Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Mozilla 1.4 Released

Posted by simoniker on from the moz-strutting-like-suedehead dept.

Phil writes "MozillaZine is reporting that Mozilla 1.4 has been released for Windows, Mac OS and Linux. The new version is pretty similar to today's Netscape 7.1, which is based on the same code, but lacks Netscape's proprietary features. More information can be found in the release notes. The release can be downloaded from mozilla.org's releases page or via FTP. From here on, mozilla.org's focus shifts to Mozilla Firebird and Mozilla Thunderbird." The official release news is now up on Mozilla's main page, so let the downloading begin.

51 of 421 comments (clear)

  1. YES! by tobocop · · Score: 4, Funny

    Sexy, finally I can trash that old Netscape 7.1 installation!

    --
    Support bacteria, it's the only culture some people have
    1. Re:YES! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      I'm still using 4.78 you insensitive clod!

  2. Must be browser day by superpulpsicle · · Score: 3, Funny

    Earlier there was an article on netscape.... now one on mozilla.

    That's too much browser info to digest in one day. Get some PS2 articles in here. ;)

  3. Install caveat by John+Zebedee · · Score: 5, Informative

    Just installed the windows version: release notes don't require an uninstall of previous versions (in my case 1.3.1) but V1.4 barfed every time it started until I had rebooted and uninstalled 1.3.1. Seems fine since though

    --
    The future is here. It's just not evenly distributed yet. -- William Gibson
    1. Re:Install caveat by mu_wtfo · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yes, new versions of Mozilla should always be installed into a clean directory. Installing over top of previous versions is known to cause problems.

      From the relnotes: Note: It is recommended that you uninstall previous versions of Mozilla before installing Mozilla 1.4. This will not delete your bookmarks, history, cookies and other information which is stored in your profile directory.

      --
      If all the world's a stage, anyone who says they want better lighting spends far too much time in a dark theatre.
    2. Re:Install caveat by missing000 · · Score: 5, Informative

      I just did an install over 1.3 on w2k and everything went very smoothly.

      The installation is aware of mozilla.exe running, and prompts that it is shutting it down.

      I didn't even have to restart.

      I'll see how well the update goes on a redhat box when I get home from work :)

  4. NTLM Security! by kawika · · Score: 4, Informative

    This is a very big addition. Some of the intranet sites I use require NTLM to access and I was never able to use Mozilla.

  5. hmmmm by deadsaijinx* · · Score: 3, Insightful

    not to be an ass, but is it really news worthy every time Moz makes a release? Didn't we get headlines for 1.4 RC2 and RC3? I use moz exclusively, but even I don't think it's news worthy everytime Moz has a new release (reminds me of the nightly releases news for Phoenix a while back).

    --
    YOU SUCK BALLS!
    1. Re:hmmmm by Shenkerian · · Score: 5, Interesting

      You make a fair comment, but this is Mozilla's new stable build, and the last one distributed as a monolithic application bundle. The stories about the RC's were mostly free advertising for last-minute stress testers, because this stable build has to last until they completely separate the innards into separate applications.

      --
      You tell me how "whilst" differs from "while," and I'll stop calling you a pretentious jackass.
    2. Re:hmmmm by swordgeek · · Score: 5, Informative

      "is it really news worthy every time Moz makes a release?"

      No. The announcements for RC1, RC2, and RC3 were really unnecessary.

      However, this release--1.4 final--is definitely worthy of a post. This is the official 'stable production' release (the first since 1.0, I think), and is also the final relase in the old development path. If there were only three Mozilla announcements on /. in its entire history, they would be for (1)the initial creation of the project, (2)the 1.0 milestone, and (3)the 1.4 release.

      --

      "People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
    3. Re:hmmmm by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      "You're just mad because we wouldn't let you join our club."

      Well I'm not giving up my girlfriend just to join you guys!

  6. This was my Post!!! by nite_warrior · · Score: 3, Funny

    Damn, I was so close to get a post on the front page... anyways glad to see a new release from everybody's favorite browser (after konqueror, opera, lynks and telnet to port 80)

  7. lacks Netscape's proprietary features by tubabeat · · Score: 5, Funny

    Like mandatory pop-ups...

