Slashdot Mirror
Mozilla 0.9.1 Out
MatriXOracle writes: "mozilla.org released milestone 0.9.1 today. New features include Bi-directional text support, LDAP Autocomplete in mail, new combined taskbar, an overhaul of the Modern skin with all new colors and buttons, and lots of performance and stability fixes, with over 30 of the topcrash bugs fixed." I'm using today's build right now, and it's very pretty, especially with the (brilliant!) modern theme. However, it's also segfaulted repeatedly for me already, so I hope you have better luck.
This is a bit old (it's from CVS) and it's changed subtly since this, but here you go:
href="http://www.skylab.org/~plumpy/mozilla.jpg
Go here:
/ unix/linux22/xpi/spellchecker.xpi
ftp://ftp.netscape.com/pub/netscape6/english/6.01
It should start the smart-update installer thingy-bot and then you'll have a spell checker.
"capitolize"? Sounds like you really shouldn't turn off spell checking...
Actually, 0.9.1 IS a stable release. Every release the mozilla team does is a stable release, with periods of unstable (nightly) releases in between. As for 1.0, they will declare moz 1.0 when it is feature-complete, and doesn't crash. And since a bunch of stuff HAD to be in there for 1.0 (like LDAP, and BIDI) they added them.
Besides, the new modern theme is just that, a theme. There will be lots of them out there later, so while that's a new feature, it doesn't impact stability that much.
Also, mozilla.org has very elaborate mechanisms to stop people from submitting code that could crash moz. You need to have your patches reviewed by other developers before you can have them submitted, for example.
I think that Mac OS X is Mozilla's last big chance for any kind of market share dominance. Right now, there is no single BEST browser for OS X. IE 5.1 preview SUCKS (it stalls every 5 seconds when you go to do something). OmniWeb has a slick interface and decent speed SOMETIMES, but it has a bad tendancy to get bogged down with too many threads when you have only several browser windows open. iCab is wicked fast, and fairly good with compatibility, but it currently lacks Java and mouse scroll wheel support in OS X. Then.... we have Mozilla, or Fizilla, as the Carbon version is called. It currently lacks Java and mouse scroll wheel support, but seems to be WICKED fast compared to other OS X browsers. The "Modern" skin/theme actually looks pretty decent along side Aqua too. If the Mozilla team can hammer down Java support (which should be easy with OS X's excellent support of Java 1.2, and upcoming support for 1.3 later this summer), and of course I NEED scroll wheel support in my primary browser of choice, Mozilla has a really good chance of capturing OS X market share, and with a platform this young, OS X is only going to get bigger in the next year. Mozilla needs to have just these few (but major) things added to the OS X port, and they just might capture a LARGE portion of the OS X browser market.... and with OS X poised to be the only OS that Apple ships in the future, that could really mean big things for Mozilla's future. I think this Fizilla process needs to be junked too. It should be Mach-O and take advantage of more of the hot features in OS X, and they need to get it in the main codebase with nightly builds, just like the ancient Mac OS 9 and Win/Linux versions. Just my $0.02... If you're bored, check out http://wop.mine.nu/ :)
Oh, and I'm using Opera to post this, which is also an excellent browser for Windows - always fast and usually stable. Its main advantage to all other browsers is its killer UI with mouse gesture recognition, lots of hotkeys, excellent bookmark management etc.
Also, if you filter JavaScripts and animated GIFs using a local proxy like Proxomitron, even Netscape 4.7 becomes rock stable (I can use it for days without a single crash). Really, if you don't want to use IE, don't use it.
Took you this long? I ditched NS4.7 around Moz0.8. But I use Konqueror too. They both rock. :-)
---
Yes.
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
Sometime a long time ago (1998) I opened a bug to request multiple sigs. You can add your .02 to it at the following URL, if you'd like:
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2350
Let's compare those to Opera now (v5.11):
Startup Speed: IE6. But only because it mostly starts up with Windows. Opera is a fairly close second, and Mozilla takes at least 10x as long.
Winner: IE
Interface: It's a matter of preference. If you like root-level windows for each page, Mozilla is better. If you like MDIs, Opera is better.
Winner: either Mozilla or Opera
Rendering Speed: Definitely Opera. Mozilla beats out IE by a bit, but Opera is much faster.
Winner: Opera
Image Rendering: Opera. It's damn fast.
Winner: Opera
Interface Speed: Opera and IE are tied. They're both win32 native speed. On slow machines (like mine) IE tends to drag resources sometimes though, pausing interface responsiveness for a short period of time. Mozilla is just damn slow on a p266.
Winner: Opera, but not by much
Download & Install: You must be joking. Opera v5.11 is 2.18 megabytes. Neither IE or Mozilla come close.
Winner: Opera, by far
Editable Text Boxes: They're identical in Opera and IE. And yes, Mozilla's suck.
Winner: Opera and IE tie
Stability: Mozilla crashes every once in a while (though much less than it used to), Opera crashes every once in a while (though much less than it used to), and IE is pretty solid.
Winner: IE, by a small amount
Loading Cached Pages: Opera and Mozilla both theoretically load them instantly, but Mozilla takes a bit of time to do so on my machine (i only have 96mb RAM and a p266).
Winner: Opera by a small amount
Sidebar: Sidebars suck. I turn them off in all browsers.
Winner: Tie between all of them, since they can all be turned off
Standards support: Opera supports nearly all standards perfectly, with some of the advanced features of CSS2 being the sole exception. IE does not properly support even CSS1. Mozilla supports standards nearly perfectly with a few CSS2 bugs.
Winner: Mozilla, by a small bit. It's helped by the fact that it also supports non-standard pages better than Opera ("de facto Netscape standards") with its quirks-mode backwards compatibility
Gender Recognition: Opera has it. IE and Mozilla don't.
Winner: Opera, by far.
Cost: Opera is free with ad banners, or $30 without. IE and Mozilla are both free.
Winner: IE and Mozilla tie.
Overall Winner: Opera. It's small, fast, and the gesture recognition kicks ass. And in v5.11 Java/JavaScript/Flash/etc. all work properly 99.9% of the time, and CSS rendering is nearly flawless (much better than IE6's CSS anyway). And it's fast on my p266. Did I mention that I like the gesture recognition?
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
IE is worthless on anything but MS platforms.
Now IE isn't good on as many platforms as Opera and Mozilla are, but it's certainly not worthless on non-MS platforms. The Mac version of IE in particular is even better than the Windows version.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
Every time Mozilla and bug, slow, or sucks are mentioned in the same paragraph, a Smart Tag with links to Bugzilla is displayed.
DCMonkey
I happened to have the mozilla 0.9 and linux kernel 2.4.5 sources on my hard drive. I decided to find out how big they are in comparison of each other. The command I used to test was: xargs cat | find -iname *.[ch] I used a slight modification of that for Mozilla which has .cpp sources. This doesn't even count any of that XUL stuff.
Here are the results:
Mozilla is currently some 22,000 lines of code bigger than the most recent kernel release.
Holy hell that's a large project.
\\\ SLUDGE
http://moria.seul.org/~bergo/mozilla.png
I get really sick of people who complain about bugs in Open Source software, yet don't even take the time to report them to the developers.
Grrrr.
--
On Winblows you can turn on the preloader for mozilla by specifying the -turbo option. Which means that it will stay in memory like IE does thus giving you nearly instantious opening speed. (And no we havent given up on cutting down startup speed this just to get people off our back who complain that IE loads so fast and why cant Mozilla...well now you have it so stop bitching :)
If it's staying in memory, how does one get it to unload (cleanly without killing it in taskmgr)?
Yep: I got that problem the first time I ran it.
I don't see a spell checker, is there one and I'm blind? Mail and news looks good (this is all I use Netscape 4.7 for), although bit slow. I'm still not sure if I want to trust it with normal useage... and not have a built-in spell checker will bias me away from it.
1) Is there anyway to change the IP address of the news server? My ISP has several servers on round-robin DNS. Sometimes one or two of the servers play up, so I would like to hard-code one of the IPs. I don't want to setup a new server as I will lose all my settings and state... is there are way edit these things (preferably in the UI, not in some configuration file ;)
2) I can only seem to find message filters for email. Are there any for news? If not, is there a kill file option?
Although, honestly there isn't anything wrong with killing it from the task manager.
I'm just a bit paranoid about doing things like that. I would rather it gets chance to shutdown cleanly in case it needs to update any of it's configuration settings.
Actually if you're listening to mp3s with something that uses EsounD (like xmms) just launch mozilla with esddsp. That fixes it.
If it's so important to you to have encrypted email, then get a mail client that supports it. It's not like there's a shortage of them. Some are even good at it.
"No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare."
--James Madison
*Much* nicer. *Much* faster.
Thanks Mozilla folks.
Deleted
The main thing is that they actually got something accurate about the Mozilla release and not the usual - this in Mozilla 0.x, late as usual, it sucks and lets all use Konquerer or whatever it's called!
The original submitter should have acknowledged the source, but I don't see this as too much of a problem. As long as something positive is written that's what matters.
At this stage mozilla needs all the testers and downloads it can get.
The mozilla one is a lot more intelligent, it can support things like multiple search engines
More info see: http://sherlock.mozdev.org/
Netscape 4.x had this, it was called roaming access.
David E. Weekly
David E. Weekly
Code / Think / Teach / Learn
h4x0r for
Mozilla skins are not "worthless eye candy" -- using XUL you can implement not only different browser looks but different behaviors and functionality. That's what enables developers to create entirely new classes of applications without touching the underlying browser code.
You can install instances of Mozilla that are independent of each other. I keep a directory called "nightly" in my home directory (in /pub/mozilla/nightly/latest
Mandrake 8.0) and download binary tarballs a few
times a week from the
directory. Just untar them into individual directories and you can keep several builds around
at a time. The only issue is that occassionally
some change will invalidate your profile so that
you have to recreate it. Profiles are stored
under ~/.mozilla, so you can back those up too
if you like.
Yes.
