Slashdot Mirror


Mozilla 1.0 Officially Here

hhg writes "People of the world, rejoice! At last, the long awaited Mozilla 1.0 is released, and has emerged on the ftp.mozilla.org ftp-server. Let the release parties loose!" And there's even an Ann Arbor party now ;) Congratulations to all the developers that contributed to the mighty lizard. And bahtama writes "The latest IE gopher hole patch is out! :) ... Check the release notes and then grab it from here."

914 comments

  1. A little song... by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 2, Funny

    For they're all jolly good fellows, For they're all jolly good fellows, For they're all jolly good fellows ..... And so say all of us!

    1. Re:A little song... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anyone here use the Mozilla Newsgroup reader? Is there a way to 'combine and decode' attachments over multiple messages? I sure as heck don't see it

  2. Get it now... by LBrothers · · Score: 1, Funny

    Grab your lizard?

    1. Re:Get it now... by LinuxCumShot · · Score: 1

      what exactly is a mozilla? where did the word come from?

      --
      -- OMFG = Oh My Floatse Goatse
    2. Re:Get it now... by PyroMosh · · Score: 2

      From the NewZilla FAQ:

      "The code name for the product that became Netscape Navigator, and later Netscape Communicator. The name was derived from the fact that the first Netscape Navigator was intended to be the "Mosaic killer." Mosaic was the first graphical web browser and quite popular during its time."

      The Mosaic it's refering to is NCSA Mosaic: the first web browser. Some of it's principal developers went on to form Netscape Communications Corporation.

  3. looks like it's time for me to try it out! by Budgreen · · Score: 0

    any suggestions?

    --
    The greatest right given is the right to be wrong...
  4. after such a long process by Husaria · · Score: 1, Funny

    its finally out, props out to the development team...

    now how long before mozilla 2.0

    1. Re:after such a long process by sketerpot · · Score: 1

      It'll probably be a while until 2.0 is out. Who knows what sorts of things may be in that release? Judging by the amount of cool stuff in 1.0 (all the netscape stuff, XML UI stuff, calendar, miscellaneous goodies), there's no telling what may be in the future so far ahead of time.

    2. Re:after such a long process by netdemonboberb · · Score: 1

      At a minor release a month, most likely a year at the minimum until 2.0 comes out.

      --

      Volunteer Mozilla developer, RPI Student.
    3. Re:after such a long process by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When Mozilla 2.0 is released probably Internet Exploiter 9.0 or 10.0 will be out. The way they increase their versions is mad and doesn't really make any sense.

    4. Re:after such a long process by Gerv · · Score: 2

      Note: calendar is not in 1.0.

      Gerv

    5. Re:after such a long process by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hi, this is my first time using the internet. Are you the president of the united states of aemerica?

    6. Re:after such a long process by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Based on how long it took 1.0 to come out, I'd say at least three years. With about two thousand smaller releases in between, all of which Slashdot will report on.

    7. Re:after such a long process by dossen · · Score: 2, Informative


      ~/mozilla# ./configure --help

      Usage: configure [options] [host]
      Options: [defaults in brackets after descriptions]
      Configuration:
      ...
      --enable-calendar Enable building of the calendar client
      ...


      This is from the 1.0 source-tree. So if you want it, calendar is in 1.0 (Note: I haven't tested it, and you need to install a special libical, but it's there).

    8. Re:after such a long process by Gerv · · Score: 2

      Yeah, OK - but "it's not there" is true for anyone who downloads any sort of binary, or who does a standard build - so 99.99% of people.

      Gerv

    9. Re:after such a long process by rm+-vrf · · Score: 1

      Well, if it's of any help, I'm using 1.0rc1 on windows and I installed the calendar from http://mozilla.org/projects/calendar/

    10. Re:after such a long process by evalhalla · · Score: 1

      Major version numbers should be updated if and if only the program has changed substantially (i.e. rewriting of code, major changes in the main features etc.). If you only add some minor features, improve those already present etc. you should change the middle version number only, while the minor version number shows bugfixes etc.

      In this way, it could be years before Mozilla 2.0 is out, but this only means that they worked well on the 1.0 one.

      The sad thing is that most people thinks that, in version numbers, "bigger is better", while huge version numbers often mean that the program is bugged and badly written, while small version numbers after a few years mean that the program has been designed and made well. (Think about sendmail vs. qmail)

  5. mozillazine by cetan · · Score: 5, Informative

    http://www.mozillazine.org/articles/article2278.ht ml pretty much says it all :)

    Congrats to all the hackers on the moz project. Fantastic job and well worth the wait.

    --
    In Soviet Russia...michael would be rotting in Siberia!
    1. Re:mozillazine by nirvdrum · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The Start Guide is pretty cool too. Was this around in any form before, or is this completely new?

      --
      If there was a "-1 Not Funny", that'd be my most used mod.
    2. Re:mozillazine by David+Gerard · · Score: 1
      "The Start Guide [mozilla.org] is pretty cool too. Was this around in any form before, or is this completely new?"

      It's completely new, the reviewer's guide for 1.0. Er, it's still being tweaked ;-)

      The FAQ is new as well, and already very popular on the user newsgroups and forums. And it will be maintained.

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
    3. Re:mozillazine by Gerv · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's completely new; we put it together in the last few weeks. Kudos to all those in the credits list for their hard work.

      Gerv

    4. Re:mozillazine by archen · · Score: 4, Funny

      I think I like the way mozilla.org put it better:

      "stick a fork in it, it's done"

    5. Re:mozillazine by David+Gerard · · Score: 1
      Yeah, I was wondering about that one ... saying 'fork' around an open-source project ;-)

      "It's soup! We're there yet!"

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
    6. Re:mozillazine by Alex+Belits · · Score: 2

      Yeah, I was wondering about that one ... saying 'fork' around an open-source project ;-)

      It depends... One can't reasonably launch it on Unix without calling fork(2) and execve(2).

      --
      Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
  6. Party? by gordgekko · · Score: 0, Troll

    A party because a piece of software was released? Social lives can be good too...

    --
    You want to know who isn't running Firefox 2.x? They spell it "definately" and "rediculous".
  7. Survival of the Fittest by 2names · · Score: 1

    Don't lizards eat gophers?

    --
    "I'm just here to regulate funkiness."
    1. Re:Survival of the Fittest by codeguy007 · · Score: 1

      Shouldn't that be gophers don't eat lizards but they do eat Internet Explorers.

  8. Ding Dong, IE is Dead! by WillSeattle · · Score: 2, Funny

    Which IE, the OS bound IE
    Ding dong, the wicked browser's dead!

    It knew when you were sleeping
    It let the virii in
    And tried to blame it on other apps
    But now we know it's Spring

    Ding dong, IE is dead!
    Which IE, Microserf IE
    Ding dong, the wicked browser's dead!

    [noone expects a thousand munchkins to defeat a wicked witch, but you just need a minor event or two ...]
    -

    --
    --- Will in Seattle - What are you doing to fight the War?
    1. Re:Ding Dong, IE is Dead! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Not until Mozilla 1.2
      DHTML&JS performance in 1.0 sucks (although it's very good in nightlies) and also some other cool stuff (= other IE's good ideas and some bad too) are planing to be implemented mostly probably for 1.2

    2. Re:Ding Dong, IE is Dead! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please, learn the proper English plural of the word 'virus.'

      There's no need to be making up words in hopes of sounding smarter. You only end up looking silly.

    3. Re:Ding Dong, IE is Dead! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That'd be "proper english plural"...

      The "English" are a people.
      The "english" is a language.

    4. Re:Ding Dong, IE is Dead! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's spelled "viri", doofus.:)

    5. Re:Ding Dong, IE is Dead! by croanon · · Score: 0

      And also, viri is not english. It is from Latin. :) Virus is male 2m noun. Plural will be viri, but the i at the end is long, and is not written with a dot on top but with a straight line on top. So, it would be more correct to move it into english as virii.

      --
      Dear Bill, do you have a .net tatoo on your ass for marketing?
    6. Re:Ding Dong, IE is Dead! by Fafnir_b · · Score: 1

      O my god. Did you ever learn latin or do you just "know" that the plural of all latin words is something like ${word%us}i?

      The above is valid for words like dominus (powerful guy), so lots of powerful guys (two at least) would be domini. It's what we call o-declination in German.

      Virus however is a word that belongs to what we call u-declination. The Nominativ (1st case, don't know how this is called in English) plural of these words is ${word%us}us=$word _but_ the "us" of the plural form has a long "u". So if you want to introduce latin as the second official language at slashdot, the first step would be to use virus as the plural of virus.

      --
      This is just another ot comment by some german know-it-all

  9. If this is true... by goldspider · · Score: 0

    ...then why do they still have RC3 listed as the latest build on their site?

    --
    "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
    1. Re:If this is true... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      because you didn't empty your cache

    2. Re:If this is true... by Kiaser+Zohsay · · Score: 1, Redundant

      Hit reload. I checked it this morning too.

      --
      I am not your blowing wind, I am the lightning.
    3. Re:If this is true... by goldspider · · Score: 1

      Nope, went to mozilla.org, hit refresh, and the top story is still "Moving Towards 1.0 - 30 May"

      Oh well, I've waited this long, what's a few more hours :) Or I could just go to the link published in the story :)

      --
      "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
    4. Re:If this is true... by Cmdr+Taco+(luser) · · Score: 2, Informative

      I just got the release binary from mozilla.org, but it looks like the mirrors aren't ready yet (at least the 2 that I checked).

      Perhaps we shouldn't get too frenzied to download until the mirrors are updated.

      --
      All things in moderation.
    5. Re:If this is true... by netdemonboberb · · Score: 1

      Some of the servers had to reboot. They should be OK now. That is, unless they get really bogged down (which usually happens on a release).

      --

      Volunteer Mozilla developer, RPI Student.
    6. Re:If this is true... by PhilHibbs · · Score: 2

      None of the UK or FR mirrors have 1.0 yet, but the IE one does:

      ftp://ftp.eunet.ie/mirrors/ftp.mozilla.org/

      And it's quick, too.

  10. omg by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    /me sends coats to hell

  11. Replacing IE? by CodeRed · · Score: 1

    Finally, I can replace IE on Windows. Oh wait, I don't use Windows. Think I'll stick with Konqueror.

    --

    --
    CodeRed, the lower user #. No relation to SirCam.
    1. Re:Replacing IE? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      methinks you are an idiot. Thanks for playing.

      Play again?

      [ ] Yes

      [X] NO

    2. Re:Replacing IE? by wackybrit · · Score: 2

      But Mozilla is better than Konqueror. Why would you want to keep using a second rate browser when a standards compliant one hits the streets?

      Oh, hang on.. you're one of those 'beards' who are still running Slackware, aren't you?

  12. Ironic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I just finished installing Mozilla 1 RC 3 and two articles down is another IE security hole. Go Mozilla!

    1. Re:Ironic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Ironic ... I just finished installing Mozilla 1 RC 3 and two articles down is another IE security hole.


      I didn't know Alanis Morisette read slashdot...

  13. Well, I'll have to go download it... by Dimwit · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...of course, I'll use that new transfer protocol - TCP/IP over Flying Pigs.

    ...but I'll have to bundle up - my office just froze over.

    ..and maybe I won't have time - I think an attractive girl just mentioned that she may want to talk to me.

    --
    ...but it's being eaten...by some...Linux or something...
    1. Re:Well, I'll have to go download it... by blue+trane · · Score: 1, Funny

      I think an attractive girl just mentioned that she may want to talk to me.

      You're just feeding their power. One day though geeks will simulate girls well enough to level out the playing field a bit more.

    2. Re:Well, I'll have to go download it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      One day though geeks will simulate girls well enough to level out the playing field a bit more.

      Someone already has.

      Amazing what you can do with plastics, eh? :)

    3. Re:Well, I'll have to go download it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and maybe I won't have time - I think an attractive girl just mentioned that she may want to talk to me.
      She just wants you to fix her computer duh! Scientist are now proving that girls are attracted to brains. Now if we can just get attractive girls to read those reports! But seriously, almost all women naturally date attractive fun guys when they are younger. But, once they are ready to settle down they find a nice honest, smart, mature guy. The mature part is critical btw, if your only 18 you still got a few years comming. If you havn't met any hotties (btw don't ignore the non hotties, they can atleast give you practice for the hotties, just don't let them trap you if you don't want to be trapped.) by the time your 25, then you need to start worrying, but not before. But you still need to get out, and socialise if you want to have any chance ever! Good luck!

    4. Re:Well, I'll have to go download it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and maybe I won't have time - I think an attractive girl just mentioned that she may want to talk to me.

      If you were a real nerd, you would install it for her.

  14. BOOYAH! by Kiaser+Zohsay · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Now, why won't http://www.schnitzer.at/mozparty/ come up?

    --
    I am not your blowing wind, I am the lightning.
    1. Re:BOOYAH! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://www.schnitzer.at/mozparty/ is ok. Over 2000 people celebrating woldwide! Thanks to all the people out there who contributed in various ways!

      PS: Hmm, interesting, I wonder why I never heared about "M$-release-parties"...

    2. Re:BOOYAH! by PyroMosh · · Score: 1



      You mean like the Direct X release parties when Alex St. John was still working there? Or the "DOS is dead" party? Or the "Midnight Madness" IE release party for 3.0? Or this party for IE5?

      And you probably never heard of them because you know nothing about Microsoft, you just know "Oh, it's cool to hate Microsoft and always put 'M$' I'll do that and I'll be |_33+!" Read a book, do some digging. MS (at least used to) have an interesting corperate culture. High intensity with a high burnout rate for sure, but a lot of the industry's best and brightest have worked at Redmond.

      </rant>

      How ironic. I'm writing a post defending MS on a thread attached to a Mozilla article while using Mozilla 1.0 RC3.

    3. Re:BOOYAH! by croanon · · Score: 0

      I was working for MS at Seattle. What interesting corperate culture are you talking about? IT SUCKS!!!! Open source community is such a cool community. :) And you are right, OH, IT IS COOL TO HATE M$!!!!

      --
      Dear Bill, do you have a .net tatoo on your ass for marketing?
  15. Snowshovels? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This order of snowshovels goes where?

  16. what next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    First amazon.com had a profitable quarter.

    Next, Slashdot sold out (Again)

    Then, mozilla was released.

    Coming up Warcraft III and Duke Nukem forever released.

    1. Re:what next? by rnws · · Score: 3, Funny

      Heaven forbid, Microsoft might even release a bug-free version of Windows. Then again Hell could freeze over...

    2. Re:what next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Followed by Doom 3.

      Next is M$ source code.

      Mabye we will even see that new matrox card.....

    3. Re:what next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    4. Re:what next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess you haven't installed Windows XP.

      And no, like any other sane person, I don't consider newly discovered security flaws which are patched relatively quickly to be "bugs." It's stable, runs well, doesn't fuck up, and is a pleasure to use.

    5. Re:what next? by phajek · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Windows XP is bug free? What kind of crack have you been smoking?

    6. Re:what next? by bryan1945 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Obviously better crack than we have!

      --
      Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
    7. Re:what next? by TheRain · · Score: 1

      it's kinda like on big slashdot april fools joke, isn't it? :)

      --
      Please help! I'm stuck inside my virtual reality headset!
    8. Re:what next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, I don't know about you, but I wouldn't be making such bold claims if I was in your shoes. Especially because of the 17 unpatched security holes in IE, and the fact that plenty of these have been known for a long time.

      Note that this site also lists one security hole in mozilla, and the version number in which it was fixed.

    9. Re:what next? by MAJ+Rantage · · Score: 1
      Coming up Warcraft III and Duke Nukem forever released.


      Well, maybe Warcraft III....
    10. Re:what next? by m_evanchik · · Score: 2

      Don't forget that debian woody should be going stable soon.

    11. Re:what next? by VP · · Score: 1

      Don't forget: The US soccer (football) team wins against Portugal (ranked among the top-5 teams in the world)...

    12. Re:what next? by croanon · · Score: 0

      Of course I did not install XP, and never will. I do not like to help the most unethical company in the history of the mankind, that is, M$. They lie, cheat and steal. And why should I? Linux is much much better and free and requires no registration, and cool, and fun, and etc.

      --
      Dear Bill, do you have a .net tatoo on your ass for marketing?
  17. Alternately... by delphi125 · · Score: 1
    Check the release notes and then grab it from here.

    Since the release notes are about 30 screens full, grab it first THEN check the release notes (that is, if you would ever bother to RTM).

  18. Talkback packages only by AndSoitGoes · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Now that they have hit 1.0 are versions
    without talkback going to be availible.

    Have they or will they remove debug information?

    The pacakage is still ~10megs for windows. I was
    hoping to see some reduction for 1.0 since I
    still use a lowly 56K Modem.

    1. Re:Talkback packages only by sehryan · · Score: 1, Troll

      No, they probably haven't, because Mozilla is not really supposed to be an end-user browser. It is supposed to be the engine for other end-user browsers. At least, that was its original intent. So leaving the debug stuff in the 1.0 makes sense, since they are always developing and not making a mass consumption product.

      --
      The world moves for love. It kneels before it in awe.
    2. Re:Talkback packages only by Nicopa · · Score: 2

      Rubbish. Mozilla binaries are fully optimized and have no debugging code. They are apt for end user use. You'll see that Netscape production releases also have talkback included.

    3. Re:Talkback packages only by digital-hell-native · · Score: 1

      I think they already did remove debug information in RC3 or RC2. Correct me if I am wrong (probably the worst thing you can say on /.) ...

    4. Re:Talkback packages only by David+Gerard · · Score: 1
      Talkback is optional - remove the talkback.exe binary if you really don't want it.

      Milestone releases do not have debug code. I repeat, milestone releases do not have debug code.

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
    5. Re:Talkback packages only by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 1

      Moz binaries aren't fully optimised, at least not on Linux: they're compile with -O rather than a higher level for one thing. Time to look into compiling my own version methinks...

    6. Re:Talkback packages only by thesolo · · Score: 4, Informative

      Now that they have hit 1.0 are versions without talkback going to be availible.

      Most likely not, talkback helps them debug!

      Have they or will they remove debug information?

      The debug menus have been removed since 1.0RC3

      The pacakage is still ~10megs for windows. I was hoping to see some reduction for 1.0 since I still use a lowly 56K Modem.

      Simple solution, use the Net Installer! It is a 200KB download that lets you choose the options you want, and then download them. If you don't want/need Chatzilla or Mail & News, you can install a smaller package.

      As for 10 megs for the full package, that's not big AT ALL! Remember that it comes with Mail & News, an IRC Client, a browser, a WYSIWYG editor, and an address book.

    7. Re:Talkback packages only by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah, 10 MB for an high quality standard compliant and clossplattform web browser, a full feature email app, a good HTML editor and an irc client.

      Only 10 MB???

    8. Re:Talkback packages only by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Higher than -O is known to be buggy if the code was origionally done on -O

    9. Re:Talkback packages only by friedmud · · Score: 2

      Just go to gentoo.org I bet the 1.0 source ebuild will be up tonight and I will download and build and install in one fail swoop:

      emerge mozilla

      And it will be compiled with MY build options that I have compiled my ENTIRE system with.

      Derek

    10. Re:Talkback packages only by Nicopa · · Score: 1

      Appearantly you were right:

      http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5348 6

      It seems there were some problems with broken gcc optimizations.

    11. Re:Talkback packages only by netdemonboberb · · Score: 1

      http://wp.netscape.com/communicator/navigator/v4.5 / fs1.html

      AFAIK, talkback doesn't require any debug code. It returns stack traces and memory locations of errors and other information that is used to find what caused the error on the other end, yet not bloat the code.

      Here is some information on Netscape quality feedback agent (talkback):

      "Quality Feedback Agent - a small piece of software embedded in Netscape Communicator 4.5 - gathers data about what is happening in Communicator whenever it crashes. Although end users may not be able to decipher this information, it will be tremendously helpful to Netscape engineers, enabling them to quickly isolate the cause of a crash and then correct it. The Quality Feedback Agent makes it easy for end users to participate in the quality improvement process at Netscape, and helps Netscape identify problems more readily."

      --

      Volunteer Mozilla developer, RPI Student.
    12. Re:Talkback packages only by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GCC sucks. Film at 11

    13. Re:Talkback packages only by Tackhead · · Score: 4, Insightful
      > use the Net Installer! [mozilla.org] It is a 200KB download that lets you choose the options you want, and then download them. If you don't want/need Chatzilla or Mail & News, you can install a smaller package.

      Call me an old fart, but "net installers" (aka stubs) annoy me. (This isn't a Mozilla criticism - IE is just as bad.)

      If I don't want the email/news/chat cruft (and I don't), but I do want the basic browser on 3 systems, why should I download a 200K .exe three times, click on the same options three times, and download the same few-megabytes browser, three times?

      Just gimme a damn URL where I can get the installer that contains everything needed for the basic browser. (That is, tell me where to find the thing the stub's downloading). Then let me download it ONCE. I can then FTP or copy it on my LAN, or even burn it to CD and use SneakerNet to get it to other machines.

      General question: I'm seeing stubs more often, and I just don't get the idea. Apart from marketing ("Look! Upgrade your Netscape! Only 200K download!" - conveniently ignoring that it's only the stub, and thereby obfuscating the size of the real download) purposes, what value is added by these "network installer" stubs?

      In principle, can't it be replaced by a web page with radio buttons that say "do you want your download to include/exclude $FOO, $BAR, $BAZ", and upon clicking "submit", give you a page with the corresponding packages/zips/tarballs/whatevers?

    14. Re:Talkback packages only by mbbac · · Score: 2, Informative

      I did the stub installed on Windows 2000 and everything was required except for Personal Security Manager.

      I don't think that's helping reduce bandwidth requirements of the servers much.

      --

      mbbac

    15. Re:Talkback packages only by Analog · · Score: 2
      This has been true for the nightlies, so I assume it's so for 1.0 as well, but you can get an installer package which contains everything in a single tarball then still pick which pieces you want just like you do with the 'net install.

      Not *exactly* what you were asking for, but close enough I would think.

    16. Re:Talkback packages only by Gutzalpus · · Score: 1

      When you use the net installer, it gives you the option of saving all the files into a separate directory should you need to reinstall. Should be not much of a problem from that point to transfer those files to your other 2 computers.

    17. Re:Talkback packages only by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just a warning, Building mozilla takes HOURS. 7 on my celeron 700....

    18. Re:Talkback packages only by edwdig · · Score: 5, Informative

      Under the directory on the ftp server with the stub, there's an XPI directory which has the packages for the individual components. The install also has an option to save the downloaded files.

    19. Re:Talkback packages only by archen · · Score: 1

      just FYI, there's an "advanced" feature in IE that allows you to just download all the components you select and not install them. Course this sometimes backfires too since I might want to download IE for win98 while I'm using win2k... I forgot which OS won't let you do what, but it's pretty damn annoying. Of course then again your stuck with a pile of IE cabs and other stuff to cart around instead of a nice installer..

      I only use Mozilla in the zip file myself.

    20. Re:Talkback packages only by tswinzig · · Score: 3, Insightful

      General question: I'm seeing stubs more often, and I just don't get the idea. Apart from marketing ("Look! Upgrade your Netscape! Only 200K download!" - conveniently ignoring that it's only the stub, and thereby obfuscating the size of the real download) purposes, what value is added by these "network installer" stubs?

      For chrissakes, you are replying to a response which clearly exemplifies the main reason stubs are provided -- people on slow connections that don't want to install certain parts of the program! Why should they have to download everything?

      Mozilla provides a complete download as well.

      Sheesh.

      --

      "And like that ... he's gone."
    21. Re:Talkback packages only by GrandCow · · Score: 1
      If I don't want the email/news/chat cruft (and I don't), but I do want the basic browser on 3 systems, why should I download a 200K .exe three times, click on the same options three times, and download the same few-megabytes browser, three times?

      Just gimme a damn URL where I can get the installer that contains everything needed for the basic browser. (That is, tell me where to find the thing the stub's downloading). Then let me download it ONCE. I can then FTP or copy it on my LAN, or even burn it to CD and use SneakerNet to get it to other machines.


      JESUS FUCKING H. CHRIST! Can't people ever be happy? No matter what people do for free there are always people who feel the need to find something wrong with the system. If you've got 3 computers and your connection to the internet is only a 56k modem then tough shit! Bite the bullet and spend the half an hour downloading the 10 meg package. You could even set it to download while you're on the crapper. People put in hundreds of hours developing this piece of software and all you can say is "10 megs is too big, give me a download option where I can only download 500k at the max, and BTW I won't use a web installer because I don't want to spend the 20 seconds checking the options I want and don't want." That's the exact reason so many people thing computer people are jerks. Anyone else would have just started the download, got a soda, and came back just as it was finishing.
      --
      "Well kids, you tried your best, and you failed. The lesson is, never try." -Homer Simpson
    22. Re:Talkback packages only by tweakt · · Score: 2
      If I don't want the email/news/chat cruft (and I don't), but I do want the basic browser on 3 systems, why should I download a 200K .exe three times, click on the same options three times, and download the same few-megabytes browser, three times?

      Simple use the Net-Installer, and then save a copy of the .XPI's it downloads. or you can get them from the ftp site. It will use them off disk instead of retreive them several times.

    23. Re:Talkback packages only by mu_wtfo · · Score: 1

      And, another thing to keep in mind - Netscape, the commercial browser built on Mozilla - Last I checked, it's full download was 25Mb. And I seem to recall the full IE6 download being close to 19Mb.
      Another thing - you can download indivdual components yourself. In the windows-xpi folder are installable .xpi files for each component. Of course, you need an existing installation for xpi to work, but still. :)

      --
      If all the world's a stage, anyone who says they want better lighting spends far too much time in a dark theatre.
    24. Re:Talkback packages only by thesolo · · Score: 3, Informative

      I did the stub installed on Windows 2000 and everything was required except for Personal Security Manager.

      Did you already have a version of Mozilla installed previously?? If so, you need to uninstall it first, or else everything but PSM will be required. If Moz is not previously installed, you can turn the other options on and off. For example, right now I only have the browser & address book installed.

    25. Re:Talkback packages only by caferace · · Score: 2
      Talkback is like an old friend that hardly ever comes to visit anymore. Sniff.

      Oh wait. That's a Good Thing (tm).

    26. Re:Talkback packages only by mbbac · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the tip.

      Do you have an idea why this is the behavior?

      --

      mbbac

    27. Re:Talkback packages only by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mozilla's net installer let's you do the same thing. Save the files it downloads and use them to reinstall or install on other machines.

    28. Re:Talkback packages only by Permission+Denied · · Score: 2
      Have you ever tried the cygwin installer? I'm not a big Windows person, so I haven't seen too many install programs, but I think cygwin makes the perfect installer.

      You download a small binary. However, this binary is not a stupid stub, but it's pretty smart. It contains a list of mirrors and you then click on whatever mirror you want to use. Then the installer fetches a list of available packages from the site. The next screen allows you to select which various packages you want installed and it understands some basic dependency issues (eg, openssh requires openssl, etc). You can also pick which version of what package you want to download if you wish. Then, once you've selected the various components, it downloads all of them. They are all standard .tar.bz2 files and they all go in a certain directory. Then you install from those packages you downloaded. The next time you start up the installer, it allows you to pick a mirror and download more packages or update existing packages or it allows you to install from the already-downloaded packages. This means you can just copy over the directory to your next machine when you want to install. Everything's a text file as well, so if you're on a corporate LAN, you can edit the list of mirrors to point to some machine in your company that has the packages served up via a web server, or you can set up your own .tar.bz2 files and edit the list of available packages to install your own stuff.

      This is the perfect installer. It's simple enough that you can understand it if you go poking around with a text editor. If I install everything in cygwin, that might take up hundreds of megs, but installing only the basic stuff that I need takes up only ten megs or so. Even with that, ten megs is a whole lot to download over a modem, so I can download what I need at work (and only what I need), burn to CD and then take it home to my personal box.

    29. Re:Talkback packages only by Jon+Howard · · Score: 1

      Then let me download it ONCE. I can then FTP or copy it on my LAN, or even burn it to CD and use SneakerNet to get it to other machines.

      The net-installer has an option, which it clearly presents to the user (which I suspect you missed because you complained before checking), that allows you to save the downloaded installation files to any location you'd like on your PC.

      You can then do all of the things you mentioned above with those files. You'll have to download them once in either case, so the only handicap is the extra ~200K for the stub - which should take less than 2 min. on a 56k.

    30. Re:Talkback packages only by friedmud · · Score: 2

      Just like I thought there is already an e-build for mozilla 1.0.

      I am compiling it as I type (using konqi meanwhile).

      Derek

    31. Re:Talkback packages only by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm on 56k and prefer tarballs or packaged binaries to installers because I like having control over software installation, and I don't trust installers to resume when my connection is interrupted. Thankfully Redhat is pretty timely with its rpms.

    32. Re:Talkback packages only by Ed_Moyse · · Score: 1
      No, if you actually read what the poster wrote he *also* wants the option to only install parts of mozilla, but objects to stubs because you have to download the stub for each machine you have. This quickly becomes a pain. He has a point.


      Sheesh yourself!

    33. Re:Talkback packages only by error0x100 · · Score: 1

      10 megs is less than an hour to d/l on a 56k, on a clear day even 45 minutes. Sorry, but someone complaining that that is just too long to wait for a download, is just being nitpicky for the *sake* of being nitpicky.

      10 megs is tiny. An IE download is about six times that size, if I remember correctly, and is only a browser.

      These people have been busting their butts on the software for 4.5 years, I can't believe someone will complain "sorry an hour is too long to wait to download the thing". Mozilla is a huge project, over 200 MB of source and over 6000 source code files.

  19. Well done by perlyking · · Score: 2

    Its a great browser from what i've seen in RC3. I'm trying to get used to it (i'm so used to opera now). I like the middle click opens in background new tab and the image permission options.

    --
    no sig.
    1. Re:Well done by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Could you (or someone knowledgeable) please post a compare and contrast on the two? Advantages and disadvantages of each, etc...

      I'm going to migrate from an older NS product and the subtleties surrounding the choice are overwhelming.

    2. Re:Well done by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I were you I would just give it a go, it shouldnt be a big leap from older netscapes to get used to. I preferred netscape 4.x until I got tired of its crashes. Mozilla is really quite good.

      Arggh I hate this 2 minute wait and 20 second crap - silly slashdot.

    3. Re:Well done by sketerpot · · Score: 1

      I can post my first impressions, having moved from Opera to Mozilla about 15 minutes ago. First, Mozilla is feature-laden. It has a lot of stuff that you don't get in Opera, and it can do all the stuff that opera does, with a few exceptions. It has good control over JavaScript, which I like. It has plenty of options. It has Composer, for making web pages. It has a chat program, an email client, a DOM inspector, and all sorts of stuff. It's not quite as snappy as Opera UI-wise, but that's the price you pay for more features.

    4. Re:Well done by Bearpaw · · Score: 2, Informative
      So far so good, on Max OS X. (I'm used to Omniweb these days, occasionally running Netscape or [gag] IE when Omniweb runs into problems.)

      Seems pretty fast, though I haven't run tests. Love the tabs, especially the ability to have multiple windows and/or multiple tabs.

    5. Re:Well done by hondo77 · · Score: 1

      I'm using it on OS X, too. Not as snappy as IE but it sure does render full Slashdot articles quickly. I see that some of the same bugs I saw when I was using it on Linux months ago are still broken (moving bookmarks, some preferences stuff, printing is horribly broken (but I can use OS X's preview to get around that)). I'll be playing with it every so often but it looks like IE will continue to be my main browser for now.

      --
      I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
    6. Re:Well done by mu_wtfo · · Score: 1

      Yes. Yes, yes, yes. Tabs are the best thing ever invented, in my opinion. I use them every day, and I usually have 8-10 open simultaneously. Imagine trying to manage that many browser windows? In the windows taskbar, each window has the same icon, and the window title gets chopped off at like 5 characters. Wih tabs, I get the favicon on each tab, I can tell at a glance which tab I want.
      Okay, except when I'm working in bugzilla, and I've got 20 bugs open in different tabs *all* with the same favicon. :)
      If anyone wants a more-configurable version of tabs for mozilla, check out multizilla.mozdev.org. I'm not going to link to it because mozdev is already pretty well slashdotted, but check it out after the rush subsides.
      To sum up: Tabs ROCK!

      --
      If all the world's a stage, anyone who says they want better lighting spends far too much time in a dark theatre.
  20. In other news.... by jeffy124 · · Score: 2, Funny

    The FAA has spotted an unusual number of pigs at high altitude, the devil called me up asking to send him a jacket and gloves, a cow was seen in the night sky above the moon.......

    --
    The One Rule Of Chess You'll Ever Need: Don't play someone who carries a kit in their bookbag.
    1. Re:In other news.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ....psychic wins lottery, geek finds a date, the boss gave me the day off .....

    2. Re:In other news.... by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 3, Funny
      "The FAA has spotted an unusual number of pigs at high altitude, the devil called me up asking to send him a jacket and gloves, a cow was seen in the night sky above the moon......."

      And Dilbert got an office with a REAL DOOR. REALLY! I'm not kidding! Look at today's comic!

    3. Re:In other news.... by dadragon · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Not to mention the fact that Canada is going to beat the USA 5-2 in the World Cup final at the end of the month. The devil is also reporting to be giving out free sleigh rides, and IBM just sold ice to the eskimo!.

      --
      God save our Queen, and Heaven bless The Maple Leaf Forever!
    4. Re:In other news.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm fairly certain Satan is safe until Mozilla is running on a released version of the Hurd.

    5. Re:In other news.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ROFL!!

    6. Re:In other news.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, WOW! Let's all throw a party for that, too!

    7. Re:In other news.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People with jobs make me sympathize with terrorists.

    8. Re:In other news.... by TaxSlave · · Score: 1

      The FAA has spotted an unusual number of pigs at high altitude

      "If pigs had wings, and birds had none,
      My windshield wipers would not run.
      -Heywood Banks

    9. Re:In other news.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Leather gloves? Maybe it was O.J.

    10. Re:In other news.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Umm, Canada isn't in the World Cup.

    11. Re:In other news.... by dadragon · · Score: 1

      I know that. That's why it would never happen, sorta like pigs flying and such. Humour is lost on this one......

      --
      God save our Queen, and Heaven bless The Maple Leaf Forever!
  21. Finally... by joestar · · Score: 2

    The March 98' dream, when Netscape announced that Netscape's sources would be released, this dream finally transformed into reality. Many doubted about the calpability of the project to give something valuable, and there was much FUD about the project, but now we have the proof that a big Free Software project such as Mozilla has a sense.

    I've been using Mozilla 0.9.x under Mandrake 8.2 for a while, and when I compare it to Internet Explorer, I have to say Mozilla is simply better. And I have to say, Mozilla-mail is also better than Outlook in many aspects.

    Long live to Mozilla!

    1. Re:Finally... by cowmix · · Score: 2

      No way MozillaMail is better than Outlook Express.. at least not yet..

      My migration from OE to Mozilla has been painful. I am sticking to it but I just want to say that things have a lot farther to go to where the email side is as robust as the browsing.

    2. Re:Finally... by cetan · · Score: 1

      Migrating for OE to Mozmail was a snap. It couldn't have been easier for me. MozMail is now my mailer of choice full time.

      Of course, I used to own a packard bell (pentium 75) that never had any problems either, so maybe I'm just a fluke :)

      --
      In Soviet Russia...michael would be rotting in Siberia!
    3. Re:Finally... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no, you're not a fluke.

      I also owned a trouble free packard bell p75 (legend 401cd if i remember correctly). not only has it been trouble free for 7 years, but it is now running with 96mb of ram (up from 8), 2mb video ram (up from 1), a 133 mhz pentium (*overclocked from 100*), dual pci network cards, and an isa-pcmcia-802.11b adapter. standard 850mb hard disk and 2x cdrom are still in place.

      all this on openbsd 3.0 as my router/firewall/dns/dhcp/webserver/whatever-else with an uptime of 149 days.

      this box aint just trouble-free, its solid as a rock.

    4. Re:Finally... by afidel · · Score: 2

      In close to a decade of use of Mozilla mail and its predecessor netscape mail I have never lost a single email message. I don't know a single user of outlook/express that can say that. To me any mail client that loses mail is a non-starter. When we move to exchange for calandering later this year I plan to keep mozilla mail as an email client and just use outlook as a PIM to sync with my palm and arange meetings.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    5. Re:Finally... by Ricdude · · Score: 2

      Mozilla lost my mail. Although, I must admit, it took 5 years to do it, on folders shared by pine, netscape 4.x, netscape 3.x (on hp-ux, no less), and mozilla 0.9.x. I think one of the older netscape versions nailed the mail header cache info. O well, it had long since been time to clean the crap out of there anyway. =)

      --
      How's my programming? Call 1-800-DEV-NULL
    6. Re:Finally... by David+Gerard · · Score: 1
      "Mozilla lost my mail. Although, I must admit, it took 5 years to do it, on folders shared by pine, netscape 4.x, netscape 3.x (on hp-ux, no less), and mozilla 0.9.x."

