If he had worked with the SeaMonkey team to begin with to change buttons and such, we could both have our way
If..Could.. Not good enough. If you're annoyed by this percieved ego trip, I hope Seamonkey gives you what you want. I would not have Seamonkey discontinued myself, either. More Gecko-based browsers = potentially less cross-browser coding nightmares; if someone uses Firefox or Seamonkey, then they may not be using IE/Win, IE/Mac, or Opera. (nothing personal against Opera).
However am I seriously to believe, for one second, the Mozilla Project would have condescended to take this feedback, had it been offered in a way that would please the likes of you more?
Not sure why I wasn't around to give it a hug, or as you say, jump up and down about usability, but I can't help but think that Mozilla had a good run, At The Time.
Pedants can chip in here, but after the ghastly NS4 release and the various organisational restructuring that ensued, Mozilla was _the_ leet project, in fact I seem to remember back then they were using the Seamonkey word. Except the code was so awful that they had to skip version 5, and when version 6 came out, it offered little that was different, as far as the interface goes, to NS4. The interface is at least as important as the browser working properly and as you rightly point out, nasty remote exploits ideally belong nowhere in any of the Foundation's releases.
So, software engineers and the like will have some warm fuzzy memories about all of those Mozilla releases, and the political significance of what that meant - the re-birth of something shoddy and proprietary (NS4) into something open-source. But there were people like me 'jumping up and down about usability' back then. They weren't listened to, they were dismissed and explained away. I can't help but feel that I as a user am profiting from this ego trip, in the form of a new default browser which pleases me more than IE.
I seriously would love to see someone telling the end-users that Firefox is evil because the lead developer went on an ego trip, and that instead, they should use this, ahem, rather fully-featured alternative called Mozilla (but it's going to be Seamonkey soon..), and that whether they like Firefox or not, really clever people won't be using it because really clever people don't think the ends justified the means.
You weren't paying attention; I didn't actually want to know what the ego trip is. The use of the term seemed a little reactionary in reference to something I think is simply A Good Thing. End users won't give a seamonkey about the politics, they won't grieve for Mozilla.
I fired both of them up (1.0.6 and 1.7.11) navigated to Google and did a search and Firefox actually takes up a bit more memory...
You whinge about Firefox taking up more memory, and I shall praise it for having the buttons where I want them.
So maybe it looks nicer and has the buttons where you want them Yes. Yes it does. Glad to see we share some things in common.
FYI the 'ugly bloat' I referred to was based on two aspects;
- Mozilla is ugly. It's ugly with its blue skin, it's ugly with its classic skin, and when I have to look on the net for skin #3, sorry, you lost me. (because I'm attempting to advocate for ordinary non-geek users, you see). - Mozilla is overkill for most non-geek users, who if they considered an alternative at all, are seeking only a different browser to re-learn, to begin with. People are naturally very precious about their email, and such non-geeks who are on the edge of breaking from the default Windows setup, would not seek to conquer Rome in a day by adding a new email client to the transition. - Hence bloat to me is more a case of having unnecessary software installed, and it would seem to me that if Seamonkey ever finds its way onto the system of the non-geek I described, it could only be after another friendlier browser such as Firefox has whetted their appetite.
it caused the Mozilla team to screw up what I thought was a pretty good software engineering process
You are still not listening. You are not They. They are not You. 'They', shallow as they may seem to You, are unencumbered by any consideration 'good software engineering process.' A simple installation experience and a soft learning curve is more the kind of thing They care about.
FireFox only solved a UI design problem by making Mozilla look like a Windows app.
On Windows. And it looks like a GTK app on GNOME (OK it uses GTK widgets in KDE, but this would happen with any other GTK app anyway.) And for the most part, it looks like an OS/X app on OS/X.
It broke just about everything else that was good about Mozilla.
