Slashdot Mirror


Mozilla RC3 Released

pjdepasq was one of many reader to submit the news that "Those fine folks at Mozilla.org rolled out RC3 on Thursday I noted. They say it's the last planned release before 1.0, which I'm guessing is right around the corner. As a fan of the project (I'm using it on 3 platforms!), kudos to all of you!" Here are the release notes.

16 of 492 comments (clear)

  1. Netscape 7 by mbrix · · Score: 5, Insightful

    With the upcoming release of Mozilla 1.0, Netscape 7 will be based on that. I really hope reviewers, developers and users will take a new view on Netscape so Netscape can gain some of the lost market share. I'm tired of seeing websites which simply don't care about Netscape/Mozilla support...

    And don't start saying "hey, I don't need Netscape, I want plain Mozilla!". You're right, but Netscape is for (l)users. If Netscape 7 has success, you'll also have more luck surfing the internet with your Mozilla browser.

    By the way, MozillaZine is also a great source of information for Mozilla-fans.

    1. Re:Netscape 7 by bunratty · · Score: 5, Informative
      Well, I need netscape anyway because some sites won't let you install a plugin for mozilla but only netscape or explorer.
      The Mozilla PluginDoc project was created to help Mozilla users with installing their plugins. Go to that website to get instructions on how to install your favorite plug-in without needing Netscape.
      --
      What a fool believes, he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.
  2. Something interesting about Moz on Windows XP by Nailer · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It uses native widgets. I.e., unlike a lot of other apps - eg, Microsoft's own Office XP - Mozilla actually uses Windows XP's `styles'. If you get rid of the GreyModern / Netscape 4 themes and replace them with the IE theme, Mozilla actually looks and acts like a rather pleasant and featurefilled native looking web browser for Win32. Without the security holes of IE, plus tabbing, popup control, and lots of other goodies IE doesn't have.

    1. Re:Something interesting about Moz on Windows XP by satanami69 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Edit->Preferences
      Click on Advanced
      Click in Enable Quick Launch.
      Click ok.
      Now it'll load just as fast.

      --
      I really hate Dan Patrick.
    2. Re:Something interesting about Moz on Windows XP by Webz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You are only partially correct. Mozilla does not and probably never will (in the near future) use native widgets for any OS because of (I think) XUL. Mozilla has its own rendering engine, controlled by JavaScript and style sheets. This allows for mucho customization, by web developers and users alike. It does not, however, earn any brownie points in usability.

      You are, however, correct in that Mozilla on XP inherits the visual style of XP's interface (anything Luna or Classic). But that's all. Mozilla does not inherit the accessibility features in XP. Should XP suddenly support a new input device for navigating sheets (or similar), Mozilla wouldn't have any part of it. The Mozilla team has had many a debate on how to mimic the keyboard shortcuts in Windows since none of the interface is native. For the majority of Windows users, however technical ye are, this is a moot point, because it just looks the same and does its job. This argument is most apparent in Mac OS X, an environment associated with pretty colors and UI guidelines provided by Apple. Many, many OS X users have not used Mozilla because it looks and functions like nothing on OS X. And of course, Linux users either don't care or don't have enough time/energy to choose a standard interface and then care. =)

      Mozilla, in all of its open source and standards-compliant glory, will always be a second-rate browser if not native to each platform of operation. Don't get me wrong, I love Mozilla to no end... I'd just like a native version. (See Internet Explorer, OmniWeb, Lynx, etc.)

      PS - I don't recall any version of Office using Windows's UI controls... Office always shipped with some new, bleeding edge control of its own, often to be reincarnated into the controls of the next version of Windows. Even Office XP, of all things, has no correlation to native Windows XP controls.

