On 3/24/2002 8:16 PM, Bundy wrote: <snip> >>>IRC Client = bloatware and will never make it to a NS build. It's a >>>horrible IRC client to boot, anyone that uses IRC uses MIRC. BTW-It's >>>an option to download in Mozilla and adds on top of the 10meg+ download. >> >> >>Many mozilla users use it, if people use it, it is by definition useful. > > > > Bullshit. I go to the Mozilla IRC server, maybe 40 people on it, half of > them bots. Dalnet has 100,000 people.
The point isn't how many people are logged onto irc.mozilla.org. The point is how many people use chatzilla. Do you mean top say that noone uses chatzilla to log onto dalnet? Conversely, I dont think everyone who logs onto irc.mozilla.org uses chatzilla. You're comparing apples and oranges. FWIW, I've tried out other chat client and have always come back to chatzilla. but thats me... >>>Webpage Editor = bloatware - should be the users choice to download in >>>the first place. everybody knows, it's a piece of shit. >> >> >>Same comment as the one for the IRC client. furthermore, your opinion >>are purely based on prejudices and not on facts. If you want to be taken >>for a reasonnable person and not an idiot, you should really base your >>opinions on facts. Didn't they tell you at school that "this is a piece >>of shit" is not > > > > The fact is, it should be the users choice to download. > Do you have a problem with this? The problem is that the composer is also used for HTML message composition. From what I've heard adding the Composer GUI (the one you get when you press Ctrl-4) is not that much of bloatware but I dont have any numbers to back up. >>>Javascript profiler - bloatware, only geeks will ever use that. >> >> >>I use it, I guess I am a geek then. > > > Yes, you must be. Most people don't use it. Agreed. Which is why NS6.x will never have it. But people who use Mozilla, the geeks, find use for it. So I dont see any problem with shipping it with Mozilla. NS6.x, Beonex, Galeon, etc will get rid of it. >>> >>>Opera does include a mail/news client. >>>It's email client is pretty good. >>>It's news client is horrible. >> >> >>I guess that it is pure provocation from your part, Opera mail client >>totally lacks of ergonomy and features. You can't even create >>sub-folders or create HTML messages. The only feature really worth of >>interest in opera mail is manual filtering. > > > False statement about Opera email. You can create sub-folders. > > Email /Manage EMail/ Right click on a folder to create another. > > Nope, you can't do html unless its raw code. > > > >>Opera does not support the DOM and its javascript capabilities are >>limited. Its CSS support, although very good, isn't as complete as >>mozilla's. back/forward speed is indeed better in Opera but when you use >>tabs you almost never use back/forward. > > > but..but..but.... most users use the forward/back button. > > > >> >>Yeah, it's like 2 clicks for Opera and 3 clicks for Mozilla. > > > False, a lot are one click or zero clicks (F12 key) F12 = zero clicks???? Wow, what logic. By your logic Alt-E->e = zero clicks. agreed? >>>Faster loading pages >> >> >>Wrong > > > > Correct. Is that based on any concrete numbers or just on yoru perception? > >>>WAY faster using the back/forward buttons >> >> >>You already said it >> >> >>>Uses far, far less memory >> >> >>True and this is why I advise it for older machines. But with every new >>Opera release, the program gets bigger and memory-hungry. When opera has >>all of Mozilla features it will use at least as much memory. > > > But who wants IRC and a Composer? Most people don't. Again, users > choice, not Mozilla's bloatware. IRC is an install time option. I've already written about Composer. Also if you were to write up a patch that separated Composer into a separate install time option, I doubt if people would oppose it. >>>Can be run on slow computers like a 486 >> >> >>Opera 6 is NOT usable on a 486. Opera4/5 was but that's history. > > > Tell that to the 486 DX-2 66 I am running it now. Runs better than NS > and IE 4 Good. Then you should stick to Opera. >>>Tons more skins/themes (if you care about such petty things) >> >> >>XUL is far more powerful than the BMP skinning Opera uses. Ever heard of >>cross-platform UI ? > > > Tons more skins in Opera, 80+... > Show me 80 skins for Mozilla. I'm sure once 1.0 comes out, there'll be more skins for Mozilla. There's about 10 on xulplanet.com right now. Pratik.
