Slashdot Mirror

Slightly off-topic - the DHTML is b0rked in mozilla; a quick search at
bugzilla.mozilla.org shows no-one else has logged this so I've done so myself. (Hmmm, actually I was just searching against the URL to find the bug I just logged and it didn't turn up... oddness... ) (And now I get the error "Sorry, bugzilla links from Slashdot are not allowed." heh! :) http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/slashdot/index.html?id =134931 is the one, anyway... ) Yes folks, you can file mozilla bugs against the "tech evangelism" component to sic the mozilla wranglers onto the site's designers and get them to fix non-standard HTML for the non-IE world's benefit. (Remember when sites were designed only for Netscape, and we used to complain that they should test on mionirty products such as IE? Ah, happy days...) </ot>

That's right, it's blank.

Now try it in Opera. What a surprise! That's blank too...

OK, try again. What about Mozilla? Blank again.

Last shot, let's try Dillo. No, that's blank too...

Wait a minute. Why hasn't any other Slashdot reader noticed this already? You can't all be using Internet Exploder, can you?

When I hit 'back' it doesn't take me to the part of the page I went forward from, but to the top of the page.

That's the big problem with Mozilla -- they put all their efforts into fancy features, and don't even look at the basic behavior and usability bugs. Here's one I submitted months ago. OK, it's not earth-shaking, but they haven't even screened it.

What's good about Konqueror is that they focus on basic browser functionality. I have to admit that they are over-fond of stealing every IE feature they can. Microsoft envy is a bit of problem with the whole KDE project.

Mozilla's view source bug -- the one where it reloads the page from the server instead of displaying the cached source -- THE most frequently reported bug in Bugzilla -- HAS FINALLY BEEN FIXED!!!! :-D

The checkin was made less than an hour ago! See http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=55583.

Once this bug is fixed in mozilla, you dont need to go to slashdot or thinkgeek for love..

Mozilla custom keywords. One of the most underrated features of Mozilla.
I've set up a few dozen keywords so far, ranging from "dic whatever" to search for 'whatever' at dictionary.com to "bug 123456" to search for bug 123456 in bugzilla.

Probably on mozilla.org somewhere, but also at Google itself, which is pretty nifty (look for the section "Use Google from the Location Bar" at the bottom). It references Mozilla bug 29871, which has a few other ideas/examples.

"...to produce a stripped down version of Windows that will allow 3rd party vendors to insert components such as browsers, media players, and IM clients."

Hmm... Seems to me that this has already been accomplished. Winamp anybody? How about Mozilla? And for those that want full stripped GUI and everything, just go see our friends over at Litestep.

-----------------

The main components of Windows are modular. Meaning, you can upgrade IE, WMP, and MSN Messenger just fine.

However, does Microsoft document the specific COM interfaces necessary to replace MSHTML (IE's HTML rendering engine) with a third-party renderer such as Gecko (Mozilla's rendering engine), or MSN Messenger with Jabber? If so, I couldn't find it on MSDN.

Wrong. Mozilla have better XML support. See bugzilla #64945 for in-depth discussion. More specifically, look at comment #34 and reply. Another usefull link is this article

Cheers,

--fred

As 'a few' people have already noted before now, non IE and NS 4.x browsers are being turned away. A "tech evangelism" bug for Mozilla has just been filed. (bug 134431 - ooh, palindrime bug).
Guess the evangelism guys will soon tear into Sharp and get them to fix this. :)

My theory (call me paranoid) is that there are time loops in there to make the free version worse than the proprietary version

That is simply not possible, since the free version is, well, free. Since the entire source code is available, any deliberate slowdowns would be discovered in no time. The source of Mozilla, for example, can be found right here. Feel free to go through it if you like.

A more likely reason is that the free version has some debug routines turned on by default which are switched off in the proprietary version.

