Re: Behavior, scripts, CSS

Tantek Celik wrote:
> > Mac Mozilla requires OS 8.5 and installs
> > three-thousand-three-hundred (3,300) files. That\'s a \'zilla alright.
> > MacIE
> > requires only 7.6.1 and a fraction of the files, so the user can get by
> > without spending tons of $$$ on software and hardware upgrades.
>
> As far as number of files - well, suffice it to say, before the HFS+ disk
> format, it was tremendously better in terms of disk space efficiency for the
> user to have fewer files (besides the obvious usability benefits of not
> cluttering the user\'s file system), hence a good goal for all Mac
> developers.
>
> I would expect that a final release of a Mac product would address such
> issues, which might not be worth addressing until that point.

You are remarkably prescient. I just downloaded the PR3, and it\'s 2500 files
smaller than current Mozilla (still 500 files though with Live3d, Java etc). However, this sucks because it\'s less power to the user; before it was easy to edit the skins, but now they\'re locked up in .jars.

[But at least you can still change the preferences JavaScript to remove some
of the Netscape-specific stuff; I recommend editing pref-ns.js and changing
the pref(\"imageblocker.enabled\", false); to true to restore Mozilla\'s \'only
accept images from the originating server option\', and 
change pref(\"javascript.allow.mailnews\", true); to false [exactly how is this
a good idea?].

> > (How\'d you do it?:)

> Let\'s just say that there may still be a few advantages to \"small-group\"
> \"owned-source\" _development_.  Just ask the Opera folks.

Yes, small-group software is better because then the developers can\'t
put in the bloated crap and concentrate on proper features instead. Not
sure that owned source is better than managed source though.

Received on Wednesday, 4 October 2000 11:44:04 UTC