Are you running apprunner or viewer? If you run mozilla-apprunner.sh or whatever it's called you'll have something that resembles a web browser with the back, forward and stop buttons as well as bookmarks and a useful cookie manager. Viewer is just a basic shell for testing the layout engine without all the additional overhead so it can be used to test bugs in the layout engine. --
Mozilla is definitely a usable browser now, it's got a few annoying bugs but nothing that shouldn't get fixed before beta. Download the builds and give bug reports or criticism. Check that it works with your favourite sites. Read the relavant documents on http://www.mozilla.org/ for information on bug reporting and helping the mozilla team. The main problem with Mozilla is that it needs glibc2.1 or higher to work, if anyone can help them work on a solution then please do so if you have the time.
This site has been mentioned a few times before on Slashdot but the more they can mention it the better as it's useful for developers of software that uses GUI's to see the mistakes made by others.
MS has taken a bit of a hammering here and they deserve the criticism but so do many other companies that produce software less intuitive than MS's (e.g. why is the Options menu for IE4 under view for Windows, Edit for Mac and in IE5 it's under tools).
For the new user the number of applications with different toolkits under Linux can mean inconsistency for the user although the developer has more flexibility. As well as different toolkits producing a different look and feel you have different developers who have different ideas about the options on a menu where buttons should be located, etc. The free software world can learn a lot of lessons from the mistakes of MS and others if they want to be intuitive to the average user.
As I've used PC's for a while (DOS, Win3.1 then Linux) I've grown used to the inconsistencies of different applications and it's never really bothered me, however with many new users this will be an important factor especially if they're used to the Macintosh way of doing things. --
The context of your comments about Mozilla seems to imply you think it is going to be yet another slow and bloated Netscape browser. If you had read the previous comments on the other two recent Mozilla articles you would have realised that Mozilla is making really excellent progress and is a compact download size.
Netscape will be themeable but that's just a spin off of their XUL user interface language. The fact that all the interfaces are written in XUL means that it can be easily themed as well as customising the user interface to the way you want.
As for integrating Instant messaging with email. No one at Mozilla.org said that and even if Netscape does do that you can easily get a copy that wouldn't have this feature.
Mozilla is here now (although in pre-alpha form). You can't see a current build of Opera on Linux so I believe Mozilla will be along sooner rather than later. Even if you don't like Mozilla their rendering engine is good and someone can use it as a base for another browser with a different interface.
If Opera had started porting (although to be fair they didn't have much money when they started) to other operating systems before the Mozilla announcement I believe they would have got a good share of the market but now their browser is likely to follow behind Mozilla and so is unlikely to succeed unless they can offer something special.
FWIW the more recent nightly Mozilla builds now remember the size of the Window when you close it (however the size is not remembered if the browser crashes).
Remember the milestone releases are slightly less upto date than the nightly releases. --
Re:How much of the current code is from Netscape?
on
Mozilla M10 Released
·
· Score: 3
Not very much of the code is from the original Netscape.
The last major piece of original Netscape code was the network library (netlib) which was replaced by necko (new faster modular networking library) in the M9 release.
The layout engine has been totally rewritten (that's why it's took so long to get this far) as well as the widgets and other front end code. A lot more code in Mozilla is designed to be cross platform to make porting easier.
So it's a hard task to find any major bits of original Netscape code in Mozilla. --
Re:By the same account Microsoft has lost the OS w
on
Whither Netscape 5.0?
·
· Score: 2
I didn't say closed source didn't work I was trying to criticise the validity of the article. The exact same reasons they were using to say that open source didn't work could have been used to say closed source didn't work. Basically saying that the article was totally wrong. --
XUL which is used by Mozilla to customise every aspect of the user interface is responsible for the look and feel of the Netscape browser and allows the user to apply skins to cusomise the look of their browser and this INCLUDES all the widgets (buttons, etc) as they're using their own XP toolkit.
