|
AOL Releases Client for Mac OS X with Gecko Browser
|
Log in/Create an Account
| Top
| 264 comments
|
Search Discussion
|
|
|
|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
We are not responsible for them in any way.
|
AOL + Apple market share is small (Score:2, Troll)
by NotAnotherReboot on Tuesday August 13, @08:43AM (#4060669)
(User #262125 Info | http://www.erikanderson.net/)
|
|
Considering that Apple market share is fairly small and then add in those using AOL on it it's even smaller this won't make much of an impact. Most sites already work completely in Mozilla, the only ones being the ones who don't care about working on every browser, and never have.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
|
Do we hate AOL today? (Score:5, Funny)
by joshua404 on Tuesday August 13, @08:43AM (#4060671)
(User #590829 Info)
|
|
I can't remember - Is AOL the evil corporate empire today or are they the champions fighting against M$? Let me check my calendar..
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
|
MacOs and Win (Score:3, Insightful)
by joe_fish on Tuesday August 13, @08:43AM (#4060676)
(User #6037 Info)
|
|
Mozilla has always had a greater percentage market share on MacOS compared with Windows, so it makes sense to start there when moving browser components.
But it's about protecting your userbase. No point in alienating your users too soon. It'll come but not in a rush.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
- 1 reply
beneath your current threshold.
|
8.0 Uses Gecko (Score:3, Informative)
by spring on Tuesday August 13, @08:44AM (#4060679)
(User #116537 Info | http://www.voluntech.org/)
|
|
The Win32 / 8.0 version of the AOL client does use Gecko as the rendering engine.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
|
That's one (Score:1)
by RobertNotBob on Tuesday August 13, @08:45AM (#4060682)
(User #597987 Info)
|
|
That's one small step for Gecko ( actually 3 tiny little quadruped steps). One Giant Leap for browser kind!
I wonder if they will disable 'disable popups'.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
- Re:That's one by biohazard99 (Score:1) Tuesday August 13, @10:54AM
- Re:That's one by Mr. Balrog (Score:1) Tuesday August 13, @06:35PM
|
Curious, this choice... (Score:1, Interesting)
by ites on Tuesday August 13, @08:45AM (#4060686)
(User #600337 Info)
|
Trying something new for a niche platform
makes sense when looking at the market.
AOL does not need browser wars...
but it needs to regain control of its user base.
If AOL is smart it will test the waters
before jumping in.
Consider Gecko on Mac to be a prototype for
a new AOL version for Windows.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
pop-ups (Score:2, Interesting)
by NASAKnight on Tuesday August 13, @08:47AM (#4060693)
(User #588155 Info | http://gauss.nhgs.tec.va.us/~srawls | Last Journal: Monday July 01, @11:50AM)
|
|
Does this mean AOLers can finally get rid of those stupid pop-up adds that AOL spews out at startup?
Been aol free for 3 years, and I'd never go back
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
- Re:pop-ups by Ravagin (Score:2) Tuesday August 13, @08:54AM
- Re:pop-ups by RazzleFrog (Score:1) Tuesday August 13, @12:01PM
- Re:pop-ups by galaga79 (Score:2) Tuesday August 13, @09:38AM
- Re:pop-ups by Nebrie (Score:1) Tuesday August 13, @02:05PM
- 1 reply
beneath your current threshold.
|
Obligatory... (Score:2)
by Ravagin on Tuesday August 13, @08:47AM (#4060696)
(User #100668 Info | http://joe.sameperson.net/)
|
|
...Web Standards Project [webstandards.org] link.
I'm very glad to see this kind of progress actually taking place. Since I started not worrying about NS4 support (that is, giving NS4 dumbed-down or no styling at all), IE/win has become my arch-nemesis of web design. The broken box model alone is enough to keep a man (or woman) up nights.
I hope the introduction of AOL gecko clients, especially for windows, will put a damper on the attitude of many web authors that "IE is all that matters," and "mozilla sucks because it doesn't support industry standards."
