RE: Some free software is pure crap, just like proprietary.
>
> I understand that I should not expect "secure" behavior, as
> those features are not available.
>
> I _do_ expect features that are on the menu to work, and so
> far, I have never been able to edit the bookmarks. Why is this
> so hard to fix?
>
That's a good question. I don't know -- most likely it has not
been a high priority for anyone to date.
> I can appreciate this. What I can't appreciate is that this
> product is the "free clone" of a functional browser that has
> been available for over a year, and I haven't seen any real
> progress. Many of the releases simply fails to come up, and
> the ones that do work fail under "ordinary" conditions (like
> clicking on a site label)
>
> A years worth of mind share hasn't brought this product any closer to
> being viable than it was the day Netscape released the code.
> My question is addressed to that fact.
>
I think it's a common misconception that Mozilla is just the old
Netscape code released for people to play with. I would guess that
something like 50% of it has been completely rewritten over the last
year to implement an entirely new layout engine and program architecture.
There has been a tremendous amount of work done "under the covers",
it just isn't that visible yet to the user.
Frankly, I am quite impressed with the amount of work that has been
accomplished on Mozilla in the last year. And I think that the closed-
minded windbags (not aimed at you [Dale] by the way) that deride Open
Source software movement because of Mozilla are missing the point entirely.
I see Mozilla as a great success. Some amazing things have been done,
and done the right way -- not rushed to market to meet an artificial
timeline:
1. A useful bug tracking system, now in use by several other projects
2. A useful build monitoring system, now used by several other projects
3. A useful IDL compiler, now in use by several other projects
4. A highly advanced HTML/XML rendering widget, used by some other projects
5. Plus a very cool browser that is increasingly functional every day.
> The only solution for me is either to be patient and wait for
> "the team" to improve the product so I can actually use it, or I have
> to dedicate some energy of my own to make fixes for the parts that are
> important to me.
>
Well, that's free software for you. You of all people should know how
this works -- the programmer's itch is the one that gets scratched. :-)
> I understand the US restriction issues, but look, netscape is
> a US company and their product contains all the tools for connecting to
> other sites. Do we need to apply to the US government for a Munitions
license
> so we can do this right, or what?
>
I don't know -- Perhaps the good people at fortify could provide a patch.
> My complaints were not about what I want, but the lack of any real
> progress or improvements in these products over the last year or more.
>
See above, but I would assert that there HAS been REAL progress and
REAL improvement over the last year. It's just not the progress that
you are personally interested in.
However, I concede your point that just because software is Free,
does not mean it's better. And frankly, your statements show a very
good example of why proprietary software, or at least "for hire"
software is useful -- when you have a need that does not match up
with the current interests of the development community.
-Brent
Reply to: