Slashdot Mirror
Mozilla 0.9.4 Released
asa writes: "Lots of bug fixes (1,467 at last count) since 0.9.3 including the ability to disable the JavaScript window.open() method during page load and unload events. You can find more information on what's new at the release notes and mozillaZine."
I've got the new release mirrored at ftp://nerf-herder.net/pub/mozilla
-Peter
Read the release notes. Arabic language support should work.
Gerv
Just six more releases until they'll be forced to call it 1.0! Wait... I wonder if they can do 0.9.8.1, 0.9.8.2, etc. and delay it a couple of more years.
Bad thought there. Eep.
Oh well, thanks anyway to the Mozilla team for their hard work, especially for the work they've done this week after the tragedies in our country. I know that most people's productivity levels are null, lately.
Do you like German cars?
Disabling window.open has been around for a couple of releases now, it's just not the most straightforward thing to enable. I was most pleased to find that hitting enter after filling in a form will actually submit a request everyplace I tried it, assuming that's the intent of the form (i.e. a search engine). This seemed to be a hit-or-miss thing in previous releases.
Interested in open source engine management for your Subaru?
Hopefully these things have gotten better, it is quite annoying when the browser crashes
If Mozilla is going to be able to compete with the major browsers, it (IMHO) has to be a lot more stable. I can cope with a page being rendered badly, but not with a browser crash. IE is still a lot more stable. Or.. perhaps it is just bad Java Runtime integration ?
Thanks anyway Mozilla team, i'm off to the download zone
Probable impossibilities are to be preferred to improbable possibilities.
Aristotele
Mozilla's back and better than ever!
It's now even more stable than before.. Seems like they finally are getting near the magical 1.0..
__ elacin
does better than 0.9.2. I've been using that for a while now, but it renders quite slow on ilovearabs.com and famous-arab-aviators.com
Seriously... For some reason 0.9.3 was considerably less stable than 0.9.2 on both my linux and windows systems... I'm glad to see so many bugs fixed. This is my primary browser and each improvement to it is an improvement to my LIFE.
I switched to 0.9.3 permenantly but does anyone know what to put in the "helper apps" to
get RealPlayer8 working automatically? I'm not having much luck! Anyhow looking forward to giving 0.9.4 a try.
I havnt used a mozilla release for sometime(been a little busy to grab them everyday..) and WOW! talk about a speed... seems much faster
Wow, what a great release! I think that 0.9.3 really is a key step in the right direction for 1.0. See http://www.mozilla.org/roadmap.html for more details on the roadmap and plans for 1.0.
Also, as a mozilla developer, I would like to thank all those who have joined the project recently and done something to help. Even if you cannot code, there is still lots that you can do. I urge you to download 0.9.4 or even better, a nightly build, and to look at http://www.mozilla.org/start, http://www.mozilla.org/qa/help, and http://www.mozilla.org/get-involved.html. There are many things that you can do to help which will help get 1.0 out the door sooner and better.
No POPUPS whatsoever:
user_pref("capability.policy.default.Window.open"
But...if some sites need popups, make a zone for them like this:
user_pref("capability.policy.strict.sites", "http://www.evil.org http://www.annoying.com");
user_pref("capability.policy.strict.Window.alert"
user_pref("capability.policy.strict.Window.confir
user_pref("capability.policy.strict.Window.prompt
It is very cool, and there is a lot of scripting and other trickery you can do with these prefrences.
-David
# Hack the planet, it's important.
I tried the 0.9.4 Linux milestone - it does not work. It just exists with a "BadMatch" X error.
Looks Mozilla still needs a lot of work.
This isn't really front page news. So some new release of some software package is out? Big deal. This sort of stuff is for Freshmeat, not Slashdot. Most of the Ask Slashdots that don't get put on the front page are more interesting than this ..!
I've been using Mozilla's daily builds as my standard browser since M18 and as my email client since 0.8 and I've got to say that I love it - yes, it is a memory hog but I have more than enough memory to give a fsck.
I've been trying to evangelize the users from my work place into using Mozilla since 0.9.2 and so far I've managed to get 10 out of 90 to switch (from Netscape 4.75 of course, IE is a no-no acording to company security policy).
Way to go Mozilla Team - it gets better every single day, congratulations!
All browsers' default homepage should read: Don't Panic...
I have tried everything trying to get the damn Mozilla plugin functionality to work. I have tried placing Real, Flash, and Java plugins in /usr/local/mozilla/plugins, ~/.mozilla/plugins, installing various versions of different system libraries, and still, the only plugin that shows up in about:plugins is that damn "null" plugin. Is there some manual registering that needs to take place in order to make Mozilla see these plugins?
Excellent. I may now pr0n from work and not have to frantically close windows at the last minute.
Thank you, Mozilla team. My raging codpiece salutes you.
...the ability to disable the JavaScript window.open() method...
You might not want all pop up windows disabled, only windows with ads.
Check out Proxomitron
It will has rewrite the http stream, so you can rewrite headers, html, cookies, etc. For both incoming and outgoing. Also make Mozilla reply as "User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1)". Its more powerfull than junkbusters, and has more features and filters(all editable)
Thanks for the mirror, mozilla seems swamped (can't connect at all).
I guess I'm wondering why the new versions are so much slower than the older versions of Netscape. I know this is the M$ approach to application "upgrades", but is it something we really want to emulate?
In a band? Use WheresTheGig for free.
On > 2 button mouse how do you get Mozilla to recongize one of them as, say, the Internet back button? Any ideas?
Lynx is probably faster still. But it doesn't mean you necessarily want to use it. This is not an excuse (Mozilla should be faster than it is), it's just an observation.
Gerv
I tried this latest release on my system(p4 1.2ghz 512mb ram) and it is amazing. The new --turbo option really helps and the initial window opens in about 5 seconds.