      The reason you could share the folders at all was that they were plain-text mbox files. So set up a cron job to do a daily backup of your mail folder to a safe location elsewhere. You won't regret it.

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
    7. Re:Finally... by afidel · · Score: 1

      actually if it was in fact an indexing problem then just delete the index. Next time you launch mozilla it will re-create the index. Easy solution =)

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
  22. Please!! Count to ten and then decide by _LORAX_ · · Score: 5, Informative

    Cm'on if you have 1.0_rc3 and you are not having problems, please do everyone a favor and DON'T download today...

    Unless you are having problems.. try this weekend after the mirrors have had time to catch up!

    1. Re:Please!! Count to ten and then decide by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 5, Informative

      Or use gnutella. The MD5 is 684461f4bef2888271cb05bd3d80af28 for mozilla-win32-1.0-installer.exe.

    2. Re:Please!! Count to ten and then decide by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ya know, I was thinking about that, but then I decided I'd much rather open up 4 connections with Prozilla and saturate my cable line at 180 KB/s for a while. In fact, I think I'll do it for the rest of the day. Hope you guys don't mind.

    3. Re:Please!! Count to ten and then decide by BlueJay465 · · Score: 2

      Pardon my ignorance, but is there a quick and dirty MD5 checksum viewer for a win32 platform available? and if so, where would I find one.

      I would just like to find out what all the hype behind Mozilla is...

    4. Re:Please!! Count to ten and then decide by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am sure that the internet is ready to crumble under the load of tens and tens of people downloading Mozilla.

      I was rather surprised at the credits page...with such a 'rapid' development of Mozilla I was expecting too see 3 people at the most responsible. I guess we can look forward to version 1.1 right around the time Episode III comes out...on DVD...re-issued.

    5. Re:Please!! Count to ten and then decide by Spoons · · Score: 2, Informative

      If you are using windows and you haven't installed cygwin yet, you are missing out. It has bash, emacs, etc. That makes windows liveable. And yes they have md5sum. :)

    6. Re:Please!! Count to ten and then decide by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
    7. Re:Please!! Count to ten and then decide by Oxide · · Score: 1

      Damn!! too late... I downloaded it before I got to your post :)

    8. Re:Please!! Count to ten and then decide by gid · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Securitywise, all that md5 sum means is that no one changed it after you posted it on gnutella. For all I know, you trojanized it yourself, or you downloaded it from somewhere else pre-trojaned.

      Just an fyi.

      So basically for an md5 sum to be any good, the md5 sum has to come from a reputable, secure source, such as mozilla.org, not some random person on slashdot.

    9. Re:Please!! Count to ten and then decide by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Securitywise, all that md5 sum means is that no one changed it after you posted it on gnutella. For all I know, you trojanized it yourself, or you downloaded it from somewhere else pre-trojaned.

      If that were the case it's quite likely that someone would have noticed and pointed that out. I downloaded my copy from mozilla.com, so it's highly unlikely that it's pre-trojaned.

      So basically for an md5 sum to be any good, the md5 sum has to come from a reputable, secure source, such as mozilla.org, not some random person on slashdot.

      Personally I'd settle for a relatively long-time slashdot user who uses his real name and was modded to 5. In the unlikely case that someone spent a year posting on slashdot and building up a reputation just so s/he could plant a trojan into the 1.0 release of mozilla, and that you happened to download the exact same copy from gnutella that s/he had distributed, it would eventually be discovered, and that person could easily be traced by IP address and reported to the FBI.

      So while I agree with you that my MD5 sum wasn't military grade security, I think it does present some additional security. Even more if others respond to confirm the MD5. And I hope others put mozilla into their gnutella sharing directory.

      Ultimately, the problem should be solved by AOL putting the MD5 on https://www.mozilla.org/. But I checked, and if they have, I couldn't find it.

    10. Re:Please!! Count to ten and then decide by l_km_n · · Score: 1

      look at www.download.com, search for md5 and you'll get a gpl'd md5summer for win32

    11. Re:Please!! Count to ten and then decide by Ricdude · · Score: 2

      If anyone is paying attention to the age of my slashdot ID, I just downloaded the windows installer from a mirror and also got an md5sum (cygwin) of:
      684461f4bef2888271cb05bd3d80af28 *mozilla-win32-1.0-installer.exe

      Of course, I *could* have just copied his numbers to throw you off the trail, but I encourage you to perform this experiment yourself.

      --
      How's my programming? Call 1-800-DEV-NULL
    12. Re:Please!! Count to ten and then decide by non-poster · · Score: 0

      http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla/releases/mozill a1.0/MD5SUMS has the md5sums. Wow. What an concept...

      One of the lines happens to be
      684461f4bef2888271cb05bd3d80af28 ./mozilla-win32- 1.0-installer.exe

    13. Re:Please!! Count to ten and then decide by KMitchell · · Score: 2, Informative

      You could also hit:

      http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla/releases/mozi ll a1.0/MD5SUMS

      which is a small enough page that it can probably survive the slashdotting.

      The posted MD5 does check out BTW :)

    14. Re:Please!! Count to ten and then decide by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 1

      Cool. I didn't know about that page. I would have just posted a link to it instead of the md5 if I did. Why they don't put it on an https site, I don't know (of course, maybe they do).

    15. Re:Please!! Count to ten and then decide by stikves · · Score: 2
      There is md5 ported to Win32


      Just go to www.etree.org.


      (etree is a music sharing community.)

    16. Re:Please!! Count to ten and then decide by Jon+Howard · · Score: 2

      I encourage you to perform this experiment yourself.

      No offense, but wasn't the point of the MD5 sum in the post a few levels up to be able to download from a non-secure server (such as gnutella) and relieve some of the load on the official sites? ;)

    17. Re:Please!! Count to ten and then decide by gid · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I really didn't mean to attack your reputation whatsoever. I trust you fully, I would never even bother with an md5.

      But *IF* I was paranoid and wanted to grab what I was positive was a trojan free copy of mozilla, I wouldn't trust an md5 from third party, even if your account is years old. For all I know, someone hijacked your account for the sole purpose of distributing a trojaned mozilla. Very doubtful yes, but possible. When I do care about security, I go all out, not half ass.

      Ok, if I download mozilla off gnutella, I'm pretty sure no one had the time to mess with it wrap a trojan around it.

      And if you say it's good (via md5), then I'm even more sure no one messed with it, seeing as how you seem like a nice guy and have been on slashdot awhile and I don't think you want to screw anyone. And the fact that you got modded all the way up to +5 means your absolutely cream of the crop.

      But, if I download mozilla and compare the md5 that I got off of mozilla.org then I'm almost aboslutely positive that no one screwed with it, and if someone did screw with it, you can bet your cookies that there will be a huge press release about it and I will find out that I grabbed a trojaned version. Whereas with the first two methods, I probably wouldn't find out right away.

    18. Re:Please!! Count to ten and then decide by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 1

      The only reason I mentioned the +5 was the fact that many people saw the post increased the probability that someone would have noticed if I had posted the wrong MD5. I wouldn't download an executable from gnutella and run it unless there was an MD5. The fact that someone posted the MD5 on slashdot would possibly convince me. In any case, I didn't realize that AOL had already posted the MD5 on their ftp site. I would have just pointed people to that, if I did.

    19. Re:Please!! Count to ten and then decide by coe · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Never, ever listen to this kind of crap

      Reason, you can never, ever trust slashdot or similar system for MD5 sums of software. Long-time slashdot user dosn't mean anything and all that trace stuff by FBI is total crap. I'll give you a trivial scenario.

      Mister well know slashdotter was in university terminal and reading happy slashdot, posted few commnets. He looked his watch, "damn Im late for lecture". Stood up and run like hell to classroom.

      Mister blackhat comes to the terminal. Gee, a open login. Trick time! Mozilla is out, excelent. Hack the mozzilla source code to send all the nice data to his cracked linux box someplace, somewhere. (Fast thing to do, about 30mins and you are done) Takes the md5 sum, posts it as "Hey, use gnutella, the real md5 sum is This!"

      Then he fires up his gnutella server network, all supply his cracked version of Mozilla stuff and sits back waiting to get rootshell access to port x on several computers. He is untracable, some nice box someplace keeps all the data and he just picks interesting hosts to contact.

      Never ever mod this kind of garbage up!

      I personaly like this line "In the unlikely case that someone spent a year posting on slashdot and building up a reputation just so s/he could plant a trojan into the 1.0 release of mozilla" Like the slashdot password cant be stolen in several ways?

      There is no way to justify posting MD5 sums out of the official site. Never-ever do it.

      --
      -- -Sk (coe.) uuh. yasp.
    20. Re:Please!! Count to ten and then decide by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 1

      Reason, you can never, ever trust slashdot or similar system for MD5 sums of software.

      Nor can you trust http. Nor can you trust ftp. Technically you can't even trust https, or scp, or any method of transfer. Maybe if you build the machine yourself from the ground up, transister by transister, then you can trust it. Nope, even then you have to trust that the transister itself wasn't designed improperly. Gee, I guess you can't trust anything, can you?

      There is no way to justify posting MD5 sums out of the official site. Never-ever do it.

      2763d63b4b5f9d9f0e56fabc64334e95 ./mozilla-mac-10 -stub-instal.bin
      aec749db92b2fe03d247cfaa08c1d236 ./mozilla-mac-10 -full-instal.bin
      f773828f035affb022c8989045c690d0 ./linux-xpi/brow ser.xpi
      a6be6ff71051f94d988ab5b3af8724cc ./linux-xpi/chat zilla.xpi
      13cd011c36b2b2ff8ec5f5c6b612d106 ./linux-xpi/defl enus.xpi
      e5647eca938a877055917ba908392167 ./linux-xpi/insp ector.xpi
      6b28aa34476527ac4c44aa946f38f3fd ./linux-xpi/lang enus.xpi
      f2c1094e218fee49583726789ab96510 ./linux-xpi/mail . pi
      66fed4679661d0c0c640d1dbafa36af7 ./linux-xpi/psm. xpi
      1c2e0712d07130d88d7253015934a8ce ./linux-xpi/regu s.xpi
      f99bb9daf49c9e919cde5d54fdcfe059 ./linux-xpi/talk back.xpi
      94d39361968acbb2f745eddd97263feb ./linux-xpi/venk man.xpi
      b85671bdd3fe50b5806a8a11a696ed08 ./linux-xpi/xpco m.xpi
      1280114c60f4290aa6d781ba4cc75996 ./mac-xpi/browse r.xpi
      1f4e10c545ed8730cce0a52ca1b8b096 ./mac-xpi/chatzi lla.xpi
      6f14a66514ed61915ffe335673403ef6 ./mac-xpi/deflen us.xpi
      5dacc8365a39f05a019cbb6afcd1ff18 ./mac-xpi/inspec tor.xpi
      87b4e21ff15f931a130d505d315aecc8 ./mac-xpi/langen us.xpi
      3711c89eefee52d2fc099dc63407f13d ./mac-xpi/mail.x pi
      6ab127751d8076c897f3b3ed542102b3 ./mac-xpi/regus. xpi
      98849a0223aa505f43b11cd4be430119 ./mac-xpi/talkba ck.xpi
      d0141c0c7ce5ac738455fb66e44f6b3b ./mac-xpi/venkma n.xpi
      f0219e6de76287fd7f22efcde078b102 ./mac-xpi/xpcom. xpi
      78ece99d195388815fc086ed66ee5e8a ./mozilla-macosX -10.smi.bin
      893bb53966f9b5d5b2239cabc6dba4bd ./mozilla-i686-p c-linux-gnu-1.0-installer.tar.gz
      7fda58bab7855ae1 41cb3c8f92983dff ./mozilla-i686-p c-linux-gnu-1.0-sea.tar.gz
      3924198e5e7a6648b2e90c 8325064f24 ./mozilla-i686-p c-linux-gnu-1.0.tar.gz
      3637990a871800ce73613c3f0d 5929f7 ./src/mozilla-so urce-1.0.sit.bin
      033da936e48336aa2c5d8bf0aa039056 ./src/mozilla-so urce-1.0.tar.bz2
      35a7524c2fbb773e23449179c5cb1f20 ./src/mozilla-so urce-1.0.tar.gz
      451bab64989899f0c7d3ceaa3f83edb8 ./README
      d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e ./MD5SUMS
      8d0fb73b0409819575f445f02ffe4457 ./README-bsdos
      8745654b86e95c932a3cf5a3b8b8046b ./windows-xpi/br owser.xpi
      406f07384d499880fd839b19fd57915d ./windows-xpi/ch atzilla.xpi
      5b0e5d8de93891412d7f7fc3e934e23e ./windows-xpi/de flenus.xpi
      1d7b97d544ee0b261e2a385b488ca5d6 ./windows-xpi/in spector.xpi
      f3c28f1cf4b1281d5693f62bfaeb7fef ./windows-xpi/la ngenus.xpi
      ccf71efa628f0b8b07ebb835339c0459 ./windows-xpi/ma il.xpi
      c105d4a99ac72bbd800f7f1187978e04 ./windows-xpi/mo zillauninstall.zip
      a4ca84380bcfeef01c4fc1b01c7cb6 57 ./windows-xpi/ps m.xpi
      edccdbffa41bfde5bfd76961be35bce0 ./windows-xpi/re gus.xpi
      411654d9bf774b5e0c268205ccbf17a0 ./windows-xpi/ta lkback.xpi
      29e7a31e84c77042171b6fc59823c3d6 ./windows-xpi/ve nkman.xpi
      74ef9bf20e581a608b815f7516517178 ./windows-xpi/xp com.xpi
      684461f4bef2888271cb05bd3d80af28 ./mozilla-win32- 1.0-installer.exe
      5f5c523a4623a66fa7c132ee33d144a e ./mozilla-win32- 1.0-stub-installer.exe
      9af9f85af2cfa4cc9ed736c657 5769e7 ./mozilla-win32- 1.0-talkback.zip
      2e16e57429c325ff7ed01a4fdaf5120c ./mozilla-i386-u nknown-freebsd4.5_1.0.tar.gz
      71277c62af9ee8a81fdc e3d5aa7cabed ./mozilla-i386-p c-bsdi4.2-1.0.tar.gz
      e8b6be2bfa50fb9904579437eead 4ee1 ./Red_Hat_7x_RPM S/alpha/mozilla-1.0.0-2.alpha.rpm
      2431797e6a44922 dead81b8e195a03c8 ./Red_Hat_7x_RPM S/alpha/mozilla-nspr-1.0.0-2.alpha.rpm
      dd885d0777 a10a92a3a71fd2a5b07ad9 ./Red_Hat_7x_RPM S/alpha/mozilla-nspr-devel-1.0.0-2.alpha.rpm
      ccbd 0a083db186d54994bfb519700013 ./Red_Hat_7x_RPM S/alpha/mozilla-nss-1.0.0-2.alpha.rpm
      21a76d12352 6ec4e62ac516ddbbd1aba ./Red_Hat_7x_RPM S/alpha/mozilla-nss-devel-1.0.0-2.alpha.rpm
      b750d a5da2fd1aa816ac984783405578 ./Red_Hat_7x_RPM S/alpha/mozilla-devel-1.0.0-2.alpha.rpm
      24c4ea18b 442ed836394f91969a6074b ./Red_Hat_7x_RPM S/alpha/mozilla-mail-1.0.0-2.alpha.rpm
      310f828eb7 2ea75e8a9271ef64519336 ./Red_Hat_7x_RPM S/alpha/mozilla-psm-1.0.0-2.alpha.rpm
      b419bdf45fe 577f2d97a793146448479 ./Red_Hat_7x_RPM S/alpha/mozilla-chat-1.0.0-2.alpha.rpm
      2eab0c7d61 44932e3ac0387c71489dc4 ./Red_Hat_7x_RPM S/alpha/mozilla-js-debugger-1.0.0-2.alpha.rpm
      c85 2c9554942a969b6edaf1e01d7bf30 ./Red_Hat_7x_RPM S/alpha/mozilla-dom-inspector-1.0.0-2.alpha.rpm
      7 707ddc76f0e811eebc270bbeaad8eee ./Red_Hat_7x_RPM S/i386/mozilla-1.0.0-2.i386.rpm
      2462cf0671f4e9de8 51b6a5218f6ac8a ./Red_Hat_7x_RPM S/i386/mozilla-nspr-1.0.0-2.i386.rpm
      116345662f17 442ecc03f147b44ab9f1 ./Red_Hat_7x_RPM S/i386/mozilla-nspr-devel-1.0.0-2.i386.rpm
      11f23a 0ff5d170ae330047e34194a8a2 ./Red_Hat_7x_RPM S/i386/mozilla-nss-1.0.0-2.i386.rpm
      408271b6a2d1d 73cf24dbb81994197c3 ./Red_Hat_7x_RPM S/i386/mozilla-nss-devel-1.0.0-2.i386.rpm
      e99f1c0 1acb691a10bf79b9d5dca15d5 ./Red_Hat_7x_RPM S/i386/mozilla-devel-1.0.0-2.i386.rpm
      a605ca57184 c4d1a7eea5d2814fa3ab6 ./Red_Hat_7x_RPM S/i386/mozilla-mail-1.0.0-2.i386.rpm
      2ee85b6b5154 9fd9c6f5b66ef1c56a83 ./Red_Hat_7x_RPM S/i386/mozilla-psm-1.0.0-2.i386.rpm
      31494833e0e2c 4053ab7710306f30d76 ./Red_Hat_7x_RPM S/i386/mozilla-chat-1.0.0-2.i386.rpm
      26bba0cd16f5 218dec05b7121040ac9b ./Red_Hat_7x_RPM S/i386/mozilla-js-debugger-1.0.0-2.i386.rpm
      f8068 34fc841ad6634f18de6053503fb ./Red_Hat_7x_RPM S/i386/mozilla-dom-inspector-1.0.0-2.i386.rpm
      2a3 eab34f05921744783364319aea378 ./Red_Hat_7x_RPM S/SRPMS/mozilla-1.0.0-2.src.rpm
      b18ab3464a3e4e03b 3be12b7dd4ab251 ./mozilla-i386-p c-bsdi4.3-1.0.tar.gz
      885d9e36ac854ab6fd7e643669a8 60b2 ./mozilla-os2-va cpp-1.0.zip
      d7a66ff845bedcf288eec64e4111b0ba ./mozilla-alphae v6-dec-osf4.0f-1.0.tar.gz
      b9f3f1f3857ab599cc2ec38 a26bf75bc ./mozilla-powerp c-unknown-linux-gnu-1.0.tar.gz
      320520d8c0330e4e30 3f6acc42b6c384 ./mozilla-sparc- unknown-bsdi4.2-1.0.tar.gz
      f9215c40c309a0460f72f7 8e11c24b3c ./mozilla-openvm s-alpha-m100.sfx_ax

    21. Re:Please!! Count to ten and then decide by gid · · Score: 1

      It's all cool. You have your feelings about security, I have mine, no biggie. :)

      Maybe that moderation comment was a bit too much, but it I thought it was kinda funny at the time so I typed it. Damn why does all my humor have to be at someone elses expense? Guess that's why I normally try to stick to self depricating humor. :)

  23. mirror in sweden by fredan · · Score: 4, Informative

    if you wait for a while, I will have the files at ftp.fredan.org/mozilla/

    1. Re:mirror in sweden by Markusis · · Score: 1

      Progeny's mirror seems to have a hell of a lot of bandwidth left over. I just DLed 1.0 at 333kb/s.
      http://archive.progeny.com/mozilla/relea ses/mozill a1.0/

  24. Ann Arbor Party by npietraniec · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Ann Arbor Party... Looks like Taco will be there.

    1. Re:Ann Arbor Party by the+Man+in+Black · · Score: 2

      So let's all go to a party...celebrating a software release...at which you might meet the founder of a popular website. And maybe then he will invite you over to his house for pizza and ice cream and you'll be best friends forever.

      [Props to Gabe from Penny Arcade for the quote]

      Somehow, going out to party with a bunch of sweaty male IT workers and Software Developers just doesn't sound like my idea of a good time.

      Unless there's free beer. Then I'm all over it. :-)

    2. Re:Ann Arbor Party by 137 · · Score: 0
      So, let me get this straight: you're mocking people who want to have a party celebrating a software release because they're geeks, and to do it you use a quote from Penny Arcade. Penny Arcade, for god's sake.

      Pot, meet Kettle. Kettle, this is Pot.

    3. Re:Ann Arbor Party by GyrlGeek · · Score: 1

      You know, I'm offended All IT workers aren't sweaty males, some of us are sweaty females. Just pointing that out.

    4. Re:Ann Arbor Party by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, any excuse to party is a good excuse in my opinion. :)

    5. Re:Ann Arbor Party by zootread · · Score: 1

      Somehow, going out to party with a bunch of sweaty male IT workers and Software Developers just doesn't sound like my idea of a good time.

      So bring some girls. That's what I'd do if I was going. Most of the girls I know like getting drunk and talking to computer geeks. Too bad there are no parties in my town.

      --
      Zoot!
    6. Re:Ann Arbor Party by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So where is this shindig at? Ann Arbor is a pretty big place, ya know!

    7. Re:Ann Arbor Party by mE123 · · Score: 1

      Oh come on, you know that's a lie...

      Like the Internet, in IT I assume that everyone is a 30-40 year old man, until proven other wise

    8. Re:Ann Arbor Party by _ZorKa_ · · Score: 1

      The Ann Arbor party is going to be held "actually" in Ypsilanti at Tap Internet, Inc. Address info is:

      Tap Internet, Inc.
      125 N. Huron St. STE #400
      Ypsilanti, MI 48197
      734-482-1371 (if you get lost or need directions)

      Coming I94 from Chicago get off at exit 183 and head north (left). Coming from Detroit get off at exit 183 and head north (right off of exit). When you cross downtown Ypsilanti get in the left lane and park at the Joseph Mercy Hospital parking lot on the left and walk to the end of the block to 125. Party starts at 7:00 and once all of the Pizza and food is eaten the party will be migrated to the bar around the corner.

      -Z

      --
      "With enough memory and hard drive space, anything in life is possible!"
    9. Re:Ann Arbor Party by GyrlGeek · · Score: 1

      Hey, I'm a girl and I can prove it.
      Test me.

    10. Re:Ann Arbor Party by II+Cold · · Score: 1

      sweaty huh?? I don't know about you, but my office has central air!

      --
      "Try not. Do. Or do not. There is no try." -Yoda
    11. Re:Ann Arbor Party by mE123 · · Score: 1

      Ok, then... How do you make a casserole?

      J/K

      :)

      PS. The Pic on your user info doesn't work... you are such a man...

    12. Re:Ann Arbor Party by GyrlGeek · · Score: 1

      Hey, I hate casserole. I never make it. BUT give me another test...come on....

    13. Re:Ann Arbor Party by mE123 · · Score: 1

      Well if the link had worked that would have been a good start...

      Eh, I'm hitting a problem you see... If I give you a question I need to have the answer, right. But if I know the answer then another guy could know the answer...

      maybe if you could show me some witness or something like that... maybe something like old posts somewhere that mention that you are female...

      PS you do seem interesting though.. how about we switch the context of this argument.. try Emailing me (mE123 at softhome.net) or ICQing me (#11765864)

      -------
      "Geez...You Guys are so un-hip it's a wonder your Bums don't fall off!" Zaphod Beeblebrox, Ex-Galactic President.

  25. New 1.0 Start Page and User FAQ by David+Gerard · · Score: 4, Informative
    Start page: http://mozilla.org/start/1.0/

    FAQ: http://mozilla.org/start/1.0/faq/

    Don't bother looking at these in IE 5.0, its PNG support is rubbish.

    --
    http://rocknerd.co.uk
    1. Re:New 1.0 Start Page and User FAQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seems to work fine in IE, regardless of rubbish png support.

    2. Re:New 1.0 Start Page and User FAQ by David+Gerard · · Score: 4, Insightful
      "Seems to work fine in IE, regardless of rubbish png support."

      Yeah, though in IE6 we needed to use a different tail PNG because IE6 gets the gamma wrong, and IE5's support is so b0rken we just don't put them on the page at all (you'll see a weird slideshow effect).

      IE will become the new Netscape 4: the b0rken pizza ship that no-one wants to code for any more, because it's just too painful. I so so so wish we hadn't had to allow for the thing.

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
    3. Re:New 1.0 Start Page and User FAQ by seizer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's not the point. What you're implying is that Mozilla have made their pages to break IE. But we're going for *standards* here, not a lock-out competition, so that anybody can make a browser which will work. And actually, the page renders fine in IE, even though you miss out the eye candy of the lizard at the top right. Mozilla have designed the pages very well, with "degradation" in mind. That is, people with less advantaged browsers STILL get a readable and usable version of the page. It's what CSS is all about, and it's what Mozilla is all about. It's a Good Idea(TM).

    4. Re:New 1.0 Start Page and User FAQ by Aanallein · · Score: 2
      Start page: http://mozilla.org/start/1.0/
      And do take half a second to hover over the parties link. :)
    5. Re:New 1.0 Start Page and User FAQ by elmegil · · Score: 1

      God knows they look like crap in Netscape 4.79.

      --
      7 November 2006: The day Americans realized corruption and incompetence weren't addressing 11 September 2001
    6. Re:New 1.0 Start Page and User FAQ by Mithal · · Score: 1

      The start page manage to crash my IE 6.0. Surprising.

    7. Re:New 1.0 Start Page and User FAQ by zapf · · Score: 1

      I don't know about you, but the lizard in IE6 looks identical to the one in Mozilla, the only difference being that in Mozilla the right border of the box is one pixel off from the lizard image while in IE6 it aligns perfectly. Look right under the lizard where the "mozilla 1.0" bar intersects the right border. In my mozilla 1.0 final (win32), it is one pixel off. In IE6, it isn't.

      But hey, let's moderate up the people who talk about ie6 gopher holes in a mozilla thread, and moderate down the people who actually talk about the browser at hand.

    8. Re:New 1.0 Start Page and User FAQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The start page manage to crash my IE 6.0. Surprising.

      Not really. Getting Microsoft to support web standards is like pulling teeth.

    9. Re:New 1.0 Start Page and User FAQ by seizer · · Score: 1

      Ahh, my apologies. Not quite up to date here (IE5.5, uni computer lab).

      Well spotted on the differences!

    10. Re:New 1.0 Start Page and User FAQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I don't know about you, but the lizard in IE6 looks identical to the one in Mozilla,"

      Only if JavaScript is turned on. I had to put a hack in there to call directX in WinIE. Look at the detect-problems.js for yourself.

      "the only difference being that in Mozilla the right border of the box is one pixel off from the lizard image while in IE6 it aligns perfectly. Look right under the lizard where the "mozilla 1.0" bar intersects the right border. In my mozilla 1.0 final (win32), it is one pixel off. In IE6, it isn't."

      It's only 1px off sometimes. Resize you're browser and you'll notice it line up. It's a rounding error which I couldn't do anything about while writing the page.

      You'll also notice that IE 6.0's box model screws stuff up. Around the Mozilla 1.0 text in the upper left there is supposed to be 1px on the top and 1px on the bottom, it's not there in IE because the border is on the inside of the box.

      Same problem with the dino head, it drops down into the border because of their box model.

      The 2 column display also works in IE 5.5 but not in 6.0.

      IE was the only browser that I had to special case, which was really annoying. There were some pretty bad "float: right;" bugs in the page (Didn't matter if it was ieMac or ieWin either) until a couple days before we released. I fixed the problem by juggling around code elsewhere on the page that was seemingly unrelated.

    11. Re:New 1.0 Start Page and User FAQ by David+Gerard · · Score: 1
      I was speaking from a position of being one of those who worked on said pages. We busted ass not to break IE5, though it did its damnedest to hinder us.

      Of course, they're fine in Konqueror and Opera.

      Really. IE5 is SUCH A PIECE OF SHIT.

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
    12. Re:New 1.0 Start Page and User FAQ by gol64738 · · Score: 2

      WTF, i cannot believe that MSIE chokes on a simple transparent .png file. the .png format kicks ass all over .gif formats (alpha channel, etc), AND is an open standard while .gif is not.

      users want alpha transparency, which allows one to do nifty effects like drop-shadows and anti-aliasing against any background, but the poor suckers stuck using MSIE are still locked in the dark ages of GIF-style binary transparency. (and it's implemented in such a way that any palette index that isn't completely opaque is treated as completely transparent--depending on your image, say goodbye to most of it!
      To make up for that, MSIE doesn't support 32-bit RGBA transparency at all. what a pile of fucking shit.)

    13. Re:New 1.0 Start Page and User FAQ by SCHecklerX · · Score: 2
      Check out the demos! Very nifty stuff. I really like the eagle shadow, Complex Spiral, and MathML. NIFTY!

      http://mozilla.org/start/1.0/demos.html

    14. Re:New 1.0 Start Page and User FAQ by zapf · · Score: 1

      The page looks fine in Opera 6 (win32).

  26. good news for Linux? by tps12 · · Score: 0, Troll

    I think this is going to be a major boon for Linux. Far too long has Linux been considered a "marginal" OS with a handful of zealous believers. With Mozilla at 1.0, and KDE and Gnome almost ready for prime-time, and several Linux office suites in the final planning stages, Linux is poised for triumph.

    Watch the Windows users come running in droves!

    --

    Karma: Good (despite my invention of the Karma: sig)
    1. Re:good news for Linux? by sketerpot · · Score: 1
      Don't forget cheap PCs. You've probably heard the argument before: as computers become cheaper, the cost of Microsoft products is going to become a considerable part of the cost of the computer. Why pay that if you don't have to? I can foresee cheap web terminals and simplified computers using linux, KDE/GNOME/whatever (whichever makes you feel happy), and Mozilla becoming fairly widepread. It's not a perfect user base, since it is for simplified things rather than general computer use, but it is a user base. Linux could grow from there.

      Look to the future!

    2. Re:good news for Linux? by morgajel · · Score: 2, Funny

      *setting down his tech support headset*

      um, is that such a good thing?:)

      --
      Looking for Book Reviews? Check out Literary Escapism.
    3. Re:good news for Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Major boon for Linux? Poised for triumph? Running in droves?
      Move out of your mommy's basement and get a life LOSER!
      If you're naive enough to think Mozilla 1.0 will change the world, think again peanut.

    4. Re:good news for Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about a GOOD DVD player? How about some NEW games? How about all the specialized stuff like Photoshop, Illustrator, Flash, AutoCAD, Avid Video, etc.

      How about EASE OF USE?

      I love Linux and use it at home, but for most people, it just doesn't have all the necessary software, or it is just to difficult to use. You need more than a web browser and an office suite.

    5. Re:good news for Linux? by Sj0 · · Score: 2

      ...Now the Linux folks will realize what the rest of us Alternate OS users have known(and have experienced) for years. It doesn't matter if you have a better OS, it doesn't matter if developers are making things for your OS. It doesn't matter if you have a rabid user community who believes that this OS is the greatest ever coded. Microsoft will lie, cheat, and steal to ensure it's position.

      As a niche OS, Linux only got fringe attentions from them, but now that it's becoming a formidable desktop platform, I fear that MS will bring it's PR machine into gear...

      --
      It's been a long time.
    6. Re:good news for Linux? by ncc74656 · · Score: 2
      You've probably heard the argument before: as computers become cheaper, the cost of Microsoft products is going to become a considerable part of the cost of the computer.

      "Is going to become"? It already is...consider this cost breakdown I posted over the weekend. For my hypothetical low-end machine (which isn't even as low-end as you can go), Win2K accounts for more than a fifth of the system cost. It's the most expensive item in the list. If you leave the monitor out of the list and consider just the computer and what goes into it, 27.3% of the cost is for Win2K. (You could get Win98, WinMe, or XP Home for less, but Win98's a bit long in the tooth and WinMe and XP (any version) blow chunks.)

      --
      20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
    7. Re:good news for Linux? by Theom · · Score: 0

      "Photoshop, Illustrator, Flash, AutoCAD, Avid Video [..] for most people, it just doesn't have all the necessary software"

      Most people don't use these aplications.

      --

      mp3: l33t term for empty.
    8. Re:good news for Linux? by sketerpot · · Score: 1

      Let me rephrase that and add more detail: the cost of Windows, Office, and third-party commercial software is going to become an intolerably large and unnecessary part of the cost. Some bright people are going to sell computers for cheaper prices by using Open Source/Free stuff, and then they will probably catch on due to the fact that the hardware and stuff is good, and they're CHEAP!

    9. Re:good news for Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      moderators: everything I say is supposed to be funny. don't be upset if it's over your head.
      Is that what you tell girls too?
  27. Congrats by shadowofdarkness · · Score: 1

    Congrats to the moz team you are truly (slow working) visionaries.

  28. Beonex Communicator 0.8-stable based on Mozilla 1 by benb · · Score: 5, Informative
    Beonex also just released the Mozilla 1.0-based browser Beonex Communicator 0.8-stable.

    While the ultimate goal of the Mozilla project is to produce source code that can be used by other projects and companies, the Open-Source project Beonex tries to make a browser for end-users out of it. (See Beonex vs. Mozilla). Beonex Communicator stays relatively true to Mozilla. Special emphasis is being put on security and privacy. The software is configured defensively, to avoid security holes to appear in the first place. For example, it sanitizes incoming HTML-email to the largest part.

    The current version is available for Windows und Linux and bases on the final Mozilla 1.0 source code.

    BTW: Congratulations to the whole Mozilla project!

    Disclaimer: I am a member of the Beonex project.
    I hope, Slashdot will also run this as main news article.

  29. Quick! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Everyone! Run out, throw some 24 bit transparent pngs on your web page as onload pop-ups, and show users what IE lacks!

  30. new king by SirSlud · · Score: 4, Insightful

    While there are some rough edges (tho, remember IE 1.0? ;), Mozilla is now the king of browsers. Tabs, developer-friendly tools (that dont get in the way of the newbie), skins, the level of customization, speed, cookie management .. and free (and open source!) Whats not to like?

    Say goodbye, IE! Man am I glad to see you go.

    (BTW, I hear in the next (last?) WinXP patch, you'll be able to strip IE from your system entirely? Where can I find detailed information about this?)

    PS. I've been using Mozilla for about a month or two, and despite aforementionned rough edges, this thing absolutely blows IE out of the water in all respects except market share. ;)

    --
    "Old man yells at systemd"
    1. Re:new king by essdodson · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I doubt you'll see anyone stripping IE. IE is the browsers of choice for those who use windows. I don't really care how it goes about it, loading files on startup or whatever, IE is by far the best browser offering for Windows. It may have from the enemy, but IE is here to stay.

      I'm seeing more and more people switch to IE every day. Complete cluelessness of Netscape is to blame for this. Even though Mozilla is a rock solid browser I doubt these people would be willing to run Mozilla after finding out that Netscape 6 is derrived from Mozilla code base.

      --
      scott
    2. Re:new king by Lynggaard · · Score: 1

      And which features of IE is better than mozilla ?

    3. Re:new king by Sj0 · · Score: 2

      IE is the browsers of choice for those who use windows.

      Speak for yourself. I can't stand browser crashes which take down the shell, and I used 98lite to transplant the 95OSR2 GUI into 98 because I don't think integration is a good thing for stability, speed, or memory consumption. I use K-Meleon

      --
      It's been a long time.
    4. Re:new king by JahToasted · · Score: 1
      I don't know about stripping IE... I tried win98lite and it did some whacky things.

      But even so, next week all the computers at my office (some already are) will be using mozilla as the browser and mail client. Good bye IE/Outlook security problems.

      Mozilla is better than IE in every way. Faster, more stable, more secure. It doesn't matter how many people use it. I'm gonna use it and everyone who i can convince will use it.

    5. Re:new king by Schnapple · · Score: 2, Informative
      remember IE 1.0?
      I may be wrong here, but I don't think there was ever an IE 1.0. Microsoft, like dozens of other companies, bought the right to "brand" a distribution of Mosaic and either they rolled some of their own crap into it and called it "2.0" or they based it on 2.0 of Mosaic.

      I don't know or recall if there's any shreds of Mosaic in IE 6.0 (or even if there were any in 3.0, the first IE to be a "contender") but like MS buying QDOS and making it MS-DOS, they did the same with Mosaic.

      All I remember is that it used to suck to have to set up Windows NT 4.0 on a system and try to download all the latest service packs, browsers, etc. to discover that the POS IE 2.0 they bundled with it couldn't read ASP pages (insisted on .htm or .html) which is what MS put its updates on microsoft.com in.

      Actually since MS bundled IE 2.0 with NT all along and no one complained, then they bundled IE 4.0 with 98 and caught hell about it, if IE 4.0 is so bad, why did people complain? IE 2.0 was bad and no one griped...

    6. Re:new king by NanoGator · · Score: 2

      "Speak for yourself. I can't stand browser crashes which take down the shell..."

      Try using Windows 2000. I use IE on it all the time and crashes are extremely seldom. When crashes do happen, they don't wipe out the OS and cause a reboot.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    7. Re:new king by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stripping IE may be a bit too harsh. Try a kinder, gentler action, like just removing the icon from the desktop. :-)

    8. Re:new king by Dazza · · Score: 1

      Mozilla, mainly due to its tabbed browsing, is a much easier to use browser. However, IE is still significantly faster then Mozilla at displaying large pages ( for example, large drop-down lists ) and hence can often seem slicker to use.