    --
    "Linux is a serious competitor"
    - Steve Ballmer, Chief Executive Microsoft Corp.
    1. Re:lacks Netscape's proprietary features by fobbman · · Score: 5, Funny

      That's a good point. For all of the bloat that Mozilla is accused of having, I am disheartened that they have left out the "Put yellow running dudes all over the fucking place" feature that Netscape has had for quite some time now. Does anyone know of a plugin that I can compile to be able to enjoy that functionality that I am missing?

  8. Same as RC3 by mblase · · Score: 5, Informative

    As was pointed out to me in the recent Netscape 7.1 story, Mozilla 1.4 final is the same code as Mozilla RC3. (Check the "about:" page to see the idential release date.) So if you have RC3 installed, you can safely leave it there without worrying about major changes.

    1. Re:Same as RC3 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Not only are there no major changes, there are no changes at all. The files are exactly the same. 1.4-RC3 is 1.4.

    2. Re:Same as RC3 by Deven · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not only are there no major changes, there are no changes at all. The files are exactly the same. 1.4-RC3 is 1.4.

      This is the way release candidates should always be handled, yet it seems they rarely are. How many times have bugs snuck into an official "stable" Linux kernel release that weren't in the preceding "pre" kernel? A strict policy of only releasing final versions as re-releases of release candidates would reduce this danger...

      --

      Deven

      "Simple things should be simple, and complex things should be possible." - Alan Kay

  9. Same as Mozilla 1.4rc3 by ChazeFroy · · Score: 3, Informative

    This release is the same thing as 1.4rc3. Log on to their FTP site and compare file sizes. Even the Windows installer says "1.4.0.2003062408".

    If you already installed 1.4rc3, don't bother wasting your time with 1.4 final.

    1. Re:Same as Mozilla 1.4rc3 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      I mean come on, what did you think Release Candidate meant?

      For those of us used to Microsoft's 'Release Candidates', it's a big frigging surprise for the RC to be identical to the release version.

      Microsoft Release Candidate == alpha version
      Release version == beta version
      Service Pack 2/3/4 == almost there...

  10. Re:The only question that remains: by Poofat · · Score: 3, Funny

    When the sun explodes.

  11. Got it, love it by MrZeebo · · Score: 5, Informative
    I used to be a Mozilla-only user. However, over time, it seemed that the speed of Mozilla started getting worse and worse, especially under Windows. On my dual-boot machine, I kept with Moz under Linux, but switched to Opera 7 under Windows. For the time, Opera was much quicker, not just at starting up, but seemingly at rendering web pages as well.

    When I noticed that 1.4 had been released (in the comments for the Netscape 7.1 story) I figured I'd give Mozilla another try under Windows.

    I was amazed.

    Mozilla 1.4 is noticeably faster than previous versions under Windows, and seems on-par with Opera 7. For a while, I was running Opera 7 for browsing and Thunderbird for mail... I think now I'm going back to Mozilla for both.

    Once the xft-enabled RPMs are up for Red Hat 9, I'll give it a try on that OS as well, but, as I said, speed didn't seem to be an issue there to begin with.

    Bravo, Mozilla. Firebird is certainly fast, but some people like the integration of the web/e-mail programs, and it's nice to see a speed boost for us as well.

  12. Re:Lovely... by tinrobot · · Score: 4, Funny

    That's the classic 0x610f0769 bug.

    Increment by 1 so it reads 0x610f0770.

    Results may vary.

  13. BitTorrent by cos(0) · · Score: 5, Informative

    Get a BitTorrent download here!

    1. Re:BitTorrent by Dahan · · Score: 4, Insightful
      This reminds me... shouldn't Mozilla provide checksums and/or PGP signatures for these files? While I'm not 100% trusting of files on mozilla.org (servers can, and have been, compromised and files trojaned), I don't trust software from random .torrents at all...

