Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 17th Dec 2009 22:16 UTC
Mac OS X Late last night (CET), we reported on the story that the VLC project needed more developers for the Mac version of this popular video player, or else the Mac variant may disappear. Just about every website out there reported on this issue, but it turns out it all got a bit exaggerated (on the internet? Surely you jest...). We spoke to VLC developer Pierre d'Herbemont to clarify the issue, and they've also put up a wiki page about the so-called demise of the Mac version of VLC. He also detailed what, exactly, they meant by "Apple is blocking us".
Permalink for comment 400257
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Qt4 Interface?
by sbergman27 on Fri 18th Dec 2009 14:31 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Qt4 Interface?"
sbergman27
Member since:
2005-07-24

The reason why Firefox had to take a completely new direction was because of that disastrous decision by Netscape over version 6, or what should have been version 5. That pretty much finished them and the browser off in that incarnation to the point where Mozilla had no real choice.

The mistake of deciding to rewrite from scratch was made long before Netscape 6. Netscape 6 was a desperate attempt to get some new Netscape... anything... out before the brand was completely forgotten, and all marketshare for Mozilla/Netscape was lost. Netscape 6 flopped (and badly) because the rewrite was taking *way, way* longer than expected (Surprise!) and wasn't anywhere near baked yet.

The fact that 11 years after the foolish decision was made, FF is just now clawing its way back to the point that IE only has about a 3 to 1 lead on it makes it an excellent example of the problems Joel is referencing.

Note to people who seem a bit confused: Firefox was not a rewrite of Mozilla. It was a strip-down and streamlining of Mozilla. The stupid mistake was in throwing out so much of Netscape's mature and tested code back in 1998 and 1999... long before Phoenix/Firefox.

Edited 2009-12-18 14:44 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2