Slashdot Mirror


Mozilla Releases Firefox 1.0 RC1

islandroots writes "Mozilla has finally posted the first Firefox 1.0 release candidate on their FTP servers. This could very well be the last official release of Firefox before the big 1.0 launch date on November 9th. Mozilla FTP Servers"

44 of 579 comments (clear)

  1. Who will notice? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    When we're all playing Halo 2 on November 9th! Pick another release date!

    1. Re:Who will notice? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Who actually goes to a release party for a browser? Sounds like the same group of people that have fantasy battles with foam swords at my school . . .

  2. Extensions by erick99 · · Score: 5, Informative

    After reading comments that indicate that your installed extensions will show up as incompatible with RC1, I think I'll wait. Apparently the browser has to automatically consider extensions as incompatible until authors check them or something along those lines.

    --
    http://www.busyweather.com/
    1. Re:Extensions by mosschops · · Score: 5, Informative
      How about after setting:
      extensions.disabledObsolete = false
      in about:config ?

      Since there's a good chance extensions that worked under 1.0PR will be fine in 1.0 RC1.
    2. Re:Extensions by silverfuck · · Score: 4, Informative

      I did this to get all my extensions working with one of the recent nightlies (think it was 20041026 or 20041022), and it's fine with RC1 too:

      1. Exit FF
      2. Open your extensions.rdf, held in 'extensions' under your profile directory.
      3. For each extension, change the "em:maxVersion" entry to "1.0" (from "0.10" or whatever).
      4. Save, open Firefox again, and re-enable all your extensions.

      Worked flawlessly here (on about a dozen extensions), and should work for pretty much any extension, as there were no major changes from PR to RC1, it's mostly bugfixes (except for the single window mode, obviously don't re-enable Aaron Spuler's Single Window extension).

      --
      You know you've been IMing too long when you almost say 'lol' out loud to a non-geeky friend...
    3. Re:Extensions by jez9999 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      How about the ability to sort bookmarks alphabetically? The ability to make the browser popup ALT attributes for images? The ability to copy images directly into the clipboard? The ability to switch user-agent on the fly? The ability to download with software other than the browser?

      There are a ton of extensions I use. How can you proclaim a browser's strength as its extensibility, and then have this 'don't use extensions' nonsense every time you upgrade version?

    4. Re:Extensions by mosschops · · Score: 5, Insightful

      How about making the browser more user-friendly and not requiring archaic commands in about:config?

      Unfortunately, backwards compatability can't always be guaranteed, particularly in applications under rapid development like Firefox.

      Refusing to use potentially incompatible components is the most user-friendly solution. I'd rather it did that than misbehave and potentially crash! about:config is not meant for the average user, but as a handy direct approach for power users (makes a change from editing config files, like I do in Opera).

      I do still hope that things settle enough after 1.0 that extensions won't be invalidated on every minor update...

    5. Re:Extensions by Proteus · · Score: 4, Insightful
      There are a ton of extensions I use. How can you proclaim a browser's strength as its extensibility, and then have this 'don't use extensions' nonsense every time you upgrade version?
      Firefox has been Beta, and still is. You can expect better consistency between production-release versions, but expecting that fixing bugs and refining the codebase will never break outside applications (extensions) is insanity.
      --
      We may not imagine how our lives could be more frustrating and complex—but Congress can. – Cullen Hightower
    6. Re:Extensions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Then don't try to push beta software down my throat. Don't start this campaign to get 1 million downloads for a preview release. I bet no one told their friends & family that when they download Firefox, they were downloading beta software. Oh yeah, and don't bitch when companies aren't adopting Firefox. Save all this for the 1.0 release.

  3. Should I just wait? by Dante+Shamest · · Score: 4, Interesting

    How different is this from my Preview Release? Should I download it? Or just wait until Nov 9th?

