Jonathan Wilson wrote: > > From what I have seen with things like favicon.ico and other things not > really. > Accually, its probobly more like this: > The engineers and coders do care about the browser and want to make it > better (no, reading favicon.ico when first loading the page even if not > asked to by the user with no way to turn it off is not better) > But on the other hand, we have the managers and marketing department > plus the people at AOLTW that seem not to care about the product known > as mozilla and also as netscape 6. What I dont understand is just what > AOLTW or netscape corp accually gains out of this favicon.ico thing.
What do they gain out of *any* of Mozilla? It's a complete and utter failure after, what, five *years* of work, the laughingstock of the computing world, and yet they still drag the dead carcass along. And then to top it off they slap a commie star on it apparently as some sort of sick joke. In all seriousness, somebody answer me this: other than crash-wise, which I'll grant you is much improved, is today's Mozilla *any* different than it was at Netscape 6.0-time? I notice no significant difference. The mail composer is still an unusable joke, without even *NOTEPAD* quality editing features (PLEASE somebody "challenge" me on that one). The "cache" does nothing more than serve up week-old "news". The XUL is just as slow. The 1.0 performance release criteria that Hixie, Jesus X, myself, and even Gervase Markham worked on (summary: 1.0 must be at least HALF AS SLOW as either IE OR Netscape, whichever is SLOWER) have been thrown in the shitter, once again in deference to a date on the calendar "by which we must dump something on the unsuspecting public, steaming or otherwise". The... ah why the hell do I bother, nobody here cares enough about this project to put it to sleep, let alone make it good. Makes me ill.
