Blake Ross has been getting quite a bit of press over these last few days, some great and some bad. I cannot say that I am fan of his speaking, with much of his statements sounding disingenuous. It is comments like “because it scared me to think what another author with less Firefox experience might churn out” that are the shockers though!
Is Blake saying that Firefox is complex? but I thought “complex software is produced by lazy developers“. If not the browser from a user’s perspective, I know first hand the complexities of the Mozilla codebase.
Reminds me of Ben Goodger’s shocker statement if security is important to you, this demonstration should show that browsers that are redistributions of the official Mozilla releases are never going to give you security updates as quickly as Mozilla will itself for its supported products.
As the one person with all of the information, as I was the security maintainer for the Firefox code in Netscape Browser 8, the reality is that Mozilla had significant responsibility in a number of (AOL) Netscape security issues and related regressions. The biggest problems related to limited communication to vendors by Mozilla, and a lack of tools or person power (vigilence) to identify relationships between security issues and also regressions.
These are relatively minor things in relationship to the fantastic contribution to literacy and freedom that both these fellows have made! I am encouraged by the opportunity for Flock and Mozilla to learn together how to be further these essential causes. Well, now I have to write to Dan Veditz and security-group @ moz.org and work on establishing a security relationship that works well for both organizations.
Technorati Tags: Mozilla, Firefox, Flock, Blake Ross, Ben Goodger, Dan Veditz, Netscape
2 Comments
Complexity has nothing to do with my Dummies statement. There are books written by authors intimately involved with a program, and there are books written by authors contracted to write about a program. It’s very easy to tell the difference.
I don’t know what it means to say my comments sound “scripted”. Most of the interviews I do are via e-mail, so yes, they are written, and I think hard about the points I want to get across.
Regarding “tell the difference”, often people intimate with a program make the worst writers, and produce complex documentation. Technical writing is incredible challenging, and is often done poorly. Having said that, I can think of many technical authors that are masters of their trade. My own attempts in technical writing have made me appreciate their work all the more!
I have not yet read any of your technical documentation, nor other “user” books on Firefox, but I am enthusiastic by the role Dummies can play.
Whether software or otherwise, I believe strongly in knowing my competition. I may have overlooked it, but I have not seen discussion about how this book’s role will relate to “similar books”. Is Scott Granneman’s “Don’t Click on the Blue E!” “similar”? How will Dummies differentiate itself?
I am even more interested in how it fits into the whole user experience. How directly will it complement existing (free) user communication? I find it difficult to provide help ensuring that it’s a valuable resource for our users without seeing how those two sections fit into the rest of the document.
It is disappointing seeing the posts that do not understand the magnitude and commitment of writing such a book is! Best wishes!
Additional Technorati Tags: “Don’t Click on the Blue E!”, Scott Granneman, “Firefox for Dummies”