Slashdot Mirror
Mozilla Branches For 1.0 RC1
At the end of last month, the Mozilla Project closed the tree for what will become Mozilla 1.0. Now jkeiser writes "Mozilla has branched for 1.0 RC1, which is the first last step to a final Mozilla 1.0! Mozilla has spent four long years getting the browser standards-compliant, fast and solid. Cross your fingers for a rockin' final release around the corner." Reader whovian points to the just-modified roadmap, too.
I can't wait to see 1.0.
It's going to be the best (and only, really) open-source browser.
good news to have mozilla 1.0 around the corner.
See subject. Please don't contest that 1 = 0.9999999... this has been hashed out a thousand times on the sci.math newsgroup. Go find a FAQ.
There have been numerous milestone releases, but this is the one that proves that this project was doable from the start depsite the naysayers. What's even more amazing that the Mozilla development team started from a source tree that was a poster child for how not to maintain a source tree. Keep up the good work Mozilla team!
Since I am forced to use Windows at work, for a long time IE was the best choice. The "page widening posts" by our friend Klerck I tried Mozilla, and I didn't like it, so I settled on Opera. I'd much rather use something open source to redeem myself for the sins of using an MS OS, so hopefully Mozilla will great improve (and soon).
When I first started playing around with Mozilla (mid-99) I figgured they would *never* have a usable product. The thing just plain didn't work.
.0 that means something, as opposed to most commercial vendors (and a lot of OS projects) that usually wait until 3.x to begin getting things right.
And while they are a bit behind schedule. 4 years for a 1.0 doesn't sound bad when you realize that this is a
Good job guys.
(posted on 0.99)
In Capitalist America, bank robs you!
The release schedule on mozilla.org shows a release of 1.0 RC1, but no 1.0. When is 1.0 scheduled to come out?
cp /dev/null ie
cp /dev/null netscape
cp /dev/null opera
cp /dev/null konqueror
-- everyones not everybody and neither is everybody like everyone.
Hrm, I'm too scared (or wise) after falling for so many goatscx links...
.
It would be nice to have the ability to block images without visiting the site, certainly; or the ability to block entire sites
Fuck, for all I know, you just liked to an Easter Bunny Fan Club page (although 'tacoinspector' doesn't give me much hope...
It's a funny coincidence that this ended up as a story, as I was peering around the Mozilla website tonight trying to figure out an answer to one question:
When now can we expect an official 1.0 release?
I'm not a programmer in any way, so I don't know much of anything about development schedules or whatnot. And all the FAQs seemed to tiptoe around a definitive answer.
Awfully convenient that this became a story; I didn't want to ask in any of the other stories' comment sections, 'cause I didn't want to be offtopic.
Goatse redirect with a counter for each user. My score just jumped from 198 to 224. KEEP CLICKING, SLASHBOTS!
Alternately, they could declare that 1.0 is an asymptotic limit for Mozilla, and no actual human coded Mozilla will ever reach it, though future versions will come closer.
The most important feature in 1.0 is that the api will now be stable for the 1.0.x series. This means a lot to galeon & co. Nobody is saying that 1.0 will be perfect, but since mozilla is a good browser suite already, the 1.0.x series is liiking very promising.
There was a Moz 1.0RC1 troll that was getting modded down left and right earlier. What took you guys so long?
Now we can finally integrate it into the kernel!
Then the Opera Vs Netscape trials start, and life begins anew.
I for one am *extremely* grateful to the developers of high-quality applications that I use for work and play. I don't know what I would use if not for mozilla, but I'm sure it would not be as cool. (No replies about konqueror or Opera. Sorry, but they just don't cut it for me.) It's been a long, painful road, with more than a few bug reports, some patches, and more crashes than I can shake a stick at, but I've had fun. And if the ends justify the means, well then 1.0's delay is justified.
python -c "x='python -c %sx=%s; print x%%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))%s'; print x%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))"
It has become a quite good app; the same could be said of many open-source products. I was thinking about this the other day....I'm in my fifth year of college, and I graduate next month. When I started, I couldn't do my work on Linux without either spending loads of $$ for ported commercial products, or constantly grinding my teeth. Two and a half years ago, I went pretty much linux all the time, using StarOffice as my suite. Still, I was stuck with Netscape 4.x as my browser. But now, I'm able to do all my work in a pure open-source environment (I'm not a CS major...I'm one of those social science types). It's a big change. Mozilla is a very good product. Congrats, and thanks folks.
--typing this on Galeon, one of the many Mozilla kids.
Anyway, now that the tree has branched (which is really cool, by the way) the only drawback that I see is that I won't get my Mozilla fix every 5 weeks (5 weeks in Mozilla development-speak is more like 7 :o). Their release schedule has changed to 13 weeks.
Well, hopefully it will be 13 chronological weeks rather than 13 mozilla release weeks, hehe.
But anyway, once I've been weened off my Install-Newest-Version-of-Mozilla addiction, I guess I'll appreciate that all the serious bugs have been ironed out (i haven't noticed a single one since an early 0.9.x), it's so fscking customizable, and the performance is far better than anything except perhaps Opera. [I'm not even going to mention lynx - whoops. Damn]
Hey, I said I was biased (^&
Please vote for bug 135331.
I agree. 0.99 is the first version of mozilla I have found to be remotely usable (mac os 9) - previous ones had crashed HARD - and now I am a convert. well done moz team!
sulli
RTFJ.
Just because IE comes with windows is not an excuse to not use this wonderful browser. Switch NOW ! :-)
I bet it didn't take Microsoft that long to release Windows 1.0
I don't wanna come off like a whiner here, but Mozilla is not going to find much of an audience unless freetype support is _standard_
Cheers
Bowie J. Poag
55583
oh wait... it's fixed.
nevermind.
There aint no pancake so thin it doesn't have two sides.
Starting with version 0.9.8, I finally switched fully over to Mozilla.
It's really turned into a great app. Not only is it not playing catch-up with Internet Explorer anymore, but I'd argue that they are beating it with some of its new features like tabbed browsing.
Here's to hoping Mozilla will give open source a nice rebound in the desktop market.
:wq
Blocking imgs /etc, or WINNT_HOME\system32\etc\) add line
Opera: press "g", click unknown link (g toggles images)
Blocking Sites:
Open hosts (search, normally in
shitty_site 127.0.0.1
At least the last 0.9.9 RPM packages were rubbish; Mozilla threw Segmentation fault immediately at startup. Same both with my home comp (i586 with Mdk Linux) and my work laptop (i686 with RH 7.1), so this can't be just a random problem.
Amazingly, the nightly build RPMs seem to work just fine.
This is definitely not the first time this happens. I don't know who compiles Mozilla for packaging, but it's obviously not done very well. Problems this obvious (Segfault at startup) don't give a very fancy image of Mozilla.
All packages should be tested at least somehow before distribution.
Arrgh! I can't stand the wait! We hit 0.9.9 and I thought, "GREAT! Next time I see Mozilla on /. it will be 1.0!!!!!!". Several Mozilla stories later I see this 1.0 story! Branch closed... Does that mean it's ready? No Moz! Now another 1.0 story with no Mozilla!!
I want my browser! STOP TORTURING US!!!!!
I stole this Sig
OmniWeb isn't free (as in speech), but it's darn good, and using the browser of the underdog is a small step towards restoring competition to the marketplace, which is morally good (just like using OSS).
I recommend going to omni's website and trying it out.
Bringing irony to the Slash-masses
Ohh, And here I thought we have a RC1 available for download. Dang. Never mind, I didn't realize Mozilla is such big news that /. publishes even plans to have a beta build :-)
.92 and moved toward the point I'm at right now, which is about 95% mozilla and rest for IE. Usually the culprit is some kind of fancy menu-system or dysfunctional scripting gimmick. The important thing is, however, that for majority of the sites Mozilla works just great!
I've been using Mozilla starting around
I'm just feeling a little odd about thinking it'd be a good thing to have AOL use Gecko so that we'd get standards-compliant web sites. Who'd have thought of it, AOL as a force for the white hats?
Release Candidates are just for final bugfixing before the actual release, correct? Like the freezing process in Debian. So they'll just be stabilizing the code until they think it's ready. This is exciting because it means the 1.0 release can't be more than a few weeks away. It's a big deal because most people don't think of a project as actualized until it hits 1.0, which, let's face, many open source projects don't. If commercial product versions are any measure, Mozilla could probably somewhere above 4 or 5. It's nice to know that the developers have such a high standard for quality that even though it's been an excellent browser for several months now, they just now think it's 1.0 quality. Just think of how much better it can and will get from here. Props to all the Moz developers for such great work. Keep it up!
--
Promoting critical thinking since 1994.
You can always get the nightly builds...
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
There are so many nice things about mozilla that make it so much easier and enjoyable to use than any other browser ... probably the most significant thing for me is tabbed browsing man one window multiple web pages, where has this feature been, must admit it makes older versions of netscape and ie seem almost impossible to use.
Another really sweet features of mozilla is UI pleasing to the eye and intuitive to boot, if you don't like it download an alternative theme, don't like any of these roll your own. I know, I know not a new idea but it has been done well.
All in all a fantastic product. Much thanks and much respect to all involved in producing such a great product, and one thats free too :)
Er... why don't you su cp /dev/null /etc/passwd
and then tell me the difference between /dev/null and /dev/zero..
thanks!
-- everyones not everybody and neither is everybody like everyone.
Too bad that the Linux version has much lower priority than Windows. Some bugs I reported half of year (or even more) still show off - just becouse they're Linux specific. Some others, mostly all platform bugs, have been fixed in a few weeks or months.
