illion wrote:
> in article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Gervase Markham at
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 01-06-24 18.33:
>
>>Footprint, Performance and Stability
>>------------------------------------
>>I want to start by making a controversial statement: we should have no, or
>>very little criteria in these categories for Mozilla 1.0.
>>
>>
> This is always the question, but as a non tekkie, i would say that
> performance is VERY important. As an example i can accept if a web-site
> missplaces a picture in mozilla. But if it is slow in doing it, theres
> no reason to use it.
>
> See Opera, they are lightning fast but cant display websites. They still
> get many users just out of the pure admiration of their speed.
>
> This however is just my thoughts.
>
I tend to be of the opposite view. I'll take something that does the
right thing slowly over something that doesn't do the right thing no
matter how long you wait.
However, Gerv wasn't saying that performance doesn't matter. He meant
that saying "<feature A> has to operate in <n> milliseconds on a <x> MHz
Pentium III" wasn't a good idea. At least, that was how I interpreted it.
--
http://www.classic-games.com/ http://www.indie-games.com/
I've often thought intelligence agencies should recruit idiots, as
idiots seem able to infiltrate any group in large numbers.
