Slashdot Mirror
Mozilla Now Even Includes The Kitchen Sink
zzxc writes "Mozillazine reports that a 'kitchen sink' easter egg has been added into Mozilla by a patch to bug 122411. It shows an ASCII art animated kitchen sink. This was prompted by people complaining about Mozilla's bloat - that 'it includes everything but the kitchen sink.' You can see this xhtml demo by going to about:kitchensink in a recent Mozilla nightly, or at mozilla.org with an older mozilla build. Please note that this is not actually included in the browser package, so it doesn't add to mozilla's bloat. Instead, about:kitchensink directs the user to the xml document on mozilla's website."
about:everything will redirect to wikipedia, google or something like that, so really will include everything.
I don't care for the kitchen sink. Could you please include a car washer instead?
But IE has had something like that for years. Sometimes it redirects you to a nice blue screen.
"I used to have that really cool,funny sig
if we can blame mozillas bloat on everything *including* the kitchen sink, what can we blame windows bloat on? does microsoft have an easter egg including the appliance section in best buy somewhere?
Trying this in internet explorer 6, you get:
The XML page cannot be displayed
Cannot view XML input using style sheet. Please correct the error and then click the Refresh button, or try again later.
The system cannot locate the resource specified. Error processing resource 'http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/DTD/xhtml11.dtd'.
Next time, please complain "Mozilla has everything but a red light district". Can't wait for the animated xml-porn
Fleur de Sel
Does it have a garbage disposal for all those pop-ups and spam?
Give this a go: about:mozilla
:)
Anyone know any more of these 'features'?
is more than this... the kitchen sink can even be controlled by mouse turning it on and off.
And that is ascii art is particulary appropiated, all those letters seems to be flooding mozilla zine and slashdot discussion forums.
Neither does Windows, unless you count showing a blank blue screen on request as a "feature." I wish people would stop posting this as if it were somehow funny and interesting.
My guess is that this was going to be an Easter Egg, but someone somewhere along the line thought better of it.
Several releases of Emacs have also used a kitchen sink as a launcher icon.
[
The Mozilla 1.3 branch has been closed in prep. for release. There's a mention of it on Mozillazine as well.
/. :)
The outstanding bug list has been mirrored here:
http://www.phule.net/mirrors/bugs-2003-02-22.html because it's not very nice to bugzilla.mozilla to link directly to it. At least not from
In Soviet Russia...michael would be rotting in Siberia!
...at least using the build I downloaded a few hours ago (Build 2003022108 on WinXP)
alias uptime="echo '5:33pm up 22342352324 days, 6:28, 2124315623 users, load average: 2432.40, 12312.31, 123123.19'"
I figured the first post would say
"if you don't like the bloat, use phoenix!"
But it didn't. Instead someone pointed out about:mozilla which has been in there since like Netscape 2 I believe, maybe even before. I can't believe it got modded up and people didn't know about it. Anyway, if you want the kitchen sink and only the kitchen sink, use phoenix. ^_^
The GeekNights podcast is going strong. Listen!
in Internet Explorer, try going to about:mozilla its supposed to imply that mozilla causes BSODs. haha.
If you're stuck on IE, here it is:
from The Book of Mozilla, 3:31
(Red Letter Edition)
Also see The mozilla museum and The hidden features of mozilla. Its about the old netscape, but still very enjoyable and sometimes hilarious.
bug 56061 - about:about: RFE to display a clickable list of all the supported about:*
Timeo idiotikOS et dona ferentes
The page is valid XHTML. If IE can't render it, that's its problem. Most of the IE-only pages are not standards-compliant, and that's the problem.
It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
It's kind of hypocritical to talk about sites that just don't work in Mozilla and other browsers, and that you shouldn't support companies that make sites like that but when a site like this works only in Mozilla it's just fine
Oh what a load of troll-scented crap. This isn't a "site", it is a silly easter egg built into the program. This is not a page with actual information, it's not meant for consumption by the general public (i.e. my grandfather is not going to search on Google for "kitchen sink", find this, and be disappointed that it does not work in IE). It is a "feature" specifically for Mozilla users.
Would you complain the same way if a Mozilla skin or XUL extension didn't work with IE? Of course not. It's not meant to.
"Wow, you're like some kind of superhero able to ward off happiness and success at every turn."
-- Ryan Stiles
A million ASCII kitchen sinks flowing for a million years will produce the greatest works of literature known to man.
"It was the best of times, it was the blurst of times!!?? You stupid kitchen sink!"
This comment was generated by a Squadron of Ultra Ninjas
I have to agree 100%. All too often people that have pretty much only used Windows spout off like this. They think they know it all because they _did_ visit the Apple store and in their un-biased/un-buying mood thought it *was* slow.
/.
:)
I sit on the side of seeing the EXACT same hardware running Windows, Linux (Netware, BSD, OS/2, and BeOS for that matter) all side by side.
I've seen IE on Windows and IE on the Mac. Compare Mozilla on Windows then to the Mac. Now take a look at Linux. How about Safari. Wow.
Now -- go to your Windows box. Transfer 8G out while getting 9G dumped to you while encoding a video stream while ripping a CD with the music playing and even have another operating system running to see IE6 about: mozilla
all while posting to
Go ahead try it... If a Windows user were to sit down and _learn_ to use Linux or a Mac as they did, at one point, _learn_ to use Windows then, and only then, do I think people will begin to understand. I show them daily...
Yeah, yeah yeah -- in Russia this may be off topic.
IE6 IS the kitchen.. and Windows is the house. Or maybe a better analogy would be that IE6 is the toilet of the Windows bathroom. :)
When I try the link in my IE6 I get... :
---
The XML page cannot be displayed
Cannot view XML input using style sheet. Please correct the error and then click the Refresh button, or try again later.
Parameter entity must be defined before it is used. Error processing resource 'http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/DTD/xhtml11.dtd'. Line 85, Position 2
%xhtml-prefw-redecl.mod;
-^
---
Now is MS bitching about the W3 or Mozilla?
Yes, but whats that got to do with the price of tea in D'ni?
No, it doesn't. If you read the later comments in the bug, you'll see that drivers@mozilla.org (the project managers) have vetoed about:kitchensink. It's not likely to get into Mozilla unless the patch can be modified so it only affects Mozilla (right now it affects most Mozilla-based browsers, including Phoenix, Galeon and K-Meleon). Even then, I still have doubts that it will get in.
NTLM easily explained
m.kelley
life is like a freeway, if you don't look you could miss it.
would be if the user typed in "about:everything", and the computer replied, "42". (Optional alternative behavior is for mozilla to wait several million years before returning this answer.)
Snarkiness is inversely proportional to wisdom because it emphasizes feeling right rather than being right.
I have no complaints about Mozilla taking up too much of either RAM or cycles.
As you point out, the cycles are no problem when it is idling. Just a possible problem when animating ascii. (I wonder of other browsers would do better at ascii animation consumption of cpu cycles?)
As for RAM, who cares? RAM is cheap and getting cheaper by the day. Just look at the things we can do with computers today while jerking off vs. the things we could do with our computers, say in 1990.
Unfortunantly, having so much capability takes RAM.
We could trade RAM for capability and go back to using Commodore 64's.
I imagine in 10 years everyone will complain that Mozilla takes up 9 Gigabytes of RAM! Why can't it be efficient like back in 2007 when it only needed 768 MB of RAM? Of course, nobody will mention what Mozilla can do in 2013 vs. today.
Could Mozilla be made to have the same capability and use less RAM? Yes, undoubtedly. What would it cost? Development effort.
I believe there is some fair tradeoff of using computer resources (cycles, RAM, disk, etc.) to shorten development effort. Use higher level languages. Higher level abstractions. Yes you can be more efficient by working at a lower level of abstraction, but the development effort is higher.
Why don't we write everything in assembly language? This used to be a huge argument between the "high level language" camp and the "assembly language only" camp. The evidence was clear. Assembly programs were smaller and faster. More efficient by every possible measurement. So why aren't we still writing programs that way? Why don't we still use GOTO instead of structured programming constructs? Why was object oriented programming introduced? Why do we even tollerate the existance of interpreted languages, and even worse, inefficient languages that use dynamic typing such as Lisp, Python, JavaScript, etc.? Don't people know that static typing allows much more efficient compilation?
My hunch is that people don't care. They value productivity more.
If you could have your new super-duper software package (Office, word processor, browser, <insert software package of choice>) released nine months sooner, but it would use 30 % more RAM, would you take it?
I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
... It does not respond, so I guess no more kitchensink for today! Too bad /. really floods -everything- these days ..
...
hope they don't add a about:shower
--- I am known for the ones who want to find me on the net. Is that a privacy risk or a privilege? One might wonder..