Their mail and newsgroups still do not download the multipart porno for the newsgroups. What's the point of having the a full browser if you can't download porno with it. Hopefully they'll have it solved by 1.0's release. I suppose you can use it with any newsgroup, but really, let's make sure we concentrate on it for the real reasons.
I really hate Dan Patrick.
Mozilla lacks the integrated digital rights management hooks found in IE/Media Player. If the CBDTPA/SSSCA passes, Mozilla could very well become an illegal program and any distribution or development of it would result in arrest of the "guilty" parties. If you want Mozilla (and any other non-commercial software) to have a future why not write your Congressman a letter with your opinion on CBDTPA/SSSCA?
I'm not kidding.
Not so great IMAO... While tabbed browsing is nice, there are definitely two things that are serious problems. First, speed (or rather lack of it), second - "standards compliant" JavaScript aka "incompatible with rest of the world" JavaScript. I still HAVE to use IE because of that.
The moon is not fully subjugated. I demand a second assault wave preceded by a massive nuclear bombardment.
[plea for help]
Now is the time to increase the testing effort. Everybody out there, please download the latest nightly build. Get out there and test and submit bugs to Bugzilla.
You can poke fun as much as you want about the release timeline, but these Mozilla guys really work their asses off to get this product out to you at no charge. The least we can do as part of the open source community is help out by testing.
[/plea for help]
[/rant]
PK
P.S. Posted using April 9th Mozilla nightly build. A testament to how well it works and the stability of the nightly builds. I install a nightly build almost every morning and never had to revert back to using an older build because something major was broken. I always install the Linux tarballs, but of course YMMV for other platforms and installation methods. But I don't expect anything would be different for the Windoze and Mac builds.
Don't care when 1.0 is out, how diffrent can it bee?
The only bug I hayte is when I try to minimize the browser window it goes to the taskbar and then pops back up again...it resists me!!
That and the fact that it won't let me type in text in the address bar, and forms under some situations where there are many windows open. Not a hyooge problem, can live with it.
Why I will never use IE:
POPUPS!
NO SKINS
NO Cookie control/cleaning support (Gotta keep the fbi and cia from planting 10 year cookies on my private property)
NO TABS! (Why the hell did I just find out about tabs?) No tabs, no browser. IE sucks.
To sum up I give Mozilla a rating of 9 penguins out of 10.
IE? Won't rate it...not a real browser...I hope Apple and Open Source kick the shit outta Microsoft.
Later!
Will
I'm sorry, but anything that takes 4 solid years is not "rockin'"
It's about as "rockin'" as a Volvo.
Or Grandma's vulva.
The strange result is that 1.0.3 is scheduled to be released about a month after the final 1.1. Are they really planning something huge for the 1.1 branch that they don't trust themselves to re-merge the tree? I guess there is precedent for this, with Netscape 4.08 being released after the 4.5 releases were well on their way. Also, it seems that this is how Linux kernel releases work, with 2.2 still being maintained after the release of 2.4. Still, this is a new policy for Mozilla.
Now by the time my current copy of Mozilla 0.9.9 starts up, 1.0 will be released.
[snip]While tabbed browsing is nice[/snip]
I'd much rather hammer on the alt-tab combo to get to the window I want (I usually have about 8 browsers open, but am actively switching between two to four) and keeping my left hand on the KB for CTRL+V/CTRL/C than fuddling around with browser tabs.
Hey Taco! Looks like you're using the "infinite monkeys and typewriters" scheme to generate Ask Slashdots again...
1.0 is only 1.0 because the api is frozen. Not because it is finished. Not because is is completely stable, not because all bugs are solved. It is 1.0 so (other vendors) have a generic platform to work on.
First off, kudos to the Mozilla project team for getting this far... it's shaping up to be an excellent browser especially once you count the security track record of the opposition.
:).
One question I have as a DHTML web designer, is that will v1.0 fix the DHTML timing issues? The v0.98 changelog indicated that "DHTML performance has regressed", which I can verify is putting it lightly -- one of my animations that revealed a DIV via clipping worked fluidly in Moz 0.97 and hardly at all in Moz 0.99, which still hasn't patched it. Check out the "Popup Menu v5" script on my homepage on a slower computer if you want to see what I mean.
A quick search of Bugzilla reveals some articles also mentioning this issue. Does anyone know what plans are afoot to improve this?
I hope DHTML performance improves before this tree is used for another NS6 or AOL browser release, as otherwise it could render some of the more technically involved sites unviewable. If anyone's more involved in Bugzilla than I and knows the bug ID that most work is going into, please post a link to vote for it, otherwise try this one
Apart from that, I'm finding new Mozilla releases to be strides above the versions this time last year. Hopefully once fully mature it'll be the cross-platform web page development environment of choice... that's one area in which IE can never beat it, with the huge differences between IE on Windows and Mac.
More power to the lizard!
<!-- DHTML / JavaScript menu, popup tooltip, Ajax scripts -->
I've heard something about the possiblity to compile Mozilla to use Qt - anyone have experience with that? And if it does work, does that mean that if I switch to Mozilla, my browser will finally look as sweet as the rest of KDE (with Mosfet's Liquid engine)? Oh, Konqueror, just doesn't do it for me functionality wise.
sic transit gloria mundi
Mozilla uses Gtk+/Gdk under *nix, even though it implements its own toolkit on top of this. Because of this, anywhere Gtk+ goes, mozilla goes.
I am of course completely ignoring the fact that any project that runs on so many OSes could rather easily be ported to a new display layer, Gdk or no.
This is because linux also started with the 0.9x series. But as developers reach the conclusion their products still has bugs and never has the impact of linux they never want to call it finished "1.0".
And the next software project is always more interesting as the current one. Finishing a software product is a lot of work and not always fun.
Mozillia is the killer app that has to challenge MS (IE) on the desktop. Open Source/ FS lives on the net and I would guess that the browser is second only to an e-mail app as the most used piece of software. Mozillia is the marque to advertise OS. So get behind it. :)
"Academicians are more likely to share each other's toothbrush than each other's nomenclature."
Cohen
OmniWeb has a JS debugger better than Venkman? Got a link to documentation for this?
According to the diagram, 1.0 should be released
around 2002 May 1. Or did I read it wrong?
Heartfelt thanks for Mozilla. I'm using version
When I have needed standards compliance in the past, I have often been forced to use software supplied by people I don't trust. I am happy to have Mozilla as an alternative.
Version numbers don't mean shit.
That must explain why Linux is at 2.4 and Windows XP is at 5.2....
Why not use the keyboard accelerators for switching tabs then so you don't have to use the mouse? Ctrl-PhUp and Ctrl-PgDn by default I believe.
This is why real companies don't release pre-1.0 products to the general public. Think how buggy your favorite piece of software is and imagine what people would think if they saw something before even the final codefreeze.
If you liked this thought maybe you would find my blog nice too:
Everyone: Note that the parent post is from CmdrTaco (editor), not CmdrTaco. The first person is a troll, the second is the real guy.
Mozilla 1.0 just released.. click here for details!
You can find the link on the mozilla site by following the home page to the Mozilla 0.9.9 link (it's updated with every release, always in the same position) that points to the Releases page. Then, just above the [bold,italic] export notice, you'll see the roadmap link. Scroll down and you'll see a cool graphic, near which there's a grayish table with the tentative schedule for the near future - with all sorts of cool "insider"-type info & dates.
Cheers. And know that 0.9.9 is almost perfectly fine, and you don't really need to wait for 1.0. I've never had a crash or even a problem since way back when (0.9.3-ish)
> Re:I must admit that i didn't think it would happen
Me too.
> Starting with version 0.9.8, I finally switched fully over to Mozilla.
Me too.
I hadn't see the IE icon for 3 months ago. Great Mozilla Dev.s!
I for one, always click on links presented to me by trolls. While I do enjoy the gaping anus of the goatse.cx man, deep inside I yearn for some new flesh to see. But I probably account for at least 75% of your redirects.
Tabs are only a different workspace containing your browser display, a window manager designed/configured to give a tab-style effect could be just the same. It`s a pity the more innovative window managers are often overlooked in favour of plain "straight sides and a title bar" window managers.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
Now, I'm not saying that Mozilla does not do BiDi - it's just that the bugs in the BiDi implementation are so severe as to make Mozilla completly unsuable to anyone who reads and writes a complex script language. most notable are the "text selction" bugs which makes copying and pasting from pages that contain complex scripts impossible, and worse - the BiDi text input bug which causes Mozilla to spontaneusly crash when entering text in (for example) the text area boxes of weblogs.
The most infuriating thing about this, is that the serious BiDi bugs resolution dates have been postponed to later and later milestones, and now, as those are marked nsBeta1 (meaning - fixes to be submitted before 1.0 released), the source tree still has no fixes in sight, and I'm starting to doubt if we will see Mozilla as a competing browser to IE on the 'end user's' desktop - even after 1.0.
see bugs :
95228
82352
125546
112101
75011
On linux/i386 it`s a case of copying the libflashplugin.so to mozilla/plugins, wherever you installed mozilla. On windows its a case of running the installer and it works out where to put it. Netscape plugins seem to work just fine in mozilla.. However it would be usefull to have flash plugins for some of the os/hardware combinations not supported by macromedia.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
Can someone please tell me how to get it to work over X. I can't believe they're calling it "solid" and "fast" when it doesn't even paint the display over eXceed. I get nothing but a black display area on any reasonably long page.