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
|
Well... (Score:1)
by Lobo on Tuesday August 13, @08:49AM (#4060702)
(User #10944 Info)
|
|
It's good to see AOL use something other than IE. I think they are doing this for one main reason... Beta Test! It would be good to see AOL switch to Gecko on the Windows platform for no other reason than to give Microsoft what they deserve most... Competition.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
Not a chance... (Score:1)
by swaic (`moc.eticxe' `ta' `ciaws') on Tuesday August 13, @08:50AM (#4060706)
(User #541592 Info)
|
AOL is still scared to death of Gates and will not try to piss him off by taking IE out of AOL. At least I don't think so.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
- 1 reply
beneath your current threshold.
|
hmm MS supports Mozilla? (Score:1, Funny)
by linuxislandsucks on Tuesday August 13, @08:52AM (#4060719)
(User #461335 Info | http://www.diaries.com/ShareMe/ | Last Journal: Wednesday July 10, @10:10AM)
|
Have you noticde that MS sites display correctly in Mozilla..I can even get winodws udpates..
Its a consipracy to support Mozilla!
Oh no! Mozilla is coming after AOL next!
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
- 1 reply
beneath your current threshold.
|
And if this goes well, will the Windows version ev (Score:1)
by qurob on Tuesday August 13, @08:54AM (#4060731)
(User #543434 Info | http://slashdot.org/)
|
And if this goes well, will the Windows version eventually use a Gecko-based browser, too?
I almost said "No, not unless it's 100% compatible with sites that want to see IE"
But then I thought about how screwy the AOL browsers have been in the past.
I'd just fire up AOL and run IE, but 99% of AOL users don't know you can do that. The only twisted view of the world wide web they have is from inside of the AOL Browser.
Remember all the porn sites that used to say, "AOL-friendly?"
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
|
Market trick (Score:1, Flamebait)
by jukal (jukal+slashdot@cyberian.org) on Tuesday August 13, @08:55AM (#4060734)
(User #523582 Info | http://www.openchallenge.org/)
|
|
Selecting Gecko for MacOSX is just a good market trick. It's market share is minimal, and I have understood the users (exactly one that I know) of MacOSX are already used to not being able to view everything similarly as the majority. Therefore, no-one looses, and AOL gets credit.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
|
No Big Deal (Score:2, Informative)
by InKonu on Tuesday August 13, @08:56AM (#4060739)
(User #462829 Info)
|
Gecko or IE, it doesn't matter since any AOL users can still use whatever darn browser they please.
InKonu
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
|
if AOL knows what's good for it (Score:2, Interesting)
by Ender Ryan on Tuesday August 13, @09:02AM (#4060765)
(User #79406 Info)
|
|
If AOL wants to remain in existence, AOL needs to help topple the MS monopoly, first in browsers and then the desktop OS would help.
The DOJ isn't going to do anything to MS, MS will be allowed to continue doing business how they please. Pretty soon, MS is going to start pushing MSN even harder. People will buy their PC and it will come with an MSN subscription and will come preconfigured to connect to the Internet via MSN. It will most likely use completely proprietary windows only connection and communication protocols. All software that people need will come on their PC, and they'll pay per use or rent monthly, and pay via their MSN bill.
Whether that really happens that way or not is yet to be seen, but the danger to AOL from MS/MSN is very obvious, and if AOL wants to stay in business they had better start pushing to bring MS down off it's pedestal.
AOL could start by spending less money giving me coasters, and use standard connection protocols, etc.
Most people who use AOL continue to use AOL because that's what they've been using for a long time... AOL needs to start worrying about it's future.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
|
Web Developers will stick with IE (Score:3, Interesting)
by squaretorus on Tuesday August 13, @09:04AM (#4060773)
(User #459130 Info | http://slashdot.org/)
|
The reason being that its easy. Most clients of web companies use PCs with the latest version of XP and IE installed - why?
Because its easy. IE has its flaws, but its pretty much universal and good enough. With .NET you can actually SMELL the IE bias as soon as you start building a page. This keep development costs down and delivery schedules easy to estimate.
By building for IE and offering to 'do a mac version if you get complaints / lose customers' most web houses cover their arse while keeping it simple. And the carrot? 'Its cheap as chips to do in IE, but a bitch to do cross browser - so it'll costs lots more - it'll be cheaper in the long run to do two versions, and you probably wont need the second version anyway!'
