Slashdot Mirror

Unfortunately the net installer will not find it, but there is a complete set of rpms (including SRPMs) for Redhat 8.0 here. It appears to install over Mozilla 1.0.1 (distributed by Redhat) quite nicely.

Well, someone had to do it. You can find mirrors here: http://mozilla.org/mirrors.html

Welcome to the wonderful world of Phoenix

What about folks who pay-per-byte for network bandwidth?
- prefetching is a browser feature; users should be able to disable it easily

Is there a preference to disable link prefetching?
- Yes, there is a hidden preference that you can set to disable link prefetching. Add this line to your prefs.js file located in your Mozilla profile directory: user_pref("network.prefetch-next", false);

Although I admit link-prefetching may be good, but if it becomes a on-bydefault feature in most browsers, the ones that it will damage are the content providers. Those cannot turn it off (and actually do not have anyway of knowing whether their content is being prefetched (and not potentially viewed at all) or not. Well, I am just whining. Generally, Mozilla seems to be doing great :)

For those of you who are interested, here is a link to the new roadmap

source: mozillazine.org

The iCal format is compatible with the Mozilla Calendar format, so this is site can potentially be useful to nearly all /.

scripsit 1010011010:

Anyone know of a way to do something like this with Mozilla?

<br style="page-break-after: always"/>

Mozilla should support this, as it is valid CSS2 (see the CSS2 spec). Have you filed a bug against it?

Mozilla, fast, standard complient, per site image blocking, pop-up blocker, per site cookie blocker, tabbed browsing, what more could you want? (oh yeah its themeable too, make it look like IE even).

Mozilla, the big one
Phoenix, it's smaller brother
K-Meleon, the smallest of them all
Mozilla comes with nice mail program too.
J.

Mozilla, the big one
Phoenix, it's smaller brother
K-Meleon, the smallest of them all
Mozilla comes with nice mail program too.
J.

Anything from Mozilla.org. Just find one that makes you feel warm and fuzzy, hug it and squeeze it and call it George.

Personally, I like Phoenix.

I'm using mozilla with the internet explorer skin. It works great, though there's a little hack you have to do to get the home button back into the main toolbar.

Mozilla is a better browser than i.e. in a lot of ways (tabs, standards compliance, etc.), but the big one for me is that i.e. is essentially an ad delivery systerm. So there's not much we can do to selectively block cookies, or graphics from specific servers, or pop-ups, etc. And I don't like the prospect of being at the mercy of unscrupulous companies who wish to make changes without my knowledge or consent. (Actually, what I'd really like is a way to get rid of i.e. entirely on w2k/xp.)

That explains mozilla, but why the i.e. skin? Well, the default mozilla skins are not exactly beautiful. And my wife is highly resistant to change of any kind when it comes to her computer, and with the i.e. skin I was able to switch her w2k machine to mozilla without even a word of protest. Of course, at this point she's so used to tabbed browsing and the pop-up blocker that she wouldn't switch back anyway. And me, I don't have to worry about some exploit using i.e. to take her computer down.

Actually, I even use the i.e. skin on my linux box. Just for the perverse fun of it, I guess. I also have a nice wallpaper from w2k of a diver against a blue sky. It's very spiffy, though naturally I GIMPed out the little windows logo first :-).

The mozilla patch still leaves many problems (viruses / slowdown / MSN popup ads / VBS script emails / BSODs).

A far more complete patch can be found here.

I understand that this security/usability patch will correct virtually all the problems with IE to which the BBS objects. Of course, it's a pretty complete patch...

Phoenix and it fookin rocks.

Nah, no one wants free software to go away except vendors of crappy closed source software. Free and Open software folks can have their differences but the commonality is much greater.

Since (almost) noone is making money doing it, the primary form of compensation is ego gratification.

What a crock, lots of people are making a good living with free software. Even pioneers such as RMS got by. Now that free software is universally recognized as superior to other software, there is a much larger demand. Show me someone who does not get some ego gratification from their job and I'll show you someone who should be doing something else.

If someone doesn't get their way, they throw a temper tantrum and go off on their own.

This is unique to free software? -Bangs his fist and insults a federal judge- Have you ever seen the monkeyboy dance? If your eyes don't convince you, just read this article. I would never ever want to work at a place like that. It looks like they treat each other worse than they treat the rest of the world.

The end result is forked code trees, huge amounts of duplicated effort, and projects that never go anywhere.

Said another way, free software could never make a working operating system, an easy to use GUI, it's chaos, blah, blah, bull shit on a stick This message posted with Mozilla and Windowmaker on X11 under Debian, software so superior to comercial junk I can never ever go back.

SPI will survive this little tussle and free softare will survive SPI.

When the W3C XML Schema recommendation was first released, there were certain parties whom overwhelmed by its newness, complexity and buggy implementations began to advocate using as few features as possible which culminated in the article W3C XML Schema Made Simple by Kohsuke Kawaguchi. However, a year later with parser implementations getting up to speed and more people using the technology it is clear that a number of the earlier misgivings about using some parts of the technology were misguided.

This is very similar to the situation with Mozilla and C++. In 1998, a few months after the ISO standard was ratified a set of guidelines for using C++ were specified by the Mozilla team which included rules like don't use templates, don't use exceptions, and don't use namespaces. Since then the Mozilla team has looked back at their decision and realized that some of the decisions they made were unwise specifically listed as mistakes were avoiding exceptions and templates. I truly commend the Mozilla team for making their post mortem available online for other [C++ or otherwise based] software development projects to learn from.

This article aims to do the same thing for the XML community and the W3C XML Schema recommendation.

When the W3C XML Schema recommendation was first released, there were certain parties whom overwhelmed by its newness, complexity and buggy implementations began to advocate using as few features as possible which culminated in the article W3C XML Schema Made Simple by Kohsuke Kawaguchi. However, a year later with parser implementations getting up to speed and more people using the technology it is clear that a number of the earlier misgivings about using some parts of the technology were misguided.

This is very similar to the situation with Mozilla and C++. In 1998, a few months after the ISO standard was ratified a set of guidelines for using C++ were specified by the Mozilla team which included rules like don't use templates, don't use exceptions, and don't use namespaces. Since then the Mozilla team has looked back at their decision and realized that some of the decisions they made were unwise specifically listed as mistakes were avoiding exceptions and templates. I truly commend the Mozilla team for making their post mortem available online for other [C++ or otherwise based] software development projects to learn from.

This article aims to do the same thing for the XML community and the W3C XML Schema recommendation.

When the W3C XML Schema recommendation was first released, there were certain parties whom overwhelmed by its newness, complexity and buggy implementations began to advocate using as few features as possible which culminated in the article W3C XML Schema Made Simple by Kohsuke Kawaguchi. However, a year later with parser implementations getting up to speed and more people using the technology it is clear that a number of the earlier misgivings about using some parts of the technology were misguided.

This is very similar to the situation with Mozilla and C++. In 1998, a few months after the ISO standard was ratified a set of guidelines for using C++ were specified by the Mozilla team which included rules like don't use templates, don't use exceptions, and don't use namespaces. Since then the Mozilla team has looked back at their decision and realized that some of the decisions they made were unwise specifically listed as mistakes were avoiding exceptions and templates. I truly commend the Mozilla team for making their post mortem available online for other [C++ or otherwise based] software development projects to learn from.

This article aims to do the same thing for the XML community and the W3C XML Schema recommendation.

When the W3C XML Schema recommendation was first released, there were certain parties whom overwhelmed by its newness, complexity and buggy implementations began to advocate using as few features as possible which culminated in the article W3C XML Schema Made Simple by Kohsuke Kawaguchi. However, a year later with parser implementations getting up to speed and more people using the technology it is clear that a number of the earlier misgivings about using some parts of the technology were misguided.