      FWIW, this torrent is probably fine--it's identical to the one on www.mozilla.org. Checksums are:
      MD5(mozilla-win32-1.4-installer.exe)= 28cb37dfe56476fe0c5a74689cdc0063
      SHA1(mozilla-win32-1.4-installer.exe)= c46336c7ceeeaa349f2546c1009f53271b186213

      But you shouldn't take my word for it... Mozilla should be providing checksums; their distribution build instructions even recommend making a MD5SUM file.

  14. But, But, But, ... by Hal+The+Computer · · Score: 4, Funny

    I just installed Netscape 7.1 :-(

    /me bursts into tears because his browser is out of date.

    --

    int main(void){int x=01232;while(malloc(x));return x;}
    1. Re:But, But, But, ... by minusthink · · Score: 3, Funny

      it was out of date the minute they stamped 'Netscape' on it. :D

      --
      "when life gets complicated, I like to take a nap in a tree and wait for dinner" - Hobbes.
  15. Yes, it is. by MarcQuadra · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Mozilla is one of the 'pillars' of OSS software, along with GCC, the Linux kernel, KDE, GNOME, and Apache (I'm probably forgetting some too). It's important to hype it up and keep us informed so we can test and push the technology. If we were all still using Mozilla 1.0 there wouldn't _BE_ a 1.4 release for a LONG time.

    Slashdot is the appropriate place to make such release announcements. If you don't like them taking up space here, turn off mozilla stories in your prefs, if you want to track Mozilla closer turn on the Mozilla slashbox.

    --
    "Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
  16. Re:I would like to get this, but... by caferace · · Score: 4, Funny

    I don't know why you haven't upgraded to 2003. I did it nearly seven months ago...

  17. Re:Nice improvements, but.... by sremick · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Maybe when Microsoft integrates Mozilla into the OS. Most of what makes up IE loads when Windows starts, due to MS making IE the default interface to every fricken part of the OS. Double-clicking on the "e" icon simply loads the last 10% or so (prob not even that).

    You can use "Quickstart" in Mozilla or NS to enable to same behavior, but honestly I find the whole idea of an app sucking up RAM when you aren't using it to be pretty stupid. Like leaving your car running all night just so you don't have to waste the 5 seconds in the morning to start it.

    I mean, really: compare the startup time to how long you spend actually ON THE NET. Do a few seconds really matter??? Isn't it nice to close it and have it be GONE FROM MEMORY (unlike IE)?

  18. Re:I would like to get this, but... by swordgeek · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You're mistaking a lack of guarantee with a lack of testing.

    Mozilla isn't guaranteed to do ANYTHING. It's not guaranteed to be Y2k "compliant," it's not guaranteed to cause no damage to your hard drive, it's not guaranteed to cause SOME damage to your hard drive! Nor is it guaranteed to render web pages correctly, avoid sleeping with your spouse, or save the world.

    The y2k non-guarantee was put up many years ago, because nearly every organisation on the planet was being hounded with the "are you y2k compliant?" question. Mozilla is just as non-compliant today as they were then, which is to say that nobody has found any issues.

    Mozilla HAS been tested to work with four digit dates, and also been tested to render almost all web pages properly (certainly all proper web pages). It has NOT been guaranteed to do these things.

    Seriously, download 1.4 and give it a go. I think you'll be very happy with its behaviour.

    --

    "People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
  19. also released today... by pb · · Score: 3, Funny
    Wouldn't it be great if you could get some sort of 'sidebar' that told you what software has been released today, instead of having to post new /. stories every time? Well, until such a feature is implemented, or a new site is devoted to such things, I guess we'll just have to keep track of all the software releases the old fashioned way, by releasing new stories every time Netscape, Mozilla, or indeed any other software package that our readers might find relevant is released.

