Which browser do you use for primary?

[azosx]

do you know the meaning of the word 'relative'? do you know the term 'tax deduction'?

My mistake. Obviously you didn't mean relative to you. Relative to them isn't the point either
or whether they receive a tax deduction. All my point was is that these charities and research
foundations trying to solve world hunger and cure AIDS are not evil because their primary funding is from
entrepreneurs like Bill Gates or Big Business like MS. Nor do they care what MS or anybody else does. Nor do they exist to serve them.
They survive simply by the generosity of others. Much like Mozilla.

most of what i write is fact. the other is my opinion. show me the 'BS'.

Unfortunately I don't have a link to your previous Mozilla thread. I could look it up but I dont see the point
I had the oppourtunity to read it over a month ago when it was rehatched in a different thread. It's
long and tiresome and I don't feel we need a continuation of that. I will however point out the BS in
this thread.

so what do you do when somebody burns you? keep spending your money with them? help promote them? maybe go get a job working for them? or do you just sit quietly and let them keep burning everybody else?

I'm not trying to convert you to start using AOL/Netscape or Mozilla. I'm just trying to show you there's
a difference between them. Yes, I've been burned by (insert big business here), I know how it feels. Do
I go around warning everyone about them, no. How one would determine if and how they are burning everyone
else, I don't know. I don't believe in slandering a company, especially when I don't have all the facts,
which seems to apply in your case concerning Mozilla.

part of my point exactly. nobody should have that much ablilty to control what is going on. not m$, not aol, not ibm, etc. convicne me it's all for the good of the world and freedom, and i'll shut up.

I agree. It is scary the amount of control Big Business has on the way we live and the government we
stand by. Unfortunately that's pretty much how capitalism works in the United States, if you don't like it, move.
In the 20's it was Standard Oil. In the 80's AT&T. Today it's AOL and MS. I don't have a solution to this problem, but
again, I believe it's way off topic as well.

whether you want to believe it or not, the political landscape around mozilla changed the day that aol bought netscape. What mozilla was and what it is and what it potentially can be are very different things.

It so happens that the political landscape of Mozilla is outlined on their website before and after AOL
bought Netscape.

http://www.mozilla.org/fear.html

It hasn't been updated since 1998 which leads me to believe nothing has changed since the day it was written.
Look it over, it discredits a lot of what you've said now and in previous threads concerning the fact that by supporting Mozilla
you are directly supporting AOL/Netscape. This is completely untrue. It also states that they are completely seperate entities,
not the evil corporation working together as you'd have many beleive.

once more - what it was and what it is are different. i once ran with the mighty beast. it was proud, it was mighty, it was independent like netscape itself. it was the future. it was everything one could want from a browser in those days. but now that it's greatest triumphs are hustled away and incorporated into aol, it is proud no more.

See the URL above and also keep this quote taken from the URL above in mind.

" The thing to keep in mind here is that mozilla.org is not Netscape, and never has been. This is something that many people don't understand, or don't believe, but as we described in our original mission statement, the Mozilla Organization has a different agenda from Netscape. We were chartered to guide the open development of the Mozilla browser, and that is what we have done. "

aol users should!! aol supporters should!! anyone oppossed to aol probably shouldn't because they are only helping to solidfy aol's hold on the masses. and please tell me you don't really believe that free means there is no cost involved. Didn't your mother ever teach you there is no such thing as a free lunch? especially from aol!! (oh, wait. i forgot all those 'free trial' disks they send out. )

Yes, when I report a bug to Mozilla, chances are that bug will be fixed and AOL/Netscape will benefit from it.
What you fail to see because of your hatered of Big Business is they are but one of dozens that stand to
benefit as well. The dozens being independent developers trying to make a difference in this world. Trying to bring choice to the masses.
Am I correct in understanding that because of the indiscretions of AOL, the many must suffer and go without?
That makes no sense to me. Your hatred for Big Business has blinded you from seeing the greater good in all things.

