AOL Replaces IE with Netscape in New Beta

By Nate Mook, BetaNews

March 15, 2002, 12:00 AM

After almost a year of delays, AOL has taken the much anticipated first step to make Netscape's Gecko the default browsing engine in its client, a move that could breathe new life into the now stagnant browser war. As first revealed by BetaNews, AOL began developing the browser agnostic technology dubbed Komodo last year after an agreement with Microsoft sanctioning the use of Internet Explorer expired. The company has been testing Komodo with its CompuServe client since that time, but only this week made the switch in a test version of AOL, dubbed "Talon."

"The software used in this test is based on the most recent version of AOL 7.0 with Netscape Gecko as its internal browser," AOL beta coordinators wrote in an e-mail to testers. "Netscape Gecko is an embeddable browser designed to support open Internet standards, and is used for products like Netscape 6.2 and Instant AOL. This Beta tests the functionality of the AOL 7.0 software with Netscape Gecko."

AOL had originally planned to implement Komodo into AOL 7.0, which debuted last October, but encountered stability problems when used with Gecko. Internal documents viewed by BetaNews at the time stated "Komodo has not had a successful build for several weeks," citing "weeks of backlogged bugs and little to no QA."

Switching to Gecko has proved an enormous task for the media giant. Not only must AOL ensure compatibility with its own software that is heavily based on HTML-derived forms, but it also must be sure customers will have a similar browsing experience using the new engine - or face a multitude of support complaints.

According to internal plans viewed by BetaNews, AOL began a massive effort to promote Gecko compatibility in May of last year. "AOL must work to ensure the member experience for browsing is not impacted by the browser that members are using. AOLTW/CS partner content and the top most visited web sites by AOL, Inc. members (including Netcenter members) must be evangelized to use open standards in their publishing of content," one document read. "Internet Services will work with Account Services to notify Partners of the Komodo project, and ask Partners to test websites for compatibility."

If Talon is successful, AOL is likely to include Gecko as the default browser in AOL 8.0, due this fall. Such a move would give Netscape a much needed boost, with the browser currently holding less than 10 percent market share. The opportunity may also allow AOL to finally to cut strenuous ties with Redmond that have resulted from an ongoing battle between the companies. In December, Netscape filed suit against Microsoft for anticompetitive practices that caused irreversible damage to its business.

But Microsoft seems unconcerned that AOL might give IE the boot. Microsoft product manager Jim Cullinan told BetaNews last year, "AOL can use any browser technology they want in their client." After rumors surfaced last summer stating Netscape would focus more on services than its browser, Cullinan remarked, "Maybe it is because the Netscape technology sucks, at least that is what the reviews have said."

Add a Comment (379 Comments)

BetaNews reserves the right to remove any comment at any time for any reason. Please keep your responses appropriate and on topic. Foul language and personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Name (required):

E-mail (required):

Enter Your Comment:

By bigmac

posted Mar 31, 2002 - 6:25 PM

I think it's kind of ironic that the worst ISP on the planet is now paired with the worst browser. I think their tagline "So easy to use, no wonder it's number 1!" is so funny. It's number one because of who they are targeting with it: the majority of folks who don't know any better and will use it because they've got 223 free CD's in their desk drawer. And they are the most expensive! I like the recent commercials from NetZero who bust on AOL for being the most expensive.

Score: 0

By Compdoc

posted Mar 29, 2002 - 5:39 AM

You'd live in a place where no two people had the same name, and all were h0t 17/f cheerleaders with a fetish for pierced gay Dobermans in spandex.

You'd only pay $19.95 a month to live there, but half the time you tried to leave your house, the door would be stuck.

Once you got outside, even if you were in a hurry, you'd be assaulted by slimy little door-to-door salescreeps offering you great AOL 14.4 modems for only $399.99

The commute to work is just a double-click away, but every time you try to leave your driveway, the flow of traffic knocks you back into your yard.

48 hours after moving in, your mailbox would be overflowing with special offers, promotions and discounts from www.getlaid.com

The local post office would tell your mother you're not a known resident.

The local post office wouldn't forward your mail to you when you move.

The administration would kick you out of town for cursing after one of those brutal toe stubs.

If you saw a crime and called 911, they'd reply a week later with a form letter saying how you "really are important to us."

The administration would tell your boss to either pay up, or move his slack-ass company somewhere else.

Everyone on the street would have something to do with kiddy porn, and this business would account for 75% of all city revenue.

Every time you went to the mall, people would run up to you and violently scream M/F??!!, AGE/SEX?!?! or g0t PH1SH d3wd?!11 while little kids called your cell phone saying "Wanna SCREW?"

Those that didn't do that would call you and say "Hi, I'm j0e hax0r from the town council. We had a database crash and lost your tax records. Please give us your address and the key to your house or we will be forced to evict you and your family."

Every time you went shopping, you'd be kicked out of the store by a bouncer screaming "WE'RE SORRY, THIS STORE IS TEMPORARILY UNAVAILABLE."

Whenever you traveled to other cities, people would see your license tag and laugh behind your back.

Even your 3 year old son would know the intimate personal details of the town security expert.

