Planning For Mozilla 2.0 579
wikinerd writes "The MozillaWiki maintains a number of pages on Mozilla 2.0 which reveals lots of possible new features of the popular browser. What does your wishlist include about Mozilla 2.0, and how has the release of Firefox affected your use of Mozilla?"
Who has firefox affectd my use of Mozilla? (Score:3, Interesting)
New Theme (Score:4, Interesting)
Also how about a way to manage Mozilla using Windows group policies?
What about a MSI package?
Simple (Score:3, Interesting)
A graphical history record (i.e. one that keeps a stored image of places where I've been, rather than a mere text description, as most give very limited info of what that particular site was).
And, an RSS reader equivalent to FeedDemon [bradsoft.com].
Firefox never worked for me... (Score:4, Interesting)
Magnifying (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Who has firefox affectd my use of Mozilla? (Score:5, Interesting)
The features I wanted are already found in Firefox (i.e., tabbed browsing, popup blocker, themes & extensions). I just don't need Mozilla any more.
Wait till FireFox... (Score:3, Interesting)
Of course depending on what the features were I'd probably install Mozilla to see if they cause any issues with the web design work I do.
build in page validator. (Score:5, Interesting)
There is a lot of badly coded web pages out there.
It might take a rewrite of gecko by I think it is wroth it.
The normal web based validators really don't cut it
when your developing dynamic cgi scripts.
A feature I'd like to see... (Score:3, Interesting)
Since I have a TFT with 1280x1024 resolution, I often increase font sizes when browsing the web to reduce eye strain, but that often causes horizontal scroll bars to appear when long words or urls are in the text, making it much less convenient to read, e.g. in those ubiquitous phpBB based forums.
Re:Faster (Score:3, Interesting)
Bad idea, then bad poorly written web pages will never get fixed!
How Firefox have changed my use of Mozilla (Score:3, Interesting)
Since Firefox 1.0 came out I have used the Mozilla suite for email and Internet-browsing at work while I still stick with Opera at home. Firefox is there on both locations and are used from time to time. What Firefox did do when it came along was make it clear to me that Mozilla had improved over the years and no longer required me to have a heap of other browsers installed for visiting particular webpages with picky code. So, you may say that Firefox made Mozilla shine in it's own true light.
add this feature (Score:1, Interesting)
i like the cookies features, to delete cookies when browser is closed, and accept from origionating website only are all great cookie features...
A Manual (Score:5, Interesting)
I still remember the day when I tried running two separate instances of Mozilla on the same Windows machine. Neither Google nor the forums helped. Luckily I can still read C++.
Open source should mean you can look into the source if you want to, not that you have to look into the source every time you try something non trivial.
Re:New Theme (Score:5, Interesting)
I've been working on a project to be able to manage Firefox with Group Policies, but I may be extending it to cover Mozilla as well. Its a bit rough and ready, and needs a good deal of optimisation but importantly, it works and there's a number of people using it successfully...
http://spaces.msn.com/members/in-cider/ [msn.com]
My picks (Score:5, Interesting)
Gecko Rendering Engine (Score:5, Interesting)
The idea of running the GRE as a service (started at boot) and then simply launching the frontends for the various Mozilla apps (in my case, Firefox and possibly Thunderbird) appeals to me immensely.
I value "snapiness" greatly when it comes to my web browser and email apps. Having to run multiple instances of the same rendering engine is a bit of a downer IMHO. (Yes, I realise there are some benefits. Yes, I realise we all tend to have ample computing power.)
Mozilla who? (Score:1, Interesting)
Now I am a Firefox and Evolution person.
Still use mozilla (Score:2, Interesting)
feature requests (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Simple (Score:5, Interesting)
That, combined with a history TREE instead of a linear, self-overwriting history (go back 3 pages and click another link -- those 3 pages will drop out of the history). That's what I wish for.
And for the troll/poster thinking this is for prn -- nope, it's for retrieving pages with 'unknown' URLs. Surfing page to page, one is likely to not read the URL or page title, but to recognize the page body.
Re:Do tell (Score:3, Interesting)
Ability to open javascript links in new tab/window (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Do tell (Score:2, Interesting)
This feeling is not all that different from those that prefer Windows NT/2000/2003 to Windows ME/XP, or perhaps for aptly for Slashdot, vi vs emacs. There's just something innately gratifying when you're not assumed to be Joe Average.
Firefox is by far more popular, and while many believe Mozilla to be bloated, in my own experience, there was very little difference in memory usage and speed between the two, which was surprising because my Seamonkey had a lot more extensions.
An idea that ends Firefox & Thunderbird (Score:2, Interesting)
We all love Firefox for its speedy startup and simple UI. At the same time, we also love Thunderbird for its speedy startup and simple UI. Well, there's a bit of conflict here. What if we use both? Is it any better than Mozilla? For some, yes. For others, maybe not. So here's the idea.
A Mozilla/Gecko Framework -- what this means is that all the absolute basic and necessity to run a gecko-based application is there and that softwares built upon this library will work as though you have a stand-alone application installed. This is good for a few things. For starters, download time. Firefox and Thunderbird both come with the gecko libraries and anything else that depends on it. It's there to simplify installation and to have everything there without the need of having to install system-specific libraries (in my case, windows\system32). Another good that comes out of this is total modularity. This way, we can truly have a modular system where we have a singular installation of the Gecko engine but can have various softwares based on this to run with it. The possibility of having Mozilla software suite, Thunderbird, and Firefox installed at once without eating up 40-50MB of space is there. Perhaps, in guessing, such concept in realized form would consume at most 20MB for all 3 softwares.
