Fastest web browser

Ed, I think I have this figured out.

This is the classic case of a GNU/GPL person clashing with a BSD-style person.

there is nothing I can say now :)

Check out http://www.gnu.org
and http://www.freebsd.org
if you wish to compare the licenses. I have a feeling you will fit in just fine at gnu.org ;-)

No offense intended, though. I hope you find your prefect license through this ;-)

PS, the signature is the Mozilla Dragon, I got it off a mozilla bug report... I think its a bit long, though, so I may replace it soon.
 
lol:p

well at least it's good to know i'm a classic case!! i have to agree, i am a copyleft kind of person. i am not so sure i agree with some of the other stuff he supports, but copyleft is exactly where i am coming from. it's good to know that this issue is unresolvable and i can stop wearing my fingers down to the bone typing long passionate replies.
not being a programmer i still believe in proprietary software. i have no problem with that. i need it. i want it. i am willing to pay for it when it suits my needs. i believe developers should be able to eat, buy homes, watch satelite TV, etc. (not sure about driving cars - i suppose it depends on the individual. it's alright if they can focus on the world around them for awhile - he he). in fact i think individual developers or development groups that put out a great product should eat very well for their efforts. but big companies shouldn't feed all their employees off of others' work while the person who did the work lives paycheck to paycheck in the blissful ignorance of having enjoyed the work.

so again i want to ask you to explain how you are not aiding aol by using mozilla? i still see you as someone who is contributing to something that you don't really believe in either. eg, i hit a cue ball into a group of three balls. i sink two of them. the third lands in a position that blocks my shot on the eight. i end up scratching and losing. i meant to sink the first two. i accomplished the very thing i set out to do. i enjoyed it immensely and took great pride in it. but in doing so i screwed myself out of the chance to win, which was the bigger objective. of course i can still come away claiming what a great shot i was to sink two balls on one shot and how much fun it was to have played.

btw - your homepage gives icab one of the few green smilie faces i have seen. at least you practice what you preach about adhering to standards!!:)


so are there any more gnu's out there or am i surrounded by bsd's?:D
 
so how do you like my new moniker? i think i'll keep it till this thread hits the bottom of the page:p maybe i should put up a new avatar as well. do you think it would be too misleading if i used the gnu cow since i don't really know linux/not unix:D


gnu's and bsd's can still be friends, right? we just can't talk about stuff like this, right? (lol)
 
Hello!

Ed: totally off the subject but at the time of this posting you have made exactly 1000 postings! Congratulations! Keep up the great work!

Have a great day!

Albert
 
Ed - I had a similiar AOL experience back in 1993. I think I used them for a total of 3 months before I bolted and briefly joined e-World (Apple's own "AOL" like service), which I was on for maybe 1 month before I dropped it all together. I didn't get back "online" until late '94, thanks to the wonderful guys and gals at Mindspring.

As a corporation, I'm no fan of AOL. But the Netscape browser issue doesn't bother me. AOL may ultimately own the work that is done by all the volunteers to the project, but shouldn't the volunteers already know that from reading the open source agreement before they contribute?

I think Apple's license agreement with Darwin is very similiar in that you can contribute anything you like to it, but if you do, Apple can use it for their own gain and not worry about paying the creator.

Either way - my only beef with open source is the speed in which projects get finished. Mozilla started almost 5 years ago, and they have yet to ship a "1.0" release. That's pathetic, and part of the reason why IE now owns over 80% of the browser market. Netscape took too long to get a good IE 5 competitor out.

Hopefully with the antitrust settlement issue of vendors being able to put any browser on XP that they want (Compaq and HP have already stated they will use Netscape), Netscape/Mozilla can gain more share.
 
kilowatt, thanks for promoting mozilla... its really got a bad reputation with people and they bash it without trying it. Or because it sucked before. This mach-o build is amazing. its amazingly fast and it would be amazing if keyboard shortcuts would work. I've filed a bug on this and a few other problems with it at bugzilla and they are being worked on.

Ed, try and file a bug on IE and you wont know if it will even be looked at. If AOL was to kill Netscape today Mozilla would still continue.

It benefits everyone to have a viable alternitive to IE. Mozilla is the viable alternitive on practically *all* platforms. I dont want to say using Omniweb or Opera or iCab is bad, however. Using anything other then IE is better then using IE. I just think that Mozilla is really getting good. And it makes things easier for web developers since it supports this really weird thing called standards. :)

googolplex

P.S. Come on the IRC server (#macintosh on irc.press3.com). We have some really good people on there and some really good discussion at times. It would be great if we could get more people on it. :)
 
1st, thanks albert for the recognition. there is a 'congrats to ed' thread in all thoughts non-tech and i invite everyone to drop by there and chat about more mundane stuff:)

well, we all agree that having alternatives to ie is a good thing. and i am sure we go on and on with people saying #2 is better than #3 and me saying "but 3's a bigger number than 2". it is clear that all who have engaged in discussion with me have a pretty good idea of what is going on and make their choice accordingly which is how it should be. it just alarms me when someone posts a link to mozilla and says download it - it works great. many people will then try it and not know all the things we have discussed. so i speak up and say, "yea, but....". then people can make their own decision. i think this thread has done a good job of presenting both sides and hopefully a few people are reading it and making an informed choice - my real goal to start with.

i don't think my beef is really with informed developers who sign the agreement and have got a clue how it works. it is with those annoying crash reports (yes i know you can turn them off, but people who naively want to help won't do that) that average users generate.

googolplex - if aol killed netscape i very well might go back to mozilla.

btw - another of my favorite features in icab - ad blocking. i can visit ad driven free sites without having to be bothered by annoying banners. this also saves on load time.

Peace, Love and Use a Mac:)
 
Ed, in mozilla you can disable popups and popunders! :). Also there is an addon being worked on to block banners.
 
The Mach-O file that's now sitting in the nightly builds folder is only 1.1MB and doesn't include the Mozilla app, just the libical.pkg file and a readme.

Anyone know what's going on? Is there another location to get nightly builds of the Mach-O Mozilla?
 
but what happens when the sites you visit start charging for access because the advertisers have left? :confused:

i hate banner blocking software for that reason... damn... if you like a site don't block their banners... do the opposite. click on a couple of them from time to time and surf that new site that pops up so that the referring page log in their server shows that the ads are working...

i mean c'mon! how do you think people get paid to run content sites? :mad:
 
I'm having some moral issues determining where I stand on these issues... I agree wholeheartedly about blocking ads, it hurts the people we often like the most. Unless you surf porn sites or warez sites, then you have no choice but to turn on blocking because those people are NOT about fair play in the browser.

I ues AOL as my no quostians asked get on from anywhere ISP. I travel a fair amount, and it is critical that I can dial in no matter where I am. I use AOL with a $5 per month very limited time online subscription. It's enough to check my e-mail a couple times per month. Anyone reasonable stopped using the AOL browser years ago, as soon as they enabled TCP over AOL.

I agree that they provide an experience largely separate from the internet. If you want a truly moderated online experience for your kids, I view AOL as the only way to go. It's inherently closed. The internet is inherently open, and trying to block things is a messy patchwork.

I do think they are a corporation bent on making a profit, but aren't they all? They've enabled a minimum of features that keep me happy, and I send them a minimum of dollars in response. I'm also paying $250 per month for a business grade network connection, so the $5 isn't a big deal to me. I get online with AOL and surf the web with iCab. I have no bad feelings about that. Although the version numbers in Mac and Windows don't match, AOL did port to Mac OS X in short order. You're free to hate them. I don't. They are a viable tool for certain uses.
 
serpicolugnut, there was a problem with the building of mach-o for a little while. The problem is fixed and the builds should be normal again.
 
Originally posted by Ed Spruiell


btw - another of my favorite features in icab - ad blocking. i can visit ad driven free sites without having to be bothered by annoying banners. this also saves on load time.
Click to expand...

Way to talk out of both sinds of your mouth. one side: "Support the little guy don't use mozilla!!"[becasue of some personal opinion on the connection between totally open source user built mozilla and the large company AOL], the other side: "I love blocking ads..." [on those little sites where i get all kinds of free information, and thier only source of income is ads]
 
and if i am not going to follow those ads, what difference does it make? i am pretty sure phone solicitors make their money by placing calls and i don't buy from them either. advertising has never been a guarentee that anyone will buy. there is never any gurantee that the right people will see it. it is a best guess science. i am guessing i won't be needing anything they are advertising. no one has lost anything by not showing me the ad.

btw, icab doesn't block all ads, just those generated from the most well known and least appealling (to me) sources.

the world doesn't always have to be totally congruent. i pick the ways that make it seem like that for me, and you choose your ways.

"sometimes we live no particular way but our own"
-Grateful Dead
 
Originally posted by Ed Spruiell
and if i am not going to follow those ads, what difference does it make? i am pretty sure phone solicitors make their money by placing calls and i don't buy from them either. advertising has never been a guarentee that anyone will buy. there is never any gurantee that the right people will see it. it is a best guess science. i am guessing i won't be needing anything they are advertising. no one has lost anything by not showing me the ad.
Click to expand...

In fact those sites make money when the ads are simply displayed, just not as much as if there was a click thru. But also, this is not a random association. You talk specifically about helping the little guy, meanwhile you leach off the little guy in your own way, by stripping them of what is sometimes thier sole source of revenue.

Absolutely, but perhaps everytime someone posts a message about how they think others should give mozilla a try (becasue they themselves thought the functionality was good) you hop on and say, whoa, don't use that you're being bad, oh, but make up your own mind.
 
everytime someone posts a message about how they think others should give mozilla a try (becasue they themselves thought the functionality was good) you hop on and say, whoa, don't use that you're being bad, oh, but make up your own mind.
Click to expand...

that's right. i'm like the houseguest from hell that won't leave when it comes to this topic. (actually interpretting my point of view as some judgement of good and bad is a bit off, i'm just saying support a world you want to live in and don't support one you don't)

i also think your points about ad blocking are things people should take into consideration before thay do it. you've got good points. I personally don't visit many small ad driven sites. the pages i like looking at the best without ads are some of my own homepages. They are not commercially oriented in the least and i find the banners very annoying. of course i am too cheap to pay to remove them as well. so that is the price of free.
of course, if i really wanted to, i could argue that allowing advertisers to pay for ads you ignore is ripping the advertiser off, but i won't go there.;)
 
the latest build of MachO Mozilla has some good improvements in using Aqua widgets, but that damn annoying bug of keyboard shortcuts not working is still there. This should be a high priority bug fix. Otherwise, this build just keeps on getting better and better...
 
I had to come back to this thread, because today I used maybe the fastest browser when it comes to rendering I have ever seen, in fact, I am writing from it at the moment!
Konqueror on Linux! Damnit, this thing is really fast, faster than the latest Mozilla build on Linux! Just thought I'd share ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top