Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Mozilla The Internet

Run For Cover; It's Mozilla 1.4 Alpha 364

Posted by timothy from the you-could-be-the-lucky-winner dept.
asa writes "Mozilla 1.4 Alpha is out. This release features dynamic image and table resizing in Composer, smooth scrolling (see release notes for enabling this feature,) and usability improvements to spam filtering. In addition to these feature improvements, 1.4a also contains fixes for performance, stability, standards support and website compatibility. This is an alpha release so expect bugs, and don't use it unless you are willing to live with the risks inherent in such a release (ie. crashes, data loss, etc.). More information is available in the release notes."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Run For Cover; It's Mozilla 1.4 Alpha More

Run For Cover; It's Mozilla 1.4 Alpha

Comments Filter:

  • Aint Slashdot Great? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by The Real Chrisjc ( 576622 ) <slashdot AT amoose DOT com> on Wednesday April 02, 2003 @07:27AM (#5643496) Homepage
    Heh, thanks to my Slashdot subs, I have already downloaded this release, and I must say, the smooth scrolling is lovely :)) Well, its not majorly different, but nice.
    about:config anyone?
    Get it for cheap thrills of smooth scroll if you havn't already :D

    • Re:Aint Slashdot Great? (Score:5, Funny)

      by Tyreth ( 523822 ) on Wednesday April 02, 2003 @08:06AM (#5643611)
      Got a screenshot of the smooth scrolling? :)

  • Ok.. you can stop now (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 02, 2003 @07:30AM (#5643502)
    April Fools is OVER!

    6 months ago Mozilla was at .99..

    A project that's been in the work for well over 3 years..

    And NOW 1.4 Alpha?!?!

    Excuse me while I go pop some more of those hallucination thingies I had before
    • Well actually it was 1.0 about a year ago.
      But yes this is good news. Then again the rate of milestones on the way to 1.0 was not too disimilar to the rate of final point releases coming out now.
      • The Mozilla development team have got a lot of momentum up. Seems like only a few months ago that Mozilla's version numbers were asymptotic -> 1.0 as basic code was cleaned up. Now they're adding features that are actually useful every 3 months. Good for them (and us, of course), I say...

  • Smooth scrolling not on by default? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 02, 2003 @07:31AM (#5643503)
    Not on by default? What's up with this? Those less technical users who value eye candy like this are the ones that don't know how to turn this thing on and they wouldn't know that such a thing exists, either...
    • I am with Mozilla developers on this decision. In my opinion, this is just an eye candy. But when it comes to usability, it is a real irritating stuff.

      Have you been through the frustrating experience of scrolling in IE with this smooth scrolling on?

      • when it comes to usability, [smooth scrolling] is a real irritating stuff

        I agree. It's the first thing I turn off if I have to use IE.

        • when it comes to usability, [smooth scrolling] is a real irritating stuff

          I agree. It's the first thing I turn off if I have to use IE.

          I almost never, ever use MSIE. However, I think the "smoothness" of smooth scrolling depends on your video hardware. On my main system, with an NVidia geForce ti4600 the scrolling is nice. I'd almost say it was better with my old card (Voodoo3).

          But of course on my laptop (crappy Trident chip) it's painful to sit through. It seems to block all user input and use 100% CPU

      • I didn't know the option existed. So I went and looked and it was on. I just tried to turn it off and really didn't notice the difference, other than it was a little "jumpier" and didn't look as good. I switched back and forth several times. It certainly wasn't any slower or anything, it just didn't look as good. Maybe it's CPU? I have a pretty beefy machine....
      • In my opinion, this is just an eye candy.

        Hi, I coded the smooth scrolling that was checked into 1.4 (with help from roc, thanks roc.)

        I can assure you that I my motivation was *not* to create eye candy. If you use high latency displays like those on a laptop, smooth scrolling makes it *much* easier to read more than a page of text. Smooth scrolling became almost a necesity for me.

        I don't work for netscape and I have no affiliation with mozilla.org. I just patched my local tree then filed a bug so I

    • Re:Smooth scrolling not on by default? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 02, 2003 @07:39AM (#5643525)
      smooth scrolling is in experimental stages.

      there's already atleast 1 crash bug filed against it (sometimes, horizontal scrolling causes a crash).

    • Re:Smooth scrolling not on by default? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by abischof ( 255 ) <alexNO@SPAMspamcop.net> on Wednesday April 02, 2003 @08:46AM (#5643747) Homepage

      You can enable smooth scrolling [mozilla.org] by adding this line to your prefs.js file (while Mozilla isn't running).

      user_pref("general.smoothScroll", true);

      However, it's not entirely useful since Mozilla will crash when you try to scroll horizontally [mozilla.org] if smooth scrolling is enabled. In any case, here's the bug discussing whether smooth scrolling should be enabled by default [mozilla.org] (which I think could make sense, once that horizontal-scrolling crasher is fixed).

      (You may need to cut-n-paste the Bugzilla URLs into your browser, since Bugzilla doesn't accept referers from Slashdot)

    • Re:Smooth scrolling not on by default? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by RoLi ( 141856 ) on Wednesday April 02, 2003 @08:51AM (#5643772)
      Why do so many people believe that "less technical users [are those] who value eye candy"?

      Is there even something, I'm not even asking for proof, just a hint or some study that supports the hypothesis that less technical users want eye-candy?

      I have several hard facts that are supporting the theory that less technical users don't give a shit about eye candy:

      • Less technical users used MS DOS for over half a decade when Apple and others were available as alternative
      • In the late 90's, Enlightment was sure one of the most - if not the most - eyecandy infested Windowmanager. Yet it was only used by geeks, less technical users didn't care.
      • The first search-engines like Yahoo put more and more eyecande (and advertisments) on their sites - and Google wiped the floor with them by providing the simplest search engine interface possible with absolutely no eye-candy, just a white page.

      I also tried MacOSX. In the first 15 minutes, you are really blown away. It's smooth, everything is animated, everything looks good. After about 20 minutes, you get used to the effects, after an hour they just slow you down and go on your nerves. I could only choose between 2 different types of animation for minimize, so you can't even get rid of some of it.

      If eye-candy gets into the way, it should be off by default, IMO and smooth-scrolling is a prime example.

        • All the companies used MS-DOS, there were no programs for Mac (well, compared to MS-DOS)
        • Only technical-minded people STILL use Linux, not to mention a few years ago
        • Ads aren't eyecandy, they're just annoying
        • All the companies used MS-DOS, there were no programs for Mac (well, compared to MS-DOS)

          Correct. Eye-candy was obviously irrelevant in choosing the platform.

          Only technical-minded people STILL use Linux, not to mention a few years ago

          That was correct (it isn't anymore, but that's another discussion). Eye-candy was irrelevant in choosing the platform.

          Ads aren't eyecandy, they're just annoying

          Yahoo also added a couple of other stuff, but OK, I'll give you that point.

      • I don't know about you, but I think smooth scrolling shouldn't be considered "eye candy".

        Smooth scrolling is there for a valid *reason* -- it makes it so much easier for your eyes to follow the vertical jump a page makes when you click up or down (or mouse-wheel, etc).

        Think about it, you're at the end of some line, you mouse wheel, and now the page has jumped up (say) 20 pixels. Now, where do you bring your eye to start the next line? You might have to track the end point of the line you started on, and t
        • Personally, smooth scrolling drives me nuts. It was my #1 complaint about IE (fortunatly you can disable it). I set my scrolls to go one page at a time, since I don't like unnecessary scrolling, I also read documents where you sometimes have to go to the bottom of the doc (to check the footnote) and back a few times. It drove me nuts when I clicked down and had to wait a few seconds for the page to scroll past. It's not like I can read it while it's scrolling or anything either, it's too fast for that.
        • Well, I can't stand the way IE scrolls, if Mozilla has found a better way, fine with me.

          However I wouldn't like it as a default. Maybe if it's extremely successful and widely used in 1.4, you could make it the default in 1.5, but for now I wouldn't.

          Of course all this is a matter of discussion...

      • OS X eye candy (Score:5, Insightful)

        by alexhmit01 ( 104757 ) on Wednesday April 02, 2003 @09:15AM (#5643874)
        For 15 minutes, it blows you away. After 30 minutes, it fades into the background. After an hour, someone convinces you that they slow you down. After two weeks, you realize that they provide you with visual clues that make you faster, because you know what is going on without thinking, because that "eye candry" is a useful part of the UI...