This is very similar to the situation with Mozilla and C++. In 1998, a few months after the ISO standard was ratified a set of guidelines for using C++ were specified by the Mozilla team which included rules like don't use templates, don't use exceptions, and don't use namespaces. Since then the Mozilla team has looked back at their decision and realized that some of the decisions they made were unwise specifically listed as mistakes were avoiding exceptions and templates. I truly commend the Mozilla team for making their post mortem available online for other [C++ or otherwise based] software development projects to learn from.

This article aims to do the same thing for the XML community and the W3C XML Schema recommendation.

When the W3C XML Schema recommendation was first released, there were certain parties whom overwhelmed by its newness, complexity and buggy implementations began to advocate using as few features as possible which culminated in the article W3C XML Schema Made Simple by Kohsuke Kawaguchi. However, a year later with parser implementations getting up to speed and more people using the technology it is clear that a number of the earlier misgivings about using some parts of the technology were misguided.

This is very similar to the situation with Mozilla and C++. In 1998, a few months after the ISO standard was ratified a set of guidelines for using C++ were specified by the Mozilla team which included rules like don't use templates, don't use exceptions, and don't use namespaces. Since then the Mozilla team has looked back at their decision and realized that some of the decisions they made were unwise specifically listed as mistakes were avoiding exceptions and templates. I truly commend the Mozilla team for making their post mortem available online for other [C++ or otherwise based] software development projects to learn from.

This article aims to do the same thing for the XML community and the W3C XML Schema recommendation.

It'll be a wonderful day when we'll finally be able to rid ourselves from those damned Award/AMI/Phoenix bug-riddled extremely legacy code.

Actually, we better get lawyers. If somebody manages to set up a LinuxBIOS based machine that also has an X server and a certain Gecko based web browser and then starts selling it in a thin-client configuration, the maker of Phoenix BIOS might get more than a little peeved.

Using Mozilla, I generally block a site if and when it sends me an annoying graphic, which is usually, but not always, advertisement. I've found, however, that once I block an advertisement, I click on it more often.

I use the keyboard for screen movement, so I must click on the window to get it focus. I do this by picking a blank part of the screen and clicking there. Increasingly, this blank part is a blocked graphical advertisement. Thus, these clicks become advertising hits when before they rarely were.

This may not match the behavior of other people, but now that I'm blocking ads, the number of advertisements I "click on" has gone up enomorously (less than one a month to about one a week).

If you get Mozilla and PrefBar , you can toggle javascript, popup blocking, and more from your toolbar. It also works on a variety of platforms.

I must agree, privoxy is an excellent program indeed. There's a thread in their Sourceforge bug tracker about ad-blocking software (a different company I think but the same idea) and the consensus is that it will eventually have to be addressed. At the current time, however, only a few sites are going to such extremes. A rather simple policy would be the ability for the ad-blocker to request the banner image but discard the results and send a 1x1 empty image to the browser.

However, this fails for sites that use Javascript to check on the client-side whether certain images are blocked or not. Disabling Javascript is one way, but they can probably check that server-side. Sadly, it's very hard for third-party software to deal with this -- they would have to implement a complete Javascript interpreter. In other words, simple regex text handling can only go so far when dealing with scripts, it's far easier to implement changes in the browser's script engine. However, as you can see from this discussion of Bugzilla #181035, doing this can be very non-trivila. [Note that bugzilla refuses referers from slashdot and that link may not work, so either enter the URL by hand or fake your Referer: header.]

Finally, I'd just like to remind everyone using IE that would like Mozilla-like features such as pop-up blocking, tabbed browsing, per-page Javascript/ActiveX disabling, etc. to try Crazy Browser which uses the IE engine with extra stuff on top.

I'm an avid user of Phoenix, which of course blocks pop-ups, and this is great news to me! Websites that use this will now immediately inform me, "We don't want you to give us (or our advertisers) your money." This is a big time-saving feature from having to wade through a webpage for a while to determine whether or not it's crap. Now I know from the outset. Thanks, webmasters!

Have a look at bug 181035 on Mozilla's Bugzilla. There is some good discussion on how to handle this. A pop-up window can't merely be hidden from view, because invisible windows are considered a security hazard. Maybe the sandbox idea will take off allowing pop-ups to have temporary play room.