      If Mozilla could operate at IE speed, then it would be head and shoulders above IE.

      --
      -- "I know that this is vitriol, no solution, spleen-venting, but I feel better having screamed, don't you ?"
    9. Re:new king by Pii · · Score: 2
      I doubt you'll see anyone stripping IE. IE is the browsers of choice for those who use windows. I don't really care how it goes about it, loading files on startup or whatever, IE is by far the best browser offering for Windows. It may have from the enemy, but IE is here to stay.

      IE may be here to stay, and without a doubt, it has long been the champ on Windows, but the "installed userbase" equation is about to change dramatically.

      35,000,000 AOL users are going to end up with Netscape/Mozilla/Gecko as their browser of choice as AOL merges it into their software, and companies that court consumer dollars are going to have to wake up and smell the standards.

      Crappy web pages with proprietary IE only "tricks" are about to become a thing of the past.

      Back when Netscape was a player, most sites had to at least tip their hats in the general direction of standards, and browser portability. For the past few years, they haven't even had to bother. IE was the only game in town, and Netscape users were a segment that could be ignored.

      It's rare that a product whose market share has eroded so completely could undergo any real resurgence, but all of those AOL users will ensure that the lizard comes back in force, and it will happen over night, when those AOL folks download their AOL Blah.blah upgrades.

      Ironic, isn't it, that AOL will be the company that saves the Open-ness of the Web...

      --
      For those that would die defending it, Freedom
      has a sweet taste that the protected will never know.
    10. Re:new king by Martin+Blank · · Score: 2

      I don't know or recall if there's any shreds of Mosaic in IE 6.0

      From IE's About dialogue box:

      Based on NCSA Mosaic. NCSA Mosaic(TM); was developed at the National Center for Supercomputing Applications at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
      Distributed under a licensing agreement with Spyglass, Inc.
      Contains security software licensed from RSA Data Security Inc.
      Portions of this software are based in part on the work of the Independent JPEG Group.
      Multimedia software components, including Indeo(R); video, Indeo(R) audio, and Web Design Effects are provided by Intel Corp.
      Unix version contains software licensed from Mainsoft Corporation. Copyright (c) 1998-1999 Mainsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. Mainsoft is a trademark of Mainsoft Corporation.
      Warning: This computer program is protected by copyright law and international treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this program, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the law.

      I imagine that the code is close enough as a derivative (or perhaps still there) that there's still a reason to include the text.

      --
      You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
    11. Re:new king by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Speed. Mozilla is still slower in general browsing then IE.

    12. Re:new king by SirSlud · · Score: 2

      Maybe the responsiveness of the widget set is faster in IE, which makes it 'feel' faster ... but downloading and rendering seems faster in Gecko than IE on my box.

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    13. Re:new king by aengblom · · Score: 4, Interesting

      IE is fabulous in Windows until you have a problem. Then you're pretty much sunk. I've recently encountered two IE bugs that have gone unfixed and they are pretty much showstoppers for me. The first (on my home machine)... IE would often not display images--there were a variety of complex temporary fixes, but I couldn't get it to work. Most problematic: to fix my IE I had to reinstall the OS. This is the largest problem with it's integration Uninstall/Revert to previous version wouldn't work because it broke my MS Outlook!

      More recently, I have come across a bug that prevents IE from saving a photo as anything, but a BMP when the cache gets full (or something). This is a problem at work because I use IE to browse web accessible database of large image files.

      For both CPU's I had to switch to Moz. Thankfully, it was there when I needed it. IE is still a pleasure to use... but only when it works.

      --


      So close and yet so far from the world's perfect ID number
    14. Re:new king by operagost · · Score: 1
      IE 1.0 was included in the Plus Pack for Windows 95.

      I might also add that the problem with IE 4.0 as opposed to 2.0 was its level of integration with the machine. The default configuration gave browser-like navigation to every file window, allowed the user to embed a web page on his desktop, and allowed him to use single-clicks to open programs.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    15. Re:new king by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, IE is faster in everything. But in mozilla 1.1 mozilla is going to seriously catch up. In the nightlies you can already test the new dhtml rendering code, which is superfast.

    16. Re:new king by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ActiveX beats the hell out of the shitty fucking plugin model that Mozilla adhears to. The cab distribution method of IE beats the hell out of Smart Installation, oh, and Java is way quicker in IE since MS actually knows how to write a decent Java plugin and Sun is fucking clueless about it. Startup time is quicker (even with quickstart enabled), page rendering is faster, the event bubling in IE is better, and the DOM all around is superior. Sure Mozilla has tab browsing and popup killers, but since I can write my own program that acts as a container for the IWebBrowser2 IE COM object I can do the same thing now with IE. Have fun with your little illusions my friend. I hope they help you sleep well at night. In the mean time I will continue to use a better browser.

    17. Re:new king by Sj0 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I would try it, except for three things;

      1)K-Meleon has never crashed on me, even with 100 windows open. I don't think I can go back to a web browser which ever crashes. It's just too inconvenient to lose those 100 windows.

      2)I enjoy coding under dos(in fact, despite the fact that dos is quite dead, and real-mode hardware coding is not paticularly useful anymore, I'm working on an RPG for dos right now), and the dos emulator under w2k is less than stellar. For example, they don't emulate the latest version of EMS.

      3)I have achieved remarkable stability and speed under 98, and the thought of spending a couple hundred dollars for 2k just so I can run Internet Explorer without crashing the shell doesn't really appeal to me.

      If I had cable and therefore needed security(patched security.....), I'd buy it in a heartbeat -- probably before I went to subscribe to cable. As it stands however, there isn't really any reason to put Windows on a standalone PC.

      --
      It's been a long time.
    18. Re:new king by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here is a little reality check for you dumbass, just because Mozilla will be the default browser does not mean that IE will loose 35,000,000 users. Clueless user X goes to connect to the internet and notices there is some stupid lizard icon on their desktop. They don't give it a second though and click on the same icon they have clicked on since they got the service. Yep, the little e on their desktop that came with the computer. It doesn't really mean shit that AOL is switching to Mozilla because there is nothing preventing users from using IE. Moreover if they are already on AOL they are probably not even going to download the browser since they won't have to. Ironic isn't it that you will preserve the stupity of the Web.

    19. Re:new king by NanoGator · · Score: 2



      I'm sorry, I didn't mean to imply that you should upgrade to 2K simply for browsing. Since I switched to 2k, I reboot once a week at the most. I do a lot of gaming and Lightwave stuff, I beat up my computer pretty hard and it still has an impressive uptime. I also have a home-brew PVR running 2K. I reboot it maybe once a month or two.

      For me, the stability difference between 2K and 98 means I can leave programs running longer. This is of particular use to me since programs like Photoshop have a wonderful undo capability, though sadly they don't save it with the file.

      If that type of up-time is worth $200 for you, then great. But if it's not, and the upgrade'd only be for improving IE use, then yeah it'd be silly to buy it. :) I simply wanted to share my experience with getting 2K. I was surprised at the difference it made in my production life.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    20. Re:new king by psocccer · · Score: 2
      (BTW, I hear in the next (last?) WinXP patch, you'll be able to strip IE from your system entirely? Where can I find detailed information about this?)
      Well, I don't know about removing IE, but you can use gecko in IE instead of mshtml by making it use the mozilla activex control. Sounds like it works with most programs that used mshtml because it's binary compatible as an activex control... almost the same as removing IE.
    21. Re:new king by Sj0 · · Score: 2

      It wouldn't be much of a conversation if I decided to leave it at "yup, you like 2k...", would it? : )

      As I said though, I have been able to coax remarkable stability out of 98. I generally do music composition, DOS programming, play games(more than I'd like to admit, but less than I'd like to. :) ), and do a little(very little) bit of 3d modelling with Gmax and 2d graphics using Pixella(a freeware graphics program). With 98lite installed(basically, it just removes IE and some of the other junk, and installs the 95 GUI to get rid of net integration), I too get some pretty impressive uptimes when I let the computer run. The potential is definitely longer than any gaming/coding/music/art spree I've gone on.

      --
      It's been a long time.
    22. Re:new king by faaaz · · Score: 1

      Yup, that's what I've done. But I'm still stuck with the darned thing whenever I load windows. It's there when I browse my files. It loads with windows. It's part of the 'essentials' that make win tick. That really creeps me out.

      --
      we come in peace / shoot to kill
    23. Re:new king by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you Captain Clueless. Come back when you have some fucking idea what the AOL client is.

    24. Re:new king by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Translation: Mozilla SuX0rs! IE 0wnz j00!! Come back when you can provide some evidence to back up your claims.

    25. Re:new king by nil_null · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think IE has been "browser of choice" for only the last year and a half (give or take a few months). Netscape (and maybe Opera) worked with most web pages until around March 2001, when I started to notice that many pages could only be viewed properly with IE. Maybe this happened earlier, but it seems like it wasn't as big of a problem until then. Also, IE is well known for crashing frequently under Win9x/ME. In early 2001, Win2k was being recognized as a stable OS, and IE ran on it without crashing frequently. People were switching to Win2k (or buying PCs with it preinstalled), and finding IE5.0 installed and using it instead of bothering with other browsers.

      My whole point is, it hasn't been long that IE has been "browser of choice." And things change so quickly in this area that the popular browser can be Netscape one day, IE the next day, and an onslaught of Mozilla-based browsers the day after that.

    26. Re:new king by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The 99% marketshare feature.

    27. Re:new king by perp · · Score: 1
      This is a problem at work because I use IE to browse web accessible database of large image files.

      Hmm, "database of large image files", is that what the pr0n vendors are calling it nowadays?

      --
      There are two kinds of sysadmins: paranoids and losers. I'm both kinds.
    28. Re:new king by swv3752 · · Score: 1

      Sounds like what I get out of linux, but then I payed less for my stability.

      --
      Just a Tuna in the Sea of Life
    29. Re:new king by ensignyu · · Score: 1

      Hrm, from reading the web page, it doesn't sound like it will work with IE 5 or 6.

    30. Re:new king by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 2
      Yeah, unless you're trying to write pages. That earlier comment about it being painful is just too true. I've spent the last week redesigning theoretic.com, and each time I changed one little thing, it became b0rked in IE.

      Firstly it was the borders. IE's development team are lazy asses and can't be bothered rendering dotted, so they just do dashed instead. Except that when it renders boxes with a dashed border, if you scroll they become solid! ARGH!

      Next up was fonts. Despite claiming support for CSS, IE6 doesn't appear to recognise the keywords small, smaller etc, which means I have to hardcode point sizes, which then means that on Mozilla/Linux the text looks too small.

      I could go on, but writing web pages for Mozilla was great, it just worked, but I was soooo tempted to leave IE users out in the cold. As it is an open sourceish type website that wouldn't have been a huge loss.

    31. Re:new king by billybob · · Score: 1

      All I remember is that it used to suck to have to set up Windows NT 4.0 on a system and try to download all the latest service packs, browsers, etc. to discover that the POS IE 2.0 they bundled with it couldn't read ASP pages (insisted on .htm or .html) which is what MS put its updates on microsoft.com in.

      Tell me about it.. ha! The first time I ever installed NT4 (after probably hundreds of installs with 95 and 98), I ran into the same problem. It was totally ludicrous. IE2 is the worst browser I've ever freaking used. Luckily I managed to find a CD with all the service packs up through 5 on it, and then was able to use windowsupdate to get 6. What a PITA. :)

      --
      Joseph?
    32. Re:new king by Sj0 · · Score: 2

      Yeah, my RedHat 7.3 installation is great -- but it won't run the thousands of dollars of software I've accumulated over the years(because wine hates me.).

      --
      It's been a long time.
    33. Re:new king by hondo77 · · Score: 1

      Printing.

      --
      I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
    34. Re:new king by hondo77 · · Score: 1

      Even though Mozilla is a rock solid browser...

      What do you mean by 'rock solid'? 1.0 just came out, it still has bugs (some of which have been around for years), and the version I used just a couple of months ago would crash once or twice a week. How do you know this version of Mozilla is rock solid?

      --
      I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
  31. Yay, after a gestation longer than most whales... by rnws · · Score: 1

    And now I shall go and download the sucker :-)

  32. User discussion newsgroups by Nicopa · · Score: 5, Informative

    Please, don't use the developer groups for your questions. A good place for user discussion where you can ask for support or discuss and propose features is the new newsgroup:

    snews://secnews.netscape.com:563/netscape.mozilla. user.general

    (Note that slashdot adds a space inside the link)

    1. Re:User discussion newsgroups by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      snews://secnews.netscape.com:563/netscape.mozilla. user.general this works if you click on it. learn to post in html.

    2. Re:User discussion newsgroups by Dirtside · · Score: 2

      Um, there's a problem with that. First, there is no newsgroup called netscape.mozilla.user.general -- the closest is netscape.public.mozilla.user. Second, if you submit a post to that NG, you will get an email back telling you that it does not accept posts from anyone not on their email whitelist, and that you should contact the administrator to get on the whitelist.

      Except that it NEGLECTS TO GIVE YOU THE ADMINISTRATOR'S EMAIL ADDRESS. Jesus. Are they TRYING to make it hard to access?

      --
      "Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
    3. Re:User discussion newsgroups by Nicopa · · Score: 3, Informative

      Make sure you are accessing the secure server secnews.netscape.com.

    4. Re:User discussion newsgroups by David+Gerard · · Score: 2, Informative
      The user newsgroups are listed (with clickable links) in the FAQ.

      Note that you MUST be using SSL news (snews://) on port 563. Use Mozilla, Netscape 6/7, Outlook Express or slrn (those are the newsreaders I know of that do SSL news).

      (No, I don't know why.)

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
  33. We Love 1.0 by Smelly+Jeffrey · · Score: 1

    And there was much rejoice...W00T

  34. It's finally here! Yay! by netdemonboberb · · Score: 2, Informative

    After long last, its finally here. Don't think that this is the end of Mozilla. It's only the beginning! Netscape 7.0 is most likely coming off the 1.0 branch, and the trunk has already been getting bugfixes that will go into later Mozilla releases (releases). So, if a fix to a bug you wanted fixed isn't in Mozilla 1.0, its not the end of the world. Stay posted. :-)

    --

    Volunteer Mozilla developer, RPI Student.
  35. To ease the load a bit by Corby911 · · Score: 1

    Linux installer mirrored here.

    --
    Monday is a horrible way to spend 1/7 of your life.
  36. Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    YAY! I've been waiting for this day for ages! i can finally look at pitcures of women haveing hot kinky sex with other women without all those annoying pop ups!

    God i love my lizard

  37. Hit 'em where it hurts by wilburdg · · Score: 5, Funny



    This source code is subject to the U.S. Export Administration Regulations and other U.S. law, and may not be exported or re-exported to certain countries (currently Afghanistan (Taliban controlled areas)

    Bombing them is one thing, but not giving them access to Mozilla? That's just mean.

    1. Re:Hit 'em where it hurts by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 2

      I guess the idea is that encryption software would help the citizens of these countries organize revolts against their oppressive governments... Err, wait a second...

    2. Re:Hit 'em where it hurts by DietFluffy · · Score: 1

      Does anyone else find it amusing that mozilla.org has the following disclaimer on their download page?..."We do not guarantee that any source code or executable code available from the mozilla.org domain is Year 2000 compliant. "

    3. Re:Hit 'em where it hurts by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 2
      This source code is subject to the U.S. Export Administration Regulations and other U.S. law, and may not be exported or re-exported to certain countries (currently Afghanistan (Taliban controlled areas)

      Last time I checked, the Taliban didn't control any areas .... still, what with the red star and all it'd probably be seen as a symbol of communism anyway :)

    4. Re:Hit 'em where it hurts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      They may still hide in some caves.

      Don't export Mozilla to those caves - let's them use IE.

    5. Re:Hit 'em where it hurts by Zspdude · · Score: 2

      A sad precaution but a necessary one. You wouldn't want MS to have any evidence that opensource is a terrorist's dream come true, would you?

      --
      What's in a Sig?
    6. Re:Hit 'em where it hurts by bombom · · Score: 1

      Now how is that kid from Kabul who emails Katz on his C64 be able to view webpages?

      Poor Juno! (Was that his name??)

      --
      IOException - Can't Speak
    7. Re:Hit 'em where it hurts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    8. Re:Hit 'em where it hurts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      why not just say "not allowed in the Axis of Evil"

    9. Re:Hit 'em where it hurts by faaaz · · Score: 2, Funny

      why not just say "not allowed in the Axis of Evil"

      Well, that just wouldn't be practical, with the US beeing evil and all.

      --
      we come in peace / shoot to kill
    10. Re:Hit 'em where it hurts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Riiight, the governmnet is worried about them having the encryption tochnology in mozilla. What are they gonna do? Add illegal export of web browsers to the murder, conspiracy, use of a weapon of mass distruction, and other terrorist related charges?

      Irony is people with a hatred of the west have to use our technology to fight us because they don't have any of their own.

    11. Re:Hit 'em where it hurts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Lack of HTTPS support ensures that the Taliban cannot participate e-Commerce. Which is a shame, because rumor has it Muhammad Omar has his eyes own a shiny new turban from eBay, but he can't submit the secure ordering form.

    12. Re:Hit 'em where it hurts by jesser · · Score: 1

      I found it amusing a year ago. Now it's just an embarrassing bug.

      --
      The shareholder is always right.
    13. Re:Hit 'em where it hurts by Kanasta · · Score: 2

      Just how are we supposed to identify which areas are Taliban controlled anyway?

      But wait, wouldn't it be easier to defeat the Taliban if they were busy DL Mozilla and surfing the web rather than fighting back?

    14. Re:Hit 'em where it hurts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those "precautions" are not necessary, and do nothing good to anyone. And of course, they do not work, because it is not possible to enforce them.

  38. Re:big deal by rnws · · Score: 1

    Yeah, bur IE hasn't had a complete re-write from the ground up. Every product has to start somewhere. Besides, EMACS is at version 27 or something like that...

  39. testing, 1-2-3... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Looks good so far...

    Good timing with the news about the new security hole in IE.

    I like being able to get rid of unsolicited pop-up windows, by unchecking the "Open unrequested windows" preferences item (using the Edit -> Preferences menu, then the Advanced -> Scripts & Windows panel).

  40. I was not making a flame!!! Maybe it's better? by way_out_on_the_dark_ · · Score: 0

    My opera comment wasn't a flame, I was being honest, I feel it is a much better browser over all. I have daily crashes from both IE and Mozilla. Opera is rock solid and going strong in my book.

  41. Re:big deal by SirSlud · · Score: 1, Troll

    Yeah, but if your post is any indication, your troll.exe is at version 0.02alpha.

    --
    "Old man yells at systemd"
  42. Did they use RC3? [nt] by dirvish · · Score: 1

    ddddd

  43. let the party begin! by aeneas · · Score: 0

    you read the title... :-)
    & thanks for that wonderful browser.

  44. Can anyone point me to a changelog? by ThinkingGuy · · Score: 1


    I'm running 1.0rc1 at home right now, but I'd like to see a list of exactly what changes have been made in 1.0. Most other open source projects are good about listing the exact changes from version to version, but I can't find such info for Mozilla. Anyone?

    1. Re:Can anyone point me to a changelog? by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 2

      They used to do this, but basically there are so many bugs fixed etc that it's easier to check bugzilla, or the status reports.

  45. Did you see that?........ by agramata · · Score: 0, Redundant

    ....a pig just flew by my window! Oh wow, hell just froze over, too! OMG!

    Seriously though, congrats to the Mozilla Team! It's been a long time coming, but well worth the wait.

  46. a serious question by mosch · · Score: 2

    a serious question to toss into the midst of all the flying pig, snowball in hell, and slashdotheads getting laid jokes. does anybody know if moving a non-technical user, who uses netscape 4.7 for his mail and such to mozilla 1/netscape 7 works seamlessly?

    1. Re:a serious question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. When u start Mozilla for the first time, u can port a copy of your NS 4.x profile straight to Mozilla.

    2. Re:a serious question by White+Roses · · Score: 3, Informative
      In a word, yes. I moved a techically illiterate user (seriously, he called to complain his slot-loading CD-ROM was broken - he had crammed two CDs in there at once) from Netscape 4.7 to Mozilla this weekend.

      No worries. It's enough alike to keep him happy. In fact, had I not erased his entire hard disk earlier in the day ("Why shouldn't I open attachments again?"), Mozilla probably would have been able to import all of his settings automatically.

      --
      Do not touch -Willie
    3. Re:a serious question by Geekboy(Wizard) · · Score: 1

      I do it at work. I just had to install Mozilla. That's it. Nothing special. It just works(TM). And it leaves my 4.7x version of Netscape alone, so when I have to use it, it's still working. (Corporatized and such)

    4. Re:a serious question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've introduced a few non tech's to mozilla and they LOVE it. One guy who was using IE, now swears by mozilla. I even introduced it here in my workplace. Mozilla is by no means a geek only browser.

    5. Re:a serious question by Eil · · Score: 2


      Yes. I built a computer for my non-computer literate fiance recently (how sweet of me). She was using an earlier Netscape 4.x. Good that she's not using IE, but bad that she's using an ancient buggy browser.

      So on her new computer, I put Mozilla 0.9.8 on instead of netscape 4.x. She complained loudly at first to the point where she said should wouldn't use the computer unless it had Netscape 4.x on it.

      Yeah. Anyway, I made up a few excuses on why I couldn't get around to it right away. A few months later, I ask her what she thinks of Mozilla now and she says it's great! To the point where she's been trying to convince some of her friends to switch to Mozilla now.

  47. If they follow everyone elses version standards... by gfxguy · · Score: 3, Funny

    You won't ever see 2.0, it'll be 7.0..."just to avoid confusion."

    --
    Stupid sexy Flanders.
  48. Toto, we're not in Kansas anymore by burgburgburg · · Score: 1

    Looking out for those Flying Ballmer Monkeyboys!!!

  49. Memory Hog by The_Rippa · · Score: 1

    Christ - I thought IE and Lotus Notes took up enough memory already - this beast is using 24 megs on my box!

    1. Re:Memory Hog by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree - I am running Lotus Notes and IE myself, and just by quitting Mozilla completely, I cleared 55 megs... Lotus Notes, the obnoxious program it is, was using less than Mozilla!

  50. IE patch? by DanThe1Man · · Score: 1, Redundant

    And bahtama writes "The latest IE gopher hole patch is out! :) ... Check the release notes and then grab it from here."

    Why did they attach a comment that should have been mentioned in slashback and put it in such an historic post?

    1. Re:IE patch? by jonasj · · Score: 1

      It was a joke. The latest IE gopher hole patch = Mozilla 1.0.

      --
      You know, Microsoft's street address also says a lot about their mentality.
    2. Re:IE patch? by DanThe1Man · · Score: 1

      ohhhhhhh....thank you

    3. Re:IE patch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      omg, I can't believe someone moded me up, I'm sorry, I was wrong. I now know it was a joke. Please mod me my parent post down again.

    4. Re:IE patch? by Software · · Score: 3, Informative

      Because this release is the gopher hole patch for IE. That is, Mozilla replaces IE. It took me a second to get it, too.

    5. Re:IE patch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oh, thank you

    6. Re:IE patch? by thesolo · · Score: 2

      And bahtama writes "The latest IE gopher hole patch is out! :) ... Check the release notes and then grab it from here."

      Why did they attach a comment that should have been mentioned in slashback and put it in such an historic post?


      Clearly you missed the joke here. Bahtama was implying that Mozilla 1.0 is a patch for IE, by allowing you to no longer use IE anymore, an browse securely!

      Of course, you know what they say about jokes that need explaining... ;)

    7. Re:IE patch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your wish is my command. :)

      - the guy who modded you down (redundant).

    8. Re:IE patch? by bahtama · · Score: 2
      So I read this and thought, "What is this guy talking about?" So I went to your personal info page at http://slashdot.org/~DanThe1Man/ and read on it I'm a comedian that likes technology and linux. I use slashdot to reach a small audience of people that might actually get my tech related humor. It sucks coming up with funny Unix jokes knowing that I will never be ever to proform them on stage :-/

      The irony of this is more than a +5 Funny can ever allow, I laughed so hard I almost cried. Apparantly, you are not even a part of the "small audience of people" that you are trying to reach with your humor. I don't mean this as a flame,but geez, this is FUNNY. :)

      --

      =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
      Oh bother.

    9. Re:IE patch? by netsharc · · Score: 1

      Aaah, before your message I didn't know it was a joke. I was quite surprised MS released a patch so quickly, I thought patching the exploit must have been pretty trivial if MS did it so quickly. But hey, it takes them who-knows-how-long to patch root level holes on server products, even after they have a head start before the public learns about it..

      --
      What time is it/will be over there? Check with my iPhone app!
    10. Re:IE patch? by jonasj · · Score: 0, Redundant

      So exactly how can this get modded up as informative when I wrote exactly the same thing 18 minutes earlier?

      --
      You know, Microsoft's street address also says a lot about their mentality.
    11. Re:IE patch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      It probabably got modded up because the moderator was browsing at +2 and didn't see your comment. I didn't see your comment, or else I wouldn't have posted mine.

      Software, posting AC to preserve karma

    12. Re:IE patch? by DanThe1Man · · Score: 2

      asshole

    13. Re:IE patch? by hoowee · · Score: 1
      hahaha... he's totally right! This guy has no sense of humor at all! ;) Lighten up, Dan! :)

      --

      Comic Book Guy: "There is no Groening in my store."
    14. Re:IE patch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Of course, you know what they say about jokes that need explaining... ;)

      Why, what do they say?
  51. 1.0 is only PR by DeadSea · · Score: 2
    I have been using mozilla for two years.

    I have been using Mozilla almost exclusivly for one year.

    Mozilla has been the best browser out there (free, stable, feature rich (tabbed browsing, image blocking, fastest rendering)) for six months.

    Why 1.0 is news is beyond me.

    Mozilla could be improved by making new windows open faster (although tabbed browsing really helps), and adding many of the thousand of feature requests that are in the bugzilla database. Here are bugs for which I am currently voting. I'd like middle mouse button to open forms in new windows, junkbuster functionality built in, an easy way to switch SMTP servers, and the Reply-To on mail to be set to the person mail was sent to to begin with when replying.

    1. Re:1.0 is only PR by DeadSea · · Score: 2
      Bugzilla doesn't allow links from slashdot. :-( I guess it has been slashdotted in the past.

      If you want to see my votes you will have to copy and paste the link location so as not to send the referer url to bugzilla.

    2. Re:1.0 is only PR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I tried mozilla first 2 years ago, discovering within 5 minutes that it couldn't log me in into my bank web interface. Went back to Netscape.

      Every other f%cking browser works on that page, except mozilla - let's wait till it's released I said to myself...

      1.0 comes out - you guessed it, mozilla still just shows me the blank screen on that page:
      https://easyweb.tdcanadatrust.com/

      I don't care why it doesn't work on that particular page - HTML could be mailformed, the server could be total crap or something. I suppose if all you ever go to is slashdot and google, then mozilla is probably fine for you.
      But to say that this pile of crap is ready for the mainstream market is the funniest joke I've heard today. Give it maybe 5 more years and it will get to where IE is today (and I am not talking about market share).

    3. Re:1.0 is only PR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Works for me and I'm using moz 0.9.9, just logged in and checked my savings & chequing balances. Yup I'm a Canadian in Winnipeg.

    4. Re:1.0 is only PR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Geek be Gone!

    5. Re:1.0 is only PR by Explo · · Score: 2

      1.0 comes out - you guessed it, mozilla still just shows me the blank screen on that page:
      https://easyweb.tdcanadatrust.com/


      Umm, works for me and displays a login page. Can't test further myself, because I'm not the customer of that bank.


      I suppose if all you ever go to is slashdot and google, then mozilla is probably fine for you.
      But to say that this pile of crap is ready for the mainstream market is the funniest joke I've heard today. Give it maybe 5 more years and it will get to where IE is today (and I am not talking about market share).


      So you find one page that does not work for you (but seems to work for me and to someone else in this thread) and you judge Mozilla to be pile of crap because of just that? I think I browse pretty much and see pages that are useless with Mozilla quite rarely. Pretty quick judgement...

      --
      Everyone who makes generalizations should be shot.
    6. Re:1.0 is only PR by atam · · Score: 1

      I have been using Mozilla to access the TD site since 0.9.7 (when Mozilla was stable enough to become my everyday browser). No problem whatsoever. I think the problem you have is particular to your setup.

  52. But it still has the wretched mozilla UI. by glrotate · · Score: 1

    Can't anything be done to fix it?

  53. They forgot to close the most important bug !! by FullClip · · Score: 1

    The official bugreport

    :-)

    Let's party !

    1. Re:They forgot to close the most important bug !! by BabyDave · · Score: 0
      Non-link version - copy 'n paste.

      http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=100309

      (Bugzilla blocks /. referrals)

  54. Bookmarks problems still exist though by Gambit+Thirty-Two · · Score: 3, Informative

    but still, the problems with sorting bookmarks still exists. I was hoping this would be fixed before release.

    1. Re:Bookmarks problems still exist though by r_barchetta · · Score: 1


      I think the entire bookmark interface needs to be redesigned. It suffers from the classic, yet very annoying, programmer flaw: "I have a big monitor with a really high resolution so every one else out there must have the same thing." AKA "well, it looks good on my machine and that's all that matters."

      I have lots of bookmarks. Probably too many. And it seems my choices are:

      1) Do lots of up and down scrolling to find what I'm looking for. I hate that.

      2) Create lots of folders/sub-folders/sub-sub-folders/sub-sub-sub-fo lders to keep the basic bookmark drop-down list within the bounds of my screen. Then I have to navigate several menu-levels deep to find what I am looking for. I hate that too.

      Yeah, I could keep fewer bookmarks (and I do delete old ones from time to time) but where's the fun in that?

      IANAP, but I know you guys can do better than that.

      That came off a bit harsh. I do prefer Mozilla to any other browser. I just wish bookmarks were handled better.

      -r

      --
      Just because something is free does not mean you have to take it.
    2. Re:Bookmarks problems still exist though by \\ · · Score: 1

      what bookmark problems are you talking about? im pleasantly surprised to find all the sorting options, too nice.

    3. Re:Bookmarks problems still exist though by Gambit+Thirty-Two · · Score: 2

      do yours sort? I've tried numerous times to get them to sort, on two different linux boxen, and one windows 2000 box. No choices actually makes the bookmarks go in any thing close to "order"

      Apparently its a known problem. They just dont feel like doing anything about it:
      http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=139396

    4. Re:Bookmarks problems still exist though by Gambit+Thirty-Two · · Score: 2

      screenshot for the lazy

    5. Re:Bookmarks problems still exist though by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep I hate that too. I've tried to make lots of group, but still I end up scrolling and scrolling, and scrolling.

    6. Re:Bookmarks problems still exist though by Drakonian · · Score: 1
      Did I just find a bug?

      I had the Sidebar open and I was trying to delete bookmarks off the Personal Toolbar folder . (The ones that come with Mozilla). I was right-clicking and selecting Delete. But they wouldn't delete.... only later I realized I was deleting full Folders from the Bookmarks menu, including the Personal Toolbar Folder and the mozilla.org folder. And I can't get them back without reinstalling. Ugly!

      Anyone else getting that?

      --
      Random is the New Order.
  55. gah!! by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 1
    I just started downloading RC3 last night!

    Laugh ... I can only get 28.8. Oh well time to start another download.

    1. Re:gah!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For all intents and purposes, RC3 is 1.0. RC3 got hammered on a bit and no problems cropped up, so it was released. You'll notice that the Build ID of 1.0 is dated the 30th of May.

  56. Come and get Java and Flash! by Nicopa · · Score: 4, Informative
    1. Re:Come and get Java and Flash! by Tackhead · · Score: 2, Funny
      > After downloading Mozilla [mozilla.org] you can install Java and Flash automatically [technisys.com.ar].

      Java and Flash can be installed? Oops, I guess 1.0 still has some bugs left. Hope they fix these bugs by 1.1 ;-)

  57. Two words ... by gaj · · Score: 1, Redundant
    woo

    hoo

  58. Re:Beonex Communicator 0.8-stable based on Mozilla by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hi. Beonex is a stupid name. Ebonex is much better.

  59. Re:Play with it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and I fucked you up the ass too!

    here's to love songs!

  60. it doesn't have to beat IE to win by stevenj · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As long as Mozilla has its foot in the door with a significant niche of web users, as long as it is Free software that can never disappear simply because a company goes under, as long as it guarantees a viable browsing solution for all the platforms Microsoft would rather you forgot, then it has won. It will prevent Microsoft from completely dictating web standards, from creating a world where only Windows can browse the web.

    The problem Microsoft (and others of its ilk) has with Free software is that it doesn't go away. When Mozilla first came out, there was a huge hype, but that hype evaporated and turned (in some quarters) to derision when Mozilla didn't deliver right away. For most MS competitors, that would have been the end. But Mozilla kept plugging along, getting better and better...it never has to go back to square one with a new company and codebase.

    ...and the longer it holds on with the high quality it has demonstrated so far, the more companies will jump on to its bandwagon. Everyone except for Microsoft benefits from open standards, and almost everyone knows it.

    --
    If a thing is not diminished by being shared, it is not rightly owned if it is only owned & not shared. S. Augustine
    1. Re:it doesn't have to beat IE to win by Jeppe+Salvesen · · Score: 2

      I just wish they could reduce the memory footprint more. Then, we could have Mozilla on embedded devices and PS2.

      Hrmph. Can't have it all, I guess.

      --

      Stop the brainwash

    2. Re:it doesn't have to beat IE to win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If would help if they named it something else and didn't call it an "Internet client suite." What the hell is that, and what is a Mozilla anyway? I'm looking for an Internet browser to Explore the web.

      Guess there aren't any open source marketing guys on-board....

    3. Re:it doesn't have to beat IE to win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Use Gecko and write "Mini-Moz". After all, Godzilla had a "mini me", so why not Mozilla too!

    4. Re:it doesn't have to beat IE to win by scb147 · · Score: 1

      Mozilla isn't just a browser. That's why it's just not called an "Internet browser."

      Mozilla is an Internet suite because it contains a browser, mail/news program, irc client, basic web composer and address book.

    5. Re:it doesn't have to beat IE to win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We'd all like to see that. It won't happen this year though. The smallest you can get is the size of gecko, and gecko is 1.5 million lines of code.

      What goes in there?

      Well, they decided to support every single w3c standard to the letter, so that goes in there. And because you can't actually conform exactly to the w3c standards using the existing widget libraries (which is one of many reasons why IE's standards support is so horrible), they made their own widget library, so that's in there too. And then they have their own template library (because most of the C++ platforms don't have a good enough one), their own network library (to abstract away the differences in network api's from the gecko engine itself), and so on, and so on ...

      Actually, it's surprising it's only 1.5 million lines. With all the stuff in there you'd expect it to be more.

      Still, mozilla will probably never become small enough to run on embedded platforms. Rather, embedded platforms will become big enough to run mozilla. I predict it'll happen as soon as next year. My pII/233 runs mozilla, the whole shebang, at a reasonable clip, so given that cpu's in pda's are running at speeds over 200 mhz now, it shouldn't take long. All we need is a little more power and a little more memory.

    6. Re:it doesn't have to beat IE to win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course you don't have to install all those components. You can just install the browser and security manager and you'll have something that can do everything that IE does and more. Plus you get that smaller memory footprint.

    7. Re:it doesn't have to beat IE to win by sgtsanity · · Score: 1

      Being the AOL default brower won't hurt, either.

    8. Re:it doesn't have to beat IE to win by David+Gerard · · Score: 1
      The memory footprint (and memory leakage) has been going down steadily all year, and the speed has been going up. 1% or 2% a week, here and there, rapidly adds up.

      What this means is that Mozilla is actually usable in 64MB now ;-)

      That's why Netscape 7 is actually noticeably better in both respects than Netscape 6, for instance.

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
    9. Re:it doesn't have to beat IE to win by David+Gerard · · Score: 1

      Gecko ain't that big. The Windows dll widget is about 4 meg. For comparison, the IE dll widget is about 10 meg. And Gecko is actually faster.

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
    10. Re:it doesn't have to beat IE to win by oni · · Score: 2

      It will prevent Microsoft from completely dictating web standards, from creating a world where only Windows can browse the web.

      I agree with you principle, but the problem I see is that so many web sites that I (unfortunately) have to use seem to have been designed in such a was as to only render properly on IE.

      For example, webmail where I work is done through exchange and therefore requires active X. My bank (bank of America) uses an online banking systems that doesn't work with Opera (haven't tried mozzila yet) and the online college courses I'm taking make heavy use of powerpoint slides saved as HTML that only renders properly in IE.

      No amount of complaining on my part is going to change any of these sites. On the other hand, most users (my wife for example) hit one site that doesn't work in Opera and decide to go back to IE forever. My big fear is that cluelessness like thiswill continue to allow IE to dominate the browser market. I think that .NET is only going to make this worse.

    11. Re:it doesn't have to beat IE to win by groomed · · Score: 1

      But Mozilla kept plugging along, getting better and better...

      ... and AOL posted a $54 billion loss.

      Without the financial support of AOL there would have been no Netscape and no Mozilla.

    12. Re:it doesn't have to beat IE to win by asa · · Score: 2, Informative

      Bank of America is my bank and it works just fine in Mozilla and Netscape 7 PR1.

      --Asa

    13. Re:it doesn't have to beat IE to win by wohlford · · Score: 1

      It has always intrested me in what people mean by winning. Winning to Steve Jobs means making the best GUI on the planet, but not holding 90% market share. Winning to Bill Gates means that he goes home with everthing. What does winning mean to the Mozilla team? Coming out with a 1.0 release?

      Jason

      --
      Jason Wohlford
    14. Re:it doesn't have to beat IE to win by autechre · · Score: 2


      To add to Asa's comment, Mozilla has worked with Allfirst online banking since around 1.0RC1 or so.

      --
      WMBC freeform/independent online radio.
    15. Re:it doesn't have to beat IE to win by autechre · · Score: 2


      Would the online college courses you're taking happen to be using Blackboard? I just finished taking a class (at a non-online university, UMBC) where the teacher used Blackboard for some things. There are a few different ways that Powerpoint presentations can be stuck into it, and one of those methods _does_ require IE. But the others don't.

      Also, I wonder if the Crossover plugin would work for this (and maybe for your situation, too, if you're not using Blackboard). The class is over now, but the material is still up; I may download the trial version and check it out.

      --
      WMBC freeform/independent online radio.
    16. Re:it doesn't have to beat IE to win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Rate the above post way down....

      Microsoft has already won because it does dictate web standards today. You might notice that even a good many Linux related commercial sites are constructed with MS Front Page (for example, Linux Today).

      Mozilla doesn't have a presence outside the nerd commununity and halfhearted efforts by AOL to embed Mozilla into its client software on the Mac. I don't think they would dare try to replace IE with Mozilla on the Windows platform.

      There may be several million people (certainly less than 10 million out of a pool of a billion people who use a web browser at work, at school or at home) using something other than Internet Explorer. This is not enough to even be a consideration for those who design commercial web pages or ecommerce sites. Current web standards, in practice, follow MS proprietary formats and protocols, not standards set by WC3 or anyone else. To prove this point, browsers like Konqueror, Opera and Mozilla are considered "successful" to the degree they can render pages using Microsoft's protocols and formats. It's a never ending game of catch-up and non MS browsers can never handle MS formats and protocols as well as IE, much less deal with the required Active X at many sites.

      Mozilla's fate depends on the success of Linux and the free unix's, not the other way around. So what if even 50% of the world chooses to browse with Mozilla, Opera or Netecape instead of IE, if these people are connecting from a Windows platform. MS still owns the internet. Only if a significant pecentage of web clients are using a non-MS browser on a non-MS platform will that have any effect on the protocols and formats actually used on the internet.

      The sitiation will get much worse with .NET which will be adopted by portals, ISP's and other links in the chain, despite initial reluctance of these parties to embrace .NET. This is becaue almost all new computers come preinstalled with Windows XP these days, which will inevitably require updates through .NET and .NET only. The hooks for that area alredy in place.

      It's the desktop, stupid. The free software movement still doesn't get it. Not only has free software failed to establish any presence on the desktop whatsoever (outside the nerd community) but MS continues to leverage its monopoly on the desktop to control web standards and servers.

      The only way this will change will be for enough people to become so disgnusted with Microsoft's licensing schemes and forced upgrade policy that they will insist on having Linux or a free BSD preinstalled on new computers, at least enough of them to be visible to consumers as an option. In the meantime MS controls the standards on the internet which unix has surrendered without even putting up a fight, with its elitist attitude towards the home user and office worker, but that's another whole rant.

    17. Re:it doesn't have to beat IE to win by stevenj · · Score: 2
      Getting things started is hard, I agree, especially with a project of this size. But now that it exists, it's not going away.

      Even if AOL abandons it completely, that will only slow down Mozilla's progress, not halt it. Other individuals will continue working on it, and likely other companies as well. Businesses from Sun to HP to IBM have a considerable interest in open Web standards, and I'd bet that some would donate money and/or engineering time to Mozilla if push came to shove.

      Open Source provides a level playing field for differing entities to cooperate.

      --
      If a thing is not diminished by being shared, it is not rightly owned if it is only owned & not shared. S. Augustine
    18. Re:it doesn't have to beat IE to win by bunratty · · Score: 1
      No amount of complaining on my part is going to change any of these sites. On the other hand, most users (my wife for example) hit one site that doesn't work in Opera and decide to go back to IE forever. My big fear is that cluelessness like thiswill continue to allow IE to dominate the browser market. I think that .NET is only going to make this worse.
      Perhaps your complaining won't help. But logging the site in a Tech Evangelism bug report (this link works) will help. Mozilla engineers will contact the site and let the owners know what needs to be done to make the site work in all standards-compliant browsers. As Mozilla-based and other non-IE browsers such as Opera make up more market share, web designers will start to realize that it makes economic sense to support them.
      --
      What a fool believes, he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.
    19. Re:it doesn't have to beat IE to win by dash2 · · Score: 1

      If you want to influence your bank to support non-IE browsers, you don't have to do it alone: submit a report to this page.

  61. Let's Go Galeon.... by TheMatt · · Score: 1

    C'mon Galeon developers! Release your 1.0-compatible program. It makes Mozilla the perfect browser.

    And, to the Mozilla team, congratulations. I never thought I'd see this day...and yet here it is.

    --

    Fortran programmer...oh yeah. Array math for life!

    1. Re:Let's Go Galeon.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, come on.
      Skipstone is the lighter, nippier, embedded-gecko-browser

    2. Re:Let's Go Galeon.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm using Galeon 1.2.0 with Mozilla 1.0 and everything seems okay so far.

  62. Sorry to be the ungrateful user, but... by Eric+Seppanen · · Score: 5, Informative
    I really, really wish someone would have fixed the obnoxious file-extension mangling bug. It's rapidly soaring toward the top of the most-frequently reported bug list, and was introduced at 1.0rc1 back in April. It's bug 120327 if anyone's interested in reading 183 (mostly repetitive) comments.

    This bug is why mozilla insists on adding .exe extensions to anything delivered as application/octet-stream, .txt to text/plain, and likes to fool around with lots of other extensions depending on your exact setup (on my machine it tries to rename every mp3 file to .mpga).

    --
    314-15-9265
    1. Re:Sorry to be the ungrateful user, but... by Buran · · Score: 2

      A friend of mine produces MPEG videos of his volunteer work at a raptor (bird) rehabilitation/education center. When I go to download them, Mozilla wants to name the file blah.mpg.mpeg, and insists the file size is 0k when the web server knows the correct size (usually 10 megs or so). It's funny to see "Downloaded -30% of 0k" or whatever ... the first time. Changing the suggested file name works fine, and the final saved file is valid.

      Wonder if this is indeed the same problem. I thought it was a server screwup ... but maybe not.

    2. Re:Sorry to be the ungrateful user, but... by Yunzil · · Score: 2

      This bug is why mozilla insists on adding .exe extensions to anything delivered as application/octet-stream

      In my case it was adding .jpg to .exe files. I was able to figure out what caused this, at least on my system. Under "Helper Applications", I had JPEGs set to be opened with Mozilla. As soon as I deleted the association, the problem disappeared.

      I reported the bug, and how to reproduce it, but it got marked as "WORKSFORME".

    3. Re:Sorry to be the ungrateful user, but... by Eric+Seppanen · · Score: 1
      Buran: yes, this is the same bug.

      Depending on the exact system setup (which changes between OS and what software is installed locally), mozilla likes to determine the One True Extension for a given mime type, then pastes that onto every file saved even if the file already has another correct extension. The 0k thing is something different.

      If you go back to 0.9.9 you will find that file extensions work properly. But there so many people on bugzilla griping about this bug that I expect this gets fixed real soon now. Fingers crossed for 1.0.1.

      --
      314-15-9265
    4. Re:Sorry to be the ungrateful user, but... by cant_get_a_good_nick · · Score: 1

      Oddly enough, I had tagged bz2 as application/octet stream, and it named everything *.bz2 after that

    5. Re:Sorry to be the ungrateful user, but... by Thing+1 · · Score: 1
      This bug is why mozilla insists on adding .exe extensions to anything delivered as application/octet-stream, .txt to text/plain, and likes to fool around with lots of other extensions depending on your exact setup

      I've noticed that Mozilla adds ".tar" to a file named "xxx.tar.gz". However, WinRAR opens it successfully (I'm using Win2K, and get Perl modules from source occasionally).

      Didn't realize this was a Mozilla bug. Thanks!

      --
      I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
    6. Re:Sorry to be the ungrateful user, but... by mr3038 · · Score: 2
      insists on adding .exe extensions to anything delivered as application/octet-stream

      Duh, how hard it's to add application/octet-stream to helper applications in prefs? Just make sure you don't add file extension. After adding content type click Edit... and select Save to Disk and clear the checkbox. IMO should be like this by default but this is no way a hard one to work around.

      What I cannot figure out is how to keep the quicktime plugin and still force tiffs to be downloaded instead of displayed by quicktime, though.

      --
      _________________________
      Spelling and grammar mistakes left as an exercise for the reader.
    7. Re:Sorry to be the ungrateful user, but... by Eric+Seppanen · · Score: 1
      How to change quicktime plugin filetypes:
      Open quicktime. Under edit->preferences->quicktime-preferences, flip to "Browser Plug-in". Push the "MIME settings" button, then uncheck whatever MIME types you don't want quicktime to handle. I use Quicktime 5.0.2, other versions may vary.

      BTW: your "duh" comment is totally off base. This bug affects all MIME types, so a workaround for octet-stream barely scratches the surface (go read the bugzilla reports. This causes problems with .jpg .tar.gz .mp3 .ps .c .sh ...) Mozilla developers all agree this is a real bug; it's just that nobody has actually written the code to fix it just yet.

      --
      314-15-9265
  63. Popup expunger? by tinrobot · · Score: 1

    Quick question - I had configured my old Mozilla to get rid of 90 percent of the popups simply by changing a config file or something. (you'd never see that in IE - major reason I use Moze)

    I've since upgraded computers and would like to set this up again. Anyone have a pointer/instructions?

    1. Re:Popup expunger? by MauricioC · · Score: 1

      Edit => Preferences => Advanced => Scripts Uncheck 'Open unrequested windows'

    2. Re:Popup expunger? by Down8 · · Score: 1

      It is built into Moz now. Edit > Preferences > Scripts and Windows > [ ] Allow unrequested windows to open

      -bZj

      --
      .sig
    3. Re:Popup expunger? by MauricioC · · Score: 2, Informative

      Errr

      Edit
      Preferences
      Advanced
      Scripts & Windows
      Uncheck 'Open unrequested windows'

    4. Re:Popup expunger? by tinrobot · · Score: 1

      They built it in - awesome!

      One more reason to love Mozilla...

      Thanks.

    5. Re:Popup expunger? by jakew · · Score: 1

      Does anyone know if it's possible to eliminate popups except for certain specified sites?

  64. Not bad at all. by Kenja · · Score: 3, Interesting
    This looks like the first version I may end up using over IE on Windows.

    However it still has a few problems. from Klassy.com

    1. Image alignment. Seems to not support the Align=AbsMiddle property of an image tag.
    2. Lacks support for IE style layers. Its too much to expect web site devlopers to use more then one layer type. Its time to bite the bullet and support the MS style.

    These are the only real problems I can find after a breif test. Overall looking very good (other then the Netscape 4 interface).

    --

    "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    1. Re:Not bad at all. by tono · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why would they support IE style layers, when and are part of the html4.0 spec and work perfectly, not to mention Mozilla is supposed to be an html4.0 w3c browser, and NOT bend to the will of MS tags.

      --
      cheese logs keep my wang warm at night.
    2. Re:Not bad at all. by tono · · Score: 1

      fuck, and

      --
      cheese logs keep my wang warm at night.
    3. Re:Not bad at all. by Kenja · · Score: 1

      Because most people use IE. Therefor most website devlopers use IE layer tags. The end result is htat Mozila wont work with a lot of pages that use layers. I'm not saying its right, but it is the way it is.

      --

      "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    4. Re:Not bad at all. by tono · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You're missing the point, Mozilla is about the w3c standards, if they put IE layer tags in the browser they'd effectively be going back on 4 years of development and vision. I personally haven't seen a site that uses browser specific layers in a long time, so it's not the issue it was in 1998.

      --
      cheese logs keep my wang warm at night.
    5. Re:Not bad at all. by JFMulder · · Score: 1

      I think you're missing the point. People would rather use a browser that has more features (even tought their not w3c standards) then use a browser which won't render some web pages they might encounter.

    6. Re:Not bad at all. by akeru · · Score: 1

      1. Seems to support the W3C HTML Standard, of which "AbsMiddle" is NOT a part. Mozilla has no reason to support this attribute. And while I don't know what the hell it does, the align attribute has been deprecated since HTML 4.0 anyway and CSS should be used instead.

      2. Again, the problem is not with mozilla, but with web designers and (surprise, surprise) IE not supporting the standard. Mozilla also doesn't support NS4.x proprietary layers either. Why? because they were non-standard and very broken, just like IE style layers, who'd a thunk it?

      these are the only real issues I can find with your complaints. Fix your pages, then, and only then, can you complain about the browser not working.

      --

      Let's hope that there's intelligent life somewhere out in space 'Cause there's bugger-all down here on Earth.

    7. Re:Not bad at all. by tweakt · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'm sorry but your asking for too much. IE already supports non "IE-Style" layers. It's called CSS1. It's fully implemented on both IE5.5+ and NS6+ (Mozilla, etc)... Same goes for scripting objects. Both support (more or less) the Document Object Model standard.. DOM1. As for Image alignment. The "align" property is deprecated, you should be using style sheets by now. See W3.ORG.

    8. Re:Not bad at all. by guanxi · · Score: 3, Informative

      Overall looking very good (other then the Netscape 4 interface).


      The "Modern" interface is much nicer:

      1. Click Edit | Preferences | Appearance | Themes | Modern.

      2. Close Moz *and* QuickLaunch (right-click the system tray icon and choose "Exit Mozilla").

      When you start Moz again, you'll have the Modern theme.

    9. Re:Not bad at all. by tono · · Score: 1

      I understood his point, but adding IE style layers to mozilla is a bad thing for mozilla.

      --
      cheese logs keep my wang warm at night.
    10. Re:Not bad at all. by Thorgal · · Score: 1

      So these people are free to use IE.

      --
      "Man in the Moon and other weird things" - wfmh.org.pl/thorgal/Moon/
    11. Re:Not bad at all. by cetan · · Score: 2, Insightful

      People that would also rather eat glass and drink petrol are welcome to do so, but I don' think that sort of functionality should be built in to Moz either.

      Mozilla should never support the CRAP that IE tries to push as "standard." Might does not make right.

      --
      In Soviet Russia...michael would be rotting in Siberia!
    12. Re:Not bad at all. by frankie · · Score: 2
      1. Image alignment. Seems to not support the Align=AbsMiddle property of an image tag. 2. Lacks support for IE style layers. Its too much to expect web site devlopers to use more then one layer type. Its time to bite the bullet and support the MS style.
      1. Yep. Gecko also doesn't support topmargin, marquee, and a gazillion other proprietary tags and attributes. Isn't that just awful?
      2. Yep again. I expect web developers to support one (and only one) style system. It's time for you to bite the bullet and learn CSS.
    13. Re:Not bad at all. by bryan1945 · · Score: 1

      Ah, no. I am a person, and I would rather see more standards compliance in everything. Oh course, I'm one of those irrational engineer types who like things to work together correctly rather than work to some stupid company's vision of who it should be.

      But hey, I'm just one guy.

      --
      Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
    14. Re:Not bad at all. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that there are significant hidden costs to this approach. If you expect another browser to be compatible with proprietary IE "features", then programmers will have to spend a lot of time reverse-engineering IE's behavior, to the detriment of other possible features--and they'll never get it 100% right, so people will always be complaining about compatibility, and IE will always be one step ahead. Bottom line is, it's more effective to try to convince people not to use proprietary code (hence the Tech Evangelism component in Bugzilla) than it is to support it, in almost all cases.

    15. Re:Not bad at all. by ftobin · · Score: 2

      Image alignment. Seems to not support the Align=AbsMiddle property of an image tag.

      You really shouldn't be using HTML for your layout. Use CSS to acheive the layout you want. In your case, you probably want to do:

      <p style="text-align: center"><img ... /></p>
    16. Re:Not bad at all. by ivan256 · · Score: 1, Troll

      Why aren't you refusing to use IE because it doesn't support CSS correctly? It's time for MS to bite the bullet, and support some web standards like everybody else.

    17. Re:Not bad at all. by NeMon'ess · · Score: 2

      What part of "embrace and extend" aren't you worried about? If MS gets to call the shots on new browsing standards, Mozilla and everyone else is one step behind their latest version. MS will create tags and non-compliant crap to try and break other browsers or operating systems. If MS wants new tags they can work on getting the official standards updated.

    18. Re:Not bad at all. by tswinzig · · Score: 2

      Lacks support for IE style layers. Its too much to expect web site devlopers to use more then one layer type. Its time to bite the bullet and support the MS style.

      I'd rather Microsoft make MSIE more standards compliant.

      --

      "And like that ... he's gone."
    19. Re:Not bad at all. by frankie · · Score: 2

      most website devlopers use IE layer tags

      Kenja, you're going to have to back up that blanket assertion with some data. The most commonly-used sites that I know (Yahoo, CNN, Amazon) all use CSS, and little or no IE-specific code.

      Hmm... exactly what tags are you talking about? Where might I have seen these things, other than at frontpagefordummies.com ?

    20. Re:Not bad at all. by aero6dof · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't it be cool if Mozilla detected the extensions and spit out a brief message that said something to the effect of "This website is using outdated layout formats - Mozilla will try to compensate, but contact the webmaster of the site if you are still having problems with access"

      The key, of course, is to strongly imply that the formats are a) outdated, and b) possibly insecure.

    21. Re:Not bad at all. by Kenja · · Score: 2

      That wont work. I've been using the Absmiddle setting becuase I've been unable to find a CSS that works the same. However, after messing around some today it seems I found it. Using style="vertical-align: middle" within the IMG tags has the desired effect.

      --

      "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    22. Re:Not bad at all. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's exactly what got us into the entire "Click here for IE, click here for Netscape" BS of a few years ago. People want a browser with features not a browser that does it's own thing with HTML. In other words your saying you want Microsoft to control the internet, because by what you're saying, that's exactly what will happen. If people built by the standards instead of proprietery tags, then they wouldn't have to worry about what browser does what. And even more to the point, wouldn't have to worry about if one thing works on IE 5 but doesn't work in IE 6. I know, I've been down that road - I'm only coding once and not updating all 500 of my html pages just because something suddenly works different in the latest version of IE.

    23. Re:Not bad at all. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's something microsoft would do.

      The whole point of mozilla is to break with MS tradition.

    24. Re:Not bad at all. by ErpLand · · Score: 1
      Wouldn't it be cool if Mozilla detected the extensions and spit out a brief message that said something to the effect of "This website is using outdated layout formats - Mozilla will try to compensate, but contact the webmaster of the site if you are still having problems with access"

      How about spitting that error message out in the User-Agent string so it gets logged on the offending web server?

    25. Re:Not bad at all. by JFMulder · · Score: 1, Redundant

      Wow, my post generated a lot of feedback. I myself would rather have a 100% compliant browser without fluffy stuff in it, but what mathers in the end is : does this web page load. And if it doesn't well all the "Mozilla respects the standards" in the world won't save you from having to use IE. I'm not saying that Microsoft is doing the right thing in embracing and extending, I'm only saying that features and market share are what drives the industry, and not standards, even though how very important standards are. If IE can do something the other browsers can't and it's damn usefull (don't give me shit about being poorly implemented, this is a whole other debate), webmasters will target these features. Anyone not implementing these features in their browser is placing itself in the dangerous position of losing users, visibility and ultimately, a job (except the mozilla team, who does this for free of course).

      Times have changed, sadly visions and dedication are worth less and less these days. It's a shame. I understand the Mozilla team standing against all things not standard, but if they don't compete on features against Microsoft, then the "war" is already over, with Microsoft laughing it's way back to Redmont.

      Only one page not rendering correctly in Mozilla and correctly in IE will make the average user stich to IE. And browsing the net a lot, I've never stumbled across a webpage that I couldn't render with IE. And right now, if it doesn't then I'm probably on the web page of some crazy Linux zealot who doesn't want his webpage to load on IE. And that's not how you win a war. It's by either

      a) beating the enemy at it's game and making it better then what they offer

      or

      b) convincing the 3rd parties to ally with you, not your enemy

      And since the Mozilla team consist mostly of part-time voluntary workers and doesn't have a team to evangelize the benefits of Mozilla, then unless this problem is settled, it's better to mimick everything Microsoft does and do it better then them (now that would be a good way for all of you whiners saying that IE is bugriden to prove to the world that you are better than Microsoft and implement their features correctly). Then Mozilla will have a chance to beat IE. Otherwise, it,s gonna be VERY difficult, if not impossible.

    26. Re:Not bad at all. by JFMulder · · Score: 2

      Why is it bad "Bad Thing(TM)"? Is it because it's too hard to implement? Too complicated to incorporate in Mozilla because the code was not meant to be expanded this way? Or only because of some holy war based on standards? If it's the first two, I pity the Mozilla team. If it's the third one, even tough I understand, that's not how you win a war.

      If the enemy is playing dirty, you have to play dirty too, and beat them with their own severed limbs. :-p

    27. Re:Not bad at all. by Zathrus · · Score: 1

      Wow, my post generated a lot of feedback. I myself would rather have a 100% compliant browser without fluffy stuff in it, but what mathers in the end is : does this web page load

      Yup. But I've given up trying to beat this concept into the /. collective. I don't like that I need to use IE, but I do because it was the only thing rendering web pages worth a damn. And while I'm going to try Mozilla soon, I still know I'll be frustrated when it doesn't work right.

      Sure, the web page isn't "standards" compliant. That's nice. I can't change the web page. I can change my browser.

      The same people who continue to say "but IE is WRONG!" ignore that TCP/IP got to where it is today by much the same method. Your TCP/IP stack was compliant if it could talk to BSD. Not if it matched the RFCs. Because BSD occasionally ignored the RFCs itself. Sure, you could write to the "standard" and have a TCP/IP stack. Bloody lot of good it does you when you can't talk to anyone else, because they've all recognized the real world standard doesn't match a piece of paper 100%.

    28. Re:Not bad at all. by lewp · · Score: 1

      The problem with that is you're going to have to make an annoying compromise.

      Should the message be intrusive enough to actually make the average user notice it and piss off more advanced users who know about web standards and how many pages designed with IE in mind simply don't follow them?

      The alternative is to make the message take the form of a little icon or some other small detail (like the lock icon, or IE's privacy icon thingy) that novices aren't going to pay attention to? Then you may as well support the IE style layers anyway and throw your (very valid) political opposition to them out the window.

      The usual OSS-ish solution to this is to make it a toggle-able option, at which point people start whining about what should be the default setting.

      (Personal experience and evangelism follow)

      I use Mozilla exclusively and have for a while now. With some decent TTF fonts in X (and after making my X server use a DPI setting that's close to Windows') 99.9% of the pages I visit look the same in Galeon, Mozilla (Windows and Linux) and IE 5 and 6. Almost all of the rest are still readily readable/navigable even with a visual glitch or two.

      To be honest, the only pages that I'm having any problems with are pages on my employer's intranet. Hardly a big deal :P.

      I'm happy with Mozilla's rendering the way it is, IE layers or no. I'm happy with speed and memory footprint of Galeon. If the Linux Flash plugin would move a little more quickly and not periodically crash my browser I'd have no complaints :).

      Hooray Mozilla!

      --
      Game... blouses.
    29. Re:Not bad at all. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The goal is to have open web standards. You don't get that by supporting stupid standards created by a single vendor. It doesn't matter if that vendor happens to be Microsoft or not. Pretty soon there will be 35 million AOL users browsing with a Gecko-powered AOL client. It's time for the morons that have been developing IE-specific pages to realize that they need to start writing their pages according to W3C standards, or have them break when viewed by a standards-compliant browser.

    30. Re:Not bad at all. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      b) convincing the 3rd parties to ally with you, not your enemy

      Seems to me that Mozilla has one of the biggest 3rd parties on the Internet allied with it. Are websites around the world really going to design their pages to break when viewed by 35 million AOL users? Sounds like a good way to sink your business. It's time for web developers to start writing standards-compliant pages. There's a free, standards-compliant browser available for several platforms now, so they have no excuse for not doing it.

    31. Re:Not bad at all. by fumble · · Score: 1

      Um, actually you're all wrong. The tag was a NETSCAPE propitary tag. IE doesn't even support it!

      "... NS 4 relies completely on a new tag, called the tag ..."
      http://www.btinternet.com/~patrick.hutton/Gu estTut orial1/dhtmlguide3.htm

      "The layer tag is a new tag introduced in Netscape 4 ..."
      http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Orcha rd/521 2/layer.htm

    32. Re:Not bad at all. by tomgilder · · Score: 1
      You're missing the point, Mozilla is about the w3c standards, if they put IE layer tags in the browser they'd effectively be going back on 4 years of development and vision.

      Just wtf are "IE layer tags"? NS4 is the only browser to have had a proprietary layer system.

    33. Re:Not bad at all. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      CSS1 is NOT fully implemented in IE5.5. See http://www.webreview.com/style/css1/charts/masterg rid.shtml for the comparisons.

    34. Re:Not bad at all. by tin_the_fatty · · Score: 1

      I personally haven't seen a site that uses browser specific layers in a long time, so it's not the issue it was in 1998.

      http://www.oddpost.com/

    35. Re:Not bad at all. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So much for standards compliance!

    36. Re:Not bad at all. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't want a fucking "vision". I want a fucking browser that works! It's back to IE for me.

    37. Re:Not bad at all. by TheAwfulTruth · · Score: 2

      And if you write a TIFF parser that is 100% TIFF spec compliant, guess what? You can't view about 50% of the TIFF files you run across. Ideallism only gets in the way of actually getting work done. Mozilla needs to know it's place, and that place is last. If it wants to gain a foot-hold it needs to play ball, and that means supporting the most popular non-spec tags! Until Moz can render EVERY page I use regularly it cannot be my main browser. Simple as that.

      --
      Contrary to popular belief, coding is not all free blow-jobs and beer. Those things cost MONEY!
    38. Re:Not bad at all. by David+Gerard · · Score: 1
      "Its too much to expect web site devlopers to use more then one layer type. Its time to bite the bullet and support the MS style.

      We have two secret weapons: 1. The DOM Inspector; 2. The JavaScript Debugger.

      Trust me: no web developer seeing those will want to work without them a moment longer. And that means they will develop in Mozilla/Netscape - using standard HTML and JavaScript - and check in IE6, rather than the other way around.

      Thus the Lizard recruits!

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
    39. Re:Not bad at all. by n-baxley · · Score: 2

      I'm really not sure what you mean by IE style layers. Can you point me to an example? Divs are the standard that I've seen used by most people and they work quite well in both browsers, are not hard to implement and fit well into the DOM of both browsers. I'd like to hear about the IE layers to see what they are and what the advantages are.

  65. We have no life, and we're proud! by Platinum+Dragon · · Score: 1

    As I type this, the party tracking page indicates that 1873 people are attending Mozilla release parties around the world.

    I don't know what this says about the Mozilla community - that so many people are willing to party over a freaking browser release, that we're h4rdc0r3, d00d, or that we never get out.

    Congrats to the team, it's time to crush Bill.

    --

    Someday, you're going to die. Get over it.
  66. Their bandwidth must be pretty hefty by daviddennis · · Score: 2

    I have a fairly old version, so I went ahead and downloaded the Linux release. Got a consistent 123kb/second through my company T1.

    D

    1. Re:Their bandwidth must be pretty hefty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Got a consistent 123kb/second through my company T1.

      I've been trying through several different sources but the best I can get is 85kb/second. I'll keep trying though.

  67. Long time coming by colmore · · Score: 2

    Take it as a proof of concept for the "We'll release when we're damn well ready" philosophy.

    I've been using the builds since 13 or 14, and I must say, they've done a remarkable job in coming so far.

    I can't seem to download it right now, but should it fix the small number of issues I saw with RC3, this should be an amazing product.

    But no rest for the weary, the 1.1 branch is allready underway.

    --
    In Capitalist America, bank robs you!
  68. What apout a all platform ISO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey how about a ISO with distbs for
    all platforms and soursed nicely
    directed. as freebees on the party........

    1. Re:What apout a all platform ISO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah give them to me instead

  69. Re: ftp mirror... by Zurk · · Score: 0

    komodo.mozilla.org instead of ftp.mozilla.org
    may not last too long though.

  70. Re:big deal by bruceg · · Score: 1

    and still riddled with security holes! Check out the latest (just today)

  71. At long last... by spagma · · Score: 1

    the jokes about mozilla's release will cease, well after everyone has a last crack at it.

    --
    If it won't boot, Fsck it!
  72. strange choice of releases by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I notice they're using the May 31st 1.0-branch build as 1.0 . I'm on the 2nd of June 1.0-branch build right now.
    Maybe they decided to junk several days' work due to mistakes.

    1. Re:strange choice of releases by asa · · Score: 5, Informative

      I notice they're using the May 31st 1.0-branch build as 1.0 . I'm on the 2nd of June 1.0-branch build right now. Maybe they decided to junk several days' work due to mistakes.

      Actually, we're already moving forward to Mozilla 1.0.1 :-)

      --Asa

    2. Re:strange choice of releases by Akoma+The+Immortal · · Score: 1

      Already?

      Don't You Have Any Compasion For ISP? FTP servers??

      Those Pesky OSS developers just do not know how to preserve precious bandwith for us, pr0n adicts :)

      Good Job.

      The 1.0 release is as of tody my official browser at work. (I use nightly build for linux at home since 1998).

      P.S.: Happely posted from Mozilla 1.0 (Admitly boronex browser, because your server is to loaded. I will get the binaries later today).

      --
      assert(expired(knowldege)); core dump
    3. Re:strange choice of releases by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even worse, 1.1alpha is coming out relatively soon, since they've been working on that in parallel to the work on 1.0 for quite a while.

      Workaholics, the bunch of them.

    4. Re:strange choice of releases by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only 149,999 bugs to go?

  73. I think you may be right by PhysicsGenius · · Score: 1
    With a cross-platform browser in place, the barrier to entry to Linux (for Windows users) is now very low. There is almost no reason for a Window user to stay on a proprietary platform anymore, unless they enjoy playing games of any kind or watch the occasional DVD.

    I fully expect to see major businesses converting their operations to all Linux, now that Mozilla has reached 1.0

  74. Thank You! by asa · · Score: 5, Informative

    I want to personally thank everyone that downloaded Milestone and nightly testing builds and contributed feedback in the form of Bugzilla bug reports, TalkBack crash reports, comments in the newsgroups and at mozillaZine.org. And a special thanks to those people that gave a hours, weeks, months or years of their lives to the care and feeding of our bug database (triage and testcasing bug reports). Without Mozilla's amazing QA and testing community we wouldn't be where we are today.
    Oh, and all the developers too ;-)

    1. Re:Thank You! by grammar+nazi · · Score: 1

      Yeah!!

      --

      Keeping /. free of grammatical errors for ~5 years.
    2. Re:Thank You! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed. Let's give a big hand for all the people spending time cleaning up our beloved bugzilla. These people are needed; they help the developers do what they can do best. Big thanks to all the QAs for doing lots of useful grunt work! :-)

    3. Re:Thank You! by Oxide · · Score: 1

      Special thanks to you ASA and the rest of the Mozilla developers. You gave us an internet browser that is very useable and feature rich for free.

      You finger print will last a looooooong time.

      THANK YOU

    4. Re:Thank You! by sconest · · Score: 1

      Well... thanks to you too

      --
      Guvf vf abg n EBG zrffntr
    5. Re:Thank You! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you're welcome.

    6. Re:Thank You! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you, Asa, for kicking so much ass! You rock.

    7. Re:Thank You! by rickymoz · · Score: 1

      Developers, developers, developers - de-ve-lo-pers, de-ve-lo-pers, de-ve-lo-pers... yeah!

    8. Re:Thank You! by jdavidb · · Score: 2

      Asa, I'd like to personally thank you. I don't think we can overstate the importance of the release of this product. I've got a couple of books that list Mozilla as a classical "failure" of open source; well, I'm happy to see you guys PROVE THEM WRONG! Congratulations. You folks have rewritten the book on software development and quality assurance. Thank you so much!

  75. w00t! by cjpez · · Score: 2, Troll
    . . . and BOY are those servers hammered. :)

    Regardless, great news! Me == happy.

    1. Re:w00t! by Christopher+Whitt · · Score: 2

      I think there were some temporary troubles with the ftp server that were more of an unfortunate coincidence than a result of the release. All is well now and I'm pulling 80kB/s from the other side of the world... (total download time: 1m 57s)

      Christopher

    2. Re:w00t! by cjpez · · Score: 2

      Yeah, seems so. I'm pulling it down right now. Although I'm only getting 20K/sec, which is weird 'cause I'm on the same side of the world. Unless you're getting the rate in bits and I'm getting it in bytes. No, I've got a good four minutes left on the download. Odd. Anyway, thanks. I wasn't going to try again for a day or so. :)

  76. Re:Modded up if bashing IE, down if bashing Linux by Sj0 · · Score: 2, Funny

    damn straight!

    Face it, if you really want to read a bunch of pro-ms stuff, head to microsoft.com. Complaining that slashdot is pro-linux is like complaining that the pope is pro-christianity, or that Senator Hollings is pro-bribery.

    --
    It's been a long time.
  77. Unbelievable by rimsky · · Score: 1, Troll

    5 minutes with the new browser under Mac OS X, surfing slashdot and mozillazine and the darn thing crashed on me!

    What is their exact definition of a 'final' release?

    1. Re:Unbelievable by Nicopa · · Score: 1

      Do you have a talkback id? Talkback is the program which starts when there's a crash and sends that info to mozilla.org.

    2. Re:Unbelievable by phliar · · Score: 2
      5 minutes with the new browser under Mac OS X ... and the darn thing crashed on me!
      Check the release notes -- there are some problems on Macs.

      --
      Unlimited growth == Cancer.
  78. That's OK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Version 1.1 will be renamed 7.0!

  79. Congratulations! by Cally · · Score: 2
    OK this is going to be a bit of an incoherent ramble but... WTF...

    Enormous thanks and my congratulations to everyone involved with Mozilla! And to all those doubters and cynics who've been whining about bloat, performance, features,... or indeed anything at all: you can stop it now. Mozilla is the best web browser in existence today (looking only at the browser component): it supports FAR more standards than anything else, AND it copes with old broken non-compliant HTML, AND it renders pages fast, AND it (the browser) starts up like greased lightning in -turbo mode ... in fact, it's faster than Internet Explorer on this Windows box. It's also running on the nearby Linux machine. Name me ONE browser that compiles and runs on more platforms? I think moz even gives lynx a run for it's money on that front... and tabbed browsing.... tab groups... *sigh* it just gfoes on and on... threaded news/mail reader... XUL, the coolest cross-platform GUI tools and component set EVER (that I am aware of: I'm going to be the front end to my employer's anti-virus software build and test rigs using XUL, now that the APIs are frozen XULBuilder will blossom into life once more...

    Not only is it a category killer browser - irtonically hte individual apps are themselves (pretty much) category killers. mail/news easily trounces Outlook for me - apart from the secuirty stuff, it does threading. Yep, no threading in Outlook! And what's more --- no ads (Opera), no security holes (IE), and best of all, Mozilla is Free (Libre) Software.

    Many thanks also to those of the rest of us who kept the faith, spending long expensive nights downloading another flakey nightly build, who never hit EXIT on a moz process until it had crashed...

    Personally I feel more involved with Moz than any other Free Software project, I've been testing, logging bugs in Bugzilla, reading the docs, status reports and mozillazine ever since the news was first announced here on Slashdot. Anyone else out there coming to the London party? Gervase?

    A million thanks to everyone who hacked code or helped out on the project in any way. Mozilla is the most enjoyable software I've ever used, apart from Perl that is. Oh frabjous day! Calloo, callay!!! =) *does a little dance*

    PS: and a special thanks to Asa and the rest of the evangelist types who turn up here reliably and calmy refuting the FUD and bollocks that have come from Slahdotters over the years. Go back a couple of years and pick out a Slashdot moz story -- you lot /hated/ it and it sometimes seemed no-one else believed it would ever work...)

    --
    "None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." -- Goethe
  80. And for some fun... by ShmuelP · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    For a few laughs, check out MozillaQuest. Mike Angelo has an article on the 1.0 release. Now he has to branch out into articles on other things (such as Linux distros).

    In this article, he complains in this article that the mozilla roadmap doesn't call for a 1.0 release.

