Three New Releases (And Other News) From Mozilla

An anonymous reader writes "A couple of interesting releases by mozilla.org. First of all Mozilla 1.5 was released. This is supposed to be the last version of the old Mozilla suite. Mozilla Firebird 0.7, the stand-alone browser by mozilla.org was also released today. It includes many new features, e.g. Web Panels. For more information see the newly designed product page for Firebird. A third release is the stand-alone version of the Mozilla mail-program Thunderbird , which has now reached version 0.3. The Mozilla Foundation also launched new end user services, like CD Sales and Telephone Support. As an effort to target more end-users, a redesigned website was also created. As always MozillaZine has all of the stories, too. Give these new releases a try, but please use a mirror if possible."

Comments

Thanks to all that mozilla.org folks

[BibelBiber]

As always they do a great job! Especially with Fire- and Thunderbird.

mozilla 1.5 to be the last??

[pbranes]

They've been saying that for a while, and I haven't seen any evidence of that. I really hope that 1.5 is their last integrated release, and they can focus on thunderbird/firebird. I use both of these at home and at work now, and I am very please with their simple gui interface and small download sizes (I'm on 56K at home).

Re:mozilla 1.5 to be the last??

[localghost]

They've been actively working toward it. There's been a lot of work on getting Firebird and THunderbird stable. Once they get to the point where they're as good as Seamonkey, they will replace it as the new browser and mail components. From what I've seen of Firebird, it shouldn't be long now. (Though I still use Mozilla for the time being)

Re:mozilla 1.5 to be the last??

[jvervloet]

As I see it, there are (were?) two problems which make the switch from I.E. towards Firebird `frightening' for modal Windows users: (1) the lack of a Windows installer, and (2) the troubles for installing e.g. a flash plugin.

I don't know whether these things are fixed in the new release, but as long as they aren't, I will recommend Mozilla as I.E. alternative instead of Firebird. It would be a pity if Firebird users switched back to I.E. because of these little problems.

Re:mozilla 1.5 to be the last??

[jonadab]

> I really hope that 1.5 is their last integrated release

If it is, I'll be using it for a while. I've tried Firebird 0.6, and it shows
promise, but I got tired of installing extension after extension after extension
just to get features I've been taking for granted for months. Every time I
think I've got all the extensions I need I discover another missing feature.
Also, last I checked, some things I use aren't even available yet, though it
does seem to get better every time I check back. The long and short of it is,
even with *all* the extensions, Firebird isn't ready to replace Navigator yet,
and when it is, a way is needed to install multiple extensions all at once;
this nonsense about installing each one individually is crap.

Then there's Thunderbird... fortunately I don't have to be so eager for that
to shape up, since I use Gnus. But I get the feeling that if I was waiting for
Thunderbird to be a viable mailreader, I'd be waiting a while yet. (Then again,
I don't consider Messenger a viable mailreader either, so maybe I'm just being
picky in that regard.)

Are Firebird/Thunderbird/&c the future? Yes, absolutely -- and separating the
components out is something that has needed to be done for a long time. But
for the moment, the reality is that SeaMonkey is still the present. We look
forward to a day when it will be the past, but that day has not come yet.

Re:mozilla 1.5 to be the last??

[mcbridematt]

Noo..... I still want my XPFE.

I swear that if mozilla.org stops distributing XPFE binaries off the trunk, I'll compile it myself until it breaks. I actually appreciate the "swiss army knife approach" that we have seen since Netcape.

Yes, Firebird is great, but the functionality of the XPFE app suite leaves FB in the dust in my opinion.

Re:mozilla 1.5 to be the last??

[KillerLoop]

http://blackdiamond.mozdev.org

The Black Diamond project is a project to create a distrubution of Firebird with many of the popular extentions added.

Re:mozilla 1.5 to be the last??

[jvervloet]

what is so damn hard about unzipping it to C:\Program Files and creating a link for the executable in the startmenu and on the desktop...

Indeed, for us, the Slashdot crowd, this is not difficult at all. But If I tell this to 90% of my friends, then they'll say that I shoud talk normal and don't use all this difficult computer science speak.

They don't know what unzipping is, they don't know how to find C:\Program Files. They don't know what an executable is, and how to find/recognize it. They don't know how to create a link to it, they even don't know what a link is. Nevetheless they aren't stupid.

Re:mozilla 1.5 to be the last??

