"Miro's role in the Foundation was to pay for its establishment." = Investment? Charitas?
"fees for 3rd party developers are set at US$1,000 per year" = aka Microsoft certified developers?
"Rules also need some kind of consequence for not following them, or they become ineffective." = Free software is just about freedom, heh?
Mambo Steering Committee without Core Developers? So it will not be the Development Steering Committe, right? Is it Business Steering Committee then?...
Hm. Looks like somebody tries to capitalize the Mambo CMS potential. Is it the Mambo comunity who will profit on it? I don't think so.
> Now, the real question is: is this good for the community?
Main purpose of the business is to generate profit. But "generate profit" should be read as "take money from somebody else". Take money from Mambo CMS users in this case.
All the steps were heading to benefit the community in the past. Now all the steps will lead to benefit an investor on the first place and the remaining benefits will be granted to the community. Satisfy community as much (and not more) to don't let community members "defect".
Mambo CMS community will benefit because the earnings of the investor is dependant on the Mambo CMS community happiness. But Mambo CMS community will not benefit as much as it would without an investor.
I'm working on AJAX CMS written in XUL. Actually it looks like the first XUL CMS I know about.
I spent about half a year thinking of appropriate technology that will be flexible enough. I found that XHTML is rather unmanageable to be used with larger RIA. It's missing some of very important functions needed for CMS.
I chosen XUL because it gives me
1. Advantage of cross-platform compatibility
2. Overlays and bindings that XHTML doesn't have (only acceptable way how to manage RIA that has not only forms but many other special functions like WYSIWYG, RDF lists, third-party plug-ins etc.)
I have experience with it and it is very painful to write good RIA with XUL.:-) Actually it is rather SAD (opposite to RAD;-).
I must admit that XUL was rather "political" choice because from the programming perspective XAML is very similar.
I think that XHTML is great but not as good as XUL/XAML/FLASH that was created with client-side scripting in mind.
Sorry, but it is kind of strange marriage.
HTML/XHTML is not designed well to serve large AJAX application needs!
XUL and XAML are better solution. But what should I do? XAML or XUL or maybe FLASH or JAVA?
I've choosen XUL. But I'm not happy with it. I'm affraid that I will not benefit from it as I didn't benefit from browser wars.
Do we have to choose again what to support?
Flash? AJAX/XUL? AJAX/XAML? AJAX/XHTML? JAVA?...?
Where are we heading to? To AJAX WARS? Didn't we just get out of the BROWSER WARS?
Where is the problem?
I blame W3C!
W3C is too slow to address hunger for RIA on the Internet.
W3C becames to be more playground for big corporations trying to extend their influence (or sabotage anything that could harm their business) and not a forum for consensual agreements to benefit everybody (if it ever was the meaning of W3C).
AJAX is great. I know it.
W3C becames SLOW! Does not move as fast as new technologies => more compatibility problems will arise...
Future belongs to XUL/XAML but I prefer W3UIML (standardized version of XUL XAML);-)
I'm sure that there are many other people/organizations who contributed to Mozilla and nobody glorifies them in Slashdot articles. So I'm wondering how "big contribution" it really is and how much IBM self-glorification is in it.;-)
Anyway it is nice to here that IBM is interested in Mozilla (as a perspective market).
I'm skeptical about their technology. I'm sure that if it is so "good" then IBM will try to take some money of it... and if it is not so "good" so let it go on SF.net and take some populist's credits out of it... and maybe geeks will stick to it and they will make Google and Search.MSN weaker not necessarily by open-source quality search engines but by swarms of emerging not-as-good-as-google specialized search engines...
Anyway IBM will benefit by open-sourcing the market segment that its competitors are dependant on...
I can imagine eWord application. It won't be as rich as desktop MSWord but what features do you use on daily basis? Not many, right? And I'm sure that those features can be implemented using the on-line languages like XUL or XAML...
It would be great to have my own on-line eWord accessible from anywhere that is able to export or sent by e-mail any document from my on-line doc database... It is not a sci-fi. I think the eWord future is now...
