Slashdot Mirror


Moving towards Mozilla 1.0

fluedke writes "The latest Mozilla CVS identifies itself as "Mozilla 1.0". It looks like this source will become the official 1.0 within the next days. Read the news posting here." And if you're one of the missing hackers, speak up.

11 of 335 comments (clear)

  1. Re:finally by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It's too late to affect de-facto standards. It's too late to have any chance of becoming the most popular browser. But overall, I'm extremely impressed by RC3. The only major problem I have with it is that plugins are very hard to install (on Win2K) compared to IE. The positives are turning off pop-ups, and turning off Doubleclick BFAs.

    Actually my other problem isn't so much with the product, but with the source code. I wish it would compile without using Visual Studio. Then the fact that it was GPLed would actually mean something to me.

  2. Re:finally FEATURES by SomeOtherGuy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    well the ability to turn off javascript popup windows and such (stuff you will never see IE or Netscape do)....is a big enough reason for some of the IE diehards I work around....And I have yet to see tabbed browsing on IE. Face it -- there are some "killer" features that will send the cocky IE packing...

    --
    (+1 Funny) only if I laugh out loud.
  3. Re:finally by SurfsUp · · Score: 4, Interesting

    the Netscape led group has (or will officially) release Mozilla... but is it too late?

    Too late to become the dominant browser on Windows? Probably. But too late to help Linux continue its march into mainstream operating system land? No way! And the fact that it runs on Windows is a definite help there.

    Also not too late to put a stop to Microsoft's attempts to privatize web standards, not to mention put a serious kink in attempts to force .NET down everybody's throat by way of the browser.

    Also, not too late to make all those surfers who like to kill popup ads very happy.

    --
    Life's a bitch but somebody's gotta do it.
  4. Re:Competition by PepsiProgrammer · · Score: 3, Interesting

    http://www.microsoft.com/unix/ie/default.asp actually it seems they have IE 5 for HP UX and Solaris, interesting isnt it? "We have the way out, but just in case your still stuck...."

    --
    "The United States has no right, no desire, and no intention to impose our form of government on anyone else." - Bush 05
  5. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  6. Re:IE monopoly by Da+Schmiz · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Part of the reason why a number of sites look broken in Opera is that Opera breaks sites. I used to be a big Opera fan, and I still use it from time to time, but its support for certain W3C specs (document.createElement() comes to mind) is not only missing, but downright munged.

    Opera fakes document.createElement() and returns true, so sites that identify DOM-compliant browsers by this test will assume all is well, but the method doesn't actually do anything, so the site fails without an error. Last I checked, this was something the Opera programmers were "going to get around to" someday.

    On the flip side, more and more sites are now supporting Mozilla... even my bank, which I could never get to work with any browser but IE, now looks great in Mozilla (or Galeon).

    And that's the thing: every killer feature that made me switch from IE to Opera (when I was running Windows) was there in Galeon on Linux. I've got Opera, but these days Galeon is faster, renders more correctly, and has more truly useful features than Opera.

    When I design websites, I'll still keep inserting workarounds for Opera, just as I still keep kludging ugly workarounds for Netscape 4 (icky, icky). Hopefully, though, Opera will eventually become fully standards-compliant, and then we won't have a problem.

    --

    "Anything is better than IE, and you can quote me on that." -- Wil Wheaton.

  7. Re:Bugzilla.mozilla.org by Reziac · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Question: if I submit a bug, will it be taken seriously, or if someone doesn't like what I find, will I get some BS about "must be just YOUR system"?? (Which considering I have a lot of experience as a software tester and bloody well know how to properly document bugs, is pretty annoying when it happens.) Because I know of two FATAL bugs right now, but my experience with the NNTP crowd (see another post I made in a similar thread) did not encourage me to bother pursuing it.

    --
    ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  8. Re:my question by thales · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "i never could figure out why the mozilla browser keeps switching from instant skin changing to skin changing upon reboot:

    Because Parts of the old skin keep showing up in the new skin. This mainly happens when the old skin has a css rule that the new skin lacks. going to reboot flushes the old skin out of memory. They drop it to cut down on the number of bugs in an impending milestone release, then pick it up again later only to drop it again for another release.

    --
    Quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est
  9. Re:Standards? by NineNine · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It's too late to affect de-facto standards

    That's funny.. Mozilla isn't trying to change the standards [w3.org]. Get this... it's actually FOLLOWING THEM!


    You obviously don't understand what "de-facto standards" mean. That means that the standards came about by sheer use and popularity. The W3C "standards" are arbitrary standards... a third party that has no control whatsoever over web site creation (other than their own) or browser development. The W3C hasn't been truly influential for a long time. Just because somebody writes something and calls it a "standard" doesn't make it so.

  10. Best thing of all is... by Jack+William+Bell · · Score: 5, Interesting

    hmm... I just read all the +1 and higher responses and no one has mentioned the thing I personally think is the best thing of all about Moz going 1.0 -- It means they finally freeze the API's.

    I don't know how many of you have checked out XUL and the Moz extension API's, but with them you have the ability to write literally any kind of application with an Open Source, Cross Platform, UI built using Moz via XML, HTML and a little javascript. This, I believe, is the most revolutionary thing about Moz! Using it for a UI surface, I can encapsulate routines that require speed in a C or C++ module (or even Python, Java and some other languages) and do the rest in not too much a different way than creating a DHTML web page. And the resulting UI code is portable...

    And the end result is fairly fast as well. All of the browser itself, all of the built-tools like the mail manager, the calendar, the IRC chat and so on are implemented this way. The potential of Moz as a UI development API is huge, assuming anyone creates a decent IDE for it. Nonetheless you can do things right now without an IDE, and (because the API's are frozen) you can be confident it will work with bug fix releases until they do a major update.

    During development many projects demonstrating these capabilities were obsoleted when the API's changed out from under them, causing the developers to stop work until the API froze. With this at an end I fully expect to see some really cool stuff fairly soon. Check http://www.mozdev.org for some example projects (most of which probably won't go anywhere soon, but some of which are the kinds of thing I am talking about).

    Jack William Bell

    --
    - -
    Are you an SF Fan? Are you a Tru-Fan?
  11. Re:finally by rseuhs · · Score: 5, Interesting
    It's too late to affect de-facto standards. It's too late to have any chance of becoming the most popular browser.

    What about:

    • 30 million AOL customers?
    • PS3 will use Mozilla and if it is as successful as PS1 (100 Million) or PS2 (30 Million and selling over a million per month), there will be tens of millions new Mozilla-users in the net.
    • Yes, Linux is making inroads into the desktop, like it or not. South Korea's governement has recently decided to convert 1/4 of their desktops (several hundred thousand).
    • Being multiplatform is an advantage. For example people will prefer Mozilla over IE at work if they know it from their PS3 at home.
    • Mozilla has features people want. Modem users want to safe time with HTTP1.1 pipelining, almost all users don't want popups. If you look at browser stats you see that a lot of people are willing to download a new version of IE, why shouldn't they also download a version of Mozilla? Especially because Mozilla isn't entrenched into the OS, so upgrading to Mozilla is certainly not as risky as upgrading IE.
    • Also don't underestimate people's tastes and opinions. It's IMPOSSIBLE to do a product that everybody likes best, so even if Mozilla wouldn't have mroe functionality than IE, SOME people will like the interface/look/feel/whatever better. "With everything being equal", not all 100% will choose IE.

    In the short term, Mozilla/Netscape7 will almost certainly destroy the de-facto IE-standard (even with only 10% marketshare, webmasters can't afford to ignore Mozilla), in the long term (5 to 10 years) I'd say it has good chances to overtake IE.