Slashdot Mirror

Seriously, though, this is why I use the greasemonkey extension for firefox to do things like this. It allows you to add your own javascript to certain web pages. For example, the better gmail set of scripts provides a variety of enhancements, and there is a tool that lets you add a bcc to every mail (which is how I back up my sent mail).

The best part is that all the scripts are javascript, so even if you have the most rudimentary understanding of just about any programming language, you can easily figure out what the scripts are doing. No decompiling or reverse engineering needed.

Although I risk sounding like an ideologue for saying this, this once again shows how open source programs are inherently more secure than closed source.

Seriously, though, this is why I use the greasemonkey extension for firefox to do things like this. It allows you to add your own javascript to certain web pages. For example, the better gmail set of scripts provides a variety of enhancements, and there is a tool that lets you add a bcc to every mail (which is how I back up my sent mail).

The best part is that all the scripts are javascript, so even if you have the most rudimentary understanding of just about any programming language, you can easily figure out what the scripts are doing. No decompiling or reverse engineering needed.

Although I risk sounding like an ideologue for saying this, this once again shows how open source programs are inherently more secure than closed source.

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=55696

Wonder if it'll reach 10 years before getting fixed... :D

Oldbar extension URL: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/6227

The Mozilla Foundation which owns the Corp has funded several projects in 2007.

• Support and maintenance of the mozdev.org
• Development of Perl 6 and Parrot
• Implementation of accessibility features in the Dojo AJAX toolkit
• Enhancement of the NVDA open source screen reader for Windows
• Enhancements to the OpenSSL cryptographic library and Apache mod_ssl SSL/TLS module
• Enhance the Orca open source screen reader for Linux to support Firefox
• much more read the "projects in 2007" link...

Current work includes improving l10n tools Community Giving and Tools for the L10n Process

2006 10k USD to openbsd to continue development of openbsd and openssh. Mozilla Foundation activities, week ending 2006/03/31

You mean you wish there was say something like say Firebug? https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/1843

Does a normal user need it? No. Is it reasonably easy to "code yourself?" Yes. Did someone already write a very nice source code viewer that can do lots of other things? Yes.

Idiot :P

After stumbling around looking for where the source tarball was, I downloaded it and unpacked it. During unpacking I noticed a certain directory: mozilla/modules/libpr0n. Now I know why so many guys say it performs faster; it's optimized to view the kind of sites they all go to...

I filed a bug report about FF3 putting the back menu on the forward button. Join in the fun!

Firefox 3 supports windowless plugins on Linux, and has since last summer. See bug 137189

More info is on this blog post

I kind of agree with them. This is a waste of memory and time for the huge majority of people. We are talking about a project which is already under attack for it's bad memory usage. I understand why they don't want to go that road. It, to the least, show that their can be other points of view and that you do not need to be that aggressive with them.

A web developer will probably not use "view source" very much anyway. Try firebug. That's the way to go if you really want to understand a page. You'll rarely need "view source" after that.

Old bar should be updated soon: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/6227

Given the independence of the editors (the volunteers) from the publishers (Wikimedia Foundation Inc.), I'm not too concerned about the content. Of course that independence only lasts until Wikimedia insists on seats on the Arbitration Committee or other editorial authority.

But they need a mechanism -- beyond 'trust us' -- to keep an eye on the money. That much money is just too tempting, not only for plain embezzlement but also for things like loans and investments for personal or friends' businesses, unreasonable expenses, etc.

Who controls the money? To whom are they responsible? Ultimately, the responsible party is the Wikimedia Foundation Board. While I don't believe fame and talent are highly correlated, and have no doubts about the board members, it would inspire more confidence if someone was putting a broader reputation on the line for Wikipedia. I want some on the board who have something serious to lose if things go wrong, like Mitch Kapor, Joi Ito, and others on the Mozilla Foundation board. In fact, I wonder why don't have people like already. Certainly it's prominent enough to attract them.

Finally, what mechanisms do similar organizations use to manage windfalls of cash?

I installed this addon specifically so that I could read the texts behind the xkcd comics:

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/1715

(good joke)

Well what is meaning of Ad Block if the largest search engine on planet with petabytes (if not zeta) storage offers a free tool to webmasters (and themselves of course) to watch your behaviour on pages with single line?

I am speaking about Google Analytics.

Enjoy https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/4001

Another thing is the shadowy ISP issue. Comcast can ignore the FCC which is considered God for communication companies and can still mess with peoples connection if they dare to use bittorrent right? Even for paid content. What if they abuse their consumer behaviour? Every single page request, every "click" passes through ISP. Cookies, anything.

This is precisely why Adblock is necessary. The advertisers piss and moan about how there will be no more free content if everyone blocks their ads, but in a world where your privacy is actively and automatically subverted without your knowledge or consent then what else can one reasonably do? The advertisers sowed the wind with their tracking, targeting, and indiscriminate sale of personal information and now they will reap the whirlwind as more and more people black hole both their ads and their tracking mechanisms with tools like AdBlock. They can bring on the technological arms race if they want, but even the spammers (arguably the most determined, hard core, and motivated advertisers out there) have been falling behind in their arms race against the geeks.

To the advertisers out there: the web doesn't owe you or anybody else a living...adapt or die. If your content is so valuable then protect it with a login password and charge a subscription fee, at least then we will see what the "content" is really worth, but as far as I am concerned you can take your ads and shove em.

I know I'm going to be terribly offtopic, but have you tried It's all text! for firefox?

It let's you edit any textarea in a webpage by opening your favourite editor (excelent if you try to edit a wiki page using Vim and syntax highlight, even though I usually use it to write some tutorials in BBCode)

"it's looking at whether Windows 7 favors Microsoft apps over third party programs"

Doesn't Apple very heavily lean towards Apple software?

(This isn't starting flaming, this is a legitimate question - what separates Apple from Microsoft in these regards?)

the link on the firefox website says it's from google

For those who only can get DSL, the best way to document what is happening with your connection is if you run FireFox get the extension written by Google called Load Time Analyzer https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/3371. They may offer something similar for IE. It will fully document down to the millisecond what is happening as you load web pages and even graph the data for you to present to tech support on your performance issues.

First off, Firefox is tri-licensed ( http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/#source-code ) , so GPL restrictions aren't really a problem with the MPL license option. And nothing with GPL would prevent you from distributing a GPL app for the iPhone through the AppStore, you just need to distribute the source somewhere else.

Second, You won't see Firefox on the iPhone, that would be dumb as the user interface is designed for a mouse and keyboard. You may see a Gecko based spinoff (which there is one for mobile browsing already in the works for other platforms), but expecting to see anything like Firefox specifically is out of the question. You don't want ALL of that on a tiny resource starved device. You want a compact, simple, low footprint UI and an extremely compact and efficient codebase to do the work.

That's a loaded question. Passing the Acid2 test tells you that the browser understands the elements and correctly renders the Acid2 test. It tells you nothing outside those narrow parameters.

For a full idea of what is and isn't supported, you want information like this:http://www.mozilla.org/docs/web-developer/bugspecs/REC-CSS1.html

Cheers,
Toby Haynes

Both Firefox and Safari developers have obviously been fixing bugs that Acid3 demonstrates for the past few months. The Firefox tracking bug for Acid3 problems is over two months old, for example. If you want to see how well the browsers did before the test existed, use one from April 2007, when work on Acid3 started.

> so I used one from a few days before the Acid3 test was published

You do realize preliminary versions of this test have been available for a while now, right? For example, https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=410460 was filed over two months ago.

If you want to see what things looked like before people started on fixing this stuff, you'll need to go back a few months.

Um-Here is the fix.I use this theme when I'm converting those that hate change. I have found just give them Firefox with this theme and they are happy little campers. I then I get nice referral business as the machines I fix doesn't get pwned in less than a week like those who run IE do. But YMMV

For Safari, buglist here, google docs spreadsheet here

You're missing the trick. Microsoft have effectively been put on notice over ECMA script 4. That's interesting don't you think?

