Please see bug 102477...I explained it there. Outliner can't currently
display progressmeters. That's why tree was used (temporarily).
--Blake
Pratik wrote:
On 03/18/2002 02:11 PM, Christian Mattar wrote:
Hi!
Pratik wrote:
Its part of the MachV spec so I gues it should be in. But I
lol. Netscape champions barely exist anymore. Trolling becomes
difficult as the product grows successful, doesn't it?
Also on CNET's download comments, it has been mentioned by CNET people
that Netscape champions will flood the comment board on purpose, giving
their product 5-star
A browser shift by AOL is going to leave an awful lot of companies that
assume their Web sites only need to work with Explorer scrambling to
rewrite their code so that they don't lose AOL's 30 million-plus
subscribers, or about 30% of all U.S. Internet users.
--
I will tell you this, if AOL did change it's customers to Netscape, MSN
business booms.
You're so naive to believe that any of the 30 million users will even
notice the switch. Sounds like you're preparing your backup story
should this story turn out to be true. Worried, are we? ;-)
Blake
Okay, I see someone has already set you straight on this, so please
excuse me. I don't want to give you the impression that we're all
aggressive here ;-) But next time, you might want to restate your
assertions as questions.
Blake
David Tenser wrote:
Blake Ross wrote:
It's
What do you mean by it is likely that this component is going away? Do
you mean that they won't work on these usability improvements after all?
If so, why?
I can understand (or should I say, I have accepted the fact) that this
doesn't have high priority, but dropping it alltogether? I'm
If not, why put so much effort in supporting skins in Mozilla? Truth is,
most of the users doesn't care much of skin support in a browser.
Who is putting so much effort? No one that I can see. You admitted
you're new here, why are you making such presumptions?
My initial point was that
Does this mean that they haven't had the time to add this feature in
four years?
No, it means that few of Mozilla's distributor's customers have been
clamoring for it, and thus it's not a priority. Why would a feature be
added because a bug filer wanted it? Do you think that's how things
It's not a presumption. XUL. That's a _big_ effort in making Mozilla
skinnable.
Sorry, my bad. It's total misinformation, then. XUL has nothing to do
with skinability.
This article is actually written by a staff member of Mozilla, so this
is serious stuff. If you doubt people wants to
Mozilla is a *living* project. I download new builds every weekday,
which is very exciting and unusual (although I miss a traditional
whatsnew.txt file that explains what's been changed in every nighly
build).
Try the BuildBar at http://www.mozillazine.org/, run by Asa. Every
effort is
The number of bugs has skyrocketed over the years because the number of
people reporting them has skyrocketed over the years, and because we
have more features and components than we used to. Statistics
corroborate this. You seem to be suggesting that developers get worse
over time and
I take it you already have a backup from before you deleted it, in which
case simply open up that bookmarks.html and copy the relevant lines into
your live profile one.
blake
Christian Biesinger wrote:
Jonathan Wilson wrote:
Does the AOL client come with a full browser on the CD or is
I take it you already have a backup from before you deleted it, in which
case simply open up that bookmarks.html and copy the relevant lines into
your live profile one.
blake
Peter Lairo wrote:
Hi,
I don't know what drugs I was on when this happened, but I must have
accidentally
Um, you do realize your post was just as much of a troll, right?
Anyway, do what I did to counter the spam problem in the newsgroups:
just subscribe to the e-mail gateways (for this group,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]) and filter the posts into separate
folders, then add additional filters for whatever
Are you an idiot, or just acting like one? Frankly, I find the stand
by Mozilla, right OR WRONG sentiment to be the *real* bullshit around
here. People care about performance. From a browser perspective,
performance is largely judged by the snap in the user
interface/experience.
Maybe you "totally expect" tabs. The general IE-using population doesn't.
I assure you that people who don't use Mozilla-based distributions aren't
making such a decision on the basis that DHTML pages scroll slowly.
Have no fear, such distributions know the most important user complaints
You don't :-) Reread my post, I think you misinterpreted it.
