Slashdot Mirror


Mozilla Unveils Aurora Concept Browser

Barence writes "Mozilla has unveiled a spectacular new concept browser, dubbed Aurora. The bleeding-edge browser is part of a new Mozilla Labs initiative, in which the open-source foundation is encouraging people to contribute ideas and designs for the browser of the future. The Aurora browser demonstration shows a highly advanced way of collaborating data gathered on the web, and represents a spectacular introduction to the new Mozilla Labs, which much like Google Labs looks to become a home for offbeat projects which would otherwise probably never see the light of day. More details, and a video demonstration, are on the Mozilla Labs site."

58 of 213 comments (clear)

  1. new? by Rysc · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This seems like a rather old project. Am I wrong? http://www.mozilla.org/rdf/doc/aurora.html

    --
    I want my Cowboyneal
    1. Re:new? by MrHanky · · Score: 5, Funny

      Then there's also already the Arora browser, a WebKit/Qt4 based browser that actually works. I suggest Mozilla rename the browser to something like Phoenix to avoid name confusion.

  2. Shameless Contest Plug by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The bleeding-edge browser is part of a new Mozilla Labs initiative, in which the open-source foundation is encouraging people to contribute ideas and designs for the browser of the future.

    Labs is more than that. Back in ought six, Slashdot covered their first extend Firefox contest where people were bated with Alienware swag and developer conference passes to develop extensions & plug-ins for Firefox. The second year saw Shareaholic come out as a winning plug-in. The third year just finished judging and I'm excited to see what Mozilla finds as the best Firefox 3 add ons.

    It's nice to see a foundation aiding, encouraging and rewarding the average developer off the street for their work. Even better than that is when Mozilla backs a plug-in or add-on it's usually solid and reliable (unlike the many WinAmp plug-ins that plagued my college machine).

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:Shameless Contest Plug by GyroLC · · Score: 5, Funny

      ...where people were bated with Alienware swag and developer conference passes...

      If someone does it to you, it isn't bating.

  3. web os by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It's the web OS, plain and simple.
    It's good but it relies on web services a lot. But that's what a browser is for. Dear Mozilla developers, focus on Enterprise level as well. Though it is open source and all, it would be great to be able to configure Aurora to manage private services.

    The question that comes to mind is - will it be like the Aurora class ships in Stargate Atlantis? meaning - what are the security features (better shields?)? What are the requirements? (Will it be ZPM-like requirements?)

  4. Like Google Labs.... it has the same last word by MosesJones · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The similarity with Google Labs is the word "labs" this is about user requirements and suggestions rather than fully fledged products. Its about people suggesting improvements and then those moving into development. This means its at a much earlier part of the product development cycle than Google Labs (which starts with a beta or alpha product).

    Saying its like Google Labs is like saying Saks Fifth Avenue is like Madison Avenue because they both have the word Avenue.

    --
    An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
  5. inno by boxlight · · Score: 5, Interesting
    It's nice to see some innovation in software (or in this vaporware stage, at least). desktop software hasn't changed much in the last 10 years. I mean, OS X is a better looky feely version of Windows, and Vista is trying to be OS X. Firefox and Safari are trying to be a better IE. And web 2.0 apps and chat clients are basically better versions of Usenet and IRC.

    But there hasn't been anything truly revolutionary in the world of desktop software in a long time.

  6. Sombody please tag this story! by dwalsh · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Spectacular".

    --
    ${YEAR+1} is going to be the year of Linux on the desktop!
    1. Re:Sombody please tag this story! by ShieldW0lf · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Looks like a tornado touched down and sent all the guys bookmarks spiraling into a huge disorganized mess. Overwhelmingly craptastic is how I would describe it. I really find this push on all sides to transform my computer from a deterministic machine to a non-deterministic one rather disturbing. I think these are the sorts of tools that, used habitually, will make a person intellectually pliable and mentally deficient. Sabotage the persons capacity to organize their shit, teach them to fuzzy search everything and accept what they receive, throw some corporate propaganda in there to make a few bucks on the side. No one really knows what the computer is going to spit out this time, so they'll accept it. Brawndo, it's got what plants crave...

      --
      -1 Uncomfortable Truth
    2. Re:Sombody please tag this story! by jackchance · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Craptastic indeed!