To be honest: I prefer Microsoft in this situation because Microsoft doesn't play the FOUNDATION game. I know what sort the MS is from the very beginning.
I don't like projects that gain the strength and popularity by pretending something (for example pretending Microsoft's alternative) and suddenly you realize that all the years you were supporting just another Microsoft-like Corporation.
You are completely wrong. You are trying to say that if Mozilla wants to compete with Microsoft then Mozilla have to play Microsoft's game.
I believed that Mozilla is successful because Mozilla doesn't play the same game as Microsoft. Mozilla should remember it!
Every corporation is supposed to generate profit - later or sooner...
Scenario is many times the same. Let the people get used to new brand, then say the Corporation has financial problems and for the good of the users we need an investment... and investors are available... and investors need to return back their investments... and who remembers how the Mozilla started long long time ago as Mozilla FOUNDATION? Only few... If you want to get somewhere it seems to be difficult then make small steps...
People are as sheep.
Sorry for being skeptical/"chandra".
Why I have to spent almost 30% of my design time on fixing rendering issues in IE? I think that 30% extra cost is too much considering that the IE is the product of *VERY* rich company.
So why I'm forced to spend my own time/money on solving IE rendering issues? Why me? Why not Microsoft? How long will it last? I'm loosing money with IE!
I'm prepared for IE7! How? I made a safe choice: I've choosen Firefox:-))) I even choosen Firefox as a base for all my websites I will do... and Firefox helps my XUL CMS (http://demo.webdevelopers.cz/ )to be prepared for all tricks including IE7;-)... Thanx -moz!
IMHO now is the time to make people switch to firefox because of its great web browsing features/potential and not simply by scaring them that their current browser (IE) is dangerous. It was clear that the marketing strategy "we are simply safe" cannot last for ever. Moz is a complicated application and it was just question of time when the major security bugs will be discovered. Now it happened and many people will think that Moz/FF is not more secure then IE... So what about showing other "cool" features that the users will surely love? What about solving those annoying problems with XUL (like Drag&Drop restrictions, remote DTD problems, RDF restrictios) to allow thousands of heated web developers to unleash real Moz/FF potential and let users feel the real internet experience revolution? Isn't it what was the Moz/FF born for?
elixon
Suppose the spammer's machine that sends 200k e-mails per hour. This machine is for sending only. It does not have any port for receiving e-mails opened. So - the throughtoutput must be high to send out 200k of e-mails, and what they will do to the spammers? If all servers (it is not likely to happen) are having IBM soft then they will receive 200k attempts per hour to connect to blocked ports on spammers machine while trying to hit back... And this is going to stop them?:-) Their specialized machines tuned for sending with no receiving capabilities against high-performance spam-analyzing machines that will waste CPU by identifying spam and waste bandwith while trying repeatdly pass e-mail to some blocked ports on spammers machine... Hm. I don't understand it. Just another way how to hurt people afected by spam by selling the useless software/hw to them.
I really do not like the Mozilla's policy to disable whatever they can disable... I'm web developer and sometimes I regret that I have choosen the Gecko technology for our project. Instead of solving security issues Mozilla disables things like int. domain names support or drag and drop for remote application or you cannot even refresh or reload your own remote RDF resources because you do not have rights... Today I found that I do not have right to read properties on javascript textbox elements in events under certain circumstances... It is clear how they get the "hight security level" they repeat over and over in media: Threre is no security risk where are no features to secure. Is it risky? Disable it! Are you unsure about potenticial risk? Disable it to be sure!
On the other hand I everyday try to say to myself - do not give up - there is always some workaround and the technology is really great! And believe me - it IS GREAT. But mozilla seems to be too young... I'm really glad that things are moving so fast...
Hi all. Did you see the mirrored image of the CRT on the desktop on the bottom of the picture they show on their site? In my oppinion it does not reflect the CRT correctly or the product is not as thin as it looks like by the first sight...;-) Is a small marketing manipulation taking place here?
Slashdot Mirror
http://ricshreves.net/content/view/116/47/
...
"Miro's role in the Foundation was to pay for its establishment." = Investment? Charitas?