As for the connection between Mozilla and AOL, it is clearly outlined in the URL above. That URL can also be accessed from the
Mozilla website, only 3 pages deep. Not exactly hidden or hard to find. Shortly summed up, Mozilla was never
Netscape. Mozilla never became AOL. Mozilla was always bigger than the two, and much like the charity exampled above, their
only connection to AOL/Netscape was through funding. There was no seedy political underside that made Mozilla the pawn of AOL
after the merger like you want to lead many to believe.

And yes, when I download Mozilla it's free. I do not directly support AOL/Netscape in anyway because of this. I'm not directed
to AOL/Netscape websites, I'm not prompted to download AOL/Netscape software. AIM is not bundled with my download, and in direct
defiance of AOL/Netscape, I have more control over Mozilla, namely, the ability to block popup ads. I'm glad you pointed
out why very little AOL/Netscape information exists on Mozilla's website, especially regarding their connection. As stated in the URL
above, there is no connection other than funding. the FUD you've been spreading is non existant. The only way AOL/Netscape could
possibly benefit from you using Mozilla is if you filed a bug report. Unfortunately if you choose not to, a dozen others stand to suffer.
I guess they are the casulties of some war you've waged against AOL/Netscape. The propaganda you're spreading isn't going to
hurt AOL, but it very well has the potential to destroy the hard work of many independent developers. People just trying to make
a decent living like you and I. If you and people like you succeed in killing Mozilla, AOL/Netscape will still have it. Maybe they'll close the source like IE, then where will we be. Do you actually understand the repercussions of what you are trying to accomplish?

and back when those improvements went into supporting an indepent netscape, i was all for it. i sent my bugs in no matter how many crashes it cost me. but now there is a major corporation with billions of dollars benifitting from the hard work of the people who work for free. Frankly, if you want to be one of those people, go ahead. I DON'T

Your hatred has blinded you once again. These bug fixes go into fixing Mozilla, which in turn helps Chimera, Galeon and everybody else, not just Netscape. Why should these indepented projects suffer because AOL, a billion dollar company, and one of dozens that choose to use Mozilla to develop their own web browser? I don't see anyone else taking the initiative Mozilla has to create an open source platform from which anyone with the desire can develop from.

Anyone means anyone. Even billion dollar companies that have something to gain.

Your thinking is craziness. All Netscape did was fund Mozilla. All AOL was buy Netscape and did was the same. There is no seedy initiative or political involvement.

I think you are terribly confused between the difference between Netscape and Mozilla. As stated in the URL below, the are not and never were the same thing!

If anything, choose not to support Netscape, at least then your argument would make sense.

please azosx, use quotes and show me something i have said that is not true or potentially true!! something you can actually prove is false.

Everything you've said about Mozilla is untrue. They are not AOL/Netscape, you are not directly supporting
AOL/Netscape by using Mozilla. There is no seedy conection between AOL/Netscape and Mozilla and Mozilla does
not hide anything from it's users.

as for absurdity - i was around when it would have been "absurd" to imagine that Bill gates would be the richest man in the world. absurd to imagine that m$ would dominate the world of computing the way they do now. I was around when it was absurd to think that aol would buy Time Warner. that aol would actually dominate the isp market and then go for more.

see, i've lived long enough to realize that today's absurdities become tomorrows realities if we allow them. (bday in profile is wrong, real dob is 8/9/57. been using macs since there were no windows and no aol)

As for tomorrow, what will your views be when Apple dominates the market and Microsoft is made the serve them? You're
kidding yourself if you do not think this is the goal of Steve Jobs. This is the goal of any
Big Business, to be on top. And s absurd
as that alternate reality may sound, according to you it's possible. You don't really believe Apple would be any different than AOL or MS do you?

Get off the bandwagon, think for yourself. Learn more about something before completely condemn it. Try and seperate yourself and others from this hatred of Big Business. If anything I hope you see Mozilla is not the evil.

 

[azosx]

One more point in closing. In 1997 Apple borrowed over 150 million from MS and also succumb to the placement of IE as the primary web browser of Mac OS.

I understand they needed to do this. There was no other choice. Without MS, Apple may very well not even exist today.

My point is, under your belief system, Apple should now be condemned because of their relationship with MS. Not only did they accept funding from the evil, but helped in assisting it making IE the dominant web browser it is today. One could easily acuse Apple of seedy initiatives and political involvement with MS.

