Slashdot Mirror


Mozilla 1.6 Released

Jack Comics writes "Asa Dotzler of the Mozilla Foundation has announced this evening the release of Mozilla 1.6. The Mozilla 1.6 release notes can be found here."

756 comments

  1. Keep 'em coming... by natron+2.0 · · Score: 4, Informative

    More security fixes and the ability to reload the source view...nice.

    1. Re:Keep 'em coming... by cujo_1111 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It is very nice. Mozilla continues to get better with every release. Like AMD, it just needs some more public exposure...

      --
      If I point out that you are incorrect, making me a foe does not make you any more correct.
    2. Re:Keep 'em coming... by iammaxus · · Score: 5, Funny

      "...the ability to reload the source view"

      Great! Now it's so much easier to read slashdot the Hardcore Way

    3. Re:Keep 'em coming... by ender81b · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Shudder. Ancient HTML 3 code... oh the horror.

      As an aside, Anybody know when Moz will officially be branched off into firebird/thunderbird components? I thought this was supposed to happen around 1.6 apparently I was wrong.

    4. Re:Keep 'em coming... by NightSpots · · Score: 1

      Yea ... when do they strip out the plugin architechure to comply with the Eolas patent?

      Afterall, MS can no longer release versions of IE, it's only a matter of time until Mozilla is hit, too.

    5. Re:Keep 'em coming... by typhoonius · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Actually, the Eolas "president" (it's a one-man operation) is only going after Microsoft specifically to promote "alternative" browsers such as Mozilla. At least it'll give us an IE patch; it seems like the only way to get Microsoft to update the thing is to come up with a lawsuit. Anyone have patents on a "Faulty DOM Implementation"? Or maybe someone with a patent on "Buffer Overflows" could take out the whole company.

    6. Re:Keep 'em coming... by gumbi+west · · Score: 1

      The thing that gets me is that "show source" can't just show you the source for the page you are looking at. It has to reload... problem being if the page way dynamic (i.e. you just hit "buy" or some such thing).

    7. Re:Keep 'em coming... by teamhasnoi · · Score: 5, Funny
      HA! I cut the cable to my monitor and I read Slashdot by looking at its VERY ELECTRONS!

      Not really. I have a nice old lady read it to me, 'cause I'm scared of the Metal Ones.

    8. Re:Keep 'em coming... by hendridm · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That is the impression I got from the roadmap too: "Deliver a Mozilla 1.4 milestone that can replace the 1.0 branch as the stable development path, then move on to make riskier changes during 1.5 and 1.6. The major changes after 1.4 involve switching to Mozilla Firebird and Thunderbird ..."

      Apparently "after 1.4" means several versions after 1.4. The Mozilla roadmap is as clear as mud (pretty diagrams though). The Firebird roadmap is much more concise.

    9. Re:Keep 'em coming... by brasten · · Score: 5, Informative

      From what I've been reading, more people are interested in the suite over the *birds than originally anticipated, so they'll be keeping it around for a while.

      However, most developers working on the suite are focused primarily on the Gecko engine, with very little work being done on the front-end of things. Since the *birds are obviously Gecko-based as well, they are essentially being worked on by most Mozilla developers, even if indirectly. So it's not like the *birds are missing out on much development effort.

    10. Re:Keep 'em coming... by el-spectre · · Score: 4, Funny

      Wuss. I hold my hand near the ethernet cable and use induction to surf the web...

      --
      "Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
    11. Re:Keep 'em coming... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Yeah now if only Mozilla wouldn't butcher the source so badly when you view it... goddamn, its annoying having it show lowercase HTML when you put it in uppercase.

    12. Re:Keep 'em coming... by bluephone · · Score: 2, Informative

      Try this: http://www.squarefree.com/bookmarklets/webdevel.ht ml#generated_source It's a bookmarklet that takes the current page, and shows you it's source in a new window, without reloading. It's not the EXACT source from the server though, it's the cleaned up onebeing displayer. It's as close as we get, currently.

      --
      jX [ Make everything as simple as possible, but no simpler. - Einstein ]
    13. Re:Keep 'em coming... by Malc · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "From what I've been reading, more people are interested in the suite over the *birds than originally anticipated, so they'll be keeping it around for a while."

      Grrrr. This is a pet peeve of mine. Why do so many people find the word "suite" to be synonymous with "monolithic app"? There's absolutely no reason. The suite can consist of the *birds where each component runs in its own process space. There are plenty of other tightly coupled suites out there that do this very well. Why would anybody want to run it all in one process space? It was a fundamental architectural mistake made by Netscape a decade ago, and just pure foolishness when the open source Mozilla team copied it!

      As far as most users are concerned, they click an icon on their desktop (or in the app) for whatever they want to do, be it browsing, mail, IRC, calendaring, etc. A window appears and they do their thing. Why does it matter if that window comes from the same process or not? It doesn't. In fact, it's preferable if it doesn't. Crashes, or blocking actions won't tie up or interfere with the other process(es) (which is a major problem with the current suite).

      Once the *birds implement the same functionality from a UI and extensions perspective, and the same integration with each of the other components as the current suite, there is no reason to continue with this monolithic monstrousity. I like the Mozilla products. I use the components (mostly mail/news and browser), I want the suite. I don't want a monolithic single process app.

    14. Re:Keep 'em coming... by Oliver+Defacszio · · Score: 5, Funny

      That's hardcore? Pff. I just read Slashdot on Monday and know what's going to be posted on Friday.

      --

      -
      Inventor of the term 'pardon my French'.
    15. Re:Keep 'em coming... by T-Ranger · · Score: 3, Funny

      Thats easy. More SCO stories and dups.

    16. Re:Keep 'em coming... by brasten · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "Once the *birds implement the same functionality from a UI and extensions perspective, and the same integration with each of the other components as the current suite, there is no reason to continue with this monolithic monstrousity."

      Yes, I happen to agree with you... being a Firebird/Thunderbird user myself. I don't think whether the current suite is a monolithic monstrousity or a multi-process paradise matters to some. There are - apparently - those who desire the integration between components that the suite has to offer.

      Hopefully, someday soon, the individual birds can acheive the same level of integration with each other while remaining separate processes... When that happens, the "Suite" will simply be the full collection of *birds. Until then, the single-process application lives on.

    17. Re:Keep 'em coming... by ebrandsberg · · Score: 2, Funny

      I stare into the fiber port on a 10-gig switch!

      Now where did I put my glasses?

    18. Re:Keep 'em coming... by BZ · · Score: 1

      > Once the *birds implement the same functionality
      > from a UI and extensions perspective, and the
      > same integration with each of the other
      > components as the current suite

      Yeah, once this happens. ETA is at least 6 months for this (TBird is in 0.4, for goodness' sake).

    19. Re:Keep 'em coming... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't hold your breath. Mozilla is bloated because that's just the way a large portion of the developers want it. They don't want people to be able to pick just the parts they want. Those same developers would probably walk away from the project it it were branched off into components.

    20. Re:Keep 'em coming... by benjamindees · · Score: 2, Funny

      I love it: abusing one inept branch of the government to make up for another. Take that, Ghandi.

      --
      "I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
    21. Re:Keep 'em coming... by joshwa · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, this hasn't made it into yesterday's Firebird build yet...

    22. Re:Keep 'em coming... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It took them 6 years to do this?

    23. Re:Keep 'em coming... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The 'suite' has taken 2 years to get to the current stage. The 'birds' want to start from scratch for some unknown reason. Why would any sane person want to go thru the pain of bugs nobody wants to fix again?

      Seriously, Gecko is mature, but I wouldnt say the Mozilla GUI is completely polished yet. So many visual problems that nobody wants to fix because they don't change any of their windows settings.

      When the birds get to about 1.1 some smartass will think it's a good idea to make another browser from scratch.

      That's how broken the bug system is. Nobody is 'responsible' for boring bugs, and thye just get put in a corner to rot for 3yrs.

    24. Re:Keep 'em coming... by WuphonsReach · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Some of us wish that Firebird had multiple processes so that a crash in one window wouldn't wipe out the other 4 windows with half a dozen tabs each....

      (A habit that you form once you have a tabbed browser...)

      Thunderbird 0.4 has worked well for me for the last month (replaced Moz 1.4). It's finished enough that it's useable for me at least.

      --
      Wolde you bothe eate your cake, and have your cake?
    25. Re:Keep 'em coming... by yomegaman · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'm posting this by whistling into the phone!

      --
      ...wearing a skin-tight topless leather jumpsuit, with cutaway buttocks and transparent crotch panel.
    26. Re:Keep 'em coming... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nobody really wants to handle the GUI issues because the GUI code is basically end-of-line anyway. And you are likely 100% correct about the fate of the "birds".

      Back when AOL was running things, they could throw developers at XUL, but with a smaller & more casual developer base, people will be more interested in building Gecko-based browsers that are specific to Windows/Mac/Gnome/whatever.

      Considering it took them 4 years to add basic things like customizable toolbars to XUL, maybe that wouldn't be the worst thing if it gets ditched.

    27. Re:Keep 'em coming... by abertoll · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Why would anybody want to run it all in one process space? Because... you can keep common parts of the program loaded into memory for faster startup.

      --
      "he drew his sword Ringil that glittered like ice... and he wounded Morgoth with seven wounds..."
    28. Re:Keep 'em coming... by Bj�rn · · Score: 1
      Some of us wish that Firebird had multiple processes so that a crash in one window wouldn't wipe out the other 4 windows with half a dozen tabs each....

      Yes that is annoying when it happens even if is relativity seldom, at least for me. IE however does start multiple process (at least occasionally) and it can have some negative consequences. If a webpage opens another windows cookies are not propagated to the new window. A consequence of this is a popup window might not be logged in to a site, while the original window is. This doesn't always happen with IE though, only sometimes.

      --
      Never express yourself more clearly than you are able to think. --Niels Bohr
    29. Re:Keep 'em coming... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From what I've seen, IE is predictable. Click on the icon, you get a new process. Click New Window, it's the same process. Although it might work differently on Win98.

    30. Re:Keep 'em coming... by rock_climbing_guy · · Score: 1
      Let me know if I can help you out with my patents on any of the following:

      dangling pointers
      infinite loops
      blue screens of death
      digital restrictions management systems
      pressing three keys at once to reboot
      fear, uncertainty, and doubt campaigns
      four byte integer over/underflows
      weak encryption systems
      using CD-ROM discs to spread a plauge of crap over the entire planet, and now probably on to Mars. ( Does the Mars lander use Windows at all? )

      --
      Wh47 d1d j00 541, 31337 15n't t3h r0xor5 ne m0r3???
    31. Re:Keep 'em coming... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > you can keep common parts of the program loaded into memory for faster startup

      That's what shared libraries are for.

    32. Re:Keep 'em coming... by SnowZero · · Score: 1

      Took me a while to get used to, but that is the standard now according to w3, see this link. The upshot is that XHTML should all be in lowercase because it is based on XML (which is case-sensitive), and the DTD for XHTML is in lower case. I remember the days when most standards people wanted it in uppercase to look like SGML...

    33. Re:Keep 'em coming... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, I'd be more inclined to praise the Mozilla team if they'd turn their attention to useability issues. I don't mean type ahead searching either. For the kinds of things Mozilla is good at, it has been roughly unchanged since M1.3 and nothing has been done about the kinds of things Mozilla is NOT good at. Indeed it seems clear that the Mozilla project has plateaued and lacks direction. But it's not like there isn't work left to do! It's just the kind of work that the Mozilla bunch probably doesn't particularly want to do on features they personally don't care about. How do I know Mozilla is unfinished? Well ordinary users I support (informally) are frequently asking me about things that they should be able to do with their browser but Mozilla doesn't do. Mostly it has to do with integration of Mozilla and multimedia - but there are a few wacky javascript incompatibilities that beset the mozilla user too. Typically the more javascript a commercial website uses the more likely Mozilla will simply not work with that site. Tell me its all about compliant Javascript I believe you. But the people who're asking me about that simply don't care. They just want it to work. I like to plug mozilla and opensource flagships like OpenOffice.org and Linux to Windows people straining under the weight of Windows licensing. But if I can't tell people that Mozilla can do all that IE can do and MEAN it honestly, then I can't wholeheartedly advocate Mozilla. It seems that there will always be "yes but," issues holding honest people back from saying "oh yeah ditch IE use Mozilla and never look back!". To be honest one must add some caveats: "Be prepared for some things that kinda don't work --multimedia, and even whole websites" That's the way it will stay, until the Mozillans address themselves to some realworld issues. For example, I have gotten really sick of Mozilla telling me that rtsp is not a registered protocol. Stuff it ! For an unregistered protocol it sure is being used with increasing frequency. A lot more often than Mozilla is being used I'll bet. Get cracking on supporting prevailing protocols, W3C registered or not, or rot in a unmarked grave of irrelevancy. Your choice. Second of all. How come some non-mozilla programmers are the ones responsible for the Mplayerplug-in that embeds mplayer in Mozilla ? This is symptomatic of the inattention to useability in Mozilla. People use browsers for more than just reading Linux HOWTOs, guys.If XUL is this wonderfully extensible platform, why don't you guys prove it by extending Mozilla's embrace to network distributed multimedia. Why did someone else have to come up with this tiny plugin? What is it all of about 1400 lines of code? 5 years on from its birth and Mozilla still lacks integration with multimedia on non-windows platforms. 1400 lines and in 5 years it never occurred to you to write them. Where are you guys keeping your heads if you think you can create a viable browser that is essentially text and jpgs/gifs only and doesn't successfully integrate multimedia? That's crazy. Stop using yourselves as references and do some user based research.

    34. Re:Keep 'em coming... by clubin · · Score: 1

      I'm working on a dynamic site and I spit out handy debug info in HTML comments (performance profiling info and the like). Seeing as how a nearly immediate second request for the same page is highly likely to get responded to faster than the original, due to optimizations all over the infrastructure, this bug really gets to me. I've been considering using IE just to get around that when I need to.

    35. Re:Keep 'em coming... by CProgrammer98 · · Score: 1

      lowercase tags is the new fasion, and indeed the only standard. "legal" form if you wish to be compliant with the xhtml schema.

      I personally have always used lowercase tags. It just looks nicer in my pretty syntax highlighting editor... I don't want my html shouting at me!

      --
      And the people shall be oppressed, every one by another, and every one by his neighbour Isaiah 3:5
    36. Re:Keep 'em coming... by jesser · · Score: 1

      According to bug 55583, that problem was fixed a long time ago. I tested it just now on one of Slashdot's lame-filters, and it is fixed. I'm using Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7a) Gecko/20040114 Firebird/0.8.0+ (MozJF).

      --
      The shareholder is always right.
    37. Re:Keep 'em coming... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe Kevin Mitnick has prior art on that one, since the government was afraid he'd use his phone call from jail to hack into government computers.

    38. Re:Keep 'em coming... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What happened with the guy who wrote patches against slashcode to make it html 4.01 (or some other recent standard) compliant?

      The patches didn't make it? It'd be nice if the most frequented open source discussion site did care about www.w3c.org ...

    39. Re:Keep 'em coming... by wsloand · · Score: 1

      You know that there are a lot of neophytes on Slashdot when this post gets modded offtopic instead of funny.

    40. Re:Keep 'em coming... by Junta · · Score: 1

      Well that is all and good, but when you are on the road far removed from such luxury as ethernet or even a computer, nothing beats picking up a phone, dialing a dial-in service, and making modem noises with your mouth for some quick web browsing.

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    41. Re:Keep 'em coming... by walt-sjc · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I just wish they would do more for performance. I've got 2 identical machines - one runs Debian Sid with galeon, Mozilla, firebird, konq, etc. The other runs Win2K. Debian is my main desktop and I use Galeon (which is Mozilla based for those of you unfamilar with Galeon) as my main browser.

      IE loads the exact same pages almost instantly, where it can take several seconds for ANY of the linux-based browsers to load - some times as much as 10 times longer. It seems to be mainly an issue with tables.

      For example: go to the the asterisk users mailing list, scroll down, click on a message, then click back. See how long it takes to re-render the cached page? Horrible. Try the page in IE and Mozilla. Konquerer is fastest of the linux browsers on this page.

    42. Re:Keep 'em coming... by MoogMan · · Score: 1

      Pah, nothing! I live in the desert and use fire and smoke signals to communicate with my nearest "Internet Service Provider"

    43. Re:Keep 'em coming... by iantri · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Opera can restore all your tabs if it crashes..

    44. Re:Keep 'em coming... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Big deal, I don't read Slashdot.

    45. Re:Keep 'em coming... by schovanec · · Score: 1

      I would patent that, but there's already too much prior art...

    46. Re:Keep 'em coming... by Short+Circuit · · Score: 1

      At 20 years old, and with a 5-digit Slashdot uid, I've been accused of being born with ethernet growing out of my ears.

    47. Re:Keep 'em coming... by Bedouin+X · · Score: 1

      IE will spawn multiple processes (if that feature is enabled) when you click on the IE icon while it's already running. The new window will be a new process.

      Maybe that tidbit can help you avoid the cookie problem

      --
      Dissolve... Resolve... Evolve...
    48. Re:Keep 'em coming... by smacktits · · Score: 1

      Opera, the superior browser. It beats everything else hands down, whether on Windows or Linux.

    49. Re:Keep 'em coming... by MooseGuy529 · · Score: 1

      I use Firebird--it is the BEST BROWSER EVER! The UI is smooth and simple (I use a skin called Breeze), it responds almost instantly (cough*the suite doesn't*cough), and it works... the tab-browsing is much better in that it opens tabs in the background by default. I use this to read through slashdot, open all the stories I want to read (without having to switch back to the homepage again) and then I can read all the stories without waiting for them to load or going back to the homepage again.

      My major problem with the suite is that it takes much, much longer to load and is missing a lot of the smoothness and snappiness of the individual components by themselves. XUL and all that related GUI stuff, I think, is an extra layer of complication that makes the app too slow.

      Another gigantic complaint is the Address Book. I don't know if anyone is actually paying attention to it, but it still sucks, even if it is "bug-free" for the moment. It's really unintuitive to make groups, and most of the time, creating a group creates extra, non-removable address entries. They should start over and have three ways to add and remove addresses from groups: drag and drop, a list of "who's in this group" and a list of "what groups is this person in'. It also needs to give the address book the same automatic recognition of names that the email client has, to make creating groups easier.

      --

      Tired of free iPod sigs? Subscribe to my blacklist

    50. Re:Keep 'em coming... by badmonkey · · Score: 5, Informative

      I just read yesterday in the firebird documentation that it has a 250 millisecond pause built in before rendering so as to not have to reflow the page as much as bytes stream in. It can be deactivated as in the instructions here
      So that'll make it a little faster I think

    51. Re:Keep 'em coming... by gnu-generation-one · · Score: 1

      No way to specify the From: field in email messages?

      No way to block Flash graphics without using an external proxy?

      No per-mime-type filtering options?

      And is there any way of making the "Close other tabs" button disappear? No! No! Dammit, don't close everything, I meant just "close this tab"...

    52. Re:Keep 'em coming... by Bedouin+X · · Score: 1

      I've found that Netscape tends to do most of the things that you mention much better than Mozilla. You'll find that Netscape works MUCH better with plugins. Particularly Real and WM. I should also say that I mainly use Firebird now and don't have the problems that you have, if that's worth anything (if it's not I don't need to know).

      Whenever I have newbies that whine about IE, I point them to Netscape 7.1 and I can generally recommend it with authority. It's not IE so it's not realistic to say (or expect) that it does everything that IE does. However it does a lot that IE doesn't, and for some users that evens it out in the end.

      --
      Dissolve... Resolve... Evolve...
    53. Re:Keep 'em coming... by juhaz · · Score: 1

      For a someone who whines about usability you really should take some writing lessons.

      I just might read that if it was actually readable, ever heard about paragraphs and the like?

    54. Re:Keep 'em coming... by Malc · · Score: 1

      "There are - apparently - those who desire the integration between components that the suite has to offer. "

      Then those people need to be educated. And if they're developers, they should be ashamed of themselves for not being able to see it (and perhaps should just stick to VB Script). Like I said, tight integration doesn't mandate a single process space, that just makes it easier. It also allows developers to be lazier as the lines between components can easily be crossed and perhaps blurred. There are many tightly integrated suites and systems that are multiprocess based. For now I will just suggest KDE and MSFT Office.

    55. Re:Keep 'em coming... by plover · · Score: 1
      Except for the times when that's not true.

      A lot of the "preloaded for your pleasure" stuff simply gets swapped right back out to disk again because you ran a large memory footprint program (such as a game) after preloading. "Loading the browser into memory" in many of these cases means gathering data out of the various configuration files, loading it into memory, and then swapping it back out as virutal memory. Not much of a performance gain.

      I find most programs with "quick launch" features to behave more like "slow boot" features. As a rule, I disable them.

      --
      John
    56. Re:Keep 'em coming... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You were robbed, sir.

    57. Re:Keep 'em coming... by Chilliwilli · · Score: 1

      BitTorrent link anyone? I can't seem to get to the offical ftp for the life of me.

      --
      Cure cancer.. and stuff! www.team45.info
    58. Re:Keep 'em coming... by plover · · Score: 1
      Count me as a *bird wannabee.

      At the moment I'm using Moz 1.6b (1.6 is arriving in Download Manager at the moment) and I'm not willing to drop functionality of my browser down to the firebird level yet. I like having a browser with all the bells and whistles, but that's where I want it to end, too. I've got a different mail program, I don't use composer, and frankly I couldn't care less about news. I'd rather not have all that other crap along with my browser, but Mozilla is so much better than anything else at UI and dodging crap HTML that I can't give it up.

      Hmm...it's been a little while since I last tried [fire|thunder]bird. Perhaps it's time to take another look...

      --
      John
    59. Re:Keep 'em coming... by bluGill · · Score: 2, Informative

      In addition to the above comments: that is what fork() is for. I know Mozilla runs on Windows which doesn't have fork (at least it didn't last I checked, I don't know what posix services provides windows though), but why should I suffer on unix which does.

    60. Re:Keep 'em coming... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      And don't forget more SCO stories and dupes.

    61. Re:Keep 'em coming... by cscx · · Score: 1

      YOU ARE A GOD.... ahem.

    62. Re:Keep 'em coming... by swv3752 · · Score: 3, Informative

      I have a win2k machine at work with Moz 1.4 and IE6. I think it is a P3 700mhz 512mb RAM.

      Trying the parent's mailing list- Moz -9 secs to load. IE- 15secs. We have a caching web proxy on a fast pipe. I tried Moz first.

      Click a message then go back- Moz 2secs, IE 2secs.

      IE does start displaying content faster but the complete load is from cache takes nearly identical amount of time. Seems to me that performance is adequate.

      --
      Just a Tuna in the Sea of Life
    63. Re:Keep 'em coming... by plover · · Score: 1
      Heh, you sound like an old line from Usenet:

      "Has anyone else noticed how much lamer the newbies are these days?"

      Or maybe we are just old. Maybe Slashcode really needs a new mod tag: "-1, Geezer reminiscing"

      By the way, I really was whistling 110 baud into phones before many of you were born. I couldn't whistle specific characters, but at least I could get the modem on the other end to believe it had carrier. But you try telling that to kids these days, and they just mod you offtopic ...

      --
      John
    64. Re:Keep 'em coming... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Actually, I'd be more inclined to praise the Mozilla team if they'd turn their attention to useability issues. I don't mean type ahead searching either. For the kinds of things Mozilla is good at, it has been roughly unchanged since M1.3. It has been getting only slightly better at what it does well (law of diminishing returns kicking in) and, on the other hand, nothing has been done about the kinds of things Mozilla is NOT good at. Indeed, it seems clear that the Mozilla project has plateaued and lacks direction. But it's not like there isn't work left to do! It's just the kind of work that the Mozilla bunch probably doesn't particularly want to do, on features they personally don't care about.

      How do I know Mozilla is unfinished? Well ordinary users I support (informally) are frequently asking me about things that they should be able to do with their browser but Mozilla doesn't do. Mostly it has to do with integration of Mozilla and multimedia - but there are a few wacky javascript incompatibilities that beset the mozilla user too. Typically the more javascript a commercial website uses the more likely Mozilla will simply not work with that site. Tell me its all about compliant Javascript --OK I believe you. But the people who're asking me about that simply don't care. They just want it to work. I like to plug mozilla and other opensource flagships like OpenOffice.org and Linux to Windows people straining under the weight of Windows licensing. But if I can't tell people that Mozilla can do all that IE can do and MEAN it honestly, then I can't wholeheartedly advocate Mozilla. It seems that there will always be "yes but," issues holding honest people back from saying "oh yeah ditch IE, use Mozilla instead and never look back!". To be honest one must add some caveats: "Use Mozilla but be prepared for some things that kinda don't work --multimedia, and even whole websites" That's the way it will stay, until the Mozillans address themselves to some realworld issues.

      For example, I have gotten really sick of Mozilla telling me that rtsp is not a registered protocol. Stuff it ! For an unregistered protocol it sure is being used with increasing frequency. A lot more often than Mozilla is being used I'll bet. Get cracking on supporting prevailing protocols, W3C registered or not, or rot in a unmarked grave of irrelevancy. Your choice.

      Second of all. How come some non-mozilla programmers are the ones responsible for the Mplayerplug-in that embeds mplayer in Mozilla ? This is symptomatic of the inattention to useability in Mozilla. People use browsers for more than just reading Linux HOWTOs, guys.If XUL is this wonderfully extensible platform, why don't you guys prove it by extending Mozilla's embrace to network distributed multimedia. Why did someone else have to come up with this tiny plugin? What is it all of about 1400 lines of code? 5 years on from its birth and Mozilla still lacks integration with multimedia on non-windows platforms. 1400 lines and in 5 years it never occurred to you to write them. Where are you guys keeping your heads if you think you can create a viable browser that is essentially text and jpgs/gifs only and doesn't successfully integrate multimedia? That's crazy. Stop using yourselves as references and do some user based research.

      (reformatted for whiney, no-attention span semiliterates)

    65. Re:Keep 'em coming... by nehril · · Score: 1

      wow. that is a dramatic difference! it's probably slower in actual (stopwatch) time, but it does SEEM visibly faster.

    66. Re:Keep 'em coming... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's easy. They are all dupes. You only have to read a weeks worth to know that.

    67. Re:Keep 'em coming... by cgenman · · Score: 1

      I extrapolate the storage pattern of all of the RAM drives connected to the internet from the electromagnetic and gravitational forces affecting a piece of fairy cake.

      And as it's about lunch time, I think my internet connection is going down.

    68. Re:Keep 'em coming... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Block flash, at least from displaying
      http://extensionroom.mozdev.org/more-i nfo.php/flas hclick

      and i use http://www.xulplanet.com/downloads/prefbar/help/fa q.html to specify a couple of From: fields. can't type free text though.

    69. Re:Keep 'em coming... by pmsyyz · · Score: 1

      Why not just highlight whatever you want to view the generated source of, right click, and select View Selection Source?

      --
      Phillip
    70. Re:Keep 'em coming... by jonadab · · Score: 3, Insightful

      > Why do so many people find the word "suite" to be synonymous with
      > "monolithic app"?

      Because most of the components of the suite are not available as *birds yet.
      Navigator (if the browser itself is all you use) can be replaced with Firebird,
      and the truly adventurous can replace Messenger with Thunderbird, and Composer
      (which to me was never useful anyway) is I *think* available as a Thunderbird
      extension, but that's about it. Sunbird last I checked is so far a non-starter,
      and then there are the other components... where are they in the *bird series?
      They remain... unimplemented. Okay, I think DOM inspector is available as a
      Firebird extension, but then you can only use it to inspect Firebird; you
      cannot, for example, use it to look at the Thunderbird XUL (for theming
      purposes). So, basically, the *birds are still lacking that.

      It's not the monolithicity of SeaMonkey that keeps people using it; it's the
      fact that it's essentially *complete* (well, except for Messenger, which is
      still missing quite a number of critical features, but that's another thread).
      The *birds are still very alpha; there are whole *categories* of features
      that nobody has even *looked* at implementing in them yet.

      If all you want is the browser, Firebird can be used as a replacement for
      Navigator (though to get the full functionality of Navigator you have to
      install about twenty extensions and a small handful of minor things are
      still not up to snuff), but if you use the SeaMonkey whole suite, there is
      no non-monolithic replacement available yet from Mozilla.org.

      That is why people continue to use SeaMonkey.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    71. Re:Keep 'em coming... by jonadab · · Score: 1

      Umm, *where* did this idea come from? Yeah, Windows has some shortcomings,
      but no fork? Where did this idea come from? Of course it has fork -- it's
      had fork since Windows 95 came out (sooner if you count early versions of NT).
      Okay, the 3.x series didn't have fork, but 3.x was just a mostly-useless
      graphical shell.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    72. Re:Keep 'em coming... by GeckoX · · Score: 1

      You're right, only when you have the "Open Windows In A New Process" option checked off in your internet options.

      No big mystery here ;)

      --
      No Comment.
    73. Re:Keep 'em coming... by r5t8i6y3 · · Score: 1

      Opera Software obviously has a single-minded focus to produce an excellent browser but in the long run all of that effort will likely be for naught.

      unless they change their license to the GPL (or some equivalent).

      IMNSHO

    74. Re:Keep 'em coming... by jc42 · · Score: 1

      Smoke signals, eh? I've read the IP Over Avian Carrier RFC, and I read the report last year about the use of bongos to implement an IP link. But I haven't read of sending IP packets via smoke signals.

      Where is it documented? Inquiring minds want to know.

      (Yeah, I googled for "smoke signals" "IP packets", and got 26 hits, but none of them seem to actually describe a successful implementation.)

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    75. Re:Keep 'em coming... by Lozzer · · Score: 1

      Eh? What's wrong with telnet. If you don't have the time to craft the packets by hand by connecting yourself to an ethernet cable that is.

      :
      --
      Special Relativity: The person in the other queue thinks yours is moving faster.
    76. Re:Keep 'em coming... by greed · · Score: 1

      Windows does, indeed, not have fork(). And I'm going by the Platform SDK manual for NT, 2K, and 9x.

      fork() does not just create a child process. It creates a child process running the same program; read-only segments are used as-is, and read-write segments are copied. Open file descriptors are remain open in the child. (Modern systems do copy-on-write for performance, since fork() is often followed by exec(), which loads a new process.)

      You can't bolt on fork() from userspace; not efficiently. It needs too much access to the page map tables. Cygwin tries, and it is slow. If you want a program to run well on Windows, you're much, much, much better calling CreateProcess directly, rather than trying to keep fork()/exec() shared with your POSIX implementation.

      Instead of using fork(), people write multithreaded applications on Windows. Threads are even faster to initialize, but instead of just sharing the read-only segments, they also share read-write segments (and open file descriptors and all that other stuff). So you have to do your resource management differently. But that's OK, and there are POSIX threads, so everything is still a pain to port anyway.

      Of course, threads can communicate via their shared read/write memory, which fork()ed processes cannot do (without using the shm* IPC functions); so they're much better for some classes of problem. But for "launch and run 'till done" tasks, fork() is great, as it gives you process isolation among your workers.

      There's a reason why VisualStudio's runtime has a spawn() function.

    77. Re:Keep 'em coming... by CoolHnd30 · · Score: 1

      looks like its /.'ed . Anyone know of anywhere else to find that info ?

    78. Re:Keep 'em coming... by unother · · Score: 1

      I believe you answered your own question!

      I think the switch has more to do with a politically palatable way to ditch the unimportant portions of the suite (Chatzilla and Composer) and allow a sprucing up of the interface on ALL platforms to match the UI (a huge issue on OS X, and one on XP even although slightly less so).

      Personally, I have found I now consistently use Phoenix^H^H^H^H^H^H^HFirebird on the PC side. On OS X, well, I have Firebird hanging around but Safari is at this point "good enough" for my daily use (even though I still want some of the customizability of TBE).

      I personally applaud them for breaking up the application. Remember, there's nothing to stop them, when replacement time comes, for offering a monolithic installer which includes both Thunderbird and Firebird. But since the average Windows user (their ultimate target market) will want to install probably the browser only (and use OE/Outlook for email) it is sensible to allow the piecemeal installation.

    79. Re:Keep 'em coming... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On Linux, there's a bug where you can't run more than one instance of Mozilla. You have to go to your existing Mozilla window and open a new window. Many distros work around this bug by using a Mozilla helper script that checks for a running instance of Mozilla and uses xremote to open a new window.

      The problem with this workaround is that Mozilla, Firebird, Thunderbird, etc, don't distinguish themselves as different apps to such a script. Thus, if you're using Thunderbird, and you launch Firebird using such a script, it'll try to open another Thunderbird instance INSTEAD of Firebird.