    1. Re:Should I just wait? by tsager · · Score: 5, Informative

      The (rough) changelog is here:
      http://www.mozilla.org/projects/firefox/qa/ changel og-rc1.html

    2. Re:Should I just wait? by plj · · Score: 5, Informative

      From MozillaZine:

      Asa Dotzler writes: "Today we have our first Firefox 1.0 candidate builds available for testing. You can get these test builds from FTP. If you've already downloaded 1.0 PR (the "feature complete" preview) and you're not really interested in testing and bug reporting, then you should probably stick with 1.0 PR for a couple more weeks and upgrade when we release the official Firefox 1.0.

      --
      “Wait for Hurd if you want something real” –Linus
    3. Re:Should I just wait? by peterprior · · Score: 4, Informative

      Correct url without space and clicky for lazy people is here

    4. Re:Should I just wait? by Jugalator · · Score: 4, Informative

      How different is this from my Preview Release? Should I download it? Or just wait until Nov 9th?

      Among the largest changes are:

      - Tabbed browsing preferences, see "Advanced" panel in Options.
      - Several bug fixes to the new find toolbar.
      - Browser migration improvements.
      - Security fixes, such as an important fix to the problem with inactive tabs able to grab input focus.
      - Maybe a dozen crash fixes, some being among the most commonly reported crashes.

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
  4. First Post by goldsounds · · Score: 5, Funny

    ... with Firefox 1.0 RC1 It counts for something, doesn't it?

  5. Java Update Bug by DrunkenTerror · · Score: 4, Informative

    Be aware, there's some sort of Java bug with the application update mechanism. There is a bit of a thread here.

  6. Gonna wait by JasonEngel · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I've used each version of Firefox (or whatever their earlier names were) since 0.7. I am on PR1 now, or whatever the version label is. Oddly, I feel compelled to wait and not try this release candidate. I know the date of the planned 1.0 release and for some reason knowing that has me thinking it's perfectly ok to wait until then.

  7. Of course they did. by base3 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I just installed 1.0PR and got everything just the way I wanted it, including a recalcitrant Java terminal emulator working. Ah, well, price of progress, and off I go to do it all again!

    --
    One CPU cycle wasted on digital restrictions management is ONE TOO MANY.
  8. Will it support by pommiekiwifruit · · Score: 5, Insightful

    this dodgy website. I am using 1.0 RC1 at the moment and it often renders this site very badly, hiding the text in negative-X land. Perhaps I should have stuck to internet explorer, which this site is obviously designed for.

    1. Re:Will it support by barcodez · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's really annoying I know. A workaround is to do ctrl++ then ctrl+-. So control and the plus key followed by control and the minus key.

      I never gotta the bottom of whether it's ./ or FF fault. Anyone know?

      --

      ----
    2. Re:Will it support by Edgewize · · Score: 5, Informative

      Here is a short javascript bookmarklet that fixes table rendering. To prevent Slashcode from mangling it, I've inserted some linebreaks. Condense it back into one line and then use it as a bookmarked URL; whenever you select it, it will fix all of the incremental-display bugs on the current page.

      javascript:(function(){
      var s=document.body.style;
      var x=s.display;
      s.display='none';
      s.display=x;
      })( )

    3. Re:Will it support by tsager · · Score: 5, Informative

      The bug is fixed in trunk. But unfortunately the fix won't make it for Firefox 1.0 as the merge of the two source trees will only be made after release (due to need of excessive regression testing).
      Bug about the issue is here:
      https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?i d=21752 7#c108

    4. Re:Will it support by eyeye · · Score: 4, Insightful

      More annoying is slashdots multiple comment pages.

      Does anyone read past the first page - the following pages contain mostly comments you've already read.

      Or has it been fixed now?

      --
      Bush and Blair ate my sig!
    5. Re:Will it support by Jugalator · · Score: 5, Informative

      this dodgy website [slashdot.org]. I am using 1.0 RC1 at the moment and it often renders this site very badly, hiding the text in negative-X land.

      Fixed in the trunk builds, and will therefore be in all Firefox versions after Firefox 1.0 Final.
      This is Bugzilla bug #217527.

