Kill Bill's Browser

[Aloone_Jonez]

You said yourself that the Opera guys would even possibly have to adopt XUL or "die".

Yes, but more emphasis on the word possibly, Opera might have to support XUL in the end but this will depend on either Firefox becomming the dominant browser or Microsoft Internet Explorer supporting it.

I can do that on here too.

Good, it's about time the open source community catches up on this one. Mac OS and Windows have had OLE for years, correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Apple invent it or was it Acorn?

I agree that XUL might be one of the advantages of Firefox but it doesn't nessacerly make it superiour overall and as it's so new (and unsupported) it isn't important to me.

[piratePenguin]

Yes, but more emphasis on the word possibly

Actually, you never even mentioned the word "possibly" in the post I was referring to.

I don't know how well Opera will adapt to the, I suppose it will either have to or die out.

Good, it's about time the open source community catches up on this one.

I didn't happen today or yesterday. In fact, it probably goes back to the early days of GNU/Linux - GPM has copy and paste support. I dunno when Qt and GTK+ had their own clipboards, or if there were other libraries even before that with their own clipboards.

See, clipboard support isn't hard to do, and it'll never require a redisign. XUL is a technology. It's not quite-so-easy to implement. After properly implemented, you know that that app/renderer has a good design. Gecko (think that's what I should be calling this. Rather than Mozilla or Firefox) (Firefox's renderer) has an XUL implementation that seems to be properly implemented.
Gecko.tecnical_points += 10000000;

I agree that XUL might be one of the advantages of Firefox but it doesn't nessacerly make it superiour overall and as it's so new (and unsupported) it isn't important to me.

I said that IMO Firefox is technically superior to Opera. I never claimed that Firefox is better than Opera, because they both win in different fields.

[skyman8081]

In my opinion, Firefox is extremely over-engineered.  The solution of XUL is way too complex for the needs of a lightweight browser like firefox.

They are trying to do too many things with it, it's the original mozilla project all over again.

Firefox has plateaued, any new changes to it are seen as "heresy" and users tend to be hostilic to them.

[MarathoN]

Isn't it better that they get more things done anyway, to stay ahead of the competition?

It's better than commerical apps like Opera, which don't get updated as often. :rolleyes:

[piratePenguin]

In my opinion, Firefox is extremely over-engineered.  The solution of XUL is way too complex for the needs of a lightweight browser like firefox.

I guess that's partly-true. But the XUL stuff is written and it's in Gecko (AFAIK), and it works. It might be a little bit slower with it, or take up more ram, but IMO it's advantages far outweigh the disadvantages. Firefox doesn't run slow for me, I've never had a problem with it.

They are trying to do too many things with it, it's the original mozilla project all over again.

Like what? Most/All of the XUL stuff is written already. They're still getting new visible-features in often.

Firefox has plateaued, any new changes to it are seen as "heresy" and users tend to be hostilic to them.

What makes you think that?

[Aloone_Jonez]

I guess that's partly-true. But the XUL stuff is written and it's in Gecko (AFAIK), and it works. It might be a little bit slower with it, or take up more ram, but IMO it's advantages far outweigh the disadvantages. Firefox doesn't run slow for me, I've never had a problem with it.

Sorry, you haven't convinced me of any real advantages that'll enhance the user's experiance, the unimportant features XUL provides doesn't out weigh the disadvantages caused by using more resources. I would rather have these resources used to provide the really handy features of Opera therefore making it easier to use and superiorly functional to Firefox.

Extensability and themeability were much easier to get working (I'm sure).

I don't care, I don't need extentions in Opera and the default theme is very nice - I've had no reason to change it even though I could.

It will run and look like a native app on different systems.

So would any program if X had a standard widgit set.

It can render XUL pages.

Only important if XUL takes off as a web standard.

I didn't happen today or yesterday. In fact, it probably goes back to the early days of GNU/Linux - GPM has copy and paste support. I dunno when Qt and GTK+ had their own clipboards, or if there were other libraries even before that with their own clipboards.

What's that? Different clipboards for different desktops/applications?

I was referring to a universal clipboard for the whole operating system - something Mac OS and Windows have had for many years.

See, clipboard support isn't hard to do, and it'll never require a redisign. XUL is a technology. It's not quite-so-easy to implement. After properly implemented, you know that that app/renderer has a good design. Gecko (think that's what I should be calling this. Rather than Mozilla or Firefox) (Firefox's renderer) has an XUL implementation that seems to be properly implemented.

It it's that easy then why hasn't it been done?
Why can't I draw something in Inkscape then paste it into an AbiWord document?
This would be easy on a Micorsoft Windows, at work I can easily paste things from Adobe Illustrator to Microsoft Word, why can't I do this on Linux?

Gecko.tecnical_points += 10000000;

I agree, the rendering is better in FireFox though it's not that much better.

