Slashdot Mirror

They have certain milestones for 1.1 and certain milestones for 1.5. They are completing many milestines for 1.5 so that is what the release is going to be.

http://www.mozilla.org/projects/firefox/roadmap-1. 0.html
http://www.mozilla.org/projects/firefox/roadmap.ht ml
http://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox:Home_Page

Firefox allows site-by-site popup blocking/allowing, would it be too much of a stretch to have the same feature for Javascript?

NoScript

Fortunately they can be implemented in a cross-browser way:

Using XML Data Islands in Mozilla

http://lxr.mozilla.org/seamonkey/source/embedding/

Use the source luke. Examples of Gecko embedded in Gtk, Win32, Cocoa on OS X and lots more. Even OS/2.

For the sake of improvement, have any of you bothered to file bug reports with firefox. I'm not saying you haven't but it would definitely help if the developers were on the same page with firefox's shortcomings. You're posting on /. and giving technical details of what the problem seems to be so I don't expect to hear any of the usual "well joe user wouldn't be bothered." because you guys don't seem like the average joe user.

The web developer toolbar does this too, and a whole lot more. If you are building websites and don't have this, you have problems.

The trunk of the cvs tree has plenty of 64-bit specific fixes over the last year, but -- being unrelated to security -- they don't make their way into the 1.0.x branch, which is the only one released.

Having to maintain compatibility with the backwards OS/compiler combinations (like Win98/MSVC6) impedes development -- especially porting to the "obscure" new platforms like FreeBSD/amd64.

And if you happen to be lucky enough to have a working 64-bit firefox, try installing the Forecastfox extension and restarting... (Careful -- backup your ~/.mozilla first.)

the mozilla store has re-opened, and they Now have a backpack .

Now that I am 100% sure never to get a girlfriend sporting my newly ordered backpack, they may as well start offering thunderbird underwear.
In case people start trying to spam my crotch, I will have protection :D

Oh yes, and here's the wiki, which gives a mock-up of the relavent interfaces.

I find the CSS Sidebar immensely useful. It lets me quickly look up a style and see what values it takes. It's also a good reminder of some of the little-used styles.

am I blind or is there no download link on spread firefox ? kinda silly aint it ?

It actually does make sense, from the page.

"Spread Firefox is the central meeting place for the Firefox open source marketing effort. We are an authentic, creative, action oriented, and user-driven community."

This site is for people already using firefox and wanting to spread its adoption, not for new users. It's kinda like separating user and developer mailing lists. A new user looking for firefox wouldn't likely be interested by some community siet promoting it, they just want to download the thing and would be better off at the home page. The community on the other hand really doesn't want users to grow accustomed to downloading firefox from a site that isn't mozilla.org (nore want to be responsible for maintaining download links).

That being said there really should be a link to http://www.mozilla.org/products/firefox/ somewhere prominant on the page incase some confused surfer ends up there as it's the 4th link on google.

Mozilla Sunbird is Mozilla Corporation's stab at your problem. It might be worth checking out.

http://www.mozilla.org/projects/calendar/sunbird.h tml

In general, the BSD license is much more appealing to commercial endeavors. The BSD TCI/IP stack should be a sufficient example.

I would guess that there is much more software with commercial roots that has been released under the GPL than the BSDL. Some examples are QT, and Mozilla.

Just plain "Ajax" (which in my mind still reeks of a cleaning agent more than a web technology) does not seem to be enough to displace desktop apps, as the interfaces built with it are still clearly web interfaces - albeit more responsive ones. However the combination of asynchronous javascript, XmlHttpRequest and XUL (tutorial can be found here) seems to have more of a chance to provide a native application look and feel to a web-based application. A well-known example of such an app is the Amazon.com browser, give it a try if you have not done so.

This is unfortunately true. Lots of people say "For every Microsoft product, there is a free and open-source alternative". It's true. However, most of those free and open-source alternatives are in permanent beta-stage, while proprietary products have seen many release versions.