With SVG, Microsoft can either support it themselves (eg: via SilverLight) or expose a business opportunity to their competitors (eg: Adobe). Which does history say is the most likely? IE9 -- with just enough SVG support to hinder the format until Microsoft have a patented alternative to ram down everyones throat.

the last few days slashdot.org has developed an almost infinite loop every couple of refreshes. The status bar seems to blame it on continually downloading from ad.doubleclick.net. I usually hit refresh to try again, but that doesn't work when you want to post comments :(

> Javascript - Safari, Opera, and Konquerer all have at least some support > for Javascript DOM 3, which Firefox lacks in the released versions so
> far.

Care to cite? Last I checked, various parts of DOM3 Core and DOM3 Events (as it existed at the time; it's been mutating since) were supported in Firefox 1.5 and Firefox 2. See:

    http://lxr.mozilla.org/mozilla1.8/find?string=nsIDOM3

(1.8 is the Gecko version for Firefox 1.5 and Firefox 2.)

> image formats

While it's nice to support more of these, there is no standard that requires their support in a web browser... MNG and Tiff in particular were judged to not be worth the code it would take to support them. That's a judgement call, of course.

> Web Forms 2.0

Which isn't a standard yet. Not even close.

I do agree with your general point that trying to judge which browser is "more standards compliant" by comparing _which_ standards they implement is silly. The only sane questions to ask are: "Which browsers support this standard I want to make use of?" and "How good is their support for that standard?" And even the latter of these two is pretty fuzzy.

Foxdie

iSafari Leopard

Resource? Command "I" to "get info" on Safari. Click on the Icon, and Command "C" to copy. Command "I" on FireFox to "get info". Click on the Icon and Command "V" to paste. Close all dialogues.

Foxdie

iSafari Leopard

Resource? Command "I" to "get info" on Safari. Click on the Icon, and Command "C" to copy. Command "I" on FireFox to "get info". Click on the Icon and Command "V" to paste. Close all dialogues.

why con them, most mac users i know use firefox anyway.
Dont forget fission https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/1951 , to get rid of the status bar, although its important to change the setting so you can hover links

> Ok, point taken about threads being means to an end, although I said
> 'threading' rather than 'the use of threads'; I guess I should have said
> 'concurrency in operation of the browser'.

Ok, that is better but still abstract. The way to proceed, at least in
bugzilla, is from symptoms to causes.

So the new bug 384115 can have comments naming bugs that might block it, in the
sense that they are bugs to-do with UI starvation or other symptoms that we
believe can be fixed by taking advantage of hardware parallelism where it
exists.

Other bugs that involve starvation or suboptimal scheduling of ideally
concurrent operations may not want or need parallelism, and they may be real
bugs -- they just don't need to block bug 384115. We could have another metabug
(there may be one already) blocked by these, or all, "responsiveness" or
"scheduling" bugs.

> > - Tabs may reference one another's variables including DOMs using window.open,
> > and any pair of communicating tabs must serialize all of their scripts to
> > uphold the run-to-completion execution model that is part of the browser JS
> > standard.
>
> To the extent that they reference each other's variables, then yeah, they
> should serialize, but this is rare AFAICT,

It doesn't matter how rare it is. The problem is not solved by saying how often
it happens. Consider:

Window A:
i = 1
document.write(i)
i = 2

Window B:
w = window.open("", "A")
w.i = 3

The two windows race to load. What is written in A by the document.write call?
It must be 1, not 3 (and not 2, of course).

If you try to multithread the two windows (which could be tabs, iframes, frames
in frameset, or top-level windows), you'll have to join the threads somehow
when B executes window.open, before it returns the reference to A that's
assigned to w. But if you make B wait for A's script to complete, you will
leave B vulnerable to having its currently-running script's invariants violated
by script in another window C that calls window.open("", "B") and messes with
mutable state reachable via the returned ref to B.

What's more, if A opens B while running, and B opens A, you could have a
deadlock. It could be fixed by making one script lose and be preempted by the
other, possibly involving invariants varying due to the winner mutating the
loser's variables. Such a rule would be an incompatible change to the de-facto
standard execution model.

Note that windows may load sequences of documents, some of which run scripts
that address other windows (and so join with their threads) while others do not
address any other windows.