This means that Netscape can release a Mac skin as the default with their Mac version and a Windwos skin with their win version and whatever with their UNIX version (we linke many skins!!).
At the moment it's just easier to ship one skin.
I seriously doubt the Netscape branded Mozilla will look like what you've got now. --
Full screen browsing has never worried me (I can get rid of all the buttons and just have the title bar showing which is good enough for me).
But if you want the feature (which you seem to do) then please put an enhancement request in at Mozilla.org. First of all please check bugzilla to see if such a request has already been made (it probably has) and if it hasn't then submit a 'bug' report but categorize it as an 'Enhancement' so they know it's not really a bug it's a feature (request). More info on how to do this is at mozilla.org, just make sure you mark the bug report as an enhancement request rather than an actual bug.
You may then want to report the 'bugs' id number so people here who also want the feature can vote for it.
> I'll be patiently waiting for a decent browser for Linux. I'd even pay for it
Hopefully Mozilla will meet your needs it's a bit quicker than Netscape (hopefully that'll be much quicker once the debug code is removed) at starting up and definitely quicker than rendering.
Personally I've had very little problem with Netscape on Linux apart from it's a bit slow, it rarely crashes. The same goes for Mozilla but it may crash regularly on your machine so I advise you to test mozilla on your machine so that all the bugs are ironed out and we have a really stable browser when it is released.
If Mozilla doesn't meet your needs hopefully we'll have opera along for Linux soon but Mozilla is shaping up nicely as far as I'm concerned.
I'd like to see IE for Linux just to keep competition healthy. They couldn't kill off Netscape (although they nearly did) so they can't kill Mozilla as it's open source. If Microsoft entered the Linux world with IE we'd see peoples motives even higher to produce a better web browser. --
Re:By the same account Microsoft has lost the OS w
on
Whither Netscape 5.0?
·
· Score: 1
I meant screen of death not depth and this message was sort of a joke mainly to point out how stupid these postings are.
When you think that Microsoft will get a massive share even though W2K is massively delayed then why should mozilla be dead even though this is delayed? --
By the same account Microsoft has lost the OS war
on
Whither Netscape 5.0?
·
· Score: 5
So the delay of Mozilla has meant Netscape has lost the browser war has it. I think I'd better become a reporter.
Microsft have officialy lost the OS war due to the delay in releasing their closed source operating system called Windows 2000 which was originally due out in the beginning of the year. Microsoft had originally called Windows 2000 NT5 and expected it to be released in 98, then 99, then who knows. Insiders inside the Microsoft Corporation said this was to make sure they had integrated their messenger with every component of the operating system and also to add new features to control the user interface (e.g. a colour picker to change the colour of the screen of depth). This is one of a series of delays for Microsoft products since their experimentation with closed source in the seventies. This proves that closed source does not work.
Now you don't see many articles saying that, so why do you see that about Mozilla? --
Sorry about the strong headline but I'm personally fed up with articles like these. Mozilla was delayed for one reason - they originally tried to base an open source project on their terrible Communicator codebase. They worked for months on that and nearly had a shipping version but they decided to scrap it and rewrite the browser totally. Now although it's nearly a year 'late' at least we're getting a small (5 MB) and standards compliant browser rather than yet another bloated released based on Communicator.
I wouldn't say Mozilla is ready yet and has a few months to go but the progress has been much improved the past few months and external developers are starting to get involved. Look at http://www.mozilla.org/ and check the weekly status updates, check http://www.mozillazine.org/ for more up to date news. There's a lot going on. Open source didn't prove to be the ultimate solution for Netscape, the couldn't release the source and suddenly get a top class browser. They had to improve the code before anyone would go near it and that's what they have done. It's took them longer than expected because they didn't understand that people wouldn't hack on any crap. They've got their act together and are doing well.
There are a number of ways to help. 1) Contribute patches and bug fixes 2) Provide testcases for bugfixes (The Gecko bugathon) 3) Rate bugs in order of importance. 4) Download builds regualrly to test them.