• The Scripts & Windows panel under Preferences|Advanced. You can prevent popups, block target="_blank", prevent pages from positioning themselves out of your screen or from flipping under/over existing windows, block status bar scrollers and/or stupid link descriptions which prevents you from seeing where a link will take you... and more!
• Custom bookmark keywords. I never type "slashdot.org", I just type "/." in my location bar, and it works. When I want to look up an RFC, I just type the word "rfc", a space, the number, and hit enter. "rfc 2616" is expanded to "http://ietf.org/rfc/rfc2616.txt". "whois slashdot.org" gives me whois info on slashdot.org, "acro ITYM" goes to acronymfinder.com and searches for ITYM, "cache http://mozilla.org/" gives me Google's cache of mozilla.org, "whats yahoo.com" asks Netcraft which web server Yahoo is running, "v yahoo.com" asks W3C whether they use valid HTML or not. You create these keywords yourself. They truly rock.
• Links toolbar. Not really a killer feature, but pretty handy. The links toolbar is Mozilla's support for HTML's <link> element. <link> is used to group pages logically together. If pages use <link> and you use Mozilla, you will have a toolbar with links to the next/previous Slashdot story, next/previous Bugzilla bug, next/previous set of pornographic thumbs, or whatever you are currently looking at. Though <link> has been part of the HTML standard since the first version ever (version 2.0), only Mozilla, ICab and Lynx support it (IIRC).

Still no home button - Not true. It's in the "links" bar, which makes some sense.

http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89350

No view source in external editor - Gosh, that WOULD be nice, wouldn't it?

http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35268

See also http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103767 which is about editing the contents of a <textarea> in an external editor.

Still no home button - Not true. It's in the "links" bar, which makes some sense.

http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89350

No view source in external editor - Gosh, that WOULD be nice, wouldn't it?

http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35268

See also http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103767 which is about editing the contents of a <textarea> in an external editor.

Still no home button - Not true. It's in the "links" bar, which makes some sense.

http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89350

No view source in external editor - Gosh, that WOULD be nice, wouldn't it?

http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35268

See also http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103767 which is about editing the contents of a <textarea> in an external editor.

Mozilla 1.0 party.

Bugzilla is your friend.

right-clicking to select "open in new window" is slow in IE because IE requires two clicks for context menus.

Sorry, but I don't understand what you mean -- Mozilla requires two clicks as well, and will do so until bug 89308, which I notice you have voted for, is fixed.

???

You can also vote on bugs. This is a great way to tell the developers which bugs you want to see fixed.

Now that we have told them what bugs we wanted fixed, how do we get the LONE FINAL ARBITER at Mozilla to agree with it. It's a pretty sad situation to have a dictator of a project when there is already a perfectly good voting mechanism.

I realize that...but there's a reason why that 2 weeks is there...while there is no ideal release date set for 1.0, it's my guess that it's because the roadmap is a publicly viewable document and they don't want ppl saying "where's 1.0"...

Internally, it's a different story...there's no reason to indicate that anything would change internally (besides feature checkins getting harder to include in 1.0 releases). And previous releases have occured ~2 weeks following the freeze...

So, yes...it's safe to say that based on previous release schedules there is an aim to get it out within 2 weeks of the freeze date...

I don't know how much you know about the project beforehand, so I don't know how much of this makes since to you...

And the 4 weeks is not on the site...it's only my guess from what I see Here and what has been there in the past following a freeze...and realizing that it's not as likely for them to push a bug fix to another milestone :)

As for compiling mozilla, don't bother compiling it unless you have a reason (I compile it myself because I'm following a few patches that aren't in the main tree yet). Just download the latest milestone or nightly (though the nightlies don't happen every night on Sparc Solaris right now).

Is their a way to force >1 mozilla process?

No, at least on MS Windows. (On Linux, opening Mozilla a second time *always* starts a new process, which is worse because of speed.) But Mozilla has far fewer website-related crashes than Netscape, and I think it has fewer crashes overall, at least if you use a milestone build rather than a daily.

The roadmap doesn't say "2 weeks". If you look at the drawing in the roadmap, you'll notice that there's a lightning-bolt break in the 1.0 branch, indicating a break in the (time) scale. I also don't see the "4 weeks" you mention on Tinderbox.

Well maybe they should close the real bug then: http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=55583. Although it seems as though the actual feature is implemented, from following bug 55583, it is not clear whether it is or not.

