Mozilla 0.9.2 Storms Out The Gates 310
Well, a lot of you were up late or up early finding out that 0.9.2 of Mozilla has been released unto the world. The Mozilla folks have also, in fine fashion, put out release notes as well.
There is no opinion so absurd that some philosopher will not express it. -- Marcus Tullius Cicero, "Ad familiares"
a few things about Mozilla (Score:2)
1) It's much better than it was. The last few releases have seen huge improvements each time. 0.9.2 is much better than 0.9.1, 0.9.1 is much better than 0.9 & so on.
2) The stablity is great. Most bugs are minor weirdo ones (such as the right-click menu disappearing at times, form security notices appearing 3 times instead of once) which seem to be appearing when the programmers add new features. I know from my visits to irc.mozilla.org that handling Bugzilla's torrent of bug reports has them a bit under the weather.
3) The whole Mozilla project is seriously lacking programmers & quality assurance people. They are simply overloaded. This is one of the most (if not the most) important open source projects, yet it is heavily understaffed. They need help really badly.4) It's simply better to browse with & more stable. I've switched to using it for my browsing.
5) The IRC client is too bare bones & would confuse 90% of internet users.
6) No IE for mee
How to set the hidden prefs... (Score:2)
http://www.mozilla.org/unix/customizing.html
Very good - *but* some annoying little bugs (Score:4)
Re:Frankenstein please! (Score:2)
You may be interested in the Multizilla [mozdev.org] project, which aims to give a tabbed interface to Mozilla.
Alex Bischoff
Opera-like gestures (Score:5)
In case you're not familiar with the feature, Opera has gesture support. For instance, to reload a document, just hold down the right mouse button, and move the mouse up then down. Or, to go back a page, hold down the right mouse button and click the left mouse button ("forward" is just the reverse: hold down the left mouse button and click the right mouse button).
Alex Bischoff
Re:Opera blows chunks with Slashdot (Score:2)
Guess the linux memory model works a little better eh Bill?
Re:My rule of thumb: (Score:3)
--
Re:understaffed IRC client developer team (Score:2)
_____
Sam: "That was needlessly cryptic."
Re:Plugins won't work on Mandrake 8.0 (Score:2)
for example:
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=791
Multi-user installation: here's how (Score:4)
Thanks to Ben Bucksch you will be able to find how to do that here:
bug 74574 [mozilla.org]. It could use some more votes. (hint)
Re:Quick Launch?? (Score:2)
Despite recent Slashdot interpretations of events, MS were cleared of illegally trying to leverage their OS monopoly to gain a browser monopoly.
No they weren't. The Appeals Court just struck down the lower court's penalty. The Findings of Fact and the conclusion that they illegally used monopoly power still stand. They tossed out the penalty because Jackson didn't hold remedy hearings and gave interviews to the media. It's still possible that once the new judge examines the evidence and documents from the previous trial, holds remedy hearings, etc. that they may still be broken up. That would be funny.
Mozilla rocks (Score:2)
Frankenstein please! (Score:2)
After trying all the browsers my conclusion is that what I'd like is parts of each all lumped together.
What's sad is that Mozilla is SOOO close to being a great browser. It just lacks the good GUI (good in the sense of responsive, fast, and usable), which has improved some over the years but not enough to give hope that things will radically change.
Re:Stable now (Score:2)
about how the moz team is adding too many features...
Well, I wouldn't say screaming
One thing I would like to see (outside of the roll-your-own system) is some sort of componentized download - so if I wanted just the web browser, and nothing else (mail/news, composer, etc...) so I could download a smaller file, and have a smaller memory footprint, compared to someone who uses the mail client and/or the composer, who could trade a larger download/memory footprint for those extra features.
I'm actually very happy with the stability improvements over the past few months (I download nightlies twice a week) - the devteam has been doing an excellent job at bugsquishing =)
Re:Opera blows chunks with Slashdot (Score:2)
Re:Quick Launch?? (Score:2)
Re:Crashes on startup, anyone else? (Score:2)
Re:Quick Launch?? (Score:2)
Re:Yeah, 25 crash bugs fixed, sure. (Score:2)
Re:Always getting better... (Score:2)
Mozilla shrinking (Score:5)
Re:telnet:// links need to work on linux (Score:2)
However, Protozilla [mozdev.org] is a powerful, externally-developed add-on that solves the problem and allows you to do lots of other stuff.
It's unlikely (read: not going) to get added before 1.0, but the author of Protozilla has hopes of getting Protozilla added as a standard part of Mozilla at some point (read: when he can convince the guy who'd be in charge of adding it to add it).
Steven E. Ehrbar
Re:Still too slow... (Score:2)
You can see similar effects with very lightweight pages such as heise Newsticker [heise.de], where the pages load quickly with all other browsers, but for some reason there's a delay with Mozilla.
Re:OT Save context/URL trees in IE? Answer! (Score:2)
Use a proxy, and log everything. (-;
Humm, then you could run a log analyzer on it, and have a nicely formated html output of the day. Never forget a URL again.
Best part you can filter out those nasty ads, and speed up your surfing.
--
I regret to say that we of the FBI are powerless to act in cases of oral-genital intimacy, unless it has in some way obstructed interstate commerce. ~J. Edgar Hoover, attributed
Re:Can I change the UserAgent string? (Score:2)
Re:Mozilla shrinking (Score:2)
Wouldn't it be nice to have the Mozilla code be packaged into "components" of a size somewhere between 100K and 1MB!?!? An installer should then be able to download only the parts that have changed from build to build....
(Offcourse this is a feature that brings advantages to those users of the nightly builds, only - I assume that, every of these parts changes from release to release quita a bit)
Your post should not have been modded down. Moderators, remember you are supposed to be commenting on the quality of the post, not expressing your agreement or disagreement with it.
