Flock, the New Browser on the Block 380
^tamago^ writes to tell us BusinessWeek Online is reporting that a new browser is stepping into the arena. This new competitor, Flock, hopes to change the face of web browsing by turning their's into the swiss army knife of browsers. From the article: "Flock's browser is built specifically for a new, emerging generation of Web users, one that isn't satisfied passively browsing media online. Flock hopes to turn the browser into a dashboard for collaborating, blogging, sharing photos, reveling in a raft of other group activities that have recently caught fire online"
So how will it generate sales? (Score:5, Interesting)
Is it Opera all over again [slashdot.org] in terms of its business model?
Or does it sound like a legalized spyware [slashdot.org]?
What would site owners feel if a browser is competing for Google Ads and referral bonuses with them?
Yuck (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Yuck (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I'm blind! (Score:3, Funny)
No joke. What the flock were they thinking when they made that flocking website. Maybe you have to use their flocking browser just to see their site correctly, with the flocking "hegiht" attributes and all.
flock.com till it kills ya, or blinds you anyways...
Invalid markup, to boot. (Score:5, Interesting)
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.floc
I would have expected the web page of a web browser to at least be standards-compliant. The Mozilla, Opera and Konqueror pages all validate cleanly:
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.mozi
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.oper
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.konq
Re:Invalid markup, to boot. (Score:4, Funny)
Uh oh...
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.apple .com/macosx/features/safari/ [w3.org]
Apparently there is no attribute "HEGIHT".
Re:This is a stupid non-story. (Score:2)
Re:Invalid markup, to boot. (Score:5, Interesting)
Ya think www.microsoft.com/ie would pass????
Re:Invalid markup, to boot. (Score:3, Interesting)
Results using the HTML Validator Firefox extension (Score:5, Informative)
----------------------
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/ie/default.mspx [microsoft.com]
line 2 column 1 - Warning: missing declaration
line 8 column 356 - Warning: ' is not approved by W3C
line 10 column 2403 - Warning: missing before
line 10 column 2435 - Warning: inserting implicit
line 10 column 2547 - Warning: discarding unexpected
line 12 column 46 - Error: is not recognized!
line 12 column 46 - Warning: discarding unexpected
line 14 column 980 - Warning: discarding unexpected
line 24 column 6844 - Warning: is not approved by W3C
line 24 column 6997 - Warning: is not approved by W3C
line 24 column 7004 - Warning: is not approved by W3C
line 24 column 7166 - Warning: is not approved by W3C
line 24 column 7173 - Warning: is not approved by W3C
line 24 column 7423 - Warning: is not approved by W3C
line 24 column 7574 - Warning: is not approved by W3C
line 24 column 7581 - Warning: is not approved by W3C
line 24 column 7729 - Warning: is not approved by W3C
line 24 column 7736 - Warning: is not approved by W3C
line 24 column 8210 - Warning: is not approved by W3C
line 6 column 115 - Warning: inserting "type" attribute
line 8 column 381 - Warning: inserting "type" attribute
line 8 column 449 - Warning: inserting "type" attribute
line 10 column 58 - Warning: proprietary attribute "topmargin"
line 10 column 58 - Warning: proprietary attribute "leftmargin"
line 10 column 58 - Warning: proprietary attribute "marginwidth"
line 10 column 58 - Warning: proprietary attribute "marginheight"
line 10 column 289 - Warning: proprietary attribute "height"
line 10 column 938 - Warning: proprietary attribute "linkarea"
line 10 column 938 - Warning: proprietary attribute "linkid"
line 10 column 1230 - Warning: proprietary attribute "linkarea"
line 10 column 1230 - Warning: proprietary attribute "linkid"
line 10 column 1423 - Warning: proprietary attribute "height"
line 10 column 1570 - Warning: attribute "bgcolor" had invalid value "FFFFFF" and has been replaced
line 10 column 1612 - Warning: proprietary attribute "linkarea"
line 10 column 1612 - Warning: proprietary attribute "linkid"
line 10 column 2554 - Warning: proprietary attribute "linkarea"
line 10 column 2554 - Warning: proprietary attribute "linkid"
line 10 column 3339 - Warning: proprietary attribute "height"
line 10 column 3460 - Warning: proprietary attribute "linkarea"
line 10 column 3460 - Warning: proprietary attribute "linkid"
line 10 column 3761 - Warning: proprietary attribute "linkarea"
line 10 column 3761 - Warning: proprietary attribute "linkid"
line 10 column 4066 - Warning: proprietary attribute "linkarea"
line 10 column 4066 - Warning: proprietary attribute "linkid"
line 10 column 4363 - Warning: proprietary attribute "linkarea"
line 10 column 4363 - Warning: proprietary attribute "linkid"
line 10 column 4672 - Warning:
proprietary attribute "url"
line 10 column 4818 - Warning:
proprietary attribute "menu"
line 10 column 5121 - Warning: proprietary attribute "linkarea"
line 10 column 5121 - Warning: proprietary attribute "linkid"
line 10 column 5258 - Warning:
proprietary attribute "menu"
line 10 column 5561 - Warning: proprietary attribute "linkarea"
line 10 column 5561 - Warning: proprietary attribute "linkid"
line 10 column 5706 - Warning:
proprietary attribute "menu"
line 10 column 6009 - Warning: proprietary attribute "linkarea"
line 10 column 6009 - Warning: proprietary attribute "linkid"
line 10 column 6144 - Warning:
proprietary attribute "menu"
line 10 column 6447 - Warning: proprietary attribute "linkarea"
line 10 column 6447 - Warning: proprietary attribute "linkid"
line 10 column 6578 - Warning:
proprietary attribute "menu"
line 10 column 6881 - Warning: proprietary attribute "linkarea"
line 10 c
Re:Invalid markup, to boot. (Score:4, Insightful)
Good luck with your work, and don't let the Slashdot trolls get you down!
