Posted on 01/04/2005 4:26:26 PM PST by Coleus
|
|
 |
|
|
Is this internet prodigy about to knock Microsoft off its pedestal? A Miami teenager has created a free web browser that has been called Bill Gates's worst nightmare |
A MIAMI teenager is basking in the glory of helping to create a new internet browser at 17 that is now challenging the grip of Microsoft, which once held a virtual monopoly on web surfing.
Computer analysts say that Blake Ross’s browser, Firefox, is a faster, more versatile program that also offers better protection from viruses and unwanted advertising.
Industry experts have dubbed the new software “Microsoft’s worst nightmare”, according to the technology magazine Business 2.0. It hailed Mr Ross, now 19, as a software prodigy. He is also a talented pianist and “an unbelievable creative writer”, according to his mother, Ross. “Anything he does, he does well,” she said.
As a seven-year-old Mr Ross became hooked on the popular computer game SimCity, designing and budgeting his own virtual city. By 10, he had created his own website. He later created his own computer applications and online text games.Soon he was reporting computer software flaws to manufacturers online.
At 14 he was offered an internship at Netscape in Silicon Valley. His mother drove him out to California for three summers in succession.
At Netscape, Mr Ross was introduced to the Mozilla Foundation, a not-for-profit organisation that promotes “choice and innovation on the web”.
Mozilla was already trying to develop an open-source alternative browser to Microsoft’s Explorer, which many analysts felt had grown clumsy and outdated. Mr Ross and his friend David Hyatt began working on a small, user-focused browser. What began as an experimental side-project turned into Firefox.
Mr Ross is quick to point out that he was one of a large team at Mozilla who worked on the project for five years. “It’s a big volunteer effort,” he said. In fact, the pair left before the work was completed, but Mozilla credits them with making the breakthrough. After he left to go to university, Mr Ross continued to be a “significant contributor”, according to Mozilla.
The task involved throwing out all the old codes and rewriting the entire system so it would support all websites on the internet. While Firefox still has a long way to go to rival Microsoft, it seems to be catching on. Firefox has received dazzling reviews from industry analysts. Recently some 10,000 Firefox fans raised $250,000 (£131,000) to take out a two-page advertisement in The New York Times. It is not just in dividual users who are taking interest. In December, the information technology department at Pennsylvania State University sent a note to college deans recommending that the entire 100,000-strong staff, faculty and student body switch to Firefox.
Mr Ross, now a student at Stanford University studying computer science, is taking it all in his stride. As a volunteer on an open-source product, there was no financial reward.
Microsoft professes to be unfazed. Windows executive Gary Schare said: “We’re seeing the natural ebb and flow of a competitive marketplace with new products being introduced. It’s not surprising to see curious early adopters checking them out.”
Not content with making a huge dent in Microsoft’s browser share, Mozilla, the foundation behind Firefox, is also going after Microsoft’s Outlook and other e-mail packages.
Called Thunderbird 1.0, the package works on Windows, Macintosh and Linux and has been praised by the industry and press for finally offering a challenge to Microsoft’s dominance in the e-mail arena.
The software provides a number of features which other packages are struggling to offer. Key features include e-mail junk filters that analyse and sort incoming mail and greater security elements.
I just ran a page created entirely by VisualStudio .NET through the W3C validator and it threw six errors. I also ran some CSS through the validator and it came out fine, but IE couldn't render it -- Firefox could.
IE does do one thing better than Firefox. It can handle bad HTML better, which is one of the reasons why IE renders pages created by Microsoft tools better.
It is FireFox's problem, not Microsofts. CSS are defined by the W3C, not Microsoft.
Microsoft disagrees. They admit that they ignore the standards, stating that standards compliance is not something their customers want, so it's not something they're interested in doing. Let me dig up a quote...
"While it is true that our implementation is not fully, 100 percent W3C-compliant, our development investments are driven by our customer requirements and not necessarily by standards ... We balance feedback from all our customers and make our development decisions based on meeting the requirements of all of our customers, not just a few of them,""Few of them" refers to all the developers and content-creation companies (like Adobe) complaining about IE's shoddy CSS implementation.
I posted a similar comment a couple of weeks ago and was pretty much branded a computer nitwit, neophite, simpleton, too stupid to understand, idiot, etc. In fact, just the opposite is true, Because I know what I'm doing, I have had very very few problems with spyware, adware, malware, viruses and other security threats. Maybe its the simple things I do like actually using a firewall and antivirus software that also blocks popups, and keeping the program up-to-date; running Adaware, Spybot S & D, and Spywareblaster on a regular basis and keeping those programs up to date; ignoring email from strangers; effectively using spam filters, etc. Unfortunately, there are too many people who view their computer as just another appliance and they really don't have a clue about the most basic security precautions.
I can't say that I won't ever use Firefox again, but in my opinion, the hype is better than the product.
In the business world, nothing like that is free. The IE programmers' salaries come out the Windows bucket since they are developing what is a feature of Windows, just like any other feature. Sure, you could say every individual feature of Windows is free, but you still have to pay for the whole.
No. It's because IE does the best job at rendering what comes out of Microsoft IDEs.
FireFox implements CSS's different than IE. IE is the standard on the Internet right now and most Internet content is targeted toward IE. Thus the problem. Some current content does not work right on FireFox. IE is the standard. It will be hard for FireFox to go beyond the hobbyist and home user if there is problems displaying current content. There are thousands of developers that develop CSS the IE way. This is not a huge problem but it is an issue.
How standards are implemented is always a gray area – it is not an absolute science.