    I know, it's a tough job, but some site in the open source community needs to take this on. Now some of you might say this gets in the way of actual news, but I don't think there's actually that much risk of that here. If it pushes another Anime story off the front page, I think that's a risk I'm willing to take just to make sure that I have the latest version of Mozilla available to me. And I'm sure the rest of you will agree, once you see the new vision for slashdot's software section, which will soon greatly boost our daily story posting, as well as provide reviews of all the software, and meaningless license debates, which will surely degenerate into GPL misunderstandings and anti-BSD flamewars, and more zealotry! As you can plainly see, everybody wins.

    Also Released Recently Today:

    - CodeTek VirtualDesktop 2.3.5
    - dnspython 1.0.0 (Stable)
    - Alt+Connect 2.5.7/9 (Development)
    - Advanced Bash Scripting Guide 1.9 (Stable)
    - bes-cms 0.3
    - BlogPlanet 1.0.2
    - PhotoGen 1.9b
    - imgSeek 0.7.2
    - The Tamber Project 1.2.10 (Pogo)
    - OSSP fsl 1.2.0
    - Minimalist Queue Services 0.0.3
    - OSSP l2 0.9.2
    - Cyrus SASL 2.1.14 (SASLv2)
    - Bugzero 2.7
    - tclperl 2.5
    - tclpython 3.1
    - PHPXref 0.3
    - SimpleData 3.0.17
    - Postfix 2.0.13 (Stable)
    - Firepass 1.1.1a
    - Nmap 3.30 (Stable)
    - GKrellM 2.1.14 (GTK 2.0)
    [...]

    ...watch slashdot.org for updates!

    --
    pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
    1. Re:also released today... by (startx) · · Score: 3, Informative

      ummm, you mean like freshmeat or the freshmeat sidebar? Are you trying to make a joke or troll? Whoever has mod points today thinks your serious...

  20. wow, bug-city! by Tumbleweed · · Score: 4, Informative

    Too bad, so sad. Moz 1.4 is fulla da bugs.

    Within 1 minute, I found that it's listing sans-serif fonts as serif, and serif fonts as sans-serif. Yikes.

    Also some weirdness in the toolbar buttons with vertical alignment. (Back & Forward buttons 'valigned' to the top, whilst Reload & Stop buttons are on the bottom). Bizarro.

    At least this is the FIRST time a Mozilla release has actually NOT decided to make itself the default browser in spite of my always telling it not to. One bug fixed, yay! :)

    1. Re:wow, bug-city! by nathana · · Score: 5, Informative

      Also some weirdness in the toolbar buttons with vertical alignment. (Back & Forward buttons 'valigned' to the top, whilst Reload & Stop buttons are on the bottom). Bizarro.

      I've seen stuff like this happen when you install a new version of Mozilla on top of an old version, or you install a new version and still continue to use your old profile.

      Try wiping out your old profile after backing up your bookmarks and mail (rm -r ~/.mozilla/ or delete Mozilla under Application Data in Windows), and let Mozilla 1.4 generate a new one for you. After that, you may find that all your problems have disappeared!

      -- Nathan

    2. Re:wow, bug-city! by otherwhere · · Score: 4, Informative
      Within 1 minute, I found that it's listing sans-serif fonts as serif, and serif fonts as sans-serif. Yikes.

      Actually, it's allowing you to select _any_ font you want to be displayed when the page author has suggested serif, it's not saying "these are serif fonts, pick one". Therefore, both dropdowns contain all installed fonts. It's a feature, not a bug.

      I will admit, however, that toolbar weirdness is probably not a feature.

  21. Problems I have with Mozilla 1.3 by truesaer · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Hopefully these things will be addressed in Mozilla 1.4. I have been trying to transition from Internet Explorer, but it has been a bit rough because Mozilla is still missing some of the polish that IE has.


    1) I still find an occasional page that renders incorrectly. Or maybe what its actually doing is rendering correctly due to spec compliance. But I don't really care what the problem is, I just want them to always render like other browsers.


    2) There are weird problems with keyboard keys not working right sometimes. For example, occasionally if I click in the document that has been displayed, the arrow keys will not move the page. Or in forms the home/end keys, etc. dont work. It seems like these events aren't being captured, although I can't find any consistent way to cause it.


