ChimChim, competition for Chimera!

Thats cool and all, but I'm a moron and can't figure out how to 'build' it .. if someone else does get it working and would like to spread the love, do let me know. :)
 
Originally posted by iamnotmad
Mozilla.org now has thier own cocoazilla based browser, Called ChimChim!!

Excellent. Check it out here:
ChimChim
Click to expand...

I just wanted to respond to my own message before it got out of hand.

Actually Chim Chim and Chimera are the same project.
(found out after I posted this)

In any case go download chimera now (version .12 binary) It's great.
mozdev.org

Thanks.
 
hey ed, just because AOL / Netscape USES the code from Mozilla doesn't mean that chimera is evil. Chimera also uses the code. But, you see, using chimera doesn't help aol/netscape any.

AOL IS NEVER GOING TO ADOPT CHIMERA!
SO THERE!

EDIT:

So like if I download the mozilla code and make my own web browser out of it called 'AOL SUCKS' you still wouldn't use it would you? Even though aol isn't going to capatalize on my web browser.

I'm sorry if I sound a bit pissed :) I'm just trying to see where you draw the line, thats all.
 
Just to point out Ed, Omniweb uses Mozilla code as well and they probably will end up using more. I guess you will have to stop using that to because as we all know mozilla is the work of the devil.
 
1st - googolplex - I have never made this personal. I have not problems with you or anyone else who knowingly uses mozilla and knows what they are doing. I can hol my own in discussion and debate without resorting to telling people that YOU don't know what you are talking about or that you are aiding the devil ( i don't believe in the devil). could you show me that little respect in the future?

btw - your threads are not parties. they are discussions. and you guys can discuss how it works and what you like and dislike to your hearts content and i will not join in. In fact i think that is great. I also think all aol users should be downloading the stuff and helping themselves. I have made it clear that i will only post when there is a link posted with something simple like "try mozilla" along with it. I just think people should be informed. it's not mozilla is trying to hide this info. they just don't put it in plain sight either.

kilowatt - you've got a good point. and a while back i asked for anyone to show me where this could not be used by aol and i would back off. all igot was a reply from googolplex saying it could be but that he believed they wouldn't use it. The thing about Omniweb and the others is that they are not opensourced. the improvements they make are not linked to the mozilla project and are not available for aol to take advantage of. so i am ok with that. If you made a browser and called it "aol sucks" and made proprietary changes in it from the mozilla builds, i would give it a look. (sounds like a great idea to me:p )
 
Originally posted by Ed Spruiell

If you made a browser and called it "aol sucks" and made proprietary changes in it from the mozilla builds, i would give it a look. (sounds like a great idea to me:p ) [/B]
Click to expand...

But Ed, Chimera does have "proprietary changes", meaning changes that will only be for Chimera. Unless by proprietary you mean, not open source, but then you are condemning open source in general.

Besides the all of this, shouldn't we use what software is the best for us? Hell, I'd use MS Windows if it were beter. We should encourage companies large or small by using thier software if they are making good stuff. But I digress.
 
Ed, I in no way meant to offend you in any of my replies. I should have put a smily at the end of the previous post. I wasn't serioulsy saying it was the work of the devil. Most of what I say to you about this issue is all in fun, because I know that you and I will never aggree about it. And I dont have a problem with it. I am 'discussing' as well. I pointed out to you that Omniweb uses mozilla code.

In response to your last paragraph I will ask why open source is bad? AOL is giving stuff for other people to use. Isn't that good thing? If the omnigroup wants to take code from mozilla then thats great. AOL is in turn helping out the Omnigroup. Isn't that a good thing? Are you against open source in general because you fear a company like AOL is going to use it?

I still dont understand what is wrong with AOL *giving away for free* the code that their *paid* employees are working on. That seems great in my opinion. I think that you have to get past your anit-aol stance and see that what they are doing is good for people other then them.

Anyways, I dont mean to offend you in any way so I'll put a smily at the end of each possibly offensive phrase :).

OK? :)
 
clarrification accepted:)

to tell you the truth before we started all this i would have thought that open source is a good thing. I think i was naive. i think you guys are helping me see ths potential downside that i would not have thought of before. I think kilowatt summed it up pretty clearly when he said that i am GNU and you guys are BSD. and i'm fine with that.