Blake
Please stop posting with your old netscape.com address. You're an
embarrassment to the company.
Thanks,
Blake
David Hyatt wrote:
That explains why my badge doesn't work any more!
Jeremy M. Dolan wrote:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Damien Covey wrote:
Is this some joke that normal
wrote:
Blake Ross wrote:
You don't :-) Reread my post, I think you misinterpreted it.
Blake
Who doesn't what now? Sorry Blake, you'll have to give me a bit more
context than that. Or does Mozilla have an over-snipping defect too?
Well I mean come on now, it's only been a year! It's not like they
haven't been working on all kinds of other stuff, such as... well
there's the... um... oh! There's a context menu now! That's what took
a year! Yeah, see, they were working on it all year, and I just
happened to
Yeah, like that. See, that's even easier than snipping all that truth
that makes you so angry, isn't it Blake?
Er...huh?
Just remember, it's for the
good of the code. Yeah, and that may not always be for the good of AOL.
If there's anyone your AOL rants aren't going to work on, it's
76% of respondents wanted Dave Hyatt to be fired.
21% of respondents wanted a more severe punishment.
- of these, 12% considered a lifetime of coding in only XBL as
adequate retribution.
The remaining 3% of respondents couldn't muster up anything more
intelligent than DOWN WITH
Right, now let's all say it together: What AOL wants, AOL gets, and the
rest of the Open Maozilla community has no option but to suck it down.
Your attempts at starting some sort of mass rebellion against Netscape
are failing miserably. But I guess you've already realized that, since
or Netscape or Sun Microsystems etc etc etc whatsoever? And AOL does
not have veto power?
Yup. Right on both counts!
Except you Blake.
No, me especially (see below in original post).
Why? Because the truths I broadcast struck too close to the bone?
No, I thought new people to the
See the cnet article about Mozilla being embedded in a beta version of
Compuserve.
I work for Netscape, so there's nothing I can say about anything, but I
do rest assured that I know more about what's going on than you.
Blake
JTK wrote:
Blake Ross wrote:
While I 100% agree, there's
Wow, you know more about download manager than the person implementing
it! :-)
See the spec, http://mozilla.org/xpapps/MachVPlan/DownloadMgr.html. I
don't see any space for an ad in the UI, right now anyway (at no point
would it affect Mozilla if such a thing did get implemented).
Blake
JTK
How many non-AOL employees were involved in that decision? Mozilla *is*
still an Open project, right?
Right.
Right?
Right (again). Of the fourteen people on
http://mozilla.org/about/stafflist.html#Staff-Members, exactly half are
not employed by AOL.
You know, you've really lost
Oh, wait, you mean
http://www.mozilla.org/about/stafflist.html#Staff-Members. Yeah, not
real clear there who's paid AOL muscle and who ain't.
Well, er, if you'd really like to know, see my other post where I gave
the numbers. Anyway, it generally doesn't say what company anyone works
Somebody paid to have it added. Apparantly somebody with more money
than sense.
There has hardly been an outcry from web developers about this,
despite the distorted picture that a select few like to present. And
users, of course, don't care about the backend details, they just love
the
Yet you know they do?
I dunno about him. I know they do (the feature was requested by users).
Blake
Blake Ross wrote:
Yet you know they do?
I dunno about him.
Oh. I didn't see who you were responding too.
In that case, yes, I would expect Navigator's manager to know more about
the likes and dislikes of users than you (random Joe in the newsgroup).
Blake
This is a petition to fire David Hyatt for his crimes against the World
Wide Web, namely his implementation of automatic favicon retrieval. Sign
your name here and I will pass this on to Steve Case.
The select entire constituency of this newsgroup in fact, but who's
counting as long as the green keeps rolling in, huh? Nobody who
understands this misfeature supports it unless they're paid to do so,
and you know it.
I'm not entirely sure what you mean. Right, I already said users
JTK wrote:
Blake Ross wrote:
Yet you know they do?
I dunno about him. I know they do (the feature was requested by users).
