Slashdot Mirror

To be effective you have to have an EXTREMELY large hosts file, and that will drag down the PC. Sure if you are dealing with a new Core2Duo it won't be noticeable, but I like being able to keep my "old faithful"(1.1GHz Celeron,Win2K Pro,512Mb of RAM) as a Netbox while I keep my big PC separate for gaming.

With FF3 and Adblock+Noscript I can still use that machine and have a VERY comfortable Internet experience like I am having right now responding to you. FF3 also gives me advantages that no other browser I have found offers. Like what you say? To start there is FEBE which gives me a butt simple way to keep my browser synced to my gamer rig and my flash, and makes FF backups a simple 2 click affair. I have a few other extensions that are nice but the other "mission critical" for me is iMacros which allows me to VERY simply script any repetitive task I do on the web. Filling forms, logging in to mail or websites, downloading wallpapers from my favorite picture sites,etc. If you need to do something more than once iMacros can automate the task for you. simply hit record, do the task, save, and if you need to tweak it there are a ton of examples that come with it to show how to automate just about any task you may think of.

So as someone who was surfing the web back in the bad old days when it was pretty much IE5 or else I have had plenty of experience in using hosts files to block the crap. And I'm sorry but IMHO FF3 stomps the hosts file into the ground. It doesn't suck RAM 24/7 like a constantly loaded hosts file does, it takes care of updating the block list for me without needing intervention, it comes with me on a flash so I can use it on a customers PC without the need to alter it, and with iMacros I have automated scripting that I can tailor to whatever repetitive job I may come across. So while I am glad that a monster hosts file works for you, for me it is simply pointless. After all, if you are using FF3 as your default browser why in the world would you actually NEED to bother with a hosts file?

Sorry, but Firefox's extension system isn't only ONE features, each and every extension has at least a feature!

You talk about Opera Gestures and SpeedDial, well, you have them here and here.

I know they're not included by default, but I don't use them, why would I want them by default? If every feature is to be installed by default, the browser will have one of two problems:
1 - Full of features, slow and unusable
2 - Fast and lean but with little features.

Plugins/extensions allow you to choose exactly what features you what so you can have those without crippling you browser. Oh, and I can make my own features, so I'm not dependent on what the 'developers' think it's best for me.

Sorry, but Firefox's extension system isn't only ONE features, each and every extension has at least a feature!

You talk about Opera Gestures and SpeedDial, well, you have them here and here.

I know they're not included by default, but I don't use them, why would I want them by default? If every feature is to be installed by default, the browser will have one of two problems:
1 - Full of features, slow and unusable
2 - Fast and lean but with little features.

Plugins/extensions allow you to choose exactly what features you what so you can have those without crippling you browser. Oh, and I can make my own features, so I'm not dependent on what the 'developers' think it's best for me.

The cool thing about Firefox is that you can basically force users into installing malware by exploiting bug 59314. Just keep popping up a dialogue box (with no way to stop it or switch to another tab) until the user gives in and says yes.

It just proves that modal dialogs suck.

Something both Safari and Firefox 3.1 have by default
Here is the test

The messed up thing is that Greasemonkey is being offered through Mozilla as an add-on. Would this version be infected as well? http://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/748

The cool thing about Firefox is that you can basically force users into installing malware by exploiting bug 59314. Just keep popping up a dialogue box (with no way to stop it or switch to another tab) until the user gives in and says yes.

but then, upon further research, i found out about dynamic textarea resizing, a useful little feature for lots of data entry, while using chrome. you just click and drag the corner of the textarea to make it bigger (or smaller). very nifty

Firefox has supported this for years through extensions. Probably the best known one right now is Resizeable Textarea.

Also, I would be cautious of recommending your Windows users to Safari. For some reason all Apple software in Windows seems to run exceptionally slow. I never realized what all of the hubub for Apple software was about until I tried it on a Mac. I don't know what they do to make it cross platform, but there are serious performance issues on the Windows side.

Here you go: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/433

The DOM isn't part of the language. It's an API and a poorly implemented one for that matter. I'm talking purely about the language.

Your argument is bridged entirely on the inadequacies and shortcomings of various browser (primarily Internet Explorer) implementations of an API. You have no argument against the language itself other than your dislike of lambda calculus in object-oriented languages. Yes, the DOM sucks, but don't blame the language.