However as of now its an open issue at Mozilla with no clear solution in sight. This is going to be an arms race no doubt.

No. So, when IE loads, it uses 1.5MB instead of 12, including everything its pointing to.

I don't run Windows, so I don't have a first-hand way to measure it myself, but I'm positive your analysis is incorrect. This article, certainly not by a fan of Mozilla, has a screenshot of IE using 9.98MB.

And the entire thrust of the memory usage discussion is that Internet Explorer uses "system libraries"; libraries aside from the ones it opens itself and that are not counted against it. Windows Explorer displays little HTML-based summaries in the left of folder windows; Windows Help is HTML-based now. Are you seriously trying to say that Windows loads no HTML-rendering components itself?

- IE is still faster on Windows. Rendering time is about the same, but startup time and memory usage for Nutzilla is still much higher.

Nice strawman. You admit that rendering time is the same, then start complaining about the irrelevancy of startup time. This is just like Mac/PPC fanatics blithering about Photoshop start time, something that happens only once and is highly dependent on HDD speed, bus speed, system load, etc, but with the additional error that a good chunk of Internet Explorer is already loaded.

Enable Quick Start and put Mozilla in your startup. Watch your system startup time go up and your Mozilla startup time go down. Don't complain that this is "cheating"; this is what IE does.

- You are valid being contrarian about IE, there are real reasons why it sucks, non compliance, pop-ups, bad JVM, poor integrate-ability with the real JVM, bad scripting engine, prone to viruses.

I really don't understand your post. It seems you're defending IE, but in this paragraph you systematically demolish any reason I can think of for using it.

- I have found Mozilla on several occasions unable to download things because of errors in the salt.

- It should be clear to anyone that Mozilla the browser isn't Gecko. I do not think Gecko sucks. Mozilla does.

Its clear that the people at Opera know how to put things together far better than the Mozilla folk.

They are owned by AOSHIT, if that isn't a mark of inferiority, I don't know what is.

Point. But somehow Mozilla overcomes.

popups? What does that mean?

Please do not blame Opera for not being open source. [snip] I am not using Opera, because I have strong computer and I can waste resources for such product like Mozilla. But there are places when Mozilla is not a right thing.

Yeah MIT uses it for webmail. It works fine but is slow as balls.

I feel a need. A need for speed.
Come on minotaur. Phoenix Rocks

http://www.mozilla.org

A worse one (for YouServ compatability and anything else reyling on dynamic DNS) is the fact that Mozilla caches IP addresses until the browser is completely restarted. How's that for stupid?

Please vote to have this issue fixed right here.

krmt writes

"Man, if I only had a bunch of virtual desktops so I could have an uncluttered screen."

Virtual Win.

"Wow, what I wouldn't give for grep right now."

Cygwin. Or try this collection of natively compiled GNU utilies.

The registry is a big PITA. Can't help you there. There is a readme describing the structure here, but a lot of programs break that. OTOH, if you don't mind spammy logfiles, regmon can help you find what program is accessing what keys in the registry.

"Stupid spam. I'd love to have procmail running here. Ah well, I guess I'll wait until I reboot to Linux to read my non-web email."

There is a variety of client-side plugins for spam. The next release of Mozilla will also have spam-blocking capabilities.

"It's so great that I've got tabs in Mozilla. Why can't I have them on my windows too like I do in Linux?"

Too bad they don't make a mozilla windows port. Tabbed browsing works great.

I agree, linux is better. But not for most of the reasons you list. :)

The fix is located here and here. I've already "patched"...

an update, I noticed a new project that does just this.

Phoenix, a subset of mozilla.

C'ya online infrastructure.

I use Mozilla on all platforms I'm running but combine it with bannerfilter on squid. Mozilla doesn't support regexps yet for picture-blocking but is host-based until they fix bug 78104. Disk cache is switched on though as I'm the only user on my system so I don't see this as a possible security problem.
Cookies are selectively permitted and pop-ups are blocked.
Security is imho the biggest reason to use Mozilla in stead of IE.

