Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Mozilla The Internet

Mozilla 1.4RC2 Released 508

Posted by timothy
from the if-it-ain't-baroque dept.
levell writes "Mozilla 1.4RC2 has been released. It looks like the final version of 1.4 may be out soon. It looks good although there are some problems with java on old linux systems (discussed here). 1.4 will be a long lived branch that some distributors will base versions of their own software on (e.g. Netscape planned release, codenamed "buffy"). 1.4 will be the last version of Mozilla released as a suite, after that the switch to separate browser, e-mail etc. applications will take place."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Mozilla 1.4RC2 Released

Comments Filter:
  • by jkrise (535370) on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @09:27AM (#6233114) Journal
    That accidentally doesn't work with this Mozilla any more... now that AOL's approved of IE and sunk Netscape and abandoned Mozilla (yet?), this is the next in line.
    • Browser Spoofing. (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Delta-9 (19355) * <delta9.gmail@com> on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @09:43AM (#6233300)
      I think browser spoofing is a very bad thing. Yes it lets you load your page correctly, but it will never let the "powers that be" know that people use something other than IE.

      I have stopped telling safari to use the IE "user agent" because of this. I want people to know that I use something that isn't Microsoft and sooner or later this is going to make a difference. Especially with the fact that M$ has officially dropped their IE for OS X.

      • Re:Browser Spoofing. (Score:5, Interesting)

        by El Cubano (631386) <robertoNO@SPAMconnexer.com> on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @10:03AM (#6233529) Homepage

        I have stopped telling safari to use the IE "user agent" because of this. I want people to know that I use something that isn't Microsoft and sooner or later this is going to make a difference. Especially with the fact that M$ has officially dropped their IE for OS X.

        Boy would I love to join you there. Unfortunately there are still some websites that flat out refuse to load into anything other than IE, most notably the website where I access my payroll information to verify I was paid correctly). I emailed tech support and their reply was, "we only support IE in Windows, get partition magic and install windows on your computer." It's a tough fight righ now.

        • Don't cave in. (Score:5, Interesting)

          by haeger (85819) on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @10:53AM (#6234080)
          I emailed tech support and their reply was, "we only support IE in Windows, get partition magic and install windows on your computer."

          Then do what I do. Refuse to use their service. My bank didn't allow me to use Mozilla on Linux, bye bye bank. I can find someone else to give my money to. My company recently installed a time-reportin tool that requires Windows and IE, I still send my report card to a secretary since I don't have a computer with IE on it, it's either that or they can PAY me to come in in the evening to fill out those damn web-reports in IE, and I guarantee You that I will do this on high pay time.

          Don't cave in. All over the world there is one thing people understand. Money. If not supporting Mozilla starts costing them money then they'll have to rethink.

          I'm sure I could install windows if they like, provided that they pay for the licese, the computer, my time to install and administer the box. If they want me to run it, they'd better pay me. I don't do boring stuff on my spare time.

          .haeger
          • Re:Don't cave in. (Score:4, Interesting)

            by El Cubano (631386) <robertoNO@SPAMconnexer.com> on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @11:01AM (#6234174) Homepage

            Then do what I do. Refuse to use their service. My bank didn't allow me to use Mozilla on Linux, bye bye bank. ...

            <snip>

            Don't cave in. All over the world there is one thing people understand. Money.

            I agree with you in principle. But, this the U.S. government, not a bank. It's my payroll, not an account. Believe me, I understand money, especially mine. At least for now, I can still get my pay statement in the mail, but what happens when they stop mailing them out (like when they went to exclusively direct deposit)?

            At least I recently talked to a supervisor in the tech support shop (I managed to a get phone number to them) who seems to be more helpful than that twit of a tech who responded to my first email.

          • BofA (Score:3, Informative)

            by engine matrix (553187)
            Say what you want about Bank of America, but their online banking works great with Netscape/Mozilla. I think WAMU works o.k. too. Is there a website out there that lists IE only companies/services? A list like that would definitely bring this problem into the open and possibly shame companies into cross-platform development.
          • Re:Don't cave in. (Score:3, Insightful)

            by Cromac (610264)
            Then do what I do. Refuse to use their service. My bank didn't allow me to use Mozilla on Linux, bye bye bank

            He said it was his payroll service, not his bank. It's not like he can just tell the accounting department to "go use someone else" unless he's the CEO.