Besides, with things like Rhino around, the language has a chance to move beyond the browser and be appreciated for what it is instead of its messy roommate (the DOM).

My son's nearly 3 and has an old (slightly broken) ThinkPad loaded with Ubuntu Intrepid, and some parts of the NetBook Remix:

• maximus - ensures all windows are full screened
• window picker applet - gives a titlebar and better window picker
• Firefox set to autostart and has speed dials to his favourite sites with the address bar hidden.

At 2.5, I'm not worried about him typing in an address and seeing something he shouldn't, and the speed dials are big enough to get him to Thomas and Friends, CBeebies, Kneebouncers and a few other sites.

The mouse pointer size is bumped up to maximum (Preferences > Appearance > Themes > Advanced, IIRC) and the speed dials have really helped him with his mouse control, and he can now navigate pretty much unaided around the CBeebies website, playing the Flash games there.

And no, we don't use this as an electronic babysitter.

Or you could just use NoScript. If you are waiting for the all of the self-proclaimed web designers and developers out there to change their ways then you are likely going to be waiting for a very long time. Firefox + AdBlock + NoScript...accept no substitutes.

Or you could just use NoScript. If you are waiting for the all of the self-proclaimed web designers and developers out there to change their ways then you are likely going to be waiting for a very long time. Firefox + AdBlock + NoScript...accept no substitutes.

No, he's not. It's great for web development too:

https://addons.mozilla.org/de/firefox/addon/1419

But note one typical but totally crazy thing: IE behaves slightly different, when used in an embedded way. (Like in IE Tab or those "Browsers" that internally use IE.)

Other browsers won't be able to do that with most FF plugins, unless they also implement XUL. This means they either have to re-use gecko, or write their own XUL implementation from scratch. I don't have anything against XUL, but I don't see any browsers taking it up.

I'd suggest you also get the IE View extension in addition to that one. Personally, I use both. IE View remembers which pages/sites to *always* open in IE. This way, if you're browsing Netflix, you can keep Firefox on most of the time, and only just use IE for the streaming DRM parts. And if you install that one, you may also want to install Firefox View which installs a context menu in IE.

And last, this is not directly relevant to your post, but there is also Opera View which can be useful once in a while (but which IE Tab can do as well, since "IE Tab" can also let you open links in external applications within its context menu -- in addition to IE).

I'd suggest you also get the IE View extension in addition to that one. Personally, I use both. IE View remembers which pages/sites to *always* open in IE. This way, if you're browsing Netflix, you can keep Firefox on most of the time, and only just use IE for the streaming DRM parts. And if you install that one, you may also want to install Firefox View which installs a context menu in IE.

And last, this is not directly relevant to your post, but there is also Opera View which can be useful once in a while (but which IE Tab can do as well, since "IE Tab" can also let you open links in external applications within its context menu -- in addition to IE).

IE Tab allows you to use Internet Explorers rendering engine in Firefox.

I use this for Windows Updates all the time, I haven't actually used IE since I first installed my OS. I had to use it to download Firefox :-P

If you ever visit Korean sites, they are chock full of ActiveX crap. If you ever want to be able to navigate them properly, your only chance is to run Internet Explorer.

If you use Firefox but need to use IE from time to time, I *highly* recommend the IE Tab Firefox Extension. I never used to use it because I figured it'd be too much of a bloat or hassle, but it really works *great*. I encourage you to use it if you ever have to open an IE window.

Very few FF3.0 plugins will work on 3.1beta.

Actually, most of them will, if you install the Nightly Tester Tools add-on. You can then force compatibility on any or all of your add-ons.

YMMV, but in my case, the following work fine in 3.1 beta 1: iMacros, Adblock Plus, DownloadHelper, Firebug, Flashgot, Foxmarks, and Web Developer Toolbar.

Most people I've ever asked "exactly what Firefox extensions do you use", give me a list of features that are either in safari or easily available through plugins.

The Session Manager plugin is why I use FireFox.

Have you tried Download Statusbar? I have mine set to clear the bar after 5 seconds, but you can probably set it to 0 if you just want them to go poof.