Maybe, probably not. But who paid to have it added?
Is this what you do when you're faced with an argument you can't refute?
Say Maybe? I can look
Somebody's actually *managing* this freakshow?!?! Good night!
Night! :-)
Blake
That might be true right now. But what about a year from now when
Mozilla has 40% market share?
Gosh, I hope not. Mozilla isn't a distribution, so 40% of internet users
wouldn't have any technical support at their disposal.
While I 100% agree, there's no need for hyperbole here.
Compaq does ship with Netscape 6.1 on at least some of its machines.
Blake
Jonas Jørgensen wrote:
David Hyatt wrote:
That might be true right now. But what about a year from now when
Mozilla has 40% market share? If Mozilla only supported the link
solution, people will add links. But
Pseudocode?
Yes. What you wrote is more or less a mixture of pseudocode and real code.
Better?
Nah; still nonsensical.
Due to the added complexity, I'll give you a little extra
time to check this is; say after the Millenium?
Good one. If you're trying to get my goat, it's not
Sure thing, chief. Pseudocode's easy, ain't it?
Blake
JTK wrote:
Well, until you try to run/unizp whatever you downloaded and
Windows/Winzip tells you it's short. Here's an interim patch until
future civilizations rediscover the magic of ZMODEM and are able to
resume failed file
Water under the proverbial bridge. What's AOL I mean the Mozilla
community doing *now* to get Mozilla more than 0.75% market share?
Already answered this; you chose to ignore it.
Blake
Got my name changed officially today, it's now Blake Ross. What do you
folks think?
(Yes, that was user error.)
Blake
news.mozilla.org wrote:
Mozilla has 0.75% of the market. Why is that? Why Chris?
You're too shortsighted. You need to look ahead to an embedded world. Do
you
Oh I have many names Mr. Ross.
Maybe, but only one is your work address ;-)
[EMAIL PROTECTED], huh?
JTK wrote:
Gervase Markham wrote:
JTK wrote:
Total number of files: 33202
Total number of licensed files: 14393
Total number of NPLed files: 9640
Total number of MPLed files: 4753
Total number of GPLed files: 2047
Total number of LGPLed files:
JTK wrote:
To Pratik, Blake, barney, Phillip, and the rest of the dozen or so folks
who have used Composer in the past:
It's far more than a dozen. I won't bother to argue with you because I
know I'm right (i.e., real statistics beat your guessing).
Does it have a minimal code size and
JTK wrote:
Oddly enough, the world doesn't seem to be waiting for Mozilla.
Download the competition here:
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/ie/default.htm
btw, I wouldn't expect the world to wait for Mozilla. I wouldn't expect
most of the world to even know about Mozilla. If you think that's
Well, I take that back...the counter is still down, on and off.
Also, feel free to compare the ratings between Netscape 6.1 and
Internet Explorer 6.0 at download.com. Not that download number has
anything to do with the user rating (since 6.1 has more votes towards
its 79-80% -- 1000 -
editors can't do half the things
that Mozilla's can.
--Blake
Blake Ross wrote:
We're accepting patches. Oh, but you're not a programmer. Thanks
for judging the difficulty of a programming task, though!
--Blake
Mozilla having problems with text editing really baffles me. I
thought
starts out with programming a text editor.
Blake Ross wrote:
We're accepting patches. Oh, but you're not a programmer. Thanks
for judging the difficulty of a programming task, though!
--Blake
Mozilla having problems with text editing really baffles me. I
thought text editing
It seems unreasonable to complain about a problem that you didn't report
for over two months (and still haven't)...I use plaintext editor often
and don't know what problems you might be alluding to. The best way to
get traction on something is to report it.
--Blake
Indeed. When some of the
programmer starts out with programming a text
editor.
Blake Ross wrote:
We're accepting patches. Oh, but you're not a programmer.
Thanks for judging the difficulty of a programming task, though!
