Slashdot Mirror
Mozilla 0.9.7 Released!
Chezypewf writes: "The newest release from the Mozilla Dev team is out. This milestone features basic S/MIME support, favicon support and the Document Inspector, a tool to inspect and edit the live DOM of any web document or XUL application. You can grab it here: http://www.mozilla.org/releases "
Shoot, there is still not support for MSN's "Secure Password authentication". One day, one day.
I really hate Dan Patrick.
If it's ever going to topple MSIE, they need to slow their development rate. The fact that Microsoft goes from IE4->IE5->IE6 confuses enough newbie users, going from 0.0093->0.0094->0.00103 every 2 weeks is beyond most people.
.1
Great browser, ridiculously fast development rate. Slow it down guys, release every
My two cents.
- Dave Brennins
http://www.davebrenninslaw.org
dave@davebrenninslaw.org
ARGH! How many more MB of browsers am I going to need to download this week?
Are they ever going to freeze Mozilla and just fix bugs?
with something which changes so much, downloading binaries makes a lot more sense than building from source each time. would sure help in the beta-testing and bug-fix process. additionally, the binary tarballs are smaller than the source distros, so that saves on some internet traffic.
wonder if anyone in the freebsd community would do this soon for 0.9.7 ?
Ignore the "p2p is theft" trolls, they're just uninformed
--Asa
Ooh Wow, another Microsoft indentured servant!
It's obvious you haven't used Mozilla recently (like, the last three releases). Fantastic standards-compliant browser with excellent USER-FRIENDLY - as opposed to ADVERTISER-FRIENDLY - customization and privacy options.
And on my system, using Mozilla's quick start option, it loads FASTER than IE.
I'd love to chat, but I'm gonna rush off to get the new release!
pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
wow. now i can finally create one and avoid shtuff like /favicon.ico HTTP/1.0" 404 272
198.236.22.34 - - [21/Dec/2001:10:27:47 -0800] "GET
in my http logs, without feeling bad for catering only to windows ie users.
fav icons...man... i can't wait until we have magical talking paperclips, too!
But the 0.9 releases of Moz have shaped up very impressively; add the 1.0 Galeon release and it's almost flawless. Useful window management (remember, where the computer is used to help you manage your windows) with multiple desktops and Galeon's fullscreen mode make an excellent browsing platform indeed.
Pushin' 'n dealin', shovin' 'n stealin'
I just started using Mozilla with 9.5 and from the last ten minutes of playing with 9.7 I've seen a few good fixes. it no longer choked on a javascript open window link that made 9.6 hang instead it gives a nice error message. I can now get rid of the side bar that I don't use too.
If the improvments and bug fixes keep coming 1.0 will rock
-Mike
I don't know, I just kinda woke up a-holdin' it.
I like the way you talk!
> KARMA WHORE!
/. readers).
Um, that's my text. I'm the co-author of the release notes and the originator of the what's new section. I would think that I'm allowed to post that here and save a bit of load on our releases page (not to mention the added convenience for
--Asa
I like the way you talk too!
I know, it's beena round, but I'm happy to have this feature:
http://www.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla0.9.7/#new
Mozilla has a new advanced preference panel for fine-grained JavaScript control. For instance, you can disallow pop up and pop-under windows without turning off JavaScript altogether.
I'd still like to have site-by-site preferences wihtout having to edit the prefs.js file, but, what can you do? (i know... i know... write the damn code yourself...)
--You will rephrase your request for me to go to hell. Goto statements are not acceptable programming constructs
FOR THE RECORD:
1. i use mozilla
2. i like mozilla (mostly more than exploder 6)
3. i hope mozilla succeeds past ALL our wildest expectations
BUT.
the news we NEED to hear isn't about release candidates
THE NEWS WE ALL NEED TO HEAR ABOUT MOZILLA IS THAT AOL AND/OR SUN AND/OR IBM AND/OR EARTHLINK AND/OR the EU AND/OR CHINA or ???????
is going to adopt mozilla as its mandatory standard, at the expense of other browsers...
'cause other than that we're all a bunch of ICU nurses/doctors playing a Dead Pool bet
sorry!
REALITY BITES!
......
Ten quid, she's so easy to blind. And not a word is spoken...
Great, so it looks like there's still time to take that Quake 2 source and roll that into Mozilla to make a new feature that Microsoft will never touch. QuakeTML. All we need is a nice markup language for blood splatters and trash talk...
My own pointless vanity vintage computing page
That there sometimes is, or isn't, a release for FreeBSD is confusing.
/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-4-stable/www.
If you see the time-scale it came in the ports-collection for the 0.9.6 release:
ftp.mozilla.org: Nov 21 01:10 mozilla-source-0.9.6.tar.bz2
In the ports-collection: Revision 1.74 / [...], Wed Nov 21 16:27:41 2001 UTC (4 weeks, 2 days ago) by sobomax: Update to 0.9.6. [...]
That's the same day!
Please wait a couple of days and get it from your own ports-collection or download it in binary format from ftp.freebsd.org (or your local mirror) in
About favicon.ico, I've written a small manual how to make them in a unix-environment
bash$
Copy the files from your "plugins" subdirectory for Netscape to the "plugins" subdirectory for Mozilla. They will work. I've been running Quicktime (under Windows) and Flash with no problems.
Well, I did have one problem ... where I forgot to copy the Quicktime 5 plugin over the Quicktime 4 plugin, and it would crash when the page was unloaded. That was fixed by getting the plugin version to match the DLLs it was linked against. Doh!
What an outstanding browser, regardless of the OS you run it on!
Mozilla is good stuff... Keep up the great work.
Thanks to all at Mozilla, Asa, Brendan, Seth, Steve, Dave, Boris, Navin, Brian, Peter, Mike, Simon, timeless... Etcetera. We know who you are. We can see the ruthless triage and the late nights, the cross platform blues. X font handling. Sorry for doubting you in the past guys. Maybe ultracapitalism, anarchy and Internet Explorer will not rule after all. And the beast shall multiply a thousandforth, eh? And the followers of Mammon shall tremble? I better find a new job
Pushin' 'n dealin', shovin' 'n stealin'
OMG! Finally! Thankyou mozilla devs for getting this in, it is the one final thing that means I can get rid of crappy ol' netscape 4.x! Those of us stuck with email that is required to be encrypted (company mail etc) and who are linux users can now leave the realm of netscape 4.x!
.9.7.1 or nightly builds.
The UI is still very incomplete. It didn't seem to want to let me sign or encrypt email (which sucks) but I could read it, view my certs, and do other basic operations, which is all I need. The encrypting of mail is of course still needed, but I'm going to guess that the ui glitches (the menu item not recognizing that I'd selected "always encrypt") are going to be resolved in
Again, great job mozilla! Thank you from this linux + s/mime user!