    For real news about Mozilla, of course, try another site, such as MozillaZine/

    --
    Solution to blink tags: wrap them in another blink tag, with a javascript delay loop, so they cancel each other out
    1. Re:And for some fun... by jonasj · · Score: 1
      --
      You know, Microsoft's street address also says a lot about their mentality.
  81. you can't remove IE after patch by DietFluffy · · Score: 1

    The next service patch for Windows XP doesn't let you remove Internet Explorer, it merely lets OEMs hide the explorer icon. All the code for Internet Explorer will be left intact on all Windows XP systems.

  82. On the gopher... by quantaman · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Yeah this shouldn't be mentioned in the Moz 1.0 story but it's there anyways so I'll try to mix, MS has had since the 20th to look at this and just now that it was finally reported came up with a fix. Frighteningly coincidence(?) this could end up giving a lot of people the perception that M$ gives speedy bug fixes, patch a couple hours after the report! Nevertheless it still took them 16 days!! Contrast this with the fact that RC3 was released on the 24th! Hmmm, it takes M$ 16 days to release a bug patch and the Mozilla crew 11 to release a new build!!

    --
    I stole this Sig
    1. Re:On the gopher... by elmegil · · Score: 1

      Did you even look at the link provided? The fix was Mozilla.

      --
      7 November 2006: The day Americans realized corruption and incompetence weren't addressing 11 September 2001
    2. Re:On the gopher... by berzerke · · Score: 1

      You didn't read the sarcasm in the comment. To the best of my knowledge, MS has not released a patch. The "patch" mentioned is to switch to mozilla.

    3. Re:On the gopher... by quantaman · · Score: 2

      My bad, I don't use IE so I didn't bother even looking at the patch link. Moderators, please moderate the above comment into oblivion and save me the horrid embarassment of my laziness and foolishness in overlooking the obvious joke. Reduce my foolish words to -1 so that none but the ranks of trolls may smirk at their stupidity!!
      (on that note if the moderators have done as I requested those who are reading this humor me and please don't look at the parent!)

      --
      I stole this Sig
  83. Book of Genesis 2.0 by Doom+Ihl'+Varia · · Score: 1

    ".....And God created mozilla. And he said 'This is 31337'. So, after much toil, on this most holiest of days, got created Mozilla 1.0. And the angels did sing"

  84. 17 Years of Development by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Finally after 17 years of development we finally have a 1.0 release. Congrats to the team!!!

  85. who cares ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who gives a shit about mozilla ?
    It's an overbloated pile of turd anyway.
    It's not the people that make it bloated
    It's AOL, like only they know how.

  86. Congratulations! by GenetixSW · · Score: 1

    This is positively fantastic news. Mozilla has made enormous progress, especially in the past year, and it is truly a feat of human co-operation that it came as far as it did. My warmest regards go out to everyone involved in the project, for putting the effort into building such a wonderful, powerful application.

  87. Guess I'll have to wait two weeks.. by mstyne · · Score: 1

    Thought I'd be slick and download the net installer. Guess I was two minutes too slow, because now I can't download it at all! (And the installer offered to delete RC3, which I stupidly agreed to.) Guess it'll be Konqueror for now! : )

    --
    mstyne: real name, no gimmicks
  88. Been There by Kylow · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Have you never seen the hott (double T for double hot) Linux chicks?

    http://www.succurit.com/pictures.php?cat=chicks

    My favorite is http://www.succurit.com/pics/other/linux_chick4.jp g

    1. Re:Been There by sirinek · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      Those are just pictures Stileproject grabbed from somewhere else, and then photoshopped (or gimped or whatever) graphics onto....

      And what happened to his site? It used to be funny, now its all porn.

    2. Re:Been There by Kylow · · Score: 1

      Ha. I don't think Stile ever made any secret of the fact that he was a sell-out. It just took him a while to get enough traffic to justify porn banners everywhere.

    3. Re:Been There by dadragon · · Score: 1

      The problem with "linux_chick4" is that she hasn't yet upgraded to v2.4.

      She's therefore too old for me.

      --
      God save our Queen, and Heaven bless The Maple Leaf Forever!
  89. Internet2 mirrors? by Fez · · Score: 1

    Are there any mirrors on Internet2 links?

    I didn't see any listed, and I figure as long as I'm sitting on a fat university pipe I could put it to good use...

  90. Re:OPEN SOURCE NEEDS MORE BABES... by lib · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    ... of _legal_ age.
    That girl looks like she's 12. 13 at the most.

  91. Re:OPEN SOURCE NEEDS MORE BABES by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did you see her shoes? Definitely a geek.

  92. Bugzilla Slashdot Blocker Circumvention Method(tm) by Crypt0rchid · · Score: 1

    Hm, I use Galeon and when I click on the link posted above, bugzilla refuses to display the page. But when I right-click on the link and say "open in new tab" - everything works fine. No cut+paste needed ;)

    greetings,
    cryptorchid

  93. The ONLY thing annoying me... by thesolo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm using 1.0 right now, and the only thing that is annoying me is that 1.0 still uses that same (IMHO tacky) splash screen!

    I fortunately replaced the splash screen on my copy at work (in Windows, drop a file called mozilla.bmp into the Mozilla directory, and that becomes your splash!) before I showed Mozilla off to my boss. Had he seen the regular splash screen, I don't know if he would have taken it seriously.

    Seriously, the browser is professional, the splash screen should be too.

    1. Re:The ONLY thing annoying me... by shadowofdarkness · · Score: 1

      I have never seen a splash screen. What does it look like? if it is a bmp please email it to darkshadow@shaw.ca since I am interested in what it looks like.

    2. Re:The ONLY thing annoying me... by Mr.+Quick · · Score: 1

      that's a good move...

      consider it stolen, as i attempt to get my department (~50 people) to move to mozilla.

      thanks.

    3. Re:The ONLY thing annoying me... by thesolo · · Score: 5, Informative

      P.S. I replaced the splash with one of the splash screens found here:
      http://www.lotekk.net/index.php?page=moz&sub=splas h

      Very professional, and very fitting!

    4. Re:The ONLY thing annoying me... by cetan · · Score: 2

      I'm using the graphic from here: http://www.mozilla.org/party/2002/flyer.html for my splash screen now.
      Thanks for the tip!

      --
      In Soviet Russia...michael would be rotting in Siberia!
    5. Re:The ONLY thing annoying me... by JahToasted · · Score: 1

      Hey cool... thanks for the link comrade!

    6. Re:The ONLY thing annoying me... by Scooby+Snacks · · Score: 2, Informative

      I believe the splash screen is disabled by default on *nix. Try starting mozilla from the command line with 'mozilla -splash' to see it. I believe it is enabled by default on Windows; try launching it as 'mozilla -nosplash' to hide it.

      --

      --
      Runnin' around, robbin' banks all whacked on the Scooby Snacks...
    7. Re:The ONLY thing annoying me... by RedSynapse · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Oh no, not the return of the Never-Ending-Splashscreen-Debate-From-Hell.
      Oh it all starts out nice "we need a prettier splashscreen, here I made one check it out." Then the accusations of satanism and communism begin (seriously). [to view the links you'll have to copy the link location into the address bar. Bugzilla doesn't accept direct links from slashdot]

      Long story short, they can't change the splashscreen because of the legal wrangling necessary. But ANYONE can change the splashscreen to anything by putting at .bmp file named mozilla.bmp in their /mozilla directory.

      Personally I think the best ones are here, and no it's not listed on the big list of splashscreens given before.

    8. Re:The ONLY thing annoying me... by dimator · · Score: 2

      That's pretty cool, but my Mozilla uptimes are pretty high these days; I don't see the splash screen much :) It's not unusual to go weeks with the same mozilla process.

      By the way, since we're sharing mozilla tips, I use MSS to manage my mozilla process. Very handy.

      --
      python -c "x='python -c %sx=%s; print x%%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))%s'; print x%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))"
    9. Re:The ONLY thing annoying me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A browser with a splash screen, thats interesting. I guess I am just used to IE loading to quickly to see a splash screen.

    10. Re:The ONLY thing annoying me... by archen · · Score: 1

      That works? Hmm... no more using reshack for me (like I've been doing for the last 7 months)

    11. Re:The ONLY thing annoying me... by Danse · · Score: 1

      That's because IE loads at bootup, something which Mozilla is also capable of, in which case you won't see the splash screen. It only shows up if Mozilla isn't already loaded.

      --
      It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
    12. Re:The ONLY thing annoying me... by tomer · · Score: 4, Informative

      If you'll search the web for "mozilla.bmp", you'll get some other sites for splash screens.

      Here are some:
      first - the Bugzila page. Full of links and attachments: http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32218
      http://latinmoz.f2g.net/mozillation/
      http://www.vorstrasse91.com/moztips/tricks.html (those are quite nice...)
      http://www.geocities.com/mozamp/mozsplas h.html

      Enjoy.

      0000B4B5E831

    13. Re:The ONLY thing annoying me... by Buran · · Score: 2

      How is it replaced in OS X?

    14. Re:The ONLY thing annoying me... by po_boy · · Score: 2

      Whoah, that's pretty weird. I'm using mozilla 1.0 on OSX and I just noticed that the string "" (or is that ⊂ ?) is supposed to be.

      I wonder if I just found my first mozilla bug, or my first slash bug.

      (Now I notice in the preview of my posting that mozilla has pretty much trashed what I posted, so if it makes no sense to you, then you're probably using mozilla.)

    15. Re:The ONLY thing annoying me... by David+Gerard · · Score: 1
      Splash screens are covered in the FAQ. You can change it easily in Windows - drop a bitmap (any size) called mozilla.bmp in the same folder as mozilla.exe.

      Unix/Linux and Mac, unfortunately, still require you to recompile with your own splashscreen to change it.

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
    16. Re:The ONLY thing annoying me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not to nitpick, but being targeted toward software
      developers and not regular end-users means that the
      splashscreen is more or less irrelevant.

    17. Re:The ONLY thing annoying me... by hute37 · · Score: 1

      R U Sure ?

      I think it's

      %SystemRoot%\winnt256.bmp

      on my NT4 machine

    18. Re:The ONLY thing annoying me... by Calroth · · Score: 1

      The search for a new splash screen is well-documented as http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32218. Note that the current splash screen may have legal implications, as mozilla.org may not have image rights to the green dinosaur... also well documented as http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28028. (Bugzilla doesn't liked being linked to from Slashdot, so copy and paste... and please don't slashdot 'em too bad.)

      An unofficial group to do a new splash screen is hosted at http://sourceforge.net/projects/splashzilla.

      Ahh, whilst I'm here, why not a shameless plug. My own splash screen

    19. Re:The ONLY thing annoying me... by greatsasuke · · Score: 1

      Placing an image file named mozilla.bmp in the same directory as mozilla.exe doesn't seem to work for me. Anyone else have trouble getting this to work?

    20. Re:The ONLY thing annoying me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had trouble with it at first.

      A couple of things to try:

      (1) The mozilla.bmp thing may only work for Windows. I think changing the splash on Linux and OSX is different.

      (2) The mozilla.bmp file has to be in .bmp format. I tried it at first, just putting the .pngs or .gifs or or whatever in the directory and changing the extension name to .bmp, but you actually have to change the format of the image.

      Why did they go with .bmps anyway? I would think that for a splash that a more compressed [smaller] file, like a .png, would be better.

    21. Re:The ONLY thing annoying me... by thales · · Score: 2

      "mozilla.org may not have image rights to the green dinosaur"

      Mozilla.org does NOT have the image rights to the green lizard, It's a Trademark of the Netscape division of AOL Time Warner. It was checked in by Error.

      A More vexing problem is mozilla.org may not own the image rights to the red dino. It has been used since the start and is almost certainly the work of a Netscape employee, or an artist hired by Netscape. Bug 28028 has been open for over two years regarding licensing image rights for promoting Mozilla.

      Even worse a check of USPTO records will show that the trademark "Mozilla.org" is owned by Netscape NOT by the group using the name Mozilla.org. The Trademark Mozilla was applied for by Netscape some years earlier but was rejected and that rejection is before an appeals board.

      --
      Quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est
    22. Re:The ONLY thing annoying me... by shadowofdarkness · · Score: 1

      Thanks that worked fine

    23. Re:The ONLY thing annoying me... by superyooser · · Score: 1
      If you're using Windows, you can suppress the splash screen by using the -nosplash or -quiet tag in your shortcut like this:
      "C:\Program Files\Mozilla\bin\mozilla.exe" -nosplash
    24. Re:The ONLY thing annoying me... by Erik+K.+Veland · · Score: 1

      Jeebus! Open Source has a lot of left-brainers it seems. Isn't there a single graphic artist out there that could design a splash screen to save their life?

      Splash screens are really redundant in this day and age, but if you have to have one, at least make it pretty. Like Chimera. Or Photoshop 7.

      --
      "I tend to think of OS X as Linux with QA and Taste", James Gosling, creator of Java
    25. Re:The ONLY thing annoying me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Report that bug to Bugzilla, if you would? I found it too, on Win2k, Moz 1.0.

  94. bugzilla! by Wakkow · · Score: 1

    There's probably a bug or feature that you keep saying to yourself, "I'm sure someone else has noticed/wants this". Most likely someone has. Check out http://bugzilla.mozilla.org.

    I'm sure it's almost safe to assume your bug/feature has already been reported.

  95. IE Patch by Frac · · Score: 0, Troll

    Here's the link to the IE Patch:

    link

  96. Right on by tps12 · · Score: 0, Troll

    You are basically right, I think. Linux is making huge strides every day, and this is just another notch in the stick with which Linux will beat Microsoft about the face.

    Linux has shown superiority over Windows in nearly every category. There are a few areas, such as compatability with mp3 players and other popular peripherals, compatability with the latest Office standards, and any serious desktop publishing, where Linux still lags a bit (though one need only check out SourceForge to see the attempted solutions slowly on the way), but with this release we can safely expect to see some big players "go Linux" Real Soon Now.

    Go Mozilla!

    --

    Karma: Good (despite my invention of the Karma: sig)
    1. Re:Right on by 00_NOP · · Score: 3, Insightful

      compatability with the latest Office standards

      Except they aren't standards are they? They are secrets.

    2. Re:Right on by Linux_Users_Suck · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Superior in every way? Count the number of users buddy.
      Only a few areas where Linux lags a bit? Get real.
      Climb off the cloud of dope smoke and come back to the real world you loser.
      Karma Whore.

  97. Already got it by jscott · · Score: 1

    Funny thing was opening up moz1.0 to read this story.

    --
    signal, noise, to me it's all the same.
  98. WE WIN! by mdouglas · · Score: 1

    finally!

    i can remember 3'ish years ago at my first job, downloading mozilla, which at the time was the incredible crashing browser demo. that seems like ages ago, now it's finally reached THE major milestone. mozilla rules! everyone get milkfaced and hum like bunnies!

  99. YEAH!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i got it, runs beautifully for me, sweet on my Linux...

    to all you Mozilla programmers\coders\hackers, THANKS!!!

    I offer a Laurel & Hearty handshake :)

  100. offtopic:Re:WE WIN! by forkboy · · Score: 1

    everyone get milkfaced and hum like bunnies!

    OMFG, I thought I was the only one who remembers that sketch from The State. Or even remembers The State at all.

    --
    This message brought to you by the Council of People Who Are Sick of Seeing More People.
  101. applications by orcldba · · Score: 1

    I wonder if anybody knows if is Oracle going to support Mozilla as a browser for it's applications. It can be a big market for Mozilla. It is also the way for Oracle to get rid of the dependency on IE they seems to develop recently.

  102. Re:OPEN SOURCE NEEDS MORE BABES... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ceren is plenty old.

    Well, old enough to be a freak at the Folsom street fair.

    Too bad there aren't pictures of that ;-)

  103. It's been a long time coming... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...but it's finally here! As the Germans say, was lange währt wird endlich gut.

    Lots-a-champagne corks a-popping, I presume!

  104. Re: ftp mirror... by back@slash · · Score: 1

    thanks man. 102KB/sec instead of 0.2KB/sec.. a little bit of a difference.

    --
    This comment was generated by a Squadron of Ultra Ninjas
  105. File a Tech Evangelism bug report by bunratty · · Score: 1

    Mozilla doesn't support most IE extensions to the HTML standard. You should report that site in a Tech Evangelism bug to Bugzilla so the site can be fixed.

    --
    What a fool believes, he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.
  106. Hoooray! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have nothing intelligent to say, but thought I should chip in with a big hooray!

    Mozilla 1.0 is a triumph for open source, and a milestone in computer history :)

    /penhead

  107. Does it include by Lucas+Membrane · · Score: 1

    email and newsgroups (as Netscape Communicator and Opera do)?

    1. Re:Does it include by kcurrie · · Score: 1

      ...and the email/news client is (AFAIK) only included in the Windows version..

      --
      -- I speak only for myself.
    2. Re:Does it include by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Nope. It's all included cross-platform.

  108. Mozilla is an important piece of the puzzle by PhysicsGenius · · Score: 1
    With a fast and stable browser on their machines, clients can access server-based software in a .Net or even Java environment. This frees them from the confusing legacy software on their local hardware, making Linux a clear favorite in the category of "thin client". And when people get a taste of not using Linux at work, they'll be clamoring to make it their invisible OS at home as well.

    Microsoft's biggest downfall was in making the local OS easy and fun to use. They will now pay the price as businesses flock to Mozilla and Linux in an effort to keep employees from fiddling with desktop themes all day.

    1. Re:Mozilla is an important piece of the puzzle by Linux_Users_Suck · · Score: 1

      KDE? Themes.org? Think before you speak moron.

  109. Quickest IE patch ever released. by Fehson · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I think this is the first time IE has taken less than 2 months to be patched.

    1. Re:Quickest IE patch ever released. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only if you wan to run a piece of software with 150,000 bugs in it! At that point IE becomes the patch!

  110. Re: ftp mirror... by Aanallein · · Score: 5, Informative

    Please do not use the above mirror. It's primarily for use by the developers. If it becomes unusable they won't be able to get any work done.

  111. link missing periods/slashes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    link doesn't work. it's missing the periods and slashes.

    learn to post in html.

  112. my only gripe... by yanyan · · Score: 1

    is that Moz 1.0 still hangs when attempting to play audio (in Flash) while some other app is already playing audio. I hate having to stop xmms just to allow the page to load. That's according to the release notes.

    Gripes aside, i'm still downloading 1.0 but i'm sure this is going to rock! Kudos to the Mozilla team.

    1. Re:my only gripe... by mvdwege · · Score: 2

      If you have esd running, try starting Mozilla with $ esddsp mozilla. That will use the esd mixer daemon to make sure that Flash doesn't get an exclusive lock on /dev/dsp.

      I believe Arts has a similar wrapper, but I'm not sure.

      Mart (who got bitten by this too)
      --
      "I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
  113. Re:OPEN SOURCE NEEDS MORE BABES by blue+trane · · Score: 1

    make the software simulate the babes, then you don't need the babes. suddenly the value of babes goes down, and no one cares what they advocate...

  114. Is it safe to upgrade my old Mozilla (Ximian)? by antdude · · Score: 2

    Or should I wait for Ximian to release v1.0 final? I don't want to break a bunch of things if I try to upgrade to non-Ximian v1.0. I am running Red Hat Linux v7.1 and v7.2. I also don't use Nautilus on my machines.

    Thank you in advance. :)

    --
    Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    1. Re:Is it safe to upgrade my old Mozilla (Ximian)? by Platinum+Dragon · · Score: 1

      It works beautifully, and Nautilus will run with an incorrect Mozilla version anyway; it just won't access Web pages, probably due to a version check while loading the Gecko library.

      Upgrade away - she's a beaut.

      --

      Someday, you're going to die. Get over it.
    2. Re:Is it safe to upgrade my old Mozilla (Ximian)? by David+Gerard · · Score: 1

      Er. Use the Ximian package of Mozilla. If you just whack a mozilla.org tarball over the top, it could mess up Nautilus (see the Faq question on this topic: # 10.14. I use GNOME. I installed Mozilla from a mozilla.org binary, and now Nautilus isn't working properly).

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
    3. Re:Is it safe to upgrade my old Mozilla (Ximian)? by antdude · · Score: 2

      Well I was referring to the RPM version mozilla-1.0.0-4.i386.rpm. :)

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  115. I like that we have an open-source browser but -- by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    the bottom line is that I will continue to use IE because I can't use my bank's website with Mozilla, it doesn't handle most of the web plugins that sites require and frankly it's not that bug-free or stable.


    I will continue to use the best product for web browser, and that's OmniWeb.


    I really hope Mozilla's evolution continues because it's a promising product with a promising future. But it's still not ready for Joe user's desktop.

  116. Re:So close, and yet so far... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Man, are you still crying about that? We already told you that it isn't a bug and that the change was necessary. This will be the final behavior of the browser.

  117. Where the parties are at by Mr.+Sketch · · Score: 4, Informative

    The complete list is at http://www.schnitzer.at/mozparty/

    It looks like we'll finally be able to close out Bug #100309.

    1. Re:Where the parties are at by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Sorry, links to Bugzilla from Slashdot are disabled."

    2. Re:Where the parties are at by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wish one of those BSD babes would disable my pants.

  118. Re: ftp mirror... by Xaoswolf · · Score: 1

    Well, it was a nice idea at least...
    So, do I wait for three hours for the download, or do I come back tommorrow?
    I think we all know that I'm going to be stuck here in the office salivating over my keyboard watching those 0.7 kb/sec stream in.
    My life is so sad...

  119. Not on either side by Metaldsa · · Score: 1

    But when I used Netscape 3.0 it crashed every 2 web pages I opened or froze and I am not even making this up. IE was a godsend for me and many of my friends. I know it has its bugs since its the best thing to try to hack (thus inviting more hackers) but IE is one of the reasons why I use the web more and am more productive with it.

    I'm glad there is an alternative but praise competition and good web browsers. I wouldn't turn this into an anti-IE party because w/o IE most people would have been crashing on netscape for the past 2 years.

  120. Re:OPEN SOURCE NEEDS MORE BABES by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He has a good point that chick is ugly

  121. WARNING - do not upgrade to Mozilla from Netscape by Animats · · Score: 5, Informative
    Mozilla 1.0 went out the door with Bug 137164 unfixed.

    Near the end of the release notes, there is the warning

    • Do not share a profile between Netscape and Mozilla builds. Doing this can lead to unpredictable results, some of which may include loss of Search settings and preferences and unchecked growth of the Bookmarks file (large enough to freeze your system). It is best to create a new profile for each or manually copy (and change the name) an existing profile.

    The bug report itself contains this pathetic comment:

    • If you point someone to a door with 'Enter' on it and the handle shocks them when they touch it - maybe they shouldn't do that, but that still makes you a pretty mean bastard.

      that is to say... If Netscape can't use a Mozilla profile(and vice-versa) without causing nasty corruption then it shouldn't be trying. We should offer to import and create a new one without harming the old one - just like we do with other browsers that we like/share users with/ and support but with which we have incompatible profiles. (uhh 4.x)

      Believe me, I'm overjoyed to mark bugs that stem from this behavior as invalid (and I will) but that doesn't strike at the core issue. Lots of users, QA, and developers have spent a ton of time chasing down these demons - no one knew of this incompatibility. Isn't there something to be done?

  122. Multiple instances and profiles... by Dirtside · · Score: 2

    I downloaded the Mozilla CVS Release Tag 1.0 yesterday... previously I'd been using 1.0-rc1. They fixed the last few bugs I'd noticed (yay), but the major difference I noticed is that with RT1.0, I can no longer start multiple instances of Mozilla (I'm running Mandrake 7.2 on a P3-800). Well, I CAN, except it won't let me use the same profile for separate instances -- it says "that profile is already in use".

    Why does it do this? Can I disable this behavior? Why does Mozilla suddenly need to not allow multiple instances to access the same profile data, after never having done this for any previous version? I had to go back to using 1.0-rc2 (I would have tried rc3, except the .tar.gz from mozilla.org appears to be corrupted -- all four times I downloaded it), and unless there's some way to let multiple instances of 1.0 access the same profile... I guess I'll stick with rc2.

    I haven't tried the full 1.0 release yet, but I doubt it's any different than RT1.0. Even if it is, actually being able to download it will take a while, due to server overload.

    --
    "Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
    1. Re:Multiple instances and profiles... by cr@ckwhore · · Score: 2

      Yeah!! I noticed this behavior starting with RC3. Its a serious problem not being able to open multiple instances of my web browser! The whole "profile" idea is lame anyway.

      Here's what I do about the multiple instance problem... in the same directory as the user's prefs.js... usually somewhere deep in the .mozilla hidden directory, is a file named "lock". Basically, if you delete the lock file, Mozilla will then launch in a new instance without a problem.

      Like I said before, its a major pain in the ass. Seems like the lock file is a poor-man's fix to a bigger problem. I'll probably move back to RC2 and stick with it for a while.

      --
      Skiers and Riders -- http://www.snowjournal.com
    2. Re:Multiple instances and profiles... by cr@ckwhore · · Score: 2

      I just dug around in Mozilla and found this:

      http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7643 1

      There's a lot of information in there. Apparently the profile locking issue goes back a while, and there are a few reasons for it.

      --
      Skiers and Riders -- http://www.snowjournal.com
    3. Re:Multiple instances and profiles... by tono · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Ctrl+N

      --
      cheese logs keep my wang warm at night.
  123. Strange formatting of the google page by jms · · Score: 1

    Try this. Go to the google bork language page:

    http://www.google.com/intl/xx-bork/

    Now press reload a couple of times. When I do it, the page layout changes randomly -- large gaps appear and disappear both in the google title header, and the options list.

    Is it just me?

    1. Re:Strange formatting of the google page by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no problem over here

    2. Re:Strange formatting of the google page by odaiwai · · Score: 2

      Yep, it's just you. I get exactly the same layout every time.

      dave

  124. fast mirror site by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    1. Re:fast mirror site by Nintendork · · Score: 1

      Thanks! The http download worked for me at about 140kb/sec.

      -Lucas

  125. Re:OPEN SOURCE NEEDS MORE BABES by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You 2 must be queer...

    Not that there is anything wrong with that, but ceren is cute as a button.

  126. Re:OPEN SOURCE NEEDS MORE BABES... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dude, if there's grass on the field, then play ball!

  127. I'm proud. Congratulations ! by N0Nick · · Score: 1

    Mozilla started as an open-source project with no support from the open source community, I guess no one believed that fine free software could grow out of what was once the commercial browser.
    They proved them all wrong, didn't they?

    Mozilla not only proved that the browser-war is not over, it also proves that there *is* a place for standards-compatible software in the software market. And, it introduced some new standards to open source: bug-tracking software, nightly builds etc. Not to mention the great Gecko and holy XUL.

    I might have not contributed any code to the project, but I feel proud of participating in the Bugzilla bug-hunt, designing my web pages to work well with it and talking with people about how great it is for hours ;D

    Good Job!

  128. Philadelphia Mayor Attending? by BinBoy · · Score: 1

    Unless someone is playing a prank, it looks like the mayor (j.f.street(AT)phila.gov) is attending the Philadelphia Party. Didn't realize anyone in the government would be aware of Mozilla.

    --
    Binary Boy downloads music, movies and pictures while you sleep.

  129. Neat... by Robotech_Master · · Score: 2

    It's great that Mozilla is finally out after all this time. I remember downloading early releases and being quite unimpressed by what I saw there...but by the it got to v 0.9X, I was a believer.

    Does anybody else find it peculiar that Netscape is dumping its 6.X versions already, and the new Netscape is v7.0? Even though hardly anything has actually changed from 6.2?

    I really wish that they'd hurry up and get the Debian package out, though. Even Testing still only has Release Candidate 3.

    --
    Editor Emeritus and Senior Writer, TeleRead.org
  130. Just think. . . by PhxBlue · · Score: 3, Funny

    . . .Mozilla could advertise itself as the most Gopher-Friendly browser on the market!

    --
    !#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
  131. Re:OPEN SOURCE NEEDS MORE BABES by bazza · · Score: 1

    *sigh* this is the second comment today linking to these images directly on my site, not fun for my bandhwidth/box load, they're now blocked

  132. Yes... by friedmud · · Score: 2

    And an IRC chat client that I think is VERY top notch.

    Go grab it now!

    Derek

  133. Re:OPEN SOURCE NEEDS MORE BABES by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let me guess you are from US

  134. Some pics about Mozilla 1.0 by benb · · Score: 1
    Mozilla 1.0 ad - that's a parody on an old Netscape 4.7x ad (when Mozilla was already well underway and 4.x horribly outdated).


    Free the Lizard! - Beware the Lizard - it has been freed!

  135. BSD booth bunny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's a BSD booth bunny you're showing. Yet
    another reason why BSD is superior to *linux.

  136. Sh*t by digitalhermit · · Score: 2

    About twenty minutes ago, after reading about the gopher hole and following links to find out that my version of Mozilla was vulnerable to a bug allowing access to the hard drive, I downloaded rc3. I did the rpm -Uvh and saw that I needed a couple other support packages. Odd. The server seems a lot slower now. And what's this about v1.0 doing here? Dangit, why won't ncftp connect?

  137. Congratulations to an excellent browser by sjgman9 · · Score: 1

    I must say that on all computers where I have some influence, I tell people to ditch IE and install Mozilla. The tabbed browsing, pop-up remover, ad killer add-on, speed, and not being integrated into windows in addition to being open source make this the best browser I have ever seen.

    Internet explorer can suck it!

  138. Re:OPEN SOURCE NEEDS MORE BABES by User1234 · · Score: 0

    Ok dressing up a chick in a devil outfit is works. But I don't think that a chick dressed like a penguin would be very cute. The shape of a penguins body does not curve the same way a hot hicks body curves.

  139. Maybe Bill Gates will have an attack of kindness.. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 1

    Maybe Bill Gates will have an attack of kindness and decide to spend one of Microsoft's 40 billion on fixing all the bugs in Windows XP. .... Nah, probably won't happen.

  140. Re:Modded up if bashing IE, down if bashing Linux by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 5, Funny
    Good work, moderators. I commend your pro-Linux stance!

    And yet in that post Linux is not mentioned once. Not even indirectly. Do you even know what Mozilla is?

  141. RACH ON MOZ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's all...Moz is the only gui app that I absolutely require on my systems. Were there no Mozilla goodness, there would be no X for me. Love this browser, thanks to all who made it so.

  142. Re:Beonex Communicator 0.8-stable based on Mozilla by happy+monday · · Score: 1

    good idea, but can i ask that you allow download of the components separately? e.g. the browser, mail client etc... that would save me downloading a whole 9mb just to check out the browser.

  143. Is Mozilla 1.0 free of the IE gopher bug? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Although Mozilla is supposed to be a from-the-ground-up rewrite of what became Netscape 1-4.7, does it share any code with Mosaic for accessing gopher servers? How much gopher code from Mosaic has Microsoft left to fester in IE?

  144. Mozilla team: THANKS by fire-eyes · · Score: 1

    Thanks so much guys. I started out over a year ago using the binaries for linux. Then I started grabbing source code. Then I started grabbing source off of cvs, for both 1.0.0+ and 1.0rcX.

    Absoloutly fantastic product people, keep it up. Now that the API is frozen, it's going to be very interesting watching all the nifty tools roll out.

    Open source rocks.

    --
    -- Note: If you don't agree with me, don't bother replying. I won't read it.
  145. Re:Bugzilla Slashdot Blocker Circumvention Method( by cetan · · Score: 1

    When you open in a new tab/window you're removing the referer. You're not linking from /. anymore. Hence, it works.

    --
    In Soviet Russia...michael would be rotting in Siberia!
  146. How to use tabs for automated surfing... by pipeb0mb · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Hey. Using the new release on OS X, I was wondering how I could open a folder of bookmarks, automatically, in different tabs...would sure make morning surfing alot easier. The folders are on my toolbar, and are like 'news' with cnn, slashdot, fox, google news and such...If I could somehow open them all at once, in different tabs, well, that'd be heaven.
    :-)

    Also, this is the first Moz I've tried on my new iBook, and it certainly renders faster than IE or OmniWeb. AAMOF, Slashdot loads considerably faster.

    Nice work. I'll try to make myself get used to it, as it seems alot more polished than I expected.

    1. Re:How to use tabs for automated surfing... by qurk · · Score: 1

      You can do that by clicking on bookmarks, file bookmark, clicking in the box marked file as group, and choose folder to put it in :)

    2. Re:How to use tabs for automated surfing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      nope.
      i'd like this also...

      :(

  147. Yawn, yawn nice try /.ers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is so sickening to see what happens in slashdot, not for people that think though, but rather for all these OSS/FS zealots (usually I call hackers as OSS/FS losers, it fits nice).

    First you bash IE, then you announce Mozilla 1.0 release.

    Surely that is not show that OSS/FS is viable, but rather to support all these OSS/FS zealots that work for Redhats for free (this is innovation: extend the meaning of free to everything. Is your wife free tonigh OSS/FS hacker?)

    1. Re:Yawn, yawn nice try /.ers by Visceral+Monkey · · Score: 1

      Wow. You must really have a problem with people who give stuff away. Why the bitterness at "free" software?

      --
      *Fortitudo, aequitas, fidelitas.*
  148. there should be a law... by neoevans · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    ..."The latest IE gopher hole patch is out!"

    They really shouldn't take the best possible post and include it in the article, it's just not fair.

    --
    "You are not a beautiful and unique snowflake."...Tyler Durden
  149. Mozilla slower then NS4.7 on Solaris by stefanlasiewski · · Score: 4, Informative

    I have not downloaded Mozilla 1.0 yet, but I do have RC3 installed on this Ultra5/270Mhz/512Mb .

    While this monster is by no means a speed demon, Mozilla is so slow it is unusable. Takes 30 seconds to start up, 1-2 seconds to register a click. The rendering of pages is fine, but everything else is really, really slow.

    Netscape4.7, on the other hand, is fine. Not fast, but perfectly usable.

    I also use Mozilla all the time on a Win98 & RH7.2 (Dual boot/366Mhz/512Mb), and it's way way FASTER then Netscape4.7.

    Why is Mozilla so slow on Solaris?

    --
    "Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."
    1. Re:Mozilla slower then NS4.7 on Solaris by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why is Mozilla so slow on Solaris?


      They don't call it "Slowaris" for nothing.

      Sorry, couldn't resist. You do have a valid question.

    2. Re:Mozilla slower then NS4.7 on Solaris by guacamole · · Score: 2

      Mozilla is slower than NS 4.7 on ALL operating systems .. it's just since the original Ultra5's are
      -very- slow machines, it is more annoying to you.
      I use a 333MHz Ultra5 and I prefer to stick with the netscape 4.79.

    3. Re:Mozilla slower then NS4.7 on Solaris by pmz · · Score: 2

      They don't call it "Slowaris" for nothing.

      The problem, here, is not the OS, it is the Ultra 5. Ultra 5s were marketed as low-end workstations when they were first sold, which makes them very-low-end today. Ultra 5s were intended as basic administrator workstations with absolutely no frills.

      As a counter example, I have a 440MHz UltraSPARC IIi-based workstation with UltraSCSI disk drives, 512MB of RAM, and Solaris 8, and Mozilla/Netscape works beautifully. What I have that the Ultra 5 doesn't is bandwidth.

    4. Re:Mozilla slower then NS4.7 on Solaris by FooBarWidget · · Score: 1

      Unless you have enough CPU power and RAM. Starting from a certain configuration, Mozilla is actually *faster* than NS4.
      Mozilla is slower than NS4 on my Pentium 233, but is much faster than NS4 on my Athlon 1,4 Ghz with 128 MB RAM.

    5. Re:Mozilla slower then NS4.7 on Solaris by David+Gerard · · Score: 3, Informative
      "They don't call it "Slowaris" for nothing."

      "The problem, here, is not the OS, it is the Ultra 5. Ultra 5s were marketed as low-end workstations when they were first sold, which makes them very-low-end today. Ultra 5s were intended as basic administrator workstations with absolutely no frills. As a counter example, I have a 440MHz UltraSPARC IIi-based workstation with UltraSCSI disk drives, 512MB of RAM, and Solaris 8, and Mozilla/Netscape works beautifully. What I have that the Ultra 5 doesn't is bandwidth."

      To make a fast Sun build, use the Sun Forte compiler instead of gcc - being tweaked for the OS and architecture, it does a lot better.

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
    6. Re:Mozilla slower then NS4.7 on Solaris by Kanasta · · Score: 1, Troll

      What I really want to know is, why does it take 3s to open the bookmarks tab, and when you go away and come back, it takes 3s again?

      NS4.7 read bookmarks from a text file and took less than 1s, why is Moz so slow at everything?

      Feels like Java all over again!

    7. Re:Mozilla slower then NS4.7 on Solaris by NineNine · · Score: 2

      Unless you have enough CPU power and RAM. Starting from a certain configuration, Mozilla is actually *faster* than NS4.
      Mozilla is slower than NS4 on my Pentium 233, but is much faster than NS4 on my Athlon 1,4 Ghz with 128 MB RAM.


      I know this'll get modded as "flamebait" but Mozilla is bloated as hell. I shouldn't need a 1 Ghz machine to run a fucking web browser! The web browser is probably the most used app on most computers... it shouldn't be as bloated and resource intensive as Photoshop. All my PC's are sub 500 mhz boxes. Mozilla is just too slow and bloated for me to use.