The Paradise game client already had a kitchen sink (version 2.2p8).
This variant of the game Netrek, which completely revamped the gameplay of the original and added a ton of 'features', many of which tended to irritate purists of the game. The client developers added a little outline kitchen sink which would pop up on the screen when a given button was pushed, along with the phrase 'Kitchen sink activated! Bad guys beware!'
Just a piece of trivia for you, and a great game at that.
Cole's Law: Thinly sliced cabbage
I remember, back when I was playing Diablo 2, there was this undead mummy that would randomly pop up with different names. One time it was named "The Creeping Feature" and another time "The Feeping Creature"...
All that we see or seem is but a dream within a dream.
Number of tabs seems to be dependent on your available free graphics memory. Most of my machines have 64MB cards in them, but one only has an 8MB card.
Since it's my habit to visit voyeurweb.com and download everything I can find in a new tab (which usually loads about 10 60k images per page), I've discovered that I can usually open about 70 tabs before things go wonky.
I close a few tabs, and things go back to normal.
When I try the same thing with IE (LOTS of open windows since IE is teh l4m3 and doesn't do tabs), I usually get a crash or lockup at around 40 open windows.
Anyway, on the box I have that only have 8MB card in it, the number of tabs full of pictures I can open is much, much lower. Maybe 10 or 12, before wonkiness sets in.
The 8MB graphics-card machine is a Linux box with a Matrox G100. The rest of my PCs are running W2k or Linux with some higher form of ATI card.
-- I wanna decide who lives and who dies - Crow T. Robot, MST3K
Reading the headline I thought they had integrated emacs into Mozilla but they just stole the icon :(
He saw some dirty arabs and fired. Too bad it was just some friendly kurds, BBC reporters and his fellow cowboys.
I *definately* recommend you get linky. I actually don't browse porn as much as graffiti, but the 'open all image links in one new tab' feature is a KILLER, and it'll probably be even more so for you.
The patch was not checked in to the Mozilla trunk because it was vetoed by drivers@mozilla.org. It will likely never be checked in.
How about doing some tiny little bit of fact-checking? Who needs news if it's false?
There are tears in my eyes here, man. Thanks!
-- I wanna decide who lives and who dies - Crow T. Robot, MST3K
--sex
Very popular slashdot journal for adul
As for IE sucking a log on this, well, it's 100% valid XHTML and CSS with decent DOM use, so I'm not surprised IE won't view it.
jX [ Make everything as simple as possible, but no simpler. - Einstein ]
What kind of a sad world has it become when easter eggs get announced before they've even made it into a beta? The whole point of these things used to be the treasure hunt. Do you read the walk-through before you even start playing a new game?
all those letters go poop, PooP, and so on. So your second comment is spot-on, especially the latter part
Use ISO 8601 dates [YYYY-MM-DD]
Phoenix has [almost always] shrunk over its releases. Here we go:
The latest Win32 nightly is 6,320 KB and the Linux version is 8,964 KB.
Use ISO 8601 dates [YYYY-MM-DD]
trying to simulate a BSOD crash?
Wrong color. The BSOD uses background color #0000AA (text mode color #1) by default, while about:mozilla uses #000080 (a bit darker).
Will I retire or break 10K?
Put another way, here's another story. In the early days of the interstate highway system, there was a problem with the roadway signage where, because the signs didn't give people enough warning that an exit was coming up, drivers kept colliding with the signs, destroying them, while trying to veer off the highway at the last minute. When the project engineers were told about this, the solution they came up with was simple, elegant, and completely wrong: build a sign strong enough to withstand an impact from a car moving at highway speeds.
The lessons there should be obvious. Rather than identify what today might be called the usability problems of the signage system, they focused only on the sign device itself. Their solution didn't make the problem go away, and it probably made impacts with signs much more dangerous for people in the car. The right solution, which we have since moved to, is to come up with standards to give people more information ahead of the exits so that collisions like this are much less probably.
I think the Mozilla people are falling for the same trap. They've heard the complaints, but rather than take them to heart, they poke fun at it -- and in fact adding in code for this easter egg, even if you are downloading the xml from mozilla.org's servers, is only adding to the application's bloat. Like the splash screen example, this is itself a great sign *ahem* that the project developers aren't listening to the concerns of their users. Rather, it's just starting to seem like a colossal exercise in self-gratification.
Good thing I can use Safari :-)
DO NOT LEAVE IT IS NOT REAL