"fees for 3rd party developers are set at US$1,000 per year" = aka Microsoft certified developers?
"Rules also need some kind of consequence for not following them, or they become ineffective." = Free software is just about freedom, heh?
Mambo Steering Committee without Core Developers? So it will not be the Development Steering Committe, right? Is it Business Steering Committee then?
Hm. Looks like somebody tries to capitalize the Mambo CMS potential. Is it the Mambo comunity who will profit on it? I don't think so.
> Now, the real question is: is this good for the community?
Main purpose of the business is to generate profit. But "generate profit" should be read as "take money from somebody else". Take money from Mambo CMS users in this case.
All the steps were heading to benefit the community in the past. Now all the steps will lead to benefit an investor on the first place and the remaining benefits will be granted to the community. Satisfy community as much (and not more) to don't let community members "defect".
Mambo CMS community will benefit because the earnings of the investor is dependant on the Mambo CMS community happiness. But Mambo CMS community will not benefit as much as it would without an investor.
I'm working on AJAX CMS written in XUL. Actually it looks like the first XUL CMS I know about. I spent about half a year thinking of appropriate technology that will be flexible enough. I found that XHTML is rather unmanageable to be used with larger RIA. It's missing some of very important functions needed for CMS. I chosen XUL because it gives me 1. Advantage of cross-platform compatibility 2. Overlays and bindings that XHTML doesn't have (only acceptable way how to manage RIA that has not only forms but many other special functions like WYSIWYG, RDF lists, third-party plug-ins etc.) I have experience with it and it is very painful to write good RIA with XUL. :-) Actually it is rather SAD (opposite to RAD ;-).
I must admit that XUL was rather "political" choice because from the programming perspective XAML is very similar.
I think that XHTML is great but not as good as XUL/XAML/FLASH that was created with client-side scripting in mind.
Sorry, but it is kind of strange marriage. HTML/XHTML is not designed well to serve large AJAX application needs! XUL and XAML are better solution. But what should I do? XAML or XUL or maybe FLASH or JAVA? I've choosen XUL. But I'm not happy with it. I'm affraid that I will not benefit from it as I didn't benefit from browser wars.
Do we have to choose again what to support? Flash? AJAX/XUL? AJAX/XAML? AJAX/XHTML? JAVA? ...?
Where are we heading to? To AJAX WARS? Didn't we just get out of the BROWSER WARS?
Where is the problem?
I blame W3C! W3C is too slow to address hunger for RIA on the Internet. W3C becames to be more playground for big corporations trying to extend their influence (or sabotage anything that could harm their business) and not a forum for consensual agreements to benefit everybody (if it ever was the meaning of W3C).
AJAX is great. I know it. W3C becames SLOW! Does not move as fast as new technologies => more compatibility problems will arise... Future belongs to XUL/XAML but I prefer W3UIML (standardized version of XUL XAML) ;-)
I'm sure that there are many other people/organizations who contributed to Mozilla and nobody glorifies them in Slashdot articles. So I'm wondering how "big contribution" it really is and how much IBM self-glorification is in it. ;-)
Anyway it is nice to here that IBM is interested in Mozilla (as a perspective market).
I'm skeptical about their technology. I'm sure that if it is so "good" then IBM will try to take some money of it... and if it is not so "good" so let it go on SF.net and take some populist's credits out of it... and maybe geeks will stick to it and they will make Google and Search.MSN weaker not necessarily by open-source quality search engines but by swarms of emerging not-as-good-as-google specialized search engines...
Anyway IBM will benefit by open-sourcing the market segment that its competitors are dependant on...
I can imagine eWord application. It won't be as rich as desktop MSWord but what features do you use on daily basis? Not many, right? And I'm sure that those features can be implemented using the on-line languages like XUL or XAML...
It would be great to have my own on-line eWord accessible from anywhere that is able to export or sent by e-mail any document from my on-line doc database... It is not a sci-fi. I think the eWord future is now...
To be honest: I prefer Microsoft in this situation because Microsoft doesn't play the FOUNDATION game. I know what sort the MS is from the very beginning.
