On 11/27/00 6:38 PM, in article [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Ben Bucksch"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> John Welch wrote:
> [NS6]
>
>> "It's repackaged Mozilla, nothing more, nothing less"
>
> It is, ant that's good that way. But you miss the fact that Netscape is
> the largest contributor to Mozilla.
Then to all effective purposes, Netscape <=> Mozilla
>
>> Netscape will do nothing that doesn't come from Mozilla, ergo, any problems
>> are Mozilla's fault, because Netscape isn't taking any responsibility for
>> their own product other than Branding.
>
> I don't see Netscape excusing itself. In fact, they claim, the product
> had "outstanding quality". I never heard something like "We're sorry
> about XY, but that's how Mozilla is.".
Read the bugzilla reports and NS marketing from an IT POV sometime.
>
> Again, if you want to complain about Netscape 6, *you are wrong here*.
> These groups are only about development. Users are wrong here. These
> groups are not about Netscape 6.
And this is the main source of trouble. Mozilla and NS spent years working
in a hacker - heaven nightmare, and now that the general public is telling
them what the results of this are...y'all are complaining that the general
public has no business here. Well, outside of a few hundred, thousand?
Hackers, whom do you think is going to *use* this product? Is your target
market Mozilla? Is this nothing more than an interesting science project,
not intended for use by non-hackers? Does it have a life outside of NS6?
Y'all better start listening to the general public complaints, because right
now, neither NS6 or Moz. Is terribly well thought of, and if AOL decides to
quit funding Moz because NS6 tanks, how long is Moz going to be around to
debate this.
john
>
>
--
"First there...that others may live."
USAF 720th Special Tactics Group
