Slashdot Mirror

The release date for this release is smack on the estimated release:
http://www.mozilla.org/roadmap.html
In the past, mozilla builds were never released on schedule. They seem to be getting it right now.

See: http://www.mozilla.org/about.html

Asa is one of the Top Men behind mozilla.org

Create the favicon, but please also put the in your pages so that eventually browsers will stop searching for favicon.ico. Microsoft created this mess and hopefully it can be fixed. Also, by using the method, you can have different icons on different parts of your site. Unfortunately, "shortcut icon" (also started by Microsoft as a response to complaints about logs) is not proper use of the link tag. It is saying that this is both a shortcut and an icon.

Evangalism bug for the method:
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=110296

sadly, they dont yet have a freebsd binary download, as they did for 0.9.6

Umm, so why not just pull down the latest nightly build for FreeBSD? Moz is getting them up there perty darn regular now. Heck, it's more up to date then 0.9.7! Just untar that bugger into your home directory.

gzip -dc mozilla-i386-unknown-freebsd4.4.tar.gz | gzip -xvf -
cd ~/mozilla
./run-mozilla

It's even a faster install then a package. This is what I'm using at this very moment until the port gets completed. Wanna work 0.9.7 into Galeon's compile and all when it's ready.

and hotmail.com works just fine for me on mac, windows and linux mozilla 0.9.7 builds.

Except for downloading attachments. This is a big one IMO since it appears to be a genuine cookie handling bug and not some quirk of hotmail.

Bug 105917. Target fix release, 0.9.9

Hi there. I designed the interface for Mozillas Javascript prefs back in September, and Doron Rosenberg has spent the past couple of months implementing it.

the wording needs a little work

Well, if you have any suggestions, do share them.

Can you guess which one stops pop-ups?

None of them do. Thats why there isnt a checkbox labelled do pop-ups. Blocking pop-ups in toto would be pretty useless, because it would stop a large chunk of the Web from working properly.

Think about it. <a href="http://foo.bar/" target="_new">foo</a> is a pop-up, and none of these prefs prevent that from working, because then the link would break completely nothing at all would happen when you clicked on it. <a onclick="javascript:window.open(whatever)">foo& lt;/a> is a pop-up, and none of these checkboxes prevent that from working either, for the same reason. (In both cases it would be nice if you could get the link to open in the same window rather than opening in a new window, but we dont have the back end to allow that yet.)

What one of these checkboxes does let you do is stop windows from opening by themselves based on a timer, or when you navigate to or from a page. Thats the behavior that annoys people the most, since the new window is usually of no interest to them whatsoever. And whats the label for this checkbox? (Drum roll please ) Open windows by themselves.

If you have a better idea of what to label that checkbox, Id be glad to read it theres been a lot of suggestions so far, but theyve all been either too wordy, too obscure, or (as in your case) just plain wrong.

Good job on the prefs, Moz-team, but please, hire Jakob Nielsen before 1.0 ships.

Hah. I wrote to Jakob Nielsen a year or so ago, asking if he was interested, and he didnt bother replying. I guess whining about sucky Web sites (or sucky mobile phones) is like shooting fish in a barrel, compared to coming up with Javascript prefs your mother would understand.

-- mpt

Hi there. I designed the interface for Mozillas Javascript prefs back in September, and Doron Rosenberg has spent the past couple of months implementing it.

the wording needs a little work

Well, if you have any suggestions, do share them.

Can you guess which one stops pop-ups?

None of them do. Thats why there isnt a checkbox labelled do pop-ups. Blocking pop-ups in toto would be pretty useless, because it would stop a large chunk of the Web from working properly.

Think about it. <a href="http://foo.bar/" target="_new">foo</a> is a pop-up, and none of these prefs prevent that from working, because then the link would break completely nothing at all would happen when you clicked on it. <a onclick="javascript:window.open(whatever)">foo& lt;/a> is a pop-up, and none of these checkboxes prevent that from working either, for the same reason. (In both cases it would be nice if you could get the link to open in the same window rather than opening in a new window, but we dont have the back end to allow that yet.)

What one of these checkboxes does let you do is stop windows from opening by themselves based on a timer, or when you navigate to or from a page. Thats the behavior that annoys people the most, since the new window is usually of no interest to them whatsoever. And whats the label for this checkbox? (Drum roll please ) Open windows by themselves.

If you have a better idea of what to label that checkbox, Id be glad to read it theres been a lot of suggestions so far, but theyve all been either too wordy, too obscure, or (as in your case) just plain wrong.