And as for the above poster who wonders why I don't just give the old folks a shortcut? Because with Seamonkey it really makes it easy to copy/paste that recipe they are sure that Mabel will like,LOL! But that is what I love about Firefox,all the diversity. I give Seamonkey to the older folks, Kmeleon to those with older PCs or who only care about speed,and Flock to those that are into the social sites. With the FF codebase I can give everyone something for them and still not have to worry about the latest IE bug. Oh and those who haven't given it a shot should try Songbird. I have been using it myself as well as handing it out to my customers and it is really gotten quite nice.

One thing that frequently bothers me about Firefox -- can't get rid of the menu bar. In Konqueror (and in many other KDE apps), ctrl+m toggles it. It's also possible (at least in kde3, haven't tried since kde4) to create an OSX-like menu bar at the top of the screen, which all KDE apps will use -- but Firefox won't.

Hide Menubar... although I just hit F11 when I need the extra space.

Personally, I wish there was a way to disable the sliding animations (downloads complete/menus and tabs hiding when it's in fullscreen)...

The CustomizeGoogle Firefox addon allows you to filter search results like experts-exchange.com with wildcard expressions. Besides that, the addon can rewrite some of Google's pages to achieve, for example:

- Rewrite image search results to point directly to the images
- Remove ads
- Permanently set search preferences without having to log into your Google account. The addon stores the settings on the client's side and rewrites all HTTP GET requests to Google with the proper parameters.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/743

I'm glad to see that I'm not alone in hating "experts exchange". I've solved it by installing CustomizeGoogle and I've put http://*.experts-exchange.com/* in my filter. Works like a charm.

There is no new Google-feature needed which they can datamine. All you need is the GooglePreview addon: https://addons.mozilla.org/de/firefox/addon/189

It allows you to filter out unwanted domains from your search results among very nice other features.

Firefox has been asked for years for better corporate deployment support. The answer was some wiki pages and a Client Customisation Kit which is currently listed as supporting FF2.

Firefox still ships as an .exe, not a Mozilla branded MSI, despite one being requested in January 2004 (bug 231062). Despite being listed as P1 for FF3 there's no sign of it yet.

There is an MSI linked from Mozilla pages, but it is not a Mozilla MSI. With all respect to Frontmotion for the work they have done, if I'm bringing an MSI inside my firewall it has to say Mozilla on it.

Reaching IE's integration level would be beyond most companies but Firefox's level barely reaches baby steps.

(incidentally for those who wish to mod me down "cuz that post hatez teh firefox", this is being posted with Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.0.4) Gecko/2008102920 Firefox/3.0.4)

Firefox has been asked for years for better corporate deployment support. The answer was some wiki pages and a Client Customisation Kit which is currently listed as supporting FF2.

Firefox still ships as an .exe, not a Mozilla branded MSI, despite one being requested in January 2004 (bug 231062). Despite being listed as P1 for FF3 there's no sign of it yet.

There is an MSI linked from Mozilla pages, but it is not a Mozilla MSI. With all respect to Frontmotion for the work they have done, if I'm bringing an MSI inside my firewall it has to say Mozilla on it.

Reaching IE's integration level would be beyond most companies but Firefox's level barely reaches baby steps.

(incidentally for those who wish to mod me down "cuz that post hatez teh firefox", this is being posted with Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.0.4) Gecko/2008102920 Firefox/3.0.4)

Firefox has been asked for years for better corporate deployment support. The answer was some wiki pages and a Client Customisation Kit which is currently listed as supporting FF2.

Firefox still ships as an .exe, not a Mozilla branded MSI, despite one being requested in January 2004 (bug 231062). Despite being listed as P1 for FF3 there's no sign of it yet.

There is an MSI linked from Mozilla pages, but it is not a Mozilla MSI. With all respect to Frontmotion for the work they have done, if I'm bringing an MSI inside my firewall it has to say Mozilla on it.

Reaching IE's integration level would be beyond most companies but Firefox's level barely reaches baby steps.

(incidentally for those who wish to mod me down "cuz that post hatez teh firefox", this is being posted with Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.0.4) Gecko/2008102920 Firefox/3.0.4)

To clarify, they can use the cookies from your browser.

I don't know if they understand the sqlite storage that firefox 3 uses yet, but searching a bit, it looks like people have made it work (by dumping the database to a cookie file):

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/8154
http://blog.schlunzen.org/2008/06/19/firefox-3-und-cookiestxt/

It looks like the addon also dumps session cookies.

