Slashdot Mirror

The build itself is blocked due to some other bugs. Check out bug 28709, or rather the bugs it depends on (28711 and 28717).

So Mozilla has several showstoppers on IRIX. If anyone has the ability and time to fix this, please do! Otherwise, if you want an IRIX Mozilla, at least go vote for these critical IRIX bugs so that the developers at least know that someone cares.

The build itself is blocked due to some other bugs. Check out bug 28709, or rather the bugs it depends on (28711 and 28717).

So Mozilla has several showstoppers on IRIX. If anyone has the ability and time to fix this, please do! Otherwise, if you want an IRIX Mozilla, at least go vote for these critical IRIX bugs so that the developers at least know that someone cares.

The build itself is blocked due to some other bugs. Check out bug 28709, or rather the bugs it depends on (28711 and 28717).

So Mozilla has several showstoppers on IRIX. If anyone has the ability and time to fix this, please do! Otherwise, if you want an IRIX Mozilla, at least go vote for these critical IRIX bugs so that the developers at least know that someone cares.

The build itself is blocked due to some other bugs. Check out bug 28709, or rather the bugs it depends on (28711 and 28717).

So Mozilla has several showstoppers on IRIX. If anyone has the ability and time to fix this, please do! Otherwise, if you want an IRIX Mozilla, at least go vote for these critical IRIX bugs so that the developers at least know that someone cares.

The build itself is blocked due to some other bugs. Check out bug 28709, or rather the bugs it depends on (28711 and 28717).

So Mozilla has several showstoppers on IRIX. If anyone has the ability and time to fix this, please do! Otherwise, if you want an IRIX Mozilla, at least go vote for these critical IRIX bugs so that the developers at least know that someone cares.

The build itself is blocked due to some other bugs. Check out bug 28709, or rather the bugs it depends on (28711 and 28717).

So Mozilla has several showstoppers on IRIX. If anyone has the ability and time to fix this, please do! Otherwise, if you want an IRIX Mozilla, at least go vote for these critical IRIX bugs so that the developers at least know that someone cares.

The build itself is blocked due to some other bugs. Check out bug 28709, or rather the bugs it depends on (28711 and 28717).

So Mozilla has several showstoppers on IRIX. If anyone has the ability and time to fix this, please do! Otherwise, if you want an IRIX Mozilla, at least go vote for these critical IRIX bugs so that the developers at least know that someone cares.

Great, the browser is skinable. That has to be one of the most useless features I've seen. I don't want my browser to have it's own look and feel, I want it to look like the rest of my desktop. (GNOME at the moment) Would it be too much to ask to just let it use GTK themes?

Looks like someone started on such a project, though that page hasn't been updated since November 20, 1998.

Maybe that option is in the Mozilla source, I haven't been following development that closely. At least the Mozilla folks decided to move away from Motif. Motif just looks ugly compared to GTK (or even QT)

But its coming. It just needs everybody to test it out and submit bugs.

aging M16? the M16 build is hardly a day old, and already it's aging...

//rdj

So? I employ proven, stable technologies like Python and Gtk+ to create an interface so flexible, that it is written and intepreted at runtime.

Seems a narrow point of view... If Python and Gtk+ suit your needs, then no one is shoving Mozilla down your throat. But what if you needed a cross platform framework? What if you had to (or wanted to) support Macintosh, i386 Linux, Windows, Irix, i386 Solaris (and those are just from the homepage) without so much as a recompile (assuming the rest of your code is written in a good cross-platform cross-compiler manner)?

I need a fast
Mozilla is faster and more responsive than Netscape 4.x (P3 450)

lightweight
Smaller download/footprint too.

standards-compliant web browser!
As standards-compliant as they come, along with MathML and scalable vector graphics.

Take your buzzwords and shove them.

Jeez, does another application framework piss you off that much?? Wow...


--
"And is the Tao in the DOS for a personal computer?"

So? I employ proven, stable technologies like Python and Gtk+ to create an interface so flexible, that it is written and intepreted at runtime.