Good job on the prefs, Moz-team, but please, hire Jakob Nielsen before 1.0 ships.

Hah. I wrote to Jakob Nielsen a year or so ago, asking if he was interested, and he didnt bother replying. I guess whining about sucky Web sites (or sucky mobile phones) is like shooting fish in a barrel, compared to coming up with Javascript prefs your mother would understand.

-- mpt

Hi there. I designed the interface for Mozillas Javascript prefs back in September, and Doron Rosenberg has spent the past couple of months implementing it.

the wording needs a little work

Well, if you have any suggestions, do share them.

Can you guess which one stops pop-ups?

None of them do. Thats why there isnt a checkbox labelled do pop-ups. Blocking pop-ups in toto would be pretty useless, because it would stop a large chunk of the Web from working properly.

Think about it. <a href="http://foo.bar/" target="_new">foo</a> is a pop-up, and none of these prefs prevent that from working, because then the link would break completely nothing at all would happen when you clicked on it. <a onclick="javascript:window.open(whatever)">foo& lt;/a> is a pop-up, and none of these checkboxes prevent that from working either, for the same reason. (In both cases it would be nice if you could get the link to open in the same window rather than opening in a new window, but we dont have the back end to allow that yet.)

What one of these checkboxes does let you do is stop windows from opening by themselves based on a timer, or when you navigate to or from a page. Thats the behavior that annoys people the most, since the new window is usually of no interest to them whatsoever. And whats the label for this checkbox? (Drum roll please ) Open windows by themselves.

If you have a better idea of what to label that checkbox, Id be glad to read it theres been a lot of suggestions so far, but theyve all been either too wordy, too obscure, or (as in your case) just plain wrong.

Good job on the prefs, Moz-team, but please, hire Jakob Nielsen before 1.0 ships.

Hah. I wrote to Jakob Nielsen a year or so ago, asking if he was interested, and he didnt bother replying. I guess whining about sucky Web sites (or sucky mobile phones) is like shooting fish in a barrel, compared to coming up with Javascript prefs your mother would understand.

-- mpt

I am afraid java is not yet supported in OS X. you can watch the progress here in bug 88870.

THE NEWS WE ALL NEED TO HEAR ABOUT MOZILLA IS THAT AOL AND/OR SUN AND/OR IBM AND/OR EARTHLINK AND/OR the EU AND/OR CHINA or ???????

Amen! I'd love to hear that news. Making Mozilla better gets us closer to hearing something like that. There are lots of ways that you can help to make Mozilla better. See getting involved page for some of them.

--Asa

I check the mozillazine.org and the mozilla site from time to time, and noticed today they've released another milestone just in time, for the first time!
If you take a look at the mozilla development roadmap, you'll believe me. Don't blame me for another exact release you see (0.9.5), 'cause .9.4 adn .9.5 were intended to be so, in order to be used for netscape 6.x products, and the schedule itself was changed. See freeze & branch date for 0.9.4 & 0.9.5, and you'll believe me again.
Anyway, the mozilla dev team have made a great work in a great manner, for many this could be a cool gift for the season. Thank you, and have a nice vacation everybody.

Scripts and Windows
x Enable Javascript
x Open Windows by themselves
x Move or resize existing windows
x Make windows flip over or under other windows
x Change status bar text
x Change Images
x Create or change cookies
x Read cookies

Can you guess which one stops pop-ups?
Would a usability expert know what half these prefs mean?

Good job on the prefs, Moz-team, but please, hire Jakob Nielsen before 1.0 ships.

I know, it's beena round, but I'm happy to have this feature:

http://www.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla0.9.7/#new

Mozilla has a new advanced preference panel for fine-grained JavaScript control. For instance, you can disallow pop up and pop-under windows without turning off JavaScript altogether.

I'd still like to have site-by-site preferences wihtout having to edit the prefs.js file, but, what can you do? (i know... i know... write the damn code yourself...)

Okay. Click on the link in the article , repeated here for your convenience. You will see a heading "Releases". Look at the next sentence.

Give it time, friend.

mozilla.org provies binaries for linux, mac (9 and X) and windows. Other builds (the dozen or so other platforms you're used to seeing at ftp.mozilla.org) are contributed by "platform champions" who take the time to make binaries so that you don't have to.

It's late in the week, christmas and the new year right around the corner. Give folks a little time (usually only a matter of days) to make those builds and send them in to mozilla.org.

Or you could do one better and make a build and contribute it to mozilla.org sooner. See Building a Mozilla distro for tips.

