Slashdot Mirror

Anybody know why this killer feature is disabled by default?

Because I don't like it. Read the Mozilla mission statement . Read between the lines. Between the lines it says that anything Anonymous Coward finds useful will continue to be the default unless and until AC decides to change. Flexibility and innovation are only allowed to the degree that AC finds the results acceptable and nice.

There are the keywords in Mozilla and the Smart bookmark in Galeon.

And in Mozilla the url bar provides a quick way to access you favorite search engine.

One thing is good to keep in mind about Microsoft. By its anti-customer actions, Microsoft is buying itself an unprecedented amount of bad feeling. At present feelings against Microsoft are so negative that the company has business only because it has a virtual monopoly. If there ever becomes a real alternative to MS software (like the Open Office suite, for example), Microsoft will rapidly collapse.

(I have written this comment so that it includes information that most readers here already know, but that the average computer user needs. That way, if you like the comment, you can pass it on to your less knowledgeable friends.)

The first paragraph may sound like an exaggerated opinion, but collapse of a computer company's business has happened before. IBM had, at one time, almost 100% of the personal computer business. But it was surprising at the time how much people didn't like IBM. People who supplied cement to the building industry and people who ran dry cleaners and students who played with Basic all knew that IBM was in court for anti-trust violations. It was often shocking how much negative feeling toward IBM there was among people who had little understanding of the technical issues behind the violations.

As soon as an alternative to buying PCs from IBM was available, IBMs business dropped rapidly. The magazine articles at the time exaggerated IBM's percentage of the market because they failed to count the computers that were made by very small businesses. The alternatives to IBM PCs were called clones, and thousands of companies built them. IBMs business quickly dropped to 8% of the market, and then below that.

Now history is poised to repeat itself, this time with software. Linux is still not easy enough to configure. Open Office has, for the needs of many people, arrived. The Mozilla browser will soon be released, but it doesn't have a calendar or a spell-checker yet, and these are important to many people who use Microsoft Outlook. Events are moving fast, and it won't be long before the selfless love of the open source programmers overthrows the world's most abusive software dictator.

Often people with little technical knowledge don't understand that underlying the negative feeling toward Microsoft are strong technical failings. For example, Windows XP, Microsoft's newest operating system, has a file called the Registry. This file contains settings for the operating system and almost every other program that is installed. The registry file is a single point of failure. If something goes wrong in the registry, as it sometimes does, the only method of recovery is to re-install Windows XP, all the programs, all the drivers, and all the patches again. This can take days, during which the user is not able to work normally.

Why does Microsoft have such a flawed design? Why put information for many programs in one file? Why not put each program's settings in separate files, so that one cannot destroy the others? Apparently because having all the settings in one file accomplishes a kind of copy protection. Someone who copies a program's folder will not be able to operate that program on another computer because the settings are hidden in Windows XP's registry file. So, all the honest customers suffer because of Microsoft's desire to extract the most money from the world. That kind of offensive defensiveness actually lowers long-term profit, something the company executives have not learned.

What about all the competition with the calculator, Telnet clients, PPP clients (Who buys Trumpet Winsock?) etc. The Internet is now one of the most common uses of a computer. Of course MS is goign to bundle or even integrate a browser into their OS since that's what their customers want. Does a consumer even "know" what a PPP client is? Should these be "unbundled" from the OS so that there can be more competition?

You're just being absurd you know, and judging from the number of +2 replies, it doesn't look like anyone bought it. (Except me, I guess.)

They want something that works, not with 100 privacy settings.

And suddenly you've become the representative for Joe Consumer? This court case has nothing to do with consumers themselves. Let me make a quick example of what is at the heart of this case...

I've introduced many people to Mozilla, and a lot of them have been floored by how much more useful (and stable) it is over the bundled Internet Explorer. After being with Mozilla for a month, most of them loathe the clumsy interface and lack of features of Internet Explorer.