Seems a narrow point of view... If Python and Gtk+ suit your needs, then no one is shoving Mozilla down your throat. But what if you needed a cross platform framework? What if you had to (or wanted to) support Macintosh, i386 Linux, Windows, Irix, i386 Solaris (and those are just from the homepage) without so much as a recompile (assuming the rest of your code is written in a good cross-platform cross-compiler manner)?

I need a fast
Mozilla is faster and more responsive than Netscape 4.x (P3 450)

lightweight
Smaller download/footprint too.

standards-compliant web browser!
As standards-compliant as they come, along with MathML and scalable vector graphics.

Take your buzzwords and shove them.

Jeez, does another application framework piss you off that much?? Wow...


--
"And is the Tao in the DOS for a personal computer?"

1. A cursory glance at the Mozilla home page would tell you that SSL support is being implemented in Mozilla with something called PSM 1.1 for Mozilla.
2. Well, Shockwave... I guess you've got me there, no use browsing the web without it. =)
3. Java's a good point, too. I will definitely miss the animated banners and scrolling marquees that proliferate throughout the web. Granted, there are a few sites that use Java and JavaScript well. I don't know, guess I'll play it by ear. If I encounter a site that absolutely must use Java, then I'll switch back to Navigator.

My point (aside from being a sarcastic bastard) is that the vast majority of my web browsing is stuff that Mozilla supports. I use IMAP for mail and Mozilla's mailer is finally beginning to look presentable.

Why not try it out now? Report bugs and make it better? Because I can't see yet another bad picture album?

--

has anyone been able to get mozilla to build under irix 6.x? I've followed the instructions at www.mozilla.org/unix/irix.html, but building still fails on my machine... anyone know of a place to snag binaries?

--

Didn't the entire old Netscape codebase get tossed about a year into the project? (Please correct me if I'm wrong on this; a really quick skim through mozilla.org during the writing of this didn't help much.) I'd say going from nothing to a fairly-usable browser in two years isn't a bad job, especially one that plans to compete with the "big boys".

Unlike ION Storm, the Mozilla crew acknowledges the problems and debate over their decisions - the Mozilla at One article seems to cover the high and lowlights of Mozilla's then-young life.

It still crashes more a bit than I'd like for daily use, and some useful features are missing. I've only been really trying it since late M13, but I've seen some definite progress in stability and features. It already renders pages more accurately than Netscape in Linux, so there's points in its favour right there:) I grabbed the last nightly build before M16 officially arrived; runs pretty fast compared to M13, though it still takes time to load.

If I could program worth a lick, I'd contribute in a second.

As it is, I'm happy.

I love everyone who takes the time to complain about mozilla's speed without bothering to understand how this project has progressed. Obviously M16 isnt even a public beta release so the usual 'your milage may vary' rules apply but please, before you start bitching, goto mozilla.org and learn about the agenda for the future. AFAIK mozilla isnt even feature complete yet (altho M16 is very near final feature base) and speed optimisation is not due to commence until well after the feature set has stabilised!!

mozilla is a pretty special piece of software and the developers dont pretend it is bug free (hence the existance of bugzilla. Last i checked IE doesnt have such a public forum to air REAL grievances about bugs and performance. If you dont like it, contribute, mozilla is not netscape and you can influence its direction by getting involved.

I love everyone who takes the time to complain about mozilla's speed without bothering to understand how this project has progressed. Obviously M16 isnt even a public beta release so the usual 'your milage may vary' rules apply but please, before you start bitching, goto mozilla.org and learn about the agenda for the future. AFAIK mozilla isnt even feature complete yet (altho M16 is very near final feature base) and speed optimisation is not due to commence until well after the feature set has stabilised!!

mozilla is a pretty special piece of software and the developers dont pretend it is bug free (hence the existance of bugzilla. Last i checked IE doesnt have such a public forum to air REAL grievances about bugs and performance. If you dont like it, contribute, mozilla is not netscape and you can influence its direction by getting involved.

