I would say "free" more in the sense of freedom than "cost". Mozilla is
the "independent" developent end of which netscape is one realization.
When one is using netscape a big chunk of that is mozilla, but also
includes netscape / aol additions.
So, netscape is free to sell it, as are other companies and individuals
- what they can't do is take away the "freedom" or in other words
copyright the license.
Interestingly, with the freedom also comes more security. Compare with
microsoft who is encouraging users to update serious security threats
daily. In a closed infrastructure only the hackers have access to the
code.
I would add the real plus of mozilla is its internet applications such
as form, password, download, cookie, and image managers. Rather than
microsoft taking over your memory you can control it yourself. My
favorite is that little option that will stop a website from opening a
link I have not selected - (popups what are they? Oh yea the price for
using exploder or netscap. Oh yea, the email lets me control if scripts
should be run or not and guess what there was no 30Mb outlook patch to
download.
n
Mike Cole wrote:
> So, Mozilla is open source software and not in it for the money. Bye bye netscape.
> mike
>
>
-- “There is no hope of finding the sources of free action in the lofty realms of the mind or in the depths of the brain. The idealist approach of the phenomenologists is as hopeless as the positive approach of the naturalists. To discover the sources of free action it is necessary to go outside the limits of the organism, not into the intimate sphere of the mind, but into the objective forms of social life; it is necessary to seek the sources of human consciousness and freedom in the social history of humanity. To find the soul it is necessary to lose it". A.R LuriaNate vygotsky@charter.net http://webpages.charter.net/schmolze1/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jan 01 2003 - 01:00:07 PST