Slashdot Mirror
Mozilla Foundation Turns 1
antatack writes "It's already been a year since the Mozilla Foundation was created, and it's been quite a year. The Mozilla Foundation has prospered, our products are receiving rave reviews, consumer and enterprise interest in Mozilla products is at an all time high, the awareness of the importance of choice in browser software is growing and our community remains vigorous and energetic."
This is really an amazing feat for what is essentially a volunteer group within an organization that acts as a non-profit entity. I don't know the exact status of Mozilla but I think this is descript of the actual effort. It would be remarkable for a large company, publicly funded, to do this well.
Happy Birthday!
Erick
http://www.busyweather.com/
That's easy, we'll just remove half of the functionality from Gecko.
I don't notice any speed difference, but my machines are all fairly high spec. What bugs me most about IE is the jerky scrolling, the Fox is much more even in its mouse-wheel scrolling.
Rave reviews from numerous websites, stable products, loads of publicity and all of the squeeky-clean open-source development that the slashdotters demand. It sounds to good to be true. So what's the catch? :-)
I don't really have much to say, other than "Congratulations." They've been a poster-boy for OSS, and proven that network collaboration really can result in a stable, useful, well-developed product. I wonder what new innovations we'll be praising for the 2nd, or even 5th anniversary.
:)
Great job guys, and thanks for the browser.
Like woodworking? Build your own picture frames.
Considering the amazing success of Mozilla, one can't help but wonder how long it will be before someone attempts to buy it.
So I'm curious, is that even possible? Could some big corporation just come along and buy Mozilla out?
"The dew has clearly fallen with a particularly sickening thud this morning"
Mozilla is 1 year old.
Wonder how long until FireFox turns 1.0?
What did the Mozilla Foundation do that has made Mozilla such a huge success? Maybe more to the point, why haven't other OSS projects taken off like Mozilla? Any ideas on what can be done on other OSS projects to achieve similar success?
"Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
Yeah, cos the problem with browsers these days is they just don't do enough. What we need is stuff like shell and other OS integration - that'll give Joe Netizen the experience he demands and reduce Steve Admin's headache through an order of magnitude reduction in zombies.
Isn't it time for spin off movies now?
Mozilla VS Explora!
Death match of the titans, who will survive!?
I like muppets.
I have had trouble convincing people to use the Mozilla browser simply because the name M-o-z-i-l-l-a does not "cut it"! My suggestion is for Slashdotters and Opensource lovers to redeem the Netscape name from AOL so that we use it instead of Mozilla. What do you think?
Moderators please fix the above "anti-groupthink" moderation. Pointing out realistic flaws with what otherwise might be an excellent product and flagship of the Open Source movement might temporarily damage pride, but knowing that they exist in order that they should be fixed can only be to our advantage.
My money is on either Microsoft Trying to buy it (yeah like that would go though) or AOL. If AOL tried I would fall out of my seat laughing.
Evolution or ID?
For just pennies a day, you could help IE get the help it needs to combat virii. Weekly updates will come with a picture of the browser you are supporting.... Please help.
Firefox is, no doubt about that, the best browser around.
Long live Mozilla!
It would be nice if some members at the mozilla foundation published a lessons learned paper. The things they have learned about making an OSS application successful.
I know one of the things is user interface. They have done that very well. Better than most people realize. The skins, that type of idea is everywhere from cell phones, to just about everything. Everyone likes to customize.
Evolution or ID?
I'm not putting down Mozilla, I'm using Firefox right now and have switched my wife, Mother, and my own PC's to using Firefox and Thunderbird almost across the board. I do think however you have to give credit where it's due. The massive rise in their popularity isn't soley due to the fact that they are offering a solid browser, it's also due to the fact that MS isn't.
My Tech Posts on Twitter
The cause of the crash would be the impact with the ground. It has nothing to do with IE of FF.
The Terrible 2.0s are the worst years for a foundation. The trantrums suck, all answers are 'no' and if they can see it it's going into their mouth no matter where it came from.
I have been reading a lot about FireFox (and Opera, to be fair) here on Slashdot lately. Everyone who uses one of these alternative browsers has nothing but good things to say about them, and if someone says something bad about one then they are either attacked as being MS sheep or assaulted by a series of suggestions on how to fix the situation.
My question is this: aside from the obvious security-through-diversity advantage, and the fact that the IE HTML engine is a bit on the slow side, what are the benefits of using FireFox or Opera over, say, Slimbrowser, Crazybrowser, or MyIE2? These IE-based browsers have tabbed browsing, built-in pop-up blocking, mouse gestures, and a host of other features that they probably borrowed (read: stole) from the "geekier" browsers out there. I'm not saying that the 2 advantages I mentioned aren't enough, but if I'm running a firewall and antivirus program, and I don't notice the speed difference between them, why should I switch?
