Slashdot Mirror
Planning For Mozilla 2.0
wikinerd writes "The MozillaWiki maintains a number of pages on Mozilla 2.0 which reveals lots of possible new features of the popular browser. What does your wishlist include about Mozilla 2.0, and how has the release of Firefox affected your use of Mozilla?"
It has ended it.
How about a new Theme? I personaly dispise the current theme and the way the various toolbars interact within mozilla.
Also how about a way to manage Mozilla using Windows group policies?
What about a MSI package?
Mine are pretty simple.
A graphical history record (i.e. one that keeps a stored image of places where I've been, rather than a mere text description, as most give very limited info of what that particular site was).
And, an RSS reader equivalent to FeedDemon.
So I always used Moz. Personally I think the best change for Moz would be to make it less bloated, and make it totally modular. Basically make it so you can strip away most of the program and turn it into something closely resembling Firefox if you so choose.
I would like to see something like what opera has with web page magnification. Its on firefox too but you cant make images any bigger then they already are like you can with opera. But i still like FF better.
When I read about the evils of drinking, I gave up... reading.-Henny Youngman
I don't know what these new features are (not even the google cache of the page is loading) but I'll certainly be waiting for these features to make it into FireFox rather then change to Mozilla temporarily.
Of course depending on what the features were I'd probably install Mozilla to see if they cause any issues with the web design work I do.
I would like to see a build in page validator.
There is a lot of badly coded web pages out there.
It might take a rewrite of gecko by I think it is wroth it.
The normal web based validators really don't cut it
when your developing dynamic cgi scripts.
A kick-ass feature I'd like to see in Mozilla and Firefox would be to automatically break up long words/numers/urls at the edge of the screen.
Since I have a TFT with 1280x1024 resolution, I often increase font sizes when browsing the web to reduce eye strain, but that often causes horizontal scroll bars to appear when long words or urls are in the text, making it much less convenient to read, e.g. in those ubiquitous phpBB based forums.
> IE's html standard
Bad idea, then bad poorly written web pages will never get fixed!
..to the better.
Since Firefox 1.0 came out I have used the Mozilla suite for email and Internet-browsing at work while I still stick with Opera at home. Firefox is there on both locations and are used from time to time. What Firefox did do when it came along was make it clear to me that Mozilla had improved over the years and no longer required me to have a heap of other browsers installed for visiting particular webpages with picky code. So, you may say that Firefox made Mozilla shine in it's own true light.
"-Who said sit down?!"
-- S. Ballmer @ MSDC 2003.
add an, empty cache when browser is closed...
i like the cookies features, to delete cookies when browser is closed, and accept from origionating website only are all great cookie features...
I still remember the day when I tried running two separate instances of Mozilla on the same Windows machine. Neither Google nor the forums helped. Luckily I can still read C++.
Open source should mean you can look into the source if you want to, not that you have to look into the source every time you try something non trivial.
Though its not directly related to the Mozilla Suite (sorry, I tried to RTFA, but its down) my biggest wish is to see the Gecko Rendering Engine (GRE) finally split from the Mozilla/Firefox/et al code base. This seems to have completely dropped off the road map despite being discussed for months (years?).
The idea of running the GRE as a service (started at boot) and then simply launching the frontends for the various Mozilla apps (in my case, Firefox and possibly Thunderbird) appeals to me immensely.
I value "snapiness" greatly when it comes to my web browser and email apps. Having to run multiple instances of the same rendering engine is a bit of a downer IMHO. (Yes, I realise there are some benefits. Yes, I realise we all tend to have ample computing power.)
Since Firefox 1.0 I have been busy wiping Mozilla from the machines that I administer. Macs get to keep Safari as second browser. I used Mozilla since the 0.96 beta as browser and most of the time as mail client too.
Now I am a Firefox and Evolution person.
realkiwi
I've been using Mozilla for about a year now, I've used FireFox and I dont really see a reason to change, Mozilla has the plugins i use and they work without any problems and its just as fast if you ask me. I dont use the email client...but i dont install it either so bloat isnt really a problem.
Trolling using another account since 2005.