(and no, the boss wouldn't let us just use pgp/gpg....)
Not necessarily; I lurked and read for at least a year before signing up...then let my account slip for another 6 months before actually using it.
I don't believe the UIDs mean a whole f*k of a lot.
I agree, look at me!
The more you know, the less you understand.
Can you guess which one stops pop-ups?
Would a usability expert know what half these prefs mean?
Good job on the prefs, Moz-team, but please, hire Jakob Nielsen before 1.0 ships.
I check the mozillazine.org and the mozilla site from time to time, and noticed today they've released another milestone just in time, for the first time! .9.4 adn .9.5 were intended to be so, in order to be used for netscape 6.x products, and the schedule itself was changed. See freeze & branch date for 0.9.4 & 0.9.5, and you'll believe me again.
If you take a look at the mozilla development roadmap, you'll believe me. Don't blame me for another exact release you see (0.9.5), 'cause
Anyway, the mozilla dev team have made a great work in a great manner, for many this could be a cool gift for the season. Thank you, and have a nice vacation everybody.
Top Nine Reasons to Quit Slashdot.org
#9. Slashdot is a plot by Microsoft to destroy the productivity of Linux users.
I have friends who were once tremendously productive programmers, until they started reading Slashdot. Then, the endless stream of links, updated a dozen times a day no less (so you don't go once a day to get your fix; instead, you keep a window open and hit reload every twenty minutes or so), steadily seduced them, until they eventually became babbling idiots, dribbling saliva from the corners of their mouths, ranting on the forums about the relative merits of Karma Whores and Anonymous Cowards. Can there be any doubt that this website is anything other than a nefarious ploy to destroy Linux by undermining the productivity of its developers? And is there any organization that would like to destroy Linux more than Microsoft? (Well, maybe the Santa Cruz Operation...) Is it any coincidence that just as the Feds were working out Microsoft's sentence, Microsoft sued Slashdot, resulting in a firestorm of geek ire that totally overshadowed the monopoly ruling?
#8. Screaming 14-year-old boys attempting to prove to each other that they are more 3133t than j00.
Need I say more?
#7. Technical opinions refereed by popular vote means lousy technical opinions.
Before the Internet, a certain breed of deconstructionists had a lot of fun telling everybody that "privileging of dominant paradigms" was wrecking the world. The Internet has taught us that privileging certain views is absolutely crucial to avoid drowning in the ravings of idiots. On Slashdot, many articles discuss technical issues---but comments are refereed by popular vote, and even though the populace of Slashdot readers knows somewhat more than your average set of people off the street, they still tend to promote (as in "moderate up") a lot of technical nonsense. Reading Slashdot can therefore often be worse than useless, especially to young and budding programmers: it can give you exactly the wrong idea about the technical issues it raises.
The pre-Internet publishing world had magazines, newspapers, and journals with editors. Respectable publications hired qualified editors. Those qualified editors were educated enough to make intelligent decisions about the quality of content. The Slashdot model removes the editors and substitutes popular vote, and the result (unfortunately) is that the quality level becomes incredibly inconsistent. It was an interesting experiment; it didn't work, not for Slashdot (though it might work in some other population of users). Too bad. Now, it's time to quit.
#6. Community myth that Linux is technically superior to any other operating system in the known universe.
People who do operating systems research, of course, think this is a joke. Dissent from this view in Slashdot, however, and you'd better be wearing your asbestos fatigues.
#5. Butt-ugly visual design.
Of course, this one's a matter of taste. However, in my analysis, the visual elements of the Slashdot site are basically hopelessly confused and wrong. From the cryptic links in the left margin, to the drop-shadowed graphics (hello, digital design cliche circa 1994?), to the offensively lousy color scheme (let's use circuit board green, because it's "News for Nerds", right?) I can't find much to like about the design of Slashdot.
#4. Gullible editorial staff continues to post links to any and all articles that vaguely criticize Linux in any way.
Blowhards (like the flock of irresponsible columnists over at the Windows-boosterism rag InfoWorld) have had tons of fun taking advantage of this tendency to drive hits to their site. On any given day, Slashdot readers are treated to another link to another column by another self-proclaimed pundit declaring that Linux is (pick one) unreliable, not scalable, not user-friendly, doomed, piracy-inducing, foul-smelling, or un-American. And irony was that the editors of Slashdot are falling right into the pundits' trap: inciting the Slashdot community is the one surefire way to drive up your hit count and hence your revenue from ad banners. Did the Slashdot editors ever wise up? Not that I ever saw. Given how tiresome the endless pro-Linux jihad had become by the time I quit, I have very little desire to go back and find out whether that's changed.
#3. Gullible editorial staff continues to post links to bogus pseudoscience articles by crackpots.
At the time I quit, the editors were posting links to theories of alternate consciousness, unified theories of the universe made up by people in their garages, and the like at a rate of two or three a week. And the number was only increasing. If I want to read articles that promote totally bogus pseudoscience, I'll open up the Village Voice. We don't need another webzine filling that role.
#2. Editorial/comment system pretends to be democratic but in reality most content remains firmly in the iron clasp of the editors.
The above problems with editorial could be solved if stories could be moderated as well as comments, or if editors paid attention to negative feedback about the posting of certain articles. However, the editorial staff, while pretending to be ideology-free selectors of any "interesting" content, in fact exert tremendous power over the content of the site, because they are the only ones who can select top-level links. They have furthermore demonstrated, for all the reasons above, that they cannot use this power wisely.
In fact, if you think about it, the links on Slashdot are easily an order of magnitude less interesting, on average, than those of Suck, Hotwired, or FEED---all of which are run by smart editors with good taste (and two of which are dead---thus proving that only the good die young). If you've read any of these webzines, you'll probably agree. Rob and Hemos simply don't compare, as editors, to Stephen Johnson or Joey Anuff.
So, really, it's time to ask yourself: why should I read Slashdot? Because it targets my demographic? That's a silly reason. So why not quit today?
#1. Two words: Jon Katz.
Every community has its resident gasbag. The difference between Slashdot and other communities is that they have the means to kick their village idiot off his soapbox, but they lack the will. If Jon Katz is not the single worst writer for any webzine, anywhere on the planet, alive today, then I am a penguin. His writing manages to be endlessly meandering and verbose, and simultaneously utterly content-free.
