final, Mozilla 1.0 will be released, and will not have the same feature set of Netscape 6.
I was considering the whole !Prog directory as an entity which !run file handles the so-called "demand".
It's still hardly optimal, especially when you have the problem that they just sit in memory when no longer in use and can't even be swapped out (Yet another RISC OS deficiency).
Maybe but this is so elegantly done, there.:-)
You call making the only form of shared libraries the equivalent of kernel modules elegant?
We don't consider the same entity here: Your "You" is the programmer or integrator or whatever you want to mean. I meant the user, the 6-year old kid dealing with his ARChimedes. He shouldn't bother about the RMEnsure command.
So basically, the programmer has to make up for the OS's deficiencies. What a great way to attract developers.
Also, RiscOS modules reside in memory and don't usually occupy much space (xxKB for the biggest)
And they also run pretty much as kernel modules and a bug can easily bring down the whole system.
They are loaded on demand
I beg your pardon? Sorry, but they are not loaded on demand, you have to issue an RMLoad to load a Relocatable Module.
and can also be dynamically replaced or updated as the system is able to distinguish between several available versions
This feature is not exclusive to RISC OS. In fact, you have to do the hard work yourself. You have to compare versions yourself and issue an error if you have the wrong version.
It wouldn't surprise me if it was Abit. There are quite a number of people getting pissed off at their refusal to follow the GPL with their distro (I think it was first pointed out a few months ago, and still the company won't correct it).
It's OK to send Lars' music around the net, but even hint that Microsoft might be able to repackage the vast amount of GPLed code out there and profit from it without releasing changes to the community and everyone flips out. Not so funny when it's happening to you, is it?
Lars can go fuck himself. Sorry, it had to be said. Why did I say that? Simple, he wants to put the writers of the Pan newsreader put in jail. Check out SuperPimpSoft's homepage for more information.
OK, copying music is wrong (At least without permission), but Lars has lost the plot. He now wants the writers of a bloody newsreader put in jail for God's sake. And why? Because the newsreader can automatically put together multi-part mime attachments.
the prevailing opinion (or excuse, depending upon how you look at it) among my immediate friends at Microsoft is that we lost the trial because the judge wasn't following the law.
Perhaps the judge was following the law, perhaps he wasn't. But let's not forget that there was another party not following the law in the court room; Microsoft. Or has falsifying evidence suddenly become legal?
Perhaps, but what happens when they find out why the judge got pissed off. After all, the appeals court isn't likely to not consider the fact that Microsoft tried to make a mockery of the justice system.
If Microsoft didn't want the judge to be biased towards the DoJ, then why did they go out of their way to piss him off? Lying in court, falsifying evidence, selective memory etc. etc.
Sorry, but that's daft. Whilst the standard may have been workable, it had already changed by the time IE was released. This means that when a standards compliant implimentation is put into Mozilla, it'll still be incompatible with IE.
Speaking of standards, why is IE *still* incompatible with the DOM core standard? They had an excuse for IE4, but IE5 has no such excuses.
There is an at least partially working XSLT parser in the tree. I'm not sure how far along it is and it's not being done by the Netscape-employed Mozilla team.
Now, you bitch about Mozilla not supporting XSL, but which is better; waiting for a standard to be finalised or releasing before the standard is finalised and then finding out it's changed already? IE5 has that problem, although I note from the W3C XSL page that MS have released an update for its XSL implimentation. Now all they have to to is get namespaces working correctly.
Netscape 6 PR1's CSS support blows Microsoft's away; in fact, it has the least number of bugs, and was claimed to have the best CSS support of all the browsers in an article right here on Slashdot. So, you're comment that IE's CSS is better than Netscape's "ever was" is just plain wrong.
And we all know that/. is completely unbiased and that everything you read here is 100% true:)
Every release of Mozilla I've had so far has crashed on a semi-regular basis on either Linux or Windows.
Hmm...On this machine Mozilla has crashed twice in the past week. That's pretty good considering I'm using nightly builds which can fluctuate in quality by daft amounts.
Slashdot Mirror
It's nice to see Corel helping out the Mozilla and KDE projects this way. Since Nautilus already uses Gecko and now the possibility for Konqueror to use it, we are one step closer to having a more standards compliant web.