I just don't believe in helping oppressors. and aol is oppressive in my opinion. If someone gives you the greatest gift in the world you would be happy i am sure. you seem to feel this way about mozilla. but if that person then turns around and kills your family because you gave them access to them, would it have been worth it? I just see helping mozilla as being similar to this example. less dramatic maybe.

perhaps this is a difference of the times we grew up in. I grew up when corporate america was financing the war in vietnam. later it financed apartheid in South Africa. It is currently financing a whole host of mean and nasty things including clearcutting the rainforrest. I still see the world as a place where people are often so caught up in having the best that they lose sight of the costs. I do not support companies whose ethics i oppose. I wouldn't work for them unless i thought that some good might come out of me doing so.

I really struggle with how to explain this to you. I realize that when I was your age i probably wouldn't have really gotten it either. and so that is not your fault. I cannot give you experience and hindsight. I can only give you what mine has led me to;)
 
iamnotmad - to clarrify a little more of what i alluded to in my last post, let me say that my concern is with the way open source is handled. When it is used by huge monopolies to increase their profit margin and gobble up their competitors, then i have a problem with it.

i guess what you describe as proprietary is just what i meant and so far you are the first to say that chimara has such things. so long as the little guys are making improvements that are not opensourced property and hence the finished version of the browser cannot be adapted by netrape/aol, then i am all for them. show me where Chimera qualifies as that and i will leave it alone. this is my understanding of the status of Omniweb.

btw - i would give up Omniweb, which i rarely use, in a heartbeat if i thought it was aiding aol in any way. or if it came down to being the only browser that wasn't aiding aol or m$, then i would use it as my default brwser despite its sluggishness.

I will still jump all over regular mozilla but that is just the way that is for reasons you either understand from reading the other thread or you don't.

:)
 
Ed, I'm trying to understand why you don't like AOL. IMHO, AOL is a decent ISP for people who need a service that is easy to learn.

I *think* you're point of view is that AOL is a huge company who aspires to serve the entire world and make loads of money. While you don't seem have the details of what AOL has done that is so terribly wrong, you have enough experience with large companies to know that they are always doing something wrong and it will come to light eventually.

Is that close?

Vanguard

PS If anybody is interested, I support any browser that supports open standards. Browsers that do this allow web developers to build sites that work with any browser. That allows me to choose pick my favorite browser and it prevents vendor lock-in.
 
And mozilla especially prevents lock-in because anyone can use it. AOL can't lock you in with it because some nicer company could just download the source, compile and called it "aol sucks". Its also great that Mozilla supports standards better than anything else. It helps the community. I don't have a problem with big companies if they are doing good things. And what AOL is doing with Mozilla is good. I may not like Microsoft for being anticompetive, but if they were doing something like mozilla I'd sure as hell support it.
 
Originally posted by Ed Spruiell
iamnotmad - to clarrify a little more of what i alluded to in my last post, let me say that my concern is with the way open source is handled. When it is used by huge monopolies to increase their profit margin and gobble up their competitors, then i have a problem with it.

i guess what you describe as proprietary is just what i meant and so far you are the first to say that chimara has such things. so long as the little guys are making improvements that are not opensourced property and hence the finished version of the browser cannot be adapted by netrape/aol, then i am all for them. show me where Chimera qualifies as that and i will leave it alone. this is my understanding of the status of Omniweb.

btw - i would give up Omniweb, which i rarely use, in a heartbeat if i thought it was aiding aol in any way. or if it came down to being the only browser that wasn't aiding aol or m$, then i would use it as my default brwser despite its sluggishness.

I will still jump all over regular mozilla but that is just the way that is for reasons you either understand from reading the other thread or you don't.

:)
Click to expand...

Well, Omniweb, undoubtedly does help Mozilla (then in your eyes AOL) If they are using some code, then they help debug it potentially, surely if omnigroup finds a nasty bug or two in code it uses from mozilla, they would let the mozilla group know.