[Jagasian]

I can't find "C:\Program Files". Can you help me. I keep getting this error: "bash: cd: c:Program: No such file or directory". Thanks!

MozillaFirebird is the best

[Daath]

Even on my windows machines I use nightlies of MozillaFirebird as the default browser! It's simply just the best - The ONLY thing I have come across is that it sometimes crashes when you use back several times in quick succession (possibly when there are flash or java or the like on some of the intermediate pages).
Other than that, it's Firebirdlife is blissful ;) (not sure if I'm just ignorant, but that's a definite possibility!) :) Thunderbird is very cool also! (Also my default mail app!)

Re:MozillaFirebird is the best

[Daath]

Indeed! That is one thing that I cannot live without anymore! An efficient built in popup blocker :)
The AdBlock plugin is also nice, although it loads the ads and then hides them... Ideally it should just not load them ;)

Re:MozillaFirebird is the best

[Mantrid]

The worst is when I have to switch to IE for the (very) odd site that doesn't like Mozilla - all of a sudden all these pop-ups appear and I remember just how annoying those things were!

Re:MozillaFirebird is the best

[Peer]

Ideally it should just not load them ;)

NO, it should load them, otherwise the site is able to detect you're blocking the ads, and may take precautions. (That's probably why ./ has those annoying text ads.)

Re:MozillaFirebird is the best

[jandrese]

You guys must not be using the same web that I am. While I can still use Mozilla for most of my web browsing, there is still that 5% of websites that don't work. It is almost always a javascript issue, and almost aways listed as an "advocacy bug" in bugzilla. This drives me nuts. I can tell you right now that BBandT bank is not going to fix their website anytime soon. Wouldn't it have made more sense to implement those few "broken" features and pop up a warning about them being depricated/contact the webmaster? Once most sites stop using them, THEN you can remove them from the browser. My GF gave up on Mozilla because it just didn't work for her online banking and a few other sites she frequents. Yes, I told the webmasters about the problem, but most of the time they're just using some out-of-the-box web services suite and have no idea of how to fix it. In a couple of instances the original company is out of business (oh those .coms ) but they figure: why fix it, it works with everything here?

IMHO, advocacy bugs are one of the leading causes of "screw it, I'm switching back to IE".

Re:MozillaFirebird is the best

[pebs]

That's too bad. Although there are times where Mozilla works and Firebird doesn't, and vica versa, I've never had to use IE for anything since Mozilla 1.0. Everyone I know who has switched to Mozilla/Netscape prefers to use it over IE.

Bank of America's page works great. Fidelity's page works fine. BBandT are stupid pricks for limiting who can use their site.

Sites that only work in IE are exactly the reason other browsers are sticking to standards, and should stick to the standards.

Re:MozillaFirebird is the best

[Hooded One]

Never mind that banks and other major websites *are* responding and are getting their act together. As more people start moving to Firebird, this will only increase.

Re:MozillaFirebird is the best

[pebs]

I wish some people would take a reality check from time to time, you can't make utiopia and ignore the flaws of the real world. Not all the time, atleast.

You can try. Why give up on your goals just because some shitty banking site doesn't work? If someone really wanted to, they could fork Mozilla and make it work with IE's non-standards. Mozilla is meant as a reference implementation of a standards-compliant browser. At least they are trying to help the situation.

Re:MozillaFirebird is the best

[edwdig]

Mozilla is meant as a reference implementation of a standards-compliant browser. At least they are trying to help the situation.

That was true back when AOL was funding Mozilla development. Mozilla would be the reference implementation, and Netscape and others would be the end user versions. But there is no more Netscape. Mozilla is now directly aimed at end users.

What are the implications..

[adeyadey]

..of the recent software patent lawsuit (won against MS/explorer) for Mozilla?

AA With X11

[nicolas.e]

The two releases have many new features which look good, However, the one i looked for the most, gtk2/xft is not included in the precompiled binaries. I can easily understand that some people can not use xft, but i think they are not the majority. It would be just great to download and just have these fonts. It is quite boring to wait for the 2-3 hour compilation of mozilla to look at the *great* antialiasing...

Re:AA With X11

[4of12]

...effort to target more end-users...

Granted, that's got SVG in it too

Really great SVG support, IMHO, is one of the necessary ingredients for making the web more exciting. This is the kind of innovation that is not just useful, but something the whole community can participate in.

