Mozilla 0.9.5

agotneja writes: "Check out mozilla.org for details :) Another fine (hopefully!) release." For whatever reason, 1.0 still seems really far off.

Comments

When will Mozilla Innovate?

[HanzoSan]

I want to see the Mozilla team create NEW features, I tried to give some ideas, such as username and password autocomplete, another thought would be a shielded password and username autocomplete which uses stars to hide both the username and password.

This way someone looking at your keyboard cant look at your hands and see your password because its set to autocomplete.

Re:When will Mozilla Innovate?

[tim_maroney]

SSH (yes, it was originally open source)

For geeks only. Command lines aren't innovative -- they're reactionary,

Original httpd (became Apache)

Just the server-side component of the web browser, which I already acknowledged as an open source innovation. I have to say, though, as a protocol engineer, I don't see what's so special about HTTP. It's another super-simple "text commands on TCP" protocol, very much like FTP. Where's the innovation in hhtpd?

PGP

For geeks only. Like most open source software, the user interface puts it out of reach of most people. And again, where exactly is the innovation? The encryption is textbook stuff.

Perl

One of the most godawful programming languages ever invented, highly derivative from the UNIX shell, and for geeks only. Where's the innovation?

Python

Yet Another New Programming Language. Is everything new an innovation now? What does Python contribute?

BSD Unix

Not even slightly open source for the first eleven years of its development -- required an expensive UNIX source code license. Also, not an innovation -- just a clone of Bell Labs UNIX.

All of the software that formed the foundation of the Internet

Really? The earliest Internet software I saw was part of the closed-source UNIX operating system. Open source reference implementations from places like MIT and Dartmouth came some years later as clones of the proprietary stuff. I've just gone over a bunch of Internet history pages and I do not see any description anywhere about people sharing software with each other -- the "openness" they're talking about was mostly in the form of RFC sharing, not software sharing. Given that these were the days of radically incompatible operating systems and software on punch cards, I'm not sure how an "open source" model of source code sharing would even have been possible. But if you can provide specific links showing that the software, as opposed to the protocol documentation, was freely available and widely shared, I'll gladly look at it.

The case of Web browsers is clear: the (open source) Mosaic was a huge innovation, and proved the Web was suitable for end users. That led to the creation of Netscape, who capitalized on that innovation and took it mainstream.

No, it was geek-only software when it was Mosaic. Netscape made it suitable for the average end user at the same time they closed the source. They did this because they wanted to make money from a broad market, not out of the goodness of their hearts. The web browser was something of an innovation, even though it derives heavily from SGML and FTP, but it was not an innovation that made a difference in the world until it went commercial.

Many of the innovations that comprise your computing experience today originated from university researchers who had no interest in profiting from those innovations.

Not really true when it comes to end-user-facing software. Some of it did come out of research, but it was not open-source research. The GUI, the spreadsheet, the WYSIWYG word processor -- none of these killer apps came from the open source world. On the back end, language compilers were traditionally closed source, as were operating systems. You haven't demonstrated that the Internet was founded on open source, but if so, it's the only major layer of "my computing experience today" that was.

Tim

freshmeat.net

[peterprior]

Anyone else getting freshmeat.net coming up all wacky?

Its mostly ok, but the top horizontal bars are like 10 pixels thick instead of 1 :/

Its not faster than MOziilla, its not more stable

[HanzoSan]

Konq is good, but MOzilla is faster, more powerful and more stable.

Plus Konq is just or linux and KDE at that.

Re:Its not faster than MOziilla, its not more stab

[HanzoSan]

Ok, Lets see your statistics, show me the time in seconds it takes mozilla to render a page not downloaded from the net but from your harddrive.

Get some sample HTML files and so on, and see which one renders fastest, I'll bet money on Mozilla.

Stability, Konq has crashed, Mozilla has NEVER crashed in Linux or Windows ever since version 0.9.3

Put your money with your mouth is, show some statistics.

Konq is for KDE, KDE is for Unix, usually Linux.

Konq faster at loading pages than Mozilla? prove it,
Faster at loading up in KDE? of course, its built into KDE, but its not faster at actually browsing the web.

Re:Because upgrading IE often hoses your machine.

[Craig Davison]

IE is not integrated into the kernel. It's part of the shell. There's still a kernel API down a few levels that knows nothing about web pages, or My Computer, Network Neighbourhood and other such shell objects for that matter.

I would argue: browser updates always (shell and UI DLLs are updated by browser upgrades), just don't launch IE or OE for your browsing/email.

> The problem is that you need a basic background in computer science to understand what I just said.

Ignorant, pompous dick... What's your problem? Low UID gone to your head?

Re:Q: Why should an IE user switch?

[NDPTAL85]

No...its preachy fucks like you who we would all be better off without.

So YOU leave.