Slashdot Mirror
Red Hat: Who Needs Netscape?
LazyBoy points to this story on Yahoo which says that Red Hat won't be bundling Netscape with its distribution once Mozilla 1.0 is out. And since the (very nice) .9 is out, with .9.1 on the horizon, that shouldn't be all that long from now. Rather cool that the long-heralded failure of Mozilla is proving to be exaggerated, even with a lot of other good browser projects in the ring.
Like, apply the modern skin. try to highlight something in the URL bar (it highlights but invisibly). Or apply more than a few changes in the preferences, then the "OK" button doesn't work (you can click it but it doesn't make the dialog box go away or apply the changes). I think that it may be a specific preferences setting that causes this about midway through the list (I don't recall which one off the top of my head, images from another server denial IIRC). These are just the obvious ones you'd run into after using it for 15 minutes or so.
My point being that while mozilla is getting (somewhat) faster, it's still <em>really</em> buggy. Sure, it handles CSS and JavaScript much better than Nutscrape 4.x, but that doesn't mean the bugs it has are any less annoying.
--StandardDeviant, too lazy to log in
I will never install qmail or any other DJB program on my system, for one simple reason: putting binaries in /var is insane! My /var partition is mounted nosuid,nodev,noexec 24 hours a day, and I don't need the hassle of reconfiguring qmail and putting binaries into /usr like a sane program every time I upgrade.
Mozilla also has a noticable delay (~0.2 seconds) the first time I access the right-click menu, and about 0.5s when I load a large submenu of bookmarks. These delays may seem insignificant, but they make the GUI feel generally unresponsive, and are the reason people see Mozilla as slow or bloated. Accessing any menu on 4.7x happens "instantly" for me.
Maybe it's faster, but "faster + incorrect" just doesn't cut it.
Then would you rather stick with using the old cache and image lib?
All the problems you mentioned is minor -- by minor I mean that given enough time for the new code to mature, they will eventually go away.
The old cache and image lib is far from being "correct", and their bugs are far more serious. For example, the old cache provides no way to re-use the page currently showing on your screen without reloading from the network. The old image lib has serious performance problems when it comes to animations, and the incorrect caching routine also makes Mozilla reload certain images from network all the time. These are serious problems that can't be fixed with a few patches, and that's why major parts are being re-written in 0.9.
The bugs you see in 0.9 are really nothing compared to more serious issues before 0.9. They will get fixed.
>In a real econmic downturn, the "open source" model will fail.
Slackware exists, despite for years never being a real company (maybe they are now? Did Patrick ever bother making that step?). Hell, the last company handholding them just let go and they're still right on schedule. Case in point.
Open source works despite downturns in the economy simply because it is not tied to a revenue stream. If it was it would feel the effects like Microsoft is about to (gee, maybe that's the reason why they just started publicly decrying open source again, and that they are getting tough on licensing? because they need to scrape every last dollar from the barrel again?)
Oh, but now I see... you are equating success with money + company growth. I suggest you open your mind to a world where money doesn't rule you.
I won't be so rude to Netscape. Without their opening up their source code to Navigator, starting the Mozilla project, and being the main developer/contributor to the Mozilla project (in the beginning at least), there would be no Mozilla.
*Disclaimer* I work for Netscape. This just seems like a bad idea. A few reasons come to mind. 1) Many banks verify (read test) *all* browsers they will allow into their sites. It's unlikely that bank A will want to spend time testing Mozilla (they don't test konq - try it on wellsfargo.com) when they have a partnership with Netscape. 2) Netscape pays for every copy of Redhat installed on developer's machines. Hmmm, maybe Netscape will decide they can just download (legally and legitemately) Red Hat for free and burn hundreds of copies and not pay for Enterprise support - that just might fit better with Netscape's budget. 3) Mozilla will never reach a satisfactory 1.0. (Wine is the only other project of this calibur, and I don't see it ever hitting 1.0) Mozilla's current timeline certainly does not have a bug free browser (or even a performant stable browser) targetted for 1.0!!! :P
Red Hat seems to be shooting themselves in the foot.
Entertaining? It still looks pretty relevant. It's nice that Mozilla and NS 6 are mostly working now, but:
still applies. There's hardly anything innovative or to be proud of in Mozilla (or any other recent web browser, even Opera). I can easily see why a hacker, or anyone who likes doing cutting-edge stuff, would be disappointed.His complaint was that it never got to shipping, and now two years later, it's still not at 1.0. He was right.
If Mozilla teaches a lesson about sticking with it, through thick and thin, the lesson is: don't do it! It's an ok browser, but not spectacular, and a single programmer could write (and this has happened several times) a better browser in three years.
JWZ was right.
As much as Netscape 4.x has been a boil in the arse of Linux for the last 4 years, it needs to stick around a tad bit longer. Some sites still work best with it, at least in parts.
Take Datek Online for example. While I can access all parts of the site under Linux, sometimes I need to switch browsers, depending on what I want to do with it.
Netscape 4.x can access the whole site, but the Java applets sometimes (usually) hang it. It's also butt-ugly.
Mozilla can get to almost all of it, but the Account Options menu simply doesn't show up if you're screen isn't GREATER than 1024X768. Before 0.9, the PSM also hogged almost all the CPU's power when going to a secure site, and kept doing that until you closed Mozilla. Fortunately 0.9 fixed that.
Opera can get to pretty much everything but Java.
Konqueror can get to the whole site, but the JavaScript chart doesn't show up. I haven't tried Java with it yet.
Also Netscape is a little less quirky than Mozilla for Web developers in some areas still, but Mozilla and Konqueror are definitely just about there.
So...I'm finally able to get along without Netscape 99% of the time, but sometimes something just works better with it.
He can read just fine.
You said IE on Windows is the best option.
He said that was good to know, in case he chooses to run Windows under Linux.
What's so weird about that?
I wonder if he's changed his mind about the nature of time, organizational behavior, and how to get things done fast since it's been forever getting his nightclub redone. I don't expect he figured it would be this long getting done. Of course there's a lot he had to rewrite from scratch at the club.
I know a lot of Slashdotters use /. moz updates as personal reminders to go get the latest build, just for browsing purposes.
I've been following the nightly builds pretty closely, and I would suggest waiting for 0.91 for most browsers. There have been a few bugs that crept in over the last two weeks or so. The most well-understood one is a problem with right-click context menus, at least on Win32. It sounds like they have the problem in hand, but it makes life painful.
I think there are some problems that have been introduced into the rendering engine, because I have gotten a few really unexpected and unusual crashes. In some cases the browser window just completely disappeared without a trace or any error.
And I have had a few *really* annoying crashes while composing messages in textareas. (Like I'm doing now.) That is extra painful because you lose what you were writing!
So your best bet is to wait on this one if you have a stable build that you're running, and pick up a nightly build or 0.91 build in a few weeks.
Other than that, recent changes in how pages are built make everything seem a lot smoother and faster. I forget what they called the one fix... it had a funny description, but the upshot was that you can now click on things on an "outgoing" page if your new page hasn't loaded yet. For us impatient browsers who give up on crappy-loading sites, that one was a real breakthrough!
Not for the browser... no, I can easily live in my galeon-ized world quite happily without the netscape browser. Unfortunately, I still need digital signing/encrypting ability for my mail, and my company has adopted X509 (verisign) certs for this. As all inter-company mail must be encrypted, I can't get around this.
:( I *really* wanted it to.
:( Yes, I'd love to help them instead of just bitching, and I would if I had any experience coding this part of the system.
Yes, I tried to convince them to use pgp/gpg, but the lack of integration with netscape and other (windows) mail clients made that no happen
There is alread a bug about this in the bugzilla database, but it looks like they aren't going to be able to get it in by 1.0
Konquerer is not all there so that leaves Opra. I don't know but it seems like a pretty sad state of affairs for the Linux camp.
:( It sucks, especially for those of us who are forced to use X509 signed email.
Yup, I agree
However, there are a few projects out there, the most promising that I've dealt with is Galeon, a gnome browser based on the mozilla engine. It still requires mozilla and it's libs, but the browser itself is quite stable, has cool features (tabbed and multi window browsing, https support, cookie support, bookmark import/export... ). Lets just say that I haven't used netscape for a while now (except for flash/rm pages) and galeon is my primary browser.
Not the perfect solution, but I'm glad its around because you are absolutely right, browsers are in a sad state for linux right now. Mozilla rocks, but it's just not there (yet) for daily browsing.
I had to admit it, but IE *is* good. It used to suck, but now netscape is basically dead, it's a decent browser. I'd have liked to have seen what would have happened if NS and IE had continued along their competing paths, and if they would have just drowned in each others added useless features, or would have actually improved each other (what that whole "competition/inovation" thing is all about).
Hmm, what sort of processor do you have? Mozilla 0.9 is faster than 0.8.1, I'll grant you that, but it's still by no means fast. I have a Pentium266 with 160MB of RAM, and it's incredibly slow, especially compared to Opera and Internet Explorer. Mozilla takes nearly 30 full seconds to start up! Opening a new browser window in Opera is instantaneous (thanks to the MDI), and takes less than 1/4 of a second in IE, but takes around a second in Mozilla to fullly open, size itself, and render the toolbar. That's just too slow.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
Well, Galeon is certainly better than the full Mozilla; it's Mozilla's scripted UI layer that slows a lot of things down. And yeah the tab-mode is cool; Opera's MDI works very similarly. I don't like having 8 or so root-level browser windows open all the time. =]
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
IMAP is now in KMail in the current KDE 2.2 alpha.
And, although it's gorgeous with antialiasing and TT fonts (the first browser IMO that beat the pants off of IE4/5 for font rendering), it can't resize most text on a page. This makes using pages with teensy letters difficult.
--
Change is inevitable.
Change is inevitable.
Progress is not.
And honestly, the qmail directory structure is *weird*, and certainly not FHS-compliant. (And all of those .dot files for aliases? Sheesh.)
I would have to agree with RedHat in making this decision. First, Netscape 4.xx is quite old, slow, and doesn't support some of the newest web stuff. Compared to IE5.5 on Win32 or Konqueror on Linux, the older version of Netscape really feels, well, OLD.
Netscape 6 is a miserable attempt at release software. It has completely messed up almost every box I have seen it installed on. Crash prone, bloated, and not giving any of the promised speed increases, it is a failure for a major release of software.
Mozilla, while having some of the same pitfalls as NS6, is better, though not by much.
Konqueror has become my browser of choice lately, and I think that, unless something better shows up to the game, it will be the future of web browsing and Linux.
KDE (and thereby Konqueror) is included with Red Hat. I just installed v. 7.1 and Knoqueror works great.
Mozilla works very well too.
It's great to have a choice isn't it?
Co-founder and designer at Music Nearby: http://musicnearby.com
You won't use mozilla as a web browser because the bundled e-mail client won't do secure e-mail? Why not use mozilla as a browser, and an e-mail program for e-mail. Or hell, use any well evolved program. They all do e-mail eventually anyways.
--
"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
I don't get what your beef is... The issue is Red Hat announced that when Mozilla hits version 1.0, they'll switch to it (instead of using Netscape). What I'm saying is "big deal; everyone's going to switch to Mozilla when it hits 1.0". That's my point. There is nothing revolutionary about stating that you want to move to an open source version of Netscape's browser. When Mozilla hits 1.0, kiss Netscape's closed source browser goodbye because no Linux distro company that still thinks about its business is going to sign all the distribution agreement crap that Netscape wants to distribute its closed source browser.
As for RH making money supporting Mozilla, I doubt it. It's one of hundreds of packages on their distro. I'm sure they aren't getting paid to do any work with Mozilla; if anything they're the ones paying. That's fine; when they put money into open source software (like all Linux distro companies do, bar none), everyone benefits.
No Linux distro that is backed by any intelligence will be using Netscape browsers when Mozilla hits 1.0. Why would they? The source code is not available for Netscape browsers, so all bug fixes need to be handled by Netscape/AOL. Add to this the fact that feature-for-feature the new browsers (Netscape's and Mozilla's) are just about identical, and it's clear that there's not much of anything to lose by switching.
The only thing original about this is that Red Hat has announced it first. I'll be very, very surprised if any Linux distro ships Netscape after Mozilla is cooked. It just doesn't make sense.
Yes. The rendering of 0.9 is extremely fast. On those pages that take a noticable time to render, like the evil3d.net link posted today on slashdot, Mozilla seems to be faster than Netscape. However the GUI itself sucks. Rendering of the page is much faster than rendering of the GUI, but if you use a different shell like Galeon this doesnt matter for you.
Try galeon out - galeon.sourceforge.net. It uses the mozilla core so it's somewhat bloated, but it renders FAST, has lots of neat features (like being able to disable status bar changes by javascript) and is pretty stable. Of course, if you're not on Linux then building Mozilla can be a daunting obstacle, but Galeon might be worth it... As for mail, mutt is king.
Well, if you awnt it that bad, for several hundred dollars you could buy quite a speed intel system and JUST RUN IE :)
We can actually say goodbye to that awful, bloated, buggy Netscape. I never thought I would see the day.
--
"How many six year olds does it take to design software?"
dinner: it's what's for beer
feel free to ask the Mozilla team what they think about the OS/2 programmers they work with.
I'll rather ask of you. What do they think of them? Are there many of them?
__
__
Men with no respect for life must never be allowed to control the ultimate instruments of death.
GW Bu
And I say this as a Mozilla advocate since M18!
The new image cache, rendering code, whatever they stuck in after 0.8.1 has some serious bugs. Images getting scrambled, flickers of previous images appearing before the correct image gets rendered, images not getting rendered at all until you click on or click/drag over them, one-pixel-off placement errors with adjoining bars of color... Maybe it's faster, but "faster + incorrect" just doesn't cut it.
Maybe this is all just stuff happening on my system, but my system isn't too far off from standard RH7.1, for which I downloaded release RPMs directly from ftp.mozilla.org.
Don't get me wrong; most of the bugs that bothered me were gone by 0.8, and so it's good to see the developers turning their eyes to performance even at the cost of a little backsliding. But if you're new to Mozilla, and want to see how they've progressed, try 0.8.1 first!!
Haven't actually *tried* Mozilla 0.9, have you? I'm running it on a PII-450, and it seems plenty fast enough.
When I was using Mozilla 0.8, that was the only site I still kept Netscape 4.7x around for. But now Mozilla 0.9 works with the online banking just fine. Hurray! No more Netscape 4.7x for me!
