Who cares if Napster wins or loses? What's going to happen as napster-like software becomes more common with the advent of high-bandwidth connections?
In the distant future, (heh) when everybody in a technologically-advanced location is able to transfer gigabytes of data across the country in a moment and for a minimal cost, what will the Recording industries do then?
I predict that there will soon come a true "Information Age," where information will be so easy and inexpensive to propagate, that there will be absolutely no way to stop its dissemmination.
With the wide availability of fast internet connections, the feasability of wide-area shared data repositories are becoming (and will become) quite commonplace... right? So what happens when Big Evil Corporation can no longer police or control the dissemination of its electronic information?
All computer-based information, be it somebody's "art" (i.e. music) or somebody's hard work and talent (i.e. software) is nothing more than a string of 1's and 0's, that can be duplicated and redistributed at a low (and, in my hypothetical rant, at an eventual zero) cost. Encrypted or not, built with a pop-up liscence, whatever... it still boils down to easily-replicable 1s and 0s.
So, in the future, maybe businesses and people who deal in electronic information be forced to assume that once their particular information, product, or artwork has been put into an electronic form, that product is available to anybody at nearly zero cost.
Then the question becomes, how would they make money? My opinion is that the music artist would make money with live performances, or with music released to television or radio distributions before they release it in a recorded media format. In the case of software, people would be paid based on the speed at which they could produce somehting, or people would be paid to fill a software void that hadn't been filled yet. We already see an example of the possible business model with open-source software.
Overall, I think we're moving into an age where information becomes plentiful and not "worth" anything; rather: time, service, and conveinience become the main things that draw the consumer dollar. Like water. For the most part, water is free. You can walk down to the pool and get some. But people still buy packaged water, and people pay a fee to have it pumped from a central location into their homes. People who live in an area where water is scarce might pay a high price for the same water that is freely available to somebody who lives by a lake and owns a well. It would be a complete upheaval compared to the way we do things now, but that's one possible way I see it happening.
And I suspect that when that day comes, there'll have to be a great change for the RIAA, et. al.
Just musing. I'd be very interested in the opinions of the more well-informed and econmically-savvy than I. Apologies for my spelling.
If they put Bruce Campbell in to replace Mulder... damn. I might have to re-subscribe to cable and start watching X-Files again.
I swore off the series many seasons ago, when it got too excruciatingly boring and monotonous for me to give it any attention.
How to write your own X-files episode: 1. Agents discover paranormal activity 2. Agents enter life-threateaning situation due to said paranormal activity 3. Agents miraculously escape with their lives and nearly prove existence of paranormal activity 4. MiB's show up and erase all record of said paranormal activity ever ocurring. 5. Rinse, repeat. Make sure in the next episode that Agents act like last week's paranormal activity never happened.
Hey, I'd tack on the "flamebait" moderation myself, if I hadn't posted. Darn.
If BC dosen't get the part... He should go for second-best (or better, depending on your point of view) and do an X-Files parody series.
I come to slashdot to get informed without the alarmist attitude and the manufactured headlines.
"Could this be the end of the internet?" Bah. How about, "Companies improving methods to limit bandwidth" or something.
Slashdot: save that headline for a relavant story, guys. You're sounding too much like the mass-media built-to-sell-more-copies drivel that abounds today. Write about stuff that might be interesting to geeks, and be accurate. That's all I want. I'll turn your pages and click your banners for that. Please don't try to play the creative-headline game. Or the tease-buzzword game.
yeah, yeah, moderate me down. But you know you feel the same way.:-P
Unfortunately, I don't understand business politics... but what difference does it make?
Can't the 2 Microsoft companies still cooperate to produce, if they so desired, the exact same (half-assed, market-oriented) products that they have been all along? Does "breaking up a company" even mean the employees have to swap cubicles? I don't see how.
Looking foreward to opinions posted to this article from the more business-savvy/.'ers.
I see lots of people here arguing about why one should or should not be upset that video format X, developed by big commercial company Y, available for $n.nn per play, is not available or is difficult to make work on platform Z.
What the world needs is for another "standard" to come along that is able to be implemented by anybody who can read an algorythm and write some C. Example: MP3. Sure, it was developed by an organization that was originally charging a chunk of change to get the encoding program (remember l3enc?)... but today we have a miryad of mp3 decoders for every platform, right? And commerical companies looking to make a few bucks by exploiting the latest technology rage will be able to do it using their own embraced-and-extended versions of the open format. (P.S. Don't ever, ever buy a Lyra.)
