Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Domains

Domain: mozilla.org

Stories and comments across the archive that link to mozilla.org.

Comments · 17,579

  1. Re:What is this obsession with tabs? by Meshach · · Score: 4, Informative · on No IE7 For 2k, Now In Extended Service

    There are lots of ways to have tabs in earlier versions of IE without upgrading the operating system

    SlimBrowser is on that integrates into IE seamlessly and gives you tabs, pop up blacking, and all the other "obvious to everyone but ms" features

    Of course the better alternative is still available

  2. It's OK Windows 2000. by Comatose51 · · Score: 2, Funny · on No IE7 For 2k, Now In Extended Service
    There, there... It's OK. Firefox loves you. Firefox won't judge you. Just because you're 5 years old, it doesn't mean you can't have tabs.

    Come on. Just download Firefox and you can hang out with the other cool kids.

    Aw... Is that a smilie emoticon I see in your window?!

    [Mr. Burns] Excellent... [/Mr. Burns]

  3. Sure there is by Moderator · · Score: 0 · on History of Netscape and Mozilla

    Sure there is. Try reading this:

    http://www.mozilla.org/cvs.html

  4. Javascript is at 1.5, post misleading by markdowling · · Score: 1 · on Mozilla Extending Javascript?

    Mozilla have not "extended" the spec, merely their implementation of Javascript to take in 1.5 features.

    See here:
    http://developer-test.mozilla.org/docs/JavaScript

  5. Re:Eh, and who is going to support the oss...? by hankaholic · · Score: 3, Informative · on Using Computer Stores to Spread Open Source?
    To my knowledge, no one actually sells a (support) license or a retail box for any of these products. (Maybe OO.org... but definitely not FF or T-bird.) (emphasis mine)

    You should really ask someone to update mozilla.org then -- they seem to think that "[t]elephone support at 1-888-586-4539 is available for Firefox 0.9 and above, Thunderbird 0.8 and above, and final Mozilla release versions 1.5, 1.6, and above. $39.95 per incident." When you mention this to the webmaster, mention that you saw the text above at http://www.mozilla.org/support/.

    So, who is going to support these additional software packages? Who is going to be responsible for the software if/when it breaks, or if/when Firefox leads to a virus infecting the computer?

    Who is responsible if/when Internet Explorer breaks, or if/when it leads to a virus infecting the computer? Last I checked, Microsoft won't "be responsible" either, in terms of cleaning up messes they allow to be created through bugs in their software.

    Geeks often forget that a major part of the computer industry is support. [...] At least, when you have a licensed copy of MS office, and it goes whacko, you can call up MS and demand that they fix it. Can the same be said of the OSS that you listed?

    Support is often a consideration with enterprise-level deployments. For such cases, there are third parties that are more than happy to offer support for OSS software. Sun themselves offers support contracts for OpenOffice.

    For home users of Office, Microsoft offers two free phone support incidents, but only if your copy came from them. If it came preinstalled, you'll have to call your PC vendor (who will likely do very little to help) or pay Microsoft $35 per incident ($245 for "advanced issues"). I'd imagine that most people didn't buy a retail copy of Office, which means that there's no free support for the average user.

    and there is no 1-800 number to call for help, either.

    Microsoft offers an 800 number only for the fee-based support. If you bought a retail copy of Office (which is the example you gave), and are taking advantage of one of your two free incidents, you'll be calling (425) 635-7056.

    Maybe before citing the myriad of support options available from OEMs at reasonable costs to home users, you might consider the real-world availability to those users. Bundled software is up to the PC manufacturer to support, and generally their support ends by suggesting use of the system restore CD. This means that bundled software is virtually unsupported, and the average user isn't likely to pay tons of money for a retail box -- they'll borrow from a friend long before, and anyways are so used to being pushed aside by ineffectual support departments that they expect very little in terms of vendor support anyways.
  6. Re:make it tangible by Spoing · · Score: 3, Interesting · on Using Computer Stores to Spread Open Source?
    First of all the Mozilla project (for example) should produce a boxed version of their product suite.

    Normally, they do.

    The store is closed at the moment, though when it is open they do sell manuals, manuals with CDs, CDs, or a whole kit from the Mozilla store. I think I remember them giving discounts for bulk purchases, starting at 10 units. Wouldn't hurt to ask.

