MCBastos wrote:
Interviewed by CNN on 18/06/2011 14:59, Rufus told the world:
No, I don't think you're understanding *me* - I'm not interested in the
Mozilla technology, I'm interested in the Mozilla *feature set*. Big,
subtle difference in that I'm thinking as a user and not a coder, and I
also realize this means a *new* product.
What I want is the Mozilla feature set brought to iOS...which is why I
now have the Atomic browser on my iPad. It's as close as I can get.
The thing is, the feature set on Firefox and Seamonkey is completely
dependent on the Gecko engine. The user interface is ran by the browser
engine, not by the operating system. That's what allows writing such
powerful browser extensions, for starters. Gecko was designed from the
start to offer this functionality. Webkit does not offer it, and that's
why Safari and Chrome extensions are comparatively simpler.
I find that hard to believe as stated. The feature set "as implemented"
within the *current* releases as coded is dependent on the Gecko engine,
but for a *new* product what we are talking about is a set of design
requirements and interface specifications - not the actual
implementation in code to accomplish the task. I like the SM
implementation...(completely) new code, same look.
Biggest limitation with iOS that I can discern is file transfer...but I
can live with hardware/OS limitations, interface issues can in general
always be evolved.
The Atomic browser is about as close to SM as one can get for iOS.
Tabbed browsing as opposed to opening new full screen, rotable pages
like Safari (which leaves me thinking I won't like Full Screen Apps in
Lion...), better user bookmark sorting ability, limited user
"theme-like" (color - with a few strokes I could make it look even more
like SM Modern in that respect) selection ability, a user definable
Personal Toolbar...none of these are Safari features and Atomic has far
more pref settings available to the user. So it's been done...to an
extent. What's missing from Atomic for me as a SM user is an integrated
e-mail/usenet client.
But I've *just* grabbed NewsTap and it's extremely full-featured and
looks to be just the ticket...so I may actually have what I want now,
other than that the two (Atomic and NewsTap) aren't integrated. but as
I've mentioned before iOS is beginning to change my mind about the
utility of a suite - that may also hold with Lion...I'll have to wait
and see what Lion actually does. Lion's full screen app implementation
may drive me to using the Safari/Thunderbird combination.
What you are asking for would be an entirely new product, built from the
ground up, reusing very little existing Mozilla/Seamonkey code, made to
mimic superficially the Seamonkey features. I say "superficially"
because, even if it looked like Seamonkey, it would be unable to run
extensions -- because those extensions depend on Gecko to run.
Yes - I'm aware of that and have said so. In fact, I would expect an
iOS implementation would/could use *none* of the existing SM *code*, but
that doesn't mean it couldn't behave and or look like SM and still *be*
SM...I'd call it "PadMonkey", myself...just for marketing purposes, and
to distinguish it.
What you are doing, essentially, is going to Honda and suggesting they
should build a Civic -- but using a Ford engine, Ford transmission and
Ford unibody, with only surface bodywork and upholstering by Honda. And
of course, it should *still* allow the installation of engine tuning
kits which were designed for a Honda engine, because those engines are
one of the nice things about Hondas...
Yeah...that's done all the time. In point of fact, Honda are presently
developing jet engines and are now looking for someone to build other
than Hondajets to put them in as a competitive alternative to the
Williams engine. Epiphone builds Les Paul and other Gibson designed
guitars, GM rebrands common designs and parts, US plants build Toyotas,
a lot of the parts on my Harley are made overseas now and it's still an
"American motorcycle". That's how open markets work...
If the SM Team wrote it, it would *be* SM if that's what the team wanted
it to be. Just SM for and to the constraints of another platform.
Would you be surprised if Honda considered your request could hardly be
called a Honda and therefore they weren't interested in wasting
engineering talent developing it, while there were real Hondas to be
developed?
Boeing, Airbus, and a whole host of other jets are delivered with GE,
Rolls Royce, SNECMA, etc. engines, and all the companies make
money...none of them really care what the final product is called. They
all get their cut - and that's really what it's all about. I'm still
trying to figure out how the SM team generates revenue...they must
somehow/where, or they wouldn't be doing what they do.
--
- Rufus
_______________________________________________
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
