Mozilla 1.8 Alpha 5 Out And About 57
asa writes "Today we've shipped the latest Alpha release on the road to Mozilla 1.8. With nearly 600 bug fixes since Alpha 5, A6 contains some exciting new Gecko work.
You can help the Mozilla team as we drive toward 1.8 by downloading and testing this release. Get the release builds and notes at mozilla.org."
Who uses this anymore ?. (Score:4, Interesting)
I read my mail in mutt and I like that (*hint* , it lets me use vim to compose) , chat with xchat etc.. Mozilla Suite might have been overshadowed by it's leaner sibling :)
But Gecko improvements are GOOD (TM)Re:Who uses this anymore ?. (Score:1)
It certainly has in this household... Some time ago I thought the intention was to cease further development of Mozilla as Firefox matured. Looks like that's gone by the board.
Re:Who uses this anymore ?. (Score:4, Informative)
Mozilla is still the testbed for new functionality that may make its way into Firefox, Thunderbird, etc. A sort of Debian testing of the browser world.
I do (Score:3, Informative)
1 - Find Mozilla more mature and stable
2 - Aren't driven to use the newest thing just "because"
3 - Use MozMail as their main client and don't feel like switching
4 - Don't want to keep separate apps updated/tinkered with
Re:Who uses this anymore ?. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Who uses this anymore ?. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Who uses this anymore ?. (Score:2)
I, for one, do. I prefer Mozilla's mail/news client, and I use Chatzilla and Moz Calendar as well. For me, the Mozilla Suite is exactly what I need.
Additionally, despite the constant whining about 'bloat' from certain Mozilla developers, I find the Moz Suite to be perfectly fine performance wise, on modern hardware. The slowest machine I run it on is 700 mhz Celeron, and it's fine on there.
Not to mention I hate the fact that Firefox doesn't support the same "search in the url
Re:Who uses this anymore ?. (Score:2)
Re:Who uses this anymore ?. (Score:2)
I would replace one app by two, I'm not sure where is the gain..
Roaming Profiles (Score:5, Interesting)
Correction (Score:5, Interesting)
This should read "...since Alpha 4, A5 contains some..."
I don't use the Mozilla suite anymore (moved to Firefox), but the Gecko improvements will of course end up in Firefox as well, so it's all good. Time to browse over to the roadmap to figure out how that development path actually works nowadays...
Seamonkey over Firefox (Score:4, Informative)
I sincerely hope that Mozilla.org does not stop supporting the suite, as most of the users of the suite have been Mozilla supporters far longer than the current influx of Firefox fans. Hopefully, our dedication in testing would convince them that seamonkey is just as important as Firefox.
Re:Seamonkey over Firefox (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Seamonkey over Firefox (Score:1)
Re:Seamonkey over Firefox (Score:1)
Re:Seamonkey over Firefox (Score:2)
Re:Seamonkey over Firefox (Score:1)
Re:Seamonkey over Firefox (Score:2)
Re:Seamonkey over Firefox (Score:2)
Re:Seamonkey over Firefox (Score:3, Informative)
I would be mortified if they did stop supporting the suite.
> Hopefully, our dedication in testing would
> convince them that seamonkey is just as
> important as Firefox.
Hopefully so.
Cheers,
Roger
Re:Seamonkey over Firefox (Score:1)
Re:Seamonkey over Firefox (Score:2)
It's all good.
Cheers,
Roger
Re:Seamonkey over Firefox (Score:2)
Re:Seamonkey over Firefox (Score:3, Informative)
Maybe some people think that mozilla provides better integration between browsing, mail, news, organization, and even HTML page creation as opposed to having different apps like Firefox and Thunderfox to do the same thing.
Choice of course - some people may prefer links/w3m/lynx/surfraw, vim, tin/slrn, and mutt to do the same thing as well.
Perceived benefits are what makes the determination of what makes something better because
Re:Seamonkey over Firefox (Score:2)
Then, there's the UI differences: the teeny-tiny search bar instead of typing searches into the big URL bar, slightly different handling of middle clicks and searching, and so on. I haven't used anything but Moz for a while, so can't tell you more specifics. These are mat
Re:Seamonkey over Firefox (Score:3, Interesting)
Here's a few things I like better in the suite:
1) Type ahead find is nicer in the suite. I prefer it to only search links if I start typing. Even messing with about:config, I haven't gotten FireFox to work like that
Re:Seamonkey over Firefox (Score:2)
2) In the suite, type-ahead find works everywhere. That includes the View Source window and email messages. In the seperate apps, it only works in the main browser window.
This works fine for me in Firefox 1.0's view source windows. I use it all the time on both OS X and Windows.
Re:Seamonkey over Firefox (Score:2)
I mostly prefer the way it works for what I do. I guess a large part of that is the fact that I'm so used to it that any change is a pain.
I can't really tell much difference over startup times or responsivity (this is on Windows with the quick start enabled), I think the firefox interface is messier - too much candy. I prefer the way I have moz set up with text only buttons and as few of them as possible.
The real gripe for me is the search bar. Why have a who
Re:Seamonkey over Firefox (Score:2)
I've been using Phoenix/Firebird/Firefox since 0.4 or 0.5, and I've had very few stability problems. I leave my browser running all the time, rarely with fewer than 10 tabs, and it just about never crashes. When it does, as you say, it's a shock. Which isn't surprising in either case, because they're almost the same program.