I agree, OmniWeb is an excellent lightweight browser. Especially considering that the entire development team consists of two part-time engineers!
Considering something like Napster never broke out of beta, this 1.0 is definitely more meaningful.
Windows 2000 and WinXP are perfectly good operating systems these days. I prefer using Linux at home but at work, where I need to get things done quickly out-of-box and not after tweaking the OS for hours and having to read obscure FAQs and HOWTOs on how to get a standard piece of hardware working on Linux, using Windows is simply the best alternative. Microsoft Office documents are also such a standard way of communicating with the clients that a non-Windows environment is a practical impossibility.
Or do you really believe RMS' crap about how using closed source is wrong??
you think... i have trolls and flaimbait modded up and "funny" (ya know, as in fucking queer?) modded down. i do love that large gaping ass. ooohh.. ::moans:: i'm sorry, i have to go jack off again.
I'm stoked about 1.0. I think the browser is solid as hell.
HOWEVER, the included Mail and Newsgroup app has a LONG way to go. There are many, many outstanding (and often show-stopping) bugs with the Mail reader.
I have been testing it recently with the hopes of deploying it throughout our company as the standard mail client. The Windows version is horribly broken. It often hangs upon startup and you cannot print many messages without first double-clicking them and opening them up in their own windows, and printing from these. For kicks, I tried the test with several different builds (including 0.99rel) on several different computers. Same results all around. Our mail server runs Courier IMAP and works great with every other mail client I've used (Pine, Mac OS X Mail.app, SquirrelMail, Mulberry, Eudora, Netscape 4.x, etc., etc.)
just out of curiosity, what compielr do they use for the Win32 builds? I mean I would guess VC++ 6.0.
.NET (quite nice i might add) and the new optimizing technologies in there are amazing. My NES emulator gained an extra 100 FPS just from a simple recompile with new compiler. Could Mozilla for Win32 gain even better performance if they compiled it with VS .NET C++ compiler?
The reason i ask is that i recently upgraded to Visual Studio
Man, you gotta work for M$. If some people like me are linux zealots, they you're M$ emplyee
I write javascript apps and big ones at that not just mouseovers and the like.
Since 0.98 I priomarily use Mozilla as my development browser and then do the IE specific stuff afterwards.
I have found that it's IE's javascript that is the most annoying of the two.
And Opera's is just annoying "left hand side of line xxx can not be assigned to" yawn
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
I wish they'd provide a FreeBSD binary or if
they already do, a more prominent link to it
in the front page. FreeBSD is just too important
not to generate binaries for it.
MadEagle
OmniWeb was tested for its claim for web standards compatibility at A List Apart.
Basically they though it had great promise, but had a "long way to go before it can live up to its developers' claims to any sort of useful or meaningful CSS and DOM support."
Does anyone know when the Mozilla project officially began? I've heard reports that it started as early as 1988, others say 1992.
I've only been using it since version 0.7.5 (or so), so I am really unsure how long it's been. I know it's been in development for a long time, but 13 years? That sounds like my speed of work. (I've been working on mod for Deus Ex for 6 months, and am only now to the version 0.0.17.)
I didn't have any luck finding this online, so if anyone knows, pass it along.
No excellent soul is exempt from a mixture of madness. --Aristotle
Right on.
When I see a hot chick on her knees scrubbing the toilet bowl, I smile and get a tear in my eye. I am so happy.
You are halucinating. Linux is not the only unix in existance. X (sadly) is probably going to be with us forever now, and if anything 'goes away' it will be one of Gnome/KDE (or, better, both, since they're both dull knock-offs of windows and if they got out of the way and stopped absorbing so much time/effort we might be able to build a decent desktop).
Won't compile and run on 68K Macs.... bad code design.
It was broken since inception.
Why? Too many resources, string resources, butchery of code layout, and breakage of all the old mac-isms.
There are very fast modern web browsers for 68040 based Macs though.... the 2002 version of iCab and of course slightly older releases of Navigator.
I wish source to the REAL netscape 3.01 was given out.
It was secure, exploit free, had Javascript, Java support and all the things Mozilla lacked at first that made it unpopular among reluctant programming contributors.
Or maybe the fact that the code released to the press was different by a few lines than the code eventually released to the public. The press got a different source code version that was never distribted to the public. Maybe it was only a few lines but it was fraud. Simple fraud.
Mozilla would have been released at 1.0 many years ago if it was actually based on the real source code to navigator instead of a still-born project that never shipped...that is until now.
I bet its memory usage is astronomical compared to iCab.
I use a LCD and XP ClearType and Mozilla renders beautifully on any web page with any font. It is better than apple's anti-aliasing on os x. I wouldn't say it if it weren't true. It seems that hardware anti-aliasing is definitely better than software anti-aliasing.
Mike
One of the things that really bugs me is when people look at the bug cound and say hay there were 21 000 bugs in X version but there are now 22 000 bugs in Y version so X version must be buggier than Y version.
Generally most of the bugs in that were found in version Y were already in X but they weren't found. That is there aren't more bugs just more that are found.
Another thing is have you read some of the bugs submitted?
Check out these(5 new bugs picked at random):
*Bugzilla Bug 78633 [console] photon port should not print to console for opt builds (maybe)
*Bugzilla Bug 35419 solaris/gcc should use -shared instead of -G in configure.in DSO_LDOPTS
*Bugzilla Bug 108476 Error with XML
*Bugzilla Bug 56179 Broken mozilla.org links
*Bugzilla Bug 9185 Gtk command-line args crash viewer
It may just be me but none of these are show stopper bugs in my mind. The truth is if the bug database wasn't open then people would be talking about how much more stable the new mozilla is instead of how many more bugs it has.
It a couple of people went through the 22 000 bugs and removed the redundant bugs and fixed the trival bugs that most people don't care about chancers are that after one or two months the bug cound would be down to something more like 3 000 bugs BUT mozilla would be almost exactly the same.
Are you arguing that Mozilla isn't releasing version 1.0? And that MSIE is already up to version 6.0? If not, then SHUT THE FUCK UP, BITCH!
Hmmm...what a dilemna. Use version "1.0" of a browser written by some open sores, unemployed, unwashed, unshaven, communist, terrorist sympathising, college drop-out hippies on a sugar high from coke and pizza, or use an industry standard browser already up to version 6.0, with full 100% guaranteed compatibility with all web sites, developed by an all-American, anti-terrorist respected corporate giant called Microsoft. Add to that, Mozilla was probably written in something slow and bloated like Python, Java, or PERL (the open sores hippie's favorite piece of shit language), while Microsoft's browser in written in 100% C or C++.
Gee, call me crazy, but I know what will be running on *MY* machine!
...and the entired population of Arkansas is upset...many sigh, "Why can't our family tree branch?"...referring to the way their family trees tend to just loop back upon itself...
hell, this will probably get mod'ed "Redundant" by the chimps with mod-points anyhow.
Beer, now there's a temporary solution -- Homer Jay S.
Given that Linux as a much lower installed base than Windows, it's hardly suprising, isn't it?
You're making the mistake of equating open source and Linux. This may be the case for a few projects (the Gnome, KDE, etc) the vasy majority of open source projects aren't Linux-centric.
ObMozBugComplaintBitchSlap: Anyway, instead of bitching about the time it takes to fix Linux bugs, why don't you fix them youself? It works for me, and I feel better about myself when I wake up in the morning because of it.
mike
-- written using Moz 0.9.9+ runnning on Debian/unstable
-- "So, what's the deal with Auntie Gerschwitz et all?"
Unicode is poorly designed it the spec.
.... #)
Apple and other corporations have created far more usable script languages supporting arabic and hebrew and asian sets > 64K symbols, etc.
I was horrified to read the unicode spec when it hit the store shelves years ago.... I wanted to see if they called and octothorpe and octothorpe was correctly listed as an entry for the symbol commonly called "hash sign" and "sharp" and "crosshatch" and "number sign" and "octothorpe". (all the same suymbol
But I found out unicode was impossible to implement in pascal and Modula-2 or any case sensitive language!!
Why?
Because Unicode morons added a header definition for Pound_Sign (the british unit of currency and then retyped pound_Sign with a lowercase letter in the c language header file for the octothorpe.
octothorpe is an undisputed non-confusing name and obviously british people take great offense in americans renaming their currency name for antoher symbol (the octothope with its many other names).
I vowed that day that I would NEVER EVER support unicode and in fact I vowed a lifetime goal of another promise to myself... I vowed to sabotage all unicode progress wherever I could by making it defective, slow, incoplete or impossible to retrofit into source code. I wanted unicode to be associated with feces. I hope I suceded in my own little ways.
I celebrate BiDi bugs in all their glory. Longe live "case insensitive symbol language definitions"
death to unicode hypocrisy and mediocrity!
But I've had real trouble installing the things successfully in Mozilla - plugin installers often "know" that they belong to Netscape, and don't seem to be visible to Mozilla, especially if I have both browsers installed on my Win98 machine. Which plug-ins are going to work? Will the Mozilla developers test the installation procedures? And how do you keep Internet Exploiter from stealing dominant-browser status?
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
No need to read sci.math to prove this:
1. Open a new Excel spreadsheet
2. Enter 0.9999999 in a cell
3. Result: 1
QED
...when 1.0 is actually released:
"Today's headlines: Mozilla releases 1.0, reports of flying pigs, hell freezes over. Film at 11."
Hello, my name is Robert Lerner, and I pronounce Lernux as "99% cpu"
No, 0.9x came several months after 0.01, the first release - though Linus did skip from 0.12 to 0.95 when the project started to stabilise. See Riley Williams's archive for details.