You can get the same thing in Firefox with the Prism for Firefox extension.

I think the REAL reason that Google is pushing Chrome instead of Firefox can be summed up in one word: Adblock. I am sure that Ads being blocked in pretty much every FF out there can't be making them too happy. If I was in charge at Mozilla i would be trying to make a deal with one of the smaller OEMs, maybe Acer and Asus to start, and offer them a "branded" FF that had links to the companies website in the default bookmarks. And if they really wanted to kick some ass they would have Adblock Plus and ForecastFox installed by default and set to go at first run. Simply ask them for their country and zip code to set up the extensions.

Because working PC repair I have been installing FF with Adblock Plus and ForecastFox installed on the menubar and to hear my customers talk that is just the greatest thing since sliced bread. The LOVE not getting anymore stupid in your face ads and having the 3 day forecast sitting in a bar at the top with a little pop up with the current weather at startup is just the coolest damn thing to hear them talk. Of course I also point out that it is a safety feature, since it will pop up a warning when there is a severe weather alert in their area. I have heard nothing but compliments on that feature.

But I really doubt that we'll be seeing Google pushing Firefox, or really doing much of anything with Firefox except paying for the default search rights, thanks to Adblock Plus. While they will continue paying for those simply because it would be foolish to give up a 20% browser share to MSFT or Yahoo, Adblock Plus means many of their ads simply won't reach the majority of FF users. because if you go to recommended add ons which IIRC is sorted by most popular you will see that Adblock Plus is always near the top. According to Mozilla 331,002 downloads this week were for Adblock Plus. So that is 331K Mozilla users that won't be seeing their adsense ads this week, and that of course doesn't count all those that have download Adblock Plus in the past. So I think we'll be seeing a lot more of Google trying to push Chrome, not because they think it has a better chance of beating IE, but because unlike FF you can't easily block ads in Chrome. And since ads are their bread and butter who can blame them.

what silverlight seeks to achieve that isnt currently offered in the web browsing experience?

There is some interesting stuff in Silverlight which isn't in the current "web browsing experience" (or at least, not easily). Whether it's a good idea I'll leave for you to decide ...

The interesting bit is XAML which is an XML-based format for describing the user interfaces of standard applications, eg. text boxes, forms, inputs and so on. Much richer and more fully featured than standard HTML forms, but arguably HTML + JS + canvas gives you something similar if you're prepared to invest a lot of effort. Anyway. For client applications, it's a bit like Gnome's Glade XML descriptions. Microsoft extended XAML so you could send it over the web, to a Silverlight plugin in a browser, so you can turn Windows client apps into fully remote web applications.

I should add that nothing here is innovative -- this is exactly how Mozilla XUL works, although Mozilla didn't really ever get their act together to make XUL work properly for local clients (you can do it, but it's a giant PITA, unreliable and changes constantly).

Rich.

You mean the Java plugin? Because Firefox doesn't use Chrome's JavaScript engine, it uses SpiderMonkey.

Java != JavaScript.

SVG is also part of the growing portfolio. If you have any modern browser the you can use it (IE is still playing catch-up).

BTW does anyone have any examples of good games implemented using SVG?

Would it kill you to put a link in there somewhere?
http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/documents/mf-2007-audited-financial-statement.pdf

This is not where Adobes priorities should be!

They're already working on Tamarin which is used by Firefox 3.1 and the Adobe ActionScript VM in Flash, QUOTE:

The goal of the "Tamarin" project is to implement a high-performance, open source implementation of the ECMAScript 4th edition (ES4) language specification. The Tamarin virtual machine will be used by Mozilla within SpiderMonkey, the core JavaScript engine embedded in Firefox®, and other products based on Mozilla technology. The code will continue to be used by Adobe as part of the ActionScript(TM) Virtual Machine within Adobe® Flash® Player.

This means it's fast. All those nice things you read about Firefox 3.1's javascript being an optimising and tracing compiler and blah blah blah will soon also apply to Adobe Flash.

Release the source, or at least an open API/documentation/something, and then let us do the work.

You mean the specs that have just been updated and aren't under any restrictions any more?

And the source for the VM that has been available for quite a while as well?

When you're done adding a renderer and so on, you'll probably need the compiler, too.