IE is here to stay.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
- Re:Web Developers will stick with IE by thasmudyan (Score:1) Tuesday August 13, @09:11AM
- Re:Web Developers will stick with IE by Art Tatum (Score:1) Tuesday August 13, @09:16AM
- Re:Web Developers will stick with IE by Squareball (Score:1) Tuesday August 13, @09:17AM
- Re:Web Developers will stick with IE by ejaw5 (Score:1) Tuesday August 13, @09:39AM
- Speak for yourself ... but .. by bushboy (Score:1) Tuesday August 13, @09:44AM
- The latest versions of XP and IE? by Per Abrahamsen (Score:2) Tuesday August 13, @10:00AM
- Re:Web Developers will stick with IE by Mononoke (Score:1) Tuesday August 13, @10:11AM
- Re:Web Developers will stick with IE by Mononoke (Score:1) Tuesday August 13, @10:14AM
- Re:Web Developers will stick with IE by sehryan (Score:2) Tuesday August 13, @11:15AM
- Re:Web Developers will stick with IE by TheWickedKingJeremy (Score:1) Tuesday August 13, @11:23AM
- Not this developer by thelexx (Score:2) Tuesday August 13, @12:21PM
- 1 reply
beneath your current threshold.
- Re:Web Developers will stick with IE by Lysander Luddite (Score:2) Tuesday August 13, @12:46PM
- 1 reply
beneath your current threshold.
- Re:Web Developers will stick with IE by tshak (Score:2) Tuesday August 13, @12:48PM
- Re:Web Developers will stick with IE by bitdamaged (Score:1) Tuesday August 13, @01:17PM
- Re:Web Developers will stick with IE by pheenixx99 (Score:1) Tuesday August 13, @02:57PM
|
I use and support the following (Score:4, Insightful)
by DeadBugs (darkdaze@yahoo.com) on Tuesday August 13, @09:04AM (#4060774)
(User #546475 Info | http://slashdot.org/)
|
|
AOL is not all bad. I use the following
Gnutella
WinAmp
IM
Mozilla
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
|
You want GEICO, not... (Score:1)
by C0LDFusion on Tuesday August 13, @09:07AM (#4060786)
(User #541865 Info | Last Journal: Friday August 09, @03:05AM)
|
...need I say more?
::is modded down::
"That was uncalled for!"
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
Mac IE != Windows IE (Score:5, Informative)
by salimma (salimma1@NosPam.yahoo.co.uk) on Tuesday August 13, @09:11AM (#4060808)
(User #115327 Info | http://salimma.freeshell.org/ | Last Journal: Thursday August 01, @04:50AM)
|
|
Mac IE is a totally separate product from its Windows counterpart. I'm not too sure about whether it exposes itself as a DCOM component like WinIE, and thus is easily embeddable into other programs, but its rendering engine is definitely different - MacIE passes Mozilla's rendering tests [mozilla.org], whereas WinIE does not.
On the other hand, MacIE has incomplete support for certificates - try going to a site with a certificate from an unknown (to IE) provider in MacIE and it would not let you in (in version 5.1 and under at least).
Besides, they already have a browser product that uses Gecko - the one used by their subsidiary, Compuserve. It makes sense to migrate AOL on Windows last, since there is no pressing need.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
|
Why is this so great? (Score:1, Troll)
by shftleft on Tuesday August 13, @09:14AM (#4060818)
(User #261411 Info | http://slashdot.org/)
|
|
IMHO, IE is by far the best browser out there. I'll admit, this may be so because sites taylor to the IE crowd, but I've found for speed, user friendliness, and ease of use, IE takes the cake. I use galeon on my Linux workstations, but I feel its more unstable and less reliable than IE. I know competition is healthy, but when I is the best then they need to come up with something to compete.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
|
Browse compatibility (Score:1)
by chrisseaton on Tuesday August 13, @09:14AM (#4060822)
(User #573490 Info)
|
|
I don't understand everyone talking about how it will make web designers make their sites compatible for all browsers. I use Mozilla and have never come accross a site that renders with serious errors. Most pages look the same in all browsers.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
Makes a lot of sense (Score:2)
by aengblom (slashdot@aeng[ ]m.com ['blo' in gap]) on Tuesday August 13, @09:20AM (#4060855)
(User #123492 Info | http://www.aengblom.com/)
|
IMO, Mozilla blows away IE 5 on the Mac (as opposed to being about even with IE5/6 on the PC). It's faster and neither are preloaded. Very smart move.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
|
Does it even matter? (Score:1)
by Drunken_Jackass on Tuesday August 13, @09:28AM (#4060886)
(User #325938 Info | http://slashdot.org/)
|
I mean at the end of the day, we're still talking about AOL.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
- 1 reply
beneath your current threshold.
|
IE rendering vs. Gecko (Score:1)
by jmatlock (sdm@xtex.org) on Tuesday August 13, @09:31AM (#4060907)
(User #232136 Info)
|
Does it really matter who you 'target' for anymore? Gecko and IE seem to render almost everything identically these days.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
- 1 reply
beneath your current threshold.
|
Web Designers Won't Change (Score:1)
by mackertm on Tuesday August 13, @09:32AM (#4060911)
(User #515083 Info)
|
Will this make web designers think twice about tailoring their web pages to Internet Explorer? Or will they ignore this, given that the Windows client will still have Internet Explorer as the default browser?