I dont know if anyone else got this but with 0.9.4 I got "Error Sending Command" when i was usig the redhat 7.1 rpms.
The 1.0 release is getting closer now, the latest schedule predicts the 1.0 as early as late 2002. I can't wait.
I've been using Moz daily for almost a year now for both web and mail. I downloaded a daily a couple days ago and it's getting better all the time. The most notable improvement: The mailer isn't a time-sink like it used to be. Even in 0.9.3 it would take me upwards of 1 or even 2 minutes to click "new msg", put in 3 recip addrs, type a subject line and then start writing the body. Luckily I only write about 3 emails a week...
324006
> much slower than the older versions of Netscape
Because it's still beta-quality code? There are many performance issues currently being worked on. Also, some things that NS4 does quickly (eg style resolution) take a lot more time to do _right_.
Now, in the inevitable war between the annoying ad companies and the poor downtrodden browser users we'll get no more popups, but click-thrus or something even more insidious instead.
/. crowd decries the use of Smart Tags (because they change content) but is more than happy to change content they DON'T like (popups and banner ads). Do I smell a note of hypocrisy here?
I can't wait for "This site cannot be viewed without the EvilPopupsAndPersonalInfoCollector plugin installed".
Don't get me wrong, this is a good interim effort but web advertising is going to continue.
<obtroll>
I also find it interesting that the
</obtroll>
Fear: When you see B8 00 4C CD 21 and know what it means
In my mind, I don't think of Mozilla or Netscape 6.x to be an upgrade to Netscape 4.x, I think of it as a completely different product. Any time that you rewrite 100% of the product, you can expect the new version to be slower, more infested with bugs, and just "feel" worse than the older version which has been tended for many years.
/. without permission from the people involved, but someone at Netscape (d. hy.) did a lot of work on page loading and a new contributor did a lot of proformence work as well recently (jes.). Mail/news also uses the widget in the folder-paine, which has great speed increases as well.
However, if Netscape decided not to do the 5.0 rewrite, disaster would be the only end. The old code was not mantainible and doesn't allow for the powerful new features and embedding that seamonkey allows for.
Speed is something that is being worked on and is significantly better than before. I won't mention full names here on
So we are trying the best we can. As always, patches are welcome.
Zach
Mozilla's gui responsiveness and load time is slower, but the rendering engine is fast: it's the only browser that renders big tables like Slashdot comments as they load instead of waiting for the entire page to load (on my 28.8). The only browser I havn't compared it to is Konqueror.
I think it's a fair trade-off. It's always in memory on my machine anyway.
See this newsgroup post for details.
For Mozilla on the Mac are smaller memory requirements(I can take the base config, but add a few plugs and it becomes huge), the ability to set the location of your cache(maybe this in the prefs file and I am missing it?), and few mime types included by default(I know I can add them, but I'm lazy).
Nevertheless, it is my everyday browser and I hope that as it matures, more sites will support it!
All your World Trade Center are belong to us.
You have no chance to survive. Make your cruise missle.
Links is text based, renders frames, and has HTTP 1.1/keepalive support, color. It supports the mouse in terminals too, so you can just click links.
I perfer links over lynx.
Netscape 4.7 is older, WEAKER, of course its going to be faster.
Think about it.. the most powerful browser cannot be the fastest browser.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
Konqueror does a much better job than Netscape
4.x of doing styles right, and it's a lot faster
than Mozilla. I wish the Mozilla people well,
but it's simply false to claim that the slowness
is required for a correct implementation.
Everyone who complains about speed doesnt know anything about how computers work.
New software is bigger, more powerful, and NEEDS a more powerful computer, RAM IS CHEAP, dont tell me Mozilla uses too much ram when you can buy a gig of ram for under $200.
Get a faster harddrive, if mozilla is slow you are most likely using cheap IDE crap.
Now, if you have a modern computer THEN you may use modern browsers and modern software, if you have a computer which was made before Netscape 4.7 was released, then you should be using netscape 4.7, your computer will never be powerful enough to run mozilla.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
Lynx is lightning fast. its perfect for a nix user who wants weak yet fast software.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
Mark this one down as flamebait.
My responce to the cad above is:
Fuck off and die.
That blunt enough?
(ignore sig.. on a higher build now)
We'd be very interested to hear of pages Konqueror gets right, and Mozilla gets wrong. Please file bugs in Bugzilla here, and then quote the bug numbers. We'll get right on it.
Gerv
If you travel over to one of the following pages on mozilla.org, you can learn all that you can do to get involved. Confirming the unconfirmed (from page number 3 below) is a great way to get involved, doesn't take much time, and is of a big help when all the many bugs come in after a big release like this.
If mozilla used less memory (I've got a laptop with 192MB and it is still slow!).... and.... (though not critical) if it could read IMAPish email from my @netscape.net account.... then I'd use it all the time....
===> An eye for an eye makes everyone blind - MG
Come on already.... lets get a spell checker folded into the email client. I need ALL the help I can get. I tried hacking the 6.1 checker in to the last build, but no luck. Is there any word on when - world acording to me - one of the most basic things about an email client will be included?
+++ UGUCAUCGUAUUUCU
In Windows NT/2000, users can set in the mouse preferences for the mouse to automagically move to the default button in dialog boxes and alerts. However, Mozilla doesn't currently cooperate with this.
:). Or, if you aren't inclined to programming, you can also vote for the bug (of course, you'll need a free Bugzilla account to vote).
The bug has keyword "helpwanted", so if you know how to accomplish this functionality, please speak up
Alex Bischoff
HTML/CSS coder for hire
Netscape has a proprietary spell-checker which it ships. No-one has yet found time to write an open-source one. Obviously, no-one at Netscape would spend time doing it, and external contributors are busy on other things. The usual trick is to use a build close to a Netscape release and install their spellchecker.