You're probably not missing anything if you prefer dedicated software. For me though, integrating web browsing, html editing, and email is just logical and one of the reasons I kept using Netscape instead of the Outlook/IE combo in my Windows days.
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
Cheeze I need this, and both Mozilla and Firefox would make my day if they could pull it off. Sites that use javascript-driven links (think Blockbuster's Netflix competitor and news sites) make it impossible to use tabbed browsing.
FOr many Mozilla users, it is just the feel of Mozilla that makes it superior to Firefox. Firefox just has a simplified feeling, while Mozilla looks and works like a power browser. I am a long-time Mozilla user, and I've tried Firefox 1.0, but can't stand it. It just feels like an IE replacement rather than a web workhorse.
This feeling is not all that different from those that prefer Windows NT/2000/2003 to Windows ME/XP, or perhaps for aptly for Slashdot, vi vs emacs. There's just something innately gratifying when you're not assumed to be Joe Average.
Firefox is by far more popular, and while many believe Mozilla to be bloated, in my own experience, there was very little difference in memory usage and speed between the two, which was surprising because my Seamonkey had a lot more extensions.
If Mozilla 2.0 is to be started, some major changes are needed to how the overall software suite works. The current setup for the Mozilla software suite works just fine and as such, there's little need to fix what isn't broken. However, there's a problem amongst the picky.
We all love Firefox for its speedy startup and simple UI. At the same time, we also love Thunderbird for its speedy startup and simple UI. Well, there's a bit of conflict here. What if we use both? Is it any better than Mozilla? For some, yes. For others, maybe not. So here's the idea.
A Mozilla/Gecko Framework -- what this means is that all the absolute basic and necessity to run a gecko-based application is there and that softwares built upon this library will work as though you have a stand-alone application installed. This is good for a few things. For starters, download time. Firefox and Thunderbird both come with the gecko libraries and anything else that depends on it. It's there to simplify installation and to have everything there without the need of having to install system-specific libraries (in my case, windows\system32). Another good that comes out of this is total modularity. This way, we can truly have a modular system where we have a singular installation of the Gecko engine but can have various softwares based on this to run with it. The possibility of having Mozilla software suite, Thunderbird, and Firefox installed at once without eating up 40-50MB of space is there. Perhaps, in guessing, such concept in realized form would consume at most 20MB for all 3 softwares.
Yeah, I'm sure a handful of you people must be thinking: Isn't this been thought up already with 'such-and-such' feature of Mozilla/Gecko? Yes. It has. But it appears at its current form, it cannot do such things. And I specifically remember a long time ago that one of the goal of Mozilla is to build a software suite that is modular. It's been years since. And I have not seen this realized or come to fruition. If this idea is being delayed to 2.0, so be it. But for 2.0 to be deserving of its number, it ought to at least be capable of being modular.
I'm happy for the Mozilla developers that they are looking forward to a 2.0 codebase. And I wish them luck in persuing that goal of a final code release. This framework idea is my only suggestion, as it is solely needed since we have 3 'ready-for-prime-time' softwares built upon the same Gecko library.
~ Old Warriors Society
I'd love to be able to set my live bookmarks to automatically update at user-defined periods of time; so, for example, I may want my BBC News bookmarks to refresh every 10 minutes, while my slashdot bookmarks can refresh every 30 minutes. At the moment, they only seem to refresh when the browser is first started.
Also - and this is a niggle, but... - the "find" toolbar (accessible by ctrl+F)... they really should move the close button back to the right side of the bar... as far as I can tell, every other part of the UI has the close button in the top-right (or right) corner of the relevant pane, except for that damn find bar!
*ahem*
Maybe what's really needed for our friends in the less advanced countries is a web site that functions as a browser ?
Yes thankyou, I am an idiot.
Sky subscribers are morons. They pay to be advertised at !
Of course, some of the above may alreay be planned but as I can't get on mozilla's web site, I can't check.... Maybe it was slashdotted?
One of Mozilla's greatest strengths is not as just a web-browser but as a cross-platform application development platform.
Just try playing around with XUL a little. It's surprising what it can do. I'm just starting out with it, but having worked my way through MFC, QT, TCL/TK, WTL, GTK++, FLTK, wxWidgets etc. etc. in search of the One True UI Library, I'm liking what I've seen so far.
