Think a little harder. Try compatability with more websites than any other browser.
Think a little hard still. It's not that IE is more compatible with websites. It's the other way around. Because IE has had 90% or more usage share for years, web developers must ensure their websites are compatible with IE. Many don't ensure they're compatible with other browsers. That's why many websites tend to work better in IE.
He was asserting that what matters was the "whole Mozilla Project", though -- I was trying to justify that the Suite is soon not really going to be a part of that.
Like your other post, this one is also not entirely accurate. Although the version of the Suite based on Gecko 1.8 will not be a Mozilla product, it is a project hosted by the Mozilla Foundation, similar to the Camino project. Additionally, Mozilla 1.7.x will continue to be a supported Mozilla product.
OEMs distributing OOo is unlikely, as they're already distributing trial versions of MS Office on their systems. Does anyone know how much OEMs have to pay per system for the trial version? Would it really be worth it to ship OOo instead?
Yes, Firefox growth is declining somewhat. If you graph the four numbers given for Firefox's usage share against the four dates, the last three data points lie very nearly along a line, and the first data point lies clearly below that line. That shows that the growth from Dec. 3, 2004 to Feb. 18, 2005 was nearly linear and approximately 0.65 points of usage share per month. The growth from Nov. 5, 2004 to Dec. 3, 2004 was faster, but that's probably because that period includes the first few weeks after Firefox 1.0 was released.
If the linear growth rate holds for 7 months after the last data point, that would mean Firefox usage share will reach 10% in September 2005. If Firefox's growth continues to slow, that goal will be reached later. Firefox's growth would have to slow dramatically for Firefox never to reach the 10% goal. I doubt Firefox's usage will drop or level off soon, as your post implies.
And with enough usage share, more adware and spyware makers will specifically target Firefox, too. That's not necessarily all bad, however, since that will drive more users to Opera and Safari, resulting in a more diverse browser market. That would mean more competition and better features in all browsers, and more web sites would follow the standards so they can work in all these newly popular browsers.
While you do have a point, the problem with IE having so much usage share is that Microsoft has no reason to bring IE up to the level of standards support that other browsers have. That leads to web developers needing to bend over backwards making their sites work in IE, and they can't use some of the fancy features the other browsers have.
As IE loses usage share, MS will be more pressured to get their act together and support more standards, and that will mean web developers will be able to develop better sites more easily. And in the end, the ones who benefit from the better sites are the end users, including IE users.
There is a group of people who are planning to fork the code, and continue work on it
That's not entirely accurate. There is a group of people who will continue working on the code, but there are no plans to create a fork. That way, the Suite developed by the group will continue to benefit from all the Gecko improvements and bug fixes that Firefox does.
Try this tip shamelessly stolen from adot's notblog (March 4, 2005 entry):
To block pop-ups from plugins, open your Firefox 1.0 or 1.0.1 browser, type about:config in the address field. Right-click in the resulting config page somewhere and select New -> Interger. Type privacy.popups.disable_from_plugins in the resulting dialog, hit OK, type 2 in the next dialog and you're all set.
This pref can actually take three values:
0: open allowed
1: the opened windows are treated as popups, but they're allowed to open (we limit the number of these types of popups)
2: the window is a popup, block it
Would you be complaining if I wrote a page that only worked in mozilla?
Yes. You should in general write what will work according to the standards rather than what happens to work in the popular browsers at the moment. That will ensure your pages will continue to work in future browsers.
Realistically, you do need to sometimes rely on features that aren't in the standards. But when you do that, you want to stick with using those non-standard features in a way that works in several popular browsers, again so that it will stand a good chance on continuing to work in future browsers.
If you build a website that works in only one browser at the time you build it, you're more than likely going to have to rewrite parts of it later. And that generally ends up costing more money than doing it right in the first place.
So you figured out on your own that Java isn't good for short one-off programs, scripting, or rapid application development? Man, you are one mental giant!;-)
The fact that the roadmap mentions Gecko 1.8 and doesn't mention Mozilla 1.8 anywhere isn't enough of a clue? And the fact that the Mozilla Application Suite - Transition Plan explictly states that there will be no Mozilla 1.8 release is not enough of a hint for you?
There's a difference between continuing the cutting edge nightly builds and starting to single out some and refer to some of them as alphas and eventually betas.
Yes, there is a difference. Only about 100 users download each of the nightlies. They need to release alphas and betas every 5-6 weeks to attract the many thousands of users they need to test the recent changes to the code. Without the releases, the widespread testing of Gecko would not get done and bugs would pile up.
So I ask you again, perhaps more accurately this time, should the changes to the Gecko trunk, which includes changes since the 1.7 branch was created in April 2004 that have not ever been in Mozilla 1.7.x or Firefox 0.x or 1.0.x, not been tested thoroughly because singling Suite builds out would imply a final release of the Suite?
Actually, the usage is not flattening. The growth curve used to be exponential, and now it is nearly linear. That's a slowdown in the growth, but the number of new users the browsers are attacting per month has been nearly constant since around the time Firefox 1.0 was released.
Well, Mr AC, it's because the current roadmap that is on the Mozilla site today discusses the development and release process for 1.8 and 1.9.