"How can you claim that you are anti-crack, while still writing a window manager?" — Metacity README
That roadmap isn't actually new. Just look at the revision date, the last thing on the document. Mitchell Baker has indeed promised a new roadmap, but that aint it yet.
The link's still good, though - that's where it'll be when it's done, but don't get confused because that's been there about three weeks now...
An interesting idea. Does any wm do this currently? I can see that it would be useful for consoles; not sure about other apps. File managers possibly.
One-click tabs for each emacs buffer would be nice. I find one of the few times using emacs where I have to use conscious thought just to use it is when I'm trying to think which buffers I have open/what their names are.
You read it correctly, but not sufficiently deeply..
May 1st is of course International Labor Day, i.e. Communist's Day. And we all know that open source projects are evil communist plots designed to overthrow the heroic efforts of god-fearing capitalist corporations.
It's really all a subtle plot.
Damn, I know i had this coming on /. A second after posting it i realized there was a 0.xx where xx =12 version of linux.
To correct this I will try to damage my monitor by slamming my head into it.
My wishlist:
* Standard plugins installed (Flash, Java).
* Mouse Gestures installed by default.
* An IE (lookalike) skin.
This way I can drop Mozilla in anybodys lap and make them use it.
If they need to install extra plugins, configure them and do other "techie" stuff they'll say "Screw it, I'm going back to IE that actually works" and that'll be the end of it.
Mozilla has to be better than IE in ALL areas for it to succeed. I know it's better in most, but it can improve in some.
Users dont want whats technically the best, they want something familiar that works when they see it the first time.
.haeger
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. -- Harlan Ellison
I have been using Mozilla forever (well, since the alpha 9 release), and have been amazed by it's progress. I downloaded CVS snapshots regularly, and found more and more reason to love Mozilla.
...
However, ever since 0.9.7, things didn't seem so peachy. The same Mozilla snaps that were brining me so much joy were crashing on a regular basis. Even the official releases were crashing. The little things that I thought were really cool, were deemed to be not so and disabled.
My gripes with Mozilla, however, are now over, now that I've installed KDE 3.0. The new Konqueror is sheer brilliance, and Kmail is as full featured as Mozilla mail was. I am finally 100% satisfied with my desktop system.
I tried to love Mozilla, and for the longest time I did
One problem wiht Mozilla. It likes put bizare names on the files that I download. Omniweb does support the features of os x better. I hope Mozilla will get there one day.
"4 years for a 1.0"!?! Do me one. This is not something written from the ground up. However much new code there is in there, Mozilla was based on the Netscape source release and is "1.0" in name only. They have taken 4 years to get back where they started.
-- the most controversial site on the Web
There's a reason for this apathy. OmniWeb may be small and light, but it also has no DOM to speak of, is way behind on features compared to Mozilla and is also MacOS X only as far as I'm aware.
In fact I believe the Omni crew are switching away from their own rendering engine to using Gecko, because it'd take years for them to get to the level of rendering accuracy Mozilla has. OmniWeb is currently a little like Konqueror on Linux, real nice, but can't really compete yet in terms of rendering or features.
When a crash is reported by Talkback, see if you can reproduce it. If you can, don't bother sending the repeat crash logs, there's no point. Instead, try to make a minimal test case, so you find the exact problem that causes the crash.
Now go into Bugzilla and file a bug with a brief description of the crash, and most importantly of all the talkback ID of the crash. You can find this out by running the talkback program that's in the components directory. Once you've added the talkback ID to the crash report, a Mozilla engineer will pull the stack trace from the Talkback DB and work will start.
If you don't file in Bugzilla, chances are it won't be looked at! So file them!
Finally, a quick word of warning: don't be surprised if the bug is marked as critical/futured. I've found several times now when I've crashed Mozilla it's because I've been doing some strange stuff with XML or the site contains some seriously twisted markup. Although crashes are always treated seriously, if it's not a situation the average user will ever encounter it will probably get futured.
Happy hacking!
4 years of development does sound bad when you consider a "commercial vendor" who has waited "until 3.x to begin getting things right" now has approximately 80% of the browser share.
Horrible but true.
"My cat's breath smells like cat food." - The Tao of Ralph Wiggum.
The other thing that's a bit annoying, though has improved greatly since I first tried the 0.9.3 release, is the feeling that Mozilla is a little sluggish. I don't know if it's actually slower rendering an average page than Opera is (perhaps a tiny bit), but it feels slower. Opera seems to get everything worked out in the background before drawing a page; Mozilla seems to draw it as it goes. I know this is a crap reason to not use a browser, but it's that F5, <pause>, white screen, page-draws-down that bugs me.
There are, of course, other minor annoyances, like the rather slow loadup time (but I have my browser open nearly 24/7 anyway), but those two things are probably what I still find the worst. Oh yeah, and I'm sure Mozilla supports them, but there doesn't seem to be a way to turn on mouse gestures through the preferences.
Please note that I'm speaking purely from the point of view of someone who is using Opera, and before that IE. I find Opera's keyboard shortcuts and the ability to turn off Javascript, images etc with a single pulldown menu (F12) to be really great; I imagine you can do similar things in Mozilla, but they're not as easy to find in my experience.
On the other hand, Mozilla has a fabulous preferences system that is much easier to use than Opera's. It has a prettier interface too, although Opera certainly isn't ugly. And while it doesn't have mouse-wheel window switching, it also doesn't keep focus on the old window tab because of it. Don't think I'm bashing Mozilla because I'm not. I imagine that if you were someone accustomed to Netscape, Mozilla would seem far better than Opera. Opera seems to try to be more like IE. If Opera wasn't around, I'd use Mozilla, and I'm pleased there's a really decent alternative to Opera--both because competition promotes innovation, and because if Opera ever goes under or their browser just goes to shit, I can switch to Mozilla. I'd like to make a completely redundant statement now, and say kudos to everyone involved with the Mozilla project. Awsome work guys; I may not use your browser, but I'm still behind you 100%.
just goes to show how much dignity oss community has.to them, 1.0 actually means a good product, which is important, because it also means they are trying to just make their product better instead of stealing money from unbeknownst consumers.
lets just hope this particular trait of oss remains and does not become corporate like competition.
QED
BSD is for people who love UNIX. Linux is for those who hate Microsoft.
Has anyone else tried this trick. Look at the source within the first 10 seconds, as it meta-redirects automaticly to Our Favorite Gaping Anus (OFGA)
This way you can delayed-blast people to OFGA by, for example, making a mirror of a slashdotted site, but adding the meta-tag. The page will seem perfectly benign to a moderator with an itching "+1, informative" -finger...
There is acatully, fluxbox. It's a fork where they've kept developing the blackbox code. You can find it at fluxbox.sf.net
[Science] is one of the very few things that raises human life a little above farce and gives it the grace of tragedy.
ObMozBugComplaintBitchSlap
In 2 years of reporting 800 bugs, I've been told "fix it yourself" two or three times. Mozilla developers appreciate bug reports and most don't mind an occasional "I think this bug is important because...". If you just go around complaining "This bug has been known for x months" or "I can't believe you didn't fix obscure bug y, nobody will use your browser", you might get that response, but you're more likely to be ignored.
The shareholder is always right.
Actually, there was also a release called "ME" after that -- perhaps they run out of numbers?
_________________________
Spelling and grammar mistakes left as an exercise for the reader.
i just tried this, but for some reason i keep getting mozilla crashes when i go to www.flash.com. i was hoping for an answer to my lack of flash on linux... maybe tomorrow.
One of the main things that I still haven't figured out (and I have looked) is how to go to the address bar using the keyboard. In Opera you hit F8. In IE you hit Alt-D. I'm sure Mozilla must have this really obvious feature or people would go insane, but I just can't seem to find it.
h elp/
Ctrl+L. For other shortcuts see http://www.cs.hmc.edu/~jruderma/mozilla/keyboard-
The other thing that's a bit annoying, though has improved greatly since I first tried the 0.9.3 release, is the feeling that Mozilla is a little sluggish. I don't know if it's actually slower rendering an average page than Opera is (perhaps a tiny bit), but it feels slower. Opera seems to get everything worked out in the background before drawing a page; Mozilla seems to draw it as it goes.
What's wrong with incremental rendering? One thing that often annoys me when I use Opera is that it will download an entire 4MB page before displaying anything. Mozilla sometimes does that as well, but we consider it a bug (129640) when it does. Mozilla has an optimization that makes not display anything for the first 1.2 seconds of interpreting a page (unless it finishes in under 1.2 seconds), so once the first screenful of the page appears, you can usually read it while the rest of the page loads quietly.
The shareholder is always right.
Just one more area needs more speed, and this is particularly an OS X thing.... it's just how quickly a cached page is displayed. Pages loading up uncached load much quicker than IE on my G4/800 iMac. I just wish I could go back a page as quickly as I can in IE.
Mozilla is my primary browser these days, however, and it rarely crashes. That, in itself, is great.
I can't wait to see what 1.0 holds.
Well, yeah. There's a distinct difference between contributing bug reports (i.e. doing something useful) vs bitching about bugs not getting fixed (i.e. worsening the signal:noise ratio). So, given you're actually helping those working on Moz, it's not suprising that you haven't been given the "fix it yourself" treatment very much.
It just occasionally annoys me enough to read *yet another* post complaining about some bug by someone that has no intent to spend time fixing it, yet simultaneously expects others to go out of their way to fix it for them, and at those times I feel the need to wield a clue-by-four. I guess that makes this meta-bitching, but hey, everyone needs an outlet. 8)
Keep on reporting those bugs!