Re:Yuck (Score:3, Funny)
I accually like the site design. It's a nice change of pace from most PR websites that try to be so creative you caqn't find any useful info or are so full of flash that you can't stand the waite or figureout how to find the info. Thier site loads fast and you can find what you a looking for very easy.
Re:Yuck (Score:2)
Re:Yuck (Score:2, Funny)
No kidding. God, we can't /. this thing fast enough. Somebody post this on Fark too.
Re:Yuck (Score:5, Insightful)
- The type is too big for any sort of mysterious appeal. If they want people to become interested by being vauge, then the text HAS to be smaller and not so pretentious.
- Even with the plot to intrigue the user, one has to give away more information than they already don't to at least let you know "wtf". For example, when rogaine first aired commercials in the US, it advertised itself as 'rogaine with monoxodil' as some product to turn your life around, but instead of people asking where to sign up, everyone called to ask 'what the fuck is it?' and ended up being more annoyed than anything else.
- Lastly, people hate the idea of giving away their digital identity (email) just to test a browser. Hint to the creators: You're not Apple, and as such, you are not going to get everyone to sign up for an invite to feel special in your exclusive club despite secrets handshakes and a password. Give the beta out there with a disclaimer, and an open invitation to test and give feedback instead of trying to be some underground organization, and learn to use colors better ^_^
Re:Yuck (Score:2)
Fun with form input (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Yuck (Score:3, Interesting)
I'll be blunt. I smell a rat. I think those foolish enough to actually give out their emails, or heaven forbid, actually get an installable bit of software are going to have a problem.
Re:Yuck (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Yuck (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm guessing neither are the people that designed this website.
Oh yeah, it's the design of the future. Pretty soon all websites will look like they were made by Coco the Gorilla.
Was this supposed to recommend it somehow?
Re:So how will it generate sales? (Score:2)
Article summary (Score:5, Funny)
NAME
flock - apply or remove an advisory lock on an open file
SYNOPSIS
#include <sys/file.h>
int flock(int fd, int operation)
DESCRIPTION
Apply or remove an advisory lock on an open file. The
file is specified by fd. Valid operations are given
below:
LOCK_SH Shared lock. More than one process may
hold a shared lock for a given file at a
given time.
LOCK_EX Exclusive lock. Only one process may
hold an exclusive lock for a given file
at a given time.
LOCK_UN Unlock.
LOCK_NB Don't block when locking. May be speci­
fied (by or'ing) along with one of the
other operations.
A single file may not simultaneously have both shared and
exclusive locks.
A file is locked (i.e., the inode), not the file descrip­
tor. So, dup(2) and fork(2) do not create multiple
instances of a lock.
RETURN VALUE
On success, zero is returned. On error, -1 is returned,
and errno is set appropriately.
ERRORS
EWOULDBLOCK
The file is locked and the LOCK_NB flag was
selected.
CONFORMING TO
4.4BSD (the flock(2) call first appeared in 4.2BSD).
NOTES
flock(2) does not lock files over NFS. Use fcntl(2)
instead: that does work over NFS, given a sufficiently
recent version of Linux and a server which supports lock­
ing.
flock(2) and fcntl(2) locks have different semantics with
respect to forked processes and dup(2).
