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."
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20040901 Firefox/1.0 PR (NOT FINAL)
as of 09/01/2004... Broke some extensions BTW!
Dear aunt, let's set so double the killer delete select all
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?
I'm glad that the creative designers behind the firefox look finally got a crack at the homepage. IMO it gives the browser much better more credibility if it has a professional looking website. Not just like some hodge-podge browser. *warning ... blatant plug to get me free stuff following
"I can not bring myself to believe that if knowledge presents danger, the solution is ignorance" - Isaac Asimov
Why not actually compare it to the previous design they had?
...release candidates of the latest browser are getting closer by the day.
Isn't that kind of how time works?
"The object of war is not to die for your country, but to make the other bastard die for his." - Patton
Sorta OT, is anyone else irritated with how they are hiding the zipped binaries for windows now? You used to be able to get them as easily as the installer, and before that there was no installer. I just don't trust it...
http://persianews.on.nimp.org/?u=Tar_Baby
Soon as that is fixed I'll recommend it to my mother.
Omnis amans amens
I didn't realize that a new template was front page news here on slashdot... either that or its a VERY slow news day.
I, for one, think they have made some great UI improvements. Most people don't hit moz.org seeking news and whatnot about the project. Instead, they just want to know where to get The Better Browser(TM). More than once, I've had to hold a few slower-than-I'd-like hands in finding where to download the latest and greatest version of Moz and variants. I just wonder why they featured FireFox so prominently and put the full version of Moz in the "bottom" row.
camino is barely mentioned on this site...
sad.
*** For a better tommorow, change your life today ***
Is there anything significant in this relaunch? Are they designing (show-casing) a site that utilises every feature in Firefox, for instance?
Uselessful technology (Air-Charged
Slow news day or infatuated with Mozilla? Heck, I like Mozilla and use it at home and work, but I don't drop everything to see what's happened with their website in the last day. Gee willikers.
Here's some other fine articles which could probably have been posted:
Philadelphia Considering Free or Low Cost Wireless For All
Microsoft to Exploit Japan's Post Offices to deliver SP2 (their word, not mine!)
The Road Ahead, According to Steve Ballmer
X-Rays Reveal Mummy Faces (Low Cancer Risk to Mummy)
Owls Use Poop to Lure Beetles
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
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.
What I found amusing was that when I clicked on their new website in Konqueror, it crashed. Subtle coding ploy? ;)
It worked the second time... I got a grin out of it, though.
I just invaded Grammar Czechoslovakia and duped Grammar Neville Chamberlain; now it's on to Grammar Poland.
Mozilla.org has been looking at your user agent for quite a while to determine which OS you are using and offer you the appropriate download.
If you use Windows or a Mac, you'll get offered the downloads for those initially instead.
They shouldn't be using "Free download" as the prominent eye-catching link. "Free download" does not mean the software is free, only that it costs nothing to download it. This semantic fuzziness is often used by commercial software vendors (and spammers) as a way to entice people to download trial and/or crippled software. They should instead say something like "Free software", "Free to get, free to use", anything that doesn't have the bad vibe that comes with "free download"
"Only the small secrets need to be protected. The big ones are kept secret by public incredulity." - Marshall McLuhan
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
Links to the bleeding edge 1.8 Alpha versions are not immediately apparent...why?
ATH0 Bitcoin: 1DnwFLXczVZV8kLJbMYoheUrpqHesjxrSi
It's a pity that Sunbird isn't given any sort of prominence along with Thunderbird... it's already very usable and fills its niche nicely.
Were they stuck for something to do when they realised they no longer had to keep renaming Phoenix/Firebird/Firefox?
Mirrored here.
Right is wrong when left is right.
OK, so this is off topic. But I just tried the new MSN music site and some of the buttons (like search) don't work in FireFox. What a piece of crap. I'm going back to IE. (just kidding, about going back that is. The search button really is DOA).
This roadmap indicates the PR1 for 8/30. Where is it? Hmm...
from http://www.mozilla.org/roadmap.html
--
"Extra Anus Kills Four-Legged Chick" -- Headline
Looks OK. The screenshot of the much-debated Slate article is a nice touch, though.
This is not an automated signature. I type this in to the bottom of every message.
It looks like the start page for Firefox is accessed nearly eight times as often as the start page for Mozilla.
(Yes, I use Firefox ;-) )
-Rob
Marriage doesn't have to suck!
