Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

mozilla.org Releases Mozilla 0.9.8

Posted by timothy on from the chatzilla-rocks-hard dept.

asa writes: "Today mozilla.org released the Mozilla 0.9.8 Milestone. New to this release are improved Address Book functionality, page setup(for printing), MNG/JNG support, native-style widgets on winXP and OS X, dynamic theme switching, improved BiDi support, speed, stability and footprint improvements, and much, much more. www.mozilla.org and www.mozillazine.org have the full scoop." The build I'm posting with (2002020305) is a little crashy, but most aspects are shaping up very nicely.

7 of 612 comments (clear)

  1. Re:first `Mozilla has sucked for years` post by yomegaman · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Which version of OmniWeb are you running? I'm using 4.1sp36 on my iBook and very rarely does it crash on me. I'm going to take another look at this new Mozilla, but the thing that kills it for me is that the keyboard support sucks. If you have two windows or tabs open, switching between them using the keyboard doesn't take the focus with it, so you have to click the mouse somewhere in the pane before you can use the arrow keys to scroll. Little things like that make a big difference.

    BTW, I agree with you about IE, it's pretty nice. The only things I don't like about it are the slow rendering of big tables that you mentioned, no popup-blocking, and the Carbon text doesn't look as good to me as the Cocoa text that OmniWeb uses (especially for serif fonts).

    Anyway, get the latest OmniWeb and give it a spin. Be sure to clean out any junk in ~/Library/Application\ Support/OmniWeb/ first, corrupted history files have been known to cause problems.

    --
    ...wearing a skin-tight topless leather jumpsuit, with cutaway buttocks and transparent crotch panel.
  2. Re:The most important fix... by weave · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Speaking of this "fix", the fix created a lot of controversy. Apparently some sites like ole slashdot set their pages to no-cache, most likely to force a page refresh so as to get another ad impression. Ignoring it was debated for cases of moving back in history but Netscape objected to it because they claimed banks would worry about the security implications of ignoring no-cache directives.

    The compromise was to ignore no-cache for speed purposes on http requests but don't ignore it for https requests.

    The full gritty details is in big 112564.

  3. Ad counting by jesser · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Am I the only person who looks at ads after clicking a link to another page? If a site screws with IE's back button, they get about 50% fewer clicks from me. Also, if I scroll down before leaving the page with the ad (and then hit Back), I won't see the double-counted ad because it is still scrolled off the screen.

    Advertisers should penalize sites that use no-cache to increase ad impression counts. It slows down browsing, doesn't increase the total nubmer of times a user sees ads, and annoys users who are actually interested in the ads. And, now, the double-counting effect is harder for advertisers to account for because some browsers (eg Mozilla) correctly ignore no-cache for the Back button in most situations.

    --
    The shareholder is always right.
  4. Re:performance by cgleba · · Score: 3, Interesting

    http://www.mozilla.org/performance/Performance_Pro ject.html

    This is a complete list of performance stuff that they're working on.

    I've been watching it for a while because I like Mozilla but just can't use it because the GUI is so damn slow it feels like I'm browsing drunk.

  5. When to deploy... by vex24 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm a sysadmin (yes, Windows :P ) and I've actually started rolling out Mozilla with new workstations instead of our standard Netscape 4.7x (I will never encourage our users to use I.E. for political and security reasons). I'm finding that Netscape 4.x is becoming a hassle to many users as they're often finding sites that it can no longer handle. Rather than drift into I.E., I'm trying to give them a solid alternative.

    I've been impressed by the reception so far... only one user has rejected it wholesale, but the first question after I loaded on Netscape for him was, "Now how do I turn off pop-up ads in this one?". That seems to be the most-loved feature so far, as many websites now have pop-up ads (I wouldn't know, as I turned them off at 0.9.4!).

    IMHO Netscape has made a very bad name for itself by releasing 6.x too early from buggy Mozilla builds, and loading them up with advertising and AOL stuff to boot. I've found that telling clients that Mozilla is a new browser based on Netscape is a good way to go.

    I've actually found that the few problems users have had have been minor, and the mozilla bug tracking site almost always has workarounds for those show-stopper bugs...

    Anyhow, just something to think about; this is a nice foothold that open source software can make in your office workplace. It's kind of the Apache of desktop software I suppose...

    --

    People shape laws. Not the other way around.

  6. Re:It's the simple features that count. by DennyK · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Hmm...when I type a word without the .com or www., Moz tries to resolve word, and then automatically tries www.word.com if word doesn't resolve. And you don't even have to hold down a key... ;-D

    DennyK

  7. I just tried it for the first time... by cr0sh · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I have to say I am very impressed - I have been meaning to try it, never getting around to it - then saying "Well, maybe at 1.0". But, I kept hearing and reading good things about it, and so I decided, after seeing how simple the install was, to go ahead and give it a shot.

    I love it - I suppose it will "compete" with my Netscape install now. I think I might install it on my Winders box at work (yeah, it sucks).

    Wow - a new set of fun!

    --
    Reason is the Path to God - Anon