Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Mozilla The Internet

Mozilla Rising ... As A Platform 397

ceswiedler writes "Salon is running a story about Mozilla's potential dominance as a platform for application development. They discuss the community development centering around Mozilla, and point out that its cross-plaform GUI environment is 'exactly the kind of thing Microsoft was trying to prevent when it launched its war against Netscape. It didn't want Netscape around, because Netscape was becoming a platform.' In what might be a Salon first, they even include a reference to a Slashdot comment by SkyShadow."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Mozilla Rising ... As A Platform

Comments Filter:
  • by SquadBoy ( 167263 ) on Tuesday September 10, 2002 @03:59PM (#4231151) Homepage Journal
    This might work. I *love* Jabber just get a server that has a good ICQ gateway and you should be rocking.

    http://www.jabbercentral.org/clients/view.php?id =9 71468490
  • I would disagree. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by gnomepro ( 588995 ) on Tuesday September 10, 2002 @04:02PM (#4231182)
    Netscape 4.x, imo, was never a platform. It was only a crappy, behind the times web browser. It still is. Mozilla, on the other hand, is a viable platform. It is much different than the 4.x series and it's crappy predecessors. IE3 was a better browser than NS4. Oh, well! Now is the time for Mozilla to rule the world. :-)
  • by aao-brad ( 542582 ) <{ten.tsacmoc} {ta} {p_darb}> on Tuesday September 10, 2002 @04:04PM (#4231212)
    You forget one thing. Windows is an OS, whereas Mozilla is just an application / framework, which is multi-platform. From what I understand, Mozilla is only tied to the platorm you compiled it under.

    Microsoft's problem is that it tied IE to the underpinnings of Windows, which essentially means you have to keep IE around. Mozilla doesn't tie itself directly into the OS.

    I'm not sure about the interaction, but I think it will be something like: [Kernel} ---> [Mozilla App Layer] ----> Application

    Keep in mind that not every single application written for an OS will run through the Mozilla layer, only those apps written with the Mozilla framework would pass through the app layer.

  • Re:Portability... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by aao-brad ( 542582 ) <{ten.tsacmoc} {ta} {p_darb}> on Tuesday September 10, 2002 @04:09PM (#4231249)
    Here's a scenario:

    Casual user A has a Mac running Linux and the Mozilla framework. User A finds a cool app on the framework and wants to share it with his buddy, User B. User B is running Windows with the framework. User A passes the app to User B, User B runs it with no problem.

  • by ZillaVilla ( 605321 ) on Tuesday September 10, 2002 @04:24PM (#4231364) Homepage
    there already is a MozillaOS, it's called:
    ByzantineOS [sourceforge.net] it's bare bones Linux with Mozilla and sawfish. Boots and runs from a CDrom without touching the local harddrive. it's small...and I tried it on 2 machines, all I had to do was pick low or high res, get my connection "dhcpcd" , and start the GUI "startx" real slick once it loads you can remove the cd, and when you're done you don't 'shutdown' you just kill the power....and it's FAST.

  • Eclipse (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 10, 2002 @04:28PM (#4231399)
    Developers who are looking at Mozilla as a platform for creating application interfaces should also take a look at another open source project which was designed to do just that, Eclipse [eclipse.org].

    Eclipse provides a fairly full featured set of APIs for for creating GUIs along with nice APIs for working with resources (files, directories, etc.), creating builders, compilers, etc. It's mostly suited for creating IDE type apps (as an example, WebSphere Studio Application Developer [ibm.com] developed by IBM who developed the initial Eclipse code base is built on Eclipse), but I've seen some fairly nice "proof of concept" type projects for more standard issue apps like Word Processors, etc.

    Eclipse is Java based, so the code is fairly "write once, run anywhere (debug everywhere (twice))" for whatever platforms the project's custom SWT widget toolkit works for (Linux and Windows included).

    As a bonus, Eclipse on it's own if a fairly nice (free as in speech) Java IDE that runs on Linux (even includes a built-in CVS client).
  • by sphealey ( 2855 ) on Tuesday September 10, 2002 @04:40PM (#4231499)
    IE's already in place, and it works very, very well, and the components are well documented. I'm seeing *many* shrinkwrap programs coming out now that DO use IE as a framework. Quickbooks Pro 2002, for example, is built on IE.
    What was that quote attributed to Lenin? "The capitalists will sell us the rope we use to hang them"? It amazes me when I see independent software developers build their products on Microsoft tools when Microsoft has already announced their intention to attack that market in the future!