--Asa

• The Labels feature in Mail&News is now fully implemented. Organize your mail messages with the following new features:
  • Add labels to messages via context menus or the Message menu.
  • Clear labels from messages.
  • Change description and color of the labels via preferences (Edit | Preferences | Mail & Newsgroups | Labels). Five different labels are supported.
  • Add filter rules to set labels to spec.
• Mozilla Mail&News now supports basic S/MIME functionality although the UI is still incomplete.
• The Document Inspector is now enabled in complete installations. The DOM Inspector is a tool that can be used to inspect and edit the live DOM of any web document or XUL application. The DOM hierarchy can be navigated using a two-paned window that allows for a variety of different views on the document and all nodes within. If you're using the Mozilla installer, be sure to switch from typical, to complete or custom install to install the DOM inspector and JS Debugger.
• The Mac OSX toolbar collapse button is now implemented. Press this button in the title bar to toggle display of toolbars.
• The latest and greatest ChatZilla 0.8.5 is now shipping in Mozilla.
• Springloaded folders -- Dragging and hovering over a bookmark or message folder will expand the folder.
• Mozilla works again on Mac OS 8.5.
• Mozilla now supports shortcut icons (a.k.a favicons) and custom page icons in bookmarks and in the personal toolbar.
• If you type into the URL bar while a page is loading, your text is no longer overwritten when the page load completes.
• The sidebar now has a Close button.
• Print preview is now available on Macintosh.
• Mozilla now has support for digest access authentication.
• The Save Page operation now also saves images, stylesheets, objects and applets included in the page.
• Mozilla now supports the longdesc attribute of the img tag. The longdesc attribute contains a link to a file describing the image in detail, for those times where the image cannot be downloaded. To view the longdesc, right click on an image, click 'properties' in the context menu, then click on the description url in the properties dialog.
• Mozilla has a new advanced preference panel for fine-grained JavaScript control. For instance, you can disallow pop up and pop-under windows without turning off JavaScript altogether.
• When a page using a strict document type declaration (e.g. HTML 4.01 Strict) links to an external style sheet (using <link>, @import, etc) Mozilla will only load the style sheet if it is served with a MIME type of "text/css". Style sheets served with other MIME types, like text/plain, application/x-pointplus, etc. will not be loaded. To add the proper css mime type to an Apache web servers, add "text/css css" to the system mime.types file. Or if you can't do that, add "AddType text/css .css" to your .htaccess file.
• 
  
  --Asa

What? Are you afraid of getting sued by the makers of a certain browser?

I use...Netscape 4.77 to browse the web. I do not depend on non-free software for anything.

Netscape 4.x is non-free software. Consider using Mozilla, links, Konqueror (to name just a few) if you want to live completely in the free software world.

Now to your point about what DrinkOrDie was thinking: I don't know. I'm not saying I can defend their actions (I use only free software as much as possiblemy PC's BIOSes are not yet free software, for instance) but I don't know why they did what they did. I don't think what they did is stealing and I'm not convinced the genuine loss in income for the copyright holders of the duplicated software is in the billions because I'm not convinced all the people who have unauthorized copies would have paid for them anyhow. However, I'm still not privvy to why DrinkOrDie did what they did.

Mozilla != NPL

From mozilla.org:

At the moment, parts of the source are available under either the Netscape Public License (NPL) or the Mozilla Public License (MPL), often in combination with either the GNU General Public License (GPL) or the GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL), or both. mozilla.org is working towards having all the code in the tree licensed under a MPL/LGPL/GPL tri-license; for more information, see the Relicensing FAQ.

First of all, you should note that mozilla is relicensing everything under a triple license (NPL/GPL/LGPL for some and MPL/GPL/LGPL for others). See here for more info.

But to claim the NPL isn't free is bullshit. The NPL is basically the GPL with a few nods Netscape's way. The main difference is that they can use your code in proprietary products, whereas you can't use theirs in proprietary products.

Pretty much that means that this code acts like a BSD license for Netscape, and a GPL license for you. But since there's no real way for Netscape to yank the code away from you, even if they wanted to, I think it's pretty fair to call mozilla "free". The source code is out there, and there's nothing they can do to stop that. How is that not free?

Read more about the licenses here

First of all, you should note that mozilla is relicensing everything under a triple license (NPL/GPL/LGPL for some and MPL/GPL/LGPL for others). See here for more info.

