And it came to pass that JTK wrote:
>Stuart Ballard wrote:
>>
>> JTK wrote:
>> >
>> > Garth Wallace wrote:
>> > >
>> > > No. Webmail access, like AIM and Net2Phone, is one of
>> > > the features that Netscape adds to Netscape 6.x but
>> > > does not contribute to Mozilla.
>> >
>> > That doesn't sound very "Open" of them. Oh that's right,
>> > the whole "Open" thing was a sham from the get-go.
>>
>> Oh, I get it. 3 closed features (AIM, Webmail, and AOL mail
>> access) means that having everything else open is a sham?
>>
>
>Yeah, pretty much: "You work on the stuff we don't want to,
>we'll take it and bundle it with a bunch of stuff that's
>proprietary, and you get nada. So long, sucker!"
>
>> I have never had any desire to use AIM, Netscape webmail,
>> or AOL mail.
>
>What about other web-based mail systems? It'd sure be nice
>to be able to hook up to Hotmail or Yahoo mail or Google mail
>or whatever-mail with Mozilla, wouldn't it?
YOu CAN currently hook up with Yahoo mail - via their POP
server. It's even free.
And Hotmail uses a proprietary format that requires Outhouse or
OE.
And even Netscape 6.1 won't open other service's webmail.
So what, in fact are the merits of your complaint?
>> I
>> can get a fully functioning browser (and an almost-adequate
>> mail/news client - last time I tried it it came within
>> inches of being my permanent client, but crashed just a
>> little too much... I expect to start using it full-time at
>> 0.9.2) that does everything I need it to and is 100% open.
>>
>> Is that a sham?
>>
>
>Yep. Because it ain't 100% "Open".
The only claim made was that MOZILLA would be 100% open.
Netscape 6 was only ever touted as a browser BASED on open-
source code - and it is.]
The only "sham" I see is you claiming to have any sort of
relevence.
Now run home get mommy to change your didey.
--
}:-) Christopher Jahn
{:-( Dionysian Reveler
I live like this 'cuz I like it; I've seen too much to pretend
To reply: xjahnATyahooDOTcom