            My company recently installed a time-reportin tool that requires Windows and IE, I still send my report card to a secretary since I don't have a computer with IE on it, it's either that or they can PAY me to come in in the evening to fill out thos

      • Re:Browser Spoofing. (Score:3, Interesting)

        by hawkfish (8978)

        I think browser spoofing is a very bad thing. Yes it lets you load your page correctly, but it will never let the "powers that be" know that people use something other than IE.

        I recently had to write some code to identify OSX browsers from their UserAgent strings, and IE is not the problem - it is Mozilla! Everything claims to be Mozilla, and the only way to know if you have Mozilla is by process of elimination using the later parts of the string - i.e. if it is not something you know, then it must be M

      • Re:Browser Spoofing. (Score:4, Interesting)

        by TheRaven64 (641858) on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @11:53AM (#6234605) Journal
        Opera's UA spoofing is ver easy to toggle (ctrl+alt+o for Opera, ctrl+alt+i for IE). I leave it in Opera mode most of the time, but when I find a site that diverts me to a 'your browser is not supported because our web site was designed by the Boss's 13 year old son who thinks IE rocks' page then I hit switch to IE mode. I then make a point of visiting the site in Opera mode and then leaving a couple of times a week to rack up the count of 'customers turned away by our refusal to adhere to standards'.

        Ironically I have yet to find a page which doesn't work in Opera identifying as IE, while a lot of ASP sites fail to work while identifying as Opera.

  • Hmm... (Score:5, Funny)

    by stienman (51024) <adavis AT ubasics DOT com> on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @09:28AM (#6233120) Homepage Journal
    "We do not guarantee that any source code or executable code available from the mozilla.org domain is Year 2000 compliant."

    Good thing we're not in the year 2000 anymore. Lucky for those lazy developers...

    -Adam
  • Camino? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Montreal (594947) on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @09:28AM (#6233126)
    Hopefully the Camino developer(s) will now switch to this branch - from what I can see, the nightlies have been pretty variable quality ever since 0.7, which is when they switched to the trunk from a 1.0-ish branch.
  • by Blahbbs (587167) on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @09:28AM (#6233133)
    ..I just downloaded RC1 last night! Thank God for DSL...
  • Java (Score:5, Informative)

    by graikor (127470) on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @09:29AM (#6233140) Journal
    It isn't just old Linux systems that have problems with Java - in fact, Java applets are one of two issues that cause Mozilla to crash. The other is viewing too many images in tabs - even if you close tabs after you've viewed the pics, and try not to keep more than a half-dozen open at once, eventually it will die, and the Netscape Quality Agent pops up...
    • Re:Java (Score:5, Funny)

      by syle (638903) * <syle@@@waygate...org> on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @09:39AM (#6233253) Homepage
      The other is viewing too many images in tabs - even if you close tabs after you've viewed the pics, and try not to keep more than a half-dozen open at once, eventually it will die

      Another case of porn driving innovation. Come on, people, try to have some self-control! Was 5 naked people at once really not enough?

  • RH 7.x is "old" ? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by DragonWyatt (62035) on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @09:30AM (#6233145) Homepage
    Interesting that the last great, stable RH is considered too "old" for mozilla...

    Or am I just overreacting? I like my 7.3 boxes, dammit.
  • by PhysicsGenius (565228) <physics_seekerNO@SPAMyahoo.com> on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @09:32AM (#6233173)
    MathML. It's supported, but only in pure XML pages. This means that on legacy HTML sites, like Slashdot and K5, I can't fully get across the brilliance of my scientific and mathematical ideas, which is a lose-lose situation.

    As open source projects, you'd think that Slashcode and Mozilla could meet halfway on this. But, as anyone who's tried to submit a patch to either project knows, they are open in name only. Development of both systems is really closed to outsiders and only insiders (the creators, their friends and people who think exactly the same way that they do) are allowed to submit patches. Witness the recent Taco IRC interview where his response to "when will Slashdot validate at the W3c" was "Whatever. Next."

    /me starts an open-minded source revolution

    • by scrytch (9198) <chuck@myrealbox.com> on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @09:57AM (#6233447)
      MathML. It's supported, but only in pure XML pages. This means that on legacy HTML sites, like Slashdot and K5, I can't fully get across the brilliance of my scientific and mathematical ideas, which is a lose-lose situation.