I'm not going to because I actually don't know all the details, but hopefully you can see how easy it easy it is to spread FUD by mixing up just a few key facts.

You can refute my claims but I don't know how long I'll continue to defend them. I'm new to forum debates but I've noticed big ones have a tendency to get off track and lose sight of what's important. I'm also just very tired and in a poor state of mind.




Also, I live in Arizona and have a home where the fires are so have spent the last week on pratically no sleep worrying about whether one
of my homes has burnt to the ground or not (feel sorry for me, boohoohoo). The only reason I tell you this is because im going on no sleep so anything I've written
above may be slightly garbled, misspelled or lacking clarity. For that I apologize but I try!

 

[themacko]

What fires?

 

[azosx]

What fires? Are you serious?

Only the largest fire in North America, the Rodeo-Chediski fire. 375,000 acres, over 550 square miles and right in your backyard.

Our cabin is in the the Heber-Overgaard area and presumably burnt to the ground.

 

[themacko]

Sorry, my sarcasm was a little too subtle, there.

 

[azosx]

Oh, I guess it's just not funny when your home burns to the ground.

 

[fryke]

I don't care about fires, I don't care about the US. If I were the most altruistic man on the planet, if my choice of software was solely based on ecological issues, I wouldn't work in the graphics design business by now, I wouldn't own a Mac, I wouldn't be here on this board to discuss political issues in a F****ING BROWSER CHOICE THREAD.

Seriously, this is making me angry from time to time. There is choice in browsers. Microsoft helped bringing choice to the browser market by competing with Netscape Navigator at the time. Of course they didn't compete by building the better product, they competed with making theirs free. They also developed their browser until it was actually better than anything out there before. Everyone's playing catch up with them for more than two years now. There is - in fact - one single market where Microsoft was helpful for me and others: The browser market. Look at the browsers of the time before MS entered the market. Applications the size of Photoshop (Netscape 3 at the time), buggy as hell, crashing all the time, behaving like no serious application software package before. On the Mac just like on any other operating system, Netscape was both the only real web browsing software AND the most horrible piece of junkware I had ever seen.

The game turned. MS IE took everything. For some time, they had both around 50% market share. That was the worst time in web experience. Almost every other website didn't work in the 'other' browser, which means it was optimised for only one. People started to write JavaScript pieces that decided which page should be served on which browser, which meant that people using a THIRD browser had no chance of viewing the site at all.

We're over that, mostly. Still there are sites that just don't work if your browser is not exactly one of the big two.

Now, where are we. We can't use

- IE, because it's from Microsoft, which is The Devil.
- Netscape, because it belongs to AOL, which is The Devil, 2.
- iCab, because it feels kinda strange, doesn't look right and also doesn't work with all sites.
- OmniWeb, because it lacks support for many websites we want to see.
- Chimera, because it's based on Mozilla, which 'belongs' to AOL, which is The Devil, 2.
- Mozilla, because it's Mozilla, which 'belongs' to AOL, which is The Devil, 2.
- Opera, because it's ad-based, which is bad per se. Also, Opera is known spyware.

What's still there? Lynx and links, two text-only browser. They're both fast and have incredible support for websites, if you keep in mind they're text-only.

So what do I do? Do I choose between the less of, what, 9 evils? Nope: I choose the best of them all. The one which doesn't get in my way. It's also great that IE doesn't need to be updated every other week, just because some or other feature now finally should (but doesn't) work (right).

My choice: IE 5.2. It's a great, clean webbrowser that doesn't only do the job, but does it right and fast.

 

[themacko]

Originally posted by azosx
Oh, I guess it's just not funny when your home burns to the ground.

Oops.

 

[toast]

<i>the strongest oaths that are straw to the fire i'th'blood</i>

I find <b>Chimera</b> very good. I can just browse my forums with it (this one and desktoppublishing.com).

Now for what it doesn't handle, <b>Microsoft Internet Explorer</b> is a very good browser for me, because it's stable. I have tried others, but they crashed where Explorer didn't.