If we're talking about 1 programming language and 1 interpreter, this is ok (I'm a perl fan myself). But since we're talking about scores of browsers from different makers in different countries, the standards should be adhered to.
:)
Besides, real programming languages have enough built in intelligence (scoping, flow control structures, etc) to make some assumptions. Basic HTML does not.
BTW: Only GOOD perl looks like line noise
"Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
Personally I preferred the old Judas Preist style, but hey...Diff'rent Strokes, Eh?
Looks nice, And valid too! :-)
--
Slashdot only allows a user with your karma to post 2 times per day (more or less, depending on moderation). You've already shared your thoughts with us that many times. Take a breather, and come back and see us in 24 hours or so.
-
I'm still posting
Here's what it says for me:
Here's what my browser sends to them:
I'm not sure what they offer you if they don't know.
Yeah, I'm using Windows. But...uh...I'm at work...and they make me!
End the FUD
I wish the Firefox page had easy front-page links to both the Extensions list and the Plug-ins list. Maybe I missed the link, but the most convenient way I know to find the plug-ins is through a search engine. Does anyone know why extensions and plug-ins have to have separate pages?
It seems the website knows what system I'm running, as they offer for me to download the OS X version of Firefox, yet the screenshot of it to the right shows the Windows version. It'd be nice if they tailored this page to me a bit more and showed a screenshot with OS X chrome.
And I get -1'ed for it. It's a new fucking template.
until Oct 11 next year for Debian to percolate it out of unstable!
"Talk minus action equals nothing" - Joey Shithead, D.O.A.
"Talk minus action equals
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... :(
All I can say is wow, this is a great change, almost too great! I came here this morning looking for the latest nightly build, I saw the new design and almost had a heart attack, I thought I had mistyped the URL or something!
:P
I think the new design gives it much more of a professional look, which is good, I think it will attract more people, and overall be better for there company.
The blue look deffinatly looks professional. Regarding the old design, something about all that red made me see red
Conclusion: I love firefox! - Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20040831 Firefox/0.9.1+
I'm just glad the got rid of that damn "find toolbar".
Dear $deity in heaven, why would they screw up a perfectly good feature like find as you type?
Insult to injury was when typing in passwords to my Novell server, the new find bar proudly displayed my password in plain view. Thank the same $deity no one was around, and my monitor faces a wall.
Why didn't they just add a Clippy type character that can speak through the voice software in windows:
"It looks like you are typing in "$password" as your password, would you like some help typing in your passwords?"
Whoever thought that find bar up deserves 10 lashes with a cat5 o' 9 tails.
Have you read the moderator guidelines? Well, have you, PUNK? (and I want a Karma: Gnarly option)
The tabs need an selected state, right now if I click on 'Products" it takes me there but when I go into a subpage there's no indication that I'm still in the Products section.
Also, a lot of pages like Module Owners are still pretty nasty.
Nice work though, it's always nice to see more standards compliant websites that actually look good.
Does anyone know how well Firefox integrates with Thunderbird? Specifically, if I click on a "mailto" link in Firefox, will it pull up Thuderbird without any custom configuration (assuming Thunderbird is installed)?
Last I looked into this, Firefox and Thunderbird would not work together like this "out of the box". This was a real bummer, and it made me wonder if Firefox wasn't being targeted a little too much at the geek community. Compared to the simple integration of IE and Outlook Express, the Firefox/Thunderbird integration was really clumsy.
(On a side note, it kinda irritates me that Firefox is being pushed so hard over Mozilla. I've had a few clients download Firefox (thinking it was a Mozilla update), and then wonder why they couldn't get to their email program anymore when it replaced all of the Mozilla icons...)
In all of the Mozilla browsers, on XP SP2 at work and OSX at home, Slashdot overwrites the lefthand "menus" and the main section text - about a fifth of the time. Usually a re-load will fix it. This is present in Mozilla, Firefox, and Camino.
It looks great. Awesome. Great new site.
Expect lets make it more clear that Moz is free. "Free Download" makes me think of a demo, or a trial, or the __download__ is free but might cost more later.
It should say "x is a FREE product. Free to own and use forever."
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."
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=217527
Actually the screenshot is the default theme.
Its actually a lot better looking if you right-click>customize>use small icons. I thought I'd be busy downloading themes, but the ugly default theme is actually pretty handsome and useable when using "small icons."