      HTML doesn't support namespaces, which makes picking out your embedded mathml a little problematic. Ideally the <OBJECT> tag would support XML (or HTML). In the meantime, use an iframe -- true, it won't work on slashdot, but slashdot won't accept your mathml anyway.
    • AFAIK, MathML *requires* XHTML, period. Why complain about not being able to shoe-horn it into legacy HTML when the spec doesn't allow it?
    • by martin-boundary (547041) on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @10:20AM (#6233724)
      Don't take this personally, but mathematicians and physicists have been able to communicate their ideas for three hundred years without the benefit of MathML. Typography is convenient, but if you're creative, you can find ways around the limitations. And if you're posting on sitessuch as k5, you probably want to keep it simple for the masses anyway.
      • by Chris_Jefferson (581445) on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @10:25AM (#6233767) Homepage
        ... that is the most stupid thing I've ever heard.

        Mathematicians and physicists have been communicating for three hundred years by drawing mathematics, complete with symbol sets. Whenever I want to send / recieve mathematics nowadays, I tend to just write it in latex, because I (along with many mathematicans) can just parse raw latex off the screen. However I'd kill it have the latex (or MathML) parsed by my newsreader / e-mail client / browser in an easy-to-use way
    • by jwriney (16598) on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @10:25AM (#6233780) Homepage
      Not to mention the major burst of insanity that surrounded the removal of MNG/JNG support, two perfectly useful new formats.

      Mind-boggling Bugzilla discussion of this is here - http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195280 [mozilla.org]

      --riney
    • by Phantasmo (586700) on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @10:28AM (#6233814)
      Witness the recent Taco IRC interview where his response to "when will Slashdot validate at the W3c" was "Whatever. Next."

      The only reason to use tabular layout (like Slashdot does) is to make things look good in Internet Explorer.
      Switching to pure CSS (as the W3C recommends) saves bandwidth (as all of the formatting and layout information can be stored in a separate, cacheable file), gives you the freedom to create far more interesting [meyerweb.com] and visually powerful [csszengarden.com] designs, and makes the page accessible.

      Slashdot should take a hint from Wired [wired.com]'s excellent example and move into the new millenium.
      • by arkanes (521690) <{moc.liamg} {ta} {senakra}> on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @12:30PM (#6234953) Homepage
        The other reason is that the markup is simpler, more portable, and less bandwidth intensive. How about that?

        The Wired site loads and renders slowly, does wierd things when sized very small, and is much heavier on markup than slashdot (when balanced agasint the larger size of a slashdot page).

        I agree that using tables for layout is a crappy way of doing things. On the other hand, it's well known and commonly supported (all modern browsers render tables more or less identically, the same cannot be said for CSS markup, especially level 2), but CSS layout semantics are crappy, overly verbose, and lend themselves to pixel-width positioning. Try reproducing all the built in features of table layout in CSS - it's very difficult. And your newly marked up pages will be noticably heavier than the table layout.

    • Witness the recent Taco IRC interview where his response to "when will Slashdot validate at the W3c" was "Whatever. Next."

      Where does it say that? I read the entire interview just now, and don't remember anybody asking that question, and I can't find the words "valid" nor "w3c" in the page. Please tell me I'm being blind and show me the relevant quote.

  • Unfortunately, the auto makers have decided to sue the Mozilla team for using their trademarked names. The new names are now:

    Buffy - Browser
    Dawn - Mail Reader
    Willow - HTML Editor
    Xander - News Reader
    Spike - Porn Search Plugin
  • by levell (538346) on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @09:36AM (#6233219) Homepage

    I linked to it in the story but the summary of the java problems on linux is:

    You need to use a version of the java plugin that has been compiled with the same version of gcc that mozilla has been, the 1.4 latest branch mozilla build has been compiled with gcc3.2 and therefore you need to use the gcc3.2 plugin that ships in the latest betas of Sun's JRE (and there is also a suitable Blackdown java).

    The kicker comes if you run an old linux distribution (e.g. Redhat 7.x), - you don't have the dynamic link libraries required to run gcc 3.2 code as they weren't available when RH7.x was released. Mozilla still runs as it includes all the relevant libraries statically linked inside it - the java plugin doesn't. You therefore either need to recompile Mozilla with an old version of gcc or install the libraries for gcc 3.2.

    The release notes could do with a little tidying in order to make what java works where clear to users

    .

    If this isn't fixed in the release version it would hint that Mozilla plan to phase out support for old distributions which would open to the door to things such as nice font rendering (via XFT) in the default builds, or do some other current distributions not come with XFT?

