Tabbed browsing is not a Gecko feature (the rendering enginer). It is a feature of the browser built on top of it. Galeon has had tabbed browsing for a long time; Mozilla added it only recently.
Yes. Galeon's version numbers never meant anything with respect to how close it was to a "1.0" release. I.e. 0.12.x was really just a label, it had nothing to do with it being 10 major releases from 1.0. I've felt Galeon has been close to 1.0, if not there already, for a few months now. It's actually very appropriate.
Galeon is definitely, noticably faster than Mozilla. On slower hardware, this difference can be quite noticable. I have a dual Gigahertz workstation class machine, and Mozilla is still definitely slower!
Galeon is MUCH more stable than Mozilla. This may have changed recently, but Galeon is rock solid. Mozilla crashed within 5 seconds the last time I tried to use it (admittedly about two months ago).
Galeon has had tabbed browsing support for much longer, so it is likely to be much more stable in this area.
Galeon has very nice GNOME integration. Handlers for mail, ftp, news, etc. can use programs defined in the GNOME control panel for those URL types. To be fair, I don't know where Mozilla is with this, last I heard it wasn't happening.
I did hear about this... I wonder what performance will be like; can they maintain similar performance, or will they have an option to turn transactions off for speed?
Comparing Oracle and MySQL performance in the context of XML is silly. It is a well-known fact that MySQL is significantly faster than Oracle, but not because of XML, Java, or other "OO crap". It is simply because MySQL doesn't have transactional support, and probably a host of other non-OO high end RDBMS features.
I wouldn't be surprised if "OO crap" does indeed slow down Oracle, but I know the JVM for Oracle is completely optional. I can't speak to any XML features in Oracle, I'm not familiar with them.
So what's holding 1.0 back?
on
Mozilla 0.9.5
·
· Score: 2
I actually use Galeon, not Mozilla directly, and as far as I'm concerned, Galeon is 1.0 quality and beyond. It is definitely rock solid from my experience.
So what's really keeping Mozilla from 1.0? If the whole Mozilla browser is anywhere near as good as Galeon, I don't see what should be keeping them. What are the major issues?
My point wasn't so much that only raising prices is proof of a monopoly. It is one of the indicators, but my point was simply that Microsoft is hurting the consumer by raising prices without raising the benefits.
Saying that you don't plan to buy Windows XP as proof that no one is being forced to buy Windows is the most naive thing I have ever heard. Who cares about individual buyers, especially the oh-so-few that actually have the knowledge to make a choice? The battle is among corporate customers, and they are pretty much forced into it, again because Microsoft has a monopoly.
Note that there's a similar problem even with the average consumer who must pay the Microsoft tax on a new computer.
First off, Microsoft kills off competition. You will never quite find out how the consumers could have benefitted, because Microsoft has eliminated possible new advances that could have competed with them.
But more than anything, we are now seeing the most obvious, direct, and "see, they are clearly a monopoly" harm: raised prices. It's even worse than just raised prices; it's clear that the advances in Windows and Office are really slowing down, so Microsoft is essentially forcing you to pay more for less. Microsoft is simply milking its customers, and even threatening them to audit them if they don't move to the new program.
If that isn't consumer harm, then I don't know what is.
I agree that the flexibility of alternate typefaces, font sizes, and basic formatting are often useful. Unfortunately, 9/10 times I see HTML used is to simply be annoying. I.e. stupid banners, flowery fonts, all sorts of bs that clutters up any real message.
I still use Emacs to read email in large part precisely for this reason. (Actually, Emacs can do HTML also, but I prefer not to.) Plain text messages are easier to read and deal with than their HTML counterparts. In fact, the only HTML-only messages I get are 100% of the time spam, and the only time someone sends me something that truly needs to be formatted, they send it as a separate Word attachment, which is easy enough to open.
Ximian is coming out with Evolution, which is essentially an open source Outlook replacement. It's still in beta but should be reaching 1.0 before the end of the year (I think).
So far, Evolution's main shortcoming is it doesn't understand Exchange protocols, so Linux clients can't use it to talk to Exchange for shared calendaring. I realize that is one of the main points you need. I believe it is a fatal flaw for evolution, but Ximian apparently doesn't think it's such a big deal, saying that such support will come "eventually, but not high priority". Nonetheless, it can do IMAP, POP, LDAP, and a bunch of other open protocols.