  7. Re:Browser wars spilling into mail by datadriven · · Score: 1 · on Browser Wars 2: Electric Boogaloo

    This extention is pretty good. fireFTP

  8. More links by jesser · · Score: 3, Informative · on Mozilla Extending Javascript?

    This entry in Asa Dotzler's blog contains links for downloading this release candidate of Deer Park Alpha 1.1.

    The article has links to New Web Developer Features and New Extension Developer Features. There's also a page listing New Browser Features and an unofficial page listing Notable bug fixes.

  9. More links by jesser · · Score: 3, Informative · on Mozilla Extending Javascript?

    This entry in Asa Dotzler's blog contains links for downloading this release candidate of Deer Park Alpha 1.1.

    The article has links to New Web Developer Features and New Extension Developer Features. There's also a page listing New Browser Features and an unofficial page listing Notable bug fixes.

  10. More links by jesser · · Score: 3, Informative · on Mozilla Extending Javascript?

    This entry in Asa Dotzler's blog contains links for downloading this release candidate of Deer Park Alpha 1.1.

    The article has links to New Web Developer Features and New Extension Developer Features. There's also a page listing New Browser Features and an unofficial page listing Notable bug fixes.

  11. All this nice new stuff... by Mitchell+Mebane · · Score: 1 · on Mozilla Extending Javascript?

    ...but no inline-block. At least, not according to this page. :(

  12. Re:Funny... I thought ECMAScript was an open stand by pomo+monster · · Score: 2, Informative · on Mozilla Extending Javascript?

    C'mon, mods, the parent poster makes a good point. It's only "flamebait" if you're ready to apologize for the hypocrisy of the Mozilla developers.

    For the record, the new methods are NOT ECMA standards, according to the Array object reference. In other words, developers relying on these methods will be locking themselves into Gecko, unless other vendors scramble to support them, which they will likely do in buggy and incomplete ways--which, incidentally, is exactly what standards (like ECMAScript) were supposed to prevent.

    I suspect we'll be seeing similar non-standard extensions to CSS and (X)HTML in the months and years to come, rendering the W3C more and more irrelevant. The standards armistice was always a nice dream, I guess, and it was good while it lasted. So much for that.

  13. Native XML is a very neat feature by MarkEst1973 · · Score: 3, Interesting · on Mozilla Extending Javascript?
    Using Rhino http://www.mozilla.org/rhino -- which already has the E4X functionality in the runtime -- you can stuff like this (using an html document as my sample xml):

    var html = <hmtl/>
    html.head.title = "my title";

    print(html);

    This prints as:

    <html>
    <head>
    <title>my title<title>
    <head>
    <html>

    Although this is a contrived example, I find the ability to access XML as native objects using dot-notation to be very convenient and useful.

  14. You know the answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful · on Mozilla Extending Javascript?

    Mozilla Extending Javascript = yes (read the posting)
    Are web designers going to use it = no since they like "write once, run everywhere"
    Will extension developers use it = yes
    Will anybody remember the person responsible for Javascript in the first place?
    Well, see for yourself, a document that he maintains Roadmap

  15. Re:Canvas in Firefox 1.1 Developer Preview Release by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative · on Mozilla Extending Javascript?

    Sorry, the link was http://developer-test.mozilla.org/docs/Drawing_Gra phics_with_Canvas

  16. Eudora by SgtChaireBourne · · Score: 1 · on Outlook, Evolution and Kontact Side-by-Side

    If you're stuck on Windows still, then Eudora is probably the best way to go. I'd pay for a Linux version if they had one. Though many others I know also like Thunderbird

  17. Re:Boooooooring! by timmyf2371 · · Score: 1 · on More Details on IE7 Tabs
    I don't like dealing with sites which don't work properly with browsers such as Firefox either, but in all honesty I find features such as tabbed browsing and popup blockers and Ctrl+L to select the address bar text are so much more of an advantage.

    I personally use IEView which adds a "View this page in IE" option to the rightclick menu for pages which do not work in Firefox.

  18. Learning from the original? by Metaphorically · · Score: 2, Interesting · on More Details on IE7 Tabs
    FTA:
    Currently, windows that have been customized, such as hiding a toolbar or making the window non-resizable, will default to opening in their own standalone frame, ... The rationale for opening only customized windows in a new frame is that this seems to correlate with scenarios where showing a window on top of the current window is desirable
    The interesting thing is that I read this blog post yesterday, then I also ran across something on the Firefox tips page. It basically says that by setting browser.link.open_newwindow.restriction to 2, Firefox will behave the same way. I think this is the default setting nowadays, because Fx already did this for me without my changing any prefs.