I said that IMO Firefox is technically superior to Opera. I never claimed that Firefox is better than Opera, because they both win in different fields.

Correct, though it I suppose depends on what you mean by technically superior.

There are many things technically superiour about Opera;the user interface; the downlad manager; the session management, to name but a few, the main thing that amazes me though is how it has all of these features but its smaller and faster than Firefox. Yes I know Firefox has better rendering, XUL (which isn't of any importance) and extensions (which I don't need with Opera) but Opera is just so much more feature packed, as far as I'm concerned there's I have no choice Opera for me.

[piratePenguin]

There are many things technically superiour about Opera;the user interface; the downlad manager; the session management, to name but a few, the main thing that amazes me though is how it has all of these features but its smaller and faster than Firefox. Yes I know Firefox has better rendering, XUL (which isn't of any importance) and extensions (which I don't need with Opera) but Opera is just so much more feature packed, as far as I'm concerned there's I have no choice Opera for me.

Do you think in a race to adopt eachothers features Opera would've implemented XUL, and designed the whole web-browser as an XUL app as fast as Firefox can implement all_them_sometimes_useful_features?

Firefox's XUL design, and it's support for XUL, is what makes it technically superior IMO. Not functionally superior. Technically.
It's design.

I don't care, I don't need extentions in Opera and the default theme is very nice - I've had no reason to change it even though I could.

I don't give a fuck if you don't care, or if anyone cares of Firefox's XUL design. It's design will still be there and gecko/whatever will still have all them extra technincal_points.

[Aloone_Jonez]

Do you think in a race to adopt eachothers features Opera would've implemented XUL, and designed the whole web-browser as an XUL app as fast as Firefox can implement all_them_sometimes_useful_features?

Large parts of Firefox would have to be re-written to implement Opera's features, for example to implement zooming and theming of the widgits on pages the rendering engine would need a complete re-write.

Firefox's XUL design, and it's support for XUL, is what makes it technically superior IMO. Not functionally superior. Technically.
It's design.

XUL design isn't superiour at all, it's the waste of space that explains why FireFox is a larger download, uses more memory and has less useful features over all.

I don't give a fuck if you don't care, or if anyone cares of Firefox's XUL design.

Good and neither do I, so there's no point in discussing this issue any further.

[piratePenguin]

Large parts of Firefox would have to be re-written to implement Opera's features, for example to implement zooming and theming of the widgits on pages the rendering engine would need a complete re-write.

I still stand by what I said.

XUL design isn't superiour at all, it's the waste of space that explains why FireFox is a larger download, uses more memory and has less useful features over all.

How do you know?

Good and neither do I, so there's no point in discussing this issue any further.

My point was that it doesn't matter if anyone cares, it doesn't change Firefox's superior design.

[Aloone_Jonez]

Firefox is superiour.

Oh, no it isn't Opera is superiour.

Firefox is superiour.

Oh, no it isn't Opera is superiour.

Firefox is superiour.

Oh, no it isn't Opera is superiour.

Firefox is superiour.

Oh, no it isn't Opera is superiour.

Round and round we go, we're not acheiving anything here, this debate has ceased being productive. Look how we're both hanging on trying to get the satisfaction of having the last word - very funny don't you think?    

[skyman8081]

[piratePenguin]

Firefox is superiour.

I never suggested that.
Damnit I've been very careful with my words, only for you to fucking bend and twist them to suit yourself.

Round and round we go, we're not acheiving anything here, this debate has ceased being productive. Look how we're both hanging on trying to get the satisfaction of having the last word - very funny don't you think?    

Fine I'll stick to what I said in this post.

BTW skyman, you never answered any of my questions about your thoughts on XUL.
How you.

[Kintaro]

Opera sucks.

It cant even use a lot of STANDARD javascripts, it is below IE as far as I am concerened because it is so incompatible. Opera need to follow standards and stop taking shortcuts for quicker load times. Mozilla Firefox is perfect for me.

[Aloone_Jonez]

XUL design isn't superiour at all, it's the waste of space that explains why FireFox is a larger download, uses more memory and has less useful features over all.

How do you know?

Let me put this very simply.

Opera has lots of useful features and is small.

Firefox is bigger and has less features.

Alright then maybe XUL isn't to blame, perhaps sloppy inferiour coding is a more likely culprit I'll just stick by my oppinion too, Opera is smaller, uses less resources and has more features than Firefox, hence it is technically superiour.

Hmm, I wonder what Microsoft you say if you tried to them that Linux is superiour to Windows because it uses less memory and has more features. I bet they'd say something like "Windows NT has a microkernel design which is technically superiour to Linux's monolithic system, therefore Windows is technically superiour to Linux even though it uses more resources and has less features".

[H_TeXMeX_H]

Can't we just say use any browser except IE, as long as it works well for you ?