For You. 'They', the non-geek end-user, were barely ever interested in it in the first place. Presumably you might be a software engineer, and clearly you seem to be the target audience for Seamonkey.
while I can understand that The Kitchen Sink suits you nicely, and offers a consistent Kitchen Sink across platforms, I do fear there is something of the luddite in these statements;
Firefox is a backstep on Mozilla, and mostly an ego trip.
Firefox is the first piece of OSS software that I both liked sufficiently enough to recommend it to my girlfriend, to my dad, to my mum, and also that has remained a favourite of two of the three listed.
If by 'ego trip' you mean the necessary and useful refinement of the interface offered by Mozilla'a previous offerings (read: netscape, moz. suite) to something that is readily comprehended by non-geek users, I have to agree with you there.
Indeed, may the collective ego of all firefox developers continue to expand and to do useful things like:
- developing and refining platform agnostic windows, menus so that non-geeks never have to become aware of the fact that their browser is somehow not quite like Windows.
- letting them clear History, Saved Form info, Passwords, Download history, Cookies, and Cache, all with one button.
- letting them choose the download folder, so they're not prompted where to save every download
My point really is only that, pehaps banally, there are different horses for different courses and that firefox, clearly, is something much better than the mere ego trips of developers. End users don't care about the politics of browser development. They don't care that, in fact, firefox is the bastard grandson of netscape, indeed, they are more likely to use it if they don't know that.
The emerging profile of the firefox user is that of the IE/Win user who has got fed-up of spyware, and have become receptive, over a long time, to the fuss in the computer press about this other browser. And they damned well wouldn't be interested in the ugly bloat of The Kitchen Sink.
Hey I'll help you out with that..
Because, you see, apart from Java, this breakthrough also has the ability to, err..store email offline for later reading? * shifty looking grin *
Ah! Internationalisation support...knew there was something that distinguished it from Thunderbird et al.
Oh. Well Java is still cool I spose. I did look at a Mac screenshot though. Looks like a crufty GNOME app. I hate to be a Negative Nancy but Yet Another Email client? Why?
Slashdot Mirror
If he had worked with the SeaMonkey team to begin with to change buttons and such, we could both have our way
If..Could.. Not good enough. If you're annoyed by this percieved ego trip, I hope Seamonkey gives you what you want. I would not have Seamonkey discontinued myself, either. More Gecko-based browsers = potentially less cross-browser coding nightmares; if someone uses Firefox or Seamonkey, then they may not be using IE/Win, IE/Mac, or Opera. (nothing personal against Opera).
However am I seriously to believe, for one second, the Mozilla Project would have condescended to take this feedback, had it been offered in a way that would please the likes of you more?
Not sure why I wasn't around to give it a hug, or as you say, jump up and down about usability, but I can't help but think that Mozilla had a good run, At The Time.
Pedants can chip in here, but after the ghastly NS4 release and the various organisational restructuring that ensued, Mozilla was _the_ leet project, in fact I seem to remember back then they were using the Seamonkey word. Except the code was so awful that they had to skip version 5, and when version 6 came out, it offered little that was different, as far as the interface goes, to NS4. The interface is at least as important as the browser working properly and as you rightly point out, nasty remote exploits ideally belong nowhere in any of the Foundation's releases.
So, software engineers and the like will have some warm fuzzy memories about all of those Mozilla releases, and the political significance of what that meant - the re-birth of something shoddy and proprietary (NS4) into something open-source. But there were people like me 'jumping up and down about usability' back then. They weren't listened to, they were dismissed and explained away. I can't help but feel that I as a user am profiting from this ego trip, in the form of a new default browser which pleases me more than IE.
I seriously would love to see someone telling the end-users that Firefox is evil because the lead developer went on an ego trip, and that instead, they should use this, ahem, rather fully-featured alternative called Mozilla (but it's going to be Seamonkey soon..), and that whether they like Firefox or not, really clever people won't be using it because really clever people don't think the ends justified the means.