      If you only use Mozilla for web browsing, then Firebird's a great choice. However, if you use it for web browsing and any other function, I'm afraid I can't recommend using the *birds until this bug is fixed.

    80. Re:Keep 'em coming... by dizzyduck · · Score: 1

      Galeon can do this as well. But Firebird can't, sadly.

      --
      Allergy advice: Contains eggs.
    81. Re:Keep 'em coming... by jovlinger · · Score: 1

      I've been trying to switch to thunderbird, or even mozilla mail, but frankly, both just suck ass.

      It could be the IMAP server I'm connecting against, but there seems to be no way to tell it to just give up, don't look for more folders, and resync NOW.

      Instead, it tries to keep some stateful prediction of how the IMAP account will look, and when it's wrong (often, as I use multiple MUAs against the same account) there seems to be no way to make it re-sync.

      That, and the editing engine is ass. Thunderbird moreso than Mozilla, but neither is very good. They should just implement a shell and fire up jed.

      Lastly, mozilla 1.5 has been crashy as well.

      I WANT mozilla not to suck, but frankly, it aint so. Unfortunately, seems there is no other alternative. Perhaps I'll look into the galeon / the other gnome browser / opera.

    82. Re:Keep 'em coming... by hitmark · · Score: 1

      but for some reason it cant import my mozilla mail...

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    83. Re:Keep 'em coming... by JCholewa · · Score: 1

      > Opera Software obviously has a single-minded focus to produce an excellent
      > browser but in the long run all of that effort will likely be for naught.

      > unless they change their license to the GPL (or some equivalent). ...yeah, because it's completely impossible to be innovative if your source is closed, right?

      Bah. Small design and development groups can do wonders with the right talent and under the right direction, even if they're not sharing secret sauce. There are an assload of features that Opera does (and this assload increases dramatically with every point release!) that will take quite some time to be matched by other providers, whether they be Free or that other kind.

      Opera has enough business acumen to stay afloat. They're like Apple: open to their customers, really good at inventing innovative features, competent at putting together smooth interfaces, and with a growing fanbase that will buy their crap even if they turn evil. Additionally, they're pretty good at adapting their product for out of the way platforms, like in the embedded sector.

      I use mozilla now and then, but Opera has many advantages not covered by Moz, which include (but are not limited to):
      * the ability to put the page bar (that's the "tab" widgets) on the right or left side of the screen, a feature that allows me to have forty web pages open in one window (that's pretty normal for me) with all page titles being readable (in Mozilla, the tabs shrink so that you can't read the title, and in MozFirebird, after the fifteenth or so tab you have to scroll back and forth to see available pages!).
      * dragging pages between windows. If you use various Mozilla Extensions or something like Multizilla, you can drag within a window, but I think you have to right-click to move to a different window
      * out-of-the-box session management. I have to install Multizilla in Moz1.5 in order to get session management, and that doesn't always work properly.
      * out of the box gestures
      * out of the box, on the fly browser ID changing
      * on the fly skinning (no restart needed!)
      * ability to quickly disable page's styles and special effects
      * in-page print preview
      * download manager docked in sidebar
      * can drag individual "tabs" into bookmarks.
      * hold right button, scroll wheel to change pages (Mozilla can do this with the proper add-ons)
      * "G" key makes graphics disappear if you accidentally click on a goatse.cx link (this is much faster than closing the page in either Opera or Moz)
      * SHIFT+Up/Dn/Lt/Rt to navigate among links on the active page
      * auto-reload menu option
      * "Fast Forward", which lets you navigate through multipage articles with a single gesture or keypress (instead of hunting down the "Next" link on the article page each time).
      * Undo if you accidentally closed the wrong page (I think Moilla-Firebird can do this, though).
      * toolbars can be moved around. I remember when you could put the address bar above the navigation bar in Netscape 4.x. You can't do that in Mozilla or Netscape 7.x. You can't do that (AFAIK) in Mozilla-Firebird. Hmmm. Well, maybe you can't do that in Opera, either, but it does allow me to put the address bar on the bottom of the screen, which is where I prefer it.
      * CTRL-J pops up a list of links from the current page. You can emulate this functionality in Mozilla with either Linky (that's at mozdev.org) or with a bookmarklet (if you're not using bookmarklets, you're not interested in power browsing, btw).
      * SHIFT-F11 to emulate PDA browsing mode (this is for web page developers that really do care)

      I usually have a Mozilla window open, but the majority of my web pages open up with Opera, because the interface is smoother (and faster) and the session management is better. Nothing cooler than starting up your computer with your applications in the same state that you left them.

      In the time that Mozilla has moved from 1.0 t

    84. Re:Keep 'em coming... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, just don't try to click on the stop button or a menu while Moz is doing it's thing.

      Mozilla's percieved slowness has a lot more to do with the UI responsiveness than the HTML rendering. It also has weird issues like taking 20 seconds to come back in from swap.

      In other words, the stopwatch frequently lies.

    85. Re:Keep 'em coming... by SquadBoy · · Score: 1

      Konq and Kamail. IMO both rock hard. :)

      --

      Cypherpunks: Civil Liberty Through Complex Mathematics. Those who live by the sword die by the arrow.
    86. Re:Keep 'em coming... by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      I've switched to Thunderbird because Eudora sucks, M2 has no spam filtering and is just odd, and I won't touch lookOut (or Express Infection) with a 10-ft pole.

    87. Re:Keep 'em coming... by SuDZ · · Score: 1

      "Trying the parent's mailing list- Moz -9 secs to load. IE- 15secs. We have a caching web proxy on a fast pipe. I tried Moz first.

      Click a message then go back- Moz 2secs, IE 2secs."

      The real question though is how long does it take to transfer a 17 meg file? :)

      SuDZ

    88. Re:Keep 'em coming... by steveg · · Score: 1

      Having separate applications instead of a monolithic suite seems fine to me. I don't especially care about the "integration" aspects of the suite.

      What I *DO* care about is the interface, and firebird at least has made non-configurable changes to the interface that I find completely unpalatable.

      Until the *birds make it possible for me to configure the elimination of *all* sidebars (without losing functionality and without jumping through a lot of hoops) I'll be sticking with Seamonkey.

      --
      Ignorance killed the cat. Curiosity was framed.
    89. Re:Keep 'em coming... by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      No, it uses vxWorks, a competitor to Windows CE .NET, QNX, and embedded Linux.

    90. Re:Keep 'em coming... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seems to take about the same amount of time in Moz 1.6 and IE 6, what version of Moz did you test this with?

    91. Re:Keep 'em coming... by Vincman · · Score: 2, Informative

      goto your current firebird-profile and create or edit a file called: user.js

      enter this:

      // This one makes a huge difference. Last value in milliseconds (default is 250)
      user_pref("nglayout.initialpaint.delay", 0);

      in the file and save it.

      Other speed-improving tweaks to be added to the same file are:

      // Enable pipelining:
      user_pref("network.http.pipelining", true);
      user_pref("network.http.proxy.pipelining", true);
      user_pref("network.http.pipelining.maxrequests", 100);

      // turn on timer-based reflow management
      user_pref("content.notify.ontimer", true);

      // sets the allowed time between reflows in microseconds
      user_pref("content.notify.interval", 100);

      // set the number of reflows to do before waiting for the rest of the page to arrive
      user_pref("content.notify.backoffcount", 200);

      More tips, extensions and themes for firebird can be found on http://texturizer.net/firebird/

    92. Re:Keep 'em coming... by irritant-1 · · Score: 1

      I only use firebird, mozilla and thunderbird. The only time I use MSIE is I suspect that something may be missing on the site I'm viewing. IMHO the main weakness for Mozilla (and related projects) for everday web users is navigating through all of the Mozilla related sites just to find what they want. Granted it's a large project but most of it is nowhere near a three click. Maybe some of those Information Architects should get involved before the navigation becomes unmanageable.

    93. Re:Keep 'em coming... by durbacher · · Score: 1

      > Once the *birds implement the same
      > functionality from a UI and extensions perspective

      They won't.
      *That*'s why many stick with the suite, the monolithic one.

    94. Re:Keep 'em coming... by Sax+Maniac · · Score: 1

      You are absolutely right - there was an option in IE somewhere that does this. I set it a long time ago and have been much happer (well, as happy as one can be when forced to use IE). You use a little more memory, but when IE takes a nosedive, it doesn't take your entire desktop with you.

      --
      I can explanate how to administrate your network. You must configurate and segmentate it, so it can computate.
    95. Re:Keep 'em coming... by saintlupus · · Score: 1

      When that happens, the "Suite" will simply be the full collection of *birds.

      I believe that's called a "flock".

      --saint

    96. Re:Keep 'em coming... by jx100 · · Score: 1

      oh, so the internet's centered around you, isn't it

    97. Re:Keep 'em coming... by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Because it is a suite?
      Mozilla includes a browser, chat, mail. All diferent from each other, hence Suite.

      Now you can have a suite that contains monolithic applications.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    98. Re:Keep 'em coming... by gnu-generation-one · · Score: 1

      http://extensionroom.mozdev.org/more-info.php/flas hclick

      Thanks for the info. I've been looking at that for a while, but a bug in mozilla means that it can't block <embed> tags yet, which account for about half of the flash advertisements you see. I'm trying to find a good way of blocking Flash, but the best solution I've found so far is Privoxy (a filtering proxy server).

      "http://www.xulplanet.com/downloads/prefbar/help/f aq.html to specify a couple of From: fields."

      It's easy enough to set up a new email account whenever you want to send email from a particular name. It can be useful if you only have one or two email addresses, but if you regularly tell people your email address is my.name.recipient_identifier@mydomain.com, it can make you wish for the ability to specify your own email address. As often as not, I've had to resort to emailing a message to myself, and sending it from a system with kmail installed.

      Mind you it's better than Outlook (which we use at work) -- you can type in your From: address, and get the error "You don't have permission to send on behalf of this user"... C'mon, just let me specify the damned address, or do I have to telnet into the SMTP server myself?

    99. Re:Keep 'em coming... by TRACK-YOUR-POSITION · · Score: 1

      Epiphany (the Gnome Mozilla-based browser) also does this. Since for some strange reason Mozilla 1.5 has been performing particularly badly on my Gentoo linux, I've been using Epiphany lately and been rather pleased with it, even though the rest of my Desktop is KDE>

    100. Re:Keep 'em coming... by Bj�rn · · Score: 1

      Yeah, thanks for the reply. I was referring to popup windows opened from an existing browser window, often done with JavaScript. Not that it matters that much to me since I prefer Mozilla or even Opera to IE. My point was that cookies as implemented by IE can present a problem if every window is a separate process, thats all. But then again, why shouldn't the Mozilla developers be able to a better job?

      --
      Never express yourself more clearly than you are able to think. --Niels Bohr
    101. Re:Keep 'em coming... by olman · · Score: 1

      Really? Well check out bug 76831 Seems to me that sloooooow startup of this monstrosity is a long-standing problem. I have never noticed the problem with FB/TB, but maybe I've been just lucky.

    102. Re:Keep 'em coming... by jonadab · · Score: 1

      > fork() does not just create a child process. It creates a child process
      > running the same program

      Yes, obviously, the same program with the same state (initially; after the
      fork the two diverge). I use fork() on Windows all the time. Admittedly,
      I'm using Perl, not C/C++/VB, but are you telling me that ActiveState made
      up fork for Win32 out of whole cloth? That seems odd, since perl does not
      support fork on other platforms that don't have it (e.g., DOS). Further,
      if you compile the vanilla Perl sources on Windows (using e.g. cygwin) it
      supports fork just fine -- and, for that matter, threads.

      Moreover, many applications not written in Perl appear to use fork on
      Windows, though (not being a C programmer) I have not examined how they
      do so. Apache, for example, appears to fork off multiple copies of itself,
      just as it does on POSIX systems.

      If the Windows API doesn't have fork() as such, *something* must provide
      the same or equivalent functionality.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    103. Re:Keep 'em coming... by ElGnomo · · Score: 1

      from the texturizer page: >Pipelining is an experimental feature, designed to >improve page-load performance, that is >unfortunately not well supported by some web >servers and proxies. so, would enabling this cause conflict with these web proxies, causing some pages to not load, or would the worse case senario be that the webpage loads a little slower than it would with piplining off?

    104. Re:Keep 'em coming... by Vincman · · Score: 1

      I've not noticed any negative effects, but the best way to find out is to test it and decide for yourself ;)

    105. Re:Keep 'em coming... by scottj · · Score: 1
      As an aside, Anybody know when Moz will officially be branched off into firebird/thunderbird components? I thought this was supposed to happen around 1.6 apparently I was wrong.
      Actually, you are dead on. I think the milestone has slipped since that announcement, however. And while the roadmap mentions Firebird and Thunderbird extensively, it neglects to give a revised milestone for branching off.
      --
      .-.--
  2. Begging for Firebird 1.0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I hope this brings us closer to Firebird replacing SeaMonkey as the official Mozilla web browser.

    Extensions fscking rule.

    1. Re:Begging for Firebird 1.0 by MachDelta · · Score: 1

      Extensions fscking rule.


      Amen to that.

      /me waves his mouse around like a magic wand and zipps off to another website

    2. Re:Begging for Firebird 1.0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      /me waves his mouse around like a magic wand and zipps off to another website

      Never heard it called a mouse before, snake yes, mouse, well, I can only assume you have some strange deformity there. Still must be great for the ladies.

    3. Re:Begging for Firebird 1.0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are "extensions" for SeaMonkey. They are just called "plugins."

      Most of the Firebird extensions are based on earlier Mozilla plugins.

    4. Re:Begging for Firebird 1.0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are "extensions" for SeaMonkey. They are just called "plugins."

      No, actually they're called extensions.

      Both SeaMonkey and Firebird support extensions (like AdBlock) and plugins (like Flash player).

    5. Re:Begging for Firebird 1.0 by juhaz · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Extensions fscking rule.

      What makes you think extensions are Firebird-only?

      There have been extensions for Mozilla long before any of the developers even dreamed about Phoenix. Good ones work in both browsers.

  3. Any news on AmiZilla? by Amiga+Lover · · Score: 4, Funny

    How are efforts in AmiZilla going? Is the Amiga Mozilla port any closer?

    1. Re:Any news on AmiZilla? by mios · · Score: 5, Funny

      Sorry ... the developers moved over the the ComiZilla project ... they figured the port to the Commodore-64 would be more useful.

    2. Re:Any news on AmiZilla? by baryon351 · · Score: 1, Funny

      Is the Amiga Mozilla port any closer?

      On track & rockin'! Just around the corner. Any day now. We have hundreds of developers all under NDA working on it. You can sign up to our mailing list with information, only $9.95 a month. Say would you like to buy an AmiZilla Tshirt? only $49.95.

      Just you wait until next month!

    3. Re:Any news on AmiZilla? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Considering there's only one other Amiga user on the planet, they ought to get a friggin' mail client for Amiga first so you guys can email each other instead of posting at /. to communicate.

    4. Re:Any news on AmiZilla? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Props for Eric Schwartz's AmiZilla mascot!

    5. Re:Any news on AmiZilla? by stuffedmonkey · · Score: 0

      Yeah - how about the VIC20 port? I have my audio tape drive ready to go!

    6. Re:Any news on AmiZilla? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The sad thing about that is that every Amiga user has to be at least 30 years old.

    7. Re:Any news on AmiZilla? by Justin205 · · Score: 0

      How are efforts in AmiZilla going? Is the Amiga Mozilla port any closer?

      Wow, and I thought this guy was serious at first. Then I read closer. He said Amiga. (Damned tiny fonts, they had me wondering why this is Funny!)

      --
      "Your effort to remain what you are is what limits you."
    8. Re:Any news on AmiZilla? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HA HA HA
      This one cracked me up!

    9. Re:Any news on AmiZilla? by StarWreck · · Score: 2, Informative

      That seems to be highly doubtful, the Commodore 64 only has a 1MHz 6510 processor and 64K ram, upgradeable to a 20MHz SuperCPU with 16mb ram. The Amiga on the other hand can be upgraded to Dual Processors (233MHz PPC and 50MHz 68K) with an additional 128mb of ram. Hell, if you're feeling extra giddy you can even get an additional SharkPPC accelerator that gives you an extra 450MHz G4 processor and AGP graphics(9800 XT anyone?). Just in case you were wondering, all 3 processors can process seperate threads at the exact same time. Isn't that amazing? Yep, the Amiga's dead all right.

      --
      ... and in the DRM, bind them.
    10. Re:Any news on AmiZilla? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not an Amiga user, but is it really necessary to abuse this guy? He asked a perfectly normal question for the progress of a Moz port, and every mentally slashdotted troll in this forum wakes up.

      What's with you guys? Did you troll mommas spank you little troll butts?

    11. Re:Any news on AmiZilla? by lortho · · Score: 2, Informative

      A lot of people don't realize that this actually is half-serious... the foundation originally offered about $4000 to anyone who could successfully port Mozilla to the Amiga, and the sum has steadily grown since.

    12. Re:Any news on AmiZilla? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, a 233MHz PPC? That's almost half as powerful as the CPU in my phone! AMIGA r00lz, d00d!!!1!!

    13. Re:Any news on AmiZilla? by Saven+Marek · · Score: 2, Funny

      Hey give the guy a break. All he's saying is his machine isn't 10 years out of date like everyone else thinks

      it's only 5 years out of date!

    14. Re:Any news on AmiZilla? by oohp · · Score: 1

      Haven't you been reading the news? There is a new Amiga box out from some UK company. Also, the Pegasos boxes can run Amiga apps under MorphOS. So stop trolling. If there are people still making software for a dead platform and companies releaseing "dead" hardware then it isn't dead.

    15. Re:Any news on AmiZilla? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pefectly serious question? AmiZilla was never serious; I knew one of the guys involved (Jaffa was his nick) and he was a joker, a teenage kid who couldn't code for toffee.

    16. Re:Any news on AmiZilla? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > There is a new Amiga box out from some UK company.

      There's a generic rebranded PPC motherboard out from some UK company, sold as an amiga part, with an extra few hundred quid slapped on the price for the privilege.

      It may or may not run the future AmigaOS4 (which only exists as a beta, and has done so for several years now)

    17. Re:Any news on AmiZilla? by o1i · · Score: 1

      Only a couple of people working on it, but we are at the beginning. But coming closer, definately ;), but still far away. Rating your question as funny should give some motivation, at least to me ;).

    18. Re:Any news on AmiZilla? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It might sound doubtful, but there really is a web browser for C64. (Portable also to Atari 8-bit, NES, maybe more..)

      Observe: Contiki

    19. Re:Any news on AmiZilla? by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1

      You're new to the Amiga scene, aren't you? The correct denotation of "ain't gonna happen" is "two more weeks", and has been for years.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    20. Re:Any news on AmiZilla? by iminplaya · · Score: 1

      "ComiZilla"

      That's the Russian version...right?

      --
      What?
  4. Where is 2.0?? by smd4985 · · Score: 4, Funny

    This is all good and well, but I'm looking forward to Mozilla 2.0, which will integrate the superior FireBird and ThunderBird.

    --
    smd4985
    1. Re:Where is 2.0?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I thought the whole point was to DISintegrate them.

    2. Re:Where is 2.0?? by iminplaya · · Score: 1

      I'm still waiting for them to integrate Linux and Open Office...in version 3 maybe?

      --
      What?
    3. Re:Where is 2.0?? by BZ · · Score: 1

      "2.0" will mean that the rendering engine has reached 2.0. It has nothing to do with any of the birds.

  5. Where? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, yes this is good and all. But where is my Firebird? Do they have to do the whole resurrecting from the ashes thing again?

  6. hurray for mozilla! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hurray for Mozilla and props to the Mozilla team. Thanks for a great browser!

    1. Re:hurray for mozilla! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's the porn viewer's browser of choice. And with good reason.

  7. Am I the only one... by revmoo · · Score: 5, Funny

    Who has been tempted to do a string replace on the mozilla source, replacing all instances of 'mozilla' with 'mozirra'? :-)

    --
    I would expect such blatant racism on Fark, but on Slashdot? Mods please ban this asshole.
    1. Re:Am I the only one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well, if you're going to do it, at least get it right...

      MOJIRA!!!

    2. Re:Am I the only one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are indeed the only one, my addle-minded, ignorant, mouth-breathing racist friend! Isn't it cute how those Japanese transliterate L's and R's because they actually lack L's in their phonemes? I'm sure your mastery of the Japanese language must be impressive as well!

      Oh wait, Japanese == Vietnamese == Chinese == Phillipino == ... to a simpleton like yourself.

    3. Re:Am I the only one... by revmoo · · Score: 1

      Oh wait, Japanese == Vietnamese == Chinese == Phillipino == ... to a simpleton like yourself.

      Not true! My best friend is a mexican!

      --
      I would expect such blatant racism on Fark, but on Slashdot? Mods please ban this asshole.
    4. Re:Am I the only one... by potus98 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      HAHAHAHAAAA! ROTFLMAO!!!

      You're totally lying if you didn't mutter "mozirra" out loud, think back to that last Saturday afternoon TV matinee or visit to the dry cleaners, and chuckle!

      Why other posters so sensitive? Racism, bigotry, sexism, driving, and sex are some of the best topics of comedy!

      I'm stirr rorring on the froor raughing!.....hehehee

      --
      This one gang kept wanting me to join cause I'm pretty good with a bo staff.
    5. Re:Am I the only one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whiner -- STFU...

      Because of people like you, we may all someday be dressing in gray robes and with numbers as names (chosen randomly, of course, so as not to offend), lenses to make our eyes the same color, shaved heads and faces, not speaking audibly -- only using sign language -- so we don't have any different voice and we will all eat gruel -- wonderful gruel -- to make sure we are healthy in our sameness...

    6. Re:Am I the only one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mexican doesn't have to be a racial slur.

      It can also be a tasty, spicy, food. A food that comes to life, crawls off your place, and humps your leg, leaving a spicy but delectable jizzum residue!

      Mad props to drug-addled pervert party!!!

    7. Re:Am I the only one... by Gojira+Shipi-Taro · · Score: 1

      Not I, but apparently I'm not as amused as you and the mod that gave you a Funny that there is no "r" or "l" sound in Japanese, only a sound that is roughly in between.

      Yes I know the joke is done all the time, but it's just not as drop-to-the-floor-and-roll-around-laughing funny as some of you seem to think it is.

      Work with a smoking hot chick from Osaka for a few years and it won't be funny to you, either ;)

      --
      "Oh my God. This is terrible. This is the end of my Presidency. I'm fucked."; ~ Donald J. Trump
    8. Re:Am I the only one... by f0rt0r · · Score: 1

      You got it. My sensei made a big deal about that when my swordfighting class went to see Godzilla 2000 or whatever the latest version was. Now, if they are trying to pronounce the English word "Mozilla", then the poster is correct. If they are saying it in Japanese, then you are ( most ) correct. Dang, I am so analytical today.

      --
      I can't afford a sig!
    9. Re:Am I the only one... by generic-man · · Score: 1

      Now, if they are trying to pronounce the English word "Mozilla" [as "mozirra"], then the poster is correct.

      Not true. There's no L sound in Japanese, so that's replaced with R. There's also no "zi" sound; that's pronounced as "ji" even though it is occasionally written "zi."

      So, "mojira" is really the closest you can get.

      --
      For more information, click here.
    10. Re:Am I the only one... by el-spectre · · Score: 4, Informative

      "Godzilla" is a poor translation to english. The original japanese name sounded like "Gojira". It's entirely possible the dude was playing on that.

      Ah, the courage and wisdom of AC.

      --
      "Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
    11. Re:Am I the only one... by Onan · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well, to be really pedantic, there isn't a sound that maps directly to either the English R or L, there's a single sound that's about halfway in between the two. Hence the tendency of Japanese speakers to swap them in both directions; to someone who has spoken only Japanese, it seems like an arcane distinction between two tiny variants of the same sound.

      Romanji tends to transcribe the sound as R, but they're both equally accurate.

    12. Re:Am I the only one... by dadragon · · Score: 1

      Remember that in this politically correct world, anything that sounds even remotely like it could concievably be racist, must be racist.

      It's just the way it works now.

      --
      God save our Queen, and Heaven bless The Maple Leaf Forever!
    13. Re:Am I the only one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is transcribed as an 'R' because it IS an 'R' sound, just not the English 'R'.

      It's like a Spanish 'R' but with a flap instead of a trill.

    14. Re:Am I the only one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You had better not be talking about Takako, you asiaphile piece of shit white boy! :p

    15. Re:Am I the only one... by bugbread · · Score: 2, Informative

      Time for me to be pedantic: romaji, not romanji. But good post.

    16. Re:Am I the only one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What a sickening display of Canadian Nationalism you display in your sig! You non-Canadian hating racist Nazi pig! Waaaa!

    17. Re:Am I the only one... by SnowZero · · Score: 1

      True, but listen more carefully to a native and notice that they really do manage to mix in an L-sound into it too. We just tend to map it to R because it sounds more like that to us. Psychologists have studied this in the past, and after you learn a language you tend to map ambiguous things one way or the other, even if they are ambiguous (there are some pretty amazing demos of this, pitty I don't know if they are on the web). They have a computer range between two sounds linearly (say L and R), and the listener will just hear a flip part way through, and you barely notice the mixing on the interpolated versions.

      If you want to play with it, notice the L is a flattening of your tongue on the roof of your mouth, while the Spanish R is the tip of your tongue on the roof. If you flatten it just a bit, you can get an excellent reproduction of the japanese R/L sound. Of course, since they don't make a distinction, they'll never notice anyway...

      Now if only kanji were as easy to learn as pronunciation...

    18. Re:Am I the only one... by Saint+Stephen · · Score: 1

      Well except for the fact that when I say "R" my tongue is at the back of my throat and my lips are forward with the centers higher than the sides,
      and when I say "L" my tongue is at the top of my mouth and my lips are stretched out to the sides.

      They are the same in the throat.

    19. Re:Am I the only one... by jesser · · Score: 3, Funny
      --
      The shareholder is always right.
    20. Re:Am I the only one... by fbg111 · · Score: 3, Informative

      There's also no "zi" sound; that's pronounced as "ji" even though it is occasionally written "zi."

      Actually there's no "ji" sound either. Again, the Japanese pronunciation doesn't map to any English syllable. In English, we say "ji" with our tongue at the roof of our mouth. In Japanese they say it with their tongue at the very front of their mouth, right behind their front teeth gums. It sounds more like a mix of the English sounds "zi" and "ji". The Hepburn romanization uses the letters "ji" to denote this mora (one beat, roughly equivalent to a syllable), but because of that, every English speaker who learned Japanese under that system is speaking with a gaizin accent.

      Newer systems such as the Jordan romanization (Eleanor Harz Jordan) attempt to correct this problem by using the letters "zi" to represent the mora, but with the disclaimer that "zi" is not the correct sound either and is only used to remind learners not to say "ji". The correct sound is actually a combination of "zi" and "ji" pronounced with the tongue at the front of the mouth.

      Once you understand that, then it doesn't really matter how you romanize "Mozilla", whether it's "mojira" or "mozira", since you know that in this case neither mora "zi" nor "ji" is a phonetic spelling, but rather a symbolic representation of a sound that doesn't exist in English. The spelling only matters as a reminder for learners who have not yet mastered the new sound.

      --
      Flying is easy, just throw yourself at the ground and miss. -Douglas Adams
    21. Re:Am I the only one... by jsebrech · · Score: 1

      That's an english r. Over here in Belgium we have a rolling r (tongue at the roof of your mouth about 1.5 cm behind your teeth, as if you're saying l, and having it vibrate by blowing air over it, VERY difficult for someone who didn't learn it as a child). Then there's the french r, with the back of the tongue vibrating against the back of your mouth's roof. Anyway, my point is, the interpretation of what is an r depends HEAVILY on where you live, so I wouldn't make assumptions on what the japanese think an r sounds like.

    22. Re:Am I the only one... by wass · · Score: 1
      Time for me to be pedantic: romaji, not romanji. But good post.

      Time for me to be pedantic. Romaji, romanji, and rmaji are all valid names for the same script. See wiki.

      --

      make world, not war

    23. Re:Am I the only one... by GlamdringLFO · · Score: 1

      Time for me to be pedantic: mojira is an anagram of romaji. Bet you didn't see that one coming...

      --
      Skal! AMS
    24. Re:Am I the only one... by xjqkojqxj · · Score: 0

      In Korean, there isn't a sound halfway between "r" and "l" -- they have both sounds -- but context affects which sound you use. So Koreans are prone to say the wrong letter because of surrounding context. e.g. "n"+"r" => "l"+"l", so "Han River" => "Hal-Liver"

    25. Re:Am I the only one... by illuminatedwax · · Score: 1

      "Godzilla" is in no way a poor translation to english. The original was "Gojira" and comes from the Japanese word for "gorilla" and "whale" ("gorira" and "kujira") repectively. A direct translation would have been something silly like "Whalrilla" or something. Instead, they used the brilliant "Godzilla," which turned the creature into some sort of divine lizard, which really fits Godzilla's character. Plus it even sounds like the original.

      Brilliant, if you ask me.

      --Stephen

      --
      Did you ever notice that *nix doesn't even cover Linux?
    26. Re:Am I the only one... by el-spectre · · Score: 1

      You are, of course, correct. I shouldn't have said "translation", maybe "soundalike" would have been better.

      --
      "Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
    27. Re:Am I the only one... by arth1 · · Score: 1
      Well, to be really pedantic, there isn't a sound that maps directly to either the English R or L, there's a single sound that's about halfway in between the two. Hence the tendency of Japanese speakers to swap them in both directions; to someone who has spoken only Japanese, it seems like an arcane distinction between two tiny variants of the same sound.

      To be fair, English speakers do the same thing with sounds they don't have. The "y" sound tends to be replaced with a long "i", and the deep "o" sound (like in German "Sturm") gets replaced with an English "ou" diphtong, or just plain "u".

      As for "R", what do the Japanese do when confronted with a Germanic guttural R, created by rolling the back of your tongue, or the rolling R of Slavic languages? Neither is nowhere near the lisping R of English (which is close enough to a "dz/l" sound).

      Regards,
      --
      *Art
    28. Re:Am I the only one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, who won WWII? We'll pronounce it like we want to.

    29. Re:Am I the only one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Time for ME to be pedantic.

      "Romanji" is wrong. Wiki is often wrong.

      The most correct term, spelled in the most-often used romanization system, is "roomaji." It can be written in numerous correct ways, including "romaji," depending on the romanization system used.

    30. Re:Am I the only one... by el-spectre · · Score: 1

      As an aside, the only redeeming feature of the cruddy hollywood godzilla movie ("plot DOES matter") was the scene where someone was talking about the old japansese man who saw big G. This guy says something like "it's gojira, some stupid reported misheard it as 'Godzilla' and it stuck"

      --
      "Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
    31. Re:Am I the only one... by Ironica · · Score: 1

      Ok how about Mozjilra?

      --
      Don't you wish your girlfriend was a geek like me?
    32. Re:Am I the only one... by bugbread · · Score: 1

      Thanks. Wiki has been corrected. Oddly, someone noticed in 2002, but no-one corrected the page.

    33. Re:Am I the only one... by wass · · Score: 1
      "Romanji" is wrong. Wiki is often wrong.

      It's funny because I just was reading that wiki article the night before I posted that comment, and remembered that.

      I studied Japanese in college, and we called it romaji (with long o), but I also knew about the various other romaji pronunciation methods. So it seemed perfectly plausible that romanji was used instead of romaji in some parts of the world.

      --

      make world, not war

    34. Re:Am I the only one... by edsterino · · Score: 1

      True, the Japanese 'r' is neither an English 'l' nor 'r' but it's so much closer to English 'r' that 'l' isn't in the running.

      Japanese only swap r and l when not speaking Japanese. Because they don't say 'l', they don't hear it much like an English person has a hard time hearing the "oe" (o+umlaut) in German or the long vowels in Japanese. English beginners will use a pronounciation different than their native 'r', because they know they have to. They will succeed in doing that -- saying something that sounds different. Whether it sounds like an 'r' or 'l' eludes them.

      Some Japanese actually say something like an 'l' when speaking Japanese. My SO does this. It's totally weird. It's considered something of a lisp by the Japanese.

      The odd thing is, if you have the chance to watch a Japanese TV show with singing (and can stomach it) the verterans will usually sing "la la la" with 'l'.

      Romaji doesn't tend to transcribe the sound as 'r'. Correct romaji *always* uses 'r' -- at least the 2 main romaji systems I know of (official government one for education and another, which is more common but I don't know the name). When an 'l' is used, it will usually be because they are actually writing the word in the original language (such as 'London').

  8. awesome by McAddress · · Score: 3, Funny

    I see the browser wars being rekindled. oops, never mind, those are the flames being thrown at me.

