Re: [expert] M13
On Mon, Jan 31, 2000 at 09:41:47AM -0500, Andrew Post wrote: > The profiles feature is useless on any OS with user accounts. That's one > of the reasons why I don't use Netscape on NT. What about Office/Home/Travel profiles on a laptop with Linux or NT ? -- Sylvain GIL - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - Dis donc, Cortex, tu veux faire quoi cette nuit ? - La même chose que chaque nuit, Minus: tenter de conquerir le monde! (choeurs) C'est Minus et Cortex, Cortex, Cortex.
Re: [expert] M13
I've been a fan of Netscape since my Mosaic2.0 days. The code may be available at the UI in Illinois. I think that is where it orginally came from. If so, maybe Linux community can build a browser that will work for all of us? But then again, it may be just my private pipe dream. Pj [EMAIL PROTECTED] Nothing in Linux is impossible. Only thinking makes it so.
RE: [expert] M13
> From: Ramon Gandia [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Benjamin Sher wrote:
> > still needs a lot of work. I am, of course, disappointed to
> know that
> > Mozilla 13 is not yet ready for prime time, but truth, in
> the long run,
> > never hurt anybody. Let's hope the Mozilla folks continue to improve
> > their new Communicator.
>
> That is the whole problem, Ben. Communicator was never a good
> product, for either Windows or Linux. The code on Communicator
> has been in the 13MB to 20 MB depending on version.
The last version of Netscape I used at any length was NS3.0. I switch to
Internet Explorer and haven't looked back. Considering how much M$ usually
ignores standards and blazes their own trail, IE4 and IE5 are VERY compliant
and up-to-date with Web Consortium standards.
This became very apparent when I tried to design some web pages. IE would
function according to the spec while Netscape merrily went its own way and
either ignored the tag or, worse, misinterpreted the tag. Netscape 4.x, for
example, is frickin' clueless about cascading style sheets. HELLO??!!! How
many years has CSS been in the spec? 3? 4?
I could go on, but I think I made my point: Whatever M$ faults are, they
have the most compliant browser on the market. Period. I think the web
browser open source community should wake up and smell the coffee. You guys
are NOT outperforming the "evil empire" with regard to browsers. Just a
fact of life.
To be fair, I did try M13 yesterday on my LM6.1 system. The fonts were so
small I couldn't read it, and no matter what options I tried, I couldn't
increase the fonts onscreen. That, along with 10 crashes, both exceptions
and outright fatal errors, tells me that the Mozilla project still seems to
be stumbling along. I blame Netscape and AOL more than the programmers. It
isn't fully open source like Linux so why would the many Linux gurus want to
develop it.
Matt Zaleski
P.S. Contrary to the stance some might think I have, I have no love for
Microsoft and I want Linux and open source to kick their butts. But if
we're not honest about the capabilities on the Open Source side, we're no
better than the PR ("marketing" to those outside the U.S.) machine in
Redmond.
Re: [expert] M13
Ramon Gandia wrote: > Benjamin Sher wrote: > > > > Dear Ramon and friends: > > > > My thanks to Ramon and other gurus for your evaluation of Mozilla 13. As > > a non-techie, it is all too easy for me to be won over by the lovely > > design and shiny chrome. It's good to know that what's under the hood > > still needs a lot of work. I am, of course, disappointed to know that > > Mozilla 13 is not yet ready for prime time, but truth, in the long run, > > never hurt anybody. Let's hope the Mozilla folks continue to improve > > their new Communicator. > > That is the whole problem, Ben. Communicator was never a good > product, for either Windows or Linux. The code on Communicator > has been in the 13MB to 20 MB depending on version. > > Mozilla right now has a fairly light footprint, about 4 MB, but > that is not the Netscape 5.0 they talk about. Netscape 5.0 > will use Mozilla as the BASIS. then they will add all of the > Shopping stuff to it and get it up to 15MB just watch. > > A much better approach would have been to base Mozilla on the > old Netscape Navigator 3.x. Just change the Java engine on it > and aways to go. Unfortunately, bloatware and commercialism > killed that idea. Netscape Corporation directed the Mozilla > project and told it what the end result needed to be. > > This looks to me like a project that is not going to be very > good. Specially for Linux. Does anyone know if the Mozilla > source code database contain the Netscape 3.x source code? I > haven't found it, and I doubt it is there. > > -- > Ramon Gandia ---Sysadmin --- http://www.nook.net > 285 West 1st Avenue ISP for Western Alaska > P.O. Box 970 tel. 907-443-7575 > Nome, Alaska 99762fax. 907-443-2487 > === Well, actually, they started using a new model at Mozilla and set up a classic source tree. In that classic source tree is something that goes by various names called Qt-zilla which should be of interest. Unfortunately the directions of the "legitimate" spammers, AOL and company, have ruined a potentially good product. So what options do we have? OperaIf it ever gets out of the gate Konqueror Likely to be limited to KDE and Gnome at first GrailCould be reactivated. It was sort-of slow on Pentium 