With all this copying of Windows UI, why don't any of the toolkits support such menubars? It looks like this is a native MFC thing and has been around for awhile.
Of course what I would really like to see is the eradication of all these toolbars and a switch to pop-up menus and windows that contain only content, but it is looking hopeless...
It would be real nice if there was a "play this once" and "play this continuous" and "stop" on the pop-up menu, though. Just in case you want to control the animations individually. And some preference for the intial state of all of them.
If we are going to waste computer time, I think Mozilla should continuously guess at any missing data (ie guess that images are the same size as the last image, add missing close tags, whatever) and continuously redraw the window while it is downloading. Ie if it has got data in memory and is not busy reading more data it should do as much as possible to get it on the screen. Perhaps it does do this?
I'm using it now and it's very nice. Mozilla has been my primary browser since 0.8, mainly because I conscientiously refuse to touch Microsoft products -- but at this stage of the game I think I can safely say that it really is a world-class browser that can stand on its own merits. It's fast, it's accurate, and it's good looking.
--
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
Although I disagree with the content of this post, I still have to give it a +20 Absolutely Hilarious, for characterizing quite adequately the way many of us behave around our favorite toys.
Engineering and the Ultimate
Because Mozilla isn't _just_ a browser. It's a testbed for Corporations doing free software. It's a possibility for a free software application to be used in many, many corporations and user desktops.
Engineering and the Ultimate
If you want PGP support in Mozilla, please vote for bug 22687.
To quote Eran Tromer from that bug page:
"I'd like to express my personal opinion on the matter. Context: I'm not a Mozilla developer, but I'm well-versed in relevant security issues and I've been following this bug with interest.
"In terms of security, e-mail is currently one of the weakest facilities on the Internet. HTTP/SSL, SSH and SCP provide encrypted and authenticated protocols for the respective needs, but e-mail by and large still relies on plaintext messages passed in the clear by POP3 and SMTP. The implications are obvious and frequently experienced. This is paradoxical, considering the vast popularity of e-mail and its frequent use for sensitive information.
"This grave situation persists mainly because of lack of functionality in common e-mail software. Encrypted e-mail ought to become the *default* format, and it must become trivial to import public keys, to send standard-compliant signed and encrypted messages, and verify their validity upon receipt. None of this is possible without e-mail software support. And Mozilla is in the position to change this situation.
"It is my opinion that in this case, clean architecture should be sacrified for functionality. Yes, providing this functionality in Mozilla 1.0 (i.e., anytime soon) may necessitate unmodular, specialized and hard-to-maintain changes in the codebase. It is not possible to do the Right Thing with the given resources and timeframe. Then go ahead and just do a Working Thing and fix it later, because this one is too important.
"Mozilla.org is spending an inordinate amount of time on building a fantastic infrastructure, to-the-letter compliance with numerous standards and owe-inspriring customizability. But as a practical web user, site administrator, programmer and consultant, I'd rather give up all of these than have my e-mails show up in the wrong hands.
"Hence, I urge you to reconsider your decision."
(end quote)
- Tal Cohen- Tal Cohen
... but I still need SSL support :/
Your Working Boy,
- Otis (GAIM: OtisWild)
I've been thinking about email encryption a lot lately. Rather than encrypting the mail at the user level, what would be involved in doing it at the mail server? In other words, create an extended SMTP protocol which allows for two mail servers to talk to each other via encypted messages. Then *any* messages sent via these servers, whether encrypted at source or not, will not be easily read in transit. I realise that creating a new mail transfer protocol is not something you can do overnight, but is anyone involved in making SMTP a little more secure?
Better than nothing though right? And you could always build in support for the extended SMTP into the mail clients themselves. That way everything is encrypted without user intervention.
The difference in version numbers from the previous is not always proportional to the increase in quality.
The folks are doing it for FREE because they like to code. Creating is the fun part. Everything else is just BUSINESS. Not that I am switching over but I am glad that Mozilla is there and still pushing things a bit.
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
yup, i had this problem with 0.9 and 0.91
Problem seems to be in the permissions on the Plugins directory. If you installed as root (which most people do), then all the directories in /usr/local/mozilla are only writable by root.
Solution is to either temporarily chmod the plugins dir to "777", or to run mozilla itself from a root shell and then go to java.sun.com or somesuch.
(BTW, the Flash/Shockwave plugins work great too!!)
I thought 9.0 was a huge improvement. This release is even better!
--
Your Servant, B. Baggins
Sheesh, I've had to deal with that working on my local server for some time now with Netscape and Mozilla. What I usually do when I'm actively doing work is set my cache to 0 on both memory and disk and flush the cache. When I'm done, I set the cache back for regular browsing.
I've actually left the cache off and really didn't notice too much of a slowdown - most of the sites I visit have pragma no cache set anyway.
I know, it's a pain in the arse, but until our overworked friends at Mozilla decide to disable caching for source requests, we'll have to deal with it. I don't even know if it's on the wishlist. If it is, please bump it up - webdevelopers who use Mozilla (me) would be very happy.
Mike
I'm starting to lose what little faith I had left in slashdot since it is clear that the editors are doing serious storyscreening. Favouring their pet topics and leaving out stuff they don't really want to have to think about.
- the Crazy Fraggle
Stupid question but:
I'm trying to upgrade mozilla 0.8
from my default install of Mandrake 8.0
and because of tangle dependance of RPM
I can't go to mozilla 0.9 or 0.9.1
!!
anyone have the same problem ?
thanks
Back button doesn't work!! (Now it does?)
Dropping down the bookmarks menu and then clicking in the browser window to pop it up sometimes makes it start scrolling up and down like crazy.
Dragging bookmarks to and from the shell works now. So does IE Favorites.
CPU usage is dramatically lower. Startup time is about the same.
No longer behaves badly on slow loading pages.
Still can't easily sort in threaded mode in the newsreader.
Still doesn't recognize external mailers, probably never will
--
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
That looks pretty great, I'm glad they've improved it so much, I really hated the "Modern Skin" when it came out.
- sigs are for wimps.
Thanks (in advance)
- sigs are for wimps.
Is this 'by design' or am making some mistake?
Someone who succeeded in doing this, and how did you get it to work?
Also, (on Win2K) when using -turbo, when I open a new first window it doesn't open maximized, which it does without the -turbo switch. Guess this is a little bug, but does anyone know how to force mozilla into starting fullscreen?
I tried -max, -maximized but that didn't work
----
Every expression is true, for a given value of 'true'
I've tried Galeon and liked it a lot, but found that sometimes it wouldn't load any images on certain pages.
Common sense is what tells you the world is flat.
Try loading news.com - I get their whole page in a small top frame :)
I guess they better fix their html...
I'm using it on a Win2k box right now.
- It's better than 0.9
- New skin rocks!
- The turbo feature is really cool - when using that, it loads *faster* than IE!
- Java works mostly - it doesn't work with my internet bank, though :(
Overall it's really cool!
Greetings Pointwood
http://www.mozilla.org/mailnews/mozmail-5-23-log.h tml
seems to suggest there is an effort from within
Mozilla to do multiple sigs. However I found no
further references. I did look at the crypto FAQ
before posting, but with statements like:
"We know of at least two efforts which may produce
PGP support for Mozilla"
it was neither specific nor helpful.
Writing this from 0.9.1
With the -turbo option it is all that I want
in a browser. Well, a few glitches but no
showstoppers.
My main grief is with the theming. Both themes
have screwed up alignment of buttons and
drop-down list on the toolbar. Modern theme has
the drop-down list looking horrible (it's border
is misaligned with the list itself) while the
classic theme has the GO button lower than the rest. This is Win95 box at work. YMMV.
Oh, and clicking the icon brings up two windows:
one for the startup page and one with about:blank
location. I think I saw somewhere that this was
fixed in the nightlies though.
But the kicker is the superfast rendering. IE
doesn't hold a candle. Wow.
I have recently looked for multiple or even
singular PGP signatures support and couldn't
find any. Do you know if anything is in the
pipe (maybe already done)?
The String API was changed after NS6 was released, so the commercial spell checker no longer works... but if Netscape ever decides to make NS6.1, they should use the updated API for the spellcheckerk er/libspellchk.so) Load FAILED with error: undefined symbol: Implementation__C8nsStringh k.so) Load FAILED with error: undefined symbol: Implementation__C8nsString
nsNativeComponentLoader: SelfRegisterDll(/opt/mozilla/components/spellchec
nsNativeComponentLoader: SelfRegisterDll(/opt/mozilla/components/libspellc
1.3L, 3 moving parts, 280 HP, no Turbos, wanna Race? RotaryNe
This is normal. I think the users may have their own plug-in directory somewhere in their home folder.
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
Ow; my head hurts. That screenshot was too recursive.
Don't leave us hanging! How'd you do it?
--
--
Mod up a post Rob doesn't like and you'll never mod again
--
--
Mod up a post Rob doesn't like and you'll never mod again
--
--
Mod up a post Rob doesn't like and you'll never mod again
I don't know about the release but I've been using the nightly and it run the Flash, Real Player, and Java plugin just great now!
I just headed to thees.org to get my little mozilla theme and it seems it has been overloaded by the Moz.91 and slashdot...cool
He said ORGANIZE an effort to fix it, not write it himself. It is the equivalent of someone not liking a political issue, someone suggesting he organize a political action comittee and you complaining that not everyone is a politician.
Mozilla is open access, everyone gets a shot, if you don't like something, get some people who know what they are doing and agree with you to change it.
-Shieldwolf
just = (My)Opinion.toCents();
Works for me, I have the jdk installed and mozilla detects it when I launch it. I have had some trouble getting Java to work with mozilla on linux though (haven't tried recently so maybe things have improved by now).
In any case, jdk1.3.1 has the same changes as jdk1.3.0_1 that enable it to work with mozilla and so will all future versions as far as I can tell. Did someone test with jdk1.4 beta?
Jilles
Hmmmm,
/usr/dict/words
$ grep knowticable
$
Doesn't seem to help here.