        Alex
      • Is there even something, I'm not even asking for proof, just a hint or some study that supports the hypothesis that less technical users want eye-candy?

        It seems to me that it's based off of the assumption that a lot of tech people consider "non tech" people to be stupid because they don't know how to use a computer, and thus have this belief that they must be easily amused by dancing spinning things. I think many tech people liking the CLI, vs regular people liking the GUI has probably contributed towar
      • > Why do so many people believe that "less technical users [are those] who value eye candy"?

        Personaly I don't. Less technical people use what their boss tells them to use. They don't have the time, energy and mostly interrest to fiddle around with settings and toys.
        (and if they had the interrest, they wouldn't stay "less technical" very long..;)
    • Not on by default? What's up with this?

      Simple answer: because it's an Alpha release. I would expect that to change, and surely it will be easy to (de)activate in a stable release.

  • Did they keep the kitchen sink?

    Daniel
  • Is there a large panicky or extremely nervous element to the Mozilla userbase?

    Quote (their formatting):
    "If the build you're looking for isn't here yet, DON'T PANIC."

    Hmmm, can't seem to find the build I need...
    OMGWHATAMIGOINGTODOISITALLENDING? HELPMESUPERMAN!!!11

  • Marketing ploy (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Now Redhat will need to release version 10.

  • Not mentionned in the story ... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Pat__ ( 26992 ) on Wednesday April 02, 2003 @07:37AM (#5643521)
    The code for the bookmarks has been rewritten so you can see major updates there including icons in the sidebar (still waiting for icons in the personal toolbar) but that's a good start.

    Also the dynamic image resizing in Composer is way too cool :-)
    Worth launching Composer just to see it in action.

    And finally for those of you using the pie-menu extentions you should download the latest version compatible with 1.4 alpha.
    • Yeah, the bookmarks aren't quite fixed because they have brought in some newer bugs, but that's because the bookmark code has been overhauled.

      They also added a cookie manager that has an option for IE-like security zones (it is better than IE's of course). The jury is still out if I like it or not. I just block all 3rd party cookies.

  • I've had a look (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Mattygfunk1 ( 596840 ) on Wednesday April 02, 2003 @07:37AM (#5643522)
    I have been playing around with the development version prior to this, and it will definately be a big step-up from 1.3 when the final is released. The speed, look, and feel make the best browser even better.

    ___________

    Your Cheap Web Site Hosting [cheap-web-...ing.com.au] costs as little as 3 bucks.

  • It's nice (Score:3, Informative)

    by Dark Lord Seth ( 584963 ) on Wednesday April 02, 2003 @07:42AM (#5643531) Journal

    Been running a nightly 1.4a build since a few days because 1.3 doesn't like my google adress bar search function thingamajig. It's pretty much as lovely as Mozilla 1.3 except it hasn't killed my google adress bar search thingamjiggy... yet.

    Otherwise, I still agree that Mozilla is lovely!

    • If you like the Google bar, try this:

      In the Prefs box:

      1) Navigator section, Internet Search subsection
      Set "Search Using" to Google

      2) Nav section, Smart Browsing subsection
      Turn on "Location Bar Autocomplete"
      Press the Advanced button
      Check "Show internet search engine"

      Now, instead of using the Google bar, you can type someting into the location bar, press the up arrow key, and press enter. When you hit Ctrl-T to open a new tab, the focus goes into the location bar by default, so this can save a lot of

  • Bookmarks, new feature (Score:5, Informative)

    by metz2000 ( 589474 ) on Wednesday April 02, 2003 @07:43AM (#5643536) Homepage
    An excellent new feature has been added. The ability to drag and drop bookmarks using the menu only. No longer do I have to go into Bookmark Manager!

    Still can't right-click the items in the bookmarks menu, but hey maybe in a future release. :-)

    Very good work IMHO.

  • One feature i would like to see is... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by !recycle ( 467325 ) on Wednesday April 02, 2003 @07:44AM (#5643539) Homepage
    the ability to copy images straight out of a browser window. it is one feature that i have always liked about IE.

