[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: XUL != Mozilla

• To: 'Gerald Bauer' <luxorxul@y...>, martind@n..., xml-dev@l...
• Subject: RE: XUL != Mozilla
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 16:50:15 -0600

You have a lot to learn about selling, Gerald.
Didier is trying to tell you something you need 
to hear and you are blowing him off with more 
self-absorbed indignation and pity me promotion.

Why does anyone need XUL?

Quick!  Fat client vs thin client.  You 
have to make a linkage to a customer need or XUL 
dies.  It won't do you a bit of good to 
tell a customer MS is evil, W3C is academic, or 
everyone steals.  Tell them why they need XUL.
Pick any client you can envision and try that.

Can you do it without Spy Vs Spy? You'll lose 
that game because as Didier rightly points out, 
your competition can build, target and launch 
faster than you can. 

Get this through your head: a customer does 
not care to inherit your enemies when they 
buy your product particularly if your enemies 
are very powerful ones.  Only children admire 
the self-destruction of the anti-hero.

len


From: Gerald Bauer [mailto:luxorxul@y...]

> XUL is not a bad idea Gerald, it was simply badly
> implemented, badly
> marketed, badly supported. And this doesn't suppress
> the fact that you have
> probably invested a lot of efforts into your site,
> simply that you do not
> have the resource to push that into the market and
> that Mozilla was a living
> dead (or sleeping beauty) for a long time.

  Didier, just to get the story straight. XUL stands
for XML UI Language and is not bound to Mozilla. XUL
is a language family to use XML to build rich UIs.

  For example, if you look at Microsoft XUL or at
Macromedia XUL or at Luxor XUL and so on you will find
- suprise, suprise - that everybody is using the
<button> tag to create buttons. (Of course, the
high-minded W3C academics had to reinvent the wheel
and insist on using <trigger> in XForms.)

  Anyway, your analysis about possible XUL adoption is
also completely flawed. If you can learn on thing from
history, it's that big players (e.g. Micromedia,
Microsoft, etc.) ignore standards and instead push
their own wares. The only proven way to build a rich
internet for everyone is to threaten their inbred
clunker with free open-source alternatives.
Unfortunately, it takes quite a while to build up the
code base as most people prefer to free ride and play
the arm chair critic. I'm sure you know what I mean.

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: XUL != Mozilla
    • From: Gerald Bauer <luxorxul@y...>
  • RE: XUL != Mozilla
    • From: Rich Salz <rsalz@d...>

• Prev by Date: XUL != Mozilla
• Next by Date: Re: Word 2003 schemas available
• Previous by thread: RE: RE: Why can't we all work together? XML UI Languages Abound
• Next by thread: RE: XUL != Mozilla
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread