Slashdot Mirror

We do not guarantee that any source code or executable code available from the mozilla.org domain is Year 2000 compliant.

We've been in the year 2000 for a while now. How can an organization continue to release code that has not been tested to comply with four digit dates? This seems like a disaster waiting to happen.

If you haven't tried it already, take a look at Camino (formerly Chimera). I've used it under MacOS X for almost a year now and use it as my full time browser on my iBook. It's fast, has the gecko engine with a nice Aqua interface and beats the pants off of Mozilla in terms of speed in my opinion. It's also another reason why I don't know what all the fuss is over Safari. Feh.. more chrome. It's like Java just came out and people are abusing the chrome skins again at Apple these days. Why on Earth didn't they stick with the sweet Aqua interface on everything??

According to the roadmap, after releasing a stable version on which other browsers can be based, they're moving away from Seamonkey (the suite) to an architecture like that of Mozilla Firebird and Thunderbird.

Does that mean we can hang the last release of the Mozilla suite with a simple html page? (bugzilla link, either disable referrer or copy&paste)

Try this on for size: Mozilla Firebird.

It's so strange. I look at the writeup for the new Netscape release, and when the poster talks about the new features, the links they provide are links to mozilla.org pages. I look at the Netscape main page and I can't even tell that they make a browser. The "Downloads" link is tucked away in the upper-left corner. Even today, when they're releasing a new version, there's no hint of it even on their main page!! Instead the big deal is "10 things everyone should do before turning 30". Whaa?? Then, there's the awful pain of trying to install the Netscape version. The last time I installed a version of the Netscape-branded Mozilla, I had AOL crap littering my system everywhere.

On the other hand, when I go to the Mozilla site everything is clear. It's obvious where to download the version of Mozilla I want for the platform I want. It's also normally 2 or 3 versions ahead of the Netscape-branded release, and the install process is clean and painless.

Given all that, who are the poor sods downloading and installing Netscape?? I guess they have enough knowledge of computers to be able to install an alternative to IE, but not enough to be able to know about Mozilla? Can there really be more than a handfull of these people, and can't they be rescued and re-educated?

...for one thing, you can choose to install it without the mail/news or IRC chat client at all, cutting down on the size. Don't use the email, you don't need the Palm sync -- but those who do might appreciate it.

If you get the browser, then you still get Composer with it at minimum. If you want a browser only, then feel free to contribute to the development of Mozilla Firebird, which is even more streamlined than the browser-only install.

Chill out, the Moz developers know that bloat is a common complaint, and they're doing what they can about it. But one thing at a time, since every feature you don't want is one some other user can't live without.

Firebird and its brothers Thunderbird, Waterbird, and Monkeybird (OK, I made up those last two) will eventually be the components that make up the Mozilla suite (check the Mozilla roadmap) and thus, unless AOL decides to pull the plug, will be the next version of Netscape as well. So yes, eventually this will happen.

Firebird is great, but it still has quite a few crashers and trivial bugs that need to be ironed out before it's thrown out to the non-geek masses. It is only at version 0.6, after all.

http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla/releases/mozill a1.4/

A full reload is pointless on most sites. Why bother reloading title.gif when you want to see if there are any new slashdot stories? It's a waste of bandwidth.

It sucks that the shift-reload trick is undocumented, but you could easily fix that.

This is my 700th post. Hooray for me!

The new version is based on Mozilla 1.4, which is due out later today

Mozilla 1.4 is out too. jason

One of the goals of Perl 6 is to make non-trivial projects possible. That's good. The way it's being done is bad. Perl was once a lightweight, extremely flexible language. Now it's become a huge ugly monster. People wanted OO, so a nasty hack was bolted on top to allow some semblance of it. Now this nasty hack is being expanded. Sure, the code's different, but the basic form is the same. Kludge upon kludge upon kludge; I'd much rather have a nice, clean, pure language (and not one with loads of irritating whitespace thank you very much).

The same goes for the syntax. All the switching between $, @ and % is really irritating (ask a newbie how to get at the length of the keys array of a hash inside a hash, for example), and the changes proposed for 6 are just making this worse -- it seems that Larry, in his infinite wisdom, wants to prefix every data type with a different hard-to-type character. Perl was only designed for the three data types, and adding more is a mess.