Notice, by the way, that I have not said a word about his technical acumen. It's not necessary to. Katz (who, like all opportunists, likes to paint himself as an innocent victim whenever he's criticized) makes a big deal about how there are "technical snobs" in the Linux user population who blast him for not being a technical genius. To tell the truth, Katz's inability to install even recent Linux distributions (which are arguably as easy to install as MacOS or Windows) on a run-of-the-mill x86 PC does testify to his general cluelessness. However, Katz is not a programmer or sysadmin; he's a writer. He must stand or fall based on the quality of his writing. And his writing is totally the pits. He would never have gotten published anywhere but Slashdot; even WIRED, cheerleaders of all things "digital" and "decentralized", finally got tired of his babbling and let him go. The cheesiest, most blatantly pandering "Hookers Who Read Proust" article on Salon.com displays more literary skill than the finest Katz screed ever to see the light of day.
To make things worse, Katz is also a shameless opportunist who regularly uses Slashdot to promote his books. And the Slashdot admins go right along with it. You can't criticize someone for their taste in friends, but you can criticize them for continuing in a relentless and blind nepotism that destroys the quality of the site.
No single factor wase more pivotal in driving me away from Slashdot than Jon Katz. Even when I registered for an account and filtered Katz out, still he made it into news items not labeled Jon Katz---presumably to promote sales of his book. What other webzine displays such a blatant disrespect for its readers?
But then again, Katz's pandering, one-note "Ich bin ein Geek" spiel may be exactly what the Slashdot audience deserves.
Simply put, it's time to quit Slashdot, once and for all.
The Slashdot Effect: A new for
Really weird you should say that...I use IE only on NT; which I'm rarely even in. I use mozilla anywhere else and can't think of a single page I've come across that it won't load in.
:):)
Hell; my gf even did her online-banking in mozilla; now that is sweet.
I think IE's security flaws speak for themselves in this argument. Would you rather live in a house under renovation, with a few scaffolds and paint cans lying around, but otherwise locked up tighter than a bank vault, or in a beautiful finished mansion with no locks on the door and a giant neon sign outside that says "FREE STUFF HERE, PLEASE STEAL MY STEREO!"
I rest my case.
Only two more releases before they... umm... add another digit of precision to the version number. :)
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
Actually, Mozilla is one of the more web standards compliant browser out there. I can write an HTML 4.01 Strict web page that will NOT render on MSIE (IE 5.5SP2, at least).
If I can't look at a site in Mozilla or another popular W3C standards compliant browser, I quickly lose interest in what that site has to offer.
Mozilla on Mac OS X works great. Not as optimized as IE 5 is though. Soon hopefully......
Mozilla on OS 9.1 doesn't seem to work at all for me. About 2 weeks ago the nightly builds stopped working for my Mac....
I still think the thing that sells me on this browser is the intergration of email/browser. I can do without the composer part. In fact, I don't think I've ever run it in the Mozilla releases.
Now, to try getting Mozilla to work on my FreeBSD machine.......
It's either on the beat or off the beat, it's that easy.
I moderate therefore I rule!
--
Funny.
*Note, im talking about windows.
Ive been using mozilla for awhile now, and Im very very impressed with how it just gets better. It renders quicker the IE6 which is impressive, and the Tab feature (people call an Opera ripoff) is great. You can install it into a directory with an older version of mozilla, it doesnt create a new secure directory. That salt directory it made was rather annoying.
Using it as a daily browser for both work and home, I do have a few problems with it. Some javascripts dont work with internal business sites. (LiveLink and Eroom which we use for documents and communications) No spell checker yet. (But im told its coming.)
And at home, I cant use my online banking with it, but everything else seems to work fine.
Newsgroups reader seems to be work in progress, the nightly builds seem to have a few bugs. But I am downloading the daily builds and it could be me.
BTW, I could swear the 0.9.7 directory was on ftp.mozilla.org for the last couple days.
-
I'm too shy to express my sexual needs except over the phone to people I don't know. - Garry Shandling
Roadmap information:
http://www.mozilla.org/roadmap/mozilla-1.0.html
http://www.mozilla.org/roadmap.html
On the Mozilla roadmap, it shows Mozilla 1.0 following the same start, freeze, release timeline as the rest of the builds. I personally feel it should be started, frozen for twice as long as usual with drivers@mozilla.org being the only ones who can approve changes, then submitted to longer-than-normal testing period.
I would also like to see better documentation, and improved features. I think this release stands for Mozilla, and it should be something Mozilla.org should be proud of. We shouldn't rush into it. I would be perfectly happy if it wasn't released until the end of summer, 2002.
What do you want to see in Mozilla 1.0? Do you agree it should follow an extended schedule compared to most milestones? What features would you like to see improved or added?
You can also talk on newsgroups like netscape.public.mozilla.general
Let's make Mozilla 1.0 fantastic!
Volunteer Mozilla developer, RPI Student.
Um, since when did IE beat Mozilla here? IE doesn't even support <link>!
marotti.com
The mansion. I live in a good neighborhood.
to see in Mozilla is the ability to have multiple windows open, some of which always load graphics, some of which never load graphics. Of course this should be accomplished via a toggle button like in Opera not options in the preferences and hitting the image button every time I follow a link. It would be good if there were similar buttons for Java/script/cookies as well.
He who defends everything, defends nothing. -- Fredrick The Great
I mean, jeez, the scrollbars don't even work right in the preferences dialog box.
So Mozilla is open source. So what? Who cares?
Well, I care. And I think your priorities are pretty lame.
As for "telling it like it is" - you're simply telling it as you see it. That's cool I guess. I just think standards compliance, openness, and privacy controls are more important than whether or not the Mozilla team has fixed the preferences scrollbar yet.
And cross-platform is pretty freakin cool too.
To each his own.
pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
I just wanted to weigh in my thanks. I know it's reduntant and all, but I know the moz team reads the site (hi Asa!) and I just wanted to say thanks for the great browser. I use it in conjunction with Konqueror at home, and it's my browser of choice on my windows partition and at work. I've been amazed at how much it's progressed, and now my most waited for feature (javascript prefs panel) is in! Thanks you guys. I'm rooting for you!
"I may not have morals, but I have standards."
I'm on linux and I had Mozilla 0.94 installed. I at least expected the Mozilla installer to keep my bookmarks but this was unfortunatelly not true :-(
This sounds to me like a serious bug. When upgrading I don't want my bookmarks to be removed. All other settings (like subscribed newsgroups, proxy settings, mail folders, and even the history) are preserved. But not the bookmarks!
Greetings,
Project Manager of Crystal Space (http://www.crystalspace3d.org). Support CS at http://tinyurl.com/cb3x4
o . . _.-_ .,,,' ._-_ ^^; .,}
o __.'..o."-.
o . . .
o. .
o _-\" . `""
o.