    A good example here is midrange ERP systems. Vendors are embracing Microsoft tools including .Net and IE. Of course, Microsoft acquired Great Plains and has already stated that it plans to "embrace" 90% of the functionality of the ERP products. Yet there the ISVs go, paying for the privilage of using the tools that will make them obsolete.

    It makes Microsoft's statements in the antitrust trial that its competitors were just too stupid to keep up seem more believable.

    sPh

  • by Fugly ( 118668 ) on Tuesday September 10, 2002 @04:41PM (#4231511) Homepage
    ...I really do, but so long as that little IE icon is sitting on the Windows boxes that ship, I'm not sure Mozilla will gain enough foothold to beat down Microsoft. Not yet, anyway.

    There is an easy solution to this. Most geeks know about Mozilla. Lots of us really like it a lot. Most non-geeks have never heard of mozilla (and if they have heard of it, they'd never bother to switch anyhow because they're afraid of their own computers).

    Here's the great part though. Who do those non-geeks call to fix their computers when something goes wrong? Us geeks. Why pay for tech support when you've got some weirdo that will come over just about anytime 24/7 to fix your computer for a 6 pack of decent beer? Everytime I fix somebody's computer, I download Mozilla, install it, remove their desktop and task bar icons for IE and replace them with mozilla icons. I then tell them a little bit about it, show them how it kills popups, and show them where their last remaining IE icon is in Start->Programs in case they need it.

    My dad, brother, aunt, mom, neighbor, and most of my high school friends that are still around are now all happy running Mozilla 1.0 or 1.1. Half of them are running OpenOffice now too :)
  • by antidigerati ( 195379 ) on Tuesday September 10, 2002 @04:57PM (#4231650)
    When the absolute best things going for Mozilla for developers is its array of integrated development tools. Mozilla's DOM Inspector and JavaScript debugger are absolute heaven after coding for IE and MS's poor excuse for a browser development environment.

    The DOM Inspector lets you interactively walk through the DOM of a page viewing each containers attributes and children. You can interactively change values and appearance. You can turn on the 'blink' feature to temporarily 'blink' whatever element you are selecting in the DOM. You can also view all CSS elements on the page and inspect how they are cascading. And lots more. Wow!

    The JavaScript debugger is everything we have come to expect in a 'standard' development environment... but it is for JavaScript. Set breakpoints.. set watches.. step through code.. evaluate javascript in context.. change code on the fly..

    And included in the JavaScript debugger app is JavaScript profiling! Turn it on and play with the page.. then save the results to a number of different formats. You get an excellent breakdown of what code was executed and for how long, how many calls were made, where the execution time was spent etc etc.. just like you would expect from a Profiler. Now I can definitively show how much overhead comes with using DynAPI!

    And all of this built into the browser! I think from the development standpoint alone, it will boost productivity by an order of magnitude. Takes out so much of the guesswork that usually goes along with front-end development.

    I think Microsoft should be afraid. Very afraid. Mozilla is what browsers should have been 5 years ago. I've now switched my development environment to developing under Mozilla and then testing IE later for any quirks. The dev time is radically decreased.
  • by startleman ( 567255 ) on Tuesday September 10, 2002 @08:28PM (#4233437)
    There was a story [slashdot.org] posted about OEOne [oeone.com], who built an operating environment "homebase desktop" [oeone.com] using mozilla on top of RedHat. Thought some /.ers might be interested if they missed that one.
  • by Phroggy ( 441 ) <slashdot3@ p h roggy.com> on Tuesday September 10, 2002 @09:28PM (#4233873) Homepage
    For example, menus in Windows are expected to be static (that is, they stay visible after the user releases the mouse button), while Macintosh menus tend to be rubber-band (menu disappears when user releases mouse button).

    Actually since Mac OS 8, Mac menus behave the same way that Windows menus are supposed to. I say "supposed to" because Windows is a buggy pile of crap.

    Want to see something amusing?

    Open Notepad. Click-and-hold on a menu. Drag down, below the menu, off to the side. Release the mouse. The menu disappears. This is the correct behavior.

    Open an Explorer window. Click-and-hold on the Favorites menu. Drag down, below the menu. Release the mouse. The menu disappears, just like in Notepad.

    Click-and-hold on any other menu within Explorer. Drag down, below the menu. Release the mouse. The menu remains open.

    Explain to me how this behavior can be inconsistent between different menus within the same application? Mozilla's behavior is Bug 32494.

    In Windows, a menu action simply happens while on Macintosh, the selected menu item flashes several times.

    This is Bug 66120.

    Mozilla has multiple versions of the Classic skin, one for each platform. I don't use it. I use the Modern skin, which looks and behaves the same way on all four platforms I use.

If all else fails, lower your standards.

Working...