How did that happen? Going from freihofer R&D to Winamp/XMMS for free? This is where my bottle o' clue runs out. I'm dont know how to get from point A to point B on this... but there has to be a way to do it, right?
Yes, you're right, and so are the other 2/.'ers who replied to my post.
After I went to work and had to deal with the aftereffects of ILOVEYOU on my coworkers' computers, I found Slashdot to be a very useful resource. I was suprised nobody flamed me:)
So next time I'll be sure to have some tea before complaining about a story.
I wonder how possible it would be to develop a rudamentary javascript compression function which maps extended ascii characters to repeated chunks of HTML code... or better yet, maps ascii to formulas which could generate changing content.
Pipe dream: Implementing wavelet compression using javascript and ascii. Whoo.
I stopped watching the X-Files after the 6th episode. (Yes, it took me that long.)
What does everybody find so intreguing about that stupid series? The believing character and the nonbelieveing character perpetually stumbling across mysterious phenomenon X, only to lose all trace of it by the end of the show, neither believer nor nonbeliever changed in the least.
Rob, add an option so I can turn OFF stories about X-Files.
Egad. Don't kill your 13-year-old's interest in scifi forever! Foundation is one of the most boring, political series I've ever tried to read. Go for some better (or simply, more lightweight) stuff like _Positronic_Man_... that's the (awesome, lighthearted) book that the Robin Williams movie "Bicentennial Man" was based off of. I've never seen the movie, but the book is very good, I read it many times over.
The opencontent site can probably provide a good solution for people looking for a GPL-style liscense for written works. I don't know RMS's opinion on it, but it has a well-built site with lots of information.
I think the GPL is icky when people attempt to apply it to written works; one deals with software and software terminology like "the source to this program," it becomes a messy kludge when people attempt to apply the GPL. Leaves many areas open for interpretation. I wouldn't trust my written works out there without an appropriately-worded license. (that is, if i had any "written works" to begin with;)
How many people will see this article two days from now, after it has faded into the archives of "old slashdot news"? I suspect that there will be a bombardment of comments to the copyright office today that will trickle off as we near the deadline.
I propose that an ad banner should be created, pointing to a central source for advocacy, (http://www.opendvd.org maybe?)... Containing by then a copy of this story, an advocacy mini-howto, and a link to the copyright office comment box. If this ad were to run on the Andover network of sites (and maybe also be picked up by traffic-heavy sites with opendvd-friendly admins as well... linux.com?), we might get more thurough feedback on this important issue, even after the slashdot effect dies away.
What do you think?
-Mike
This has probably been said...
on
Free Be
·
· Score: 1
I've been wanting to try BeOS for a while... but I've had no great "need" to. Now that it will be offered for free, I'll probably download it and give it a shot, to see, for myself, what kind of advantages it has over my current operating system choices.
Which means, that if I see that it will benefit me at work, I'll have the company order it (them being a company and all,)... which adds one more user to BeOS's current group.
I'm sure there's more out there in the same situation as I, so I can imagine that this will definitely benefit BeOS.
Yes, I've used emacs, and yes, i do realize why the spec recommends that keys be passed to the applications. It's because many traditional apps use many keyboard commands, leaving little for the window manager to safely "default" to without overriding the bindings of whatever app the user is using.
I understand that forcing an alt+something binding to a menu option is suboptimal when using emacs. My point is: If emacs had developed in an environment where the alt+ binding already existed, the emacs bindings would have grown up differently. And nobody would have a problem with a uniform menu-control binding for the window manager. If Microsoft had always been the developer of our X and window manager, there would probably be an edict in place of strict, non-overridable conformity to a UI. And many Emacs bindings, or at least the methodology behind assigning keybindings would be similar, if not the same, to any other app developed in the same environment. VI, gvim, gedit, anything, becase all those apps would have grown up in the same "ALT key always opens a menu" environment. I'm not advocating this hypothetical situation, but it would eliminate my issue with the prevention of certain specific keyboard and mouse customizations under X.
I'm not saying i'd prefer a strict, closed standard that could not be overridden. I would prefer the ability to easliy customize. Nor am I making a statement on the value of emacs or the way emacs' default keybindings are set up. (I personally don't like them, and I know i cna change them, but that's a whole 'noter point on which to start a flamewar altogether.)