Yeah, I'm sure a handful of you people must be thinking: Isn't this been thought up already with 'such-and-such' feature of Mozilla/Gecko? Yes. It has. But it appears at its current form, it cannot do such things. And I specifically remember a long time ago that one of the goal of Mozilla is to build a software suite that is modular. It's been years since. And I have not seen this realized or come to fruition. If this idea is being delayed to 2.0, so be it. But for 2.0 to be deserving of its number, it ought to at least be capable of being modular.
I'm happy for the Mozilla developers that they are looking forward to a 2.0 codebase. And I wish them luck in persuing that goal of a final code release. This framework idea is my only suggestion, as it is solely needed since we have 3 'ready-for-prime-time' softwares built upon the same Gecko library.
Nice features (Score:2, Interesting)
Also - and this is a niggle, but... - the "find" toolbar (accessible by ctrl+F)... they really should move the close button back to the right side of the bar... as far as I can tell, every other part of the UI has the close button in the top-right (or right) corner of the relevant pane, except for that damn find bar!
*ahem*
New browser idea (-1 stupid) (Score:2, Interesting)
Yes thankyou, I am an idiot.
Some changes I would like to see (Score:5, Interesting)
Of course, some of the above may alreay be planned but as I can't get on mozilla's web site, I can't check.... Maybe it was slashdotted?
Missing the point... (Score:5, Interesting)
Just try playing around with XUL a little. It's surprising what it can do. I'm just starting out with it, but having worked my way through MFC, QT, TCL/TK, WTL, GTK++, FLTK, wxWidgets etc. etc. in search of the One True UI Library, I'm liking what I've seen so far.
Re:2.0? (Score:5, Interesting)
platform platform platform (Score:3, Interesting)
- SVG
- A better client-side VM.
- Heavy duty form support, including the ability to create and use form "widgets"
- Client-side persistent store
Want to compete with MS's upcoming XAML platform? I believe this list will go a long way toward that.This will allow interactive graphic applications that are just not possible now with primarily text-oriented DHTML.
Like real compiled Javascript 2.0 or perhaps a Python VM. You can do some amazing and surprising things with client-side JS, but as web apps tackle what are now primarily the domain of "fat" installed apps, we're going to need some real client side power. The ability to create and call libraries of routines will prove to be important.
These issues are being addressed in both Ian Hickson's WHAT-WG and W3C's Xforms. Implementations of these in compiled code would be great.
From what I gather, Moz 2.0 will embed the small SQL engine SQLite to store it's configuration data, etc.. How about providing access to this engine for web apps? Think of it as maybe a cookie on some relational algebra radioactive steriods. Imagine being able to download chunks of data from your server-side store and work with them locally. You would effectively have web apps that continue to work when disconnected from the web.
Re:Firefox never worked for me... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Firefox never worked for me... (Score:3, Interesting)
Emacs does vi better than vi does.
(I was on an HPUX machine with no emacs at the weekend. The combination of traditional vi and no worthwhile job control was pure nostalgia. I kept wonderring if I needed to worry about changing the ribbon or cleaning chad out of the punch).
Re:Wishlist: Slashdot (Score:3, Interesting)
I think it's more or less OK to have a not 100% correct layout if the engine is rendering while the file is still loading, but the final result should be correct.
I would love to use Mozilla or Firefox BUT.. (Score:3, Interesting)
I want/prefer/like my email integrated into the browser. Firefox/Thunderbird works OK but not as well as Mozilla. But overall I prefer the Firefox browser for tabbing, speed and ease of user. It just feels good. It's nice to have choices again. I am a happy camper even with the problems.
Re:My picks (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Simple (Score:2, Interesting)
That, combined with a history TREE instead of a linear, self-overwriting history (go back 3 pages and click another link -- those 3 pages will drop out of the history). That's what I wish for.
Something like this? [uiuc.edu]. Unfortunately, it's mac-only, a browser unto its own, not an addon to safari, and not a terribly good browser at that. Would be nice if someone ported it to some other browser.
Pull-away tabbed browsing (Score:4, Interesting)
Most of my boxen have virtual desktops, so it's handy sometimes to have different windows on each desktop each with several tabs on the same subject. For example, I'll have one desktop with slashdot and a few links alongside IRC and another desktop reading API documentation for a project.
Another reason this is useful is so that when you open links from the mail program in a new tab, it does not always put the tab in the window you want.
Re:It's also the HTML (Score:3, Interesting)
The results were mostly complaints about using features not available in this version of HTML. Slashdot sends a Doctype claiming HTML 3.2 compatibility. Gee, imagine that telling the Gecko engine to use rules for one version of HTML and then feeding it another version could cause errors??? Deh!
Since I already use Proxomitron a thought hit me -- why not replace the wrong Doctype declaration with a newer one? It's certainly easy to do. I am no expert so I had no idea what version of HTML would support those features. I could only take a wild guess and swap in the 4.0 Doctype from the validator site.
Let's hope they get motivated to coordinate their Doctype and their HTML code.