Slashdot Mirror
Mozilla 1.0 RC2 is out
ferratus writes "The Mozilla organization just released the second release candidate for the upcoming 1.0 due out in a few weeks. See the updated release note and remember to see the mirror list before hitting the main server."
Mozilla 1.0 RC 2 has just been released and is already available for download. This is what has changed from the previous RC. New stuff include support for "HTTP pipelining", something which can increase performance by 50%! (disabled by default, check the releases notes).
This was the story I have submitted, Slashdot staff is weird, really.. =)
We hardly knew you. [http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13849 6 - not linkified in hopes of not /.ing bugzilla again]
Back for 1.1, hopefully...
Did you install on top of a previous install? If you did then remove that install and start fresh (you won't lose your profile, it's stored in a different location).
--Asa
Well, um, install a Duke Nukem game then, maybe Duke
Nukem Forever will get released. *grin*
Any while you're at it. Switch to Privoxy. It's based on Internet Junkbuster but has some advanced features like the ability to replace text within the html code itself. I use this to block flash ads on a per website basis.
Check out AbiWord.
Perhaps they should just hide it and hope it goes away.
I wish I could show you the "known defect list" for the software on your computer. I don't care what it's running. It's long.
Software sucks. Mozilla less then most. And this is the big run up to 1.0, after all.
Do you expect perfection? Are you prepared to pay the millions of dollars it costs you? (And still sometimes lose the rocket to a small, small bug...?)
This doesn't fix a security hole from RC1. RC1 didn't have that security hole (it was obscured by the entire feature not working). Mozilla 0.9.9 did have the hole and it's now fixed in RC2. But this is not a security release. This release didn't happen because of the security fix (you could get that in a nightly builds many many days ago). This was a planned release based on feedback from RC1. We fixed 270 bugs between RC1 and RC2 including the most frequently encountered crash and hang problems.
--Asa
Agreed! And no restricting it to just namby-pamby cheesy looking cheap white shirts with flimsy looking text and a lame graphic - I want a QUALITY black shirt featuring that big, red "Commie" star on the front, with the lizard's head in the middle, and something simple on the back; maybe just "mozilla.org" in a kickass font or some such.
The world is riddled stupid looking cheap, white software promo t-shirts. Mozilla folks: PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE don't do this. Charge the whole whopping $2-$3 you'll need to make it a NICE shirt.
The Free desktop that Just Works
[ First, I use both Mozilla and IE (my employer has pages that are designed only for IE, and it's their computer anyway, so fine.) I have Mozilla running through the Proxomitron filtering out ads, but I have IE running straight. ]
Anyway, I accidentally went to some news site on the IE browser. O My God! It has been literally years since I saw crap like that on my screen. These giant flashing blocks of color went sweeping across the screen, swooping up to an advertisement. The banner ads across the top were flashing contrasting colors so violently and rapidly that I had to scroll them out of view before I could focus on the text. I then closed IE (and the pop-unders it had left behind) and brought the same news site up in Mozilla behind the Proxomitron. I'm very serious, all I could see was the news article, but all I could feel was an overwhelming pity for folks who don't have blocking software.
Am I taking a free ride? I have certain sites that I frequent in my Proxomitron bypass list, and occasionally click on an ad just to give them a hit or two. (Hi Thinkgeek!) I pay for the shareware I use. I support faqs.org via the Amazon Honor System. The next time I use sneakemail, I'm sending them $12. Others (such as that news site) inspire me to implement and even write new filters. But is it a free ride?
So now I have other questions. Do you hit "30-second skip" on your ReplayTV remote while watching prerecorded shows? If you don't own a ReplayTV, do you fast forward through the commercials at the start of a video tape? Do you wait for the end of a TV show to go to the bathroom, or do you temporarily forget your ethics, sneak out and do it while the commercials are on? Are you taking a free ride then?
It gets even more absurd: does it take you two hours to read a "free" newspaper because you feel you have to read all the ads before you read the comics? Do you read every flyer tucked under your windshield wiper? Of course not! Nobody does. But where do you draw the line? So, then what makes it OK to dodge this ad because it's on paper or videotape, but not duck that ad because it's on the web?
Ads on TV still hit lots of viewers -- those who are watching real-time, those who can't afford a VCR, those who are watching a TV not under their control. Ads on the web still hit lots of viewers, too -- those who aren't savvy enough to realize they don't have to.
My vote is this: advetisers that are patently offensive (flash, animation, javascript, DHTML, motion or blinking all qualify to me) should be blocked on principle. For example, I haven't felt the need to run out and write a 'Google Sponsored Link blocking filter,' but I sure devoted time to wipe out a handful of obscene javascript and flash tricks. I view ads on a few selected sites. So, am I free-riding? I've finally decided that I don't care if I am.
John