Asa Dotzler wrote: > That's fine. Mozilla isn't for the regular users. Regular users should > be looking for Mozilla distributions like Netscape 6.x, Beonex > Communicator, HallZilla, etc. Mozilla.org provided binaries for testing > and development purposes. It's fine with me if users go with Netscape > 6.x instead of Mozilla because they consider 6.x to be newer and better > than 1.0. A Netscape release gets the user agent out there just as well > (maybe even better with commercial support and additional features like > IM) as a Mozilla binary :) Will it be like this forever? Isn't Mozilla at some point going to be a browser for regular users as well?
- Re: Mozilla 1.0? Shouldn't it be 5.0 Hall Stevenson
- Re: Mozilla 1.0? Shouldn't it be 5.0 David Gerard
- Re: Mozilla 1.0? Shouldn't it be 5.0 Richter
- Re: Mozilla 1.0? Shouldn't it be 5.0 Hall Stevenson
- Re: Mozilla 1.0? Shouldn't it be 5.0 Jeroen Roeterd
- Re: Mozilla 1.0? Shouldn't it be 5.0 Hall Stevenson
- Re: Mozilla 1.0? Shouldn't it be 5.0 Richter
- Re: Mozilla 1.0? Shouldn't it be 5.0 Asa Dotzler
- Re: Mozilla 1.0? Shouldn't it be 5.0 Jonas J�rgensen
- Re: Mozilla 1.0? Shouldn't it be 5.0 JTK
- Re: Mozilla 1.0? Shouldn't it be 5.0 Garth Wallace
- Re: Mozilla 1.0? Shouldn't it be 5.0 Garth Wallace
- Re: Mozilla 1.0? Shouldn't it be 5.0 Jonas J�rgensen
- Re: Mozilla 1.0? Shouldn't it be 5.0 Gervase Markham
- Re: Mozilla 1.0? Shouldn't it be 5.0 Hall Stevenson
- Re: Mozilla 1.0? Shouldn't it be 5.0 Asa Dotzler
- Re: Mozilla 1.0? Shouldn't it be 5.0 JTK
- Re: Mozilla 1.0? Shouldn't it be 5.0 Asa Dotzler
- Re: Mozilla 1.0? Shouldn't it be 5.0 Ian Davey
