• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Underwhelmed (WAS: XOM micro tutorial)
• From: Matt Gushee <mgushee@h...>
• Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2002 11:24:45 -0600
• In-reply-to: <96FQK4WGD61WPLWUZEB5VSZYFCTP.3d8c8775@MChamp>
• Mail-followup-to: xml-dev@l...
• References: <60vnouk550lf4j6l5j1ig9iboce27rij5n@4...> <96FQK4WGD61WPLWUZEB5VSZYFCTP.3d8c8775@MChamp>
• Reply-to: Matt Gushee <mgushee@h...>
• Sender: <mgushee@h...>
• User-agent: Mutt/1.3.27i

On Sat, Sep 21, 2002 at 10:51:33AM -0400, Mike Champion wrote:
> 
> That's an interesting assertion, but I don't follow the reasoning.
> You're saying that that DOM's pursuit of the chimera of XML+CSS as 
> the universal light application platform helped kill Netscape?
> 
> More people would assert that Netscape's failure to pursue XML
> aggressively gave Microsoft a powerful differentiator.  

Potentially powerful, but I doubt that it made much real difference in
the marketplace. I know 3 or 4 dozen "average" web developers, and most
of them still don't really know what XML is; maybe 2 or 3 are actually
using it.

Nope. Netscape lost the battle because they didn't show up for it.

-- 
Matt Gushee
Englewood, Colorado, USA
mgushee@h...
http://www.havenrock.com/

• References:
  • Re: Underwhelmed (WAS: XOM micro tutorial)
    • From: Arjun Ray <aray@n...>
  • Re: Underwhelmed (WAS: XOM micro tutorial)
    • From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Underwhelmed (WAS: XOM micro tutorial)
• Next by Date: Re: Underwhelmed (WAS: XOM micro tutorial)
• Previous by thread: Re: Underwhelmed (WAS: XOM micro tutorial)
• Next by thread: Re: Underwhelmed (WAS: XOM micro tutorial)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread