Robert Scoble, MS evangelist, says (as reported in Internet News): "As to Mozilla, you guys should talk with us. We're working underneath on the foundation. Longhorn will let you make a new awesome browser that'd blow away what you're doing today. Here's a hint: I'm using Firefox on Longhorn. Works great! But it COULD BE so much better! You don't take advantage of Avalon. You don't take advantage of WinFS. These things are not threats to you. They are platform-level investments we're making for you to use..."
Hey Robert - here's a suggestion for you: you guys should talk with us. We've already completed the foundation. We have a mature XML-based UI markup language, and a fantastic web content rendering engine that you should take advantage of, instead of re-inventing the wheel with XAML and Trident/Tasman enhancements. These things are not threats to you. They are cross-platform investments we are making for you to use...
I mean, surely it makes sense for them to use the XUL technology stack rather than XAML for Longhorn? After all, it's the established and open way of doing what they are trying to achieve. The only way they'd not use it is if they wanted to get some sort of patent or proprietary single platform lockin - and I'm sure they wouldn't do anything that nasty.
Posted by gerv at May 9, 2004 11:55 PMBut then they can't have a completely proprietary operating system.
Posted by: Robert Accettura at May 10, 2004 01:35 AMI didn't know that XUL is a good fit for building Windows apps. XUL and XAML are two different technologies trying to answer different questions.
XAML is a technology answering this question: How do we make building Longhorn applications easier?
Does XUL answer that question? I thought XUL was answering a question like:
How do we make building GUI's for cross-platform applications easier?
They seem like similar questions, but they are not. XAML is NOT an appropriate technology to use for cross-platform applications (note, it isn't even an appropriate technology if you want to deploy your Windows app on older versions of Windows).
Posted by: Robert Scoble at May 10, 2004 05:25 PMThat said, I'm all for learning from each other and seeing what we can do together.
By the way, that article misquoted me. I don't think XAML is an appropriate technology for Mozilla to use. I do NOT advocate making any part of the rendering engine in Mozilla a Longhorn-only thing.
My suggestions were more aimed at Mozilla, the application, not Mozilla, the rendering technology.
Posted by: Robert Scoble at May 10, 2004 05:28 PMXAML is a technology answering this question: How do we make building Longhorn applications easier?
I thought XUL was answering a question like:
How do we make building GUI's for cross-platform applications easier?
If Longhorn apps were cross-platform, that'd be the same question. But you guys don't want that. That's the point :-)
Gerv
Posted by: Gerv at May 11, 2004 09:24 AMHmm. :/ Problem with your post is that cross-platform IS a threat to Windows. Of course they don't want apps to be cross platform; then no one would HAVE to use Windows. Can you imagine if Photoshop, say, was built with Mozilla and ran on all platforms including Linux? Both Microsoft and Apple would quake in their boots.
Posted by: James "Kovu" Russell at May 20, 2004 11:43 PM