Slashdot Mirror


Mozilla 1.4 RC1

Mister.de writes "Mozilla 1.4 RC 1 is out. We've added lots of features and fixed lots of bugs since Mozilla 1.3. Help us shake it down in preparation for Mozilla 1.4 final. More information is available in the release notes. Mozilla is an open-source Web browser, designed for standards compliance, performance and portability."

7 of 401 comments (clear)

  1. Any word on how the new AOL deal impacts Mozilla? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Some links:
    "Does Netscape Deal Mean 'Game over' for Open-Source Browsers?"
    http://www.newsfactor.com/perl/story/2 1639.html

    Microsoft pays AOL 750Mil for killing Netscape. Gives 7 year license to use Microsoft Internet Explorer:
    http://news.com.com/2100-1032-1011296.h tml?tag=nl

  2. It's fast by YellowSubRoutine · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'm posting with my fresh and shiny 1.4 RC1, and I have to say that the subjective speed is increased significantly over 1.4 beta.

    It feels on par with opera now...
    Congrats to the mozilla team

    Btw... why is RC1 announced on slashdot? wouldn't it make more sense to kick their ftp servers in the nuts when 1.4 is finalised?

  3. Re:dazed and confused by rmsousa · · Score: 5, Informative

    Firebird is NOT exactly a fork. According to the page (OK, I've read it somewhere, old phoenix's page, I think), to make a Firebird build they get the latest CVS Mozilla and patch only the interface code. This way, if some change in RC1 is deeper than interface, then it is automagically in the next Firebird. You can see this if you go to about:config in Firebird. You'll see (should I say legacy) options for about everything in Mozilla (mail/news, composer).

  4. Re:Unfortunately by SimplexO · · Score: 5, Informative
    Unfortunately Microsoft will change how NTLM authentication works soon because of this, and the Mozilla team will be forced to change.
    I know you got modded Funny, but if you are serious, you shouldn't be too worried about NTLM now on windows. Maybe in the future, when they get it under Linux, though.

    See, they just use the Windows dll, and if that gets updated, Mozilla should just be able to get things done.

    Good thought, bad example.
  5. Re:The MOST important change by mu_wtfo · · Score: 5, Informative

    Well...*mostly*. From the release notes:

    "# Due to the nature of C++ compilers, libraries built with GCC will likely be incompatible with libraries built with MSVC. For example, XPCOM plugins will not work. This includes the Java plugin.
    # Due to the use of MSVC-specific code in the tree and the relative immaturity of the w32api, certain functionality will not be available in the GCC build. The dependency tree for bug 203303 tracks the list of MinGW GCC-specific issues.
    "

    No Java, and other, unspecified, non-working bits. Hmm...I think I'll wait until it's a little older before I try to build on Win32.

    --
    If all the world's a stage, anyone who says they want better lighting spends far too much time in a dark theatre.
  6. Mozilla "Classic" isn't dead yet / other comments by minnkota · · Score: 5, Informative

    There's been a lot of discussion about how Mozilla 1.4 will the be the last version in it's current form, as Mozilla 1.5/2.0 will be based on Firebird... Keep in mind that one of the goals for 1.4 is to replace 1.0.x (currently 1.0.2) as the stable distribution version. So while future versions will have drastic changes to the GUI framework, 1.4 will live on with small fixes for those that aren't needing or wanting the very cutting edge. Just as there are many current unix and linux distributors shipping 1.0.2 today, there will be many shipping 1.4.x a year from now. As for the version number discussion, my vote is to call the next version 1.5... I think the version 2.0 title should be reserved for a refined, heavily tested version of Firebird. Much like the extensive testing that went into the current flavor of Mozilla before 1.0 was released. Maybe I just don't like version number bloat...

  7. Re:THAT'S considered an acceptible release bug??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
    How the heck are RANDOM CRASHES an acceptable release time bug?

    You're right, they're not. So I suggest that you complain to ATI that their graphics card driver is full of bugs and can lead to random crashes of applications that use graphics in a serious way. They already admit that the problem is at their end so you may as well let them know that you find it unacceptable.

    For what it's worth, I'm not sure if this particular crash is actually still happening. It's been in the release notes for ages, but I don't recall many reports of it happening recentley. Maybe it's been fixed by the latest driver upgrade.