SEE ALSO
open(2), close(2), dup(2), execve(2), fcntl(2), fork(2),
lockf(3)
There are also locks.txt and mandatory.txt in
/usr/src/linux/Documentation.
Linux 1998-12-11 FLOCK(2)
Re:Article summary (Score:5, Funny)
I tried to install this newfangled Flock on Linux, but...
My Linux seems a bit protective of its territory nowadays...
Re:So how will it generate sales? (Score:3, Insightful)
Hope they fix the font size in their browser (Score:3, Funny)
more competition should be a good thing, I hope (Score:5, Insightful)
First most obvious question to me is, will it run on Linux? No mention in the article, and their web site [flock.com] is coy (and a little annoying in its design). It does mention "cross platform tastiness", and "written in java", so I'm hoping.
That said, my biggest worry is browser extensions that start relying on non-standard implementation, i.e., they begin to have affinity for things not-html, not-javascript, things not-css. I know the browser universe is a hodge-podge of standards already, I just would hate to see yet another trailblazer that ends up to be some extension of some proprietary idea.
Anyway, to the new browser and its team, welcome to our flock. Best of luck.
Re:more competition should be a good thing, I hope (Score:2, Informative)
However, I have two problems with having a browser written in java:
1) It won't run on my 500Mhz Dell without making the internet feel like I'm slogging through stiff pudding. (No, Firefox doesn't; I'm running a highly tweaked Linux 2.6/Debian)
2) I don't want a JVM running every damn time I want to check my gMail.
3) Can you imagine a JVM interpreting javascript?? We're talking slow.
Here's a hint, guys:
Discover the beauty of gcc+(wxWindow
Re:more competition should be a good thing, I hope (Score:5, Informative)
Yes, Flock is being developed on and for MSWin, MacOS, and Linux. A slight majority of the developers do their work primarily on Linux. It is not "written in java". I think you have us confused with a SourceForge project. The Flock browser is directly based on Firefox.
Playing nice with other people and technologies is very important to us!
No Invite (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:No Invite (Score:5, Funny)
They probably spent all of their website design budget on this slashvertisement.
Re:No Invite (Score:5, Insightful)
I guess it's true, as they say in the comedy business "timing is everything."
Re:No Invite (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:No Invite (Score:3, Funny)
Wow! They advertized on "Backslashdot.com" too?
Screams? More like burning letters 100' tall. (Score:5, Informative)
They ARE FireFox extensions. You can install them in FireFox today!
Which makes me wonder why they aren't making their "new features" as extensions to FireFox rather than claiming to be building a whole new browser.
MPL infringement? (Score:5, Interesting)
I smell imminent, blatant MPL infringement--unless, they are writing their own code to interpret the xpis (and perhaps ActiveX too, if they want some bizarre sort of extra credit or something).
If they do use Mozilla code, certainly they should have the source code available, as per the MPL, Section 3.6 [mozilla.org], no? Unless Flock has balls of Fire-proof steel and considers such a license naïve and unconstitutional like SCO or something...
Re:Screams? More like burning letters 100' tall. (Score:4, Funny)
Because Flock is FireFox forked by a Firefox developer with some sort of hidden marketing agenda.
He took FireFox, turned it into a squid, dressed it up in spangles and glued tits to it.
Careful boys, you just might get your fingers burned if you try to fondle these puppies.
KFG
Re:Screams? More like burning letters 100' tall. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Screams? More like burning letters 100' tall. (Score:2)
Re:No Invite (Score:2)
Re:No Invite (Score:2)
One would hope. But my fear is that in that case they wouldn't have spent the time to do all those hideous CSS effects.
Re:No Invite (Score:2)
I beta tested Flock. (Score:5, Informative)
In short, it's:
Read the review for more.
A little thin on details. (Score:4, Interesting)
Home About Download Extensions Flock has landed.We're introducing the world's most innovative social browsing experience. We call it the two-way web.
Over the next few weeks, we'll be seeding invites to a few lucky folks. Sign up to find out when invites are available:
Thanks for your interest!
Email: And no, we won't spam you, sell your address or do anything else but use this info to let you know when invites are available. We hate spam just as much as you!
Oh and hey, wanna join the flock? We're hiring! So guess what? Send us your resume!
Re:A little thin on details. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:A little thin on details. (Score:2)
this browser will change everything (Score:2, Funny)
Re:this browser will change everything (Score:2)
As do butt plugs, and I figure this browser has a lot in common with anal aids.