Based on the info in Bugzilla and the newsgroup, I made sure that the right symlink was installed, and that the environment variables were set right, and a whole bunch of other magic that was supposed to help. But no matter what I try, Mozilla will not start up and even display a window if I have the java plugin (or a symlink to it) in the plugins directory. It just silently exits. When I remove the plugin, everything is fine.
This is my ONLY major complaint with Mozilla 0.9. It's plenty fast enough on my PII-450, and it doesn't crash as often or leak as much memory as NS 4.7x.
But benchmarks lie (especially my lame ass ones.) Do yourself a favor and test it on your system. Let us know.
Not to mention you are not tied to one platform! ;)
Novel theory: Modern Man evolved from psychopath
You must be a very poor bunch of web designers if you can only do flashy things that work with IE5 and not Mozilla.
The idea about standards is that every browser should be able to handle them correctly. Mozilla and IE5 handle the current crop fairly well in the context of browsers historically so you're really doing something wrong.
DJB's license doesn't adhere to the DFSG, which makes it near-impossible to put into debian-main. This is what redhat refers to.
-- dieman - Scott Dier
I've got a PII 200 w/64M RAM, and Mozilla works fine for me. Startup is a little slow, as well as opening new windows. However, Galeon takes care of most of that. I especially like it's tab-mode, where every Internet "window" is actually just a tab in the main window, so I don't clutter up my screen.
Engineering and the Ultimate
What do you mean that's not how open source is supposed to work? There's nothing wrong with open source working this way. The FREEDOM is what's important, not necessarily the actual contributions.
Engineering and the Ultimate
You're missing the point. RedHat ships binaries to users. They also ship source, but that's not really their focus. They may modify the source and ship modified binaries if they feel it improves their distribution. With Bernstein's license, they can't do this.
In addition, you're quoting the GNU project out of context when you say Bernstein's license matches freedom 2 "The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor." the same page that lists the freedoms also clearly says, "The freedom to redistribute copies must include binary or executable forms of the program, as well as source code." Clearly Bernstein's license doesn't allow binary forms of modified code.
Fortunately, as you point out, Bernstein's code "NEVER" has holes in it, so we don't need to worry about it. Of course, I'm more impressed with your ability to travel into the future and confirm this. Unfortunately Red Hat is not able to visit to future to check this, so errs on the side or caution.
In addition, while Bernstein's software has never had any holes under Bernstein's narrow definition, Linux itself might have problems which require modifying qmail as a workaround. This is quite common, and while Bernstein can complain all he wants that it's the operating system's fault, the rest of us need to deal with the reality of the hole and find a workaround. This has happened before, and under Bernstein's license, Red Hat can't ship patched binary to fix it.
Search 2010 Gen Con events
So what? We should stick with a 2 year old browser? A browser than doesn't handle Java properly?
A browser than doesn't do HTML 4.0 properly?
A suite of internet apps that doesn't handle multiple e-mail accounts?
A suite of internet apps where we CANNOT fix bugs that come up because:
And the Netscape/Mozilla project is going to lose funding?
BULLDINKY!
As Mozilla matures, Netscape his all it's future browser releases locked in right there. So it's HIGHLY unlikely that funding is just going to "go away".
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
There seems to be a lot of confusion about the license Dan puts on his programs and whether this license is Open Source.
Section three of the open source definition requires that derived works are allowed:
Contrast this to this excerpt of Dan's license:
I hope this clears up any confusion people may have with whether Dan's license is open source.
- Sam (Posting this at one since this is a rather heated discussion)
The secret to enjoying Slashdot is to realize that it should not be taken too seriously.
Pages encoded in Japanese are ugly unless you set the font size to 16 points.
The way Mozilla works around this problem is by, instead of performing a "we will scale the closest sized font we have, even if it looks ugly", they perform a "we will resize the size of the letters rendered to the closest font available, without scaling". Which results in much more satisfactory results.
- Sam
The secret to enjoying Slashdot is to realize that it should not be taken too seriously.
Options -> Configure Konqueror -> Navigator Konqueror -> Appearance -> Minimum Font size
- Sa,
The secret to enjoying Slashdot is to realize that it should not be taken too seriously.
For the record, I feel that:
- Dan is a brillant programmer who has not had to make any changes to Qmail in the last three years--since Qmail has not had one security problem of note ever. The only reason Dan has to make changes to DjbDNS is because of the way the BIND developers makes changes to how they interpret the vaguely-worded DNS RFCs.
- Dan does give away his software, and he does allow people to freely use it and freely separately distribute patches for it.
- While I do not completely agree with Dan w.r.t. the license he chose, I feel Dan has valid concerns about Linux fragmenting the way Unix fragmented. His license stops Qmail or DjbDNS from fragmenting.
- Sam (Who could very well stop development of his DNS server if Dan made a GPL version of DjbDNS)The secret to enjoying Slashdot is to realize that it should not be taken too seriously.
And, yes, I agree that Dan is free to do as he wishes with his code. The current license, for better or for worse, however, will stop it from being adopted by any of the major distributions.
- Sam (Since Dan ain't gonna change his license, back to coding my alternative to BIND and DjbDNS)
The secret to enjoying Slashdot is to realize that it should not be taken too seriously.
Note that Nautilus uses the Gecko rendering engine -- ie, it's as tied to Mozilla as Galeon.
-30-
I haven't used either Navigator or Mozilla for quite some time. What does Navigator have that Mozilla doesn't for someone like me who doesn't need another mail client or web design software?
What is this about djbdns and qmail and RedHat? Is there a story there that I've missed somehow?
Please post a link.
Thanks. I was not aware of the volleys between djb and RedHat about actually distributing the packages.
I can see how it would be difficult for RedHat to bundle djbdns or qmail, since with the license, changing file locations is a no-no. However, I wish RedHat should make some efforts to include them in the distro. Especially in the light of the recent BIND issues. I use djbdns, qmail, and publicfile myself. They are great products.
that's assuming it HAS bugs, which it doesn't. And if it did have verifiable bugs, then DJB would be the first to make the fix and make it available.
AND if DJB STILL wouldn't fix the bugs, then they can distribute their own patches with scripts to apply them.
Bugs and incompatibilities are taken care of by the maintainer of the software. If RedHat has a patch to fix a problem, they can submit it.
Added features? adding features would nullify the security guarantee for one, and would turn the product into something else. If a distribution maintainer wants to change the configuration of the package, they can easily do so with another RPM.
This is how E-Smith is able to ship Qmail in its distribution, and it works quite well.
The license does not prohibit binary re-distribution. From the license:
-----
May we distribute binaries?
You may distribute a precompiled package if
* installing your package produces exactly the same files, in exactly the same locations, that a user would obtain by installing one of my packages listed above;
* your package behaves correctly, i.e., the same way as normal installations of my package on all other systems; and
* your package's creator warrants that he has made a good-faith attempt to ensure that your package behaves correctly.
All installations must work the same way; any variation is a bug. If there's something about a system (compiler, libraries, kernel, hardware, whatever) that changes the behavior of my package, then that platform is not supported, and you are not permitted to distribute binaries for it.
You may distribute an operating system that includes a precompiled package under the same rules.
-----
The E-Smith Distribution, which is based on RedHat, includes Qmail.
It does this by including one RPM that includes the full, working, approved binary, plus another RPM that applies E-Smith's customizations to it.
This BS about the license not ALLOWING RedHat to include it in a distribution is false, and there is working evidence to the contrary.
http://slashdot.org/articles/01/04/16/1352255.shtm l#98
kill -9 `/sbin/pidof -s netscape-communicator`
Netscape also runs wild on animated GIFs that have 0 pause between frames... It will use as much of the CPU as it can just to animate that stupid little GIF as fast as possible :-P
http://www.wellsfargo.com/per/browsertest.jhtml
Fool that into believing your Konqueror is Netscape or IE, and I'm all ears!
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
I need Netscape in order to do Online Banking.
Even though Konqueror would WORK, Wells Fargo
refuses to accept any SSL connections not coming
from Netscape or IE.
Java and Javascript support are pretty good in
Konqueror, but there are still quite a few things that won't work in it that will work in
Netscape. I don't care about those though. If I could do online banking with Wells Fargo without Netscape, I'd probably never use it.
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
the techies will still be running thier rouge linux boxes
Actually, my Linux box is more of a taupe.
Of course, qmail and djbdns have no holes. Guaranteed.
You realize that good security practice dictates that we can now never accept anything you ever say on the subject of security again, right?
IIS does a lot on the kernel level. That was one of the factors in original Mindcraft tests.....
So I'm guessing that's like:
Party - bean counters
KGB - marketing (!?)
military - engineers
I'd love to be equipped like the military for some of the meetings I get dragged to.
"You WILL agree with me, my T72 in the parking lot says so."
Sorry.. just come from a meeting and that sounded like a fun idea.
--
Delphis
Delphis
You think that's bad - when I actually wrote a page for a project I did for the US gov, I was told to strip it down so that it was compatible with Mosaic. That was a year ago.
-lx
One aught to do research before posting. See/
http://www.spec.org/osg/web99/results/res2000q2
to see how well Windows 2000 Advanced Server smokes linux.
I've used Netscape under every WM you can imagine and have done a lot of tests on it. Pretty much if you have a lot of memory you'll seldom crash but if you have very little memory you'll crash and often pull down everything unless you have set limits to how much RAM Netscape can hog.
Netscape has major problems with certain plugin's, Java, and especially forms. If you open up a memory monitoring tool of some kind and use nothing but Netscape you can watch it's memory usage climb endlessly. I think it's network layer also has memory leaks because sometimes when you try to open a page it zooms way off the charts.
At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
The last time I used Mozilla was around a year ago. I have a generic 350MHz box with 32 megs of RAM. It was too slow to be useable, though only just. Have things become better? I'd like to give it another shot, but I also want to know what to expect.
DJB is working on v2.0 of Qmail. I think some of the patches will be included.
His problem, if you read the mailing list is this: he knows he can write secure code. He has a personal warantee to that effect. He doesn't have time to audit other people's code. Now, someone replaces his password check program with another one, and introduced a security problem (buffer overflow). The person then went to the mailing list and complained.
Whose fault was it? In the user's mind, it was djb, because a) he had a warantee that there would be no securiy issues with his software, b) user found a security problem.
djb is responsible for his code. Other people who wants to write patches against his code, has to be responsible for their code. By keeping it separate, you, as the user, knows who wrote what, and *you* will be responsible for the changes you make to his code.
Je ne parle pas francais.
i'm just going to play devil's advocate here, and i know this has been stated millions of times before, so don't beat me up too much for saying it, but it seems pertinent to this discussion:
are you sure you really considered the precise implications of you said when you stated "You aren't as free to do what you want with them as GNU applications"?
i'm a mostly-believer in the GPL ideals, but i don't go into it thinking that it's truly a "free" license. it seems logical to me that if it were completely and totally free (as-in-speech), there'd be no encumberances whatsoever, thus, it'd not be viral.
as it is, it's more encumbered than the BSD-style licenses, and certainly moreso than that which is released into the "public domain".
just my 0.02.
Peter
I mean, for one, yeah, Mozilla _is_ really good.
Also, Netscape 6 and Mozilla have a virtually identical user interface, so it's not like people who can't tell the difference will, well, be able to ell the difference.
Plus you can always download Netscape anyway. Someone's bound to make RPMs of it for the tarball-challenged.
Does Red Hat bundle KDE? maybe they should leave Mozilla out and say they're bundling Konq. That'd be a story.
--
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is kinky.
(And personally, I think it's pretty funny he gets called a "quitter" by people who've never started anything...)
I don't see how it could mess up Xwindows...
Well, it can. NS 4.77 has locked XF86 several times for me... without me being root...
I wasn't aware (read: didn't care) that RedHat was involved in any hullabaloo regarding qmail & djbdns. However:
Qmail and djbdns are each distributed under licenses which basically prohibit you from distributing modified binaries. You can redistribute the source, you can write patches for (and redistribute) it, you can distribute binaries. You may not redistribute patched binaries or directly modified source. The full text is here
This makes GPL die-hards pretty upset. If I'm reading this correctly, some folks petitioned RedHat to include both qmail and djbdns in their distribution, and RedHat balked because of license issues. The thing is, they already were distributing Netscape, so the license argument sounded kind of lame.
You don't have to put it in /var. Edit your conf-qmail before you compile,
and you can have qmail go anywhere you want it to.
The qmail license (and the "problems" it causes) is interesting and bizarre, because none of it actually effects the people who install and use qmail. So there's a problem, and yet, there isn't.
---
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
What problems obtaining the JVM? First time I hit a page that needed Java, it gave me the get-a-plugin dialog, which took me through the install steps and gave me Java just like it should've. Or you could go directly to Netscape's plug-ins page and download and install it and any other plug-ins you want in one fell swoop, if you don't want to wait.
Mozilla 0.9:
Well, X.509 certificates. Run your own CA if you want. PSM 2.0 lets you add new CA certificates. You just have to convince all your correspondents to add your CA certificate to their browser as well as your personal certificates. Of course, you're not all that far away from PGP/GPG's web of trust at that point.
Laissez lire, et laissez danser; ces deux amusements ne feront jamais de mal au monde. - Voltaire
Communication and coordination may not be as critical in debugging as in the early phases of development. There are whole classes of bugs that are localized and simple to fix. However when you have to deal with issues that require substantial redesign, you are left with the same communication team bottlenecks as in the earlier design and coding phases. That means your optimal team size may be larger during testing, but there will still be an optimal team size. Beyond that the bug fixers will start stepping on eachother's toes and you'll get an unmaintainable mess. You can have an infinite number of eyeballs looking at the code, finding bugs, and suggesting corrections, but you still have to have a limited number of hands applying those changes.
So have as many tasters as you want. Let them suggest what spicing changes need to be made. You'll get a result that appeals to more people. But too many cooks will still spoil the soup.
Laissez lire, et laissez danser; ces deux amusements ne feront jamais de mal au monde. - Voltaire
Well, no. Marketroids can overpromise and cause dissatisfaction in the client base when those promises can't be met. You could also argue that when bean counters take over a company, they screw it up because they focus on short term gains and fail to plan for long term R&D or customer relationship management/support.
:-)
All three groups are indispensible to the long term health of a company, the problems happen when one of those groups gains control, stops listening to everyone else in the company because they think they know better, and upset the balance.