I don't like projects that gain the strength and popularity by pretending something (for example pretending Microsoft's alternative) and suddenly you realize that all the years you were supporting just another Microsoft-like Corporation.
You are completely wrong. You are trying to say that if Mozilla wants to compete with Microsoft then Mozilla have to play Microsoft's game.
I believed that Mozilla is successful because Mozilla doesn't play the same game as Microsoft. Mozilla should remember it!
Every corporation is supposed to generate profit - later or sooner... Scenario is many times the same. Let the people get used to new brand, then say the Corporation has financial problems and for the good of the users we need an investment... and investors are available... and investors need to return back their investments... and who remembers how the Mozilla started long long time ago as Mozilla FOUNDATION? Only few... If you want to get somewhere it seems to be difficult then make small steps... People are as sheep. Sorry for being skeptical/"chandra".
I love AJAX. It's fast for development and powerfull. JS+XUL=POWER ;-)
Why I have to spent almost 30% of my design time on fixing rendering issues in IE? I think that 30% extra cost is too much considering that the IE is the product of *VERY* rich company. So why I'm forced to spend my own time/money on solving IE rendering issues? Why me? Why not Microsoft? How long will it last? I'm loosing money with IE!
I'm prepared for IE7! How? I made a safe choice: I've choosen Firefox :-))) I even choosen Firefox as a base for all my websites I will do... and Firefox helps my XUL CMS (http://demo.webdevelopers.cz/ )to be prepared for all tricks including IE7 ;-)... Thanx -moz!
IMHO now is the time to make people switch to firefox because of its great web browsing features/potential and not simply by scaring them that their current browser (IE) is dangerous. It was clear that the marketing strategy "we are simply safe" cannot last for ever. Moz is a complicated application and it was just question of time when the major security bugs will be discovered. Now it happened and many people will think that Moz/FF is not more secure then IE... So what about showing other "cool" features that the users will surely love? What about solving those annoying problems with XUL (like Drag&Drop restrictions, remote DTD problems, RDF restrictios) to allow thousands of heated web developers to unleash real Moz/FF potential and let users feel the real internet experience revolution? Isn't it what was the Moz/FF born for? elixon
Suppose the spammer's machine that sends 200k e-mails per hour. This machine is for sending only. It does not have any port for receiving e-mails opened. So - the throughtoutput must be high to send out 200k of e-mails, and what they will do to the spammers? If all servers (it is not likely to happen) are having IBM soft then they will receive 200k attempts per hour to connect to blocked ports on spammers machine while trying to hit back... And this is going to stop them? :-) Their specialized machines tuned for sending with no receiving capabilities against high-performance spam-analyzing machines that will waste CPU by identifying spam and waste bandwith while trying repeatdly pass e-mail to some blocked ports on spammers machine... Hm. I don't understand it. Just another way how to hurt people afected by spam by selling the useless software/hw to them.
I really do not like the Mozilla's policy to disable whatever they can disable... I'm web developer and sometimes I regret that I have choosen the Gecko technology for our project. Instead of solving security issues Mozilla disables things like int. domain names support or drag and drop for remote application or you cannot even refresh or reload your own remote RDF resources because you do not have rights... Today I found that I do not have right to read properties on javascript textbox elements in events under certain circumstances... It is clear how they get the "hight security level" they repeat over and over in media: Threre is no security risk where are no features to secure. Is it risky? Disable it! Are you unsure about potenticial risk? Disable it to be sure!
On the other hand I everyday try to say to myself - do not give up - there is always some workaround and the technology is really great! And believe me - it IS GREAT. But mozilla seems to be too young... I'm really glad that things are moving so fast...
elixon
Maybe the picture was trimmed from the bigger one that mirrored 'old CRT' on the desktop? Hm. Strange. elixon
Hi all. Did you see the mirrored image of the CRT on the desktop on the bottom of the picture they show on their site? In my oppinion it does not reflect the CRT correctly or the product is not as thin as it looks like by the first sight... ;-) Is a small marketing manipulation taking place here?
elixon