×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Firefox Lead Engineer Scolds KDE Project

Zonk posted more than 8 years ago | from the he-said-she-said dept.

KDE 669

trent42 writes "Firefox lead developer Ben Goodger has had harsh words on his blog for the KDE project, in light of its public tiff with Apple over the KHTML rendering engine. Goodger says 'Safari's renderer is vastly superior to the KHTML used by Konqueror,' and that the KDE developers should follow Apple's lead and focus more on the needs of users, instead of insisting on software perfection."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

669 comments

Agile (3, Insightful)

mfh (56) | more than 8 years ago | (#12518975)

So basically, KDE should read this [agilemanifesto.org] .

Re:Agile (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12519231)

What a load of marketroid crap. That page looks awful and it's full of buzzwords.

??? HUH ??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12519254)

Are you crazy? The Agile Manifesto has been around for a while and is generally followed by good programmers.

The buzzwords are only there to get management interested.

KDE Kalled Out (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12518987)

Krushing!

Re:KDE Kalled Out (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12519179)

How the fuck can you say it's overated if you are the only person who rated it?

Can't wait... (3, Insightful)

ElGuapoGolf (600734) | more than 8 years ago | (#12518988)


Personally I can't wait for the KDE response which scolds the Firefox developers for having such huge and stupid security holes in their browser.

Maybe the Firefox team should get rid of the glass walls before they start chucking stones at other people.

True - Even if the mods don't like it! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12519113)

You're absolutely right, even if the moderators don't like the non-Slashthink position that you have adopted.

Maybe if he spent a little less time blogging about KDE and a little more time working on Firefox, the security holes wouldn't be there.

Re:True - Even if the mods don't like it! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12519209)

*sticks fingers in ears*
Lalalalalala can't hear you!

Re:True - Even if the mods don't like it! (1, Interesting)

telbij (465356) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519232)

Maybe if he spent a little less time blogging about KDE and a little more time working on Firefox, the security holes wouldn't be there.

You mean like Firefox 1.0.4 [searchenginejournal.com] ? Anyway, the poster may have had a point if the dev was blogging about KHTML security, but he wasn't even remotely near that topic. Hence, troll. (but at least not AC troll like you).

Re:Can't wait... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12519287)

How is parent a troll?
The only troll here is the Firefox developer.

Slashdot: where the truth gets buried under the moderation system

In a way I agree (5, Insightful)

baryon351 (626717) | more than 8 years ago | (#12518992)

the KDE developers should follow Apple's lead and focus more on the needs of users, instead of insisting on software perfection.

In a way, I agree. It's comforting to sit down, load an app, and have everything work. Knowing it's not quite perfectly written behind the scenes is a small worry sitting in the back of my mind, but it's smaller than when I have a slightly clumsy app that is otherwise technically correct.

Not that I think Konq is all that far behind in the user side of things.

Re:In a way I agree (3, Insightful)

l3v1 (787564) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519171)

Knowing it's not quite perfectly written behind the scenes is a small worry sitting in the back of my mind

Ok, so that sounds like IE's early days. I say "early days" because its flaws are nothing less than eyepopping these days. Anyway, I don't care how well Safari works and how good or bad it is or isn't behind the scenes. What I care for is that Konqueror is very well written, very stable and very fast. I use Konqueror (for browsing) about as much as Firefox, maybe more. I really think the Konqueror guys deserve every bit of appreciation for their long great work. I wouldn't like KHTML being dropped in favour of an engine hacked together by Apple devs.

Re:In a way I agree (1, Funny)

ExKoopaTroopa (671002) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519303)

Knowing it's not quite perfectly written behind the scenes is a small worry sitting in the back of my mind,

that's how I feel about Windows, but don't tell that to the linux zealots, err wait ...

Take Notes (4, Funny)

PaisteUser (810863) | more than 8 years ago | (#12518996)

Now only if Microsoft would insist on software perfection....