Visio -> Dia : The project seems dead, version is 0.94, latest news on the site dates from august 2004.

Outlook -> Sunbird : Seems to still be in development, but version number is 0.2, far, far from a stable 1.0 release. The latest news, from July 11th (after 5 months of inactivity), clearly mentions that "Please be aware that these testing builds are considered unstable and are made available only for testing purposes. We do not recommend these builds for the use on production machines", therefore, it is *not* an alternative.

Lots of open source projects have an insanely large amount of 0.9.x versions, making tons of bugfixes, but never having the guts to actually release a version 1.0 of the product. Either that, or they know that their software lacks the required quality to make it 1.0 stable.

Yeah, it sucks when that happens.

Of course you can always "embargo" all your vulnerability details (see for example bug #294795) - and feel comfortable in your superior position!

That's interesting. I'm sure many people who aren't familiar with the inner workings of the net (myself included) are surprised. The attitude of one website, one IP address seems to pretty prevalant. Take this tool, for instance, that shows the IP address of any website.

So, I suppose that visiting any one of these addresses should show the same address, right? Thanks again for your helpful explanation! -- Paul

No, I hadn't know about that, thanks for mentioning it. (For anyone else unaware, here's Mozilla.org's FAQ about it.)

Anyway, you mention collecting cookies: do you know if prefetching and cookies that come from it follow the "originating web site only" preference?

And here's a test to see if your browser is prefetching.

All the services you mention, from the default Google engine in the Search Bar, to the link prefetching feature (which existed for over two years before Google starting taking advantage of it), to the Internet Keywords functionality (the I'm Feeling Lucky Location Bar search), were developed before Google starting giving them any money.

All the services you mention, from the default Google engine in the Search Bar, to the link prefetching feature (which existed for over two years before Google starting taking advantage of it), to the Internet Keywords functionality (the I'm Feeling Lucky Location Bar search), were developed before Google starting giving them any money.

Mozilla is a 501(c)(3) charitable organization, to which donations are tax-exempt. So yes, a large percentage of the income coming from something other than donations can cause tax problems.

I think one of the underlying reasons for this is Google. It's not explicitly stated that this is the reason, but that's what I read between the lines when reading the FAQ about the reorganization. After reading Mitchell Baker's blog, I'm almost certain of it (though he doesn't explicitly state it either).

I think we will be seeing some more serious collaboration between Mozilla and Google now.

I just love when people talk crap about beta products, and say what amounts to OMG F1R3F0X0r is t3h STANDARD COMPL14NT!!1!one on the right hand, while they make crappily marked-up Web pages and Windows altar sites on the left.

Sure, Fx, Opera, and perhaps even Lynx, Links and ELinks are more on the ball with standards than Grandpa IE, but it helps when we give then standard Web sites to comply with. I hope that Thurrott, the guys at Slashdot, and anyone planning to write Web pages are noticing what the Validator thinks of them. Between the browsers and parsers of the Web, it is easily the most standards-compliant of all.

I wish it came with a reference renderer though, that would make PNG page images from valid HTML, according to common screen sizes and print page dimensions.

Marge: "Do you have Internet Explorer?"

Slashdotter: "Sure, one FireFox!"

Marge: "No, no, Internet Explorer."

Slashdotter: "FireFox?"

Marge: "Eye eee.."

Slashdotter: "Eff eye..."

Seriously though, who would voluntarily "go backwards" and use IE after experiencing all the FireFox goodness?

If you haven't; try now it's free, it's funky, it's pop-in fresh... mah-hoy!

[Firefox] doesn't garbage collect in a timely manner.

It doesn't use GC at all -- firefox uses the mozilla code base which uses standard platform malloc & free implementations. Source for the mozilla memory allocater here.

Can anyone tell me why Microsoft's "XML Data Islands" didn't take off in the mainstream given that IE has had a 90% browser share? For external XML they are simple and neat and don't require any javascript whatsoever for basic fetch-and-display use (but you can enhance functionality using javascript).

