Henri Sivonen wrote:
> Even Microsoft hasn't combined IE and OE in the same app although those
> apps share some back end libraries.
>
Um, this is what we're doing too. We have some libraries which can be
used to build things, a Web browser or a mail client or an HTML editor
or a IRC chat client. We have several products which call the
functionality of those libraries. If what bothers you is that these
apps are available in a single download then get the installer and chose
to not download the mail client.
>
>>> 2) The front end isn't native
>
>>
>> If that's really a problem for you then why are you involved at
>
>> all?
>
> That's a good question.
> Mozilla-the-browser has back end capabilities or potential back end
> capabilitites that are of intrest to me. I'm still hoping that one day
> an attitude shift will enable Mozilla's back end technology to be used
> through an FE at least as good as the FEs of IE 5 for Mac and iCab.
>
> Also, on Solaris I use Mozilla as my primary browser. The Solaris
> version works better than the Mac version and the GUI doesn't feel as
> out-of-place on Solaris.
>
>> But it also promises the generation of applications very cheaply that
>> are to a degree far greater than any other competitive method highly XP.
>
> I agree that easy XPness is attractive from the developer point of view.
> However, from the user point of view XPness isn't cool, if the XP UI
> isn't as good as or better than the UIs of browsers that have native UIs.
IE for windows doesn't use the native win32 UI and end users seem to be
fine with it, at least I haven't heard a frenzy of complainta about its
non-native UI.
-Asa