There is no mod option "-1: Disagree" for a reason. "Overrated" is not an acceptable substitute. Post something instead.
I am watching Mozilla with keen interest because it is an interesting test of the security through obscurity problem. If Mozilla takes a big market share it will attract the attention of the bad guys who currently target IE. Then we shall see if open source is a liability or an asset.
"To celebrate his first year, the Monster^H^H^H^H^H^H^H Mozilla is attacking Redmond, seeking revenge and the fall of IE monopoly on Browser Market.
Microsoft already called the Power Rangers to destroy the creature."
A few months ago I got fed up of the bi-weekly exploits being discovered for IE, so I decided to give Mozilla 1.6 a try. It was awesome needless to say. I got my best friend switched over and he loves it too.
Recently I switched my mom over to use Mozilla 1.7 after discovering around 480+ spyware and trojan on her laptop.
I've tried FireFox 0.8 or 0.7 I cant remember but it was buggy and I liked the simpleness of Mozilla 1.6 better.
I still need to use IE6 for 2 things though, Windows update and Mcafee AV update both use ActiveX. Arg i hate ActiveX.
That would be right if the first poster actually had posted more than random trollage. Quite a lot of people have stated they find it faster than IE and have then given concrete examples of things they find that are faster. Just saying "I think IE is faster" is a weak argument, saying it in a trollish fashion is even worse
Mozilla 1.7 loads instantly on my PC, and I don't have "keep in memory" enabled.
-
My favourite mozilla splash screen.
Parent may be OVERRATED or REDUNDANT, but it is certainly not OFFTOPIC.
Actually firefox is the faster one. It just doesn't start rendering the page when it gets it's first byte. IE does (ever seen IE activity when pictures come loooong after text? You see text place changing then). You can modify your Firefox to behave that way if you want to, but on older computers it will just take more time than to "wait and then render".
Some tweaks here
?SYNTAX ERROR
and it's working just gr=20 ]} $}1}&..}=3Dr}'}"}[NO CARRIER]
Are you running Windows XP? Windows XP seems to do a very good job at prefetching applications that you use often. I've noticed a huge difference between it and Windows 2000 on load times of applications I use a lot. Of course having newer harddrives with more cache helps out big time also.
Reserved Word.
that is such a troll dude ... now, if they could point out what pages actually render slower (div in div, table in div, quirks mode, etc) ... then it would help
I've frequently used Firefox (and the full-featured Mozilla) on a 64MB, 166MHz Pentium running Windows 98.
It's not the fastest thing ever, but it's completely usable. Perhaps it's a little slower than Internet Explorer on the same machine, but it's really not worth bothering about. Firefox is snappy, it doesn't get stuck in endless hourglass-waving pauses, and it starts pretty quickly too.
It feels considerably faster on that PC than Firefox does on my modern iBook, where it takes an age to start and even longer to display dialogue boxes and suchlike - it's why I've stuck with Safari. Maybe there is room for improvement on the Windows version of Firefox, but I'd rather the effort went into other platforms as well.
Tedious Bloggy Stuff - hooray?
Thanks to the planning behind this foundation, after the Microsoft Empire falls, there will only be 10 years of anarchy instead of 100. In its place, an even greater (but planned) empire will replace it. That new republic will be open source.
Rumor also has it there is a second foundation, located at Slashdot End in the galaxy...
OK, here's my issues performance related with Mozilla (I'm on quite an old version now, 1.5, so maybe some of these have been fixed):
.3 seconds. I suspect it might be using a garbage collector that has been badly tuned (?).
- startup time is slow, much worse than IE + Windows desktop load time (to account for the preloaded parts of IE).
- random pauses. Mozilla seems to occasionally stop responding for about
- html editing component (e.g. mail's compose window) has serious issues with long documents; IE's equivalent component is much faster, although not as nice IMHO.
Related problems:
- memory consumption is much higher than IE.
- some operations (e.g. moving a large volume of e-mail between mailboxes) seem to tie up all open Mozilla windows while they occur, which isn't very nice.
I'd submit these as RFEs on bugzilla, but my experience is that anything of bugzilla that isn't a showstopper bug just gets ignored for 2 years.
bah, offtopic is harsh.
:D
+5 happy birthday
I started using Mozilla around release 0.5, and never had any performance problems... even on the 450Mhz P2 that I was using at the time.
I suspect that the people bitching about Mozilla performance either have 50 spyware processes running or are part of the Gentoo crowd that is seeing noticeable performance increases after recompiling GNOME for the 5th time.
Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
While I am a big Mozilla fan (and I'm posting this from Firefox) I was a little disappointed that Cello's 11th birthday was overlooked by Slashdotters on June 8th this year. Back in my youth, Cello vs. Mosaic was the hot topic of debate.
You can run Firefox from a USB stick, so you dont even have to install it on the machine you are working on.
Would be that today a v1.0 firefox release.
Electronic Music Made Using Linux http://soundcloud.com/polyp
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I have been a pretty steadfast Microsoft user (WinXP, VS.NET, Office, etc.) but recently I have started using alternatives to some of their software: iTunes, Trillian, and now FireFox.
There are two reasons to this (except in the case of iTunes, that ones because I got an iPod recently)
1. Security is better (No activeX, no hijacking)
2. Customization (I can choose the way I want my software to look!)
It may seem shallow, but I switched to FireFox because it let me make a cool looking browser.
"Here's a spoiler: You're will die alone."-Triumph the Insult Comic Dog
startup time is slow, much worse than IE + Windows desktop load time (to account for the preloaded parts of IE).
You're talking about Mozilla, not Firefox - they are two completely different products which use the same rendering engine. Mozilla is rather slow and bulky, Firefox is quite speedy and small. I would certainly estimate Firefox to be as fast, if not faster than IE.
html editing component (e.g. mail's compose window) has serious issues with long documents; IE's equivalent component is much faster, although not as nice IMHO.
Again, you're not talking about Firefox here - hell, you're not even talking about the browser.
http://blog.nexusuk.org
oh, i get it, it was a joke rofl good one man
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
How are the finance of the foundation doing ? What have they done with the money ? How many people have they kept employed via the foundation ? Who are the most generous corporate donators (so I can give them my business back) ? Inquiring minds want to know!
<em class="cheerleader"> Go Mozilla ! </em>
:wq
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I heard something about Mozilla's incompatibility with the Debian Free Software Guidelines. What's the current state of the process? Will there be Mozilla packages for Debian in future? Does the discussion on this issue still go on?
Somebody please explain.
>>All of this terrific news wouldn't have been possible without help from lots of individuals and organizations.
/.) the news is receiving zero coverage.
I hope the Mozilla team starts thinking more seriously about public relations! Considering ALLLL of the IE problems lately, the one-year anniversary of the Mozilla Foundation is cover-worthy news. Alas, (and no disrespect to
I for one, would love to help with Mozilla PR.
Perhaps SCO will come out and say that they've already own it. They've always owned it, and everyong who uses it is in violation of their IP.
Odder things have happened.
Although I have the mod points to fix the parent, I won't because the moderation was fine. Your post, however, deserver an "overrated". But because I'd like to think of myself as having standards (not to be confused with morals), I'll just reply:
;p
Bullshit! Firefox is faster than IE. If the grandparent is talking about load time: that point has been beaten to death by now. IE 'loads' faster because it doesn't. That has been done at boot time. Keep Firefox open at all times and then test speed differences.
Untill you get a clue: people with lesser standards, mod parent down!
Karma? What's that again?
Shells for IE (including AOL's monstrous dumbing down exercise) all suffer from the one common flaw. They ALL suffer from the security holes in the MSIE backend. It's just another exercise in (in)security through obscurity.
Forward the Foundation !!!! ;p
When the Fox is slow to load some page or another, I will frequently try the same page in IE because I'm an impatient bastard. Almost invariably, IE loads the site as slowly as the Fox, telling me that it's a server issue & not the browser's fault.
Pages that use Java take a hundred years to load in Fox. Period. Maybe there are settings that I've neglected to tweak, but the Java environment seems to start loading at whatever point the page in question calls it, adding Java's start time to the time it would normally take the page to load. IE wins for speed hands down in this case, but if I'm doing something stupid and can fix it easily, I'd love to be corrected here.
Tabs. Right now, I have about a dozen tabs open. Can't live without 'em. However, if I try to quickly flip from tab to tab and reload or submit or follow a link or run a script, after the third or fourth page I try to load I notice a difference of up to a full second when loading or when I even try to switch to another tab. Should Fox be able to withstand this kind of abuse? Dunno. Should I be able to reconfigure the browser to fix this too? Dunno, but I'd like to think so.
Overall, I'm very happy with Firefox in the speed department (curse you, Java-reliant pages!), and can't imagine subjecting IE to the same treatment without getting hourly blue screens. It's not a perfect experience, but it sucks infinitely less than the Microsoft alternative IMHO.