Let's say this Mozilla thing storms the computing industry and every man, woman, and child wants it installed on their computer (since "The Internet" to them is the equivalent of a web browser). Since the unwashed masses are not generally comfortable installing new software and downright fear having to download something as large as Mozilla, the OEMs are getting all kinds of requests to put Mozilla on their systems.

It sounds like a no-brainer to everyone from sales to marketing, but by the time the licensing department hears about it, the idea is shot down. They cannot legally do that since Microsoft currently dictates exactly what can be installed on their computers when they go out the door. The result of this is that people cannot get the software they're demanding pre-installed on their computers. It might be great, wonderful, world-changing software but thanks to Microsoft, it will never see the light of day.

That is anticompetitive, that is hurting innovation, and that is what this court case is about. There are of course more angles to it, but this I feel is the most important one.

This bug was fixed yesterday, the day that it was known by the mozilla developers. The crash is fixed, the bug is fixed, it's all fixed. You can see the bugzilla entry here.

Nice quote: "If I lose, I will pledge that I, and my crack mozilla development team, will assist in implementing XSL in the mozilla open source project.". I guess the author lost, because there's XSLT in Mozilla

Use nmh. Messages are stored in separate files rather than an entire folder in one file. You can then auto-archive by date with something like: refile `pick +inbox -before '1 apr 2002'` -src +inbox +archive

Personally, I use mh (using the emacs mh-rmail frontend). I refile stuff automatically typically just based on the '-from' (using commands much like the above pick/refile). And if I'm looking for something I remember seeing awhile back, a grep on one or two mail folders (which are just directories full of text files for us mh users) does a pretty good job...

I won't say that there's no way to improve on this, but any fancy system that someone proposes has got to beat some pretty effective simple tools...

I mean, if you're really after identifying a burst of activity on a given topic... wouldn't a combination of text searches and visual scans of subject headers sorted by date get you 90% of the way there?

While we're on the subject, anyone taken a look at this old jwz idea: Intertwingle

jzw of Mozilla/Netscape fame have a hypothetical program called Intertwingle which is (Score:5,Interesting) ....

1. If you get page widening from parent post, just get Mozilla. It's free, fast, and just plain better.
   
2. The title of this page should begin with ATI, not ATi.
   

I'm not sure how much overlap there will be between your Exchange replacement and the intended Calendar server for Mozilla's calendar project.

There is already somebody interested in starting work on that calendar server. I believe the intention is to use the IETF standards, but if you could work together with the moz people to get an Exchange replacement that also played nicely with standards-based calendaring servers, I'm sure there would be a lot of very happy people in the world. Perhaps, just maybe, you may even be able to combine efforts...

While you're looking at you might hit bugzilla.mozilla.org and look at bug 17048 and 124026 for a slightly unrelated bit on roaming capabilities in Mozilla. I vaguely remember somebody mentioning that it might be nice to connect with a calendar server at some point. It may not have any relevance, but I throw it out for your information.

I'm not sure how much overlap there will be between your Exchange replacement and the intended Calendar server for Mozilla's calendar project.

There is already somebody interested in starting work on that calendar server. I believe the intention is to use the IETF standards, but if you could work together with the moz people to get an Exchange replacement that also played nicely with standards-based calendaring servers, I'm sure there would be a lot of very happy people in the world. Perhaps, just maybe, you may even be able to combine efforts...

While you're looking at you might hit bugzilla.mozilla.org and look at bug 17048 and 124026 for a slightly unrelated bit on roaming capabilities in Mozilla. I vaguely remember somebody mentioning that it might be nice to connect with a calendar server at some point. It may not have any relevance, but I throw it out for your information.

That's interesting. Maybe you should start a fact-finding project. Just by yourself listing your goals and resources you've identified (RFCs, existing source code, API reference guides etc.) If other developers like what you've put together maybe something'll start from there.

I've seen the start and failure of at least one other groupware project, was not pretty :) And I'd say that first step of defining the project in detail is for one or two people only. Others can join later if they agree.

You can take a integrated mail daemon approach eg. http://courier-mta.org/ Which is an integrated ESMTP/POP/IMAP server, and try to add a calender server( whatever that is). Or create the standalone server as you said. I use Cyrus for IMAP/POP and sendmail for SMTP, so actually that way may suit me better. But I suspect starting with something like courier might be better for you.