--
People who read and write languages with bi-directional text might not consider that a feature©©©
The src/log_ldap.c is a simple getpwnam() wrapper and it can be reused by any program that use this library call to read
Isn't that what you should pam_ldap for?
Granted, of course it makes sense to use it more extensively (sendmail, ...).
Exactly, but this was what you were (partially) proposing to use it for, unless I misunderstood you.
When I Customize Sidebar, select google, and click OK, google.xul downloads via a visible download dialogue (I think this is already wrong), and wants me to suggest a default action (for which only "Save to disk") seems to be an option.
Default download directory doesn't work for me. Using mozilla.exe to open the google.xul displays the sidebar info in the main page. What should I do here?
Am I missing something obvious, or is this a bug I should report? Also, since other sidebars (CNN I'm looking at) work okay, is the problem in Moz or on Google's end?
I realize there are better forums for this question, but I thought I'd start here. I'm not noticing it in Bugzilla.
Oh here's another question ...
Does anyone have the link for that utility that adds Slashdot to yr sidebar?
Es.
Automation? COM? That's been dead for ages!
.Net Client? :-)
Why don't you include a native
Correct. Removing the links from this wouldn't be a bad thing, but it would probably be next to useless from a POV of stopping most snooping.
There are two threats that I see...
The first is something like Echelon. This is a centralized (sitting on a few backbones) server that records all email that passes. They'd then scan for keywords, etc.
The second is someone who wants to read YOUR email, specifically. They'll tap in at your ISP, to ensure they see all your email.
Now, stopping random snooping is a good thing, but it's not most people's biggest concern. They want to stop people from snooping directly, reasoning that if someone snoops randomly they aren't aiming to use the information directly, but if they snoop on you specifically, chances are they're malicious.
So, encrypting between the links is a good idea, and should be done eventually, but isn't IMHO a huge priority.
I get this too, but I've found a couple of workarounds. It seems to only happen when I scroll the page with the arrow keys or the mouse wheel (or sometimes on load); thus, it can be fixed by simply doing a page-down and then page-up, or by right-clicking near the image so the popup menu obscures it - this fixes whatever area was obscured by the popup. It sometimes takes a few clicks, but once you get good it takes fewer :) I do it when I'm feeling too lazy to reach for the keyboard.
Also, sometimes clicking on images fixes the problem, but that obviously doesn't work well for images that have hyperlinks....
Peter
You know what I hate? Wait, what do you like? I hate that!
and since i haven't seen it mentioned yet, don't forget to evaluate 0.9.1's improved "threaded pr0n" ;)
0.9.1 (Using it now) is great! Thanks Moz guys! The one irritating thing about 0.9 and 0.9.1 is that animated Gifs can't be stopped (AAAAGH!!!). It probably has to do with the new image library (Pr0n) that landed just before 0.9. It included major rework on animated Gifs. I liked the way 0.8 would stop loading an animated Gif when the stop button was pushed! Even better would be an option that causes Moz to stop loading all Gifs after the first frame by default. Then maybe a right-click option we could use to selectively continue loading an animation. Anyone now when we'll be able to stop those pesky Gifs???? Jono
No I hate that too. I also find that the wheel mouse in linux is way to klunky, if rolls down to much. While I am bitch about it, I wish it would import my Netscape mail filters too. BTW I am posting with 9.1 right now :)
"arch thats not supported by the moz team? Like *BSD or anything else"
Not supported?!? Did you look at the builds that were posted for 0.9? Mozilla is a Cross Platform (XP) application. If you've got a platform Mozilla can probably be compiled for it. (feel free to snicker with vic20 and c64 comments)
Mozilla 0.9 - Completed May 7, 2001 (one month ago)
Win32
MacOS 8.5 - 9.0
Linux
AIX
DG/UX
Irix
OpenVMS
OS/2
HPUX
FreeBSD
BSD/OS (bsdi)
Solaris
Tru64 Unix
Yes! BeOS support!. I just left it off the lsit. Sorry. --Asa
"2. new autocomplete widget - now works like a combo of IE and NS 4.x complete, but better than both (uses any site in your history file). Has an option to search for keywords thru Netscape at the bottom of the list, tho i wish this were google instead. "
Edit|Preferences -> Navigator -> Internet Search -> Default Search Engine.
You can select any of the search engines for the autocomplete popup. Mozilla search engined are based on sherlock technology so there are literally hundreds of them available (including Google, which I am using right now).
--Asa
in Mozilla:
Tasks|Privacy and Security|Cookie Manager
there's also |Image Manager for controlling killing those pseky banner ads.
--Asa
The bookmarks problem is actually pretty easy. Bug 71685 Bookmarks in Sidebar are blank. This affects you if you have used the sidebar blank bookmarks workaround or your profile was created between early March and late May. If you have a pre ~11 March profile for which you never used the sidebar blank bookmarks workaround or a post ~23 May profile this probably doesn't affect you.
If you have a profile which was created before about March 11 and you used the workaround between about March 11 and May 23 then you will have to use the workaround again. If you have a profile which was created between about March 11 and May 23 then you will have to use the workaround now.
Workaround:
1. open browser
2. view sidebar
3. click "Tabs" button at top right of sidebar
4. select "Customize Sidebar" menuitem
5. select "Bookmarks" from "Tabs in My Sidebar" list
6. click the "Remove" button below the list of "Tabs in My sidebar"
7. click OK
8. click "Tabs" button at top right of sidebar
9. select "Customize Sidebar" menuitem
10 select "Bookmarks" from "Available Tabs" list
11 click the "Add" button below the list of "Available Tabs" list
12 click OK
note: just unchecking the tab from the "Tabs>" menu and rechecking it will not fix the problem. --Asa
Patience. Source tarball should be there in the next 24 hours. It's a lot of work to get it all together and we'd rather give out what we have when we have it then make everyone wait until we have hte last of the 30 or 40 builds we put up each Milestone.
--Asa
Slashdot editors posted a comment which was clearly stolen from http://www.mozillazine.org It would be nice to see a little more integrity from the slashdot editorial staff. Checkin sources, reading referenced links, etc. would go a long way to improving the value this site brings to it's users and the Web in general.
--Asa
I suspect that your problem was attempting to load sites with TLS (SSL 3.1) enabled where the site didn't support TLS. Mozilla nightly builds now gracefully downgrade to SSL3 when they encounter these misconfigured or out of date servers. The fix didn't make it into the Milestone but we did set the pref for TLS to off (you can reenable it Edit|Preferences Privacy and Security -> SSL -> Enable TLS) as the Milestone default so you should have better luck visiting SSL sites.
--Asa
--Asa
Another option would be to implement the packet-level encryption capabilities of IPv6. (Pipe dream, I know....)
- Rev.
A couple of comments..
You say that for rendering speed, Mozilla 0.9.1 would beat IE 6. That's not what the Mozilla developers are saying tho. For network loading, I don't know, but pure rendering speed should still be faster in IE.
Interface speed.. IE is *WAY* faster than Mozilla. On a fast computer, you may not notice much difference but on a slower one like some laptops, the difference is huge.
Sidebar. IE ripped Mozilla? Hello? The sidebar in Mozilla is based on the sidebar that appeared in IE 4. It has gone through several iterations of development, first being called Aurora, then having these "flash notification" thingies that would show you that you have a new email etc., and now finally, the version we see in Mozilla now. Microsoft has said that it will drop the content-panes (news, media player etc.) for the release of IE6 because the public didn't like it in usuability testing. But to say that Microsoft ripped the idea from Mozilla is just wrong as Mozilla really ripped the idea from IE4.
The Adobe Acrobat plugin relies on it, it was more for backward compatibility with NS4 than anything else.
I noticed a couple people saying that Mozilla is faster than IE, but it seems to me that Mozilla loads pages before all images are rendered by default, whereas IE waits by default and then renders everything. Is this true of the latest Mozilla build too?
Konqueror does just that with cookies. There is also a config page where you can change the acceptance or not of cookies per domain. The cookie management in Konq simply rocks.
It seems like a logical extension of that idea to do the same thing with javascript popups. Konq will already let you shut them off completely. For that matter Mozilla will too but a config file has to be edited and the tweak is widely advertised.
Makes web development impossible - hit a .cgi script or some other dynamic file, view source on it. Fine, now go back, change the script, press reload and get the new HTML content reflecting the changes in the script. View source again, whoops, even though the HTML changed, the view source gives you the old source still!
And have you submitted a bug report? Have you checked the release notes to see if this is an acknowledged problem? Have you created a new profile to see if the problem is somewhere in your old one?
Have you considered that for most people it works without a hitch? (I installed it and it worked - it's been my main browser since 0.7).
And it deserves a topic on Slashdot because Slashdot is 'news for nerds' - and Mozilla is a big open source project. And quite a few people are interested in Mozilla. That is why.
- "I'll probably get modded down for this."
I'm not very familiar with PAM, but isn't PAM only for authentication (can you get user name, shell, unix uid, home dir, etc. with PAM ?) .
nss_ldap also from the PADL guys, makes this possible, but your whole system becomes LDAP dependant, and you can't have different servers / search methods for every daemon (and this is ofen needed, for instance to separate POP/FTP users and those with shell or admin access, or site-local and remote users, or...) .
{{.sig}}
While Active Directory and NDS are widely used in the Microsoft and Novell worlds, LDAP has never been very popular in the Unix world. Most people even never heard about it. /etc/passwd. It's a GPL package, so feel free to merge it to any piece of free software.
LDAP is a standard protocol to access very modular hierarchical databases (called "directories" but anything can be stored in a LDAP directory, not only addresses) . It's way more flexible than SQL. You can redefine your own types and constraints (schema), all objects are extensible, all instances can belong to several classes, and anything that can fit in a tree can fit in a LDAP directory.
The first steps into LDAP aren't trivial. The syntax of LDIF files is a bit difficult to learn, but it's worth learning it.
There's an excellent open source LDAP server called OpenLDAP. It has support for LDAP version 3, SSL, IPv6, and everything you need to use LDAP. I've successfully installed it on large production servers. It's stable, and fast (if add your own indexes) .
Just like IPv6, LDAP for Unix is here for a long time (thanks, iPlanet), but it needs better integration with common software. If LDAP was implemented in all daemons and client software, it would ease a lot network administration. You can then configure all servers from a single workstation, in a coherent, unified database.
And for programmers, adding LDAP support is not a hell. Have a look at some OpenLDAP samples. I implemented LDAP support in Pure FTPd in less than one hour with no previous knowledge of the OpenLDAP API. The src/log_ldap.c is a simple getpwnam() wrapper and it can be reused by any program that use this library call to read
Also, Unix lacks good visual XML and LDAP editors. The recently announced Ganimede looks promizing, though. But if you are starting to learn LDAP, also give a try to GQ (sorry, I can't remember the URL, check it on Freshmeat) . It's a simple GTK tool to browse and edit LDAP directories and schemas.
{{.sig}}
Other big improvements are:
1. libpr0n now displays images properly in linux, before gifs would get blanked out fairly often
2. new autocomplete widget - now works like a combo of IE and NS 4.x complete, but better than both (uses any site in your history file). Has an option to search for keywords thru Netscape at the bottom of the list, tho i wish this were google instead.
3. fix for the can't delete ie favorites bug
4. the preferences window is a fixed size now. Before if you were using large fonts, it made it impossible to access the pulldown menu for fixed size font size.
Overall, it's more polished than the 0.9 release, a lot of the new features were cleaned up and work a lot better.
>It looks like this is a native MFC thing and has been around for awhile.
yes, it's native. yes, it's been around for some time. but MFC is hardly XP (that's cross platform, not office or windows..)
//rdj
No one can understand the truth until he drinks of coffee's frothy goodness.
--Sheikh Abd-Al-Kadir, 1587
You say that something that takes up 35MB is *not* a memory hog? IE (which is quite bloated) eats up only 10MB of memory with one window, and 12MB with 3 (www.opengl.org, www.slashdot.org, and www.microsoft.com)
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
Well, you may have plenty of RAM, but the more RAM my web browser uses, the less RAM I can give the 3D Studio. Besides, I just feel unclean when a program uses more RAM than it needs to. And yes, while IE may use more RAM than reported (according to the current conspiracy theory) a fully loaded Linux system uses more RAM (yes I'm reading top carefully!) than Win2K. Win2K is obscenely bloated. Thus, a fully loaded Linux system (X4, KDE2, GNOME-libs, kernel 2.4, ALSA, the works) is obscenely bloated.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
Umm, what are you running this on? IE starts up in a second or two. Hell, Photoshop starts up in less than 40 seconds (on my PII-300). How can you POSSIBLY be happy with a 40/sec startup time for a web brower?
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
Umm, well written C++ code (BeOS usespace) can be a lot more sevlte than poorly written C code (X11, GNOME et all)
>>>>
Disclaimer: All I mean by this is that the BeOS userspace is C++ yet takes up less than 10MB, while GNOME does less (it is simply a desktop environment) and takes up a good deal more space. Comments about BeOS's deadness are irrelvant to this post. Sheesh, it's sad that I even have to bother to make this point clear. Apparently "on-topic" doesn't ring a bell with a lot of people.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
The modern theme is so new, it doesn't even work on my machine. Don't get me wrong I love Mozilla, I just hate its bugs.
--
microsoft, it's what's for dinner
bq--3b7y4vyll6xi5x2rnrj7q.com
it's a sig, wtf?
The default installation of Mandrake 8.0 places mozilla in /usr/bin. If you install 0.9.1, it will detect the old installation and ask you to delete it. If you delete it, it will erase EVERYTHING in /usr/bin! This leaves the system in a fairly unuseable state. Just thought ya'll might like to know.
Russian Russian Russian RussianDollSig DollSig DollSig DollSig
Does this mean I don't have to write my email anymore?
I knew if Slashdot kept on talking about it, it'd be smart enough to do something useful for me...
I just got LDAP auto-complete working. Very cool. Also, this is the first time that Java runs right out of the Mozilla installer for me. Very smooth.
This is looking great, the Mozilla team should be proud this time.
Holy Crap! Excellent review, well written. Many people will complain, bacause they don't like your results. Read their comments for the rare valid point they may make so that you can be an excellent product reviewer by the time your, let's say, 15.
Make your parents get you a modem!
A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices. -- William James
Available Platforms: Opera supports a ton, Mozilla supports a few more. Opera 5 for Mac hasn't been released, yet.
Winner: Mozilla wins, Opera a close second. IE is worthless on anything but MS platforms.
A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices. -- William James
Why are new features going in when it's not stable?
.5 release with no changes at all.
.9.1 is nice. I'm downloading now, and I'll continue to use Mozilla.
Well, the focus now is building what Netscape 6.5 will be based on, so they can't just release a full
There really needs to be a "stable" release of this thing.
Well, the thing that bugs me is that the same damn things keep breaking!! I don't get it, is the code really that fragile? I mean, after all this time, you'd think that the code that displays the title of the page you're viewing in the title bar of the app would be pretty stable, yet in a build from last week, this was busted. You'd also think that the [super]reviewer of the patch that broke this would have caught it. (This is just one example of just stupid stuff that shouldn't break.)
Anyway, from the comments I've read so far, everyone, who is usually very critical, has been saying
---
python -c "x='python -c %sx=%s; print x%%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))%s'; print x%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))"
First of all, a confession. I've been using IE5.x for quite some time now. It's always been faster than Netscape by far and more standards-compliant. (Even if tainted by embrace-and-extend.) Mozilla's never been fast or stable enough to compete.
.9.1 changes all of that.
This baby is *fast*, and I mean extremely fast. Pages pop right up on broadband, even those damned table layouts from the dark days of the 4.0 browsers, broken CSS, and terrible DOMs. Not only that, but it appears as stable as .9 was, which was far more stable than any previous Netscape release since it was called Mosaic.
First of all, a big thanks to the developers who finally proved that Open Source can deliver. It's been a massive undertaking, several years in the making, but Mozilla's OSS development model have kept it at the cutting edge.
Second of all, download this sucker right now. Make sure all your friends do as well. The faster we get standards-compliant browsers the quicker web developers can leverage CSS to make cool sites faster. Believe me, I'm sick of coding for Netscape 4.x and the steaming pile of feces that is it's CSS support. Perhaps this won't be enough to keep Netscape's market share, but the 7% or so of us that use Netscape should upgrade ASAP.
I don't think anything JWZ said after he left, which really wasn't much, was unfounded. Mistakes were made, the browser project got incredibly behind schedule, etc. Here it is, over two years since Zawinski left and Netscape/Mozilla still doesn't have a decent final product to show. If you read his web site, you see that he supports the idea of Mozilla and plans to use the product when it's finalized. He was just disgusted with the way the organization was operating.
That documentation is slightly out of date.
capability.policy.default.windowinternal.open
should be
capability.policy.default.Window.open (note the captialization).
There's already a bug to update the documentation, which I plan to fix next week.
The shareholder is always right.
I haven't noticed this problem, but I searched bugzilla and found two bug reports that might be the same problem:
bug 83289 Scrolling page with images (jpg) causes white lines in the images.
bug 74358 Images rendering with thin horizontal white lines (both GIF and JPEG): supposedly fixed April 11.
Do you still see the problem in Mozilla 0.9.1? What operating system are you using?
The shareholder is always right.
bug 56969: Sidebar should not appear when I use a Web search site.
You can vote for that bug if you want. Voting has a small but nonzero influence on how quickly the bug is fixed, and you'll automatically find out when the bug is fixed if you vote for it.
By the way, bugzilla is now much easier to search than it was before. I was able to find that bug by typing "search sidebar" (without quotes) into the bugzilla front page.
The shareholder is always right.
For some reason i expected a different look than netscape, but i'll live.
Mozilla is distributed with two themes, Classic and Modern. The Classic theme, which is the default, is designed to look like 4.x. You can switch themes from the View menu or from preferences.
The shareholder is always right.
Maybe it's just late or something, but when I looked at that it made me really disoriented. It must have been something about how I had my browser windows layed out, and I saw the same thing in the screenshot as what was on my screen.
I need more sleep...
Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
More than the colors, the shading and shadows KICK ASS!
Because not enough people would use it on those platforms to warrant the time it takes to pre-build it. It's not closed minded, it's thinking realistically. Tell you what - if you run BSD, then you are most likely very used to having to compile your own progs. What's one more?
Not really.. Look at the latest version of Word. A thousand times more bloated than ever. It has so many "smart" features that I can't even type without it capitolizing every other god damn word I didn't want capitolized.
OTOH, most Linux software's UI (or lack thereof) is so much astoundingly better that I choose to pay the price.
For me (a programmer), these things don't really matter, and so I choose to use linux in the department where a pretty gui is less important than a functional interface, even if the interface is on the command line or has a hundred control keys attached to it in Emacs.
If you ask me, there are some priority issues with the mozilla team. Bug 4033 has been open for I don't know how long, and yet it seems like this could create quite a problem.
Wow, just tried that out. I love it!
Guess I'll never set eyes on Google's front page again...
Heh. About a week ago, (with 0.9) Mozilla would crash every single time I loaded Slashdot. I found that it wouldn't crash if I went to another page first and then reloaded slashdot so that was my workaround until yeserday's milestone.
Weird eh?
I've gotten those plugins to work in Mozilla on a 98se machine. Windows Media is kind of buggy.. but Flash and QT run flawlessly. I was wondering if anybody else has done this.. and if so.. does anyone have any idea when the afformentioned plugins will be officially released for NS6 so we can actually use them with Mozilla?
I have been using Flash and Quicktime within Mozilla for a while now and I remember having to load IE to view some movies (either QT or Flash).. now I can view all of them within Mozilla.
Hmm...with Microsoft trying to sell a half way decent operating system to home users, and AOL having a browser that could be used to build a complete GUI, when should we expect AOL to start shipping a "consumer" operating system?
there is no thing
what else could you want?
there is no thing
what else could you want?
after posting this, I "remembered" that I've done very little looking into encrypted SMTP. Please take my above comments as unresearched, etc.
there is no thing
what else could you want?