    8. Re:Mozilla slower then NS4.7 on Solaris by David+Gerard · · Score: 1

      Something's definitely wrong. Try again with a fresh profile, and for that matter uninstall rc3 and get 1.0-final. You should have PLENTY of machine to run Mozilla beautifully.

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
    9. Re:Mozilla slower then NS4.7 on Solaris by nr · · Score: 1

      Maybe due to to little CPU power? You have to keep in mind that Mozilla is designed for modern computers. I have an 5 years old Ultra-1 Creator workstation with UltraSPARC-I 176 MHz on my desk and I notice the same behaviour as you. On my P-III 900 MHz IBM Thinkpad the speed of Mozilla is ok.

      You can run it on a higher nice-level to give the browser some extra CPU time. This improves things a little.

      nice --99 mozilla

    10. Re:Mozilla slower then NS4.7 on Solaris by bjb · · Score: 2
      I ran Mozilla regularly on a Ultra 10 (333MHz/256MB) and didn't think it was that bad.

      My guess is that you're using this at work, correct? If you're at work, and your system is set up like most Sun boxen in a work environment, your home page is probably on an NFS drive. If this is correct so far, then I bet what is really killing your performance is that your cache directory is on the NFS drive.

      I could be completely wrong on your situation, but if that is the case, you can fix this by putting your cache on your machine's local disk. You just have to find some space, so do this:

      • Open a shell and type "df -k /var/tmp". This will report to you how much space is available on your local disk (/var/tmp is typically located on your local disk; filesystem should be something like /dev/ctd0s0.. or /dev/vx/..).
      • Look at the "Available" column. This is being reported in kilobytes (-k), so dividing that by 1024 is roughly the number of MB free. If this is under 100MB or the "percentage used" is over 60%, then you might not want to proceed (if you use up ALL this space, you'll prevent other applications from running).
      • Create a subdirectory in /var/tmp called "mozcache".
      • Open Mozilla, go to Edit->Preferences->Advanced->Cache->Di sk Cache Folder and set it to /var/tmp/mozcache. You might want to reduce your disk cache setting to something around 8192-16384 if you're worried about space.
      • Close mozilla, restart. Hit a web page and verify that it is using the new cache by doing a directory listing of /var/tmp/mozcache.
      Two words of warning:
      1. /var/tmp is NOT automatically cleaned by Solaris. Any files you create there will most likely stay there. Of course, Mozilla cleans up its own cache directory, but just keep this in mind.
      2. If you go to another machine, it might not create the /var/tmp/mozcache.

      Apologies if this is stuff you already know.. I just figured that if you didn't know this, it'd be useful.

      --
      Never hit your grandmother with a shovel, for it leaves a bad impression on her mind...
    11. Re:Mozilla slower then NS4.7 on Solaris by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mozilla 1.0rc2 is a lot faster than NS 4.77 on my pentium II/233 in linux.

      I very, very rarely start netscape 4.x anymore. Only for sites that use broken code, which I happen to come across about once a month.

  150. Re:Modded up if bashing IE, down if bashing Linux by bryan1945 · · Score: 0

    Just had to say that this was the funniest thing I've read today, and I really needed a chuckle.

    Thanks!

    --
    Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
  151. Re: ftp mirror... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, gee, it seems I'm having a bit of difficulty getting through to ftp.mozilla.org. Go figure.

    Now I just have to convince all the Windows people at my office to switch over. It's not exactly like getting them to run Linux instead, but it's a start. :)

  152. Re:OPEN SOURCE NEEDS MORE BABES by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Jeez. Have some pride! That is just plain ugly. That is your idea of hot?
    And I wonder why computer users are known as geeks/losers/nerds/etc
    Don't make statements like that and maybe the negative perceptions will go away. Maybe

  153. bugs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OK, I've been using Mozilla for several months now, without many problems. RC3 was just fine for me; so I upgrade to 1.0 on win2k (have to use it at work, schade.....) and there are lets of major bugs; mozilla freezes on start, mail doesn't open at all, etc. I hope I am the only one having these problems, because any newbies that try to use it and see this will instantly go back to IE.

  154. Orbit Theme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting
    Yes, and Orbit is also pretty cool. (Screenshot)

    Grab it from here: http://www.alfordot.com/e/p/cdn/orbit3/

  155. Super-Duper by jeffphil · · Score: 1

    I've been using Mozilla for over 2 years, and have been happy ever since. The innovation and dedication of this project is mind-blowing, and just goes to show what powerful things can be created when we all work together.

    Great work team moz.

    I think the old saying Rome wasn't built in a day, should now be changed to Mozilla wasn't built in a day.

  156. Re:OPEN SOURCE NEEDS MORE BABES by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    BOO! HISS! =)

  157. A Great Day by The+Cat · · Score: 2

    Our congratulations. ^^

    An amazing accomplishment in development, to say the least. In case any of the developers are reading, here is a copy of our e-mail sent to mozilla.org this morning:

    "On behalf of Heavy Cat Multimedia Ltd. I would like to offer our congratulations on your spectacular success in software development. We have been developing with Mozilla for almost three years now, and we have been consistently impressed with its progress. Developing for Mozilla is a joy for which we are very grateful.

    Once again, ometedou gozaimasu!"

    Enjoy the parties!

  158. Re:OPEN SOURCE NEEDS MORE BABES... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If they're old enough to bleed, they're old enough to breed.

  159. Party at my house!! by synthox · · Score: 1

    I am spray painting my Barney suite Red right now. My buddies are out tapping the keg. We looking forward night of illegal plugin injections and reloads woohoo. Stop by if you like.

    --
    ~~Some people never go crazy what truly horrible lives they must lead.~~ Charles Bukowski
  160. Don't get too hopeful :) by Yam-Koo · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Mozilla can't beat IE at everything, so don't get a case of fanaticism just yet. :)

  161. Huh ? by Yag · · Score: 1

    Not Found The requested URL /pub/mozilla/releases/mozilla1.0/mozilla-win32 -1.0-stub-installer.exe was not found on this server.

  162. First see if you NEED to download Java! by vanza · · Score: 4, Informative

    Anyone with a recent JDK/JRE installed already has the plugin for Mozilla/Netscape and does NOT need to install this package!

    I don't know why the installer does not do this automatically if it detects Java, but all you have to do is go to the Mozilla plugins directory and make a symbolic link to the plugin. In the case of JDK 1.4, the plugin resides in ${JAVA_HOME}/jre/plugin/i386/ns610/libjavaplugin_o ji140.so (for Linux at least).

    In Windows, in some directory that looks like that, there are some dll's you can copy to the Mozilla plugins' folder to make the Java plugin work.

    --
    Marcelo Vanzin
    1. Re:First see if you NEED to download Java! by gabec · · Score: 1
      Just for posterity I thought I would note that it *does* automatically detect java, as it did on my machine.... but if you go to the release notes it gives you step-by-step instructions on how to do it if for some reason it doesn't work.

      the following is from the above linked page:

      Java

      Windows and Linux: To run Java applets, you must install the Java Run Time Environment (JRE) plug-in.

      Windows: When using installer builds, everything should Just Work without any help.

      See the Java section for more details about Java version compatibility.

      Windows: If you're using the Installer build and you already have JRE 1.3.0_01 on your system Mozilla should recognize it. If it doesn't recognize it then follow the copy instructions for the zip builds.

      If you're using the win32.zip or talkback.zip builds After the JRE is installed on your machine, copy NPJava130_01.dll, NPJava130_01a.dll, NPJava130_01b.dll, NPJava130_01c.dll, and NPOJI610.dll from the install directory (something like C:\Program Files\JavaSoft\JRE\1.3.0_01\bin) to your Mozilla plugins directory (something like C:\Program Files\ Mozilla 1.0 \bin\plugins).

      Linux With tar.gz builds on Linux, after the JRE has installed, put a symlink to java2/plugin/i386/ns610/libjava.oji.so in your mozilla1.0 plugins/ directory.

      With Linux RPM builds, you must install Java as the root user.

      Mac OS: You must have Mac OS Runtime for Java (MRJ) version 2.2 to run Java applets with Mozilla . If you have Mac OS version 8.5 through 8.6, you may need to upgrade your version of MRJ. For an upgrade, you could go to versiontracker's MRJ page.

      Hope this helps!

  163. Re:OPEN SOURCE NEEDS MORE BABES... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Er... you obviously don't spend too much time around females do you? She looks older than most of the 21 years olds I see at college. She's just short (petite, whatever). Small does not necessarily imply young.

  164. Truetype / Xprint by tweakt · · Score: 2
    RPMS for Red Hat Linux 7.x (i386, alpha platforms) Does not support TrueType or Xprint.

    Could someone please explain why the Redhat 7.x RPMs that are distributed still dont support TrueType fonts (and therefore no anti-aliasing) ?

    Might I expect an official Redhat RPM of Mozilla 1.0 released sometime soon with full TrueType support and antialiased fonts? It looks so nice!

    1. Re:Truetype / Xprint by robkore · · Score: 1

      Hmm, after a little looking around, I came across this link. Mr. Blizzard doesn't like the truetype code, and does not want to support it. Too bad for me, I guess I will have to finally learn how to use those src.rpms.

    2. Re:Truetype / Xprint by tweakt · · Score: 2
      Peice o' cake:
      rpm --rebuild mozilla-1.0.src.rpm
      rpm -ivh /usr/src/redhat/RPMS/i386/mozilla-1.0.i386.rp m
      Course, if you need to tweak anything before compiling, do it this way...
      rpm -ivh mozilla-1.0.src.rpm
      SPEC file is in /usr/src/redhat/SPECS It contains all the instructions on how to generate the RPM... specifically unpacking, patching, and running configure, make, and make install. And then which files to include into the final rpm.

      Under /usr/src/redhat/SOURCES is the source tarball and any patches that will be applied or other files that are required to be installed. Then do this:

      cd /usr/src/redhat/SPECS
      rpm --ba mozilla.spec
      rpm -ivh /usr/src/redhat/RPMS/i386/mozilla-1.0.i386.rp m
  165. Trouble With the Mozilla Download Site? by windowpain · · Score: 0

    ... or with my system?

    Every time I try to click on any of the download links I get a "404 - Page not found" error. Is anyone else having this problem? I tried clearing my browser cache and still no luck.

    If no one else is having this problem does anyone know what could cause it? I get 404's much more often than I think I should. Sometimes I'll get a 404 and then go back and click the link again and I get the page. What's up with that? I'm using IE 5.5 on Win98se over a Comcast cable modem.

    Thanks.

    --
    Insert witty sig here.
  166. The old bait and switch? by sys49152 · · Score: 1

    I would love to download Moz 1.0 (as I have every build since .09). However, every single Linux link (tar.gz, RPM, etc.) immediately responds with:

    The requested URL /pub/mozilla/releases/mozilla1.0/mozilla-i686- pc-linux-gnu-1.0-sea.tar.gz was not found on this server.

    Nor can I connect to the ftp site.

    Hmmm, the Windows and Mac links are the same.

    What gives?

  167. Re:Maybe Bill Gates will have an attack of kindnes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Chances are he'll LEARN TO FUCKING CODE first.

  168. Would take O(2^n) space on server by yerricde · · Score: 2

    In principle, can't it be replaced by a web page with radio buttons that say "do you want your download to include/exclude $FOO, $BAR, $BAZ", and upon clicking "submit", give you a page with the corresponding packages/zips/tarballs/whatevers?

    To an extent, RealPlayer did this (small, medium, and large downloads), and AOL's Winamp still does. Any more than a S/M/L scheme, and you have to store 2^n packages on the server, one for every possible subset of the n components. Or you get a set of separate zip files, which is hard for the average point-and-drool user to install correctly.


    Good AOL products: Mozilla and Winamp. Bad AOL products: AOL and DMCA.
    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
  169. Kmeleon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I liked Kmeleon for my alternative to IE. I wonder when it will incorporate the goodies of Mozilla 1.0.

    I have found no difference in Kmeleon than IE other than it is much faster and much smaller footprint.

  170. Mirror mirror on the wall.... by neanderdude · · Score: 2, Funny
    ...tell us one that ain't jam packed!

    My boss wants the lizard, so I don't get sacked.

    Just about any open mirror will make my day
    and then the Lizard may be here to stay!

    Should I quit my day job and become a poet???

    1. Re:Mirror mirror on the wall.... by neanderdude · · Score: 1

      Nevermind...someone else posted a some mirrors that worked.

      Nothing to see here folks. Please continue with your lives.

  171. Congrats to slashdot effect, too. by kiwipeso · · Score: 1

    A really fantastic job, first time I go back to check and all the web's down on that site.
    [Not going to run a promo-troll on my stuff yet.]
    Sorry I haven't been able to catch up with latest stories, have been very busy on several things.

    I offer you the greatest congrats for finally getting there, It's a great day for competition with the umbrella corporation.

    --
    - Kaos games and encryption systems developer
  172. Re:OPEN SOURCE NEEDS MORE BABES by chadm1967 · · Score: 1

    What's that supposed to mean??????

  173. Whoopedee...... by dorker · · Score: 0

    Big WhooppeedeeCrap.

  174. Excellent work. by exedanni · · Score: 0

    Congrats Mozilla developers, you convinced me to move from Netscape 6 to Moz 0.99, and now I am ever so pleased to be using the best browser so far.

  175. Re:OPEN SOURCE NEEDS MORE BABES by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    nope
    I love US but ratio of good looking girls to ugly girls is sad :( and the fact that 65% of population is fat doesn't help either :(

  176. mozilla is an end-user browser by The+Pim · · Score: 5, Insightful
    While the ultimate goal of the Mozilla project is to produce source code that can be used by other projects and companies, the Open-Source project Beonex tries to make a browser for end-users out of it.

    I don't mean to deprecate your efforts, but I think this "Mozilla isn't about producing an end-user product" idea has always been wishful thinking--and is becoming less plausible every day. Mozilla is clearly destined to become the prominent browser in the free software community and the web development community, and a popular browser among computer users at large.

    I'm not saying it's a bad idea in principle to separate the development of the engine and the finish; I just don't see how it can happen in this case. The core features and the user interface of a browser are not separable enough. In order for Mozilla to produce a browser for testing purposes going to want it to be a good user interface. The evidence bears this out: users file usability bugs in bugzilla, the developers take them seriously, and as a result, vanilla mozilla has an overall better user interface than any earlier Netscape browser.

    The Mozilla developers seem to agree on the value of a reference user interface, in order to prevent excessive variation in the interfaces of derived products. For example, they insist upon limiting the number of user-configurable variables, which would not make sense if they were only about the basic technologies. In order for their reference interface to be credible, they have to invest resources in usability. The way I see it, the "reference interface" position amounts to a committment to an end-user product, even if they don't realize or admit it.

    On top of this, Mozilla already has all the visibility in the free software and web development communities. If Mozilla refuses to provide an end-user product, it will mostly create user confusion. Mozilla has all the developers. Mozilla has all the infrastructure. It only makes sense for Mozilla to do the last 10% and provide an end-user product. Maybe someday beonix or galeon or someone else will overcome this barrier (just as GTK and QT have finally displaced athena as free widget sets for X), but it will take a long time.

    Of course, in some markets, vanilla Mozilla won't be the king. Among Joe PC, it will a Netscape or AOL branded version. Users of embedded systems will get whatever modified version their manufacturer included. But even the popular computer press reviews Mozilla, so the message that it is not for end-users doesn't seem to have gotten through. And among the slashdot demographic, Mozilla is it. Let's face it: how many of us will download Mozilla 1.0 to "test" it? Most of us want to use it! Mozilla is already a great end-user browser, and will keep getting better.

    --

    The evaluation of an action as 'practical' . . . depends on what it is that one wishes to practice.
    1. Re:mozilla is an end-user browser by benb · · Score: 1

      Yes, it's a truth that many end users use Mozilla. The result of that is 100% (!) noise on the development newsgroups.

      Per the official mission, mozilla.org has an interest in getting testing coverage, not making a perfect browser for end-users to download. As such, many of the mozilla.org binary downloads are bigger than necessary and probably slower than necessary (compiler flags, lots of development/testing stuff included). Default prefs (sometimes hidden) are often adjusted to get maximal testing of the features. I firmly believe that Beonex Communicator is better suited even for Slashdot folks.

      Yes, mozilla.org is trying to produce a browser suitable for end-users. But only as source-code, to be modified and redistributed by others with minimal effort. (But it's still enough effort to keep me busy.)

      Beonex has been created, because mozilla.org didn't want to adapt to end-users. I'd be glad, if mozilla.org changed its focus, but it should be consistent. I think that the current situtation is suboptimal for both mozilla.org development and end users.

    2. Re:mozilla is an end-user browser by David+Gerard · · Score: 1
      "I don't mean to deprecate your efforts, but I think this "Mozilla isn't about producing an end-user product" idea has always been wishful thinking--and is becoming less plausible every day. Mozilla is clearly destined to become the prominent browser in the free software community and the web development community, and a popular browser among computer users at large."

      Check out FAQ section 11 for a pile of resources for end users, by the way. And the FAQ itself ;-)

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
    3. Re:mozilla is an end-user browser by mattdm · · Score: 2

      Those FAQ sections are really beside the point. There's really two things -- the "look somewhere else for support" bit (which is fair enough), and the aforementioned wishful thinking.

      Do you think Red Hat will ship a Mozilla-based version of their old Red Baron web browser, or will they include Mozilla? What about Debian? Slackware? UnitedLinux? Anyone?

  177. Ho-hum by gkbarr · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    Well la-de-frickin-da, now all they need to do is make it work correctly and I might waste the bandwidth downloading it.

    NEWS FLASH! IE won the browser war last century, thanks for playing.

    --
    Sapere Aude - Homer
  178. Ironic by WiggyWack · · Score: 1

    Heh. I was looking to download Mozilla with IE when IE crashed... Ah, sweet irony. :)

    --
    Macintosh humor! MacComedy.com
  179. Re:OPEN SOURCE NEEDS MORE BABES... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Ceren is plenty old.

    Too bad it not obvious how to pronounce her name from the spelling. I mean is it "Karen" or "Serene" or what?

    A geek could make a real fool out himself by getting it wrong. He'd be like "That Karen sure is hot!" and then there'd be this embarrassed silence while everyone tried to come to terms with his cluelessness.

  180. Is there a good CD image to distribute? by stienman · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Obviously we're all excited to take this to our friends and families. Is there any effort to make a good installation CD with all the binaries, source, and a windows autorun (either open an html file on the CD or run the full talkbak installer)?

    I can put one together myself, but I'm not certian what the best (most easily understood) directory structure would be... Perhaps something like this:
    • Root
      • Linux
      • Suse
      • Redhat
      • ...
    • BSD
      • FreeBSD
      • NetBSD
      • ...
    • Windows
    • Source
    • DOCS
    I'd like to have something burnable by next Wednesday for the Ann Arbor Destroyed by Mozilla party...

    -Adam
    1. Re:Is there a good CD image to distribute? by Joe+Tie. · · Score: 1

      I'd like to have something burnable by next Wednesday for the Ann Arbor Destroyed by Mozilla [schnitzer.at] party...

      All this talk about Ann Arbor is bringing me down. I just moved away from there earlier this year to a cowboy town where people look on in fear and incomprehension if you so much as bring out a pda.

      --
      Everything will be taken away from you.
    2. Re:Is there a good CD image to distribute? by Voidhobo · · Score: 1
      Hey! You forgot this:
      • Macintosh
        • Classic
        • OS X

      (among others, like OpenVMS and OS/2)

    3. Re:Is there a good CD image to distribute? by guacamole · · Score: 2

      Oh, if you add OS X, please add a Solaris build as well (preferably built on Solaris 2.5.1 or 2.6 box, it should be upwards compatible with newer releases)

    4. Re:Is there a good CD image to distribute? by jdavidb · · Score: 2

      Please don't forget Macintosh. Classic and OS X.

    5. Re:Is there a good CD image to distribute? by BigJimSlade · · Score: 2

      Is there any effort to make a good installation CD with all the binaries, source, and a windows autorun (either open an html file on the CD or run the full talkbak installer)?


      I doubt it's up to date, but check out Demo Linux. There's one or two images you can download.

  181. Re:new king (off-topic) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, I grudginly started to think maybe 2k and IE was ok when I was forced to use it at school for a while. However, it wasn't long and I started seeing crashes again. Later when I installed XP on a PC, IE 6 locked up on windowsupdate.com! So, I'm back to my old prejudices. Fewer crashes, maybe, but 2k, XP, IE5, IE6 - it doesn't seem to matter. They all still eventually will barf on you.

    It's sad that after all this time and all the MS posturing, the flagship webbrowser can still lock the flagship OS hard during the installation.

  182. Disapointed for one promise by MrJones · · Score: 0

    I'm really happy with mozilla 1.0 but also disapointed because one of the primary promises of Mozilla(in the post Comunicator 4 age) was that it
    sould run faster.
    Now, it does not run faster because it use more memory and because of all the XPE(wheel reinvented) stuff.

    Anyway, still want to drink some beer in the name
    of Mozilla 1.0

    --
    Get my e-mail after a captcha test in: http://tinymailt
  183. Re: from the it's-only-been-how-many-years dept. by tweakt · · Score: 5, Interesting
  184. Needs to be said by mu_wtfo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Well, with 390+ comments posted already, this one probably won't even be seen, but there's something I need to say.

    WOOOO-HOOOOOOOO!!!!!!

    Thank you, mozilla.org and everyone else who contributed to this project! Now - let's party like it's 9.9.9!!!

    --
    If all the world's a stage, anyone who says they want better lighting spends far too much time in a dark theatre.
  185. If you forget the mirror list by sebol · · Score: 1

    It seem like a link is missing from the mirror list,
    Here is the missing mirror :-
    http://ikhlas.com/mirror/mozilla-1.0.0

    --
    -- Hasbullah bin Pit (sebol)
    1. Re:If you forget the mirror list by arwen_undomiel · · Score: 1

      aha..very funny..gone through this few times..:P

  186. YOU ARE ALL A BUNCH OF RETARDS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    AS IF you would know what to do with a babe (assuming you slip her the date-rape drug so she can't flee).

    1. Re:YOU ARE ALL A BUNCH OF RETARDS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course we know how to operate a female, that is what JPEGs are for, right?

  187. frustrated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My company uses Microsoft Proxy server 2.0 of all things... I really want to use Mozilla at work, but it has trouble logging in. Any suggestions?

  188. Awesome by Petronius · · Score: 1

    Well, the last time that I downloaded Netscape, that it was a 10 meg download and that it beat every other browser was a long time ago! But they're back!!! I'm so impressed! Keep it up!

    --
    there's no place like ~
  189. JAVA APPLETS still don't work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    JAVA APPLETS still don't work

    1. Re:JAVA APPLETS still don't work by captredballs · · Score: 1

      I am using an applet in mozilla right now. I do have the java plugin installed, so maybe you can try that. Honestly, I'm exactly sure why I need the plugin, but hey, it works.

      --

      I suppose I'm not too threatening, presently, but wait till I start Nautilus
    2. Re:JAVA APPLETS still don't work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      on a MacOS 9.2.2 w/ MRJ 2.2.5 box JAVA APPLETS still don't work

    3. Re:JAVA APPLETS still don't work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "on a MacOS 9.2.2 w/ MRJ 2.2.5 box JAVA APPLETS still don't work"

      I bet Java Applets don't work on my Atari 800 either. Sheesh.

      Welcome to the year 2002 and upgrade to OS X you Dog.

    4. Re:JAVA APPLETS still don't work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Help > About Plugins.

      See any plug-in listed for Java? No? Then Mozilla is not running applets because the plug-in is not installed. Copy the plugin files to the plugin directory (NPJava* files in the bin directory of the Java installation - at least in Windows).

      If you are going to complain, at least try to understand the problem.

      ---
      Jabel D. Morales - VMan of Mana

      Not a coward, just lazy to register.

    5. Re:JAVA APPLETS still don't work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (at least in windows), dude the year is 2002 get a mac and try to get java applets running, i do understand the problem, JAVA APPLETS do not work on mac platform

    6. Re:JAVA APPLETS still don't work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ok you dolt, buy me a $5,000 graphite g4 machine w/ 17 flat screen display and ill use os X

  190. One US mirror already has it by pngwen · · Score: 2, Informative

    one US mirror has mozilla-1.0 on it site and is currently giving me the maximum download my IDSL line's bandwidth will allow.
    &nbsp
    The mirror is:
    &nbsp
    ftp://archive.progeny.com/mozilla/releases/mozilla 1.0/
    &nbsp
    This seems to be the only one that has it at the time of this posting.
    &nbsp

    --
    I am the penguin that codes in the night.
  191. Reality check by tacokill · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Ok, I've read the article and I've followed this project via slashdot for a while. Here's my question: so what?

    Not to be a jerk but the only headline I see here is "Mozilla 1.0 released and finally catches up to IE - as of 2 years ago"

    1. Re:Reality check by cetan · · Score: 2, Informative

      If you followed the project for so long then you would know the answer to your question.

      IE was passed by Mozilla in terms of functionality ages ago.

      --
      In Soviet Russia...michael would be rotting in Siberia!
    2. Re:Reality check by qurk · · Score: 1
      ya ill bite :)

      mozilla isn't catching up to ie as of two years ago cause two years ago IE sucked even more than it did today :P IE sucked serious ass as of 3.0 and 4.0 was a regrouping effort and ya it won most of the market share but does that make it right :P

      I can't speak for anyone but myself but I never ran it :P

  192. Re:Maybe Bill Gates will have an attack of kindnes by SkankhodBeeblebrox · · Score: 2, Informative

    Not trolling, but you do realize the Willam F. (?) Gates foundation donates millions and millions of dollars to charities each year... Gates' has a lot of things you can flame him for, not being kind isn't one of them...

  193. ^^^ typo by The+Pim · · Score: 2
    A line got deleted.

    In order for Mozilla to produce a browser for testing purposes going to want it to be a good user interface.

    should be

    In order for Mozilla to produce a browser for testing purposes, it has to have a user interface. As long as it has a user interface, people are going to want it to be a good user interface.

    --

    The evaluation of an action as 'practical' . . . depends on what it is that one wishes to practice.
  194. Nuts to you, buddy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've been waiting 35 years for this. Dog years, that is.

  195. Mozilla will never amount to anything. by Tuzy2k · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    All of the Linux community will cream itself and have orgasms of pleasure for months to come...however, 95% of the world wont ever SEE mozilla. Guess what...NO ONE CARES. Just like Linux, Mozilla will never amount to anything but its little niche of a few thousand users. While IE will continue to be used by millions of intelligent people. :) I wont be checking this for a reply so flame away, I will take satisfaction in knowing that I have pissed off a few LLLL's (Linux Life-Long Losers) and wasting a few minutes of their life. :) muahahahahaha

    1. Re:Mozilla will never amount to anything. by javajeff · · Score: 1

      I use Mozilla in Windows.

    2. Re:Mozilla will never amount to anything. by Down8 · · Score: 1

      Potentially, 30,000,000 ppl could be using Mozilla, since AOL has been testing it. And Everyone who uses Netscape 6/7 sees Mozilla.

      So, 95% of the world might be close, but not 95% of the online world would be WAY off.

      -bZj

      --
      .sig
    3. Re:Mozilla will never amount to anything. by JunglPunK · · Score: 1

      I know that here where I work, many "set-in-my-ways" IE users are switching over to Mozilla. Their typical response to finding out about Mozilla: "Pop-up suppression? Where can I download it?"

      I think more people care than you think; they have just resolved themselves to using software that is a bit anemic, because that is all they know.

      BTW - the Mozilla converts I was referring to are not "Linux Life-Long Losers," as you put it, but Windows users- which illustrates yet another of Mozilla's many strengths.

      -

      --
      - Sprechen Sie mit der Hand, weil die Ohren nicht hören.
  196. Re:Maybe Bill Gates will have an attack of kindnes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh puleez... he only did that after getting married (who's to get the credit?) and after getting ask "when" by David Frost and a host of others. Most of what they "donate" is Windows licenses anyway... bah!

  197. Re:new king (off-topic) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have never had IE lock up Win2k or XP. I have never had it affect either system negitively when it crashses and I use both quite a lot. Anyone who willingly uses the 9x line of windows isn't a competent user though so obviously user error is probably the cause here, not the software.

  198. MAIN DOWNLOAD SITE IS FLOODED. WHY??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why doesn't someone like Sprint or Microsoft donate an OC-768 or something like that so people can download it???

  199. THANKS FOR THE DDOS DORK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bazza.com is now pounded into the dirt.

  200. Other ports by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Where's Irix at?

    Might just have to do some compiling

  201. Mouse button functionality? by greatsasuke · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I realize this is a very trivial issue, but does anyone know if they're planning to enable the Back/Forward buttons on my mouse for use in Mozilla? I recently switched over from using IE full-time (I really like the tabbed browsing), but this is the only real caveat I have, despite it not being a really big deal.

    Any help or info anyone could give would be appreciated. Thanks.

    1. Re:Mouse button functionality? by Down8 · · Score: 1

      Did you try just using the buttons? I have an MS IntelliMouse Explorer [v2], and it works fine in Mozilla - always has.

      [Alternately, if you can map your buttons to 'Alt+[left-arrow]' for Back and 'Alt+[right-arrow]' for Forward, you'll be set.]

      -bZj

      --
      .sig
    2. Re:Mouse button functionality? by __aasfhc1949 · · Score: 1
      Hello greatsasuke:

      If you hold down "ALT," you can move the mouse wheel to go forward/backward. At least on Win98SE with Mozilla 1.0.

  202. What's wrong with the UI? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Mozilla UI is pretty much the "standard browser UI". What's wrong with it?

  203. UNCOs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Mozilla has several (around 3500) unconfirmed bugs, most of them seam to be gone since a long time or dups, but we need some help to get through them - just ask on irc.mozilla.org #kill-unco and read there: http://sucs.org/~sits/mozilla/unco/

    1. Re:UNCOs by segmentation+fault · · Score: 1

      It might be just me, but in my world 3500 bugs disquafilies software from using the 1.0 version number...

      --
      -segfault
    2. Re:UNCOs by asa · · Score: 2

      3500 unconfrimed bugzilla reports is not the same as 3500 bugs. Think of an unconfirmed bugzilla report as nearly equivalent to a slashdot reader commenting about something he doesn't like in Mozilla or some feature he want's implemented in Mozilla. Until the report has been 'confirmed' then it is not considered a bug in Mozilla. The top of this thread was encouraging people to help us sort through those reports and resolve the bad ones and confirm the good ones. More information on this can be found at http://www.mozilla.org/quality/help/

      --Asa

  204. Mozilla is dying! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny
    Mozilla is dying!

    Today in the news Mozilla has been shown to be decreasing by 99% of 0.0001% leading experts in the field to believe that Mozilla is, in fact, dying. Richard Stallman, founder of the upstart Free Software Foundation was quotae as saying, "It's GNU/Mozilla damn you GNU/Mozilla!!!!!" Eric Raymond was reached for comment but he shot both of our journalists dead proclaiming, "Git offa mah propherty you city boy!" Cmdr. Taco and Hemos were unavailable for comment as they are currently in an undisclosed location doing ungodly things to CowboyNeal who by all accounts, has been dressed up in a leather and latex montage and forced to consecrate with small asian monkeys.

    In other news Linus Torvalds, founder of the Loonix software movement was found chastising pigeons in a NYC subway earlier today. He claimed they were in it with the queers. Bill Gates commented, "That's what happnes when you do not charge for your product, dimentia sets in and *WHAM!* you're gone." He then added, "Besides 640k should be enough for anybody."

  205. bsd is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... dying

  206. Bullshit hypocricy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yeah and if somebody makes a little nursery rhyme about how Lunix is dead he gets bitchslapped. Or mozilla, slashdot, bsd, etc etc ad infinitum.

    Mod me down, you're proving my point.

    1. Re:Bullshit hypocricy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Suvh hostility. Why not just go make your own open-forum page and stop readin/bitching about /.?

    2. Re:Bullshit hypocricy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why not just go make your own open-forum page and stop readin/bitching about /.?

      He can't. It's against Microserf corporate policy to do that.

    3. Re:Bullshit hypocricy by FuzzyBad-Mofo · · Score: 1

      Well, they haven't had an update for awhile but I don't think I would call Lunix dead yet!

  207. Re:Mozilla is NOT dying! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    only bsd is... got the new freebsd??? yah... u seen it??? yah.. it blows hardcore

  208. As usual no SPARC/Solaris binaries by jopet · · Score: 1

    Its the thing that pisses me off most that they
    are not capable to get Sun to contribute
    binaries for 2.6 and 8. But maybe that is just
    Sun's way of telling us to finally give up
    Solaris entirely and switch to Linux...

  209. Re:Maybe Bill Gates will have an attack of kindnes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perhaps one of the reasons for such generous donations to charities is that he owns most of the charities he donates to and this is by all means one of the simplest ways how to avoid taxes in USA and the rest of the so-called "civilized" world.

  210. Re:Bugzilla Slashdot Blocker Circumvention Method( by jonasj · · Score: 1

    That's a bug in Galeon: http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=59572. Mozilla used to have this bug as well, but it was fixed in 0.9.9.

    --
    You know, Microsoft's street address also says a lot about their mentality.
  211. Re:Maybe Bill Gates will have an attack of kindnes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Becouse it's better to pay chariaties than taxes!

  212. Bugzilla shows 150,000 bugs... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, who's got egg on their face now? If I recall, there was a virtual panic attack when Microsoft said there were 65,000 or so bugs in Windows 2000 when it was released. Who's got the egg stuffed up their nostrils now? Smell that? That's rotten, nasty, filthy, icky rotten eggs! All over your collective Slashy-dotty faces! See? Closed source IS better!

  213. Great, now get rid of IE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Congrats to the moz team for this, i have followed it along for a loong time and am really pleased with the result.

    Now, how the hell do i kill IE without uninstalling windows?

    Perhaps i will need to wait before i can use moz and see its full effects on my system, without IE running in the background and stealing all my processor time.

  214. Working mirror by friedrichfried · · Score: 1

    I've found a working and up-to-date mirror in korea... ftp://linux.sarang.net/.4/ftp.mozilla.org/pub/ All versions included ! - friedrich - http://theemessiah.free.fr

  215. Super duper secret easter eggs! by TheCorporal · · Score: 2, Informative
    Ahh yes, ok so its not so secret, but still its entertaining. Enter about:mozilla in your address bar and you get a cool page with a cool quote from the cool book of Mozilla. Too much coolness? I thought as much =) Enjoy....

    "And the beast shall be made legion. Its numbers shall be increased a thousand thousand fold. The din of a million keyboards like unto a great storm shall cover the earth, and the followers of Mammon shall tremble."

    from The Book of Mozilla, 3:31
    (Red Letter Edition)
    --
    "On weekends, to let off steam, I participate in full-contact origami."
  216. Re:Maybe Bill Gates will have an attack of kindnes by boinger · · Score: 2

    Are you aware of how much money that shrew of a man has? Percentage-wise, he gives next to nothing.

    --
    Send your friends messages of love at fuck-you.org
  217. Disappointed by jdun · · Score: 0, Troll

    I would expect something more then this. I can't believe they went with the crappy Netscape interface. One of the reasons why everyone moves to IE was because NS had one of the worst user interfaces.

    I did download one of the first version of Mozilla and I did like their interface but the finally version use NS crappy interface. Mozilla won't beat IE with this kind of crappy interface. What a waste of effort.

    1. Re:Disappointed by Down8 · · Score: 1

      You do know they still have the Modern theme right? View > Apply Theme > Modern

      -bZj

      --
      .sig
    2. Re:Disappointed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That simply changes the colors, not the overall interface.

  218. Re:big deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well I'm not sure, but I've heard something about playing with decimal point. So to my knowledge Emacs is actually at 1.21 Am I right?

  219. I'm sorry, you're looking for NETSCAPE! by Omega · · Score: 2
    The splash screen upsets you?

    You're using Mozilla, and that splash screen has been there for the past year.

    If you want the "Professional browser" then you're looking for Netscape 7 (with ad-branding and all).

    The Mozilla project went out of their way to allow you to mod the splash screen (like you did) so let's not go nuts and claim that the browser is unprofessional because the splash screen isn't "pretty enough".

    1. Re:I'm sorry, you're looking for NETSCAPE! by jdun · · Score: 1

      The slash screen is stupid anyway you look at it. Waste of CPU cycle, probably slow it down when lauching it.

  220. Better Icons (for windows users at least) by tswinzig · · Score: 3, Informative

    If you're sick of that curly, blue lizard icon that appears on EVERY window, try installing the icons found here:

    http://www.grayrest.com/moz/resources/icons.shtml

    They're nice looking, and more importantly, I can now differentiate between the browser windows and the mail windows...

    Supposedly these and other icons are available from the following page, but it's really slow right now for me...

    http://plugindoc.mozdev.org/icons.html

    --

    "And like that ... he's gone."
    1. Re:Better Icons (for windows users at least) by David+Gerard · · Score: 1

      DO NOT use the grayrest.com link. Use the plugindoc link. mozdev can take the load, grayrest can't.

