Isn't WordPress open source? Why don't you start contributing and fixing all those bugs, instead of writing a new version from scratch?
I wouldn't be re-writing from scratch. LOL. However experience has taught me that it's sometimes easier to re-implement/design than refactor. In the case of WordPress it would be a lot more work to refactor than to just re-implement much of the model logic.
If you look at the code you will see there is very little separation of model, view code and controller. Refactoring that code into MVC components would be a headache and a half. It's be easier to gut it and implement the models from scratch, copying WordPress business logic and removing the the model code from the application and replace it with appropriate calls to the model, step by step.
I'm not denying the market exists, I'm sure someone very ambitious like yourself will come along and swipe up their market share if they don't continue innovating.
It happens all the time.
Like windows, or ummm internet explorer with mass market share, tons of bugs, no stability, very expensive, tons of exact alternatives... point proven.
Windows is a bad example. The application would need to be 100% backwards compatible with WordPress...that is the interface, database schema, etc. Only the core code would be improved to reduce overhead, heacahes, etc. Upgrading would be like transitioning from Windows XP Home to Windows XP Pro not Windows to Ubuntu. Even a seasoned expert would have transition troubles going from Windows to Ubuntu.
Windows has the major advantage of having far more applications which are designed solely for Windows and most end users are not proficient enough to use a VM or setup WINE. Plus there is little tangible evidence that supports the fact Windows is less secure than Linux. Windows has the disadvntage of being far more popular and thus far more attacks are likely. As a long time Windows user I can confidently state, I have never had a virus, my computer rarely crashes (never since XP) and IE is significantly faster than FF, especially on Windows.
FF uses a C++ abstraction layer to cross compile on Linux, Windows, Mac, etc. Not to mention M$ is notorious for using hidden API's to give their applications an "edge".
Besides FF interface is mostly XUL where as Internet Explorer uses native Windows controls which absolutely will render and respond faster than an HTML document. The rendering of a structured document is a slow, intensive process.
Any test you find comparing the two is like comparing apples to oranges and can easily be swayed in either direction but technically speaking it's almost impossible for FF to run as swiftly as IE. Internet Explorer (some of it's components anyway) is crafted right into the OS desktop it's always resident in memory and therefore always has an advantage.
People don't switch to Ubuntu because it's not backwards compatible with Windows or some of the hardware. The day that happens I promise people will start switching.