• Vector graphics,
• independent of screen resolution,
• able to convey layout information, and in
• a standard format accessible to anyone who can download and read a specification,

would really help the web become a better place.

Mozilla's market share is so low that it is not regarded as a serious competitor to IE.

The only way Mozilla can gain broader acceptance is if it not only does the standard HTML rendering acceptably good, but if it offers exciting new technology that is not available in IE.

IIRC, an SVG implementation is already in IE, but there's little incentive for it to be further developed. Arguably there's incentive for SVG in IE not to be further developed by Microsoft because a robust successful implementation may displace competing product lines of their own and other partners (Shockwave, Adobe). There's a potential wonderful application area to be served, but it will require someone besides established big-names to develop.

The old extensions as non-root bug..

[Mr Smidge]

Crucially, have they fixed the bug in the Linux build that stops non-root users using some extensions properly?

I remember this being quite a task to solve..

ghastly new firebird website

[pangloss]

it looks...awful. the new moz 1.5 beta site looks good, as does the thunderbird site, but the firebird site looks like a bad joke. i'm just waiting for a flash jobbie screaming "SUNDAY SUNDAY SUNDAY". they ought to at least put up a link to the 0.7 release notes (maybe explain the new auto-download feature). ok enough ranting on the site.

anyway, i love the product. in fact, i'm posting this with 0.7. actually i'm just glad they fixed the form completion bug back with 0.6.1.

Guess it's not the last release

[martinde]

Check out the Mozilla roadmap. It shows a version 1.6 coming out in December 2003. Of course, it looks like 1.5 is several months "late" (an observation, not criticism) so I guess the schedule could be a bit loose.

BTW, for us who are too lazy to go find out ourselves, what makes firebird better than mozilla itself? I find mozilla to be quite satisfactory, why would I switch?

Re:Guess it's not the last release

[cjpez]

Meh. The reason I don't like Firebird is most of the items marked "Yes" where Mozilla says "No." I hate integrated search bars (yes, I know you can turn those off), I despise Form Fill to no end (and it seems that Form Fill is impossible to turn off, which is what finally drove me away from Firebird last time), "Automatic Downloading" isn't something I feel deserves to be under the category of "features" ("bugs" is more like it)... Also, if the whole goal of Firebird is to be the friendly, easy user experience, then I shouldn't have to go into "about:config" just to get the browser to behave properly. It seems most of the configuration options I think are great are simply holdovers from the Mozilla codebase that they're going to axe once they get around to it.

For example:

• Why do I have to set browser.fixup.alternate.enabled just to turn off Firebird's damn "helpful" URL-rewriting "feature" (yes, I *didn't* mean to put a ".com" at the end!)
• Why do I have to set browser.tabs.autoHide to false just to have it keep the tab bar visible all the time like it should be doing by default (don't they understand it's *annoying* to have your whole window shift down whenever you open a new tab?)

There were other little minor annoyances, too, but I've forgotten those. Anyway, it's still Moz for me, all the way.

Looks don't make a brand

[Max Romantschuk]

The website redesign won't make Mozilla more successful. Advertising is what's needed, plain and simple. How the site looks won't affect people's awareness of Mozilla, advertising will.

Making the site UI more streamlined does make sense though.

Re:Looks don't make a brand

[Chris_Stankowitz]

The website redesign won't make Mozilla more successful. Advertising is what's needed, plain and simple. How the site looks won't affect people's awareness of Mozilla, advertising will.

Making the site UI more streamlined does make sense though.

Its all part of a joint effort. They are not just re-doing the website for shits-&-giggles. Its all an effort to look more "professional" as they offer new services.

Re:Looks don't make a brand

[3Suns]

Um, actually they often do. I still maintain that IE beat out Netscape solely by 1) being persistent and not getting uninstalled, and 2) having a more striking and recognizable icon.

Seriously, back in 1997 or so when IE was trying to overcome Netscape, most people had both browsers installed: Netscape because they were used to it, and IE because it came w/ the OS. People have crowded desktops, and they generally don't much care which browser they use. Which icon is going to stand out more, Netscape w/ it's square, busy, low-contrast "N" logo, or the bold, simple, stylized "e" for IE? Sooner or later people got used to IE, realized they didn't need 2 browsers, and got rid of the easier one to uninstall.

Re:Looks don't make a brand

[Deusy]

The website redesign won't make Mozilla more successful. Advertising is what's needed, plain and simple. How the site looks won't affect people's awareness of Mozilla, advertising will.