It would make a good CS project for someone. Fuzzy logic matching isn't all that hard. The UI is open source, it's just the back end that's currently proprietary.
If you are interested, mail me and I'll point you in the right direction.
Gerv
Isn't a/ispell open source ?
Im still using an 0.8.x build of Mozilla and for some reason Im failing to see all the instability that the newer releases are striving to thwart.
;)
Maybe its just me? Im not a 'power user' perse... most of the sites I visit aren't multimedia intensive with the exception of some Flash which isnt readily supported anyway.
I guess if something happens in which my browser stops working Ill upgrade, but until then Im happy where I am =/
Kudos to the Mozilla team for all they're hard work and maybe someday Ill upgrade and check out all the new features
Changeable user agents is bug 46029. Feel free to vote for the bug if that issue is important to you.
Alex Bischoff
HTML/CSS coder for hire
I used netscapes 6 spellcheck.xpi with an early version of mozilla and it wored fine. It doesnt work with 0.9.4 (just tried) hopefully someone fixes this soon.
Or maybe it's not the first.
For mozilla 9.4, win32 on winXP using the GrayModernIII skin:
Edit > Preferences > Mail & Newsgroups
The formatting in the window is in a messed up font and the background doesn't show. Blah.
----------------
The bug for getting a spell checker into Mozilla is bug 56301. If you can help out with the effort, that would be fantastic, as the bug is somewhat stalled at the moment.
It used to be that you could install Netscape's spellchecker, but that is no longer supported.
PS Gerv: This message isn't directed at you, but primarily at the parent post to your post.
Alex Bischoff
HTML/CSS coder for hire
Anyone know where they got this idea? Anyone know a way to turn it off? Are they planning on keeping this awful behavoir? This sucks, I am going back to 0.9.3 and hoping IE never follows suit.
Sean
"'Yrch!' said Legolas, falling into his own tongue."
This sentence included because the filters are biting. And this one too.
it was with a daily build (a few weeks old) of Mozilla 0.9.3 -- it never crashed, never even noticeably slowed down, over a more than 14-hour stretch. I was afraid both that the machine would crash and that my ISP connection would break, because phone service was so sketchy (this was not far from DC, but I circuits were busy all over the country). But I *expected* Mozilla to crash (I find that most browsers don't like to be on forever, Mozilla one of the worst offenders), and it never did. Thanks, Mozilla guys :) Good show.
Aside: for years, I've heard people praise IE to the skies. I've tried it out, have sampled a few versions of IE (on Mac and Windows) sometimes, but they've never impressed me as being better for anything *I* do / want to do than either Mozilla or Konqueror, and seem to crash just as often. My iBook came with both Netscape and IE installed, but so far no compelling advantages are apparent.
timothy
(wireless in the backyard, blacksburg va)
jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
Can't get in at the moment, but 0.9.3 was very good on OS X (if a bit of a CPU hog).
On OS X I noticed something odd:
On Internet Explorer 5.X it could not jump to the first 2 anchors on *any* page no matter where they were. As a webmaster I was obiously going "HUH!? WTF?"
Mozilla/Fizilla: Perfect every time.
IIRC I noticed this too:
IE used less cpu but more "kernel space" acccording to my load docklet.
Mozilla/Fizilla used cpu all the time, but "kernel" usage was ~10% to IE's average and spikes of 25 to 50, respectivly.
Stability, well, I found myself using IE heavily.
Why? Well, pegging the cpu like seti@home while using just a browser annoyed me...dunno why besides "that is what seti is supposed to do" and IE made the load docklet look interesting (blue/red graphs).
Sorry, but it is the "blinky light/shiney object syndrome" that has affected me since getting into computers.
Moose
Ooooo, shiney objects!
Have you read the moderator guidelines? Well, have you, PUNK? (and I want a Karma: Gnarly option)
Anyone know where they got this idea? Anyone know a way to turn it off? Are they planning on keeping this awful behavoir? This sucks, I am going back to 0.9.3 and hoping IE never follows suit.
Sean
"'Yrch!' said Legolas, falling into his own tongue."
lynx sucks my ballsack. links doesn't.
links for os x doesn't have mouse support, btw.
b ut, it still doesn't like my ballsack.
help out.
<I>including the ability to
disable the JavaScript window.open()
method during page load and unload events.</I> <P>
Ah! That's why I'm seeing a large delay before
some pop up ads appear. I.e. the evil JavaScript
program wait until after all loading is done before calling the window.open() method, once the
window has been openned, then it can continue with
loading events.... let's just make then illegal instead. Or just boycott all who use them and hope they go away some day....
M0571y H@rml355.
The reason moz/nscp6 is slower than 4.x is that the entire user interface is built out of XML, CSS, and javascript (something collectively referred to as XPFE). This approach ensures that there's as little platform-specific code as possible, making mozilla available on a wide number of platforms that simply wouldn't have been plausible if everything was being done natively. It's been said many times that if not for XPFE, there wouldn't have been versions for anything but Windows and possibly Macintosh.
The good news is that UI responsiveness improves with each release, and I fully expect it to equal 4.x in time. However, I've read that GTK is a bottleneck of some sort, so that's why Windows has a performance advantage over *nix.
but that is no longer supported
;-)
Well, the 6.1 spellchecker is not supported with current builds. But if you wait for the next Netscape release, the spellchecker will work with those builds and all following builds (until we break it again
Gerv
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Mozilla 0.9.4 still feels sluggish on my machine, a 1.1 GHz T-Bird w/ 512 MB of PC133. It feels sluggish under both Linux and Windows. Yet the GIMP and Photoshop (not to menton my games) never felt so fast. If I can shuffle AutoCAD projects with 5+ million elements with ease, I should at least be able to have a complete, yet zippy, web browser.
