Posted by: Jeremy Akers
on March 16, 2007 01:43 AM
"Have to agree... It appears to be similar to IE's ActiveX despite the response below. Also, after a search.. little in the way of multiple browsers using this technology set (save gecko-based browsers)."
Gecko is open source, and using gecko is the easiest way to implement XUL support, as all the code to support XUL is already built into Gecko. A quick list of browsers that use Gecko (In alphabetical order):
So I fail to see how you're locked in. These all use Gecko, but as it's open source, anyone is free to modify it, and no-one is locked in to anything. This is quite different from browsers based on the IE engine, where they ARE locked in. They can not modify the engine to fit their needs.
"When it comes to introducing new tech-sets, better that they remain server based (php, perl, asp...) then tying them to specific browsers."
As shown above, you're not tied to a single browser. Anyone can use gecko and/or XUL to build a browser, and there are TONS of browsers already out there. Also, whether it's better to have it server based or client based it a rather arbitrary opinion not based on any real facts.
"Not that familiar with XUL but according to WIKI:"
Not sure why you would search the wikipedia for this when you could go straight to the horses mouth:
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Re:The code that binds.
Posted by: Jeremy Akers on March 16, 2007 01:43 AMGecko is open source, and using gecko is the easiest way to implement XUL support, as all the code to support XUL is already built into Gecko. A quick list of browsers that use Gecko (In alphabetical order):
* Alefox
* Beonex Communicator
* Camino (formerly Chimera)
* CompuServe
* DocZilla
* Epiphany
* Flock
* Galeon
* IceWeasel
* K-Meleon
* K-MeleonCCF
* K-Ninja
* Kazehakase
* Lolifox
* Madfox
* ManyOne
* Mozilla Application Suite
* Firefox
* Netscape
* Salamander
* SeaMonkey
* Skipstone
* uBrowser
* Torpark
So I fail to see how you're locked in. These all use Gecko, but as it's open source, anyone is free to modify it, and no-one is locked in to anything. This is quite different from browsers based on the IE engine, where they ARE locked in. They can not modify the engine to fit their needs.
"When it comes to introducing new tech-sets, better that they remain server based (php, perl, asp...) then tying them to specific browsers."
As shown above, you're not tied to a single browser. Anyone can use gecko and/or XUL to build a browser, and there are TONS of browsers already out there. Also, whether it's better to have it server based or client based it a rather arbitrary opinion not based on any real facts.
"Not that familiar with XUL but according to WIKI:"
Not sure why you would search the wikipedia for this when you could go straight to the horses mouth:
<a href="http://www.mozilla.org/projects/xul/" title="mozilla.org">http://www.mozilla.org/projects/xul/</a mozilla.org>
<a href="http://www.mozilla.org/projects/xul/joy-of-xul.html" title="mozilla.org">http://www.mozilla.org/projects/xul/joy-of-xul.ht<nobr>m<wbr></nobr> l</a mozilla.org>
And as far as no XUL specification existing:
<a href="http://www.mozilla.org/projects/xul/xul.html" title="mozilla.org">http://www.mozilla.org/projects/xul/xul.html</a mozilla.org>
-Jeremy
#