I do agree that there are many kids who jump into their X+wm and don't know where to go to change things, or don't understand which controls which. This is why I made my rather vague statement about berlin.
I hope berlin, or maybe the next release from the Xfree86 project, eventually becomes as easily customizable as your given window manager, so I could set up my X(/berlin/whatever) and wm combo to allow:
uniformity in copy and paste operations in as many applicatoins as possible, employing the keyboard, not just the mouse. (an X Server issue) and
keybindings to allow keyboard management (raise, lower, size, move, hide) (for me, similar to that of Windows, for others, customizable to whatever they want) (A WM issue)
It seems every X11 window managers' design heavily incorporates the mouse as a necessary tool for window management. I even get this impression from reading snippets of POSIX specs. Here's a (very botched) paraphrase, or at least, the impression I got when learning about POSIX window manager recommendations:
"The window manager should not intercept any key bindings... they should all be passed to the application and the mouse should be used for windowing."
Anyway, I have, since I first booted linux and fired up X, always thought this was STUPID. The one thing that I see Windows having over Mac OS or linux window managers was the common, global key-mapping that comes from a tidbit of smart thinking at one point in the design (or stealing somebody elses' idea) and then the subsequent forcing of all the applications that run within your operating environment to adopt "similar" keybindings and look-and-feels.
I took key bindings for granted in Windows. Say, in the middle of anything else, I suddenly had the urge for some Slashdot in a maximized explorer window.
Ctrl-Esc R iexplore [enter] [F4] www.slashdot.org [enter] Alt-[SPACE] x Done. Or maybe size it a bit and move it some. Alt-[SPACE] S (arrow keys) [Enter]. And the cordless mouse is still stuck somewhere in the couch cushions with dead batteries.
Before I figured out that there were window managers that supported something other than focus-follows-mouse, I almost developed tennis elbow, slapping that rat around to keep my focus where i wanted it, and the windows raised where I wanted them. very frustrating.
I moved to BlackBox, because it was nice and speedy. But I still had no pop-up root menu on the keyboard. (I kept telling myself I'd learn C++ and contribute a patch)
later I moved to Windowmaker, and found out why people swear by that. Its neat, theme-able, and nicely configurable. But something about it still irked me. Maybe I preferred the simplicity of BB.
three days ago, i slapped Sawmill on my machine and I think I've found a new love. It's all configurable in the same way emacs and scwm are, very modular, and it looks all pretty, very theme-able too. Not too bad in terms of speed, either. It's not blackbox (I loved BB's responsiveness) but it works well, and you can BIND stuff. With a wussy GUI configuration editor, even! If you want. wow.
So now i have a nice pretty desktop, that plays nice with gnome (even though I don't use gnome much), yet is not quite as hungry as Enlightenment or KDE, and supports lispy customizations (I don't know it well enough to code yet, but i can see the ability of the program to expand). I've got alt-space mapped to the window controls, ctrl-esc mapped to a popup app list, and f12 mapped to the root menu. So now i can, once again, sit on the couch across the room with the cordless 'board and have nearly-full control over my work environment. All I have to do is figure out how to configure it to be able to size the windows with the keys. That and implement selection, copy, and paste using shift and arrow keys.:-P
Maybe the whole system is flawed and maybe Berlin will work more to my liking. Man, i wish i already knew how to code. Then i'd just go FIX all this stuff, instead of bitching about it, eh?;) (Helping berlin or any other OSS project to completion would be hella cool too.)
Good luck, jacobian, in your search for the "right" configuration.
I am not a C++ coder. Yet. And I know I'm totally oversimplifying the situation in my quesiton. With that in mind, maybe someone more enlightened than I could answer me this: Could it be possible for an industrious group of coders to grab the mozilla layout engine and wrap a simplistic UI around it, effectively creating what I see many people here asking for?... A lightweight-but-functional browser-only browser, minus all the crap?
I used to be a big fan of the Mozilla project, but every screenshot that I see, I end up saying, "What is that mess over in that sidebar there? I don't want that. Can't they just finish the friggin renderer?"
Slashdot Mirror
Who cares if Napster wins or loses? What's going to happen as napster-like software becomes more common with the advent of high-bandwidth connections?