    I suppose it's a logical conclusion for anyone building tabbed browsing into a web browser, but when I first read the tip I was struck by the similarity in the reasoning.
  19. Like this1 going unpatched for 5 yr now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0 · on There Is No Safe Web Browser

    https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45375

    I would say more hackers have a field day looking for bugs using code analysis programs etc. Which ain't that easy with IE.

  20. There may not be any completley safe browser... by jvd · · Score: 1 · on There Is No Safe Web Browser

    But at least there are more secure http://www.mozilla.org/products/firefox ones...

  21. Re:Needs a better spellchecker. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0 · on 2-Year OpenOffice High School Case Study

    Right-click on a typed word inside a web form on any webpage to get a suggested spelling for that word. Then select the word from the popup menu to change it. The words are obtained in real-time over the Internet using Yahoo!'s Spelling Suggestion service.

    https://addons.mozilla.org/extensions/moreinfo.php ?application=firefox&category=Editing%20and%20Form s&numpg=10&id=485

  22. Re:Semantic Web? by smartdreamer · · Score: 1 · on Using the Semantic Web to Enhance Search
    Okay, you want more than words... I guess you ask to much. ;)

    Semantic web is not something you can thing of as a concrete application nor we can consider it mature. As you surely read, semantic web is an extention of the current web. So I can link you to firefox or some HTML editor. Joke aside, it is more complicated than that and if you want to embrass semantic web you should get to know XML, RDF and OWL (in this order). In fact, if you are not working to build sw, you should consider another approach. I suggest you to look at RSS there and foaf which are IMHO concrete, but limited, examples of semantic web working examples.

    As a web developper... try to generate web pages from RDF (mindswap as some tools) or XML (ala gentoo) source.

  23. Re:XML in IE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0 · on Netscape 8 Breaks IE XML

    They're mellowing their stance these days.

    Mozilla.org was launched in 1998. The first "quirks mode" was introduced in 1999, and that certainly wasn't the first concession to compatibility. I could probably dig up earlier stuff if I bothered.

    So basically, the most you can claim is that Mozilla were attempting perfect standards support from 1998-1999, and that from 1999-2005, the majority of the time Mozilla.org has existed, they have been working towards a mixture of standards compliance and compatibility. That is a far cry from "mellowing their stance these days", and claiming that they have a "stubborn insistence on absolute compliance" is at odds with the facts.

    Suppose your ISP hosts your web site for you, but is unkind enough to provide incorrect MIME type information for XML files you store on the web space they host. (Note that this is something over which you, the ISP subscriber, have no direct control.)

    I've been in that situation before. I emailed tech support and they fixed it. BFD.

    Even if we take it as a given that the ISP is unresponsive and clueless, and that you, as a web developer, are unable to procure the basic necessities of web hosting, it's still a stupid thing to argue about. Why? Because Internet Explorer is moving away from its laxness.

    Plenty of clueless web developers thought "Meh, I can't be bothered using media types correctly and it works in Internet Explorer, so I guess I'll just blame Mozilla (and every other browser in existence)". Then their stuff broke because Microsoft partially fixed this bug in their HTTP implementation when they released XP service pack 2.

    You are criticising Mozilla for not going out of spec when every implementation but one follows the spec, and even the one that doesn't follow the spec is getting fixed so that it does. Obviously Mozilla are evil standards nazis!

  24. Speedy by AKAImBatman · · Score: 5, Informative · on Official BitTorrent Search Opens

    BitTorrent search however proves with first tests [that it is] as...Google...fast.

    So fast that the browser times out on a search for "mozilla". Hopefully they'll get those kinks worked out soon. :-/

    Bandwidth generously provided by Hot or Not

    That explains everything. ;-)

    Will he get sued?

    I still think that anyone trying to sue Bittorrent or a generic search engine would have a hard time of it. Bittorrent has so many legal uses that it just isn't funny. Here's some example of legal torrents:

    Privateer Remake
    OpenOffice
    Star Trek: New Voyages (legal fan made)
    FreeBSD
    Star Wars: Revelations (legal fan made)
    Xandros Free Edition
    Mozilla Firefox
    Doom 3 Demo
    America's Army (now for Linux and OSX)

    I could go on, but I think you get the point.

  25. Re:Nokia chooses Opera, not Firefox, for browser by Raphael · · Score: 1 · on Nokia's Linux Handheld
    Nokia still chooses Opera, not Firefox, for its browser.