You'd occasionally be sent home during the day by another bouncer telling you that the city has performed an illegal operation, but that it's really the Earth's fault.

The local McDonalds sign would be realistically changed to "McHax0r Wuz H3r3" and "Gr33tz 2 K}It0sawruz" almost daily. Police don't investigate, but do show up with little scrubby tools, or just remove the sign altogether.

Half the kids in the daycare you use are thinly disguised, fat, hairy, drooling, diapered men holding sacks of candy.

Your daughter would disappear to the No-Tell Motel every night, and you'd foot the bill.

Putting up controversial art in your home would result in the police bashing in your door, throwing your a** on the floor, and kicking the crap out of you while saying "Ya got two chances left, d***face. ROFLMAO LOL!!"

You'd send your kids to school for history, math, and science, but they'd wind up studying ph1shing, one-handed typing, and annoying acronyms.

You'd not have any idea who your neighbors are, and most new arrivals would move in at night, stuff everyone's mailbox with crap, and vacate before sun-up.

The administration would secretly sell off chunks of their personal land in the city, while buying up neighboring cities with imaginary funds.

The administration would build a huge, state- of- the- art park, and allow the kids to play there free, then suddenly demand money while ripping down the swings and beating the kids currently playing there.

Don't forget the AOL playground, which is locked so that the kiddies can not get out "for safety reasons," and then hordes of perverts & pedophiles are allowed in.

The police would work for free out of some sort of "duty" to the city, but would secretly only be doing it for the free food stamps.

Upon waking every morning, a voice from above would shout, "HEY! YOU DO WANT A godd*** AOL VISA, DON'T YOU?" To which you say "no." The voice then replies, "OK, I'LL ASK YOU TOMMOROW."

A trip to the local library would find you a few ancient doom 2 patches, commercial pix of Pamela Anderson Lee, and a viral copy of PkZip 2.04g

Community events would be periodically interrupted because of the speaker randomly flying out of the meeting hall and appearing several minutes later with some stupid comment about a Punt Monster.

Your neighbors would be called to leave on pilgrimages to a mystical land called USENET, where they would bleat the virtues of your fair city.

Somewhere in another city, David Cassel would be sitting with a telescope trained on City Hall, smiling contentedly.

As seen at: http://www.insanepictures.com/jk.shtml?1258.htm

Score: 0

By sphiggo

posted Mar 25, 2002 - 5:52 PM

Boy, nothing like world vs Micro$oft story to draw a crowd.

Score: 0

By Compdoc

posted Mar 25, 2002 - 11:59 PM

Yeah hi, just wonderin' if we could possibly grow up with the "$" in Microsoft? K? Thanks.

Score: 0

By sphiggo

posted Mar 26, 2002 - 5:22 PM

Hey, don't cry man, it'$ only a dollar $ign

Score: 0

By k_semler

posted Mar 26, 2002 - 3:37 PM

I will second that. Putting the dollar sign in Microsoft really makes no sense. I am wodering why people do it. Do they think they are insulting Microsoft? They aren't. It is about as effective as calling Karl Marx or Lenin a communist to insult them. They are communists, so calling them a communist would be a compliment to them, not an insult as it would to capitalists such as myself.

Score: 0

By sphiggo

posted Mar 26, 2002 - 5:20 PM

$o I write Micro$oft. $ue me!!!

Score: 0

By chris_kabuki

posted Mar 26, 2002 - 9:55 PM

If you live in America, it's quite likely someone will. I'm sure a good enough (read: well paid) lawyer could start with defamation and go from there.

Score: 0

By sphiggo

posted Mar 28, 2002 - 6:10 AM

Not bloody possible. There's nothing defamatory in those posts. No lawyer is that good. ...yes: this statement is still not defamatory. :-)

Score: 0

By Compdoc

posted Mar 28, 2002 - 6:22 AM

Edited for the "$" challenged:

"Not bloody po$$ible. There'$ nothing defamatory in tho$e po$t$. No lawyer i$ that good. ...ye$: thi$ $tatement i$ $till not defamatory. :-)

Score: 0

By Compdoc

posted Mar 28, 2002 - 6:26 AM

I'm convinced that "Anti-Microsofties" cant even see an "S" unless formatted in the "$" style. Maybe we could use this deficiency as a "$ecret Code"?

Score: 0

By fewt

posted Mar 28, 2002 - 8:22 AM

You were picked on on the playground a lot, weren't you.. :-P heh heh

Score: 0

By Compdoc

posted Mar 28, 2002 - 6:45 PM

Umm No, but I'm certain that you were.....

Score: 0

By fewt

posted Mar 28, 2002 - 11:16 PM

LOL, no. :-)

Score: 0

By sphiggo

posted Mar 28, 2002 - 7:49 AM

For your info, I'm not anti Micro$oft. [couldn't resist] :-)

I run Windows 2000 Server and a bunch of Micro$oft apps [:-)] - could care less for anything else right now. Don't get $o worked up about it.