In the distant future, (heh) when everybody in a technologically-advanced location is able to transfer gigabytes of data across the country in a moment and for a minimal cost, what will the Recording industries do then?
I predict that there will soon come a true "Information Age," where information will be so easy and inexpensive to propagate, that there will be absolutely no way to stop its dissemmination.
With the wide availability of fast internet connections, the feasability of wide-area shared data repositories are becoming (and will become) quite commonplace... right? So what happens when Big Evil Corporation can no longer police or control the dissemination of its electronic information?
All computer-based information, be it somebody's "art" (i.e. music) or somebody's hard work and talent (i.e. software) is nothing more than a string of 1's and 0's, that can be duplicated and redistributed at a low (and, in my hypothetical rant, at an eventual zero) cost. Encrypted or not, built with a pop-up liscence, whatever... it still boils down to easily-replicable 1s and 0s.
So, in the future, maybe businesses and people who deal in electronic information be forced to assume that once their particular information, product, or artwork has been put into an electronic form, that product is available to anybody at nearly zero cost.
Then the question becomes, how would they make money? My opinion is that the music artist would make money with live performances, or with music released to television or radio distributions before they release it in a recorded media format. In the case of software, people would be paid based on the speed at which they could produce somehting, or people would be paid to fill a software void that hadn't been filled yet. We already see an example of the possible business model with open-source software.
Overall, I think we're moving into an age where information becomes plentiful and not "worth" anything; rather: time, service, and conveinience become the main things that draw the consumer dollar. Like water. For the most part, water is free. You can walk down to the pool and get some. But people still buy packaged water, and people pay a fee to have it pumped from a central location into their homes. People who live in an area where water is scarce might pay a high price for the same water that is freely available to somebody who lives by a lake and owns a well. It would be a complete upheaval compared to the way we do things now, but that's one possible way I see it happening.
And I suspect that when that day comes, there'll have to be a great change for the RIAA, et. al.
Just musing. I'd be very interested in the opinions of the more well-informed and econmically-savvy than I. Apologies for my spelling.
-Mikey
If they put Bruce Campbell in to replace Mulder... damn. I might have to re-subscribe to cable and start watching X-Files again.
I swore off the series many seasons ago, when it got too excruciatingly boring and monotonous for me to give it any attention.
How to write your own X-files episode:
1. Agents discover paranormal activity
2. Agents enter life-threateaning situation due to said paranormal activity
3. Agents miraculously escape with their lives and nearly prove existence of paranormal activity
4. MiB's show up and erase all record of said paranormal activity ever ocurring.
5. Rinse, repeat. Make sure in the next episode that Agents act like last week's paranormal activity never happened.
Hey, I'd tack on the "flamebait" moderation myself, if I hadn't posted. Darn.
If BC dosen't get the part... He should go for second-best (or better, depending on your point of view) and do an X-Files parody series.
I come to slashdot to get informed without the alarmist attitude and the manufactured headlines.
:-P
"Could this be the end of the internet?" Bah.
How about, "Companies improving methods to limit bandwidth" or something.
Slashdot: save that headline for a relavant story, guys. You're sounding too much like the mass-media built-to-sell-more-copies drivel that abounds today. Write about stuff that might be interesting to geeks, and be accurate. That's all I want. I'll turn your pages and click your banners for that. Please don't try to play the creative-headline game. Or the tease-buzzword game.
yeah, yeah, moderate me down. But you know you feel the same way.
So now what?
/.'ers.
Unfortunately, I don't understand business politics... but what difference does it make?
Can't the 2 Microsoft companies still cooperate to produce, if they so desired, the exact same (half-assed, market-oriented) products that they have been all along? Does "breaking up a company" even mean the employees have to swap cubicles? I don't see how.
Looking foreward to opinions posted to this article from the more business-savvy
-Mikey
I see lots of people here arguing about why one should or should not be upset that video format X, developed by big commercial company Y, available for $n.nn per play, is not available or is difficult to make work on platform Z.
... but today we have a miryad of mp3 decoders for every platform, right? And commerical companies looking to make a few bucks by exploiting the latest technology rage will be able to do it using their own embraced-and-extended versions of the open format. (P.S. Don't ever, ever buy a Lyra.)
What the world needs is for another "standard" to come along that is able to be implemented by anybody who can read an algorythm and write some C. Example: MP3. Sure, it was developed by an organization that was originally charging a chunk of change to get the encoding program (remember l3enc?)