In attempting to be blunt, you've oversimplified the situation to the point that what you've said is frankly wide of the mark.

Point 1: A website is an advertisement. (As are all points that lie on the road to regularly using a product.)

Point 2: People, in general, are fickle. Advertising with the old web page would have been a battle.

Granted, a website redesign won't affect awareness. It's not an attempt to affect awareness. Awareness and impressions/usage are two very different things.

Advertising only works well when it holds newfound attention. The successful advertisement will take people straight to the next stop on the advertising chain: Mozilla's homepage. Here applies the age-old saying: First impressions last. The first impression you get is from the website - the point of entry for newcomers.

The old site was hackish. The main selling points from a user perspective were missed and there was no implied incentive to continue on to the download page.

The "midway design" (midway between the old and the new) was better but there was too much information on the one page. Developer information didn't need to be on the front page - developers know where they are going. And you can't describe every Mozilla product succinctly in one page like the "midway design" did.

The new design is an excellent front page. All the important points are immediately made to the reader. It sells Mozilla excellently and will get the attention of the user to a degree that even if their initial trials with Mozilla are unsuccessful they will return to what they perceive as a professionally presented project. With the old page, if it didn't work, it was probably forgotten.

A case in point would be the GNU project. They certainly aren't the most well known of organisations outside of tech circles but it isn't as if they haven't advertised themselves; GNU/Linux. Have you seen their website recently?

Re:Looks don't make a brand

[Mr Smidge]

I have managed to convince a number of my friends to swtich to using Mozilla or Mozilla Firebird, but I always kept in mind that people are inherently lazy and non-techies often don't really care, so long as something is good enough.

The factor that has convinced them to at least 'try' Firebird has been popup blocking. But I've often found that it is *then* all the other great features (tabs, speed, simple configuration etc.) that make them stay. So go ahead.. when numerous people complain that their computer is slow, suggest it as an alternative.

"You could always use a different internet browser you know. I'll install one that blocks popup adverts and is much faster, if you like. And if you don't like it, I'll get rid of it for you" - 90% of people I've said that to have agreed, and probably a further 90% of them have stuck with it. Let's educate the masses!

Re:Looks don't make a brand

[Rick Zeman]

Sooner or later people got used to IE, realized they didn't need 2 browsers, and got rid of the easier one to uninstall.

Err, don't you mean the one they could uninstall?

Thurderbird needs a good spell checker

[Tanaka]

I like Thunderbird, but the spell checker is really bad, especially at guessing words. Wish they would use ASpell. What this e-mail client really needs in an inline spell checker.

Firebird website burned my eyes

[JasonUCF]

Holy shit!

1. I use Firebird almost exclusively.

2. I (heart) 0.7

3. I (heart) everything those developers are after, even if they're naming their projects after cars ( COME ON! NOT A TROLL! )

4. The firebird redesign looks like it was done to appeal to 13 year olds! What the fuck! My eyes bled when I saw that page. My wife, a professional graphic designer, just shook her head and walked away. For such an awesome piece of software, you'd think they'd have a better piece of design on the webpage? Geeez... find a better pro bono designer! Mod me down, fine, but you shouldn't, because I don't want a flame war, I want to know what the fuck they were thinking. Kitsch is nice and all, but, geeeeeeeeeeeeezzzz......

The new Mozilla does not have MNG support!

[Anonymous Coward]

There is one major regression from Mozilla 1.4 to Mozilla 1.5: the support for the MNG image format has been removed. This means that all those who thought that they could replace the animated GIFs on their pages with the patent-free MNG format will have to go back to GIF or Flash. This also means that JNG, a subset of MNG allowing JPEG-style photgraphic images with full transparency, is broken as well since the release of Mozilla 1.5.

The worst part is how this was handled: support for MNG was dropped because the code was too large and there was no maintainer, but then it was never restored despite impressive reduction of the size of the code and the presence of several active developers.

For details, take a look at Bug 18574. The release of 1.5 without MNG support is a sad day for those who love open image formats.

Re:The new Mozilla does not have MNG support!

[Raphael]

This means that all those who thought that they could replace the animated GIFs on their pages with the patent-free MNG format will have to go back to GIF or Flash.