Um. No.
Turn font smoothing on in windows.
Font handling in X still sucks.
2nd on the list of most knowticable(sp?) is the Modern theme
Ouch.... late night? I can understand, I get that way sometimes too.
FYI - it's noticeable, as in "did you notice a difference?" This, as well as many other fine words can be found using our dear friend "grep" in /usr/dict/words
- passion
I don't get this too... Why no MIME types? new W3C format is SIMPLE, they could at least autoconvert those 4.x ones to new format. I hope it gets FIXED on commercial release especially, no one (end users) want to know what the heck is MIME type and which program to run it. I know geeks hate this but I want to click to a realplayer link and I don't want to get queried whether to open link with realplayer or save to disk (it is a LIVE radio argh!).
After a few minutes I noticed the following:
- new modern skin rawks... It also seems to perform much faster.
- page rendering is much faster
- Java still doesn't work. Tried the plugin, failed... Manually installed from the jre, crashed mozilla when starting java. I would really like them to get this fixed.
- https SSL connections seem to go really SLOW. I don't know why but it takes forever to retrieve pages of a secure connection.
The only reason I run netscape 4 for linux anymore is that it has java and ssl works good. For most of my browsing I use konq, which is great... But not for everything. With a bit more work, mozilla could do really well. People will use it, but only if it works
--
Maybe they changed something, or they havnt finished uploading yet, but I cant seem to find any source! Whats the deal with that?
Buying a Dell computer is equivalent to dropping the soap in a prison shower.
It is still a memory hog. On my system Mozilla-9.1 averages 137MB of _Shared_ memory. Netscape-4.7 only 14MB of _Shared_.
This seems to make Mozilla unusable on most systems. Was using C++ over C a wise decision. I know hindsight is 20/20. But the major problems Mozilla seems to be having (in linux anyway. I havent used it much on any other platform) are resources (mem and cpu) and hackers. With C these problems go away.
I have to say, it's very difficult to trust a review written by someone who actually likes Word 6 for Mac. It is widely considered one of the worst kludgy ports ever made, and was a key factor in the creation of the independent Mac business unit within Microsoft.
To bring this back on topic ... I really want to see Mozilla succeed, and I'm glad it's about equally compliant as IE 5 for Mac (which is what IE 6 is based on). But so far the XUL interface is way too slow and too buggy.
Don't forget about the much-improved URL auto-completion, where a drop-down list displays a list more neatly than the former menu-list when you type into the url bar! :-)
Yesterday I was disappointed by netscape-6.01A for Solaris 8 interminably rendering only a gray box for all my efforts to install it.
So, given the steadily improving reviews (I know - early slothfulness was a deliberate strategy to catch more bugs) of mozilla, I'd like to give it a try as a replacement for Netscrape-4.77
I'm behind a firewall that won't let CVS do its network checkout, so can anyone give a URL to a source (.tar.bz2) distribution of 0.9.1?
"Provided by the management for your protection."
mozilla -turbo loads FASTER than IE5. If you have anything in your "links" toolbar it is SIGNIFICANTLY faster. They're calling it "near-instaneous" -- and they mean it.
____________________
It's rare that you're presented with a knob whose only two positions are Make History and Flee Your Glorious Destiny.
> Most of the people in the world are not
> programmers!
But most of the people have money, even if it's only 30$. If you want a certain bug / feature to be fixed, hire somebody to do it. There are people who do that for Mozilla. Maybe you need to pool your money with fellows, but it can be done. You just need to be willing to spend a few bucks for software.
> I can write programs as they pertian to my work,
> which is to say simple script type programs
> usually less than a thousand lines.
Actually, the Mozilla UI is written exactly like that. Welcome on board *g*.
> Simply acknowledge their suggestion and act on
> it if you want to.
"Thanks for your suggestion". Suggestion->Trashbin.
Would that help you? IMO, it would not even be poilte.
1: how am i supposed to tell my parents
just sit them down and tell them. They may be mad at first, but after a moment of shock theyll just be concerned for your safety.
2: And do I have to go around to everyone I've ever sleeped with and tell them that they might have HIV?
YES YOU DO! Because obviously one of them already has HIV and may not know about it, and everyone youve slept with since then is at risk, even if youve used protection, which you obviously havent at some point. You owe it to those people to let them know they may be at risk.
3:And what about my bf, I don't know how I could ever tell him
if you really care about him, youll tell him. If he had cancer, and you were the only one who knew about it, youd tell him right? Because you want him to get treated as soon as posible. There are treatments for HIV that work to prevent full blown aids and allow you to live a normal life. talk to your doctor about treatment as soon as possible. the sooner you start being treated, the more likely it is you will live a long life.
Apparently, it's called "Making a post to Slashdot". Finally, a good reason to announce software releases!
Of course, you could probably also submit it as an Ask Slashdot.
kickin' science like no one else can,
my dick is twice as long as my attention span.
Withdrawal before climax is very ineffective and those who try this are usually called "parents."
Ximain RedCarpet updated includes
Mozilla in list of updated packages.
Because of this I do not wish
to install it manually, not to break
package dependencies.
They still have 0.8.1 and I am waiting for
Ximian to publish new RPM with updated version.
Cool! Thanks, I'll see about trying that this afternoon.
Things you think are in the Constitution, but are not.
That's a good question, I've been wondering that myself. I'm using 0.9 and I'm not sure if the problem is in the Flash pluggin itself or Mozilla, but if I'm using the sound card (i.e. listening to MP3's), and the pluggin is installed then Mozilla won't start, it (the mozilla-bin process) just sits there, no UI or anything. I'm guessing it's the flash pluggin and not Mozilla.
Anyone else had this problem? (I'm using a 2.4.2 kernel with a VIA AC97 on-board sound card, btw).
Things you think are in the Constitution, but are not.
friggin' A. First a typo on the Mozilla main page and then the Mozilla team actually updates the page while I'm posting!
Use my userscript to add story images to Slashdot. There's no going back.
Perhaps I should also mention that the roadmap is messed up? Here's a thread relating to the problems with the roadmap, started by the guy who makes them. As I said in that thread, there has been a blank FAQ link at the top of the page forever. When is the branch date for 0.9.2?
Use my userscript to add story images to Slashdot. There's no going back.
Because of the hype that a few of the Mozilla developers put on talkback here on Slashdot and on MozillaZine, Mozilla has seen lots of recent improvements (see the bottom of this page). Now that 0.9.1 is out, the Drivers team at Mozilla will take a large bit of control over the management of submisssions for 0.9.2 in an effort to brush up the code in preparation for 1.0. It looks like we'll see 0.9.2 released after only two to three weeks (see this roadmap sneak-peek); half the current expected milestone lifetime. In addition, Netscape is being encouraged to take the next NS6 from the Mozilla branch this time, meaning that much of the Netscape team's work will be applicable to Mozilla.
Also of note, the Mozilla main page doesn't reflect the new milestone and the roadmap also fails to mention the release or the news about 0.9.2.
Use my userscript to add story images to Slashdot. There's no going back.
Why are new features going in when it's not stable? When will there be a feature freeze? There really needs to be a "stable" release of this thing.
To the Moz team: thank you so much. I was beginning to worry that speed was never going to be addressed. I have the highest hopes now for M1.0. Go Go!
MyopicProwls
MyopicProwls
My homepage
Since 0.9, Mozilla has truly, truly shown that it will (is!) be one of the bright, shining stars of the Open Source community. There is no longer -any- doubt in my mind that it will be the best browser on any platform. The pace of advance lately has been nothing less than amazing.
My hat goes off to the developers.
signature smigmature
- James
Wow... maybe I got a version compiled with debug because its about half as fast as IE and even had a Modern Theme bug where it drew the address bar about 5 pixels too low...
I'll keep waiting....
http://www.masturbateforpeace.com/
If it's staying in memory, how does one get it to unload (cleanly without killing it in taskmgr)?
I would assume that there's some sort of menu command to Unload Mozilla. Or the turbo mode puts up a systray icon (like Napster does) when you close the last window; clicking the icon puts up a menu with "Quit" as one of the choices.
Will I retire or break 10K?
With each release of Mozilla I have noticed that it runs faster, smoother and with fewer problems then the previous edition.
While 0.9 isn't as fast as (for example) Konq, its still respectable and I can't wait to see the improvements in 0.9.1
Responding to bug reports and feature requests with "Why don't you fix it yourself?" really is a big turn off to users. The people who are capable of fixing themselves already know that they can do so. You're just reminding people of their own lack of technical skills when you respond like that.
If free software is intended to be used by anyone other than programmers, then the authors need to be more diplomatic when dealing with users.
Erm... since a year or 3 people use 'automation' with COM on win32 instead of DDE/OLE. I don't think it's really 'visionary' to include DDE code in an application TODAY. To say the least.
Personally I think including an own 'COM' variant in an application for win32 is a bad decision. If they had, the win32 version whould have been finished by now.
--
Never underestimate the relief of true separation of Religion and State.
If I recall correctly, I had problems first when I tried cp'ing (on Linux that is) javaplugin.so (or whatever it is) to plugins-dir, but when I symlinked, things started working. Not sure why, but thought this might help.
I like paying taxes. With them I buy civilization -- Oliver Wendell Holmes
Did you mean incredible or incredulous? Although they technically mean the same thing, they also mean the opposite things.
Thanks for the tip. I wasn't aware that there was a workaround, and so the last time I ran into this I ended up blowing away all my profile to fix it. You are doing a great service here by triaging these complaints. If this isn't a planned, organized effort, maybe it should be. (Whenever important Mozilla news gets posted on major web forum, an informed developer should actively dispel myths and douse flames.)
At work, I have a Linux workstation and a Windows desktop running side by side. Visitors to my office always comment on how much more crisp and readable and faster Mozilla 0.9 is on Linux versus Explorer 5.0 on Windows. It can be done, but it takes a little effort.