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
    6. Re:Will it support by koi88 · · Score: 5, Funny

      I never gotta the bottom of whether it's ./ or FF fault. Anyone know?

      How dare you. It's never Mozilla's, FF's or slashdot's fault. Stick to the usual suspects, please:
      • Microsoft
      • George Lucas
      • patent attorneys
      • SCO
      So if you run Windows, it must be Microsoft's fault, if you run Linux, it's SCO's fault (the code I borrowed from them is incredibly buggy).
      If you use BSD, it's because BSD is dying.
      If you use Max OS X, either George Lucas' ruined it or some patent attorney is to blame (I'm not sure on the last one).
      --

      I don't need a signature.
  9. I'm running it from debian unstable by da5idnetlimit.com · · Score: 4, Informative

    "Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20041026 "

    and you are right, some extensions don't work anymore (I had "browsertime" not working), but all the others I use seem fine (download manager tweak, translation panel, user agent switcher, dictionnary search)

    On the other hand, so many things that were working only so and so are now working again ..(search the web is one, opening an url you highlighted in a new tab is another...)

    So if you are not THAT dependant on ALL your extensions give it a try... also that way you can mail your extension wrtiter and get them/help them to fix that compatibility problem...

    --
    It takes 40+ muscles to frown, but only four to extend your arm and bitchslap the motherfucker
    1. Re:I'm running it from debian unstable by pipingguy · · Score: 4, Funny


      ...dictionnary search.

      That was funny.

      Firefox still sometimes effs up Slashdot's rendering. Or is it the other way around?

  10. Not truly a "release candidate" by Edgewize · · Score: 4, Informative

    This "release candidate" is really just an interim release between 1.0PR and 1.0 final. The Firefox team knows that there are still significant bugs that must be addressed before 1.0-final. See The Burning Edge for a small taste of what's been fixed since 1.0PR, and what is still left to do.

    A word of caution: there will be significant bugfixes between now and the final release, but there may or may not be automatic update notifications. If you decide to install this on the computers of your friends and family, make sure to upgrade them again later ;)

  11. MOOX builds of Firefox RC1 by EvilMonkeySlayer · · Score: 5, Interesting

    See http://www.moox.ws/tech/mozilla/
    It's firefox and Thunderbird compiled specifically for processor architectures. (they have slightly better performance than normal Firefox)

  12. what does this mean? by nighty5 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Its a bug release - ala no new features.

    Keep those bug reports coming!

    "This is a rough changelog for the RC-1 release. It's probably got a few bugs on it that aren't actually fixed and it's certainly missing a few bugs that were fixed, but it should give you a pretty good idea about most of the 250 or so bugs we've fixed since the Preview Release."

  13. Actually, the French already HAVE halo2 by koi88 · · Score: 5, Funny


    ...if I remember a previous story on slashdot...

    And don't underestimate the power of a hard baguette.

    --

    I don't need a signature.
  14. Re:Security still an issue! by A+beautiful+mind · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Thing is, this is a GOOD THING (TM). The Mozilla foundation is trying to weed out the bugs now, the security bug hunting contest, etc should ring a bell . They fixed more than 250 bugs, blocking the 1.0final. Its better to make things work now, than to break things later. Anyway the NYT ad is about FF 1.0 FINAL, which should not have any serious security problems (look at the Burning Edge for bugfixes. There are other reasons that why IE shouldnt be compared to FF aswell, including M$ policy about what is considered a "vulnerability" and a "security issue" and that IE is not actively developed now for four(!!!) years. Its quite bad that there are serious bugs in IE at all(!!), remember they had four years to weed those out. Just my $0.05 :)

    --
    It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
    Be yourself no matter what they say
  15. Love Firefox, hate extension system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I really enjoy using Firefox, it's a real breath of fresh air after years of IE window opening, cluttering the taskbar and having to deal with popups wasting my time. The only beef I have is the extension system, why is it organised that way?

    Extensions

    Are difficult to install for my family, who simply don't understand or trust the process.

