Slashdot Mirror

Thing is, only way to know about it is if you read the bug

Or if, for example, you were to read the release notes?
http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/thunderbird/releases/ 1.5.0.8.html#issues

Learn to browser?
Firefox
Opera

Make sure you check out the add-ons for Firefox, such as NoScript and AdBlock.

Ignorance is an expensive habit to maintain.

I was a relatively early adopter of Firefox, I liked it because of the multiform support, tabbed browsing, etc. I have a triple boot system, with Vista RC2, XP, and Mandriva - and Firefox 2.0 has been crashing/hanging within minutes of any browsing session, with no discrimination for the platform I am on. Needless to say, previous versions didn't have the issue. I have a psychical aversion to downgrading (I'm American, we aren't trained for that kind of thing), but I guess I will have to go back to 1.5 soon. I have also found myself using IE or opera when I am doing something that I really don't want to lose.

I'm a EE, and I know enough coding to break stuff, and piss off the CS dept., but I have no desire whatsoever to debug a browser. With that in mind, I've seen, as have the rest of you here at /., a major push to get everyone possible using FOSS. So here's my point - The community can't have it both ways with FOSS:
1: Either this type of software should only be used by those who have the ability and/or desire to fix what is or could become broken
or
2: the community, having pushed the use of FOSS into the less-technical world, should take responsibility for what they have created and promoted.

The reality right now is that the 'community' seems to want both - they want the market share - and they are very quick to run away when a product doesn't work as advertised - and don't try to say that Firefox in particular isn't advertised. Try searching for 'Firefox 2.0' crashes...Basically every response will lead you here.

Since Firefox really is the poster child of the FOSS movement, they need to be very careful not to make Microsoft's case for them.

I've upgraded to 2.0 on all 3 of my PCs, one running Windows, another with Mandriva Linux, and my Powerbook. I usually use Safari on my Powerbook but I'll start Firefox 2.0 just to use its "Report Web Forgery" menu pick to report the web sites that come in the phishing emails I get every day. http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/phishing-prot ection/

Please, please, this time. Please let /. users be more constructive.

What jurisdiction does the FCC have over the internet?

If users are not tech savvy enough to use Firefox & Permit Cookies, then they get exactly as much protection as they deserve. Cookies aren't the problem, stupid users are.

Here's where I go slightly off topic. Stop reading if you want.

I accept that advertisers are scum and will do whatever they can to make money off of me, so I fight back. I use Firefox, Permit Cookies, Flashblock, Adblock Plus, and Filterset.G Updater.

I no longer have cable (tv) - the only things I watch are things I downloaded and then put on my XBox with XBMC. I'm happy to say that commercials are no longer a part of my life! After shutting off cable for a while I can't stand to watch the TV in the break room or a friend's house because there are so many commercials. You don't realize just how many there are until you stop seeing them for a while. Try it! I do not subscribe to any advertisement packets calling themselves magazines. I use Gmail almost exclusively for personal mail and it's spam filters are pretty good.

I recommend trying all of the above.

2 suggestions for you... Firefox + Adblock Now in 2 easy to click links!

Firefox at least sends the address of the page you're trying to connect to to Google to check it, as evidenced here: http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/phishing-prot ection/, I'm not sure about IE7.

No, firefox ships with an automatically updating local database of phishing sites.
You don't need to test every site with google, just use the built in one.

Read more here

Its pretty hard to miss.

Here is the hard-coded example of a phishing site from firefox: its-a-trap!.

The info is here

Its pretty hard to miss.

Here is the hard-coded example of a phishing site from firefox: its-a-trap!.

The info is here

A few helpful sites: Opera Firefox K-Melon"

Switch to Firefox, idiots! None of the security problems!

See?

For the 20-30 pages I visit regularly, I haven't noticed a rendering difference between IE7 and Firefox.

I suspect the same holds for 80% of the internet population. The 80/20 rule.

So why would the 80% try out a "slower" browser? And before you say Mozilla doesn't care about the 80% ... they do, they are a corporation complete with a board of directors and chairman.

Yep its just like the fancy new Christmas toy that has a few more bells and whistles than last year's toy. Unfortunately it lasted less than a hour before I managed to break it.

I downloaded Firefox 2.0 and installed it under Linux (Gentoo 2.6.17-r7).

Just for the heck of it I tried the same tests I tried in 1.5 and filed bug reports about several months ago. Sure enough Firefox 2.0 does *NOT* handle memory allocation failures. If one limits the amount of virtual memory (e.g. ulimit -Sv 115000) and starts firefox shortly thereafter it will core dump and will open a Talkback Incident window. I managed to file 3 different reports in 30 minutes of using it with memory limits in the range from 100-120MB.

