Re: Holy Hell
Konqueror it's self may be a good browser, but I'm not going to use it unless I can use it from within GNOME. I mean, don't get me wrong: I'm glad your experience with KDE was favorable. But every experience *I* have had with KDE has left me with a *nasty* taste in my mouth.
Now, I might try using Konqueror from within GNOME's ability to emulate KDE. If it works (and if I find Konqueror to be as nifty as you find it) then I'll continue using it.
But after my last few experiences with KDE, I don't like it one bit, and I won't use Konqueror if it means having to switch to KDE.
My Suggestions on the Browser War
I agree with you that we are loosing the Browser War, and that
we must somehow find a way to take back the Browser War or
else the results are to be disastrous.
My concurrence even extends to some details of the strategy
you suggest. But there are some things you said which I must
beg to differ on.
You say that the way to do it is to get rid of all nifty
say that I don't think this approach will work.
Getting rid of things that really *don't* cause compatibility
problems, such as Font tags, I don't think will help at all.
And as for getting rid of things like Flash will buy time,
that will *only* buy time. It won't solve the problem.
The problem with your idea of going back to a bare-bones
version of the Web is this: a strategy, in order to work,
has to enlist the co-operation of millions of Muggles who
don't care about the idealogy of what's behind the software
they use: and who won't know that they *need* to care
until it's way too late.
Sorry to tell you this, but the features that Flash and
the alike offer are things that they won't just give-up
for the higher cause, and if we just give those up without
working toward a *viable* and *suitable* alternative, we'll
just get left behind in the dirt.
Instead of seeing that the *whole* web be brought down to
bare-bones, it would be far better to see that the framework
of the browser *it's self* is *simple*, and that the *interface*
for writing *plug-ins* is simple too. By that I mean that if
a competent programmer wants to write plug-ins for this Open
Source Browser of the Future, he/she shouldn't have to spend
more than a few *hours* reading to learn how, and it would be
*best* if he/she can learn in *less* than an hour. (And it's
important to note that the reading-times mentioned do *not*
apply to speed-readers but to *regular* readers.) Also, that
browser shouldn't require any special SDK for developing
plug-ins unless that SDK is *easy* to both download *and*
And one should outsource as much of the nifty-browser features
of HTML as possible. But I do *not* advocate getting *rid* of
such features *entirely*. First of all, you'd be throwing out
the good with the bad if you do that. But furthermore, you'd
never get a critical-mass of people to co-operate with a plan
that limits their web-experiences to that which can be coded
in bare-bones HTML. We won't win the Browser War that way.
But one thing I *do* agree with you 100% is that the W3C is
long overdue for replacement. They've dropped the ball,
undoubtedly. But here is how I think they've dropped it:
-> Their specifications are over-bloated. They go far beyond
what a weekend teenager would have time to read.
-> They failed to take a firm-stand when it came to setting
standards, and instead came out with wishy-washy (and
therefore even *more* bloated) standards.
Here's the components of how *I* think we need to go about
taking back the browser war.
1> A new Open Source browser. It can be either a Web browser, or
a broser for an alternative to the web. It should be on it's
own a bare-bones browser, but it should have an interface for
plug-ins. But a simple interface, that any *competent* programmer
can learn to use with *very little reading*.
2> Set up a new standards-body to de-throne the W3C. Make this
Standadrs Body a vigilant one.
3> Putting together a library that people can use to easily write
platform-independent plug-ins. Once again, it has to be easy
to learn how to use this library.
4> Work *really* *hard* on replacements for plug-ins who's
manufacturers have been *especially* un-cooperative with the
Linux community. For instance, Flash (unless my research is
terribly flawed) must go: because Macromedia has failed to
release authorning tools for the Linux platform. But I maintain
that though Flash *should* go, it *won't* go until we have a
viable *alternative* to flash.