What you really need is a balance between the three groups. In the old Soviet Union, the three groups were the Party, the KGB, and the military - when one group got too powerful, the other two would gang up to bring the first one back down to their level. That's not exactly the best example, and I'm not advocating the same level of infighting and purges, but you get the idea
Laissez lire, et laissez danser; ces deux amusements ne feront jamais de mal au monde. - Voltaire
OK, so he has stated his experience. How many 500+ developer projects have you been on?
Laissez lire, et laissez danser; ces deux amusements ne feront jamais de mal au monde. - Voltaire
Yes, well to push that bad analogy further, the flip side is that you would have to worry about "disappearing" in the middle of the night, only to find yourself being sweated out for weeks in a basement dungeon as part of a focus group. Aieeee!
Actually I didn't really envision a one-to-one mapping of the triumvirates; I was thinking more from the standpoint of the three sides needing to be in balance as part of a system with negative feedback.
Laissez lire, et laissez danser; ces deux amusements ne feront jamais de mal au monde. - Voltaire
It occurs to me that even if you are a stellar programmer who is very good at producing well written, self-documenting code; what are the odds that more than 75% of the rest of your 500 or 1000 programmers on the team are also great programmers good at documenting code and changes? Even with only 25% of your programmers being poor at documentation and maintenance skills, your codebase will quickly turn to an unmaintainable mess.
Frankly, these days I suspect you're bloody lucky if you can get 75% of your programmers on a team that size to have decent maintenance skills.
Laissez lire, et laissez danser; ces deux amusements ne feront jamais de mal au monde. - Voltaire
The browser-making arm of Netscape is owned by AOL. AOL keeps Netscape going because they are the dominant market share player and they understand that game. The last thing they want is to not have a fallback position if Microsoft ever decides to pull the rug out from under them with IE. Since Microsoft owns MSN, a major competitor of AOL, and given MS's past behaviour of leveraging a monopoly in one market sector into a monopoly in another sector, it's an ace in the whole which AOL will not lightly set aside. AOL didn't buy Netscape because they expected to make money from the portal. AOL bought Netscape to keep Microsoft honest by using FUD with teeth. They bought Netscape to avoid handing the Internet to MS on a silver platter. So far that strategy has worked.
If Microsoft loses an appeal at the Supreme Court level and gets broken up in such a way that they can no longer use IE to turn MSN into the dominant ISP, then I think you'll see AOL cutting Netscape loose and telling them to fend for themselves. Until then, it's a relatively cheap insurance policy,
Laissez lire, et laissez danser; ces deux amusements ne feront jamais de mal au monde. - Voltaire
Bugs and incompatibilities are taken care of by the maintainer of the software. If RedHat has a patch to fix a problem, they can submit it.
The great thing about free software is YOU can take care of these problems. If your answer was "Bugs and incompatibilities are taken care of by the maintainer of the software. If RedHat has a patch to fix a problem, they can beg us to fix it." one might almost think you are talking about Microsoft or something. Free software is about control, specifically that fact that YOU control the code, not some "maintainer."
I think djbdns and qmail are probably great for the compile it yourself crowd who can make any modifications locally and be satisfied, but for the people trying to add value, it sucks.
I like Linux a lot and use it at home and at work. (Mandrake at home and RedHat at work). In both cases I like Linux because it helps me get my work done, not because I like fucking around with it (which I do, but i can't let that get in the way of my work). So I rely on distributors to make my life easier. Anything that makes life harder for them makes life harder for me.
A lot of people are yelling that there aren't holes in qmail and/or djbdns. Okay, there probably aren't, but that cash reward is small consolation for RedHat and its customers in the unlikely case the shit does hit the fan.
But what about bugs? Incompatabilities? Features that RedHat customers want that these programs might not have natively? Can't do anything about that can they? I suppose they could ship the source and patches and build them during install to get around the "distributing modified binaries" clause, but what a pain.
Imagine if RedHat could only ship the Linus kernel binary, or you had to build the modified kernel during every installation (makes installation of large clusters quite a pain). The great thing about the license of the kernel is that RedHat can modify the kernel, give those changes back to the community at large as source, and to their customers as easy to use binaries.
I am not affilated with RedHat in anyway.
LOL. Even better!
--
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
I see a white mouse
And I want to paint it black.
No neutrals anymore,
I want it to turn black.
Apologies to the Stones.
--
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
bnf
this space intentionally left blank (oops)
Read the licenses of djbdns and qmail, and you'll see why we can't ship them: If a hole is discovered, we're not allowed to distribute a fixed version in binary form.
/var/qmail/bin without exception. This of course irks most distros who have their own idea of where the mailer binaries go, and means they go towards similarly functional (though less secure) mailers with less restrictive licenses.
And the chances of qmail or djbdns having holes in is...? Anybody...? Approximately zero, I'd say. For people that don't know, the author guarantees cash rewards to anybody finding exploitable code in his software. The code is very very easy to audit, since most of the programs he writes are as small as they possibly can be (and split up into separate, mutually distrusting binaries), and use none of the standard I/O or string handling functions because djb doesn't trust them. Okay, so I'm biased, I love both programs, but this is someone who knows how to write secure code.
I think the reason most distros find djb's license so restrictive (not that I necessarily disagree) is his stance on distros not being allowed to shift files around to suit their view of the filesystem hierarchy-- e.g. no binary packages of qmail are allowed unless they put their binaries into
Matthew @ Bytemark Hosting
killall -TERM netscape or maybe kill -9 $pidofnetscape ?
;)
just a guess
"Fighting the underpants gnomes since 1998!" "Bruce Schneier knows the state of schroedinger's cat"
Let's not forget most of the contributors to Mozilla are Netscape employees. You can call it Open Source all you like, but that's not the way it's supposed to work. I think having all those installations on the next release of RedHat will force everyone to have a second (or first) look, and hopefully, the bright (and lazy or bandwith throttled) among us might not bother downloading Netscape. And they'll get angry. And you know what? They just might fix it.
Laziness has been working against us - there's no incentive... perhaps this time laziness might actually help us. Hopefully, more users will mean a bigger contributor base.
NS 4.x plugins work fine with mozilla. Just symlink in the contents of /usr/lib/netscape/plugins to mozilla/plugins and your all set. Works fine for me, anyway.
I have a menu option "Netscape Killer".
I'm curious. What does your Netscape Killer do?
cpeterso
Bank of America and Merril Lynch Online both
refuse SSL connections from Mozilla
It would have only been 100Megs but for all the linuxconf dependencies...
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
I disagree. I also run Windows as my primary OS; IE is by far the slowest browser I've used. For raw speed, nothing right now beats Opera. Although supposedly it sticks to the standards to most, a lot of pages dont look perfect in it. Mozilla is definitely getting MUCH better. I'm actually using it right now: much faster than IE6.0 in just about everything. These are my experiences; your mileage may vary. As an aside, does Slashdot use http/1.1 compression? One of my favorite game news sites now uses it, and everything loads perceptibly faster...
What part of Opera's licence prohibits distribution and bundling? The licence seems to specifically allow the software to be "freely copied, stored and distributed by any person or organization, providing that the person or organization meets the terms and conditions of this document in full."
I don't see anything in those terms and conditions that would prevent RedHat distributing it.
Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
Adding things like Chatzilla didn't delay Mozilla much, if at all. The developers working on Chatzilla, for the most part, are ones who joined the project for that purpose.
It does take some work from the core developers to write the interfaces, but then, imho, that's important. I want Mozilla to support many pluggins, I'll just be picky about which ones I install.
I don't specifically want a browser that's an email client, but I want one that you can closely integrate with one, which Mozilla is better at for their practice at integrating their own client, and Chatzilla, etc, etc.
Of course, that's why you don't need any of this Free Software/Open source Crap. Bugs and incompatibilies are taken care of by the vendor. Now all of you uppity little bastards just put down your compilers, go home, and start buying over priced software in in a nice shrink wrapped little package like your supposed to....
djbdns and qmail are Free Software in the GNU sense of the word.
Near as I could tell from looking at Bernstein's web site you are not allowed to distribute modified binaries or source!
According to the FSF, one of the four freedoms provided by "Free" software is "The freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements to the public". A license that requires you to distribute your improvements as patches can barely be consideded to provide that freedom. Certainly that's enough reason for me to avoid it.
This belies the point that holes are NEVER discovered in Bernstein's software
A completely foolish statement. Even if it is true that there has never been a qmail or djbdns exploit, that does not prove there never will be one. Even OpenBSD has had exploits, and those guys are DAMN careful!
It is impossible to guarentee that a non-trivial piece of software does not have vulnerabilities. Not allowing distributors, or hell just concerned sys-admins from distributing sources or binaries that with any kind of improvements is just plain fucking rediculous. IMHO Bernstein is just being a jackass. His "Free software" is about as free as Microsoft's "Shared Source" bullshit.
Why don't you just come out and admit that marketing ploys are your only reasons for including or not including something in the dist.
What marketing ploy would that be? Thier attempt to actually follow thier stated values? Thier attempt to support the Free Software that spawned them?
You are a hypocrite.
In this case, they are not. You, however, are a fool.
I think its pretty clear to every operating system company that once Mozilla is good enough quality it would take over. Netscape is a boring method for AOL/Netscape to try and force other agendas.
Other browsers just aren't there yet. Konquerer is good, but its still just a little too lightweight. (My impressions). Opera has always been okay, but not quite strong enough. Lynx is great!
Really, the only hope is a good Mozilla. And the latest release shows that it is VERY close to being industrial strength.
Lottery: a tax on those bad at math.
It was the LDAP support that kept us using Netscape 4.7x as our Web and E-Mail clients. Now PHBs, noting the stablity and lack of LDAP in Netscape 6 have decided to charge forward and switch to Outlook 98 and IE despite even the latest virus. Of course the techies will still be running thier rouge linux boxes.
In my opinion, mozilla.org should follow a development process similar to the linux kernel with a development branch and stable branch, but they are opposed to this, it seems.
How does it seem they are opposed to this? They just haven't gotten to the stable branch yet! They're still on the development branch, you know.Hmmm... you might be right on this one.
But I think that is just why RedHat's announcement is a good thing. If mozilla.org is not going to release 1.0.1 or similar then I think RedHat is going to!
RedHat distributes it's own patched kernel and gcc packages for example, I don't see why it should be different with Mozilla.
My understanding is that Mozilla will not support secure email (Verisign Certs). If that's the case, then our shop cannot use Mozilla.
I work with IE day in, day out. Woah, that thing has a buggy rendering engine.
It'll regularly ignore or miss out instructions, while throwing a complex table at it is a pretty good way to make it go nuts. One page I can think of will regularly produce an entirely useless and unrequested blank space, for example.
It regularly fails to send requests to the servers so I have to hammer on the link or hold the refresh key down to actually make it load the page. Its interface isn't anywhere near as powerful as Netscape's, either. Daft design, too -if I right-click to get a menu for a back command (for example) then I lose the options because it assumes it's got a link - but knows it hasn't because it doesn't give me the link options!
In many ways it's better than the alternatives, sure, but it's far from fantastic and I would happily dance on its grave. It's a lazy implementation in many ways and they could really do with some proper competition.
Greg
(Inside a nuclear plant)
Aaaarrrggh! Run! The canary has mutated!
Re: tables, I mostly work with intranet sites so I can't link to the page. Seriously, though, try some more complex tables in IE and watch it fall over. If you really want some fun, mix spans, percent sizing, nested tables and images. Handcode to make sure the editor isn't working round known problems. Some of the results are just truly horrible.
Re: right clicks, click on the normal background. You get Back, Forward, Save Background As, Set As Wallpaper and so on.
Now, try the same but hit an image. A normal part of the page (especially when the page _is_ an image) but the menu changes. I now get (ghosted) Open Link, Open Link in New Window, Save Target As, Print Target and so on. An inappropriate and largely useless set.
I wish we could replace IE... Looking forward to trying Mozilla, hoping it proves more stable than NS6.
Greg
(Inside a nuclear plant)
Aaaarrrggh! Run! The canary has mutated!
Try configuring Konqueror to report a "supported" User-Agent string to your bank's site. If your a 2.x, odds are it will work.
There are known DOSes in qmail that have been there for (literally) years with no attempt made to address them. DJB's response is always that DOSes aren't real holes and that it's impossible to be DOS-proof; there's an inkling of merit to that, but a DOS which allows an attacker with a substantially smaller pipe to swamp a server with overwhelming resources _should_ be fixed.
Use exim instead of qmail. Not only does it have no known security holes, but you can actually fix them if you find them.
http://packetstorm.securify.com/9901-exploits/qmai l-DoS-anonymous.txt
has a message from DJB on the subject from January. Excerpt: "Denial-of-service attacks have always been excluded from the qmail security guarantee"
rage, rage against the dying of the light
Let me get this straight, you admit that you can't distribute modified binaries and must distribute patches instead of modified source. Before this you say that these programs are free in the GNU sense of the word. I am sure Stallman would love to rip you a new asshole for that comment. I cannot believe that your shit post got modded up to 5.
And about this whole RedHat shipping Mozilla instead of Netscape: years ago when they included the Netscape binary only package it was said that part of the motivation was that netscape released most of the code. The original intention was always to switch to Mozilla from day 1 of including Netscape. This article is really old news, although I am sure most people have forgotten that by now.
Have fun trolling. I certainly hope your message comes up for meta-mod.
So how exactly are you supposed to install this other RPM on a machine? Does it contain the source code in pristine form with patches and then must be compiled? It would seem that that would be the only way to satisfy the conditions of the license. If that is true then what the hell do you do when your server doesn't have a compiler (which it shouldn't).
I suppose now you will pull the argument that qmail is uber secure and thus you don't need the rest of the system locked down. That is total BS.
Red Hat makes a binary distribution using open source code and their own patches to better integrate components. The qmail license almost directly contradicts with the purpose of a binary linux distribution. It also contradicts the GPL.
It is entirely true that Red Hat is not allowed to include a modified binary in their distribution. Sure they could include some dumb hack to get around the license, but why should they.
You fucking people need to get it through to your small ass frontal lobes that businesses need to make money. Red Hat provides for their customers a prepackaged linux distro and automated package updates. Red Hat is not obligated to include every package under the sun. They include what they see as useful to their customers. If you want qmail on Red Hat then fucking grab the source and install it. Damn!