While I anticipate the bookmarks handling may be better (1.5 never should have been released until its bookmarks handling was on par with Netscape 4.72!) I still do not consider this to be production quality software. It will not be until it has decent handling of the various types of resource allocation failures (can't open tab, can't open window, can't allocate memory for image, script, network connection, etc.).

Though I haven't tested it yet I also suspect they haven't handled things like window switching or efficient session restart. The open window (tab) should have top CPU and network priority until it is displayed. Any excess CPU or network resources can be dedicated to non-lead tabs or mininimized windows. They probably also haven't handled the heap fragmentation issue -- so after using Firefox for a week and one has opened 100 windows and 700 tabs (pushing the memory usage up to 1.2GB) it will still take 15 minutes or more to simply close all the windows and exit from Firefox (presumably because it has to merge all of the memory fragments being deallocated). Upon restarting the same session one will find that Firefox only needs 900MB. That is a memory leak and/or heap fragmentation problem.

Please, no comments about how I shouldn't be using my browser this way... You use your browser your way, I'll use it my way. I happen to like to work on multiple things at the same time and when I'm writing research papers it isn't uncommon for me to open hundreds of sources simultaneously. I wouldn't have started limiting the virtual memory and run into Firefox's failings in that area at all if 1.5 hadn't turned out to be such an excessive memory consumer.

The interesting question one might ask is how one releases software and specifies what its minimal memory requirements are if you don't limit its memory to determine that? I can only assume that the Firefox developers picked their numbers out of thin air [1].

As an aside it may be worth noting that Firefox 1.5.0.7 does run under Windows 98 on a 75 MHz Pentium that only has 132MB of memory. It doesn't have the performance that Netscape 4.72 can show on the same machine though. As the 2.0 memory requirements seem to have increased (presumably due to the SQL libraries for bookmarks & history handling) I strongly doubt its performance would be improved over 1.5.0.7.

1. Firefox 2.0 will *NOT* run in the Linux specified Minimum System Requirements of 64MB of RAM [2] unless you also have several hundred MB of swap space. And believe me, having pushed Firefox memory to ~70% of system RAM under Linux -- you would *not* want to try to use it even on a 128MB system due to Firefox's problems with heap memory management and the poor paging performance it generates under Linux.
2. http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/system-requir ements.html

http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/2.0/releaseno tes/

The yellow and blue are more suited to Microsoft than Mozilla because for some reason, those colors remind me of dealing with indian call centers. There are also zero new features that appeal to me, this is nothing but a glorified point release with some "2.0" branding slapped on top. The artwork, now there's something special; special as-in total catastrophy.

http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/

**My poor eyes**

http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/2.0/releaseno tes/

The yellow and blue are more suited to Microsoft than Mozilla because for some reason, those colors remind me of dealing with indian call centers. There are also zero new features that appeal to me, this is nothing but a glorified point release with some "2.0" branding slapped on top. The artwork, now there's something special; special as-in total catastrophy.

http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/

**My poor eyes**

The link to the Firefox download page could have been included. I had to find it myself.

http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/

I think IE7 is the first browser with integrated real-time anti-phishing functionality, with an RSS platform and support for Simple List Extensions (see below), with "QuickTabs," with support for OpenSearch, and with shrink-to-fit printing on by default. In Windows Vista with Protected Mode, IE7 is the first browser to "put itself into a sandbox" and run with low privileges.

On the topic of functioning extensions, I use a few, and they've all updated themselves and are functioning perfectly.

For those intereseted (I'm guessing none of you), they are: Ablock, Adblock Filterset.G Updater, All-in-One-Gestures, DownloadThemAll!,ForecastFox,IE Tab, and Web Developer (toolbar).

Also, since the http://www.mozilla.com/ is linking to the 2.0 downloads it seems safe to assume this is the official release.

I went to getfirefox and lo and behold by removing the version number for 1.5 and putting 2.0 in ala:
http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/products/download.htm l?product=firefox-2.0&os=win&lang=en-US
I started downloading it.

(Mind you it is really slow and stopped at 33kb)

Umm Why not just download the official from the site http://en-us.www.mozilla.com/en-US/products/downlo ad.html?product=firefox-2.0&os=win&lang=en-US It is not like it's not already posted they just haven't linked it ;-)

Just get it now, without overwhelming specific mirrors:
http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/products/download.htm l?product=firefox-2.0&os=win&lang=en-US/a

I don't see this as a bad thing, as your still getting it the way they want (using the official link that selects a mirror for you) I'm just not waiting for them to post the link, so I wrote it myself ;)

why wait? http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/products/download.htm l?product=firefox-2.0&os=win&lang=en-US

Its already out, they just dont have the link public yet. http://www.mozilla.com/products/download.html?prod uct=firefox-2.0&os=win&lang=en-US Obviously I only cared for the Windows/English/US version.