Yes, this happens in my office also. The machine running Windos is a 386sx16, with 8 mb of RAM and a 240 mb MFM hard drive, running W2K and an IE 6 pre-alpha build I snagged from my latest 'leet hack of hotmail. Since the powersupply gave out on this machine three years ago, I forced to allow an autistic four year old child draw on the 10-year old 14" monitor, in crayon, what he thinks a webpage might look. I only give him brown and green crayons.
The other machine is a screaming fast dual athalon running linux, with the latest nightly build of mozilla (you have to get the nightly builds, every night). It still loads much slower than I'd like, and doesn't render tables quite as fast as the four year old child, but my soft and fragile ego as a wanna-be geek forces me to point out to everyone who comes by my office just how 'leet and skinnable and cool mozilla is, and how much more featureful it is than IE. They always pretend to be impressed, just before they leave.
I'm going to submit a story to ask Slashdot: "Why doesn't anyone ever vist my cube anymore?"
Slashdot is jumping the shark. I'm just driving the boat.
Why can't we have that nice fiery lizard from the splash screen as the icon?
However, I notice that if I change the default search engine it keeps setting it back to netscape. It can't possible be doing it on purpose. Er, could it?
Under Win98SE, tabbing from text box to box to enter my /. password crashes Mozilla 0.9.1. Looks nice though, and yes, I reported the bug. Now what I want to know is....
/. that pissed off the Mozilla developers? These crashes don't just happen by themselves. In the words of a great captain:
Who's the bastard at
"When I get back, I want some answers!"
Green-voting, republican-registered, socialist-libertarian.
It's a bit like when we got to know that Windows 2000 had... wasn't the number as high as 65,000 bugs.... (now don't quote me on that number). Anyway, it proved that most of them was merely things like spelling errors, poor helpfiles and so on....
Off course, The Moz developers still have a lot of work left, but luckily Mozilla seems to have improved very much in the last months! Keep up the excellent work developers! ;-)
mmm... im dreaming sweet dreams about their 1.0 release
__
Greets, Øyvind Berg ~ ËlaC|n
__ elacin
I'd rather be lucky than good.
Try out Opera again (5.12 for windows). It is faster than the old 3.x releases, has mouse gesture support, and a host of other cool features. And once you open it once you should never close it until Windows crashes. ;)
Does it include email? This wasn't included on the K Meleon FAQ page.
Remember "Bring 'em on"? *sigh
I downloaded RH7.X packages fromi ll a0.9.1/Red_Hat_7x_RPMS/
:) - mozilla 0.9.1 is very good now. It works fine on my AMDk3-450mhz.
http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla/releases/moz
It works fine and its fast(still not as fast as old netscape but its getting there). I started tested using mozilla 0.7,that one was BAD
I will from here on use mozilla as my main browser!
Really, this latest release of Mozilla is sweet! It seems a little faster and lighter on the cpu. Great work Mozilla developers! :) Moz all the way!
regex-compatible page searching...that would rock! probably would need to leave it off by default, for users that would get confused (regex, wtf is that?), but I'd love to be able to search pages with some power.
;)
0.9.1 kicks ass anyway
--
--
grep "xercist"
With 0.9.1 (nothing changed in JB config), all cookies from all web sites are accepted. what's going on here?
I have moz configured to accept all cookies, in 0.9 as well as in 0.9.1. But 0.9 was working fine.
Anyone?
It's good to see ldap support making it into the builds! This was a key feature before the Mozilla mail/news client could pick up steam in the business world. Now if they (we?) can only get a spell checker working...
Netscape's existing spell checker can't be included due to licensing restrictions. That leaves preliminary plans for including Pspell. Unfortunately, it doesn't sound like this will be included in 1.0...
Yeah... I think that broke in 0.8. Eric
Yeah, maybe it shoulda been on another port from the beginning (8888 was being used, I forgot about other ones) but still weird that it's blocked out. I still feel it's a valid choice. We have a fairly important collection of CGI scripts on our internal server and I can't just change the port in the conf file without breaking a lot of things. I guess I need to keep netscape or IE around to fill out my timesheet and other stuff.
Ha! LDAP is an exercise in how to take the simplest thing and make it as freaking complex as possible. All it does is store some basic info, such as people's contact information. I shouldn't have to think about it to make it work. I shouldn't have to buy two books and wrestle with it. It should just go! I've been forced to use it and I don't like it. I could've implemented the important functionality in a servlet with a flat file quicker than I could figure out how to make LDAP happy.
"I am a cipher, a cipher, wrapped in an enigma, smothered in secret sauce" -Jimmy James
It would have been worse if he had created teh screenshot, made the url a link, and made teh img a link to itself. ;)
[yeah, i had teh same moment of "but I wanted to see a screenshot, not the /. article" ;) ]
krenshala
krenshala
krenshala
If it does what it should -- if it encounters flash it will automatically send an email to abuse@whateversiteimon.com
In all reality -- other than eyecandy what good is flash??? When I am using IE and go to a site that uses flash -- I see an animation "Splash Screen" that usually takes about 1 minute to "play" through a bunch of usless garble before I can actually view the site (yes I know their usually is a "Skip Intro" button in most cases). Other than letting me know that someone on the web team knows how to use flash what good does this do for the content of the sight.
I can see the web team now --- "John you will code the DB connections and handle the transactions, Sally you will be responsible for the JavaScript and HTML, Bob you will tie the UI together, and Helen will keep are coffee cups filled and in your spare time you can work on a cool 60 second Flash intro for all of our customers to sit through EVERY time they visit our site.........errrr"
(+1 Funny) only if I laugh out loud.
I noticed on one distro with Mozilla pre-installed (I think it was Mandrake 7.1 but I'm not sure) that the permissions are set so that a non-superuser does not have write permissions to the plugins directory. So you can download the plugin but when it tries to install, it fails. Either download it as root or fix the permissions, and then try it again.
Always encrypt with rot13 TWICE for extra security.
You don't need to use it these days, but for a while the nightly that came out after the milestone was considerably better. Another great thing about Open Source; people would bang on Moz for several hours, the big problems would get noted, bug reports made, fixes discussed, implemented, and posted several hours later, so you could almost see the bugs disappear (actually, you can; go to bugzilla.mozilla.org if you have a bug!). If it was Windows.... (well, you know the rest).
ObPlug: mozillazine.org , which has a "build bar" that gives the quality of the most recent nightly, and other Moz updates.
"Sometimes a woman is a kind of religion, she can save your soul & set you free from all your sins" - Bad Examples
I just downloaded .9 just a few hours ago. I thought this wasn't coming out for another month at least. I guess open source can move fast.
Of course this is a mild annoyance as I am on DSL so it will only take me 3 mins or so to get it, but still...
Just a Tuna in the Sea of Life
I never noticed Mozilla crashing, but these two new features are silly.
New modern theme is cute but why cannot I do full screen, or importantly drag the address bar next to the menu's and the quick favourites next to the navigation tools, i.e. move the tool bars horizontally!
Previously, pressing the ESC key with the cursor over an annoying gif animation stopped that animation. I remember this feature being in mozilla up to 9.0, but then it disappeared. It's not in 9.1 either. Anyone know what's up?
MS is very creative because they called it hosts! Incredible, isn't it? It is in [system32dir]\drivers\etc\ for NT4 (and W2K). If you haven't got one, there is a hosts.sam file which is a sample host file. Remove the .sam edit it, and it runs.
Same for lmhosts by the way.
Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
All this means, of course, that I was rather skeptical when I downloaded Mozilla. It's a great browser. Faster, more stable, and it doesn't seem nearly as bloated.
Linux 2.2.18, glibc 2.1.3, XFree86 4.0.3. I can't reproduce the problem in Win98. I have a cron job that builds the nightlies for me every day. I almost invariably see this problem at BBC News with the images down the right side. It's an intermittent problem -- some images are fine, but there are some images and pages that are just horrible.
.JPG images and the distortion looks physically different from the attachment in #74358.
I looked at the BugZilla entries, and they look like they may be the same thing, but I've never seen the problem with
*sigh* I guess I should try filing a bug report again... Last time I did it, it didn't work out too well...
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
I have wanted to switch to Mozilla for some time now, but there's one bug that is keeping me tied to NS 4.77:
All GIF images have horizontal white lines one pixel wide through them at random positions. Scrolling the window makes this problem worse and may increase the density of the lines. It looks like a redraw problem of some kind...
I know, this is the wrong forum, but while I'm thinking about it, has anyone else experienced this problem? Is there a fix?
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
My only grip about mozilla is that none of my mimetypes were carried over from netscape 4.7. In fact..i don't think i have any at all. It sure is a pain in the butt to add them all manually. Does anyone know of a script or something that does this?
-- juju
Yeah, you can change it. Doesn't seem to get saved. It's been driving me CRAZY. :P
-- [ta]
1. Bookmarks no longer appear in the sidebar .9.1 doesn't download my mail any more (can't have that)
2. I use a program called ePrompter to pre-screen my mail and when it's running
It happens on two machines at different locations. And no I haven't filed a bug, and no I probably won't because I couldn't describe it clearly enough to be useful.
For some reason, Mozilla works far better on Windows than it does on Linux for me. I have Mandrake 8.0 at home, and everytime I try to install on Linux, I can never get the JRE plugin to work.
This space left intentionally blank.
If you close the browser window with the X in the upper-right corner, or with File>Close, or with double clicking the icon in the upper-left corner mozilla will remain in memory. If you close it with File>Exit, it will unload from memory. Although, honestly there isn't anything wrong with killing it from the task manager.
I love going down to the elementary school, watching all the kids jump and shout, but they dont know I'm using blanks.
File>Exit will close mozilla and make it unload from memory. File>Close, or closeing by useing the Icons will not.
I love going down to the elementary school, watching all the kids jump and shout, but they dont know I'm using blanks.