I run a good-sized website in my spare time, and I do my best to account for all browser types and such - at least within reason. Some moron complaining about some browser I've never heard of on his Commodore 64 not working well doesn't affect me much... ;)
Anyway, what percentage of users are using AOL on Mac OS X? I would wager it's a rather insignificant percentage compared to all the AOL users on Windows. This will have no impact on designers who prefer to go IE-only on their sites.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
Arrrg - one more Netscape to KILL (Score:2)
by gelfling on Tuesday August 13, @09:38AM (#4060952)
(User #6534 Info | http://slashdot.org/)
|
This is just one more AOL groupthink idiocy from the same people who bought NS because it was not IE. Now this "We're better than good, wer're different !!!"
C'mon - the company is in deep shit financially and however they can provide a C+ average function for free is what they will do. This has nothing to do with you.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
IE better on the mac (Score:2)
by galaga79 on Tuesday August 13, @09:43AM (#4060990)
(User #307346 Info | http://www.scrapbook.melb.net/)
|
Just to be the devils advocate, I have been reading up on lots of browser stuff for the redesign of my site and from what I have learnt it appears that Internet Explorer is better on the Mac than it is on the PC. This is mainly because IE on the Mac is far more standards compliant with better CSS2 support and full support for PNG transparency.
As far as IE on the PC goes version 6 aint so bad because it is step closer to better CSS2 support, though it is still a far cry from Mozilla's CSS and PNG support.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
|
Gecko™ (Score:1)
by mrBlond on Tuesday August 13, @09:49AM (#4061031)
(User #141708 Info | http://iamjackswebsite.cjb.net/)
|
|
Mozilla bug 149325 (can't link to it from slashdot) mentions possible trademark problems with the word Gecko. Add that to Toho apparently aiming for a precedent to go after Mozilla by bearing their teeth at Davezilla [davezilla.com], and we Moz fans have some interesting times ahead.
Oh, and there's an IE skin [mozdev.org] for Mozilla, which along with custom splash screens and icon sets, allows you to ease your co-workers into Mozilla.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
- Re:Gecko™ by MonsterChicharo (Score:1) Tuesday August 13, @12:25PM
- Re:Gecko™ by legojenn (Score:1) Tuesday August 13, @04:27PM
|
Aren't they already ignored? (Score:3, Interesting)
by Lethyos (tofuchute@nosPam.hotmail.com) on Tuesday August 13, @09:49AM (#4061033)
(User #408045 Info | http://slashdot.org/ | Last Journal: Thursday June 27, @08:02AM)
|
As far as I recall, web designers/builders/maintainers/whatevers have traditionally ignored AOL, passing them off as irrelevant (for a variety of reasons from the custom browser they used to use, to the fact that AOL users are stupid by stereotype). To answer the question posted in the story, yes, I think the trends towards developing for Internet Explorer will (sadly) continue, for two reasons. First, the irrelevance AOL is considered to embody (read up), and second, because web design doesn't pay what it used to. As a result, those who want web sites built want them built as quickly as possible. Making cross-platform web sites is more expensive than IE-only.
It's still good to see yet another large company "support" open source software... Even if they do nothing other than lend credibility to a particular project.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
I wish my competitors ignored AOL... (Score:5, Interesting)
by alexhmit01 on Tuesday August 13, @10:04AM (#4061134)
(User #104757 Info | http://www.feratech.com/about/bios/ahochber/)
|
AOL is the SINGLE most important demographic for anyone in the B2C space. They are followed closely by people that use MSN's search engine. People that use Yahoo's search engine are a distant third.
People that run NS6/Mozilla are meaningless. Google searchers with any browser are kinda worthless.
NS4 users are important, you get people at work at low-tech companies.
I mean, it depends what you are doing. If you are building crazy flash sites with loud annoying noises, ignore AOL. My sites try to make money, like hell I'll ignore the largest contingent of shoppers, just because people think that they are stupid.