Can I just ask everyone to remember that Mozilla is pre-release software. Use it if you wish to, but *PLEASE* don't have a go at web developers if a site doesn't work - it still has many bugs, and some sites fail in it.
And before someone has a go at me for clearly not using standard code, I use XHTML 1.1 and CSS for layout. Some things still go wrong.
I'd also like to ask Mozilla to make it clearer on their site that it is pre-release - you can go to mozilla.org and download a release without ever seeing a clear message that says so.
The Microsoft programmers behind IE are a talented bunch.
Sure. That's probably why, in the about box, IE still mentions its roots as being something really old. Hmm, starting it under wine. Yes, some quotes: "Based on NCSA Mosaic(TM); was developed at the National Center for Supercomputing Applications at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Distributed under a licensing agreement with Spyglass, Inc.
Also the JPEG group, Hummingbird, and Intel code.
Go to www.kazaa.com. It needs an IE user string to get in. Also try www.hotmail.com, you need IE user string to get in.
This is the first version that I've tried with working drop lists. Until now, they had they same bug that the menus used to have: after clicking on them, they disappeared before the mouse got over the drop down part. I dunno if it was to do with my X-Mouse policy (TweakUI), but it made Mozilla extremely annoying. Thank you.
I think that the last of the known xmouse bugs was recently fixed by dean tessman. Glad it's working for you.
--Asa
Well, if they're nearly as talented as those behind Windows XP, then you my friend are screwed!
kazaa.com has lame browser sniffing:
//redirect for people with a less than
//version 4 browser
var NS4 = (document.layers);
var IE4 = (document.all);
var ver4 = (NS4 || IE4);
if(!ver4)
location.href= "notsupported.htm";
and hotmail.com works just fine for me on mac, windows and linux mozilla 0.9.7 builds.
--Asa
Has there ever been any talk of support for multi-part binaries in the news client? All self-respecting dedicated news clients have this feature.
And from the "unsupported" page:
meta NAME="GENERATOR" Content="Microsoft Visual Studio 6.0"
pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
Given that KazAa (wtf ever the capitalization is on that one) embeds spyware in w/ their program; I don't think I'm missing a whole hell of a lot there.
;)
....
Esp if I'm not using winders in the first place.
I *Do* need to test out musiccity.com out on mozilla, though (assuming I get 0.9.7 for windows)
Honestly, I want the core frozen absolutely solid. Then declare 1.0. While I love all the features that have been put in to the UI, what really needs to happen for 1.0 in my opinion is to stabilize that API so people can start coding around the platform.
The original vision is still critical, and I want to see more projects like the fantastic pubmed. These things are going to be what really kicks mozilla in to high gear. I really believe that third party stuff like this will make mozilla worth having.
1.0 is all about stability. The browser itself is certainly stable enough to go 1.0. You can add the UI enhancements for 1.1, but make the core solid so people have the platform. Then we'll start to get the plugins that we so desperately need too.
"I may not have morals, but I have standards."
Hmmm, practically the first thing it says on that page is to give feedback and bug reports. Been there, done that, didn't work. There's a layout bug in Mozilla that was introduced after 0.9.4 and has been in every release (nightly and milestone) that I've tried since then (just verified it's still in 0.9.7).
I was a good little Mozilla user and filed a detailed bug report, including instructions on how to trigger it. After several days, I got a suggestion to try a newer build and the bug was closed. Great. Way to go. I now have sites that validate perfectly at W3's validator (so bad HTML likely ain't to blame) and render perfectly in all other browsers including older versions of Mozilla, but are broken in the newest versions. I gotta hand it to you guys, I was really starting to think I could forget about all the stupid little workarounds I have to do to deal with stupid little layout bugs. So much for that.
What exactly is 'sweet' about on-line banking? The withdrawl fees? Or perhaps the service charges?
Elitist pig.
anyone have java working yet, ANY hack out to get it working in OS_X ?
thanks
I have a problem with Mozilla 9.6 on Windoze, but I'm not sure it's a bug.
;-)
I visit a lot of Cyrillic sites, and the header of the window that is encoded in cyrillic is always shown as a set of question marks. Even worse, when I bookmark such a site, the letters in Bookmarks are not shown as cyrillic but as additional latin symbols (the same way as if a cyrillic page is shown in Western encoding).
Is it Mozilla or just silly me?
Tigers respect lions, elephants and hippos. Maggots respect no one. (C) S. Dovlatov
Hi there. I designed the interface for Mozillas Javascript prefs back in September, and Doron Rosenberg has spent the past couple of months implementing it.
Well, if you have any suggestions, do share them.
None of them do. Thats why there isnt a checkbox labelled do pop-ups. Blocking pop-ups in toto would be pretty useless, because it would stop a large chunk of the Web from working properly.
Think about it. <a href="http://foo.bar/" target="_new">foo</a> is a pop-up, and none of these prefs prevent that from working, because then the link would break completely nothing at all would happen when you clicked on it. <a onclick="javascript:window.open(whatever)">foo& lt;/a> is a pop-up, and none of these checkboxes prevent that from working either, for the same reason. (In both cases it would be nice if you could get the link to open in the same window rather than opening in a new window, but we dont have the back end to allow that yet.)
What one of these checkboxes does let you do is stop windows from opening by themselves based on a timer, or when you navigate to or from a page. Thats the behavior that annoys people the most, since the new window is usually of no interest to them whatsoever. And whats the label for this checkbox? (Drum roll please ) Open windows by themselves.
If you have a better idea of what to label that checkbox, Id be glad to read it theres been a lot of suggestions so far, but theyve all been either too wordy, too obscure, or (as in your case) just plain wrong.
Hah. I wrote to Jakob Nielsen a year or so ago, asking if he was interested, and he didnt bother replying. I guess whining about sucky Web sites (or sucky mobile phones) is like shooting fish in a barrel, compared to coming up with Javascript prefs your mother would understand.
-- mpt
Current stats: 2 successful Slashdot submissions, 2 Slashdot comments.
> The mansion. I live in a good neighborhood.
:)
Until some robber happens to cruise through your neighborhood and sees your nice house and walks in the door
As Jack Handy once said: "I can envision a world entirely at peace. And I can see us invading that world, cause they'd never expect it!"
Except for downloading attachments. This is a big one IMO since it appears to be a genuine cookie handling bug and not some quirk of hotmail.
Bug 105917. Target fix release, 0.9.9
"Mozilla" is the codename for Sweden.
Does any one else have trouble with mozilla and hotmail?
It used to work when first installed. On windows the send button doesn't work, and on Linux the signin button doesn't work anymore, so I have to resort to Netscape.
this!
Isn't /etc/passwd supposed to be masked 0660 ? On mine it is masked 0654 ! Shit that doesn't look good to me!
imagine that. I'd sure hate to be forced to call HAZMAT.