For a browser to give IE a run for its money it will have to be a solid program (FireFox seems to be that), It needs to confirm to W3C standards (FireFox seems to do that), and it needs to work perfectly with existing content (this is where FireFox may have a problem). My point all along is for a browser to make it – it must work with the current content (content for the most part that is targeted at IE). If a browser does that – it can give IE a run for its money. Microsoft makes it money on the content so if the new browser works perfect with their content, MS will not be effected. Of course MS wants to be the dominant everything – but it is not a requirement for MS’s success. MS does not make a dime on the browser – they make their money on tools to create and deliver content (as well as OS’s and other software).
I use FireFox
I am a fan of FireFox
It is the best non-IE browser I have used.
IE is too extensible therefore too vulnerable – I don’t need that so I have sought out an alternative browser and I currently use FireFox.
My point is it is absolutely ludicrous and silly to claim a new free browser is going knock Microsoft off its pedestal. Somebody someday will knock Microsoft off its pedestal but it is not going to be FireFox (unless somebody like IBM buys it and creates a set of content tools that can compete with MS)
I don't really like that statement - it was late when I wrote it and that is not really what I meant. It should be MS's rendering of the standards is now the industry standard.
bump and save
Like what?
That statement is simply not true. I see you are a hardcore MS hater (the kind that is willing to make up stories). Whatever turns you on. Fight the good fight Comrade (just like the democrats objecting to the Ohio vote) but if you ever invest money or your career in something I would suggest you work closer to reality.
Actually Bill's exact line (I know people who were at the meeting) was "why is there a standard out there being used by 4 million people that we don't own". At that point they were already putting the base (purchased) version of IE in Win95 (which was about to leave beta) but it was no big deal, just another utility for a market they'd heard about. After the meeting came the most frightening thing MS has ever done, the making of the new IE team. They decided who needed to be in the IE team, figured out where to put them, sent one group of people to empty that building and another group to collect the people; it was almost like a layoff, they came into people's office with boxes and said "you're on the new IE team, get going" anybody that took more than a minute to respond had their computer unplugged for them (no "hang on while I save these changes"). The big slow moving behemoth of Microsoft changed directions in an afternoon, something no one even thought was possible. Everybody thought that Netscape would have 2 or 3 years after MS entered the browser arena before they'd have serious competition, the next version (the first real version with actual features and stuff) of IE was out by the end of the year.
I was at a company that worked very closely with MS during that time, it was a very interesting view into what really makes MS a powerful company, raw will and absolute dedication to winning a market space is what that was all about. I was shocked when they officially ended new development in IE, that was a very non-MS move, guess even MS can get cocky when they have 90% of a market.
Firefox fails in almost every site that I try to use it -- anything with fancy scripting.
It also made itself the default browser and I can't get IE back as default -- even after clicking that "Have IE check if it is the default" box.
Join us in reality, Comrade. The vast majority of content is target toward IE - even content NOT created with MS tools (my company has many products written in Java and other non-MS technologies running on Unix platforms but we only support IE). No business can create web content without making sure it works perfectly in IE. Most business software only supports IE. The only way FireFox can make a major impact is if it can work "just like IE" and like I said: how can a free browser that works just like IE knock Microsoft off its pedestal?
IE is part of windows. Proof? Open windows explorer(not IE), In the Address at the top, type in Http://www.google.com hit enter. Look at that, IE is now in explorer. The core files that run windows are the EXACT same files that make up IE. They are inseperable.
In other words, Microsoft is responsible for the dumbing-down of the Internet.
When using IE I was forced to run Ad Aware everyday and it would always find 20 to 30 spyware programs every time!
Then there is tabbed browsing which works great. The feature I like the most is you can highlight any word or phrase on any webpage and have a Google search done on it, which opens up in a new tab. I love that!
IE is dead, long live Firefox!!
Tabs, RSS feeds (live bookmarks, great for FR), easy extensibility, quality popup blocking (SP2's isn't that good), better privacy and security tools, view selection source (also excellent for FR posting), and for the developer, excellent code debugging. Google searches are also integrated (no Google toolbar necessary) including selecting some text and clicking to open a Google search for that in a new tab.
With a couple quick extensions added, you get intelligent ad blocking and a whole bunch of other useful stuff. I use dictionary search, plain text links and GMail notifier.
All of the above has sped up my web browsing a lot.
One is only useful because we're in an IE world. Some sites, and lots of pages at Microsoft, either refuse your visit or give a warning if you're running Firefox. I can quickly set my user agent to IE to view these sites. All of us doing this has lowered the usage statistics for Firefox and added to the IE numbers.
And if you know JavaScript it's easy to write your own extensions.
Yes it is. I watched the story unfold as someone who'd already been using the WWW for a year or so.
I see you are a hardcore MS hater (the kind that is willing to make up stories).
The old adage isn't true, when you make assumptions, you only make an ass out of yourself. As recently as a few years ago I was recommending IE to people using Netscape because Netscape was the inferior product. I have no company loyalty.
You may be able to put pretty pictures into FrontPage and hit Publish, but if you don't know by experience how badly IE renders the standards then you're not really a web developer.
I hear a lot of good things about Opera, but I have the same attitude paying for browsers and I do about buying bottled water...
You can try the free version. It does have a banner ad in the upper right corner of the browser but you soon forget it's there. It's only a real problem if you have a small monitor and use a resolution below 800x600.
I used the free version for a couple of years until I realized how addicted I had become to Opera, so I bought it. It was well worth it (all updates are free).
The email client in Opera is a bit odd, but once you learn it, it's nice and convienent.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