Ahem.
http://mozilla.org/source.html

Try about:mozilla as a URL in Mozilla. Quite amusing. Is it truly an easter egg? In truth I don't know if a bug report counts as documentation.

But look at the KDE browser. That's come a lot further a lot faster than the Mozilla project.

That statement really bothers me, because while the KDE browser is just that, a web browser, you have to understand that Mozilla is as much as application framework as it is a web browser. The ability to parse HTML is just one part of what the Mozilla project is all about.

Did you know that every part of Mozilla's UI and dialogs are written in an XML doc type called XUL? By doing this, the Netscape guys no longer have to deal with half a dozen UI toolkits for each platform. As you can imagine, this is no small task.

Konqueror has come along faster, but there are different design goals: Browser vs. complex cross platform app framework (wrapped around a browser).


--
"And is the Tao in the DOS for a personal computer?"

Really, in what way is downloading & compiling KDE less easy than doing the same for Mozilla?

Instructions for building Mozilla:

1) Download the source tarball
2) Unzip into directory of your choice
3) cd into the directory and type: make
4) Go for coffee, come back in 40 minutes
5) Type ./mozilla and go for a surf

Instructions for building kmail:

0) Look for a kmail.x.x.tgz. Find a very old one. Get confused. Hunt around with RPM. Figure out it's now part of kdenetwork. Look for kdenetwork.x.x.tgz. Find a version that's way too old. Learn you have to get it out of CVS, and you have to get all of KDE with it.
1) Explore kde.org. Find the part that tells you about cvsup
2) Download and install cvsup
3) Find the instructions about how to get download KDE via cvsup
4) Decide what parts of KDE you actually want to download. Get confused. Decide to download everything
5) Start the download and go to sleep
6) Wake up, discover you got disconnected, repeat as necessary
7) Get a cup of coffee, sit down, and start figuring out how to build it
8) Guess that you have to build QT first. Try to build QT in the obvious way. It doesn't work. Go back to instructions. Learn you have to link a directory first. Do it and try again.
8) Go out for a walk while QT builds. Come back, find it's still building. Play Mahjong.
9) Try to use the same strategy to build kdebase. It doesn't work. Try some more. It still doesn't work.
10) Go back to developer.kde.org. Learn about the build script. Download it. Fiddle with it until all the path variable are correct. It finally seems to work. Out of fear, decide to build everything.
11) Go to sleep while it builds.
12) Wake up. One of the first packages failed to build - it's because somebody checked in something ugly that broke the build. Start cvsup again. Go for another walk while the tree updates. Later that day, start the build again and go to sleep.
13) It builds this time. Now figure out how to install it, without conflicting with your current KDE installation. Go for a surf. Find a howto on this subject. Read it. Fiddle with paths. Now it works.
14) Run kmail from the new desktop

OK, I may have missed a couple of steps, or a couple of details, but that's essentially what has to happen. Umm, don't you think there's a difference in difficulty and time investment between the two procedures?

There ARE snapshots of libs and app-packages available, and the next set of those will even contain CVS information, so you just need to update a specific directory from that on.

But why can't I just download a tgz of the specific package I want to compile, like almost any other open source project? Then all I need are headers for kde and qt, and I'm up and hacking. There is a *radical* difference in the amount of work required to get started. Later, when I've got some code I'm proud of, I can figure out how to submit it to a maintainer. In other words, the normal open source process.

Package snapshots only eliminate a few of the steps I listed, and you still have to figure out which packages you need, which directories to put them in, and how to set the paths. This is a *lot* of work if you've never done it before.

Mainly, what I hear you saying is: there's no problem, it's just your imagination. But it's not my imagination, I've been through this. I know what the difference is between downloading and compiling "spruce", for example, versus downloading all of kde and qt just to compile "kmail". It amounts to *days* of extra work the first time you do it. It's not my imagination.

Perhaps I should rejoin the KDE mailing list and we can continue this discussion there. *But* I still have this nagging feeling - why should I do that, when the last time I did, I just got flamed?
--

--

Netscape -> Mozilla
Pine -> Mutt
JDK -> Kaffe

What was the problem again?