Blah... (2, Insightful)

afd8856 (700296) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519000)

Just what we need. Internal fights between developers for 2 open source projects...

Re:Blah... (4, Insightful)

Skye16 (685048) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519071)

Why is this necessarily a fight? Why don't the Konquerer developers just say "you're ugly" and proceed to ignore the other guy? He can have his opinion, they can have theirs, and it's completely useless to argue about it. As a general rule, people don't like being told what to do, especially after they've made an informed decision.

Re:Blah... (1, Flamebait)

mbbac (568880) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519110)

It's between developers for 3 open source projects: KHTML, WebCore, and Firefox.

The KHTML guys are really shooting themselves in the foot with this. They certainly aren't encouraging companies to participate with open source projects. The only thing they're doing is reinforcing an existing conception about open source developers -- that they're a pain to work with.

Re:Blah... (5, Insightful)

hostyle (773991) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519272)

How would you like it if you had a real nice and clean well documented codebase and you gave it to someone for free, the only stipulation - if you make some changes please give them back to us also. The guys you give your code to do make changes and do give them back. Problem is the code they give back is all over the place and badly (if even) commented. Then other people (your users) start complaining "this other guys software is better than yours, but hes using your code. Give us those features NOW." ?

Re:Blah... (5, Insightful)

JohnFluxx (413620) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519276)

Hmm, we work hard with Apple to give them the best possible access to our code. Apple does the minimum it can in giving the code back to us. Slashdotters praise Apple for the work on html, and so we just ask for people not to praise apple so much since they aren't exactly working with us - they don't use any of the resources we set up to try to encourage them to work with us.

And now _we_ are the pain to work with and aren't encouraging participation??

Re:Blah... (5, Insightful)

AllUsernamesAreGone (688381) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519132)

And this is different from the normal how exactly?

Quite frankly, I'd rather have them arguing - when OSS developers disagree it often highlights issues that people should really be thinking about.

You might like the Solid Wall Of Unity approach but give me chaos any day.

Re:Blah... (1)

PaxTech (103481) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519273)

Quite frankly, I'd rather have them arguing - when OSS developers disagree it often highlights issues that people should really be thinking about.

Mod up.. the competition between projects and groups is what keeps pushing up the quality of open source software. If some occasional infighting is the price of progress, I say bring it on.

Re:Blah... (5, Insightful)

squiggleslash (241428) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519234)

Even worse is that Ben doesn't even appear to know what he's criticising. He takes a quote out of context and puts the same spin on it that /. did a few weeks ago, treating it as a criticism of Apple when the thrust of the original piece was protesting that people were assuming that just because Apple had added something to WebKit, it follows that it'd be in the next release of KHTML, and were getting pissed at the KHMTL people when that didn't happen.

I'm not 100% surprised, given the degree to which the original post was misrepresented, but given some replies to his blog entry pointed this out and Ben's single response to them has been dismissive, it'd be nice to see a sign of good faith.

Why not (4, Funny)

mattmentecky (799199) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519002)

...and focus more on the needs of users, instead of insisting on software

Why not try something completely the opposite, like Microsoft, and focus on neither?

tif porn? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12519003)

So where is this tiff of KDE getting scolded?

Ha ha. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12519008)

Those that produce buggy, insecure browsers should not throw stones regarding software perfection. Perhaps if he spent a bit less time blogging about KDE and a bit more time working on Firefox, it wouldn't have so many vulnerabilities!

whatever (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12519010)

apple sucks

Apple Fanboys ... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12519018)

Before going off on a mod down frenzy, perhaps Apple's devout zealots could address the issue of why Apple didn't back Mozilla in the first place.

Re:Apple Fanboys ... (1)

baryon351 (626717) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519053)

> perhaps Apple's devout zealots could address the issue of why
> Apple didn't back Mozilla in the first place.

Why? it's not an issue that needs addressing, or even thinking about.

