Group 1

Grupo 1

Nomes e NUSP:

André Kenji Hidaka Matsumoto 12542689

Fernando César L B F 10260559

Kenzo Yves Yamashita Nobre 5028772

Luiz Felipe Diniz Costa 13782032

Rafael Kuhn Takano 11200459

Rafael Zimmer 12542612

Thais Ribeiro Lauriano 12542518

Otávio Ferracioli Coletti 11767796

Samuel Rubens Souza Oliveira 11912533

Victor Rodrigues da Silva 12566140

1.1

MIME : Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions is a standard that made attachments of audios, images and videos possible in an email. It was later reused in Media Types as a way to identify file types transmitted on the Internet.

DNS: Domain Name System is a system to map and translate human-readable domain names into IP addresses. DNS is an example of technology that reused older technologies, since it was based on Internet Protocol (IP) and Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP), besides other types of networking protocols.

1.2

The advantage of reusing older technologies is the lower use of time and money compared to creating something new. Another advantage is the interoperability, which makes the integration with other technologies a lot easier.

Besides that, stability is an important factor in reusing older technologies since they have been around for a longer period of time and they are mostly likely to have more compatibility with other devices, browsers and operating systems.

1.3

The WWW could have used some different technologies, instead of MIME, Tim Berners-Lee could have defined and created new file extensions to use on WWW, but reusing MIME was practical and easier to develop the WWW and MIME had the extensions that WWW would need at the moment.

It would have been difficult to develop the DNS system without reusing pre-existing standards. It was built on an already large foundation of preexisting work and networks, and many of the key concepts were already standardized. While it may have been possible to develop alternatives, it would have required a significant amount of time and resources, and there was no guarantee they would have been widely adopted which could therefore limit the amount of users.

2.1

Our group came to a consensus that the browser wars did happen, as well as how it was described on the video. Specifically, the way Microsoft aimed for market domination, considering that the company was a prominent force in size, technology and available capital.

2.2

We believe that, analyzing the growth size of users for all browsers during the period known as the “Browser Wars” showed an unusual rate for all browsers. This arose from the multiple incentives directed towards ad programs and expanding the user base for the browsers. Not only that, but the versions of the browsers also had a rapid increase in their release rate. A good example would be the direct competition between the Netscape and the Internet Explorer browsers, which made Microsoft’s browser rise up an entire major version to match up to the Netscape browser.

2.3

There are two situations that show very well how the browser war was similar to the war of Troy, and a Browser War afterall.

The Internet Explorer development team decided it would be a good idea to deliver a “present” to the front doors of the Netscape headquarters, with their giant logo imprinted on its front side.

The second example was the declaration of the CEO of Microsoft, proposing a “cut of air supply” to the Netscape progress. This happened shortly before the change of business model of Netscape to an open source approach.