    3. Re:Something interesting about Moz on Windows XP by astrosmash · · Score: 4, Insightful
      That only solves half the problem. So the UI is native, but the buttons / input fields / combo boxes etc on web pages are still not.
      Buttons, input fields, and combo boxes on web pages can never be native widgets, for two reasons:
      • You can't apply CSS to native widgets. (border colors and sizes, onHover and onFocus styles, etc)
      • You can't control the z-order; native widgets will always be on top of all rendered content.
      That's why mozilla and IE render their own controls, and I'm sure Opera will some day, too. (I've never used OmniWeb, so I can't say anything about that)
      --
      ENDUT! HOCH HECH!
  3. Re:Mac OS X version... by SimonKeogh · · Score: 5, Interesting


    Bloated? A ten meg download that includes browser, mail, news, irc client? And I don't know what machine you are using, but Moz is as snappy as anything else on my computer. I'm sorry, but nothing about this excellent peice of software seems bloated or slow to me. This is by far the best web browser I've ever used IMHO.

  4. Heres the post everyone should read first by HanzoSan · · Score: 5, Informative



    Basically, this is what posts you'll see.

    "IE is faster, Mozilla cant beat IE"

    Lets respond to this post right now. OF course IE is faster and always will be faster because its build into the damn OS. MSN msger is faster than ICQ and AIM, anything made by Microsoft should be the fastest considering Microsoft has advantages in terms of knowing the source code of the entire OS.


    "IE has won, its too late, Mozilla team should just give up"

    Isnt this exactly what the IE team should have done back in 1998 when Netscape 4 was winning 70-30 in terms of percentages?


    "Opera's done it all first, Mozilla is copying"

    Of course Mozilla and Netscape will copy Opera the same way Opera and IE copied Netscapes Bookmark system.

    "Opera is better than Mozilla and IE because its faster"

    Are you using Windows? Perhaps you should try linux on your 486, its faster. What? You arent using a 486? Well stop complaining about speed, if Mozilla is slow, its because you are too slow to upgrade

    "Mozilla/Netscape cant render page X"

    Maybe it WOULD render page X if you stopped using IE and wrote that same msg to the site owner

    "Mozilla is bloated and slow"

    Try Kmeleon, Galeon, or if both those are slow try lynx.

    "AOL isnt supporting Mozilla, why wont they put gecko into their AOL package?"

    They have. AOL 7.0 gecko beta. Also try Netscape 7


    This ends all arguements you people will have before they begin, the rest of the arguements will be about bugs in mozilla, when will 1.0 release, why mozilla isnt availble for your obscure OS, or why the mozilla team took 4 years to build the best browser.


    --
    If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
  5. Mozilla/Netscape usage & anti-Netscape sentime by galaga79 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This is not intended as flamebait by any means, but does anyone know what sort of browser share Mozilla/Netscape have? I have been following and pushing both browsers for the past year, encouraging others to try them out, but when checking the browser statistics for my website they don't have any entry at all. Right now the breakdown for my site is about 97% Internet Explorer 5+ and 3% Netscape 4, which is a real shame. Does anyone out there have any more promising browser usuage stats?

    It is also interesting guaging people response to Mozilla/Netscape on sites other than Slashdot. It seems like there is real anti-Netscape sentiment out there, an example being the response to Netscape 7 at deviantart where there is loads of "Netscape sucks" one liners. I could be wrong on this, but it seems ever since Netscape 4 a lot of people seem unprepared to give Netscape a second chance. Perhaps it is "cool" to hate Netscape because they are owned by AOL, I don't know

    Anyway that aside, Mozilla is great is most definitely stable enough for public consumption as the last few releases haven't crashed on me at all. As soon as I get home I'll download RC3.

  6. Their planning to release with a big bug still in! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Yesturday, as rc3 was released, bug ID 82534 (http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=82534 copy and paste - they dont allow links from slashdot) was changed from Mozilla 1.0 to Mozilla 1.0.1

    To summarise, this bug freezes any keyboard input to mozilla under some circumstances - so its kinda major

    It only happens on windows, but is very easily reproducable (there are many examples of how to produce it in the bug thread)

    Two friends of mine tried using mozilla on windows, and both encountered this bug and were stumpped

    I cant believe they are planning to release 1.0 with this bug still in since it will for sure put a lot of people off mozilla for a long time - what with it being a point zero...

  7. Mozilla and acceptance by theolein · · Score: 5, Informative

    I have just read one page of trolls and flamebait and the usual anti Mozilla responses such as it is bloated, slow, non CSS compliant, buggy, no one uses it, etc.

