<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Don&#8217;t build solely on another&#8217;s technology&#8230; re: Flock</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.centernetworks.com/dont-build-solely-on-anothers-technology-re-flock/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.centernetworks.com/dont-build-solely-on-anothers-technology-re-flock</link>
	<description>Web 2 and Social Media News and Reviews</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 01:50:56 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Jimmy</title>
		<link>http://www.centernetworks.com/dont-build-solely-on-anothers-technology-re-flock/comment-page-#comment-12669</link>
		<dc:creator>Jimmy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-12669</guid>
		<description>While I agree with you on your stance of not building on anothers technology, I&#039;d like to point out the reason this move by Mozilla has pissed me off.

Let me first say that I think Flock is a great browser.  It innovated where Mozilla couldn&#039;t.  I use Flock all the time, it&#039;s just a better experience to surf the net with.  It didn&#039;t always used to be for me, and I can easily see how these features aren&#039;t always mainstream.  The idea of Mozilla is to take a base browser and put extensions on top of it.  If they want to preinstall stuff like this, they&#039;re going to end up in Opera&#039;s shoes.

Anyways, the reason this pisses me off is that the guy that came up with the &quot;idea&quot; for Mozilla is actually a former Flock employee...  that&#039;s why the screenshots even show Flock being used and not Firefox...  This isn&#039;t a competing idea, this is a stolen idea.  Let&#039;s also clear this up:  Mozilla is a corporation and Flock is a corporation.  They&#039;re both for-profit entities.

IMO, that&#039;s pathetic.  Mozilla should be concentrating on making a better rendering engine, not feature enhancements like this, or a competitor for Apollo... get your fucking act together, Mozilla.  Firefox is turning to shit with these memory leaks and all they can do is steal ideas from other companies!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>While I agree with you on your stance of not building on anothers technology, I&#8217;d like to point out the reason this move by Mozilla has pissed me off.</p>
<p>Let me first say that I think Flock is a great browser.  It innovated where Mozilla couldn&#8217;t.  I use Flock all the time, it&#8217;s just a better experience to surf the net with.  It didn&#8217;t always used to be for me, and I can easily see how these features aren&#8217;t always mainstream.  The idea of Mozilla is to take a base browser and put extensions on top of it.  If they want to preinstall stuff like this, they&#8217;re going to end up in Opera&#8217;s shoes.</p>
<p>Anyways, the reason this pisses me off is that the guy that came up with the &#8220;idea&#8221; for Mozilla is actually a former Flock employee&#8230;  that&#8217;s why the screenshots even show Flock being used and not Firefox&#8230;  This isn&#8217;t a competing idea, this is a stolen idea.  Let&#8217;s also clear this up:  Mozilla is a corporation and Flock is a corporation.  They&#8217;re both for-profit entities.</p>
<p>IMO, that&#8217;s pathetic.  Mozilla should be concentrating on making a better rendering engine, not feature enhancements like this, or a competitor for Apollo&#8230; get your fucking act together, Mozilla.  Firefox is turning to shit with these memory leaks and all they can do is steal ideas from other companies!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.centernetworks.com/dont-build-solely-on-anothers-technology-re-flock/comment-page-#comment-12672</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-12672</guid>
		<description>I am amused that GOOG may have found the way to successfully take on Office. Their online office suite may be the way forward on that front. To be sure MSFT is trying to follow GOOG&#039;s lead, but Redmond has little competence with regards to implementation of compelling Web 2.0 applications and NO credibilty with regards to security, online or otherwise.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am amused that GOOG may have found the way to successfully take on Office. Their online office suite may be the way forward on that front. To be sure MSFT is trying to follow GOOG&#8217;s lead, but Redmond has little competence with regards to implementation of compelling Web 2.0 applications and NO credibilty with regards to security, online or otherwise.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.centernetworks.com/dont-build-solely-on-anothers-technology-re-flock/comment-page-#comment-12674</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-12674</guid>
		<description>&gt;I am amused that GOOG may have found the way to successfully take on Office

IMO GOOG is doing an MSFT here too. It&#039;s not like they invented the idea of online apps, or are the first, or only ones to do it. There does seem to be a perception that they are the only ones out there doing it or that the idea didn&#039;t exist until they thought of it.  Heck you can even &quot;take on Office&quot; for free with OpenOffice and work offline too.  Maybe when GOOG rebrand it and release it, people will believe it&#039;s real...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>>I am amused that GOOG may have found the way to successfully take on Office</p>
<p>IMO GOOG is doing an MSFT here too. It&#8217;s not like they invented the idea of online apps, or are the first, or only ones to do it. There does seem to be a perception that they are the only ones out there doing it or that the idea didn&#8217;t exist until they thought of it.  Heck you can even &#8220;take on Office&#8221; for free with OpenOffice and work offline too.  Maybe when GOOG rebrand it and release it, people will believe it&#8217;s real&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