Score: 0

By Compdoc

posted Mar 24, 2002 - 8:23 PM

http://www.insanepictures.com/jk.shtml?1258.htm

Score: 0

By NULLedge

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 9:22 AM

http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104-864256.html

Score: 0

By DigitalSin

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 8:28 PM

I think the article presents a good view on both perspectives. I think that in reality, we need both open source and closed source paradigms. Open source is particularly valuable in scientific research, or any other type of learning\knowledge sharing scenarios.

I really don't think this is a debate that will ever bear a winner. I mean what’s the eventuality open source proponents can hope for? Microsoft opens the code for Windows? Apple opens all their source? Everyone lives in this harmonious world where code is freely available to anyone with a net connection? To think even anything close to this is being highly naive and not even close to being practical. There'd be no motivation for corporations to create something new, because some college geek will make something even better and then give it away for free.

The only innovation we'd see is that from universities or lone hackers with too much time on their hands. I doubt any of this would be very useful for consumers.

Both have their part to play in the yin and yang of development and business.

Score: 0

By Compdoc

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 9:28 AM

NICE! Thx

Can't wait to hear the "re-fewt" of this one.........

Score: 0

By NULLedge

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 9:32 AM

did you read the whole article? its near the bottom where linus trivolds explains open source.

Score: 0

By Compdoc

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 9:51 AM

*Blush* umm, yeah {:-0

BUT, ease of use has had it's price....

They *used* to concentrate on that ONLY, now they will backtrack and fix the *important* stuff

I really do hope that someday a Unix based OS comes out that is easy to use AND has a kick a** GUI. Trust me, I'll use it when it does....maybe not for my main OS, but I will use it.

Score: 0

By wnowak1

posted Mar 26, 2002 - 12:07 AM

OS X is UNIX with A nice GUI

Score: 0

By fewt

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 3:58 PM

Kick a** GUI..

Example Shots:
http://kde-look.org/content/preview.php?file=1172-1.png
http://www.kde.org/scree...s/kde300beta2shots.html
http://www.kde-look.org/...iew.php?file=1091-1.png

GUIs (Complete Desktops)
http://www.ximian.com
http://www.kde.org

GUIs (Windowing Environments err "Shells")
http://fluxbox.sourceforge.net
http://www.windowmaker.org
http://www.xfce.org

Tons more info:
http://www.plig.org/xwinman/

Score: 0

By mrastudent

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 10:38 PM

that Ximian desktop product looks pretty nice, I guess tomorrow I'll be loading up some Linux and trying it out

Score: 0

By Compdoc

posted Mar 22, 2002 - 7:46 AM

I concur. However, although the Ximian desktop shown in the link below is by far the most "Kick Ass" desktop for *nix* OS's, it still falls WAY short of Windows XP's "beauty".

http://www.ximian.com/im...esktop/desktop_naut.png

As someone else posted, the GUI shoud be INCLUDED in the kernel as in Windows OS's instead of being seperate from it. Both KDE's and Ximian's "artists" should be FIRED or if they are not "paid", they should be removed from development until they get some lessons in graphics design. If it is decided that the GUI be left out of the kernel, the artwork should be redesigned at the very least. This is the basic problem with the *look* of *nix* OS's desktops. They are, in a word "cumbersome" and FAR from the "pretty" look of XP. This isn't meant to be overly harsh but if these desktops ever expect to compete with Windows, they need a makeover BIG TIME.

Score: 0

By deryk

posted Mar 23, 2002 - 8:24 AM

I'd settle for a standard 'start menu' type system. Not to mention graphical installers. I constantly have terminal windows open in order to be speedy and productive... in the 21st century, as Microsoft have proven, you shouldn't have to see a command prompt very often.

All this time, and *still* programs don't install their own icons... unless you're using Mandrake (yuck) with KDE, and RPM packages that are specifically written for Mandrake.

Score: 0

By fewt

posted Mar 23, 2002 - 9:30 AM

I'll agree that it's not there yet, however every application I've installed lately (Crossover, WPO 2000, Erics Ultimate Solitaire, etc) all installed icons for both GNOME and KDE.

Score: 0

By mrastudent

posted Mar 22, 2002 - 7:31 PM

That's why Windows GUI is much more responsive than Linux. Linux does not intend to put any more GUI stuffs in the kernel than necessary to protect stabilty.

Windows integrates more of the GUI into the kernel which results in more speed, but the GUI can take the system down. It can't (well when it does you can telnet/ssh in) take out the system in Linux

Score: 0

By fewt

posted Mar 22, 2002 - 9:51 AM

The GUI shouldn't ever be in the kernel. GUI hooks maybe for direct access, but that's there now.

Score: 0

By Compdoc

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 4:42 PM

Thx fewt

Score: 0

By Compdoc

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 10:06 AM

BTW, whats with the GUI in FreeBSD? I've heard of problems from some people. I haven't installed it yet or even burned the ISO. Can I even get the GUI to work?

Score: 0

By deryk

posted Mar 23, 2002 - 8:27 AM

As with Linux it gives you XFree86 and your choice of window manager. In the installer, it gives you a choice between KDE, GNOME, fvwm and a few others.

