<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Wheadon&#039;s Words; Mark&#039;s Mutterings &#187; firefox</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.markwheadon.com/blog/tag/firefox/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.markwheadon.com/blog</link>
	<description>Welcome to Mark Wheadon&#039;s blog; I hope you find it useful. Feel free to comment on anything you read here.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 02 May 2010 14:14:38 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Firefox by Microsoft?</title>
		<link>http://www.markwheadon.com/blog/2009/04/firefox-by-microsoft/</link>
		<comments>http://www.markwheadon.com/blog/2009/04/firefox-by-microsoft/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 26 Apr 2009 10:23:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Mark Wheadon</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Mac OS X]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Windows]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[firefox]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[miscrosoft]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[open source]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[osx]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[plugins]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[thunderbird]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Windows vs Mac OS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[windows vs osx]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.markwheadon.com/blog/?p=762</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Open Source Community and Microsoft do have something in common after all.


No related posts.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: left;">I was trying to figure out why <em>firefox</em> doesn&#8217;t sit as well on <em>Mac OS</em> as I&#8217;d expect &#8212; why it feels slightly alien on there (as does <em>thunderbird</em>), and then it occurred to me: <em>firefox, thunderbird, </em>et. al. are, in some ways, more akin to <em>Windows</em> than <em>Mac OS.</em></p>
<p>I&#8217;ll explain (I think I&#8217;d better <img src='http://www.markwheadon.com/blog/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' />  ).</p>
<p><em>Mac OS</em> is pretty complete out of the box. If you&#8217;d like to burn an ISO image onto CD, or browse that ISO image, or <em>ssh</em> to another host, or use <em>VNC</em>, or&#8230; then it&#8217;s all already there, well integrated and working from the start.</p>
<p><em>Windows</em> isn&#8217;t like that &#8212; the basic OS lacks a lot of functionality. If you&#8217;re going to burn an ISO, or browse one then you&#8217;ll need something like <em>Nero.</em> If you&#8217;d like to <em>ssh</em> to another machine then you download <em>putty</em>, if you&#8217;re going to connect to another machine using <em>VNC</em> then you&#8217;ll need that, and so on.</p>
<p>What you end up with is a whole host of extra software, all pretty much working, but all pulling in slightly different directions and all clearly written by different companies with different ideas about the user interface, and differing levels of integration with the whole.</p>
<p><em>Firefox</em> and friends are also a little like that. The basic functionality is in the application, but all the extra frills are plugins, written by many different people. Many of the plugins are a little quirky, and they all tend to pull in slightly different directions &#8212; sometimes interacting badly with each other. It works, but it&#8217;s not elegant.</p>
<p>Microsoft and the Open Source Community do this for very different reasons. Microsoft does it to spread their programming effort as thinly as possible (I guess they&#8217;d say <em>as efficiently as possible</em>), always concentrating on &#8216;value&#8217;, and never on quality. The Open Source Community do it out of necessity: not everyone can be hacking the central code all the time, it&#8217;s just not practical, and the plugin approach enables a huge number of people to work on additional functionality whilst keeping the project manageable.</p>
<p>The world would be a much poorer place without open source software, but there <em>is</em> a price to pay. The plugin approach that open source development engenders leads to some great software (I wouldn&#8217;t give up my <a href="http://www.slimdevices.com/pi_squeezebox.html" target="_blank">Squeezeboxes</a> for the world for example, and my <em>squeezeserver</em> is bristling with plugins), but those systems do sometimes feel like they&#8217;re all elbows and knees &#8212; rather awkward, and somewhat less than elegant.</p>


<p>No related posts.</p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.markwheadon.com/blog/2009/04/firefox-by-microsoft/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
