Travis Crump wrote:
> But the only real reason to want to exit the browser completely(instead > of just closing[Ctrl-W vs Ctrl-Q] the browser window) is when installing > xpis which is a rare occurence, or when upgrading Mozilla in which case > every component would have been upgraded and would need to be restarted > anyway. Well, here are some times I have to exit completely, just from a user perspective: * My browser crashes and takes Chatzilla with it (this is involuntary but it still sucks and it's still an exit) * When I have altered Mozilla code and need to restart Mozilla to see the difference (i.e. when creating a theme). * In Netscape, the access to Webmail is flaky, and if my laptop goes into hibernate, I _often_ must exit to restore access to Webmail. Sometimes, I must restart (after exiting Quick Launch each time) several times before I even GET Netscape to successfully log in the first time (and this on a rock-steady DSL connection). * Currently, changing themes requires restart of Mozilla, but as this looks to no longer be the case in Mozilla, this is probably moot. * If any Mozilla "app" takes down Mozilla, my Chatzilla goes with it. Basically, I guess my point is that at the same time we're telling people they can make applications from Mozilla that have nothing to do with browsing, Mozilla or its parent Netscape has yet to release a non-browser application (i.e. Mail) based on the Mozilla code as a proof of concept. I personally think for Mozilla.org, post 1.0 Chatzilla should branch a standalone version, and for consumers, Netscape should offer Netscape Mail alone, at least, if not NIM, too. This would reinforce to the world that we can in face make non-browser applications from Mozilla. >and if all four are open it will use 4 times as much memory. > Will it use four times as much? Or would it be somewhat less? You'd think that if the individual apps were "streamlined" - that is, built only to include certain functionality. For example, a standalone Chatzilla is not likely to hog quite as much memory as a complete instance of Mozilla, warts 'n' all, would it? Or, would it be possible to make a Mozilla-dependent application fail-safe, such that if Mozilla bites it, the application salvages the current document(s) and its(their) contents long enough to start another instance of Mozilla underneath that document? Does that make any sense at all? As to sharing profiles, this I do understand. However, this could be solved by allowing Mail to import or sync settings from Navigator and vice versa. This may be a logistical nightmare, it might be really easy, I'm not sure, but it is an option even if it is a bad one.