      Did you notice the 3D 'mouse' she was using. can you imagine having to hold your arm above your desk for hours a day.

      I can google something (or delicious or whatever) and copy the link into an IM window WAY faster than that person was working.

      The only cool thing in that video was the automatic transformation of data. That idea might come to fruition... it would be fairly easy to create an markup language for data and have a plugin that could re-render on the client side.

      --
      1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 55 89 144 233 377 610 987 1597 2584 4181 6765
  7. Nothing is wasted! by jfbilodeau · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Though Aurora may never see the light of day, the ideas brought forth may find themselves in future iteration of the browser, and even the web.

    At the very least, open-source innovations like those provide previous art when a troll patents the very same idea years later.

    --
    Goodbye Slashdot. You've changed.
  8. Re:Another browser? by halfEvilTech · · Score: 5, Funny

    How many more web browsers do we need?

    um about 3 +/- the sq rt of a loaf of bread

  9. Also Like Adobe & Digg Labs... by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The similarity with Google Labs is the word "labs" this is about user requirements and suggestions rather than fully fledged products. Its about people suggesting improvements and then those moving into development. This means its at a much earlier part of the product development cycle than Google Labs (which starts with a beta or alpha product).

    As long as we're talking about labs, there's also Adobe Labs and Digg Labs that I keep my eye on. (Funny, I don't actually read Digg, I just enjoy seeing how they visualize their data!)

    While you're right that these sites aren't open to the public, I think it's mostly due to the nightmare of trying to credit people with ideas when you're making billions off these ideas months later. The community might not ... like that.

    I will point out that the 'labs' concept just seems to be an indication of how these entities see future development. A similarity between Google and Mozilla is that they offer tons of developer resources on their labs sites. I don't think those two are so different from each other.

    Instead of looking at these Labs as inferior, I rather give the companies a chance to show me what they think is bleeding edge and a lot of the time it's a good indicator of innovation. However you look at it, it's a good idea to keep an eye on the labs so you know what your competitor/partner is up to and get a glimpse of the future as they see it.

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:Also Like Adobe & Digg Labs... by larry+bagina · · Score: 4, Funny

      where's slashdot labs?

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    2. Re:Also Like Adobe & Digg Labs... by vbraga · · Score: 2, Funny

      On my lawn. Now get out of it.

      --
      English is not my first language. Corrections and suggestions are welcome.
    3. Re:Also Like Adobe & Digg Labs... by Falkkin · · Score: 5, Informative

      slashcode.com

    4. Re:Also Like Adobe & Digg Labs... by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 4, Funny

      In Cowboy Neal's mother's basement.

  10. Re:The future of Firefox is MSIE? by irc.goatse.cx+troll · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ugh. I really hope they figure out threading. Right now web2.0 is like windows3.11 level multitasking-- One site or plugin starts to eat all of your resources and until you manage to close it or it fixes itself you can't use any of your other (web)apps.

    --
    Pain lasts, kid. Its how you know you're alive. Sometimes I think this growing up thing is just pain management-TheMaxx
  11. All in a name by IceFox · · Score: 5, Informative

    This will no doubt lead to confusion with the Arora webkit browser. http://arora-browser.org/ Sigh... I spent a good chunk of time finding the name and making sure there wasn't any conflicts out there. And then comes along not only a software application, but a browser... :( Should I change my name or ask them to change theirs? -Benjamin Meyer

    --
    Do you changes clothes while making the "chee-chee-cha-cha-choh" transformation sound?
    1. Re:All in a name by byolinux · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Ask them to change.

    2. Re:All in a name by IceFox · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yah mozilla keeps destroying my names. I have been icefox sense 1997 and could usually get that nick everywhere I went, but ever sense firefox came out it has been harder and harder to get the nick icefox. And now this :(

      --
      Do you changes clothes while making the "chee-chee-cha-cha-choh" transformation sound?
    3. Re:All in a name by nighty5 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I honestly thought this article was regarding the Arora browser based on WebKit.

    4. Re:All in a name by orielbean · · Score: 2, Funny

      To quote Mike Bolton - "why should I have to change? He's the one who sucks!"