    Often incompatible with latest releases, preventing me from upgrading for months

    Incomaptible with each other

    Can cause problems EVEN if deemed "compatible", and often even uninstall fo extension does nothing! Have to reinstall fire*! This is my biggest annoyance, Adblock broke the downloading progress bar, then tabbrowser extensions ruined my cookies settings. All too often I feel like the extensions are like a house of cards piled up, and I'm hesitatant to even install a new theme in case they all fall over and I have to install them all over again, fingers crossed.

    Really, the whole extensions system is a mass of incompatabilities, conflicting requirements, errors and security dubious sources. I'd prefer any bloat to that!

  16. Re:Security still an issue! by rdc_uk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ask yourself these 2 questions about FF and then IE...

    How many times have you heard (directly) of someone's machine being infested with 'sploits and spyware through that browser?

    How many times have YOU found something slightly suspicious on your machine due to that browser?

    Which browser came out as "less secure"?

    Security flaws are One Thing, actual in-use live exploits of vulnerabilities are Quite Another.

    Plus;
    get FF backdoored, browser fucked.
    get IE backdoored, COMPUTER fucked.

  17. Potential security problem with extensions? by hkmwbz · · Score: 5, Insightful
    A discussion in the MozillaZine forums raises an important point about potential security problems when using extensions.
    "What happens when one of those authors goes bad? We are so used to installing these extensions we really never give it a second thought, especially upgrades. verson 0.5 of ACME extension does what we want so yea lets install 0.6 clickerty click. We probably install more extensions than we ever clicked "YES I WANT A DIALER" button in IE. Isnt this a huge community driven security risk."

    In a nutshell, one is worried that the UMO (update.mozilla.org) staff does not have the resources to properly scan all extensions and extension updates for malicious code. And even if you do check the extension when submitted, the author may add an update later with malicious code, and then Firefox installations all over the world may get infected.

    Currently, they may be able to handle the task, but if Firefox manages to gain even more popularity, one can probably expect even more submitted extensions, and with a larger user base, it becomes a tempting target for crackers.

    Fortunately, the discussion in the MozillaZine forums seems to result in a lot of nice ideas about how one can handle this, but it might still be something one needs to keep in mind.

    It would be sad if Firefox was hit by security problems with extensions similar to how ActiveX has been a problem in Internet Explorer.

    Perhaps Firefox's growing popularity will lead to more donations, of which some money can be used to hire staff to really make sure that UMO is not used as a tool to spread malware?

    --
    Clever signature text goes here.
  18. I don't get it, what is so great about FireFox? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative
    Firefox (or Phoenix or Firebird) was originally started as a lightweight web browser, presumably in response to concerns about what I'll call proper Mozilla (i.e. the suite) bloat.

    It now seems to implement everything that the Mozilla Browser does, and I don't really find it any faster than the Mozilla Suite, and I like the integrated mail client (which has great search, spam filtering and other facilities).

    Some people object to using the suite if they don't use the mail client, but really, come on, it's taking up only a few MB on your hard disk. Get over it!

    If you do use the associated Thunderbird mail client then you're actually using more memory as the GRE (Gecko Runtime Environment) is not yet sharable between different processes.

    Plans like putting a full page ad in the New York Times for FireFox seem a bit crazy to me. What about the mail client, IRC client and forthcoming calendar? Advertise once there's a whole suite, and even then not in newspapers!

  19. Testing release... by ganiman · · Score: 5, Informative

    Right off of the spreadfirefox.com website:

    a note to SFX community: This is a testing release. This is not a product release. We're not pushing this release on our PR users. The majority of PR users should stick with PR until 1.0 ships. This is a testing release and we don't need everyone downloading it, just the folks that want to be involved with testing and bug reporting. Please don't evangelize this release or start pushing all your friends and family to upgrade. Most of them should wait until 1.0 in about two weeks.