Or you could just download it here: http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/products/download.htm l?product=firefox-2.0&os=win&lang=en-US

Just thought this was interesting. I just went to download the FireFox 2.0 RC3 version and got this URL: http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/products/download.htm l?product=firefox-2.0rc3&os=win&lang=en-US and decided to try and munge the URL to this: http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/products/download.htm l?product=firefox-2.0&os=win&lang=en-US Both have certs which expire 02/Nov/2006. :(

Just thought this was interesting. I just went to download the FireFox 2.0 RC3 version and got this URL: http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/products/download.htm l?product=firefox-2.0rc3&os=win&lang=en-US and decided to try and munge the URL to this: http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/products/download.htm l?product=firefox-2.0&os=win&lang=en-US Both have certs which expire 02/Nov/2006. :(

http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/products/download.htm l?product=firefox-2.0&os=win&lang=en-US get it here!

This link seems to work fine for me:

http://www.mozilla.com/products/download.html?prod uct=firefox-2.0&os=win&lang=en-US

If it hasn't been released then I imagine that link would not work. Myself, if I am not releasing something I do not put it on a public web server, that's just me though.

Firefox 2 has not yet been officially released. Please be patient. We still plan on launching Tuesday, October 24th in the afternoon pacific time. Linking to anything other than getfirefox.com or mozilla.com hurts us, our volunteer mirror network, and our ability to effectively serve up and guarantee availability of Firefox. Thank you! -- cbeard@mozilla.org

At this writing,
http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/
and
http://www.getfirefox.com/
and
http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/
all only say Firefox 1.5. Come f-ing on, slashdot, after having jumped the gun several times on freebsd. do they really need emails from everyone that produces software saying "only announce things when they're really announced" before checking a single website or two to see if something's officially out?

At this writing,
http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/
and
http://www.getfirefox.com/
and
http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/
all only say Firefox 1.5. Come f-ing on, slashdot, after having jumped the gun several times on freebsd. do they really need emails from everyone that produces software saying "only announce things when they're really announced" before checking a single website or two to see if something's officially out?

Firefox 2.0 discovered live and downloadable on Monday:

You cna check out the roadmap or download the alpha.

Compose message to context works for me on Linux in 1.5.0.7. Are you running the official 32-bit build or an unofficial 64-bit build? Have you tried a fresh profile? If so, did you report to bugzilla?

• Delete Outlook.
• Install Thunderbird.
• Open the Preferences panel.
• Click on the Privacy tab.
• Select the option, "Block loading of external images."
• Select the option, "Block JavaScript."
• Click OK.
• You're done.

Solution #2:

• Delete Outlook.
• Install mutt.
• You're done.

Schwab

Um, how about not reading email in HTML?

If you're using Thunderbird, by default it won't display images in e-mails. Is says 'to protect your privacy, these images have not been shown', and offers a button to click to show the images.

*crap* I thought of trying it out. But http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/2.0/releaseno tes/#install warns that it will replace my existing installation

Unless they install this update.

Oh that's nice. I come back to check ./ and this is what I find? Some random guy who made his account like yesterday is calling me a moron for posting a link that was mentioned in the original article. I don't know what your problem is, buddy, but like most Slashdot posters I use this in conjunction with this and I'm adware-free. I even had to look up what Zango was just to figure out what the hell you thought was so important that you posted about it like a million times.

I don't know what kind of bizarre, self-important crusade you think you're on by cluttering up ./ with your ridiculous tirades, but it really makes you seem like a real jackass. Just a little FYI.

You already have it: Firefox downloads, including Linux i686. If your system isn't Linux i686, you can always grab the source code and compile your own version.

Nothing stops you from using the "official" Firefox binaries or source.

However, keep in mind that the official Linux version of Firefox seems to think Linux works just like Windows and has broken install requirements because of that. Because of this BROKEN Firefox behavior, all Linux distros patch Firefox to make it act like a UNIX program.

Apparently this dastardly act of open source in action has caused Mozilla to refuse to allow Debian to call their fixed version of Firefox "Firefox" because people might get confused. (I guess having a working browser harms their image of "piece of crap software that's really only designed to run under Windows and plays lip service to other platforms that they don't really give a shit about".)