Granted, newer software is generally larger and more capable, and thus often requires more cpu cycles to do its job. Yet Mosaic and early (pre 2.0) versions of Netscape ran fine on my Sun SPARCstation 10 so many years ago. With advances in coding and cache techniques, not to mention the abilities of modern compilers and the speculative processes doen in the modern cpu -- why must a modern web browser run so slow??
My SPARCstation 10 had a single 50 MHz SPARC processor and 32 MB of rather slow ram. Has Mozilla gotten so far out of hand that even the latest 1+ GHz wizbang PC can't even handle it? Is Mozilla actually more demanding than my Maya rendering daemon??
I say finish up Mozilla. Release 1.0 'when it's done'. Then go back to the drawing board and start over. Bring in some of the old school coders, the folks that didn't have 4+ GFLOPS CPUs. Bring in the old browser folks... Marc Andressen, JWZ, etc.
Sure, Mozilla will be fine by next year when it hits 1.0 and when we all have 2.0 GHz PCs. Browsing will be great at that point. But I pitty the next advance in browsing, because Mozilla 2.0 will certainly bring back the slowness. It is time to start over and do it right.
I've been using Netscape Communicator 4.72 for the last X years. Why? I have over 82000 email messages that I have kept! I do not want the hassle of moving over to Outlook or some other platform for email - lots of filters to set up, _lots_ of folders to set up, and many many thousands of messages to transfer. So I've been waiting for Mozilla to mature. I have tried it a few times over the last two years - and always it has not quite made the cut. In particular, importing the huge number of messages and folders has been a real hassle (often crashing). I'm getting close to switching. This release seems much better. We'll see...
"Blade Runner" the Comic Noir, "Akira" the Film
Helping with organizational effectiveness is our job.
That won't be fixed. You'll have to wait until the next time Netscape releases a spellchecker.
Gerv
and people design their pages to work with IE. Therefore, other browsers who work with the standard can't render those pages correctly.
Although, even IE doesn't get Java pages right all the time.
"It's comin' back around again..." -RATM
I can't figure out to use the new feature for blocking window.open() attached to OnLoad or onUnLoad in the latest build for Win32. Can anyone point out where it is?
Any good software engineer will tell you, that every bug fixed creates two more!
Person who wrote this article: can you be a bit more derogatory with your one line summation?
Have you even used the thing? What sort of XT system with 64K of RAM do you run it on?
It works. I've used Mozilla solidly for nearly a year now.
(Plus regarding disabling popups, that was around since 0.8, although I hear it now has an interface other than a text editor. I'll install the latest milestone once I post this comment and close Mozilla.)
I have to say I'm am extremely impressed with the latest releases of mozilla, there has again been a very very nice speed jump.
As a submitter of bugs, it's good to see them getting cleaned up, at this point it's better than many browsers that call themselves 3, 4, 5, 6, 7... whatever.
Stability is getting really good, I haven't been able to crash the latest 0.9.3 nightlies or 0.9.4, even with java, javascript, and flash.
Really excellent work, my thanks goes out to everyone who has helped with Mozilla.
Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
I've been happily using Omniweb under MacOS X for some time, and there is a very nice near-equivalent feature you guys should know about. Hidden in OmniWeb -> Preferences -> Javascript, there is the following dialog:
;)
Scripts are allowed to open new Windows:
* Always
* Only in response to a link being clicked
* never
The second choice of course, is the preferred choice. I'm glad that I'll be able to use Mozilla soon for the sites where Omniweb's javascript doesn't work, as the SMP bug under MacOS X now has an uncommitted patch! Too bad Omniweb will still look better for now
Much props to the Mozilla crew. Keep it coming
I'd like to know if the annoying behviour of requerying a page when "view source" or "save" ing has been changed ?? It makes no sense at all to re-download a page to do these things, rather than use the copy being displayed, and this completely stuffs up pages using forms which you have filled out... Why isn't this behaviour optional ???
Disabling the popups is great, now is there a way to circumvent those annoying sites that maximize the browser window?
Menu item spacing is larger for Bookmarks Menu. Vote for this bug.
"There ought to be limits to freedom"
The obvious workaround for advertisers desparate to be as annoying as possible:
var w = window.open(...);
if(w == null)
window.location = "popups_required.html";
redirecting you to a message telling you that you need to enable popups to use the site
There's 10 types of people in this world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
This seems to have been a re-occuring problem among all of the releases, but even worse with .94 (.93 seemed to be getting better). Here are my specs : 1.2 ghz athlon w/ 266 fsb, 266MB PC133, gf2 ultra, sblive 5.1...)
I started mozilla having 136 MB with the buffers & cached memory. After about an hour or so of watching realplayer videos in cnn & abc and going to various sites I had only 85 MB free with buffers & cached memory included. I noticed a very aparent slowdown in the way programs loaded. I closed the window with realplayer with no ram gain. I then clozed mozilla. and my free memory went back up to 135 or so.
This may be caused by the fact that I have 4-5 windows open at once. I later tried using the "flush memory" option which only freed up about 5-10MB. The older versions seemed to have much less of this problem, but it was still noticeable. I use opera 5.05TP1 and it not only loads in a second or two, but is much faster at loading web pages and allows you to have up to 10 or more pages open at once in one opera window. This is quite nice for the way I browse. Unfortunately It does not have real player support, but id does have java & flash suport.