"Linux doesn't exist. Everyone knows Linux is an unlicensed version of Unix"- Kieren O'Shaughnessy
Mozilla & all its descendents is great, but more attention should be given to Konqueror, another great Open Source browser that deserves the support - or at least recognition - of the community (At last the Linux one).
It's all about having choice.
Treehugger? Treehugger... Treehugger!
...what's the Mozilla Foundation's corporate song? o/~
SIGERR: laziness exceeds quota
Has anyone at Microsoft said anything about Firefox? I'd be curious to see what they think about all this (or if it has even registered on their radar at all).
In case this hasn't been mentioned already, Mozilla 1.8 Alpha2 is now available for download.
I saif f#@$ not f*** - its fold disguised.
I use Firebird and Im a fan of Mozilla but I think it get a disproportionate amount of coverage.
I am a fan of OSS too..
Mozilla will do just fine without such padding stories. And dont forget Opera.
Here's my two performance gripes about Firefox (0.9.2/WinXP/512MB RAM/Athlon XP 2400+): 1) Absolutely horrid DHTML performance. (Bug 21762) 2) When there are more than a few tabs in a window, resizing the window is extremely slow and choppy. I suspect the browser is trying to resize all of the pages at once, instead of just the visible page.
The roots of education are bitter, but the fruit is sweet.
--Aristotle
Most of the complaints about Mozilla performance have been answered long ago - if you want something fast and light, get Firefox, download the extensions you want, huzzah. If you want a full-featured browser suite with email client and web development tools, go for Mozilla. If you are still running on a Pentium 233 and want to run the full Mozilla suite, don't complain that it's slow, you are running on last century's hardware.
It's the user interface. That's where it all begins. Mozilla and FireFox especially look and FEEL like real 'for profit' programs. Open Office and The Gimp do not... not entirely.
Let me elaborate. First off, I know that OOo and The Gimp are just as, if not more, useful, featureful, easy to use as the MS equivalents but it's about presentation. They have a very distinct 'Wal-Mart brand' feel to them.
Now, first things first, I understand that this is much easier for a browser to pull off than an office suite or drawing tools... There's simply much less UI to deal with. Still if the program doesn't make you FEEL like it is as smooth to run as MS's, it'll make the switch harder to make for joe-sixpack even when the extra features sure would make you think it's worth it.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
what's wrong with giving their workstation an address like 10.2.3.4 in a 10.0.0.0/8 subnet?
:)
Oops, sorry, I meant a 10.0.0.0/24 subnet. (404 Could not locate coffee error
http://blog.nexusuk.org
Here are a few things to clear up about the performance of Firefox. I confirmed this on an old 200MHz computer running Windows ME.
1. Boot time IS faster than IE!2. Browsing is smoother than IE, especially when opening a new window.
3. You can make it even faster by going to this tweak site
I am a big Mozilla/FireFox/Thunderbird Fan! i love Mozilla!
I didn't know Mozilla has only been around for a year!
Their software is so great, i thought they had been around for a while!
Congratulations Mozilla!
One thing that Mozilla has proved to the software community is that Open source projects can survive. And they can make a decent (if not in billions of $) profit. I think the main reason behind Mozilla's success are the developers. I am not talking about the on and off developers, but people like Asa Dotzler, Doug Turner, Christian Beisenger, Mitchell Baker, Boris Zbarsky, Brendan Eich, and the other drivers of Mozilla and not forgetting the countless others who are developing applications *using* Mozilla. Three cheers to everyone. I think the Mozilla foundation has evolved a wonderful business model for any entrepreneur looking to build software based on OSS.
I was *wondering* what magic of routing I wasn't familiar with there for a moment. :-)
May we never see th
html editing component (e.g. mail's compose window) has serious issues with long documents; IE's equivalent component is much faster, although not as nice IMHO.
IE has an HTML editing component? When did they add that?
May we never see th
but, the fundamental difference between standards and morals is that the latter is specific and the former is generic. Morals are a TYPE of standard, yet standards are not morals.
Further, while morality is implicitly about standards of behavior, the word standard does could apply to anything.
jesus, it was a fscking joke. stupid friggin' mods...*grumble*
out of curiosity, does camino work better?
I've generally found that IE is slower and uglier than the Mozilla / Firefox browsers (at least if you run the "Leave Mozilla Preloaded" stuff.) There are exceptions - Slashdot has their "break Mozilla" features, but usually I get better performance with Mozilla. There's also the issue of tabs, which saves me the time I'd spend hunting through lots of windows.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
Try using the latest Firefox instead of an old version of Mozilla. Firefox 0.9.2 seems snappier than IE to me, and even the startup time is now practically down to nothing.