Once Netscape 6/Mozilla reach RTM versions, all that really stands in the way of true standards compliance is WinIE. MacIE is already wonderfully standards compliant by all accounts, and hopefully the WinIE team will follow suit.
The problem with those statistics is that they are for a university web server. Now, I'm actually surprised Netscape have such a large market share even there, I'd have thought it would be below 20%.
;)
It's disturbing how few people I know who use Netscape. Two of my friends use Netscape because they refuse to use IE on principle (Which is silly if you ask me, at least until 6.0 goes final), while nearly everyone else uses IE. The only other people who use Netscape are Linux users.
Make no mistake, Microsoft have been bitch-slapping Netscape ever since the release of IE4. The problem is Netscape 4 was a buggy mess and even without desktop integration, IE was more standards compliant and more stable (Until you enabled desktop integration, oops). There are a fair number of people who said it was faster, but I never really saw much speed difference, except in how quickly Netscape would crash
1) I have Windows 98 on this machine, and Windows Update has *never* told me that there are any drivers that need updating, and I've been using it since late 98.
2) OpenGL is integrated into XFree 4 I believe.
Sorry, but IE5.5. does not have excellent standards support.
You can embed Gecko into IE as its rendering engine through an ActiveX control somebody developed.
I'm no fan of Windows, but I do prefer the IE interfact to Mozilla (Those customisable and movable toolbars are absolutely wonderful).
I'm not so sure Mozilla taking a "web platform" rather then "browser" approach is so bad. The goal of Mozilla is to be a very portable platform. They want to be able to use it in everything from PCs to set-top-boxes and maybe even as far down as cellphones. Plus it will help them in the long run (Getting to Mozilla 2.0 should be a lot easier than getting to Mozilla 1.0).
Your point about XMLTerm is rather invalid BTW, since it's an outside project. So is the IRC client.
Oh, and one thing I forgot to mention, creating XPToolkit was the only way to ensure a standards-compliant browser. Netscape don't have the luxury of being able to change, say, the Windows toolkit to be more standards compliant while the IE team can.
Firstly, I thing MS have a lot more people working on IE alone than there are on Mozilla. The problem is the Mozilla folk are also trying to create XPToolkit, XPCOM and a few other things which make Mozilla more than a browser. Hell, somebody even made a Mozilla-based IRC client.
Now, you really don't seem to understand Mozilla's history or position do you? Come on, admit it. I tell you what, I'll explained what happened:
1) Netscape began work on Netscape 5 around mid 1997 IIRC
2) Netscape release what they had done so far as Mozilla.
3) In October 1998, after more than a year of developing their version 5.0 product, they scrap the old code and start from scratch using NGLayout (Gecko). This is the real killer, along with the development effort that went into Netscape 4.5.
4) After a lot of discussion, the Mozilla developers decided that to remain portable, they'd have to reinvent the wheel in the form of XPToolkit and XPCOM and XPFE
5) After what is now around 1 and a half years of development *from scratch*, Mozilla is finally maturing into a usable product.
6) There will be a Netscape 6PR2 and probably PR3 before Netscape 6 final. After Netscape 6 final, Mozilla 1.0 will be released, and will not have the same feature set of Netscape 6.
Obviously you know sweet FA about what you're talking about, so let me explain it to you:
1) No, Netscape 4.x does not render it correctly. This might have something to do with Netscape 4.x being crap
2) No, IE (Any Windows version, don't know about Mac) does not render it correctly. Therefore IE is not standards compliant.
3) Mozilla does render it correctly. This may have something to do with the fact that Mozilla is very standards compliant.
and Aussie Leeanna Walsman, who'll take on the physically-demanding role of a new highly-killed bounty hunter.
Can't be a very good one then...
I was considering the whole !Prog directory as an entity which !run file handles the so-called "demand".
It's still hardly optimal, especially when you have the problem that they just sit in memory when no longer in use and can't even be swapped out (Yet another RISC OS deficiency).
Maybe but this is so elegantly done, there. :-)
You call making the only form of shared libraries the equivalent of kernel modules elegant?
We don't consider the same entity here:
Your "You" is the programmer or integrator or whatever you want to mean.
I meant the user, the 6-year old kid dealing with his ARChimedes. He shouldn't bother about the RMEnsure command.