    5. Re:All in a name by sootman · · Score: 3, Informative

      Correction: Firefox WAS called Firebird, then changed after the database collision was noticed. And this was AFTER changing the name from Phoenix because of the BIOS manufacturer. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox#History and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox#Release_history

      --
      Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
  12. Not more frames by GBC · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This looks interesting and it is good that they are thinking about the future of browsing. I liked the ease with which you could manipulate and share data, though I imagine that something that is designed to be that open would introduce some interesting security issues.

    I am definitely not a fan of the pop-up frames as you move the mouse to the edge of the window - it is one of the things I don't like about Sugar OS on my XO/OLPC laptop. I don't know if others have had similar problems, but I found them way too easy to trigger and very distracting when you were in the middle of doing something else.

    Also, I am not sure how practical the bookmarks/history view is for large amounts of data. It looks like they are taking a leaf out of iTunes' album view. I still use bookmarks instead of tags (not sure if that makes me a dinosaur or not) and I have a helluva lot of them. A visual representation of them versus the existing menu structure would make it much harder to find what I am looking for. It is down to my personal preferences admittedly, but if the end goal is to make information easier to find, I don't think it works.

    Oh, and did anyone else get reminded of the D&D computer games with the radial menus when watching the demo?

  13. Organization = disorganization? by e2d2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What is with this new desktop "paradigm" I keep seeing everywhere from this new browser to the new multi-touch displays? Where everything is disorganized and you simply wander through everything tossing it out of the way like looking through your dirty clothes hamper for a clean set of underwear. Call me old fashioned but I like hierarchical data and tree structures.

    I understand it's just a concept, but seeing this type of thing everywhere has me wonder who exactly is doing usability and what they are smoking because I want some.

    1. Re:Organization = disorganization? by gertam · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Order? Structure? Hierarchy? How quaint! Don't you realize that no one has any time for that anymore. The new paradigm for the future is EXACTLY to toss everything on the floor and let the glorious God SEARCH order it for you.

      The new usability is all about easing the life of the content creator, and letting the computer sort things out. Creating order is boring and hard. The content user is responsible for leveraging SEARCH to find what it needs. Oh, maybe you can throw a category tag on something if you really need to find it again quickly.

      This is the whole GMail vs. Outlook argument that I see over and over again. Trees and hierarchy are soooooo old fashioned. This is just a visual extension of the death of the hierarchical structure in our lives.

    2. Re:Organization = disorganization? by interiot · · Score: 5, Interesting
      "New" paradigm? It's been happening for 10 years.
      • Google — you could have one central authority organize everything into a single hierarchical structure that's organized very well... or, you can do as good of a guess as possible with lots of help from machines.
      • GMail — you could spend lots of man-hours neatly organizing your mail into folders... or, you could just search it.
      • Biology — using humans to figure out causation is best, but using machines to find correlation will work for now.

      When you find yourself spending your whole day organizing data into trees, but the amount of data is constantly growing, you begin to realize that it's not useful to perfectly organize everything anymore.

    3. Re:Organization = disorganization? by the_raptor · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Except Gmail encourages you to use tags, which are functionally no different to folders/directories if you just use one.

      --

      ========
      CINC, 4th Penguin Legion
    4. Re:Organization = disorganization? by icebrain · · Score: 3, Funny

      Order, structure, and hierarchy work great for my files and things. But for my bedroom and workshop, "toss it on the floor" seems to be the entrenched system.

      --
      The meek may inherit the earth, but the strong shall take the stars.
    5. Re:Organization = disorganization? by gertam · · Score: 3, Informative

      It is different than folders/directories. It is better. You don't have to know any hierarchy before tagging something. As you indirectly point out, it can have multiple tags, and really it is a helper to SEARCH. It can help organize things for sure, and I find it more useful, ultimately, because it is not hierarchical. But it is not the same as folders/directories.

      It really is more like throwing everything on the floor, except you have a magic tool to grab any item you want, so long as you have the right incantation to retrieve it.

    6. Re:Organization = disorganization? by Ramirozz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, why to add all these effects and nice looking,sci-fi movie-like widgets and features if most users around the world do not know what bookmarks or tags are? We, technical people, are used to learn new stuff quick even if it is not 100% usefull. Mozilla needs to remember there is still a gap between technology and users. Internet is very young and there is a lor of people who only uses the address bar... that's all they need. I do understand all these are concepts but I'm not sure if all this "Minority Report" tools are the way to go. Usability is not fashion

      --
      http://www.quasarcr.com/
    7. Re:Organization = disorganization? by PrescriptionWarning · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think it really shows that there really are different kinds of users out there. There's those like us who prefer a cleaner desktop and some sense of organization, perhaps sometimes almost to the point of OCD (i can't stand having a filled trash bin for instance).