    1. Re:awesome by PReDiToR · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The browser wars have already been won.

      FireBird has beaten IE and we are just waiting for the inertia to bury the old stalwart.

      Are you telling me that you aren't waiting with baited breath for tonights nightly 0.8 build that really says 0.7+ in it?
      The fact that there are nightly builds and every week a couple of builds optimised for Athlon/P4 or older processors should entice you to at least try it, free of charge, and see if it actually works for you.

      Most people that have tried it are still trying it, and a fair number of us have it as default browser.

      --

      Do not meddle in the affairs of geeks for they are subtle and quick to anger
    2. Re:awesome by spacecowboy420 · · Score: 2, Funny

      It's plausible, he is the

      "PReDiToR"

      --
      ymmv
    3. Re:awesome by TechnoPops · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Firebird has won the browser wars? That's quite the statement to say, since it seems IE still has a good ~85% chunk of the market. I think it still needs to carve quite a big piece out of Microsoft's share before we can start claiming any victories.

      --
      "Each time you smile, it'll only last awhile. Life may be scary, but it's only temporary."
    4. Re:awesome by PReDiToR · · Score: 2, Informative

      Thank you AC, I stand corrected and have every intention of remembering this lesson.
      Please, log in and say hi, so I can add you to my friends list. It would be interesting to see if you can teach me anything else.

      bate1 (P) Pronunciation Key (bt)
      tr.v. bated, bating, bates
      1. To lessen the force or intensity of; moderate: To his dying day he bated his breath a little when he told the story (George Eliot). See Usage Note at bait1.
      2. To take away; subtract.

      [Middle English baten, short for abaten. See abate.]
      Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc.

      bated

      \Bat"ed\, a. Reduced; lowered; restrained; as, to speak with bated breath. --Macaulay.


      Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc.
      --

      Do not meddle in the affairs of geeks for they are subtle and quick to anger
    5. Re:awesome by tierra · · Score: 1

      That is very true. I use it as my default browser for both my linux box at home and my windows box at work. I've installed it as the default browser on my dad's system, and him and the rest of the family is starting to get the hang of it and liking it. Everyone I show it to enjoy the many features of Firebird. My sister thought I was running some supercomputer with how fast it was running (optimized in gentoo), and I hear plenty of conversion stories from my co-workers.

    6. Re:awesome by Clovert+Agent · · Score: 1

      Why was the parent modded as funny? Apart from the unlikely optimism in "bury the old stalwart", it's not an uncommon view that Firebird is a vastly superior browser to IE.

      http://www.joelonsoftware.com/news/20030601.html
      http://weblog.infoworld.com/udell/2003/06/02.htm l
      (both linked off Firebird's homepage)

      That's not much of an accident - the Mozilla Firebird 1.0 Development Charter (http://www.mozilla.org/projects/firebird/charter. html) starts: "Mozilla Firebird grew out of the desire to make the best browser for Microsoft Windows."

      So far, so good.

    7. Re:awesome by Fembot · · Score: 1

      Firbird now reaches well into the realm on the non-techies... I was quite supprised a couple of weeks back now when a non geek friend tried to convert me to firebird!!!

    8. Re:awesome by Overly+Critical+Guy · · Score: 1

      The browser wars have already been won.

      You're kidding, right? IE is close to 90% of the market share.

      FireBird has beaten IE and we are just waiting for the inertia to bury the old stalwart.

      How has it beaten it at all if more people use IE? When SP2 comes out this year, IE will have built-in pop-up blocking and a download manager, and then even LESS people will be bothered to try a browser that still thinks it should reimplement every widget with "XUL" for some bizarre reason.

      --
      "Sufferin' succotash."
    9. Re:awesome by fredrik70 · · Score: 1

      while firebird is a much better browser, it doesn't have anywhere close the market cap that ie has. thing is ie is usually 'good enough' for most users, and it comes preinstalled on all windows boxes, which firebird doesn't, until that happens, ie will be the leader, not in tech, but in market cap at least.

      --
      if (!signature) { throw std::runtime_error("No sig!"); }
    10. Re:awesome by pmsyyz · · Score: 1

      I respect your usage of alternating capital letters in your nickname. it shows that you are a wild and crazy driver on the information highway, and that you will not bow down to societal norms and typical rules of capitalization.

      --
      Phillip
    11. Re:awesome by Ironica · · Score: 1

      That's quite the statement to say, since it seems IE still has a good ~85% chunk of the market.

      Markets are things where people buy and sell stuff. The only browser that has any "market" share that I know of is Opera.

      Besides, those statistics are, at least in part, based on user agent reporting. How many folks running Gecko and Opera have it set to report as a version of IE, just to turn off stupidly-written browser version checking code on sites that otherwise work just fine?

      Finally, I'll just point out that the grandparent was being facetious as far as I can tell. ;-)

      --
      Don't you wish your girlfriend was a geek like me?
    12. Re:awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There was evidence to prove that Overly Critical Guy is a lying cocksucker, but he deleted it. Think independently.

  9. Fantastic! by PovRayMan · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Another release of Mozilla is a great thing, but I've been personally more interested in Firebird / Thunderbird. As we all know Mozilla will eventually fully break up into the seperate projects, and my interest is completely oriented on the progress of Firebird / Thunderbird.

    Firebird is a great browser about to hit 0.8 and stepping closer towards the great 1.0 release that took Mozilla years to obtain. Thunderbird is still in need of lots of work, but the progress is fantastic and I exclusively use it even in its immature state.

    For the Mozilla devs who browse /., thanks for all your hard work in making free software that suits my wants and needs. Keep up the great work!

    1. Re:Fantastic! by Goonie_Goo · · Score: 0

      Is there any idea when Firebird 0.8 is to come out? I recall reading something about the first week of January, but that has been and gone. Great browser thou.. leaves IE for dead. :)

    2. Re:Fantastic! by PovRayMan · · Score: 1

      Personally I don't know the official release date for 0.8, but I was given this url a while ago..

      http://pryan.org/firebird/

      I'm not sure the details of those builds, but they may have 0.8 branch builds. From what I gather it's mostly optimized builds.

    3. Re:Fantastic! by HanzoSpam · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Firebird is a great browser about to hit 0.8 and stepping closer towards the great 1.0 release that took Mozilla years to obtain.

      Well, yeah, but you have to consider Firebird uses the Gecko rendering engine, the same as Mozilla. Having a pre-written rendering engine wasn't an advantage enjoyed by Mozilla.

      Thunderbird is still in need of lots of work, but the progress is fantastic and I exclusively use it even in its immature state.

      I've been using it across Linux, Windows, and MacOS X, and I haven't had a single problem with it. I'm not really sure how much more work it needs, since it seems pretty clean of bugs, unless they're planning on adding some more features.

      I hope not. Creeping featuritis has been the death of too many fine pieces of software that were fine just the way they were.

      --

      Progressivism: Parasites helping parasites to help themselves - to other people's stuff.
    4. Re:Fantastic! by petabyte · · Score: 1

      Actually, I'm more interested in a gecko runtime enviroment that was mentioned when Firebird came around. I don't like Firebird at all and only use mozilla for its rendering (I use epiphany) so if I could cut out the parts I don't need and could just have a rendering engine for epiphany that would be great.

    5. Re:Fantastic! by Observador · · Score: 1

      I've been trying unsuccessfully to download firebird for the last 20 minutes...

      Also been readin slashdot... I reload de home page and there it is... a slashdot news on mozilla... announcing a new version no less...

      I think I'll postpone getting firebird for a day or two until the slashdotting subsides

      --
      I wish I could filter out the annoying Pickens articles...
    6. Re:Fantastic! by adamfranco · · Score: 1

      I use Firebird/Thunderbird exlusively as well, but I have seen a few problems:

      - Clicking on links in Thunderbird doesn't send them to a broswer on *nix systems (OS X included).

      - For some reason Firebird sometimes "captures" my mouse-click in OS X and forces me to log out to use the mouse again. Kinda strange. I'm trying to figure out a pattern, but its something with right-clicking, then hitting the keyboard or somethign.

      Anyway, I love these two, but they still need a little work. The plugin system that they use seem like it should be pretty good for preventing feature-creep from killing them. Default: nice and stripped down, 1-click install of any additional features. Pretty nice if you ask me.

      --
      "When ideology and theology couple, their offspring are not always bad but they are always blind." -- Bill Moyers
    7. Re:Fantastic! by murphyslawyer · · Score: 1
      I have only one major annoyance on OS X, and it is this -

      If I close the last Firebird window, I have to do an Cmd+N or File->New to get a new browser window. With Safari I can simply click on the dock icon. Same problem with T-bird

      Has anybody else had this problem and know of a work-around?

      --
      I ain't evil, I'm just good looking.
    8. Re:Fantastic! by Phleg · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Having a pre-written rendering engine wasn't an advantage enjoyed by Mozilla.

      *ahem* Netscape ring any bells?

      --
      No comment.
    9. Re:Fantastic! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mozilla will eventually fully break up into the seperate projects, and my interest is completely oriented on the progress of Firebird / Thunderbird.

      I really hope this doesn't happen. I love Mozilla especially just because it is a _full suite_ which gives me everything I need in one package (Mail, Browser, Composer). And I can download this beautiful suite with ease for my Linux workstations and my Windows laptop. No need to hassle with separate programs.

      And did you know, you can select in Mozilla installation which components you want to install! So.. it's splitted up already! :)

    10. Re:Fantastic! by Enucite · · Score: 1

      I was under the impression Gecko was written from scratch.

    11. Re:Fantastic! by Orbix · · Score: 1

      The main thing that I can see Firebird still needing development work on is in the configuration/option dialogs. They're a lot better in .7 than they were in .5 and .6 (which is a good thing, since they were absolutely horrid for a while there), but there's a good ways to go before the config settings are really complete.

    12. Re:Fantastic! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      As we all know Mozilla will eventually fully break up into the seperate projects...
      Right after hell freezes over.
    13. Re:Fantastic! by justMichael · · Score: 1

      - For some reason Firebird sometimes "captures" my mouse-click in OS X and forces me to log out to use the mouse again. Kinda strange. I'm trying to figure out a pattern, but its something with right-clicking, then hitting the keyboard or somethign.

      I'm guessing it's deeper than Firebird, sometimes when the &$$%^# cat walks across my PowerBook keyboard I have to log out to get the mouse back and I use Camino, to me the widgets fit in better.

    14. Re:Fantastic! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why start from scratch if you can fix Moz1.x?

      I tried Firebird, frankly it sux. Based on someone's whims standard button usage etc changes. Why?

      Plus, it takes on all the crappy bugs Moz has. Small GUI matters, but annoys the crap out of me. Reported by me and hundreds of others over the last 3yrs and nobody has even looked at it. Obviously not as 'interesting' as some other development work eh?

    15. Re:Fantastic! by caino59 · · Score: 1

      i've read the posts about people saying about firebird crashes and whatnot...

      I run firebird on both windows and linux...now for the moment I'm just going to leave linux alone, as most users out there (seriously, cmon now) are in windows mode.

      I fully suppoty firebird, and try to get anyone I know to use it. As far as crashes go, it locks up less, needs restarted, doesn't need it's process killed as much as IE.

      One of the biggest problems I see is flash, and thats due to people not writing flash entirely right, in that it's designed to work with the broken-standard of IE. Fine, I just dont browse those sites.

      Firebird loads every bit as fast as IE (even tho IE is loaded at boot) And I cannot give up tabbed browsing. And you don't have to worry about the IE security holes.

      I also use Thunderbird exclusivly for email. I've yet to have it crash once. It does everything I need.

      Both firebird and thunderbird just seem so much more friendlier to use, and really -they both just work better than their MS counterparts (regardless of Outlook Exp, Full blown Outlook, etc)

      I'm here to stay and look longily towards the next releases of each...

      I will also continue is teaching friends and family about the benefits of both Firebird and Thunderbird, no matter that they ren't in a final version.

    16. Re:Fantastic! by hatchet · · Score: 1

      Probably today? There is only 1 more bug openned for FB 0.8.. and it's quite easy fixable.

    17. Re:Fantastic! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, it was written from scratch at Netscape, but it predates the Mozilla project.

    18. Re:Fantastic! by trash+eighty · · Score: 1
      Clicking on links in Thunderbird doesn't send them to a broswer on *nix systems (OS X included)

      it does on my OSX box, maybe its just a setup issue?

    19. Re:Fantastic! by aanantha · · Score: 1

      Firebird uses XUL, Gecko, and PKI which were developed for Mozilla.

    20. Re:Fantastic! by jez9999 · · Score: 1

      I hope not. Creeping featuritis has been the death of too many fine pieces of software that were fine just the way they were.

      I, however, hope somebody gets round to coding in a fix for this *major* missing feature which is stopping many people, including me, switching from Outlook Express to Thunderbird. *sigh*

    21. Re:Fantastic! by CProgrammer98 · · Score: 1

      "Sorry links to mozilla from slashdot are disabled" How mad is that! what's the point? surely any slashdot reader can immediatly think of at least 3 ways to get round that.

      Pointless.

      --
      And the people shall be oppressed, every one by another, and every one by his neighbour Isaiah 3:5
    22. Re:Fantastic! by fbg111 · · Score: 1

      For the Mozilla devs who browse /., thanks for all your hard work in making free software that suits my wants and needs. Keep up the great work!

      Second that! Bravo to you guys, and thanks for the hard work and great product.

      --
      Flying is easy, just throw yourself at the ground and miss. -Douglas Adams
    23. Re:Fantastic! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It stops Slashdoting of Bugzilla. It works, too; most Slashdot users are too lazy to copy the link to the clipboard and paste it into the location bar.

    24. Re:Fantastic! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Yes, it was written from scratch at Netscape, but it predates the Mozilla project.

      No, it doesn't. Gecko was developed by netscape developers after the mozilla project was started. The original intention of the mozilla project was to adapt ns4 to support web standards. When they realised it would be faster to rewrite the engine from scratch, they did. Then when they noticed the new engine was powerful enough to do the entire UI, not just the webpages, they rewrote the UI. It was a sort of cascade effect. Once the engine rewrite decision was made, it cascaded into rewriting everything. They still aimed for netscape 4 equivalency for mozilla 1.0, which at the time seemed smart, but in hindsight was not one of the brightest ideas, since netscape 4's design, though reasonable for the age it was created in, was horribly outdated by the time mozilla 1.0 was released. Hence the need for firebird, thunderbird, and so on.

      If you don't believe me, the source code for netscape was released (and the mozilla project started) march 31st 1998. The NGLayout project (which resulted in gecko) was started late 1998.

    25. Re:Fantastic! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Firebird uses a new xul toolkit. That is, it renders xul like mozilla, but the code that renders xul is new (to support stuff like the user-modifyable toolbars). That's why some improvements can't be ported back into mozilla.

    26. Re:Fantastic! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IIRC this was instituted after slashdot linked to a bugzilla entry and thereby kept the developers from being able to access their own bug database for a while.

    27. Re:Fantastic! by Alex · · Score: 1

      Having a pre-written rendering engine wasn't an advantage enjoyed by Mozilla.

      *ahem* Netscape ring any bells?


      He said advantage!

      Alex

    28. Re:Fantastic! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Gecko was developed by netscape developers after the mozilla project was started... If you don't believe me, the source code for netscape was released (and the mozilla project started) march 31st 1998. The NGLayout project (which resulted in gecko) was started late 1998.

      Monday 26th October 1998 (let's be specific here) was when Mozilla development switched to focus on NGLayout. However, the new rendering engine (originally called Raptor) started as an internal Netscape project in 1997.

    29. Re:Fantastic! by DShard · · Score: 1

      I was having a similar problem on my debian sarge system until I upgrade to the latest version (.4). Maybe a simple update will fix this.

    30. Re:Fantastic! by rmohr02 · · Score: 1
      Clicking on links in Thunderbird doesn't send them to a broswer on *nix systems (OS X included).
      See http://www.mozilla.org/projects/thunderbird/linuxu rls.html.
    31. Re:Fantastic! by Doctor+O · · Score: 1

      Go fix it yourself. Simply create the "all-in-one" tree you want and filter incoming messages to be moved there. Problem solved.

      --
      Who is General Failure and why is he reading my hard disk?
    32. Re:Fantastic! by Ironica · · Score: 1

      I, however, hope somebody gets round to coding in a fix for this *major* missing feature which is stopping many people, including me, switching from Outlook Express to Thunderbird. *sigh*

      You know, it never occurred to me that this was an issue, in spite of the fact that I use five different email addresses routinely. This is partly because I never used Outlook Express... the first mail client I ever used that could handle multiple accounts at the same time was Goldmine, and then Netscape Messenger worked almost exactly the same way.

      What I do instead is...

      - I have a spamcatcher forwarding account that I use for most online purchases, website registrations, etc. which forwards to my main personal account.
      - I have two other addresses created on my domain that I use for different purposes. Both forward to my main personal account.
      - I have a school account that is completely separate. I want it that way, so that I can have a different set of filters, different sig, etc.
      - I have filters in Mozilla that split up the mail in my personal inbox, throwing everything addressed to my other addresses into their own folders. (My filters also split out all mailing lists and dump everything that isn't explicitly to any of my addresses or from any known lists into another folder.) At the end of it all, the stuff in "Inbox" is stuff sent specifically to my personal account, which I only give to actual people who I want to get email from.

      It would drive me *batty* to start out with everything in one hierarchy and have to split it up. It's clear (to me, anyway) that if they implement the functionality you describe, they'll need to do it in such a way that you decide which way to do it at set-up time, and that you can easily convert between the different flavors. This, I'd guess, will require a bit of work, and may be a lower priority since the system "works," just not how people are used to it working in other applications.

      In the meantime, maybe my workaround will help some people who have the ability to forward mail (and don't have any compelling reason not to).

      --
      Don't you wish your girlfriend was a geek like me?
  10. 200l 700 by Deraj+DeZine · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I can't believe that development is still chugging along with Mozilla despite the fairly recent dismemberment of Netscape's Mozilla team.

    I just hope that can get XUL to become a cross-platform standard for web applications. Some people don't mind using web interfaces, but I would prefer an application that looks like a real application (native widgets and all) wherever possible.

    Are you a web coder? What are you waiting for? Start using XUL!

    --
    True story.
    1. Re:200l 700 by Deraj+DeZine · · Score: 1

      Well, I guess that would be a valid reason. But the next time you're coding, I'd suggest you take a look at XUL. It's a very attractive toolkit. Just a thin layer on top of native widgets. The resulting dialogs are often sleek and sexy. You know you want it.

      --
      True story.
    2. Re:200l 700 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Are you a web coder? What are you waiting for?"

      Users to stop using IE.

    3. Re:200l 700 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I've been toying with XUL for a while now and am cozing up with 'Rapid Application Development with Mozilla'. Fantasic read, but the one thing that really sticks in my craw is the total lack of organized documentation.

      The *only* way a 'platform'/language will be widely adopted is by making it accessible to Joe Coder. Just take a look at PHP, it's not always the best language, but has a *huge* user base, primarily because it's well documented.

      Yes, there are now thousands of 'developers' writing crappy code, but dammit, at least they're pushing it to their clients, friends, family the neighbour's dog. Evangelism (sic) is the root of success.

      Leo

    4. Re:200l 700 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      javascript is a half-baked language which is slow as hell. But you have to use javascrip for XUL. I used javascript to pair and convert text in mozilla and the speed is horror. I mean it is slower than mozilla, can you imagin that?

    5. Re:200l 700 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, and I think they should use python + XUL to code the XUL. python is as portable as javascript in mozilla but it is a complete language.

    6. Re:200l 700 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      PS. A big Thank You to all of you developers and bug busters who have put in the time and effort for yet another release.

    7. Re:200l 700 by Basehart · · Score: 1

      I bet you say that to all the coders!

    8. Re:200l 700 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you won't want to do serious programming using javascript which XUL is stuck with.

    9. Re:200l 700 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your're right. You want to use the best tool for the job. And if building a client interface with XUL and javascript takes you one tenth of the time, all the more power to you.

      If you decided that the Mozilla playform was right for a 'serious' project, it's very unlikely that you'd write everything in XUL/javascript, you'd more likely leverage C++ or C for your core. Remember, Mozilla itself is *written using XUL/javascript/C++/C*

    10. Re:200l 700 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Despite what the slashdotters say, XUL isn't really packaged as a developer tool. It's more like part of Mozilla that you can use, if you are willing to track API changes and so on. I'm not sure if they *want* it accessible to Joe Coder because that would limit whatever they wanted to do in Mozilla.

    11. Re:200l 700 by Daengbo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I would love to. I spent a week of nights trying to do exactly that. I don't live in an English speaking country, and the only docs that I could get about XUL appear to be from a milestone.
      Half of the stuff I tried wouldn't work because the syntax has changed. I can't spend six months tracking down and sorting through which version of XUL this doc is, and if it will help me or not before I even get to really start working on my app.
      Mod me down for saying something bad about moz if you want, but I really wanted to do my next stuff in XUL, but I could barely get off first base with it, much less finish a product in my off-work hours.

    12. Re:200l 700 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Javascript is not that slow. It's Mozilla that's slow. Try using Javascript (JScript) in Internet Explorer or Windows Script Host and you'll see that it kicks ass. I use it on Windows with WSH, and it by far surpasses Perl in speed. Without all of Perl's bullshit syntax.

  11. whence next by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought 1.5 was the eol for mozilla and firebird was to carry the touch from there.

    Whatever mozilla rocks and those who bitched at the earlier version can now stfu.

  12. Thank you by after · · Score: 1

    Well, another release. What can I say, keep that good stuff coming. We all love it.

    Now GO GET FIREBIRD UPDATED! :)

  13. Mozilla Growing by lukior · · Score: 4, Interesting

    All slashdot readers know about the benefits of Mozilla but I am happy to see some more mainstream magazines giving props to the browser. I noticed it won some magazines comparo of browsers for the end of 2003. Perhaps this is due to the fact that we keep seeing improvements in Mozilla while it seems like IE has been a stagnant product for some time.

    --
    I would like to salute the ashes of american flags, and all the fallen leaves filling up shopping bags.
    1. Re:Mozilla Growing by Joseph+Lam · · Score: 4, Insightful

      ya, most ppl out there that I met don't know what's 'Mozilla' nor its relation with Netscape the browser. Most companies still build IE only websites, some better ones build IE+Netscape, but Mozilla still remains to be the 'underground'.

      More promotions, either by the press or by us /. readers are important.

    2. Re:Mozilla Growing by bunratty · · Score: 3, Informative
      Most companies still build IE only websites, some better ones build IE+Netscape
      It's rare for me to visit a web site that doesn't work perfectly or near perfectly in Mozilla. Today I ran across one for the first time in about a year. It uses document.all for navigation, which means that users must be running IE or Opera and also must have JavaScript enabled for links to work. When the developers finally realize that over 20% of visitors can't navigate their site, I think they'll quickly fix it.
      --
      What a fool believes, he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.
    3. Re:Mozilla Growing by Jacob0531 · · Score: 1

      Agreed. While Mozilla/Gecko are fantastic, we all know that it will not prospor on its merits alone. Hopefully the Mozilla Foundation will gain enough force to help with marketing someday. In the meantime, it's back to the grassroots campaign, trying to convert people one at a time.

      Personally, I use Mozilla daily as my main browser. And am looking forward to future advancements with Firebird. I commend the Mozilla team for all their hard work! Others I know swear by Opera. Either way is a win-win for the internet community, with more pressure for standards compliance.

      Kudos! And with this post written, and the new version downloaded, it's off to install 1.6!

    4. Re:Mozilla Growing by K_J_Raine · · Score: 1

      For my sites and web apps that I write the first testing ground is Moz.
      If it works in Moz Generally it means that it will work in any browser and I don't have to put up with the bloat that is IE.
      This in itself is advertising for me.
      Plus, when my clients bitch that the app/site is running slow I get to introduce them to Moz (usually Firebird lately) and there

      --
      There is only one satisfying way to boot a computer. -- J. H. Goldfuss
    5. Re:Mozilla Growing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      M0D P4R3NT UP!!12#24%)five^C(+-)6.022*10^(-24) / 0

    6. Re:Mozilla Growing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People don't need to write websites that support Mozilla. It is enough if they write html that is not broken and follows W3C recommendations.

      But hey, even when they try to make websites that are only for IE, I can still read most of them using Mozilla.

    7. Re:Mozilla Growing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most companies still build IE only websites, some better ones build IE+Netscape, but Mozilla still remains to be the 'underground'.

      just because you have a copy of frontpage does NOT make you a webdesigner. if they make it for only IE then they have the bosses kid who knows a bit about "puters" and a copy of frontpage.

      and from looking at the design of many of those pages, I know I'm right.

    8. Re:Mozilla Growing by balster+neb · · Score: 1

      That's right. I know many people have used Netscape 7.x but very few have even heard about Mozilla.

      It would have been nice if AOL gave mozilla.org the rights to the name "Netscape", and hence allowed mozilla.org to market Netscape as the end-user browser. Such a move would have hugely increased Mozilla's recognition.

      Pity that Netscape is now just an AOL service.

    9. Re:Mozilla Growing by Chester+K · · Score: 2, Informative

      When the developers finally realize that over 20% of visitors can't navigate their site

      I think you added an extra 0 that doesn't belong in that percentage value of people who don't use IE.

      As popular as Mozilla, Firebird, Opera, Konqueror, and whatever other browsers are popular here on Slashdot, all of them combined are but a mere speck on the overall landscape.... Konqueror less so than others since Apple adopted it.

      --

      NO CARRIER
  14. Must... restrain... by someguy456 · · Score: 1

    Well, it's being a good couple of months with Firebird, but with this release, I'll go back to Mozilla, again. Fast, lean, and efficient is nice, but when you have a 3.1ghz cpu with 1.5 gigs of ram and 200 gigs of hd space, why not throw in the kitchen sink too?

    Hopefully they'll play nice together...

    1. Re:Must... restrain... by mfago · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You've forgotten the best part about using Firebird & Thunderbird:

      your email program doesn't crash when your browser does.

      Moz itself doesn't crash that often, but plugins brought it down several times per day for me. A serious flaw in the design IMHO.

    2. Re:Must... restrain... by mixmasta · · Score: 1

      Hmm, mozilla hasn't crashed in 6 months on me, and I use the browser and mail every day. I'm not sure that is that big of a deal.

      --
      #6495ED - cornflower blue
    3. Re:Must... restrain... by Dirtside · · Score: 1

      I do something that's probably relatively rare: I run two SEPARATE instances of Mozilla, one for browsing and one for mail, under different profiles. I could just use Firebird and Thunderbird, sure, but neither one has exactly all the features that I want -- yet. I'm sure some day I'll just switch over.

      But when the browser (occasionally) crashes, it doesn't take mail with it. Not that relaunching them both exactly requires a great deal of effort... but the point is, you don't need to *necessarily* use FB/TB in order to avoid the dual-crashing problem :)

      --
      "Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
    4. Re:Must... restrain... by kivaapina · · Score: 0

      Me too, I'm using Mozilla and I'm pretty happy with it so I did not switch to *bird. I like it all integrated. Can't wait to test that about:about thing!

  15. UPDATE: Mozilla 1.6 Released by cribb · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    first mozilla 1.6 crash reported.

    --
    Hostes alienigieni me abduxerunt. Qui annus est?
    1. Re:UPDATE: Mozilla 1.6 Released by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      I can't believe that. I thought Slashdot was part of the Mozilla regression test suite.

      It's a joke I say, son, a joke. /me ducks

  16. Anybody have torrent links? by lingqi · · Score: 1

    please?

    --

    My life in the land of the rising sun.

    1. Re:Anybody have torrent links? by f0rt0r · · Score: 2, Informative

      Edonkey has it. :) I actually use emule on Windows XP to access the Overture ( I think that is the name) network. Lots of legal stuff there. Plenty.

      --
      I can't afford a sig!
    2. Re:Anybody have torrent links? by JWhitlock · · Score: 2, Informative

      Although the main site was completely unresponsive, and the primary mirrors as well, quite a few of the secondary mirrors were pretty good. The progeny link worked for me.

    3. Re:Anybody have torrent links? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would NEVER download and run an app from Edonkey, kazaa or gnutella.... you would have no idea what the application may be.

      at least with dloading from www.mozilla.org you could feel comfortable that, barring an exploit, your getting clean stuff.

      sheesh, back in my more 31337 days, i would backpack all kinds of phone home trojans on public software sources (like into /pub at the uni)

  17. Not bad by hendridm · · Score: 1

    I haven't run Mozilla in awhile, been running Firebird instead. I must say it's pretty snappy and responsive. Too bad they haven't fixed the Control+Enter bug yet :(

    1. Re:Not bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is the ctrl-enter bug?

    2. Re:Not bad by HanzoSpam · · Score: 1

      I haven't run Mozilla in awhile, been running Firebird instead. I must say it's pretty snappy and responsive. Too bad they haven't fixed the Control+Enter bug yet :(

      What behavior does that produce? I haven't noticed any problems with it.

      --

      Progressivism: Parasites helping parasites to help themselves - to other people's stuff.
    3. Re:Not bad by hendridm · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You know how in Internet Explorer and Firebird you can type a word (like 'google') and hit Control+Enter, it will convert 'google' to 'http://www.google.com'. I like that feature. Sure, you can just type 'google' and hit enter while it tries to figure out what you mean, but Control+Enter shaves precious seconds off of the load time. In Firebird, there's also Shift+Enter and Ctrl+Shift+Enter too, but I don't use those. IE only has the Control+Enter feature. But Mozilla lacks all of them!

    4. Re:Not bad by decaying · · Score: 1

      Control-Enter is fine, open in new tab.

      --
      ----- One piece short of Legoland
    5. Re:Not bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is a bug? Sounds like it's just a feature from another browser that you happen to like. This does not a bug make.

    6. Re:Not bad by wmspringer · · Score: 1

      Personally, I just type "go", hit down, and enter. Bam, I'm at www.google.com :-)

    7. Re:Not bad by filenabber · · Score: 1
      even quicker - go to google and do a search for the word test. Now bookmark the results. Go to Manage Bookmarks and edit that book mark. Change the name to something like "Google Quicksearch". Edit the location field and relace the word test with %s . Change the keyword to g. Now, to do a search, you can type g folowed by the word(s) to search for and hit enter. You can similarly make one for the "I'm feeling lucky" feature at google.

      This trick works for many websites. I have a Quick Searches bookmark folder that has quick searches for Google, Google Lucky search, dictionary.com, and mailinator.com.

      --
      Are you a Candy Addict?
    8. Re:Not bad by Isaac-Lew · · Score: 1

      That works in Mozilla 1.6, I just tried it. See Edit -> Preferences -> Smart Browsing, then put a checkmark in "Domain Guessing".

    9. Re:Not bad by dark_panda · · Score: 1

      There's a feature in konqueror that I like even more than this: Web Shortcuts.

      Basically, it lets you enter something like this into the location box:

      "gg: example"
      "ggg: example"
      "php: example"

      The first line will search Google for "example", the second line will search Google Groups, the last one will search the PHP documentation. Of course, you can define custom shortcuts, which I've done for sites like Everything, Wikipedia, RPMFind, all sorts of things. That way you don't even need to go to the site, you can search it right away. Very useful.

      J

    10. Re:Not bad by poulbailey · · Score: 1

      Mozilla has had this feature for many, many months.

    11. Re:Not bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    12. Re:Not bad by dark_panda · · Score: 1

      Excellent. An AC pointed me to some documentation. I hadn't noticed that Moz had this feature, since I usually use konq.

      I use moz mostly for debugging, as it has some excellent built-in tools, like the DOM and javascript debuggers. The fact that it throws up an error immediately when it hits some bad XHTML is also very helpful.

      J

    13. Re:Not bad by JCholewa · · Score: 1

      > There's a feature in konqueror that I like even more than this: Web Shortcuts.

      Opera has had this capability since the dawn of time. Mozilla has had it for at least a year and a half (probably before 1.0, though I can't be sure). I have it set up so that I type "g example" to bring up a google search on "example".Doing this in Opera requires editing a text file (Opera comes with the 'g' keyword and a bazillion others already built in, though), whereas to do it in Mozilla you have to bookmark a page, open the bookmark for editing, change the search term in the URL to '%s', and type in a letter or word in the "keyword" field.

      Konqueror was second to last of the major web browsers to implement this feature.

      --
      -JC
      coder
      http://www.jc-news.com/parse.cgi?coding/main

  18. But No One's mentioned the most important feature by Hal+The+Computer · · Score: 4, Informative
    As listed in the Release notes mozilla's greatest feature yet:
    One step closer to the kitchen sink, about:about has been implemented. Typing about:about in the address field will give the user a nice list of available about:s.
    By the way, if you haven't yet, if you use mozilla, you need to check out about:mozilla
    --

    int main(void){int x=01232;while(malloc(x));return x;}
  19. Mozilla as a platform by Linus+Sixpack · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'd love to hear more about mozilla as a platform. Java\python and open office integration is happening , I just dont think that it gets enough press.