Perl 6 is a complete rewrite, but it keeps all the mess which has accumulated over the previous versions. This is not good. Sure, my const int $var = 27; may look neat (in the same way that, say, Pascal does), but $var isn't entirely constant, or entirely an integer, it's just a hack which makes it sort of behave like one. The whole thing is an exercise in pseudo-computer science masturbation with little real purpose except to please the managers who dislike the one thing that makes Perl special.

On a similar note is regexes. I'm an avid fan of regular expressions simply because a nondeterministic finite automata is far more flexible than linear code. However, Larry must have been smoking that cheap $2 crack when he wrote this. Does he want Perl 6 to be flex or something?

I won't be going on to use 6. It's a nice idea, but it's completely unnecessary. It won't make large projects any easier to manage (the language is still, at heart, an almighty hack -- an impressive one, but still a hack). It won't make OO any cleaner. It won't make development any faster. To put it bluntly, Perl scripts will still look less beautiful than our friend Mr Goatse. I'd prefer to use a language which has always been pure synthesis of science and engineering, not some half-baked imposter.

Perl 6 will be nice, but I'm guessing it will be the end of Perl. It can't do what it wants to do whilst still being based upon a nasty mess. There are now other options, which provide all of Perl's power and none of the mess. Sorry, but *BSD ^H^H^H^H Perl is dying. Larry is buggering it up the ass without lubricants, just like Shoeboy is doing to Larry's daughter.

As I wrote only late last night, using Bayesian classification with only two categories (spam and "non-spam") is somewhat short-sighted, since if properly trained, a Bayes classifier can do a much better job than ordinary mail filtering (procmail, Mozilla or Mail.app filters, you name it).

In fact, if I had to bet on the next "killer apps", mail sorting and RSS filtering based on Bayesian classification would be right at the top of my list, based solely on the actual time-saving benefits for users. And I can't see any reason for Bayesian filtering not being included in Mozilla Mail and Apple's own (revamped) Mail.app.

I have to use Outlook at work, and after setting up Outclass (which requires POPfile) with several "buckets" to classify my corporate e-mail by project and field, I'm definetly not going back. Outlook, even with extensive use of Rules Wizard and categories, simply cannot cope with the diverse kinds of project-related e-mail I swap with colleagues, and Outclass is the only thing I could find that could deal with Exchange, PST folders and multiple Bayesian "buckets" categories.

Come on, do the right thing and tell Apple and The Mozilla Project that you want configurable Bayesian filtering on their mail clients.

As I wrote only late last night, using Bayesian classification with only two categories (spam and "non-spam") is somewhat short-sighted, since if properly trained, a Bayes classifier can do a much better job than ordinary mail filtering (procmail, Mozilla or Mail.app filters, you name it).

In fact, if I had to bet on the next "killer apps", mail sorting and RSS filtering based on Bayesian classification would be right at the top of my list, based solely on the actual time-saving benefits for users. And I can't see any reason for Bayesian filtering not being included in Mozilla Mail and Apple's own (revamped) Mail.app.

I have to use Outlook at work, and after setting up Outclass (which requires POPfile) with several "buckets" to classify my corporate e-mail by project and field, I'm definetly not going back. Outlook, even with extensive use of Rules Wizard and categories, simply cannot cope with the diverse kinds of project-related e-mail I swap with colleagues, and Outclass is the only thing I could find that could deal with Exchange, PST folders and multiple Bayesian "buckets" categories.

Come on, do the right thing and tell Apple and The Mozilla Project that you want configurable Bayesian filtering on their mail clients.

Uh... why do you need this when you have bookmark shortcuts/keywords?

Generic solutions sometimes "just work."

And Control alt delete helps.
And reinstalling ..... your favourite OS...helps
And going back to i.e. 6.0 sp1 helps
And installing the latest SP helps.
(and not discussing this on /. helps)

AND I WAS NOT TALKING ABOUT BUGZILLA! Maintainers at the mozilla project donÂt care about all the bugs i note at slashdot. Hey, I cannot even link to bugzilla.

If i check bugzilla there are currently 343 bugs open that are:

blocker or critical
and
assigned. (i did not select new 1441 bugs because they still contain dupes, or bugs that need te be cleaned).