Score: 0

By mrastudent

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 10:36 PM

FreeBSD's focus has always been on servers. Unlike Linux, they aren't under the false impression that they can make a decent desktop OS so they are sticking to what *nix was made for, servers.

I know what you're going to say Fewt.

Score: 0

By deryk

posted Mar 23, 2002 - 8:39 AM

Oh well, I'll say it instead :)

I'm happily running FreeBSD as a desktop. It's true that it's intended for servers and doesn't strive to be a desktop OS, but it's capable of being one as a side-effect of Linux's popularity (all the nice things like KDE get ported).

Obviously, since it's not designed for the average desktop type person, it doesn't have any pretty installers or GUIs like Mandrake for instance. So no, I wouldn't recommend it as an OS for your Joe Average at all.

On the positive side, it seems like the next step once you know enough about the *NIX ways of doing things. If others go the same path as me, they start out with Redhat or Mandrake. Then they get to know their way around it and try something like Slackware (realising how nice it is not to be frustrated over RPM dependencies and such). Then, now that they know their way around and are no longer afraid of the command prompt, they go on to Debian or FreeBSD and have the best of both worlds.

I find BSD and Debian far less frustrating, as both have a sensible directory structure and installers that solve their own dependencies. I prefer FreeBSD out of the two because Debian is so heavily against non-GPL software that it's very difficult to find some non-free packages for it. I also love the choice between binary packages and source ports, *both* of which resolve their own deps. Basically, FreeBSD is to me like a Linux for those who know their way around it, and are frustrated at things like RPMs. Perfectly capable as a desktop :)

Score: 0

By fewt

posted Mar 22, 2002 - 6:22 AM

What am I going to say? Actually I agree with that. One note, Linux *IS* making progress to the desktop because people want it there. FreeBSD will ride along, as it is Linux compatable in a sense.

Score: 0

By mrastudent

posted Mar 22, 2002 - 9:04 AM

Yeah, if you want XFree86 on BSD you can always use OpenBSD

Score: 0

By fewt

posted Mar 22, 2002 - 9:32 AM

huh? I've used XFree86 on FreeBSD..

Score: 0

By Compdoc

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 9:13 AM

Re: Microsoft and Standards Posted by Ender
on March 21st, 2002 at 8:54AM ET

Whatever happened to fair competition? Whatever happened to not using your monopoly for illegal acts?

Re: Microsoft and Standards Posted by Compdoc
on March 21st, 2002 at 9:07AM ET

It's more like:

Whatever happened to the government staying out of free trade? Isn't this why we fought the Revolutionary War against England? The Sherman Anti-Trust Act/"law" is Anti-American, Anti Competitive, Anti-Capitalism and many other HORRIBLE things. It is also a REALLY good excuse for Communistic/Socialistic individuals and companies to "cry foul" when their s***ty products can't compete with Capitalistic individuals and companies.

"fair competition" is for China, NOT the US. We here in the US believe that if you want to win in business that you "Bust yer ass", NOT "Sue yer ass"...............

Score: 0

By Ender

posted Mar 22, 2002 - 4:38 AM

Bussiness is like a game and like every game it has rules. If you don't like the rules, don't play the game. If you break these rules, the referee will bust you.
Microsoft has been playing a very nasty game for the last couple of years and has been getting away with it. Now they're busted,they're the ones that are crying foul play. Isn't the world ironic.

Score: 0

By Compdoc

posted Mar 22, 2002 - 7:51 AM

Like I said, "The Sherman Anti-Trust Act/"law" is Anti-American, Anti Competitive, Anti-Capitalism and many other HORRIBLE things."

Our nation lost many good men during the Revolutionary War in fighting England's repression of our free market. It seems to me that in light of the Anti-Trust law which this country now employs, they died in vain............

Score: 0

By fewt

posted Mar 22, 2002 - 9:37 AM

No, our ancestors fought to end taxation.

Score: 0

By Compdoc

posted Mar 22, 2002 - 1:08 PM

Which stemmed from Englands desire to destroy our free trade.........

We were making better products at cheaper prices which caused JEALOUSY by the crown and well, you know the rest........

Score: 0

By fewt

posted Mar 22, 2002 - 11:33 PM

Our capitalist system had not yet been established. I was under the impression that England was simply doing as it did to all of it's people. ;-)

Score: 0

By Compdoc

posted Mar 23, 2002 - 8:33 AM

Yes, but they had already started to enjoy a relative amount of "freedom" from mother England as they were so far away from massive amounts of British "stormtroopers". It was only when we started getting some "balls" that England started sending more troops over to "keep us in line". You know the old saying, "Give 'em an inch........" Well, they liked this newfound "inch" and they took the mile........

To be honest, the way things have turned out in this country, we would have been better off never fighting the Revolution as we have lost "almost" everything we fought for at that time. Our Founding Fathers must be rolling over in their graves...........................

Score: 0

By Sppire

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 5:50 PM

"We here in the US believe that if you want to win in business that you "Bust yer ass", NOT "Sue yer ass"............... "

Could have fooled me.
Sppire.