Go check www.mozilla.com.
Asa is one of the main developers, you dipshit.
The scrollbar in the messagelist window is missing for me.
Anyone else seeing (I mean not seeing) this?
Snapshot
Other than that, its a vastly improved release.
kudos to mozteam.
This site Chess Line totally screws up now in the newest mozilla
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
I have been trying to use mozilla since milestone .17. It always has one main huge problem and one gripe. No image load toolbar button like netscape (minor gripe) and most inportantly it confuses webpages.
Seriously, it has done this since forever and I have tested it on multiple redhat builds (every 7.x including betas).
I can load one page and then while it is loading choose another and the url becomes mixed between the two. And then neither will work right. Seriously its a mess. I have tried submiting it but no one cares. Text book example of open source devel issues (and I like open source).
Please, a dirty hack is what everyone else is using too.
The only one who isnt is opera.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
girls:m l
m l
m l
m l
m l
m l
m l
m l
http://www.ratemypicture.com/profiles/64913.sht
http://www.ratemypicture.com/profiles/64826.sht
http://www.ratemypicture.com/profiles/46433.sht
http://www.ratemypicture.com/profiles/78973.sht
http://www.ratemypicture.com/profiles/66317.sht
guys:
http://www.ratemypicture.com/profiles/38652.sht
http://www.ratemypicture.com/profiles/66256.sht
http://www.ratemypicture.com/profiles/43530.sht
Do you have a point? Who cares what they made the page with!? "They suck!" "Yeah, yeah! Look, I checked and they used Visual Studio to make it! Losers!" You know, people use whatever works for them..
Try k-melon. It uses Gecko, but doesn't have the bloat of Mozilla. And it's *fast* :) All in all a good bet.
I've been using nightly builds and home cvs builds of Mozilla on Linux for some time now. It's support for CSS and the W3C box model leads a great deal of people into believing that Mozilla has many bugs because IE5/6 renders there pages fine. They don't realise it's IE5/6 rendering it wrong because their code doesn't do what they mean it to do...
If there is one thing I'd like to see improved in the next release of IE it's CSS selector support. CSS Selectors level 3 is basically finished, Mozilla supports most level 2 selectors, and yet IE6 trails with very limited support. Yes, you can select an element that is within another element (descendant selectors) but IE6 lacks support for a huge array of other selectors such as child, sibling and selectors based on attribute value(s).
This selectors point may seem very trivial to web authors used to writing for IE because they merely give an element a class and write a new rule for it. But that bloats the HTML/XML significantly, and can give the programmer a headache, not forgetting the problems of handling inheritance propeties.
With CSS2 selectors, I can say, td[class ~= "body"] > p:first-child { font-weight: bolder; } and have the first paragraph child of a table cell who's class attribute contains a value "body" go bolder. I can't do that in IE6 as effectively.
C'mon Microsoft, you helped create the selectors standard, now let's see you implement it!
Just like JAVa is slower than C.
Try using a native interface and Mozilla suddenly is fast. Try kmeleon or galeon
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
On my redhat 7.2 system with KDE 2.2.2, mozilla (the stock version) takes a full 18 seconds to start, whereas konqueror takes 3 seconds.
I am a Mozilla developer, but I must give credit where credit is due. IE is a nice piece of software from a usability, appearance and stability standpoint. On the other hand, it is lacking in terms of standards compliance and number of features. I don't think its fair to attack the programmers for Microsoft because you don't like the company. They are just doing their job and following orders.
Volunteer Mozilla developer, RPI Student.
Whoever moderated didn't get the joke. He (or she) meant Mozilla "the beast" was released as you can tell by his ASCII art. Whoever moderated this to redundant probably thought he was talking about the software being released.
Volunteer Mozilla developer, RPI Student.
Well unfortunately, until my credit union updated their website, it was only compatible with IE for online banking. Now it works with NS 4.7x + 6.2. It conveniently ignores 6.0 through 6.1 :)
Chris
Asa is no developer - he's a QA, you "dipshit"!
See: http://www.mozilla.org/about.html
Asa is one of the Top Men behind mozilla.org
Mozilla now supports shortcut icons (a.k.a favicons) and custom page icons in bookmarks and in the personal toolbar.
...is working even as I type into 0.9.6.
324006
It really does.
Oddly enough, Mozilla crashed and burned after I installed the 0.9.7 release (win32). It gave me an error when I first tried to launch it that "a device attached to the system is not functioning" and that there was a file missing "linked to export XPCOM.DLL."
So I installed Linux. Haha, no. I first searched the bug database and didn't find anything on either of the error messages. Uninstalled via Control Panel, which gave me another error, something about an uninstall log and the Registry. I said, screw it, and just deleted the c:\program files\mozilla.org folder. Wasn't ready to give up yet, so I went to mozilla.org and downloaded the latest nightly build.
Installed that and Mozilla has been working perfectly. It's fantastic, and my father-in-law, who was very fond of Netscape and has suffered the past year and a half with IE, absolutely loves it.
I'm not sure what the differences between the 0.9.7 release and the nightly build I downloaded are; I'm just happy I got the browser to work -- it's fantastic. If it's of any interest, when I was first downloading Mozilla, I used the 209kb net installer. It said it found CRC errors when it was verifying the files, but redownloaded them. Perhaps my problems stemmed from that... but the nightly is holding its own with IE right now (IMHO).
Once I was able to access wells fargo with mozilla, I quit using ie. There's some minor javascript stuff I have that doesn't work, but everything else is great. I'm just waiting for deployment kits, so I can slam it on the 50 W2K boxes I maintain. Only real gripe at this stage, after having used mozilla from early M releases (M8 I can remember, but I think I was using it before then, too) is lack of a pgp plug-in in the mail client. This has been the case for some time, though, and I'd gladly accept gpg, but I suspect that's not going to show up anytime soon.
The release date for this release is smack on the estimated release:
http://www.mozilla.org/roadmap.html
In the past, mozilla builds were never released on schedule. They seem to be getting it right now.
Anybody else have the problem that hitting the back button while reading /. takes you to the top of the previous page instead of scrolling down to the section where you left off?
For me, the behavoir of the back button (or pop-up) has changed from 0.9.6 to 0.9.7. Previously, Back would take you back one frame in a website using (yuck) frames. Now it takes you back to the previous web site, totally off the one you're on. And I prefer the "back one frame" behavior.
Please tell me if I'm a doofus and there's a setting that controls this. I can't find any such thing. Or is this the "correct" behavior of the Back button? TIA.
sigfault (core dumped)
I tried looking for it in bugzilla but couldn't spot it - I suspect I'm probably searching for the wrong thing though. Maybe it's something wrong with my setup?
