Re: What's holding Euphoria back ?
First..If you use our version of NS then the E is load right along with
java...People would not even know(cept of corse b\y the outstanding
quality of the page) that ppl were using E...the only people that would
know is the one who dont have it...eg anyone using any MS
browser...=)...or a none E enabled one....I dont care what MS says is
the newest thing to suport...Im not here to serve them...Ther are alot
of pages out there that are MS only...And they did that so people ~had~
to use there browser ...Yes i agree a plug in would be easier..i have no
clue how to do this as i have never tried ... Ill look into it some
time...
Grape
>>You gave me a idea....If some one(i dont think me) could port the
>>netscape browser to E and then make a new pulg in type(just a E file
>>that can call and work with and in the browser)
>
>I'd thought about the role of Euphora as a replacement for Java; it
>would certainly be a lot easier to use, however, the problem of take-up
>would occur; I haven't even got ShockWave installed and a lot of people
>might be a little unhappy about having to load the Euphoria Engine just
>to view a web page ( "Why can't they use Java, like everyone else ?" ).
>
>That said, Euphoria would undoubtedly run a lot quicker than Java I'm
>sure.
>
>Rather than rewrite NS ( and then port it to all platforms Linux, Mac
>etc ); why not concentrate on Plug-Ins for browsers ? I know it can be
>done with IE at least.
>
>I would seriously suggest not implementing a browser as the danger is
>that MS will come up with some new fangled concept which you than have
>to implement, which may be hard, Hmm, I wonder why MS do this ? 
>DHTML is now a standard AFAIR but does anyone really think that will
>stop MS creating its own variants ?
>
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