Download and install Mozilla.

Yes, Mozilla has had its share of security flaws, but they generally get fixed faster, too.

right here

You can get a patch here.

Are we really already so fucked up that when Microsoft is not competent enough to implement technologies, we are no longer allowed to use them?

No, Mozilla/Phoenix never had any security problem even remotely as severe as this.

Recently there was some big fuss about a so-called "security hole" which alled a webmaster to know which link you clicked on his site.

I take 100 of these holes anytime over just one IE-sized format-and-destroy hole.

I usually try not to sound insulting, but come on... if you're still using Internet Explorer then you are honestly being stupid.

Try Mozilla or one of its derivitives, my favourite is Phoenix. Another fine piece of software, independant of both IE and Mozilla is Opera.

I usually try not to sound insulting, but come on... if you're still using Internet Explorer then you are honestly being stupid.

Try Mozilla or one of its derivitives, my favourite is Phoenix. Another fine piece of software, independant of both IE and Mozilla is Opera.

Another doomsayer, give me a break, the Internet is going to fall apart in $random years, we'll be swimming in spam and popup ads, hackers will wage "cyberwar" on our "infostructure" unless we do something about it. Whatever. Use the proper tools. By now if you're still swamped in spam/popups/adware, then you're an idiot.

The moron who cut me off on the road this morning is a danger to motorists, highways are doomed to failure!

XForms are a Very Good Thing, but only if browsers support them... a search at mozilla.org reveals only a Status Update from January 2001 suggesting a review of the (then) state of the XForms spec, and BugZilla only mentions one feature request for XForms which is only three days old...

Still, I'm really looking forward to this one - death to the tired key=value GET and POST lists!

XForms are a Very Good Thing, but only if browsers support them... a search at mozilla.org reveals only a Status Update from January 2001 suggesting a review of the (then) state of the XForms spec, and BugZilla only mentions one feature request for XForms which is only three days old...

Still, I'm really looking forward to this one - death to the tired key=value GET and POST lists!

XForms are a Very Good Thing, but only if browsers support them... a search at mozilla.org reveals only a Status Update from January 2001 suggesting a review of the (then) state of the XForms spec, and BugZilla only mentions one feature request for XForms which is only three days old...

Still, I'm really looking forward to this one - death to the tired key=value GET and POST lists!

XForms are a Very Good Thing, but only if browsers support them... a search at mozilla.org reveals only a Status Update from January 2001 suggesting a review of the (then) state of the XForms spec, and BugZilla only mentions one feature request for XForms which is only three days old...

Still, I'm really looking forward to this one - death to the tired key=value GET and POST lists!

The close-ups of the phoenix made it look like a prop from a 60's monster movie.

A Phoenix? In a monster movie with a name like "Mozilla"?

This sounds familiar...

SVG support has been a difficult issue in Mozilla because of the rich canvas. As you say, the XML parser and DOM and CSS parser and inheritance and XLink simple linking and JPEG and PNG and ECMAscript are there already.

The Mozilla SVG project started off by using Raph Levien's rendering library libart, which is only licensed to be used under the terms of the LGPL and not the standard Mozilla MPL/GPL/LGPL tri-license.

So, that licensing issue held up getting SVG code into the trunk, and when it was in ther trunk, stopped it being in the core builds (it was there in CVS and could be enabled at compile time). It worked on Linux, MacOS, Windows, etc - it was very cross platform code but there was the licensing issue.

A new approach is to split the rendering code into platform-independent and platform-dependent parts. A test of this approach is available from the croczilla site (which has a bunch of great examples too) - there is a build that uses the GDI+ renderer suplied with Windows 2000/XP. Clearly, this avoids the license issue o the rendering library and clearly, it means there needs to be a separate platform layer for each supported OS (darwin on MacOS X, perhaps different linux layers for Gnome or KDE, etc)

I know the Netscape folks are aware of this, too, because I visited Netscape and gave them a demo which included Mozilla SVG among other things.