Rich.

Novell Directory Services, or eDirectory, is a distributed, replicable, hierarchical directory database, which currently runs with full functionality on NetWare (administered and managed almost exclusively from MS Windows), with plenty of functionality (or so the glossies imply) on Solaris and Linux. In the past, NDS has been accessed mostly from Windows clients through Novell Directory Access Protocol (NDAP), something that looks darn similar to Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP, a subset of the heavy X.500's Directory Access Protocol). Novell used to provide an LDAP gateway to the NDS, which would send your LDAP request through NDAP to the NDS, and then the answer would come back through NDAP, through the LDAP gateway, and back to you. Novell's eDirectory now lets you hit NDS directly through LDAP, so LDAP is now a true peer to NDAP.

I've played with NDS for Solaris before, and it's pretty slick. Here at Miami U, we've got one or two replicas of a test NDS tree, and we just made our Solaris machine another replica of that tree. All user attributes like shell and home directory are stored as NDS attributes (part of the installation involved extending the NDS schema to allow for Unix attributes). We're pretty excited about this, because any given client of ours has at least five or six different passwords to remember; consolidating directories is a must at this point.

Novell also has a product in Golden Master right now called NetWare NFS Services 3.0. This is another gateway-type thingy that provides NIS and NFS services. I haven't played with this one yet, but it sounds promising.

The problem I'm running into is that Linux doesn't support 32-bit UID's. Miami has on the order of 30,000 clients to support, so we decided to start numbering UID's at the next highest order of magnitude, 100,000. Well, Linux can't see UID's bigger than 65,535, so we must either re-do all our UID's (big, big, big pain in the tochus, as thousands of these UID's are currently in use), abandon universal UID's and the ability to NFS share data across platforms, or wait until Linux gets big UID support. I've read that the recent 2.3 kernels actually support large UID's but we've still got to wait for glibc 2.2. There have been hacks, but I really don't want an enterprise depending on Joe's hack.

Jeff

Technically it is not really Konqueror supporting https but rather the kio_https module of KDE's kio system. Every KDE application can do HTTPS.

By the way, Mozilla can do HTTPS as well with the right plugins. Both have Java, Javascript support, render fast and almost with full compliancy to the specs. Konqueror can even do Netscape plugins such as Flash, I'm not sure about Mozilla but I expect that it will since it is ment to replace Navigator sooner or later.

And if that's not enough, w3m (Lynx only better ;-) can do it as well!

Forgive my ignorance, but I haven't downloaded a Mozilla build in ages: how's the PNG support?

You're forgiven :) Mozilla has full alpha channel support now, but the default is still sort of a kluge: instead of true color mixing, it uses random dithering to simulate transparency. This was done so that alpha would work on all platforms, including those that do not have native alpha compositiing, since Mozilla's architecture makes the necessary calculations difficult.

There is, however, a build option that compiles in support for native alpha compositing on some platforms--but I can't remember which platforms or which option.

There is more information available in the bug report in bugzilla.

Forgive my ignorance, but I haven't downloaded a Mozilla build in ages: how's the PNG support?

You're forgiven :) Mozilla has full alpha channel support now, but the default is still sort of a kluge: instead of true color mixing, it uses random dithering to simulate transparency. This was done so that alpha would work on all platforms, including those that do not have native alpha compositiing, since Mozilla's architecture makes the necessary calculations difficult.

There is, however, a build option that compiles in support for native alpha compositing on some platforms--but I can't remember which platforms or which option.

There is more information available in the bug report in bugzilla.

XMLTerm is a mozilla based x-term, with some web-like features (check the screenshots). Here it is in the tree:
http://lxr.mozilla.org/mozi lla/source/extensions/xmlterm

amazing!

To try it out, you'll need the source, Luke:
./configure --with-extensions=xmlterm {others}
./mozilla -chrome chrome://xmlterm/content/xmlterm.xul

see the pages for more details.
--
"And is the Tao in the DOS for a personal computer?"