How did that happen? Going from freihofer R&D to Winamp/XMMS for free? This is where my bottle o' clue runs out. I'm dont know how to get from point A to point B on this... but there has to be a way to do it, right?
Yes, you're right, and so are the other 2 /.'ers who replied to my post.
:)
After I went to work and had to deal with the aftereffects of ILOVEYOU on my coworkers' computers, I found Slashdot to be a very useful resource. I was suprised nobody flamed me
So next time I'll be sure to have some tea before complaining about a story.
Thanks, and take care,
Mike
because I like playing with new hardware (esp. keyboards, since I am a keyboard nut),
Eh?
Here's some links that may interest you.
http://www.techstyle-com.com/thekeyboar ds.htm and http://www.techarts.com/produc ts/keyboards/default.htm.
... I prefer the second link, both because the company lives right here in my hometown and the keys themselves are hand-carved cherry wood.
Hmm. So you can use javascript and writeln().
I wonder how possible it would be to develop a rudamentary javascript compression function which maps extended ascii characters to repeated chunks of HTML code... or better yet, maps ascii to formulas which could generate changing content.
Pipe dream: Implementing wavelet compression using javascript and ascii. Whoo.
I stopped watching the X-Files after the 6th episode. (Yes, it took me that long.)
What does everybody find so intreguing about that stupid series? The believing character and the nonbelieveing character perpetually stumbling across mysterious phenomenon X, only to lose all trace of it by the end of the show, neither believer nor nonbeliever changed in the least.
Rob, add an option so I can turn OFF stories about X-Files.
This is a troll, but...
Egad. Don't kill your 13-year-old's interest in scifi forever! Foundation is one of the most boring, political series I've ever tried to read. Go for some better (or simply, more lightweight) stuff like _Positronic_Man_... that's the (awesome, lighthearted) book that the Robin Williams movie "Bicentennial Man" was based off of. I've never seen the movie, but the book is very good, I read it many times over.
http://www.opencontent.org
The opencontent site can probably provide a good solution for people looking for a GPL-style liscense for written works. I don't know RMS's opinion on it, but it has a well-built site with lots of information.
I think the GPL is icky when people attempt to apply it to written works; one deals with software and software terminology like "the source to this program," it becomes a messy kludge when people attempt to apply the GPL. Leaves many areas open for interpretation. I wouldn't trust my written works out there without an appropriately-worded license. (that is, if i had any "written works" to begin with ;)
How many people will see this article two days from now, after it has faded into the archives of "old slashdot news"? I suspect that there will be a bombardment of comments to the copyright office today that will trickle off as we near the deadline.
I propose that an ad banner should be created, pointing to a central source for advocacy, (http://www.opendvd.org maybe?) ... Containing by then a copy of this story, an advocacy mini-howto, and a link to the copyright office comment box. If this ad were to run on the Andover network of sites (and maybe also be picked up by traffic-heavy sites with opendvd-friendly admins as well... linux.com?), we might get more thurough feedback on this important issue, even after the slashdot effect dies away.
What do you think?
-Mike
I've been wanting to try BeOS for a while... but I've had no great "need" to. Now that it will be offered for free, I'll probably download it and give it a shot, to see, for myself, what kind of advantages it has over my current operating system choices.
... which adds one more user to BeOS's current group.
Which means, that if I see that it will benefit me at work, I'll have the company order it (them being a company and all,)
I'm sure there's more out there in the same situation as I, so I can imagine that this will definitely benefit BeOS.
to power down an atx power supply when the motherboard is locked, hold the power button in for 5 seconds.
Yes, I've used emacs, and yes, i do realize why the spec recommends that keys be passed to the applications. It's because many traditional apps use many keyboard commands, leaving little for the window manager to safely "default" to without overriding the bindings of whatever app the user is using.
I understand that forcing an alt+something binding to a menu option is suboptimal when using emacs. My point is: If emacs had developed in an environment where the alt+ binding already existed, the emacs bindings would have grown up differently. And nobody would have a problem with a uniform menu-control binding for the window manager. If Microsoft had always been the developer of our X and window manager, there would probably be an edict in place of strict, non-overridable conformity to a UI. And many Emacs bindings, or at least the methodology behind assigning keybindings would be similar, if not the same, to any other app developed in the same environment. VI, gvim, gedit, anything, becase all those apps would have grown up in the same "ALT key always opens a menu" environment. I'm not advocating this hypothetical situation, but it would eliminate my issue with the prevention of certain specific keyboard and mouse customizations under X.