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
    2. Re:Better Icons (for windows users at least) by tswinzig · · Score: 2

      One problem with the mozdev.org link is that I get an "invalid install package" (or similar) error when trying to install icons from that page. The greyrest install works fine, though. :-/

      --

      "And like that ... he's gone."
  221. Re:new king (off-topic) by NanoGator · · Score: 2

    Yah I can understand your problems. All I can do is tell you that my entire office uses Win2k, and I'm the guy who has to fix the machines when they break. I personally have 3 machines I use actively to do things like use the web and I don't have the problems you describe.

    I understand I can't change your mind, and that's cool. I thought I'd at least share with you what my experience is so you understand I'm not just throwing around MS marketing lines. :)

    --
    "Derp de derp."
  222. Bill and Melinda Gates foundation by Ashurbanipal · · Score: 1
    The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is actually pretty kind.

    I give credit to Melinda, personally - she's obviously got a fine head on her shoulders.

    Pretty fine shoulders, too, come to think of it.

    1. Re:Bill and Melinda Gates foundation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wasn't it Melinda's ideas to create Microsoft Bob?

  223. Congrats! by sverrehu · · Score: 1

    and THANK YOU!

  224. Thank You from us using OS X by Eraser_ · · Score: 1

    I would like to thank the developers who have made it possible for me to have a responsive, fast, and non-memory hogging webbrowser for both OS X (Especially!) and my other FreeBSD machine.

    IE was so slow and cludgy it took forever to get anything done, and Netscape 6 in all it's glory just used too much CPU and Memory to get anything done. This launches quickly, and does everything i want it to! Great Job :) (and heck, much better than the milestones i tried out a year ago too :)

  225. Did they ever fix... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... the problem on Windows XP where it cannot seem to remember the user's mail profile at startup time? Ya know it gets kinda ridiculous where you have to re-enter all your email settings each and every time you start up the mail client. They're gonna need the talkback for this.

  226. Working mirror by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  227. Wheres the Spell Checker in Moz Email? by BrookHarty · · Score: 2

    Not to knock the damn hard work, but wheres the spell checker?

    I switched to Mozilla Email, and theres no spell checker. Wasnt is suppose to be released in 1.0? Humm, maybe I can steal netscape 7.x spell checker.

    1. Re:Wheres the Spell Checker in Moz Email? by BrookHarty · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Tried to install spellchk.xpi from netscape 7, didnt work.

    2. Re:Wheres the Spell Checker in Moz Email? by blufive · · Score: 1

      Read the FAQ
      Summary:
      They can't use Netscape's spellchecker, for legal reasons. Mozilla's own one is still in development and not ready for prime-time yet.

    3. Re:Wheres the Spell Checker in Moz Email? by BrookHarty · · Score: 2

      Ya, the spell checker has stopped working from 0.9.x on. Be nice when its fixed.

    4. Re:Wheres the Spell Checker in Moz Email? by Joe+Tie. · · Score: 1

      I havn't tried it myself with email, only the html editor, but the spellchecker here might work, depending on what operating system you're on. There's a 1.0/1.0rc3 build near the bottom of the instalation page.

      --
      Everything will be taken away from you.
    5. Re:Wheres the Spell Checker in Moz Email? by smalltalker · · Score: 1

      Use the Spelling checker from MozDev. Make sure you install the one at the bottom of the page that says it is for RC3

      --
      Steve Cline http://www.clines.org, http://www.objectbap.com
  228. Re: ftp mirror... by iceT · · Score: 2

    If they didn't want to be a mirror, why is there site on the Mozilla mirrors site?

    I have a copy at my company as well but I won't publish it to the world, because I'M NOT A MIRROR.

    --
    -- You can't idiot-proof anything, because they're always coming out with better idiots.
  229. Not switching to it until bug #58554 is fixed! by pomakis · · Score: 1, Troll

    I just wish that bug #58554 would be fixed so that I can have use xv as my helper aplication for images. Why this is listed as an RFE and not a bug is beyond me. If you configure Mozilla to use "xv" as the helper application for MIME type "image/gif" and it continues to render the GIF inside the browser window, it's clearly a bug, and an annoying one at that! It's the only thing keeping me from switching from Netscape 4.x to Mozilla.

  230. Still need a new icon :-) by MrZeebo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I still wish that the Windows build had the "red dinosaur head" icon rather than the "blue gekko-creature" icon -- IIRC, the Linux builds have the red icon, why not the Windows builds?

    Not that this is a huge deal -- I've used Moz since 0.7 and now it is my default browser on both Linux and Windows XP... but still, I think the dinosaur head icon would look better -- especially when it's enlarged and put at the top of the start menu as your default web browser in XP (which should be its placement on every Windows computer some day ;-) ).

    Or at least the ability to choose between the two.

    1. Re:Still need a new icon :-) by sconest · · Score: 2

      You could give these a try.

      --
      Guvf vf abg n EBG zrffntr
  231. GO MOZILLA! I believe. . . by TheUndertaker · · Score: 1

    To the mozilla team!

    Thank you for the BEST DAMN WORK, Mozilla! I believed in the project back 98 and I believe in the project now. . .

    Thank you for everything!

  232. Re:Maybe Bill Gates will have an attack of kindnes by Malcontent · · Score: 2

    I am not impressed. I give a greater percentage of my salary to charity and I bet most people do too. Bill G handing out a million is like me gving a homeless guy a buck.

    --

    War is necrophilia.

  233. please be responsible by qurk · · Score: 1

    I would like to extend my thanks and congratulations to the mozilla team for bringing the best browser ever yet to the world :) Also, please don't drink and drive. Ask a sober friend for a drive, sleep on your friend's sofa, call a taxi, but let's keep this a very happy day :)

  234. Gates foundation is less than 1% of Bill's cash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please... don't get taken in by the insanity here. Bullshit he is generous.

  235. RedHat RPMs still without TrueType fonts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    The official Mozilla RPMs for RedHat 7.2 are still built without TrueType font support. If you care for decent fonts on your screen, here is a build with freetype2 enabled:
    http://nil.ics.uci.edu/~gal/download/mozilla-1.0.0 -freetype2

    1. Re:RedHat RPMs still without TrueType fonts by robkore · · Score: 1

      The official Mozilla RPMs for RedHat 7.2 are still built without TrueType font support.

      Does anyone know the reasoning behind this?

  236. Congtratulations! by theolein · · Score: 2

    Thanks for all the hard work!

  237. Re:WARNING - do not upgrade to Mozilla from Netsca by psaltes · · Score: 3, Informative

    Actually, what it really means (though this is not explicit in the release notes) is that you can't share a profile between mozilla 1.0 and existing versions of netscape. I read elsewhere (maybe in the FAQ?) that this will be doable in future netscape builds (i.e. ones based on moz1.0). Also, from the bug report, which you rather unfairly neglected to quote:

    The 1.0 relnote for this bug is good but not enough. The solution should be that
    Netscape creates its own registry.dat and doesn't touch Mozilla's. That should
    be done for the next major Netscape release, or there will be a lot of users
    with profile corruption caused by sharing profiles between Netscape and Mozilla.
    That could lead to user frustration.

    It sounds like it is actually a problem with current netscape builds.

  238. Re: ftp mirror... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    for gods sake man, IANAMD but if I was I'd be drinking champagne tonight instead of working on Mozilla...

  239. and I just shat my pants by global_diffusion · · Score: 2

    ...time to clean up ;)

  240. Re:Maybe Bill Gates will have an attack of kindnes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Um, are you fucking kidding? The Gates foundation has an endowment of over 23 BILLION DOLLARS and has already given out over 5 BILLION DOLLARS in grants. Get a clue.

  241. Re: ftp mirror... by Osty · · Score: 1

    for gods sake man, IANAMD but if I was I'd be drinking champagne tonight instead of working on Mozilla...

    Champagne bought with what money from their free, open source browser?

  242. Re:Maybe Bill Gates will have an attack of kindnes by hawkestein · · Score: 2, Troll
    Are you aware of how much money that shrew of a man has? Percentage-wise, he gives next to nothing.

    Aw, c'mon. How do you know how much he gives? Cursory google search turned up that Bill Gates is the greatest philanthropist in American history. At the very least,in 1999, he made what is believed to be the largest ever individual donation to charity..

    I don't like his business practices, but as a philanthropist I don't think he deserves the scorn. (And, quite frankly, I don't care what his motivations for giving are either. The world would be better off if people always did the right thing for the wrong reasons, rather than the other way around.)

    --
    -- Will quantum computers run imaginary-time operating systems?
  243. Re:But it still has the configurable mozilla UI. by tjwhaynes · · Score: 2

    Can't anything be done to fix it?

    Well for a start, this is a browser where themability is built into the lowest to the highest levels. If you fancy fixing something in the XUL descriptions to make something behaviour in a more intuitive fashion for you, it can be done. There are different graphics available if you don't like the modern theme, and now the APIs are frozen, you can expect there to be more on the way.

    Or maybe you mean like Galeon for those with Gnome. Or maybe Skipstone which is just GTK+ based? Or K-meleon if you are on Windows? There are projects galore out there playing with the Moz codebase.

    You can plug almost any GUI you want on the front of the Gecko rendering engine. A lot of the projects listed above have been done to improve the connectivity between the Gecko engine and other related parts of the UI environment - imagine Bonobo-integration of the Gecko engine to provide a central, capable HTML engine for all GNOME components..

    So if you don't like the UI, you can fix it at many levels. For me, it works fine.

    Cheers,

    Toby Haynes

    --
    Anything I post is strictly my own thoughts and doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the opinions of IBM.
  244. Looks fine in IE6 by Microlith · · Score: 1

    Not that I terribly care to use IE6.

    Just to clarify though, PNG alpha channels are still fucked and require a work around for IE6 to work properly.

    1. Re:Looks fine in IE6 by David+Gerard · · Score: 1
      "Just to clarify though, PNG alpha channels are still fucked and require a work around for IE6 to work properly."

      And the gamma is wrong - detect-problems.js will show you the ridiculous effort we had to go to to get a page written to standards to work AT ALL tolerably in IE5 and IE6. As for IE4 ... forget it.

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
  245. AOL client by MenTaLguY · · Score: 2

    Apparently you've never used AOL. The normal means for web browsing (and this is all most AOL users use) is the mshtml control (IE) embedded in the AOL client window.

    The change in AOL 7 will be that Gecko (Mozilla) is embedded there rather than IE.

    No clicking on 'e' or (admittedly) stupid-looking lizards involved.

    Now, it IS true that AOL users aren't all going to magically upgrade to AOL 7 once it comes out.

    --

    DNA just wants to be free...
    1. Re:AOL client by nuggetman · · Score: 1

      Apparently you've never used AOL. The normal means for web browsing (and this is all most AOL users use) is the mshtml control (IE) embedded in the AOL client window.

      The change in AOL 7 will be that Gecko (Mozilla) is embedded there rather than IE.


      AOL 7 has been out since October and has IE built in still, but I believe the beta version of AOL 7 with Gecko is available at KW: BETA. The major release with Gecko will be 8.0 this fall.

      --
      ...and that's all there is to it.
    2. Re:AOL client by vsprintf · · Score: 1

      You really ruined my day, man. After reading the parent post and having just received an AOL 7.0 CD in the mail, I was going to claim first postal.

      So how do you install this thing anyway? I can't seem to find any rpms or source files...

  246. Congrats by Visceral+Monkey · · Score: 1

    Congrats to the Moz team, it looks great!

    --
    *Fortitudo, aequitas, fidelitas.*
  247. Still some quirks by kirkjobsluder · · Score: 2, Insightful

    From what I've seen of Mozilla, I really like it. However there are some quirky things with assessability through a speech recognition program that makes it a bit more difficult to use. One of the big issues is that bookmarks are not recognized by the speech recognition interface. Another nice feature that would really hope the assessability is the feature of being able to browse a link by saying the link name.

    One of the things that I would like to say about the access Mozilla project is that they seem to have a clue that assessability is important. The open office group downgraded the complaint that even basic menu functionality is not visible to speech recognition software from a bug to a feature request. However until Mozilla works just as well with existing speech recognition software as Internet Explorer interacts with existing speech recognition software I'm not going to use Mozilla on a regular basis.

    1. Re:Still some quirks by qurk · · Score: 1
      I'll bite.

      basically your not upgrading are you. You're not paying for the next software. what guarantees do you have that your need will be in their next software. If you didn't have good old ie to fall back on you could still code something for mozilla for the good of all humankind. for free.

    2. Re:Still some quirks by David+Gerard · · Score: 1

      Accessibility is proving to be a PITA for many reasons. mozilla.org does actually care a lot about it. See the accessibility newsgroup for discussions of the problems so far.

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
    3. Re:Still some quirks by kirkjobsluder · · Score: 1
      basically your not upgrading are you. You're not paying for the next software. what guarantees do you have that your need will be in their next software. If you didn't have good old ie to fall back on you could still code something for mozilla for the good of all humankind. for free.

      I can't respond to your questions because they are incomprehensible. What does "their next software" refer to? Microsoft or Mozilla?

      There are some good reasons to think that Microsoft will continue to include acessibility through MSAA (Microsoft Active Acessability) in future versions of Internet Explorer. One of those reasons is that Visual Studio 6 and Visual Studio .NET build MSAA-active interfaces by default with minimal effort by the application programmer (although some effort is required if you want to go beyond default behavior.) The second reason is legal compliance with ADA.

      There is certainly some good indications that Mozilla, Sun and IBM are working on a competing framework but there is the other problem. At the moment, acessability development is mired in a standards war between Microsoft (MSAA) and Mozilla, Sun, Gnome and IBM working on derivatives of a Java acessability framework. Hopefully out of this will come a good framework but at the moment, I don't have the option of waiting for the proposals to become reality. Meanwhile this is a serious legal threat in regards to the adoption of most existing open-source software which is inacessable due to an absence of applications that speak both MSAA and Java Acessability.

      Certainly I could code my own but there are a few problems with that. Coding a solution that works with one program isn't going to help me work with another program or even future versions of the same program. At this time, I don't wish to learn C++ or Mozilla internals in order to create a solution. Ultimately the problem needs to be addressed on the graphical toolkit level so that any object created with a graphical toolkit can be described or activated by acessable software.

      In addition you raise an interesting Catch 22 which demonstrates how open-source ideology favors the developer rather than the end-user. You can't even start to roll your own if you can't use the system, but you can't use the system until you roll your own custom interfaces. I really hope that IBM, Mozilla, Gnome and Sun manage to produce something useful but there is no point in me adopting software that I can't fully use yet or is unecessarily more difficult to use.

  248. Where'd SVG go? by clubin · · Score: 1

    No SVG build? No more nightly builds hosted on ftp.mozilla.org? What's an SVG fiend to do?

    C'mon, Mozilla. What's up?

  249. Soon it will become the standard in governments by willpost · · Score: 1

    and i'm sure Microsoft will hire another analyst group to dig up dirt on it

  250. Re:OPEN SOURCE NEEDS MORE BABES... by lib · · Score: 0

    I dunno where you go to school but all the college girls around here look alot oder than that one. try this or this or this etc.. etc..

  251. Re:Beonex Communicator 0.8-stable based on Mozilla by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What features does it have besides these

    "No revealing "Referrer"
    Cookies are deleted at shutdown
    Certain invasive JavaScript commands disabled "

    I'm not trying to be a pain, but for the end user, why should they use Beonex over Mozilla. Those few features don't real seem to offer anything except for the ultra paranoid.

  252. congrtas! by houseofmore · · Score: 0

    Good on ya Mozilla. Job well done!

  253. Mozilla/5.0 == Mozilla/1.0 ?!? by mortenf · · Score: 1

    So, does that mean that Mozilla 1.0 will identify itself as "Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; Mozilla/1.0)"?

    That's completely straightforward and reasonable, and will never confuse anyone...

    --
    Don't make fun of my speling, english is my 2nd language...
    1. Re:Mozilla/5.0 == Mozilla/1.0 ?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gecko/20020530

  254. So how do you define "web page"? by yerricde · · Score: 2

    what mathers in the end is

    What does this have to do with Eminem (aka Marshall Mathers)? ... Oh, you mean s/mathers/matters/.

    does this web page load.

    First, before you can have a web page load, you have to have a web page to begin with. If you put some content up on AOL's proprietary system, would it be a "web page"? Does Flash served up through HTTP count as a "web page"? And if you made some content available through HTTP in Microsoft's proprietary mark-up language (which happens to look similar to HTML), would it also count as a "web page"?

    There has to be some definition of a "web page". You may choose "web page" as it's defined by the documentation on MSDN, with VBScript, ActiveX, and the like. I'd rather define "web page" using the W3C specification of HTML and related technologies (CSS, ECMAScript, DOM, PNG, etc).

    now that would be a good way for all of you whiners saying that IE is bugriden to prove to the world that you are better than Microsoft and implement their features correctly

    And end up in court for violating patents owned by Microsoft Corporation. Microsoft's latest patent licenses specifically exclude any software licensed under the GNU GPL (part of the tri-license covering most of Mozilla).

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
  255. Oh my god. by flacco · · Score: 1


    I just came in my pants.

    --
    pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
    1. Re:Oh my god. by edinho · · Score: 1

      Depends on your gender, it might not be a big deal at all...

      8^)

      Cheers,
      e.

  256. Re:Maybe Bill Gates will have an attack of kindnes by Tempura_Roll · · Score: 1

    Quoting Albert Einstein:
    "I am absolutely convinced that no wealth in the world can help humanity forward, even in the hands of the most devoted worker in this cause. The example of great and pure characters is the only thing that can produce fine ideas and noble deeds. Money only appeals to selfishness and always tempts its owners irresistibly to abuse it. Can anyone imagine Moses, Jesus, or Gandhi armed with the money-bags of Carnegie?"

  257. Re:Maybe Bill Gates will have an attack of kindnes by GSloop · · Score: 3, Interesting

    From your link...


    While Gates has surpassed the Carnegies, Rockefellers and Fords in total dollars given to charity, philanthropic experts say comparisons to givers from the Gilded Age may be unfair.

    "Yes, it's more money than anyone has ever put into a foundation," Englehardt said. "Is it a larger percentage of his worth? Probably not." One of the things that makes comparisons to the Carnegies and Rockefellers difficult, explained Englehardt, is that they gave before the income tax, and thus tax deductions, was created.

    "In real dollars, it's more than they gave. Relative to what it can do, it's probably smaller than what the Carnegies' or Rockefellers' money could do."

    Ellen Lagamenn, a New York University history professor and expert on philanthropy, said comparisons between Gates and the late greats are premature.

    "I don't think these comparisons at the moment are very accurate or apt because Bill Gates is at the beginning of his philanthropic life," she said. "We have a whole record for Carnegie and Rockefeller. I think the issue is what Bill Gates is doing and how sensibly he is doing it. It seems to me he is heading in the right direction."

    While benefactors such as Carnegie, Mellon and Rockefeller represented the burgeoning wealth arising from oil, steel and railroads, those of the late 20th Century are bearing gifts from the revolutionary age of information technology. And, like Rockefeller, Gates stands accused of being a monopolist.

    Gates' $750 million gift to the Global Fund for Children's Vaccines came less than three weeks after United States District Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson ruled that Microsoft used its monopoly power to thwart competition. The ruling was seen as a threat to Microsoft stock, but share prices rebounded after Jackson appointed a federal judge to mediate between Microsoft and the U.S. Department of Justice prosecutors.



    In a percentage of total wealth, it's not the same.

    Also, many of the "generous" givers - i.e. Standard Oil (Rockafeller) gave very generously to help cover up their image of anti-consumer/anti-competitive greed. So, from that angle, BG fits right in.

    Go do some research - most of these scumbags only give to help "reinvent" their image.

    Gates may give, but look at the actions of the firm he ran. If you think that'll help re-invigorate his image with me, you been smoking somthing...

    So, the origional poster was right! "Bzzzt - you win a years supply of toilet paper..."
    Cheers!

  258. Congratulations team! by The+OPTiCIAN · · Score: 1

    love your work!!

    --


    Believe with me, my saplings.
  259. for the lazy... by Icculus · · Score: 1
    try these

    satanism

    communism

  260. open local files by e**(i+pi)-1 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Great release! I would switch completely
    to mozilla if there were not an annoying issue
    which had been in the bug list for years: in
    linux, mozilla still does not open local
    files like

    mozilla help.html

    (galeon does this correctly). While a little wrapper

    #!/bin/sh
    dir_name=`pwd`;
    absolute_filename="file://$dir_name/$1"
    mozilla $absolute_filename

    can help, I hope this is soon no more necessary.

  261. The best charity would be making a good product. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 2


    If Bill Gates wants to be charitable, why doesn't he fix the bugs in Windows XP, and in Internet Explorer (17 and counting)?

    The bugs and deliberate shortcomings in Windows XP are causing me lots of grief now, so I'm particularly aware of them. (I have to support my customers.) I haven't been able to find anyone associated with Microsoft who seems interested in fixing them.

    Quite likely the bugs are not fixed because some secret agency of the U.S. government like the CIA or the FBI or the NSA wants the bugs. That may be the reason that the government is giving Microsoft such a sweet deal after the company was found guilty of breaking federal law.

    The people who own computers are usually the leaders of any society. The huge number of bugs and deliberate insufficiencies slow us in our work. Making a good product would be the best charity for the whole world.

    Giving free copies of Windows to people who would not otherwise buy them is cheap charity. (It's just one CD, and their group is allowed to make copies. The cost is in supervising the program.) Also, remember that they are expected to pay normally for upgrades.

    Maybe the free software is donated to groups whom the U.S. government wants to watch. It's possible that the U.S. taxpayer supports what the Gates Foundations are doing, not Bill Gates or his father or wife. That is definitely the kind of sneaky behavior in which the U.S. government has engaged in the past. For evidence of this see What should be the response to violence? .

    Anyhow, often rich people give money because they want to feel superior, and like to tinker with other people's lives. Don't look only at how much money is spent; look at the effect of the money. Many times a charitable project is, effectively, merely a method of advancing a rich person's hidden agenda.

    Do you think that, in some other area of his life, Bill Gates is a nice guy? I don't think it ever works that way. I'm sympathetic to the troubles he has had in his life, but not accepting of his abuse.

  262. Re:WARNING - do not upgrade to Mozilla from Netsca by David+Gerard · · Score: 5, Informative
    FAQ section 7 tells you how to work around this.

    NOTE: you can't start the profile manager unless Mozilla is fully shut down.

    --
    http://rocknerd.co.uk
  263. Re:Beonex Communicator 0.8-stable based on Mozilla by David+Gerard · · Score: 1
    "good idea, but can i ask that you allow download of the components separately? e.g. the browser, mail client etc... that would save me downloading a whole 9mb just to check out the browser."

    Dude, you can use the net-installer builds, that's why they're there :-) Install the browser and PSM (so you can get https://), then install the other bits when you want them.

    --
    http://rocknerd.co.uk
  264. Re: ftp mirror... by David+Gerard · · Score: 2, Funny
    "for gods sake man, IANAMD but if I was I'd be drinking champagne tonight instead of working on Mozilla..."

    We are. On #mozilla ;-)

    --
    http://rocknerd.co.uk
  265. Today is a great day... by javacowboy · · Score: 1

    ... not just for Mozilla and its team, but for OpenSource, the internet itself, as well as the spirit of innovation and entrepreneurship.

    This is not just a web browser: it is a platform of its own. When Netscape first came out, Microsoft feared that it would become a platform of its own that would quickly make Windows irrelevant. Mozilla is a proof-of-concept of Microsoft's fear. Its interface is almost identical across operating systems: the browser will look and mostly act the same across Windows, Linux, FreeBSD, Mac, Solaris, etc. This means that a developer can design a web application or site that he can be almost 100% confident will run the same across many different operating systems without having to perform extensive operating-system specific testing. This gives alternative operating systems like Linux a huge advantage, because the developpers of a web application need not explicitly support that operating system.

    Mozilla is, IMO, the best web browser out there, even better than IE. The tabbed interface allows me to browse several pages at once in the same Window, a real time saver both as a surfer and a developer. The automatic fill-in of usernames, passwords and form data is a real time-saver. Also, it looks better than any other browser out there: a real eye-pleaser.

    Another thing that I hope will happen and that probably won't is a renewal of the browser wars. Microsoft has been getting complascent by not making significant updates or changes to IE other than to impair user functionality (no more native plug-ins or Java included). I would really like Microsoft to have to face browser competition again so that the company once again has to stay on its toes. The end users can only benefit from that.

    --
    This space left intentionally blank.
  266. Great work, guys by Eloquence · · Score: 2
    Thanks to all the developers for making it happen, and thanks to AOL for funding an open source effort. Mozilla has been my only browser for the last few months and I'm unlikely to switch again (unless Opera becomes open source *cough*).

    You can find some cool add-ons for Mozilla at Mozdev. Among these are: Annozilla, a sidebar tool for annotating websites; Forumzilla, a tool for reading web discussion forums usenet-style; Jabberzilla, a Jabber-client; MozBlog for weblog authors; OptiMoz for mouse gestures, and many many others. Not all of these work with 1.0 yet, though.

  267. Mozilla Mail by Operandi · · Score: 1

    How powerful is Mozilla mail on windows? Can it handle 1-2k emails in each folder (inbox, etc) without choking?

    1. Re:Mozilla Mail by asa · · Score: 3, Informative

      I run mozilla mail with about 15 folders, only 2 or 3 of which ever have fewer than about 10,000 mails each. I get between 300 and 1000 messages a day and they get filtered to my different folders. Mozilla mail has no problems with my volume.

      --Asa

  268. Tabbed browsing by Operandi · · Score: 1

    Sometimes when I click a link, it open a new browser window. I hate this. Is there any way to make it open a new tab instead of a new window?

    1. Re:Tabbed browsing by SouthSideMike · · Score: 1

      edit your preferences under the advanced section there's a windows and scripts section. and you can just right click on the link and select open in new tab

  269. It can't be by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    After reading slashdot headlines about version 0.99rc1, 0.99rc2, 0.99rc3, 0.99.1b, 0.99.2brc1, 0.99.3brc1, 1.0rc1, 1.0rc2, 1.0rc3 and now 1.0 ... It can't be. It just can't be.

  270. media player? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is there a way to get Windows Media Player to work in Mozilla? For example, C|Net Radio?

  271. it's not cold! by UnAmericanPunk · · Score: 1

    The ground doesn't feel cold... the air isn't very cold.... damn, would have thought there'd be more of a temperature change when hell froze over...

    --
    Question everything that you've accepted without thinking.
  272. eat your own dick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you fuckin cunt, get a life, no, die, thats better.

  273. Re:Beonex Communicator 0.8-stable based on Mozilla by Alan · · Score: 2

    They also have a "simple html" view for mail, which sanitizes incoming html to simple html or plaintext. A cool feature, but to be honest, the rest of the browser looks exactly like mozilla with the modern skin and "beonex communicator" in the titlebar.

  274. Re:OPEN SOURCE NEEDS MORE BABES by colmore · · Score: 1, Redundant

    Hot hicks do have unusual curves!

    --
    In Capitalist America, bank robs you!
  275. about:mozilla by Monkey+Puncher · · Score: 1

    And the beast shall be made legion. Its numbers shall be increased a thousand thousand fold. The din of a million keyboards like unto a great storm shall cover the earth, and the followers of Mammon shall tremble. from The Book of Mozilla, 3:31 (Red Letter Edition)

    --
    FREAK, Beating the SHIT out of defenseless Primates is MY hobby...GET YOUR OWN.
  276. port blocking bug 92769 by bzzt · · Score: 1

    have they fixed this one?
    bugzilla 92769

    oh who cares. i gave up on moz a long time ago. i really like opera, but more and more i'm just using IE. right now i'm using IE on osX and it's pretty nice.

    if they've fixed this bug i might try it.

  277. Build ID:2002060308 by rapidweather · · Score: 1

    I have this one (linux) from 6-03-02 nightly build. I'm sure it'll do for a while. Did have a bug however on one of the nightly builds after rc3 that caused a bunch of ? marks to appear in my list of email boxes (the left hand pane). These are testing builds, and errors are expected. Overall I find the Windows version of Mozilla to be the better of the two vs linux version. I'm thinking that they call them the same but they are quite different. As far as Netscape 7.0 goes, I find the linux version to have a strange bug where you can only open it once. If you decide to close NS 7pr1, and then later want to reopen it, nothing happens. (kind of like when the Boss promises you a raise) This bug is not present in the Windows version of NS7pr1. Overall I like Mozilla better than NS 7, it seems to be very well done, and has no serious bugs in either Windows or Linux.

  278. The TRUE philanthropists are the Mozilla people. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 3, Insightful


    One last note. Moderators may not reply to stories they moderate, so they often only moderate stories in which they have little interest. Because of that, moderators often don't follow the entire discussion threads closely.

    Therefore, it is probably necessary to explain that this discussion of Bill Gate's charity is VERY much on topic.

    The true philanthropists are those who contributed to Mozilla, and those who contribute to other open source projects.

    Someone who annoys the whole world with buggy software, so that he can make money, is not a true philanthropist. It matters little if he gives a small part of that money to a worthy cause.

  279. Finally by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Finally its here :)

    anyway who still wants to use m$ ie,

    and for ppl that still use ie,
    hope you know about the hidden folders
    m$ lets ie make.
    thinking about content.ie5
    ~\Temporary Internet Files\Content.IE5

    read more about it here

    http://netsecurity.about.com/library/weekly/aa02 04 02a.htm
    http://www.fuckmicrosoft.com/content/ms-h idden-fil es.shtml

  280. Activity of a bored, rich housewife? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    While any positive contribution is good, maybe this is just the activity of a bored, rich housewife.

  281. Re:Modded up if bashing IE, down if bashing Linux by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 1

    > Do you even know what Mozilla is?

    as Spock once said : "...it is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smells bad."

  282. What you talking bout Willis by uberstool · · Score: 1

    It's nice to see

    about:mozilla

    is still there :)

  283. Your box and OS suck. FUCK OFF. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    thank you.

  284. Re:OPEN SOURCE NEEDS MORE BABES by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sure, I'd even sell myself to the dark $ide for this cutie.

  285. Unimpressed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't see much difference from NN4.x It's not any great speed improvement. I'm actually finding it to be slower than IE in most cases. It's clunky looking and feeling, and it takes forever to load images. On the whole, I'm disappointed and unimpressed.

  286. hoowee=hahtama by DanThe1Man · · Score: 2

    It is strange that booth hoowee and bahtama use the same rarely used Simpson's reference: "Comic Book Guy: "There is no Groening in my store". It is used by hoowee in his sig, and bahtama in this comment. Kind of makes you wonder why this guy likes to have conversation with himself.

    1. Re:hoowee=hahtama by bahtama · · Score: 2

      Hehehe yeah, two people referencing the Simpsons on slashdot! What are the odds! :) Next, more than one person will says Microsoft sucks! I think you have been wearing your aluminum hat a little too much, your conspiracy theories are getting the best of you. Or maybe this is some of your "tech" humor that I just don't get. ;)

      --

      =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
      Oh bother.

    2. Re:hoowee=hahtama by DanThe1Man · · Score: 2

      um, that comment I made was under hoowee. Unless you have acess to thats account's user profile, you are coming back to this thread every hour to see what I wrote. If that is the case, I'm glad I'm not the only one without a life.

      James Herriot and the Care Bares suck.

    3. Re:hoowee=hahtama by DanThe1Man · · Score: 2

      errr, I mean the stupid Gummi Bears.

    4. Re:hoowee=hahtama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dan dan, I hate to break it to you but be he one person or be he two, he's right. And hell even if you think I'm the same person (which I'm not, but my saying that likely won't convince you), it doesn't really matter. The number of people insulting you isn't the difference: you responded to his very much legitimate point with what is called an "ad hominem" attack. Look it up with google or something if you have to.

      You're not an awful person or anything, but face it that comment you made up there (the parent to this whole thread) is really quite dumb in a very ironic and hilarious way. So be it, we all make dumb stupid mistakes every once in awhile. And if you can't handle a few anonymous hucksters laughing at you via /. for what is in actuality a pretty funny thing (even if it is a bit mean), then maybe you should get out now while you still can.

  287. Still slow as molasses and... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's still SLOW to load/run as molasses and doesnt support simple style tags.

    I'll stick to IE when I'm in Windows

  288. Re:Great, now get rid of IE - (Here's how.) by JunglPunK · · Score: 1

    A great free tool for uninstalling IE (3-6) from Windows (95, 98, 98SE, ME, & 2000 SR1) is IEradicator which can be found at:

    "http://www.litepc.com/ieradicator.html"

    It's a nice tool to have in the troubleshooting bag, especially in the IS dept. of a university where all of the students have laptops. Our helpdesk people are extremely happy with it.

    It doesn't work on Windows 2000 SR2 or XP because of System File Protection, but you really can't beat it for the price! (unless you install Linux, which has no nasty IE in the first place)

    Congratulations and thanks to Mozilla for the great browser!!

    -

    --
    - Sprechen Sie mit der Hand, weil die Ohren nicht hören.
  289. Damn... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why did this have to happen the very day I install Mozilla 1.0 RC3...??? grrrr...

  290. True, IMAP Support sucks.... by germanbirdman · · Score: 1

    So a few of us have got together to try and make it not suck in an unofficial project.

    We have all just started, all new to the code, but if you'd like to help, drop by at www DOT fastcheck DOT org. Not a real URL here to not slashdot the server.
    There is nothing to download, it just contains a forum.

  291. pretty good by Mourice · · Score: 1

    Pretty Nice, but the address bar bug is still there from RC2. It doesn't always update to the page it's actually at.

    --

    No excellent soul is exempt from a mixture of madness. --Aristotle
  292. Can someone please explain to me.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...why slashdot's home page doesn't render properly with Mozilla 1.0 on XP?

    There are clear rendering errors using a generic XP install and "Microsoft certified" ATI graphics driver. If I had to guess, I'd say that it's a bounding box problem, as some of the title line graphics are clipped one pixel too high.

    For the record, each of Opera, Navigator and IE appear to render the page correctly on the same machine in the same configuration.

    So does this mean
    (a) that slashdot's home page isn't standards compliant; or
    (b) Mozilla doesn't work properly in this configuration?

    Not to rain on everyone's parade, but this does seem like pretty fundamental stuff...

    1. Re:Can someone please explain to me.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mozilla has never rendered a web page perfectly in it's life and it's not magicly going to start just because they labeled it 1.0. :)

  293. Re:OPEN SOURCE NEEDS MORE BABES by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, uh, how about Mozilla 1.0? :)

  294. Re:OPEN SOURCE NEEDS MORE BABES by Ceren · · Score: 3, Interesting


    Who is the user at madchat who is hosting those pictures? I can't find contact info.

    And you want hot chicks? Hand hot chicks a copy of the Unix Administration Handbook, and make yourself avaliable to answer questions. It worked on me.

    - Ceren E.,
    that daemonette, who just wants to see the photographer's credits BACK on those pictures.

  295. Mozilla on OpenBSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Has anyone successfully run Mozilla on OpenBSD?

    1. Re:Mozilla on OpenBSD by SteelX · · Score: 2

      No, the Mozilla port on OpenBSD is still broken at the moment. It has been like that for a pretty long time.

  296. Re: ftp mirror... by oasisbob · · Score: 1
    I believe the post was referring to flying pigs... Not an actual FTP site.

    It's funny. Laugh.

  297. Begun, This Browser War Has. by Dan+Crash · · Score: 2

    A few years ago, I remember posting something on Slashdot about how Mozilla was too little, *way* too late. Netscape was dead, and worse than that, it was kludgy and buggy. IE was, in spite of its faults, the most standards compliant browser out there, and it was hella fast, too.

    I really thought Mozilla was doomed. And all those notices on mozilla.org! "Download at your own risk! This software is buggy! It'll probably make your 'puter explode!" It seemed like they didn't even want to succeed.

    I've been keeping track of Mozilla since then though, and downloading new versions every so often. Today, I just wanted to take the opportunity to thank the Mozilla team, congratulate them, and apologize to them. I thought you couldn't do it. But you did do it. And you did it well. You've made me a stronger believer in open source than I was before, and you've made a kickass browser, too.

    Let the browser wars begin again!

    --
    He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.
    1. Re:Begun, This Browser War Has. by ealar+dlanvuli · · Score: 1

      I also am impressed, the progress you guys made is astounding

      --
      I live in a giant bucket.
  298. Re:Great, now get rid of IE - (Here's how.) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Except that about 50% of the software you install after that will reinstall it! It's a system component that is required by a HUGE software base. But then I realised long ago that /. users don;t actually do *anything* with their computers but surf, e-mail and chat. So maybe it won't be a problem for you.

  299. it sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    jews could make better browser

  300. Re:OPEN SOURCE NEEDS MORE BABES... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey, if she's old enough to pee, she old enough for me.

    If she's old enough to go to the store, she's old enough to buy the bread.

  301. Re:OPEN SOURCE NEEDS MORE BABES by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unless you consider DC not part of US...

  302. Tabs...? by gusnz · · Score: 2
    According to the release notes, there's one major bug that'll stop me from using tabs. Quoth the page:
    While using tabbed browser, visiting a page which calls the window.close() method of JavaScript, the entire window will close, as opposed to the tab which contained the code.