  • by Dolemite_the_Wiz (618862) on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @09:37AM (#6233232) Journal
    This is probably the most important feature missing from Mozilla for YEARS.

    NTLM Support.

    From the Release Notes page [mozilla.org]:

    Mozilla on Windows now has support for NTLM authentication. This enables Mozilla to talk to MS web and proxy servers that are configured to use "windows integrated security".

    Dolemite
    _______________________
  • by Gregoyle (122532) on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @09:39AM (#6233263)
    If they are going to drop the "suite" version I sure hope it does. This is the one feature stopping me from using Camino or even Safari. I love how all the newer browsers are supporting tabs now, but there is one feature from the "suite" Mozilla that I use every day but that none of the other browsers has added.

    I just love tabbed homepages. The way you can save a tab group as a bookmark and then set that as your homepage. I use this every day; I load up my four most visited sites and just go. For some strange reason it makes a big difference.
  • by SCHecklerX (229973) <thecaptain@captaincodo.net> on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @09:43AM (#6233303) Homepage
    I installed rc1 yesterday, no problems. RC2 will not install without having a newer glibc installed. Ugh.
  • by introverted (675306) on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @09:44AM (#6233312)
    1.4 will the last version of Mozilla released as a suite, after that the switch to separate browser, e-mail etc. applications will take place."

    So instead of monolithic systems that try to do everything, this sounds like a swing back in the direction of discrete programs that only do one thing. (And hopefully do it well.)

    I very much like the idea of being able to install my web browser of choice without being forced to simultaneously fill my hard drive with "extras" that don't quite do what I want, but can't be removed either. And browsers and office suites are just two places I'd like to see a little less of the "Swiss army knife" approach. (Sure, it's cool, but do you really need a telephone that can take pictures, program your VCR and mow the grass?)

    Don't get me wrong, I agree that interoperability is a Good Thing. I just don't want to be forced to take on the clutter of tools I won't use.

    • by Cochonou (576531) on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @09:53AM (#6233404) Homepage
      You don't seem to have heard about the new Mozilla roadmap.
      Here is for you. [mozilla.org]
    • by edgrale (216858)
      You can do a Browser only installation right now if you want, in fact you've been able to do so for quite some time, if not for ever.
    • by DrXym (126579) on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @10:41AM (#6233969)
      But the thing is, Mozilla is not monolithic. It is is a discrete set of components running in the same address space. Chrome overlays make them look like a single app but most of the code each part of the suite appears in its own distinct DLLs and .jar files under the surface. And if you don't want the 'clutter' of multiple tools, the answer is not to install them in the first place. IIRC a mailto: link in the browser will open your default email client if there is no mail/news installed for example.


      The perception that running stuff seperately is going to be some magic panacea is wrong. At the end of the day you will have subsets of Mozilla running in their own process space instead of the whole lot in one. Aside from some potential stability improvements (not that Moz is bad now), the effort is more to facilitate a UI rewrite than to fix any fundamental bustage. There is also a downside that you might lose integration that some people appreciate such as a unified pref dialog, a single profile, being able to open a tab in the browser from a link in an email and so on.


      The UI would definitely benefit from simplification it has to be said, but the suite has to come out the other side of this process as functional as it went in, and that also includes ensuring stuff like the editor and other less visible parts (e.g. JS debugger, DOM inspector) are not left behind in the process.

  • What the... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by JediTrainer (314273) on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @09:53AM (#6233401)
    From the release notes (emphasis mine):

    Mozilla 1.4 requires Sun J2SE v 1.4.2 Beta to run Java applets

    Why would they make a decision to make a browser dependent on an unreleased version of Java? 1.4.1_02 isn't good enough?
    • Re:What the... (Score:5, Informative)

      by brettlbecker (596407) on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @10:09AM (#6233595) Homepage
      This is because the beta is compiled against gcc3.2. It's the first sun release to be compiled as such. I'm using the beta right now and it works perfectly.

      It should be noted that this version of Moz is not meant for universal public use. 1.3 is still the 'default' public version. So what's the harm of requiring a development version of java if you're running a development version of the browser?

      B
  • by Lumpy (12016) on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @09:57AM (#6233460) Homepage
    I just love the FUD that flies around here...

    Yes if you use a older distro you will have troubles, simply get the sources and compile it... Magically the problem goes away.