  • So what? (Score:2, Funny)

    by etrusco ( 576870 )
    All I know is I'll quit using Mozilla and will start a port of Konqueror to Winblows if that irritating tab bug [mozilla.org] isn't fixed in 1.4.
    • but you gotta love "url in the clipboard", "ctrl-t", "middle click", "page opens"
    • All I know is I'll quit using Mozilla and will start a port of Konqueror to Winblows if that irritating tab bug [mozilla.org] isn't fixed in 1.4.

      I hate that one too. I frequently middle-click (open in new tab) links from Slashdot, for example. Frequently the link times out. I'd like to be able to switch to that tab and reload, but when I do, the URL isn't there -- it reloads the blank page. Usually by this point I've already moved elsewhere in the /. window and it makes it a major pain to keep trying the

  • NTLM on Windows! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by bunratty ( 545641 ) on Wednesday April 02, 2003 @07:49AM (#5643555)
    Asa didn't mention one new major feature -- Windows builds now support NTLM authentication. This was the one blocker for lots of folks who wanted to run Mozilla at work. Eventually, other platforms will get NTLM, too.

    • Re:NTLM on Windows! (Score:5, Interesting)

      by weave ( 48069 ) on Wednesday April 02, 2003 @08:12AM (#5643629) Journal
      Let's hope they fix bug 162025, another huge corporate blocker. If a place has a GPO that redirects the %appdata% folder, mozilla won't work. If a mozilla profile is pointed at UNC pathname, it won't work.

      Read my ranting about it for more details in comment #28 of that bug.

      I manage 2000 desktops and deployed Mozilla before fully understanding the ramifications of this bug. The end result was a lot of pissed off users of lost profiles over and over.

      Don't think it's a big deal? My employer's entire IT structure was recently looked over by an outside consultant and during my interview, she asked "What is your e-mail client?" I said "Mozilla." She was like "Mozilla was a big mistake let me tell you. Your users hate it."

      And the only reason they hate it is because Windows, when using roaming profiles (and my users roam a lot being it's a college) likes to move the location of the profile (eg, ...\username, ...\username.domain, ...\username.domain.001, etc) and if that happens, mozilla goes to hell and loses the profile. And you can't move %appdata% to a UNC path via GPO to get around this because Mozilla just plain ole won't work then.) And while you can move most of the profile to a fixed drive letter place, like Z:\mozilla, registry.dat file still must remain in %appdata%.

      So here I tried to give my users a browser alternative and I got reamed by a consultant (whose final report hasn't been released yet) for doing it.

      So yeah, I'm a bit bitter... If you manage a windows domain environment, avoid Mozilla, Netscape 7, or anything based on the code, until this bug is fixed,. Learn from my misfortune.

      • Re:NTLM on Windows! (Score:3, Insightful)

        by GooberToo ( 74388 )
        I'm confused as to why you didn't do an incremental deployment or a test deployment. Seems like either would of easily caught this, with even the most modest of testing.

        • Re:NTLM on Windows! (Score:5, Insightful)

          by weave ( 48069 ) on Wednesday April 02, 2003 @09:40AM (#5644075) Journal
          I agree. But as with most things in life, there's more to the story than appears.

          It all began in January of 2002, when the decision was made here to move from NT on desktops and NT 4 domain controler to XP on desktops and 2000 server and Active Directory on servers. The plan was to test the environment in vmware machines and get bugs worked out between January-April of that time period, change the servers to AD between semesters in May, then deploy XP desktop to some end users during the slow summer months, then do the deployment in August.

          We had used Netscape 4.7 for web and mail client during the NT days and had some nifty logon scripts to edit and install prefs.js and a netscape profile so users didn't have to configure squat. The profile locaton was changable by a simple registry change. It worked very well, the masses were happy.

          As anyone in academia is aware, it's a chaotic environment and crap kept being thrown on my team left and right, keeping them from working on this project. You have to understand that most faculty are primma donnas. Getting them to understand that a project of this scope requires a bunch of techs to basically disappear for months and not available to handle their pet projects, grants, and last minute crisis, escapes them. "We are here for the students" is the common mantra (which is true, but often they are best served by, ah like, decent planning).

          My pleas for understanding went on deaf ears. "We just signed a contract to provide xxx training and need this lab up in two weeks" for example. "Drop everything and do it."