• Apple. I've thought for a long time that Apple should have split up. One company for OS, one for hardware, one (Claris) for apps. Nice & simple. And allow clones, to drive down prices--I was pissed when they killed the clones, even though I didn't own one.
• Sun has too many viable, profitable competitors. I do, however, think that Java should be handed off to an independent standards body.
• AOL/Time Warner/Netscape/What Am I Missing? isn't a monopoly...yet. It's just a conglomerate, albeit a huge, scary one. I'm happy that the Netscape browser is now under the control of an independent organization. And if they start abusing their media ties, expect someone to unleash a holy shitstorm.
• IBM. Last time I checked, it wasn't illegal to be an ex-monopoly, even if the fall wasn'tcaused by government intervention. Antitrust law is only there in case the actions of the market are insufficient to prevent or punish abuse. In this case, the market got to IBM before the DoJ could. IBM has been a good corporate citizen recently, so lets give 'em a break. And has anyone else noticed that IBM's devcenter billboards mention Linux but not Windows, or any other MS product or technology?

yup, that's about right. Blake. It was mentioned in my post, but my writing was so dense and rambling that i don't think anyone noticed it :)
More people might have used blake, of course, if it hadn't been for the fact it was $30 shareware, and until you paid that $30 every single browser window blake created had a huge nagware panel saying to pay for Blake. This is really really wierd when you consider all Blake did was fuse two free pieces of software together.. and you were expected to pay $30 for it.

Cyberdog's web browser was always awful, but the mail and newsgroup parts were wonderful-- so good that i continued to use cyberdog as my mail/news reader for years.. unfortunately it had a couple small bugs that were serious problems to me, and since apple had locked down the code they would never get fixed. Had apple had one engineer spend about a day fixing problems in Cyberdog-- problems being things like it's lack of inherent Internet Config modularity support, which would have been rediculously easy to code in, or its inability to send non-GIF pasted images, or its totally inexplicable inability to send files without binhexing them first, or a way to translate opendoc images into normal JPEGs [since an "opendoc image" was just a wrapper around the original JPEG], or the tiny bit of work to make it compatible with the newer versions of the Macintosh Runtime for Java-- i might still be using it today. But apple refused to do even the tiniest bit of maintenence work on it, and so it's small but serious problems caused me to finally flee to Outlook Express 4.. *sob* oh god the memories

an interesting project would be reimplementing Mozilla as a cyberdog-style opendoc thing. [i'd suggest doing the same to Bettertelnet or Mactelnet as replacements for cyberdog's telnet part, now that they're opensourced, but i don't know how opendoc-compatible the GPL is..] Unfortunately i don't think opendoc still works in the mac os, and i don't think the windows port was ever finished. Pity.

The US is the laughing stock of the world. We took one of the most successful companies in the history of commerce to court, to punish them for being too successful.

No, actually, the European Union is also investigating MSFT for anti-trust, and if we don't break them up, they will. They're not laughing at us, they're sneering at our wimpiness in following our own laws.

The browser is irrelevant

Yeah, we'll all be using Opera anyway. Either that or Mozilla.

Make sure you read the release notes, and see if anything in there will fix your problem. Specifically, make sure you delete your old mozregistry.dat file in the Windows directory, if one is there.

Works perfectly under Linux... you should file a Bugzilla bug if you can reproduce this on Win32.

I agree that iCab is looking really good. But as a Mac user too, I welcome anything that's not Micros~1, as do most /.-ers, I assume. This is why I have been trying every Mozilla milestone since M10, and why I'm an alpha tester for MacOpera. We need alternatives, we need choice, we need support for standards.

However, I agree that a nightly build is hardly newsworthy.

Take a look at Table renderer crashes on large tables. This may or may not be what is happening...

Very nice. Definity an improvement of M15. It's still not all that fast though; and there's still a couple of noticable bugs in it. At least the stupid bookmark bug ( 11586 ) was fixed.