  • by JaJ_D (652372) on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @10:00AM (#6233493)
    Netscape planned release, codenamed "buffy"

    Buffy the IE slayer...... Hummm doesn't quite work.

    Although the 'destroying the undead whose goal it is to reign the earth and bring pain, misery and fear to all' analogy may have some distance to run

    :-]

    Jaj
  • by green pizza (159161) on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @10:02AM (#6233518) Homepage
    As a few other folks have pointed out on the usenet, there doesn't seem to be any new IRIX nightlies. While the other platforms have binaries built about once a day, the most recent IRIX nightly is from late May.

    Does anyone from the Mozilla project happen to know what the problem is? Is there something that we IRIX users/developers can do to help? If it's a hardware need, I can probably spare an Octane or two to help the Mozilla project.
  • by edwardd (127355) on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @10:04AM (#6233541) Journal
    (e.g. Netscape planned release, codenamed "buffy").

    As in "Ready to be canceled"?
  • by Monkey-Man2000 (603495) on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @10:05AM (#6233548)
    I'm sure this Mozilla doesn't have SVG support. However, I was wondering if anyone knew the status of the Adobe SVG Plugin's compatibility with the browser (whether Adobe is developing a new compatible plug-in or Mozilla compensating for Adobe's compatibility problems). My understanding is that Adobe developed the 3.0 plugin before the Mozilla API was frozen, and now it crashes the browser. This is common to Windows and Linux and for Mozilla derivatives as well (Netscape). Neither the Mozilla developers or Adobe seem to be budging. I just want to have some decent SVG support in Linux. Is SVG development something I should avoid?
    • by IamTheRealMike (537420) <mike@plan99.net> on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @11:18AM (#6234343) Homepage
      The Adobe plugin appears to be frozen in time, focus now appears to be on a Corel plugin. I don't know if that works with Mozilla or not.

      For those who don't know, Adobe used unfrozen APIs, which Mozilla then scrapped entirely, rendering their work useless. Unsurprisingly, they never updated it.

      So, if you want SVG in Mozilla, you need to hack on the Moz native support, which has more potential anyway. Be warned, it's a LARGE spec :( I'm not really sure what has been happening on it lately, but iirc there have not been any updates for a long time now.

  • Threaded Mail (Score:5, Informative)

    by abischof (255) * <alex@nOSPam.spamcop.net> on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @10:16AM (#6233675) Homepage

    Threaded mail is a handy feature, especially when following multiple discussions on mailing lists. And, though Mozilla supports threading, it just doesn't remember the threaded expansion state [mozilla.org].

    So, you could turn on threading (View -> Sort By -> Threaded). Then, you'd probably expand the threads (View -> Threads -> Expand All Threads). So far, so good. But, if you switch to another folder and come back to the original one, the threads won't be expanded anymore.

    This is bug 64426 [mozilla.org] and you can vote for it [mozilla.org] if you like (of course, you'll need a free Bugzilla account to vote [mozilla.org]). You may need to copy-n-paste the links into your URL bar, as Bugzilla doesn't accept referrerrs from Slashdot.

  • RPM? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by jejones (115979) on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @10:19AM (#6233712) Journal
    mozilla.org doesn't have RPMs for this version (or a few versions back, for that matter)... Should I as an RH 9 user just wait for the official release? Obviously there's some way to generate an RPM, but looking around the mozilla.org Unix build instructions web pages doesn't point to instructions. (Searching freshrpms turns up nothing.)
    • Re:RPM? (Score:5, Informative)

      by tuffy (10202) on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @10:27AM (#6233804) Homepage Journal
      I'm hoping there'll be an RPM of the official 1.4 release. But rpmfind.net lists of a few RawHide Mozilla-1.4 RPMs that work just fine on a RH 9 box. I haven't been able to determine just which "official" Mozilla build they are, but they have the nice antialiasing that I've come to enjoy from the GTK2-linked builds.
    • Re:RPM? (Score:3, Informative)

      by Ethidium (105493)
      See the RPM HOWTO [rpm.org] at rpm.org [rpm.org] for instructions on how to build your own RPM. It's really not hard. Or just use the supplied installer. Having mozilla as a non-rpm package is not the end of the world.
  • Netscape, why? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Capt_Troy (60831) <tfandango@MENCKENyahoo.com minus author> on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @10:22AM (#6233738) Homepage Journal
    My question is simple, and I'm not a netscape user so maybe someone can enlighten me,

    But what's the point of Netscape taking the latest mozilla code, as they have done for quite a while now, and creating their own browser? Are there some added features that Mozilla doesn't include? Seems like taking one thing and calling it another, unless there is some compelling reason to use netscape over mozilla.