Nope, the only module Slashdot is using is mod_perl (here) The compression I'm using on the page you mentioned (glad you like it) is called mod_gzip and you can get that here. The latest release finally addressed some of the dynamic and cache related issues we were having.. Since I'm running the Shack server on BSD had to wait around for the port which came out a couple of days ago. It's improved vastly since the earlier builds which was pretty much a novelty but hard to use in any real world scenario. The only issues I've run into with this version is the transmit error showing up a little more than it should (but that doesnt break anything)
-Steve Gibson
-Steve Gibson
Shacknews.com
The problem isn't bugs. It's the crazy file locations and custom stop/start service programs that DJB wrote. And, because of his license, programmers are discouraged from fixing his weirdness. Try to maintain a big-ass patch? Forget it. I've got better things to do with my time, thank you very much!
I run djbdns because there's nothing better out there. But I run Postfix instead of than QMail because it fits into the rest of my system much nicer. Just think if EVERY program author felt the need to come up with his own file location standards and wrote his own licensing agreement. I'd be a Microsoft user, I can assure you that.
One day, I really hope somebody comes out with a good DNS package so I can ditch DJB's weirdness once and for all.
Complain about non-standard, closed source, etc...
"I'm sorry Mister Jones, but because 80% of the population is totally braindead, we are unable to show our regular movie on this flight. You'll have to settle for 'Elmo In New York'."
Or
"No, no, no... 80% of our readers don't know what grammar is, so you'll just have to relearn English."
Just because something is popular, doesn't make it correct.
Fascism should more properly be called corporatism, since it is the merger of state and corporate power.
Nautilus uses Mozilla silly!
You Like Science?
You Like Science?
You Like bottomquark.
AOL actually pays Microsoft to bundle IE with their service?
It seems to me that Microsoft would WANT AOL to get all of their users to be tied to IE, even to go so far as to maybe pay the cost of making the CD's for them just so they'll use IE.
Strange.
load "linux",8,1
It's not even close to as good as IE. I truely wish it was, but it just isn't. That's reality.
I have to keep a W2K box around just to run IE withouth having to run vmware or something. That's what my clients use on their intranet, that's what I have to make sure it works in.
load "linux",8,1
My laptop batteries will die before Mozilla even gets around to drawing its borders. Sorry, not everyone can afford new hardware every year. The thing is huge and nasty. Still doesn't do referrer headers properly making it impossible to surf any site that uses them to keep users clicking forward and stop them from enterring from anywhere but the homepage. I've had a bugzilla report in on this since .6 and it's only marginally better now.
Wake me when Mozilla lets me set more than one preference at a time. Currently they don't set at all and I get chrome://communicator/content/ errors and shit. Oh and maybe the prefs box should be resizable so I can actually see and/or manipulate the values??
Personally I see Mozilla as a failure of open source. The sick part is they could have done worse.
Well, currently I need a N4 around. For some odd reason, my banks homebanking system consistantly makes Mozilla hang. At least with N4, I have a chance of using it before it crashes.
It's rather odd, though. The system is Java-based, yet with the java-plugin in mozilla, the behavior is roughly as follows: the java-applet loads, then starts, then mozilla stops rendering anything but the java-applet, then the java-applet hangs.
So while Mozilla has numerous good things, then from a strict users point of view, it's just not ready to replace N4,
Ohh, did I mention...I'm on Linux...
-- "Life is a bitch - and she hates me..."
So you don't like daemontools? Write your own then. Nobody else has. Daemontools fills a badly needed hole in the Unix toolset -- control of a daemon. Or are you going to tell me that:
kill -HUP `ps aux (or -ef) | grep processname | grep -v grep | awk '{print $2}'
is reasonable?
Don't piss off The Angry Economist
Ahhh, but the thing that you're missing is 1) there is no widely-accepted standard for file locations across all Unix platforms, 2) if you're actually paying attention, you'll see that Dan has changed his mind between qmail and djbdns (in other words, he's experimenting to see what's best), and 3) what seems weird to you seems normal to someone trying to help qmail users. I don't have to ask where you've installed qmail. I KNOW where you've installed qmail. I can give you exact shell script commands telling you what file to modify.
/usr/local, or whether you've installed it via an RPM in /usr. The license doesn't permit binaries to install it in weird places.
/usr, locally-installed stuff goes in /usr/local" idea makes a kind of sense. But there are other ideas that make more sense, such as "Package foo gets installed in location bar", where "bar" is constant no matter what flavor Unix you're running.
And in particular, it doesn't matter whether you've installed qmail yourself in
Yes, I realize that the "system stuff goes in
The alternative is to impose extra support costs on the qmail support community, for what benefit? So that YOU don't have to think qmail is installed in a weird place? That's worth nothing to me -- certainly not the cost of having to wonder where in the hell you installed qmail on your version of Unix.
-russ
Don't piss off The Angry Economist
If a hole is discovered, you will immediately go to Dan Bernstein and he will pay you $500. Now, having done that, do you think he'll let that security hole sit around for one microsecond more than necessary? The $500 security guarantee is not there to compensate you for your costs. It's to guarantee that Dan takes security seriously.
-russ
p.s. Erik Troan said the same thing four years ago. There has not been a security hole in qmail in that whole time. So, in hindsight, Redhat could have been shipping qmail that whole time, and never had to worry about fixing a qmail hole. How many sendmail holes have there been in that time?
Don't piss off The Angry Economist
Every time I look at qmail, I see too many cool/needed modifications that will ONLY be distributed in a pain-in-the-ass patch format.
I do not believe this to be a necessity. People write patches because that is what they are used to doing. Instead, people should look at qmail as an email toolset, with a bunch of documented API's, just as Unix has documented API's and people write programs to use them.
Forbidding the change of file and directory locations has no conceivable security function,
You're quite right. The purpose is to keep qmail standard across all platforms. Nobody else tries to do it. I believe that it is a worthy goal. Often when people give answers on the qmail mailing list, they do so with shell commands. This is only possible because the helper knows where the helpee has installed qmail.
-russ
Don't piss off The Angry Economist
i thought it was funny. since many /.ers dont use windows (i know you have statistics about this that is why i didnt say most) and the topic is mozilla on redhat i thought the comment about running windows under linux was appropriate. that is unless microsoft has releasted ms windows and ie for linux. then your comment might seem to apply here.
personally i prefer konqueror on linux. it is fast and stable enough for my needs. more to the point. making broad genearalizations like ie on windows is the best there is period really makes you loose creadibility. it implies that you have tried every browser/os/hardware combination possible to determine this. also as someone else pointed out that lynx is faster.
use LaTeX? want an online reference manager that
-- john
hey. that compression stuff works really well. if i wasnt the only nerd here i would have thought it was cached on the proxy server.
use LaTeX? want an online reference manager that
-- john
Back in late '87, folks would talk about network security in the way you talk about gopher extermination on the east coast. "They" have to do network security, but "we" run UNIX. UNIX is secure, there's never been a major break-in on a UNIX system from the network that wasn't due to misconfiguration or social engineering.
;-)
Of course, there had been, but folks kept it quiet. Why air dirty laundry. Most people who worked on the code knew there were holes, but they weren't top priority.
Enter Robert "Wormer" Morris. He decided to blow the lid on this show, and made one little mistake. The rest is history....
One day, Mr. Bernstien will make a mistake. Everyone does. When that day comes, I dearly hope that I'm not using an OS that would take it for granted that such a mistake will never happen.
Don't get me wrong. I like the man's coding ethic, I just think he should let someone else package, license and distribute his software for him, so that it promotes, not prevents others from using his software (in the same way that RMS should let someone else do his public appearences
Konqueror and Galeon are the ones I would name, but there are many more on Freshmeat of course which may not be all that good, and if you want text-only your choices go up as well;) Also, many people swear by Opera, even if that's not "a browser project" as I meant that phrase (which is to say, open source software ...)
Cheers,
timothy
jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
bertok wrote: "".9 very nice"? What have you been using until now that was [gasp] worse than Mozilla 0.9? It's the worst browser I've ever used."
.8, .8.1+ ... (I think that's the right sequence, or was there a .7 instead of M18? Forget right now ;)
:) ) and I'm not finding the visual glitches that I used to find in previous versions. The speed is fine, at least on this mid-grade but fairly nice laptop (PIII 650, 128MB RAM), and there's still plenty of optimizing to do, so (one hopes) this is anything but a minimum config.
A: heh -- Mozilla M12, M13, M14, M15, M16, M17, M18,
.9 is really much nicer than all that preceded to my experience. I don't find IE any better, but I suppose I don't use it very often, perhaps there are features I ought to beg for in Mozilla;)
.9 does not crash every minute or so, I happen to prefer the aesthetics of its design to IE's (esp. the new Modern theme!
Konqui has some advantages, too, but this is not bad, not bad at all. NS 4.7X offers no advantage over Mozilla I can see, and crashes a lot more (in my experience thus far).
timothy
jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
"You realize that good security practice dictates that we can now never accept anything you ever say on the subject of security again, right"
;-)
Actually, really good security practice would dictate you would never accept anything anyone ever said without verifying. Fact is that it's impractical to have any security practice that does not at least partially depends on trust (in the human sense).
It's important to know that a software developer takes security very seriously. IMHO DJB is as good as they come in security. Unfortunately he also seems to be a very dificult person.
I use Qmail & Djbdns on all my machines, but I fully understand Redhat's reluctancy to include them in their distributions. DJB could have a great influence on the state of software if only he wouldn't be so damn stubborn on the licensing issue. He must have been dropped on the head when he was a child or something
Regards,
Xenna
I'll have to agree with you. I'm one of the 600 who still use Netscape. I like the e-mail client. The only reason I haven't dropped Netscape is because of their e-mail client. I use it along with pine, and I'm happy. But it is convenient to just pop up their browser when I'm viewing e-mail.
When Evolution is finally out of beta, I'll probably drop Netscape then.
Steven Rostedt
Steven Rostedt
-- Nevermind
You realize that good security practice dictates that we can now never accept anything you ever say on the subject of security again, right?
Anyone who states that anything can be trusted absolutely does not understand security. Guaranteed.
Boss of nothin. Big deal.
Son, go get daddy's hard plastic eyes.
Expanding a vast wasteland since 1996.
Every time I look at qmail, I see too many cool/needed modifications that will ONLY be distributed in a pain-in-the-ass patch format. Bernstein doesn't seem to care about his users' needs, only about his software's security reputation. It's his right, but it's reason enough for me not to run qmail; YMMV. It doesn't make the resulting binary any more secure, just more time-consuming to administer. If the qmail patch list were carefully integrated by him as options, I'd feel better. Forbidding the change of file and directory locations has no conceivable security function, and only strengthens the notion that he is a talented coder who is also an eccentric and a pain in the ass to deal with. Again, it's his right, but it doesn't make me feel safe relying on such an arbitrary person.
No marketing ploys, just practical decisions.
Boss of nothin. Big deal.
Son, go get daddy's hard plastic eyes.
Expanding a vast wasteland since 1996.
2 things I'd like to see in the mail client, better filters. like a "does not contain" also the ability to have filtered messages not send up the new message flag. the ability to move messages more than x days old. and to play diffrent sounds for diffrent filters.
Also a way to sync the contact list with jpilot. would be great.
They way I see it, the Linux community will probably follow the lead of Red Hat (after all they are one of the most influential distos around). This means the support of Netscape itself in the Linux world will severely decline. Soon you'll have different browsers in the Linux world to those found in the corporate mainstream.
Seems to me that this is a very good recipie to get the whole Mozilla/Netscape project to lose all funding completely and go down the tubes. I guess I'll start looking to KDE to provide the browser of the future now and ditch any ideas I had of a resurgence of Netscape on any system anytime soon.
Once again, this is basically admitting the failure of the open source community to successfully cross the bridge into the corporate world - in fact it's more like they promised to cross the bridge, waited for the corporate types to be on the Netscape side and then burned the bridge.
To sum it up... ACK!!!
Fear: When you see B8 00 4C CD 21 and know what it means
Sure!! 127.0.0.1 is the one I use but I'm told that if you have one of those new-fangled name resolution things going I can use 'localhost' as well.
;)
Fear: When you see B8 00 4C CD 21 and know what it means
Somebody told me I shouldn't log in as root all the time, so I just changed my .bashrc to have a 'su -' at the end instead, and then set root's password to nothing.
Is that bad?
Fear: When you see B8 00 4C CD 21 and know what it means
Good luck. School systems love it for some reason that I can't quite fathom. I wonder if they'll notice the difference with the "classic" theme. I bet it's the old "I `learned' this five years ago and don't want it to change!!!." They're just going to LOVE Mac OS X.
Opera and Lynx are faster. Mozilla .9 feels faster than IE, even in windows. Its just not true that IE is the dominant browser. IE isn't even the dominant browser in Windows.
I triple boot Mandrake, W2K, and W98. W2K is not stable, or I wouldn't have W98 still on my machine. W2K doesn't interupt you with bluescreens as often, because it can do partial reboots fast, on its own. But it did take down its partition (twice). The second time it couldn't even reinstall (even after it alleged to have reformatted the partition.)
The "most stable browser you've ever seen" can choke part way through loading a page. In order to load fully, the cache has to be emptied else IE continues to reload the partial page. I've never seen this with any other browser.
The Modern skin is beautiful. Easily the prettiest browser I currently run. But skins make "look" arbitrary, so I'm not sure how much this matters.
*I* have read it. Have you? or do you just think you have because there used to be so much talk about it on Slashdot. Debugging != development.
How we know is more important than what we know.
I disagree totally, except possibly with your analogy which appears to be supporting my argument! Guess that shows how useless analogy is. Debugging does not introduce the same bottlenecks as development because the code contains all the information to perform the job. Someone debugging a piece of code need never talk to the original developer. It may speed up the process, but this is solely because the original developer knows the code already. Finding bugs is definitely easier to parallelize but fixing them is also parallelizible in my opinion because it does not require communication.
How we know is more important than what we know.
So you dont know how to comment. Your example does not invalidate my argument. So it takes a little disciplin and it requires you to communicate via the code. That is exactly my point.
How we know is more important than what we know.
That's why you have standards. You do code reviews before you check in and you do builds and run test suites and backout changes that cause regressions. But when you start talking about 500 or 1000 programmer teams I think we're both talking out of our asses.
How we know is more important than what we know.
zero. See topic.
How we know is more important than what we know.
re: B, that's bullshit. Fixing bugs is infinitely parallelizable and putting developers on the email client takes away from the bug fixing effort, it also adds more code to fix.
How we know is more important than what we know.