That is a LOT! and they want 1.4 to be the next stable release for a longer time. I think it is still time forsome bugsquasing before releasing is.

LotÂs of these bugs are cross platform bugs (example:it wont build on true64,aix)

One bad bug i want to note is:209896
Bug: mozilla crashes if upgraded from 1.3.1 to RC2.
workround: uninstall first.

Yeah right: so every bug somebody calls (on some generic internet forum) the response will be: delete you mozilla directory first, then reinstall.

Then what about Thunderbird?

Errr... they seem to have pulled RC3 off the releases page. Last minute changes?

Firebird a subproject of Mozilla is a light weight version of Mozilla seems a lot better bet to me.

Actually, the current Mozilla Roadmap clearly states this goal: Deliver a Mozilla 1.4 milestone that can replace the 1.0 branch as the stable development path, then move on to make riskier changes during 1.5 and 1.6. The major changes after 1.4 involve switching to Mozilla Firebird and Thunderbird, and working aggressively on the next two items.

So actually, that's where we're heading :)

This isn't a troll. I browse with either Safari or a Mozilla derivative, and use xhtml+css whenever I have to make a web page. That being said, if marketshare is the driving factor, then there's only one answer: MSIE for Windows. If you check out, say, Google's Zeitgeist survey, it's clear that the overwhelming majority of web surfers use MSIE, and that's what you have to cater too. Unfortunately for the rest of us.

This isn't a troll. I browse with either Safari or a Mozilla derivative, and use xhtml+css whenever I have to make a web page. That being said, if marketshare is the driving factor, then there's only one answer: MSIE for Windows. If you check out, say, Google's Zeitgeist survey, it's clear that the overwhelming majority of web surfers use MSIE, and that's what you have to cater too. Unfortunately for the rest of us.

Yeah, me too. But unlike the Mac, I could not run Office, Photoshop, function as a web server, surf the web, compile code
, run bioinformatics searches, do molecular modeling
and have wonderful text aliasing all at the same time.

If you want something Safari-like for Windows try out Mozilla Firebird. Sure its a beta release, but its running solid on this Windows box and it "feels" a lot like Safari does on my iBook. The tabs are great, popup blocker works well, and its fast. The Options menu is very simple and mac-like as well. Good luck! --Ryan

Second Life will initially be available for Windows-based PCs, with Mac and Linux versions following by the end of 2003.

This page not only resizes your browser window, it makes the fuxoring page too small. So I resize it bigger, then click another thumbnail and it again resizes itself too small.

It seems that the chart linked to has no mentions of Mozilla/Netscape 7, which imo probably has the best support for the widest range of standards. Here's a page detailing the various XML stuff Mozilla supports.

http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=207545

I'd imagine that one of the most difficult parts of debugging for a large OSS project is dealing with the deluge of bug reports.

If you are using a relatively standards-based browser, and connecting to HTTPS servers, you are fine.

SSL protects against man-in-the-middle attacks through the utilization of certificate authorities. If someone intercepts your connection, they must present your browser a signed certificate. If they present the one the original site uses, they must have the corresponding private key, which is near impossible. If they present a different certificate, your browser will pop-up a warning dialog informing you of this.

The breakdown can only occur if a CA is compromised, or there is a security breach at the company providing the service over HTTPS.

Long story short, use a good browser, and pay attention to those warnings, and you'll be golden.

Ever since I started using Bayesian filtering (via Mozilla Mail and SpamBayes), I haven't even cared how any other techniques compare. It's that good!

For me, Google is no longer a logo and a text box. It is a tiny icon and a text box near the upper-right corner of my screen. That's even simpler, and nicer to use. Plus, I can use the same box to search Amazon.com, Everything2, and dmoz.org, all very easily and without having to worry about ads. Now that's what I call browser innovation!

(JavaScript=rhino?) will stay a mystery.

I can't recall where I read it (probably in my well-worn copy of the third edition), but I've heard it's a shout-out to the open-source version of JavaScript for Java, Rhino.

More info at http://www.mozilla.org/rhino/

nnooiissee: So just to clarify, 1.4 will ship with mng support, correct?

Stuart Parmenter: Yes. This was landed on the trunk and will not effect 1.4 at all.

nnooiissee: So just to clarify, 1.4 will ship with mng support, correct?