So basically, the programmer has to make up for the OS's deficiencies. What a great way to attract developers.
Also, RiscOS modules reside in memory and don't usually occupy much space (xxKB for the biggest)
And they also run pretty much as kernel modules and a bug can easily bring down the whole system.
They are loaded on demand
I beg your pardon? Sorry, but they are not loaded on demand, you have to issue an RMLoad to load a Relocatable Module.
and can also be dynamically replaced or updated as the system is able to distinguish between several available versions
This feature is not exclusive to RISC OS. In fact, you have to do the hard work yourself. You have to compare versions yourself and issue an error if you have the wrong version.
Some actual facts to back up your statements might be useful. Otherwise I'll just chalk you up as just another troll.
Debian's Apt does that as well, so that's hardly a great advantage.
It wouldn't surprise me if it was Abit. There are quite a number of people getting pissed off at their refusal to follow the GPL with their distro (I think it was first pointed out a few months ago, and still the company won't correct it).
It's OK to send Lars' music around the net, but even hint that Microsoft might be able to repackage the vast amount of GPLed code out there and profit from it without releasing changes to the community and everyone flips out. Not so funny when it's happening to you, is it?
Lars can go fuck himself. Sorry, it had to be said. Why did I say that? Simple, he wants to put the writers of the Pan newsreader put in jail. Check out SuperPimpSoft's homepage for more information.
OK, copying music is wrong (At least without permission), but Lars has lost the plot. He now wants the writers of a bloody newsreader put in jail for God's sake. And why? Because the newsreader can automatically put together multi-part mime attachments.
3. 6,070,222. Synchronous memory device having identification register
;)
4. 6,067,592. Read the rest of this comment...
Heh, I guess Slashdot could be in violation of a patent every time someone posts a long comment
So I guess you don't mind BT price-gouging everyone in the US who uses hyperlinks?
Alan Cox joked that it was in fact an EU conspiracy to place a stupidity tax on the US. I'm beginning to think he's right.
And just how did you travel to this alternate universe where Microsoft never existed? It's the only way you'd know that as a fact.
Oh wait, I forgot, speculation == fact these days, silly me.
That just gave me an idea. Embed the DeCSS source in a skin :)
the prevailing opinion (or excuse, depending upon how you look at it) among my immediate friends at Microsoft is that we lost the trial because the judge wasn't following the law.
Perhaps the judge was following the law, perhaps he wasn't. But let's not forget that there was another party not following the law in the court room; Microsoft. Or has falsifying evidence suddenly become legal?
Perhaps, but what happens when they find out why the judge got pissed off. After all, the appeals court isn't likely to not consider the fact that Microsoft tried to make a mockery of the justice system.
If Microsoft didn't want the judge to be biased towards the DoJ, then why did they go out of their way to piss him off? Lying in court, falsifying evidence, selective memory etc. etc.
Sorry, but that's daft. Whilst the standard may have been workable, it had already changed by the time IE was released. This means that when a standards compliant implimentation is put into Mozilla, it'll still be incompatible with IE.
Speaking of standards, why is IE *still* incompatible with the DOM core standard? They had an excuse for IE4, but IE5 has no such excuses.
There is an at least partially working XSLT parser in the tree. I'm not sure how far along it is and it's not being done by the Netscape-employed Mozilla team.
Now, you bitch about Mozilla not supporting XSL, but which is better; waiting for a standard to be finalised or releasing before the standard is finalised and then finding out it's changed already? IE5 has that problem, although I note from the W3C XSL page that MS have released an update for its XSL implimentation. Now all they have to to is get namespaces working correctly.
Netscape 6 PR1's CSS support blows Microsoft's away; in fact, it has the least number of bugs, and was claimed to have the best CSS support of all the browsers in an article right here on Slashdot. So, you're comment that IE's CSS is better than Netscape's "ever was" is just plain wrong.
And we all know that /. is completely unbiased and that everything you read here is 100% true :)
And I suppose RichInStyle is biased too...
Every release of Mozilla I've had so far has crashed on a semi-regular basis on either Linux or Windows.
Hmm...On this machine Mozilla has crashed twice in the past week. That's pretty good considering I'm using nightly builds which can fluctuate in quality by daft amounts.