Still, in my opinion, <b>using two browsers</b> (first to speedbrowse and second to slowbrowse) is a normal thing.

<i>I find…
for me…
in my opinion…</i>
How wonderful these sound in such a thread.

____________
The Macko: there are ways to know this (the mailing list). Sometimes the company traces the customer's IP. Ask them.
Azosx: I think you just broke longest post record, am I right ? I didn't learn much, though. Convincing takes over shouting for me.
Ed: The Bill & Emma Foundation gives out money to 3rd world. Even if they're not on my top-charity list, that's still charity to me.
fryke: I'm glad to see we're two not to care about the US, which are the real Evil of this thread ! LOL, and thanx for such a last open-minded post.
____________

 

[googolplex]

These arguements actually amuse me now. Fryke is making sense! Although I disagree with him that IE is the best browser he has a point.

Although I think IE is a great evil then mozilla because IE got its dominance in unlawful ways and continues to do so. Mozilla on the other hand isn't doing anything illegal and it is actually one of the good things AOL does err make that the only good thing AOL does . So by Ed's logic that I'm helping AOL by using Mozilla (which I am, but I'm helping everyone) I'm helping AOL do good, not bad.

Oh and the problem for webmasters that fryke is talking about has a simple solution. I'm going to make this nice and clear so everyone hears.

Use the standards and demand browsers that support the standards!!!

If you are a webmaster and you don't support standards, serioulsy, screw you. You don't help things, you make things worse.

I really don't care what browser you use as long as you use one that isn't made by a company that exploits standards and has made the mess we have now.

 

[azosx]

The problem with forum debates is that posts get extremely long and people are less likely to read or understand them.

I don't like to debate that way but I decided to humor Ed anyhow.

To sum up my huge post above. Mozilla was not Netscape, Mozilla never became AOL.

Mozilla was always a separate entity from Netscape and then AOL/Netscape and still is.

Yes, the political landscape of Netscape changed greatly after AOL aquired it but Mozilla never changed, only the funding did.

To quote from Mozilla's webpage,

"The thing to keep in mind here is that mozilla.org is not Netscape, and never has been. This is something that many people don't understand, or don't believe, but as we described in our original mission statement, the Mozilla Organization has a different agenda from Netscape. We were chartered to guide the open development of the Mozilla browser, and that is what we have done."

Now if you are totally hellbent on not supporting AOL, don't use Netscape, it's as simple as that.

For more information regarding Mozilla in relationship to Netscape and AOL visit the URL below.

http://www.mozilla.org/fear.html

Also, take a look around mozilla.org in general and learn something new.

Please, try to get this through your heads, Mozilla is not Netscape, Mozilla is not AOL.

You are not supporting AOL by using Mozilla. You are however supporting the open source initiative.

If for some reason you have a problem with that, I suggest you stop using OS X immediately, because Darwin, it's core, is open source as well.

 

[Izzy]

Am I understanding this correctly? From the tone of this topic it seems as though there are people who are against using a product when it works the best on your system. I'm supposed to use a browswer that runs almost unusably slow, crashes frequently, and is unintuitive for me?

I've given the other browsers a chance and will continue to do so...when one of the others starts working better for me I will be more than happy to switch. I want to be the most productive with whatever piece of software that I use. For right now IE works the best...everyone has their preferences and that is fine. No amount of arguing, name calling, etc. will change that everyone.

There are bigger issues out there in this world than what web browser we all use. I wonder how much better off the world would be if were this passionate about issues like improving our communities, helping the indigent, etc...