I'll take an semi-illiterate user running AOL 5.0 on an 800x600 monitor visiting my site over a "1337 Linux Hacker" running a Mozilla beta shopping me and 12 competitors to save 50 cents...
Alex
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
|
Where Free Software Fails (Score:3, Funny)
by jvmatthe on Tuesday August 13, @09:58AM (#4061093)
(User #116058 Info | http://curmudgeon.linuxgames.com/)
|
Recent big moves by the tech industry indicate that free software is moving forward, for the good of all. IBM's offerings, Sun's offerings, Apple, and now AOL with this full embrace of Gecko on MacOS X (the newest UNIX on the block!). We have free software replacements for web browsers, desktop environments, office productivity apps, and on and on.
Yet, there is one very painful area in which free software has not stepped up and provided GNU replacements. This key area is preventing the adoption of free software for the standard desktop, and it must be remedied soon, or all will be lost.
Thus, I propose that the FSF take up the following projects as soon as developers can be found:
- GNU Hunter for BSD - A deer^H^H^H^HGNU hunting simulation game. Finally, the unwashed masses can put down their weapons, leave their Windows machines behind, and massacre virtual deer on a free operating system. Expansions for various critters should be developed by the community using a plugin system. A lucrative deal with Wal-mart will follow.
- GNASCAR for GNU/Linux - Utilizing OpenGL for mind-blowing 3D graphics, this brings all the thrill of speeding around oval tracks to the free software world. I suggest a "dynasty mode" that includes famous names like Earnhart and Petty.
- WWE: Wrestling the GNU Way for GNU/Linux - Enter the ring against Raymond, Stallman, Moglen, Perens, and the king of them all TORVALDS! Unlock secret characters like CmdrTaco and Roblimo.
Until this hole is plugged in the free software front, we are fighting a losing battle.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
|
Need to give developers time (Score:2)
by n-baxley (nate@NosPAm.baxleys.org) on Tuesday August 13, @10:03AM (#4061129)
(User #103975 Info | http://www.baxleys.org/nate/ | Last Journal: Friday November 16, @10:19AM)
|
|
There are so many pages out there that have been developed with IE specific features, that making this switch too soon would stop people using the AOL browser all together. If they roll this out slowly, it will give developers time to switch. That's why it's more important than ever to notify sites that do not work well in Mozilla and NS6 so that the developers get the message and get their sites fixed. That being said, if AOL would make a rock solid commitment to moving to gecko, it would really light a fire under the developers and thier bosses to be proactive in finding the problems in their sites. I'm no fan of AOL, but if they can help get standard based web pages more common, then I'm all for them!
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
Huh? (Score:2)
by tempest303 (jensknutson@noSPAM.yahoo.com) on Tuesday August 13, @10:43AM (#4061406)
(User #259600 Info | http://www.upevil.net/)
|
|
America Online plans to stick with Internet Explorer for their Windows client
Where does it say this? The linked article just says "no major changes", but that could be taken any number of ways, like "no major user-visible changes". I'm guessing he average AOL user won't be able to tell the difference between an IE based AOL and a Gecko one.
I really don't think we'll know which way AOL is going until 8.0 is actually released.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
Apple and AOL have larger plans? (Score:2)
by d3xt3r on Tuesday August 13, @10:47AM (#4061430)
(User #527989 Info)
|
|
I know AOL was planning to do this anyway, but could this move be part of a new partnership between AOL and Apple?
OS X.2, will include an Apple derived IM client using AOL's network, and now AOL ditches IE on the Mac. Maybe the two are working up some larger plans in order to push on M$. They are already pushing AOL chat on OS X and now they are pushing IE off as well. If the Mac starts to make a resurgence on th e consumer's desktop, maybe this will make a people wake up and realize that there are other things other than M$ out there that deserve their attention.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
|
Can't wait (Score:1)
by v8interceptor on Tuesday August 13, @10:48AM (#4061440)
(User #586130 Info)
|
|
...it'll probably be in my letterbox any day now!
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
So what? (Score:1)
by YrWrstNtmr on Tuesday August 13, @11:05AM (#4061543)
(User #564987 Info)
|
The "browser" within AOL has little visual resemblance to IE, Mozilla, Gecko, Netscape, or whatever. The AOLer sees a window. In that window, a website may or may not open. Nowhere is there an IE or Gecko logo. I'd bet that 90% do not know nor care that the underlying tech is from the evil empire to the west, or from Gecko.