So while scripts from different (unrelated, cf. document.domain) domains may
not address one anothers' variables, a window might in the future load a doc
from the same domain as another window. So you cannot assign windows to threads
_a priori_ based only on current document domains.

Windows are addressed by name, and even an unnamed window may be given a name
after it has been created (and so referenced by script from another window).

> and done on purpose when it's done,

That's irrelevant too, because the APIs do not require cooperating windows to
declare their intentions up front. Note that the *windows*, not documents that
may or may not be presently loaded in them, must join or leave "threads" in
order to preserve run-to-completion.

> AFAIK, plus the main issue that concurrency or use of threads (say per tab)
> w

If I have understood correctly, http://www.mozilla.org/projects/tamarin/ and related projects will be a big win for JavaScript performance.

Including Tamarin (or Tamarin-Tracing) in Mozilla (and Firefox) should speed it up more. Tamarin is the VM for ActionScript (Adobe's implementation of JavaScript 2 aka ECMAScript Edition 4) that is used in Flash Player. The integration project of Tamarin into Mozilla is called ScreamingMonkey (while SpiderMonkey is what Mozilla currently uses).

http://mozilla.org/projects/tamarin/
http://wiki.mozilla.org/Tamarin:ScreamingMonkey

Including Tamarin (or Tamarin-Tracing) in Mozilla (and Firefox) should speed it up more. Tamarin is the VM for ActionScript (Adobe's implementation of JavaScript 2 aka ECMAScript Edition 4) that is used in Flash Player. The integration project of Tamarin into Mozilla is called ScreamingMonkey (while SpiderMonkey is what Mozilla currently uses).

http://mozilla.org/projects/tamarin/
http://wiki.mozilla.org/Tamarin:ScreamingMonkey

I don't know what build options Ubuntu uses, but could the large executable be a result of static linking? Firefox configuring build options.

They tried. See XUlrunner.

one word: flashblock, link: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/433

I don't know about other components, but ImageLib has been optimized for SSE2. Loading pages with images will be much faster (and you have to love the support for color profiles).

Short answer, maybe Long answer: If FF3 isn't using a processor specific optimization, you can always Download your own build, I like pigfoot's (scroll down) build for windows.

Depending on you browser settings your browser can do an MSN or Google search on return of a 404, or it could simply give you an error message.

In IE, it defaults to MSN, but can be set to give you a basic 404 not found page. In FF, it defaults to a 404 not found page, but you can download various extensions to make it do whatever you want, eg. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/4693

Why? For most users, having fast (and accurate!) back/forward is more useful than having Firefox allocate less RAM. The feature even automatically turns itself off if you don't have a lot of physical RAM.

Turning off bfcache might be useful for rudimentary leak detection, but a proper leak-detection tool is less likely to be confused by fragmentation, other caches, or the OS simply not reclaiming memory that the application has relinquished.

Why? For most users, having fast (and accurate!) back/forward is more useful than having Firefox allocate less RAM. The feature even automatically turns itself off if you don't have a lot of physical RAM.

Turning off bfcache might be useful for rudimentary leak detection, but a proper leak-detection tool is less likely to be confused by fragmentation, other caches, or the OS simply not reclaiming memory that the application has relinquished.

I might be wrong here, but I think Firefox and Seamonkey (or Iceweasel and Iceape if you're a Debian guy) both render pages in pretty much the same way.

Have you given the user agent switcher plugin for Firefox a try?

Mammon slept. And the beast reborn spread over the earth and its numbers grew legion. And they proclaimed the times and sacrificed crops unto the fire, with the cunning of foxes. And they built a new world in their own image as promised by the sacred words , and spoke of the beast with their children. Mammon awoke, and lo! it was naught but a follower.

from The Book of Mozilla, 11:9
(10th Edition)

Mammon slept. And the beast reborn spread over the earth and its numbers grew legion. And they proclaimed the times and sacrificed crops unto the fire, with the cunning of foxes. And they built a new world in their own image as promised by the sacred words , and spoke of the beast with their children. Mammon awoke, and lo! it was naught but a follower.

from The Book of Mozilla, 11:9
(10th Edition)