    Hmmm... Did you check Gtk+ WebCore, sponsored by Nokia?

    They also contributed a bit to Minimo although they probably do not consider it to be fully usable yet.

  26. Re:Somebody call a whaaambulance. by benjamindees · · Score: 0 · on Inquirer Blasts Mozilla for Microsoft-Style Bashing

    1.0.4 had been out for a week already before Netscape launched 8.0.

    This is, again, wrong. Netscape 8.0 was released on the 19th, three days before Firefox 1.0.4 on the 22nd.

  27. Re:Totally Justified by linuxci · · Score: 1 · on Inquirer Blasts Mozilla for Microsoft-Style Bashing
    BTW for the Mozilla(TM) Trademark Policy I'd just like to say I'm just giving my views on why the trademark policy is the way it is and based on the blog post I linked to previously I do think that Netscape is violating them if they've not got permission.


    I'm not saying I agree or disagree on the policy, a lot of things I think are a bit too restrictive IMO, but it doesn't bother me because the underlying software is free even if the branding isn't.

  28. Re:i could be wrong... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0 · on PalmOne to become Palm Again; PalmSource & Linux

    Besides, real projects change their name every few months, just to keep people on their toes. Wake me up when they merge the Netscape and Firefox code to form FirEScape.

  29. Re:AJAX will also kick your ass by AstroDrabb · · Score: 2, Informative · on AJAX Buzzword Reinvigorates Javascript
    Huh? Why don't you look for a real DOM ref? That one is not standards compliant. So if you only care about crappy IE, you are OK, otherwise, you will get a bunch of crap.

    For example, click on the first link in your example. It takes you to "DHTML Collections". It lists "all" as a collection. "all" is not a DOM collection. It is MS specific crap that break compatibility between browsers and makes your web app only work in IE.

    Here is a _real_ DOM reference. This one is standards compliant and will work with the major browsers out there.

  30. Re:AJAX will also kick your ass by NutscrapeSucks · · Score: 1 · on AJAX Buzzword Reinvigorates Javascript

    Agreed about MSDN.

    If it says it is not part of any standard, that basically means not to expect it to work in anything but IE

    Actually, there's a lot of DOM that is commonly supported but has never been standardized. window.open() being an obvious example. I've cross-checked stuff against the Nutscrape 4 docs, which is close to the common baseline for most browsers. (except for layers).
    http://devedge-temp.mozilla.org/library/manuals/20 00/javascript/1.3/reference/frames.html

  31. Well, Safari's Javascript is pretty anemic ... by forrest · · Score: 1 · on AJAX Buzzword Reinvigorates Javascript
    I never could get my Hanzi Quiz program to work under Safari, and that's just local javascript.

    It's possible the latest version has caught up by now, but I found quite recently that I couldn't use a function as the replacement in String.replace() (like perl's s///e).

    The only conclusion I could reach after banging my head against a wall a lot about that browser is that if to do serous Javascript programming, you just have to forget about Safari.

    One day they'll catch up, I'm sure ... but there need to be apps out there which people want to use before Apple realizes that their precious browser is broken. Let's go ahead and put them out there.

  32. Re:thanks, slashdot by Dasch · · Score: 1 · on AJAX Buzzword Reinvigorates Javascript

    Hey, I just saw this on Mozilla Update: NoScript

    What a coincidence, eh?

  33. Re:thanks, slashdot by Dasch · · Score: 1 · on AJAX Buzzword Reinvigorates Javascript

    Hey, I just saw this on Mozilla Update: NoScript

    What a coincidence, eh?

  34. Re:thanks, slashdot by rebug · · Score: 1 · on AJAX Buzzword Reinvigorates Javascript

    What Firefox needs is full-blown per-site preferences. It's scheduled for 2.0, so we'll be waiting a while for it.

    OmniWeb and Safari (with PithHelmet) both offer a full set of preferences for every site I visit, something I can't live without in Firefox.

  35. Re:AJAX Won't Deliver... by Sparr0 · · Score: 1 · on AJAX Buzzword Reinvigorates Javascript

    This site best viewed in a Browser That Works Better than Internet Explorer.