Score: 0

By DigitalSin

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 3:46 PM

Excellent post, my sentiments exactly. Those confusing your post with communism need to seriously go back to middle school and do some reading on government. Linux and its whole ideology which follows is much truer to communism than anything else I see floating around.

Communism: A theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members.

Capitalism: An economic system in which the means of production and distribution are privately or corporately owned and development is proportionate to the accumulation and reinvestment of profits gained in a free market.

Score: 0

By Compdoc

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 4:55 PM

Thanks, I don't do bad when I keep my emotions to a minimum :)

Score: 0

By Hans_Wolf

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 12:18 PM

A true communist way of thinking.

Read My Struggle (The Road Ahead) by Bill Gates.

Sieg Heil, Genosse.

Score: 0

By Compdoc

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 1:16 PM

If I'm not mistaken, and I'm NOT, "Sieg Heil" or rather "Zeig Heil" is a fascist, NOT communist phrase.

And Bill Gates is FAR from a communist! Bill Gates and MS are Absolute Capitalists. The commies ALWAYS try to call their enemies the real commies to deceive people from the truth and take societies eyes off themselves.

Just look at the OS's:

Windows is Capitalist

Linux, NOT Unix, BSD or other *nix* OS's, is communist.

Score: 0

By Compdoc

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 1:19 PM

And how may is ask is "the govt. needs to STAY OUT of biz" in ANY way communist? In communist countries, the government is VERY involved in business, EVERY aspect for that matter.

You sir, are a jack ass......

Score: 0

By NULLedge

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 9:35 AM

its a combo. its a game of chess. to win, you have to win from all angles. gates is a great puppeteer(sp). he's played the industry for a long time and will continue to dominate where ever no ones paying attention.

Score: 0

By Compdoc

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 9:43 AM

No denying that but the govt. needs to STAY OUT of biz.

BTW, I wouldn't pick on your spelling, only those who post un-intelligent or *personal attack* replies :)

Score: 0

By NULLedge

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 8:37 AM

http://wired.com/news/an...st/0,1551,51202,00.html

Score: 0

By Compdoc

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 8:56 AM

"The federal judge hearing the Microsoft antitrust case said particularly damaging testimony (from RealNetworks) against the company is hearsay, and refused to consider it in deciding whether nine states can impose harsh penalties on the company."

I wonder how many pieces of testimony from other Anti-MS companies are hearsay?

BTW NULLedge, thanks for the link.

Score: 0

By NULLedge

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 9:23 AM

That would be as many that have had overturned cases in court.

Score: 0

By Compdoc

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 9:32 AM

True

Score: 0

By Compdoc

posted Mar 20, 2002 - 4:47 PM

Guess that last post was a *bit* too much :-D

nothin's bitin' today.........

In any event, AOL really does ruin everything they get their hands on.......no need to expound

bbl, gotta change me lure :-D

Score: 0

By NULLedge

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 9:25 AM

i'd put money on the fact you use winamp, aim, icq, or any other of their *ruined* software

Score: 0

By DigitalSin

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 3:32 PM

I resent that comment, Winamp is still a great software. It has a small memory footprint and seems to work fine. AIM has always been ruined, it plain sucks. ICQ I agree with you on. That used to be a nifty ware, but now it isn't worth the 20+ megs of RAM it eats up.

I too use Trillian.

Score: 0

By Compdoc

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 9:34 AM

Nope, I use Trillian :)

Score: 0

By Compdoc

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 9:36 AM

And I HATE the fact that E-bay is owned by them but I had an account before they were bought out.

Score: 0

By NULLedge

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 9:35 AM

trillian plays your mp3s?

Score: 0

By Compdoc

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 9:38 AM

No, that would be WMP :) I just responded to the IM part. Sorry :)

Score: 0

By DigitalSin

posted Mar 19, 2002 - 3:59 PM

I saw quite a bit of debate saying that Microsoft should open this and that. As far as Office is concerned, any Office document be it excel, powerpoint, or word, can be exported as an HTML document. .NET is wholly based around open standards like XML and SOAP. Even the MSN Messenger protocol has been opened (unlike AOL). I think this shows Microsoft is going into that direction.

I had the most hilarious conversation with a person who actually holds a high IT position in his department. He said he was going with java for a web service they're doing because they wanted something more open and non-proprietary. It's this kind of misinformation I hate. Java is not standard, it is VERY much proprietary, and has NEVER been submitted to a standards body.

.NET on the other hand has been submitted to a standards body (note the existence of projects like Mono) and is open (fully standard XML and SOAP).

Score: 0

By Tux0Racer

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 12:31 PM

"I saw quite a bit of debate saying that Microsoft should open this and that. As far as Office is concerned, any Office document be it excel, powerpoint, or word, can be exported as an HTML document. .NET is wholly based around open standards like XML and SOAP. Even the MSN Messenger protocol has been opened (unlike AOL). I think this shows Microsoft is going into that direction."

Part of Microsoft's widely known embrace, extend, and exterminate stratigy.

Step 1. Embrace new techonolgy: "See, we use XML and standards. Aren't we wonderful. Everyone should use us because we are nice and support open things."

Step 2. Extend: "Say hello to MSXML! It's much better and supports more then those silly standards. Aren't we wondefful. Everyone should use use because we have the most features."