          Now, understand, I'm a manager, not an administrator. I don't get to ask too many questions, I'm here to implement upper decisions and to take the blame when things fail.

          So, come May, we're not ready to move to Active Directory. I announce that we won't meet the August changeover date. I get my ass reamed. "Textbooks for XP have been ordered, syllabi changed, we can't go back now."

          So, panic kicks in and a lot was done with little testing. We also had hoped to roll out Netscape 7 but it didn't come out until the first week of classes, so we went with Mozilla 1.0.1 instead.

          Overall, the deployment was quite a success except for the Mozilla issue. I got lucky in a lot of areas. But people only see the things that fail.

          So yeah, in an ideal world, I could have avoided it through proper planning. And I got shafted due to decisions and situations beyond my control. Can you realize how frustrating it is to see decisions being made that will doom your project to failure, have no one care, and then when they do fail as you predict, you are the one who gets the blame? There is a reason why Dilbert is such a popular comic strip.

          And if you think CYA memos would have helped, they don't. I do them all the time, remind people of my dire warnings, and you just come off like a whining bitch.

          But I am the manager, and it's my job to take one for the team, so thanks for reminding me of my place...

          (Note to self: Never post to slashdot hoping to share real-life knowledge again. Everytime I do, I regret it. Just like I'll regret this one since it'll get picked apart and criticized further. It's like being in an abusive relationship. I know I should leave this place, but keep coming back for more abuse for some reason...)

      • I'm finishing our Win2K -> OS X migration... WOW is networking more pleasant... at least for a small network.

        You mount the home directory off a server, instead of copying it up and down (takes forever) on Windows.

        Mozilla isn't on any machines, it's in the Applications share, mounted at /Network/Applications. They can run the .App file, and everything works fine...

        Really nice, I have 3 alternative browsers and 1 alternative IM client, for people that want them. There is no installation, and they are
        • well, wandering off topic, but I am envious. A corporate decision was made at my place to kill off the last Mac holdouts last year, the Marketing department. So we got them all PCs and confiscated their G4s. I put one in my office, started playing with OS X, and loved it so much that I got an iMac for my living room and recently a G4 12" laptop for personal use.

          It's such a breath of fresh air. I suffer in a Windows world all day long, but when I go home, I use a Mac.

          I wish I could swing a switch here...

        • You don't copy the home directory up and down on Windows either. It maps to a server share. The PROFILE is what is uploaded and downloaded from the server. You can actually get around this by copying the profile folders that you care about to your home directory and editing the registry so that the entries for these folders (my documents, favorites, etc) are pointing to your home directory.
        • This kind of "roaming" has been standard using NFS on unix since the 80s. I have never understood why windows copies your complete "home directory" up and down, that is insane!

          For performance reasons it may be nice to have a local copy of your homedirectory. For that reason Sun (and others) introduced a local-caching layer on NFS which copies files on demand (and copies them back after use) and also takes care of "cache coherency" issues when accessing your NFS mounted directory from several places in para
    • This would be great, why isnt this in the release notes?

      more about this is found in
      http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1 5 9015
      (copy and past,bugzilla does not accept /. refferrers)

      This very close to the i.e. implementation. Microsoft documented their security mechanism:
      howitworks/security/sspi2000.asp> [microsoft.com]
      msdn [microsoft.com]

      For the non windows users (or older mozilla users) ther is still an ntlm proxy [freshmeat.net] that works very good.

  • Export Restrictions (Score:5, Funny)

    by kinnell ( 607819 ) on Wednesday April 02, 2003 @07:57AM (#5643575)
    This source code is subject to the U.S. Export Administration Regulations and other U.S. law, and may not be exported or re-exported to certain countries (currently Afghanistan (Taliban controlled areas), Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Libya, North Korea, Sudan and Syria)

    They forgot France, Germany and Turkey.

    p.s. Taliban controlled areas? I thought the Taliban had been defeated.

  • this is great, i wish roaming profiles was in the pipeline however even a decent hack to commit / checkin to a uri resource.

    or hack to get yahoo companion working again.
  • I read "data loss" as "hair loss" ... I don't want to know how I will interpret "increase your screen size" or something like this.