Here's a demo (use IE5 or later). I figure they must be in use somewhere because there's even a Mozilla article on getting them working in Mozilla.

Though not written in a garbage collecting language, (it's C++) the Mozilla framework called XPCOM uses reference counting for its garbage collection. And it has been used since at least the 4.x days.

They can still (and do) write pointers with classic syntax (int*), most of the time, you'll see the nsCOMPtr being used for managed pointers.

Though not written in a garbage collecting language, (it's C++) the Mozilla framework called XPCOM uses reference counting for its garbage collection. And it has been used since at least the 4.x days.

They can still (and do) write pointers with classic syntax (int*), most of the time, you'll see the nsCOMPtr being used for managed pointers.

If "localization" (or "L10n" for short) means "translation of UI text" only in "weirdland", then many of us use a web browser made in weirdland.

Regardless of how it could work, the facts are serving application/xhtml+xml has a diminished user experience for Mozilla/Firefox users. http://www.mozilla.org/docs/web-developer/faq.html #accept

And while a strict browser could be faster, Mozilla and every other major browser are designed for quirky HTML first, and XHTML second. That means it's likely largely the same rendering path, with additional code on top to enforce XHTML rules. XHTML may have some great machine-parsing applications, but as of right now, I'm not sure if Web Browsers are one of them.

As for whether a DOCTYPE is worth serving ugly pages to 70-80% of your audience ... I think the bottom line in our discussion is that while W3C specs are nice, it's important to understand realwold behavior.

Sounds like you need User Agent Switcher. Go to http://update.mozilla.org/ and look for it, it's a Firefox extension that comes in handy (though I rarely need it). You can define custom user agents in addition to the ones it includes. Here's a link, not sure if it will work as a direct link though.

https://addons.mozilla.org/extensions/moreinfo.php ?id=59

Sounds like you need User Agent Switcher. Go to http://update.mozilla.org/ and look for it, it's a Firefox extension that comes in handy (though I rarely need it). You can define custom user agents in addition to the ones it includes. Here's a link, not sure if it will work as a direct link though.

https://addons.mozilla.org/extensions/moreinfo.php ?id=59

That's what extensions are for:
https://addons.mozilla.org/extensions/moreinfo.php ?id=59&vid=62&category=Popular

Yep, there's an extention for that: https://addons.mozilla.org/extensions/moreinfo.php ?id=59

Have you considered installing the User Agent Switcher extension for Firefox?

Google Caching and Wayback lookups. You could easily look URLs up by right-clicking on them.

Oh, wait, there is one.

/shameful plug

installing Firefox and Thunderbird ends up installing 2 copies of those basics on disk, and dragging 2 copies into RAM. If you're going to be using both during a session, the classic client is leaner.

The long term plans for mozilla involve XULrunner, which will provide a runtime enviorment which multiple XUL spps can share. (In other words, exactly what you're asking for. ^_^ ) At one point Firefox was going to switch to using XULRunner by 2.0, I'm not sure if that's still the plan.

More info about XULRunner can be found at the wiki here.

I've been using IE7 for months now Luna Blue

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2 Final//EN">

fraudeliminator Shows a toolbar that indicates whether the site you are at is really the one you think it is. Utilizes constantly-updated blacklists and artificial intelligence. Helps prevent phishing.

There you go. And the cool thing about FF is, that you can ADD to it. Without needing to wait until a big corp does it for you in a blackbox kindof way. (because the button is there it doesn't mean it's failproof or it actually works.)