Note that MS Internet Explorer does not support MNG either, and Mozilla has a small market share in comparison to MSIE. But on the other hand, it is true that the removal of MNG is bad news for those who intended to use it inside their company, if their company uses Mozilla or other browsers derived from it.

I think that is is possible to restore a part of the MNG support by installing an XPI file for Mozilla. This is not a perfect solution because it requires every user to download a separate package for MNG support, but this could be a partial workaround for companies wanting to use MNG in their intranet.

For details, take a look at Bug 18574.

Heh! The links to Mozilla from Slashdot are disabled. So if you want to take a look at this bug, you have to copy this URL and paste it into a separate browser window (or tell your browser or proxy to drop the Referer header, if you can do that):
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18574

Please do not add a new comment to that bug report. Voting for it is probably equally useless, because this bug report has far more bugs than any other bug report in Bugzilla, but still nobody wants to apply the required patches that would revert the removal of MNG support. Instead, spend your votes on related bugs, such as bug #196670 or bug #204520.

Re:The new Mozilla does not have MNG support!

[Glenn R-P]

The LZW compression patent expired in the US in June 2003. In Europe,
Japan, and Canada it runs until next summer. GIF will always be technically inferior though.

Reasons for the slowness

[GarfBond]

For those of you wondering why the mozilla servers are swamped all of a sudden, it's because they just recently moved all the servers off of the AOL backbone onto a different host (one of the effects of AOL nixing Netscape), so we're no longer able to get oodles of bandwidth like we used to. Please be understanding while the servers undergo a slashdotting :)

Dunno about 13 year olds, but...

[djeaux]

... I was restoring my 16 yr old daughter's laptop (after a particularly NASTY Kazaa episode) & decided to go with Firebird. In the past, she had told me that she preferred Netscape 7.1 to MSIE anyway, and knowing that Netscape was dead-in-the-water, I asked if she ever used the mail client. When she answered "no", I installed Firebird.

So last night, I ducked into her room & asked which browser she was using. She answered "Firebird ... and it is GOOD"...

I'll have to ask her opinion of the new Firebird homepage, though :-D

Re:Mirrors arent't up to date..

[Lerxst Pratt]

Yes... well, sort of. I checked the page source for the filename of Firebird 0.7 and stuck it into Google. I got one hit and it downloaded very fast. I hesitate to post the link because it's probably someone's home machine. However, anyone with sufficient skill will be able to duplicate my feat.

alt. link for windows firebird 0.7

[klocwerk]

http://fileforum.betanews.com/detail.php3?fid=1032 985422

linky

Re:alt. link for windows firebird 0.7

[Lerxst Pratt]

This "mirror" points back to the already /.ed ftp.mozilla.org.

Re:How about some RedHat RPMS of recent releases?

[The One KEA]

Like I said elsewhere, I use the Dag-Apt Firebird RPMS, which are available for RH7.3, RH8 and RH9. Linkage: http://dag.wieers.com/packages/mozilla-firebird/

Unfortunately they only have 0.6.1 packages at the moment, but I'm sure they'll update to 0.7. I checked the apt repository at FreshRPMS as well and they haven't updated yet either.

Mozilla beta site looks great

[lay]

This is the kind of site that the mozilla folks should focus on: an appealing product site that shows a different image from the "developer-oriented" or "cutting-edge-freak" current website.
This is a great advantage towards public perception of Mozilla as a very good browser. It shows maturity on a project. Congratulations to all the folks at the Mozilla team and thank you for providing us with a serious browser.

Re:Can't get mouse gesture working with Firebird 0

[Lerxst Pratt]

Apparently, you are talking about a completely different browser. Firebird does not have mouse gestures installed by default. Mouse Gestures is an extension that you have to install yourself. You can't disable what you don't have. ;-) Also, mouse gestures are AWESOME! It saves you loads of time if you're a frequent net browser.

Re:Why Mozilla sucks ass, part IV

[zr-rifle]

>Because I don't live on caffiene, I don't play Quake, I don't read Slashdot, and I hate Linux.

If you don't read slashdot, why are you replying this news?

Firebird is too.. modular

[E-Prime]

I've tried Firebird (coming from the regular Mozilla) and while it technically may be the XSOP, it went straight out the door again here.

If you want it to do half the stuff Mozilla does, you have to install a ton of plugins, and none of these seem properly "coordinated" project-wise. So you end up much like with Miranda - tons of functionality, lots of duplicate settings and no grand master-plan as to how things should look or where they should be in the UI.