I was looking all over for this - Yes, mozilla is faster (win98SE-p166NOMMX-64MBRAM) :)
:p
This option should have been enabled (grammar?) by default (eg, put in the startup folder)
Now I'm going to figure out how much mem it takes
Does anybody know how well this Mozilla release handles Flash plugins?
www.Beyond7.com Insane modern art water sculpture.
it was most definetly mozilla's newish image rendering engine (libpr0n). i had to click or highlight some images sometimes for them to show. i supposed it's gotten better with this new release
"I keep looking in the want-ads under 'revolutionary' but there don't seem to be any listings.. "
run mozilla as root to do the install. it worked for me on a .8 build
"I keep looking in the want-ads under 'revolutionary' but there don't seem to be any listings.. "
This is great but I cant seem to get it to work in a short cut. Does this set it as a pref for good?
How can I get mozilla out of memory? Do I need to kill it like a normal crashed task?
On my system it happens to launch faster then explorer! It can render a slashdot discussion with 500 comments at a threshhold of 0 nested four times faster then IE 5.5!
Great job!!
The Lottery:
"Not my manner of thinking but the manner of thinking of others has been the source of my unhappiness." - M
I realized after I posted my comment that I should have put the discaimer "This is completly unscientific." I didn't run any benchmarks or anything. It was just what it felt like. Mozilla felt faster than IE6. The Interface felt about the same. But these are the kind of "Bechmarks" that matter, real-world opinions, not any tests of actual rendering speed or anything. Use a browser that feels faster, not one that has proven in benchmarks to be 5/12ths of a second faster. And I'm using an old 380Mhz K6-II, and I can agree that you wouldn't want to put Mozilla on a 386 with 4MB of RAM but, with any machine sold from a few years ago to today the interface should feel about the same.
And about the sidebar, I still say that Microsoft "Innovated" the sidebar from Mozilla. The IE4-5 sidebar has only for history. The IE6 sidebar now has stocks and weather and a cruddy MSN search. It sounds like Mozilla's sidebar to me, and in about 3 or so months it has felt like Moz's sidebar. And MS shouldn't drop the "Personal Bar" as it is useful. I use it quite a bit for getting the weather and seeing what BEOS, AAPL, MSFT and RHAT are at right now. The only thing they should rip out is the media player. I want to use WinAmp, not the embedded MS-Media Player.
--Volrath50
I have been using Microsoft's IE6 Beta on my parent's PC (my Mac doesn't have a modem) for the past while for my browsing. I just downloaded Mozilla 0.9.1 and I'll do a quick comparison:
Disclaimer: IE6 is in Beta. But so is Mozilla.
Startup Speed: IE6. But IE Programmers probably know a bit more about Windows than Moz Developers... And someone else said Moz now has an IE like always on mode now.
Winner: IE6
Interface: I used to hate the Old Modern theme. The new one is 10x better. I can say Moz wins by a long shot.
Winner: Moz 0.9.1
Rendering Speed: When I downloaded IE6 I thought nothing could get faster than it. There was next to no waiting for a page to render. Even my copy of Moz at the time (I think 0.8.1) wasn't as fast. This new copy of Moz is just a tiny bit faster, but it is faster.
Winner: Moz 0.9.1 but not by much
Image Rendering: With Moz's new libpr0n it beat's IE6 by a small->meduim amount.
Winner: Moz 0.9.1
Interface Speed: I no longer notice the "XUL Lag" I did with older Mozillas. But as IE6 is Win32 native it is a little faster.
Winner: IE6 but not by much
Download & Install: I have a 56k modem because I live in the middle of nowhere, so I can tell you that downloading big stuff sucks. IE6 brings up this smart installer like NS6 so you can select what more Microsoft software you want. I chose Outlook Express and Internet Explorer. Rougly what is included in the Mozilla .EXE installer. Moz is about 9MB while IE6+OE6 was something like 13MB. Plus IE rebooted my PC and updated a bunch of stuff which took like 10 minutes alltogether. Moz installed easily and with out a reboot.
Winner: Moz 0.9.1
Editable Text Boxes: About the only thing that I hate about Mozilla is the Slashdot comment box type thing. IE6 uses a native embedded notepad type thing while Moz uses the horrible XUL Text Box. The XUL Box sometimes doesn't catch my keystrokes and it is horrible for navigating with the mouse. It take me about three trys to get where I want it the XUL box.
Winner: IE6 by a long, long shot.
Stability: I haven't used Moz 0.9.1 long enough to get an opinion, but the IE6 beta has only crashed about 4 times in about 3 months of heavy use.
Winner: Probably IE6
Loading Cached Pages: Mozilla loads and renders cached pages instantly or near instanly. IE6 takes a second to load it from my disk.
Winner: Moz 0.9.1
Sidebar: IE6 ripped off Moz's sidebar. There are more stuff for the Moz sidebar but for the two things I look at the most (stocks & weather (no I don't own any stocks, I'm 13...)) Moz always want's me to log back into NS's Server. Yes I know this is NS's Fault but I have to count it. Plus when the Browser-With-90%-Market-Share(tm) debuts in non-beta for with sidebars everyone will make an IE6 sidebar, mark my words...
Winner: Tie For Now
Overall Winner: Moz 0.9.1! But IE6 has some yet unimplemented features such as privacy protection (gasp!) and a bunch of other stuff. I will try to give a Browser comparison every few browser releases to keep up.
I've Tried to give an unbiased opinion. I don't really hate MS that much as I use MS Office 6 on my Power Mac 6100 and I like it. And I can say that IE6 is very good. But Moz just tied/exceeded IE6 for now. But any new features will be assimilated, see My SideBar.
--Volrath50
XPI support no longer seems automatic in 0.9.1. Does anyone know if this was done intentionally. Then again this could just be my own incompitance.
I started used the nightlies after 0.9 came out immediatly because of a bug that caused images to be messed up on 0.9 because the page was not redered properly. I don't know the specifics but I know it was something about how after the bug was fixed the pages loaded 12% faster because they were managing images better (and maybe they had been redundantly rendering them.) But since then I have enjoyed every nightly CVS build. (I built my own tar.gz from CVS for the fun of it) Congratulations to all. Now could someone please reply to this and tell me how to get java working in mozilla 0.9.1 (i can only seem to get it to work once in a while from that netscape download Java for linux link)
thanks
What comes first, finding a teacher or becoming a student?
What JVM will be added? Is there an issue with including Sun's VM? Specificly, I would like to see jdk 1.4 on a browser as soon as it's released this year... with web start, xml parsing and the latest swing enhancements.
Like many people i was a netscape booster and then had to move to IE when netscape tanked. Not a move i really wanted to make. And i've not downloaded mozilla until now because i haven't been in the mood to be a test subject. But i have downloaded 0.9.1 and have used it a bit. So far i'm quite pleased. No crashes, speed is good. The install went well. It did an excellent job importing my netscape defaults, something i hadn't expected it to do, but appreciate. All my pages seem to work fine. My goofy home page loads very quickly and looks correct. The email and news client seem to work. I haven't used any other features yet. For some reason i expected a different look than netscape, but i'll live. I'll use it as my default for a while and then i hope i can switch from IE and netscape. thanx
Note that the new mime type for XUL is application/vnd.mozilla.xul+xml
My only complaint so far is that Mozilla has a tendency to barf and die on sites with a lot of Javascript or large PDFs; invariably I end up with an orphaned runaway mozilla-bin process that needs killing after that happens. It's a gripe, sure, but not any more of a problem really than IE when it hopelessly locks up. Both instances are rare, thankfully.
As soon as I can get the chance, I'll see if 0.91 fixes any of this. It's been a really good product lately, much better than any Netscape I've ever had to use on my UNIX workstations. Thanks, Moz-dev-guys. I appreciate it. Lots.
Ha ha you Anonymous Coward! Mozilla is better than Internet Explorer! Ha ha ha! You don't even know how to spell. Mozilla loaded in less than a second
Volunteer Mozilla developer, RPI Student.
Now this is just redicilous. Buying the time of a trained person is NOT cheap, for most programmers I know their time is worth $25/hr and up. Now consider that if I was going to pay them to work on a project like Mozilla I'd not only have to pay for the actual time it takes them to write and debug the feature I need, but also to learn the code well enough to be able to do so. Sorry, but I'm not willing to pay $100 or more just to have a feature addedd to what is supposed to be free software. I am certianly wiling to spend money for software but only so much. To me $100+ is a good, low level pro application or powerful plugin, not a single feature in a web browser. Plus realise that if you take the attitude again, you'll just be cutting your market share. The average Joe will just blow you off and go get something else. Please remember that the feature in question (supporting extrenal mail programs) is present in IE and Opera, IE also being free.
Actually, the Mozilla UI is written exactly like that. Welcome on board You must have missed the "I don't like programming" part. I don't like it, I'm not very good at it, so I don't do it.
"Thanks for your suggestion". Suggestion-Trashbin.
The idea here is just to listen to your users. Basically, when someone makes a feature request, acknowledge it and mentally file it. Of course you can't add every one, but try to keep a tab of things people want. If a whole lot of people want something, you'd do well to offer it. I do the same kind of thing in my line of work. If one person complains we need to change the way something works, generally we aren't going to act on it, however if a lot of people also want the same change, it happens. We try to give people what they want, and programmers should strive to do the same. Now again, free software is free and you certianly don't have to BUT if you want it to grow, you need to. J. Random (L)User isn't going to take the time, effort and money to find a programmer and contract them to add features to the software, they are going to find software that does what they want and use it. This is certianly something Mozilla needs to think about since they are really an underdog browser at this point. Most people in the world think there are only two browsers: Netscape and IE. Well, if you want to convince those people that they ought to use Mozilla, then you're going to need to make it offer everything they want. If it can't, they'll use what can since in this case you are competing against other free software. Remember, the ethical and social considerations of free as in speech software are lost on most average people. They only care about free as in beer software and both Netscape and IE have that. What Mozilla needs to do (and I think they are making great strides towards it) is provide a superior browser. IF Mozilla is better than Netscape or IE, it will be much easier to convince people to start using it.