There's a reason for DJB software licence. What if someone takes Qmail, adds unofficial patches to it, releases it in binary form in a distro, and holes are found (due to the addition) ? People will yell "Qmail sucks, Qmail is insecure, a serious flaw was discovered !" . Qmail will loose credibility, because of something his author never comitted. DJB licence allows you to distribute the original source code, plus patches. And you can build the whole thing. It's allowed and free, so you *can* have your own improvements to DJB software. But these patches must be in a separate package, not merged in the original tarball. Everyone can check what additions are done to the software. And everyone know that there's a safe base. It also avoids bloat. If I need LDAP with Qmail, I add the patch. If I don't need LDAP, I use a vanilla Qmail package, and I know that there is no code I won't use in it. I have something that perfectly fits my needs. It improves efficiency and security. It's just like installing OpenBSD. You have a minimal audited base, and everyone adds his own bloat according to his needs. Now for Linux distributions... Can't you provide a package that will self-recompile ? That way, you can include Qmail and djbDNS in Redhat. You can fix holes and add Redhat-specific features if you want. SRPMS are done for this, aren't they ? It doesn't choke a newbie, building and installing SRPMS are just like RPMS. Nothing to configure, no 'make' to type. Debian package can also recompile themselves from source code. Also, please have a look at Gentoo Linux . A new Linux distro that relies on daemontools, djbdns, qmail, ip, reiserfs, etc.
{{.sig}}
Some people are yelling because Opera isn't FREE as in FREE SPEECH. But if it was an opensource project, will these people get into the source to improve and debug it ? Probably not. Mozilla is opensource. Who's working on it ? Almost the same team since the beginning. Openoffice is opensource. Who's working on it ? Only the original StarOffice coders. The fact is that it's hard to contribute to very large projects. I tried to understand the Mozilla source code, but I never was able to understand the whole mecanism. It's designed in a very clever way, but even with documentation, understanding it is a worthy challenge.
{{.sig}}
Heh. I have a button on my gnome taskbar to do the same thing. My only major netscape lockups are the java applets at pr0n sites, tho
The license requires all files to be installed in "exactly the same locations, that a user would obtain by installing one of my packages listed above".
So, unless a distribution happens to have the same directory structure/composition as djb, they have to choose between breaking the license, breaking their directory structure, or not including his stuff. The last option seems the wisest.
Are you using 0.9 on windows or linux? Under linux, mozilla 0.9 and all daily builds since then are still painfully slow to start and very slow to use. In its defense it does not crash very often, but is so slow I'd rather risk netscape 4.77 even though it does crash.
FYI: I'm using a p2-450/256mb ram, debian testing, surely a fast enough system for a browser.
i used to feel the same way ... then i tried opera. i'll never go back. and it's nice not feeling like i'm covered with scum every day.
nobody
parturiunt montes, nascetur ridiculus mus
How can the essentially same comment be score 1 Flaimbait and score 3 Insightful at the same time?
> worthless KDE libs only for Konq
.. the biggest distro is relying on this. Neccessity is the mother of invention and all that ...
Well, if the libs are worthless, doesn't that make Konq worthless?
My feeling on all this is that IE took years to get good. Netscape 4.7 -> Moz/Nscape6 is the rebirth, and it will be a few years before we can judge them against the ubermature IE.
The relevance of the post is that the biggest Linux distro is abandoning the biggest *nix Browser. While that doesn't mean that you like either, it doesn't diminish the relevance of the post. While Mozilla may suck, at least this indicates a major push and/or reason to guide it towards unsuckiness in future versions
"Old man yells at systemd"
Those sound like good ideas. I'm not sure if they've been suggested or not, but if you want to know, you can head over to bugzilla and check. If they're not there, you can file them as request for enhancements (rfe).
Their current work load is focused on finishing features/bugs for NS6.5, but once work on 7.0 starts (end of the summer, last I checked), there will be *lots* of room for feature work.
--
python -c "x='python -c %sx=%s; print x%%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))%s'; print x%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))"
A) If you don't like the email client, don't use it. It's not taking up your memory or CPU if you just fire up the browser. Does a little envelope icon in the bottom left bother you that much?
;)
B) If you're going to argue that working on the non-Browser sides of the project prevents everyone from working on the browser, that's also incorrect. There are teams. Each team works on their side of the project. If everyone was dumped onto the browser team, NO work would get done, because there is an optimal size.
C) If anything, the other side projects at least have uncovered many bugs, performance knocks, etc, in the UI system that have been fixed.
I happen to think that the mail client is pretty damn good, and on-par with other free clients. The standard support is there, the IMAP is there, the HTML-input is there, the multiple-accounts, the filters, etc. But I'm not exactly impartial.
--
python -c "x='python -c %sx=%s; print x%%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))%s'; print x%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))"
then worry about the 200 applications they want to build into it. But instead they let the engineers run the show which will ultimatly be their downfall.
I interned at Netscape last summer. I worked on the Mail/News client. Let me assure you that there are most definitely phases to the project, and its not just a bunch of engineers sticking in whatever they want. Whatever new idea I had, it was shot down, because we were focusing on bugs at the time. All feature work was put on the back burner. Instead, I, and everyone else, worked on critical bugs.
And let me also assure you that the other projects in Mozilla (IRC, etc) were not created when an engineer said "Screw my bugs, I'm going to work on this." They were created when someone had some free time, or an outside contributor delivered some code.
Did NS6 ship bug free? No, but don't blame that on random engineering if you don't know what you're talking about.
--
python -c "x='python -c %sx=%s; print x%%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))%s'; print x%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))"
I'm still waiting for mozilla to have java support, does anyone know if the mozilla team will ever achieve this?
Maybe I am ignorant, but for Redhat, why would anyone bother with Netscape 6.*? I mean who cares? You get the latest Mozilla and whatever plugins you need and all done. This is not news to RedHat users.
Someone you trust is one of us.
And I must say I'm not that keen on rebooting just too check my accounts
At least it's not a site you have to check every five minutes.
The shareholder is always right.
Thus, for example, the wheelchair-accessible portion of the upstairs bar, just in case someone has one of those new magic wheelchairs that can climb a flight of stairs.
Wheelchairs that can climb stairs do exist. Not that that makes the requirement any less silly, of course.
The shareholder is always right.
A friend told me about this Web browser. Galeon looks nice too. It is based on Mozilla and faster. I played with it on my Pentium 2 300 Mhz (128 MB; RH Linux v7.1). It does seem faster than Mozilla without all the bells and whistles. And also saves CPU, RAM, and other resources unlike Mozilla and Netscape.
I look forward to receiving replies.
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
The article states that they can't bundle Netscape 6.0. They don't feel the least bit obligated to bundle it, in fact. They also mention that they're open to bundling any browser that has the required capabilities.
- 05 -10-010-20-NW-RH-SW
Linux Today has a slightly more in depth article that discusses their plans:
http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2001
afaik, bug 42184 is still unresolved. As a sysadmin, I can't really take mozilla seriously when its release notes suggest installing it separately for each user who wants to run it.
You forget, of course, that Red Hat's *primary* distribution method is in binary packages (.rpms) with source being secondary (.srpms). If the license in question prohibits binary re-distribution, then Red Hat obviously can't make it part of the distro. Part of Powertools, perhaps, but not the (.rpm-based) distro. This makes all your points - good, bad, or indifferent - all the same: moot.
--
If they take out Netscape, that means they'll have enough room to put Afterstep back in.
That isn't how I read the license for qmail.
Quoting: If you want to distribute modified versions of qmail (including ports, no matter how minor the changes are) you'll have to get [djb's] approval.
And there have never ever not once not even no no been holes discovered in qmail or djbdns, so rushing out a security fix is not something to expect. Check the age on some of those packages. They are from a long time back, and they are still the current release.
You gotta check out the 0.9 builds, they for the first time feel as fast as IE or Netscape. There appears to be a HUGE speed increase over 0.8x builds. Check it out first, you might be surprised.
KDE 2 is now bundled with RedHat 7.1
Gnome is also bundled.
They seem to work fine, incl. Konquerer.
Stephen
BTW, feel free to ask the Mozilla team what they think about the OS/2 programmers they work with.
--
Lord Nimon
And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
Mozilla is the result of Netscape opening the source, so I think it reflects well. If their business model relies on users not being able to change their browser's homepage and feeling compelled to buy whatever pops up on the browser, they're in trouble.
--
"that's not encryption - it's a new perl script that I'm working on..." - from some Matrix parody
My last understanding was that NewMoz (the bastard stepchild of the traditional Mozilla) still does not support LDAP. Business (Red Hat customers) need this if they are of an international, or pan continental company. That is unless Red Hat has decided to abandon the desktop completely and focus on servers.
Standard compliant? All users want are pages that display - IExploder is the winner in this regard, even if I do hate it, and have no love for the OS's it currently runs on.
If you designed the other way around, you would have no trouble at all (almost).
Build flashy on NS and it usually works in IE with little or no changing needed. IE is a broken system full of non standard stuff.
Stop and think about that 85% of your stats.
How is that number driven? There are sites I access with IE only because they have broken code that only IE will eat without choking. Those sites are going to show high usage of IE users because non IE users will bomb each time they visit.
Dump your MS pagebuilding tools. They truly are the tools of the devil.
It's the best graphical linux mail client that exists. Much stabler than Evolution and far less feature bloat. You don't have to pay 100's of dollars for it ('cause it's free). Though if you insist on doing so, I'd gladly accept that amount as a finder's fee ;)
Mozilla 0.8 was promising, 0.9 looks even better, but I'm pretty pleased with Opera. Very fast, stable and it doesn't take long to get used to and enjoy the Opera way of doing things. I don't miss NS 4.7 at all.
Religion is the opium of the people. Evolution is the opium of scientists.
djbdns and qmail are both under the DJB license, a license of their creator. You arent as free to do what you want with them as GNU applications.
You get the source. You can re-distribute it. You can modify it for your needs. You can distribute binaries if and only if the binary installation works and maintains the intended directory structure of the source build.
You can modify and distribute patches SEPARATELY from the original.
If you read the GNU free software page, all freedoms are assured to the user of the software. Just not to the distributors, since they cannot distribute a modified binary.
Of course, qmail and djbdns have no holes. Guaranteed. So there is no need to distribute a modified binary. Anyone who claims otherwise has not dealt with sendmail and BIND over the years. These djb programs are a blessing, and the user is assured of all essential GNU freedoms. That ought to be enough. Heck, on my redhat boxes I consider them the least buggy pieces of software on the machine, and I will gladly build them from source whenever I need a dns or mta.
Near as I could tell from looking at Bernstein's web site you are not allowed to distribute modified binaries or source!
You are, of course, allowed to distribute modified sources as patches separate from the original source.
Even if it is true that there has never been a qmail or djbdns exploit, that does not prove there never will be one. Even OpenBSD has had exploits, and those guys are DAMN careful!
DJB redefines damn careful. Look. Is it better to have distributed sendmail and BIND for the last 20 years, or DJB's software ?? In one case you have remote root exploit after remote root exploit, and you can distribute modified binaries. In the other case, you have secure software that is open source, but does not allow distribution of modifications.
Which case do you think is easier to admin ???
It is impossible to guarentee that a non-trivial piece of software does not have vulnerabilities. Not allowing distributors, or hell just concerned sys-admins from distributing sources or binaries that with any kind of improvements is just plain fucking rediculous. IMHO Bernstein is just being a jackass. His "Free software" is about as free as Microsoft's "Shared Source" bullshit.
DJB's software provides all the GNU essential freedoms to the user. The only issue is that modifications can only be distributed as source patches.
As I recall, QT 1.0 was issued with more restrictions than that, and was WIDELY distributed by SuSE, Mandrake, et al. With QT there was the additional restriction that anything linking to the software had to be open source or buy a license from Trolltech. In fact, QT STILL has that restriction.
What is more free then - the GPL'd QT or DJB's programs ? On what high moral ground should someone stand to distribute crappy exploitable but GPL programs compared to DJB licensed programs ? Who is really doing a service to the Free Software community ?
Of course, qmail and djbdns have no holes. Guaranteed.
:)
You realize that good security practice dictates that we can now never accept anything you ever say on the subject of security again, right?
My security advice will forever be limited to being no better than the security of djb's software.
Now that is a real limitation
I like Linux a lot and use it at home and at work. (Mandrake at home and RedHat at work). In both cases I like Linux because it helps me get my work done, not because I like fucking around with it (which I do, but i can't let that get in the way of my work). So I rely on distributors to make my life easier. Anything that makes life harder for them makes life harder.
This shows a basic misunderstanding of the djb software.
Qmail build and configure: trivial.
Sendmail build: a reaosnable feat.
Sendmail configure: well - let's put it this way. Eric Allman invented his own language because the sendmail.conf syntax is so convoluted.
Djbdns build and configure: trivial
BIND build: pretty easy
BIND configure: Totally non-trivial. A royal pain.
The mean time between required sendmail or BIND upgrades for security issues in the last 20 years: I dunno, but I am guessing no more than a few months.
The mean time between security upgrades for qmail or djbdns: infinite. It has never happened.
I like free software as much as or more than the next guy. But I cannot tolerate monolithic buggy binaries that have the remote root compromise of the month. It is just plain silly. Djb's software provides more than enough basic freedoms for 99% of all users. As he states, netscape was not open source, and was shipped by nearly everyone. QT 1.0 has a more restrictive license than djbdns.
But the thing I appreciate most about qmail and djbdns is not the license or the security. The programs just keep running. They have never needed checking, ever. They have never failed, never required a HUP, nothing. It is unbelievable to me that they work so well.
If you don't trust RedHat to make modifications then a) why are you using their distribution at all?, and b) what's to stop you fetching the "official" version from the author anyhow?
If all they do is add dependencies to their binary build, it is not worth so much. BIND has had a HORRIBLE security record in the past ten years. Sendmail was HORRIBLE in their security record from 1985-95.
Now, why would I want to use such a package instead of djb's packages ?? I wouldn't. I would take a secure package that provides me, the user, the source, over a GPL package that is a buggy piece of crap anyday.
The real question is, why would RedHat choose to distribute GPL packages with horrible security records, and suppress packages that provide source code that have not a single remote root compromise between them ??
The source to djb packages is open. Reverse engineering of cpoyrighted materials is totally legal. The fact that RedHat chooses to distribute buggy insecure server packages instead of DOING something about it says a lot.
And me, I will still use djbdns and qmail. I use them because I, as a user, have all the freedoms I desire. I use them because I don't have to worry about getting broken into. And that is the single biggest issue for admin'ing boxes. No one likes to reinstall and track down a cracker. And with djb programs, the likelihood that you will ever have to do so is reduced considerably.