Apart from that, it's all coming along rather well and I use it as my main browser and mail client on my primary work machine. The only real thing left from my point of view is to trim down on the memory leakage (eg try switching between IMAP folders with the welcome page visible in the preview pane and watch Moz chew another 30-50k).
And we still don't have a 1.0 release yet.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
It looks like it boots faster though, but that could be my imagenation...
Quazion...
Right on. I think they got stability and correctness done right, because every webpage I've been to renders correctly and I've never seen a single bug for quite a few versions of Mozilla. The performance, well, to be honest, is kind of on the low side. And the memory useage is really on the high side. In my opinion, more speed and less ram-hungry are the only things it really needs.
It's pretty well-known that Netscape 6.0/6.0.1 are based on Mozilla 0.6, Netscape 6.1 on Mozilla 0.9.2, and Netscape 6.2/6.2.1 on Mozilla 0.9.4. There are also some fairly strong rumors that Netscape 6.5 will be based on Mozilla 1.0.
Does anyone know how likely it is that there will be additional releases of Netscape based on a Mozilla release say between 0.9.6 and 0.9.8? Given that Mozilla 1.0 is not likely to be out before April, that will make quite a while between the 6.2 release in October and the 6.5 release. Especially since it takes 1-2 months after a Mozilla release for the corresponding Netscape release to appear. With Netscape 6.2 it's getting to be a pretty useable browser but there are still some annoyances that have been fixed in Mozilla that would be nice to have rolled into Netscape.
Asa? Anything you can talk about?
I mean it's been at 0.9.X forever it seems.
On the internet the world is your neighborhood.
The past few nightlies, and also 0.9.7 now kill all the text in the UI (back, forward, etc buttons) after one run. Oddly enough, running as root here is fine. Could be a number of things. *sigh*. I really wish they'd stop breaking things that once worked.
You can't get www.pogo.com to work proper.
:)
Its either a bug in JAVA, or the interface with JAVA, or EA needs a kick to the head for writing there site in proprietary MS JRE java. The JAVA applets load, but you can't interact with the games. DOH!
There are related bug(s) in bugzilla, and I filed a complaint complete with JAva console output to pogo, we'll see
Long live Mozilla, I just want my dang games to work in linux, so yet oen more reason I don't have to boot back to Windows.
But I just got the 0.9.7 binary for OS X, and it kicks all ass. Finally, a Mozilla that is stable, fast, and featureful enough for daily use has been released... and I now have an outstanding (and [Ff]ree!) browser I can use on this OS.
Bye bye, IE. Bye bye, OmniWeb. Thanks, Mozilla team!
then maybe you can get rid of the commie icons
Mozilla, just like IE, has been a hack/botch fix of older versions to support new standards. What I'd love to see is a lightweight browser, that _only_ does webbrowsing. It doesn't have its own mailer, or nntp client, or even its own GUI library.
More than that, it should be written from the ground up bearing the standards in mind. It should have seperate parser, dom and renderer modules to make io plugins easy etc...
Cheetah (cheetah.sourceforge.net) started well, but the mailing list looks dead now, and they may well have given up. Does anyone else agree, and if so know where we might find one?
A voice spake from the darkness and said unto me "Smile, things could be worse." So I smiled and lo, things bec
I run a PII 266 MHz - can it handle it?
Two versions ago I tried Mozilla and it was unusable on this machine.
IE shows PNG just fine..
Opportunity knocks. Karma hunts you down.
Odd..i checked there again and its not there. All I have is Cache, Proxies, Software Install and Mousewheel
-
ping -f 255.255.255.255 # if only
"This is not required by the HTML 4.0 specification. The specification says that this is an optional feature."
I love the modern chrome, and refuse to touch other good browsers like opera or konqueror because of their lack of uniformity but . . . can ANYONE tell me why Mozilla is so darn SLOW on linux?!? Is the Windoze version any faster as they claim? Yes, I know Moz is still pre 1.0 but don't you think they stop adding stuff and increase its performance? What is causing the lag? It can't be the renderer?
The strangest thing I noticed about the new Mozilla for the Mac is that it seems to be using some native widgets in the UI. Bring up Preferences and what ho, those are Macintosh buttons, check boxes, and radio buttons, not the clunky Mozilla ones. But look on a form page and you'll still see the boxy Mozilla controls.
Is there a partial adoption of native widgets in progress? Bug 112980 seems to imply so but details are scanty. The bug does not even have a description, only a title and comments.
If the Mozilla team has finally caught on to the importance of respecting platform UI standards, though, hats off to them.
Tim
Fantastic standards-compliant browser with excellent USER-FRIENDLY - as opposed to ADVERTISER-FRIENDLY - customization and privacy options.
/. is an artificial selection effect. Most people gave up on Mozilla a while back, and only the hard-core Open Source religionists are continuing to post their unwavering stream of rave reviews.
Which, according to its own metrics, crashes every few hours on average. The numbers are actually somewhat low, of course, because some crashes are sufficiently serious that they don't report in to home base, and most Macintosh builds don't even have TalkBack installed.
I think what we're seeing here on
Lee Strauss
I thought a lot of you might find this interesting.
;)
In Windows 2000, I've checked my Hotmail account with both Mozilla and I.E. Surprisingly, Microsoft's own hotmail website works better with Mozilla than with their own IE browser!
Try it yourself when you get a bunch of messages that need to be deleted:
Check the checkboxes for the messages you want to delete. Mozilla will react instantly, while IE lags 5-10 seconds to react to the checkbox. Am I the only one who has that problem in IE at the Hotmail website?
This happens for me on a BP6 with dual 533 Celerons with 512 Megs of PC133 - Perhaps it's time to upgrade
From his job description, it sounds like he's a professional astroturfer. Not that it really matters, I just thought he beat the drum on Mozillazine and /. in his spare time.
Geeze, the WWW was around for years without anyone supporting LINK, and since 2 months ago it's suddenly become a major bashing point.
Is the feature even enabled by default in Mozilla yet? Is there any site that uses it effectively other than w3c.org?
(Don't get me wrong, it's a cool feature. Just that there's 9 years of legacy HTML out there.)