Re:Apple Fanboys ... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12519062)

Uh, maybe because their browser is buggy, slow, and sucks complete ass?

simple business decision (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12519101)

While not an apple zealot I can answer.

Apple decided not to use the Mozilla codebase because it realized that Mozilla would be a direct competitor for Safari and that every time an advance was made by Apple, it would need to be given to its direct competitor.

By using the KDE rendering engine, Apple could be fairly certain that the changes they made would not be immediately available on another browser. (Sorry guys, not many Linux on PPC folks in general)

It was simple business decision, competing products need to have a point of individuality, if the Mozilla codebase was used then Safari would offer nothing that sets it apart from Mozilla.

Re:Apple Fanboys ... (1)

rdc_uk (792215) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519203)

Because at the time safari began, mozilla was the whole bloated suite.

Firefox as a seperate browser came after, and therefore too late.

Also; because they didn't want to?

Re:Apple Fanboys ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12519241)

And who made Firefox a slimmer browser? Why, Ben Goodger!

Pot meet kettle (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12519021)

yeah i suppose it means fewer choices and competition.

Why is this a good thing again?

Uh.. (4, Insightful)

Thyamine (531612) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519028)

So the two are mutually exclusive? We can only have software that is perfectly written or software that addresses the needs of the users?

Can't we figure out what the users need, and then deliver excellently written software to do that?

Re:Uh.. (2, Insightful)

Feneric (765069) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519065)

No, they're not, but they often can't be achieved in the same (usually all too brief) time frame. I tend to side with the Apple / Firefox folks on this argument -- fix it first, clean the code second.

It's interesting to note that Apple doesn't seem to have gotten into any significant disagreements with any of the other OSS people they're working with (regarding Darwin, etc.) along the lines of what's happening now with the KDE kamp. That leads a little more credence to Apple now, too.

Re:Uh.. (3, Insightful)

Skye16 (685048) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519096)

I disagree. It's much harder to clean the code after it's already implemented and integrated. Do it right the first time and you don't have to worry about it later. In the mean time, you have a stable, secure product that people can rely on, even if they don't have the latest and greatest features.

Re:Uh.. (1)

Feneric (765069) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519301)

It depends. Please let me clarify that I was talking about patches when already in the maintenance mode of a product (which is applicable for the KDE stuff being discussed). I agree with you wholeheartedly when talking about brand new designs.

Re:Uh.. (4, Interesting)

drew (2081) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519302)

Of course, Apple hasn't really gotten into any significant agreement with the KDE people either. People who have been paying attention may have noticed the KDE developers saying that although Apple hasn't cooperated with them as much as the might have liked, they are within their rights to do that.

For all that has been said about a feud between KDE and Apple, the real feud is between the KDE developers and the users and slashbots who think that any new features in Safari should be in KDE too, and if they aren't it's because the KDE developers are slow, lazy, whatever.

It's worth noting that (from what I've heard, at least) the other open source projects that apple has used code from haven't gotten back much more in the way of useful contributions than the KDE team has.

Re:Uh.. (5, Insightful)

HomerJayS (721692) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519087)

This is the classic software development dilema.

It can be developed quickly, cheaply, or correctly (but you may only pick two of the three options)

Re:Uh.. (1)

lukewarmfusion (726141) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519134)

It goes for a lot more than software, too. I tell many of my clients (usually right around the time they get unreasonable) the same thing, though worded differently:

Fast, cheap, good: Pick any two.

Generally speaking: If you think you got all three, either you screwed someone over or you're a sucker.

Re:Uh.. (0, Troll)

Johnny Mozzarella (655181) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519277)

So the two are mutually exclusive?
Yes.

We can only have software that is perfectly written or software that addresses the needs of the users?
Perfect software never ships(except Hello World).

Can't we figure out what the users need, and then deliver excellently written software to do that?
Yes. [see Apple]

As a Moz/FF user... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12519036)

... since the early betas and a very happy user of Konq (mostly as a filesystem browser) all i can say is that software perfection is what draws me to the software both as a user and developer.

Re:As a Moz/FF user... (1)

MrAndrews (456547) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519120)

Ah, but is it actual perfection or the appearance of perfection that draws you? Which is more important: software that does what it's supposed to do safely and well, or software that is technically perfect, but may have usability hiccups? I know I prefer software that is brilliantly executed and as perfect as can be made, but none of that matters if the user doesn't see the job being done perfectly too. One doesn't make software for programmers, one makes software for users.

Schweet! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12519040)

Who better than a firefox developer to start a flamefest!

User Needs vs Software Perfection (4, Insightful)

ranson (824789) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519041)

"KDE developers should follow Apple's lead and focus more on the needs of users, instead of insisting on software perfection."

Now I think back to 1995, when IE focused on user needs over software perfection and the following of published specifications. And look what a mess of incompatibility we have today of javascript, css, java VMs, etc. Mainly because M$ focused on 'the needs of users.' No thanks, I'll stick to the specs.

Boy are you dumb (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12519075)

Completely different case. Did you miss where Safari passed a tough web page test? The whole point is that the Safari rendering engine is superior. Can't you read?

Re:Boy are you dumb (3, Interesting)

BladeMelbourne (518866) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519285)

Safari only passed the Acid 2 Test [webstandards.org] because the developer David Hyatt [mozillazine.org] spent time over two weeks [mozillazine.org] to make it pass.

I'm not saying that this is a bad thing, in fact it's an excellent thing. But the fact is Safari, Mozilla and MSIE all failed the Acid 2 test when it was released. Using MSIE I see red. lol.

Now Safari passes. And no doubt each would fail several more tough tests. No one test can prove a superior rendering engine, unless it was 10 MB big and tested every [X]HTML/CSS1,2,3/JavaScript specification in various scenarios.

I'm looking foward to getting a Mac Mini and seing how good Safari is. It will also allow me to develop web pages against Safari for the first time.

Re:User Needs vs Software Perfection (4, Insightful)

mccalli (323026) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519091)

Now I think back to 1995, when IE focused on user needs over software perfection and the following of published specifications. And look what a mess of incompatibility we have today of javascript, css, java VMs, etc. Mainly because M$ focused on 'the needs of users.' No thanks, I'll stick to the specs.

Utter nonsense. I too can think back to those days, and no browser was following the specs. "Netscape is the next Microsoft" was a common complaint, as Netscape piled proprietary tag after proprietary tag into their browser. And don't even think about their initial CSS stab, the web still suffers from that today.

Cheers,
Ian

Re:User Needs vs Software Perfection (4, Insightful)

nine-times (778537) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519116)

What about the fact that this all started because Apple created a build of webcore that passed the Acid2 test? I don't think the accusation was that Apple wasn't adhering to standards, but simply that the code was "messy" by KDE standards.

Re:User Needs vs Software Perfection (2, Insightful)

QuietLagoon (813062) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519136)

Mainly because M$ focused on 'the needs of users.'

Microsoft did not focus on the needs of the user, they focused on the needs of maintaining their monopoly. If that briefly aligned with the needs of the user, it was purely coincidental.

Re:User Needs vs Software Perfection (3, Insightful)

Johnny Mozzarella (655181) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519222)

Perhaps you missed the story about Safari passing the Acid2 test?

Safari's code is capable of performing to publish specifications.
Microsoft's objective was to create their own specification.

Entirely different thinking.

Re:User Needs vs Software Perfection (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12519253)

> Microsoft's objective was to create their own specification.

I don't know why anyone informed would say this. The CSS in IE6 is kinda bad, but it's clearly supposed to be W3C CSS and not something proprietary.

Oh holy shit (4, Insightful)

ErichTheWebGuy (745925) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519051)

Do we really need to start another flamewar between projects? Who benefits? Perhaps the KDE project and Firefox should *both* keep their collective mouths shut!