Also, if I may stretch this a little farther (though not as far as your family killing analogy) in an indirect way by using any other browser that supports web standards you are helping mozilla, since thhat is waht the group fights for alongside those other browsers. If you really don't want to help mozilla your going to have to use IE, since the more IE users there are the more MS thinks they can make the web proprietary.

On a side note you are making assumptions about every one else's age around here and thier level of wisdom. I don't think you know everyone's age, not mine at least. In addition, I've known "young'ns" who are wise beyond thier years.
 
" On a side note you are making assumptions about every one else's age around here and thier level of wisdom. I don't think you know everyone's age, not mine at least. In addition, I've known "young'ns" who are wise beyond thier years."

I dont think we should get into that. Just because some people are yougner (like me) doesn't mean we are wrong. I just have a different opinion then Ed.

Anyways I dont think Ed was trying to make a statement saying that younger people don't see the issue right because they are too naive or something. I'm pretty sure he was just saying that he thought differently when he was younger...

And yes, web standards should be helped even if a big contributer to it is AOL. Its a good thing that they want standards isn't it?
 
Originally posted by googolplex

... Just because some people are yougner (like me) doesn't mean we are wrong. I just have a different opinion then Ed.
Click to expand...

That's exactly what I meant... Sorry if that was unclear.
 
:o still drinking my first cup of coffee and watching the hockey game but i will quickly address the age misunderstanding.

first, i don't aproach any of this discussion in terms of right or wrong. at least not in absolute terms. there are only personal right and wrongs involved here.

i also was speaking to googolplex about age and to some extent vanguard. I don't have to assume their ages - i know them. iamnotmad was never included in that statement. iamnotmad - i apologize for any lack of clarity that allowed you to feel i was making assumptions about you.

And if i did not consider these two young men to have exceptional intelligence i would not bother to go into such depth attempting to explain myself to them. so far they have been very good debate opponents 99% of the time.

actually googolplex i was saying, not implying, that youth does carry an inherent naivity. It is as inescable for you as it was for me. It is certainly not 'wrong'. It is just the way things are. You cannot have more experience than your years allow you. I would guess, nay, I would hope, that some of the perceptions and perspectives you hold now will change as you go thru life. Developmental research supports this statement.

and googolplex there are some things that are so hard to put into words so that a person who has never been thru certain things can fully understand them because they require certain shared experience. I have never met a teenager who has been thru them yet. Things take on different dimensions when they move beyond the intellectual experience. I know you can approach the intellectual side with great skill. I am not sure there is a way for me to explain the emtional/experiential part adequatly. There are some things that the old and the young cannot see the same. It has always been that way and it always will. The best we old farts can do is plant the seeds of perceptions and hope for the best. I can only say that i see more things the way my father did now that i am older than i did while he was alive. (not that i agree with everything he tried to teach me, but i understand things much better now)

so to summarize, never be defensive about your age. It is yours to own with pride. It is not wrong but you may find as time goes by that the world is not just the way you see it now. There are also no absolute rights in either side of this discussion. Both perspectives have things that are correct and incorrect. The important thing is that we present both sides so that people can make informed choices and perhaps take a minute to think about the consequences of their actions. neither choice is faultless and without future implications that might have negative outcomes.

ok, so this wasn't so quickly, but it says a little of what i need to say.;)
 
So I'm not wrong. But my age is leading me to thinking this way? I dont think so. There are many other people who are your age who beleive the same things as me. Please don't make this an issue of age, because its not. If you think that its because of my age that I beleive this then thats OK. But its not because of my age that I beleive this. I dont see why we should even be discussing this.

Its stupid to argue who is "right" or "wrong", because we aren't going to change each other's minds. And we shouldn't bring an issue like age into this. It isn't an age arguement. Somebody who is 16 can see this issue just as well as you can. How about we go back to talking about how great this browser is :)

googolplex

P.S. To all Americans, You put up a good effort in the hockey game and you almost got us! GO CANADA GO!
 
To all Canadians: Your countrymen played a great game. You put it all together when it counted and you beat us in a fair game. I was hoping that the USA would come out on top but it just wasn't meant to be. We'll see you in 901 days. :)

Vanguard
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top