Really? so if you pay any attention at all to ***REALITY****, which appears to escape you, you might have noticed the following:
1. The Linux market share on the PC desktop is so small to almost unmeasurable (as related HERE on
2. That a key component to getting mindshare on new desktop users or those desktop users who are thinking about getting away from Windoze is the browser and the related email/chat/IM clients
3. That a browser needs to support ALL the MIME data types that IE does AND offer a better browsing experience than IE, Zilla is close but not their yet
4. Every new generation of MS OS provides additional "lock in" from the OS to the hardware and the apps and that means that it becomes harder with each generation to offer an alternative paradigm and get it accepted....both O2K and OXP have substantially better OS integration than they have ever had...making a steeper hill for any other product to climb
TO THE *NIX POLITICAL CORRECTNESS BIGOT(S) who wrote the above post and the asshole who modded my parent post as "Flamebait"
"Making all athoratitive statements like that leads only to flame wars and not better browsing
NO, making rational discussive statements about the REALITY of a product leads to further discussion about the product
further discussion leads to an open exchange of viewpoints
and that can lead to involved parties reassessing their approach and priorities and, if they're smart enough, making changes that lead to an even better product
The Stallmanian Political Correctness, *NIX Style you would insist on leads to the inane belief that "If you build it, they will come."
Microsoft, whom i know very, very well, loves having fools and cheerleaders on other products development teams.....
....because while everybody on some other project is reassuring each other with heartwarming "Shit, man. This thing is Da Bomb!"
MS just quietly goes out and locks in another market.
From a market share point of view, if ALL the users and readers of
MS would throw a party and have a large laugh at the people who don't seem to understand that they have just deprived MS of a whooping
I have had 3 customers of mine call me in the last month INSISTING that they had to upgrade to XP NOW!
i explained to them that XP is pretty much a simple dot upgrade to 2K and there was absolutely no reason to upgrade if they were having no problems with 2K and that, in 2 of the 3 cases, that XP doesn't have certified drivers for some of their h/w...they all DIDN'T BELIEVE that XP isn't the "greatest new OS of all time" and that their systems wouldn't work so much better with XP installed
THAT'S the mentality that Zilla, et al have to suceed against and that won't happen unless the products are way better than the competition (sa, "Innovator's Dilemma" by Clayton Christensen)
My respect and admiration goes out to all those actually working on Zilla/Opera/Netscape..i've spoken to number of them...they actually making a difference and fighting the good fight
Bigots like you just make rational and reasonable discussion either difficult or impossible
BTW, it's bad enough that you're a narrow minded anti free speech bigot, please learn how to touch type
Ten quid, she's so easy to blind. And not a word is spoken...
It *seems* that when I "view source", the browser hits the server to download another copy. I don't WANT *another* copy - I want to the see the source of what is being rendered in the browser. With many web-based apps, doing another request (especially without resending the proper POST info, etc) will give back different results.
The same behaviour was a huge problem for printing in Netscape. Rather than print what was in the browser's memory and on the screen, netscape would do a GET request on the URL. If it didn't come back with the right results - oh well! Too bad...
Why on earth can't we simply see what's in the browser's memory already? It seems this is the EASY thing to do and Netscape (and now Mozilla) are unnecessarily complicating the matter.
creation science book
In that exact order.
Freeze it for 1 month and work on bug fixes, and for a month work on just increasing its speed.
The only thing Mozilla needs is speed and stability, it has the power.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
The same thing happened to me when i upgraded from around 0.94, i lost some of my bookmarks but not all of them
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
Ooh Wow, another Microsoft indentured servant!
--That would explain the several Linux boxes I use as servers both in the workplace and at my house.
It's obvious you haven't used Mozilla recently (like, the last three releases). Fantastic standards-compliant browser with excellent USER-FRIENDLY - as opposed to ADVERTISER-FRIENDLY - customization and privacy options.
--It's still slow, and sure it "looks nice" but I'd rather be able to view most of the sites on the internet than have a blue browser.
And on my system, using Mozilla's quick start option, it loads FASTER than IE.
--Well, I wish I could say the same but it seems on my Athlon XP 1800+ that when I click the "e" the brwoser window has appeared before I let go of the mouse button. Mozilla still takes a second, even with Quick start.
I'll get the new release too, but it's still inferior. I would like it to be better, I was always a Netscape fan but seriously IE has stolen the crown. The point is no longer HTML standards compatibility - it is IE compatibility and all the competitors are failing.
Wow... It takes you a whole second to start mozilla? That's terrible - I don't know how you manage.
I understand it is the first actual Mozilla browser, and I don't generally like skipping versionnumbers. But in this case I'm sure many users/developers will find the version number 1.0 very confusing. And how are the User Agent string gonna look ? Like:
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.0) Gecko/1.0
or
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; Mozilla/1.0) Gecko/1.0
or ? I guess you can't stop using the "Mozilla/5.0" in the beginning of the User Agent string, since this will break to many sites.
It would be nice if Netscape gave a checkbox to remove AIM from the 4.xx releases during install (didn't notice if they do in 6.x), and thanks to Mozilla for not making me waste the bandwidth downloading it. It was my ritual to install Netscape, then kill off the AIM directory and the shortcuts. Not being able to option out of AIM at install time puts Netscape up there with other spamware like Real (not that 'SmartDownload' ie 'DumbAdDownload' got Netscape any points from me either).
Now let me put my Junkbuster list in Mozilla somewhere & I'll be a happy guy. Moz rocks.
Are there any plans for quick launch option for Linux? I just discovered that there exists one for Galeon. Start "galeon -s" from your gnome sessions, and there you go ..
And one thing that bothers me always is this bug
One "feature" that bugs the hell out of me is the automatic conversion of >'s in mail and news replies to vertical gray bars. This wreaks havoc in the Python newsgroup where some session code like
>>> spam = "asdf"
>>> 1 + 2
3
>>>
looks more like this...
||| spam = "asdf"
||| 1 + 2
3
|||
Except with really ugly gray vertical lines. This really needs to be an option to turn off. I haven't been able to find the setting in the options, however.
Bug 116595 is a Tech Evangelism bug for KaZaA's bad browser sniffing.
What a fool believes, he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.
I pay for performance when I spend $3000Cdn on a computer. If a simple, tiny thing like a browser takes ten seconds to start, I am not getting my money's worth.
mozilla is getting better, but two problems still remain: there are many features from 4.x still missing, especially in the mailnews component (see bugs marked 4xp in bugzilla as a first aproximation). And there are still a lot of sites that just dont work or that dont get rendered correctly because of web programmers and site designers failing to strictly follow w3 standards (those are the 'tech evangelism' bugs). i still doubt that the market power of mozilla will make those people reconsider.
It works just fine in Mozilla 0.9.7 if you turn off JavaScript.
We're going to make information free Mr. Anderson, whether you like it, or not.
musiccity.com works fine under Mozilla 0.9.7 for both Linux and Windows (Mandrake 8.1 and NT 5.2 respectively)
We're going to make information free Mr. Anderson, whether you like it, or not.
or 1000 new ones...
You can't, can you?
Damn Trolls.