Re:Oh holy shit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12519243)

really.. I'm tired of all the drama.. These kinds of issues really don't even deserve attention.

Re:Oh holy shit (2, Funny)

Trillan (597339) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519250)

Well, he started it!!

Seriously, the occasional blow-up like this is probably good in the long run. If a little embarassing to watch now.

Heh... (5, Insightful)

Otter (3800) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519068)

[T]he KDE developers should follow Apple's lead and focus more on the needs of users, instead of insisting on software perfection.

I got on the KDE guys for their bit yesterday, so today I'll point out to the Mozilla side that the reason there was a decent browser for Linux in 1999 was that the Konqueror guys satisfied the needs of users while Mozilla went off constructing a whole new software platform...

Re:Heh... (1)

Timesprout (579035) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519228)

Are you kidding? I installed redhat on a machine in the office for the first time in 98-99, much to the amusement of several colleagues who could not believe Star Office was so slow and unstable and that Konq fell over on just about every other web page. Even Netscape was more usable at that stage.

I have to admit the considerable slagging I received has biased me against Konq, which is part of the reason I think them complaining about Apple was an incredibly stupid thing for them to do. But you are correct, at least they had something as opposed to the Mozilla 'platform to rule the world' pipedream.

Re:Heh... (2, Interesting)

John Harrison (223649) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519242)

Similarly, the reason Apple selected KHTML as its base was that it was so well written. If the KHTML guys hadn't been so anal about doing things "correctly" Apple might never have used the project in the first place.

In the short term, a hack will get a feature out the door more quickly. In the long term, a pile of hacks doesn't hold up as well as a properly engineered soltution. Notice how some browsers (Netscape, ie) had to be rewritten from scratch a few times.

It seems to me that each project should feel free to proceed as they see fit. Who knows, maybe in the future Apple will come back to KHTML in order to get that stable base again.

Mutually Exclusive? (2, Interesting)

Goo.cc (687626) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519072)

"The KDE developers should follow Apple's lead and focus more on the needs of users, instead of insisting on software perfection."



Are these two things really mutually exclusive?

Re:Mutually Exclusive? (1)

yokem_55 (575428) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519211)

More to the point, it is FAR easier to achieve the goal of pleasing users if you have an excellent code base to work with, and over the long run, users WILL appreciate the quality of the code in the form of having stable, extensible, maintainable software. It's really hard to please users and give them the features that they want if your code has turned to spaghetti and you spend more time dealing with bugs than improving the user experience.

Re:Mutually Exclusive? (1)

rokzy (687636) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519212)

yes, you can't focus on two things at once. that's kinda part of the defintion of focus. jeez...

Is it tortoise and the hare? (2, Insightful)

Ckwop (707653) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519076)

This is one question I'm really not sure I have the answer to. Is doing it properly better in the long run. The problem with a hacked bug fix is that it stays a hacked bug fix forever. Period.

Evenutally, that hack becomes a trouble to maintain and I'd bet my bottom dollar that it then takes more time to remove the hack and rework it properly that it would have taken to fix it properly in the first place.

I suspect the reason Longhorn is taking so damned long is because this problem is just starting to pinch Microsoft. The "Just get the product out" mentality works for a while - but then all that extra complexity comes back and makes your life very hard.

Simon.

Whaaa? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12519092)

I thought software perfection meant focussing on the users?

Pissing contests (4, Insightful)

goldspider (445116) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519093)

Ya know, I can't help but wonder if it's silly little pissing contests like this that, at least in some way, prevents OSS from reaching its full potential.

Here we have several very adept programmers slapping at one another over how their respective web browsers work. Am I the only one out there that finds this kind of bickering trivial and unproductive?

Yes, people will have disagreements, and people will have different ways of doing things. Fine. But why not harness those different perspectives and create something better?