    Mozilla is easily the easiest open source project I've been able to implement, its that good.

    IE is so dangerous that its not worth the integration -- even my users are beginning to get that.

    sl

  20. Re:4w350m3 by Deraj+DeZine · · Score: 1

    The name "Firebird" was probably suggested during a flame war.

    And yes, I know this is not true =)

    --
    True story.
  21. Cool.. what about SVG? by Wheaty18 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm currently running the Windows version of Mozilla 1.5 over IE. I recently downloaded the SVG-enabled version of Mozilla, and it's pretty neat. Any ideas when SVG support will be officially merged into the Mozilla stable tree?

    1. Re:Cool.. what about SVG? by khanyisa · · Score: 5, Informative

      Have a look at the svg project page (http://www.mozilla.org/projects/svg/) Basically, not for quite a while yet, but feel free to help out!

  22. use the mirrors by a.koepke · · Score: 5, Informative

    When downloading this you should have a look at the mirrors list and find one near you.

    http://www.mozilla.org/mirrors.html

    --


    (\(\
    (^.^)
    (")")
    *This is the cute bunny virus, please copy this into your sig so it can spread
  23. At which time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    they'll change the name to Chevell SS

  24. Worth upgrading? by m_evanchik · · Score: 1

    I'm running 1.2 on win 98. Is the upgrade worth it?
    I tried 1.4 stable butit was too buggy.

    1. Re:Worth upgrading? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >I'm running 1.2 on win 98. Is the upgrade worth it? I tried 1.4 stable butit was too buggy.

      Are you sure it was the browser?

      *ducks*

    2. Re:Worth upgrading? by welshsocialist · · Score: 2, Informative

      There was a bug in the 1.4-1.5 timeframe with rising GDI levels caused Mozilla to fail. I'm thinking you were effected. See Mozilla Bug 204374 and this thread at Antony Shen's forums.

      --
      Support the Chagossians
    3. Re:Worth upgrading? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

      Yes. It is.

    4. Re:Worth upgrading? by m_evanchik · · Score: 1

      yes, it was the browser. 1.2 still runs fine. You don't need to duck, as I'm not the vindictive type.










      *SPLAT! Pie in yer face.*
      ok, sometimes I lie.

  25. Re:But No One's mentioned the most important featu by obotics · · Score: 2, Informative

    Better yet, check out about:mozilla in Internet Explorer ;-)

  26. Re:Mozilla and popups by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, missing out on functioning web sites when things like Javascript don't work. Sorry, I use Mozilla too, but on many sites I'm forced to use MSIE via VMWare. I can name several such sites off the top of my head.

  27. Who uses the suite? by Trillan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Just curious, who uses the suite instead of Firebird/Thunderbird... and why?

    I prefer the individual applications, primarily due to launch speed, but also due to what I think is a superior interface of components in the components-as-apps approach vs. the components-in-suite approach.

    1. Re:Who uses the suite? by bucky0 · · Score: 1

      I do, but that's mainly due to my stupidity. I couldn't for the life of me, figure out what the difference was supposed to be...

      --

      -Bucky
    2. Re:Who uses the suite? by darnok · · Score: 1

      I'm using Firebird/Thunderbird, but I'd switch back to Mozilla in a heartbeat if they ever got SVG integrated back into the main build.

    3. Re:Who uses the suite? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I use the suite because it includes browser, mail, chat, dom inspector and every so often I use composer.

      The DOM inspector is the greatest thing since sliced bread for figuring out what's going on with your CSS.

    4. Re:Who uses the suite? by aunchaki · · Score: 1

      I still use the suite (SeaMonkey) wherever I need *both* browser and mail client. I keep them both running constantly, so launch time is not an issue for me. Where I only need a browser, I install FireBird (and love it).

      I'm curious, how does the footprint of SeaMonkey compare to running FireBird and ThunderBird simultaneously?

    5. Re:Who uses the suite? by Lukey+Boy · · Score: 1

      I do. Since I use both apps open all day on my system, it makes more sense to load one big bloated binary than two :-)

    6. Re:Who uses the suite? by inode_buddha · · Score: 1

      I use the suite just out of sheer laziness. I remember the "browser wars" too well, and decided on Moz back around 0.7 or so. I got sick and tired of trying out everything under the sun all the time, because I'd rather be reading /. than trying to import my prefs into yet another browser. Been a happy camper since.

      --
      C|N>K
    7. Re:Who uses the suite? by Erik+Fish · · Score: 1

      When I get to work I launch Mozilla. When I leave work I close Mozilla. In between Mozilla stays open. No reason for separate components because I use both e-mail and web browser frequently throughout the day.

      Mozilla is also an excellent drop-in upgrade/replacement for Communicator 4.x. This is incredibly useful when your employer, your customers and some of your affiliates have standardized on Communicator 4.x in the past.

      I really hope they finally squashed the "Mozilla freezes and utilizes all available CPU cycles for 30 seconds to a minute randomly when loading a page" bug.

    8. Re:Who uses the suite? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aha. So that's why my browser always halts when I'm loading suprnova.org!

    9. Re:Who uses the suite? by thegrommit · · Score: 1

      Just curious, who uses the suite instead of Firebird/Thunderbird... and why?

      I use the browser, mail and irc client on a regular basis. Tried Firebird and didn't like the separate search bar and simplified preference dialog. And as the suite does what I want, there's no reason to look for workarounds.

    10. Re:Who uses the suite? by edwdig · · Score: 1

      For starters, last time I tried Thunderbird (about 6 months ago), it used about as much memory as the suite did. Firebird seemed to use about 50% what the suite did. So by using both, my memory usage would be about 50% higher than before.

      Second reason is the DOM Inspector saves a lot of time when doing web development. It's a pain to get it working with Firebird. Any builds of it I found didn't work right.

      Third reason is I've seen a decent number of sites that do browser detection and won't let you in if your browser isn't on their list. Firebird rarely is on the list, however, Mozilla usually is.

      I do occasionally use Composer, altho not very often. If this was the only reason, I wouldn't care.

      The final (and possibly most important) reason is there is no easy way to move your mail from Mozilla to Thunderbird. Yeah, you can copy your profile directory and then go editing files to make it work, but I don't want to do that.

    11. Re:Who uses the suite? by zsazsa · · Score: 1

      I prefer the individual applications, primarily due to launch speed

      That's funny, because that's why I use the suite. The turbo/quicklaunch feature in Windows really keeps things quite bearable, especially on older computers. Even in Linux where quicklaunch isn't available, I can click that mail button in a browser window and know the mail window will pop up in an instant, rather than waiting.

      Will quicklaunch make its way into the 'birds? Will they be able to share a common GRE to make launching of one faster if the other is running? If so I'll switch when those features are implemented.

    12. Re:Who uses the suite? by Trillan · · Score: 1

      Will quicklaunch make its way into the 'birds?

      It doesn't really have to... Firebird launches instantly. I use Thunderbird a lot less, but it seems toi launch within a couple seconds.

    13. Re:Who uses the suite? by Erik+Fish · · Score: 1

      No, that happens because the mirrors are often overloaded.

      This bug occurs randomly. You could be loading an enormous Flash-heavy mammoth, page six of some Google search results or 2k of static HTML with no graphics from the web server in the next room. In any case it's time to get coffee because your computer is going to be busy for a while.

    14. Re:Who uses the suite? by pedro · · Score: 1

      I find the suite more.. integrated. And configurable in a manner that works well for me.
      Plus, Composer is a none-too-shabby WYSIWYG authoring tool for quickly knocking out and tweaking some html. Between that and Bluefish (or Arachnophilia on doze) for the odd tag massaging I'm pretty much set.
      Break out Composer separately and globalise prefs between the various suite components so that I'm not suddenly using IE as my browser after my bro-in-law is done at zone.msn.com (on our dozenboxen) and I'll be less insistent on the monolithic Moz manifestation.
      For now, though, even for multiple users, it just seems more flexible.
      Firebird on Win98 is damned fast, however. I've got all of the kids here converted, and they prefer it to IE not just for speed, and the popup suppression, but for the 'cool factor'.
      It's not their 'parent's' browser, which carries a certain cache'.

      --
      Brak: What's THAT?
      Thundercleese: A light switch.. of TOTAL DEVASTATION!
    15. Re:Who uses the suite? by antdude · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I like to have my email, newsgroups, and browser running at all time.

      Also, Prefbar only seems to work with Mozilla. :(

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    16. Re:Who uses the suite? by bonkeroo+buzzeye · · Score: 1
      I do. I came to Mozilla when Phoenix was a semi-comatose project and Thunderbird wasn't a glimmer in the developers' eyes. Finally, I found a browser I *loved* that made surfing the net enjoyable rather than infuriating. So there's partly just loyalty to a trusted workhorse.

      I did try an early Phoenix and a few later ones including Firebirds and I found the interface too IE-like for my taste. I disliked the Windows-ized limitation of easily settable options that would 'confuse' the user. I disliked not having my mail connected to my browser. (A good chunk of my mail contains links to places and it's nice to just click on it and have it open in my browser.)

      Those who accuse Mozilla of being ugly apparently don't know how to install themes - I loved gashu's lofi and, since he hasn't updated in a long time, I've been happy with the 'rain' theme which goes nice with ice (the Infadel IceWM theme, slightly modified).

      Those who accuse it of being slow - well, it's not right for all systems but it opens in about 2.5 seconds on my box (1.1GHz Athlon, with either Slack or sometimes Gentoo) and stays open indefinitely after that. Dillo launches instantaneously - faster than Firebird. Net savings: maximum of 2 seconds a day. *twirls finger* And it renders pages as fast as anything. Back when I used Windows, the quick launch/pre launch, whatever it was called, made it nearly as fast as the always preloaded IE.

      I dunno. I just love it. A more pertinent question might be: given Mozilla's excellence, what need was there to split it and why would people switch? The only advantage I see is saving 2 seconds a day - otherwise, there's fewer options, more trouble coordinating two apps, and so on.

      I haven't added up the disk usage and memory footprint but if you added the Birds it's probably not that big of a savings - maybe even none. Particularly if you add in the equivalents of the other components. Which will probably never be developed to a particularly high level - most lagged behind in the suite - they'll die completely split apart.

      Sorry for the ramble, but I love my mozilla and hope for many more versions after 1.6.

    17. Re:Who uses the suite? by Jotham · · Score: 1

      Will quicklaunch make its way into the 'birds? Will they be able to share a common GRE to make launching of one faster if the other is running?

      That's the plan of the XRE and GRE projects (which pages are outdated and I want updates from!!!)

      The idea is to turn the XUL and Gecko rendering engines into a single standalone shared component - much like DirectX. It'll also turn Mozilla into a nice development platform for writing other little apps.

    18. Re:Who uses the suite? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just curious, who uses the suite instead of Firebird/Thunderbird... and why?

      Venkman!

    19. Re:Who uses the suite? by pedro · · Score: 1

      Thanks much for the ramble.. :)
      It's called a 'Zilla for a reason!
      I'm fine with it on my 400mhz PII.
      Splitting the functions will result in the same sort of chaos we see when .gov departments go asunder..
      Replication of effort and functionality, crossover and conflict between what used to be cozy relationships..
      I'm OPPOSED!

      --
      Brak: What's THAT?
      Thundercleese: A light switch.. of TOTAL DEVASTATION!
    20. Re:Who uses the suite? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have been using the standalone apps for a couple months now. The biggest reason is that Mozilla seemed to have a problem handling my 4gb of work email (approximately 350,000 messages) and it would hang when trying to close at the end of a session. It would refuse to complete compacting. Lots of other stuff always went awry, too.

      I decided to switch to the standalones so that if my email had to crash due to the sheer volume, at least I wouldn't lose my entire browser session and open tabs, too. Luckily, since switching to the standalones, all of my email problems are solved and I never have the problem anymore to start with!

      Also, I prefer only eating up twice the resources when *necessary*. If I'm just browsing the net, I don't need the email application sucking up resources just sitting around and not doing anything.

      Not to mention, I find that having a seperate email and browser client now makes it easier for me to hop onto and off of my work's VPN remotely (where I work) so that if I just want to hop on the VPN and check my work email, I don't have to close down my browser session. I can leave that going and *only* fire up the email app.

      Mozilla and its apps are really coming into full swing now. At this point, there is NO reason to use ANY other browser or email client, other than being too lazy to install them, not knowing about their existance or simply needing to use the other browsers so you can actually *view* all of those fucking miserable pages in the world that are geared to ONLY work in MSIE.

    21. Re:Who uses the suite? by mixmasta · · Score: 2


      It does everything I want, the way I want. I have the all the prefs set just how I like 'em. For example turning off the icons on the toolbar and showing only text buttons. I don't really need firebird's pretty icons. =)

      I run mozilla for weeks at a time, launch speed is irrelevant. The only thing firebird offers me is less features and more bugs. No thanks.

      I've been waiting for years for mozilla to be finished, and I'm not going back to another half finished browser and mail ever again. Call me up when *bird reaches 2.0, and I'll take a look.

      --
      #6495ED - cornflower blue
    22. Re:Who uses the suite? by DrBlubGut · · Score: 1

      Thats easy. Me. Why? Because they don't have a tool to move about 6 years of mail easily. I use *bird on other machines but untill I don't have to hand edit files I'm not moving the main machine over.

    23. Re:Who uses the suite? by Patik · · Score: 1
      Tried Firebird and didn't like the separate search bar and simplified preference dialog.
      You don't need to use the separate search bar, and you can easily remove it from your screen (you can move/remove everything, actually, even the address bar and bookmarks). If you type something into the address bar that's not an address it'll do a Google "I'm feeling lucky search", or you can setup a keyword bookmark so that typing, for example, g searchterm does a standard Google search for 'searchterm'. You can set these up for other things as well (IMDB, dictionary.com, google groups, google news, and quickly searching your favorite sites).

      As for the advanced preferences dialog, it's still available at chrome://communicator/content/pref/pref.xul (sorry, can't link it here). Just bookmark it for easy reference. If you took a good look, though, you'll see that most of the prefs are still in the newly-designed dialog.

    24. Re:Who uses the suite? by jkarczjr · · Score: 1

      I believe Thunderbird and Mozilla mail can read the same email folder. I have tried this and have been successful, so far.

    25. Re:Who uses the suite? by Prof.Phreak · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I was using Mozilla (the whole package) for a while. Then sometime last summer I switched to using Firebird/Thunderbird, and then about a month ago I switched back to plain Mozilla. Here's why:

      Most of the time I have a browser and e-mail open anyway, so why have 2 applications open when you can have one? Also, Mozilla, as it is, is far less buggy than Firebird/Thunderbird. I've encountered some really annoying bugs that just annoyed the hell out of me. Also, does anyone really notice the startup speed? (I haven't. I compile Mozilla with all the optimizations, etc., and I really don't see any `speed' difference between this and Firebird).

      Now, on my Windows machine, I do use Firebird, but that's simply because I have no need for e-mail there.

      (also, the occasional need for ChatZilla makes one more useful than the other).

      So as far as I'm concerned, I hope they still keep the intergrated package alive later.

      --

      "If anything can go wrong, it will." - Murphy

    26. Re:Who uses the suite? by Prof.Phreak · · Score: 1

      I've moved e-mail back and forth between the two:

      All you have to do is rename the folder to/from: .mozilla to .thunderbird (or vice versa).

      Remove everything but the `default' folder from .thunderbird (or .mozilla) directory. Then, in the `default/*' folder, edit `prefs.js' file to right paths (ie: change .mozilla to .thunderbird).

      Restart either app, and it will open up the files as if nothing happened.

      A bit tidious, but it can be done.

      --

      "If anything can go wrong, it will." - Murphy

    27. Re:Who uses the suite? by jkarczjr · · Score: 1

      I have all my mail in one folder and just point each mailer to it. Thunderbird: tools--->account settings--->server settings set the local dir and restart Mozilla: edit--->mail & newsgroup account settings--->server settings set the Local dir and restart

    28. Re:Who uses the suite? by Daengbo · · Score: 1

      I use composer to create themes. Well, not really me, but my artist does the work then mocks the page up in composer so that I can see what she's looking for, Then I clean it up a little and write the PhP from it.

    29. Re:Who uses the suite? by craigmarshall · · Score: 1

      Actually, I still use the suite over the *birds. I've used each release of Mozilla exclusively on both my Windows and Linux machines since pre1.0 days, and I just love the amount of polish. I know that monolithic apps aren't as good as seperate apps and processes etc., but the seperate apps just aren't as good yet.

      For example, I like being able to right click on a URL in the mail client and select "Open in New tab". I like the installer that comes with Mozilla. It makes uninstalling, then downloading and then installing the new version, a 2 minute job. I don't have to unzip binary packages, and then paste symlinks or shortcuts anywhere.

      When the *birds are as integrated as the suite (and include the HTML editor and the IRC client?), and have nice installers, then I'll use 'em.

      Craig

    30. Re:Who uses the suite? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I've tried both, and while I love Fire/Thunderbird, I'm sticking to the Suite until the Firebird developers get their heads out of their respective asses and fix the CTRL-ENTER/ALT-ENTER idiocy.

      In Mozilla, when you CTRL-click a link, a new tab opens. When you press CTRL-T, a new tab opens. When you enter a URL and press CTRL-ENTER, a new tab opens, as it should.

      In Firebird, all is the same, except when you press CTRL-ENTER, whatever URL you've entered changes into www.URL.com (e.g. www.slashdot.org.com) and overwrites whatever webpage you have in your current tab. You're supposed to press ALT-ENTER, because that's the way fucking Internet Explorer does it.

      It wouldn't be so bad, if it were possible to change the key bindings. But I guess Firebird developers are only targetting IE users.

    31. Re:Who uses the suite? by snake_dad · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I like the Mozilla user interface better, and the preferences section too. In Firebird many things are being dumbed down, and to get the same functionality as in Mozilla you need to download and install several extensions, that may or may not work. And then do the same thing with each update :-/ Mozilla gives me one single archive to download, extract, copy plugins over, (make backup of profile directory just in case) and run.

      --
      karma capped .sig seeking available Slashdot poster for long-term relationship.
    32. Re:Who uses the suite? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Last time I played with Firebird/Thunderbird, I got two copies of runtime and support libs, one with each. I'm rather tight on disk, and too tight on cash to buy more, at the moment. Maybe if they'd come up with Firebird/Thunderbird/Common...

    33. Re:Who uses the suite? by Trillan · · Score: 1

      Hmm. I just copied the mailbox files from profiel to profile. Worked fine.

    34. Re:Who uses the suite? by Trillan · · Score: 1

      I've read this a few times, but I really wonder...

      Why would anyone use Chatzilla? It's vastly inferior to every other IRC program I've ever used in terms of features, look, configurability and performance.

      I don't know; maybe I need to give it another look.

    35. Re:Who uses the suite? by Error27 · · Score: 2

      I like the idea of breaking things up from a technical/development/organizational standpoint but I don't like firebird UI.

      I like the way the middle click opens a new window in Mozilla, and I don't like tabs. Currently I have 8 browser windows open, my xchat window is open, I have 4 eterm windows open and 4 random windows minimized. That's because I was shutting down for the day and exited a bunch of applications.

      My window manager is set up so that I can take advantage of Fitt's Law to switch between windows quickly. Tabs do not take advantage of Fitt's law so they are slow by default, but after you have a lot of windows open they become unmanageable.

      Most people do not have a good window manager like mine so switching between windows is slow and confusing. In that case, tabs make a lot of sense.

    36. Re:Who uses the suite? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but Fitt's law thinks in terms of mouse navigation. Tabs work well when navigating with the keyboard. A quick ctrl+tab is fast and intuitive for me.

    37. Re:Who uses the suite? by der_joachim · · Score: 1

      Just curious, who uses the suite instead of Firebird/Thunderbird... and why?

      I do, actually. At work, I use a P2-400. Firebird is not noticably faster than Moz, and I use the Moz mail client, the debugger and the Javascript Console. Oh yeah, and I am a lazy bastard, I want to install one suite instead of lots of smaller apps. :-)

      der Joachim

      --
      Geek runner, motorcyclist and professional know-it-all
    38. Re:Who uses the suite? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Since the GRE (gecko runtime embedding, causes mozilla-based apps to share the runtime engine) isn't up to snuff yet you're loading two different engines. As a result it's much more efficient to use mozilla than firebird and thunderbird at the same time. Ofcourse, for those who don't use thunderbird (like my evolution-loving ass) firebird instead of mozilla is pretty much a no-brainer.

    39. Re:Who uses the suite? by jsebrech · · Score: 1

      First of all, firebird 0.8 will have a "nice installer".

      Secondly, what's so great about chatzilla? I always thought it was woefully underfeatured next to the standalone irc clients.

      And finally, the standalone composer is going to be called nvu, it's being developed by composer developer daniel glazman and paid for by lindows (see, lindows can do something good after all). Be patient, it will come, and it will rock (nvu is going to have lots of cool new features: integrated css design and editing, visual table editing, better support for fonts and text sizes, ...).

    40. Re:Who uses the suite? by SubtleNuance · · Score: 1

      I use them both. When Mozilla leaps Firebird (like this) I will use Mozilla for a while, when Firebird implements the latest gecko-engine, i run it.

    41. Re:Who uses the suite? by B5_geek · · Score: 1

      I use the suite and have for a long time. I wish I didn't have to though.
      I only use the browser, I have never touched the IRC, Mail, Composer, or Addy book. BUT I have found firebird to be slower, more crash prone and quite unreliable compared to Moz.

      My second issue is the skins. I am using this on a 1024x768 14" LCD and the default skin uses 25% of the real-estate. Under Moz I can use Micro, Little, or Tiny and they all work correctly. The skins say they support Firebird (most of the time) but when I install them it doesn't work correctly.

      --
      "The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." ~Plato (427-347 BC)
    42. Re:Who uses the suite? by gnu-generation-one · · Score: 1

      "Just curious, who uses the suite instead of Firebird/Thunderbird... and why?"

      I do...

      * Looks prettier by default

      * Configuration window is familiar, while I can't find anything in Firebird's options at the moment

      * Stuff in the Tools menu I actually use (such as the cookie manager and form manager)

      * More addons available at projects.mozdev.org (things like HTTP headers in the page-info screen, "save all linked files", the calendar, user-agent setting, etc.)

      * I actually use the mail and IRC clients when I'm on a Windows machine, so it's not really a problem to have them included.

      * I use the Composer program all the time, (as a word-processor, as well as web-page design) so again, no problem having it included.

      It can sometimes startle you to see Mozilla taking up 44MB of memory if you ever look at the Windows task manager, especially when you're not using the broswer and something else is trying to use a lot of memory though... and it does take a while to start if it's not already loaded.

      As to download time, if you use all the tools, it should take less time to download the mozilla suite compared to individual components?

    43. Re:Who uses the suite? by CTho9305 · · Score: 1

      I use the suite. For one thing, the suite has quicklaunch, which was removed from Firebird a while back. Another reason is that last I checked, running Moz Browser + MailNews uses less ram than running both Firebird + Thunderbird. I also like the Moz interface a little more than FB.

    44. Re:Who uses the suite? by imkonen · · Score: 1
      Third reason is I've seen a decent number of sites that do browser detection and won't let you in if your browser isn't on their list. Firebird rarely is on the list, however, Mozilla usually is.

      Wow, who does this? That is so completely counter to the entire point of HTML standards...the entire concept of any kind of standards really. It's nice to see Mozilla gaining acceptance, but if it's okay for websites to dictate which browsers we can use, it's going to become an all IE all the time world.

      I understand that practically speaking we can't always boycott websites that don't "play nice" but it should certainly be considered for websites where you have an alternative, or at least complain about how they're missing the point of standards in the first place.

    45. Re:Who uses the suite? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I use the suite (browser and email). It has more features than the birds, and fewer bugs.

      Honestly, I don't see any reason to change.

    46. Re:Who uses the suite? by ispeters · · Score: 1

      For my regular browsing I use Firebird, but I find developing a web site easier in Mozilla.

      I'm working on a project that makes _heavy_ use of JavaScript, and we're pretty much abusing the DOM and CSS specs to stretch the browser. The DOM Inspector and the Venkman Debugger have both been invaluable tools, but they don't seem to work very well, if at all, in Firebird. I would drop Mozilla in a second if Firebird could support me in this way, though.

      Ian

    47. Re:Who uses the suite? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AC post because I'm too lazy to login. I also use Mozilla rather than *birds. All the above plus additional reason is that you can set the middle click to open tabs in the Browser, and then middle click a link in Mail and open to a new tab in the Browser.

    48. Re:Who uses the suite? by swv3752 · · Score: 1

      It is goog enough for those of us who do not use IRC regularly. When one only needs to log onto an IRC channel once a month, it works great.

      --
      Just a Tuna in the Sea of Life
    49. Re:Who uses the suite? by David_W · · Score: 1
      Also, Prefbar only seems to work with Mozilla. :(

      Actually there's something close for Firebird now: PrefButtons.

    50. Re:Who uses the suite? by phre4k · · Score: 1

      I like the ui of firebird better, but some fonts are rendered ugly (like the ones on slashdot) on mandrake 9.2 using firebird. The fonts of the suite is prettier and more reader friendly.

      --
      "Nobody really checks their email any more. They just delete their spam"
    51. Re:Who uses the suite? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I use Mozilla at home on Suse 9, and Firebird on Mac OSX and Thunderbird & Firebird on Win2k at home. Main reason I use Mozilla on Linux is because it works fine and I see no reason to change. I've had a fair ammount of problems with Firebird for some reason. On a Mac sometimes bookmarks will stop working, and occasionally hyperlinks will stop working all together. On Win2k Firebird is actually somewhat crassh prone, and at times requires that I reboot the OS just to get it to start at all. I've had no problems with Mozilla on a Mac or Windows, so sometimes I wonder why I switched at all. It's sort of puzzeling since they're based off of the same rendering engine.

    52. Re:Who uses the suite? by Trillan · · Score: 1

      I've seriously never had a crash in Firebird, nor even run into a bug. The only bug I've ever run into in Thunderbird goes away when I resize its window. The difference in experiences is interesting.

    53. Re:Who uses the suite? by ayden · · Score: 1

      I run the suite because AdBlock works in both the browser and mail clients. Meaning: I can block banner ads from my incoming email. Yes, this really is an issue - especially after signing up for comics.com's free subscription service. I absolutely hate their banner ad logo asking me to sign up for their "premium" service.

      --
      "I'm The Bounty Bear. I will find him anywhere. I'm searching."
    54. Re:Who uses the suite? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I installed good ol' Mozilla for some end users. Why? Well, they needed a good, simple e-mail client with spam filtering, and they don't speak English to use Thunderbird.

    55. Re:Who uses the suite? by Trillan · · Score: 1

      Oh, okay. I'll buy that. Doesn't seem worth the weight of the suite if that was the only extra you use, but if it's one of a few items it makes more sense. Thanks for the explanation.

    56. Re:Who uses the suite? by saintlupus · · Score: 1

      Just curious, who uses the suite instead of Firebird/Thunderbird... and why?

      I do.

      I use Mozilla Composer for my web page, but since I'm on OS X I use Safari and Mail.app for the appropriate uses.

      Has anyone heard about plans to break Composer out into its own component, a la Firebird?

      --saint

    57. Re:Who uses the suite? by Juju · · Score: 1

      I use both Firebird and Thunderbird because I like the idea of seperate processes. I hate it when a crash causes you to loose everything.
      Although I have to say that I haven't had a crash for ages... So I am considering switching back to gain some memory (only 512MB on my laptop)

      --
      Black holes occur when God divides by zero.
    58. Re:Who uses the suite? by antdude · · Score: 1

      Thanks. It looks primitive compared to PrefBar. I hope it improves. Maybe when Firebird is at v1.0, then it will be useful. :)

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    59. Re:Who uses the suite? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I suggest changing the font preference to a sans-serif font like arial or verdana. Slashdot will use whatever is your default font. Firebird defaults to a serif font such as times new roman. Even on Windows, that font is hard to read.

    60. Re:Who uses the suite? by Perky_Goth · · Score: 1

      hmmm, i just instaled a few plugins in firebird and it asked me if i wanted to install them in a way that they'd be avaiable after upgrades.

  28. Whats new? by dnoyeb · · Score: 1

    I don't see any nice pictures or anything about whats new?

    Do they still consider mozilla a non-end user product and thus only intend to support developers?

    It has certainly gotten better over the last few versions. But what earns this a +0.1 value?

    1. Re:Whats new? by mrscorpio · · Score: 1

      Check the website - www.mozilla.org. They have paid support now.

      There was an article about it here, as I recall.

      Chris

    2. Re:Whats new? by BZ · · Score: 1

      > But what earns this a +0.1 value?

      Some nice changes in the back end. NTLM auth is relnoted, but there was also a lot of technical work on the layout engine. If nothing else, this release is about 10% faster than 1.5 at laying out web pages.

  29. crash in ten seconds by veggiespam · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    download, ungz, run, open book mark window, search for something, crash!

    at least they kept this crash in the code, i mean with 1.5 and 1.5.1, they added this great crashing feature and i'd hate for them to remove it. with 1.4.x, it only crashes every third time.

    oh well, back to grep

    1. Re:crash in ten seconds by cribb · · Score: 1

      atleast they're consistent. also in firebird they added the show windows-type scrolling arrows when you press the middle mouse button (atleast on linux). At the same time, the middle mouse button opens up the URL you have in the clipboard (sometimes, when you press the mouse fast and OFTEN enough so that the scroll-thingy doesn't intercept the click), a feature i cherish, especially since i was used to the middle mouse button having only ONE purpose. Atleast i have my daily workout now, changing fingers and pumping on the mouse when i want to open a page.

      --
      Hostes alienigieni me abduxerunt. Qui annus est?
    2. Re:crash in ten seconds by veggiespam · · Score: 1

      wow, rated funny and flamebait in the same post. i was hoping for "sarcastic truth"

      maybe my bookmark file is corrupt and crashes mozilla. it works fine except search, where the system crashes.

      back to bugzilla, again...

  30. Why the need to uninstall onld versions to upgrade by m_evanchik · · Score: 1

    I have 1.2 installed, but 1.6 release notes require uninstall to upgrade. Why is this?

    Also I am running adblock as well as an extension(?)/plug-in(?). Would that need to be uninstalled and then reinstalled as well?

  31. Plush Asa by miracle69 · · Score: 1

    How you been???

    --
    Linux - Because Mommy taught me to Share.
  32. Mirrors by DerOle · · Score: 3, Informative

    Find a mirror here as the main download server is already dead.

  33. Browsers by mfisher · · Score: 1

    I am more of a firebird kinda guy. Any words on when the next release of that is? Mozilla is to bulky for me.. Amazing browsers tho and the notes on this one looking pretty intresting.

    1. Re:Browsers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Should be out within a week.

  34. The Mozilla Roadmap? by 110010001000 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The roadmap has implied for some time that 1.4 was the last unified (XPFE) Mozilla-based release. 1.5-1.6 was supposed to be the Firebird transition period, during which Mozilla-the-unified-browser was supplanted by Thunderbird and Firebird. Perhaps that was too ambitious, and they've changed their mind, but the roadmap still indicates otherwise.

    What's the deal? It really looks like the new roadmap is "build in all the features people REALLY bitch about into XPFE Mozilla, then once Firebird/Thunderbird is more stable, we'll transition to those". I'm fine with that, but shouldn't they just come out and say it?

    1. Re:The Mozilla Roadmap? by edwdig · · Score: 1

      You're right about what the plan is. They said that a while ago in the progress reports. It's just that the roadmap page only seems to get updated once every year or so.

  35. Why are people still using IE? Firebird rocks. by nmoog · · Score: 2, Offtopic

    I personally hated Netscape (5+) and equally disliked Mozilla. Mostly because they were ugly as hell, took up half the screen with huge buttons and ran like shit. I really truly prefered (and would still prefer IE)
    Then I installed Firebird. It is browser heaven! I cant believe self confessed nerds would even consider starting IE after they made, or even installed their first Firebird extention... "Click to view flash objects" plugin - fucking hell, my eyes have stopped hurting when I browse now...
    THe only reason 80%+ of slashdotters use IE is because they've never tried Firebird.
    Forget IE, Opera, Netscape, Mozilla. They aren't suited to your average joe, let alone us nerds. Get Firebird NOW!

    1. Re:Why are people still using IE? Firebird rocks. by Osty · · Score: 1

      "Click to view flash objects" plugin - fucking hell, my eyes have stopped hurting when I browse now...