 

[edX]

ok, let me word this very carefully so everyone knows what i mean -

Mozilla is not Netscape, Mozilla is not AOL.

of course, i never said any differently. what i have said all along is that netrape/aol fund the development of mozilla and reap the rewards of the advances made thru its open source. advances that are made by people who aren't getting paid when they send in bug reports and bug fixes.

if that's ok, with you, then use mozilla. help aol climb to the top and become the next m$.

it's funny to me that azosx uses the same page (fear) that i would use to point this relationship out to those who doubt it. the word relationship is key to understanding all this. I am in relationship with my significnt other. I am not her and she is not me. but if you didn't like her and didn't want her to prosper for some reason, then it would make no sense for you to hire me. (believe me this happens to people - and people do get fired because of their significant others). the reason it would make no sense is because my money is spent helping her with bills, food, etc. the more money i have to contribute, the more money she has to enjoy. of course, if you believed that i would take advantage of having more money and leave her, then you would want to hire me to cause her grief. how you feel about my children is only partially related to the decision. and if my children have grown up enough to take care of themselves, then they would be of no concern in the decision.

let's see - the fear page is not deep, only 3 pages in. frankly, a relationship like this should have a direct link from the main navigation page. it doesn't. neither does the copy of the letter from the head of aol reassurring the mozilla team that they don't need to find new jobs. and if anybody believes that the paid mozilla development team is working for peanuts - i would think again. it's funny because i really believe in communism in theory. but in practice it always comes down to those who are in the central control seat, are the ones to reap the real benefits. it ends ups being capitolism with cheap labor.

as for the apple/darwin relationship. i've said it before and i will say it again. anybody who doesn't want apple to prosper shouldn't be contributing to the darwin project. Stop confusing the whole concept of open source with the problems i have with the aol/mozilla relationship.

what else - oh yea - Mozilla is not Netscape, Mozilla is not AOL.

this seems to be the only point you have to make azosx. so i now agree you are right and you can get some sleep. (i must say that i am sorry to hear about your home. the fires are a tragedy for many and not something to be ignored or made fun of. I truly hope you and your family remain safe throughout this. i hope that some miracle occurs and your home is safe, or at least the things that you value most there can be recovered)

said by that fantasy baseball expert Izzy There are bigger issues out there in this world than what web browser we all use. I wonder how much better off the world would be if were this passionate about issues like improving our communities, helping the indigent, etc...

oh, i'm pretty passionate about those kinds of things as well. in fact i would say that some of my dislike against aol goes to their 'contributions' in those areas. Did you really want to get me started?

i know fryke said some stuff back there but other than his thinking ie is the best, i don't think any of it was worth arguing about. when somebody else is the best browser he'll be using it. that's life. i'll never convince him. i doubt i will convince anybody who takes part in these discussions. it's the lurkers that are listening that are the real audience.

and just to be clear - Mozilla is not Netscape, Mozilla is not AOL.

 

[azosx]

Ok, so if you agree that Mozilla is not Netscape and Mozilla is not AOL, then Mozilla is not Big Business right?

If so, tell me why again you have a problem with people supporting Mozilla? Everybody stands to reap the rewards of it being open source, not just AOL. Why can't you see this? Why don't you understand by supporting Mozilla, you are in now way supporting AOL. How is AOL getting fat off the development of Mozilla? They change it to fit their needs, they don't just slap their logo on it and say it's theirs. So pretty much for them it's not free.

The focus of your argument has changed 3 times now, I'm having a hard time keeping up with you.

Maybe that is your only defense, I don't know.

MS funded Apple and extended it's life and got IE on the desktop as well. So by supporting Apple are you supporting MS and thus supporting evil as you'd have everyone believe is the case with Mozilla.

The link to the "fear" page is exactly 3 pages deep. I guess you have difficulty counting, let me help you. From mozilla.org, the main page, page 1, click on "At A Glance", the first link at the top on the left. From "At A Glance", page 2, click on "Fear And Loathing On The Merger Trail." Ironically, I think that title sums you up quite nicely. Now we are on page 3, where mozilla.org talks about it's mission post merger in hopes to put the minds of people like you to rest. Obviously they failed. Going back to page 2 you can learn about every aspect of mozilla.org. So quite frankly, mozilla.org does link you to ever aspect regarding their mission from their main webpage. No, not exactly hidden deep within the depths of the www as you keep trying to convince me or maybe others who wouldn't bother to see for themselves.

You're a pessimist, and you're older. Much like my father, or any father in that respect. Like the saying goes, "you can't teach an old dog new tricks." So I'm not even going to bother. You'll never admit you're wrong but hopefully others can see the truth.