    3) When I view my rental queue in Netflix, Mozilla crashes completely. This is the biggest problem...other things are just irritating, but I can't get rid of IE while this still happens. Again, maybe Netflix is using improper javascript or something. But, my perspective as a user is only "does it work." In any case, the browser should be able to handle nasty code in a way that doesn't cause a complete crash even if it infinite loops or something.


    Despite these kinds of annoyances, I am going to stick with Mozilla. I love tabbed browsing, and I really like being able to bookmark a set of tabs that I may want open for reference while working on a project. 1.3 was the first version I started using regularly because my form filler/password manager finally supported Mozilla, and with googlebar all my needs are met.


    I guess I'll go see now if 1.4 has addressed any of these issues...

    1. Re:Problems I have with Mozilla 1.3 by hawkbug · · Score: 4, Informative

      As far as pages not loading correctly as your gripe #1 - this is not Mozilla's fault in my cases. It's IE's. How? Well, lets look at this page for a moment:

      http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/clubhouse?team=col

      It looks like total ass in Mozilla, and basically any browser I've tried besides IE. It used to look just fine BEFORE that damned MSN ad bar that takes up most of the screen now. You can write terrible code, and have it look fine in IE because IE just ignores a lot of mistakes. I see this as a bad thing, because when browsers try to correctly render a page according to standards, it makes you think the browser is broken and not the page.

      BTW, I have tried repeatedly to notify the ESPN guys about all their messed up pages, but obviously nobody cares as long as they get their MSN money.

    2. Re:Problems I have with Mozilla 1.3 by swordgeek · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Can't believe that you got modded down as flamebait. Must be an idiot with moderator points.

      At any rate while I have sympathy for your points, consider it from the point of view of mozilla. There is an internationally agreed-upon set of standards on how to write HTML. A website that doesn't follow those standards is broken, in the same way that a PCI card that requires a nonstandard voltage is broken. If you got a card that didn't fit in any PCI slots other than the ones on motherboards made by the same manufacturer, it's pretty hard to blame the other board makers for following standards, even though you can't use this particular PCI card in their boards.

      Ultimately, it's a lost cause. People see websites that are broken because Microsoft promotes broken websites (and renders them the way the creators intended, rather than correctly), and blame Mozilla for behaving properly.

      Try dropping a message to netflix. I did that to Toyota Canada a year ago, and within four months they had a site that worked 100% with mozilla, opera, and IE. (Furthermore, they had a note up indicating their intentions to implement this no more than three weeks after I emailed them! Good on Toyota.)

      --

      "People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
    3. Re:Problems I have with Mozilla 1.3 by mu_wtfo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It could also be argued that IE is the most broken browser out there. Specs *are* important - no specs mean a fragmentation of the web, different vendors just randomly inventing 'html'. That means that page development time goes up exponentially, as developers now have as many different targets as there are browsers, instead of one target, the w3c spefification.

      --
      If all the world's a stage, anyone who says they want better lighting spends far too much time in a dark theatre.
  22. Type and find... by Rahga · · Score: 3, Informative

    I'll go ahead and stick my neck out: It may be newer to Netscape rather than Mozilla, but I can't tell you how much I love little things like "Find As You Type"... This is kinda second-nature stuff to those of us who commonly use vi & co..... to find a link, if the browser has focus, just type a word to find a link containing that word, or "/" followed by the word to search the text. Bad part: "/" + "Enter" won't go ahead and look for the next word, instead you have to do "Ctl+G" or "F3"... bah! No regexp support either, at least as far as I know.... maybe not useful for a ton of users, but wouldn't it rock?

  23. Re:I would like to get this, but... by jhunsake · · Score: 4, Funny

    Oh come on! We're talking about a web browser here, not your respirator.

  24. MS Content Insecurity! by fm6 · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Do any web servers besides IIS use NTLM? If your intranet sites are running IIS, then it's probably safe to assume that the content is full of IE-specific hacks. Especially if pages were authored with various Microsoft Office applications.

    Is anyone at Mozilla working on a quirks mode for Word- or Excel-generated HTML? Don't even think about Powerpoint!