Dunno, maybe it has something to do with naming similarity to the friendly Mozilla?

Just don't do it using MSIE.

Simple, eh?

Of the 4 browsers I have here, all are safer in JavaScript than MSIE (FireFox, SeaMonkey, Opera, Konqueror). Three of those are easily available for 'doze & even Konqueror can be made to work in it.

Er... sorry, I also have lynx, links & w3m available, plus Galeon and a few other GNOMEish built-ins kicking around. Spoilt for choice!

Firefox is available under GPL.
That is not true.
See http://www.mozilla.com/about/licensing.html :
Mozilla Licensing Policies

Mozilla's software is open source. This means that the software is not only available for download free of charge, but you have access to the source code and may modify and redistribute our software subject to certain restrictions as detailed in the Mozilla Public License. Official binary releases from the Mozilla Foundation are also released under the Mozilla End-User License Agreement.

Our code is free, but we do strictly enforce our trademark rights, we must, in order to keep them valid. Our trademarks include, among others, the names Mozilla, Firefox, Thunderbird, Bugzilla and XUL, as well as the Mozilla logo, Firefox logo, Thunderbird logo and the red lizard logo. This means that, while you have considerable freedom to redistribute and modify our software, there are tight restrictions on your ability to use the Mozilla name and logos, even when built into binaries that we provide.

So instead of this dangerous page which will try to install malware we'll get a cleaned-up and safe version

I'm sure glad MS is out to make the interweb a better place for everyone.

For batch changing I have found Advanced Find and Replace to be very effective. I had to update a none standards compliant site that didn't use CSS to standards compliance with CSS recently. The site had about 15000 pages at the time, if I remember rightly, but it was quite painless updating it with Advanced Find and Replace.

For HTML, CSS and PHP editing I use TextPad. A great text editor with syntax highlighting and other tools that make writing code easy. For checking the page I use Firefox with Web Developer plugin, Opera (my main browser) and, grudgingly, IE.

Instead of ftp.mozilla.org, try the mirror page – currently it seems to list beta 1, but you should be able to modify the download URL to get the en-US beta 2.

One small area that has had a reasonable amount of improvement in Firefox 2 is canvas support – I've been working on a canvas-based FPS engine and get about 50% better performance in FF2 than in FF1.5, as well as lots of fixed bugs and memory leaks.

Most major changes (like the new graphics infrastructure that'll help provide hardware accelerated rendering, full-page zooming, HTML inside SVG, better printing, etc) are being left for Firefox 3, but FF2 seems like a solid improvement over the previous version.

The canvas is actually a nice example of progress on the web. After too many years with very little going on, the major modern browsers developers (Mozilla, Opera, Apple) are working in the WHATWG to add new features – it's a balance between proprietary extensions and W3C-style specifications, with browsers implementing features at the same time as the spec is being written and guiding its development. There's room for competition between browsers in terms of feature support, and we don't have to wait years for the standards to be completed first – but it's hopefully without the old problems of those features being proprietary and poorly designed. For example, Opera 9 supports much of Web Forms 2.0 and the Mozilla developers are just starting work on it too; and it's also designed to be backward-compatible, so the new forms are still usable in all browsers and can be emulated in some (e.g. IE) with JavaScript. Firefox 2 seems to be the first browser with client-side session and persistent storage, but web sites written to benefit from that feature will be able to immediately work with future versions of e.g. Opera that support it too.

With the popularity of trends like AJAX encouraging people to think about new ways to interact with users over the web, and browsers adding features to expand the possibilities open to web developers, it'll be interesting to see what happens in the next few years.

When Firefox has its own email client from Mozilla as part of the download, I think you will see a new wave of people switching over.

Actually, Firefox only became popular after it was split from the full-on Mozilla browser. Now, that's only a correlation, not necessarily a causal relationship, but it's worth noting.

If you'd like a Mozilla email client, you've got two options today. The first is Thunderbird, a stand-alone email client intended to be a companion to Firefox. I use it myself, and aside from a few minor annoyances, it works quite well.

The second is to switch to SeaMonkey. It's based on the original Mozilla Suite, and includes both a web browser and an email client. But the underlying code is more up to date, and it uses the same modern codebase found in Firefox.

The only problem I have with the current Linux Flash is that the sound is out of sync with the picture. This makes using Google Video or You Tube a bit a hassle. So my question is

Has the sound synchronization problem been fixed?

On a side note, if you don't like flash ads with screaming sound, just install Flash Block.

But install Firefox first

N6 and IE6 and it's just... simply.. broken.