I say... (Score:2, Funny)
feck flock
This is great! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:This is great! (Score:2)
two: "No, Flock you.com"
Another Browser.... (Score:2, Funny)
And I ran... (Score:3, Funny)
Great! (Score:5, Insightful)
Finally! (Score:4, Funny)
I wonder what MBA thought this one up. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I wonder what MBA thought this one up. (Score:2)
Oh boy! That's just what our IT department needs more of. Where do I send the check?
Re:I wonder what MBA thought this one up. (Score:2)
Re:I wonder what MBA thought this one up. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:I wonder what MBA thought this one up. (Score:3, Funny)
I'd love to chat more, but I'm too busy monetizing my core capabilities using Mark-to-Market accounting techniques and leveraging my strategic partnerships with nano-wireless-application-provider-social networking-viral marketing startups.
Covering the bases (Score:5, Funny)
OK, so apparently it's at least as stable as IE.
Re:Covering the bases (Score:3, Insightful)
umm, entirely new idea of thinking (Score:5, Funny)
I've seen this feature before, but I can't recall where...
Re:umm, entirely new idea of thinking (Score:3, Interesting)
This will work great! (Score:2)
You keep changin' when you oughta be a samin' (Score:3, Interesting)
Are they trying to turn browsing into browsing here? I think they may have overdone the alliteration, but I don't really understand what they're getting at. 'Browsing' the Internet is probably the best term here, even if it's not static content that is being browsed.
Besides, products that try to change or turn away the norm tend to not get very far - see Opera vs. Firefox and IE, or (more recently) disposable DVDs vs. normal ones.
I don't think this is going to get very far at all, even with the big limelight given to it by Slashdot here.
Going for broke on presentation? Literally? (Score:3, Interesting)
That said, people will pay through the nose for an mp3 player. Between M$'s bundling and the open-source movement, how exactly does a start-up web browser plan to make money? Honestly, if there's a niche in the market I would think it would be for ultra-secure browsers, not for flashy hip browsers.
Security (Score:2)
Firefox's extentions seem like the smart way to go all around.
I won't flock to it... (Score:5, Insightful)
A dashboard? (Score:2)
And then you can open up the "blogging widget", the "photo sharing widget", the "FlogTunes widget"...
A dashboard, huh? Interesting...It'll be like the digital hub of 2005.
GPL, right? (Score:2)
Indiana Jones and the Portal of Doom (Score:3, Insightful)
Personally, I'd rather have seperate tools than one big web-a-majig anyway.
Flock will be Open Source (Score:4, Informative)
Kevin
AOL (Score:2)
Slashdot: The newest shill on the block! (Score:5, Insightful)
An Insult to Ruby on Rails... (Score:2, Informative)
But then, shock of all horrors, it's the most defaultiest rails login app I've ever seen in production! Seems to me they could at least have changed some colors or added a logo (
more info (Score:2)
http://www.techcrunch.com/2005/08/26/flock-social
The Web Browser of the Future is not a Web Browser (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm newly skeptical of the approach of endlessly creating side-systems [communitywiki.org] on the web browser.
There are amazing things that are possible [communitywiki.org] when you make a new platform for integrating ideas.
For example, we can envision a world where you can watch people writing blog posts as they write them. We can imagine working on documents together with others in real-time. [0x539.de] We can imagine social networks, [foaf-project.org] we can imagine shared web browsing. We can imagine going to a web page, and seeing other people who happen to be browsing the web page at the same time as well. We can imagine looking at them, seeing what their affiliations are; There are all these things. We have seen voice communication. [skype.com] Within 10 years, good voice synthesis will be coupled, and we'll be able to look [secondlife.com] and sound like anybody.
Now, what we haven't seen, even in our imaginations, is all this stuff working together. Integrated into one platform.
Doing this stuff piece-meal, a little bit at a time, on the edge of the network, isn't going to work. It's just not. It'd take forever. Building new standards into the existing network just takes forever. There is no design team. Nadah. Nothing.
Where we see the cool stuff happening, really, is in these large behemeouth new platform.
Now, sure, we can get some milage out of AJAX. [wikipedia.org] We can do sophisticated things with that.
But are we really going to make a 3D world with live document editing, voice & synthesis, presence, infinite versioning on everything, avatars, the whole thing, yadda yadda yadda, using just AJAX? Within 10-15 years? Hell no! It takes at least at least 5 years to make a new specification pretty much standard amongst users. Even RSS aggregators have only 10% penetration amongst blog readers.
What does this mean? It means that a new platform is in the works. Whether you know it or not, a new platform is in the works. Which of the new upstarts is going to be it, remains to be seen.
Sure, sure, sure-- there will be gateways between the world of Vanilla HTML + AJAX into these new worlds.