  • Lots of probs with RH8 RPMS (Score:4, Informative)

    by Chris Croome ( 24340 ) on Wednesday April 02, 2003 @08:03AM (#5643598) Journal

    I have just installed the RH 8.0 RPMS [mozilla.org] and Ctr-T to open a new tab is broken (but right click on a link and open in new tab works).

    Also lots of preferences things are also broken, like everything under Navigator -- the error looks like the one you get with an invalid XML file.

    However it's still my fave browser and hopefully it's going to be more stable than 1.4 was... :-)

  • another good thing about 1.4a is... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by jonwil ( 467024 ) on Wednesday April 02, 2003 @08:03AM (#5643600)
    that it now builds with MingW GCC on Win32 (well ok, some of the patches havent gone into the tree yet but still).

    If you want to see the details, check bug 134113

  • Kitchen sink (Score:2, Funny)

    by tsa ( 15680 )
    For some reason about:kitchensink doesn't work for me in Mozilla 1.3. Hopefully it works in this version.

  • Calender? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by the endless ( 412967 )
    Can anyone tell me if the calender is part of the default build now?

    I'm not sure because (naughty puppy that I am) I installed straight over the top of my previous installation... so I'm not sure if the calender happens to be there because it was carried over from my previous install, or because it's part of the build.

    Seems like a funny omission from the release notes if it is there by default now!

    • Re:Calender? (Score:2, Informative)

      by inthehacker ( 207758 )
      The Calendar is not part of the default build, but can be installed from http://www.mozilla.org/projects/calendar/ It should work fine in 1.4 alpha.
      The project has recently implemented a multi week view, and now has the ability to print calendars as well. There's lots of great work being done on it, by students at the University of Charleston (improved week views, date pickers and more) and at Penn State (integration with calendar server).
      Mike

  • Reading Spam-filtering rules? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by hiryuu ( 125210 ) on Wednesday April 02, 2003 @08:14AM (#5643639)
    One thing I had hoped to find, based subsequent interest from reading the various whitepapers on Bayesian filtering for spam, is an ability to study the spam I get and the rules implemented and learned. Even just an overview of the statistics would be nice (or a plainly-obvious way to access the data to do my own analysis); this became particularly relevant to me after "training" my filters on 1.3 on several hundred spam I'd saved, only to find several false positives in the first few weeks (most related to my job-hunting efforts, one from a friend letting me know briefly that her email had changed, and one from an old college buddy asking how I was doing after so long).

    I hear "usability improvements" in regards to the junk mail filtering, and wonder if this kind of thing might be involved, or on the horizon. (Yeah, I know I could download the alpha, but I'm a wuss who likes stable releases.) I see "context menu items" in the release notes, but that doesn't mean much to me. Anyone care to enlighten me?

    • I agree. The spam filtering is a little too aggressive. Seems to mark everybody that isn't in my address book as junk.

      Is there a way to re-train the filters? I'm getting ready to go back to my labrynthine array of spam filters so I don't miss something important.

      • Re:Reading Spam-filtering rules? (Score:4, Informative)

        by Aanallein ( 556209 ) on Wednesday April 02, 2003 @01:21PM (#5645745)
        The spam filtering is a little too aggressive. Seems to mark everybody that isn't in my address book as junk.

        So mark all that email as non-junk again to correct the behaviour. The filters will learn very quickly if you do.
        The bayesian filters working correctly depends on having knowledge of both email that is considered junk and email that isn't junk.

        Is there a way to re-train the filters?

        If you really have to, you can delete training.dat to remove all training information (found in your profile, see the release notes [mozilla.org] for the location if you don't know).

      • Before you do this, I suggest you move all of the actual spam to a spam folder if you haven't already. This will make this process easier.

        Completely exit Mozilla. Go to your profile directory, and look for a file called training.dat. Delete it (or rename it to something else). Start Mozilla Mail again. Re-flag all of the real spam as spam (select all the spam messages, and hit the junk button). Then, go through and find some good messages (not all of them), and flag them as not spam. The less aggr
  • Since it's been over a year since someone saw
    working SVG on Mozilla, using IE as a workaround
    must be acceptable.
    No, Native SVG on Mozilla isn't kicking yet.

    http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1335 67 #c30
    • Agreed on this one, I would really like to see SVG support pickup in Moz. While it's great that our bookmarks have gotten a retooling, SVG is a new feature that was only ever semi-completed.