    Which affects quite a lot of sites -- many web services open and close status windows automatically.

    The BugZilla article at http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103452 (cut-n-paste, BugZilla doesn't like /. links) also has a few interesting comments at the bottom, it's fixed and targeted at 1.01 apparently, along with a big DHTML performance fix.

    Also, the forthcoming XP service pack 1 will only allow you to remove the icons for browsers, a Reuters article here notes:

    A new button on the Windows start menu, titled "set program access and defaults," allows users to choose between four default options: computer manufacturer choice; Microsoft only software; non-Microsoft software; and customized settings, which is the default choice.

    So basically, it's nothing new for those of us familiar with deleting shortcuts and running the Mozilla installer.

    Anyway, congrats to the Mozilla hackers on getting this far! I can't wait for the next few releases. Another bonus -- now the APIs are frozen, it should make projects like K-Meleon (a light MFC UI for the Moz engine for Win32) a lot easier.
    1. Re:Tabs...? by SirSlud · · Score: 2

      Wow, that is a pretty bad bug. Tho design trends tend to be trends inside their industry/culture/community .. I'm not aware of too many sites that window.close() a window that wouldn't be the result of a popup (not advertising popup neccessarily, but things like previews, images, etc.)

      Can you provide me with some examples of sites that window.close?

      Removing the icons is piddly .. its getting _all_ the filetypes for web content that invokes IE that has eluded my lazy ass (I'm a lazy hacker.) Is there not a simple way (or utility) that ensures you cannot launch IE outside of actually launching the exe or a shortcut pointing to it?

      Amen about the congrats. To me, Mozilla is an absolutely HUGE win for proving that open source non commercial groups can develop solid *clientside* software. Software written by individuals are a dime a dozen, but really good client side collaberative OS software that runs on Win32 is pretty are, from my visibility.

      Finally, what are you using to indent your reply-quotes? I do the >[i]quote[/i] thing (with the gt and lt symbols of course), but I like your method better. Easier to read.

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    2. Re:Tabs...? by asa · · Score: 2

      So get the latest 1.1alpha build (today's nightly trunk build) where this is fixed. If you're willing to test less that 1.0 stability builds you get the latest bug fixes and features.

      --Asa

    3. Re:Tabs...? by gusnz · · Score: 2

      I was thinking of a site I use, SmoothFTP which is an HTTP to FTP portal for those of us stuck behind squid proxies and firewalls. It opens up "uploading, please wait..." windows and closes them on completion. A reasonably obvious bug like that will probably make me wait for the v1.01 final release (not trying nightlies really, I use Moz for testing at the moment).

      I run nine different browsers (NS4.0, 4.76, Moz 0.90 and 0.97, IE4, 5, 6, Opera 5 and 6, all under Win98) at home and file associations aren't that bad. Once you tell all your browsers not to keep re-associating on startup, you can basically associate .HTM and .HTML with one and let it rest -- others like .GIF and .JPG I leave with image editors, and forget about .MTHML and similar.

      I forgot to mention one of the best things about Moz is that it's similar cross-platform -- design once, run anywhere. IE can claim not such honour, as anyone who has attempted to get complicated JavaScript/DHTML running on IE/Mac will attest ;).

      Indenting? I use [BLOCKQUOTE][I]text text text text[/I][/BLOCKQUOTE] and it seems to come out alright.

  303. Whoopty Shit - Java/Flash/Speed/Rendering by scosol · · Score: 1

    I've been using Mozilla on and off for a *long* time- Ive stuck with it exclusively since RC1- I wouldn't say the fact that they're calling this "1.0" is anything signifigant. (side note, can *anyone* find the "what's new" from RC3 to 1.0? I sure as hell can't... Anyway- there's still a long way to go- It's still slow in general (anxious to try out Beonex at home). The Flash and Java performane is *horrendous*- And it doesn't render many sites "correctly"- Yes- I put "correctly" in quotes because I'm fully aware that the offending sites probably aren't rendering correctly because they're not entirely standards-compliant... But who cares? Do "standards" matter when you're on a crashing plane? Hell no- you use what you have around you and make the best of it. Making Mozilla "standards compliant" at the expense of ill rendering only hurts it. Hey guess what- Forget about the "standards", IE by virtue of market share has *become* THE standard. Mozilla should render to that, not some worthess pieces of paper... Oh- and if you'd like a lovely reference site for Mozilla's deficiencies- hit up my favorite site in Mozilla: http://www.consumptionjunction.com (Make sure you have the flash plugin) a) notice it doesn't render correctly at all b) notice the animated ad on the left (the flash one) So when I watch the movies there, I go to the "movies" tab and then open each movie in a new tab (in the background) and then go through each tab and download the movie, then close the tab. Do this and watch your CPU bog heavily as each tab has that embedded flash ad in it, churning away whether you can actually see it or not. Then do the same thing in IE...

    --
    I browse at +5 Flamebait- moderation for all or moderation for none.
  304. What are you on, tin cans? by rick-o · · Score: 1

    If 200K is so painful to download, what do you want a web browser for anyway?

  305. Why can't they get the simple stuff right? by catbutt · · Score: 1

    I mean, I really like mozilla's page rendering and such, it's pretty fast and all that. I really really really want to get away from microsoft. I'm very impressed that they pulled off the hard stuff. But the only reason I stick with IE for most of my browsing is for two really simple things that mozilla refuses to offer as preferences (but IE did right the first time):

    1) "New Navigator Window" as it is is utterly useless. If it did like IE, and opened a new window on the current page with the current history, it would be infinitely more useful than something that just emulates the icon on my desktop (opening a new browser at the default page, with no history). The power in forking the history is immense. Ok maybe an exaggeration but I use it many times a day and curse loudly when it is not there.

    2) "View source" should go to the editor of your choice (notepad is just fine with me).

    The utility of these two things is so obvious I can't believe they don't include them at least as an option. If there is a way to get this preference, I'd like to hear it, but I sure don't see it.

  306. And like they are trying by hayden · · Score: 1

    1.0 has been released. Development now stops for a week while everyone pisses it up and trys out their headache cures. Not that this is a bad thing :)

    --
    Nerd: Derogatory term typically directed at anybody with a lower Slashdot ID than you.
  307. Re:OPEN SOURCE NEEDS MORE BABES... by Chris+Burke · · Score: 2

    Nice try, but I know damn well there are tons of women at Umich look younger than her. Oh, and all those links were broken. But of the actual pictures that exist on that page, only one or two show a woman I'd call obviously older than BSD Babe.

    --

    The enemies of Democracy are
  308. The Story of Mozilla by SteelX · · Score: 2

    This book chapter from O'Reilly's OpenSources book captures the spirit of Mozilla really well:

    Freeing the Source: The Story of Mozilla

  309. Re:OPEN SOURCE NEEDS MORE BABES by WildBill1941 · · Score: 1

    I dug around for contact info at madchat, too, Ceren - couldn't find anything.

    And thanks a lot, Anonymous Coward, for linking directly to those images. Jerk. Totally wiped out my little 768/768 DSL line - NullDevice.Net hadn't had ANY traffic in forever, and now all of a sudden, I'm /.'ed right off the net. So short term, the whole damn http server is shut off so I can enjoy dinner with my wife and kid. And when I do bring the server back up, those pix are going to be blocked. Hope you all got 'em before they disappeared. You'd think people would like to the HTML page, rather than the JPGs directly - I actually spent some time writing the damn article that was wrapped around those pix.

    Well, in all of this, there's a couple of lessons to be learned:
    1) If you are going to post pix of shapely ladies on your site, sooner or later, expect to get hammered. (Those pix have been up for over two years, and never been hit like today. All glory to /.)
    2) If you've taken said action, check the webserver logs before troubleshooting your hardware. I replaced the NIC in the machine, removed a hub, switched ethernet cables, and logged into the DSL router at my ISP (I'm a part-time admin there) before I realized that it wasn't any of those - it was the /. effect...

    And Ceren, sorry for the comments some of those people said above. Very juvenile behavior, you'd think people would know better.

    - WildBill

  310. Now that we're done by Kanasta · · Score: 2

    Can we make they 'greyed out' menu items more 'grey'?

    They look like my eyes r going blurry rather than being disabled items.

  311. mozilla.org know what a calendar is? by chromosundrift · · Score: 1

    Oh I'm sorry, I just had to take the opportunity. Our beloved moz can take a joke eh? Good work on a kick arse application, nay platform.

    Now if all those web developers can get their browser detection scripts right I'll stop seeing "upgrade your old version" messages and hopefullly (fingers crossed) manage to avoid being offered a link to microsoft.com.

  312. Re:Maybe Bill Gates will have an attack of kindnes by qurk · · Score: 1

    Ya. If you make 5-6 bucks an hour and you send 30% to the government you go from not having enough to live on to being fucked beyond belief. if someone who makes 30 million a year loses 66 to the gov. and only gets 10 mil well hell the the more power to them to stick their nose at me. And you know it wouldn't be bad if I could say that 2 bucks an hour which is my fair share could go to say the military or cancer research but no it gets sent to the law enforcement who throw me in jail for smoking marijuana. It's this kind of setup which makes me want to say unspeakable things and the very least of which are FUCK YOU YOU GOAT FUCKING SENATORS REPRESENATIVES AND POLICEMEN.

  313. Re: complexity... by darekana · · Score: 1

    "it shouldn't be as bloated and resource intensive as Photoshop."

    Why not? Its dynamically scaling images, dithering, optimizing palettes, mundging in widgets, throwing on some stylesheets which may or may not cascade with their freaky transparency and glow effects, layers, inline-frames, parsing tons of shit javascript, html, css, handling plugins and still spitting out something viewable in realtime...

    sounds as complicated as photoshop to me.

  314. Re: 1.0 is finally here! by DanThe1Man · · Score: 2

    1.0 is finally here!

    This is higher then the number of working mirrors I found.

  315. Re:MARS NEEDS WOMEN! by boyko · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Offtopic and a bit trollish, but I always liked this movie...

  316. Re:OPEN SOURCE NEEDS MORE BABES... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If she's old enough to crawl, she's in the right position.

  317. cnet review by MatriXOracle · · Score: 4, Funny
    CNet's "review"
    shows the following as a boxscore for mozilla.

    CNET rating: 7
    The good: Fast; stable; free; includes full-featured e-mail client.

    The bad: Incompatible with some sites built for Internet Explorer; chat client doesn't work with the big commercial IM systems, including ICQ, Yahoo IM, AOL IM, and Windows Messenger.

    The bottom line: Until Netscape 7 comes out, Mozilla is the best free alternative to Microsoft IE. And it's faster, to boot.


    Y'know, when the only bad things they can say about your browser is
    1)it is standards-compliant; and
    2)no, IRC does not work with AIM

    then I think you've done a pretty damn good job. Congratulations!

  318. CRC errors in download for win32!!! by eyefish · · Score: 2

    I've been getting CRC errors on both the full install and the net install, both at my work and home PCs (Win2000 and Win98). So, will this be fixed before mortal folks simply give up on the download and keep using IE???

  319. Re:OPEN SOURCE NEEDS MORE BABES by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not that there is anything wrong with that, but ceren is cute as a button.

    She's cute, but she's a little chunky and young looking.

  320. Re:OPEN SOURCE NEEDS MORE BABES by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sorry for calling you a fat chick. Really. How old are you?

  321. QT? by pete-classic · · Score: 2

    Does anyone know if there is a Linux build of 1.0 that uses a contemporary version of QT instead of GTK?

    I need anti-aliasing, damnit!

    -Peter

  322. Custom search engines by rickymoz · · Score: 1

    Mentioned almost nowhere: if you want to add custom search engines to your sidebar, there's the mycroft project. http://mycroft.mozdev.org/ Any contributions welcome!

  323. Re: ftp mirror... by SmittyTheBold · · Score: 2

    No, it wasn't. Read this and notice the nesting.

    --
    ± 29 dB
  324. Cry havoc and let lose the browser wars! (again) by WhiteKnight07 · · Score: 1

    Seriously, when 35,000,000 AOL users switch to Mozilla/Netscape/Gecko/whatever when AOL 8.0 comes out we are going to see a browser war the likes of which the world has never seen. I can hardly wait. It's gonna be awsome.
    /me grins evily
    :)

    --


    We're going to make information free Mr. Anderson, whether you like it, or not.
  325. Is Gecko full7y modularised yet? by rweir · · Score: 1

    IIRC, one of the requirements for the 1.0 release was that the Gecko engine would be in a seperate library. This would mean, for example, that Galeon would now only require installing libgecko (or whatever), rather than a full Moz install. Is this still in the plan, and has 1.0 achieved it?

  326. Apologetics by Animats · · Score: 2
    FAQ section 7 tells you how to work around this.
    • Mr. Prosser said, "You were quite entitled to make any suggestions or protests at the appropriate time, you know."
    • "Appropriate time?" hooted Arthur. "Appropriate time? The first I knew about it was when a workman arrived at my home yesterday. I asked him if he'd come to clean the windows and he said no, he'd come to demolish the house. He didn't tell me straight away of course. Oh no. First he wiped a couple of windows and charged me a fiver. Then he told me."

      "But Mr. Dent, the plans have been available in the local planning office for the last nine months."

      "Oh yes, well, as soon as I heard I went straight round to see them, yesterday afternoon. You hadn't exactly gone out of your way to call attention to them, had you? I mean, like actually telling anybody or anything."

      "But the plans were on display..."

      "On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them."

      "That's the display department."

      "With a flashlight."

      "Ah, well, the lights had probably gone."

      "So had the stairs."

      "But look, you found the notice, didn't you?"

      "Yes," said Arthur, "yes I did. It was on display on the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the Leopard.'"

    (From "Hitchhiker's Guide To the Galaxy")
  327. Mozilla is still Crappy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do any of these bugs sound like bugs that should be in a 1.0 product?


    1. Double right clicking on a page can disable the keyboard. (Bug 70812)
    2. Clicking the middle mouse button in areas without links may lead to alerts popping up. (Bug 96972)
    3. Location bar stops responding to ENTER key (Bug 90337)
    4. Hourglass cursor, progress meter, and throbber do not stop spinning although downloading has been finished. Status bar says "Transferring data from ..." when page is done loading. (Bug 39310)
    5. Bookmarks cannot be rearranged if you have sorted them. To rearrange them, select Unsorted from the View menu, or click the Name column header until the arrow disappears. (Bug 64768)
    6. If you open an email in a separate window, The context-menu option, "Open Link in New Window," will not work. (Bug 133334)
    7. Biff, a feature that automatically checks your server for new mail, works only on the first account and does not work for any other accounts in the same profile. (Bug 85227)
    8. Mail notification sound doesn't play if an alternative sound is chosen. (Bug 64462)
    9. You may not see the message header (From, Subject, Date, To, Cc, and so forth) when you read messages. This problem often occurs when you switch mail folders or newsgroups. To see headers, resize the window or the message content pane. (Bug 39655)
    10. You can't forward a message that has a signature file containing the HTML tag <div class="signature">. (Bug 49484)
    11. The Subscribe dialog box may not work with news NNTP servers that require authentication.
    12. If the user starts Mozilla in offline mode (clicking the work offline checkbox in the profile manager), then tries to reply to a message while in offline mode, or double clicks on a message (which brings it up in a separate window), in some instances the application might crash. (Bug 92368)
    13. File|Open Web Location, selecting to render in Composer does not open document in Composer. (Bug 71426)
    14. Switching between Normal and HTML Source mode inserts break (br) elements. (Bug 46227)
    15. Numerous shortcut keys do not function properly. (Bugs 26264, 48951, 57805, 70630, 58332, 58712, 26269, 53505, 76925, 57700, 67142, 4302, 48375)
    16. Preferences window initial size doesn't always give hints on all options available. Resize the window from its lower right corner to see them all. (Bug 53375)
    17. Some users might not be able to print on Windows 98 or Windows ME with the default spool setting. The workaround is to go into printer properties, choose details tab, choose spool settings, and then choose print directly to printer. (Bug 130083)
    18. Printing web pages may not print out all pages due to table pagination problems. (Bug 87374)
    19. Transparent backgrounds are printed as black. (Bug 137114, 137115)

    There are many more. It needs about 4 more years of work. Go AOL!

  328. moronic moderators... by BrokenHalo · · Score: 1
    How the hell did the parent get modded informative?

    Grrr mumble grumble....

  329. Fast Mirror for Mozilla 1.0 by benners · · Score: 1
    Hi,

    you can download Mozilla 1.0 for

    - Windows
    - Linux
    - FreeBSD
    - BeOS (only 1.0 RC2 at the moment)

    from http://bezip.de

    Ciao,

    Sebastian

  330. MSN communities by rickymoz · · Score: 1

    Wow! Some are really trying hard to get MSN users to switch to Mozilla/Netscape. Found two communities:

    IE to Mozilla
    This place is for helping people migrate from the IE browser to the open source Mozilla browser for a much better surfing experience. The web is easy, you just need the right tools. We show you how.
    http://communities.msn.com/IEtoMozilla/home.htm

    Netscape - Mozilla
    The is a community to talk about Netscape & Mozilla all versions.
    http://communities.msn.com/NetscapeMozilla/home.ht m

    1. Re:MSN communities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HAHA!!! THAT WAS A GOOD ONE!!! Thanks dude, our class had a great laugh!!!

  331. Re:But it still has the configurable mozilla UI. by oever · · Score: 1


    Or maybe you mean like Galeon [sf.net] for those with Gnome. Or maybe Skipstone which is just GTK+ based? Or K-meleon [sourceforge.net] if you are on Windows? There are projects galore out there playing with the Moz codebase.


    Even Mozilla uses GTK+ on linux. This is the compile message I received when trying to do a festive compile of Mozilla:

    checking for GTK - version >= 1.2.0... no
    *** The gtk-config script installed by GTK could not be found.
    *** If GTK was installed in PREFIX, make sure PREFIX/bin is in
    *** your path, or set the GTK_CONFIG environment variable to the
    *** full path to gtk-config.
    *** GTK+ is available from ftp://ftp.gtk.org/pub/gtk
    configure: error: Test for GTK failed.


    And this when using the options ./configure --disable-toolkit-gtk --disable-gtktes. Too bad. I thought the GUI was indepenent of Qt or GTK.

    But don't get me wrong. I'm very happy 1.0 is here. :-)

    Did you notice the fireworks on the start page?
    Just hover over the parties link.

    --
    DNA is the ultimate spaghetti code.
  332. Re: from the it's-only-been-how-many-years dept. by anshil · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Cross platform, thats what mozilla is able to, what IE ca't. You can use Mozilla on windows, unix, linux, and the MAC!.

    Archiving such is not an easy thing to do.

    I'm very happy to have good a decend browser on linux.

    --

    --
    Karma 50, and all I got was this lousy T-Shirt.
  333. Re:Great, now get rid of IE - (Here's how.) by Slashamatic · · Score: 2

    Isn't it possible to install Mozilla so that it can replace IE as an Active-X provider for many programs?

  334. Changing the splash screen in OSX by Builder · · Score: 1

    Anyone know how I go about changing the splash screen in OS X? I can't find the mozilla.bmp file anywhere on my system using find :(

  335. just "Congratuations!" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    "ÂÔÕéÇÂÃÑ"
    ...congratulations in Thai.
    of course, our lizard is internationalized! :)

  336. I can vouch for this ... by Clansman · · Score: 1

    I had cleaned up my pc and removed references to IE and was encouraging my partner to use moz - she is onboard with the free softeare argument too.

    She basically just uses webmail plus a little browsing.

    Then one day recently, a bug or flaw of some kind in an update to the website meant that it wouldn't get past her password entry. Tried IE and it was fine. And, just like that, she has used IE every day since.

    Things just have to work and when they don't then thats your new perception.

    C

  337. Re:OPEN SOURCE NEEDS MORE BABES by donscarletti · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    What I mean is Ceren is obviously dressed up because she enjoys a slightly obscure, open source O.S.The other girl I assume dresses like that to just look like a hoe. Maybe the girl I pointed to is more physically attractive. But no woman, however beautiful could get me a as hard as a unix.

    --
    When Argumentum ad Hominem falls short, try Argumentum ad Matrem
  338. soooooooo kind of them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    hahaha
    they came to India to do all sorts philanthropy ya gave some thing around 50 lacs INR(approx.5 million$) to my home state (karnataka)
    and went back with 500 million$ project for networking our villages..................
    out of it i don't think even little has been done about it...............
    must have gone to a bureaucrat's pockets..............
    ---
    veni vidi veli
    i came, i saw, i looted

  339. Can you say... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    POS?

    Releasing software with KNOWN BUGS, hrmmm
    mozilla sounding more like micr0s0ft...

    1.0 - who cares, it's still a POS

  340. Mozilla 1.0 RPMs with gdkxft patch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For those who want Mozilla with anti-aliased font support.:

    http://www.opiskelijakirjasto.lib.helsinki.fi/jksm lan/mozilla/

  341. Hitler also helped modern medicine a lot.... by croanon · · Score: 0

    ....by experimenting on people. He was a race monopolist though. MS is only IT monopolist. Yet.

    --
    Dear Bill, do you have a .net tatoo on your ass for marketing?
  342. Re:WARNING - do not upgrade to Mozilla from Netsca by tcoady · · Score: 1

    I followed steps in 7.5 but it caused M to freeze before starting. In the end I have decided I have to lose the content of the old profile and I am quite relieved to have done that as it has solved a number of issues like hertz.com giving a blank screen before. Luckily I do not use M for mail yet although I would really love to do that when I figure a way to remove the duplicates from OE that were created during a previous attempt to use M for mail.

  343. Re: from the it's-only-been-how-many-years dept. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In all fairness, it's taken Microsoft from 1995-2002 to produce their high quality Internet Explorer based on NCSA Mosaic's code. That's what, 7.5 years?

  344. Re:OPEN SOURCE NEEDS MORE BABES by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    2) If you've taken said action, check the webserver logs before troubleshooting your hardware. I replaced the NIC in the machine, removed a hub, switched ethernet cables, and logged into the DSL router at my ISP (I'm a part-time admin there) before I realized that it wasn't any of those - it was the /. effect...

    Ummm.. you replaced the NIC in your machine before you did some simple troubleshooting? The first thing you should have started with is check the webserver logs. Then run tcpdump and see what's going on. If nothing, replace the network cable. Then check to see if your DSL modem is synced up correctly. Hell, replacing the NIC card is just about the last thing you would do. I'd replace my sound card before I did that. And you call yourself a unix admin? Fucking luser.

    PS: Yes, if you post a pick of a hot chick in tight fitting outfit eventually someone will post it. Ceren: Don't be suprised if right now there are half a dozen Slashdot geeks masturbating to your images. Don't be ashamed or mad, you are a beautiful lady.

  345. about:mozilla by TJ6581 · · Score: 1

    I amazed that about:mozilla still works. Although it appears that my tags will nolonger blink until the ends of the earth.... :)

    --
    "Freedom of speech has always been the abstract red-headed stepchild of the Constitution"
    -Suck
  346. Open Source Pr0n by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Obviously this is a mission for RMS! Imagine it: the FSF starts making FreePr0n with an free license. That is, you can reenact the pictures...but then you are obliged to post your piuctures on the net!

    First off will be Doctress Neutopia et al...

    You knew theyre was a reason for the "open minded" clause in the FSF employment ads, right?

  347. T-shirts, finally! by cgrayson · · Score: 1
    They're not quite art - but they are here. Because, sheez, nobody else seems to want to sell 'em.

    Check out ShirtZilla.

  348. Re:WARNING - do not upgrade to Mozilla from Netsca by David+Gerard · · Score: 1
    Um, yeah. Section 7.5 needs some rewriting. The procedure as laid out there worked really well twice for one of the FAQ authors, but has not worked as well for some others. Rewrites to fun[AT]velvet.net, please!

    Safest method is probably to go to the page with a list of all your files, then restore each thing you want back (mail, bookmarks, etc) to your fresh profile one file at a time. Though I'm loath to write that having not tried it myself.

    --
    http://rocknerd.co.uk
  349. Re:Great, now get rid of IE - (Here's how.) by Quazion · · Score: 2

    It doesn't work on Windows 2000 SR2 or XP because of System File Protection

    You can disable the SFP in the registry. =P

  350. Re:OPEN SOURCE NEEDS MORE BABES by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just what you loser's need, something else to whack off to. One would have thought the software was enough, now you need babes next to it. Maybe you ARE turning normal.

  351. Re: from the it's-only-been-how-many-years dept. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I genuinely think it's a pity that it's taken 4.5 years to produce what is a pretty mediocre browser. Why would Joe Average switch from IE to Mozilla?

    Oh, yes, the joys of Slashdot. Some idiot anonymous coward posts something like this without support what they are saying.

    Please, go back to jacking off to net-p0rn if you can't support this kind of baseless crap.

    Mozilla is relevent because it has pop-up supression; cross-platform compatibility; MathML; better support for the standards than IE; it is themeable; has a mail and news client; it an entire application framework; etc.

    I have an account; but this doesn't merit a non-anonymous reply.

  352. Some pop-ups get through by r_barchetta · · Score: 1


    I've found a couple of sites (this one in particular) that manage to sneak pop-ups past Mozilla's built in pop-up killer.

    It's not a pr0n site - it does movie reviews - and the pop-ups don't always make it through. That is, there's not a specific way that I can tell you to make it happen. Sometimes I see it on the front page, other times it happens while browsing through the reviews. When I get home from work I'll post a screenshot as evidence.

    I'm wondering what makes their method work-around unchecking "open unrequested windows."

    Has anyone else seen something like this?

    -r

    --
    Just because something is free does not mean you have to take it.
  353. Re:OPEN SOURCE NEEDS MORE BABES... by gandy909 · · Score: 1

    You hosed that one... It's:

    If she's old enough to go to the store, she's old enough to get bread!

    --

    (Stolen sig) Remember: it's a "Microsoft virus", not an "email virus", a "Microsoft worm", not a "computer worm
  354. No, not very by marnanel · · Score: 2

    Mozilla doesn't do gopher very well-- for example, it fails to show information tags (a big nuisance): try publication or floodgap in Moz and another browser and see the difference.

    --
    GROGGS: alive and well and living in
  355. Re:Maybe Bill Gates will have an attack of kindnes by Surt · · Score: 2

    Along with other posters criticizing this, I'd like to point out that bill gates stole most of that money by taking advantage of his monopoly situation. Some of that money he stole from me, and I haven't had the chance to recover it by lawsuit yet, so by giving it away to charities I don't believe in, he has deprived me of the opportunity to give it to something more important and deserving.

    --
    "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
  356. OPERA dear friend, is much much better than IE. by croanon · · Score: 0

    Don't believe me? Try it. It is spreading like a virus in Europe. :) I converted my 28 colleagues at my office.

    --
    Dear Bill, do you have a .net tatoo on your ass for marketing?
  357. Re: from the it's-only-been-how-many-years dept. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And that's just a browser. That doesn't include the mail, news or chat clients, nor does it include the html editor, or the various site debugging tools that come with mozilla.

  358. Slackware has it! by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

    Slackware-current now has Mozilla 1.0!

    --
    Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
  359. Re:OPEN SOURCE NEEDS MORE BABES by colmore · · Score: 2

    redundant? ok so i was making fun of a typo. but "hot hicks" is pretty funny, don't you think? anyway, overrated (because of the +1 karma whore bonus) perhaps, but certainly not redundant.

    --
    In Capitalist America, bank robs you!
  360. Still don't like the splash screen by dukeblue219 · · Score: 1

    When Moz loads, it still has that old, ugly splash screen. I did a little googling and found some much better ones if anybody wants them:

    http://www.lotekk.net/index.php?page=moz&sub=spl as h

    --
    -Ted http://www.freemathhelp.com/
  361. Re:Maybe Bill Gates will have an attack of kindnes by ahde · · Score: 2

    Dollar-wise he has given less than nothing. It's all tax deductible.

  362. Anyone got java working? by dhanav · · Score: 1

    Did anyone get java working with it. I downloaded and installed the jre download available from the mozilla download page. But many java applets fail to start up. Any clues?

  363. Re:Maybe Bill Gates will have an attack of kindnes by ahde · · Score: 2

    He gives money to the Bill & Melinda Gates foundation. He donates money to himself. Some of it gets spent, some of it doesn't. He gets to spend it on what he wants, which sounds to me less like donating, and more like buying things you want and earning interest on your own tax write offs!

  364. Re:Maybe Bill Gates will have an attack of kindnes by ahde · · Score: 2

    So you're saying he didn't have to pay taxes on 23 billion dollars, but he only actually had to give away 5 billion? That sounds dishonest to me. It's not particularly clever. Most people know how to cheat on their taxes, it isn't hard to figure out. But even if you can't you can pay an accountant to do it for you.

  365. Re:Maybe Bill Gates will have an attack of kindnes by ahde · · Score: 2

    When you are very rich, you can go to $100,000 a plate political dinner parties. Whether you are passionate about politics or not, its really about 1) spending $100,000 on a party because you can, and 2) buying your way into a social circle.

    Donating to the right charities is the same thing. It's what gets you to the right parties, get's your name printed in the right periodicals, and so on. It may seem like a waste of money to you and me, but when you have millions (or billions) sitting around, why not spend a few to satisfy a whim.

    If I had 2 billion dollars, I would think nothing of spending a million or two to satisfy a trivial desire.

  366. Some things are worth waiting for by npsimons · · Score: 1
    from the it's-only-been-how-many-years dept.


    The world's greatest browser took over four years to be made, and you're complaining? I bet you would have complained that Michelangelo couldn't finish a simple roof painting job overnight.


    Some things are just worth waiting for.

  367. Re:Maybe Bill Gates... by thumperward · · Score: 1

    look at the actions of the firm he ran.

    For the six seconds this is viewable before it gets tagged flamebait, I think out-of-work Californian IT folk still have it better than those that are getting the BillG cash.

    Microsoft, the RIAA and whoever else might be a terrible problem for those on Slashdot but in the Real World they have done quite a bit to make people's lives better.

    - Chris

  368. MOZILLA.ORG - your MacOS download link's broken! by Khyron · · Score: 1

    On the page http://www.mozilla.org/releases/, the download links are broken. They appear to have the wrong filenames, and in addition the files on the FTP server have mispelled names ("install" missing the last "l"). I was able to figure this out but lots of other MacOS users might not - if you value your enthusiastic MacOS fans, get this fixed pronto!

  369. Statistically impossible.... by djsable · · Score: 1

    Bug Free does not exist.

    Period.

    Current testing (software quality assurance) theory holds that it is statistically impossible for someone to find ALL the bugs in a program. The sheer number of combinations makes it infeasible.

    Kem Kaner, author of Testing Computer Software, the defacto bible of software testers goes into great detail about this idea.

    For example, I DL'd Mozilla 1.0, and have already had it crash twice, and it frequently locks up and won't browse to new addresses.

    Bug Free? I don't think so.

    Sure MS products have bugs, but so do ALL software, including Linux, and others.

    Just a data point to throw out there.

    badger

  370. Re:WARNING - do not upgrade to Mozilla from Netsca by BadTuna · · Score: 1

    Mozilla isn't even as fast as Netscape according to tests by CNET. So what is the advantage over Opera? Something for /.ers to over-tweak and post their conquests here ? I think I'll get an erection elsewhere.

    --
    Your sig here!
  371. trying to turn off image animation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I really like how I can control pop-up window creation using the preferences in Mozilla 1.0...

    Now I'm trying to control image animation, the other annoying method of advertisers. I see the Mozilla preferences in
    Privacy Images,
    but when I set "Animated image should loop" to
    "Never", I still see image animations...
    Has anyone gotten this to work?

    Now I'm digging into the source code...
    I see the function GetAnimationMode but it looks like it may not be used in the current code. Now to find out where to hook it up, and rebuild the app... Wish me luck, or tell me it has already been done! I'm using the Win32 and OS X binaries but maybe I should try using Mozilla on Linux.

  372. Thank you! I owe you a beer! by stefanlasiewski · · Score: 2

    Thank you very much for your advice. I've posted this on a dozen different forums, and you're the first person to actully propose a fix (Everyone else made fun of me for using such a slow machine).

    It improved the speed of mozilla tremendously.

    MozillaRC3 is still a little slower then NS4.7 in some regards (But it is faster in rendering pages, so the speed trade offs are worth it_, but it is completely usable now. As time goes on, I'm sure some developers will introduce some speed tweaks for we Solaris users.

    I didn't realize that a slow NFS would impact Mozilla this much. After all, the NS4.7 cache is on the same NFS drive, so I assumed the NFS impact would be similar.

    Plus, I was using RC2, which does not have the option "Edit->Preferences->Advanced->Cache->D isk Cache Folder". (RC3 wasn't available on http://www.mozilla.org/releases until a few days ago, and the netadmins don't allow FTP access, so no ftp.mozilla.org for me. So now I'm wating for 1.0 to appear for Solaris users :).

    Once again, thank you very much for your help.

    --
    "Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."
    1. Re:Thank you! I owe you a beer! by bjb · · Score: 1
      Glad that worked for you..

      In regards to NS4.7 being a little faster even with the NFS drive, it might be due to the MEMORY part of the cache; NS and MOZ are different in how they handle cache, and possibly your NS memory cache is larger? Speculation...

      As far as RC2 not having the option, the way that I always handle these things is to hack it to use the local drive as the cache. In Netscape, you could have edited the preferences.js file and found where the cache is defined. Otherwise, for any other program that has a cache directory (i.e. The GIMP's temporary directory in ${HOME}/.gimp), I usually remove the temp directory they have and replace it with a symbolic link to something in /var/tmp. If you use GIMP, you should try this.. you'll notice enormous speedup on some operations.

      The /var/tmp is a great thing if you're NFS mounted. I don't think many administrators would appreciate you using it if you're not careful, because as I said above, it is not automatically cleaned by the OS. On my Ultra 10 from my old job, I had about 1.5GB available on /var/tmp, so I'd pretty much do ALL my throwaway work on that drive (stuff that didn't have to be RAID protected). Remember, this is local disk, so it isn't going over your 10/100MBit network.. a C++ library (approx 250k lines of code) which would take about 20 minutes to compile on this machine over NFS would be about 3-5 minutes faster using /var/tmp.

      Again, this is a wonderful tip as long as you're responsible with it. Remember that if the system reboots, you're not guaranteed that /var/tmp contents will be there. If your machine is blasted, you certainly won't have /var/tmp. If you fill your /var/tmp, you might cause the OS to CRASH. Just be sure to leave at least 100MB available and you shouldn't have any problems.

      Enjoy your new-found speed...

      --
      Never hit your grandmother with a shovel, for it leaves a bad impression on her mind...
  373. Screenshot by r_barchetta · · Score: 1


    as promised.

    I know everyone has been waiting with baited breath...

    -r

    --
    Just because something is free does not mean you have to take it.
  374. Re:Maybe Bill Gates... by GSloop · · Score: 2

    This is like saying "Well, they provide jobs" when someone complains about working conditions, sweatshops etc.

    Sure, Pimps provide jobs. Hey, infact even, child pornographers provide jobs - but that's obviously a job not worth having. So, that's just a crock.

    Simply having done something innovative (which BillG hasn't) or that made someones life easier isn't an escape from your overall actions.

    The Mafia creates wealth and ease for quite a few people...but that doesn't excuse how they run their lives.

    BillG ran a company that used sharp business deals (think Stacker, think IBM and OS/2, think Sybase etc etc etc...these are only more recent examples) and great marketing (sharp deals are 80% great marketing 20%) along with a monopoly on the OS (what other general use OS was available for PC's from the mid-late 80's to today?) to gain the position they are in now.

    You can speculate that this was for the general good of the population. I'll counter that if the market had real transparancy and open-ness, the gains for the consumer would have been even greater. Just as no Mafia would produce greater wealth for all - just not as much for the few... Of course, we'll never know - I just know that eventually, what's moral and ethical is also best for me and you. We'll both do better in the long run.

    Cheers!

  375. Re:So close, and yet so far... by Tet · · Score: 3, Informative
    You are supposed to use the remote system to open a new window when mozilla exists.

    Yes, but that only works on the same X display. If you have one Mozilla open on, say :0.0, there's no way to open a new browser window on :0.1, which I need to do for my monitoring...

    --
    "The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike." -- Delos B. McKown
  376. Mozilla by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    (Im not anonymous coward my name is Linus Torvalds)
    This is a great day for the open source comunity Let us rejoice

  377. RTFFAQ. The calendar is available as a plugin. nt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is no text here. /. software sucks.

  378. The net installer is an OPTION. Sheesh. n/t by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is not text.

  379. Re:RTFFAQ. The calendar is available as a plugin. by Gerv · · Score: 2

    OK, so "the calendar is not in the binary builds of 1.0, or in your own builds unless you specifically enable the option" is a more clear statement of the truth. But "the calendar is not in 1.0" says almost exactly the same thing and is less typing.

    And it's not a "plugin", in the Flash or Java sense. It's an XPI (cross-platform installable component.)

    Gerv
    (gerv@mozilla.org, and one of the initiators of the Mozilla Calendar project)