I know little of exchange, but from what I've seen, I'm not impressed. A lot of functionality I see when someone says "hey, see what exchange can do", I can attribute to any IMAP or LDAP server. Any IMAP server can share folders for instances, etc. The shared calender is missing in OSS though.

Microsoft has release their Mail API, MAPI protocol ( don't know if that's pertinent to this cause ), and there are the free ICAL and MCAL libraries floating around the net for use.

Mozilla has a calendering client, they got it from some company, I can't remember. But it's not going to be in Mozilla 1.0 for sure. You can download CVS mozilla and build it yourself though. http://mozilla.org./projects/calendar/ That could be a good client to start with. Although developing with a mozilla based product can be a chore in inself, since it's hard to exert changes to the process as a non-aol developer.

OpenLDAP as the LDAP server.

I guess my point is, there's a lot of information, choices to be made at first. Maybe if you start by getting it all together and separating the impossible from what's not you might get a decent following?

I submitted it as well. Got marked as a dup of bug 138877, which is likely where the miscreant who put it in her signature found it.

Check bugzilla, I think there is (was?) an error with the flash plugin....

There are those who believe that with a little help from everyone, Mozilla will become the best browser on every platform. And there are those who believe that Mozilla "sucks" currently, or laziness sets in, so there's no reason to help out at all. For the first set, I invite you to check out http://www.mozilla.org/get-involved.html. With just a bit of your time, you can help make Mozilla the best browser on any platform. And every time you spend 15-30 minutes helping out the project in whatever way you choose to, keep in mind that someone else has spent 30 minutes helping fix something that won't be a problem for you. That's why it works.

In the end, if something you come across isn't working, and you do nothing to help, then it's your fault. The project only gets better when you do the work to properly post your bugs to Bugzilla.

- Adam

Yes, OmniWeb is prettier than Mozilla: Bug 121540. When it can be fixed, it will be fixed. There's a lot of enthusiasm about this. If you know how to make text drawing work with ATSUI in CFM applications, perhaps you could contribute your skills?

The first thing to do is learn how to build Mozilla under Mac OS X... it's rather a bitch, but well documented here. (Actually, it's a bitch to build under Linux too, and that's the easiest platform to build on.) Then apply the ATSUI rendering patch attached to bug 121540 (sorry, can't link to bugzilla from slashdot) and rebuild. Voila! As far as I can see, it looks like it may already be in the nightlies though, and possibly even in 1.0RC1... I haven't looked yet :-). If you find that it's not, I recommend grabbing the build from stevek's iDisk. It's a lot easier than building it if you're not already building mozilla. (I was, for other reasons. Quartz was a nice extra perk.)

As for leaving out all the composer and mail junk, I don't know of a way to do that. However, current builds of chimera are fast, have quartz rendering compiled in, and are browser only. As a bonus, it's got a nice native cocoa interface that gets better and better with every build. It's still got some bugs, but I find it pretty usable.

Hope this helps!

Mozilla 1.0 RC1 has been released. If we all remember Windows 2000 RC1 this means "pretty damn stable" (but since this is open sores, I'm skeptical). Get your copy today!

Mozilla 1.0 RC1 has been released. If we all remember Windows 2000 RC1 this means "pretty damn stable" (but since this is open sores, I'm skeptical). Get your copy today!

Even though both NT and linux are POSIX compliant, there are enough quirks in the implementations, especially with regard to multi-threading libraries. As long as you use C or C++ (or any language that does not provide both a rich threading interface and good runtime support), consider using the NSPR libraries that are meant to provide a rich set of cross-platform interfaces.

The upgrade is available right now.

They're right. Almost. It feels a little slow to me, but not unbearably so. Perhaps my tolerance is too high, but I don't feel like I'm sitting around waiting for the system. Or perhaps (since I've been using Mac OS X since the first day of the public beta and Mac OS for several years!) I'm so impressed with the overall improvements to my "computing experience" that have come with Mac OS X that I don't notice *all* of the warts. Frankly, I've had my performance complaints, and the browser hasn't been one of them. Don't get me started on the Finder...

