Re: [vox-tech] cut and past under netscape - redux

[Micah Cowan <micah@cowanbox.MAPScom>]

On Mon, Mar 12, 2001 at 12:00:20PM -0800, Peter Jay Salzman wrote:
> i think the biggest issue is that the netscape code is just too broken to be
> fixed.  it's like trying to defend a theorem based on a flawed premise.
> can't be done unless you go back and change the premise.
> 
> it might have been better for the mozilla team to scrap the code and start
> from scratch.  i would be willing to bet (in a hypothetical sense) that if
> you add up the man hours it will take for them to fix all bugs that came
> pre-mixed in the NS batter, it would prolly equal the man hours it would've
> taken to write a new system from scratch.

I mostly agree with you here.  The NS code was screwed up.  OTOH, it
would have taken a /long/ time to write certain aspects of it; mostly
the rendering engine itself (which actually seems to be pretty good,
though I haven't checked under the hood yet ;).  Actually, this is
probably the exact reason a few other web-projects exist, based on
Gecko, but no other peice of Mozilla.

>  
> > I have seen Opera, but don't like the idea of paying for my browser.
> > And Mozilla is Free Software, which to me makes it go down real smooth
> > ;) 
> 
> very true.  but i have no problem paying for high quality software that
> performs as advertised.  good programmers need to eat (the bad ones can
> go hungry until they crank out quality product).  and at 20 bucks, i see it
> more akin to leaving a tip for good service rather than paying for the meal.

If it were a tip, I'd still have the source code.  But what the heck:
unlike RMS, my principles don't override my entertainment urges to the
point that I won't shell $40-50 out to lokigames for a good port of a
great game.

Micah