      However a lot of the people I interact with, some are technical type users, others aren't so much, who have their desktops littered with icons almost filling the entire wallpaper. Granted I can understand that sometimes even in chaos there is some semblance of organization because these people know that when they're looking for a particular thing on their desktop they know its always going to be generally in the same place each time.

      My only concern with this new stuff is whether or not they'll make it just as easy to clean stuff up and organize it as they did to make it all cluttered up.

    8. Re:Organization = disorganization? by jollyreaper · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Except Gmail encourages you to use tags, which are functionally no different to folders/directories if you just use one.

      It's marginally easier to put many tags on one file as opposed to creating one file and then all the shortcuts you want in different folders as they apply. People just don't understand shortcuts. At one job, we had a big bunch of marketing cruft in a folder, 30gb of videos, pictures, etc. So and so would want that stuff in their personal folder and sure enough, they'd copy and paste. Management refused to let us set size limits on folders and so it would be a constant cycle of losing drive space, looking for the new offender, explaining how shortcuts work, making shortcuts for them, then watching some other idiot make the same mistake, then going back to the first idiot who forgot everything you told them making the mistake all over again. And any time we tried to put restrictions on things management would order them removed.

      I'm of the opinion that if you can't let someone do something bad, then you won't end up being angry they did it. If people demonstrate they won't listen to instructions like "stay away from the angry bear" and management refuses to let you put the bear in a cage, you shouldn't be responsible for maulings. Doesn't work that way, though.

      --
      Kwisatz Haderach
      Sell the spice to CHOAM
      This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    9. Re:Organization = disorganization? by steelfood · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The purpose of a computer is to do busy computational work. That is, a computer can't create a weather model, but it can read data from sensors, plug the numbers into the human-created model, and then spit out an answer. In effect, computers are there to automate and simplify hard tasks, and eliminate menial ones.

      Organization is one of the last frontiers of automation, if not the last frontier. For the most part, everybody has a "system" of organization. There are rules to this system that are by and large strictly followed. The rules vary between people, but organization cannot happen without the rules.

      In the past, what is required of the user is to set up the organization structure, and then set up the rules. Then the computer will take input, and spit it out in the organized form based on the rules.

      The future is to automatically create the rules based on the user's behavior. That's what a lot of these new "paradigms" are aiming for. This eliminates the step where the user explicitly defines the rules. In fact, they're going on step further, and trying to elimiate the initial structure setup, so that the computer can infer the structure based on the user's behavior. The combination results in looser rules, but also a more dynamic structure.

      But honestly, it doesn't look like anybody's gotten past the "throw everything on the floor" step of organizing yet.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
  14. Adaptive Path designed Aurora with Mozilla by securitas · · Score: 5, Informative

    Setting aside the gushing tone of the submitter's post, Aurora is Adaptive Path's first open source design project and collaboration with Mozilla -- it's not all Mozilla.

    Adaptive Path team designers and members discuss the design process extensively and in detail on their blog. More details in the Firehose

    You might want to check out the Aurora Launch Party, too, if you're in San Francisco tonight

  15. there is no browser by KatTran · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is just the release of part 1 of a 4 part series showing a mock-up of what a future browser might look like. There is no code, there is no browser, this is vapor-ware at its finest. Additional Adaptive Path, the people who made the video, are throwing a party to celebrate their release of the video.

    When did software development turn into movie producing?

    1. Re:there is no browser by hansamurai · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well, software development is not just code, there's also requirements gathering and design, among others. I'm not saying Adaptive Path didn't jump the gun, but the coding part is easy enough with excellent developers, design, and communication.

    2. Re:there is no browser by inviolet · · Score: 2

      Well, software development is not just code, there's also requirements gathering and design, among others. I'm not saying Adaptive Path didn't jump the gun, but the coding part is easy enough with excellent developers, design, and communication.

      Well, the colonizing-another-planet part is easy enough with excellent engineers, design, and communication.

      Well, the world-peace part is easy enough with excellent leaders, design, and communication.

      Well, the find-the-higgs part is easy enough with excellent scientists, design, and communication.