But to claim the NPL isn't free is bullshit. The NPL is basically the GPL with a few nods Netscape's way. The main difference is that they can use your code in proprietary products, whereas you can't use theirs in proprietary products.

Pretty much that means that this code acts like a BSD license for Netscape, and a GPL license for you. But since there's no real way for Netscape to yank the code away from you, even if they wanted to, I think it's pretty fair to call mozilla "free". The source code is out there, and there's nothing they can do to stop that. How is that not free?

Read more about the licenses here

What about K-Meleon? This is IMHO one of the best *browsers* (i.e. no mail client, no news client, no blot) out there. It uses the gecko (i.e. Mozilla's) rendering engine. It's open source (GPLed). It's almost completely bug less (and the bugs are all UI, not the "I can delete your hard drive" variety). It's multi-lingual. It's secure. It's easy. And to your question it's small (3.89 mb). It kicks butt.


----------
SLEEP IS FOR THE WEAK.
WHEN YOU SLEEP THEY EAT YOUR TOES.

You sound like those Linux users who struggle with crappy browsers, and suffer with latex (because there's no good office suite), just so they can "stick it to the man in Redmond."

What you may never realize is that a little diplomacy goes a long way, and you're wasting a lot of time holding a childish grudge against a store that couldn't care less about your opinion. You're only hurting yourself.

Why does a fix to a program that nobody here uses, written by a company that everybody here hates matter?

AOL (who happen to be quite big ;) have their own login / account system which they are doing alongside a few other big names (perhaps Sun?).

The name is Liberty Alliance, so make a note of that.

This has been mentioned on the XNS mailing list. Have a look at XNS - they are doing a single login / identity management technology.

(BTW, in case you missed it - AOL has been paying for developers to work on the world's greatest browser to replace IE in AOL's software.)

IE? Standards compliant?

I guess you've never tried Mozilla

Please don't say IE is the best if you've only tried the abomination that is Time Warner/AOL/Netscape/Mirabilis/Whoever Navigator

now that this cat is out of the bag...what can we do to protect ourselves if we can't switch from Windows b/c our jobs won't let us?

Install Mozilla or Netscape to browse and read email. Don't use MS tools for accessing the Internet.

What kind of steps can people use to protect themselves now

This step and this, for instance :)

Safe at last! Whew!

Not really, you still have to remove the Redmond Virus from your hard disk. For this, visit another site's list of download mirrors and be prepare to wait a little longer. Yes, Mozilla is included with your replacement OS.

I guess IE for Mac is already invulnerable.

Honestly? I seriously would recommend browsing the web only with Mozilla. I had been using IE, but I switched to mozilla full time after 0.9.1 (except for work related browsing on my company's web pages, which are written exclusively for IE browsing.) It's been buggy, it's still a little buggy, but I haven't had many real showstoppers because of it. And no one's published any attacks yet, but because it's NOT integrated into the OS, I'm somewhat less concerned about the damage it's capable of causing.

If you're stuck with IE, then might I recommend a proxy filter such as The Proxomitron? You can modify the incoming http headers to do anything you want, including altering file extensions!

John

Mozilla has gestures as well.

The aforementioned Mozilla includes an email/news client that of course uses the Mozilla rendering engine for HTML. Works quite well.

The aforementioned Mozilla includes an email/news client that of course uses the Mozilla rendering engine for HTML. Works quite well.

• Copy your current explorer.exe, shell32.dll, comdlg32.dll, notepad.exe and wordpad.exe to a backup location in case things go haywire. (I've done this before on Windows 98 and ME boxes without problems, but it's always good to be safe).
• Insert the Windows 95 CD, and start a dos prompt.
• From the prompt, enter:

  d: (or whatever your CD drive is)
  cd win95
  extract /a /l c:\your\windows\desktop win95_02.cab comdlg32.dll explorer.exe shell32.dll notepad.exe wordpad.exe

• You should have the files listed above appear on your desktop. Now shut down into DOS mode, and copy the new shell32.dll and comdlg32.dll into your Windows SYSTEM directory, and copy explorer.exe, notepad.exe and wordpad.exe into your WINDOWS directory, and reboot Windows. (If you're using ME, you can go into c:\windows\system.ini and change your shell to taskman.exe in order to be able to replace explorer and the other system files)

Of course, after doing this, the next step is to replace your browser, but that goes without saying. :-)

Second, don't just bitch about IE. If you haven't already, check out the alternatives:

• Mozilla, now in Version 0.9.6, is very feature-rich and fast and the most standard-compliant browser in existence, but not for computers with less than 128 MB of memory.
• kmeleon (Windows) and galeon (Linux) are Mozilla derivatives with smaller footprint.
• Opera, which is closed source adware and requires registration, is a very fast browser that is especially recommended for "information surfers" because of its excellent navigation and caching.
• Konqueror is KDE's built-in browser. Thanks to Qt/Embedded and/or KDE-Cygwin, it might be ported to Windows as well.
• Lynx and W3M are up-to-date text mode browsers capable of displaying most pages which do not depend on images or animations.

