Peter; You are exactly correct.
Frankly I wish mozilla would simply be profitable enterprise so there would be a finacial incentive to create a mature product. I use both IE6 and Moz, generally the nightly build. In general Moz is superior, however, the idiosyncrocies [sure wish we had a spell checker, for example] and bugs [like the misplaced text caret [sp?], lack of right mouse context menu and the misplaced text on the right, as I type this] drive me nuts. It is a mystery to me why AOL doesn't seem to be concerned about loosing the IE browser engine. Al.......... Peter Trudelle wrote: > Jason Mosser wrote: > >> The one thing that people need to remember is this, "Mozilla is not >> intended for end users." plain and simple. If one takes a good look >> around the Mozilla.org website, they will find numerous statements >> like this. > > > I've been seeing this a lot lately in the newsgroups, but I always > wonder: Where does this idea come from? Of course mozilla is intended > for end users. Why else would we all be building this application suite? > Mozilla.org is itself a distributor, and even other distributors are > largely distributing mozilla applications, relatively intact. If the > goal were really just a platform, we would be spending a lot more effort > on test harnesses and a lot less on apps. Success means getting this > code into the hands of as many end users as possible, and that means the > apps as well as the components. I can't find anywhere on mozilla.org > that says 'Mozilla is not intended for end users', but I can find these > mozilla.org pages: > > http://www.mozilla.org/get-involved.html , which says " We need > documentation for users...". http://www.mozilla.org/quality/ , which > says "...contribute to placing a fast, stable, and truly > standards-compliant browser and mail/news reader onto the hard disks of > tens of millions of Internet users..." > http://www.mozilla.org/docs/end-user/ , which says "This page provides > links to documentation for users of Mozilla and Mozilla-based browsers." > http://www.mozilla.org/unity-of-interface.html , wherein JWZ said "the > goal is to let the user accomplish what they want to accomplish: not to > produce the perfect implementation of a particular protocol." > http://www.mozilla.org/mozilla-at-one.html , which says "Now that that > groundwork has been laid more attention can be paid to other areas where > work is needed, like Mozilla testing by end users ..." > http://www.mozilla.org/roadmap/mozilla-1.0.html , where Brendan says > '...the world needs a "1.0" from mozilla.org soon...' and " We think the > world will be a better place, with more hands helping to improve > Mozilla, and more people benefiting from distributions of Mozilla..." > http://www.mozilla.org/binaries.html , which shows several end user > products which either incorporate mozilla intact, or use it as the basis > for their products. > > I think people are confusing some things that *are* often said on > mozilla.org, and are true: mozilla.org mailing lists and newsgroups are > not intended for end users, nor are the nightlies or other pre-release > builds. Even milestone builds may not be suitable for many end users, > but a key goal of mozilla1.0 must certainly be no less than to displace > non-mozilla browsers on every possible desktop. They might not all have > the red star ;-), but let's face it, they are all mozilla at heart. > > Peter >