My system is an iMac DV G3/400MHz with 512MB RAM and a 27GB internal HD. Certainly not a performance champ... in fact, except for the RAM it's rather low-end. My point of reference for Wintel is my work PC, an IBM thinkpad 1GHZ, 392MB/32GB running RedHat 7.2 and occasionally booting into Win2k (when I need to edit someone else's MS Project or Visio files). For most operations (checking e-mail, running MS Office, browsing) I don't find that the iMac *feels* slower. Most days, I work from my home office with the two machines sitting side by side. I don't find myself turning to the Thinkpad for browsing; in fact, it's rather the opposite. I do much of my office correspondence on the iMac due to the superiority of the Office implementation for Mac OS X.

Perhaps the reason I don't find it so slow, though, is that I seldom use MSIE. I am not morally opposed to MSIE; I do use office after all, and actually like office V.X. (It's the first version I've liked since the version with Word 5 (Office 4.0?), though I found Office 98 tolerable.) MSIE is just not the best browser for Mac OS X. Its rendering engine is buggy, and it's *SLOW*. By that, I mean that it feels significantly slower than the other browsers I use. I find that I use 3 browsers:

1. Mozilla - It's reasonably fast. My main complaint is that it takes almost 15 seconds to launch! Once it's launched, I find page loading to be fast and stable. It takes a few seconds to open the preferences panel, but that's no different from Moz on my Linux box, which is faster than my Mac.
2. Omniweb - It's probably in fact slower than IE, but it feels faster because the threading is better. It doesn't block while it's loading a page, and pages look great because it uses Quartz rendering. It's still slower than Moz, though, even when I compile Quartz rendering into it, and Mozilla has less trouble rendering pages with CSS and Javascript.
3. Chimera - This one is going to be the best, hands down. It's fast as blazes, even on my hardware. It's the first browser I've used on any other platform that felt as fast as Galeon. It's in a very early dev version, though, and far from feature complete. I like it a lot, so far.

All that said, though, IE is the default, and it's IE that the Mac will be judged on. I think the Moz crew has proven that the performance hit is not all apple's fault, though. Even so, Apple and MS would be well served to ensure that IE and Office are really snappy on Apple's newest hardware and OS combinations. I don't doubt that they will, now that OS development seems to have stabilized somewhat.

If browsing is slow for you on OS X, you might like to try Mozilla Release Candidate 1.

Microsoft VBScript runtime error '800a000d'

Type mismatch: 'CInt'

/education/content/DonatedComputers.asp, line 63

This, to me, looks just soooooo unprofessinal... The same browser/proxy combo works on most other sites, except those Microsoft-driven ones and some sites which insist on getting a valid Referer: tag (which I block).

I know I would not want my companies website to display this nonsense to potential customers...

I'm hoping they fix 130614 soon. I've got a Win98SE box which I cleaned up using Revenge of Mozilla (thus making it much like win95), and this is keeping me from using recent versions of Mozilla on that box. Fortunately I don't use that box very often.

See http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=84128# c20. That explains why it's necessary to block links to file:/// urls.

The problem is that mozilla handles all file references the same way, and it causes some safe cases to be disallowed.

It also describes a hidden pref you or your corporation can set that will allow links to file:/// urls if backwards-compatibility is more useful than increased security.

And at the very least, mozilla should tell the user why clicking on such a link results in nothing happening (see bug 84128).

For those of you who will now go on and spew poetic on how you have that OS with the stupid penguin as a mascot running your web servers; If something happened to Linus Torvalds that prevented him from continuing to develop the Linux kernel, you'd all be either running around like decapitated chicken or nervous school-boys at their first school dance, wondering what to do when the music started. The only reason that open-source software like Linux is being used in the corporate world today is because these uber-geeks who slipped it in via the back door were brainwashed about the supposed superiority of open-source software to the point that if they don't have it running on a machine that's less than 20 feet away from them, they begin to suffer from "separation anxiety" - how else could you explain the ultra-geeky idea of having Linux on a friggin' PDA?