Well, you can just do what I do: Browse with Mozilla.

This is why I started using Mozilla.

That might be a good idea if ads were the only reason to use popups.

// More important, disable JS windows popping up a new window on load
// (as lots of porn and spam sites do):
user_pref("dom.disable_open_during_load", true);

That might be a good idea if ads were the only reason to use popups.

// More important, disable JS windows popping up a new window on load
// (as lots of porn and spam sites do):
user_pref("dom.disable_open_during_load", true);

Yes, I have used IE5 on OSX. It is horrid. Every so often it goes into a single thread and the entire app refuses to do anything - this happens usually when rendering a complex page like a nested slashdot. The old IE (for OS9) actually works better in Classic than the Carbon IE.

I use Mozilla. It's about the only OSX app that works properly.

And I only use a Mac because my boss is a Jobs-lover. If I had my way the server would be either Solaris or Mandrake on an i686 running Samba, and the workstations would be Windows 2000 Pro.

Joel seems to be a strong advocate of code reuse and understands the stalwart value of "old code". Why then, does his comany, Fog Creek Software implement their own proprietary bug tracking system, "FogBugz" when there are perfectly awesome bug tracking systems out there, like Bugzilla?

For information on accessibility support being developed for Mozilla, see the Mozilla accessibility project and the netscape.public.mozilla.accessibility newsgroup.

They support great projects like Mozilla, open sourced an excellent webserver, but play hardball over AIM.

If AOL wants to prove their commitment to open standards, then publish the AIM protocol under a royalty-free license. Be willing to put their money where their mouth is.

What does this have to do with anything? I don't know any windows users that submit bug reports.

Not to call attention to the devil its self, windowsXP, but now when something crashes (i.e. "the playa" *.divx player) in windowsXP, it asks if you want to send an error report to microsoft.
Also, people submit bugs for mozilla, windows platform all the time, microsoft themselves have a bug submit page... i mean, it does happen, and rather often.

All i'm saying is that not all windows users are idiots. However, all idiots use windows.... or something.

~z

I agree with this assesment. The reason that Java is so nice for I18N is that the internal representation is Unicode. It makes it so easy to have output in UTF-8 (one of the current most popular Unicode encodings). This is really nice for web browsers, because the current Netscape, Mozilla, and IE all have very good UTF-8 support. Although I put down Microsoft all the time, I give them credit for a very good implementation of UTF-8 and font support for multi-lingual applications. The Mozilla team is right on their heels, however, to the point of now supporting Arabic glyph shaping. If you don't know what that is, Arabic text changes the shape of the characters depending on the context. Therefore, you can't use a simple font encoding where code 0xblahblahblah uses font glyph 0xblahblahblah. You have to analyze the data to produce a proper representation.

The "Reply" is a button ... Need to get rid of that button so that I'll have the usual options of opening my reply in another tab/window, etc.

This problem can be fixed at the HTML level (change it to a link) or at the client level (make context menus work as well for forms as for links). Kuro5hin and other Scoop sites follow the former approach; it took me a while to find the Reply button after months of Slashdot participation. Bug 17754 in Bugzilla covers the other approach, opening form submissions in a new window. IE, on the other hand, does not have a public bug tracker; if it did, I'd be all over it.

Ooops.

If you check Mozilla Releases, you will find releases for Free and Net BSD builds, but no OpenBSD builds.

Here is what you're looking for.

Mozilla, everybody's favorite huge-ass software project, uses autoconf. I worked at Netscape last year, and I can tell you for sure, build issues were something I was quite glad to have been able to avoid in a project that size. There were only a couple bits of old code in Mozilla (last time I checked) left over from the Netscape 4.x days that were non-autoconf.

If you're looking for a case study to present to your pointy-hairs, look no further than Mozilla.

> I'll put dollars to donuts that no major company
> that is pricing their toys at this stratosphere
> will EVER consider anything but BSD.

Netscape. Quicknet. Countless others.

Where are my dollars? (No, you can't pay in stock options >:-> .)