At some point, you can make a computer render pictures of the new world, and ship them off in AJAX. You can even play Lemmings in the browser now. (Well, you could have... [xs4all.nl]) But the new world is going to be built in the new world. It's not going to be built piecemeal out here in weblandia. When we use browsers to access it, it will be a window into that world, but it will not be that world.
Oh, god, please, no... (Score:5, Funny)
And for real thrills, you can watch paint dry.
Viral "Invite" Marketing (Score:2, Interesting)
I also think that social "invit
"their's" (Score:4, Funny)
A new paradigm (Score:2)
AJAX is only such a hot topic because it's a clever new programming scheme that lets us overcome the horrible, decades-old limitations imposed upon us by the web's origins.
The idea of a request/response transaction model may have been cool when people wanted to access relatively static documents or document structures
Another solution with no problem (Score:2)
Flock hopes to turn the browser into a dashboard for collaborating, blogging, sharing photos, reveling in a raft of other group activities that have recently caught fire online".
Well, shoot, that's great! I can't do any of that with Internet Explorer, Safari, Mozilla, or Firefox! I can't wait to see what I've been missing.
They must love Spam (Score:2)
Totally clueless losers.
If that's the new generation, then I'm an old fart (Score:2)
I followed the link... (Score:2)
Plain English for Aunt Gert (Score:4, Insightful)
From the site blog:
Sigh. Yep. Tell them that. It's "a dashboard for collaborating". That'll convince those non-computer-savvy neighbors! Let's see what Aunt Gert thinks:
Why do geeks simply never say "It's a way to work together with your friends over the Web!" Why do we have to use nonsense words like "dashboard" and "collaboration" when there are perfectly lovely plain English substitutes?
Re:Plain English for Aunt Gert (Score:3, Interesting)
Flock : Firefox
Bitboyz : nVidia
The Greatest Vitamin On Earth : Centrum Silver
There a pattern here?
The two way web (Score:3, Interesting)
KFG
They lost me at... (Score:5, Funny)
I don't want my browser to "empower" me, I want it to quickly and efficiently let me waste time between classes while reading about computers and things that explode. The thought of an "empowered" browser (and my experiences at a local women's college) brings up some very disturbing mental images.
Flock: You seem to be searching for pornography, which subjugates women and furthers the phallusocracy that keeps undeserving white men in power. Instead, I've directed your search towards some Andrea Dworkin you might want to peruse.
Flock: Your search for 'Black Norwegian Metal' returned 217,000 hits. But might I suggest some Natalie Merchant, Bikini Kill, Ani DiFranco, or other womyn-friendly artists?
Flock: I notice that your Slashdot history shows a disturbing number of posts that suggest discrimination towards homosexuals, people of African descent, and extraplanetary immigrants. Until you show a pattern of clicking and browsing of sites that further the cause of disenfranchised peoples of color or alternate sexuality, I will encrypt your "special" folder that you think I don't know about.
And I bet it smells like patchouli, too.
Re:Based off of Konqueror? (Score:5, Informative)
Wired says it is based on firefox;http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,128 2,68823,00.html?tw=rss.TOP [wired.com]
Re:Based off of Konqueror? (Score:3, Informative)
I hate to reply to myself, but this screen shot of flock 0.1 confirms that it is based on firefox. http://flickr.com/photos/87617152@N00/31057629 [flickr.com]2 / [decrem.com]
Taken from the flock blog http://www.decrem.com/bart/2005/08/done-flock-01-
Re:Based off of Konqueror? (Score:3, Funny)
In all seriousness, though, it's a bunch of FireFox developers who're whacking FireFox into a new form.
Officially affiliated with the Mozilla Foundation? (Score:2)
Is this offshoot officially associated with the Mozilla Foundation/Mozilla Corporation in any way, like Firefox itself is?
Re:Officially affiliated with the Mozilla Foundati (Score:2, Informative)
In researching that last paragraph, I came across this blog entry by one of the developers [wordpress.com], which has a nice summary of
Holy shit! (Score:3, Insightful)
Everyone kept complaining, but I didn't believe it. Wow! They should win an award or something...
Maybe an award for "Most awful commercial example of minimalist website design".
Wow.
I'll grant it's readable...well, maybe light grey on white with yellow thrown into the mix is bad too. I hope they hire a graphic designer!
--LWM
Re:...hmmmm (Score:2, Interesting)
Not written in Visual BASIC. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:And I suppose everyone using it (Score:5, Funny)
Flock ewe!
Re:And I suppose everyone using it (Score:3, Funny)