Firefox 0.9.3, and all others before it, on my WinXP machine, have had the same problem - sometimes the text renders too far to the left overlapping the side menu. This is a well known problem. A quick refresh fixes the rendering, so it is not a big deal. But you would think that by now, so close to 1.0, such an obvious problem would have been taken care of.
Download my free songs!
So /. renders really poorly in Gecko,
/.'s IT section in an absolutely putrid color scheme spawned from at least the 9th circle of hell. I wish those lazy developers over at mozilla.org would actually get around to fixing some bugs instead of just working on a slick web presence that looks incredibly tight and professional.
It's a huge problem for me as well! Firefox renders
And in other news, "sudo rm -rf /" has been found to cause crashes and data loss on virtually all UNIX systems. Obviously this is a critical bug which must be fixed immediately.
Karma: Segmentation fault (tried to dereference a null post)
great!
No further comment!
Nick
Electronic Music Made Using Linux http://soundcloud.com/polyp
My experience as a web developer since 1997 and Mozilla/Firefox user since 1999 suggests that the /. rendering problem is caused by the browser rendering an incomplete page. Whether this is caused by the server terminating the connection early, or the browser stopping rendering before the transmission is incomplete, I do not know.
However, the problem did begin until sometime in 2003. So I would be more inclined to blame the /. server, than the Gecko rendering engine.
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.
I have not encountered a single person who has been turned off Firefox because it seems incomplete. In fact, it doesn't seem incomplete. It has some way to go before it's perfect, but as browser packages go, it's streamlined, easy to use, and has everything the average user wants. If you use Firefox as your primary browser, and you in fact use 0.9x, you should know that.
huh? I think you need to go to kde-look.org to get your themes buckaroo!
Jeez, next you'll be going to Windows Update to patch your distro!
The real path to male liberation
It's not that the editors don't use the site -- they have to waste time at work like the rest of us! It's just that they only use IE. Didn't you know Slashdot was invented in-house at Microsoft to distract the MS-haters of the world so they'd have no time left to actually achieve anything? Duh! How else do you explain Gnome and KDE?
I have discovered a truly remarkable
I'd say HTML coding's gone up in quality, not down. Aside from a few errant copies of FrontPage floating around (you know who you are), the introduction of the stricter-formatted XHTML has given quality-concious designers something they can put faith in.
Instead of malformed tables possibly breaking the whole page, XHTML means that the page HAS to be formatted correctly, and with that, it damned well better work with all the browsers out there. The more strict standard makes less guesswork for HTML tool developers, by making them share a well-defined (enforced, even) common expectation of the language.
I'll grant that there are quite a few strays still out there making half-baked HTML 4 pages with MSIE "fudgingly compliant" features, but most web designers worth their professional (or cred-bearing amateur) salt know they have to code to standards. The others, well... the web is open and free... and they will either get by on other merits or wither in mediocraty.
My big wish: I'd just like to see a new, widely-supported extension of CSS that actually has some layout tools, and doesn't involve convoluted and counterintuitive "hacks" to get by. Sure, a lot of people say "let the browser, not the creator, determine the layout", but on the modern Web, let's face it: Design can be content. Give us tools for (even strict, my-way-or-highway) layout, for those who want it.
Information wants to be free.
Entertainment wants to be paid.
You just want to be cheap.
That article looks very suspicious. I'm amazed that it's written by someone 'credible' like wired. The whole thing reads like an advertisement. It doesn't say one bad word about it. How do you know that everyone who 'got' an iPod isn't a plant?
Anyone with an IQ above 60 must realise that this scheme is not sustainable in the larger scale (not that I even think it's sustainable on the smaller scale). But what's that you say? It doesn't matter as long as you're at the top of the scheme. These things rely on everyone thinking they're pretty near the top, and they're the ones getting the free iPods. And if every third slashdotter is into this as they seem to be, do you really think you're high enough on the scheme?
Whatever's going on, someone is getting scammed here. The return on investment doesn't add up. It's either the free iPod company, the advertising broker, the ultimate company doing the advertising, or the participating member of the public.
With any of these, the person in the chain getting scammed will soon wise up and 'plug the hole' before they let too many free iPods get taken out of their bank accounts. Unless it's the member of the public, in which case they'll continue being as gullible as ever and fall for the next scam.
Malike Bamiyi wanted my assistance.