[Greasemonkey] Greasemonkey: an Historical Perspective
jdunck at gmail.com
Mon Apr 18 12:43:59 EDT 2005
On 4/18/05, Matthew Gertner <matthew at allpeers.com> wrote:
> > If Greasemonkey makes any overtures towards allowing web publishers to
> > "opt out" or override my browsing experience in any way, I will
> > immediately fork it and make it my life's mission to maintain the fork
> > as long as possible.
> This statement makes me wonder if you read what I wrote.
I think Mark's arguing slippery slope?
> The main reason I feel so strongly about this suddenly is that I am mortally
> afraid of GM hampering Firefox uptake among corporate clients. GM is way
> cool, but the future of my business depends on Firefox adoption. In fact, I
> was actually thinking about forking GM myself to add the feature I suggested
> to make a special corporate and/or non-developer version. Think about, what
> would you rather adopt: "Greasemonkey"... or "Honeykitten"? :-)
Wow, uh, that's a risky business plan with or without GM, no? And who
knew a little extension would break businesses? Anyway, I don't put
too much stock in the Forrester report... I think its very
unfortunate, and may have the negative impact you describe even though
it is totally baseless. Suits don't have time to view source.
More information about the Greasemonkey