You weren't paying attention; I didn't actually want to know what the ego trip is. The use of the term seemed a little reactionary in reference to something I think is simply A Good Thing. End users won't give a seamonkey about the politics, they won't grieve for Mozilla.
I fired both of them up (1.0.6 and 1.7.11) navigated to Google and did a search and Firefox actually takes up a bit more memory...
You whinge about Firefox taking up more memory, and I shall praise it for having the buttons where I want them.
So maybe it looks nicer and has the buttons where you want them
Yes. Yes it does. Glad to see we share some things in common.
FYI the 'ugly bloat' I referred to was based on two aspects;
- Mozilla is ugly. It's ugly with its blue skin, it's ugly with its classic skin, and when I have to look on the net for skin #3, sorry, you lost me. (because I'm attempting to advocate for ordinary non-geek users, you see).
- Mozilla is overkill for most non-geek users, who if they considered an alternative at all, are seeking only a different browser to re-learn, to begin with. People are naturally very precious about their email, and such non-geeks who are on the edge of breaking from the default Windows setup, would not seek to conquer Rome in a day by adding a new email client to the transition.
- Hence bloat to me is more a case of having unnecessary software installed, and it would seem to me that if Seamonkey ever finds its way onto the system of the non-geek I described, it could only be after another friendlier browser such as Firefox has whetted their appetite.
it caused the Mozilla team to screw up what I thought was a pretty good software engineering process
You are still not listening. You are not They. They are not You. 'They', shallow as they may seem to You, are unencumbered by any consideration 'good software engineering process.' A simple installation experience and a soft learning curve is more the kind of thing They care about.
FireFox only solved a UI design problem by making Mozilla look like a Windows app.
On Windows. And it looks like a GTK app on GNOME (OK it uses GTK widgets in KDE, but this would happen with any other GTK app anyway.) And for the most part, it looks like an OS/X app on OS/X.
It broke just about everything else that was good about Mozilla.
For You. 'They', the non-geek end-user, were barely ever interested in it in the first place. Presumably you might be a software engineer, and clearly you seem to be the target audience for Seamonkey.
while I can understand that The Kitchen Sink suits you nicely, and offers a consistent Kitchen Sink across platforms, I do fear there is something of the luddite in these statements; Firefox is a backstep on Mozilla, and mostly an ego trip. Firefox is the first piece of OSS software that I both liked sufficiently enough to recommend it to my girlfriend, to my dad, to my mum, and also that has remained a favourite of two of the three listed. If by 'ego trip' you mean the necessary and useful refinement of the interface offered by Mozilla'a previous offerings (read: netscape, moz. suite) to something that is readily comprehended by non-geek users, I have to agree with you there. Indeed, may the collective ego of all firefox developers continue to expand and to do useful things like: - developing and refining platform agnostic windows, menus so that non-geeks never have to become aware of the fact that their browser is somehow not quite like Windows. - letting them clear History, Saved Form info, Passwords, Download history, Cookies, and Cache, all with one button. - letting them choose the download folder, so they're not prompted where to save every download My point really is only that, pehaps banally, there are different horses for different courses and that firefox, clearly, is something much better than the mere ego trips of developers. End users don't care about the politics of browser development. They don't care that, in fact, firefox is the bastard grandson of netscape, indeed, they are more likely to use it if they don't know that. The emerging profile of the firefox user is that of the IE/Win user who has got fed-up of spyware, and have become receptive, over a long time, to the fuss in the computer press about this other browser. And they damned well wouldn't be interested in the ugly bloat of The Kitchen Sink.
Hey I'll help you out with that.. Because, you see, apart from Java, this breakthrough also has the ability to, err..store email offline for later reading? * shifty looking grin * Ah! Internationalisation support...knew there was something that distinguished it from Thunderbird et al. Oh. Well Java is still cool I spose. I did look at a Mac screenshot though. Looks like a crufty GNOME app. I hate to be a Negative Nancy but Yet Another Email client? Why?