• Mozilla Application Suite - Mozilla the web browser, mail client, etc*
• Mozilla Firefox - The mentioned applications, never browse the web without it*
• AOL for Mac OS X uses Gecko, why doesn't AOL for Windows is the eternal question.
• Aphrodite* Renegade project working on UI tweaks
• Beonex Communicator* - Another option to Mozilla, cross platform
• Camino for Mac OS X, Mozilla project for OSX
• CompuServe 7.0 for Windows and Mac OS X (The now AOL service)
• DocZilla for Windows and Linux, SGML/XML/HTML web browser.
• Epiphany for GNU/Linux (Default Gnome browser)
• Galeon for Linux (Old Default Gnome browser)
• IBM Web Browser for OS/2*
• Kazehakase for Linux is a more featured browser, plans more...
• ManyOne* 3D browser?
• Minimo (web browser for small devices)
• Netscape 6.0 and later versions* (of course)

And in other applications (like):
ActiveState Komodo (visual development environment for Perl, Python and more on Windows and Linux) [4] The Liferea (news aggregator for Linux), The Mozilla ActiveX Control (allows ActiveX developers to easily embed Gecko in applications) The Mozilla Calendar (calendar and personal information manager)* The Mozilla Thunderbird The (email/newsgroup client and news aggregator)* Nvu (a web authoring application)* and Gecko# for Windows (.NET Binding for Gecko)

* Also uses Gecko to render its entire user interface via XUL.

You can either choose to adopt the rendering engine for your own applications or hopefully in the future deploy it with rights management. Personally, I think that personalized installations are the next needed step. If admins can roll out Firefo

Firefox is built on xul, so any os that runs firefox can run your xul app.
http://www.mozilla.org/projects/xul/
http://www.xulplanet.com/

Also as to components you can use in your apps. There is the render engine:
http://www.mozilla.org/newlayout/
http://www.mozilla.org/projects/embedding/GRE.html
Or the script engine, rhino
http://www.mozilla.org/rhino/

Firefox is built on xul, so any os that runs firefox can run your xul app.
http://www.mozilla.org/projects/xul/
http://www.xulplanet.com/

Also as to components you can use in your apps. There is the render engine:
http://www.mozilla.org/newlayout/
http://www.mozilla.org/projects/embedding/GRE.html
Or the script engine, rhino
http://www.mozilla.org/rhino/

Firefox is built on xul, so any os that runs firefox can run your xul app.
http://www.mozilla.org/projects/xul/
http://www.xulplanet.com/

Also as to components you can use in your apps. There is the render engine:
http://www.mozilla.org/newlayout/
http://www.mozilla.org/projects/embedding/GRE.html
Or the script engine, rhino
http://www.mozilla.org/rhino/

Firefox is built on xul, so any os that runs firefox can run your xul app.
http://www.mozilla.org/projects/xul/
http://www.xulplanet.com/

Also as to components you can use in your apps. There is the render engine:
http://www.mozilla.org/newlayout/
http://www.mozilla.org/projects/embedding/GRE.html
Or the script engine, rhino
http://www.mozilla.org/rhino/

I am an amature web designer, I am self taught and have been doing more and more commercial work on the side, because people are wanting to use the cheap linux web space out there and need people familiar with software like Drupal.

Recently I have been working a bit with a graphics designer that uses a Mac and Adobe to do her work. She was surprised at some of the stuff I was able to do with open source software and admitted that if the software she used was available on Linux, she would seriously consider switching.

One last thought, with some corprate backing the Mozilla SVG project would probably take the web by storm.

Firefox should have it [SVG] by 1.5

Deer Park Alpha already has pretty good SVG support (JavaScript support is particularly interesting).

clicky clicky

It might be a bit twisted, but it might also get the job done simply...

I don't know where to go to check if this is on the roadmap or not

Try Google. mozilla svg + I'm Feeling Lucky = Mozilla SVG Project. From the page:

There has recently been an important change to SVG enabled builds: SVG is now enabled by default (Bug 292160).

Opera has native SVG now. Mozilla has it in the latest nightly builds. Safari will also have it soon, courtesy of the KSVG project for Konqueror/KDE.

IE? Who cares? If Microsoft doesn't follow suit, it's one more nail in their shiteware's coffin.