75s, but Python code seems to run fast enough on modern processors. There are dozens of dead or dying projects out there which have a lot of merit. Perhaps it is time for a team of users/coders to look at them and pick one. After looking at the directions of M13, Bleah, I am striking Mozilla from my list of possible uses. Let's get real for a moment. I have 15 users recently moved from windows. First I gave them Netscape for their email. They do not like and manage to keep forgetting to click on the paper clip for attachments so they can save them, then they forget that clicking on their house in KDE is where the saved attachments are located. I have arranged applnks and mimelnks so the attachments open their own applications. But there is unrest among the commoners. The cry of, "too many steps, bring back Microsoft," is oft muttered. OK, now I am converting them to kmail. Not ideal by any means, but you click the attachment and XPDF or StarOffice or AcrobatReader or archiver rises to the bait and opens it. WordPerfect files without extensions which seem to be popular attachments from the EPA still have to be saved, then opened from the WordPerfect application. I will be very pleased when I can finally dump Netscape. Right now, I see it as the biggest obstacle to general use of linux on the desktop. Civileme
Re: [expert] M13
Benjamin Sher wrote: > > Dear Ramon and friends: > > My thanks to Ramon and other gurus for your evaluation of Mozilla 13. As > a non-techie, it is all too easy for me to be won over by the lovely > design and shiny chrome. It's good to know that what's under the hood > still needs a lot of work. I am, of course, disappointed to know that > Mozilla 13 is not yet ready for prime time, but truth, in the long run, > never hurt anybody. Let's hope the Mozilla folks continue to improve > their new Communicator. That is the whole problem, Ben. Communicator was never a good product, for either Windows or Linux. The code on Communicator has been in the 13MB to 20 MB depending on version. Mozilla right now has a fairly light footprint, about 4 MB, but that is not the Netscape 5.0 they talk about. Netscape 5.0 will use Mozilla as the BASIS. then they will add all of the Shopping stuff to it and get it up to 15MB just watch. A much better approach would have been to base Mozilla on the old Netscape Navigator 3.x. Just change the Java engine on it and aways to go. Unfortunately, bloatware and commercialism killed that idea. Netscape Corporation directed the Mozilla project and told it what the end result needed to be. This looks to me like a project that is not going to be very good. Specially for Linux. Does anyone know if the Mozilla source code database contain the Netscape 3.x source code? I haven't found it, and I doubt it is there. -- Ramon Gandia ---Sysadmin --- http://www.nook.net 285 West 1st Avenue ISP for Western Alaska P.O. Box 970 tel. 907-443-7575 Nome, Alaska 99762fax. 907-443-2487 ===
Re: [expert] M13
The profiles feature is useless on any OS with user accounts. That's one of the reasons why I don't use Netscape on NT. Andrew Post Ramon Gandia wrote: > > Is it me, or is it M13? I downloaded it, and it worksbut. > It sure is quirky. Loading pages, it jerks around. It does > not seem to allocate space for images, and then jerks the page > around to accomodate them. Like IE in Windows does. It is > also very slow on my Pentium II-300 running MDK 6.1. This thing > is nowhere near release as far as I can tell. > > My other impression is that the Mozilla crew has made a bad > mistake by following the Communicator idea. Netscape 3.0 > would have been a better role model, specially for Linux. > We do not need "Profiles" in Linux, that is what user accounts > are for in Linux. I suppose there is some use for it, but > nothing like in Windows. The email in Communicator/M13 is > dreadfully slow, not like in Netscape 3.x. Try it with > 1000 emails in a folder and it just bogs down. 3.x never > did that even with over 8000 in a folder. > > I hope Opera and/or KFM does well, because I think we have a > disaster coming with the Mozilla-for-Linux thing as being the > browser of choice for Linux. > > I'd use 3.x if it wasn't the browser crashes often on Java. > Its beautiful, simple and fast. > > -- > Ramon Gandia = Sysadmin == Nook Net > http://www.nook.net[EMAIL PROTECTED] > 285 West First Avenue tel. 907-443-7575 > P.O. Box 970 fax. 907-443-2487 > Nome, Alaska 99762-0970 Alaska Toll Free. 888-443-7525
Re: [expert] M13
Dear Ramon and friends: My thanks to Ramon and other gurus for your evaluation of Mozilla 13. As a non-techie, it is all too easy for me to be won over by the lovely design and shiny chrome. It's good to know that what's under the hood still needs a lot of work. I am, of course, disappointed to know that Mozilla 13 is not yet ready for prime time, but truth, in the long run, never hurt anybody. Let's hope the Mozilla folks continue to improve their new Communicator. Benjamin -- Benjamin and Anna Sher [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sher's Russian Web http://www.websher.net
Re: [expert] M13
OK... I posted a question about M13 a few days ago. I'm not dreaming! M13 is pretty bad with LM. It crashes continuously on me both with 7.0 and with 6.1. I was wondering how it does on RH. Presumably not better. -- Jean Meloche