To be fair, it lacks the old VM, which the proprietary player contains for backwards compatibility, and some closed third-party codecs.

It is not. The Firefox logo is not free. Thus, any software that includes that logo is non-free also, and Debian developers know it very well

What about software whose documentation is not "Free"? Like the GNU project documentation?

What do you say about that? Where is my "unconstrained right to learn, and to change the docs as I see fit"?

I mention that since Debian folks at least have the consistency of also considering that also as "non-Free'.

It is not. The Firefox logo is not free. Thus, any software that includes that logo is non-free also, and Debian developers know it very well

So, anything more than personal anecdotes on your side?

Has this bug (453964) been fixed yet ? According to the bug tracker, no one has even bothered looking at it, since it's still "unconfirmed".

Oh well. I guess I'll stay on Firefox 2, then. Or see if I can get IE running under Wine...

Bad form to reply to my own post, I know. Oldbar is kind of out of date. Old location bar may be a better bet.

Also, more info here. With instructions.

There is a Thunderbird 3 in the works (see https://wiki.mozilla.org/Main_Page).

They are currently headed for Beta 1 (see the latest status meeting notes at https://wiki.mozilla.org/Thunderbird/StatusMeetings/2008-11-11); the nightlies can be downloaded from the usual place (http://www.mozilla.org/developer/#builds) if you want to take a look.

There is a Thunderbird 3 in the works (see https://wiki.mozilla.org/Main_Page).

They are currently headed for Beta 1 (see the latest status meeting notes at https://wiki.mozilla.org/Thunderbird/StatusMeetings/2008-11-11); the nightlies can be downloaded from the usual place (http://www.mozilla.org/developer/#builds) if you want to take a look.

Then turn it off. If you don't want search results, set "browser.urlbar.maxRichResults" to zero in about:config. If you want the old appearance try oldbar. I actually found that Firefox 3 was a tiny bit faster than 2, so I'm happy.

For more information look here and here.

The answer to that question seems to be yes.

Why do you care so much ? From the Apache manual: "At this time no web browsers support RFC 2817."

For example Mozilla/FireFox has it on there brainstorm page:

https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/Feature_Brainstorming:Security

But there are problems:

The problem is that the security depends entirely on the server deciding
not to serve the content over plain unencrypted HTTP . The client has no
control. If the server is misconfigured, or there is an MITM, the client
will go through with an unencrypted HTTP connection.

I guess the same holds true for StartTLS in SMTP.

Don't worry about the misinterpretation. In retrospect it's easy to see how you could draw that conclusion, just as it was the other two times it happened to me today. :-)

The fact that BSD and OS X can incorporate ZFS though, does imply a certain amount of "legal compatibility" on the part of CDDL though.

True. However, Linux is one of the most obvious targets for any code transplants from Solaris, and the one that presents the greatest threat to Sun. My main point is that Linux's use of the GPL isn't the problem; indications are that Sun didn't want Solaris features to end up in Linux, and chose their license accordingly.

... since they've based their license on MPL, I assume all the work of the Mozilla community should be similarly viewed?

Your example supports my argument. You'll note that the Mozilla code is all tri-licensed, MPL/GPL/LGPL, in the interests of maximizing compatibility with other open-source projects.

DNSSec protects against a kind of attack that doesn't exist and never happens, by making attacks that do happen (like denial-of-service) easier to mount.

DNSCurve, a younger, competing protocol protects against most of the attacks DNSSec is designed to, and even protects against some denial-of-service attacks.

However, the other part of your question, about is SSL sufficient, the answer is no . It demonstrates nicely why a security extension needs to be one we can roll out quickly so that we can start blocking invalid requests, instead of just complaining about them.

DNSSec provides no benefit until some magic date in the future where we stop using DNS and start using DNSSec. Meanwhile, DNSCurve provides some benefit as soon as the root servers offer it.

Firefox 3 works fine if profiles are on the local machine under OS X, but has issues if they're on a remote machine.

There are firefox extensions that will help you change the user agent by which you're identified with, and there is Opera that lets you do that through its preferences, but that being said, it might just be easier to install the IE Tab addon on firefox -- that works just fine for me (on my old or my new computer, on my slow cheap dsl line, without any of the flickers that someone else was mentioning earlier).