Talk about ancient history! When mozilla.org first decided to focus on Firefox, they were going to "replace" the suite with FIrefox/Thunderbird. They quickly junked that plan when they realized that many large organizations, including ones that support Mozilla with money or developers, preferred the suite. Dropping support for the suite would mean losing those companies' support for Mozilla.
What a fool believes, he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.
- SVG
- A better client-side VM.
- Heavy duty form support, including the ability to create and use form "widgets"
- Client-side persistent store
Want to compete with MS's upcoming XAML platform? I believe this list will go a long way toward that.This will allow interactive graphic applications that are just not possible now with primarily text-oriented DHTML.
Like real compiled Javascript 2.0 or perhaps a Python VM. You can do some amazing and surprising things with client-side JS, but as web apps tackle what are now primarily the domain of "fat" installed apps, we're going to need some real client side power. The ability to create and call libraries of routines will prove to be important.
These issues are being addressed in both Ian Hickson's WHAT-WG and W3C's Xforms. Implementations of these in compiled code would be great.
From what I gather, Moz 2.0 will embed the small SQL engine SQLite to store it's configuration data, etc.. How about providing access to this engine for web apps? Think of it as maybe a cookie on some relational algebra radioactive steriods. Imagine being able to download chunks of data from your server-side store and work with them locally. You would effectively have web apps that continue to work when disconnected from the web.
That's true, but I think result of the rendering shouldn't depend on the source of the contents, only on the contents itself.
I think it's more or less OK to have a not 100% correct layout if the engine is rendering while the file is still loading, but the final result should be correct.
This sig under construction. Please check back later.
For some reason the Firefox engine will not print from my Samsung ML1750 printer without skewing the text up. Everything else prints on it fine. This is a show stopper for me and I am using Opera (which works fine with the printer).
I want/prefer/like my email integrated into the browser. Firefox/Thunderbird works OK but not as well as Mozilla. But overall I prefer the Firefox browser for tabbing, speed and ease of user. It just feels good. It's nice to have choices again. I am a happy camper even with the problems.
I would like to see an extension to tabbed browsing where you could grab a tab and make a new window out of it and pull it out of the current window. And I guess the inverse transform would be handy - allow merging of windows into tabs.
Most of my boxen have virtual desktops, so it's handy sometimes to have different windows on each desktop each with several tabs on the same subject. For example, I'll have one desktop with slashdot and a few links alongside IRC and another desktop reading API documentation for a project.
Another reason this is useful is so that when you open links from the mail program in a new tab, it does not always put the tab in the window you want.
- You don't know how to maintain a station wagon either!
Thanks for the hint. Wanting to see the details, I managed to get another HTML validator to actually return a result. Apparently Slashdot has only blocked http://validator.w3.org/checklink -- not http://valet.webthing.com/page/ or http://www.htmlhelp.com/tools/validator/ -- Yet. :) I'm sure they will now that I've posted this information. But anyway:
:p
:) So I setup a filter to do this, and I then turned OFF the 'redraw' macro that I have been using (also via Proxomitron) to correct the table bug just to see how things would render. So far, after only a dozen or so page renders I haven't seen the classic 'slashdot bug' table problems. The color scheme is screwed, as well as some other minor features of the page design. I supposed there are all sorts of other errors being cause by my arbitrary switching of the Doctype, but the infamous 'Slashdot bug' where tables overlap doesn't seme to occur anymore. Yes, it seems to be true that Slashdot HTML code is at fault here.
The results were mostly complaints about using features not available in this version of HTML. Slashdot sends a Doctype claiming HTML 3.2 compatibility. Gee, imagine that telling the Gecko engine to use rules for one version of HTML and then feeding it another version could cause errors??? Deh!
Since I already use Proxomitron a thought hit me -- why not replace the wrong Doctype declaration with a newer one? It's certainly easy to do. I am no expert so I had no idea what version of HTML would support those features. I could only take a wild guess and swap in the 4.0 Doctype from the validator site.
Let's hope they get motivated to coordinate their Doctype and their HTML code.