Slashdot Mirror
Mozilla.org Relaunched
mpeach writes "Mozilla Organization has launched its new Web site and it's looking a fair bit sleeker than it used to. No new product releases to go with the new look unfortunately, but, according to the Firefox 1.0 Roadmap, release candidates of the latest browser are getting closer by the day."
So /. renders really poorly in Gecko, as do a myriad of other sites.
Is that Firefox's problem for not gracefully accepting broken HTML? Or is it those web developers who write the broken HTML?
how Firefox is being plugged. It's pretty obvious IMHO from the site that Firefox has the wind in its sails so to speak, as it's offered for download (geared to your OS, nice) with a biggo font. If you want Mozilla, you have some more clicks to go. Does that mean that Mozilla will be superseded at some point by Firefox??
----- One learns to itch where one can scratch.
Try Firefox and you'll know.
Honestly. Mozilla includes everything and the kitchen sink. That's overkill for most users. As the Gnome folks learned the hard way a few good options are much more welcome than every little tidbit of configurability.
Firefox is lean, fast forward, and one tool for the job. Just what mom needs. And what I need. The features can be added with extensions, if you really have to. Most people love Firefox from day one because they "get it".
Mozillas default interface also resembles the old Netscape Navigator interface wich feels kinda old to the people that switched over to IE back in 1996.
Let's talk understatement here. You don't offer this kind of thing without a significant commitment to the package.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
While I don't agree with most of your post, I do agree that this item didn't really deserve its own article. The problem is that we don't get Quickies anymore. Remember those? One article that referred to several small items, all worthy of a nerd's attention but not important enough to warrant their own separate articles. For some reason, we don't see those anymore. I thought they were quite fun. A lot of fun's been taken out of /. lately... :(
What worries me though is that very old and critical bugs like Bug 115174 are not considered important enough as to be release blockers. For the lazy to look this up, this bug manifests in realoading a dynamically generated page in certain cases, which may result in double-charging your credit card when you have just made a purchase and simply want to save your receipt. This bug is present in both Mozilla and Firefox and has been an issue since 2002!
I have been using Mozilla and Firefox exclusively for the past couple of years and have to say that this is a PITA. I got used to it and know which sites I regularly visit are problematic and how to get around it (save as text or print to file). But a lot of users might get hit by this bug if Firefox becomes more widespread and they would rightfully be pissed.
Another problem I have is that since about version 1.3 (or earlier?), Mozilla, and later Firefox, have been unstable and crashing a lot (e.g. once or twice a week under heavy load). I don't know is this is a Linux-only issue (I only use Red Hat 9 and Fedora core 2), but they seem to have a memory leak and that's not good if it creeps into the 1.0 release. I would gladly submit a bug report for this if I only knew how to reproduce it...
I agree that Firefox is a heading in new avenues of user friendliness, but there is nothing wrong with the Mozilla Suite for its target audience.
Furthermore, there are some serious issues with Firefox (not the browser itself, but the whole movement/its existence itself):
Why can't Mozilla Mail, Mozilla Addressbook, Mozilla Composer etc. be available as simple extensions? There seems to be tonnes of nifty new extensions, but making these extensions would be great.
Also, there should be a proper way to manage extensions, which should not rely solely on the profile, which can easily be lost (at least for the stuff that are installed in the installation tree and not the profile.) I admit Mozilla Suite doesn't have it, but everyone says it sucks, so one doesn't expect anything good from it, right ;-)
Ending my dumb views. Thanks for reading.
Like the topic says, in IE I get 'Error: Object Expected'. If the site is broken in the browser people are going to be using to look at the site for the first time, what are people going to think about the browser Mozilla wants you to use?
"But I'm still right here, giving blood and keeping faith. And I'm still right here."
Not that I care, but did anyone notice that they're using some mozilla-only CSS stuff?
:D
So when an IE user goes to the site, some stuff appear to be broken (like the green box that says "Free Download" doesn't have rounded corners on IE)... Small details, but still...
On the other hand, looks very good on mozilla.
why is the latest version of firefox so hard to find for windows? all the download links are for gnu/linux! (or is this new page so "smart" that it detects what OS you are on and only print a link for that?)
From what I've heard, it's a problem with Slashdot's noncompliant HTML, not a Firefox problem. However, since /. seems unwilling to actually do anything about it (apparently the editors don't use the actual site enough to care), the Mozilla people are trying to work around it.
It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
What also doesn't make sense is why they used client-side Javascript for the rotating screenshot image, when they're already doing server-side scripting to include the latest RSS information, or why they have the screenshot as the background image for a DIV instead of an inline IMG.
It's still a lovely layout though.