Actually, the real 1.0 tracking bug is:


http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1037 05

It's very nice. I just found out about custom keywords today, and they rock.

You can set up a book mark that takes a parameter and has a shortcut keyword. So now when I type "g keyword" into the urlbar it searches Google for my keyword. Browsing will never be the same :-).

Read through the documents at www.w3.org that describe how CSS is supposed to work (or send your HTML and CSS through their validators), determine if the error is in your page or the browser, and if it's in the browser report it in Bugzilla.

Nobody can fix the bugs that you find in Mozilla if you don't report them.

No, the branch has just been closed; I'm guessing for new features of any sort. They're still going to be testing and doing bugfixes and stuff. Check out the roadmap for more info. It'll be a little while yet before 1.0 is actually out.

according to the roadmap, we can expect the first branches of moz1.0 tomorrow (friday). this is rather unrealistic. based on the fact that the branch on 0.9.9 was 8 days late, I am guessing that we will see the first branches around the 4th of April (although, remember that the entire 0.9.9 build has essentially been a frozen branch towards 1.0, so perhaps they'll be on time).

If you see a release announcement for 1.0 on Monday, April Fools to you!
... no way will it be out that early; releases are scheduled for a week after the branching but have recently been 10-20 days, so expect Mozilla 1.0 sometime around 4/20 (I wonder what a release on that day would mean for the nature of the party?).

according to the roadmap, we can expect the first branches of moz1.0 tomorrow (friday). this is rather unrealistic. based on the fact that the branch on 0.9.9 was 8 days late, I am guessing that we will see the first branches around the 4th of April (although, remember that the entire 0.9.9 build has essentially been a frozen branch towards 1.0, so perhaps they'll be on time).

If you see a release announcement for 1.0 on Monday, April Fools to you!
... no way will it be out that early; releases are scheduled for a week after the branching but have recently been 10-20 days, so expect Mozilla 1.0 sometime around 4/20 (I wonder what a release on that day would mean for the nature of the party?).

Make sure that you run talkback builds, so that your crash reports complete with stack traces are sent in, and make sure that you report the bugs you're seeing through Bugzilla. They do a pretty good job of tracking and fixing things once they're in Bugzilla, but they don't have the staff to hunt around on discussion boards like SlashDot looking for bug reports...

http://bugzilla.mozilla.org

Dude, have you looked at the bug recently? It's only remaining dependency is for Bug 40867 whose patch is at the drivers for 1.0! It should be fixed soon!

Actually, I believe a fix has been checked in and will be in 1.0. See: http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40867 It's always good to check the latest status before passing judgement.

If you wanna track the progress, you can always go to the Make Mozilla 1.0 not suck metabug. This has been done for all releases since I can remember.

Take for instance the same bug for Mozilla 0.9.9...all bugs are tracked in here up until the final release.

If you wanna track the progress, you can always go to the Make Mozilla 1.0 not suck metabug. This has been done for all releases since I can remember.

Take for instance the same bug for Mozilla 0.9.9...all bugs are tracked in here up until the final release.

Whenever there's a slashdot mozilla article, there's also the seemingly required collection of "It's too slow" comments.

However, if you haven't tried a nightly build recently, you aren't seeing the full picture. this graph shows the recent large performance gains that have recently gone into mozilla.

Personally, I find mozilla outrageously fast on Windows; faster than anything else I've tried. However, on Solaris and OSX, the performance isn't where I'd like it to be. (But as the graph above shows, it's getting better, and I've noticed it on OSX.). If you're a user of the Windows platform, and have heard the "slow performance" chatter that goes on, I think you'll be pleasantly surprised.

(In spite of the "I'd like it faster on Solaris" comment, that doesn't mean I don't like it. I still use mozilla exclusively on Solaris too; the tabbed browsing, integrated searching, and killing of popups would make it worthwhile at half the speed.)

There are also a large collection of performance bugs that probably won't make Moz 1.0, but do have a good chance of making 1.0.1. So there's even more good news just a little down the road.

Actually this bug may have been fixed, check out bug 130263.