      --
      FATMOUSE + YOU = FATMOUSE
  16. Related to Amaya? by SpinyNorman · · Score: 3, Informative

    A quick scan of TFA doesn't reveal the heritage of Aurora, but the emphasis on web publishng vs viewing, and even the name, both immediately bring to mind the (ancient, but continuously updated) W3C editor/browser Amaya:

    http://www.w3.org/Amaya/

  17. Is it like a concept car? by sleeponthemic · · Score: 4, Funny

    In that the release date is the same day as duke nukem for(n)ever?

    --
    I record my sleeptalking
  18. Re:I for one... welcome our new Itunes overloads by Enderandrew · · Score: 2, Insightful

    What do you want for podcast support?

    When I click on a podcast in Firefox, either it plays through the site's player, or the mp3 downloads and plays in my computer's media player.

    What is missing here?

    As for handling library functions of my media, I leave that to my media player. I'm not sure I need Firefox to handle that.

    --
    http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
  19. Cutting-edge Eclipse/Gecko/Java browser by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    We released our own research-oriented web browser:

    http://www.sourceforge.net/projects/suprabrowser

    It is designed to run in a VM where the individual stores all of their private data on their own server. It supports persistent, threaded instant messaging, bookmarks, RSS, file management, contact management, threaded discussions, web page highlighting, email, mailing lists, and more.

    If it sounds like too much, you can use whatever parts you want. All network traffic is encrypted using 3DES after a zero knowledge based authentication.

    For better or worse, it is certainly one of the most innovative products in the computer industry, open source or not, but that means that it takes a bit more marketing to get people interested. It's a fairly different concept as far as information management is concerned, but definitely a necessary one.

  20. Horrible UI by Phroggy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    That radial menu tells me these people know nothing about good UI design. It appears to work precisely the same way as a contextual menu, except that you can't see what any of the options are until you mouseover the button, which reveals an icon (possibly with a label, I couldn't tell from the low-res video). The way the option buttons are arranged around the circle, the chances of memorizing precisely which button performs what task are minimal, since it's difficult to distinguish between a button at 7:00 and a button at 8:00 (when the number of buttons is not constant, as it is on a clock face, which is why I can tell the difference between 7:00 and 8:00 there).

    Compare this to the standard contextual menu. You can see all the menu options at once (unless there are too many to fit on the screen and they scroll), they all have a text label, they could have an icon as well (they usually don't, but certainly should if the concept can be represented in icon form), and the interface is already familiar to nearly everyone.

    I mentioned scrolling when there are too many options in the menu. Imagine the radial menu interface with that many options on it. Imagine how long it would take to hunt through them one at a time to find the one you're looking for.

    --
    $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
    $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
  21. Not especially well-received by the Internet by JayDiggity · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Echoing other comments seen around the web...
    • Holy crap, look at all that clutter! Icons everywhere!
    • Not only that, but none of the icons have text in case someone forgets what one of the thousand icons means.
    • What the heck is up with that 3-D mouse? Is Mozilla supposed to invent that?
    • Isn't this just a fancier way to copy-paste a link over Skype and initiate a voice chat with them?
    • This can't possibly just be a Mozilla project. You'd need a whole new OS!
    • Radial menus may work sometimes, but four unlabeled cloverleaves with 5 tiny unlabeled dots that don't reveal their function unless you hover over them?
    • The only worthwhile thing there is turning numbers into graphs. So Mozilla just needs to merge with OpenOffice or something.
  22. Re:Ugly, confusing, hyped. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    hi, it's 1985 calling. ever heard of this?

  23. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Funny

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  24. Re:I for one... welcome our new Itunes overloads by orasio · · Score: 2, Informative

    That, and the kitchen sink.
    Maybe Songbird is what you want, although it's not ready yet.

  25. who's the target audience? by speedtux · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I can't figure out who this is supposed to be for.

    My parents and family would be thoroughly confused by it, as would likely be most other "normal" users.

    As a power users, I'm not sure this helps me either. I don't want icons "drifting away" from me, and it doesn't seem to make anything I do any faster.

  26. I'm not falling for this again! by andyatkinson · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'll bet the Aurora Browser *is* Windows Vista.

  27. This is not a concept car by wrook · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm hoping that I can tread the line between being appreciative of the creative work that has obviously gone into this, and trying to keep my feet on the ground. I've worked in a lot of software companies that have tried to "design" the "next great thing", and to put it bluntly, I see a lot of that in these videos.