And that is worth A LOT.
You are a hypocrite. djbdns and qmail are Free Software in the GNU sense of the word. You say
Read the licenses of djbdns and qmail, and you'll see why we can't ship them: If a hole is discovered, we're not allowed to distribute a fixed version in binary form.
This belies the point that holes are NEVER discovered in Bernstein's software. Besides that, you can provide the source. You can modify it for personal use. You can freely re-distribute the source. You can distribute source patches SEPARATELY from the djb source.
GNU freedoms are
The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0).
Clearly djb's programs meet this.
The freedom to study how the program works, and adapt it to your needs (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
Clearly this one is met as well.
The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor (freedom 2).
This one is true also.
The freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements to the public, so that the whole community benefits. (freedom 3). Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
Of course, you have to distribute patches separately, and cannot distribute modified binaries.
Look, you guys at RedHat have shipped more BIND installations that have resulted in remote root compromises than anyone else. I have personally had to re-install two machines for this reason. (and no, I didn't do the original install). Bernstein writes good free software. You can safely distribute a binary and NEVER worry about finding holes in it. Of course, any improvements in the source would have to be approved by Bernstein before being broadly distributed.
But some of us consider that a good thing.
Why don't you just come out and admit that marketing ploys are your only reasons for including or not including something in the dist.
In particular the "DJB license" does not provide "freedom 3": "The freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements to the public, so that the whole community benefits", therefore DJB's license is not a free software license by the FSF's standards. For the same reason it doesn't conform to the OSI definition either.
You are quite free to distribute patches to the djb source, so long as they are distributed separately. The FSF freedoms do not include re-distributing under the same terms as those you received. That is part of OSI and DFSG. With DJB software, you have the source, you can use it, you can modify it, you can re-distribute the original as source or binary (provided the binary does not change the directory structure and works "as intended" from the original tarball). You can also distribute patches. This qualifies as improving the software and distributing your improvements. These are the FSF essential freedoms. It doesn't make a specific point about distributing modified binaries, except in the long text after stating the basic freedoms. Note that QT 1.0 came under a more restrictive license than this...
Now then, I do not feel as a user that I am so inclined to avoid software when I am given a copy that I own. A copy that I can hack, modify, and a copy that I can distribute, as I received it, to others.
If distributions as so concerned about holes that they will not distribute djb software because they cannot distribute a modified binary - then they ought to take a good long hard look in the mirror and repeat the words "sendmail, BIND, wu-ftp, oh my" over and over again until they get it.
Crappy remote root compromisable software that is GPL'd is not worth the bits used to ship it. That has included at times wu-ftp, sendmail, and BIND multiple times each. That RedHat is free to distribute a modified binary is little solace to me as I re-install a machine. Heck, they do not even do a security review, or if they do, they are not very good at it. The cost of a single remote root compromise is well over $1000 to the admin. The cost of using qmail and djbdns is free. The cost of sleeping better at night - priceless.
Fuck Netscape!! Mozilla have been my default browser in redhat. the 0.9 release is remarkably faster and it has everything I want in a browser. I even installed it at my win2k station at work.
Internet Explorer on Windows is the best & fastest browser there is, period.
This is just plain wrong, if by "best" you mean "supports the w3 standards." IE/win has positioning bugs and problems with the object tag that made me have to hack stupid, non-compliant workarounds for IE/win on a recent project I did that used strict XHTML 1.0, CSS, and WAI level AAA code. The code was 100% valid and worked perfectly on IE5/mac, Moz/*, and NN6/*. Only IE5/win was broken.
As of pre-Moz-0.9, IE5/mac far outperforms any other browser as far as standards-compliance goes. Haven't checked the latest Moz, but I expect it's still true.
TomatoMan
-- http://frobnosticate.com
...the better for all of us. It deserves to be decently buried at midnight in an unmarked grave, but that's about all.
Of course, *nix users are probably the last people that need to be told this, but every little bit helps.
N4 is the single biggest ball-and-chain around the ankles of people otherwise dying to write quality, standards-compliant code. Now we just have to get the mac users to give it up, most Win people are using IE5, which is good enough for the most part.
TomatoMan
-- http://frobnosticate.com
I've got a dual PII 800 GX board running a Fibre Channel RAID.
Maybe I'm overly impatiant, but I pity the poor bastards with less hardware then I that have to run Mozilla
My time (and stress level) has a value to it. I waste huge amounts of time due to the short falls of these two very nessasary applications.
Maybe you've never had 18 browser windows open researching something, while composing 2 lengthly peices of email, and then have the whole works disappear because netscape decided it just didn't feel good about the webpage you wanted to load. Maybe your work or computing habits do not require such things as stability. Mine do.
It's amazing how ignorant some Linux users are. Try Windows 2000 out, you'll find that it's incredibly stable and fast. In fact, it'll smoke Linux at just about any operation. And IE 5.5 is the most stable browser I've ever used. Jason.
Yeah, I've read those results before. Those compare web servers on different OSes. I'm talking about the base operating system. Not to mention that the Linux results are based on TUX, a web server embedded in the kernel. You can always get a performance boost by moving something from user-space to kernel-space. Apples to oranges. Jason.
You mention Qt - and we fought the ideals we (well, they - I wasn't working there then) believed in and put resources into a free desktop: GNOME.
While QT may be free now, it (and thus KDE built on top of it) certainly wasn't free then - and we took the consequence of that, opening markets for people who cared less for principles and open source and more about giving a group of users the KDE they wanted.
Read the licenses of djbdns and qmail, and you'll see why we can't ship them: If a hole is discovered, we're not allowed to distribute a fixed version in binary form.
As for Netscape, there really wasn't an alternative when we added it - there now is. qmail and djbdns, OTOH, would have a hard time making it in anyway as there are other alternatives with better licenses. Qmail isn't a "must have", when we already have sendmail, postfix and exim
Netscape 6.0 is bad. However, I have been using konqueror and mozilla exclusively for about 2 months now and I love it. The only problem I've seen is that lack of flash support in mozilla (maybe it's possible, I haven't tried) and the lack of java support in konqueror. Konqueror does have the phatass support of Anti-Aliased fonts, but it is a bit slower than moz. I'm happy that I can go to websites without having to see netscape's ridiculous attempts to render them (tables support in netscape is a joke). You're going to have to back up your statement with some evidence. I think most people (including myself) would rate browsers as such, with the best first: .9 and I don't see how it's bad.
Mozilla
Netscape
Konqueror
Nautilus
Opera
By the way, I'm typing this in mozilla
Features, performance... What'y want? I installed RedHat 7.1 past weekend and it ships with both Mozilla and Netscape. I've tried them both on a 56k6 modem, and I must say that Netscape had better performance to my idea. Mozilla had the nicer features. As 56k6 modeming is quite expensive, I'd prefer to use Netscape 4.? for now. I suspect Netscape, but also Internet Explorer of using certain techniques to keep a connection going. Internet Explorer has the best performance of the 56k6 modem you see. So how do I know? Well I just simply request pages from the same web-sites all the time, and I really notice performance differences.
--
Bizar technology?
lternatives to mozilla:
/. users hate Windows or think Microsoft is out to get them!
IE (via WINE) - Microsoft's browser Konqueror - KDE's browser Nautilus - Gnome's browser Opera - Standalone browser
4 out of 4 of these are better than Mozilla right now. Notice I didn't put old netscape in that list... mozilla has finally surpassed the 4.x netscapes (in my opinion), but has a LONG way to go to beat the other browser.
Don't forget, however, that if someone out there makes a webpage and they choose to only support one browser, they'll pick IE. Complain about non-standard, closed source, etc... but 80%+ of the desktop machines on earth have IE on them... food for thought? Just because most you hate Microsoft and don't support peoples' choice to use their products doesn't mean that everyone that uses the internet hates them too.
____________________
Remember, not all
Prevent linux based DDOS's!
http://linux.denialofservice.org/
I don't know. It seems like the Open Source Community's lack of a clear leader in the browser struggle is actually a good thing. (Disclaimer: Mozilla is a leader, but it's a tad big and slow...that's why I say it's not a clear leader)
/. window), it must be many times MORE difficult to develop a browser to support today's "standards."
With IE and NN fighting over standards, which one do you develop for? Both? I wouldn't want to do it. Heck...let's let someone win the battle, set some REAL standards, and THEN come out with a real kick ass browser. As difficult as it is to develop cross-browser apps/pages (as I sit here with one I'm working on behind my
Seems to me like the darwinian nature of open source development is just shining through on this one...an open source app is only going to be developed IF 1) there is a need (which there is) and 2) there are developers willing to work on the project.
Personally, I wouldn't want to work on a browser right now...it would frustrate me more than it would reward me. And that's why I'm not doing it.
actually, i believe that the planet Melmac was destryed in a freak boating accident. i could be wrong, it has been a while. man i miss the cartoon version.
-- Hail Eris
windows is the left-hand path. you can justify your choice any way you wish, but just be aware what you're supporting the next time you open your mouth and gripe about how proprietary the web has become...
yep, and comparing the base operating system performance (which would be what? isn't the operating system supposed to run applications?) between windows and *nix is most definitely not apples to oranges. nosirree...
Great -- qmail has no holes. Unfortunately, it is A PIG to setup , install, test etc. It may not have security holes, but it does have it's strangnesses. If you fix that strangeness, you cannot distribute the fixed binaries. You have to distribute the broken binaries, or you distribute the sources and the patches to the sources (separately) and pretty much force people to build the fixed version themselves.
That's what the Redhat RPM of Qmail does... (it has to... The UID of the qmail user is compiled into the binary.... That's one of the things that's wrong with Qmail -- but it's not a security hole, so he doesn't have to fix it, or pay out his bounty for it.)
OH, you don't have a compiler? Too bad. You can always use the broken version, just reseve UID's 404 ~410 for qmail. OH. You already have users at those UIDs? Just move them.
A bison Armoured Personel Carrier doesn't have any holes either (well, OK, one -- but it's not easy to exploit) but you don't see many people driving them around. The truth is that some people care about more than just security.
That having been said, I believe the the concept behind the basic design of Qmail is wonderful -- and much more in keeping with the phylosophy behind Unix than the monolithic Sendmail. Write small programs that connect to each other in a modular way and don't necessarily trust each other... If you want different functionality, you simply replace one of the modules (or add an option). Qmail does this. It does it nicely. That has probably done more to keep it alive than it's security.
I'm just finishing an install of Qmail on a machine. My biggest complaint is that building it is like putting together a jigsaw puzzle. You get the DJB original sources. You merge in the 'standard' patches (which he will never merge into his sources [or hasn't in the last 3 years]). Then you add in the other pieces that you want and pray that they work together the way that they have for other people.
It's a nasty nit-picking job. It's a good bit easier if you can get away with the virgin DJB sources, but the truth is that many people can't. Unfortunately, nobody has the right to distribute an improved version other than DJB himself and he's simply not willing.
For me, it feels like having an MS binary with the source code encased in a plexiglass case. The most you can really use the source code for is to prod it to figure out why the binaries aren't working the way you want them to (then figure out a workaround that doesn't involve changing the source code).
--
Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
The most obvious bug of qmail is that it's dependant on running as a specific UID. (and that UID is based on various user NAMES when you compiled the binary). If you get a version that works and ship off a copy of the binary to a friend, it's going to BREAK unless the qmail users have the same UIDs as they did on my machine.
Can you understand how that is going to get in the way of RedHat distributing a binary Qmail RPM? If my system has users who's UIDs conflict with qmail, I'd have 3 choices (I can't count).
-
Install qmail with the same UID as the 'live' users and hope that those users can be trusted to not fvck with qmail
- change the UIDs of any user conflicting with qmail uids, and deal with the bitching that That causes -- especially if we have a heavily networked filesystem.
- Install the C compiler and compile a "fixed" qmail .
- Use Sendmail (or exim or
.... )
Redhat chose #4.--
Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
I hate the lack of native widgets for the scrollbars in the mozilla core of Galeon and Nautilus. All of my other apps use the lovely Crux gtk theme. The ONLY thing that makes my Linux system look inelegant are the blasted mozilla scrollbars! Does anyone know where I can get a Crux theme for mozilla? :)
In the sense that I can obtain, compile, install and use his program from source code I download from his site, I consider that "free" in every sense I need. So I'm not allowed, under his license, to redistribute a binary form of his software with different install locations or binary patches to other people. Fine, I'm willing to accept that. It doesn't prevent anybody else from getting and using the software.
In FreeBSD, I found that qmail is in their ports collection. Ports works at the source level, able to get the source from the original author's site, extract and compile the program, and install it in whatever place appropriate. Perhaps RedHat can adapt a different method of using RPMs to distribute the software using the source, compile and install after extracting the software.
I can also appreciate that, in some ways, disallowing binary patches will ensure that the program will not be patched in such ways that Dan cannot possibly be responsible for.
enter the website as www.wellfargo.com, identity of Mozilla 4 (compatible; MSIE 5.5; Win98)
Then reload wellsfargo. I rejected all cookies from the domain as well.
Wellsfargo then reported:
Your browser is:
IE 5.5
Congratulations!
You can bank online or apply for products using this browser.
Sorry, but I can't be bothered posting a screenshot.
---
---
Silence is consent.
It's not really working though from my experience. Maybe in 2.2 final.
---
---
Silence is consent.
How about if RH make RedHat Chrome for mozilla? it must be very easy for them
-- Hasbullah bin Pit (sebol)
Now we just have to get the mac users to give it up
Most of us already have, I think. I work in an all-Mac shop, and aside from testing our web-based products against Nauseator, no one I know of uses it.
Currently, I use Netscape 4.7. It is shitty, but on my Linux partition, I have simlinks to my vfat partition for the bookmarks and my email.
This allows me to access both my bookmarks and emails on the two OS, without any hassle of importing/exporting. I dual boot. For me, this is a very important feature and which forces me to stick with what I have. I am convinced that there are better alternative on each OS, but I REALLY need to have access to my email and bookmarks on both OS.
Is Mozilla going to work the same way under MS-Windows and Linux? Are the configuration files, bookmarks and email mailboxes be the same?
Anybody else with the same dilemna?
Remember the year 2000? They promised us flying cars. They delivered the PT Cruiser...
so farewell then Netscape 4.7,
.oO0Oo.
You were an annoying program,
Almost as annoying as vendor specific tags,
I'll still have to test with you,
But I'll paint my mouse black as a mark of respect.