Step 3: Exterminate: "Internet Explorer 7.0: With MSXML!" "WindowsXP 2.0 with MSXML!" "Microsoft OfficeXP 2.0 with MSXML!"... months later over 95% of the market uses MSXML and new versions eventually wipe out whatever of the real XML standard was left and they sucessfully destroyed it. Meanwhile MS zeliots are praising Microsoft for their cool version of XML and all the stuff their products support now....

P.S. Office saves with what you could essecially call MSHTML. And if you have a fancy Word document none of the things will get saved with it once it is exported to MSHTML. Even then there will be problems viewing it in a non-Microsoft product due too it's MSextended HTML and CSS.

Score: 0

By DigitalSin

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 3:23 PM

The good thing is that .NET may soon become a standard. It would be difficult to simply change something as you're suggesting quite so easily.

As for MSHTML, any Word and Powerpoint docs I have published on the web work just fine with Netscape and Opera. Granted complex documents may not be so easily exported, you can easily print the document and make it a PDF. What standard is there now that lets you make such complex documents which work on all platforms except HTML itself?

Score: 0

By fewt

posted Mar 19, 2002 - 4:12 PM

.NET will not be considered fully open until it is not protected by patent law. Your high paid IT friend was correct in his choice.

Score: 0

By Compdoc

posted Mar 19, 2002 - 5:35 PM

Whats so wrong in having a patent for something you have created?

Score: 0

By fewt

posted Mar 19, 2002 - 6:01 PM

It can be used to leverage .NET which keeps it from being a truly open system.

Score: 0

By Compdoc

posted Mar 19, 2002 - 6:13 PM

Well, leverage is used in business every day. I don't think they will though. They have too much invested in .Net to risk another lawsuit.

Score: 0

By DigitalSin

posted Mar 19, 2002 - 4:15 PM

And so Java is not patented? Whats up with all this lawsuit stuff?

Score: 0

By Ender

posted Mar 20, 2002 - 7:28 AM

The lawsuit is about breaking a contract, it has nothing to do with patents. Microsoft had the right to build a Java VM which had to pass certain tests to be able to have the Java label and is not allowed to have any proprietary stuff (i.e. it must obey that "write once, run anywhere" policy). Microsoft violated that license by adding Windows only functions which broke their VM.
Do your homework!

Score: 0

By DigitalSin

posted Mar 20, 2002 - 2:08 PM

But if Java is the standard non-proprietary entity everyone is alluding to, the lawsuit could not be enforced because nobody would own it. It's like suing someone for changing HTML, or XML.

So back to the original point yet again, Java is not standard and is proprietary. .NET is also proprietary, however its interfaces (already standardized) as well as C# has at least been submitted to a standards body. Java has not.

Which of the two would be more standards oriented?

Score: 0

By jamwheat

posted Mar 20, 2002 - 10:03 AM

Fewt, THAT lawsuit was already settled, done, and over with. The "new" lawsuit by Sun has nothing to do with the old Java- it is mainly about MS NOT including Java "out of the box" for XP. Now, isn't that just a really STUPID thing to sue over? There is no contract out that states MS *must* include Sun Java with XP, so they didn't. So, Sun wants to sue over that, and *force* MS to include Sun's Java.

James Wheat
http://belprecomputewizard.com

Score: 0

By Ender

posted Mar 20, 2002 - 10:43 AM

James, why did you address me in your reply to my post with Fewt? Do you actually read the posts and who posts them or are you blinded by all the Compdoc/Fewt "wars" that you consider every rebutal of your or one of your friends posts as an action of Fewt?

Score: 0

By Compdoc

posted Mar 20, 2002 - 4:50 PM

"Compdoc/Fewt "wars".........LOL! :-D

Just givin' him a run for his money :-D

Nothing personal...

Score: 0

By jamwheat

posted Mar 20, 2002 - 10:58 AM

Sorry Ender; guess I had FEWT on the brain, hehe....
Trying to reply to postings, answer the phone, and having customers come in tends to sidetrack me at times. No offense intended.

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

Score: 0

By Ender

posted Mar 20, 2002 - 11:03 AM

No problem James, I just don't like to be confused with Fewt. Sometimes I agree with him but a lot of the time I'm feeling he's to aggressive and not willing to listen to the opinions of the other posters (he'd rather bash them).

Score: 0

By Canuck

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 12:37 AM

True, but that could be said of other posters here, too.
That's the main reason that I don't post anywhere nearly as often as I used to. It seemed that no matter how fiercely I argued any point with others, it would not change anyone's opinion on whatever matter we were arguing.

Score: 0

By Compdoc

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 8:46 AM

I know that you are refering to me Canuck. The thing is, fewt NEEDS opposition as well as ALL closed minded individuals do. Personally, I don't think fewt is TOTALLY closed minded, just really close. One thing is, ALL IT people are very set in their ways and cannot be shaken from what they are used to and like, be it Windows OR Unix flavored software. I am going to try FreeBSD as it is a more PURE form of Unix. I'm not doing this to pick it apart or out of ulterior motives, just to explore *new* software. If only Unix loyalists would look at MS software in this way.............