As for your example with your gf, I don't even know where to begin with that. Your bitterness for Big Business has lead me to believe you've been a "worker bee" all your life and never the "queen."

You'll never admit the truth to yourself, you're older and stubborn, and in a way I'm sure you've earned it. Perhaps when I have more wordly experience, I'll understand where you're coming from.

Your problem with Mozilla is that it is open source and that AOL is taking advantage of this. Now if Mozilla decided to close the source and charge developers like AOL, Chimera and Galeon to license it, would you then be happy? What's funny is AOL doesn't even have a set plan for Netscape, they are still supporting IE and have yet to release a Netscape 7.0.

Anyone can benefit from Mozilla, not just AOL. Everyone stands to benefit from Mozilla, that is what it was designed for. What if Apple an application based on Mozilla technology, would you then stop supporting them. I don't think you would, and for anyone who did, it would be pure ignorance.

Where exactly do you draw the line? The problem is every time I counter your claims, you redraw the line.

If you feel like responding to this, tell me how exactly by downloading Mozilla I directly support AOL. I'd love to see what you come up with! Considering AOL pays inhouse developers to build Netscape from older builds of Mozilla, they aren't exactly getting it for free. And if you bothered to download and try both of them together, you'd see they are different in many ways.

**edited** But anyway I'm done. Arguing with seasoned gentlemen, burned by Big Business and who have vowed never to look in it's direction again, no matter what the cost, never resolved a conflict. **edited**

 

[themacko]

Yet another, Oops!

(I think I'd better stay out of this thread before I make ever more of an ass out of myself.)

 

[fryke]

Ed: Of course you are right. I never even doubted your points. Yes, by helping the mozilla project, you also help AOL to prosper. The *one* point that can be brought up here, is that *everyone* can take the mozilla base and wrap an application around it. If, for instance, Apple *would* make an iWeb (or whatever it'd be called), they could use the mozilla base. I'm sure that Apple would make a great browser around the mozilla core. I'm also sure that Mac people would use *that* browser instead of anything else right away (if it were any good, but Apple wouldn't ever care to give out software that wasn't any good). I wouldn't want Apple to do that, this is just to point out that by using any mozilla-based product, you would then help Apple to prosper and actually hinder AOL on the Mac platform. Now this would be getting difficult, as some people wouldn't want AOL to leave the Mac platform altogether (Apple, for instance).

And *this* is why I'm using the best product I find. Yes, some might not think as I do (that IE is the best right now), but it's the concept behind it that counts: Use the best software you can find. The political/economic issues are always a bit in a haze. For most of the people, anyway.

And as soon as OmniWeb hits 5.0 sneaky peeks, I'll give it another try. I've paid for version 4.0, because I really _want_ to get rid of the biggies. But I don't have the time and money (nor interest or nerve) to spend half of my time deciding which browser to use. It's fun and entertainment to follow the development of OmniWeb, mostly because they're a great small company that has all my sympathies running for them, maybe much like you support iCab, btw. But outside of my spare time (and also inside), I have to get the job done. And there's only one way for that: I have to be able to depend on the software I'm using. That's also the biggest reason why I buy Macintosh ever since I bought my first PowerBook (PB 150).

 

[toast]

<i>in the dark abysm of time</i>

Oh, somebody remembered iCab

 

[azosx]

Yes, by helping the mozilla project, you also help AOL to prosper.

People are so fond of making this grandioso claim, so tell me how! How, how, how, how, how, how, how, how, how? How do you come to the conclusion, especially on the OS X platform, that by using Mozilla, you are supporting AOL in any way, shape or form?

 

[googolplex]

Mozilla does help AOL, but it helps everyone else as well. AOL helps Mozilla which help the whole web. Stop just looking at the surface and look at the long term. Ed you do look at the long term by opposing IE, but Mozilla benefits the web in the long run.

Because in reality Mozilla is the only browser that can compete with IE on all platforms. Nobody else can do it at this time. So if you want to help the situation support mozilla. By spreading evil thoughts about Mozilla you are making the web stay where it is now - in hell.

 

[azosx]

googolplex,

I want to know how though. I want to know how by running Mozilla in OS X, I support AOL?