All Things Microsoft > Microsoft Software
Kill Bill's Browser
Aloone_Jonez:
--- Quote from: piratePenguin ---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.
--- End quote ---
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.
--- Quote from: piratePenguin ---Extensability and themeability were much easier to get working (I'm sure).
--- End quote ---
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.
--- Quote from: piratePenguin ---It will run and look like a native app on different systems.
--- End quote ---
So would any program if X had a standard widgit set.
--- Quote from: piratePenguin ---It can render XUL pages.
--- End quote ---
Only important if XUL takes off as a web standard.
--- Quote from: piratePenguin ---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.
--- End quote ---
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.
--- Quote from: piratePenguin ---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.
--- End quote ---
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?
--- Quote from: piratePenguin ---Gecko.tecnical_points += 10000000;
--- End quote ---
I agree, the rendering is better in FireFox though it's not that much better.
--- Quote from: piratePenguin ---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.
--- End quote ---
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:
--- Quote from: Aloone_Jonez ---
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.
--- End quote ---
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.
--- Quote ---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.
--- End quote ---
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:
--- Quote from: piratePenguin ---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?
--- End quote ---
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.
--- Quote from: piratePenguin ---Firefox's XUL design, and it's support for XUL, is what makes it technically superior IMO. Not functionally superior. Technically.
It's design.
--- End quote ---
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.
--- Quote from: piratePenguin ---I don't give a fuck if you don't care, or if anyone cares of Firefox's XUL design.
--- End quote ---
Good and neither do I, so there's no point in discussing this issue any further.
piratePenguin:
--- Quote from: Aloone_Jonez ---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.
--- End quote ---
I still stand by what I said.
--- Quote ---
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.
--- End quote ---
How do you know?
--- Quote ---
Good and neither do I, so there's no point in discussing this issue any further.
--- End quote ---
My point was that it doesn't matter if anyone cares, it doesn't change Firefox's superior design.
Aloone_Jonez:
--- Quote from: piratePenguin ---
Firefox is superiour.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote from: Aloone_Jonez ---
Oh, no it isn't Opera is superiour.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote from: piratePenguin ---
Firefox is superiour.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote from: Aloone_Jonez ---
Oh, no it isn't Opera is superiour.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote from: piratePenguin ---
Firefox is superiour.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote from: Aloone_Jonez ---
Oh, no it isn't Opera is superiour.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote from: piratePenguin ---
Firefox is superiour.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote from: Aloone_Jonez ---
Oh, no it isn't Opera is superiour.
--- End quote ---
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? :D :D :D
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version