I'm sure glad you chose to post this as an Anonymous moron - If anyone found out who you were, we'd be calling your boss to tell him what a total GIT you are.

"...train my workers to use ONE browser...." - are you effing serious?!?! I didn't think that chimps were allowed to be employed...but then again, look at the current software abortions coming from the eliteist "open-source" community, Mozilla being the best example.

What do you have to train your workers to use? The buttons on the menu bar that are pretty much the same between IE and Mozilla? The phrase coming to mind is "red herring", or better yet....TROLL!!!

ScottKin

I would like such a power tool that would enable/disable java script with a click and another to add trusted zones on the fly.

Mozilla 1.0 RC1 release possible tomorrow.

Listen, if Bug # 100393 isn't a 1.0 stopping feature, nothing is.

yep I agree

I hope they base the compuserve tests on a stable branch hopefully 1.0 and not some random date

regards

john jones
p.s. is it just me or is this graph scary window open check out 04/11

<sigh>

Don't get me wrong, Mozilla is great and I love/use it, but there are still some very serious issues:

• Bug 89350 -- Home button should appear on main Toolbar
• Bug 35268 -- Edit Source using External Editor
• Bug 96877 -- Address book: Lists lose addresses

Hope those CompuServe users can hang in there until 1.2 or so.

(I'd link, but they don't take referrals from SlashDot... here's the Mozilla Bugzilla Home Page.)

ActiveX can be used in Mozilla.

Hopefully we'll be able to counter the effect soon. The tech is there, it just needs to happen

The MPL/LGPL/GPL tri-licence is the preferred licence I think.

The NPL/LGPL/GPL tri-licence is only for stuff originally under NPL.

The most succinct explanation of what's acceptable and where is under "Acceptable Licenses" near the bottom of the licence policy page.

As a nitpick to your nitpick, the efforts that are underway are actually primarily to convert to a MPL/GPL/LGPL triple license. The Relicensing FAQ you point to actually addresses the NPL/MPL tangle in relicensing.

More information on the special rights and differences between the MPL and NPL are available in the MPL/NPL FAQ.

Currently, there are only a few bits left to be relicensed: Have You Seen These Hackers?

As a nitpick to your nitpick, the efforts that are underway are actually primarily to convert to a MPL/GPL/LGPL triple license. The Relicensing FAQ you point to actually addresses the NPL/MPL tangle in relicensing.

More information on the special rights and differences between the MPL and NPL are available in the MPL/NPL FAQ.

Currently, there are only a few bits left to be relicensed: Have You Seen These Hackers?

As a nitpick to your nitpick, the efforts that are underway are actually primarily to convert to a MPL/GPL/LGPL triple license. The Relicensing FAQ you point to actually addresses the NPL/MPL tangle in relicensing.

More information on the special rights and differences between the MPL and NPL are available in the MPL/NPL FAQ.

Currently, there are only a few bits left to be relicensed: Have You Seen These Hackers?

The Mozilla SVG implementation is a native SVG implementation. This is as opposed to plug-in SVG viewers such as the Adobe viewer (which is currently the most popular SVG viewer).

Some of the implications of this are:

• Mozilla can handle documents that contain SVG, MathML, XHTML, XUL, etc. all mixed together in the same 'compound' document. This is being made possible by using XML namesspaces.
• Mozilla is 'aware' of the SVG content. It can be accessed through the SVG DOM (which is compatible with the XML DOM) and manipulated by Mozilla's script engine.
• Other Mozilla technologies can be used with SVG. XBL coupled with SVG is a particular interesting combination. It can be used to create graphical widgets (I wonder when we'll see the first SVG-based chrome!) or extend Mozilla to recognize other specialized languages such as e.g. CML (chemical markup language). There are samples of these kinds of more advanced usage patterns on croczilla.com/svg/.