Mike.
-- "So, what's the deal with Auntie Gerschwitz et all?"
IE and Opera have kicked their asses.
Nice try. No cigar. Go to the back of the class.
Sometimes being on time counts for something, more than just showing up.
Regarding your question...there's nothing wrong with incremental rendering at all. I'm not trying to dis the Mozilla team for choosing to have Mozilla render pages like this. As you say, incremental rendering can be really helpful when it's a large page, and yes, Opera does often sit for thirty seconds on a blank page before showing you anything, and yes it's damn annoying. I was commenting entirely in terms of the effect that incremental rendering has for me, as an Opera user. Since I generally only load small pages, I find that the difference between Mozilla and Opera's rendering methods makes Mozilla feel sluggish. It's probably completely illusionary, and as I mentioned, it's a crap reason to not use Mozilla. No offence was intended &:>
I wonder now...will Mozilla ever give me the most important feature Opera has; page load speed in the status bar ;)
You should run in the Microsoft Fanatic competition in 2002. With that one, there would not have been a competition. You would won it straight away.
Linux, MacOS X, QNX, [insert other Unix variants here] are perfectly good operating systems these days. I prefer using Windows at home but at work, where I need to get things done quickly out-of-box and not after fixing the OS for hours and having to read obscure FAQs and manuals on how to get a piece of driver working on Windows, using Linux is simply the best alternative. RTF documents, supported by nearly every office suite, are also such a good way of communicating with the clients that a non-Windows environment is a practical possibility.
Or do you really believe Microsoft's crap about how using open source source is wrong??
I think , I will continue to use Konqueror for
the only reason that it starts up faster.
When i find pages that Konqi doesnt render well
I switch to Mozilla.....because 5seconds is to much for a browser...
I tried OmniWeb on Mac OS X and all it did was crash every 10 minutes. Which is a shame, because it was a lot nicer than IE on Mac.
Wow, I never thought I'd see the day!
:)
I remember when I first heard of Mozilla about 3 years ago - it was going to make the "browser war" non-existant becuase it was so much faster than Internet Explorer, and still had a lot of slimming down to do (oh, and it was already pretty small!) Never mind that at the time, it had hardly any features, was quite unstable, and such. It was a dream people had. It would be great!
Now, the moment is almost upon us, and Mozilla is almost out in the wild. Several years ago I was quite excited, but now? Well, I'm happy, of course, but what's the big deal? It's nothing all that fantastic, other than that it's a competing (open source) product for IE. If it fit on a floppy and file my taxes (damn those taxes!), though - that's another story.
I s'pose it's like sex - everyone says how great it is, and every teenage boy wants it. But then, when it's finally obtained or obtainable, it's just kind of, "Eh, it was ok, but not what I thought."
~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
Mozilla is already able to use Freetype for TTF rendering, but Mozilla can use all fonts provided by the X server as well.
So if you install TTF fonts for your X server, Mozilla can use it.
There's a patch that enables Mozilla to use GdkXft for font rendering. I'm using it, and *everything* in Mozilla is now anti-aliased!
The current patch doesn't work for Mozilla 0.9.9, but I sent a patch for 0.9.9 to the GdkXft author a week ago.
"I can't believe you didn't fix obscure bug y, nobody will use your browser"
Most of the bitching seems to be surrounding features, or the lack thereof. Things like the view source issue or the lack of roaming profiles generate mucho tension because they aren't percieved as 'bugs' by the Netscape honchos that are doing the dev plan.
I think the core issue is that people have confused 'open source' with 'democratic'. Despite the voting system, etc, Mozilla is still run very much like a commercial software project.
Nope. Mozilla isn't trying to compete with IE, and therebefore Mozilla cannot "lose".
They don't do this to fight IE so that you can whine about them losing the war.
They do this to create a good, cross-platform browser and development platform that everybody who *wants* to use it, can use it, and not to kill IE.
I use 3 browsers on a daily basis: Mozilla 0.99, Netscape 4.72 and IE 6.0. When displaying very large html pages (500K) Mozilla waits until it has read all the information until it displays it, whereas Netscape and IE will render it to screen as it becomes available. The net effect is that you can starting reading the text much sooner in non-Mozilla browsers. Admittedly, Netscape is by far the worst browser when dealing with tables whose elements are of unknown size. IE is faster than the other two browsers in almost all areas.
Is the incremental rendering of uncomplex but large HTML pages with next to no formatting impossible to do in Mozilla's current framework?
...which is the first last step to a final Mozilla 1.0!
Where else can you get coverage like this about a browser!?!
I mean it's a great browser, and it's come a long way, but this kinda of reporting borders on Star Wars theatrical opening obsession.
I'm not a Microsoftie or anything, I just hate shitty browsers. And when you're a dirty GNU hippie communist Lunix homofag, that's all you have. Shitty browsers.
...
Now if they can make Mozilla cohabitate successfully with Netscape on the same box for testing purposes, that would be just swell. :)
Steve Magruder, Metro Foodist
Well, I contributed the bug reports that's all I can do about it. Yes, I have no intent to fix those bugs personally. I don't have time to fix every oss program which I use, especially if the codebase is as huge as mozilla's. I participate on other projects so I prefer fix and enhance those.
As to my comment, I just noted that windows bugs have higher priority. Maybe I'm just bitching....
the vasy majority of open source projects aren't Linux-centric
Hopefully, I like variety. However if there was nothing such as OSS (GPLed) Linux many of them probably wouldn't exist in their current state. I mean things of daily use as Gimp, Vim, Cygwin, gcc...
In Windows world it was at best: "err, ok, take this but don't touch my-cool-bugless-ultracool-sources to my ultra-mega-tetris, you pigdog!". Something must have changed....
Since many of the primary Mozilla developers are from Netscape, Redhat, and IBM, I don't think that you are making a fair assumption.
Dissolve... Resolve... Evolve...
From the announcement "The trunk is now open to 1.1 alpha work, on the road to 2.0!" I don't think this is quite the time to open the trunk, but rather the time, as is done with the linux kernel, to get everyone even more focused on the final product.
Keeping the trunk closed says "No, you can't checkin your uber-widget yet, go find something to do on 1.0 for a while first."
Obviously, a closure like this can't last too long, maybe until RC1 or RC2 is released. However, mozilla has recently benifited enormously from what seems to be a real focus on the important things in the puch towards 1.0. A few more weeks of this could really make a tangible improvement in the final product.
"Maybe I'm just bitching...."
Aren't we all.. 8)
WRT platform bugs getting fixed sooner than Linux-specific bugs (I'm assuming you're talking about XP - cross platform - bugs here) keep in mind that fixing XP bugs give a lot more bang for buck. Fix one single bug in XP code and you've potentially fixed a bug on the 20+ different platforms tha Moz builds on. Fix one Linux bug, and you've fixed a bug on only one platform, albeit the third or forth most important one. So I think it's fair enough that XP bugs get a lot more attention.
IMHO, YMMV, etc.
Mike.
-- "So, what's the deal with Auntie Gerschwitz et all?"
Now that Mozilla is at this milestone (I don't know if I can conceived of non 0.foo releases of this software, it just seems wrong somehow), how do you all think it compares with Konqueror, Galeon, Opera, etc? Does Mozilla have a chance to get (back?) on-top in the not-IE browser scuffle? (yes, scuffle... the war ended when Netscape challenged IE and got its head handed to it on a plate)
perl -e 'print $i=pack(c5, (41*2), sqrt(7056), (unpack(c,H)-2), oct(115), 10)'
Yes Mozilla is superb project! But what is even better is the Gecko engine. Check the galeon browser you simply must fall in love, even if you do not prefer Gnome.
Really, there have been two browsers developed in 4 years. The intial project used the NS4 code as a starting point and eventually abandonded it as unusable. So, if you take out that initial time, you're probably looking at closer to 2 or 2.5 years. Really not bad when writing a product from scratch.
THIS SPACE FOR RENT
"However if there was nothing such as OSS (GPLed) Linux many of them probably wouldn't exist in their current state"
./ would have been a rabidly pro-FreeBSD site.
Well, OSS certainly wouldn't have the amount of attention that it garners today without the dymanic duo - Linux and Apache. But if Linux wasn't around, I'm sure somthing else would have filled the void. Maybe people would have hacked on the HURD instead, or perhaps
Of the tools you listed, gcc was developed by RMS and latter on the Cygwin people, Cygwin itself is a port of the GNU userland to Win32, and vim is an enhanced version of one of the original UNIX editors, all written independently of Linux. You can't credit Linux with everything. 8)
The Window's mindset I guess is mainly because people aren't used to having and giving access to source code. People get used to companies screwing them for $$$ and no source, so people on that platform set out to do the same thing when they write software for it. Pretty sad, really.
mike
-- "So, what's the deal with Auntie Gerschwitz et all?"
Maybe five years ago when Microsoft and Netscape were willy-nilly adding visual markup extensions to HTML; your assertion was true, but that changed with the W3C endorsement of HTML-4.x (purified HTML) and X-HTML (an XML application carrying the same data as HTML) and CSS. Pure HTML is a semantic language; no layout, just information in context. CSS is the "page" layout language that gives visual structure to HTML. X-HTML is essentially HTML with XML syntactic rules, from which you should infer that HTML and XML serve a similar purpose since the former can be an application of the latter.
Remember always: Representation is seperate from presentation. Always. Always. Always.