I mean, the whole concept of tabbed browsing is void if the top right-click menu item isn't "Close Tab".

I just hope they "fix" these useability issues before dropping the good old memory-hog ;)

BitTorrent link for win32 here

[Lev_Arris]

I'm probably going to regret this but I've put a BT tracker, seed and .torrent file online anyway:

http://tcnnet.dyndns.org/do
wnloads/MozillaFire bird-0.7-win32.zip.torrent
MozillaFirebird-0.7-win32.zip.torrent

I only have the win32 version right now, I'll try to put the linux one online once it completes downloading (and post the link as a child to this posting).

Note: My link is very slow (thus the first seeding clients low speed) so it would be nice if you could help seeding if you can.

Re:How about some RedHat RPMS of recent releases?

[damian]

I am trying to build rpms at the moment, but I think there is a problem with the source tar file.

Others are having problems too: bug 222241

Re:Mirror

[Lerxst Pratt]

Tanx

They'll still be developed

[Anthracks]

Composer I know for a fact will still be developed, as outlined in this MozillaZine article. One of the primary authors, Daniel Glazman, has been hired by the Lindows company (seriously) to maintain it and he plans to check the code into the Mozilla CVS. It will be a standalone application like Firebird and Thunderbird, eventually using the shared Gecko backend that's in the works.

As for ChatZilla, it's available as an extension for Firebird, and I've heard talk of making a standalone app version too, although I can't find a link to back it up. But the point is, the developers of these projects haven't randomly abandoned them, they'll still be here in the post-SeaMonkey world. Or as another poster said, you can always just run SeaMonkey, although I happen to prefer the birds.

Agree

[twocents]

While the benefits are not always immediately tangible, a good, clean design makes a better impression. It does take a bit more time, I know because I'm as guilty of sometime just throwing things up on the Web as well, but it's tough to think much of a product if you are new to the product and the Web site is terrible.

And the site certainly doesn't need to be fancy, just clean and informative.

I've been doing some work with ImageMagick of late, and I love the power this set of tools provides. I actually worked with the tools well before ever visiting the main Web site. To my surprise the site, while easy to navigate, is very stark and unimpressive compared to the tool-set. This is not a bash at all, but simply what I consider to be an example of a site that doesn't shine nearly as brightly as the product.

A contrast to the above is the Open Source project Gallery's Web site. This site is visually stimulating, which is great considering the product is a visually oriented product.

There are so many sites that have little or no content that keep piling on the Flash, piling on the glitz, so it's nice to see sites, such as the new Mozilla site, that offer something useful and look good.

Here's to presentation that equals the content.

Re:It has to be asked... (ESC key)

[lukket]

"Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; HP-UX 9000/785; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030707"

You need to analyze it properly:
X11 means you're using the X11 window manager (X Window)
U stands for Unix
HP-UX 9000/785 means that you probably have a HP 9000 with OS build 785. Build 785 happens to be v 10.20
en-US means your language is English and that you are located in the US
rv is the revision of Mozilla (1.4 in your case)

It's actually the same on Windows. Windows XP is written as Windows NT 5.1 for example.

Torrent for the Linux i686 version

[McDutchie]

I just managed to get the Linux version as well, here is the torrent. Enjoy! (get BitTorrent first if needed)

Re:I take it there's some incredible features in t

[JediTrainer]

I was able to get it from ftp.mozilla.org. The trouble is the link on the releases page sends you to their web server with an http:// link. Hit them on ftp://ftp.mozilla.org and you should be able to download the new release just fine.

Torrent for the Win32 version (full installer)

[McDutchie]

Third and last: just got through to the Win32 version, here is the torrent. Have fun. (get BitTorrent first if needed)

Thunderbird 0.3 Win32 torrent!

[zsazsa]

Thunderbird 0.3 Win32 torrent available HERE.

torrents

[mraymer]

MozillaFirebird-0.7-i686-pc-linux-gnu.tar.gz

thunderbird-0.3-win32.zip

MozillaFirebird-0.7-win32.zip

I think more might be coming soon, check this page.

still one big complaint

[BigBir3d]

Firebird is still horribly slow to scroll up and down when compared to IE. Very annoying when using up/down arrows (or left clicking the slider area) to navigate long web pages (such as /. discussions) where you want to go up or down many (10+) pages. You think this would have been worked on. Load time is faster, why isn't scrolling?