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
Are j00 kidding?! Mozilla r00lz! 3y3'm using it right now! J00 just can't beat the Modern theme; of course EarlyBlue r00lz too. The theme whose name I forget can even make Mozilla act like Opera! Oh, sorry, I'll keep my 31337 features to myself.
Join the Slashcott! Stay away entirely Feb 10 thru Feb 17! Close all tabs to prevent autorefresh!
Flashy or not, NS4 can hardly render standard HTML.
The problem with NS is it tries to render things it doesn't know how to render properly so even if you try to "embed" a degraded page in your layout, the browser still barfs. I especially like it when the entire program actually crashes because it tries to render HTML features that are bigger than its britches. At least IE says "sorry, I don't know that" and skips over the code.
-Erik
I don't think that anyone thinks that IE is going to be surpased any time soon. I also think that opera sucks, it doesn't even render w3c standard html right sometimes. It is fast, but doesn't have much else going for it. Opera is a bad example I think.
This Wiki Feeds You TV and Anime - vidwiki.org
I do all my html by hand, and when I noticed opera and netscape were rendering stuff differently than IE I ran it through the w3c checker and got it all up to par with standards. Opera still didn't get some of the stuff right, it was kind of frustrating.
This Wiki Feeds You TV and Anime - vidwiki.org
Add to that the fact that KMail doesn't support IMAP, and you're in a real quandry. What's this P-O-P nonsense? Isn't that a bit outdated?
People shape laws. Not the other way around.
Well also slackware-current has mozilla. This means slackware will be the one of the first distributions to include moz.
While you are correct that there is no WM player for linux, it is not as far fetched as it sounds. Currently WM player is offered for Sun Solaris. And from working with the people at Sun, I would say that they feel no closer to Microsoft that most devoted linux users.
all persons, living and dead, are purely coincidental. - Kurt Vonnegut
BUT
Could somebody point me to an alternative that
Well, speak up people, i can't hear a thing.
The only alternative i have right now is IE under VMware, which is somewhat heavyweight. I admit i have never tried IE under Wine.
I downloaded j2re 1.3 for Linux, and installed the RPM. Setting up the symbolic link in /usr/mozilla/plugins/ to the netscape 6 java plugin was all it took (note it HAS to be a symbolic link). So it's working very well! For example, the Yahoo baseball Java game channel works fine.
Overall, Mozilla 0.9 seems to be as functional as Netscape 4.7. Very impressive!
Am I THE single user who has no problems with Netscape 4.7x whatsoever?
It loads as fast as the Win32 version, loads and renders pages with blinding speed, its email and news clients kick ass, and there's Composer thrown in to boot. In my opinion, it's one of the best web browsers out there. The ONLY time it crashes is when a page has Flash, and THAT's because I'm too lazy to install the Flash plugin.
NS 4.7x is still rather OK. But it does show its age in quite a few ways very badly. It does support CSS much less than more up-to-date browsers and has a few other annoying features that are quite surely not going fixed anymore. Mozilla, Opera, Konqueror, IE and others will eventually let it rest in the carehouse of old browsers along Mosaic and friends.
Everyone who makes generalizations should be shot.
I would GLADLY pay several hundred dollars each for a good linux web browser and mail client!
What's wrong with Pine or Mutt as a mail client? I've used Pine for five years and it has been easily good enough for my mail needs. Mutt should be supposedly better, but I haven't felt the need to try it.
Everyone who makes generalizations should be shot.
And IE 5.5 is the most stable browser I've ever used.
Then you haven't ever used Lynx.
Everyone who makes generalizations should be shot.
But if a bug is discovered, they can't fix it and release an updated, bug-fixed qmail rpm, with the srpm. And despite what everyone has said that qmail has never had a bug, any company with common sense wouldn't want to have to completely trust that a piece of software will never have a bug. That would be utter foolishness. And while srpms are great, a lot of people just want the binary.
tcd004
Stating the Obvious so you don't have to.
Even if they signed an agreement with Opera, to distribute a fast closed-source ad ridden browser with Red Hat - I doubt their corporate customers would dig having to support it. Seeing as Red Hat can't provide security fixes or patches to it to repair or improve it, it doesn't align with their open source philosophy.
A little bird told me that Opera's primary customers are companies that won't use *any* free software. This includes a great many Fortune 500 companies. Thier rationale is that if something goes wrong with free software, they can't say "Fix this now or expect a phone call from legal" to a free software company.
Maybe the state's highest function is to grind out insoluble problems. (Zelazny, Hall of Mirrors)
PLEASE tell me where you're looking! So far I've seen few contenders, fewer that worked. I have yet to find one that is
a) Stable
b) Quick (Low resource, and quick page loading)
c) Open Source
Mozilla fails on the first and second, and doesn't do too well on the third (as far as I'm concerned) considering the munged code it's full of.
Netscape 5 fails on a & c
Konqurer only success is C.
Opera's only downfall is the final.
If you know of one, please let me in on the best kept secret out there!
--This is not a denial of service attack--
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
Can anyone tell me why it is so difficult to find a screenshot of Mozilla on their site http://www.mozilla.org ? I did a google search and came up with a few old screenshots and the GUI looks BUTT UGLY. They must have done better since then.
I realize that:
1) you are an idiot
2) this is off topic
3) this post gets posted all the time
Still, I feel compelled to respond. You say that Linux does not affect the flow of money in the real world. In fact IDC and Deutsche Banc Alex.Brown estimate that Linux will have a financial impact of 11 billion dollars US this year and 75 billion dollars by the year 2004.
Whew, I responded to a troll.
Politics, Culture, Food?
Mozilla is miserable (crashes, doesn't work, etc)
.8 came out I have seen it crash once, and I use it for more than 10 hours/day, every day. I recently switched to .9 and am nothing but impressed.
.6. I think that this says a lot about when commercial companies consider something worthy of non beta release vs. OSS programmers consider it to be worthy of non beta release.
This was once true, but have you use it lately? Since Mozilla
I see your point but I think it's outdated.
The things I'm interested in out of this article are that 1) RH said that this was a question of philosophy - good move for those that argue OSS as a business model. and 2) the writer completely skipped the fact that Netscape 6 == Mozilla
Politics, Culture, Food?
Good or bad?
________
Hmm.
I await Red Hat's innovative new .ORG project and "innovative" licensing models coming Real Soon Now...
I've designed and helped other's design quite a few websites. The rendering problem always starts because they used IE as the testbed. I switch them over to Netscape 4.7 until they get it working there. They have always rendered properly in IE after that (barring weird double spacing that IE will do to some text and other minor glitches)... overall though pages still 'look' fine in IE (even if slightly different, I mean, dbl spacing doesn't look obviously 'wrong.')
---
Both programs were written (started) by D.J. Bernstein. You might also be interested in his djbdns security guarantee. It seems to be good software but it's just not Free.
Monkey sense
A good response to security issues is very important yes, however you can't use that against DJB for the simple reason that Qmail has never had any security issues to respond to! Some of us use what we feel is best for the job. If the best piece of software to use is GPL, I'll use it. The same goes for anything else out there. I won't stop using GOOD software because of licensing that has little to no effect on me as an end user. :)
Matt
Don't take life so seriously; it isn't permanent.
Who needs Mozilla? Red Hat 7.1 ships with a very very nice browser called Konqueror. It's blazingly fast and so far more stable for me than either Mozilla or Netscape.
Screw Micro$oft.
They aren't the first to ship mozilla as the main browser. Progeny Debian comes with Mozilla is the default web browser. Netscpe 4 is also there, as is konq, but Mozilla is the default. And it works well. Really well. If you haven't tried Progeny, check it out.
A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
I've just been doing some web testing with Mozilla 0.9 and I have to say that I'm impressed. I've even retracted my vow never to touch the thing. I've only come across a few small annoyances like sub-standard (IE and W3C spec) CSS handling, inability to access .directories and slower than Konqueor load times.
It still has a ways to go before it can serve as a primary design test tool instead of a secondary (the CSS stuff really needs to be taken care of) but it's looking much, much better and I'm quite hopeful.
The speed of you cpu has nothing to do with the speed of your downloads (doh!). A 486 can saturate a T1.
A few hours grace before the madness begins again.
As others mentioned on here, Opera is an excellent browser. I don't think Red Hat would have a difficult time at all striking a deal to include the banner-sponsored version of Opera with their distro. I bet Opera would jump at the chance to get exposure from the heavyweight company in the Linux world. Sure, the Linux port doesn't really support Java or plug-ins yet, but they could still include Netscape/Mozilla for people who need that stuff (I don't).
well, Mandrake now ships with KDE 2, which includes konqui, and it's the default browser under KDE. I thought RH had KDE2 as well ... how much more mainstream can it get? :)
simon
"Hey Carlito, r'membah me? Benny Blanco from the Bronx!"
Duh. Mozilla, while an achievenment, is the bigges, most bloated application since Windows ME.
Kalrand
-the voice of reason
"I hope this clears up any confusion people may have with whether Dan's license is open source."
This does not clear up any confusion regarding Qmail's open source status.
GPL Compliant != Open Source.
Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
No offense, but I think that you missed my point.
- fr eedom.html
On the webpage you cited (http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html) it reads:
"The Sun Public License.
This is essentially the same as the Mozilla Public License: a free software license incompatible with the GNU GPL"
Note that it reads 'incompatible with the GNU GPL'. Open Source software does not need to be 'Free' (as in liberty).
This is explained here (in the ambiguity section):
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-software-for
Dan Bernstein has very different ideas about intellectual property. His purposes for shipping Qmail and djbdns are a statement against irresponsible software companies (and programmers in general) who continue to ship shit products like Sendmail and Bind year after year. The GNU project proselytizes software 'Freedom'; Berstein proselytizes quality and excellence.
Dr. Bernstein seeks to retain complete control of his product. His reasons are irrelevant. Since he developed it, and retains copyright, he is free to exert whatever control he wishes over his products.
Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
how come there is no freebsd build till now?
Isn't that the point? You didn't pay jack for this, nor have you probably ever paid for a browser in your life. Everyone seems to assume that a quality browser is an inalienable right.
Suck it up dude, or use Microsoft (although IE has it's own problems). I mean, they are working as best they can. If you want to pay the money for Opera and then start reaming the devleopers, that's one thing. But to ream a bunch of people who, from all accounts, are working really hard to build a top quality browser is just wrong.
I respect that the fact that opinions are like assholes, everyone has one, but guess what, sometimes they stink too...
Despite the tone, I'm not trying to start a war, but as long as I'm not paying anything for 99% of the software I use on a daily basis, I'm either going to criticize constructively or write something better...
there are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots
Nice to know, in case I decide to run Windows under Linux
Nice to know you can read. The post said Internet Explorer on Windows is the best & fastest browser there is, period.
To repeat, it said ON WINDOWS. And on May 10, 2001, it is an accurate statement.
Theres nothing sadder than a blind follower who obviously cant think for themselves. Except perhaps the 2 dolts who moded this as funny (hint: its flamebait).
The ivory tower has never had to reach so h
Have Opera, Mozilla and Konq. bundled? Then the browsers would have no room for complaints! All are great, Mozilla has come a long way. I have been following all three browsers for a long time now, and I'll have to say that what is out there now is awesome. But I must say, I do like the sound of Mozilla being the default browser in RH.
cheers!
But instead they let the engineers run the show which will ultimatly be their downfall.
That's a first. Normally the downfall involves letting the Marketroids run the show.
"Sometimes a woman is a kind of religion, she can save your soul & set you free from all your sins" - Bad Examples
Seeing as how RedHat is very well-known for their stripped-down, non-bloated installs, it seems like the natural thing for them to do.
It certainly works the other way. I copied windows netscape email to linux. No problems
on behalf of the whole web development community i say THANK YOU! ahh, please let this catch on. lets get IE a little more compliant and i will be able to GASP work an 8 hour day once!
NEWS: cloning, genome, privacy, surveillance, and more!
NEWS: cloning, genome, privacy, surveillance, and more!
I've been using 0.9 since it was announced a few days ago, and I have to tell you it's MUCH faster than the previous versions, and doesn't make me miss IE at all. I'm slowly making the conversion from using windows for all my desktop tasks to using only free software, and not having a browser that could run effectively on my redhat 6.2 box with only 64 megs of ram has, until now, been a real pain. But 0.9 runs very nicely with my setup, and I'm not sure what you think would make it better. I think they've figured the big picture rather nicely, and their plans are beginning to come together. You may not be a troll, but you're wrong. Bryguy when neverwinter nights comes out, my conversion will be complete :)
microsoftword.mp3 - it doesn't care that they're not words...
No no no... You just have to use the right browser. lynx - Use it for good health under Unix, Linux, and Mac OS X.
karma is for the weak >)
Sure the banner ads suck, but you gotta make buck somehow.
I wouldn't be surprised if it becomes an equivalant to IE in performance (which is by far the best browser out there right now)
I am currently not obliged to divulge that information as it might compromise the agents in the field
Just dl'd and installed the Full build of .9 and it runs great (I'm using it now), but the Net build appears to be nonfunctional. Slashdotted maybe?
Looks good to me! I've been switching between Netscape and Opera, previously, but this is fast. No problems with the display at all on SuSE 7.1 with 2.4 kernel.
Sweet.
~sabine
I don't think the original poster (teg) was arguing that they weren't free... just that they are impractical for a distribution. RedHat needs to be able to distribute all the software in the distributions as RPMS, _and_ they need to be able to fix security holes promptly, and distribute those fixes as RPMS as well.
So, if there was a hole in djbdns, and the original author doesn't fix it (or doesn't fix it fast enough), RedHat is out of luck because they can't distribute their own fix as an RPM. There's also the issue of not being able to relocate files when you package it, which is also annoying to a distro maker trying to organize things consistently.
Now, the chance of a security hole in djbdns may be really small. I'm not familiar with the software myself. But, I can see why RedHat wants to have the ability to respond flexibly to holes if they do occur.
Perhaps you use FrontPage to make your HTML? If you don't deviate from standards, then the pages will look right. I have no problems making pages for Opera. When I come accross some FrontPage designs, that is when I have problems. Opera has had to compromise quite a bit to keep it standards compliant while trying to keep up with the bigger browsers standards deviation.