      My IE only plays Flash if I tell it to. It also blocks popups. Why doesn't yours?

    2. Re:Why are people still using IE? Firebird rocks. by spanklin · · Score: 1

      I use Firebird on my Solaris box at work, and I used to use Mozilla on my iBook, pre-Safari. Has anyone else noticed that there hasn't been a single post about Safari in this discussion? I think that Safari has made Moz/Firebird irrelevant to the beleaguered Mac crowd.

    3. Re:Why are people still using IE? Firebird rocks. by ender81b · · Score: 1

      Firebird has a number of thigns that are good but the last time i tried it out (.6 iirc) it was still.. lacking in certain areas.

      1.) When a link has a target=_blank it opens a new browser instead of a new tab. Cannot express how much this annoys me.

      2.) You cannot save a series of tabs to always open everytime you restart the browser.

      3.) Can't disable gif animation.

      4.) Cannot turn on the tab bar by default or always have it on

      5.) Doesn't have zoom feature or a "always use my stylesheet" feature like opera (this is incredibly handy when dealing with sites that insist on impossible-to-read-text)

      6.) cannot change it's indentity like you can in Opera to, say, IE 6.xx -- this is becoming less and less of a deal as fewer websites I go to at least "require" IE 6.x.

      Nit Picky things
      -- no "validate source" context menu like opera has, useful for webdevelopment
      -- Just does not seem as fast as opera on certain pages.

      I'm sure there ar emore that i'm forgetting about but that's what comes to mind.I do believe, however, it to be a better browser than both mozilla and IE by far but it's still not up to Opera's standards.

    4. Re:Why are people still using IE? Firebird rocks. by ramk13 · · Score: 1

      You should really check out the numerous extensions now, if you haven't already. The available set of features to add as you please has grown a lot.

      They deal with some of the issues you are talking about (user agent spoofing, tab extensions, and more.)

      Link:
      http://texturizer.net/firebird/extensions /
      (there's even an extension to load text URLs into a tab quickly, which would be useful at the moment.)

    5. Re:Why are people still using IE? Firebird rocks. by tepples · · Score: 1

      THe only reason 80%+ of slashdotters use IE is because they've never tried Firebird.

      Do you claim that 20 percent or fewer of Slashdot users either 1) use Windows Update or 2) use computers they don't own and on which they can't install unapproved software?

    6. Re:Why are people still using IE? Firebird rocks. by ssstraub · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure this is all here however...

      1.) When a link has a target=_blank it opens a new browser instead of a new tab. Cannot express how much this annoys me.

      Easily fixed with a user.js preference.

      2.) You cannot save a series of tabs to always open everytime you restart the browser.

      Opens tabs you want to use, then
      Tools -> options -> general -> user current pages

      3.) Can't disable gif animation.

      Also located in options.

      4.) Cannot turn on the tab bar by default or always have it on

      Fixed with the TBE or Tab browser preferences extensions

      5.) Doesn't have zoom feature or a "always use my stylesheet" feature like opera (this is incredibly handy when dealing with sites that insist on impossible-to-read-text)

      I use this daily. "CTRL +" to increase, "CTRL -" to decrease and "CTRL 0" to reset to default. I believe this has been in Mozilla suite for a loooong time now, and it's been in Mozilla Firebird since it was created.

      6.) cannot change it's indentity like you can in Opera to, say, IE 6.xx -- this is becoming less and less of a deal as fewer websites I go to at least "require" IE 6.x.

      There are two or three extentions that let you change this on the fly.

      It seems to me that everything you listed can be done...You just need to check out the first link I gave to texturizer and look at the tips (kind of RTFM), and then click on the extentions link on the side and fill in any gaps.

    7. Re:Why are people still using IE? Firebird rocks. by ender81b · · Score: 1

      I'll check it out, never bothered with the extensions before but it's worth a shto now. Thanks for the info.

    8. Re:Why are people still using IE? Firebird rocks. by WuphonsReach · · Score: 1

      4.) Cannot turn on the tab bar by default or always have it on

      That one is handled by Tabbrowser Extensions.

      Not 100% sure of a fix for #2.

      --
      Wolde you bothe eate your cake, and have your cake?
    9. Re:Why are people still using IE? Firebird rocks. by ratsnapple+tea · · Score: 1

      You're absolutely right. I imagine Mozilla and Firebird are all right on other platforms, but they absolutely suck on Mac, not least from a UI and aesthetics perspective, although they're also a pain to configure and use. It seems that the latest Firebird build actually tries to imitate Aqua controls by redrawing them from scratch. Of course it gets it subtly (but completely) wrong, and therefore looks like shit.

      I have to agree with Apple--Safari's the best browser on any platform.

      </macfanboymode>

      yours

    10. Re:Why are people still using IE? Firebird rocks. by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      they want random porn popups.

      must be the only reason.. also the main reason for random joe 'iknownothinboutcomputers' schmock to switch(let's face it, everybody likes to watch porno - or at least accidentally ends up on pages with porno adverts, and those adverts are often infectious in nature and will colonize your pc if you use ie).

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    11. Re:Why are people still using IE? Firebird rocks. by rsborg · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Firebird has a number of thigns that are good but the last time i tried it out (.6 iirc) it was still.. lacking in certain areas.

      Note: Firebird is meant to be a stripped down browser, but extensible for those who want additional functionality. Thus, I will refer you to many extensions you need to install.

      1.) When a link has a target=_blank it opens a new browser instead of a new tab. Cannot express how much this annoys me.

      Get Tabbrowswer Extensions

      2.) You cannot save a series of tabs to always open everytime you restart the browser.

      Again, Tabbrowser Extensions

      3.) Can't disable gif animation.

      Several ways to do this, but my favorite is the Things they left out extension. Adds in some missing 'zilla pref pages.

      4.) Cannot turn on the tab bar by default or always have it on

      Can't help you here, don't know what you mean.

      5.) Doesn't have zoom feature or a "always use my stylesheet" feature like opera (this is incredibly handy when dealing with sites that insist on impossible-to-read-text)

      You can hack your stylesheets, but I'm sure there's an extension or bookmarklet that allows you to override your stylesheet.

      6.) cannot change it's indentity like you can in Opera to, say, IE 6.xx -- this is becoming less and less of a deal as fewer websites I go to at least "require" IE 6.x.

      Check out User Agent Switcher, or a number of other extensions that change your UA.

      HTH

      --
      Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
  36. You don't need TORRENT links by PReDiToR · · Score: 0
    --

    Do not meddle in the affairs of geeks for they are subtle and quick to anger
    1. Re:You don't need TORRENT links by mrscorpio · · Score: 1

      It's also slow, due to the slashdot effect ;)

      Chris

    2. Re:You don't need TORRENT links by mhesseltine · · Score: 2, Informative

      Read the intro to Bittorrent and then understand why torrent links were requested.

      BitTorrent does not always equal warez/moviez/gamez/etc. This would be a prime example of a legitimate use for the software.

      --
      Overrated / Underrated : Moderation :: Anonymous Coward : Posting
    3. Re:You don't need TORRENT links by PReDiToR · · Score: 1

      I'm not getting into a row over it, but I was getting 110k/sec when I posted that link, and still am.
      Maybe its because I'm this side of the atlantic.

      --

      Do not meddle in the affairs of geeks for they are subtle and quick to anger
    4. Re:You don't need TORRENT links by PReDiToR · · Score: 1

      Yes, I use .torrents for getting debian, jingo is not the most friendly or stable piece of software I have used.
      I fully appreciate what you said though, .torrent does have legitimate uses.

      --

      Do not meddle in the affairs of geeks for they are subtle and quick to anger
    5. Re:You don't need TORRENT links by mrscorpio · · Score: 1

      I'm in the USA, and at the time I posted, I was getting 4.5kb/sec TOPS from the main site. When I switched over to a semi-local mirror, however, I got it a lot faster.

      Chris

  37. It doesn't work for me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was all happy with Mozilla 1.5. Then I installed 1.6 and it just doesn't open. Ever. The process is running but no window is opened.

    Then I uninstalled it and installed 1.5 back. Now 1.5 doesn't open either.

    This was working great for me. Fear of upgrade is good for your health.

    Funny thing: Firebird 0.7 still works great.

    1. Re:It doesn't work for me by cribb · · Score: 3, Informative

      if you,re on linux, tip: delete your ~/.mozilla, make sure you backup your bookmarks and all your other profile stuff, since it's all stored there. that should convince 1.6 to work.

      --
      Hostes alienigieni me abduxerunt. Qui annus est?
    2. Re:It doesn't work for me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hopefully they'll track down and fix this "profile corruption" eventually -- this has been a problem since the very early releases.

    3. Re:It doesn't work for me by cribb · · Score: 1

      it's a feature, not a bug. besides, mozilla used to delete your bookmarks on some rare occasions when it crashed (dunno if it still does so), so it doesn't make much difference anyway.

      --
      Hostes alienigieni me abduxerunt. Qui annus est?
  38. Re:Mozilla and popups by catbutt · · Score: 1

    Google toolbar works in IE to get rid of popups quite nicely.

    I'd use mozilla more except that I can't stand it's useless "new window" function. Being as I have muliple monitors, I don't use tabbed browsing and just open new windows when i want to explore something but still keep a browser where i am not lose my place. IE does the right thing, IMO (the new window is a clone of the current one, including having the same history). I just wish they'd make it an option.

  39. Re:Mozilla and popups by Photon+Ghoul · · Score: 4, Informative

    Most people stick with what they are used to. Even when pop-up blocking is given as a feature of Mozilla to users that suffer from excessive pop-up ads, most still seem to prefer using the IE (or Windows?) add-ons that stop them.

    Side-thought: I have no experience with IE pop-up blockers, but it would seem like a very effective method for spreading malware. Maybe that's just the old tin-foil hat I'm feeling.

  40. Re:But No One's mentioned the most important featu by ryanjensen · · Score: 2, Interesting
    When "about:mozilla" is typed into Firebird's address bar (and I quote):

    "And so at last the beast fell and the unbelievers rejoiced. But all was not lost, for from the ash rose a great bird. The bird gazed down upon the unbelievers and cast fire and thunder upon them. For the beast had been reborn with its strength renewed, and the followers of Mammon cowered in horror."

    from The Book of Mozilla, 7:15

    WTF is that?

  41. I don't understand their QA process by pterry · · Score: 3, Interesting
    On 2003-06-01 I submitted a bug report (see my mirror if bugzilla doesn't let you follow a link from slashdot). I read the bug reporting guidelines and did all the right things. I created a stripped-down test case and attached it, adding the keyword "testcase". I set the Severity to Major since I think it's somewhat serious (see for yourself). The bug got confirmed by a QA person... and then ignored. There have been several releases since then (final, non-beta releases), and my bug has remained.

    What I'd like to know is: why are releases made with known Major bugs, and what does it take for a bug to get seen to and not sit in Bugzilla, ignored? It has certainly made me feel that there is little point in reporting any further bugs. Could someone explain Mozilla's QA process to me?

    1. Re:I don't understand their QA process by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Could someone explain Mozilla's QA process to me?


      Simple. Mozilla's QA process is composed mainly of volunteers. Yes, yes, open-source is great and all that stuff. And yes, bugs do eventually get looked at. But Mozilla, as a project, has decided to not adopt a "zero-bug-release" policy, and so you get releases with bugs that the volunteers haven't looked at (or figured out a fix for).

    2. Re:I don't understand their QA process by maggotbrain_777 · · Score: 2, Informative

      If you are running one of their interim builds, there is a QA menu item built-in which details the QA process and other sordid details(i.e. how to submit a bug, daily CVS checkin status, etc.). Otherwise you can read more about the moz QA process here Mozzila QA Home Page

    3. Re:I don't understand their QA process by bunratty · · Score: 2, Insightful
      why are releases made with known Major bugs, and what does it take for a bug to get seen to and not sit in Bugzilla, ignored
      If the next release of Mozilla had to wait until all known major bugs were fixed, it might be years until that next release. The chances are that almost no one experiences or notices that particular bug, or even if someone else does notice it there are more serious bugs they experience. As you can see, no one has voted for the bug to be fixed and no one else has complained that it's a problem.

      I've reported dozens of bugs over my three years of using Mozilla, and about half of those bugs (mainly the more serious ones that others have voted for) have been fixed. In one case, I fixed the bug myself just a week or two after I reported it. Unless you fix it yourself or get some indication that others think it's serious, it will likely be years before your pet bug is fixed. There are just too many other bugs that are more important.

      --
      What a fool believes, he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.
    4. Re:I don't understand their QA process by BZ · · Score: 1

      This particular bug got filed on a component that has no real owner at the moment (DOM events). No one who actually knows anything about the code was cced (this is the QA's fault). Due to rampant severity inflation, most bugs that claim to be major really aren't (this one is not, imo).

      There is also the problem that about 50 bugs get reported each day (well, more like 120 get reported, but 70 get resolved as duplicate or invalid the same day). That's far more bugs than can be dealt with with the available development resources, unfortunately.

      In general, the component a bug is reported on really determines how long it will take to fix it; some components are better owned than others....

      So please do keep filing bugs; worst-case, that gives the chance that someone will see the bug and be annoyed by it and fix it.

    5. Re:I don't understand their QA process by dragonman97 · · Score: 1

      Damn...that bug has haunted and infuriated me many times before - I hadn't gone so far as to look in Bugzilla, though. Alas, there's only so many things I can take the time to do. I don't know when the last time is that I got that bug, or for that matter, if this is supposed to affect both Mozilla (App. Suite) *and* MozFirebird, or just the former. I use the latter, and this used to get me all the time, but maybe I'm just being more careful about what I do, and not getting it by chance. These days I just have to deal with it spontaneously locking up, most commonly after if freaks out on a drag-and-drop that I wasn't even trying to do. I either have to let it crash and burn, as it locks all kbd & mouse activity in X11, or go to tty1, and just do a `!killall`.

    6. Re:I don't understand their QA process by gunpowder · · Score: 1

      Try to press F7 ...

    7. Re:I don't understand their QA process by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the other hand, I've tried to mark some of my bugs INVALID or WONTFIX, but I still get no response.

    8. Re:I don't understand their QA process by Isaac-Lew · · Score: 1

      You do realize that some sites block direct links from slashdot (in order to avoid a slashdotting), don't you?

    9. Re:I don't understand their QA process by Julian352 · · Score: 1

      Since you seem to know atleast something about Mozilla process, I'm curious if you could tell me why this bug seems to be ignored: http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=225977
      (Summary: Large # of images kills Moz)

      My best guess is that nobody wants to search for resource problems when such huge number of resources are allocated. But I do find this bug to be annoying because of having to often look at webpages that have large amount of images. (And no, they aren't all porn as the first submitter "implied")

    10. Re:I don't understand their QA process by Zaiff+Urgulbunger · · Score: 1

      With Mozilla, you can disable the referer string!

    11. Re:I don't understand their QA process by stienman · · Score: 1

      Fortunately for me, and the vast majority of other Mozilla users, this problem rarely, if ever, occurs.

      This is NOT a "Major Bug," especially so since it has an easy work around.

      Obviously if you spend many hours a day filling in web forms, then yeah, this would be crazy annoying. Or perhaps you keep a particular website open in your browser all day that has javascript onblur in their form code and it's always on the main page. Apparently this is a major issue for you, but again you have to look at each bug and not only consider the severity of the problem, but also the % of users who run into it or vote to have it fixed.

      The number of comments and votes on your bug is so low that it's unlikely it will ever float to the top of the bugfix list. If it comes close enough it may get fixed, but you may have to research and fix it yourself if you want any action anytime soon.

      I bet you could find some developer on the mailing list willing to work on it for you for a small fee. Free lunches aren't, after all.

      -Adam

    12. Re:I don't understand their QA process by BZ · · Score: 2, Informative

      The problem here, quite frankly, is that this is a Windows-only bug and requires someone familiar with Windows and its resource issues to look at it. Most of the core developers don't know much about that stuff (in fact, I think most of them develop on Linux at this point....)

  42. Mozilla is great, but I stopped using it today... by DaedalusLogic · · Score: 4, Informative

    Because Firebird plays nicely "out of the box" so to speak with MS Outlook, and my customers want that. I know it's a horrible notion to some the overall goal is to convert folks on using these pieces of OSS has to be gentle and user friendly. Business users get Firebird suggested to them and home users Mozilla. I haven't touched IE for daily browsing in a couple years now thanks to these awesome browsers.

  43. Re:Why the need to uninstall onld versions to upgr by falsification · · Score: 3, Informative
    That is not quite right

    If you plan to install 1.6 to the same subdirectory in which you have 1.2, yes, you should uninstall 1.2 before installing 1.6.

    If you plan to install 1.6 to a brand spanking new subdirectory, you need not uninstall 1.2. You should always use different profiles for different versions of Mozilla.

    BTW, you should uninstall 1.2 anyway. It has major bugs. In terms of stability, version 1.4.1, for instance, is to 1.2 as a granite rock is to gray goo.

  44. Re:Mozilla and popups by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dude, Google Toolbar or bust. Everything else sucks.

  45. IE6 users.. by zcat_NZ · · Score: 5, Funny

    If you're running Internet Explorer, you can upgrade to Mozilla 1.6 here

    (If you're not running IE, you won't see anything. My redirect exploits the ^A bug and uses IE conditional comments to make it look like an official MS page for downloading Mozilla)

    --
    455fe10422ca29c4933f95052b792ab2
    1. Re:IE6 users.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Although you can still view the page source;

      <!--[if Lawyers_From_Microsoft]>

      This page contains only comments and consequently should not display anything
      at all on any standards-compliant browser. The author will not be held
      responsible for anything that may be displayed erroniously by web browser
      software that does not comply with published standards.

      <![endif]-->

    2. Re:IE6 users.. by jdifool · · Score: 1
      Asking you to devote some time for an not so coward anonymous guy... but could you explain a bit further how this works ? Didn't get it by viewing the source... ;|

      jdif

      --
      Let's overcome our weakness.
    3. Re:IE6 users.. by toddestan · · Score: 1

      That site did nothing in Opera, but I just opened it on IE6 - holy crap that's evil! But I must admit I do like it.

    4. Re:IE6 users.. by rjamestaylor · · Score: 1

      I checked it with Firebird, first. Very cool. Tell me, please, how long did you spend (1) thinking about doing this and (2) doing this? How many people have hit your page?

      That is fantastic. Too bad your entire existing assest base and future earings will go to satsify the judgement MS will win agaist you. Thanks for a surreal experience, though.

      --
      -- @rjamestaylor on Ello
    5. Re:IE6 users.. by whiteranger99x · · Score: 1

      LMAO.....touche...fucking hilarious =D

      --
      Join the TWIT army now!
    6. Re:IE6 users.. by zcat_NZ · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I got the idea after seeing (in my inbox) a phishing email for "http://westpack.com.au^A@{some.ip}"

      Took me about an hour to edit the microsoft page for Mozilla-1.5 and get it working, and then hack the redirect so my homepage still validates. It took me 2 minutes from noticing Moz1.6 was out, editing the page with the new information, and posting the link here.

      If Microsoft sends me a C&D, I'm not sure what I'll do. I don't really have any assets or income worth sueing for but I guess that's never stopped them before.

      --
      455fe10422ca29c4933f95052b792ab2
    7. Re:IE6 users.. by StarWreck · · Score: 1
      Still using IE6? upgrade! [wired.net.nz]
      You are a god! This is the most awesome web-hack ever. If you were evil, and I'm sure that I am, you could do some serious damage with this IE6 flaw. Its going to be getting a lot of hits from people I'm sending the link to. Muahahaha.
      --
      ... and in the DRM, bind them.
    8. Re:IE6 users.. by fishbowl · · Score: 1

      Love that. I hope the long ARM doesn't reach to NZ :-)

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
    9. Re:IE6 users.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      just add a legible spoof disclaimer at the bottom. satire and that. ala onion.

    10. Re:IE6 users.. by Dreadlord · · Score: 1

      A master piece, please either keep the page up so I can email it to everyone I know, or provide source so I can mirror it.
      thank you.

      --
      The IT section color scheme sucks.
    11. Re:IE6 users.. by rjamestaylor · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the answer. Along with the AC, I recommend a legible "spoof" link to clearly mark your page as satire. Just in the small print at the very bottom, perhaps. Anyway, nice job.

      --
      -- @rjamestaylor on Ello
    12. Re:IE6 users.. by TheMysteriousFuture · · Score: 1

      Did it just (like 2 seconds ago) get /.'ed or did you get the C&D already?

      --
      .sig
    13. Re:IE6 users.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Odd...it's working again

    14. Re:IE6 users.. by trats · · Score: 1

      The other option is to upgrade to Opera 7.23. :-)

    15. Re:IE6 users.. by zcat_NZ · · Score: 1

      I've made slight improvements to the code. You might have hit it while I was copying the new version over.

      It's been very entertaining watching the referer log and seeing all the places this has been linked from! I seem to be strangely popular with French-speaking sites for some reason, and quite a few people have been getting it via webmail url's.

      I'm very dissapointed that I didn't make Fark though!

      --
      455fe10422ca29c4933f95052b792ab2
    16. Re:IE6 users.. by TheMysteriousFuture · · Score: 1

      What's the total number of unique users? Since you didn't use a redirect for the Mozilla download link there isn't a way to tell how many users have downloaded mozilla...is there?

      --
      .sig
  46. Re:Why the need to uninstall onld versions to upgr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It needs to be uninstalled to clear out any garbage that might be left behind in the program directory.

    Don't worry though, the uninstall leaves your email and stuff on the computer because it's "user generated". You won't lose any data.

    As for the add-ons, if you're using 1.2 then yes, you will have to reinstall adblock. Only recently did they make it so you don't have to keep upgrading add-ons (I believe. could be wrong).

  47. Just wondering.. how many build their own? by pedro · · Score: 1

    I think it's a doggone hoot to pull the latest mods from cvs and build it yourself every week or two, even though you get the occasional squirrely behaviour in the bargain.
    Right now I'm on 1.7a and having a wonderful time!
    It's great fun playing around with CFLAGS and stuff to see how quick you can make it execute, though I'm back at a conservative -O3 these days, since even that takes 4 hrs to compile on my feeble hardware.
    Anyone else doing it?

    --
    Brak: What's THAT?
    Thundercleese: A light switch.. of TOTAL DEVASTATION!
    1. Re:Just wondering.. how many build their own? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have waaaay too much time on your hands.

  48. Why? by Russellkhan · · Score: 1

    I just downloaded the full installer - it took all of 1 minute 29 seconds. Have you even tried downloading it from the server?

    --
    Information doesn't want to be anthropomorphized anymore.
  49. NTLM and Proxy Server by falsification · · Score: 4, Informative
    If you have Microsoft Proxy Server or some other NTLM proxy at work or wherever, take a good hard look at 1.6. It's the first Mozilla version to have a built-in NTLM solution.

    For the first time, Mozilla will work on many corporate networks.

  50. Top posting is bad by FattMattP · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Another frequently requested MailNews feature, a preference for placing the user's signature above the quoted text, has been added.
    Nooooo! Argh, this will only encourage top-posting.
    --
    Prevent email address forgery. Publish SPF records for y
    1. Re:Top posting is bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And yet, top posting didn't need encourage ment.

      People are morons. While it is tempting to create machines that prevent them from acting like it, it turns out that people are persistant, hard to predict and creative, if not clever, morons. Unfortunately at some point we chose technology over magic in our research queue and we've got to live with the limitations.

    2. Re:Top posting is bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny
      Top posting is a life-style choice.

      Nooooo! Argh, this will only encourage top-posting.

    3. Re:Top posting is bad by adamfranco · · Score: 1

      Face it though, it happens. :-) Might as well put the sig there too instead of accumulating them in a heap at the bottom.

      --
      "When ideology and theology couple, their offspring are not always bad but they are always blind." -- Bill Moyers
    4. Re:Top posting is bad by FattMattP · · Score: 1
      Yeah, it's a damn shame, though. Too bad slashdot doesn't have a mode to show the replies before the original messages. Maybe it could put the article text at the bottom of the page. :-)
      Face it though, it happens. :-) Might as well put the sig there too instead of accumulating them in a heap at the bottom.
      --
      Prevent email address forgery. Publish SPF records for y
    5. Re:Top posting is bad by adamfranco · · Score: 1

      Maybe it could put the article text at the bottom of the page.

      Unfortunatly it wouldn't really change the number of people who read the articles. ;-)

      --
      "When ideology and theology couple, their offspring are not always bad but they are always blind." -- Bill Moyers
    6. Re:Top posting is bad by edwdig · · Score: 1

      More importantly, it will get rid of the time the Mozilla team spends responding to the large number of people that constantly bitch about the feature not being there.

    7. Re:Top posting is bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wtf is top-posting?
      Nooooo! Argh, this will only encourage top-posting.

    8. Re:Top posting is bad by bunnyman · · Score: 2, Funny

      STFU. kthx bye.

      -----Original Message-----

      > Nooooo! Argh, this will only encourage top-posting.

      -----Original Message-----

      > > Another frequently requested MailNews feature,
      > > a preference for placing the user's signature
      > > above the quoted text, has been added.

    9. Re:Top posting is bad by groomed · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I used to think top posting was bad. I would go as far as to painstakingly reformat the Outlook mails people were sending me. Sometimes the topic would come up between me and a collegue or friend, and I would explain to them that top posting is bad because it destroys the flow of the discussion, making it harder to follow and less useful.

      Over the years, however, I met more and more people, and got a lot more mail, with less and less technical content. It became a hassle to correct all their posts, not to mention to repeat the same arguments over and over again. After a while I found myself top posting, as well.

      Not all people think alike, and I came to realize my reasonable, rational arguments mostly just served to control the way other people expressed themselves -- i.e., so that they would express themselves more like myself.

      Rules such as "top posting destroys the flow of conversation, yadda yadda yadda" aren't the result of some irrefutable process by which the ideal posting format has been established -- they're the exact opposite: they serve as a starting point to find fault with the way other people choose to communicate.

    10. Re:Top posting is bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, maybe some day you will understand why people don't like Linux, too.

    11. Re:Top posting is bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shut up, you're ruining my drama.

    12. Re:Top posting is bad by Chris+Brewer · · Score: 2, Funny

      I agree, top-posting is bad.

      --
      Karma: Police (this is what you get when you mess with us)

      Another frequently requested MailNews feature, a preference for placing the user's signature above the quoted text, has been added.

      Nooooo! Argh, this will only encourage top-posting.

      --
      Consultancy: If you're not part of the solution, there's money to be made in prolonging the problem
    13. Re:Top posting is bad by ChaosDiscord · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Not all people think alike, and I came to realize my reasonable, rational arguments mostly just served to control the way other people expressed themselves -- i.e., so that they would express themselves more like myself.

      I trust you're equally as accepting of those people who choose to WRITE IN ALL CAPS, or abbrvt lik u r txt mssging, or 3N463 1N 4 B17 0F 1337? (and I've seen all three by email, the first two in business email). Some forms of expression are irritating to receive and just stupid. Where you put quoted text isn't even some deep expression of your personality and life choices. It's just a freaking quotation.

      Quoting text for context is an old idea with well understood techniques. Most people were taught how to do it in high school You block quote things inline, much like I've done your text. You trim to the bare minimum so readers don't waste their time with useless junk.

      Ultimately it's a matter of being polite to your recipient. You value their time, don't you? So send them a bare minimum. And for those cases where they need lots of context in the form of previous messages, top posting is an amazingly crude and rude solution. I have a powerful, modern email client for a reason. I thread my messages to keep track of context and have powerful searching and filtering capabilities. Putting the entire conversation in a single message throws that entire system away and leaves me with a stupid giant list of text, sorted in reverse historical order with signatures, Yahoo ads, and headers all intermingled. It's a mess. If I need those messages as context, forward the lot of them to me with as little mangling as possible (often called something like "bounce"). Now my powerful email client can do smart things to help keep me sane.

      Ultimately not top-posting is about not being rude to your recipients. Top posting says, "I'm lazy, and this is easiest way for me to provide context you may or may not need. I don't care that it's less convient to you, my time is more valuable than yours."

    14. Re:Top posting is bad by WuphonsReach · · Score: 2, Interesting

      A truly useful extension would be one that would work on the receiver's end and move top-posts to the bottom, or bottom-posts to the top (whichever way the receiver prefers to see it). So regardless of how the poster did it, you'd see it in your preferred method.

      I know... technically difficult, but even if it only handled the simple cases...

      --
      Wolde you bothe eate your cake, and have your cake?
    15. Re:Top posting is bad by groomed · · Score: 4, Insightful
      For better or worse, most people don't work the way you describe. I like to spend time writing clear and concise emails, but most people don't. What's more, my effort is completely lost on them, and sometimes it even strikes them as pedantic/weird/irrelevant.
      Ultimately not top-posting is about not being rude to your recipients. Top posting says, "I'm lazy, and this is easiest way for me to provide context you may or may not need. I don't care that it's less convient to you, my time is more valuable than yours."
      This just underscores my point. You have an elaborate system, and you want people to conform. What you need to understand is that they are under no obligation to do so whatsoever.
    16. Re:Top posting is bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      > I don't care that it's less convient to you, my time is more valuable than yours.

      Sez you. Most business people find top-posting MORE convienient, and that's why every corporate mail system defaults to top-posts. Why? Because more often than not, they alredy know the context, and as pointed out, scrolling is slow.

      It's better to think about business email as a form of IM or Voice Mail rather than a "conversation". When the boss says "Do It" or the engineer says "We have a problem", they want it right up on the top where everyone sees it.

      (And this isn't a Microsoft/AOL thing, either. IBM PROFS did top-posting, as did anything from Lotus.)

    17. Re:Top posting is bad by Zork+the+Almighty · · Score: 1

      Not all people think alike, and I came to realize my reasonable, rational arguments mostly just served to control the way other people expressed themselves -- i.e., so that they would express themselves more like myself.

      I see... so you not only decided to allow the unreasonable, irrational people continue their unproductive method of conversation, you eventually caved in and joined them as well ?

      --

      In Soviet America the banks rob you!
    18. Re:Top posting is bad by groomed · · Score: 1

      No, I came to realize that it's unproductive to try and shoehorn all communications into the same system. Remember the first rule of system building: do without one if you can.

    19. Re:Top posting is bad by Aldurn · · Score: 2, Funny

      And what's wrong with that?

      >> Another frequently requested MailNews feature, a preference for placing
      >>the user's signature above the quoted text, has been added.
      >
      >Nooooo! Argh, this will only encourage top-posting.

      --
      char sig[120] = "\0"
    20. Re:Top posting is bad by grouse · · Score: 1

      A. There's nothing wrong with it at all!

      Q. What's wrong with top-posting?

    21. Re:Top posting is bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      in my company, if you do not include all reply's in the email, and Top post you are written up.

      it is idiotic to make all the developers and engineers scroll down through an email to read a response, but having that important information about that topic just a scroll away is perfect.

      Most of american management prefer top posting.

    22. Re:Top posting is bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The annoying thing about bottom posting is that when you are reading an archived discussion on google groups. You have this annoying "Read More" link to click on whenever you want to see the actual content of a post.

      This gets tedious when following a long discussion where most people are bottom posting.

    23. Re:Top posting is bad by McDutchie · · Score: 1
      The annoying thing about bottom posting is that when you are reading an archived discussion on google groups. You have this annoying "Read More" link to click on whenever you want to see the actual content of a post.

      The problem here is not the "bottom-posting" but the failure to snip the quotes down to the relevant parts only. Quoting the entire post is another bad habit, and one bad reason why top-posting is a bad habit is that it encourages this. In fact, bottom/middle-posters who don't trim are even worse than top-posters, for exactly the kind of reasons you illustrate.

    24. Re:Top posting is bad by scrytch · · Score: 1

      > Top posting is a life-style choice.

      Anything's better than inline-posting.

      >> Nooooo! Argh, this will only encourage top-posting.

      You get my drift?

      --
      I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
    25. Re:Top posting is bad by scrytch · · Score: 1

      > I trust you're equally as accepting of those people who choose to WRITE IN ALL CAPS, or abbrvt lik u r txt mssging, or 3N463 1N 4 B17 0F 1337?

      He never said that

      > (and I've seen all three by email, the first two in business email).

      They're losers.

      > Some forms of expression are irritating to receive and just stupid.

      I agree. Isn't this chopped-up style really annoying?

      > Where you put quoted text isn't even some deep expression of your personality and life choices. It's just a freaking quotation.

      Can I get an amen?

      The above style is sometimes called the Usenet style. I used to be a great fan of it, used it myself, until I realized how horribly choppy and snippy it is. It's like interrupting every phrase someone says with "oh yeah?" and "says you". I'm happy to say it's on the decline, but I still see it, alas, on Usenet.