As long as OSS projects are afflicted by this kind of petty squabbling, developers' attention will be diverted from creating quality software. Now knock it off!

Re:Pissing contests (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12519233)

It isn't petty squabbling, it is a useful feature and design discussion. I don't know about your workplace, but where I work, these issues lead to some pretty heated discussions. The more important the issue, generally, the more heated the discussion.

If people have so little passion about their work that they can just sit there and shut up, then they should think about getting a different job.

Re:Pissing contests (1)

goldspider (445116) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519286)

"I don't know about your workplace, but where I work, these issues lead to some pretty heated discussions."

Are these discussions carried out in public? Do your co-workers snipe at one another in a public forum?

I suspect the answer to both questions is 'no', because involving people that have nothing to do with the project is pointless.

Publishing this dispute on a public blog seems to be less about coming up with a soultion, and more about convincing people that they are 'right'.

Konq vs FireFox vs world (3, Interesting)

B5_geek (638928) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519098)

I have always found Konq to be the best alternative to FireFox on sites that are "IE-only". (including my companies intranet.)

As a general web-browser I find Konq to be slow and kludgy, but it has never dissappointed me on the stubborn sites.

Anybody found similar situations?

dammit (0, Offtopic)

rathehun (818491) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519103)

Why the hell can't you post a mirrordot link? Ben's site is regularly slashdotted - he has previously told us not to do this to him. Now stop being click happy and use this [mirrordot.org]

UPDATE: Good thing I hit the preview button. It's a ZDNet site or something like that. http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/ben/This [mozillazine.org] is a link to Bens blog.

Bah.

R.

Re:dammit (1)

gellenburg (61212) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519149)

Let me get this straight, you just got done pissing, moaning, and complaining because you THOUGHT a direct link to Ben's site was published resulting in a slashdotting, so you go ahead and post a mirrordot link but only come to find out it wasn't to Ben's site but to ZD Net (who does NOT deserve a mirrordot), and then correct yourself and as a last resort post the original link to Ben's site anyways?

Odd.. (4, Insightful)

0x461FAB0BD7D2 (812236) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519124)

Well maybe as a software engineer I should. But does anyone that isn't a software engineer care? Probably not. Case closed.
And guess what KHTML's team is? That's right. Full of software engineers. Which is why they care.

Secondly, developers should prioritise releasing their products on time, even if they "may have to cut corners".
Software developers in the open-source world make software because they love to. They want to make their project (note: not product) the best it can be. Releasing products on time is straight from the Marketing Department.

Goodger has every right to give an opinion, but no right to flame others for caring about their projects, much like Mozilla used to, before they gave up a large part of their community.

Love for a project, not releasing products in a timely fashion is what makes open-source different, and much appreciated.

Now if only RMS would STFU about this precious GPL (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12519125)

and realize that not everyone subscribes to his views of software licensing.

I had this vision of... (1)

bigdady92 (635263) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519129)

the fight between these 2 guys fighting like in Napolean Dynamite. They are sitting there slapping each other going "NAUGHTY BAD! HATES YOU! MEANIE!!!"

Does this make me a bad person?

KDE should be grateful. (-1, Redundant)

telbij (465356) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519138)

Apple went with KHTML instead of Mozilla. Instead of gratitude, the KDE devs are angry that Apple isn't tailoring their patches for them? The fact that Safari uses KHTML has done more for web page compability with Konqueror than years of development and advocacy could ever have done. Just look at the proportion of top-tier web designers on Macs.

Now, as a web designer myself, of course I don't want a divergent code base. I'd much prefer that testing in Safari guarantees Konqueror compatibility as well, but claims that Apple is not being a good member of the open-source community is just a bunch of self-important bullshit. Companies aren't out there to 'help the community.' If their interests happen to coincide with yours for a while, then take what you can get, but don't expect any more.

