On Thu, 12 Jul 2001 18:27:54 +0100 esteemed Gervase Markham did hold forth
thusly:
> Firstly, this automatically assumes that end-user experience is the
> defining criteria for Mozilla 1.0. This is by no means a given.
And that is just the problem with it. Look, techies designing something for
each other are just self-indulgent. A browser of all things ought to be built
for the masses.
> Secondly, it assumes that you can find some company willing to let us use
> its employees as guinea pigs.
Well, if we don't ask we will never find out. However, there are thousands of
companies, government agencies, etc out there. I'd bet some would agree to
such a request if only to evaluate the Moz technologies for their own
purposes. There's a great deal of intranet development going on.
> Thirdly, it's extremely arbitrary, as you yourself said. What if the
> percentage sticks at 49%? Do we keep working for another six months until
> we persuade one more person to switch?
Let us do the first one week run with 0.9.2 and find out what the percentage
turns out to be. This will give us a baseline to use to choose the eventual
percentage goal.
> I understand that we need to flag and fix usability issues, and I believe
> that they are getting flagged, at least, using mechanisms like nsCatFood.
> But I don't believe that usability studies should define the Mozilla
> release schedule.
If few want to use it then why release it in the first place?