Score: 0

By deryk

posted Mar 23, 2002 - 3:00 PM

Not *all* IT type people are set in their ways...
Let's see..
Once upon a time I used an Amiga
Then switched to a DOS-based PC
Then used Windows 3.1
Briefly used OS/2 Warp
Then was one of the first people using Win95
Since then I've used many distros of Linux, BeOS, FreeBSD and QNX.
I'm currently spending half my time in Windows, and about half in FreeBSD.

As for web browsers, constantly switching between them.
Guess I'm the complete opposite of your stereotype :)

Score: 0

By Canuck

posted Mar 22, 2002 - 1:46 AM

There are actually several posters that I'm referring to.
But I'll keep precicely whom to myself. ;D

Score: 0

By mrastudent

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 9:08 AM

As long as you aren't going the GUI way, you'll be happy you chose FreeBSD and not Linux

Score: 0

By deryk

posted Mar 23, 2002 - 3:07 PM

Huh? Why are people saying this?
FreeBSD uses KDE and GNOME like everything else.

It doesn't have anything similar to LinuxConf, but that's because it doesn't really need them - it's not like it is in Linux where there are 1000 different config files scattered around the filesystem with constantly changing layouts. You've got /etc. The files are really obvious. The default files, which are read first, can be found in /etc/defaults. None of the spaghetti configs you find in some Linux distros (Mandrake and Redhat spring to mind)

Score: 0

By Compdoc

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 9:15 AM

Really? Whats with the GUI?

Score: 0

By fewt

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 4:02 PM

Nothing really, unless you want bleeding edge software precompiled. It runs Linux applications in an "emulator err binary compatability layer" type of deal, I hear it's near native speed. FreeBSD and Linux are more similar than dissimilar. The reason some choose one over the other is some feel Linux is fragmented. (It's not really.)

Score: 0

By deryk

posted Mar 23, 2002 - 3:17 PM

What do you mean nothing? It comes with KDE 2.2.2 and GNOME 1.4!
Bleeding edge? KDE 2.2.2 is very stable. However, you can use FVWM, Afterstep, Windowmaker... whatever you want.

Precompiled? Of course it is! Even Slackware installs with precompiled binaries. Have you tried compiling KDE from scratch recently? It takes forever. If you really do want to compile it, you can go to /usr/ports, find KDE and do a make install.

The Linux emulation layer is not needed for the stuff it comes installed with. KDE and all the applications are compiled natively for FreeBSD (hence the term 'ports' - they've been ported to BSD)
The only time you need the emulation layer is for really awkward things that only have Linux binaries - I think maybe Realplayer and Staroffice, that's about it.

Score: 0

By Compdoc

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 8:47 AM

BTW, where is our buddy? He was AWOL all day yesterday..........

Score: 0

By Ender

posted Mar 20, 2002 - 10:39 AM

Check out http://www.sun.com/lawsuit/ and get your facts straight:

"In its complaint, Sun alleges that Microsoft has engaged in extensive anticompetitive conduct, including the following:

* Fragmenting the Java platform;
* Flooding the market with incompatible Java Runtime Environments;
* Forcing other companies to distribute or use products that are incompatible with Java;
* Significantly limiting Sun's distribution channels for the Java Runtime Environment;
* Intentionally interfering with the development of Java-based applications for compatible runtimes;
* Copyright infringement resulting from Microsoft's distribution of an unlicensed implementation of the Java Runtime Environment;
* Intentional creation of incompatibilities between Microsoft software and competing technologies, thereby raising switching costs for consumers and reducing consumer choice.
....
In its suit, Sun is seeking preliminary injunctions requiring Microsoft to:

* Distribute Sun's current binary implementation of the Java plug-in as part of Windows XP and Internet Explorer;
* Stop distribution of Microsoft's Java Virtual Machine through separate downloads."

Fact: Microsoft distributed a broken JVM.
Why? To destroy java as it's platform-independence is a threat for MS by using their long-time proven "embrace and extend" policy. They failed and now all of a sudden they don't need to put Java in their OS anymore. Then why did they have to put it in there in the first place? All MS has ever wanted to do is destroy Java by anti-competitive actions.
Why does Sun want their JVM bundled with XP and IE? MS has a near momopoly on the desktop and browser market. By bundling (or later downloading) of an old, incompatible JVM, MS is trying again to kill Java (I've can recall several problems with E-Banking-applets that only run on MS-JVM); it's the same as with IE-optimized web-sites. Why write 100%-pure. We'll just write for the largest group of people.
Is forcing them to include Sun's JVM the solution? That's up to the court to decide.

Score: 0

By Tux0Racer

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 12:36 PM

Java is just another fine example of Microsoft's embrace, extend, and exterminate stratigy.

Score: 0

By chris_kabuki

posted Mar 20, 2002 - 6:43 PM

"Fact: Microsoft distributed a broken JVM."
Not quite fact. Microsoft distributed a modified JVM which did not adhere to the "Write Once, Run Anywhere" logo. It wasn't broken. Everything you wrote in 'pure' Java was unaffected.