One pretty major problem though, at least for me, is a stupid dialog box coming up evertyime I hit a page that I've blocked. I have certain domain's blocked (like ad.doubleclick.net, a dforce.imgis.com, etc) in /etc/hosts so that way I odn't have to view the damn ads. But now everytime I come to a page with them on their, I get a dialog box saying "The connection was refused when trying to contact [insert blocked domain here]". It's really annoying, and it's the first time it's ever happened, since with IE5, N4.7, and M15, it never had any dialog box complaining about not being able to contact that particular server. Basically I'm asking if there is any way to turn this thing off.

Since nobody else has said so outright, I'll remind you all the actual milestone build of m16 is not yet out. These (as others *have* said) are the nightly builds along the path to m16. These have been available since before m15 was released.

When M16 actually does come out (and it should be within a few days), it'll be available at ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla/releases/m16/.

------

M16 builds have been appearing for ages. The nightly builds are named after the upcomming milestone, so when M15 comes out all nightlies are now called M16... Take a look at the directory structure...

On related stuff the new builds are getting quite a bit faster and now have stuff like autocomplete in them. There was a feature freeze not long ago so we should (hopefully) see builds becoming more stable.

Linux moz is looking good although some old favourites (such as the scrollbars coming free bug) are still there.

The mac builds are still lagging behind other platforms which is a shame. We really do need more mac helpers to stop it becoming a third rate platform (in terms of the quality of it's mozilla builds).

From the little testing I've done on Windoze those builds seem good too.

Plugs/Links:
Visit Mozillazine! It has a build bar that informs you how good previous builds are.

Hang out in #mozillazine. If you've got irc (and you should because moz has one built in which can be launched from the prompt using mozilla -chat) use /server irc.mozilla.org then /join #mozillazine

Got spare time and a fast connection? Help Smoketest the daily builds.

New to mozilla? Take a look at NewZilla

M16 builds have been appearing for ages. The nightly builds are named after the upcomming milestone, so when M15 comes out all nightlies are now called M16... Take a look at the directory structure...

On related stuff the new builds are getting quite a bit faster and now have stuff like autocomplete in them. There was a feature freeze not long ago so we should (hopefully) see builds becoming more stable.

Linux moz is looking good although some old favourites (such as the scrollbars coming free bug) are still there.

The mac builds are still lagging behind other platforms which is a shame. We really do need more mac helpers to stop it becoming a third rate platform (in terms of the quality of it's mozilla builds).

From the little testing I've done on Windoze those builds seem good too.

Plugs/Links:
Visit Mozillazine! It has a build bar that informs you how good previous builds are.

Hang out in #mozillazine. If you've got irc (and you should because moz has one built in which can be launched from the prompt using mozilla -chat) use /server irc.mozilla.org then /join #mozillazine

Got spare time and a fast connection? Help Smoketest the daily builds.

New to mozilla? Take a look at NewZilla

M16 builds have been appearing for ages. The nightly builds are named after the upcomming milestone, so when M15 comes out all nightlies are now called M16... Take a look at the directory structure...

On related stuff the new builds are getting quite a bit faster and now have stuff like autocomplete in them. There was a feature freeze not long ago so we should (hopefully) see builds becoming more stable.

Linux moz is looking good although some old favourites (such as the scrollbars coming free bug) are still there.

The mac builds are still lagging behind other platforms which is a shame. We really do need more mac helpers to stop it becoming a third rate platform (in terms of the quality of it's mozilla builds).

From the little testing I've done on Windoze those builds seem good too.

Plugs/Links:
Visit Mozillazine! It has a build bar that informs you how good previous builds are.

Hang out in #mozillazine. If you've got irc (and you should because moz has one built in which can be launched from the prompt using mozilla -chat) use /server irc.mozilla.org then /join #mozillazine

Got spare time and a fast connection? Help Smoketest the daily builds.

New to mozilla? Take a look at NewZilla

M16 builds have been appearing for ages. The nightly builds are named after the upcomming milestone, so when M15 comes out all nightlies are now called M16... Take a look at the directory structure...

On related stuff the new builds are getting quite a bit faster and now have stuff like autocomplete in them. There was a feature freeze not long ago so we should (hopefully) see builds becoming more stable.