Read the getting involved document on mozilla.org for more ideas.
Well the word 'Microsoft' in your search was spoiling the results a bit. If you modify your query to just 'satan email' or 'email satan' then you'll see Hotmail as number one. Remember MS fans this is just a laugh so don't get offended by it. I don't think Gates is satan and I doubt the people at Google do either. --
For a while the default Netscape search has been a combo of their Open Directory project (formerly NewHoo) and Google. Which is probably how Google make their money as Netscape will have to pay Google for use of their content (FWIW Google also provides search services for others such as RedHat and they probably get money off them too).
Anyway, you're wondering why I'm posting this under here, it's because all you have to do is to type 'more evil than satan himself' in a Netscape URL bar (if you're running a recent version) and you get the same search results, so I guess that's what Netscape mean by 'Smart Browsing'! What's funnier is that if you download the Netscape Tuneup for IE (available from http://home.netscape.com/smartupdate/ if you're running IE). This'll make the same search result appear by typing in the search query in an IE browser! I haven't tried the IE one however as I'm running Linux. --
Monty Python was one of the UK comedies that has been immensley popular in the US although as I've seen many times the US people often have a different sense of humour to us in the UK. Some US comedies are immensley popular over here while others are complete failures so I was interested to know what british comedies are popular in other countries (the US in particular) and which ones can nobody stand?
I've also noticed recently the amount of new decent british comedy seems to be on the decline meaning we have to depend on imports more and more.
Running Linux is more of a beginners guide to Linux and tries to cover all the areas that they'd be interested in to get a successful running system. It doesn't do into much depth but tries to cover the basics of what you'll need to know. If you're already experienced with Linux then you probably don't need the book and you can probably cover all this more in depth wit h the other books. As it's name suggests essential system administration covers sysadmin while the scope of running Linux is greater although not as in depth.
It's definitely worth a read for the inexperienced user or someone that needs to know a good overall knowledge of the OS.
BTW I'm posting this with Mozilla so if it doesn't display properly that's why. There seems to be a problem with text boxes on the build I'm using. However it's definitely approaching usability stage so go on and try it.
Free software or open source? Does it really matter?
Not really as much as these people make out. The hackers really shouldn't care as long as their code is licensed the way they want it to be, these arguments over free software versus Open Source just waste time that could be spent on more productive things and just make the community look bad.
The best term I've actually heard (but never use because not many people use it) is a combination of the two terms 'free source' which states the freedoms of the product and states that the freedom applies to the source code, but whatever name people use I just wish that either a name is settled upon or people just accept the names that people choose to call it. RMS isn't wrong when he talks about free software and ESR isn't wrong when he talks about Open Source, arguments over a name are really pointless and calling free software a millstone (or something similar) is totally unfair to the work being done by the FSF for many years.
I strongly believe if the most prominent advocate in the open source world preferred the term free software I don't believe it would hold us back as long as people were educated to realise that free software meant free as in freedom. It's not exactly difficult to do. The one term that I really hate is 'freeware' which brings to mind closed source Windows/DOS software written by a 13 year old with a net connection, get the press to stop using the term freeware and it will make things clearer.
I personally found Lindsay Marshall's views on Open Source(TM) interesting particularly his comments on the Cathedral and the Bazaar. Here's my representation of his views (I may have misquoted). Basically he was saying that a successful open source project was more cathedral like than bazaar like because if there's no hierarchical organisation (e.g. Linus gets the final word what goes into the kernel) more time will get spent on trivial discussions rather than on actual coding. I can see his point although I'm sure many people will disagree. Is the fact that some people see the Linux kernel development as a cathedral and others see it a bazaar mean that this is a bad analogy. --
Mozilla currenly uses Javascript style configuration files (prefs.js) which are basically the same as the ones used in Netscape Communicator. So I don't see XML config files in the forthcoming Mozilla release, however Mozilla does support XML so it could be a possible configuration file format in the future if anyone actually feels it will be of benefit. --
OK someone always asks this but today I haven't noticed anyone ask this yet. Disclaimer: I believe that people are entitled to decide whether they make their programs open or closed source and under what terms they do that.