I don't know what I would use if not for mozilla, but I'm sure it would not be as cool.
:)
Galeon is basically more featureful than Mozilla, and it uses Gecko. Plus it's not as painful to use on my Celeron 366
I'm a big mozilla fan, but to be forking for 1.0 and still have no splash screen or icons? And this stuff isn't even themeable, so the usual suspects can't help us.
This is the kind of stuff closed-source people are laughing at. Why can't the Moz team get this together??
--
I'll be switching every computer I control to Mozilla when 1.0 is released. Although I've been following Mozilla's development closely for 4 years, this will be the first time I've committed to using it.
I wonder how many more like me there are?
I swear I can't hit a link in the mozilla mail program without a 50% chance of total mozilla crash. I send my talkbacks - does that count as 'bug reporting'? Under 'what were you doing?' I put 'clicking a link'.
creation science book
I wonder if the final, gold, 1.0 release will be on the two-year anniversary of the much worse Mozilla bashing:
"Mozilla has branched for 1.0 RC1, which is the first last step to a final Mozilla 1.0"
That oxymoron just about sums it up doesn'it.
Flash will crash and take Mozilla with it if anything happens to have the sound device open when using the Linux version.
I've got a little shell script that runs every morning as a cron job. It's only burned me once. It's great to come in to work every morning and have mozilla be just a little different, and working better. All hail the mighty lizzard!!
/optm ozilla-i686-pc-linux-gnu.tar.gz` ; then /opt/mozilla /dev/null /dev/null
#!/bin/bash
cd
if `ncftpget ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla/nightly/latest/
rm -rf
echo "succeded"
else
echo "failed"
fi
tar zxvf mozilla-i686-pc-linux-gnu.tar.gz >
tar zxvf plugin.tgz >
I'm certainly not in favour of forcing clean room interpretations; just of accurate labelling of software releases. It clearly made sense for the Mozilla team to make what use they could of the Netscape code; but equally clearly, having done that, it is not right for them to adopt a numbering convention which implies that they did not do so.
-- the most controversial site on the Web
give us a bug number so we can vote on it.
the only thing i ever like about ms outlook was the ability to select "combine and decode" and view almost an entire newsgroup as one message, and more importantly save it all in one go.
such as linux
I think there's no dispute between us. I didn't mean to credit Linux for everyting. I credit Linux for that amount of attention without which we won't have oss programs as usable as they are.
It's certainly a big question whether a BSD (and similar) OSS licenced software would make the same boom as GPLed Linux.
horde.org/imp
sucks way less than any other webmail
"I think there's no dispute between us."
;)
I'd agree with that. Just don't go bitching about bugs in Moz not getting fixed again.
"It's certainly a big question whether a BSD (and similar) OSS licenced software would make the same boom as GPLed Linux."
I'm honestly suprised that it hasn't. The BSD license, sans the "obnoxious BSD advertising clause", is very corporate-friendly, so I would have though the BSDs would have been more favoured by enterprises and the like.
I guess Linux's less-stringently-controlled environment means that more people are going to work on it just because it's easier to get your code into the tree, and this general popularity captured the press's attention - hence the boom.
[shrug]
mike
-- "So, what's the deal with Auntie Gerschwitz et all?"
At the bottom of this page: :-)
Document: Done (1.462 secs)
This is on Mozilla 0.9.9 (Linux) - it doesn't give rendering time though. Hope this helps
After 0.98, the nightlies and the releases both started to give a lot of annoyances and crashes for me.
I have been galled, if not suprised, to observe the pattern of most comments regarding the Mozilla project over the years at Slashdot.
/. over the years anyway. It's not like, say, abot 80% of comments were completely unconstructive, nooo....
In the early days, it was:
"My GOD, this will NEVER be a usable product! Blah! Mozilla bites!"
This attitude has prevailed (morphing to nitpicking) even with the most recent 0.9.x releases:
"My GOD, Mozilla doesn't cook my bacon and eggs, and make my bed in the morning! Blah! Mozilla bites!"
Now with 1.0 days away, we finally see many more encouraging messages:
"Way to go Mozilla! We were with you all along! Hooray for the glories of Open Source and Free Software!"
I guess I'm being a bit cynical, but it's a good thing that most of the Mozilla developers probably ignored
I've been using Moz 0.9.9 for a while now, and I just want to say that it works superb on my win2k box. I found the previous versions quite buggy, and sometimes impossible to install, but I think 0.9.9 is a very good browser. Pages render nicely, you can block images from advertisement servers :-), and the tab function is great, just as in Opera. Only problem: My online bank doesn't support Moz. Yet.
s/abot/about/
i've successfully got it working, though sometimes i still get messages about having the plug-in installed. next to find one for konqueror.
:)
oh yeah, and getting a java plug in that works for mozilla
jesser has covered keyboard access to the address bar. Thanks! I was wondering about that one myself.
As for speed, the UI chrome can be a little sluggish on a slower machine, but I find the HTML renderer to be quite swift.
rather slow loadup time
I use QuickLaunch and find startup quite reasonable. You can turn it on under Preferences->Advanced, or during installation.
there doesn't seem to be a way to turn on mouse gestures through the preferences
For now gesture navigation is an optional module that you need to install yourself by visiting the OptiMoz site. The installation is really painless, and you can configure or uninstall optimoz through the prefs panel. One caveat: the latest nightly builds seem to have changed some interfaces that OptiMoz uses, so the prefs are no longer visible, though I expect the OptiMoz project to have an updated release available soon.
And while it doesn't have mouse-wheel window switching...
...it does however allow you to configure the mouse wheel with a modifier key to scroll pages at a time, line at a time, change text size or go back and forward through history.
All the UI people are already screaming that Moz has too many prefs. I guess I wouldn't be hired for UI design since I like lots of configurability. I don't see a RFE bug in bugzilla to add switching windows using the mouse wheel, but you can search bugzilla yourself and if you're sure such an RFE doesn't exist, then add a bug.
Of course, RFE's are low on the totem pole right now...
Christopher
Mozilla
Mozilla is starting to run into an odd problem here. Back at 0.8, and even as late as 0.9.2, there were enough bug-fixes coming in for enough major bugs that it was well worth the time of the average well-clued user to run nightlies instead of releases. The nightlies would only be truely unstable for a week or two after a release (as the flood gates opened up), but then they would stabalize, and I found them very usable.
Now, though, the 0.9.8 and 0.9.9 releases have been so stable that I haven't wanted to load a nightly. It hasn't been helped by the fact that Mozillazine used to do a great job of reviewing each set of nightlies, but they've been falling WAY behind for a while now.
I've got work to do, and was really only a tester because being one got me a better browser than NS4. I wonder how many other folk are equally lazy...?
I can't wait to test RC1. Then test RC2, and then RC3, ...
then RC895,
then RC896.
I think it depends on the bugs too. Perhaps you can post the bug numbers and others can take a look at them and see if they can reproduce them. Get a lot of people to vote for the bug and it'll get fixed real fast.
Mozilla has been my browser of choice for a while now, but it still has some serious bugs. So consider this criticism based in love. It's also encouraging that all these bugs have a real chance of being fixed. Even I could theoretically fix them.
There is a huge bug with bookmarks:
51683: Unable to have 2 differently named bookmarks for the same url.
This is more than a bit ridiculous, since the bug was submitted September 2000.
Another, less serious bookmark bug:
85469: Bookmark select/cut/paste operation is sensitive to order of selection
This is a major meta-bug:
73812: Browser doesn't fit with Mac OS X UI Specs
Anyone who uses a Mac uses it because of the user interface--having a program that doesn't comply with the guidelines is extraordinarily frustrating. But they're definitely getting closer.
128658: Typing in textarea really slow
Large textareas overwhelm Mozilla. This makes editing in WP, for example, very frustrating. Totally unacceptable.
However, it's great watching bugs get steadily fixed. So vote for the above bugs, get them fixed, submit patches, hooray. The rendering engine really is marvelous.
--
Make mine methylphenidate.
I track Mozilla releases time to time, I will not deny that it is a very very nice browser.
However, the damn thing still doesn't handle flash transparencies right (Nither does Netscape of course)... But then I again I guess Flash transparences aren't w3c compliant are they.
Wank.
Preventive War is like committing suicide for fear of death. - Otto Von Bismarck
<news truth="0">
Mozilla.org has signed a deal with Distributed Computing Technologies Inc. to include encryption research software in the official binary releases of Mozilla 1.0 Release Candidate 5. The RC5 build will include a distributed application to measure the strength of RSA's RC5 cipher, described in RFC 2040.
</news>
Will I retire or break 10K?
Why do you add the verbose flag to tar if you pipe output to /dev/null??
You can get mouse gestures for Mozilla here.
We're going to make information free Mr. Anderson, whether you like it, or not.
There's nothing in Linux as complex and cryptic as... (deep voice) the Registry.
Other than the mess that is some distributions' /etc?
Will I retire or break 10K?
'Civilised' is spelt perfectly correctly. It's only you 'uncivilized' Americans who spell it wrong.
-ize is better than -ise. The suffix -ize comes from Greek -zein (except for these few exceptions); -ise is a French (ribbit) corruption.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Wow, you sure are bittered by something. Have you been taking your medication?
Open source developers are not people who sit around all day long (well... most don't lol) and code for free. They merely donate their time, or if they are lucky enough to work for a company thats sponsoring an OSS project, they do it there. Open source software doesn't care how closed source software is doing... it just naturally progresses along as more people add their thoughts to the code, whether it's optimizations or functionality. I for one use Mozilla as my primary browser, and enjoy everything they have done. One of the smartest things that they did was take java completely out of the browser and let sun take care of it with SunSpot, the java plugin.
-- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
is neither fast nor stable, discuss?
Normally I completely agree with you, but with browsing I pretty much need to keep a hand on the mouse anyway. And actually, with this five button optical that does browser forward and back and Mozilla's middle click to open in a new tab I rarely need to use the keyboard at all for browsing except to fill out forms. Then again, Mozilla's form autofill helps out there too :).
Mozilla is especially nice for when I'm at work because I can keep one tabbed window open for things I'm actively working on with another separate tabbed window open with the sites I tend to monitor most of the day (/., k5, message boards i frequent, etc). This helps keep me organized and dramatically reduces the amount of clutter I have to deal with since I almost always have open a half dozen+ browser windows, a few gvims, two or three puttys, aim and winamp.
I switched to using it for 99% of what I do with the 0.9.9 release. There are still some pages on our company intranet that require IE, but that's about it.
Game... blouses.
Mozilla works on the Bank of America system, just like Netscape 4.7x did. Too bad Opera and Konqueror don't, though.
Mozilla 0.9.9 is almost there. Much faster and more stable than 0.9.7. Just a few more bugs (such as deleting bookmarks) to work out.
Microsoft's VP of Customer Service is Helen Waite. If you are having problems with their products go to Helen Waite.
When I used Mozilla (around 0.9.3), I had one major peoblem with it - speed. I was never sure whether it really did start or that it really recieved the mouse click or the button pressed and doing something slowly, or that it exited already or I'm typing in the wrong window..
Is this going to improve? Is it going to start in less than 10 seconds? Are buttons going to be pressed right after you click on them? More importantly, is text you type in the mailer going to appear and cursor going to move immediately after you press the button on the keyboard?
http://www.xulplanet.com/downloads/view.cgi?catego ry=applications&view=all
The second option down provides an awesome preferences bar that makes using Mozilla the best thing since sliced bread for me.
Hope you like it.
it's terminology like that that slows the whole project down! that's like saying "ok, first we're going to write half of the project, and then half of what's remaining to do, then half of what's now remaining, etc." it's an infinite series!
Just raise the taxes on crack.
(You cannot link directly from slashdot to bugzilla)
OmniWeb isn't free (as in speech)
OmniWeb isn't free as in beer either. It only runs on one type of hardware, which is not the market leader, and that type of hardware costs $800. Not everybody has the money or desk space for Macintosh hardware, especially if your school or employer mandates a particular brand of Wintel PC.
Will I retire or break 10K?
I guess I'm being a bit cynical, but it's a good thing that most of the Mozilla developers probably ignored /. over the years anyway. It's not like, say, abot 80% of comments were completely unconstructive, nooo...
/. syndrome. Some people complain about the topic. Some people complain about people complaining about the topic. And some people complain about people complaining... etc. And then everyone agrees that /. is going to hell, and wonders why.
This really is the
I vote we should just stop complaining.
Jake
Dating: while( 1 ){ call_girl(); get_rejected(); drink_40(); } return 0;
F6 works for me under Linux. Same key works in IE 5. I have no idea if that works in Moz under Win32.
I'm sure Mozilla supports them, but there doesn't seem to be a way to turn on mouse gestures through the preferences.
Optimoz does this. I don't think Mozilla has it natively.
* And remember, it's spelled N-e-t-s-c-a-p-e, but it's pronounced "Mozilla."
In 2 years of reporting 800 bugs, I've been told "fix it yourself" two or three times.
Only a few times after 800 reports. That actually sounds amazing patient of the Mozilla developers.
Just kidding with you. :)
So how long after Mozilla goes gold are we expecting Opera to stay around? You can't make money when another product is [better than/"good enough" relative to] your product. Mozilla is now immortal thanks to the GPL. How mortal is Opera?
Only a few times after 800 reports. That actually sounds amazing patient of the Mozilla developers.
That was the point I was trying to make. I didn't word my comment very well... I should have included the word "only".
The shareholder is always right.
Mozilla has an optimization that makes not display anything for the first 1.2 seconds of interpreting a page (unless it finishes in under 1.2 seconds)
Is there some way to set this timeout? I think things would have a "snappier" feel if it was more like 0.6 seconds.
I've done this in Mosaic, Netscape 1-4, and now Opera.
As far as I can tell there is no way to do this in Mozilla. On any platorm. Is there in fact a way to do this? Mozilla is useless to me without this feature.
It's called "Bookmark Groups".. Most anyone that uses Mozilla knows about Tabbed browsing. that's where you can open up a second webpage in the same browsing window and "tab" between them...
If you haven't tried it believe me once you get used to it it's awesome and going back to any other browser just sucks.
well consider this scenario: let's say when you get up you go to the same 10 websites every morning.. slashdot, cnn, scifiwire, PA... whatever.. with this bookmark groups feature you just load up all 10 of your websites into tabs and then bookmark the entire group.. then when you get up you can load up immediately all 10 websites for your perusal all in one tidy window. HELL Yeah. I can't wait for this feature! i just hope it gets done in time for 1.0
Then you come along and notice "Hey, yesterday that guy poo-poo-ed Mozilla, but today this other guy said it was good. What gives?"
Well clearly what gives is that you think this is the same person when in fact it is different people saying different things.
SIDE NOTE: Complaining about how Slashdot people are inconsistant is just STOOPED. There is not one voice here, there are many. If you came to compalin about inconsistancy, then track one person and look for inconsistancy.
There is nothing so silly as other peoples traditions, and nothing so sacred as our own.
No, I'm not a GNU hippie communist anything, YOU are an MS hippie facist Winblows homofag.
This is more than a bit ridiculous, since the bug was submitted September 2000.
I was stunned and amazed when I read this sentence. I had to read it twice before I believed it! Someone actually spelled "ridiculous" correctly on slashdot! Its gotten so that it doesn't even look correct anymore. Nice work!
You're kidding right?
They just don't label them as pre 1.0.
Georgia summer camps
if this will run on OpenBSD.
I wonder about this every then and now, mostly when
I read about new releases on slashdot.
The last mozilla that natively ran on OpenBSD/x86-32
is, if I remember correctly, 0.9.3
Newer versions run in Linux binary emulation (I should
s/emulation/personality/ though), ok, but you will have
to have a tens-of-megabytes package (the RH 6.2 libraries)
around unless your Moz-Linux binary is fully statically
linked - preferably against a 2.2 or even 2.0 kernel.
I currently work on a pentium-75 notebook that has only
32 MB RAM, thus rendering Linux binaries nearly unusable,
and even BSDI Netscrap 4.7? is sucking slow. Maybe I should
try konq-embedded, but you still need kdelibs for this.
So my solution is, and I am quite happy with this, to use Lynx
and xloadimage for browsing only (even without starting X11).
But _when_ I wish to graphically browse a website, I have no
real option.
*considering Netscrap 3 for BSD/OS* hmmm...
Anyways, I hope the folks at Moz are working to get OpenBSD
on most platforms (minus vax, I suppose, and probably minus
hppa and sparc64) to run.
Many people I know of would like to hear of success.
My Karma isn't excellent, damn it! (And
If you want elegance and superb antialiasing and standards compliance, consider Chimera.
Galeon gives you the option to block images from particular sites, i have a big list of adserving ip`s, doubleclick.net etc, added already. The option to selectively ban certain types of javascript (popups/popunders mainly) from particular sites would be nice, also the option to block images based on a path (www.bleh.com/ads/*.jpg) instead of the entire server
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
I don't think so. Note that shortening the paint suppression period would make many sites start to display before Mozilla can figure out the relative sizes of blocks. One reason for paint suppression is that without it, page elements jump around during the first second or so of rendering. (Another reason, which IMO is less important, is that it reduces the total time Mozilla takes to display a page.)
The shareholder is always right.
In the early days, it was:
"My God, writing your user interface in HTML and Javascript was a stupid idea!"
Now with 1.0 it's:
"My God, writing your user interface in HTML and Javascript was a stupid idea!"
Hopefully they'll get me to change my tune sometime in the future, cuz as of right now it's still ass.
There's nothing wrong with incremental rendering, it's just a matter of personal preference. For me it's annoying the have the page 'draw down'; I much prefer the Opera way of doing things.
And although Mozilla is much faster now than in early versions, it still isn't as fast as Opera. I did some timing on page draws earlier and although hardly scientific Opera consistently beat Mozilla time and again - sometimes displaying the page in approximately half the time that Mozilla took.
Max
My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
There's always the possibility that one of the nightly Mozilla builds will have a nasty IMAP bug that corrupts/damages the online folders.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
I was stunned and amazed when I read this sentence. I had to read it twice before I believed it! Someone actually spelled "ridiculous" correctly on slashdot! Its gotten so that it doesn't even look correct anymore. Nice work!
At first I thought you were "stunned and amazed" that such a bug could last so long.
By the way, it's "It's", not "Its".
--
Make mine methylphenidate.
This post sounds like the rantings of a brainwashed M$ slave. I suggest that you shelve your bigoted opinions and maybe give open source a try. No one asks you to like it, but give it a try before you spout off at the mouth about what you don't understand!
-keep the faith, Mozilla 1.0 is almost here
Like pi? Try 10,000 digits.
No one in their right mind goes with a .0 release, especially not in a "production" environment. ;-)
.9s and am using the latest non-daily build to post this.
Before you pick up the flamethrower, I want you to know that I've been using Mozilla since the early
"One-click tabs for each emacs buffer would be nice."