Re:KDE should be grateful. (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12519194)

Apple went with KHTML instead of Mozilla. Instead of gratitude, the KDE devs are angry that Apple isn't tailoring their patches for them?
First, KDE devs are grateful. Read one of the many linked blog entries about how Safari has done many good things for the project, if you don't believe me.

However, they are angry at something: people like you. Coming here on /. and making a completely backwards post that misrepresents everything they stand for. Sit down and STFU.

Re:KDE should be grateful. (4, Informative)

10Ghz (453478) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519224)

Apple went with KHTML instead of Mozilla. Instead of gratitude, the KDE devs are angry that Apple isn't tailoring their patches for them?


KDE-guys did not complain about Apple as such. They even specificly mentioned that Apple is abiding by the license. what they complained about were the USERS who whined when KHTML took time to incorporate improvements made in WebCore!

Do you "get it" now, or do I have to hit you with a clue-by-four?

No shit Einstein! (5, Insightful)

10Ghz (453478) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519142)

"Not everyone wants to change the world, but Apple does," he said, "and although they may have done the least required of them in accordance with the licences of the original source code, it was within their rights to do what they did, and no one should begrudge them for it."


Isn't that exactly what the KDE-developers said?? Sheesh!

I for one think that it's great that there are still people out there with a goal to create perfect code, and not just slap features together. It's interesting that Apple chose KHTML because the code was clean, fast and small. And now this guys suggests that KDE abandons those benefits and moves to Webcore (which has lost most of those benefits due to cutting corners and less than perfect code).

Is that it? Crummy code that is "good enough" is the way to go?

That just doesn't sound right (4, Insightful)

rsax (603351) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519152)

The KDE developers should follow Apple's lead and focus more on the needs of users, instead of insisting on software perfection.

I can't say I feel comfortable hearing that type of reasoning coming from a Lead Engineer of my favourite web browser. I'm not a Microsoft fan but if an IE developer made a comment like that then geeks would be cutting him or her up for that. I might be wrong since I am not a coder but wouldn't keeping software perfection a priority lead to less bugs in the future?

Some times a little conflict is good.. (3, Insightful)

Visceral Monkey (583103) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519160)

Personally, I've always liked KHTML but have been frustrated by the lack of any real progress in it's use in Konqueror. Now, is this Apples fault? No, they just built a better mouse trap. This whole thing smacks of the same hurt feelings over the Debian vs. Ubuntu tift. The king is dead! Long live the king! and all that..

Also, if anyone has the "capital" to expend on criticizing KDE, it would and should be the people who have made one of the most successful browsers out there to put a dent in IE usage. See, people kind of listen to you when you are successful as opposed to when you sit and whine because your take on things just doesn't seem to be taking off (Debian/Konqueror I'm looking at you).

Whatever.... (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12519172)

I love Mozilla, but this is nonsense. Obviously he did not read
this [kdedevelopers.org] .
Let Goodger get back to selling the world on Firefox or whatever it is that he does and leave KHTML en Webcore to their respective developers.

Buggy Firefox. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12519178)

Less than perfection means more bugs. Humm didn't Firefox get hit with that this week? Looks like Firefox is not worried too much about security.

In short... (1)

Gopal.V (532678) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519180)

Eat dirt you Khtml mongrels ?...

With thanks to CPU Wars.

Btw, FireFox didn't invent Gecko ... It's just a browser on TOP of Gecko

If Apple submitted a few more cleaner KHtml patches ... I wonder ... politics of OSS projects

He has a point (5, Insightful)

ShatteredDream (636520) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519184)

A large part of the reason that Apple is still around with not even 5% of the market is that they do care about the user. With a user base that small for their platform, most vendors would be dead but Apple focuses heavily on the user experience. I don't see a lot of that at all coming from most open source projects.

Here's a little theory of mine: users are more concerned with having a great UI and having apps that work together than raw speed. Open source desktops used to have the speed advantage, but not anymore. Can anyone honestly say that GNOME is faster than Windows XP's desktop these days? Same for KDE and MacOS X.