    When you go to the Mozilla Labs site, you are informed that these are concepts; ideas that they want to flesh out. But what I think is missing (even to the designers) is the question of how it will actually work. It's blue sky thinking with all the inconvenient "it's impossible" tasks shoved down to the hapless "engineer" who tries to build it.

    Seemingly simple things like taking a random table in a web page and building a meaningful line graph out of it turns out to be extremely hard in the general case. I speak from experience here, having been paid lots of money to do it several times before :-) (despite my protestations of impossibility). Random data in webpages (or other documents) are just not structured well enough to do it -- and it turns out that partial success (i.e., it works "most of the time") is mostly useless.

    The car industry has a long tradition of building concept cars. These are cars that are not meant to be sold. They are only ideas that might fire the imagination for future designers. But the difference between concept cars and these software concepts (not just Mozilla Labs, but many large companies that I could name) is that concept cars *are actually cars*. You can drive them. These concepts are like pictures of concept cars -- or animated movies of concept cars. It's like saying, "My concept car is the one in Speed Racer".

    Like I said, the ideas are interesting. But I'd really prefer it if the industry would build working software as a concept. One extremely good example of what I'd like to see is Englightenment. It often sucked (especially if you read the code in the early days). But the concepts were *magnificent*. And they were demonstrably *possible*.

    A person writing a window manager could look at Enlightenment and say, "That's sooo cool, but I need it to be a bit more conservative in some ways" and write something that fit the bill. Looking at these concepts, all I can say is, "I'm glad I don't have to write it".

  28. Uhh oh... by ProppaT · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I can just see it now. The girlfriend (replace with "mom" for the typical slashdot user) sits down at the computer and opens up Aurora. All of a sudden she's swept with a tornado of porn, bizarro internet videos, bookmarked pictures of her hot friends on myspace, etc. Thought that changing the name of those bookmarks to "email" and "lolcatz" was enough security? Not any more, buddy...

    --
    Wise men say, "Forgiveness is divine, but never pay full price for late pizza."
  29. Re:OT: Needs screenshots by IceFox · · Score: 5, Informative

    Yup, been working a little bit on a page with lots of screenshots. For right now you can find some on the blog: http://arorabrowser.blogspot.com/

    --
    Do you changes clothes while making the "chee-chee-cha-cha-choh" transformation sound?
  30. Re:I for one... welcome our new Itunes overloads by bheer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    > How would Firefox even know which podcasts to download?

    Firefox already understands RSS feeds. Podcasts are RSS feeds with a <media> element. All Firefox has to do is queue up all files mentioned in the media element using its download manager, and provide a bit of UI to manage/play the media.

    That said, just because Firefox *can* do this doesn't mean it *should*. To do this properly and not in a half-assed way, Firefox would have to essentially turn into Songbird (or iTunes) and bundle its own codecs etc. And that'd just bloat the browser.

    As long as Firefox depends on third party apps to play the media, this sort of functionality is best handled by an extension. There's probably one out there already.

  31. Oh God, am I the only one? by AbsoluteXyro · · Score: 3, Funny

    Am I the only one who couldn't help but notice the image of Stan Marsh jacking off in front of a computer that was on that lady's desktop?

  32. Re:I for one... welcome our new Itunes overloads by hairyfeet · · Score: 2, Informative

    Sounds like what you want is Songbird,which,hey what do ya know,it's built from Firefox. And if you want social browsing you have Flock,which,hey what do ya know again,is ALSO built on Firefox. If Mozilla wants to know where the "Firefox killer" is coming from,just look in the mirror. Somebody will take the FF code,add their own killer features and there you go. But as always this is my 02c,YMMV

    --
    ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  33. Re:WTF by Nicolay77 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Opera already has voice recognition.

    Internet Explorer: Where do you want to go today?
    Firefox: Where do you want to go tomorrow?
    Opera: Are you guys coming or what?

    --
    We are Turing O-Machines. The Oracle is out there.
  34. OMG User Interface Nirvana! by podperson · · Score: 4, Funny

    It looks like:
    1) A mess
    2) Three OS X docks
    3) Dashboard / Yahoo widgets

    But with all the aesthetic sense and usability of an Open Source project.