XEmacs has had this feature since v21.something - it's present in 21.4, which is what I use.
In contrast, I'm still trying to figure out how to get flash to work with Mozilla.
Personally I will not run Flash, due to the many annoying advertisements using it. However, if you must have it, you can just use the Netscape plugin..
FuzzyOne reason Opera can render faster than Mozilla is because it has a simpler rendering engine. Mozilla has to support DOM1 and a large chunk (if not all) of DOM2. This means pretty much every element can be seen as an object and manipulated as such, such as dynamically setting things like opacity, size, font and even position.
Since Opera is very weak in DOM support, it doesn't have to be so complex, and thus can render faster, but it cannot do many things Mozilla can do. On one hand, it's nice to have a browser that is lightweight and fast, on the other hand it pisses me off as a developer because it holds me back if I want to support Opera.
Opera is a niche browser, and always has been. The people who like Opera like the fact that it's lightweight, snappy and/or has an unconventional UI. Oh, and it has a decent download manager built-in.
While Mozilla is getting a download manager, you can hardly describe it as lightweight, at least if you don't count just embedding the rendering engine.
I imagine Galeon might appeal to many Opera fans, but in all honesty, I can't see the majority of Opera users switching unless somebody essentially built an Opera-like browser using Gecko as the rendering engine. Even then, some people would still prefer Opera for its lightning fast (If a little dated) rendering engine.
Star Office hasn't changed since 1998.
I know this is a crap reason to not use a browser, but it's that F5, , white screen, page-draws-down that bugs me.
/. page and my user page, and I didn't see this effect either (the page continued to be displayed until the next one was rendered.
I'm not quite sure what you mean. I've only been using Moz since 0.9.9 and haven't noticed this problem. I just tried F5 on the main
Not to say there aren't other annoyances. My current peeve is the way text is highlighted in the address bar. It always seems to be doing the wrong thing.
-no broken link
I'm like the other respondent, I write web application that rely a lot on JavaScript for the UI. Originally I was using IE5 for development, but I've switched to Mozilla since 0.9.9. The JavaScript is all DOM1 so, it's pretty easy to stay compliant with IE (whereas it's easy in IE to go out of compliance with other IE version). Also the DOM browser really helps a lot in other cases.
Eventually I will get around to learning how to use the JavaScript debugger. I haven't had enough of a problem yet to warrent learning it, though.
-no broken link
It does. having come from ie5, it's what I always use.
-no broken link
Slashdot has what, 10,000 users? Would you rather we all have the same opionion?
to get my own mozilla 1.0 RC 99 :D
and sip your morning coffee...and "unsubscribe" your newspaper. :)
We are now in the high times for Linux. I mean, I consider Linux and Windows to be at the crossroads for the best OS.
For Linux we have:
KDE 3.0 + all the nice utils
Mozilla 1.0/Konqueror(even more better with crossweaver's plugins!)
OpenOffice
Apache 2.0
Samba
etc.
A lot of these and other types of softwares are "professional quality"...and it suprises me that people actually do this for free.
The point? We have just met up with Windows. Open source software can *only* improve from this point on, while Windows just stagnates(with UI updates every 5 years).
I've used Netscape since Andresson announced the first version on Usenet and only upgraded when I had to. When I could't stand 4.77 "correcting" me when I typed in an address in the Location: line I tried 6.2.2 and thought for a second my CPU had been replaced by a 4 Mhz Z80. Up to one second to respond to a right mouse click is sheer idiocy.
I tried Opera and Mozilla two weeks ago. Mozilla is only half as slow as NS6.2.2, and I'm sticking with Opera, only resorting to other browsers for compatability testing.
I'd rather use Mozilla, but I don't have time to wait for the mouse to catch up to me.
I realize a fast processor and gobs or RAM probably mitigates that, but NS4.76 (and every previous version of NS) got that part right; IE never did. Can we expect Mozilla to address this?
Need Mercedes parts ?
It would make sense that windows would be considered the primary platform, but I'm perfectly content with the Linux version. In fact, there are many things about the windows version that I dislike as compared to linux. (which is pretty much anything to do with the middle mouse button...)
Personally, my experience with some of the other bug fixers and reporters has been very positive in regards to linux-specific bugs. The Mozilla team is a very dedicated group of people who want to see this thing succeed.
Honestly, this long for a bulky browser?
A simple fast gui and browser is all anyone wants.
Even ie was better at this (they are bulky AND crashy, though).
If konqueror supported ssl properly (ie easily and automatically), and was smaller, and didn't start up startkde and other annoying stuff... Twould be sweet. ANd Nautilus just stinks. As does opera. stupid ads.
Would you rather we all have the same opionion?
Oh my goodness! You don't mean they discovered yet another particle... the "opionion", the one that carries opinions from one particle to another, and helps us 'too large to be considered quantum objects' form opinions?
Tell me you don't mean THAT...
(BTW Mozilla rocks. I don't need to use Netscape anymore, when Moz is around. It has a few nasty bugs, but if 1.0 means less bugs, I'm all for it. Mozilla already does more than enough for me :-)
My other computer runs FreeBSD too.
You may be running artsd in kde that causes this problem (flash sites will hang mozilla).
Easy solution for this is to launch mozilla by doing "artdsp mozilla". This works without any problems.
I don't know if "asymptoting" is a word or not, but it sounds vaguely illegal.
Move on. There's nothing to see here.
On the other hand, Opera doesn't tell you how long it takes to load the document like Mozilla does. Not sure which I'd consider more important. If I was on broadband, probably the latter. On dialup, as I am, probably the former.
Opera is adware; you can download and use it for free, but there's an ad banner in the toolbar. Actually I don't find it particularly obtrusive, but I have registered Opera nonetheless. However, Opera has a very strong presence in embedded systems, and is the standard browser on some new Nokia phone (check opera.com for more precise info; I can't recall the exact details).
The main advantage Opera has is how lightweight it is, as mentioned by another poster. This makes it ideal for mobile devices and slow computers. Also, remember that even if Mozilla had/gets all the features Opera has, I'm still not sure I'd switch. I find Opera's increased responsiveness (perceived or not) to be a strong motivation to keep using it over Mozilla. Maybe I just don't like programs that make my computer feel slow...I'm running an Athlon ~900 MHz with 512 MiB of RAM. If I had less RAM, I would also possibly choose Opera because it's been running all night and has six window tabs open (my site, submail.net, mozdev.org and three slashdot windows), and it's using 21,252 kiB of memory. Mozilla, which I just opened, has only two windows open (one of them my extremely lightweight site and the other the slashdot front page) and it's using 21,772 kiB of memory.
Depending on your needs and preferences, Opera and Mozilla have different attractions. I imagine Opera will remain in contention on the desktop for some time to come, but probably it will eventually fall from fame to some degree. In the embedded market though, it's got a decided advantage, and quite a headstart.
As for "You can't make money when another product is [better than/"good enough" relative to] your product"...why do you think that? I mean, take the obvious example of Windows 2000 Server and Linux. Microsoft still seems to be making a lot of money. Also remember that Opera is more targeted to Windows users than Mozilla is (at least, that's the impression I get). While breaking into the IE market on Windows is pretty hard, it's becoming easier due to Microsoft's appalling track record with IE--new holes are being reported literally every week on The Register , for example. I'm not sure about this last point, but I feel Windows users may also be more willing to pay for something than Linux users, since most of them are using a proprietary OS in the first place.
Just some thoughts. Personally I think Opera will maintain a presence on the desktop, but Mozilla and IE will comprise most of the market share.
I don't notice this effect as much online, I must admit. I was particularly thinking of Mozilla in terms of web-development I suppose, and since I do that a lot and find Opera easier for it, I have a certain bias against Mozilla. Actually I'm quite impressed with how fast Mozilla loads the Slashdot frontpage; the incremental rendering is really helpful in this case.
Now, I'd better stop replying or people are gonna think I have nothing better to do with my life.
That's great, but I think most *smart* users will wait for rc23 or rc24 before upgrading. ;-)
Hey, come to think of it it doesn't. IIRC, Netscape 4.x had this feature. I think the aestitic with Mozilla's status line was to keep it clean rather than verbose.
It's true. I'm nothing more than "Big" Bill's toi boi.
But Netscape still sucks, and you're still just as gay as I am.
...
For gestures, check out Optimoz. I tried it in an early stage and it seemed to work well, though I never got used to it.
For quick access to preferences, look at Preferences Toolbar. I seem to remember that MultiZilla also has quick access to common prefs.
Hope that helps!
I just want configurable toolbars. :-(
That, and all the dataloss/crasher bugs fixed.
Not to the OS kernel, but to X11 server! And not all mozilla, just XPCE.
Imagine full control of your window frames, virtual desktops, panels, applets etc - all with XML and through the web! What a great life!
And then I am ready to imagine a lawsuit from GNOME and KDE for a lost market :)
Seriously, I still think that XPCE can do much more than just stupid web surfing. And I don't understand - why nobody notice that?!
XPCE/XPCOM model is great. It does what M$-win programmers love in M$-COM and why they don't want to hear about any *n*x.
I understand th fight for hearts of consumers. But how about "prosumers"? If we really want to win desktops for Linux, we should give something to desktop programmers.
Something, what? GNOME? KDE? It is really mis-advertisment. M$-COM programmers do not buy it. But XPCOM is very similar to the development environment they used to work! Give it them and they will love it, they will use it and create whole bunch of really cool really cross-platform applications.
What has to be done? Chil the hip of Mozilla web browser and heat the hip of XPCOM development environment