For all of this bitching about Apple exploiting OSS, I don't see any recognition that the mere fact that OSX's underpinnings are OSS gives OSS a vote of confidence in the corporate world. For one of the two largest platforms in the world to switch to that foundation is a big endoresement and help lend legitimacy to OSS. The funniest part of this is that KDE's developers are finally discovering the fact that forks do happen. Imagine that, Apple actually forked KHTML for their own needs. Why is it OK for X.Org to fork and go off in one direction, but not OK for Apple to do the same thing? They give the patches back and excuse me if I am at a loss as to how a forked code base is going to maintain a lot of similarity with the original when both are going off in separate directions.

Cooperation spotted in the horizon (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12519185)

Well, maybe before everyone starts criticising KDE developers and Apple and everything, they should get a little more information on what is being done to solve the problem: http://www.kdedevelopers.org/node/view/1046 [kdedevelopers.org]

As the guy suggests, I would advise everyone (especially developers of other projects who probably aren't that well informed) to keep quiet with the "vs" stories for a while and see what comes out of this.

Right as in legal, right as in wrong (2, Insightful)

UglyMike (639031) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519202)

From the article: "...it was within their rights to do what they did, and no one should begrudge them for it..."

Now, while I agree with the first part, I certainly don't with the second! Just because it is legal does not make it right!

While Apple should indeed not 'bend over' and provide beatifull diff patches that seamlessly upgrade KHTML, SOME effort could have been made as thanks for the effort saved in not having to start from scratch. We certainly CAN and DO begrudge them this 'take all you can, give nothing back'- attitude.

Are they within their rights? Sure!
Are they doing the decent thing? Nope ... so we carry a grudge

MoFo getting more like MS by the day, it seems (5, Insightful)

McDutchie (151611) | more than 8 years ago | (#12519210)

From TFA:

Goodger went on to say the open source community could not accuse Apple of breaching any licences.

I would not be so sure of that. I seem to recall that the GPL defines source code as the "preferred form" of the program for making modifications of it. If Apple "comments" its patches by referring to numbers in a proprietary bug database to which only they have access, Apple could be accused of intentionally obfuscating its source code, which is a violation of the "preferred form" clause in the GPL. In any case, it's ethically wrong because the free-software concept is meaningless if the provided source code is not realistically usable without having access to essential information about what it does.

It was important, he said, realise that "no software is ever perfect".

Secondly, developers should prioritise releasing their products on time, even if they "may have to cut corners".

Gee, that sounds eerily familiar. Where have I heard it before, that "give Joe Sixpack what he wants and damn software quality" attitude? Marketing fluff at the expense of solidity and security? Oh right, of course, that's the attitude that brought us the virus propagation engine that is Microsoft Internet Explorer. Is it any wonder that Firefox is now on its way along the same route?

"Most developers probably don't alienate people intentionally ... Over time, software has come to demand an impossibly high level of computer literacy," the Firefox creator wrote.

Ridiculous. The use of software is demanding less computer literacy by the year -- compare today to the MS-DOS days of twenty years back. But that is in fact a big part of the problem. People should learn to accept that using a computer requires some basic form of clue. If people are not willing to acquire such clue, they should watch TV instead so that they won't harm anybody with the viruses, spam and DDoS attacks perpetrated through their zombified computers.

What? The community doesn't have a single mind?? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12519249)

Hey, what's this?

This guy is obviously a fraud, everybody on Slashdot knows that everyone that supports open source has the same opinions on anything surrounds software.

Mod that blog down!

Ok, seriously, it's humorous how often you see crap like "The community says this" or the "The community thinks that". "The community is just ungrateful", etc. Can Microsoft lackeys shut up already with this crap?

Hm, at least konqui works with /. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12519288)

Firefox doesn't, so who is focusing on the users here?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...