How different is this from the lawsuit with Microsoft oh so many years ago over look and feel? Apple lost that battle, right? If so, then what possible claim can they have over a theme, which is essentially just look and feel?
If people are ripping off the actual icon files then that's one thing. But making something very similar, though not identical, seems like another look and feel issue.
I wasn't saying Salon shouldn't make money. I wasn't even saying they shouldn't make money off of advertising. I was only saying that these particular ads are really, really annoying, far more annoying than anything else.
However, I did not know about paying for a Salon subscription. I may just do that. (I've only recently started looking at Salon more regularly.)
The *only* thing that worries me about paying for it is if later on, even on paid subscription sites you start getting annoying ads. But it's worth the benefit of a doubt, and once you start paying for something, you're in a much better situation to complain or stop paying to make a difference.
I sympathize with their need to make ad revenue, but I find these ads the most annoying thing on the Internet. If this is the future of web advertising, I'll be getting my news elsewhere. It is incredibly annoying and distracting.
Some will never be dereferenced, if you wait for a zero reference count, because some will never be dereferenced, if you wait for a zero reference count, because some will never be derefenced... ----------
If Dr. Sattler even remotely attempts a boycott of Adobe, in particular Illustrator, I'm sure it won't take very much to deny Adobe of $2,000 worth of revenue.
Two grand is nothing to Adobe. I can't imagine, if they really look at the situation in terms of PR, that it will be worth it to them, especially if Mr. Sattler takes this angle on it. I recognize this is coming from Adobe's law firm, but if Adobe central gets wind of what's going on, I'm sure the next cease and desist letter will come from Adobe to the law firm.:)
(This is all assuming he changes the name of KIllustrator.) ----------
It's a lot more dramatic than just 8-64M of RAM (emphasis mine):
Keith and I believe that a basic X environment will end up a bit over one megabyte of code, when this is done, while preserving complete compatibility (a full X implementation).
Exqueeze me, but one megabyte?!? Anybody but Jim Gettys saying this and I'd say there were on serious hallucigenics. I wonder what the difference between "basic X environment" and the XFree86 that I'm running right now. I'm sure that means none of the 24 extensions, a single visual, and a bunch of other things, but it's still amazing.
And oh yes, it's fascinating that he says the network transparency of X is "well under a megabyte". If that's really true, then that's also great news, and a good thing to keep in mind when people go off critizing X for bloat with respect to network capability. ----------
Re:Please use talkback builds.
on
Mozilla 0.9 Out
·
· Score: 1
The talkback build is a big zip file, instead of using an installer.
It's easier to install using the installer.
There was not readily available information as to how to install using the zip file, specially if you used the installer to install 0.8.1.
In other words, if you want people to use the talkback enabled build, then provide it in an easy convenient format like RPM for Linux or an installer for Winbloze. ----------
I've found Mozilla to be extremely stable. If you're on Windows, it will even perform pretty well. If you're on Unix, Mozilla will be the slowest hog beast you've ever encountered. (If anyone knows why this is the case, please let me know!) ----------
Re:Good question in "talkbacks"
on
QT Mozilla Port
·
· Score: 1
YES!!! Please!!! Someone answer why Mozilla on Unix is 2X slower than on Windows!
I've been searching the net for an answer to this, but none is to be found... I've got a PII 400, and Mozilla is almost unusably slow. On an equivalent Windows box, it is perfectly usable.
----------
But the context of the whole discussion is software that is networked, so therefore security is an issue. It also implies that the software itself is somehow related to networking.
perl -e 'print "Hello world\n"' does everything I need, and requires no frequent updates or maintenance, but it's not relevant to the issue of network security.
My basic point is that any sufficiently useful, networked program is going to require updates and long term maintenance. Only time increases stability and security, but only asymptotically. At all times does the sysadmin need to keep a careful watch. There are no software exceptions to this; not Linux, not Windows NT/2000, not OpenBSD, not Solaris, not anything. ----------
While I agree with your discussion about the BSD license vs. the GPL, the following statement is a bit snooty and highly inaccurate:
Windows haters use Linux, but Unix lovers use FreeBSD.
You are implying an elitism around FreeBSD that is just self-aggrandizing. I've loved Unix since 1987 at MIT, and I started using Linux in 1995 because it was a lot more accessible: it was far easier to install, get support for it, and in general seemed an easier beast to deal with. Yes, it is entirely possible to be a competent programmer whose development platform has almost always been Unix, and to prefer Linux over FreeBSD.
