Garth Wallace wrote:
>
> JTK wrote:
>
> > Mama Cass Elliot wrote:
> >
> >> In netscape.public.mozilla.general the people heard Gervase Markham say
> >> these wise words:
> >>
> >>> Mozilla source code was released to the world three years ago today
> >>> (according to the dates in the source files.)
> >>
> >> so it's taken three years so far for a whole group of programmers to write
> >> a Browser/email client!!!
> >
> > Well, not quite. It's taken three years to produce an essentially
> > unusable browser and an all-but-completely-unusable email/newsreader
> > client. But it's "skinnable", I guess that's all that matters, huh?
> > Oh, but even that doesn't work real well either...
>
> I've already explained 100 times that skins are just a bonus that we get
> for free due to a design decision that makes it easier to write the
> browser for multiple platforms, but you'll just ignore me again, so I
> won't bother this time.
>
For free? Seems to me that Mozilla has paid the highest price possible
for this "bonus": complete irrelevance.
> Mozilla already works better than MSIE on my machine.
You must have one f**ked up machine my friend. Or I suppose a (very)
fringe OS.
> And I prefer
> Mozilla's mail/news interface to Outlook...and the fact that I don't
> have to load individual messages in order to mark them read (when you're
> trying to avoid porn spam at work, the last thing you want to do is load
> it).
>
Yeah, I do too! I just wish the damn thing worked!
> Besides, if you hate the project so much
?!?!?!?! *HATE* the project?!?! Wow, talk about yer not being able to
see the forest through the trees!
> (and I'm having a hard time
> recalling anything you've said that could be construes as positive or
> helpful),
If you look in .performance, you'll find that I made a number of
measurements which show fairly conclusively that Mozilla's use of a
non-native GUI results in about a 2:1 performance hit (at least in the
browser). As I'm sure you can imagine, those results were not well
recieved. Much like my valid criticisms in this group.
> why are you even in this newsgroup?
Why are you? Why is anybody? Again I ask, what is this group for? I
didn't see ".mozilla.rulez.drooling.blind.praise.only" on the sign, I
saw ".public.mozilla.general". I assumed this group was intended for
the general public discussion of the Mozilla project. Apparently it
isn't, so I ask you, what is it actually for? And once you answer that,
please have someone at Netscape (the ones running this commercial
project) change the name of the newsgroup to reflect the fact that
criticism is unwelcome and will not be tolerated.
> Don't you have anything to
> do with your time? Go read a book, or go to the park, or something.
Nah, I'll just find a wheel to reinvent...