      Right now there are no alternatives, there is an SVG plugin from Adobe but it doesn't work in anything beyond the legacy Netscape 4.x. We sorely need an industry standard for scalable vector graphics, and in this case SVG fills a huge void.
  • Word is that Mozilla 1.4-final will be the base for Netscape 7.1 or whatever they call it.
  • at leaast on my system. Screen corruption, scrollbar vanishes, crashes. Not that these things arent unexpected, but most alphas I've used have been fairly stable. Could this have anything to do with the brand new nvidia drivers?

  • Sill no MacOS support :-( (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Andy_R ( 114137 ) on Wednesday April 02, 2003 @09:19AM (#5643898) Homepage Journal
    It's interesting/annoying that since version 1.2, Mozilla only supports Mac OSX, especially given that a large portion of the Apple community is unwilling to move to the new system.

    I'm in a building where there are about 2 dozen macs, and I've converted about 50% of the people here to Mozilla, but as none of us use OSX (and quite a few have horror stories about trying to change), I'm starting to see people switch back to IE.

    I'm not trying to spark off the MacOS vs OSX debate here, but I wonder if the Mozilla project will end up losing a lot of it's market share by not supporting people like me who can't/won't/don't need to switch to OSX. It's strange that there are ports to OSes so obscure that I've never heard of them, but not the OS that the majority of people in my building use.

    Is there any way which someone not tech-savvy enough to help with a port to OS9 could help to persuade the Mozilla people to give us the extra features and stability that we are missing out on?

    Being the only MacOS browser with decent spam filtering would give people a really good reason to change, I'm sure I could boost Mozilla's market share here to 80-90% in that was available for MacOS.

    • Not really so surprising (Score:4, Insightful)

      by sjbe ( 173966 ) on Wednesday April 02, 2003 @11:01AM (#5644678)
      It's interesting/annoying that since version 1.2, Mozilla only supports Mac OSX, especially given that a large portion of the Apple community is unwilling to move to the new system.

      This shouldn't really be so surprising. With OSX replacing MacOS, there really are just two major operating system platforms out there, Windows and unix, of which OSX is one of the many varieties of the latter. It's unix underpinnings make OSX much easier for developers to port their projects to.

      MacOS for all its good features is a very unique and hence more difficult to support operating system, at least from the standpoint of cross platform compatibility. Impossible? Obviously not. But since MacOS is no longer under active development, it shouldn't surprise anyone that it isn't really worthwhile for the "official" project to continue to develop for it. There are only a finite amount of development resources out there so it makes sense to develop for the platforms with the best prospects moving forward, namely Windows and unix.

      I'm half sure that someone will probably take up the banner and try to port the more recent versions to MacOS. And that's one of the great things about open source. But there is a cost to remaining with older code bases. You take the risk of being left behind. That is among the reasons I no longer run OS/2, Windows 3.1, MacOS and a few other operating systems I've used heavily over the years. Eventually the costs of not switching become tooh great. Apparently for many Mac owners they aren't at that point yet. But they will be sooner or later. It's inevitable. The maintainers of the mozilla project simply recognize this fact and chose to deal with it now rather than later.
    • It's strange that there are ports to OSes so obscure that I've never heard of them, but not the OS that the majority of people in my building use.

      Maybe it's strange, but that's the reality. There are people that care enough about AIX or BeOS and have the skill to keep them building on those platforms. There aren't people that care enoughand have the skill to keep Mozilla building on Mac classic.

      Is there any way which someone not tech-savvy enough to help with a port to OS9 could help to persuade the Mo
  • Here are some pretty old bugs about tabs that could use some fixes / votes. They aren't critical, but fixing them (especially the first one) would really improve usability.

    This one is about the URL bar not being set when you open a link in a new tab - the problem occurs when the page doesn't load. You can't find out what the URL was that didn't load, so you have to find the link again on the page you opened it from.
    http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?i d =103720

    This bug is about tabs and the status

  • Where is Phoenix? (Score:5, Funny)

    by DeadBugs ( 546475 ) on Wednesday April 02, 2003 @09:27AM (#5643978) Homepage
    There has not been a new release of the stripped down Phoenix [mozilla.org] browser since December 7th. I notice that the nightly builds are still being updated. I hope they are not spending all this time trying to come up with a new name.
  • I just want to know why Mozilla is trying so hard to become the next IE? I mean, with useless features like auto-image resizing and smooth scrolling, features I never use at all anyways, Mozilla might as well be soo bloated like IE! I miss my M4 mozilla :( Thank god for junk mail controls though, its twarting my spam at a rate of 17 emails a day!!! Hazaa for Mozilla Junk Mail Controlls!