Anyway, does anyone know if the code they use for detecting the users settings in the Windows registry is available under the GPL (or similar)? I think it would be useful for many other Linux distributions that would like to make installation easier but would like to take a different approach to WinLinux (installing Linux in it's own partition would be a priority for many). This feature would be useful to anyone who wants to install Linux on machine running Windows already and other distributions could benefit. Like I say, I'm not saying they should HAVE to GPL their code (unless it incorporates GPLed code) but it would indeed be useful. --
I don't think so! Re:www.mslinux.com
on
WinLinux 2000
·
· Score: 1
Nothing to do with MS. $ whois mslinux.com [rs.internic.net]
Registrant: Newyen Corporation (MSLINUX-DOM) 6119 Welch Ave Stockton, CA 95210 US
How difficult would it be to port Mozilla to the dreamcast? It would be useful I think for these users to have a standards compliant web browser that works similar to those on a PC. If the porting of Mozilla was done through WinCE we'd have to pay license fees wouldn't we? What about the other options? Do you have to pay fees to Sega for distributing dreamcast software? Would Sega be interested in helping the Mozilla project to get a decent web browser on their platform? --
Yeah, that's because Netscape put the Instant messenger there. This is all third party stuff. If Netscape does try to integrate IM with Netscape and doesn't provide an option to download a version without it you can be sure that someone will compile browser only versions and make them available for download, anyway I guess as you read Slashdot typing./configure, make, etc isn't too difficult anyway.
Netscape's attitude has had to change for the 5.0 release, they now have to do everything in the open or someone will just bypass them by releasing their own Mozilla based browser. --
Slashdot Mirror
Are you running apprunner or viewer? If you run mozilla-apprunner.sh or whatever it's called you'll have something that resembles a web browser with the back, forward and stop buttons as well as bookmarks and a useful cookie manager. Viewer is just a basic shell for testing the layout engine without all the additional overhead so it can be used to test bugs in the layout engine.
--
Mozilla is definitely a usable browser now, it's got a few annoying bugs but nothing that shouldn't get fixed before beta.
Download the builds and give bug reports or criticism. Check that it works with your favourite sites. Read the relavant documents on http://www.mozilla.org/ for information on bug reporting and helping the mozilla team.
The main problem with Mozilla is that it needs glibc2.1 or higher to work, if anyone can help them work on a solution then please do so if you have the time.
--
This site has been mentioned a few times before on Slashdot but the more they can mention it the better as it's useful for developers of software that uses GUI's to see the mistakes made by others.
MS has taken a bit of a hammering here and they deserve the criticism but so do many other companies that produce software less intuitive than MS's (e.g. why is the Options menu for IE4 under view for Windows, Edit for Mac and in IE5 it's under tools).
For the new user the number of applications with different toolkits under Linux can mean inconsistency for the user although the developer has more flexibility. As well as different toolkits producing a different look and feel you have different developers who have different ideas about the options on a menu where buttons should be located, etc. The free software world can learn a lot of lessons from the mistakes of MS and others if they want to be intuitive to the average user.
As I've used PC's for a while (DOS, Win3.1 then Linux) I've grown used to the inconsistencies of different applications and it's never really bothered me, however with many new users this will be an important factor especially if they're used to the Macintosh way of doing things.
--
The context of your comments about Mozilla seems to imply you think it is going to be yet another slow and bloated Netscape browser. If you had read the previous comments on the other two recent Mozilla articles you would have realised that Mozilla is making really excellent progress and is a compact download size.
Netscape will be themeable but that's just a spin off of their XUL user interface language. The fact that all the interfaces are written in XUL means that it can be easily themed as well as customising the user interface to the way you want.