The WORST thing about mozzila is that you can not even build the thing w/o having to be connected to internet to constantly checkout files from thier CVS. If you are on a modem give up. Why can every other open source project have a owrking configure script (no matter how complex, look at gnome & kde) but mozzila has some mostly broken thing that you need to use a web page form to make some shell script for you? Its pointless and counter productive. Once I found I could run Konquer w/o having to have the KDE desktop loaded (eg Konqueror in WindowMaker) and its far more efficent
Rendering pages is extremely FAST but creating windows is SLOW. The main hitch I have right now is on new window creation (which takes a long time to do). For example on a test page that uses javascript to open and close 75 windows one at a time (see the super simple code at this URL and either copy and make you own test or click on the link on that page):
http://206.191.52.79/MozTester/pagebanger.html
On a P233 running Linux I get the following (you'll likely want to try this on a faster machine - it's the relative comparisons that are interesting).
* Netscape 4.7.* takes about a minute
* Opera takes about 15 seconds
* Mozilla takes about 5 minutes !! (actually I stopped timing it's so slow)
* KFM/Konqueror ?? (old version doesn't work try it with KDE 2.0)
* Galeon ??? (not timed recently - the sort of more "native" GTK GUI might be faster??)
* Embedded Moz etc.
* Other browsers??
On MS Windows the Mozilla GUI is likely faster (haven't tested) and IE of course is very fast
Some of the slowness is due to the server so I engourage you to create your own javascript tests that just openm and close blank windows or something
Oh, and aspell/ispell is Unix-only,no?
It's amazing how much less irritating browsing the web is since I disabled popups and animation in Mozilla.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
> 4.x of doing styles right
True. That's really not saying much. I've tried Konqueror and it's style and DOM support is pretty crappy as of last month...
If you want to be amazed by speed give Opera a try. It loads very quickly.
Yeah... Mozilla is just useless on Linux (again... this counts for all milestones):
X Error of failed request: BadMatch (invalid parameter attributes)
Major opcode of failed request: 1 (X_CreateWindow)
Serial number of failed request: 16
Current serial number in output stream: 17
Will they ever fix this ?? Seems the answer is NO.
Mozilla hereby wins the award of the worst software ever released.
Geeks, rejoice!
I only post comments when someone on the internet is wrong.
In this days of sadnes, thanks for this good news!
Get my e-mail after a captcha test in: http://tinymailt
Just can't wait for it to finish downloading so that I can test it out. .9.3 has a fairly significant memory leak that bites you on the ass after time; it gets me somewhat quickly the way I browse - opening most links as new windows. Other than that, it is for the most part rocking.
If god had intended you to be naked, you would have been born that way.
>again... this counts for all milestones
Like maybe your X install is fucked?
didn't he screw his mom in an outhouse?
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
-- @rjamestaylor on Ello
note: i'm predominantly running windows lately on my desktop machine. don't start with me. it's the curse of being a gamer.
.02
last year i ran in to NetCaptor (http://www.netcaptor.com), which, uses IE and, among other things, is "tab-able", and i simply can not go back now. (i'm addicted to tab-able apps. PowerShell rules! having 20+ windows open at any given time doesn't). so, my suggestion to developers is an add-on app that incorporates Moz for this. i'm sure i'm not the only one that would love to see this.
just my
alive to the universe, dead to the world
How the heck do you get Mozilla to not force you through the profile creation stage if you still have Netscape 4 files/prefs on the same computer? Is anyone else having is this problem?
Go to mozdev.org and install MultiZilla. It puts tabs in Mozilla.
"including the ability to disable the JavaScript window.open() method"
;)
Awesome, this'll be great for the free porn sites!
yes. now all you need is a way to call [aspell or ispell] from the browser and somehow usefully use its output...
Pspell is a portable C library providing an interface between apps such as Mozilla and several varieties of spell-check backends (such as Aspell's English algorithm or Ispell's language-independent algorithm), along with command-line apps that call those functions. It's licensed under GNU Lesser GPL.
Oh, and aspell/ispell is Unix-only,no?
No. Pspell is a cross-platform library, and even though Ispell is tuned for POSIX systems, Cygwin provides a good POSIX layer on Win32 systems. With the port of XFree86 4.10 to run on Windows 98/ME and Windows NT/2K, it's very hard to call a piece of source code "designed only for UNIX systems" anymore.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Yeah... Mozilla is just useless on Linux (again... this counts for all milestones): X Error of failed request: BadMatch (invalid parameter attributes)
Users on recent Linux 2.4 and XFree86 4.1 have reported WORKSFORME. Do any other apps that link to GTK+ work?
Will I retire or break 10K?
It is easy and works! I'm on a modem and it took me less than 1.5 hours to download and install the thing (10+ megs). I used the talk-back enabled full installer - not the net installer. That is, IMO, strictly for broadband. so when you get it downloaded do this:
1. open a terminal
2. su root
3. cd to download directory
4. type "./mozilla-installer"
5. wait - the browser will start shortly
simple.
I'm just now playing with the new release, Opera 5. It is so great... all that is missing far as I can tell is some IE-dependant javascripts... which shouldn't be needed, but all you web developers (yeah, you) are using them because they are "cool". :)
Anyways, opera is free if you agree to have an ad in your top-right corner. It is more than worth it - mozilla can go hide... they lost it a long time ago, open source or not.
And boy is it fast and stable... and since it has email and icq clients built in, I'm moving fast into being able to drop windows altogether, which will be a must as soon as 2k isn't keeping up anymore. I am not moving to the gummibear OS no matter what...
"in to" --> into
"acording" --> according
Hope this helps!
--
"Karma can only be portioned out by the cosmos." - Homer Simpson [1F10]
... that it is because they do this stuff, ad revenues are going down?
It used to work, now it crashes Mozilla (since about 0.9.1, I think). When I click on a RV link (like at espn.com) the window opens where Real is supposed to go, then all the Mozilla windows just go away. *poof!*
BTW, I'm using Debian Potato and I install Mozilla into ~/mozilla and drop rpnp.so and raclass.zip into ~/mozilla/plugins.
Any ideas???