    Tsk, tsk, tsk. Because someone trolls the web all night waiting for Mozilla to release another version of Firefox, they get rewarded with their in lights on the front page of slashdot. Did you wonder why it's only on the FTP server and not advertised on the web site?

    --
    geek n performer who performs morbid or disgusting acts, as biting off the head of a live chicken
  20. Hey guys, things are looking up! by Loco3KGT · · Score: 4, Informative

    I thought this was super neat. I went to Dodge's website - www.4adodge.com and started to price/build a new car. I got a popup saying "Your browser is not officially supported." Before I started cussing like a sailor I continued reading and it say "If you would like to continue, press OK. Otherwise, press cancel." I couldn't believe. Someone had the state of mind to let me keep going at my own risk. It was unbelievable.

    --
    Blessed be he who reads this post, Cursed be he who tells my boss.
  21. Re:Actually, we're already playing the French vers by Dot.Com.CEO · · Score: 5, Informative

    There was this little thing called "resistence" that the French had. You know, they were actively fighting against the armies occupying their soil and helping UK and allied troops with intelligence on how to hurt the Germans. They also forced the Germans to have a very large military presence in France in order to keep the peace....

    --
    Mother is the best bet and don't let Satan draw you too fast.
  22. Re:Actually, we're already playing the French vers by kid_wonder · · Score: 4, Insightful

    First, I am an American.

    if the other Allies hadn't "rescued" France during WWII, they most certainly would have lost everything.

    You know, there was this little thing called the revolutionary war, and if the French hadn't "rescued" us we'd all be eating fish & chips and biscuits.

    Get some perspective, and a bit of an education before you blurt out lines you've heard other idiots use.

    --

    "Oh, you hate your job? There's a support group for that, it's called everyone, they meet at the bar."
  23. Pop up blocker broken by Espectr0 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Some sites are now doing something different with the popups, that fools every pop up blocker out there.

    Try http://astalavista.box.sk/ for a sample

  24. Re:Actually, we're already playing the French vers by useosx · · Score: 4, Informative

    Not to mention helping the U.S. win the American Revolution.

  25. Re:Actually, we're already playing the French vers by theshowmecanuck · · Score: 5, Informative
    I'll bite:

    Read your history schmuck. Louis XVI was King of France during the American Revolution. He started helping in 1775 (that's right, before 1776). So the French had everything to do with it. Since it put such a financial strain on France, helping the Americans with the American Revolution may ultimately have been a contributing factor in the French Revolution and Louis XVI's death.

    At the time of the American Revolution Napoleon was just starting military school. He didn't start fighting any battles till the late 1790's.

    As well, since it seems you probably didn't hear about it, Napoleon was French. In fact, he was the Emperor of France, but that wasn't until 1804. He was kicked out in 1814 and tried for a come-back in 1815, and failed at Waterloo. He died (suspected poisoning) in his prison on St. Helena in 1821.

    France has won many wars. That is why there are so many French or former French territories around the world. Get your hillbilly ass off the moonshine or meth or whatever you are smoking, and actually learn what you are talking about.

    You are probably a troll, but I had to say it anyway.

    --
    -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
  26. Re:Actually, we're already playing the French vers by asoap · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I've always wondered what history books would be like if you could pickup the US off the globe and pick up France off the globe and swap the two. Would the US have defended itself when it was attacked by the shock and awe... ugh I mean blitzkreig. (sorry those two are just so interchangeable) When the nazi regime was sweeping across Europe, and you see country after country fall, and you know if you defend your borders, you know you are just going to die. Would the US defend itself? Or do you let the nazis in and then fight a Guerilla war? Kinda like what is happening in Iraq? Or are the Iraq fighters cowards because they are not using there crappy guns against US laser guided cluster bombs? Or is standing up against horrible odds to die for no reason is the smart thing to do.

    I love how the US picks on france's lack of courage, and this is from a country that put off entering the war until they were finally attacked on their own soil.

    Then again, I'm just a troll.

    -Derek

    --
    Treat me like a marketing stat, and I'll treat your movie like a series of ones and zeros