  • ATI??? (Score:2)

    by gclef ( 96311 )
    What's with the long-term bug with ATI cards (random crashes on some sites, according to the Known Problems)? Almost every Gateway PC I've worked with (and some Dells as well) have ATI's in them, which means I can never use Moz at work (and can't realistically recommend it to less-technical friends, since they have those machines as well). This bug has been there since at least 1.0, if not earlier (haven't checked earlier).

    Perhaps I don't understand the history, but it looks really bad for Moz to simply

    • Re:ATI??? (Score:3, Informative)

      by tweek ( 18111 )
      Easy fix. Go into the display properties->settings->advanced->troubleshooting and turn down hardware acceleration down one notch.

      Problem solved. At least for me on my win2k dell workstation at the office.

  • Important bugs still open (Score:4, Interesting)

    by digitect ( 217483 ) <(digitect) (at) (dancingpaper.com)> on Wednesday April 02, 2003 @09:38AM (#5644056)

    Version 1.4 *still* hasn't closed my three favorite bugs:

    Home button should appear on main Toolbar:
    http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89350

    Edit Source using External Editor:
    http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35268

    Address book: Lists lose addresses:
    http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96877

    (Sorry for the dumb links, bugzilla won't accept SlashDot referals.)

  • question about profiles (Score:3, Interesting)

    by cetan ( 61150 ) on Wednesday April 02, 2003 @10:01AM (#5644256) Journal
    How often am I supposed to be creating a new profile? Every release? Every major release (i.e. non alpha or beta)?

    It's a real pain in the rear to get a new profile going, especially when it comes to mail/news. For some reason I've got about 37 different "Inbox" files in what I perceive to be my Local Folders. who the hell knows which one is which?

    Anyone have a clue on this one because my tube of cluepaste is fresh out...

  • Location bar autocomplete tip (Score:5, Informative)

    by ortholattice ( 175065 ) on Wednesday April 02, 2003 @10:06AM (#5644294)
    I liked the 1.2.1 behavior of "first click on location bar selects all", so that "click" then "s" immediately autocompletes the most frequently visited "s" site (e.g. slashdot). This went away in 1.3 with a kind of 3rd-click-selects-all behavior. To restore it in recent nightlies, and I assume 1.4alpha, put in your user.js:

    user_pref("browser.urlbar.clickSelectsAll", true);
    user_pref("browser.urlbar.clickAtEndSelects", true);

    This will also restore the behavior partially in 1.3, but only if you click on top of the currently displayed URL (i.e. it won't work if you click in the blank area because the 2nd user_pref was implemented after 1.3).

  • SPELLCHECKER ... ADD IT DAMN-IT!!! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by molarmass192 ( 608071 ) on Wednesday April 02, 2003 @10:16AM (#5644362) Homepage Journal
    What is it going to take to get them to add the spellchecker from mozdev to the main Mozilla CVS. Smooth scrolling, great fantastic but where's the spellchecker?!?. I'm getting really tired of the "oh ... next release" promises. Stop adding menial improvements and get this moved to the main!!! Even Slashdot is a perfect example, imagine ... right click, check spelling your posts. It's certainly a hell of alot more important than "oh look, the redraw is somewhat less jerky when you scroll", wow, fantastic. Come on, somebody with a say get this moved in PLEASE!

    • Mozilla is dead! Use [Phoenix|Opera|Chimera|Galeon]
    • [Phoenix|Opera|Chimera|Galeon|IE] suck, Mozilla is the only true browser.
    • Mozilla is not a browser, it's a platform
    • Mail client in Mozilla sucks
    • Why haven't they fixed bug xxxx yet. It's been like forever!
    Did I miss any?

Slashdot Top Deals

If you think nobody cares if you're alive, try missing a couple of car payments. -- Earl Wilson

Close