Stuart Parmenter: Yes. This was landed on the trunk and will not effect 1.4 at all.

This one 133132 is the worst for me. I have to reboot about once or twice per day.

Of course, I have my PC on 24x7, so this may make things worse.

What? Thunderbird has everything that is currently in Mozilla Mail 1.4. The only difference is a better looking interface ( much like Mozilla Firebird ) and redesigned preferences screen ( also like Firebird ). Check out the roadmap for Thunderbird.

Thankfully, it will still be in 1.4, but it is removed for all future versions.

If you want it back, vote for this bug!

Can you give me a link to the ones for Linux. This is where I believe it's supposed to be. However, I can't seem to find a recent build, and I'm having diffuculty compiling it with the SVG support from scratch.

I have been trying to keep up with Mozilla developments, and have noticed here that there are still bugs to be resolved that are apparently blockers (or go straight to the bug list). The strange thing is, there was mentioned a possibility of rebranding RC2 as final, according to the recent staff meeting minutes (*1.4*, Point 3).

I find it strange that the Mozilla team is prepared to release 1.4 (which will replace the 1.0.x branch) with previously-declared blocker bugs still floating around.

BlackGriffen

BlackGriffen

Not to mention the major burst of insanity that surrounded the removal of MNG/JNG support, two perfectly useful new formats.

Mind-boggling Bugzilla discussion of this is here - http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195280

--riney

Threaded mail is a handy feature, especially when following multiple discussions on mailing lists. And, though Mozilla supports threading, it just doesn't remember the threaded expansion state.

So, you could turn on threading (View -> Sort By -> Threaded). Then, you'd probably expand the threads (View -> Threads -> Expand All Threads). So far, so good. But, if you switch to another folder and come back to the original one, the threads won't be expanded anymore.

This is bug 64426 and you can vote for it if you like (of course, you'll need a free Bugzilla account to vote). You may need to copy-n-paste the links into your URL bar, as Bugzilla doesn't accept referrerrs from Slashdot.

Threaded mail is a handy feature, especially when following multiple discussions on mailing lists. And, though Mozilla supports threading, it just doesn't remember the threaded expansion state.

So, you could turn on threading (View -> Sort By -> Threaded). Then, you'd probably expand the threads (View -> Threads -> Expand All Threads). So far, so good. But, if you switch to another folder and come back to the original one, the threads won't be expanded anymore.

This is bug 64426 and you can vote for it if you like (of course, you'll need a free Bugzilla account to vote). You may need to copy-n-paste the links into your URL bar, as Bugzilla doesn't accept referrerrs from Slashdot.

Threaded mail is a handy feature, especially when following multiple discussions on mailing lists. And, though Mozilla supports threading, it just doesn't remember the threaded expansion state.

So, you could turn on threading (View -> Sort By -> Threaded). Then, you'd probably expand the threads (View -> Threads -> Expand All Threads). So far, so good. But, if you switch to another folder and come back to the original one, the threads won't be expanded anymore.

This is bug 64426 and you can vote for it if you like (of course, you'll need a free Bugzilla account to vote). You may need to copy-n-paste the links into your URL bar, as Bugzilla doesn't accept referrerrs from Slashdot.

Threaded mail is a handy feature, especially when following multiple discussions on mailing lists. And, though Mozilla supports threading, it just doesn't remember the threaded expansion state.

So, you could turn on threading (View -> Sort By -> Threaded). Then, you'd probably expand the threads (View -> Threads -> Expand All Threads). So far, so good. But, if you switch to another folder and come back to the original one, the threads won't be expanded anymore.

This is bug 64426 and you can vote for it if you like (of course, you'll need a free Bugzilla account to vote). You may need to copy-n-paste the links into your URL bar, as Bugzilla doesn't accept referrerrs from Slashdot.

It was in 1.4rc1 also, so it's technically not that "new" for this release. Check the release notes of 1.4rc1 here.

As said by other poster, it's just on 2000, XP, 2003, NT. Not a generic fix.

And this bug (23679) is (was) the 3rd most voted one and the oldest one on the top 10 (most voted). Lot of things and temp workaround on the bug page.

Seems that, even with opensource, what the users wants is not met.