Flash alternatives

[Jeffrey Watts]

Apparently you don't.

"Monolithic" when used in reference to a computer system refers to kernel
design.  It's not really used formally for much else, but it is used
informally in circumstances like the one you mentioned.

However, your understanding does not seem to be correct.  "Monolithic", used
casually, would refer to a program that does all of its functions within
itself - single process, single memory space.  In your example, Konqueror is
indeed just as "monolithic" as everything else you mentioned.  As Linus
famously demonstrated to that arrogant fool Tanenbaum, being monolithic
doesn't make a design bad.  It's all about the implementation and the
practicalities.

The word you were looking for was _modular_.  I won't debate with you how
"modular" Konqueror is in relation to other browsers as I don't care and I
don't use KDE, but I would point out that Mozilla is "modular" as well by
your definition (it uses plugins to handle a lot of things) - probably not
as much, but then again "more modular" doesn't logically imply "better" (see
my Linus example above) - so your argument is a bit weak.

Jeffrey.

On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 4:14 PM, Luke -Jr <luke at dashjr.org> wrote:

> On Wednesday 10 September 2008 15:39:25 Jeffrey Watts wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 1:44 PM, Luke -Jr <luke at dashjr.org> wrote:
> > > Monolithic browsers are stupid anyway. Konqueror uses a "plugin" for
> > > everything, including HTML. There is no reason to have a proprietary or
> > > embedded implementation of a codec in a web browser.
> >
> > Do you know what monolithic means?
>
> Of course. Do you know how to reply to emails?
>



-- 

"He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from
oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that
will reach to himself." -- Thomas Paine
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://kclug.org/pipermail/kclug/attachments/20080910/d81d38e9/attachment.htm>