      Ultimately neither style matters, as long as it's consistent.

      --
      I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
    26. Re:Top posting is bad by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Yeah, I hate it too, except that the owner of my company polite corrected my habit of interleaved posting by informing me that it made my emails hard to read and archive.

      It didn't make any sense to me, either, but he's the guy that signs my paycheck, and I'm not in a position to respond in any way other than "yes, sir".

      So my work account defaults to top-posting. My personal account, on the other hand, is set correctly.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    27. Re:Top posting is bad by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1
      A truly useful extension would be one that would work on the receiver's end and move top-posts to the bottom, or bottom-posts to the top (whichever way the receiver prefers to see it). So regardless of how the poster did it, you'd see it in your preferred method.

      Hey, not bad! If we had a nice text-based tree structure so that emails could be formatted according to the whims of the client "browser", it wouldn't matter what program someone used to send or receive their emails. All formatting would be the responsibility of the recipient!

      We could call it...

      Well, let's see. The display render would depend on a set of heuristics (screen size, user preferences, system capabilities) to accurately depict the contents; we should use "H" for heuristic.

      Emails are text documents, so throw in a "T".

      This would be a markup language - add "ML".

      Perfect! We'll call this email description language "HTML", and instead of "reading" an email, you'll "browse" it. Man, the geeks at Slashdot will love this idea!

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    28. Re:Top posting is bad by ChaosDiscord · · Score: 1
      The above style is sometimes called the Usenet style. I used to be a great fan of it, used it myself, until I realized how horribly choppy and snippy it is.

      It's not so terrible. It's trying to capture the feel of a conversation. And while it is choppy, it's also extremely clear which points you're responding to. Your post may have been choppy, but it was crystal clear. If there is any danger to the Usenet style, it's that is very easy to fall into the trap of replying point-by-point to everything. Lots of interesting discussions on forests end up debating each individual tree. It definately has its weaknesses and can be used as a harmful crutch. Like all things it's best done in moderation.

    29. Re:Top posting is bad by TheMysteriousFuture · · Score: 1
      I have a powerful, modern email client for a reason.


      Which is?
      --
      .sig
    30. Re:Top posting is bad by ChaosDiscord · · Score: 1

      That people would find our clear and concise messages "pedantic/weird/irrelevant" is surreal. I suppose I'm focusing on business email, but I certainly find that people appreciate it when I keep to the point and use as little of their time as possible.

      I don't have an "elaborate system". The simplest case is to quote nothing. it works fine in most cases. The next and entirely optional step is "delete everything except a sentence or a paragraph that establishes context." It's not rocket science.

      I completely understand that people are under no obligation to be polite. That's not my point. People are under no obligation to not send their messages ENTIRELY IN CAPS or in txt msg spk. Just because there is no obligation doesn't mean it isn't rude.

      When communicating with other people, be it in person, by telephone, in a speech, by letter, by email, or even a Slashdot post, one should strive to be clear and concise. This isn't some wild-eyed, bearded, Unix user proclaimation, this is a simple extension of basic communication skills taught in high school. In the past businesses managed to communicate by memo and letter without quoting every single piece of prior correspondance. If necessary for context prior correspondance might be quoted ("In your letter of February 4rd you state..."). When facsimilies became mainstream they carried forward existing practices. Those practices still apply to email.

      (Completely random gripe: For some reason adding new technology seems to make people forget the lessons of the past. I'm slowly unlearning my past few years of exposure to PowerPoint hell, and rediscovering that the public speaking class I hated in high school taught me exactly what I needed to know to give truly compelling talks. PowerPoint is in fact a pretty good tool, but it's easy to confuse the tool for the purpose.)

    31. Re:Top posting is bad by ChaosDiscord · · Score: 1
      I have a powerful, modern email client for a reason.
      Which is?

      To pick up chicks with, of course.

    32. Re:Top posting is bad by TheMysteriousFuture · · Score: 1

      I was thinking more along the lines of what is the name of your 'powerful, modern email client' :p

      -TMF

      --
      .sig
    33. Re:Top posting is bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, Usenet also uses hardwrapped 7-bit text (just in case someone's reading news from a teletype), and refuses to use MIME for the most part.

      Usenet's a strange place filled with old, set-in-their-ways fogies. Certainly while you are visiting, you should blend in with the locals and use Usenet conventions (and MS's newsreader falls on it's ass there). But that doesn't mean that "Usenet-style" is some sort of universal ideal. (As for the Point-by-Point Reply, it practically gave birth to the modern troll.)

      For business emails, I've noted that 90% of the time the "clear and concise message" is in an attached word document or whatever and not in the email body. That's why quoting convention does matter as much as it does on slashdot or usenet.

    34. Re:Top posting is bad by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Good.

      Top posting is easier, quicker, and expected.

      When I open an email, espcially one that has been on going, I want to see the latest replies immediatly. I do not want to scroll down. I espcially don't want to scroll down because one person has there's at the bottom.

      Bottom posting may be better(opinion) but it is not expected.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    35. Re:Top posting is bad by ChaosDiscord · · Score: 1

      I avoided mentioning it at first, I didn't want the conversation to derail into a fight about specific clients. But, my personal taste leans toward the combination of Procmail and Mutt. It's an acquired taste, and probably not for most new users. I know better than to push it to any but the most hard-core Unix-philes. There are certainly other clients, with GUIs even, that match Mutt's power and may even surpass it; it's just what I use. (For what it's worth, I've heard exceptional things about KMail (KDE) and Mulberry (cross platform) from people I personally know and trust who have to juggle heavy mail loads.)

    36. Re:Top posting is bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      arghhhhhhhhhh you suck! etc. on an unrelated and even easier way to get -1, "Slashdot requires you to wait 20 seconds between hitting 'reply' and submitting a comment. It's been 12 seconds since you hit 'reply'!" Is slashdot discriminating against people who can type 130 words a minute? so much for a being a geek site. stupid bunch of fuglies.

  51. So where's tarball for the the source code by chipster · · Score: 1
    Usually there is a "src"directory under the "release" tree;

    http://ftp.gtlib.cc.gatech.edu/pub/mozilla.org/moz illa/releases/mozilla1.6/

    1. Re:So where's tarball for the the source code by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Usually takes a day to appear. Meanwhile, use the binaries or pull from CVS.

  52. Related question regarding linux by Clockwurk · · Score: 1

    This is only slightly related, but maybe someone here can answer. Does anyone know why the back and forward buttons on my mouse don't function correctly in linux?

    Mozilla, Opera, and IE in windows; both buttons work correctly.

    Mozilla, Konqueror, et al. My extra buttons don't work. The buttons are recognized (back button goes up one level) but they don't work correctly. Pretty damn annoying. This is a problem in every linux distro I've tested. (Knoppix 3.3, Suse 9.0, and Fedora Core 1).

    It probably cuts my productivity on the web in half. (I use SuSE 9.0).

    Also, if I could suggest one feature, I wish mozilla supported url finishing like IE. In IE, I can type a word (foo) and hit ctrl+enter and IE adds the http://www. to the front and the .com to the rear. It also will just add the .com to the end if the beginning (http://www.foo) is already there (it doesn't duplicate the http://www. part).

    Also, if there are any IE coders out there(and I highly doubt it), it'd be nice if we could have key combos for .org, .net, and .edu

    1. Re:Related question regarding linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      first question: i'm nearly positive i've read the answer elsewhere, but since i assume you googled for it first, i may be wrong.

      second question: you can turn that on in mozilla. it's called "domain guessing" and i consider it a very negative misfeature. it can even be a security risk under some circumstances, but some people like it.

    2. Re:Related question regarding linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i forgot to mention, for the first question: like i said, i think i've seen the solution elsewhere, but it's in the configuration for X-Windows, not for Mozilla. X handles all the mouse events (once upon a time X wasn't configured to understand the mouse wheel by default too) and passes them to the applications.

      that should be enough info to find the answer, if it exists, via google. good luck.

    3. Re:Related question regarding linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, if I could suggest one feature, I wish mozilla supported url finishing like IE. In IE, I can type a word (foo) and hit ctrl+enter and IE adds the http://www. to the front and the .com to the rear. It also will just add the .com to the end if the beginning (http://www.foo) is already there (it doesn't duplicate the http://www. part).

      It doesn't? I'm using Firebird 0.6.1, and it'll add http://www. .com if you press ctrl+enter. It's not smart enough to avoid duplicates though.

      I think I've only actually used that feature once myself, I can't imagine why it'd be that important.

    4. Re:Related question regarding linux by LauraW · · Score: 1
      This is only slightly related, but maybe someone here can answer. Does anyone know why the back and forward buttons on my mouse don't function correctly in linux?

      I managed to make this work on my RedHat 9.0 box last week, after a great deal of googling and lots of trial and error. The best page I found on the subject was probably this one, and there were also some forum posts here and here.

      [off-topic, but what the hell...]

      -- Laura, disappointed that RedHat's mouse-configuration tool didn't handle this automagically

    5. Re:Related question regarding linux by Clockwurk · · Score: 1

      I'm not referring to domain guessing. Here's how IE works. If I type in "foo" and hit enter, I get search results for foo from my default search engine (in default IE it's MSN search).

      Now, if I type "foo" and hit Ctrl+Enter, I get http://www.foo.com/ I find that feature pretty useful; it is fast (two keystrokes) and it is nice when the page won't work without the www. (http://foo.com won't work, but http://www.foo.com will).

      The other thing I sorely miss in mozilla is the Google toolbar. I love it. It has a google search bar (which is handy), but it also has a button to translate the page to english, as well as highlighting (and the ability to go to instances of search terms in a web page). On top of all that, it blocks popups. The Google toolbar alone is what keeps me faithful to IE. If google ever ports it to the other browsers, I'll drop IE in a heartbeat.

    6. Re:Related question regarding linux by m4rcL · · Score: 1

      Firebird does it already. Even using Shift+Enter for a .net address and Ctrl+Shift+Enter for a .org.

      Firebird Keyboard Shortcuts

    7. Re:Related question regarding linux by Clockwurk · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the links, I too was a little disappointed that the mouse config in SuSE didn't set it up correctly, but SuSE was free so I'm not that miffed.

    8. Re:Related question regarding linux by dougnaka · · Score: 1
      I just typed microsoft in my browser and hit CTRL+ENTER and it took me straight to their page, the URL didn't seem to change but it was microsoft.com, I'm pretty sure... looks like a software company of some time, nice logo...

      Also I tried some other domains and they all worked just the same..

      Mozilla 1.5 Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031209

      Built on gentoo with emerge mozilla.

      --
      My Linux Command of the Day site : LCOD
    9. Re:Related question regarding linux by artson · · Score: 1
      >> The other thing I sorely miss in mozilla is the Google toolbar. I love it.
      I like the Google bar too. If you visit http://googlebar.mozdev.org/ your wishes will be answered. I use it all the time and they've done a very nice job on it.
      --
      In times of trouble, the smell of frying onions usually gives confidence and comfort.
  53. Thunderbird-featuritus by phuller10 · · Score: 1

    I've been wanting an update of thunderbird for awhile. I was just thinking about it yesterday actually. But, just now I had the thought: "what does thunderbird do for me?" it checks and delivers my email to my desktop. "what more do i need it to do?" "..." Yeah I have all the extensions I need for it, it works flawlessly for me. I just wish they had more themes for it. The current ones aren't that aesthetically pleasing.

    1. Re:Thunderbird-featuritus by AndIWonderIfIWonder · · Score: 1

      Well, for an IMAP email account, that could make it so when you empty your trash folder it actually deletes the files off the server. For some reason you have to do "compact this folder" on the inbox to get it to do this.

  54. Re:Mozilla and popups by nighty5 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Google Bar is a most excellent way to curb the abusive use of popups, whilst still providing you the flexibility to customise against trusted URLs.
    Also has a neat Google search.
    Win32 Only.

  55. Re:But No One's mentioned the most important featu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting
    It was just recently updated. Here are two prior quotations from The Book of Mozilla:

    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)

    And the beast shall come forth surrounded by a roiling cloud of vengeance. The house of the unbelievers shall be razed and they shall be scorched to the earth. Their tags shall blink until the end of days.
    from The Book of Mozilla, 12:10

    It's a running gag type of easter egg.
  56. Re:Mozilla and popups by Orien · · Score: 1

    I agree that Firebird is the best first choice, but the Google Toolbar is by far the best way that I have found to stop pop-ups in IE. There is no spyware, no service or systray icon running, and integrates google for fast searching. It's great!

  57. Still no roaming profile by hpavc · · Score: 1

    They really need a sable roaming profile.

    --
    members are seeing something, your seeing an ad
    1. Re:Still no roaming profile by VivianC · · Score: 1

      They really need a sable roaming profile.

      Why sable? I'd rather have a MINK profile!

      --
      Viv

      Gmail invites for ip
  58. ASP.NET/Windows Auth? by krumms · · Score: 1

    From the release notes:

    Mozilla 1.6 includes a new cross-platform NTLM authentication mechanism. This feature brings NTLM authentication to the non-Windows Mozilla users for the first time and also delivers more robust and featureful NTLM support to users of older Windows versions.

    Does that mean Mozilla 1.6 is capable of interacting with ASP.NET web applications typically only accessible from Internet Explorer (i.e. those using Windows Authentication)? Are they (NTLM/WA) one and the same?

    1. Re:ASP.NET/Windows Auth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes.

    2. Re:ASP.NET/Windows Auth? by dmaxwell · · Score: 1

      Does that mean Mozilla 1.6 is capable of interacting with ASP.NET web applications typically only accessible from Internet Explorer (i.e. those using Windows Authentication)? Are they (NTLM/WA) one and the same?

      The answers to your questions are maybe and no. As far as browsers are concerned, NTLM is an authentication protocol. If your browser or proxy can't speak it then you don't get in the site. Since NTLM is often used to secure IIS based web apps then it would keep older non-MS browsers out.

      If the site is otherwise plain ole HTML, javascript, and plugins then this new Mozilla will indeed let you access them. However, Windows web apps can also do things like embed COM objects directly in the page. Having NTLM authentication won't help when the browser is used to execute MS APIs.

  59. It never fucking fails! by Lord+Kano · · Score: 1

    Three days after I download and install 1.5, 1.6 is released!

    Aaaaarrrrrrggggh!

    LK

    --
    "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
  60. Yeah, Umm, Please Help by dupper · · Score: 1

    Not to sound like a newbie (I've been using Mozilla for a while, but I just never invested in much technical skill), but installing this seems to have fucked my mouse gestures, and, thus, significantly handicapped my Mozilla usage. I've tried reinstalling it, fucking with the settings, etc., but it still won't work. Specifically, I'm pretty dependant on the left-right and right-left sequences for a quick forward and back. Any suggestions?

    1. Re:Yeah, Umm, Please Help by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All third party plug-ins have to be reinstalled. If you are having problems after reinstalling that the remains of the previous plug-in's install is interfering with the current install or the plug-in needs to be updated to support 1.6.

    2. Re:Yeah, Umm, Please Help by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I always keep a copy of my plugin directory before reinstalling, just to keep things simple. (Actually, I symlink it outside the mozilla tree, and just copy the libnullplugin and relink it in after the install.) I wish they did this by default, or at least as an option during the install.

  61. Posting from Firebird/Win2K... by frostman · · Score: 3, Informative

    Here I post from Firebird/Win2K, and for what it's worth:

    1. Firebird crashes about twice a week, and I have to kill the process before I can relaunch.

    2. Sometimes my Bookmarks Toolbar icons mysteriously disappear, only to be regenerated when I revisit the sites.

    3. Handling of unknown character sets is a Bad Joke.

    4. Plug-in loading is pretty spotty.

    5. There is no obvious indicator of Javascript errors on sites; I have to open the JS console when I suspect an error.

    6. It's kinda slow to start on my slower computer (TransMeta 800Mhz), though it's snappy on my faster one (Duron 1.2Ghz).

    7. It's still the best browser I've ever used, and I would tear out my hair if I had to live without it.

    Go Firebird!!

    --

    This Like That - fun with words!

    1. Re:Posting from Firebird/Win2K... by Chessucat · · Score: 0

      With memory usage at 35,856K. Mozilla 1.6 Released on a W2K box is a bit of a memory hog! I don't know why? Mozilla 1.6 runs fine under XP and Wins98SE!

      Why does Mozilla 1.6 eat up a lot of memory on a
      W2K box is beyond me?!

      --
      "I'm a dirty white tomcat, enter my world..."
    2. Re:Posting from Firebird/Win2K... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Moz 1.4 chewed up a lot of memory on WinXP as well.

      It was about then that I ditched it in favor of Firebird 0.7... so I can't speak for 1.5 or 1.6.

    3. Re:Posting from Firebird/Win2K... by trash+eighty · · Score: 1
      Firebird crashes about twice a week, and I have to kill the process before I can relaunch

      try a recent 0.8 build perhaps? i've used them on my work W2K box for ages and its not crashed yet... of course i'm probably tempting fate now ;)

    4. Re:Posting from Firebird/Win2K... by Zaiff+Urgulbunger · · Score: 1

      Just picking up on a few points:

      1. Firebird crashes about twice a week, and I have to kill the process before I can relaunch.
      I think this depends on the sites you're visiting. I use Firebird 0.7 exclusively (on Win2K) and very rarely does it hang. If happens, I do have to kill the process though, taking out all the browser windows.

      2. Sometimes my Bookmarks Toolbar icons mysteriously disappear, only to be regenerated when I revisit the sites.
      If the browser crashes, it will clear the cache the next time your start it -- icons are held in cache, so you loose them! Depending on your cahce, settings, I guess you might loose them from time to time anyway... but I've not noticed this myself.

      5. There is no obvious indicator of Javascript errors on sites; I have to open the JS console when I suspect an error.
      I think thats fair really -- Firebird is targetting regular, non-techie users. I don't think it helps showing a dialog (a-la IE) saying "An error has occured on this page. Would you like to debug? Yes | No".

      If you're debugging a page, its not difficult to open the JS console, and if you're a techie, you know where it is!

      7. It's still the best browser I've ever used, and I would tear out my hair if I had to live without it.
      Yeah!

    5. Re:Posting from Firebird/Win2K... by zoney_ie · · Score: 1

      I've never had Firebird crash on my 2K installation here at work - that's since I switched from IE6 back in November.

      I use it for work and surfing nearly all day long every day!

      It crashes occasionally at home with WinXP - but it might be more system related:
      a) it's Windows XP
      b) an intensive shockwave or Java page loading while I have thunderbird, WinTV and half a dozen tabs open.
      c) The PC is after all only a PIII 500MHz w. 256MB.

      My only complaint is for some reason MSN groups (I know - but it hosts the only good Irish Railway site) won't let me have a HTML message compose window. Gnarg.

      --
      -- *~()____) This message will self-destruct in 5 seconds...
    6. Re:Posting from Firebird/Win2K... by momfreeek · · Score: 1

      This functionality is enabled in one of the extensions. (Javascript Console status 1.0 : shows icon in status bar on error)

    7. Re:Posting from Firebird/Win2K... by ph1nn · · Score: 0

      i find that quite strange because i use Firebird 0.7 in both Linux and Windows and i never have crashes, and everything works (almost) perfectly. Its the best browser ive ever used and its very stable.

    8. Re:Posting from Firebird/Win2K... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On Windows, K-Meleon is the far faster (and often more stable) browser compared to Firebird. It has a much different feature set with many quirks, but for casual browsing it is good.

      Monolithic Mozilla is more stable than both of them, although it is still not as fast as K-Meleon.

      I use them all for different purposes, and I find that Firebird is the one I use least, because of its large usage overlap with the other two.

      I suggest you try K-Meleon on your slower machine, learn its quirks, and see if they are worth keeping in exchange for the enhanced overall speed and stability. YMMV, but I have used customized K-Meleon installations on my slower machines exclusively.

  62. Re:But No One's mentioned the most important featu by FattMattP · · Score: 1

    Don't forget the original kitchen sink. Too bad that it probably won't make it into Mozilla as an about: option.

    --
    Prevent email address forgery. Publish SPF records for y
  63. Probably by dn15 · · Score: 1

    Can't hurt to try it. I've used 1.6b at work (I run Firebird at home) and it never crashed. The final version should in theory be even better. :)

  64. Re:Mozilla and popups by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Pop-up blocking is great.

    Yeah I like it, imagine my surprise when it didn't block the popups on this troll's link.

  65. Firebird.. by xankar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Should be prepackaged with various popular plugins like Flash and Shockwave.

    I've reccomended firebird to all of my windows-using, non tech-savvy friends and they love it, but they wouldn't have done it without my encouragement because it was such a pain to redownload so many plugins.

    People are lazy. Lazy people buy(in the loose sense of the word, since the software's free) convenience.

    --
    ~To choose doubt as a philosophy of life is akin to choosing immobility as a means of transportation. -Yann Martel
    1. Re:Firebird.. by bwalling · · Score: 2, Informative

      One of the big pains with Firebird (on Windows) is Java. You have to add a registry entry to get the Java plug in working. Not good for the end user.

    2. Re:Firebird.. by chris_7d0h · · Score: 1

      Exactly, One of the best plugins to Firebird (and one of the strongest arguments which made me convert to that bird) is the plugin you no doubt refer to, the "Flash click to view" plugin by Ted Mielczarek.

      It blocks all those annoying Flash banners distracting your reading while still allowing you to see them if you really would be so inclined, by left clicking the place-holder of the flash area.
      Agreed, some crappy sites still use Flash as a part of their navigation system (a moronic idea as such, but..) so you're still able to use these sites.

      Another must-have plugin is the Adblock (which IIRC is nowadays bundled with Firebird). These two plugins alone makes the web so much nicer to navigate.

      However great the Gecko browsers might be, it's still to early to completely uninstall IE, as some sites are still too messed up that they only work with Internet Explorer. So at times, the Gecko browsers still can't be used to browse certain (broken) sites...

      --
      In a society that believes in nothing, fear becomes the only agenda ~ Bill Durodié
  66. Have they fixed their worst bug yet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You know, the stupid one where downloads go in /tmp first and just fill it up and then die in the arse? Damn bug is about a bazillion years old and Mozilla is an annoying pile of junk without this fixed!

  67. Real Soon Now by dn15 · · Score: 1

    The roadmap originally had it due in December. http://www.mozilla.org/projects/firebird/roadmap.h tml

    I expect it'll be ready pretty soon. I have been using the trunk nightly builds and they seem really stable.

  68. Re:Mozilla and popups by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    change your browser identifier, then when the site works flawlessly (all do for me), email the company asking them why they make it a point to explicily lock people out.

  69. If only I had mod points by aardwolf204 · · Score: 1

    If only I had mod points

    --
    Im dreaming ofa big bndwdth, That can resist the /.crowd.May ur days b merry & bright & may al
    1. Re:If only I had mod points by PReDiToR · · Score: 1

      Dude, I nearly replied to this too, but the AC is replying to a joke.

      --

      Do not meddle in the affairs of geeks for they are subtle and quick to anger
  70. Re:Mozilla and popups by Trelane · · Score: 2, Interesting

    that's an option in "preferences". It doesn't come enabled by default, but it's there.

    Also, a very nice thing about tabs (aside from being able to collect tabs in a window by topic) is bookmarking tab groups; all the documentation you want at your fingertips and at the click of a button.

    FWIW, I have 3 monitors, and still use tabs; they're just so danged useful.

    --

    --
    Given enough personal experience, all stereotypes are shallow.
  71. $ TMPDIR=/my/new/temp mozilla by Ayanami+Rei · · Score: 1

    Come on people, use common sense.

    --
    THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
    1. Re:$ TMPDIR=/my/new/temp mozilla by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that any sensible browser just puts the file where you tell it to. Simple. Obvious. Correct. Ignored by Mozilla gurus for years.

    2. Re:$ TMPDIR=/my/new/temp mozilla by dedazo · · Score: 2, Insightful
      That's like saying IE is OK because I installed the Google toolbar to block popups.

      We're always so fast to make excuses for shortcomings in open source products yet woe the commercial one that has a bug for it is "teh sux".

      --
      Web2.0: I love when people Flickr my cuil and digg my boingboing until my google is reddit and I start to yahoo
  72. Eolas and Mozilla? by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 5, Informative

    I submitted this story today, but as usual, since I am not a friend of the /. Editors, they shot it down big time (within minutes of when I submitted it), but I'm not bitter (that's a joke, OK?)! The guy from Eolas who brought the action against Microsoft about his browser patent, is in talks with "major Linux players." In fact, according to the eWeek story (rejected by /.), he's an Open Source contributor. Read between the lines, because this bodes VERY well for Mozilla. While W3 and Microsoft are hemming and hawing about what this kind of patent meant to them, and it means something very bad for Internet Explorer, I suspect Mozilla will not be a target. Perhaps it's wishful thinking, but "what if" this guy is into Open Source, and saw a nice way to screw MS? I know, "so what, he still has a patent for something that is obvious and should not be patented." Well, my position is just the same as with SCO / IMB. Lessor of two evils, and my enemies' enemy is my friend (for now).

    --
    "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
    1. Re:Eolas and Mozilla? by StrawberryFrog · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Read between the lines, because this bodes VERY well for Mozilla. While W3 and Microsoft are hemming and hawing about what this kind of patent meant to them, and it means something very bad for Internet Explorer, I suspect Mozilla will not be a target.

      A dumb patent is a dumb patent, and should be overturned as a matter of principle, no matter who it advantages tactically. Dumb patents in general are a threat to open source. Actually, they are a threat to anyone wanting to make good software.

      --

      My Karma: ran over your Dogma
      StrawberryFrog

    2. Re:Eolas and Mozilla? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A dumb patent is a dumb patent, and should be overturned as a matter of principle, no matter who it advantages tactically.

      I agree to a certain extent, but look at how well the GPL turned out. RMS thinks that the copyright system is fundamentally flawed, so he exploited it to give Free Software a boost.

      If stupid patents are going to be granted, we may as well use them to promote Free Software when we can, you know that they'll be used against Free Software when they are held by somebody like Microsoft.

    3. Re:Eolas and Mozilla? by Tim+C · · Score: 1

      The lesser of two evils is still evil.

      If you're truly against frivolous patents, then you really shouldn't be supporting this one, even if the guy is using it to stick it to MS.

      Look at it this way - by not speaking out against him, it sets a precedent. When the next guy with a similar patent starts taking *everyone* to court over it, including OSS projects, you'll be less justified in speaking out then.

    4. Re:Eolas and Mozilla? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try submitting it again, in about a week. ;-)

    5. Re:Eolas and Mozilla? by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 1

      So you think giving MS a bit of their own medicine is just as unethical as what they are doing? In principle I agree, but the Real World is not often like what we would choose, best case.

      --
      "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
  73. And any moment now.... by Crypto+Gnome · · Score: 4, Informative

    As outlined in the Mozilla project roadmap , the Mozilla Firebird browser will eventually replace the Seamonkey browser as the premiere end-user browser from mozilla.org. As part of the journey towards that goal, from milestone 0.7 onward Firebird 0.x releases will occur at the same time (or approximately the same time). Firebird Roadmap

    Yes, you heard it right. This release of Mozilla is significant ALSO in that it heralds an impending release of FireBird.

    Of course, Firebird 0.8 was due out December 2003, so we're overdue for that anyways.

    --
    Visit CryptoGnome in his home.
    1. Re:And any moment now.... by Slynkie · · Score: 1

      This release of Mozilla is significant ALSO in that it heralds an impending release of FireBird.

      What's the point? According to the roadmap, they're regressing from Firebird 0.9 back to Firebird 0.10 in late March anyways! ;)

    2. Re:And any moment now.... by tqft · · Score: 1

      Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; WinNT4.0; en-US; rv:1.7a) Gecko/20040115 Firebird/0.8.0+

      --
      The Singularity is closer than you think
      Quant
  74. Branch build by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    They should release a branch build without the overhead of image blocking, now that the Internet's favorite site is no more.

  75. Re:But No One's mentioned the most important featu by ocelotbob · · Score: 4, Informative
    A rough interpretation:
    And so at last the beast fell and the unbelievers rejoiced.
    AOL's killing of the netscape brand as a web browser, and the subsequent laying off of the dev team.
    But all was not lost, for from the ash rose a great bird. The bird gazed down upon the unbelievers and cast fire and thunder upon them.
    The rebirth of the Mozilla project as a non-profit and the rebirth of Mozilla as separate browser and mail components.
    For the beast had been reborn with its strength renewed, and the followers of Mammon cowered in horror.
    Ph33r Mozilla ;3 .
    --

    Marxism is the opiate of dumbasses

  76. whew by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nearly every sentence in that post is a disaster. Mr. Logic, please proofread your posts before pushing that button, and don't be afraid of commas. I still can't quite figure out what the "OSS" sentence means exactly, except to get a hint by randomly assembling the key words.

  77. Re:Mozilla and popups by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You also have to give props to the most excellent Avant Browser, an IE upgrade. Google for it if you want to d/l it.

  78. Why I use Mozilla instead of Mozilla Firebird by Spoing · · Score: 1

    Well, first off, it's a lie. I'm using Firebird right now. That said, Composer is not part of Firebird (as Firebird is focused on browsing) so I end up using Mozilla suite most of the time.

    --
    A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.
    1. Re:Why I use Mozilla instead of Mozilla Firebird by wemmick · · Score: 1

      Composing with Mozilla? I thought composing was meant to be done in emacs.

      --
      ___
      Cognitive Overflow
      more than yo
    2. Re:Why I use Mozilla instead of Mozilla Firebird by Spoing · · Score: 1
      1. Composing with Mozilla? I thought composing was meant to be done in emacs.

      You're looking for the VI vs. Emacs discussion. Nobody gets worked up over the choice of editor for HTML and web.

      --
      A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.
  79. Re:Mozilla's a good browser... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I find the problem with jacking off in my own face is that the first spurt hits okay, but then the next few spurts just end up stuck in my pubes and all over my cock and I get in a mess.

  80. Re:Mozilla and popups by balster+neb · · Score: 1

    Sad that IE has the monopoly in the browser market. Most users are unaware of the better browsers available. Even if they were aware, many wouldn't change because their IE was "good enough".

    MS knows their monopoly will remain as long as they update IE once in a while. What are clearly better web browsers don't get used. Web authors will continue to make pages aimed at a substandard product.

    My point here is, does a case of a monopoly stifling innovation and progress get any more clear than this? What now, after MS got away with a slap on the wrist? In the medium to short term, where does the competition go?

    Just my thoughts.

  81. Re:NTLM and Proxy Server by thegrommit · · Score: 4, Informative

    If you have Microsoft Proxy Server or some other NTLM proxy at work or wherever, take a good hard look at 1.6. It's the first Mozilla version to have a built-in NTLM solution.

    It's been available in Windows builds for quite a while (since at least 1.4). The key difference is that the new method is cross-platform.

  82. My prediction by cybersavior · · Score: 1

    I think since both the Moz project and *bird projects are aproaching major relese points (2.0 and 1.0), I suspect that the Moz 2.0 'suite' will contain *birds 1.0.

  83. More like RTLinux? by tepples · · Score: 1

    Perhaps it's wishful thinking, but "what if" this guy is into Open Source, and saw a nice way to screw MS?

    I've read that your conjecture may in fact be the case. If so, then the Eolas patent end up with similar licensing to the RTLinux patent. For those who don't follow RTLinux, a U.S. patent covers its architecture, but the inventor has licensed the patent for free use in all projects under the GNU General Public License.

    1. Re:More like RTLinux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if that's the case, let' see the proof! let Eolas release a non-revocable, gratis license for it's patent for OSS implementations.

  84. Get it from CVS while you wait by tepples · · Score: 1

    Apparently, the tarball hasn't made it up yet. In the meantime, you might try downloading the latest Mozilla 1.6 branch tarball and then, if you feel like it, CVS updating.

    1. Re:Get it from CVS while you wait by chipster · · Score: 1

      Thanks guys.

  85. Bad for YOU, maybe. by pclminion · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Saying "top posting is bad" is like saying "EMACS is better than vi." A matter of opinion ONLY.

    Bottom-posting is more useful to outsiders to the discussion, since they can follow the temporal flow of response and reply. However, top-posting is more convenient for those enagaging in the discussion, since they presumably already know who's saying what, and therefore it's better to have the most up-to-date information at the TOP. They can scroll down to get context if necessary.

    Please, don't turn top-posting into yet ANOTHER religious issue... We don't need more of them.

    1. Re:Bad for YOU, maybe. by Bistronaut · · Score: 1

      Spoken like a true evil top-poster. :-P

    2. Re:Bad for YOU, maybe. by ChaosDiscord · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Any sort of "quote the entire freaking message I'm replying to" is wrong, be it "Microsoft spits on your pathetic standards" top-posting, or "AOL Me-Tooer" bottom-posting. Both are wrong, wrong, wrong.