As for integrating Instant messaging with email. No one at Mozilla.org said that and even if Netscape does do that you can easily get a copy that wouldn't have this feature.
Mozilla is here now (although in pre-alpha form). You can't see a current build of Opera on Linux so I believe Mozilla will be along sooner rather than later. Even if you don't like Mozilla their rendering engine is good and someone can use it as a base for another browser with a different interface.
If Opera had started porting (although to be fair they didn't have much money when they started) to other operating systems before the Mozilla announcement I believe they would have got a good share of the market but now their browser is likely to follow behind Mozilla and so is unlikely to succeed unless they can offer something special.
--
FWIW the more recent nightly Mozilla builds now remember the size of the Window when you close it (however the size is not remembered if the browser crashes).
Remember the milestone releases are slightly less upto date than the nightly releases.
--
Not very much of the code is from the original Netscape.
The last major piece of original Netscape code was the network library (netlib) which was replaced by necko (new faster modular networking library) in the M9 release.
The layout engine has been totally rewritten (that's why it's took so long to get this far) as well as the widgets and other front end code. A lot more code in Mozilla is designed to be cross platform to make porting easier.
So it's a hard task to find any major bits of original Netscape code in Mozilla.
--
I didn't say closed source didn't work I was trying to criticise the validity of the article. The exact same reasons they were using to say that open source didn't work could have been used to say closed source didn't work. Basically saying that the article was totally wrong.
--
XUL which is used by Mozilla to customise every aspect of the user interface is responsible for the look and feel of the Netscape browser and allows the user to apply skins to cusomise the look of their browser and this INCLUDES all the widgets (buttons, etc) as they're using their own XP toolkit.
This means that Netscape can release a Mac skin as the default with their Mac version and a Windwos skin with their win version and whatever with their UNIX version (we linke many skins!!).
At the moment it's just easier to ship one skin.
I seriously doubt the Netscape branded Mozilla will look like what you've got now.
--
Full screen browsing has never worried me (I can get rid of all the buttons and just have the title bar showing which is good enough for me).
But if you want the feature (which you seem to do) then please put an enhancement request in at Mozilla.org. First of all please check bugzilla to see if such a request has already been made (it probably has) and if it hasn't then submit a 'bug' report but categorize it as an 'Enhancement' so they know it's not really a bug it's a feature (request). More info on how to do this is at mozilla.org, just make sure you mark the bug report as an enhancement request rather than an actual bug.
You may then want to report the 'bugs' id number so people here who also want the feature can vote for it.
--
> I'll be patiently waiting for a decent browser for Linux. I'd even pay for it
Hopefully Mozilla will meet your needs it's a bit quicker than Netscape (hopefully that'll be much quicker once the debug code is removed) at starting up and definitely quicker than rendering.
Personally I've had very little problem with Netscape on Linux apart from it's a bit slow, it rarely crashes. The same goes for Mozilla but it may crash regularly on your machine so I advise you to test mozilla on your machine so that all the bugs are ironed out and we have a really stable browser when it is released.
If Mozilla doesn't meet your needs hopefully we'll have opera along for Linux soon but Mozilla is shaping up nicely as far as I'm concerned.
I'd like to see IE for Linux just to keep competition healthy. They couldn't kill off Netscape (although they nearly did) so they can't kill Mozilla as it's open source. If Microsoft entered the Linux world with IE we'd see peoples motives even higher to produce a better web browser.
--
I meant screen of death not depth and this message was sort of a joke mainly to point out how stupid these postings are.
When you think that Microsoft will get a massive share even though W2K is massively delayed then why should mozilla be dead even though this is delayed?
--
So the delay of Mozilla has meant Netscape has lost the browser war has it. I think I'd better become a reporter.
Microsft have officialy lost the OS war due to the delay in releasing their closed source operating system called Windows 2000 which was originally due out in the beginning of the year. Microsoft had originally called Windows 2000 NT5 and expected it to be released in 98, then 99, then who knows.