The Mozilla SVG implementation is a native SVG implementation. This is as opposed to plug-in SVG viewers such as the Adobe viewer (which is currently the most popular SVG viewer).

Some of the implications of this are:

• Mozilla can handle documents that contain SVG, MathML, XHTML, XUL, etc. all mixed together in the same 'compound' document. This is being made possible by using XML namesspaces.
• Mozilla is 'aware' of the SVG content. It can be accessed through the SVG DOM (which is compatible with the XML DOM) and manipulated by Mozilla's script engine.
• Other Mozilla technologies can be used with SVG. XBL coupled with SVG is a particular interesting combination. It can be used to create graphical widgets (I wonder when we'll see the first SVG-based chrome!) or extend Mozilla to recognize other specialized languages such as e.g. CML (chemical markup language). There are samples of these kinds of more advanced usage patterns on croczilla.com/svg/.

The Mozilla SVG implementation is a native SVG implementation. This is as opposed to plug-in SVG viewers such as the Adobe viewer (which is currently the most popular SVG viewer).

Some of the implications of this are:

• Mozilla can handle documents that contain SVG, MathML, XHTML, XUL, etc. all mixed together in the same 'compound' document. This is being made possible by using XML namesspaces.
• Mozilla is 'aware' of the SVG content. It can be accessed through the SVG DOM (which is compatible with the XML DOM) and manipulated by Mozilla's script engine.
• Other Mozilla technologies can be used with SVG. XBL coupled with SVG is a particular interesting combination. It can be used to create graphical widgets (I wonder when we'll see the first SVG-based chrome!) or extend Mozilla to recognize other specialized languages such as e.g. CML (chemical markup language). There are samples of these kinds of more advanced usage patterns on croczilla.com/svg/.

Mozilla is licenced under the Netscape Public Licence [mozilla.org], not the GPL.

Actually, different bits of Mozilla are licensed under a bit of a mess of different licenses. Efforts are underway to get everything unified under an NPL/GPL/LGPL "triple license", so you'll be able to use the code as long as you abide by one of those licenses. This would, of course, fall foul of Microsoft's new license.

Mozilla is licenced under the Netscape Public Licence, not the GPL.

I think there are builds that already support it.

http://www.mozilla.org/projects/svg/

Too bad the main site *requires* winxx or mac

Only IE 4+ or a mozilla based browser:
if (!(is.ie4up) && !(is.nav6up)) {document.location.href="sorry.php"}

And the site is using a version of the ultimate javascript client sniffer so this has been a pretty conscious decision. I can somewhat imagine. Although the site doesn't look that spectacular, style probably is everything there...

Not to mention those goddamn ads that get in your face. Has anyone figured out how to uninstall Flash from Internet Explorer?

Switch to Mozilla and add a line saying
object { display: none; }
to your user stylesheet. - better than uninstalling since it let's you easily turn flash back on the extremely rare sites where it's actually used somewhat usefully.
And go and vote for bug 94035 and related (http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=94035 - copy/paste since bugzilla doesn't allow linking from slashdot) to see per site blocking of all types of content.

Or you could hope to someday see the same for IE, in which case I wish you happy waiting... :)

Just use Galeon or Mozilla. They allow you to turn off popups and/or images from certain sites.

I recently upgraded a Win box (yes, the shame) from Netscape 4.75 to 6.11 and it's a dog.

It depends on how fast your computer is and how much memory it has. Older computers with less than 300MHz processors and less than 64MB or RAM won't run Mozilla/NS6.x well. If you have an older computer that's low on RAM get Opera.

Is there much difference between the Mozilla 1.0 build and the Netscape 6.11? Should I have chosen native Win code during the install instead of "generic" code?

The Netscape version tends to run several builds behind the Mozilla version. This is because Netscape's people put together a custom build from the original Mozilla build and this takes time. Furthermore, the Netscape version is likely to be weighed down with a lot of AOL specific crap -- like custom themes, links, sidebars, and applications you don't need -- that will slow it down even more. Go to Mozilla's official website and download the latest build. It will have the latest bug fixes and improvements that won't make it into Netscape for weeks or even months.