"All MS has ever wanted to do is destroy Java by anti-competitive actions."
MS actually wanted to work with Java... Sun wanted total dominance and control. For better or good at least let some facts through rather than spreading FUD.

"Why does Sun want their JVM bundled with XP and IE?"
Because they thought that users would flock to their website to download THEIR plug-in... and they got a rude shock when that did NOT occur! Sun were quite happy with MS not including a JVM with Windows... until now.

"Is forcing them to include Sun's JVM the solution? That's up to the court to decide."
Yes, we should let some judge decide wether or not Company A can force (read: sue) Company B to include their software.

Score: 0

By DigitalSin

posted Mar 20, 2002 - 7:05 PM

Well said. Also, who cares if its installed or not? I mean how often have you had to go and download the JVM? I have once in like the last 3 years because I wanted to use Limewire. What about all those super fun drawing applets though? Or the bouncing balls? Or the rippling water effect found on so many Geocities websites?? How will we cope?

But I have to ask, if Microsoft is forced to distribute JVM, then they would have to distribute everything which both Microsoft and a competitor makes, right?

So Windows will now be 1000x more bloated. We get to have Realplayer installed, AOL, Lotus, Novell, Adobe editing wares, Netscape, Oracle..what else? I'm sure every ma and pa 5 man development shop with an imitation Microsoft product will deserve a cut too, yes? I mean thats not fair that small businesses can't compete with big bad Microsoft.

This is absurd folks. What ever happened to people innovating to compete instead of suing? I can already see this response coming: well whatever happened to not using underhanded tactics to compete? To that I say, re-read elementary american business practices and study history a little bit. It all boils down to how pleased the clients\customers are. If they like something, they pay for it. If not, they don't and you go make a better product. Not sue like some whiny little girl scout.

Score: 0

By NULLedge

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 9:43 AM

explain how you can compair sun, novell, apple, etc, etc, etc to the current lawsuits that are happening. Please. I would love to hear your theory on this. that ma and pa 5 man web shot line was bunk.

Score: 0

By NULLedge

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 9:45 AM

eeeeh. mornings. what i meant was compare novell, sun, apple, netscape, etc. to a ma and pa 5 man opperation.

your ma and pa opperation wont have the budget to file a suit

Score: 0

By DigitalSin

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 3:27 PM

My point was simply that it is not practical to include every competitor's product in Windows. And it is unfair to say those companies which have the budget to fund a large legal team can only be included in a judgement like that.

I mean to say, why would only Java have to be included with Windows? Microsoft makes many products which have competition.

Score: 0

By fewt

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 6:07 PM

Honestly? JAVA, AND .NET services (including passport) should be left out of the O/S. Installed from Windows update, or a third party update tool would be cool though IMHO. Wait, there's a whole new market.. Updates.. Linux has it today (at cost update management), Windows should too.

Score: 0

By DigitalSin

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 8:12 PM

I think thats fair. And I also like Linux updates via Red Carpet. Very nice software.

Score: 0

By chris_kabuki

posted Mar 20, 2002 - 9:29 PM

"What ever happened to people innovating to compete instead of suing?"
I'd hate to say it but America happened.... where it seems that if you can't get what you want you can always sue - no matter how obsurd and idiotic it may be.

Score: 0

By Ender

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 8:54 AM

Whatever happened to fair competition? Whatever happened to not using your monopoly for illegal acts?

Score: 0

By chris_kabuki

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 5:28 PM

Fair competition? What is this marvellous thing that you speak of? Who said competition had to be fair? You're quite welcome to step out into the real world where you might just realise that business and especially large corporations did not get to where they are nor stay where they are by being 'fair' to the opposition. Hey I know... Adobe should be forced to either stop work on Photoshop or release all of it's source code because it just isn't fair to it's competitors that their product is the best by a long shot.

Seriously, as nice as it is to go around shouting ideas of a free market, fair competition.....peace on Earth... etc. you have to realise that a lot of these people are just in it for themselves. They're not about to step up and be helpful to a competitor!

And my original comment still stands, it seems that in America if you can't get what you want you can always sue.

Score: 0

By Ender

posted Mar 24, 2002 - 5:20 AM

Chris, an OS is completely different from an application. I don't need Photoshop to view/edit/create images (most formats used are supported by tons of other applications). I can choose whatever application I want to but if I want to run xx% of todays applications, I am forced to use an OS created by a single company: MS. I even received a mail on a newslist a couple of days ago in Word-format. The author had sent it in Word cause "everybody can read word documents".

Score: 0

By Compdoc

posted Mar 21, 2002 - 9:07 AM

It's more like:

Whatever happened to the government staying out of free trade? Isn't this why we fought the Revolutionary War against England? The Sherman Anti-Trust Act/"law" is Anti-American, Anti Competitive, Anti-Capitalism and many other HORRIBLE things. It is also a REALLY good excuse for Communistic/Socialistic individuals and companies to "cry foul" when their s***ty products can't compete with Capitalistic individuals and companies.

"fair competition" is for China, NOT the US. We here in the US believe that if you want to w