    Thanks!
    • Re:Netscape, why? (Score:4, Informative)

      by GauteL (29207) on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @11:01AM (#6234175)
      1. Branding. Netscape is far better known than Mozilla.
      2. Some features (AIM integration for instance)
      3. Disabling debugfeatures. The standard Mozilla distribution include test-menus. It is not really meant for end-users, though distributors usually do this with Mozilla as well.
    • Re:Netscape, why? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Zathrus (232140) on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @11:16AM (#6234318) Homepage
      I asked a coworker this (I run Firebird, he runs Netscape) and he said that Netscape comes with most of the plugins pre-installed -- e.g. Java, Flash, etc. I don't know if this is true or not, but if so then there's one reason.

      Yeah, fine, bitch and whine about how awful Flash and java and whatever are. But some people actually want to use the web, and some websites require their usage.

      Oh, and to contradict a previous poster - Netscape no longer removes popup prevention from the preferences dialog. IIRC, it's not enabled by default, but you can enable it without having to go and edit the user.js file or about:config
    • Re:Netscape, why? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by skt (248449) on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @01:08PM (#6235342)
      Mozilla isn't really intended to be an enduser product.. its primary purpose is for testing. However, because of its stability and major releases, it seems to be appealing to endusers.. but mostly tech-saavy power users IMHO. Netscape is the product for the masses, it will have a more polished interface than mozilla and it has name recognition. It will also undergo more testing (both bug and usability) than an average milestone of mozilla. Then there is the matter of application support, netscape7 will be supported more often than mozilla. Even though anything that works with NS7 should work in mozilla, name recognition and specific quirks with releases make this somewhat important.

      Notice how NS7.02 is still based on a very early build of mozilla, the focus of Netscape 7 is on stability (in terms of the interface and functionality) and not on cutting edge features that are typically found in mozilla milestones. Most people do not need the features found in mozilla, which makes netscape 7 very appealing.
  • by BlackGriffen (521856) on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @10:33AM (#6233883)
    I'm not upgrading until I'm sure that mng support will be there in the future. See here [mozilla.org] and here (Bugzilla, you'll have to copy and paste the URL manually) [mozilla.org] where they dropped support despite overwhelming protests and an offer for another coder to take up maintenance of the feature.

    BlackGriffen

  • by gringer (252588) on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @10:35AM (#6233909)
    I have been trying to keep up with Mozilla developments, and have noticed here [google.com] that there are still bugs to be resolved that are apparently blockers (or go straight to the bug list [mozilla.org]). The strange thing is, there was mentioned a possibility of rebranding RC2 as final, according to the recent staff meeting [google.com] minutes (*1.4*, Point 3).

    I find it strange that the Mozilla team is prepared to release 1.4 (which will replace the 1.0.x branch) with previously-declared blocker bugs still floating around.
    • by cant_get_a_good_nick (172131) on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @11:59AM (#6234660)
      Just to be silly, I opened the Bugzilla link; 3 of them are already fixed, and a 4th is a licensing issue if you link statically against gcc libstfc++ (which I don't think is the default).

      Of the remaining bugs, one is about the status bar, which doesn't seem to be a blocker, and the other two remaining are mem leaks which I would consider blockers. That just leaves two big ones. They probably have time to get thse and so they're probably good for 1.4.
  • mozilla mail (Score:3, Informative)

    by PhiberOptix (182584) on Wednesday June 18, 2003 @11:17AM (#6234319)
    Am i the only one using mozilla mail? I love the spam filter, and after a few tweaking, i can block most of the crap that comes to my inbox.
    I recently tried the email standalone mozilla thunderbird (aka minotaur) and wasnÂt impressed. Lacks multiple accounts, no bayes spam filter and lots of other nice things found on mozilla mail that are simply not there yet on thunderbird.
    I hope that they get the thunderbird up to the level of mozilla mail before going thunderbird only.
    I love mozilla firebird, and hopefully thunderbird will follow the same path as its browser counterpart.

Our policy is, when in doubt, do the right thing. -- Roy L. Ash, ex-president, Litton Industries

Working...