I am just happy that I can download a new version under Windows/FreeBSD and install over the existing installation without problems like in the past.
I would like to see the best chat client known to man. I think people have been overrating the importance of having a functional web browser. I already have a web browser -- it's called Internet Explorer! But what I don't have is a good chat client. The Mozilla project should focus all their efforts on the chat client, and leave the browser part to the hackers and hobbyists who are interested in that sort of thing.
How do we interact with Moz? With the Mouz!
So as long as we can not interact with the pages the way we love to as in Opera and IE, we do not come correct!
I will not recommend Moz to my zillion friends in the universe as long as I cannot slow scroll down Slashdot! Gnagnagnagnagna!
Same goes for the crazy accelarations of the scrolling performed by Mozilla every now and then, when I roll the wheel! What is it? A feature? A free fast-reading method?
I just installed 0.9.7 under windows XP. Previously, the cursor that it showed when I hovered over a hyperlink was the same little finger/hand that I've been seeing since Netscape 1.1N or whatever it was that I first started using. Now, under 0.9.7, the hand has been changed to the cursor that IE uses when hovering over a hyperlink. Any idea how to change it back?
For the Macromedia Flash plugin, visit this page: ShockwaveFlash
Currently it has a link to flash_linux.tar.gz.
For RealPlayer 8 follow that link and fill out the form.
The other alternative is to look at Anon Cowards post which has a link, or borrow your mate's computer and steal his plugins. :-)
I've been using Moz for 90% of the sites I browse these days. It has some annoying rendering bugs on some sites (one of these days the barclaycard website will render correctly... it used to render like shit; with recent builds it goes into a loop reloading the page).
Netscape 4 is still useful for these sites though.
They're almost there. Took a hell of a long time, though.
I had Mozilla .9.5 on the computter. It worked great. Upgraded to .9.6 and it would crash whenever I tried to open a second window. Uninstalled .96 and reinstalled .95. Same problem with .95 now! So I downloaded Netscape 6.2 and have been using that ever since.
Today I tried Mozilla .9.7. It works great!
No more crashes and it seems really fast and responsive.
Well, 0.97 takes 8 seconds on my 3 year old CAN$5000 laptop (P2/366). I could easily buy a computer today for CAN$1000 that beats this laptop senseless.
So you either bought your computer a long time ago, or some component is limiting performance in some way (i.e. you got screwed).
Oh, a few other points:
- a browser is not a simple tiny thing anymore.
- Mozilla is not just a web browser.
- you didn't pay (and will likely never pay) for Mozilla.
- the Quick Launch feature works well.
BZ: The fact of the matter is, there is no good reason to keep the source once it has been parsed...
I submit to you that there is at least one good reason to keep the source: View Source.
Move on. There's nothing to see here.
All your favicons are belong to us
All your weblogs are belong to us
All your ram are belong to us
-Anonymous Troll
um... posts are supposed to be modded based on what they contain rather than on who wrote them. Your post was identical to what other people would get accused of karma whoring for. You were saving mozilla.org some load? smirk.
but, you were correct to calculate that Slashdot sycophants do mod on the basis of who is famous. That does not make it right, however, so while you win the karma race, you lose the respect of rational readers.
Re:mod this the fuck down (Score:5, Troll)
by asa (asa at mozilla dot org)
Umm, this moderator should actually read the message, and who it's from. Then mod themselves -1 Dummy. :)
Mozilla's a nice operating system, but it needs a better browser.
Two things I'd really like to see in Mozilla:
Just my 2. Otherwise, I gotta say Mozilla is shaping up pretty nice, and feels more solid with each release (on my system anyway). Keep up the great work, MozTeam!
Mozilla's a nice operating system, but it needs a better browser.
Yet more proof that most Canadians are complete idiots. God, I can hardly wait until the US invades.
One person standing ovation, only one hand clapping.
What company is going to announce that they are hereforth moving to a beta browser platform for all their needs?
None.
Wow.
Oh My God.
Lets just get real today, ok? Wait until 1.0 or even > 1.0 is out the door and doing well before you expect the clouds to break and jubilent drops of honey dew mozilla goodness to fall onto humanity.
Doh! Replied to the wrong post. Please imagine it is linked to the correct one...
View | Show/Hide | Site Navigation Bar
marotti.com
>> They are just doing their job and following orders.
Kind of like the Nazis?
Flamebait, troll, call it what you like.
.25% among IT professionals says it all, really).
I downloaded and installed the latest version of mozilla (on a Win98/AMD machine). It ran smoothly, rendered a lot more pages correctly than that horrible CSS-less Netscape does. And it doesn't crash (although from what I've seen mileage varies amongst different users).
However, I seriously question the relevance of ANY project that tries to 'start a revolution' in the browser market. The de facto situation has arisen that a browser is part of the OS. This may have been accomplished in part by scheming, bully tactics and FUD, but it is true nonetheless.
So you have the situation that someone who buys a PC gets an OS, including a browser, installed on it. If said PC is bought at, say, CompUSA you have a 99.9% chance that that OS is some Windows version. Regarding the person who buys the PC: there's a 95% or even higher chance that he or she has little or no affinity with computers, let alone can compare the compliance of different W3C standards. The most likely desire of that person for the browser is that it renders web pages the way their creators designed them. Now, who do you think those creaters have in mind?
The browser with the largest market share!
WAKE UP, PEOPLE! Web standards are being set by Microsoft, and people who get a browser installed that complies to THOSE standards flawlessly are unlikely to replace it. As are most Linux/Mac users by the way. So Mozilla is destined to attain a market share of no more than 1%, if even that is possible (personally I think Opera's current market share of
__
Not believing in force is like not believing in gravity.
There is a hidden preference for that. Close Mozilla and open the file prefs.js (it is located in your profile directory) in a text editor. Now add the following lines to the file:
user_pref("mail.quoted_graphical", false);
user_pref("mail.quoteasblock", false);
That should do it. See bug 83907 for making it configurable through the Preferences dialog.
You know, Microsoft's street address also says a lot about their mentality.
What a crock of bullshit. What are 'they' going to steal? My history logs?
Sure, you can say: my CC info. This is NOT true, however. And by the way using a credit card in a restaurant is INFINITELY more unsecure than using it online, regardless of the browser used.
__
Not believing in force is like not believing in gravity.
Your comments have the carefree quality of someone who has not yet been bitten by Microsoft's lousy security record or its customers==sheep attitude.
Enjoy it while you can - your day will come.
pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
The best web browser yet is finally out. The latest version of Mozilla is excellent. Being able to disable popup windows and leave javascript enabled is the best new feature of a slew of new features. Gone are the days of the popup x10 cam ad!