People more than ever need to go out there and download , test, and give bug reports.

I agree with your point, but why link to old builds? Asa says the -03-26 (linux and mac) and -03-27 (win32) builds are very good.

Don't just report bugs! Join the QA effort and help triage the bug reports!

Christopher

People more than ever need to go out there and download , test, and give bug reports.

I agree with your point, but why link to old builds? Asa says the -03-26 (linux and mac) and -03-27 (win32) builds are very good.

Don't just report bugs! Join the QA effort and help triage the bug reports!

Christopher

People more than ever need to go out there and download , test, and give bug reports.

I agree with your point, but why link to old builds? Asa says the -03-26 (linux and mac) and -03-27 (win32) builds are very good.

Don't just report bugs! Join the QA effort and help triage the bug reports!

Christopher

While you're waiting, try the Tree Status and the Roadmap.

From these links, you can tell that 1.0 is scheduled for release in about 2 weeks, but from the current Tree status it looks like that might not be a realistic time frame...more like 4 weeks...

When MozillaZine is back up, make sure to check out the newest Build Comments...there's been alot of fixes recently...

While you're waiting, try the Tree Status and the Roadmap.

From these links, you can tell that 1.0 is scheduled for release in about 2 weeks, but from the current Tree status it looks like that might not be a realistic time frame...more like 4 weeks...

When MozillaZine is back up, make sure to check out the newest Build Comments...there's been alot of fixes recently...

It is both good and bad that AOL has decided to use Mozilla in the next AOL release. Unfortunately they are applying pressure to the Mozilla team to wrap it up and get the product out the door.

Case in point, bug 99344. The Mozilla team has known about this one for at least six months, yet the bug still lives. Now it is unlikely the fix will be made before 1.0. The project managers are being pressured to "back burner" bugs like this one to ship the product.

Why rush? AOL pushing them is a bad thing since bugs like this one are now getting out the door and tarnishing what *has* to be a near perfect product. Rushing out the door will NOT recover any market share, it is far too late for that unless AOL/others plan to show us why everyone *must* use Mozilla/Netscape 6.x. instead of IE. For your normal "Joe Sixpack" websurfer it is going to be difficult if not impossible to convince him to change since IE works for 99.9% of what he likes to do, regardless of security holes.

On the whole I am very happy with Mozilla, I use it as my primary browser on all platforms. Still, I can't totally hide my disappointment that some knowns issues are going on neglected, leaving web developers, yet again, to deal with the bugs. *sigh* nothing changes. Things have gotten MUCH better, yet...

Is it me or does the ability to view the source of whatever your looking at seem to be something that even a 1.0 browser should do correctly?

Don't assume that just because it's 1.0 means that it's perfect.

Many people will try Mozilla for the first time in 1.0. People more than ever need to go out there and download [linux, mac, win32], test, and give bug reports.

If you want to help open source but can't hack the code, this is your chance to help! :-)

Don't assume that just because it's 1.0 means that it's perfect.

Many people will try Mozilla for the first time in 1.0. People more than ever need to go out there and download [linux, mac, win32], test, and give bug reports.

If you want to help open source but can't hack the code, this is your chance to help! :-)

Don't assume that just because it's 1.0 means that it's perfect.

Many people will try Mozilla for the first time in 1.0. People more than ever need to go out there and download [linux, mac, win32], test, and give bug reports.

If you want to help open source but can't hack the code, this is your chance to help! :-)

Don't assume that just because it's 1.0 means that it's perfect.

Many people will try Mozilla for the first time in 1.0. People more than ever need to go out there and download [linux, mac, win32], test, and give bug reports.

If you want to help open source but can't hack the code, this is your chance to help! :-)

GAR! That'll teach me to preview. That link in step 1 should be for Mozilla.

Easy solution:
1. Install .
2. Go to Edit->Preferences...
3. Choose Privacy & Security->Images
4. Animated images should loop: Once or Never

Personally, I leave mine set on "Once" because sometimes I hit pages with animated images I want to see move (once). This won't stop Flash ads (but you can just kill the Flash plugin to get those).