From the Mozilla 0.9.4 release notes:
"Viewing Arabic language text should now work on Linux and other systems without Arabic shaping support (Arabic font required). Other languages using the Arabic script, are not yet supported but support is planned."
Oh horrors! Now mozilla can be used for evil! Guess we better regulate it too.
/me groans at his own dumb joke.
It just makes life harder on web designers. How can we optimize our HTML code to render correctly in your browser, if you lie to us about what browser you're using?
If your browser sends
then the server will send IE content, but the web designer will notice the satanic "666" in the User-Agent field of the logs and know something is up. A closer inspection reveals a Mozilla browser.Will I retire or break 10K?
I downloaded everything fresh from scratch and all is well. Maybe something got corrupted somewhere....
I know this isn't the right place to ask this, but oh well, i'd be really surprised to be the only one with this problem.
I installed the RH 7 0.9.4 RPMs on my pretty standard RedHat 7.1 box. But when I launch mozilla, nothing happens. It forks 4 mozilla-bin processes, then absolutely nothing happens, no windows pop up, and the CPU stays at 0% load.
Hmm, no mozilla for you, come back one year!
DMZ
Mozilla has definitely progressed a great deal recently. However, check their page for system requirements: 64 fucking megs of ram! For those of use who like the idea of a small, fast standalone browser, dillo is the browser to watch. It now supports tables, and although it's still quite buggy, as fast as development is moving, I think within a year they may have a usable product, which at this stage is blazingly fast.
You had me at "dicks fuck assholes".
And of course, the GTK binding is much faster.
I don't mention this to detract from Mozilla, but to foster some unique add-on code that changes the browser experience while using the rendering engine you want.
Ha.. but I used worse language and got modded down less than you did... and that's what counts :)
Also I have the guts to say what I feel and post as myself.
Flash plugin opens
So, here's a list of what you can really do:
yush
The site says the tabbed interface is patent pending. Could this be a problem for other browsers? Haven't tabs been used in other programs for years?
There's a large corporation out there who began offering an official corporate Linux distro (modified from RedHat) as an option to their user base for desktop use. They already have a considerable Unix desktop user population, as well as the mixture of various Windows OS (though they're standardizing to Win2K for Windows users).
There was a big deal going down with Microsoft for internal deployment of one of MS' major technologies. One of the sticklers was this Unix user base. The "fix" was to offer web-ified versions of the native Windows apps. Of course, this required IE for most, if not all, of the functionality of the native Windows apps.
This works for Solaris and HP, since Microsoft already provides those binaries. But what about Linux? The answer was providing the corporate customer with access to code for IE's Unix port. MS was confident the corporation could migrate the code to Linux and offer their own internal binaries for their Linux desktop user base.
Sure - IE for Linux sounds like something from Bizzaro World. But then, that binary would only be for internal use by that corporation. Don't expect to find it on MS' download page just yet.
Nothing new here, in the preferences of Omniweb ( http://www.omnigroup.com/applications/omniweb/ ) there's radio buttons to select when a script can open a new window : always, when a link is clicked, or never. It's awesome, I'm glad Mozilla thought of it.
It is a disaster today. Until they *RELEASE* a product they have no product. Waiting for perfection is not the answer -- MS does at lease one thing right -- they ship.
Mozilla in 0.9.4 turns turbo mode on automatically unless I disable it. I do not see a thread about the turbo mode.The mozillaquest.com article about 0.9.4 mentions some pros and cons of using turbo mode. The article lists grabbing resources as a con. I have to agree that turbo mode does grab resources.
Wouldn't it be better to try to make the code more efficient so that mozilla just loads faster without having to load it when you boot up? I would rather wait for mozilla to load instead of having mozilla loaded when I boot up. But it would be nicer to have mozilla load faster without loading it when I boot up.
There is too much that Windows loads when it boots up without adding even more. At least there is not a turbo for Linux.
I just installed 0.9.3 There is a LOT there that looks really good. I see some very very excellent ideas in this browser and I personally will switch to it as soon as the performance gets up to par. Nevertheless I'm aghast at the TERRIBLE performance.
I can see where some of this comes from... Part of it is the user interface. There is a generic level of abstraction here that takes a LOT of CPU time and memory. I agree with the abstraction but I can not for the life of me understand why it should literally take SECONDS in some cases for a mouse click to be resolved to a specific function.
At worst - in a given window if even a 1000 separate functions could be selected - then even a linear search through 1000 fields should be instant. These machines run at millions of instructions per second. There is no excuse here other than sloppy coding. An indexed search should take milliseconds. Clean up the GUI first.
Next threading. People typically open GOBS of windows. A separate thread should handle each window IMHO. I can see activities in one window blocking another. I think the underlying reason is that the underlying rendering code is not thread safe. This is my guess - but if so the project will really suffer until this problem is rectified.
Memory management. It looks to me that there is no attention to collecting the memory associated with a given window. It looks to me that 1000's of tiny objects are being malloc()ed with the result that the memory for one page will be interspearsed with the 1000's of tiny objects malloc()ed with other pages.
If 90% of the memory in a given page is malloc()ed for an idle window - and only a single tiny object is malloc()ed for the active window or controlling code - then that page can not be swapped. Effectively inattention to memory management in a browser that opens literally dosens of windows means that the virtual memory subsystem of the computer is neutered.
In addition - malloc()ing 1000's of tiny ojects with the default malloc routines found in systems like Linux is not IMHO a good idea.
The ususal malloc() code searchs for similar sized "holes" which means that (1) it burns a lot of unnecessary CPU and (2) it prohibits the OS from paging the majority of the memory used for idle windows because this memory gets allocated like someone shuffling a deck of cards where each suit represents the memory for a given window. (if you want to use the card deck as an example - then think of 4 windows and 4 suits. If you have 8 windows - then think of 2 decks, etc). A much better idea is to collect the cards in each suit into their own pile and KEEP THE PILES SEPARATE.
