John Dobbins wrote:
>
> "Simon P. Lucy" wrote:
>
> > Does mozilla.org suffer because there is no equivalent to a Marketing
> > head? Very possibly.
>
> Possibly?
>
> Let me put it this way. Say I own an ISP. Who is going to convince me to adopt
> Mozilla? Why should I create a branded version that will be on every cd I send to
> a customer?
Netscape doesn't suffer from lack of marketing, and they'd be very happy to
convince your ISP to ship a branded Netscape 6+ instead. If you replace the
Netscape logos and home page with your own then how could anyone tell the
difference between a branded Mozilla or a branded a Netscape? It'd be pretty
tough, aside from the presence or absence of netscape-only components like
AIM.
> Not only do I not give a damn about standards, I would prefer that it NOT adhere
> too closely to the W3C. Why? Because every time a page doesn't look right I might
> get a support call that costs me money. I don't care if it's the browsers fault
> or the page authors fault. The only thing that matters to me is that my customers
> don't call the help desk
AOL tells us the same thing -- have no fear that more than a few of us "get
it".
-Dan Veditz