How to turn off URL autocomplete in Firefox? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:How to turn off URL autocomplete in Firefox? (Score:2)
What about :
or adding the same key in about:config?
On a side note, you also have the very useful option:
in order to list only addresses you've typed in the address bar autocomplete.
:-)
Most of these advanced options can't be changed through the GUI, but they are still there in Firefox.
HTH
Re:How to turn off URL autocomplete in Firefox? (Score:2)
Re:How to turn off URL autocomplete in Firefox? (Score:2)
Re:How to turn off URL autocomplete in Firefox? (Score:3, Informative)
I checked about:config [about] on an old version of Firefox I had lying around and saw that, indeed, browser.urlbar.autocomplete.enabled no longer existed (neither did browser.urlbar.autofill, but it appears that the behavior for that it is now fixed to its default "false"). So the answer to this is, it's possible, but you would have to play with XUL. If someone would care to make a plugin to do this, you could get the feature that way.
Short of that, you can reduce the annoyance by setting browser.urlbar.match
No mozilla for quite sometime (Score:1)
Re:No mozilla for quite sometime (Score:2)
Re:No mozilla for quite sometime (Score:1)
future roadmap (Score:1, Informative)
So installing compartible versions of Thunderbird+Firebird+Nvu, etc will be the same as installing the whole suite.
Re:future roadmap (Score:2)
I hope they do this carefully and with lots of planning, because it's so easy to end up in "DLL hell" (or "shared library hell") if you don't. It would be nice to keep the option to install these apps completely separately so that you can upgrade one without affecting the other. Sure, more disk and more memory, but these things are cheap today and continue to get cheaper.
Eric
How to detect Internet Explorer [ericgiguere.com]
Re:future roadmap (Score:2)
That's why I say in the article "I'm keeping it really simple so you don't need to use JSTL or any other tag library". If this is something that you want to do often, you should move it into tags, or install a filter to set request properties, or whatever.
Mind you, I don't subscribe to the party line that all scriptlets are evil. Most of the time you shouldn't use scriptlets, but there are exceptions to everything. Nothing wrong with the occasional one-off here and there -- but you gotta know the rules to
Browser Detection (OT) (Score:1)
Your signature line:
For those who are browser agnostic and simply wish for a browser to work on their web pages, it's more useful to check for the existence of a feature. Since Javascript allows you to check whether a function or object is defined without causing an error, one can gracefully fail -- simply don't use a feature if it's not available -- instead of trying to respond properly to innumerable browser versions. Feel free to read more on this from Quirks Mode [quirksmode.org]
Re:Browser Detection (OT) (Score:2)
All I'm doing is showing how you can do a little server-side scripting to decide whether or not to show a "Get Firefox!" image or link to encourage IE users to switch to Firefox. (Just do it gently and politely.) Yes, you can also do this in JavaScript, but my little article doesn't deal with client-side detection at all.
EricRe:Browser Detection (OT) (Score:1)
I'm not sure you read my second paragraph in its entirety. I was not suggesting Javascript. I was suggesting a better method to do exactly what you say you claim you are trying to do -- "show a 'Get Firefox!' image or link to...IE users." You might check it again.
Re:Browser Detection (OT) (Score:2)
Sorry, you're right, I missed that bit about the conditional comments. Yeesh, what a kludge! Anyhow, my original intent was to show people how to detect if Firefox [ericgiguere.com] was being used and to show a "Spread Firefox!" button instead of a "Get Firefox!" button but some non-IE users took offense at the implication that they should be getting Firefox too. Can't please everyone, I guess!
Hopefully some viewers learn something new when they read the article (and the HTTP header viewer).
Eric
SVG? (Score:2)
Re:SVG? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:SVG? (Score:2)
http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/mozilla/ni g htly/latest-trunk/ [mozilla.org]
It hasn't been decided when SVG might possibly be turned on for release builds. I've heard some talk of the 1.9 timeframe, but a lot of code still needs to be reviewed. Also, I think they are waiting on some rendering backend for one of the main platforms.
Bug 122092 - Enable SVG support
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12209 2 [mozilla.org]
Obviously you will have to copy and paste the above
Broken edit:proferences ? (Score:3, Interesting)
Anyone else have their preferences dialog box broken with this release ? I haven't seen a bug report for this version. Older versions bug reports have 'apparently' been fixed.
FYI, for those who do install the tar files. I wrote a little shell script that I called mozbak, that I always run before installing any theme or extension or upgrade. So I can always roll back
[07:58] [nri@sammy:bin] $ cat mozbak
date=`date +%Y%m%d-%H%M%S`
cd
echo tar cvhfz mozilla_$date.tgz
tar cvhfz mozilla_`date +%Y%m%d-%H%M%S`.tgz mozilla
use
cd
echo tar cvfz mozilla_$date.tgz
tar cvfz mozilla_$date.tgz
Re:Broken edit:proferences ? (Score:2)
Change in development road? (Score:2)
Now most of the replies seem to indicate a reverse course, that the 1.8 suite development will make its way into firefox.
I don't really care either way as long as they keep up the great work.
I had also begun to think that I would never use a "suite" again due to all that bloat, but since I love firefox so