All Things Microsoft > Microsoft Software
Kill Bill's Browser
Aloone_Jonez:
--- Quote from: piratePenguin ---You said yourself that the Opera guys would even possibly have to adopt XUL or "die".
--- End quote ---
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.
--- Quote from: piratePenguin ---I can do that on here too.
--- End quote ---
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:
--- Quote from: Aloone_Jonez ---Yes, but more emphasis on the word possibly
--- End quote ---
Actually, you never even mentioned the word "possibly" in the post I was referring to.
--- Quote ---I don't know how well Opera will adapt to the, I suppose it will either have to or die out.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote from: Aloone_Jonez ---
Good, it's about time the open source community catches up on this one.
--- End quote ---
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;
--- Quote ---
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.
--- End quote ---
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:
--- Quote from: 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.
--- End quote ---
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.
--- Quote ---
They are trying to do too many things with it, it's the original mozilla project all over again.
--- End quote ---
Like what? Most/All of the XUL stuff is written already. They're still getting new visible-features in often.
--- Quote ---
Firefox has plateaued, any new changes to it are seen as "heresy" and users tend to be hostilic to them.
--- End quote ---
What makes you think that?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version