There are leaks - but when a window is closed the leaks from the code that malloc()ed ram for the said page is not freed. How can threading be accomplished and how can working with the virtual memory system of the OS be accomodated when memory is allocated amoung all pages like someone shuffling a deck of cards? IMHO this is an area where HUGE performance improvements can be gained.
I think the developers need to address (1) how threading can be layered into the system so that a single thread runs a given window - or perhaps a forked process runs a given window depending on the os... and (2) how all memory for a given window - hense given thread can be collected into a group of virtual memory pages associated with only said window/thread - so that the OS can swap them!
This I think means that people are going to need to look at some fundemental structural issues. Solve these issues first. Once a code base that is multithreaded with thread safe subsystems like the rendering engine and GUI engines are in place - then the rest of the system should fall into line. On the other hand - if the structural issues are not addressed - then I can't see how a multi threaded version will ever come about.
I personally think that a multi threaded code base will solve a HUGE pile of problems. If the developers agree - great. If not - well - its your code base and we each are entitled to our opinions. This is just my 2 cents worth here.
Everyone seems to be extremely excited about ability to disable popups on onload/onunload -
you are fogetting however that onload even by itself will be executed, and its possible to set a timer to fire in 0.01 sec, which will then display popup, wich technically won't be part of the onLoad bit.
onUnload bit is harder to workaround, but I can see at least a dirty few ways of doing it.
Why not just post a PGP- (or GPG-) created signature using a well-known public key? This is what the Linux people do and it works great.
This build appears to have fixed that nasty memory leak that was apparent in 0.9.3.
why must a modern web browser run so slow??
It's not a matter of "must." Internet Explorer flies on my iMac. So did Konqueror when I was running Yellow Dog Linux. And so do OmniWeb and IE when I reboot into OS X.
It's not modern web browsers that run slowly. It's Mozilla, and in my experience, just Mozilla.
--saint
can you say "Tool"?
that noticed definite weirdness with the Classic Theme on the first run?
Of course, and I highly suspect it, I may be talking out of my ass. -oqti
Many who have tried Netscape 6 were very disappointed... It crashed all the time, and lacked a lot of features... But the mozilla guys know it was based on a very non-final release Seamonkey 18... There have been atleast 10 major releases since then... and now - mozilla is fast, bugless, and full of features...
And the themes - they are [b]soooooo[/b] great!!!
There are a whole slew of bugs in textarea handling that make it very difficult and painful to compose posts in textareas. This is not so critical for people who don't, uh, participate in large discussion groups such as this one. But if you DO post to Slashdot etc., you may want to hold off -- until 1.0, which is the target for just too many of these bugs, IMO.
/. their bugzilla, but I'm talking specifically about such bugs as 83650, 82151, 88024, 68331, 75629, and 74383. And, for example, as I compose this in Moz, I know that if I accidentally hit the right arrow button at the end of the post, the cursor will move to the top of the post. It's painful.
I won't link in the bugs since the Moz folks don't like us to
Does anyone know where I can find out how to set up Mozilla to use mutt as its mailto: handler? Google couldn't tell me anything useful.
Click on Setting, Configure Konqueror - and on the window click on "Konqueror Browser" -> Javascript - now look below.. Yup - JavaScript web popup policy...
GUI - what makes things much easier then you think..
I hope some day that Mozilla will have some "User Agent" menu to bypass some web sites Insisting Explorer or nothing - Don't know why Mozilla people are not adding this. (and no - when a big web side web-admin gets a request to support Mozilla - it's being ignored almost always
)
nah, no sig... move on..
Any time that you rewrite 100% of the product, you can expect the new version to be slower, more infested with bugs, and just "feel" worse than the older version which has been tended for many years.
I disagree, sure there'll be more bugs (more new code), but in fact a complete rewrite should in the end be faster and cleaner. If they somehow made the old Navigator code compliant with the standards, it would be slow nasty spagetti code. A rewrite lets you untange that mess. If it feels worse, maybe you need a different chrome?
The first time I saw the "Deeply Nested Tables" demo, I was shocked! Mozilla is MUCH faster than 4.6 laying out tables alone.
good god, any normal software in development this long would be at 5.0 by now. but this is open source garbage.
Before making judgements on the speed issue, let's just analyze what advanatage Mozilla has over Netscape 4.
1. Incremental reflow - Netscape 4 must know the dimension of every HTML element before it can put that element on your screen. Mozilla, like any modern browser, will shift images and tables around as they are being downloaded. This of course adds complication to the layout engine. Netscape 4 may finish loading the entire page faster, but at least I get to see the page in Mozilla first.
2. Hovering - this is by far the most widely used feature in CSS. To do this properly, the browser might need to re-layout and re-draw the web page whenever you move your mouse over an HTML element. Is Netscape 4 capable of re-drawing the page on the fly? No!
3. DOM & CSS - doing these right is not an easy task, and Mozilla has by far the best support for these features. It does take a performance hit resolving styles and construct DOM trees, however. Netscape 4 does an halff-a$$ job on this, is there any reason that it shouldn't be faster?
My own experience tells me that Mozilla is way faster than Netscape 4 as well as being more capable at rendering pages. Even if there's a performance penalty, I don't consider it an disadvantage.
Mabye I'm dreaming but it seems to me that rendering pages is *extremely FAST*. It's only creating windows opening dialogas etc that is SLOW. The main hitch I see now is on new window creation (which takes a long time to do). For example on a test page that uses javascript to open and close 75 windows one at a time (see the super simple code at this URL and either copy and make you own test or click on the link on that page):
http://206.191.52.79/MozTester/pagebanger.html
on a P233 running Linux (you likely want to try this on a faster machin it's the relative comparisons that are interesting).