    1. Re:MS Content Insecurity! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Microsoft Proxy Server uses NTLM by default, so this prohibits some users from seeing any webservers.

  25. Re:Proprietary Features by mu_wtfo · · Score: 3, Informative

    Actually, there is a spellchecker available for Mozilla - http://spellchecker.mozdev.org. It's planned to be included into Mozilla at some point - hopefully soon.

    However, no AOL icons available, sorry. :)

    --
    If all the world's a stage, anyone who says they want better lighting spends far too much time in a dark theatre.
  26. Why is Firebird that wonderful? by jbs0902 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I hate to say that the Emperor has no clothes, but ...

    I haven't bothered to update from Moz 1.2.1 because it works and I am happy with it. I don't see how the browser (the only portion I use) has improved significantly. From the 1.3.x and 1.4 release notes, it seems most improvements have come to the newsgroups/mail.

    As for Firebird (a.k.a. the browser formerly known as Phoenix), is it just me or is this the most IE-clone, kiddie like browser. I know we're all supposed to say how much better Firebird is, but I don't feel like an adult while using it. Most of the settings are only reachable (unless I am missing something) from the about:config screen. The preferences (under the Tools menu, just like IE) is so icon centric. Maybe Firebird is trying to reach out to the mom/pop crowd, but could I have an option to put it in advanced mode? In addition, NONE of my XUL/XPI/whatever plug-ins/skins work. The plug-ins and tabs are what makes Moz worth running in my opinion.

    Yeah, the bloat comments have legitimacy, but I have HDD and CPU speed to waste (except when gaming). The only thing I am concerned about is the way Win Moz 1.2.1 seems to memory-leak.

    1. Re:Why is Firebird that wonderful? by asa · · Score: 3, Informative

      In addition, NONE of my XUL/XPI/whatever plug-ins/skins work. The plug-ins and tabs are what makes Moz worth running in my opinion.

      That's strange. None of my XUL/XPI/whatever plugins don't work in Firebird and there are considerably more of them available for Firebird than for Mozilla (74 for Firebird vs. 51 for Mozilla extensions at last count at http://extensionroom.mozdev.org/index.html and 55 themes for Firebird http://texturizer.net/firebird/themes.html vs. about 25 for Mozilla http://themes.mozdev.org/)

      --Asa

    2. Re:Why is Firebird that wonderful? by BZ · · Score: 3, Informative

      > From the 1.3.x and 1.4 release notes, it seems
      > most improvements have come to the
      > newsgroups/mail.

      Frankly, this is because the release notes just list "new feature" type things. There is a lot of work going on with the layout engine, starting after 1.3 and still going strong. None of it is mentioned in the release notes, except in the form of the vague "performance, correctness, stability fixes".

    3. Re:Why is Firebird that wonderful? by 73939133 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Breaking up Mozilla isn't primarily about making it smaller, it's about making it more maintainable. The way it is, bugs in the mail component may hold up release of the browser component. Separating them into separate programs means they can be released independently. Besides, many people don't want to use one or the other Mozilla component.

      Functionally, Firebird is as full-featured as the Mozilla browser, and there are more extensions and skins available for it (most of the Mozilla extensions just work).

  27. Re:I would like to get this, but... by delphi125 · · Score: 5, Funny
    Grandparent: We've been in the year 2000 for a while now.

    Parent: I don't know why you haven't upgraded to 2003. I did it nearly seven months ago...

    I'm not sure which is more worrying: being 2 1/2 years behind the times or almost a month ahead. Or the state of the U.S. educational system?

  28. Old easter egg by mnemonic_ · · Score: 4, Informative

    This easter egg has existed since the Netscape/Mozilla 0.9.x days, but it's still neat. Type "about:mozilla" in the address box and see what comes up...

    Try it in IE too. You get something rather cryptic, to say the least... No, I don't know what it means either.

  29. The fix! by antdude · · Score: 3, Informative

    See comment #5 at http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=208205 #c5 ... It worked for me. :)

    --
    Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).