Linux moz is looking good although some old favourites (such as the scrollbars coming free bug) are still there.

The mac builds are still lagging behind other platforms which is a shame. We really do need more mac helpers to stop it becoming a third rate platform (in terms of the quality of it's mozilla builds).

From the little testing I've done on Windoze those builds seem good too.

Plugs/Links:
Visit Mozillazine! It has a build bar that informs you how good previous builds are.

Hang out in #mozillazine. If you've got irc (and you should because moz has one built in which can be launched from the prompt using mozilla -chat) use /server irc.mozilla.org then /join #mozillazine

Got spare time and a fast connection? Help Smoketest the daily builds.

New to mozilla? Take a look at NewZilla

Weird way of getting attention to a bug. Anyway, you can vote for bugs in Bugzilla to mark most important bugs to fix. So far this bug has only got one vote but I also don't think that Slashdot effect should be used to emphasize one bug over others. Just make a search to find other and more fatal bugs.

Weird way of getting attention to a bug. Anyway, you can vote for bugs in Bugzilla to mark most important bugs to fix. So far this bug has only got one vote but I also don't think that Slashdot effect should be used to emphasize one bug over others. Just make a search to find other and more fatal bugs.

I realize this has nothing to do with alpha channels, but since the day the Mozilla project was announced, there's been one change I've been lobbying for and I'm trying to round up additional support.

In Netscape 0-3, when you opened a link in a new window, the Go menu retained the history of the old window. This changed in Netscape 4, where the new window now starts with an empty history. I find this incredibly frustrating. At a large site, I'll frequently open multiple windows, close them as I read the articles, and then discover that I can't back out because I forgot which window was the parent.

After months of debate, a Netscape employee marked the RFE as "WONTFIX". (It seems to have recently been reopened.) If other people think this would be a useful change to make, please visit the relevant Bugzilla page and comment or vote!!

Due to this bug in Mozilla, any web page that has a form and uses a charset that is other than ISO-8859-1 would not work. I hope the severity of this bug is increased ASAP and the fix moved to something other than M19. This bug is known to effect Unicode pages that have forms as well.
--

If you want MNG, someone has to pick up the ball and run with it, as no-one on the team at the moment has the bandwidth to take it on. See this bug for the full story.

Gerv

I *am* a web designer and writer, and a lot of the work I've done over the past five years *has* gotten imitated, for better or worse. For instance, oddly enough, the original Mozilla.org (http://www.mozilla.org) was copied from the simple HTML-and-CSS layout I did The Web Standards Project (http://www.webstandards.org/): from the technique, to the color palette, to the crude four-pixel black outlines around content areas. Don't bother checking; the new Mozilla layout has evolved away from that original look, though it still bears trace elements of the original design. A lot of you probably do remember the original Mozilla layout. I'm sure when Roblimo saw it, he realized it was copied from http://www.webstandards.org and I think that's the kind of thing he was referring to in his overly kind introduction to my work.

Well, that's really interesting, but I'm afraid it's just not true at all.

I designed and implemented the mozilla.org web site. It was not copied from your site, because I've never heard of you, or your site. (I've never heard of your petition either, but that's another matter entirely.)

On the other hand, the mozilla.org web site is just not very complicated: how many web sites have you seen that have a menu on the left and content on the right? I'd say, ``most of them.''

If I was inspired by any site, it was probably gimp.org, but mozilla.org didn't end up looking much like that in the end.

Sorry to burst your bubble.

copied from the simple HTML-and-CSS layout I did

While I was in charge of mozilla.org, for that first year and a half, the site did not use CSS at all. Nor did it use any non-default font faces or sizes (except headings.) In fact, I was quite adamant that all documents on mozilla.org follow a style that rejected all the newest incompatible flavor-of-the-week bells and whistles that had shown up on the web in the last few years. I still care that documents be readable in Netscape 1.1. This was to the vocal dismay of people who were writing documents for the site, who thought that my insistence on consistency was an unnecessary hurdle for them.

You can read my style guide at http://www.mozilla.org/README-style.html.

--