Free software's biggest advantage is that anyone can nab the code, sit down, and turn an existing project into whatever they want. However this also proves to be a weakness in that many free software authors have the mindset that people SHOULD do this. When J. Random User bugs you about a feature your program doesn't have he wants you to think about adding it. If you tell him "add it yourse;f" he'll probably just wander off and find other software that does what he wants. Kind of like if you go to a restraunt and wnat to order a slight modification on a meal. You expect the cook to do that and if you got told "do it yourself" you'd probably leave.
Now, this is not to say that programmers are obliged to act on every suggestion that comes their way. Just as commerical companies make decisions about what and what not to include, so can free software authors. However telling the person to do it themselves is a very bad idea. Simply acknowledge their suggestion and act on it if you want to.
have the fixed the socks support?
"and lots of performance and stability fixes, with over 30 of the topcrash bugs fixed"
This is really what i need to hear. While i still prefere Opera i am glad to see other alternatives comming to life (espessially for linuxppc where Operas rendering is still needing some fixes). I do also think that it is very important to get this one working soon because, for come reason this is the program that most OSS critics judge OSS on.
There isn't much like the scent of a fresh harddisk
Some mega corporations would rather be a *trust* than a *monopoly*. Besides, it is probably relatively inexpensive to keep the attention of open-source developers, and spin off whatever you want from them.
If it was Microsoft's site, I'd simply say "damn ASP" and move on.
As for the https bug, it appears to've been vanquished. Wamu.com online banking works. CSFBDirect's site is broken, so I can't test there.
But by all means, use Mozilla! Password manager, better rendering, no need to force document fonts (view/zoom is a godsend on 1600x1200) etc etc etc make it well worthwhile for the 90% of the time you don't have to use Netscape anymore.
--
fifth sigma, inc.
I'm almost exclusively using Mozilla for web browsing now. Great!
The bug that really bothers me? Go to photo.net, click some image, and choose "large" image size to view. 99% of the time, it causes all my Mozilla windows to close. Bye-bye!
Then I guess I could complain about how 50% of the sites I go to, when entering SSL mode, never work. I gotta use Netscape.
I'm downloading 0.9.1 now. I'll tell you if things start working.
--
fifth sigma, inc.
Yep, that's right! No more IE for me. I can't beleive they actually got a usable browser finally (I'm typing this in .9.1)!
TODO: Something witty here...
Yup, I linked libjavaplugin_oji.so to the ns600 java plug-in. Bad news - it caused seg faults any time the browser hit anything java.
Dave Haas
Chief Operating Officer
PopCap Games
The talks between AOL and Microsoft broke down a few days ago. AOL is no longer getting prominent placement on the desktop, and my guess is that they'll continue to support Mozilla in the hopes of getting something good enough to break IE. Not that it will probably ever happen. I use Mozilla 100% of the time for browsing in Linux, but at work I have to use Windows2000, and nothing comes close to IE as far as speed is concerned. We'll see what happens...
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 meant speed all-around - i click a button, ie is there instantaneously. opera takes a bit to load. i know why this is - ie is kept in memory. but it still fires up damn fast. and it renders fast too. opera is good. i haven't used it since the 3.x days, but i liked it. just right now i'm trying to show my support to mozilla by using it, and it really is one of the finer browsers i've ever used (and definitely the nicest looking - check out this image for a screenshot i took last night of mozilla .9.1 - very nice.
Every once in a while I like to masturbate a new word into my vocabulary, even if I don't know what it means.
getting it to work in linux with .9.1 was much easier than it was with .8, but i'm still sure you can do it manually if you can't get the automatic install to work. just make sure it's in your home directory - this will solve a lot of problems for you.
let me know if you need any help.
by the way, ssl connections work fine for me - i use mozilla to check my work email through our web-based email system, and i can only connect through ssl - and it works great.
Every once in a while I like to masturbate a new word into my vocabulary, even if I don't know what it means.
anyone know if java 1.3.1 is autorecognized.....? the docs say JRE 1.3.0_1 is autorecognized and used as is (windows build) if it is already installed.
===> An eye for an eye makes everyone blind - MG
www.kmeleon.org. Uses mozilla, fast interface. 0.4 includes one of the newer builds, but you can replace the binaries with nightlies if you want.
Yes, it's only for windows.
I am now using Mozilla as my browser on Windows. It is much faster then IE. But, I still feel bitter about all the XUL bloat they put in it. Does Mozilla ever use XUL to render web pages?
Mozilla for Macintosh is getting really good. It seems faster then IE. Also it has at least some support for Inter Config. It uses the Inter Config Email client. It also seems to use the file mappings from Inter Config. It allow can login through SSL on sourceforge. IE can't do that.
In Mozilla it has a feature when ever you do a search on google or bugzilla, the taskbar pops out showing all the titles from the results
I find this feature really annoying and it took me forever to figure out how to turn it off.
To turn it off, in preferences under Navigator choose Internet Search and uncheck the checkbox.
Does anyone like this feature? I'm afraid some people might stop using Mozilla because this is so annoying and they can't figure out how to turn it off.
Don't be fooled by the fact this is only a point .1 release, the improvement is vast compared with 0.9.
:)
First up and the one most people will knowtice right away is Page Loading, the load time was cut in half at least by a checkin that occuried right after 0.9, branched.
2nd on the list of most knowticable(sp?) is the Modern theme, its great the improvement is substantial over the old one and personally I use it as my default skin now.
3rd a huge effort was put into fixing a lot of the crashers that effected 0.9 so it should crash much less (your milage may vary however)
4th: THe DDE bug was fixed (yeah!) meaning that if your on Winblows and Mozilla never did anything after you double clicked on it before with this release it should start.
5th: On Winblows you can turn on the preloader for mozilla by specifying the -turbo option. Which means that it will stay in memory like IE does thus giving you nearly instantious opening speed. (And no we havent given up on cutting down startup speed this just to get people off our back who complain that IE loads so fast and why cant Mozilla...well now you have it so stop bitching
Finally there is the other good stuff like LDAP support and Bidi support (multidirectional text support) (contributed by IBM btw) which makes Mozilla even more usuable and expandable.
We need help please please come to #mozillazine on irc.mozilla.org and ask for some help on how to get involved. I (nick Ksosez) or the other people on there will be glad to help you. We especially need C++ coders and or Linux coders.
Enjoy the release
-Ksosez
Sorry.
As previously mentioned, LDAP autocomplete is a large improvement, and several have noticed increduous speed improvements, specifically on the Mail/News program. Thirty-four debuggings of the most common crash causes, and a much more stable program overall. I'd say that's worthy.
That error occured the first time I executed it, too. It functioned properly after I restarted the program.
The latter. Spelling is not up to par today.
Run mozilla.exe -turbo Then, execute Mozilla regularly. Opening speed is faster than IE, from my perspective.
http://members.home.net/factorialnine/moz91.png
Page loading is significantly faster here than on 0.8.1 (I didn't try 0.9), this is amazing =)
Keep up the good work Mozilla developers!
Gee, I was excited about Mozilla for months until I found something so much better. Hey, I love OpenSource stuff, but I don't hate commercial software unless it's from a company that's trying to rule our world. And I love any software that works well (unless it's from a company that's trying to rule my world) So that's why I use Opera. So small, so fast, and so absolutely kick-ass compared to Lesszilla or (ugh) Netscrape. Did I mention it's small, and fast? I've registered it under Linux and Windoze and as far as I'm concerned it's some of the best money I've spent in a while. Go ahead with your flames about various foibles that Opera has... but of course it has problems. So does the software you wite. Opera rocks despite the bugs, which they are very responsive about fixing. I find it particularly annoying that the /. community seems to pretend Opera doesn't exist. Slashdot reports on commercial products all the time, why not Opera?
Was there any mention when the "final" Linux version was released? NO. At least we could have argued about the fact that it wasn't ready to be called a "final" release... but oh well.
I'm still smiling.
I have no special gift, I am only passionately curious. --Albert Einstein
I stealthily parked outside every big business in town, tapping in to their fluorescent light networks one by one, and still couldnt find a C64 build of this new Mozilla.
The "Entry Point not found" errors that come up every time I use a Form, it would be nice if these are gotten rid of. They are very annoying. Netscape and IE don't get those, but Mozilla does.
Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
Under the June 6 nightly, there is a very annoying bug with the URL autocomplete functionality. What's happening is that the first window Mozilla creates doesn't draw the previously-visited URLs in the popdown URL menu, while all subsequent windows it creates doesn't have this visual impairment. First thing I do is create a new window and destroy the first one whenever I launch Mozilla. But 0.9.1 may have squashed this bug; although it is a known bug.
I've only noticed this under 0.9 with the funky rendering of graphics; but haven't noticed it under the 0.9.1 release (June 6 for me).
Sure there are come cosmetic issues, but it's quite usable. Even Wells Fargo online banking works without requiring me to override the useragent string.
Only issue now is lack of JVM being distributed. But I know it can be added. Can someone post a procedure for FreeBSD?
Well... I registered today. Let me offically say "hi slashdot" I personally didn't think mozilla 0.91 would come out this well. As many of you know they added a lot of new features in this build and the nighlys a few weeks ago were tough to say the least. Mozilla is totally going to rock my little face of once it hits 1.0. I'd like mozilla.org to hold off on dropping in huge new features for a while. Lets make what we have stable. But, hey... it's still looking good. I would LOVE to see the fizilla project get a little more love. And I'm not talking about the lame carbon builds that are being slapped together... i'm talking about that mach-o beast they never seem to flaunt. But hey... windows, mac, and linux builds all look nice. Keep up the good work mozilla.org. This is probably one of the only geek webs sites that gives this project love.
"Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
With stuff like HTML4.0 and JRE1.x being pretty commonplace, do we really need yet another browser?
I mean, apart from some cool features what really sets it aside from the rest is probably its (admittedly: nice =) interface.
So my question is: What more is a browser than an address bar, a status bar and a HTML/Applet viewer with back button? Does it really matter which one you use?
PS: Mozilla just got itself a huge potential market, sadly all non-MS Despair Inc. 2000-2001
__
Not believing in force is like not believing in gravity.