Insiders inside the Microsoft Corporation said this was to make sure they had integrated their messenger with every component of the operating system and also to add new features to control the user interface (e.g. a colour picker to change the colour of the screen of depth). This is one of a series of delays for Microsoft products since their experimentation with closed source in the seventies. This proves that closed source does not work.
Now you don't see many articles saying that, so why do you see that about Mozilla?
--
Sorry about the strong headline but I'm personally fed up with articles like these. Mozilla was delayed for one reason - they originally tried to base an open source project on their terrible Communicator codebase. They worked for months on that and nearly had a shipping version but they decided to scrap it and rewrite the browser totally. Now although it's nearly a year 'late' at least we're getting a small (5 MB) and standards compliant browser rather than yet another bloated released based on Communicator.
I wouldn't say Mozilla is ready yet and has a few months to go but the progress has been much improved the past few months and external developers are starting to get involved. Look at http://www.mozilla.org/ and check the weekly status updates, check http://www.mozillazine.org/ for more up to date news. There's a lot going on. Open source didn't prove to be the ultimate solution for Netscape, the couldn't release the source and suddenly get a top class browser. They had to improve the code before anyone would go near it and that's what they have done. It's took them longer than expected because they didn't understand that people wouldn't hack on any crap. They've got their act together and are doing well.
There are a number of ways to help.
1) Contribute patches and bug fixes
2) Provide testcases for bugfixes (The Gecko bugathon)
3) Rate bugs in order of importance.
4) Download builds regualrly to test them.
Read the getting involved document on mozilla.org for more ideas.
Mozilla is not dead, it's coming back to life.
--
It took them a long time to get that innovation into their products. Taking ideas from a 30 year OS that is outdated, why would they do that?
--
Well the word 'Microsoft' in your search was spoiling the results a bit. If you modify your query to just 'satan email' or 'email satan' then you'll see Hotmail as number one. Remember MS fans this is just a laugh so don't get offended by it. I don't think Gates is satan and I doubt the people at Google do either.
--
Anyway, you're wondering why I'm posting this under here, it's because all you have to do is to type 'more evil than satan himself' in a Netscape URL bar (if you're running a recent version) and you get the same search results, so I guess that's what Netscape mean by 'Smart Browsing'! What's funnier is that if you download the Netscape Tuneup for IE (available from http://home.netscape.com/smartupdate/ if you're running IE). This'll make the same search result appear by typing in the search query in an IE browser! I haven't tried the IE one however as I'm running Linux.
--
Monty Python was one of the UK comedies that has been immensley popular in the US although as I've seen many times the US people often have a different sense of humour to us in the UK.
Some US comedies are immensley popular over here while others are complete failures so I was interested to know what british comedies are popular in other countries (the US in particular) and which ones can nobody stand?
I've also noticed recently the amount of new decent british comedy seems to be on the decline meaning we have to depend on imports more and more.
--
Running Linux is more of a beginners guide to Linux and tries to cover all the areas that they'd be interested in to get a successful running system.
It doesn't do into much depth but tries to cover the basics of what you'll need to know. If you're already experienced with Linux then you probably don't need the book and you can probably cover all this more in depth wit h the other books.
As it's name suggests essential system administration covers sysadmin while the scope of running Linux is greater although not as in depth.
It's definitely worth a read for the inexperienced user or someone that needs to know a good overall knowledge of the OS.
BTW I'm posting this with Mozilla so if it doesn't display properly that's why. There seems to be a problem with text boxes on the build I'm using. However it's definitely approaching usability stage so go on and try it.
--
Not really as much as these people make out. The hackers really shouldn't care as long as their code is licensed the way they want it to be, these arguments over free software versus Open Source just waste time that could be spent on more productive things and just make the community look bad.