      Only quote the bare minimum necessary to maintain context. If someone needs the entire prior conversation, forward them the entire conversation, ideally using "bounce" or similar feature so that they have access to individual messages and can have their email client do intelligent things like threading with it.

    3. Re:Bad for YOU, maybe. by alib001 · · Score: 1

      Because it disturbs the logical flow of the message.
      Why is top posting frowned upon?

      Saying "top posting is bad" is like saying "EMACS is better than vi."

      No. It's like saying: "I've decided to write backwards and I expect you to waste your time reconstructing my post."

      Top posting is irritating, rude, and unhelpful.

    4. Re:Bad for YOU, maybe. by Lars+Arvestad · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Saying "top posting is bad" is like saying "EMACS is better than vi." A matter of opinion ONLY.

      Yeah, but how many users do you think actually has an opinion on this? 99.99 % of the bottom-quoted email I get is there because their email program encourages it, not because they think it is convenient.

      Bottom-posting is more useful to outsiders to the discussion, since they can follow the temporal flow of response and reply.

      I don't think bottom-quoting help with the temporal flow at all! You have to start at the bottom and guess at what people are referring to. With the top-quoted emails it is much more common to people actually breaking the quotations up and responding to the sentences/paragraphs that actually matters. At least in my circles: I guess it varies with your community.

      I also think that there is a larger risk with bottom-quoting that inappropriate information gets passed on. I don't have an anecdote or so, but I have long been curious about what insults and copmany secrets that have been forwarded this way!

      What it really comes down to is that there is not much support for quotations in most email programs. The only app I know about where your MTA actually gives you a little bit of control is in Emacs, both VM and Gnus, where there is an add-on called SuperCite. Really nifty utility.

      I'd like to see a edit mode where you can move parts of quotations in and out of emails as units. Mozilla Mail has some help in marking what is a quote, but it is all text based in the end. I would like to see the quotes as little widgets.

      --
      Reality or nothing.
    5. Re:Bad for YOU, maybe. by dash2 · · Score: 1

      Only quote the bare minimum necessary to maintain context.
      Why? Are you short of disk space?

    6. Re:Bad for YOU, maybe. by shaka · · Score: 1

      I don't think bottom-quoting help with the temporal flow at all! You have to start at the bottom and guess at what people are referring to. With the top-quoted emails it is much more common to people actually breaking the quotations up and responding to the sentences/paragraphs that actually matters. At least in my circles: I guess it varies with your community.


      Well, since the original poster says bottom and top posting, respectively, and you say bottom and top quoting, you both really think the same thing, which makes your entire post redundant. Start reading before you post, maybe?

      --
      :wq!
    7. Re:Bad for YOU, maybe. by mike_sucks · · Score: 1

      I'm short on time and patience. Quote in context, or not at all.

      -mike

      --
      -- "So, what's the deal with Auntie Gerschwitz et all?"
    8. Re:Bad for YOU, maybe. by Myopic · · Score: 1

      emacs vs. vi isn't a religious issue -- it's just that vi users are crackwhores who don't know good from bad. it's that simple.

    9. Re:Bad for YOU, maybe. by FattMattP · · Score: 1
      They can scroll down to get context if necessary.
      If you have multiple points of context within one message, which happens a lot, it's much better to respond to quoted parts.
      --
      Prevent email address forgery. Publish SPF records for y
    10. Re:Bad for YOU, maybe. by pclminion · · Score: 1
      If you find it that difficult to reconstruct a conversation when the only transformation that's been applied to it is "Reverse order of people's replies," then I think the mental exercise would do you good.

      If it strains you to read a top-posted email, I hate to think how you handle a REAL problem...

    11. Re:Bad for YOU, maybe. by ChaosDiscord · · Score: 1
      Why? Are you short of disk space?

      No, of course not, that would be silly.

      I am, however, short on time and have better things to do than skim pages of text looking to see if someone inserted a reply. When joining an ongoing conversation, I've got better things to do than read the entire thing trying to identify which bits are relevant to the reason I was brought in.

      I am, also, sometimes on a low-bandwidth or expensive-bandwidth connection like a cell phone. Long messages mean long waits, or more money. If I'm on a moderately expensive connection like a "$5 for fifteen minutes" wireless connection, while each individual long message isn't that big of a deal, but the combined effect can be.

      I also sometimes read mail on various low-memory portable devices (Palm devices, cell phones again, high-end pagers), that may crop my message at some arbitrary boundary to try and compensate.

      I also search the bodies of old messages to find information I needed. Perhaps I want to know exactly who sent me a particular fact so that I can ask them for further details. If their message is quoted in dozens of other messages, my search is less useful. Sure, I could open any of the messages, but them I'm digging around in the usually mangled, quoted headers looking for the sender, circumventing my email client's ability to parse and intelligently display headers.

    12. Re:Bad for YOU, maybe. by alib001 · · Score: 1

      Try reading a discussion with scores of replies and scores of different posters. If someone wants to follow what has been said so far, people contributing by top posting (i.e. against convention) make that increasingly difficult.

      "Reverse order of people's replies"
      Great. So long as everyone posts backwards. Not so much when everyone else is replying to points after they've read them.

      I suggest you try exercising some dexterity by hitting the cursor keys every once in a while. With practice you may even pick up a helpful key combination or two.

    13. Re:Bad for YOU, maybe. by pclminion · · Score: 1
      Long messages mean long waits, or more money. If I'm on a moderately expensive connection like a "$5 for fifteen minutes" wireless connection, while each individual long message isn't that big of a deal, but the combined effect can be.

      In that case then, wouldn't you prefer the newest information to be at the TOP, so that once you've read and understood it you can cancel the rest of the transmission (which you only need if you've forgotten the context)? Putting the latest info at the bottom forces you to download a bunch of context that you might not even need.

    14. Re:Bad for YOU, maybe. by ChaosDiscord · · Score: 1
      In that case then, wouldn't you prefer the newest information to be at the TOP, so that once you've read and understood it you can cancel the rest of the transmission...

      It's an interesting idea, but in practice almost every email system downloads the entire message in one shot. However, if the quoted text is kept to a bare minimum (and in many cases, "bare minimum" means "absolutely nothing"), it becomes small enough to be irrelevant I absolutely don't want complete quoting of previous messages at the top, it's just about as bad as quoting entire messages below. Complete top quoting means I need to page through the junk to get to the fresh content (Good old fashed "Me-too"ing!).

    15. Re:Bad for YOU, maybe. by MarcQuadra · · Score: 1

      I just realized that thanks to your point-out. There really ought to be markup for that, so you can view a conversation the way you want it, and so can others involved.

      --
      "Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
  86. You think top posting is bad by Nailer · · Score: 1
    I've yet to make up my mind, cause I can see bost points of view

    Put the most relevant (ie, recent) stuff at the top, just like every web page in existence. Older stuff goes down the bottom for those that need context

    Have questions before answers

    Personally, I think they're each appropriate at different times.

  87. Re:But No One's mentioned the most important featu by Malcontent · · Score: 1

    Just a blue screen. What are they trying to say? That using Mozilla will crash your windows? What an odd statement.

    --

    War is necrophilia.

  88. Damn by RoadkillBunny · · Score: 0

    I just finish compiling the beta yesterday...

    --
    Cheers,
    RoadkillBunny
  89. Courier IMAP mailbox view finally fixed by iceT · · Score: 3, Informative

    I'm so happy, I could just SPIT.

    IMAP servers like Courier that store everything under INBOX (INBOX. namespace) FINALLY get displayed as a flat tree structure!

    Thank you, Mozilla Team!! Thank you, thank you, thank you!

    --
    -- You can't idiot-proof anything, because they're always coming out with better idiots.
    1. Re:Courier IMAP mailbox view finally fixed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Uh, Server Settings : Advanced : IMAP Server Directory = "INBOX" has always worked for me (Cyrus).

  90. Now if only a galeon 1.2.x worked with it.... by MarcoAtWork · · Score: 1

    I've been trying to find a galeon 1.2.x (NOT 1.3.xx, which sucks) that works with Mozilla > 1.3 but no dice, I've never been able to get something working out of the tar.gz source files (I'm on RH9) and have to keep using the old galeon 1.2.10 with mozilla 1.3 (the latest that had rpms).

    any kind soul willing to try and get a working set of RH9 rpms for a recent 1.2.x (say, 1.2.13) release? pleeease?

    --
    -- the cake is a lie
    1. Re:Now if only a galeon 1.2.x worked with it.... by SumDog · · Score: 2, Informative

      Have you tried a recent release of 1.3.x? It's gottan a whole lot better and has most of the functionality of the old gtk1 galeon browser.

      SumDog

  91. Re:NTLM and Proxy Server by berkut1337 · · Score: 1

    yep,

    Mozilla 1.6 includes a new cross-platform NTLM authentication mechanism. This feature brings NTLM authentication to the non-Windows Mozilla users for the first time and also delivers more robust and featureful NTLM support to users of older Windows versions.

  92. Re:Mozilla's a good browser... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I will fucking kill you all and use your blood for lubricant because that's what I need to get my Beezlebub cock hard enough to drench my face in my own fucking cum!!!!!

  93. Slow? by bluewee · · Score: 1

    Why is it that Mozilla loads so much slower than any other browser. Of course IE should load faster, being that it is built into the core of windows. But even bloated Opera loads faster and seems on average to load faster.

    --
    [blue] - The Ministry of Information approved this message...
  94. Middle-posting by tepples · · Score: 2, Insightful

    However, top-posting is more convenient for those enagaging in the discussion

    In my e-mail messages, Usenet posts, and message board posts, I prefer middle-posting: trim down the quoted context and insert a response to each point immediately after each piece of quoted context. I have written this very comment in middle-posting style.

    it's better to have the most up-to-date information at the TOP.

    In a proper middle-posting reply, the first piece of "most up-to-date information" will typically appear above the fold (definition) because the poster has trimmed the context.

    (Read More...)

  95. Googlebar for mozilla by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    *BING*, you got it

    googlebar.mozdev.org

    1. Re:Googlebar for mozilla by Clockwurk · · Score: 1

      Looks like it's time to fire up the old "Set Program Access and Defaults" and do some switching in the default browser department.

  96. Re:But No One's mentioned the most important featu by mu_wtfo · · Score: 1

    And they watched as the beast cast off its chains, and with a terrible roar, burst forth and slew those who had bound it. And for days the rivers ran red with their lifeblood.

    from The Book of Mozilla , 7:15
    (Red Letter Edition)

    --
    If all the world's a stage, anyone who says they want better lighting spends far too much time in a dark theatre.
  97. Restore MNG Support! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since I don't see anyone else bitching about it yet, I'll do the duty...

    Last summer, the Mozilla maintainers removed support for the MNG file format. This was a Bad Thing[tm]. See someone else bitching about it for more details. The relevant bugzilla bug is 18574, available at this url (cut and paste, since they block links from slashdot):

    http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18574

    MNG supporters have revolted and are operating out of mngzilla.sf.net

  98. You should have downloaded 1.6b by tepples · · Score: 1

    Perhaps the fact that Mozilla.org had already published version 1.6 Beta of the Mozilla app suite might have clued you in?

  99. Re:Mozilla is great, but I stopped using it today. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    mozilla sounds stupid too, it should be a type of cheese or something. these netscape programmers must have way too much late night pizza eating session i guess.

    anyway... real nerds still use mosaic, the only true browser.

  100. thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    well, thanks for finding and qa'ing that one. i hit that a *lot* for some reason - i guess now i know the reason - and it irritates the shit out of me.

  101. Re:Mozilla and popups by catbutt · · Score: 1

    that's an option in "preferences". It doesn't come enabled by default, but it's there.

    Where? I don't see it.

  102. Ask Jeeves? by Joff_NZ · · Score: 5, Funny

    From the Changelog:

    * Ask Jeeves searching has been added to Mozilla 1.6.

    WHY? FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, WHY??

    --
    The revolution will not be televised. It won't be on a friggin blog either
    1. Re:Ask Jeeves? by Chris+Coster · · Score: 1

      Apparently they found religion.

      (Ahem. ;)

    2. Re:Ask Jeeves? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, Jeeves is useless these days.

      In the good old days, you could ask:
      Is Jeeves gay?
      Is Jeeves stupid?
      and get an interesting answer.

      Whatever happended to that?

      Is Jeeves useless?
      Yes, Jeeves is useless!

    3. Re:Ask Jeeves? by timothy · · Score: 1

      For amusement? :) (And that's just one of many such interviews, of course.)

      I can't imagine using Ask Jeeves as a search engine, but it makes a funny Eliza substitute.

      timothy

      --
      jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
    4. Re:Ask Jeeves? by megabulk3000 · · Score: 5, Funny

      From the Changelog:

      * Ask Jeeves searching has been added to Mozilla 1.6.

      WHY? FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, WHY??


      Uh, ask Jeeves?

    5. Re:Ask Jeeves? by TrippyZ · · Score: 1

      >WHY? FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, WHY??

      I don't know. why not Ask Jeeves?

      Ask Jeeves

    6. Re:Ask Jeeves? by Tin+Foil+Hat · · Score: 1

      WHY? FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, WHY??

      nope, that's no help

      (This here is a lameness filter buster)

      --
      No matter how many of my rights are taken away, somehow I still don't feel safe. -Frigid Monkey
    7. Re:Ask Jeeves? by scrytch · · Score: 1

      Here's what Jeeves says. Also came up with:

      Search for WHY? FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, WHY?? on other sites:

      Search Local Yellow Page Listings for WHY? FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, WHY?? sponsored by SMARTpages.com

      Hey at least it didn't offer to show me where I could buy THE LOVE OF GOD online...

      --
      I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
  103. YDL version? by greenguy · · Score: 1

    My question is, when will there be a .ppc.rpm version, or a source that isn't specific to i686? I'm on Yellow Dog, and haven't been able to make anything since the pre-installed 1.2b work.

    And yes, I tried the yum links in the mirrors. I couldn't make them work.

    --
    What if I do the same thing, and I do get different results?
  104. Re:But No One's mentioned the most important featu by BZ · · Score: 1

    > As listed in the Release notes mozilla's greatest feature yet:

    Congrats. You've now noticed that none of the core engine changes, no matter how cool, ever make it into the release notes ("because they may be too scary for people"). But this crap makes it. .

  105. MOD DOWN - TROLL! by phalse+phace · · Score: 2, Informative
    Why was this moded "Insightful?" I originally posted this back on December 10. This person is ripping off people's post to get modded up. Mod this guy DOWN!

    Yes, I know this is off-topic, but this needs to be addressed.

    1. Re:MOD DOWN - TROLL! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL, Moderation: 30% Troll

      You asked for it!

    2. Re:MOD DOWN - TROLL! by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      No! You copied me, troll! Now send me $699.

    3. Re:MOD DOWN - TROLL! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Why was this moded "Insightful?"

      oh, i didn't realize we were expected to remember every posts you made

  106. Re:Mozilla and popups by Trelane · · Score: 1

    Edit->Preferences.
    In Navigator (is the first thing that shows), you have Display on [Navigator start...] with 3 radio buttons below it: Blank Page, Home Page, Last Page visited.

    [Navigator start...] is a drop-down list where you can select from Navigator start, New Window, and New Tab.

    Change to New Window in the list, and then activate the Last Page Visited radio button. IIRC, it doesn't follow the history, but it does bring up the last page. I may be wrong on the history, tho; I don't find it that useful.

    Much more useful, imho, is the ability to middle-click and have moz bring up the link in a new tab while you finish browsing in your current tab. You can set tab settings in the Tabbed Browsing sub-panel (is under the Navigator section in the prefs dialog you brought up.)

    --

    --
    Given enough personal experience, all stereotypes are shallow.
  107. "Mojira" by BitwizeGHC · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The name takes on new meaning when you realize that "moji" is a Japanese word for a character or ideograph. So "Mojira" could theoretically be the Japanese name of a "text-monster", which is somehow fitting for the Mozilla browser.

    --
    N4st0r, trixx0r h0bb1tz0rz! Th3y st0l3 0ur pr3c10uzz!
  108. RPMs for Red Hat Linux 7.1 and 7.2? by antdude · · Score: 1

    I know these are very old operating systems, but I don't need to upgrade if they work. I will switch until my HDD dies or whatever.

    Do 7.x RPMs exist? Or did the contributers stopped making them? I looked high and low for v1.5 version, but no luck.

    Am I stuck?

    --
    Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  109. vCard Support by n-baxley · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I see that vCard support has been added, but there doesn't seem to be any UI for it. Can anyone tell me how to open a vCard that is sent to me from Outlook?

    1. Re:vCard Support by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't think you can edit/view a vcard sent to you.
      Goto Edit -> Mail and news group setting and just below attach your sig, is the UI thing they are talking about. You can edit your vcard there.

    2. Re:vCard Support by mikefoley · · Score: 1

      Drag and drop it into the Address Book?

      --
      What's my Karma Mr. Burns? "Excellent"
  110. Re:Mozilla and popups by catbutt · · Score: 1

    Ok, I found it, but it doesn't do what I need.

    First, it opens the last page visited, literally, not the current page in the browser window I am currently in. That's just wrong.

    Second, it doesn't preserve the history, which defeats the purpose. I love the ability to open a new window, navigate forwards and backwards in the history while keeping my "old" history in the other window. I use it all the time, its hard to explain how useful that is.

    I hear you on the tabs, but I still don't like them. I never liked microsoft's MDI (especially when in "maximized" mode where you could only look at one document at a time), and this is the same thing to me. I want to have two or more things side by side. Not all the time, but often enough that I find it maddening to have to jump through hoops when I do feel the need.

  111. Re:Mozilla and popups by mixmasta · · Score: 1

    prefs/navigator/display on [New Window] dropdown.

    x Last page visited

    (on the top left)

    --
    #6495ED - cornflower blue
  112. My favorite new feature by ahg · · Score: 3, Interesting
    From the release notes:
    "Remove from server after x days" has been implemented for POP3 mail accounts.
    I have been yearning for this feature that I loved in Eudora in KMail. This is the first Linux mail client that I've seen that supports it.

    Anyone know if Thunderbird has this option yet?

    I'm now very tempted to install Mozilla and switch mail clients but I'd rather just have a stand-alone mail client like Thunderbird, and only have to transition mail clients once to get this feature.

    Thanks Mozilla team!
    --

    --Aaron Greenberg

    1. Re:My favorite new feature by seasleepy · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yup, it's in Thunderbird.

      From the 0.4 release notes: "POP Accounts now support aging on the server."
      At least I'm assuming that's what that refers to. I do know from experience that it is in TB though. Super handy for keeping the mailbox tidy.

    2. Re:My favorite new feature by BenjyD · · Score: 1

      There's no "don't download from server" filter action still, though. That was enough to keep my parents using Outlook Express (barf), despite all its problems.

    3. Re:My favorite new feature by nsuttitinagul · · Score: 1

      I like that feature too, but I should note that the GTK+ mail client Sylpheed (http://sylpheed.good-day.net) has had that feature much longer than Mozilla mail. Furthermore, it is orders of magnitude faster than the gigantic Mozilla suite. Not bashing Mozilla, but for the record, Sylpheed, the mail client I use, had it too.

      That said, I'm hoping Mozilla will continue to advance and that they'll truly abandon the SeaMonkey underpinnings for the faster *birds and extension framework.

  113. Re:Mozilla and popups by Trelane · · Score: 1

    Aight. Sorry it's not what you were looking for.

    Would you like to file a bug on it? If so, please post the bug number, so I can track it.

    --

    --
    Given enough personal experience, all stereotypes are shallow.
  114. Re:wow by yomegaman · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Misquoting Ali G. What is that all about? Is it good or is it wack?

    --
    ...wearing a skin-tight topless leather jumpsuit, with cutaway buttocks and transparent crotch panel.
  115. Re:Offtopic... by j-pimp · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    If it requires a slightly bigger heat sink, whats the problem as long as its a desktop PC. As long as you cool it properly an AMD can take the heat. Either proccessor will not last an OS boot up running without cooling at room temperature. I just walked into my companies data center of about 30 racks worth of equpitment, mostly Intel DELL stuff and the the A/C says its 63 degrees in the data center and is currently cooling. I believe it turns of at 60 degrees. Did I mention that its 2 degrees outside? All temperatures are given in Farenheit cause I'm an insensitive clod.

    --
    --- Justin Dearing http://www.justaprogrammer.net/ We're just programmers.
  116. How does this relate to 1.7a? by BlueFall · · Score: 1

    I downloaded source the other day and it claims to be version 1.7a. Does anyone know how this relates to this release?

    1. Re:How does this relate to 1.7a? by Lukey+Boy · · Score: 1

      It was branched a while ago for 1.6. The source you downloaded was the trunk, which will eventually branch and become 1.7a, b, etc.

  117. Re:But No One's mentioned the most important featu by BigFootApe · · Score: 1
    By the way, if you haven't yet, if you use mozilla, you need to check out about:mozilla


    Known about that since about .7. First time I've looked at the source, though.

    Is prophecy always written in xhtml?
  118. Re:Mozilla and popups by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Most people don't know alternatives exist. Those I've shown Mozilla almost invariably switch.

  119. Oh great... by Captain_Chaos · · Score: 3, Funny

    By the way, if you haven't yet, if you use mozilla, you need to check out about:mozilla

    Now it'll be slashdotted in no time...

  120. Why I prefer top-posting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because if an exchange of messages is all bottom posted, I open up the message, and it shows me all the previous conversations, and I'm like "yeah, yeah, whatever, I REMEMBER all this." And I have to PAGE DOWN, PAGE DOWN, PAGE DOWN, PAGE DOWN to where the sender wrote his short little "Yeah, that sounds good" or whatever.

    It's like if you read Google Groups. If everybody bottom posted, all of the content would be hidden behind the "read the rest of this message" link. Everyone probably agrees that this is wrong. So, if you're going to include the entire previous message, I think top-posting is better. But if it's a detailed response to a complicated message, and you want to do a line-by-line discussion, middle-posting would be better. Bottom-posting... doesn't make sense to me in any case. I mean, I really don't want to have to read "you said this, and here's my reply." I'd much rather read "Here's what I have to say (this is in response to when you said..." Because most of the time, I REMEMBER what I already said. So including it right at the very beginning so that it's the first thing I read is very annoying. I KNOW what I said. I don't need it repeated to me. But if I forgot, then I can PAGE DOWN, PAGE DOWN, PAGE DOWN, PAGE DOWN and remind myself.

    Otherwise, it's "ok, yeah, yeah, I remember I send you this. PAGE DOWN, PAGE DOWN, PAGE DOWN, PAGE DOWN. Ok. Now let's see what you have to say."

    So I think if you're going to include the whole message, you should top post. I think I already said this, but hey, I've got all night, and I guess I'll just post anonymously so that people won't get mad at me personally for rambling on and on and repeating myself. So, you might argue "Well, you shouldn't be posting the whole message anyway!" Well, what about when you have to email customer service because the porno dvd you ordered doesn't play, and you want to return it, and then they email you back with your entire message included, and they have in their signature "please include any previous correspondence in your correspondence" or someting like that. THEN what do you do? Well, you look to see if they top posted or bottom posted, and you do the same thing. Would you prefer that they top posted or bottom posted? Well, I think I've already beat that dead horse already. But I bet you'd want their message right up front, and not have to re-read what you just wrote. It's sort of like hearing your voice on a tape recorder. It sounds funny. People don't like to hear themselves on tape recorders. I think it's the same thing. So, be polite, and include people's message at the BOTTOM by posting ON TOP. That is, if you must include it at all.

    So that's the way I see it.

    Yeah, if I were customer service, getting hundreds of hundres of e-mails a day from people who's porno DVDs weren't playing or something, I'd probably want their entire previous correspondences included, because with all the different mail programs people use, who knows if threading will happen, or what? They probably need the whole message included. And maybe for them, they DON'T remember what they said. Or what you said. And they have to remind themselves by reading the included messages. But who's the boss? The CUSTOMER is the boss. The customer should have his way, and the exchange of e-mails should be TOP POSTED, because the customer only has one discussion going on about his one bad porno DVD. The online porn dvd store should accomodate the customer, and not force the customer to accomodate the porn store by bottom posting, even though that's what the porn store might prefer.

    And it works like my desk, too. All the new stuff is on top. Later, it gets buried by newer stuff, so the newest stuff is always on top. Important stuff has a way of filtering up and bubbling it's way to the top, but otherwise the newest stuff is on top. The less important stuff sinks to the bottom, where you can forget about it. So it seems only natural to me to have new stuff on top.

    It's like m

  121. Kill Flash Ads by Plugh · · Score: 2, Informative
    If you haven't yet, RUN, DON'T WALK to http://prefbar.mozdev.org/ and install PrefBar.

    "Kill Flash" is the most sexy, beautiful button ever made. Thank you, PrefBar guys. You rock.

    For those who don't know: this little button removes the last annoying traces of advertising from the web, and IMHO is a necessary addition to the wonderful standard Mozilla capabilities "Block unrequested pop-ups" and "Block Images from this server"

    1. Re:Kill Flash Ads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's also flash-click-to-view, which doesn't show you flash objects until you click on the big read square labeled "flash: click to view". Very handy for those of us who like to see some flash parody from time to time, but hate it when flash-based ads get shoved down out throaths.

    2. Re:Kill Flash Ads by juhaz · · Score: 1

      AdBlock is even better. You can't live without it.

      It supports blocking based on pattern, not merely a server like the built-in ones, and it blocks not only images, or flash but almost everything.

      All crap included using <OBJECT> or <EMBED> tags (including but not limited to flash)? You bet.
      IFrames? Yup...
      Scripts? Got it.
      Applets? Used to, but disabled in current builds due to a bug, probably will again after it's fixed.

      It also prevents them from even being downloaded so not only your eyes are saved but bandwidth too. Works on both SeaMonkey and Firebird.

  122. Re:Mozilla and popups by catbutt · · Score: 1

    It is bug #18808. Doesn't look like anyone is working on it, but I cast a vote for it.

    I hope it gets done for Firebird, since when I use "mozilla" normally that is what I use. Should that be filed in a completely different place?

  123. Re:Offtopic... by cujo_1111 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    But if the chip is producing more heat than another processor and performing the same as a cooler chip, I would say that the AMD chip is not as efficient. The heat is wasted energy.

    Loony time:
    Maybe AMD could make their chips run hotter and convert some of the heat back into electricity with little steam turbines...

    --
    If I point out that you are incorrect, making me a foe does not make you any more correct.
  124. Does anyone else... by anethema · · Score: 3, Interesting

    NOT want to have to install 3-4 seperate programs for all the stuff mozilla has? I occaisionally use mozilla composer for quick stuff, I use mozilla mail for my email, and I use mozilla for my browser.

    I like the mozilla preferences digalog, and i like the tools menu that has all the image, popup, and cookie controlls right there in a quick easy to use place.

    Also, its quickstart is very nice and its interface has some subtle differences from firebird..most of which I like better.

    I'm not saying discontinue firebird, since sometimes you just want a nice browser, and this is great.. But why discontinue the suite?

    Kind of like MS office, I dont wanna have to install all the programs seperate..its nice to just have them all together, and select what I want.

    Any thoughts?

    --


    It's easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.
    1. Re:Does anyone else... by Tin+Foil+Hat · · Score: 1

      I'm predicting that the Moz suite will never be dropped, despite what the roadmap says. My reasoning is that open source developers work on what they want to regardless of what anyone else says. If developers want to work on the Moz suite instead of Firebird then that is exactly what they are going to do.

      So, I think we are going to always have both products. I just hope that they don't grow so far apart that they are no longer really related.

      --
      No matter how many of my rights are taken away, somehow I still don't feel safe. -Frigid Monkey
    2. Re:Does anyone else... by anethema · · Score: 1

      I hope you are right :)

      --


      It's easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.
  125. Runs great under WinME by Foggiano · · Score: 1

    I've had version 1.6 running for several hours now and I haven't had any problems. v1.5 and Firebird would randomly lock up my system, but that probably has more to do with the OS than the browser. Hopefully this will be a permanent replacement for IE on my home computer.

  126. Where's the xft build? by jwr · · Score: 2, Flamebait

    Well, that's all good and great, but where's my xft-enabled build? I'm amazed people still use Mozilla without antialiased fonts...

    Having just installed Mozilla-1.6 without xft, it just looks plain ugly.

    1. Re:Where's the xft build? by Gudlyf · · Score: 1
      Just found these, which I imagine should get updated soon.

      Other than that, check for a "contrib" directory to appear on the Mozilla FTP site

      --
      Trolls lurk everywhere. Mod them down.
    2. Re:Where's the xft build? by rmohr02 · · Score: 1

      My personal recommendation would be to get it from a package provided by your distro. Otherwise, compile it yourself--it's not as hard as it seems. The Mozilla Detailed Unix Build Instructions go through everything you would need to do. Just add 'ac_add_options --enable-xft'. And while you're at it, 'ac_add_options --enable-default-toolkit=gtk2'.

    3. Re:Where's the xft build? by lunar_legacy · · Score: 1

      You may find xft enabled builds HERE .

    4. Re:Where's the xft build? by Gudlyf · · Score: 1

      FYI, they are now available where I originally said, here.

      --
      Trolls lurk everywhere. Mod them down.
  127. Re:Offtopic... by j-pimp · · Score: 2, Funny

    Auctually, being that the heat is considered "waste," Using the wasted energy to reduce heating costs is the best way to go.

    --
    --- Justin Dearing http://www.justaprogrammer.net/ We're just programmers.
  128. I prefer the suite for a couple of reasons ... by timothy · · Score: 1

    I don't use the Mozilla mail component generally. (I have with the account that came with my dialup ISP, but I don't generally use that.) However, I still prefer the suite, because ...

    a) I like the default look better. This is the least important reason, but I prefer Mozilla Modern to the default Firebird look. Yes, there are skins available for both to make this a picayune complaint / compliment, but Hey, YMMV :)

    b) OK, it's another one that may strike you as trivial, but since I use the browser a lot, it builds up to a moderately important point to me: I prefer to search with a drop-down from the URL / Location bar than from the separate search bar on the right. I guess some people (including the programmers, who do get more say than me :)) like it there, but it seems to me a needless complication. Maybe there's a simple way to squeeze this behavior from Firebird, but I haven't really tried except a glance through the preferences, where I didn't see it. (Is it possible, is it easy?)

    c) I have a few shortcuts / bookmarklets built up for Mozilla. Maybe they also work with Firebird, but I haven't investigated how or tried to move them over to Firebird. Again: perhaps it's easy, but switching's a bitch when staying feels fine :) Which I'm sure a lot of IE users say, too, but *staying's* a bitch when it's staying with a browser that doesn't have tabs :)

    d) Mozilla suite has what has become a very good IRC client (Chatzilla). Since I'm going to start Mozilla anyhow, unless I need to use DCC (which I generally do not use), I just hit control-6 and get a Chatzilla window, too.

    I keep a version of the Mozilla suite installer for Windows on my 64MB memory key, it's come in handy a few times when it was easier to borrow a connected, powered-up Windows machine than boot up my laptop.

    timothy

    --
    jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
  129. browser wars... it is true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    And so at last the beast fell and the unbelievers rejoiced. But all was not lost, for from the ash rose a great bird. The bird gazed down upon the unbelievers and cast fire and thunder upon them. For the beast had been reborn with its strength renewed, and the followers of Mammon cowered in horror.
    -- from The Book of Mozilla, 7:15


    -- paper
  130. Mozilla Visual Appeal by pipingguy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Slam me if you wish for being superficial, but Mozilla lacks the nifty drop-shadows and subtle visual cues that IE (and OSX?) features.

    I'm an "old skool" transformed-to-CAD draftsman originally trained with actual pencils, paper and a bit of artistic flair for focusing the eye on what's important, and I dislike Mozilla's lack of visual enhancements.

    I would switch to Moz immediately and permanently if it could do this (not because of the "cool factor" but because it is a better presentation).

    Have a look at www.milonic.com and see what they have been doing regarding DHTML.

    Please comment.

    1. Re:Mozilla Visual Appeal by jesser · · Score: 1

      Where are these shadows you're talking about? On menus? Form elements in web pages?

      --
      The shareholder is always right.
    2. Re:Mozilla Visual Appeal by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 0, Offtopic
      Slam me if you wish for being superficial

      Done.

      If Mozilla turns into a Hello Kitty interface where all the buttons look like frickin' candies, I'm going to hold you personally responsible.

      Example:

      Macs are fine, reliable machines, but OS X drives me up the wall. It's a computer; not play-skool. Does Mac think I'm a 3-year old? That's certainly what their programming mandate appears to be. OS X seems designed for imbeciles who need soothing, glittering toy-objects to stay interested. I'm an adult for crying out loud. Treat me like one.