--Blake
Mozilla having problems with text editing really baffles me. I
thought text editing
JTK wrote:
Ah hell, since I love a good argument, and indeed am a fairly proficient
software developer:
Blake Ross wrote:
[snip]
PS. If making a decent text editor is so hard (as judged by you
sarcastic response to my inquiry), why then are there (and always have
been) a plethora of share
David R. Matusiak wrote:
Thanks! Altho the wonderful and talented Brandon Hume beat you to it
several hours ago (with helpful data, even!!).
O...kay... I would consider letting you learn how to query by yourself
more helpful, so you don't have to ask questions in a newsgroup that you
can
JTK wrote:
THE ACTUAL ***LOGIC*** OF MOZILLA'S EDIT CONTROL IS IMPLEMENTED IN
***XUL!??!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!
Holy Christ, good night Irene.
Well, no. The behavior of many widgets is defined using xbl, though.
The point is that you'd have a usable email editor.
Worksforme.
I do. Peter seems
JTK wrote:
Mama Cass Elliot wrote:
In netscape.public.mozilla.general the people heard Pratik say these wise
words:
Nice review
http://browserwatch.internet.com/news/stories2001/news-20010823-1.html
The article claims that Netscape 6.1 is finished software. How on earth
can that be if it's
We're accepting patches. Oh, but you're not a programmer. Thanks for
judging the difficulty of a programming task, though!
--Blake
Mozilla having problems with text editing really baffles me. I thought
text editing would be one of the simples excercises - even DOS 5.1
edit.exe and
Um, yes, I would say that a positive response from users (i.e., the
people for whom the software was made) is a fair indicator of whether
the software is ready (i.e., ready for consumption by users, the
aforementioned group).
But anyways, to answer your question, Netscape does consider 6.1
into the decision to 6.0. You seem to enjoy dwelling on past mistakes.
6.1 was a successful product, and it will continue to be going forward.
--Blake
JTK wrote:
Blake Ross wrote:
Um, yes, I would say that a positive response from users (i.e., the
people for whom the software was made) is a fair indicator
I haven't yet had the energy to try to figure out Bugizilla, set up an
account, etc etc. It's a lot easier to bitch here in public instead of
behind closed doors.
Yeah, clearly Bugzilla is behind closed doors, what with it being
accessible to anyone in the world and all. (what?)
--Blake
If AOL is the biggest contributer on a project that is beneficial to the
whole world (MPL standards conform), then something is wrong. Why
isn't there a higher proportion of idealist programmers and other
companies contributing? Either, there is something fishy about the legal
structure of
Please capitalize more things or put them in asteriks. I'm having
trouble understanding what it is you wish to emphasize.
--Blake
Peter Lairo wrote:
You have put together a list. I don't see a bunch of newbie Mozilla
hackers jumping on those bugs and fixing them. What makes you think
fixes that went onto the trunk (and thus 0.9.3) were
put on the branch as well. Don't bother responding to people if you're
just going to drop hints about being under NDA. This isn't a popularity
contest.
Thanks,
- Blake Ross
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jay Garcia wrote:
RV wrote
I don't believe this would be a useful keyword, but rather another in a long
and growing list of cruft.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">
1. This new KW would be most beneficial in getting the attention of
*novice programmers* and experienced programmers who need a short
break/diversion/easy success to
JTK wrote:
jesus X wrote:
JTK wrote:
Huh? You mean where your Favorites are on the left side of the
screen? That's been in IE forever.
Yeah, but the Mozilla Sidebar is MUCH more than just a bookmarks pane.
No, it's little more, and not executed as well (eg, the IE ones
No it doesn't, that's why it didn't really work out as Netscape had
planned, and why they're ending up having to do most of the work
themselves.
I'm not even going to try to understand your logic. You just contradicted
yourself.
Heheheyeah. What's commercial about hooking up to a web
Er, IE6 is just like 5 with some tweaks. Looks like they're standing
still to me ;-)
--Blake
JTK wrote:
It's looking pretty polished folks, I suggest you take a look. The
world ain't standing still while Maozilla figues out how to draw
controls inside the lines.
65 matches
Mail list logo