The best term I've actually heard (but never use because not many people use it) is a combination of the two terms 'free source' which states the freedoms of the product and states that the freedom applies to the source code, but whatever name people use I just wish that either a name is settled upon or people just accept the names that people choose to call it. RMS isn't wrong when he talks about free software and ESR isn't wrong when he talks about Open Source, arguments over a name are really pointless and calling free software a millstone (or something similar) is totally unfair to the work being done by the FSF for many years.
I strongly believe if the most prominent advocate in the open source world preferred the term free software I don't believe it would hold us back as long as people were educated to realise that free software meant free as in freedom. It's not exactly difficult to do. The one term that I really hate is 'freeware' which brings to mind closed source Windows/DOS software written by a 13 year old with a net connection, get the press to stop using the term freeware and it will make things clearer.
I personally found Lindsay Marshall's views on Open Source(TM) interesting particularly his comments on the Cathedral and the Bazaar. Here's my representation of his views (I may have misquoted). Basically he was saying that a successful open source project was more cathedral like than bazaar like because if there's no hierarchical organisation (e.g. Linus gets the final word what goes into the kernel) more time will get spent on trivial discussions rather than on actual coding. I can see his point although I'm sure many people will disagree. Is the fact that some people see the Linux kernel development as a cathedral and others see it a bazaar mean that this is a bad analogy.
--
Mozilla currenly uses Javascript style configuration files (prefs.js) which are basically the same as the ones used in Netscape Communicator. So I don't see XML config files in the forthcoming Mozilla release, however Mozilla does support XML so it could be a possible configuration file format in the future if anyone actually feels it will be of benefit.
--
OK someone always asks this but today I haven't noticed anyone ask this yet. Disclaimer: I believe that people are entitled to decide whether they make their programs open or closed source and under what terms they do that.
Anyway, does anyone know if the code they use for detecting the users settings in the Windows registry is available under the GPL (or similar)? I think it would be useful for many other Linux distributions that would like to make installation easier but would like to take a different approach to WinLinux (installing Linux in it's own partition would be a priority for many). This feature would be useful to anyone who wants to install Linux on machine running Windows already and other distributions could benefit. Like I say, I'm not saying they should HAVE to GPL their code (unless it incorporates GPLed code) but it would indeed be useful.
--
Nothing to do with MS.
$ whois mslinux.com
[rs.internic.net]
Registrant:
Newyen Corporation (MSLINUX-DOM)
6119 Welch Ave
Stockton, CA 95210
US
Domain Name: MSLINUX.COM
Administrative Contact, Technical Contact, Zone Contact:
Nguyen, Kiet (KN1767) domain@NEWYEN.COM
1-510-459-7528
Billing Contact:
Nguyen, Kiet (KN1767) domain@NEWYEN.COM
1-510-459-7528
Record last updated on 14-Jun-99.
Record created on 10-Sep-98.
Database last updated on 21-Sep-99 14:40:22 EDT.
Domain servers in listed order:
NS.CSOFT.NET 208.161.216.110
NS2.CSOFT.NET 208.161.216.111
--
He said that the tilde (~) wasn't there when the user was on IRC with a dreamcast, therefore ident port 113 must have been open.
--
How difficult would it be to port Mozilla to the dreamcast? It would be useful I think for these users to have a standards compliant web browser that works similar to those on a PC. If the porting of Mozilla was done through WinCE we'd have to pay license fees wouldn't we? What about the other options? Do you have to pay fees to Sega for distributing dreamcast software? Would Sega be interested in helping the Mozilla project to get a decent web browser on their platform?
--
Yeah, that's because Netscape put the Instant messenger there. This is all third party stuff. If Netscape does try to integrate IM with Netscape and doesn't provide an option to download a version without it you can be sure that someone will compile browser only versions and make them available for download, anyway I guess as you read Slashdot typing ./configure, make, etc isn't too difficult anyway.
Netscape's attitude has had to change for the 5.0 release, they now have to do everything in the open or someone will just bypass them by releasing their own Mozilla based browser.
--