      Of course, if Mozilla went that way, then you could count on it being an option, re, Firebird and its many different available themes. Now THAT is a cool way to run a browser!

      "Everybody is different. There are no two people not on fire." -SB


      -FL

    3. Re:Mozilla Visual Appeal by lunar_legacy · · Score: 2, Informative

      I suggest css Zen garden as a showcase of what can be visually achived by using standard compliant browsers(read Moz/FB).

    4. Re:Mozilla Visual Appeal by VVrath · · Score: 1

      I shudder at the thought that *any* web designer could think it's a good thing to take over my context sensitive menu.

    5. Re:Mozilla Visual Appeal by protein+folder · · Score: 1

      Yeah...and why is the search in a drop-down box? And why aren't the samples put in sub-menus--nobody wants to have to scroll a drop-down box.

      --
      Your mind is squeezed by a blast of pain!
    6. Re:Mozilla Visual Appeal by Zed2K · · Score: 1

      When you learn what it means to be an adult you'll learn that it doesn't mean everything needs to be serious and non-toy like. There is enough serious and boring things in the world. I welcome a little fun where ever I am.

      If a tool lets you get the job done and looks stylin' that doesn't mean its any less of a serious tool.

    7. Re:Mozilla Visual Appeal by juhaz · · Score: 1

      Not only does it take over the context menu, but it also pops up on middle button!

      It doesn't work for me either, it did on fresh mozilla installation but this one seems to bug, or then it doesn't like to play along with tabbrowser extensions, adblock or some other extension I've got installed.

    8. Re:Mozilla Visual Appeal by gral · · Score: 1

      I must be missing something. I just brought up the page in both Firebird and IE 6.0. I didn't see anything different in the rendering.

      --
      Scott Carr
    9. Re:Mozilla Visual Appeal by pipingguy · · Score: 1

      RE: www.milonic.com

      Not only does it take over the context menu, but it also pops up on middle button!

      One of the options on the context menu is "Disable this Menu", the disable seems to work on IE6 and Mozilla 1.5.

      Milonic's site is essentially a demo of what their menu system can do, web designers can choose to use whichever features they like - the context menu thing has to be specifically installed/enabled.

    10. Re:Mozilla Visual Appeal by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1
      When you learn what it means to be an adult you'll learn that it doesn't mean everything needs to be serious and non-toy like. There is enough serious and boring things in the world. I welcome a little fun where ever I am.

      I don't believe I said that.

      Choice is good. If you like foolish tools, then you may use foolish tools. However, I do not like to have my asthetic choices made for me on behalf of programers who think I should use foolish looking tools. I am talking here about OS X and similar 'toy' interfaces.

      An interface sets a mood, a mood affects the unconscious. Why would I want to spend hours each day with a child's interface whispering into my unconscious?

      Being an adult means having both strength and the wisdom to apply it appropriately. Believing one has strength figures here significantly. Fools and foolery rankle me because through their practice, they immasculate, producing simpering child-men who are much reduced, if not entirely negated in their ability to care for those who depend upon them.

      What kind of adult are you?


      -FL

  131. about:mozilla crashes Safari. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Neat. Maybe it's a KHTML feature.

  132. quick and fast by turbosk · · Score: 1

    http://www.mozilla.org/products/firebird/

    is it a coincidence that the web page in the demo picture has a Subaru WRX STi (which is faster- than- greased- lightning) on it? I only noticed this because i've been lusting after an STi for a looong time and can now smell one from a mile away, yes it's a sickness, no i don't want cured. I just wanna own one.

  133. Re:Offtopic... by hitmark · · Score: 1

    hmm, my intel celeron took the beating when i had attatched the heatsink but forgotten to plug in the fan wire. it only forced a reboot...

    --
    comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
  134. Re:Why the need to uninstall onld versions to upgr by m_evanchik · · Score: 1

    Shit. Does that mean I'll have to retrain adblock? will the blocking list transfer? Is that "user generated"?

  135. Re:Offtopic... by Dave_bsr · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    So does my AMD CPU(s) - but if you rip the fan off (which i think is what a majore years-old hubbub was about) the processors do die...

    --


    Who is this Anonymous Coward character, how does he post so much, and why is he always such a whore?
  136. absolute hardcore by Viper233 · · Score: 1

    hardcore? webrowser? come on... wget, ~absolute hardcore~

    1. Re:absolute hardcore by dash2 · · Score: 1

      telnet 80 slashdot.org

    2. Re:absolute hardcore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      nc slashdot.org 80

      Pure webpage stdout without telnet terminal codes.

  137. Re:But No One's mentioned the most important featu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Aren't you 1337, most people have known about it since Netscape 3. It used to change the icon as well.

  138. Re:Why the need to uninstall onld versions to upgr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
    It's possible to export your ad rules.
    1. Adblock Preferences
    2. Adblock Options
    3. Export filters
    After reinstalling, follow the same procedure and choose Import filters.
  139. Re:wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ali G is a faggot who wasn't funny five years ago when he was on Channel 4. The only reason hes "launched" his career in the U.S is because we were fucking sick and tired of the twat.

  140. Big Deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So somebody offers a nice sum for a Mozilla port and some losers show up? That's all you have? Any OSS project will attract its share of bozos.

    Still no cause to ridicule this guy for asked for the project status.

    1. Re:Big Deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Eh? I'm talking ancient history. When Mozilla was first anounced (As in, five years ago, when Netscape 4.5 was cutting edge) Jaffa and a friend announced to the world that they were going to port Mozilla to the Amiga. First it was XMozilla, then AMozilla then finally, Amizilla.

      Five years and still no port of Mozilla to the Amiga. Nice work guys.

  141. All the advanced plugins are built-in by KlaymenDK · · Score: 1

    I'm using Mozilla Browser exclusively, both at work and at home. At home I'm also using Mozilla Mail.

    The standard Moz browser has many of the advanced features built in that you'd need to install separately for the Wossnamebird (Browserbird). And since I'm running it 9-to-5 anyway, startup times are a non-issue.

    As for the email part, I come from "The Bat!" which is no less than awesome in ability and performance (it's a plaintext-only client, which is both good and bad). I haven't used an MS mail client for over 8 years (though I am (until further) running on Windows).
    I started using Mozilla Mail because it was convenient -- it's there anyway once Mozilla is in the box, and it's really quite excellent (truth be told, the only thing I miss from The Bat! is its superior filtering ability). So you see, I see no real reason to install Thatotherbird (Mailbird) because I have what I need.

    Simplicity is the word. The most features with the least fuss -- and the Mozilla suite excels at that. I hope they keep the suite alive, even when the 'birds mature.

  142. You insensitive clod! by joib · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I'm still using Mozilla 1.0

  143. Re:Why the need to uninstall onld versions to upgr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    And that's acceptable? To recreate your profile directory every time? To reinstall browser plug-ins/extensions? To uninstall the old version each time? (And yes, you will need to uninstall the old version, unless you're content to have a zillion different versions sitting on your hard drive simultaneously.)

    The upgrade process needs to be easier.

  144. MOD DOWN parent - he's a copy troll by SmilingBoy · · Score: 2, Interesting
  145. Re:Mozilla and popups by Raccroc · · Score: 1

    Not entirely true...people like to stick with that which is "familure".
    Although I use Linux almost exclusivley, I prefer to surf the web with IE over other browers. Why?

    What I do care about is the way IE handles all shorcuts/favorites as "individual" files. I've got used to being able to easily drag/drop my favorites, same them to my desktop, send them as attachments, etc. All in all, I think Mozilla, Firebird, and even Opera are better browsers, but quite handle things like I've grown used to...like I've adapted to...like I like.

    Sure, pop-up blocking is nice; however, pop-ups don't really matter to me...I don't surf many places that use them, so it's a feature I care little about.

  146. Mozilla needs new management by RoLi · · Score: 1
    I still use Mozilla 1.2 - simply because I use Mozilla only on the (few) sites that don't work with Konqueror and I have spent some time on my Mozilla 1.2 installation (installed plugins, optimized preferences) and there is no real incentive to upgrade as the newer versions (which I've tried on other computers) don't really come with anything new.

    Unfortunately, Mozilla developers live under the strange delusion that users want less features and everything as plugins. They removed MNG support and refuse to include SVG-support in the default build. (I don't care wether it's not complete. The fastest way to make it complete is to get users and developers. The fastest way to get users is to include what is working in the default build)

    To sum up, I've already given up on Mozilla in the long term. The rendering engine is still a bit better than Konqueror's, but with Konqueror getting better with each release and Mozilla stagnating (or even getting worse - see MNG support) it's just a matter of time till Konqueror overtakes Mozilla on the rendering engine, too.

    If Mozilla would include SVG in the default build, it would be a great incentive to upgrade, it would give the SVG-format a big push and SVG-development would also get a big boost.

    The problem is that Mozilla-leaders tend to follow the Mozilla-haters (who in general parrot some anti-Mozilla phrases like "too bloated") and ignore the real users.

    Users hate to download plugins, users want a browser that can read as many formats as possible in the default-build.

    The perfect Mozilla would be a Mozilla that:

    • Comes with a Java-plugin preinstalled
    • Comes with SVG-support, no matter how incomplete
    • Comes with MNG-support
    • Comes with Flash-plugin

    Except for the Flash-plugin which might not be possible for legal reasons, everything else could be done today.

    As Konqueror is getting SVG-support out of the box, I still have hope that Mozilla also includes the SVG-support it has. However I've given up on Mozilla being a leader in browser-technology. They refuse to be pioneers (see http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18574) and want to be followers. Unfortunately, Mozilla will only include SVG-support after other browsers (like Konqueror) already have it. This is really sad, because Mozilla would have the possilities to be a leader.

    1. Re:Mozilla needs new management by jsebrech · · Score: 1

      Don't assume everyone is like you. I'm a firebird user (on windows and linux), and I love the fact that it's trimmed down and I can pick and choose functionality by installing extensions. Besides, in time all extensions will install into the profile dir, which will mean you can install them as a regular user just once, and from then on every version update of firebird will reuse them (a large chunk of extensions already support this behaviour).

  147. Custom Install by superyooser · · Score: 1

    Install with the exe file (mozilla-win32-1.6-installer.exe), click the Custom button at the beginning of the installation, and select which components you want. Only the browser and composer are mandatory. I don't understand what all the fuss is about.

    1. Re:Custom Install by anethema · · Score: 1

      Thats not the point. The point is I dont want to use firebird. I know full well that i can do custom installs of mozilla.

      Its firebird that I dont want to be forced to use.

      --


      It's easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.
    2. Re:Custom Install by superyooser · · Score: 1
      Oh sorry. I completely misread what you said. Doh!

      But I think there will be a single installer available. Mozilla Firebird will become Mozilla Browser and Mozilla Thunderbird will be Mozilla Mail. Each suite component (bird) could (would?) be packaged as an xpi.

  148. Re:Mozilla and popups by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    What I do care about is the way IE handles all shorcuts/favorites as "individual" files.
    Consider that .URL files are in the Windows standard .INI format. It's surprising somebody hasn't come up with an extension to give Mozilla* an option to use .URLs instead of the Netscape bookmark file. I do know K-Meleon has this feature, utilizing an IE favorites plug-in.
  149. Re:Mozilla and popups by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's a nice browser; I tried it but went back to Firebird. The only problem I had is it modifies IE's user agent string, appending Avant Browser. The uninstaller didn't catch this. I finally got rid of that text after finding this registry page.

  150. Mail notification still doesn't work under OS X by dafdaf · · Score: 1

    Please vote for this bug. - Would be really nice to have this fancy thing calles 'newmail notification' on OS X. ;-)

    http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1946 32

    --
    To error is human, to forgive, beyond the scope of the OS.
  151. Re:Mozilla and popups by Tin+Foil+Hat · · Score: 1

    Maybe that's just the old tin-foil hat I'm feeling.

    Stop it. Unless you're a sexy geek chick, in which case go right ahead ;)

    Seriously though, you are right on the money. Most people do seem to prefer the blocker add ons, and some of them are indeed malware. It's sickening.

    --
    No matter how many of my rights are taken away, somehow I still don't feel safe. -Frigid Monkey
  152. Re:NTLM and Proxy Server by TrippyZ · · Score: 1

    >For the first time, Mozilla will work on many corporate networks.

    Not quite true, as you can still authenticate manually.

  153. Multiple tabs by Elivs · · Score: 1
    I first encountered tabs in mozilla and soon became addicted. I now run galeon- 1 "casual" window for me, 1 window for my wife, and 2 work windows in another virtual desktop. By the time I've done a google search and opened each result in a new tab (middle click -> new tab + open in background) I've often found that I have 15-25 tabs in one window, and upto 50 amongst all 4 windows. I often don't shut down galeon for weeks at a time and so tend to leave tabs around with "articles I want to finish" and sites that "I want to browse more throughly" further adding to the plethora of open tabs.


    Galeon lets you keep you tabs 1 inch wide in a column down the left or right side, as well as the more usual place under the address bar. For dozens of tabs this is much easier than along the top under the address bar. Most screens these days are wide enough to make this layout very praticle.


    Also in galeon if the browser crashes (usually due a page with flash) then on restarting it lets you either reopen all the URLs or keep them as bookmarks.


    I use KDE apps for most other tasks but these two obscure features are what stop me from moving to konqueror as my brower. Having 15-25 tabs open is a window in a pain when they are along the top as you either need to click left/right to navigate, or the tab caption becomes so small as to be useless.


    Elivs

    1. Re:Multiple tabs by SydShamino · · Score: 1

      >> Also in galeon if the browser crashes (usually due a page with flash) then on restarting it lets you either reopen all the URLs or keep them as bookmarks.

      Anyone know if this is on the list for Firebird to implement? I lost a window with a dozen tabs yesterday. This makes so much sense that I don't see why it hasn't been done.

      (Of course, it should be possible to disable this, if you don't want files with the sites you visit on the PC.)

      --
      It doesn't hurt to be nice.
    2. Re:Multiple tabs by r5t8i6y3 · · Score: 1

      please mod parent up

    3. Re:Multiple tabs by r5t8i6y3 · · Score: 1

      please mod parent up

      NOTE:
      ----

      i attempted to post the above and received this message in reply:

      "This exact comment has already been posted. Try to be more original..."

      that made me wonder about adding a feature to slashcode that would allow folks without mod points to indicate that a particular post deserves moderating.

      this could potentially make it easier for moderators to find a post that was languishing (unnoticed by moderators but noticed by the more numerous folks without mod points) in the backwater of some thread (like this one).

    4. Re:Multiple tabs by r5t8i6y3 · · Score: 1

      maybe each post could have the equivalent of a mini poll attached to it.

      something like:

      Post Poll
      ( ) Mod Up
      ( ) Mod Down

      again, this would mainly be useful in alerting moderators to posts they were unaware of.

      once aware they would moderate as they see fit.

  154. Re:Not bad - quicker access to google by Nivag353 · · Score: 1

    Why not simply enable the search icon, then to look for something on Google, all you need to do is to put your search string in the URL bar and hit the search icon!

    The above assumes that you have selected google in the preferences as your default search engine.

    -Nivag

  155. *bird is the word by dbIII · · Score: 1
    As an aside, Anybody know when Moz will officially be branched off into firebird/thunderbird components? I thought this was supposed to happen around 1.6 apparently I was wrong.
    The *bird is the word.
    From what I've been reading, more people are interested in the suite over the *birds than originally anticipated, so they'll be keeping it around for a while.
    Not everyone's heard about the *bird.

    Surfing *bird.

  156. Upgrade my browser. . ? Sorry Jack. by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1
    I finally got everything working without bugs or annoyances.

    Until something breaks, or the world changes so much that I am forced to update, I see exactly zero reason to budge and thereby risk inviting home a whole mess of new irritations. I'm not one of those blokes so bored that I actually enjoy installing new software.

    If it ain't broke. . .


    -FL

  157. Man, isn't my timing great? by spikedvodka · · Score: 2, Interesting

    yesterday I emerge rsync, and then emerge mozilla
    downloading and installing 1.5, and spend oh a few hours compiling... now this morning I wake up, and what do I find? they released 1.6 while I was compiling 1.5 /rant

    but seriously, it's good to see that improvements continue, and at a faster rate than M$ IE

    --
    I will not give in to the terrorists. I will not become fearful.
    1. Re:Man, isn't my timing great? by Junta · · Score: 2, Funny

      I suggest an addendum to your sig:
      Gentoo: But I don't mind waiting for tomorrow..

      (Not meant to be a flame, I use Gentoo too and love it and the tradeoff is worth it, but it just had to be said).

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    2. Re:Man, isn't my timing great? by Junta · · Score: 1

      I see you took my advice, awesome ;)

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
  158. RedHat 9 rpms by smartin · · Score: 1

    Can anyone suggest a good source for RedHat 9 RPMS? Mozilla.org has not had any since about 1.4 or so, nor do there seem to be any on the redhat site.

    --
    The difference between Canada and the USA is that in Canada healthcare is a right and gun ownership is a privilege.
  159. MIRRORS by FearedThought · · Score: 0, Redundant

    http://www.mozilla.org/mirrors.html

  160. Mozilla is Love by hwestiii · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I absolutely love Mozilla and run IE only to access sites which explicitly require it, such as my employers expense processing system.

    That one only seems to break on the Java implementation. It apparently requires some of the WFC classes that aren't implemented in a more generic JVM.

    Shouldn't there be some way to select the Microsoft JVM in Mozilla? I know its apostacy, but I'd like to try it nonetheless.

  161. Re:Mozilla is great, but I stopped using it today. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mosaic? Ha! You n00b! You should be using WorldWideWeb.

  162. Me: looks at Mozilla... by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    ... then looks at IE (2 desktop machines here, one where I get things done, the other runs Outlook),

    ????

    Consider you slamed.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  163. Re:Offtopic... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All temperatures are given in Farenheit cause I'm an insensitive clod.
    Come on, no self respecting geek gives temperatures in farenheit.

  164. why i dont usually upgrade by loconet · · Score: 1

    Everytime i upgrade my theme stops working (orbit). From what it says on the orbit download page, It seems like this time it's compatible , we shall see.

    --
    [alk]
  165. Re:Mozilla and popups by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The windows url files have no support for bookmark groups (which will disappear eventually, so not so important) and bookmark keywords (which i use constantly). Maybe it could be hacked in. But really, what do you prefer as a bookmark format, a single file that's just cross-platform html, or hundreds of tiny files in a windows-only format?

    IE diverged from the bookmarks.html standard that existed before it for no good reason other than to be different. That was a dumb decision. It's not mozilla's job to support dumb decisions after the fact.

    From the perspective of those who know browser history, bookmarks.html is the standard, and IE is the stubborn one refusing to use it, not the other way around.

  166. But the real question is by Beek · · Score: 1

    Will there ever be another release of Camino?

  167. Re:But No One's mentioned the most important featu by mlefevre · · Score: 1

    Is it really only because it's too scary for people? The implementation details are possibly scary (and if not, then boring) to most, but stuff like "10% improvement in laying out web pages" isn't.

    My impression that it's more because when release note folks are looking through a big list of bug summaries for bugs that have been fixed, they understand things like "about:about", but not stuff like "XUL style attributes should use recycled CSS parsers" or "remove nav4algorithm code in nsStyleUtil.cpp".

    I'm sure cool changes to the core engine could be added to the release notes if someone who understood the core engine stuff wrote them up in English and pushed them at the right person at the right time (or they could be added after the release notes are initially published...)

  168. Re:Offtopic... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is old. It's a known fact that Opterons / A64s run notably cooler than P4's / Xeons.

  169. process space by stuntpope · · Score: 1

    When they get it where multiple Firebirds can run each in their own process, I'll be happy. (someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I saw this request on their bugzilla, with it being low priority).

  170. Re:But No One's mentioned the most important featu by iceT · · Score: 1



    OK.. so, what IS about:bloat? It just generated a blank page for me...

    --
    -- You can't idiot-proof anything, because they're always coming out with better idiots.
  171. Re:But No One's mentioned the most important featu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Using Netscape 7.1, the prophecy reads:

    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)

  172. Re:But No One's mentioned the most important featu by jdavidb · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Biblically, Mammon means money, so I wonder if they're saying that those who were in the business only for the profit motive cowered in horror.

  173. Re:Offtopic... by juhaz · · Score: 1

    AMD chips are no hotter than Intels and deal with it just fine.

    Go troll somewhere else.

  174. Well mozilla.org is up but.... by tvh2k · · Score: 1

    ...the forums are down. Too bad, I was looking for an update on FB 0.8 (due out in Mid-Dec).

  175. I have a mirror... by Koldark · · Score: 1

    I have a mirror on my site. Here is the direct link to the files.

    --
    Mike http://thenextgenerationofradio.com
  176. Does this mean Thunderbird should be updated soon? by skrysakj · · Score: 1

    It looks like two or three changes were done to the Mail portion of Mozilla, so I hope Thunderbird comes out with a new version soon and includes those changes. Has anyone heard anything remotely related to that?

  177. Opera is still better than Mozilla by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    IMHO, I think that Opera is the finest browser for any platform. Opera is tighter code-wise, has better spam fighting options with M2, and overall is a better choice for total-control browsing.

  178. That's funny, where in IE do you set this? by Ayanami+Rei · · Score: 1

    I mean really.

    Never mind that `mozilla' is a shell script anyway, which lets you set the TMPDIR for anyone who uses it on said system.
    I don't see the problem.

    --
    THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
    1. Re:That's funny, where in IE do you set this? by juhaz · · Score: 1

      I don't know where I want to be saving my downloads a week after I've started Mozilla.

      And I shouldn't need to. They've got UI for that, you get a file selector and tell it where to save the damn file. Save it there, why, oh why, does it need to go trough TMP?

      If there is one goddamned stupid feature they should NOT have lifted from IE, this is it.

  179. Done that (well, almost) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about (El) Camino?

    That's Chevelle based.

  180. Insta-Crash enabled? by xrayspx · · Score: 1

    Am I the only one who cannot enter any text into anything without locking the browser and having to kill it? If I launch the browser, it launches fine, click inside the URL field, locked. Put in a URL as a command line argument, comes up fine, hit something that has authentication, click in the auth dialog, locked. Bring up a site with a form (slashdot), browser launches, click in the search form at the bottom, locked.

    What up with that? I assume there's some xft/aa checkbox somewhere?

    I want to like it!

  181. Re:about:mozilla by TerraAlien · · Score: 1

    Thanks a lot! Clicking on that link just crashed Safari, you insensitive clod!

  182. A bit belated but... by C.Batt · · Score: 1

    Thanks for that link. That's a nice collection of bookmarklets.

    --
    -- All views expressed in this post are mine and do not
    -- reflect those of my employer or their clients
  183. Still .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sluggish ?
    Firebird is, and Mozilla-1.5 sure is.

    This nice things from Mozilla are quite good, but I can't work with that slowness.
    I would really like to see them improve this, that would be awesome :)

  184. Re:Mozilla and popups by amembleton · · Score: 1

    The windows url files have no support for bookmark groups

    You could just use a directory to store a group of bookmarks.

  185. hmmm by XO · · Score: 1

    well, this has been in since 1.3, and needs to be fixed.. the mail reader bombs on any mail server that doesn't comprehend the CAPA POP3 command to find out authentication security methods..

    *sigh*

    --
    "Champagne for my real friends - and real pain for my sham friends!" http://ericblade.postalboard.com/
  186. When Mozilla is going to be stable? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't tell me Mozilla is stable.
    Mozilla IS unstable, there are many bugs not fixed, and they even have a patch!!!

  187. Re:Firebird should be prepackaged with ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Firebird should be prepackaged with various popular plugins like Flash and Shockwave.

    I disagree! There are only two known uses for flash: Those annoying "whoompa whoompa" pump-em-up intros. and Zombo.com

  188. BitTorrent Links by MrDingusMcGee · · Score: 1

    Leave your windows open, blah blah blah...

    Windows:
    Windows Installer Torrent

    Linux :
    Linux Installer

    --
    My Sig is Sauer.
  189. A new Mozilla every week? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why don't they do a quarterly release instead, at the very least

  190. Re:Not bad - quicker access to google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the cursor doesn't start in the search box when you open a new tab using ctrl+t. It does start in the URL box, though.

  191. Re:NTLM and Proxy Server by XSforMe · · Score: 1

    Really? I have been browsing through an MS proxy server since 1.4.

    --
    My other OS is the MCP!
  192. Great. by JVStalin · · Score: 0
    I love Mozilla. I think we've established that open source production is more efficient than a top-down approach. I guess that's why planned economies are also more efficient.

    Anyways. Now I'm becoming a cyber terrorist and am going to launch attacks on Israeli computers.

  193. Java? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I actually downloaded Mozilla when I had problems with Java on web pages while using MSIE. I think it was hushmail.com that finally prompted me to do it. And I'm glad I did so, because it seems to be a very good browser. I'd like it more if I could figure out how to get leech to work ;>


    Does anyone know, is this related to a lawsuit between Sun and MS? I seem to recall something about this, but don't have specifics. It surely doesn't seem that MSIE has a decent Java VM, but Mozilla/Firebird do seem to handle Java very well.

  194. Get Opera... by tit0.c · · Score: 1

    ...and just restore the windows when it crashes (which hasnt happened to me, except when Windows takes everything down with it)
    Wish firebird had this feature...

  195. yes, but by beforewisdom · · Score: 1
    I heard there is work on a gecko runtime engine.

    I hope that means for 2.0 that you will only have to load the common classes for firebird and thunderbird _once_ as you can with mozilla, now.

    Right now if you use firebird and thunderbird you have to wait for both apps to load all of those classes on startup. Not a good result considering the split was done to enhance performance.

    I hope that chatzilla can run as an independant app as well. Chatzilla and gaim are the nicest ( feature rich, uncluttered, self explanatory interface) IRC clients I have seen yet.

    Steve

  196. Distributing Fire and Thunder by carlmenezes · · Score: 1

    Well, I've moved from Mozilla to the Firebird and Thunderbird combination because of one great feature:
    Neither of them needs to be installed to work. You unzip them and you're good to go. Which also goes for the extensions that they support too. Install all the extensions you need, put 'em on a CD and then take 'em with you for perfect browsing from any computer - works like a charm at a uni.

    Just one little gripe :
    Could they come pre-packaged with the basic plugins? I'm thinking Flash and Java. Or maybe even a simple button saying "Click here to install the basic plugins". Or even something like when you open the browser the first time, background tabs open up with a simple "click to install" procedure for Flash and Java.

    The current "click to install" feature does not work well for Java on WinXP with Firebird for some reason - Java does not find Firebird and so does not install the plugins for it. Flash seems to work fine.

    Another thing I've noticed when trying to get some of the more technically challenged folks to use Firebird :
    1) Their first reaction is "Where is Internet Explorer?". Only when you tell them that this browser blocks pop-ups and is faster than IE is the sale made.
    2) Next, they're not used to the concept of tabbed browsing, but once explained to them, they love it.
    3) They also really love the search bar next to the address bar and the fact that they can add more "websites to search from" to it.

    So how about this? Instead of Firebird opening up with the Firebird home page the first time, how about a simple HTML page that explains a few of these features so more people can try it?

    --
    Find a job you like and you will never work a day in your life.
    1. Re:Distributing Fire and Thunder by aok · · Score: 1

      Firebird actually does have an installer, and it adds the necessary registry keys (under Windows) to allow Sun's Java to detect it for installing the Java plugins.

      Be careful with the installer for the current stablization branch for 0.8 though. The safe upgrade deletes the install directory first, and if you accidentally set the install directory to be C:\Program Files you are going to be...annoyed.

  197. killfile! by bscott · · Score: 1

    Any word yet on whether a killfile feature for the news reader will get implemented? I like XNews fine, but it'd be nice to just use Mozilla for EVERYTHING... (and reading Usenet without a killfile is just uncool)

    --
    Perfectly Normal Industries
  198. Re:Offtopic... by Mod+Me+God · · Score: 1

    Granted I'm just a desktop user and not a server admin with a room to call. I have an AMD 1900+ XP whatever (not overclocked), it is about 70oC now, under a heavy load it goes to 75oC. I have had it for around 2 years and about 10 hours/day, 300 days/year (room temp is 22-25oC, motherboard temp about 30oC). Never had a problem, speed is OK, never a forced shutdown. My processor can take the heat

    A high quality heatsink would cost more than a replacement processor.! Heat is not a problem on a desktop. Server farms maybe more of a problem, but using 1900XPs for that is a misallocation in the first place, as processes used will be differently balanced.

    --
    --

    FreeNET user? Comfortable with the adverse selection?
  199. The Birds are the way to go! by BaldBass · · Score: 1

    I am using MozFirebird/Thunderbird exclusively but more importantly, I have withnessed several my colleagues switched to Thunderbird from Outlook.

    Never thought that could happen ;-)

  200. Re:But No One's mentioned the most important featu by BZ · · Score: 1

    > and pushed them at the right person at the right time

    This is the problem. The writing of the release notes is not publicised to the developer community, so it's impossible to know either the person or the time.

    > or they could be added after the release notes are initially published

    Working on this, but sometimes this is like pulling teeth...

  201. Dumbass: "whence" means "from where" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why do I bother... That damned fool AC isn't going to see this reply anyway....

  202. problem with the birds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    they just aren't as up-to-date as the monolithic app.

    gecko-mods have to be ported, features (like text search with /) have to be ported, blah, blah, blah. in short, mozilla is bleeding-edge and *bird is trailing-edge. *bird implements the most recent STABLE mozilla features. i rarely use the stable build ANYWAY.

    i use the monolithic app because it's the most up-to-date. period. if you're pissed about load time, keep a browser window open and shoulder the resource burden. ;@)

  203. Try to Highlight Me by satanami69 · · Score: 1

    You still cannot highlight this subject in order to copy and paste yet. Maybe I should open a bug report.

    --
    I really hate Dan Patrick.
  204. EXPORT DENIED TO CUBA??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh, Open Source??

    yankee go home, embargo down!

  205. Wait kiosk vendors to come and finish SVG by axxackall · · Score: 1
    It will be enabled when it will be developed (up to the quaility it could be offcially canonicized).

    It will be developed when someone will need it enough to spend own money for own in-house devloping it and then contributed back to Mozilla's CVS.

    Money will be spent for developing it when market for SVG will be there.

    Market for SVG will be there when people will be unhappy with Macromedia Flash.

    People who use Macromedia Flash have no clue about web-technologies. And they don't pay for Flash, its runtime is free, its flash developers who have to pay for it. But they have to do it anyway as their customers (like advertisers) pay for it. And advertisers do not care either about web-techs.

    But it's not that dead-end. Kiosk developers can put into kiosks whatever they like as end-users do not hae to install anything. So, I can predict that it is a big chance that first company who will make a good donation of SVG code into Mozilla (good enough to officialize it) will be a kiosk company.

    --

    Less is more !
  206. Opera pwns all (nt) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    no text, bitches

  207. Re:But No One's mentioned the most important featu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, you DO NOT need to check it out. It's more lame than a dodo that's been kneecapped by hardcore ex-KGB snipers.

  208. Re:Mozilla and popups by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Over the Christmas holiday, I upgraded my parents (on Win98) to Mozilla 1.5). I turned on pop-up blocking, etc.

    Recently they had an unrelated problem with retrieving their email. When they called their ISP's tech support, the tech support guy was not only pleased that they were using Mozilla, he was enthusiastic. Not only are my parents happier, their ISP is, too.

    The tides are changin', me boys.

  209. Re:wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, fag means a cigarette. Faggot has the same use as in the US.

  210. What is that noise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    When SP2 comes out this year, IE will have built-in pop-up blocking and a download manager [snip]
    Well, well, well, Mr. Pot, meet Mr. Kettle. What are these noises I'm hearing from you Mr. Guy about IE getting features that were in open source browsers long before Microsoft even dreamed of putting them in? What was all this noise I kept hearing from you about how open source doesn't innovate and only copies from Microsoft?

    And you wonder why people call you a Microsoft shill.
  211. Killer tip by imtheguru · · Score: 1

    Opera Web Browser style searching in Mozilla

    Thanks

    --
    Yet Socrates himself is particularly missed.
    A lovely little thinker but a bugger when he's pissed.
  212. Re:Why the need to uninstall onld versions to upgr by m_evanchik · · Score: 1

    thanks

  213. Re:But No One's mentioned the most important featu by BigFootApe · · Score: 1

    I recall the content changed in the Netscape/Mozilla switchover. This is to what I was referring.

    Two other things:
    [1] Lose the jadedness. It's passe.
    [2] By using leetspeak in a posting, you've killed 10^7 braincells uselessly. Same for Prince hashes, cryptic ebonics, etc. It's a stupid way to show how cool you are.