Your statement implies that only geeks that care first and foremost for the technical superiority of every aspect of the kernel, and its most direct subsystems, can be "True Unix Lovers". That's just arrogance. Plenty of extremely talented programmers, who "get" Unix and love it over anything else, would prefer Linux over FreeBSD simply because accessibility, support, ease of installation, and software availability are far more important criteria.
Switching solely due to the Ramen worm is a pretty sad and scary reason to switch. You might as well switch OS's at random every couple of months.
The problem with the Ramen worm was not with Red Hat, but with sysadmins that don't frequently update and maintain their systems. If you don't do that, it doesn't really matter what OS you use. ----------
Slashdot Mirror
- Make sure the battery is fully charged. It can give weird errors (e.g. "Hard Disk Error") when the battery is running low.
- Get the latest firmware from Archos web site. Lots of bugs have been fixed.
- Check out the FAQ for the Archos at Fun MP3 Players .
Have fun!Tabbed browsing is not a Gecko feature (the rendering enginer). It is a feature of the browser built on top of it. Galeon has had tabbed browsing for a long time; Mozilla added it only recently.
Yes. Galeon's version numbers never meant anything with respect to how close it was to a "1.0" release. I.e. 0.12.x was really just a label, it had nothing to do with it being 10 major releases from 1.0. I've felt Galeon has been close to 1.0, if not there already, for a few months now. It's actually very appropriate.
Galeon is definitely, noticably faster than Mozilla. On slower hardware, this difference can be quite noticable. I have a dual Gigahertz workstation class machine, and Mozilla is still definitely slower!
Galeon is MUCH more stable than Mozilla. This may have changed recently, but Galeon is rock solid. Mozilla crashed within 5 seconds the last time I tried to use it (admittedly about two months ago).
Galeon has had tabbed browsing support for much longer, so it is likely to be much more stable in this area.
Galeon has very nice GNOME integration. Handlers for mail, ftp, news, etc. can use programs defined in the GNOME control panel for those URL types. To be fair, I don't know where Mozilla is with this, last I heard it wasn't happening.
I did hear about this... I wonder what performance will be like; can they maintain similar performance, or will they have an option to turn transactions off for speed?
Comparing Oracle and MySQL performance in the context of XML is silly. It is a well-known fact that MySQL is significantly faster than Oracle, but not because of XML, Java, or other "OO crap". It is simply because MySQL doesn't have transactional support, and probably a host of other non-OO high end RDBMS features.
I wouldn't be surprised if "OO crap" does indeed slow down Oracle, but I know the JVM for Oracle is completely optional. I can't speak to any XML features in Oracle, I'm not familiar with them.
I actually use Galeon, not Mozilla directly, and as far as I'm concerned, Galeon is 1.0 quality and beyond. It is definitely rock solid from my experience.
So what's really keeping Mozilla from 1.0? If the whole Mozilla browser is anywhere near as good as Galeon, I don't see what should be keeping them. What are the major issues?
My point wasn't so much that only raising prices is proof of a monopoly. It is one of the indicators, but my point was simply that Microsoft is hurting the consumer by raising prices without raising the benefits.
Saying that you don't plan to buy Windows XP as proof that no one is being forced to buy Windows is the most naive thing I have ever heard. Who cares about individual buyers, especially the oh-so-few that actually have the knowledge to make a choice? The battle is among corporate customers, and they are pretty much forced into it, again because Microsoft has a monopoly.
Note that there's a similar problem even with the average consumer who must pay the Microsoft tax on a new computer.
Err, as far as I can tell, all Microsoft is doing is pissing off customers. Some are even considering leaving the Microsoft desktop...
First off, Microsoft kills off competition. You will never quite find out how the consumers could have benefitted, because Microsoft has eliminated possible new advances that could have competed with them.
But more than anything, we are now seeing the most obvious, direct, and "see, they are clearly a monopoly" harm: raised prices. It's even worse than just raised prices; it's clear that the advances in Windows and Office are really slowing down, so Microsoft is essentially forcing you to pay more for less. Microsoft is simply milking its customers, and even threatening them to audit them if they don't move to the new program.
If that isn't consumer harm, then I don't know what is.
I agree that the flexibility of alternate typefaces, font sizes, and basic formatting are often useful. Unfortunately, 9/10 times I see HTML used is to simply be annoying. I.e. stupid banners, flowery fonts, all sorts of bs that clutters up any real message.