  36. Re:What will happen to Mozilla.org? by Fittysix · · Score: 1 · on Time Warner to Spin Off AOL?

    The Mozilla Foundation is a completely independent entity and no longer has ties to AOL/Netscape other than the fact that (I belive) a lot of coders are employed by time-warner.

    http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/

  37. Re:I just wish they'd finally use... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0 · on Google's New Personalized Homepage

    You know, somebody actually did file an enhancement bug on this. They unfortunately made themselves look like an idiot, and I doubt the bug will get confirmed. It's not a bad idea, except I am not sure on what level MoFo has control over the Firefox start page on Google's servers. The bug is located here: Bug 29481


    Assuming that MoFo has no control over the content on that page, and that it is completely under the purview of Google, that bug is invalid anyway. Anyway, there you go for what it is worth.

  38. Automatic updates by POWRSURG · · Score: 2, Informative · on Netscape Releases Security Update

    I installed Netscape 8 the day it came out for testing purposes. I saw this story, went to Netscape with their default skin and found they had nothing similiar to the Firefox's red ! to alert me that updates were necessary. I went to Tools->Advanced->Software Update and found Automatically Download and install updates was checked by default, so I checked my UA string to find it was still Netscape 8.0. Went back to Software Update and ran Check Now and it did not find any updates. Switched to their other theme (I do appreciate it coming with two themes provided for users to choose from) and found no icon next to that throbber either (as one might expect). Will this be turned on/fixed in the future, or was the functionality for this in the 17 MB minimum hard drive space system requirements difference between it and Firefox?

    This coupled with the fact that Firefox themes/extensions do not work and the fact that it has twice the recommended system requirement for processor speed and memory (which seems accurate as it seems slower than Firefox and I am somewhere in between Firefox and Netscape's recoomended CPU speed) are just a few of the reasons I will not switch back.

  39. Re:And this is a good idea WHY? by masdog · · Score: 1 · on Netscape Releases Security Update

    I think there is a firefox plugin that copies the link, opens another application, and pastes it for you.

    https://addons.mozilla.org/extensions/moreinfo.php ?id=35&application=firefox

  40. AdBlock by empaler · · Score: 2, Informative · on Google's New Personalized Homepage

    Link

    I love that extension.

  41. Re:Altavista by Professional+Slacker · · Score: 1 · on Google Might Disappear in Five Years

    You sir need AdBlock, cleans things right up.

  42. Re:Firefox bit torrent support by joebutton · · Score: 1 · on Trackerless BitTorrent Beta Posted
    Someone should write an extention for Firefox that gives the download manager bit torrent support

    This has been thought of before:

  43. Re:Uhh... what? by jani · · Score: 1 · on Which is Better, Firefox or Opera?
    He also doesn't mention the HIGHLY obnoxious "best guess" rendering - Opera STARTS to render a page as soon as it has any data at all, then re-renders as more data comes in. Net result? You can play tag with the page elements as they move around your screen. In my experience, Firefox starts to render pages a tick or two after Opera, but tends to finish rendering a tick or two before Opera.


    Firefox has this annoying behaviour, too. The problem is especially noticeable with long tables. Firefox starts loading the table top to bottom, and rearranges the width of the table columns depending on what the next row looks like.

    Try clicking on a link, button or selecting some text, and you'll end up clicking something that was above, to the left, below, to the right, or wherever in relation to what you really intended doing.

    What Firefox has that Opera doesn't, is that restoring from full-screen mode annoyingly results in Firefox disappearing completely (Debian sarge or Slackware 9, standard XFree86 installation, reproducible every time, any Firefox version). The process is still running, but there is no window anymore.

    This is particularly annoying, considering that F11 is very close to backspace, which I tend to use often when filling out forms.
  44. Re:Uhh... what? by TheShadowzero · · Score: 0 · on Which is Better, Firefox or Opera?

    There is a system. It's called going to the Firefox/Thunderbird/Mozilla whitelist page.

  45. Re:Uhh... what? by Thaelon · · Score: 1 · on Which is Better, Firefox or Opera?
    I used to be an avid opera user until I was hired by a company that does web development. I had to switch to firefox to evade ridicule.

    I have found extensions to do most of the things I liked about opera. But there is still stuff missing, such as     reorganizing tabs (supposedly taken care of next ff version). The quick prefs thing is a really big thing for me, but for some reason firefox users don't care. FF doesn't let you control cookies as easily as you are able to in opera. The disabling of images is something I used a lot more than I thought I would. Saving sessions was awesome. I'm sure there's an extension for that somewhere. Crash recovery was nifty, though crashes were rare. Opera also overrides the replacing of the status bar text [Tools->Options->Web Features->Advanced->Uncheck Hide status bar text], so you always know what you are clicking on before you click on it.