* Netscape 4.7.* takes about a minute
* Opera takes about 15 seconds
* Mozilla takes about 5 minutes !! (actually I stopped timing it's so slow)
* KFM/Konqueror ?? (old version doesn't work try it with KDE 2.0)
* Galeon ??? (not timed recently - the sort of more "native" GTK GUI might be faster??)
* Embedded Moz etc.
* Other browsers??
On MS Windows the Mozilla GUI is likely faster (haven't tested) and IE of course is very fast (does the above in ~ 15-20 seconds)
Some of the slowness on a test page like the one above is due to the server so I encourage you to create your own javascript tests that just open and close blank windows or something
If the main slowness in Mozilla comes in drawing its own GUI this seems like a GOOD thing since opitimzing on that part of the beast hasn't even really started in earnest. It makes sense to me that the GUI would be the last thing to be sped up since rendering speed and correctness are the first job.
Wow look at that well-formed argument with all the clear examples of how Mozilla is "not even remotely usable" -- GJ!
Just so that everyone knows - it appears that the CVS variant of Galeon works fine with Mozilla 0.9.4.
I was so thrilled at 0.9.3 - it was sooo much better than any build I'd seen before. I got all psyched up to start figuring out what I could now do with this application in my company. Today, I installed 0.9.4. What a fuckin' crock of crap it is. Page rendering takes nearly a minute. This is Windows 98, I haven't checked if it's bad on other Windows, and Linux. However, my temporary excitement has gone. Maybe some day this project will turn out something worth working with. In the meantime, though I refuse to install it on my kids game machine, my dad installed ie6. I think the bar has been raised far beyond the capabilities of the mozilla development team.
And don't forget one thing: even though most people complain about the startup speed, it's just because that's what they can measure. A delay of 2 or 3 seconds every time you "Open in new window" or try to access a menu is MUCH WORSE in terms of performance perception than a startup time of 20 or 30 secs. And the reason is simple: startup is a one-timer.
It's probably realplayer. I keep Mozilla open all the time, and am always surfing with 6+ windows open at a time. no problems here. but I also use basically no plugins, no flash, no realplayer, etc. If I want to watch streaming video I keep it in a seperate program, so it doesn't crash my browsers when those buggy things go down.
I've been using Mozilla as by default browser since v0.9 and it keepes getting better with each release.
Oh yea, my system specs:
1.4 ghz Athlon (266mhz fsb)
256megs DDR RAM
AsusA7M 266DDR Motherboard
Twin 75gig IBM Deskstars in ATA R.A.I.D. Level 0 (done with a Promise FastTrack TX2 PCI card)
Windows 2000
:)
I can't help it! I'm a speed addict!
We're going to make information free Mr. Anderson, whether you like it, or not.
but that would be braindead.. read
the comment above for the correct (w3c compliant!) answer
What time is it/will be over there? Check with my iPhone app!
Hehe ... with such a powerful machine you should do yourself a favour and GET MORE RAM!! (256megs?? My *Mom* has 256 Megs and she uses her computer for "electronic mail" and "recipes").
:-P
Also do yourself a favour and install FreeBSD
Mozilla is becoming faster, more reliable and overall plain better with every new release. It's good to see the project finally on its way to becoming the best browser around and if you ask me, it already is. Combined with a lightweight interface like Galeon, it gets even better.
This is very satisfying and demonstrates the power of open source. Mozilla was started when, 1997? 1998? Considering that backed-by-MS-millions IE started development in '94, that's quite an achievement.
Who says they're using base 10? After 0.9.9, they could simply go to 0.9.A =)
hbz
to e-mail, remove '.dot.' from the address
I'm going up to 512megs in a couple of days. And up to a gig in a week or two. hehe....
We're going to make information free Mr. Anderson, whether you like it, or not.
Actually, I would install a few other OS's (linux, FreeBSD, BeOS, WinXP (just to see what its like)) but I can't figure out how to partition my raid array without losing all my data. Partition Magic only goes up to 80gigs and my array is basically a 143gig C drive. A shame really.... Hey, if anyone knows how to partition a 143gig drive without loosing all the data. Let me know.
We're going to make information free Mr. Anderson, whether you like it, or not.
That's not the way it's working for me on Win98SE. Did you install over the last version of Mozilla? Did you install to a fresh directory? This is probably an installation problem... not that it's excusable (after all, Your Average User would be lost if this happened to them), but it is explainable. If you can find out what it was, I'm sure the Mozilla team would love to know.
Right, which means we have to keep checking the access_log to figure out what interesting tricks people are using these days.
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
There was an article here on /. and people were talking about popup windows, and I said that it would be nice to be able to disable window.open on a per site basis. I wonder how they implemented this. If it was a global thing for all sites or per site. But this is cook.
Only 'flamers' flame!
we have to keep checking the access_log to figure out what interesting tricks people are using these days
Which is easy to do. All you have to do to find new tricks is extract the User-Agent field | sort | uniq, and "MSIE 666, really Mozilla" will out like a sore thumb in any "which IE versions are people using?" query.
-- Damian Yerrick, running nightly Mozilla builds until a milestone is released that includes the trunk fix to bug 30841Will I retire or break 10K?
What libc version are you running? Sometimes mozilla(among many other programs) seems to have problems with glibc 2.2.
You might want to try building it yourself.
Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
What it *does* do is allow you to specify sites or pathnames from the root of any site that simply don't load. If it's an image, you get a broken image thingie. If it's a page, junkbuster tells you that the page is blocked.
It can also acti in a similar manner with cookies.
But it never, ever, changes things, and has no universal settings. They explicitly refuse to offer those (though they do tell you how to find sites where you can see what others have done).
hawk