All the AOL user sees is "AOL".
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
|
Windows Gecko version in testing (Score:1)
by cheeserd00d on Tuesday August 13, @11:14AM (#4061616)
(User #87522 Info | http://edinboro.cjb.net | Last Journal: Tuesday November 06, @05:24PM)
|
The news.com article mentions nothing about AOL using Gecko in its windows client so I don't even know why the submitter references it.....
Also, as an AOL beta tester, I will tell you that there currently is an AOL 7.0 w/ Gecko in testing. The plan is to get Gecko fully compatible w/ AOL, and since in that time they havge started testing of verion 8.0, it will then be moved into 8.0 for the final release, to the public.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
Anyone have any screenshots? (Score:1)
by sgarrity (steven@actsofvolition.com) on Tuesday August 13, @11:15AM (#4061619)
(User #262297 Info | http://actsofvolition.com)
|
|
I'm curious to see the interface on OSX - anyone have any screenshots?
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
|
Cross-browser compatibility (Score:1)
by no1here ([jason] [at] [techhelpcenter.com]) on Tuesday August 13, @11:24AM (#4061700)
(User #467578 Info | http://techhelpcenter.com/)
|
|
As a developer, I always strive to make sure my creations are best viewed on the widest range of browsers and operating systems possible. For quite a while now, I have moved to Mozilla for almost all of my web browsing and developing needs. Of course I still need to use IE in order to download Windows updates, but Mozilla is my browser of choice and I make sure that my designs are viewed the same on Mozilla as they are on IE and other browsers. Still, differences in browsers sometimes eliminate certain desirable design features because they do not have a compliment on the other browsers.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
All about the percentages (Score:1)
by Boxcarwilli on Tuesday August 13, @11:29AM (#4061738)
(User #169764 Info | http://www.leftla.com/)
|
Ive been doing web dev for nearly 6 years now, and very heavy client side web dev (browser code). The deciding factor in building a web site that conforms to more open standars vs. browser specific rules is usually who is winning the browser war.
Granted, MSIE and MACIE are very different, but the difference between MACIE and MACNS is huge, massive I must say. If the percentages grow higher and higher for NS (I hope they do) then you will see more websites abondoning browser specific code in favor of cross browser code.
Google Zeitgeist [google.com]
Or you will see more sites implementing CSS the way it was suppose to be used. Just take a look at the newly redesigned Yahoo Mail in IE and then in NS, well done Yahoo. (except what is with this more than often asking me of my pwd lately?)
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
Smart Designers (Score:2)
by hether on Tuesday August 13, @11:42AM (#4061827)
(User #101201 Info)
|
Will this make web designers think twice about tailoring their web pages to Internet Explorer? Or will they ignore this, given that the Windows client will still have Internet Explorer as the default browser?
If the designers aren't already doing something to make sure their sites are at least palatable on browsers other than IE, its unlikely that this will make any bit of difference to them. Of course the smart ones out there are already designing for standards compliance and won't have to worry about it.
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
stick with IE? (Score:1)
by HaiLHaiL on Tuesday August 13, @11:54AM (#4061914)
(User #250648 Info | http://www.you-phoria.com)
|
|
I could see the reasoning behind this, but where does the linked article mention that AOL 8.0/Win will still use IE?
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
embedded Gecko (a la Chimera)? (Score:2)
by davebo on Tuesday August 13, @12:00PM (#4061952)
(User #11873 Info | Last Journal: Saturday July 20, @03:38AM)
|
|
I'm just curious: does anyone know if this embedded Gecko is taking stuff out of the Chimera tree? Or maybe a better question: where off of Mozilla did they branch?
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
Mac users on AOL? (Score:1)
by burnsy on Tuesday August 13, @12:18PM (#4062113)
(User #563104 Info)
|
Would any self respecting Mac user actually use AOL?
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
key word -default (Score:1)
by budalite on Tuesday August 13, @12:22PM (#4062146)
(User #454527 Info)
|
The key words is "default". This has never been about customer choice, except for the very *few* of us who have some ability to see which one is better or worse. The customer really doesn't care what browser he/she uses. Really. They use the browser that they use because it's already there when they turn the machine on. BGate$ figured that out many moons ago.