I used to use Opera for Windows at work, and now that is has been available for Linux for a while- I use it at both home and work. I have found that the banner ads really aren't a hassle, but I found it worthwhile to pay the registration fee for the Linux verison, as it is good software. Good software can't always be free. Perhaps when Opera Software becomes a larger business entity, then it will be free without banners. That just can't happen right now. It is perhaps the only software that I have purchased for my Linux machine at home. My only gripe (and in my opinion, there is no reason that they have not yet implemented this) is that Java support does not yet exist in Opera for Linux. That is supposed to change soon, and they seem to update the software just about every 3 or 4 weeks.
I've always wondered:
./ community here. That all changed one day - when I made the transition from GNOME to IceWM. It turned out that GNOME was a system resource hog, not Netscape. (This was on a 64MB RAM machine). Suddenly, Netscape just started doing everything better - loading, rendering pages, cache, everything. It's GNOME and KDE-independent, using the lovely Motif widgets.
Am I THE single user who has no problems with Netscape 4.7x whatsoever?
It loads as fast as the Win32 version, loads and renders pages with blinding speed, its email and news clients kick ass, and there's Composer thrown in to boot. In my opinion, it's one of the best web browsers out there. The ONLY time it crashes is when a page has Flash, and THAT's because I'm too lazy to install the Flash plugin.
I used to think that Netscape was a bloated piece of garbage, like the majority of the
So give Netscape a try under IceWM.
I hope you don't read slashdot in nested mode. I did this mistake with MSIE Mac Edition once and ended up waiting 4 minutes to render all nested tables on 450MHz machine! Not to mention that MSIE and Entourage are able to freeze whole machine at random moments.
So now my prefered browser on Mac is Mozilla. It takes more memory than MSIE, but it is much faster and more reliable. If I didn't know anything about Mozilla, I would be using Netscape 4.7x.
--
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
--
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Nice to know, in case I decide to run Windows under Linux...
--
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
At our company, when we create a neat looking & dynamic website, we first start with the IE version compatible with 5.0+ (our stats say 85% use 5.0+).
When that part is finished, we have to make it compatible with Netscape & those Mozilla thingies. I really, really hate that part of the design progress.
Its very irritating work because ie5 can do a bunch of flashy things that is possible, but very different programmatically in Netscape / Mozilla and most of all: it costs a lot of money! We can give our customers about 20 % discount if we just target ie50.
And most of all: my colleagues & me stay SaneCurrent Meatspace Coordinates :
Lat: 52.070884 / Lon: 4.322948
I've been using Mozilla since 0.8 because of some email features (multiple accounts management in particular) and I must agree that the 0.9 release is a very good improvement over 0.8: no more display refreshing errors, 1.5 to 2 times faster (mail client as well as web browser) and I'm quite happy of that. The only worse thing is a bug in the email client that seems to trash sometimes the .msf files (it's index of the emails) which is quite a bad thing because you see all the trashed emails coming back :-> (I had 874 emails back!)
By the way, Mandrake 8.0 includes Mozilla and Galeon and Netscape and Konqueror and... Evolution. I think giving the choice is the good way instead of deciding to impose a choice to users.
".9 very nice"? What have you been using until now that was [gasp] worse than Mozilla 0.9? It's the worst browser I've ever used, and I've been using browsers since the Netscape 2.0 days. Mozilla crashes every minute or so, it's interface is difficult to use and often scrolls off the dialog box without presenting any scrollbar, it produces lots of visual glitches and is generally slow. You can say what you want about MS, but IE 5.5 spanks Mozilla's scaly ass.
Microsoft bundles AOL in their OS in exchange for AOL using IE as a browser. I think that the original poster meant it would have cost AOL to break the contract before it was up.
For my money, .90 is not there yet
.1 to go.
Yeah, it still has about
I've got the "original" Netscape, Netscape 6, and Mozilla on my machine, and the original is the only one I use regularly. It loads the quickest, renders pages the fastest, and other than the odd "?" instead of apostrophes, works as well for my average needs as any of them. For a while, when Mozilla wouldn't even bring hotmail up without giving me errors of some form or another, I just said screw it and went back to the original.
I guess I'll give Konq a try, but to be honest, I agree with the poster who says it's ridiculous that given we're getting two full CDs of stuff anyway from RedHat that there isn't space for one more standby.
--------
Bleah! Heh heh heh... BLEAH BLEAH!!! Ha ha ha ha...
Hey, if open source browsers become more and more standardized doesn't this mean that maybe someday we can get the integrated web browser that we've always wanted as part of the operating system? Next up: the Linux registry and Linmodems!
* Please do not read my signature.
Netscape, being an AOL product includes AOL Instant Messanger (AIM) but does not have an IRC client. Conversely, the Mozilla release does not have AIM but does have an IRC client (Chatzilla).
The other item is that Mozilla is updated and debugged more frequently than Netscape 6.x
I'm scared of world leaders who think locally and act globally.
I'm sure Jamie Zawinskiis thrilled about this. It seemed that he took it as a personal failure that Mozilla.org didn't take off in it's first year of operation. In the last 6 months it seems to have been holding it's own and here's one of the proofs of that theory. Keep up the good work guys.
--CTH
--
--Got Lists? | Top 95 Star Wars Line
I think Mozilla at the end will be pretty cool (the new 0.9 is lot faster.
As a software developer is imposible to keep track of all the differences between browsers in your applications.
The best solution is to use a minimun common denominator. (until today Netscape 4.x) but with the latest build of Mozilla i think that is going to change.
If any one want to use the stable 0.9 with the new skin just download the latest build copy modern.jar from chrome and put it on the 0.9 chrome directory. and you will se how nice is getting this app. Is getting ready for prime time.
konqueror rawks
Just a reminder to all :
This is simply so they can say with a straight face about djbdns and qmail having restricted licenses. They are accused of being hypocrites because of Netscape and its closed sourceness until Mozilla. Now they can say it with a straight face, and actually mean it. Now just get rid of RealPlayer and you'll be Open Source all the way.
Linux: Because a PC is a terrible thing to waste.
James Brents
umm.. it was no big deal compiling konqueror for solaris. the only tricky part was configuring qt, since there's weird build options in the beginning. but once qt is installed, installing kdelibs and base are a cinch.
"I keep looking in the want-ads under 'revolutionary' but there don't seem to be any listings.. "
Hopefully people will realiza that Mozilla for WIN32 is better than IExplorer. I enjoy the version 0.9 a lot. Yet Opera can be a great commpetitor for IE, les clutter, high speed, free .... works for me
Yes, my bank does this. However, you can fool them by having your browser report a different useragent string... ;)
Don't tell me Mozilla is getting more stable! I'll miss my killall -HUP netscape private key pass! Err... I didn't say that out loud, did I?
On a (little) more serious note, I am glad to see that Mozilla is supposed to be getting faster. No offense, but it was really slow last time I used it under Linux. I've been using Konqueror lately...
Do you like German cars?
Yikes! And I thought Linux users liked free stuff. You must have lots-o'-money, 'cause even if Netscape, Mozilla, and Konquerer all don't work perfectly, I would still rather use them then shell out hundreds for programs that "work perfectly". Isn't that the M$ Mantra anyways, sell stuff at high prices that are supposed to be the best thing out there, when in reality it still bites: *cough* Outlook *cough*?
There was a discussion about this on the news groups (news.mozilla.org/netscape.public.mozilla.seamonke y)
Find the thread entitled "Musing about Release 1.0, branching, and beyond"
Also, look at mozilla.org or look at any discussion of documentation. Basically mozilla.org says "Our job is to develop the technology, Netscape and the other companies are responsible for taking our technology and turning it into a finished product for end users"
Based on this, I expect to see a stabilization leading up to 1.0, immediately followed my massive breakage as new features are introduced leading into 1.1.
I don't expect to see a 1.0.1 or similar that is just bug fixes for 1.0.
I wish I was wrong, but I don't think I am.
And just why shouldn't you compare apples and oranges??? Seems to me it's just fruit.... ;-)
Can't recall the last time IE crashed on me.
.ORG project and "innovative" licensing models coming Real Soon Now...
However, I can crash Mozilla under ten minutes, I find a bug every time I use it.
And *yes*, I *do* use nightlies.
> I await Red Hat's innovative new
ROTFLOL!!
--
Two witches watched two watches.
Which witch watched which watch?
The Netscape browser will end up on the desktops of the 30 million or so hapless AOL users, when the next version of AOL ships. AOL's contract with Microsoft for IE is up soon (if not already) and they own Netscape, so it's no extra cost to them.
-----------------
www.lucernesys.comHorizon: Calendar-based personal finance
Unlike you, I am not willing to suffer bad browsing experiences just because I want to run FreeBSD as my desktop (which in your case would be Linux).
I made the decision to use Windows as a desktop OS (as did more than half of /. users, as I heard the statistics showed). That was my point. If that doesn't work for you because you insist on waiting for a good browser on Linux and suffering from Netscape/Mozilla/Konq while doing that, that's your problem. I'm just saying what was my solution.
As I understand almost all of the work done for Mozilla is done by Netscape (AOL) engineers. If nobody uses Netscape and everybody switches to Mozilla AOL is not making any money from those engineers efforts. Thus they could drop support for Mozilla all together at some point.
The only hope is that AOL wants to ship Netscape to their customers instead of IE. I still have serious doubts that they will do this since most AOlers are used to IE and IE still works a lot better than every other browser on Windows.
You have a "very nice" .9? Where'd you get it, 'cuz mine sucks. Images are totally hosed and it's crashed 3 times in 36 hours. .8 was a LOT better.
--
324006
I'll take Netscape 4.x under Linux any day, provided I've taken the time to tweak my fonts/font servers. Sure, the wigets are gross (really, really gross), but the rendering engine is good and I've never had it go down screaming.
Even so, Redhat's move to bundle Mozilla is a sign of progress. More users --> (more demand) + (more developers) --> better software, at least in my ideal little world.
Who needs netscape? Netscape has no moral anymore, Navigator was a very good browser until its third version! Now... I'll let KillaZilla speak form me.
I began to use linux running from Winz instability, trying to find a solid ground to step, found this at linux. I thinks it's wonderful.
Whatever... the point is that nothing in my linux box is so instable as NS, I even have killazilla as a shortcut in my destop! That's ridiculous! As I saw once in a discussion list "WE WANT QUALITY!!!"
So, I think that Mozilla is a GREAT option, I know that Netscape 6 and Mozilla is "almost the same", but for me, Netscape is dead. I won't trust Netscape anymore, unless they make a wonderful-ultra-stable-new-Navigator.
Let them use Mozilla and leave NS. For me, it's for the best!
Don't worry, I'm in a bad mood [to|every]day
-=-=-=-=
I know life isn't fair, but why can't it ever be un-fair in MY favor!?
as for email, you may want to look into fetchmail and mutt. i used to think they were pretty old and archaic, until i really gave them a chance and began using them. mutt is the best email client i've ever used, because i can use any editor i want to compose the email, move around it with the keyboard, etc. fetchmail works exceptionally well to grab the email, which is good. you can also set up mutt to work with imap. more information on that is on mutt's website.
Every once in a while I like to masturbate a new word into my vocabulary, even if I don't know what it means.
i use linux and mozilla, and i don't suffer a bit. they've come quite a far way, even in the time i've been using them (linux since '96, mozilla for a little over a year really). i have java support, flash, etc. the java runs better here than it did under netscape on windows. mozilla renders pages *really* fast. it starts up quick now, which is definitely a plus. i think you need to take a better look before you say that we "suffer" - i don't.
Every once in a while I like to masturbate a new word into my vocabulary, even if I don't know what it means.
I remember back in the day when Netscape was the only "cool" graphical application on Linux for awhile -- it was in everyone's screenshots when showing off Linux; now it seems to be popular to bash Netscape even though they helped to inspire lots of Linux development when things were just beginning to happen for Linux.
Don't reply streaming mp3; the majority of streaming content is either RA or WMP format, and since we will never see a WM player for Linux, we're already locked out of ~60% of the streaming audio on the net. Rip out RealPlayer and you're probably down to roughly 10%... :-(
I would have to think that most people who have the gumption and desire to run Linux are already predisposed to try new things and are willing to experiment with different products to find the best one for their needs. Sure a newbie to Linux will perhaps use Mozilla simply because it came bundled, but soon they will become embiggened with the spirit of open source and competition and inevitably install Netscape anyways. I mean, how many people after becoming reasonably proficient in Linux finish a fresh installation and say, "Well that's it, I don't have to install or configure anything else because RedHat knows exactly what I need!" I just feel that Linux users being of superior mind and intellect will experiment with different browsers and choose the best one for them. If that turns out to be Mozilla, then so be it. Netscape just has too much name recognition for people not to want it on their machines, even if just to compare it to the default install of Mozilla.
Embigenned is a perfectly cromulent word.
I posted to
The Linux version of Netscape is miserable. It has messed up my X desktop more times than I care to comment on. I'm glad to see a large entity like RedHat move in and support Mozilla. With MS and Netscape continually in standards wars, maybe now we'll have a common point to focus upon.
Structural resilience ? ..
We are talking here about a bar. A place, existence of which is entirely owned to a good will of some guy somewhere in a local governmental office.
It is beyond GPL, BSD etc etc.
The only way liberals win national elections is by pretending they're not liberals.
Ooops..
This does make you wonder what will become of the 'Netscape' browser once Mozilla is polished and done... If IE takes Win32 and Mozilla the *nix community...
Evil ZEN Scientist
Netscape 6.0 is an abomination. It's a crime against humanity. Why should they feel obligated to bundle that monstrosity just because it's says Netscape on it? For my money, .90 is not there yet either which leaves linux with either Konquerer or Opra I guess. Konquerer is not all there so that leaves Opra. I don't know but it seems like a pretty sad state of affairs for the Linux camp. With the major importance of a browser you would think that the Mozilla folks would have tried to build a world class one first, then worry about the 200 applications they want to build into it. But instead they let the engineers run the show which will ultimatly be their downfall.
There is a lesson to be learned there for the OS community. It's not always about scratching an itch when you are trying to compete with commercial applications. You need some strategic planners who are more big picture oriented and can overcome the engineering nonsense. But if you try to suggest anything like that to the *community* you are labeled a troll. Oh well, I guess they can fail on their own and of their own accord.
Wagner LLC Consulting Co. - Getting it right the first time
Yeah, I'm sure he is... his Mozilla resignation letter sure makes for entertaining reading now. An object lesson in the value of sticking with it, through thick and thin?
Or maybe he's just having more fun with his other massive, over-budget, behind schedule project. I'm actually hoping he won't give up on DNA... It could be very cool, but it doesn't have the structural resilience of an open source project, where others can take over if the leader loses the faith.
Q