I still use Emacs to read email in large part precisely for this reason. (Actually, Emacs can do HTML also, but I prefer not to.) Plain text messages are easier to read and deal with than their HTML counterparts. In fact, the only HTML-only messages I get are 100% of the time spam, and the only time someone sends me something that truly needs to be formatted, they send it as a separate Word attachment, which is easy enough to open.
Ximian is coming out with Evolution, which is essentially an open source Outlook replacement. It's still in beta but should be reaching 1.0 before the end of the year (I think).
So far, Evolution's main shortcoming is it doesn't understand Exchange protocols, so Linux clients can't use it to talk to Exchange for shared calendaring. I realize that is one of the main points you need. I believe it is a fatal flaw for evolution, but Ximian apparently doesn't think it's such a big deal, saying that such support will come "eventually, but not high priority". Nonetheless, it can do IMAP, POP, LDAP, and a bunch of other open protocols.
How different is this from the lawsuit with Microsoft oh so many years ago over look and feel? Apple lost that battle, right? If so, then what possible claim can they have over a theme, which is essentially just look and feel?
If people are ripping off the actual icon files then that's one thing. But making something very similar, though not identical, seems like another look and feel issue.
However, I did not know about paying for a Salon subscription. I may just do that. (I've only recently started looking at Salon more regularly.)
The *only* thing that worries me about paying for it is if later on, even on paid subscription sites you start getting annoying ads. But it's worth the benefit of a doubt, and once you start paying for something, you're in a much better situation to complain or stop paying to make a difference.
I sympathize with their need to make ad revenue, but I find these ads the most annoying thing on the Internet. If this is the future of web advertising, I'll be getting my news elsewhere. It is incredibly annoying and distracting.
Some will never be dereferenced, if you wait for a zero reference count, because some will never be dereferenced, if you wait for a zero reference count, because some will never be derefenced...
----------
If Dr. Sattler even remotely attempts a boycott of Adobe, in particular Illustrator, I'm sure it won't take very much to deny Adobe of $2,000 worth of revenue.
Two grand is nothing to Adobe. I can't imagine, if they really look at the situation in terms of PR, that it will be worth it to them, especially if Mr. Sattler takes this angle on it. I recognize this is coming from Adobe's law firm, but if Adobe central gets wind of what's going on, I'm sure the next cease and desist letter will come from Adobe to the law firm. :)
(This is all assuming he changes the name of KIllustrator.)
----------
And oh yes, it's fascinating that he says the network transparency of X is "well under a megabyte". If that's really true, then that's also great news, and a good thing to keep in mind when people go off critizing X for bloat with respect to network capability.
----------
-
It's easier to install using the installer.
-
There was not readily available information as to how to install using the zip file, specially if you used the installer to install 0.8.1.
In other words, if you want people to use the talkback enabled build, then provide it in an easy convenient format like RPM for Linux or an installer for Winbloze.----------
I've found Mozilla to be extremely stable. If you're on Windows, it will even perform pretty well. If you're on Unix, Mozilla will be the slowest hog beast you've ever encountered. (If anyone knows why this is the case, please let me know!)
----------
I've been searching the net for an answer to this, but none is to be found... I've got a PII 400, and Mozilla is almost unusably slow. On an equivalent Windows box, it is perfectly usable.
----------
perl -e 'print "Hello world\n"' does everything I need, and requires no frequent updates or maintenance, but it's not relevant to the issue of network security.
My basic point is that any sufficiently useful, networked program is going to require updates and long term maintenance. Only time increases stability and security, but only asymptotically. At all times does the sysadmin need to keep a careful watch. There are no software exceptions to this; not Linux, not Windows NT/2000, not OpenBSD, not Solaris, not anything.
----------
I suppose you can argue this, but what is an example of software that doesn't require frequent updates and maintenance?
----------
Your statement implies that only geeks that care first and foremost for the technical superiority of every aspect of the kernel, and its most direct subsystems, can be "True Unix Lovers". That's just arrogance. Plenty of extremely talented programmers, who "get" Unix and love it over anything else, would prefer Linux over FreeBSD simply because accessibility, support, ease of installation, and software availability are far more important criteria.
If the shoe fits, wear it.
----------
The problem with the Ramen worm was not with Red Hat, but with sysadmins that don't frequently update and maintain their systems. If you don't do that, it doesn't really matter what OS you use.
----------