    And the transfer window is a big pile of crap in mozilla. Seriously that would probably be my number one gripe. That and its habit of saving files as .part, and delete them if the file fails to transfer fully. Redownloading a several hundred meg file is irritating, so I find I use wget just to avoid going through firefox whenever possible.

    Another thing that aggravates me is when I'll open a bunch of links in separate tabs to read in a few moments, then 2 minutes later a window pops up saying the server couldn't be reached     [about:config in address bar, then change "browser.xul.error_pages.enabled" to true]. But when I go over to the tab, the url bar is blank, so I have no idea which links I clicked on that couldn't be reached. In Opera, even if the page doesn't load, the url bar still has the location you tried to visit, so you can see if the link was typoed or if you even care in the first place.

    Opera never registers right clicks on web pages that pop up those copyright notices because it interferes with mouse gestures. There's no way to disable that in firefox that I'm aware of without finding the javascript options in prefs.

    Lastly, I hate that firefox doesn't obey normal unix copy and paste rules. There's no option to right click in a text field and delete everything in it without highlighting the text that is already there. In opera you just click in the box and type ctrl+U. This is particularly annoying when I'm messing with phpmyadmin.

    But at the end of the day, here I am using firefox. What can I say. The price is right.


    Links to extensions for desired features and []s are mine.
  46. Re:Uhh... what? by Thaelon · · Score: 1 · on Which is Better, Firefox or Opera?
    I used to be an avid opera user until I was hired by a company that does web development. I had to switch to firefox to evade ridicule.

    I have found extensions to do most of the things I liked about opera. But there is still stuff missing, such as     reorganizing tabs (supposedly taken care of next ff version). The quick prefs thing is a really big thing for me, but for some reason firefox users don't care. FF doesn't let you control cookies as easily as you are able to in opera. The disabling of images is something I used a lot more than I thought I would. Saving sessions was awesome. I'm sure there's an extension for that somewhere. Crash recovery was nifty, though crashes were rare. Opera also overrides the replacing of the status bar text [Tools->Options->Web Features->Advanced->Uncheck Hide status bar text], so you always know what you are clicking on before you click on it.

    And the transfer window is a big pile of crap in mozilla. Seriously that would probably be my number one gripe. That and its habit of saving files as .part, and delete them if the file fails to transfer fully. Redownloading a several hundred meg file is irritating, so I find I use wget just to avoid going through firefox whenever possible.

    Another thing that aggravates me is when I'll open a bunch of links in separate tabs to read in a few moments, then 2 minutes later a window pops up saying the server couldn't be reached     [about:config in address bar, then change "browser.xul.error_pages.enabled" to true]. But when I go over to the tab, the url bar is blank, so I have no idea which links I clicked on that couldn't be reached. In Opera, even if the page doesn't load, the url bar still has the location you tried to visit, so you can see if the link was typoed or if you even care in the first place.

    Opera never registers right clicks on web pages that pop up those copyright notices because it interferes with mouse gestures. There's no way to disable that in firefox that I'm aware of without finding the javascript options in prefs.

    Lastly, I hate that firefox doesn't obey normal unix copy and paste rules. There's no option to right click in a text field and delete everything in it without highlighting the text that is already there. In opera you just click in the box and type ctrl+U. This is particularly annoying when I'm messing with phpmyadmin.

    But at the end of the day, here I am using firefox. What can I say. The price is right.


    Links to extensions for desired features and []s are mine.
  47. Re:Ads by Ziviyr · · Score: 1 · on Which is Better, Firefox or Opera?

    Of course, for Opera fans, you can add ads to Firefox!

  48. Re:opera by Will2k_is_here · · Score: 1 · on Which is Better, Firefox or Opera?

    You have to edit your user.js to show you the additional option to force any window to open in a new tab.
    http://www.mozilla.org/support/firefox/tips.html#b eh_reuse

  49. Google search box by Saucepan · · Score: 1 · on Which is Better, Firefox or Opera?
    FF has more little things that annoy me - is there an easy way to increase the size of the Google search box?
    I don't know if I'd go so far as to call it "easy", but you can adjust the size of the Google search bar by editing some CSS in your profile directory.
  50. Use MathML fonts by jvj24601 · · Score: 3, Informative · on Free STIX Fonts to be Released in September

    http://www.mozilla.org/projects/mathml/fonts/

    They are freely downloadable (free as in beer), and they have the backing of being used and tested by the Mozilla foundation.