Yes, the current plan is to release Gecko 1.8 and 1.9 at the times given in the roadmap. Note this is the Gecko platform, which is not to be confused with the Mozilla Suite product, aka Seamonkey.
I think I figured it out. His secretary emailed me that Knuth gave his response and she was supposed to mail it to me, and she asked for my address. I was beginning to think Knuth has some mysterious locating powers!
Anyway, you can see that Knuth really hasn't given up email entirely -- he just does it by proxy so he's not constantly interrupted.
Re:In a twist of fate, Microsoft announces Visual
on
Donald Knuth On NPR
·
· Score: 1
Not only that. He redid the assembly language as MMIX, with revolutionary 64-bit instructions not found in any existing processor. Then he went on to write the assembler and simulator so we could write and execute MMIX code. As if that weren't enough, he went on to write a configurable pipelined meta-simulator to experiment with how instructions could be executed simulanteously in a hardware implementation.
You can still send him an email. His secretary prints it out on a laser printer, and Knuth stops by and picks it up and reads it. If it's worthy of a response, he writes on the paper with what looks to be a mechanical pencil and snail mails it back.
Looking at his response to my email I sent him in 1999, I'm suddenly stuck with a mystery. How did he get my address? I don't see it anywhere on the email I sent him!
Slashdot Mirror
Also HP.
OEMs distributing OOo is unlikely, as they're already distributing trial versions of MS Office on their systems. Does anyone know how much OEMs have to pay per system for the trial version? Would it really be worth it to ship OOo instead?
If the linear growth rate holds for 7 months after the last data point, that would mean Firefox usage share will reach 10% in September 2005. If Firefox's growth continues to slow, that goal will be reached later. Firefox's growth would have to slow dramatically for Firefox never to reach the 10% goal. I doubt Firefox's usage will drop or level off soon, as your post implies.
And with enough usage share, more adware and spyware makers will specifically target Firefox, too. That's not necessarily all bad, however, since that will drive more users to Opera and Safari, resulting in a more diverse browser market. That would mean more competition and better features in all browsers, and more web sites would follow the standards so they can work in all these newly popular browsers.
As IE loses usage share, MS will be more pressured to get their act together and support more standards, and that will mean web developers will be able to develop better sites more easily. And in the end, the ones who benefit from the better sites are the end users, including IE users.
To block pop-ups from plugins, open your Firefox 1.0 or 1.0.1 browser, type about:config in the address field. Right-click in the resulting config page somewhere and select New -> Interger. Type privacy.popups.disable_from_plugins in the resulting dialog, hit OK, type 2 in the next dialog and you're all set.
This pref can actually take three values:
0: open allowed
1: the opened windows are treated as popups, but they're allowed to open (we limit the number of these types of popups)
2: the window is a popup, block it
Realistically, you do need to sometimes rely on features that aren't in the standards. But when you do that, you want to stick with using those non-standard features in a way that works in several popular browsers, again so that it will stand a good chance on continuing to work in future browsers.
If you build a website that works in only one browser at the time you build it, you're more than likely going to have to rewrite parts of it later. And that generally ends up costing more money than doing it right in the first place.
I thought the speed issue was largely addressed, and now the main issue is it's a memory hog.
So you figured out on your own that Java isn't good for short one-off programs, scripting, or rapid application development? Man, you are one mental giant! ;-)
The fact that the roadmap mentions Gecko 1.8 and doesn't mention Mozilla 1.8 anywhere isn't enough of a clue? And the fact that the Mozilla Application Suite - Transition Plan explictly states that there will be no Mozilla 1.8 release is not enough of a hint for you?
So I ask you again, perhaps more accurately this time, should the changes to the Gecko trunk, which includes changes since the 1.7 branch was created in April 2004 that have not ever been in Mozilla 1.7.x or Firefox 0.x or 1.0.x, not been tested thoroughly because singling Suite builds out would imply a final release of the Suite?
There's Rincon Point in California. It's a favorite among local surfers. Get it?
I think that's what Xul Runner is all about. It includes not only Gecko, but other core technologies as well, such as networking, XUL, SVG, etc.
Actually, the usage is not flattening. The growth curve used to be exponential, and now it is nearly linear. That's a slowdown in the growth, but the number of new users the browsers are attacting per month has been nearly constant since around the time Firefox 1.0 was released.
So you're saying the past year's changes to Gecko on the trunk should have gone completely untested until now?
Anyway, you can see that Knuth really hasn't given up email entirely -- he just does it by proxy so he's not constantly interrupted.
Not only that. He redid the assembly language as MMIX, with revolutionary 64-bit instructions not found in any existing processor. Then he went on to write the assembler and simulator so we could write and execute MMIX code. As if that weren't enough, he went on to write a configurable pipelined meta-simulator to experiment with how instructions could be executed simulanteously in a hardware implementation.
Well, that's why Knuth says God is a mystery -- there isn't any proof. If there were a proof, he'd understand it and then not think about it any more.
Looking at his response to my email I sent him in 1999, I'm suddenly stuck with a mystery. How did he get my address? I don't see it anywhere on the email I sent him!
Actually, the latest version of IE is not available for Windows 2000. You need Windows XP to get the pop-up blocker and other enhancements.