I'm not saying i'd prefer a strict, closed standard that could not be overridden. I would prefer the ability to easliy customize. Nor am I making a statement on the value of emacs or the way emacs' default keybindings are set up. (I personally don't like them, and I know i cna change them, but that's a whole 'noter point on which to start a flamewar altogether.)
I do agree that there are many kids who jump into their X+wm and don't know where to go to change things, or don't understand which controls which. This is why I made my rather vague statement about berlin.
I hope berlin, or maybe the next release from the Xfree86 project, eventually becomes as easily customizable as your given window manager, so I could set up my X(/berlin/whatever) and wm combo to allow:
It seems every X11 window managers' design heavily incorporates the mouse as a necessary tool for window management. I even get this impression from reading snippets of POSIX specs. Here's a (very botched) paraphrase, or at least, the impression I got when learning about POSIX window manager recommendations:
"The window manager should not intercept any key bindings... they should all be passed to the application and the mouse should be used for windowing."
Anyway, I have, since I first booted linux and fired up X, always thought this was STUPID. The one thing that I see Windows having over Mac OS or linux window managers was the common, global key-mapping that comes from a tidbit of smart thinking at one point in the design (or stealing somebody elses' idea) and then the subsequent forcing of all the applications that run within your operating environment to adopt "similar" keybindings and look-and-feels.
I took key bindings for granted in Windows. Say, in the middle of anything else, I suddenly had the urge for some Slashdot in a maximized explorer window.
Ctrl-Esc R iexplore [enter] [F4] www.slashdot.org [enter] Alt-[SPACE] x Done. Or maybe size it a bit and move it some. Alt-[SPACE] S (arrow keys) [Enter]. And the cordless mouse is still stuck somewhere in the couch cushions with dead batteries.
Before I figured out that there were window managers that supported something other than focus-follows-mouse, I almost developed tennis elbow, slapping that rat around to keep my focus where i wanted it, and the windows raised where I wanted them. very frustrating.
I moved to BlackBox, because it was nice and speedy. But I still had no pop-up root menu on the keyboard. (I kept telling myself I'd learn C++ and contribute a patch)
later I moved to Windowmaker, and found out why people swear by that. Its neat, theme-able, and nicely configurable. But something about it still irked me. Maybe I preferred the simplicity of BB.
three days ago, i slapped Sawmill on my machine and I think I've found a new love. It's all configurable in the same way emacs and scwm are, very modular, and it looks all pretty, very theme-able too. Not too bad in terms of speed, either. It's not blackbox (I loved BB's responsiveness) but it works well, and you can BIND stuff. With a wussy GUI configuration editor, even! If you want. wow.
So now i have a nice pretty desktop, that plays nice with gnome (even though I don't use gnome much), yet is not quite as hungry as Enlightenment or KDE, and supports lispy customizations (I don't know it well enough to code yet, but i can see the ability of the program to expand). I've got alt-space mapped to the window controls, ctrl-esc mapped to a popup app list, and f12 mapped to the root menu. So now i can, once again, sit on the couch across the room with the cordless 'board and have nearly-full control over my work environment. All I have to do is figure out how to configure it to be able to size the windows with the keys. That and implement selection, copy, and paste using shift and arrow keys. :-P
Maybe the whole system is flawed and maybe Berlin will work more to my liking. Man, i wish i already knew how to code. Then i'd just go FIX all this stuff, instead of bitching about it, eh? ;) (Helping berlin or any other OSS project to completion would be hella cool too.)
Good luck, jacobian, in your search for the "right" configuration.
I am not a C++ coder. Yet. And I know I'm totally oversimplifying the situation in my quesiton. With that in mind, maybe someone more enlightened than I could answer me this: Could it be possible for an industrious group of coders to grab the mozilla layout engine and wrap a simplistic UI around it, effectively creating what I see many people here asking for? ... A lightweight-but-functional browser-only browser, minus all the crap?
I used to be a big fan of the Mozilla project, but every screenshot that I see, I end up saying, "What is that mess over in that sidebar there? I don't want that. Can't they just finish the friggin renderer?"