Example: My customers (HR for one of the largest U.S. Government Departments) use whatever is in front of them and write contracts to conform to whatever they are using. I have a middle manangement user that, until last week, had never clicked on the "Up" button to get to the next higher directory. Don't laugh. She's an expert in her field. She hasn't needed to know that to do her job which is making sure that people get paid on time and right the first time. (Ok, I was a *little* *stunned*, but my point stands.) My point is that I think *most* of the users (at work, anyway) have no real preference on what browser they use. They just want to do something or get information so they can do something. This is not a browser war; it's a marketing war.
Then again, perhaps it's like the guy who conquered the whole planet in Harrison's "Deathworld 3". Nowhere to go but down now, Billy. Hope you enjoyed the ride. Remember Digital and Computer Data Corp? Bah-ha-ha!
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
Who gives a flying rats ass what AOL does?!?!? (Score:1)
by THX1138 on Tuesday August 13, @06:55PM (#4065378)
(User #3820 Info)
|
|
Assholes OnLine is, in the scheme of the Intenet, jast a cling-on on the anus of life. That is shown time and again when their piece of 5h17 software gets installed on machines around the US screwing up settings. Lets not forget, people, that AOL in their infinite "wisdom" decided to include Windows 98 TCP/IP stack files which screwed up anything that wasn't 98 in of the iterations in the digital diarrhoea that they unleash on the gormless ID10Ts' that use their "service". And look whats happened to Netscape since they sucked in into the gaping, drooling maw that is AOL.
Anyone willing to bet they will screw it up?
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
Re:AOL is in for the money... watch out.... (Score:2)
by 13Echo (zachborgerding [at] netscape [dot] net) on Tuesday August 13, @08:53AM (#4060722)
(User #209846 Info | http://slashdot.org/)
|
That's not totally far out. AOL and its child companies are starting to embrace Linux as an alternative. There was a bit of speculation for some time about them being interested in Red Hat, but I am not sure how far that went. Nullsoft, the company that makes Winamp, really likes the whole open source thing. They have developed a cros-platform coding library called Wasabi, in which Winamp 3 is built upon. They aim to have Winamp available for Windows, Linux, and Mac- thanks to Wasabi. I am not sure if this is just because they are geeks, or if there was some corporate influence behind it, to muscle AOL's software (Winamp) onto multiple platforms. Of course, Gecko (and Mozilla) is available on almost all major platforms, and is constantly improving.
Is this a sign of AOL's interest in this sort of community, or a way of cirumventing MS's power? Who knows?
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
Re:Mozilla. (Score:2, Interesting)
by sjgman9 on Tuesday August 13, @08:53AM (#4060725)
(User #456705 Info)
|
It is a great deal faster than Mozilla on OSX. I tried it on a G3 iMac yesterday. AOL doesnt use the chrome interface, so that helps. Lets hope this can be done for Windows as well.
The browser wars would still be going on if this happened 3 or so years ago. Now better than never
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
- 1 reply
beneath your current threshold.
|
Re:AOL is in for the money... How is THAT bad? (Score:1)
by RobertNotBob on Tuesday August 13, @08:58AM (#4060746)
(User #597987 Info)
|
|
OK, so.....
As long as _I_ don't have to support their user base, what's so bad about AOLOS?
Why fight M$ when you can let AOL fight M$?
I suspect that a lot of the supporters of Linux started out like I did by being disillusioned by the alternatives. Now, more than ever, with the positive press for Linux out there, the more people see that there ARE alternatives to M$, the better for all of us.
Right?
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
Re:Decent Web Designers shouldn't worry... (Score:4, Insightful)
by mccalli on Tuesday August 13, @09:07AM (#4060785)
(User #323026 Info | http://www.eruvia.org/)
|
|
Oh yeah - all web designs should also work with Lynx, because we really love those geeky people who feel the need to surf in text
Well...there are also blind web surfers. Both CSS and HTML explicitly support markup and styling for non-graphical browsers.
Cheers,
Ian
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
|
Re:AOL Gecko browser for windows (Score:2)
by mabinogi on Tuesday August 13, @09:10AM (#4060800)
(User #74033 Info | http://www.mp3.com/cumulonimbus)
|
Is that why SP3 for W2k adds the option to set another browser as default, and to hide the fact that IE is even there?
admittedly, it's intended to be used the other way round, but the functionality is still there...
|
|
[ Reply to This
| Parent
]
|
|
|
| 25 replies
beneath your current threshold. |