    Consider this:
    1. It is the *one* browser that is nearly 100% standards compliant. IE's non-standard standards may be de facto standards in many cases, but those pages on the web that do in fact use those are very small in number and are usually on websites which are not heavily frequented, Microsoft's own pages being the exception to prove the rule.
    2.If you use Quick Launch with Mozilla, it loads part of itself into memory and then starts up about as fast as IE does.
    3.It is the *one* browser that renders pages in the same manner across all supported platforms. IE does not do this for example between the mac and Windows. Opera is one version behind on the Mac and it remains to be seen when they get to 6 there.
    4.It is, in my experince, more stable than IE on Win and Mac. I experience fewer crashes with the latest RC's than I do with IE on Win and mac.
    5.It is definitely more secure than IE. It has it's security bugs, but in no way as many as IE does.
    6.You can have an influence in the way this browser is developed. Do you have the same influence with IE or even Opera for that matter?
    If Netscape dies, Mozilla will carry on.
    7.For those who say that the browser share market belongs to IE, I say let's look again in a year. Netscape used to own the market and lost it because of Microsoft's tactics and a poor product that was less standards compliant than IE. This could change again.
    8.For those who troll that Mozilla is only at 1.0RC3 and in one year has only gotten here from a 0.9 version, perhaps you should realise that the Mozilla developers are not in a competition for version numbers with IE. Netscape plays this game and has released version 7.

    All that said, you're free to use whichever browser you like best on your platform.

    1. Re:Mozilla and acceptance by killmenow · · Score: 4, Informative

      1. It is the *one* browser that is nearly 100% standards compliant.
      For everything you say but this, I agree. However, this would indicate Opera is very nearly 100% standards compliant as well.

      I don't know if we should concern ourselves with a debate over which is closer to 100% compliant. It suffices to say there are at least *two* browsers that are nearly 100% standards compliant...and IE isn't one of them.
    2. Re:Mozilla and acceptance by frankie · · Score: 4, Interesting
      [opera.com] would indicate Opera is very nearly 100% standards compliant

      You should read that page more closely. For example:

      We are currently working on DOM [...] Modifying the document structure is not yet possible (ie. you cannot add or remove HTML elements). [...] Opera does not support W3C DOM Core [other than a dozen specific methods]
  8. Re:YAY MOZILLA! by selmer · · Score: 4, Informative
    Does the problem disappear when you add:

    user_pref("dom.disable_open_click_delay", 1000);

    From: the customizing mozilla-guide:

    When the dom.disable_open_click_delay pref is set to a non-zero number, window.open will fail when called more than that number of milliseconds after a mouse click.

  9. In other news today.... by filmcritic · · Score: 4, Funny

    The Mozilla Project today announced Release Candidate 28, in otherwords version 0.9999999999999999999999999999. The open source community has embraced this project fully and are doing everything in their power to get it released on time.

    When asked about the timetable for 1.0 release, they stated "We are definately making progress. Look for it soon! Internet Explorer XXXV will go down in flames!!!".

    Mozilla is the open source "clone" of Netscape. Netscape, if you remember, was a pioneer in the early days of WWW browsing. After being bought by AOL-Time Warner, some hoped that the huge cash flow would help the floundering former giant. AOL declared bankruptcy in 2010, bringing down all companies underneath it, including Netscape.

    All in all, Mozilla really does look like a promising piece of software if the Mozilla team could actually release version 1.0. Just wishful thinking on my part...

  10. Re:Wow.. Still no AA font support!! by IvyMike · · Score: 4, Funny

    Wow! You manage to bring this up every time they release a "bug-fix-only, no-new-features, release candidate"! And you know it! And you complain anyway, every time! And use exclamation marks, too!

    I shall look forward to seeing your same post again when Mozilla 1.0PR1 comes out, when Mozilla 1.0PR2 comes out, and Mozilla 1.0 Final comes out, too.

    When they said "you're not getting a pony for Christmas. Maybe for Easter," they meant it. Does this suck? Maybe. Do you have to whine about it every time? Apparently.

    Cheers.