As far as incremental download goes, that is a packaging issue and not something the mozilla development team should be expending time and energy on. If you want to set up your own mirror to offer incremental downloads, go ahead ;-)
--
Re:Multi-user installation: here's how (Score:2)
The release notes *still* don't document how to install Mozilla properly on a multi-user system.
I just put the binary tree in /opt, permit the whole thing read everybody, and put this script in /bin:
--
Stable now (Score:5)
However, somewhat to my amazement, the keyboard input is unable to keep up with typing speed on a 233 MHz machine. It takes some talent to design such a topheavy keyboard input stack.
Some browsers (opera), recognizing the fact that crashes do happen, are now saving the window/url chain state so they can resume more or less where they left off. Mozilla isn't doing this, and should. Besides taking the sting out of crashes, it lets you shut down without worrying about losing all your windows. This is a big deal, for a small amount of programming effort.
The bottom line for me is, the Lizard is here, and here to stay.
--
Re:Blah, eh, wha? (Score:2)
It was not only written from scratch but it was
held up by Nutscrape releasing code that Mozilla had
to give up bit by bit because it was so ugly.
It has gotten to a usable and quite competitive
state since 0.9.1.
I personally am more disappointed that they are
now rushing Mozilla out the door to 1.0 status.
A recent mozillazine article by Gervase Markham
proposed to not imporve stability or speed from
current levels, just to ensure standards
compliance and call it 1.0 release. That's what I
think is wrong with Mozilla. They should take
their time, freeze features and then release a
perfect (i.e. fully bug-free and speed optimized)
browser when it is ready.
Re:Frankenstein please! (Score:2)
my Windows install at work is as fast as NS 4.75.
-If you like Galeon, use it. Aphrodite may also be
what you want.
-Multizilla is the project for you. Join and
contribute. It's currently at alpha stage.
-Opera doesn't do as much, so it will be smaller.
-Agreed wholeheartedly.
Re:Same graphics rendering problem as in 0.9.1. (Score:2)
The other thing is, on the three machines I have it only happens on one of them. The machine it happens on has XFree 4.0.3 and a TNT2, while the other two have XFree 4.0.2 one with an ATI Rage pro and the other with a Matrox something or other.... Maybe it isn't a Mozilla bug.
Re:Opera-like gestures (Score:2)
Hold down right mouse button move slightly right and down about and 2 lines worth, let go = reload.
Once you get used to these "gestures" you can speed up your browsing experience dramatically. BTW I'm not kidding. Try getting used to the back context menu and a quick guesture, and you'll find yourself doing it all the time.
New Galeon release Monday (Score:4)
Coexistence with Netscape 4.7? (Score:2)
This message is (sadly) posted in IE5 - which, let's be honest, sucks, but I'm stuck in Windows and NS4.7 is just painful.
I would love to try Mozilla - except that I have a really, really large back archive of mail in Netscape Messenger which I can't afford to lose. I can't find an answer anywhere, so does anyone know if I can run NS4.7x and Moz 0.9x in parallel under the same OS install without causing problems?
Thanks,
Re:Coexistence with Netscape 4.7? (Score:2)
Anyway, thanks for the advice. Think I'll still back up my mail first, but nice to know it works.
And that I've got someone to blame in the event that it stuffs up
Thanks,
Re:Mozilla shrinking (Score:5)
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?bugidtype
See Mozillazine update from May, 9:_ buildbar_comments.html [mozillazine.org]
http://www.mozillazine.org/build_comments/May2001
--
Re:Always getting better... (Score:2)
search and keywords (Score:2)
--Asa
Re:mail rocks! (Score:2)
--Asa
Re:Great (Score:2)
FORUMZILLA ROCKS! [zapogee.com]
--Asa
Re:Multi-user installation: here's how (Score:2)
dist_bin=`dirname $0`
to
dist_bin=/usr/put_your_install_directory_here
Then go back and do a 'chown -R root' on the whole directory. This works for me every time. I've been meaning to submit a bug about the annoying dist_bin change, but I just haven't done it yet.
Can I change the UserAgent string? (Score:2)
Is there a way for Mozilla to tell web sites that it is a different version? Obviously, I'd want this to be a toggle, but it would help me out a lot.
Re:Stable now (Score:2)
Re:OT Save context/URL trees in IE? (Score:2)
I think your IE browsing habits are similar to my Opera browsing habits. The difference is that Opera supports that kind of hard-core browsing, and encourages it. You should give it a shot.
Re:irix support is gone? (Score:2)
Mozilla builds fine on Irix. Feel free to grab a 0.9.2 tree, build it, and contribute a build. :)
Check out the 'Recall' project... (Score:3)
Some browsers (opera), recognizing the fact that crashes do happen, are now saving the window/url chain state so they can resume more or less where they left off. Mozilla isn't doing this, and should. Besides taking the sting out of crashes, it lets you shut down without worrying about losing all your windows. This is a big deal, for a small amount of programming effort.
Well, Alphanumerica (creators of the Aphrodite skin) were working on a package called 'Total Recall', which promised just that. It's now been subverted to a generic browser plug-in called Recall, available at http://recall.mosdev.org [mozdev.org]. Worth checking out!
There's a lot of cool projects being worked on at Mozdev. XUL is starting to look like a viable platform, now the spec's more or less cast in stone!
Re:A few things... (Score:2)
Re:Crashes on startup, anyone else? (Score:2)
But now, Mozilla is much faster, more stable, and I love the standards compliance and new features.
Are you using the Linux port? I've tried yesterdays daily and 0.9.2 and it is still more than twice as slow 4.7 to start up and much slower to render a page. I do agree that its stability is vastly improved.
Has anyone else heard the rumor that Mozilla is written in java? I know it is not and I try to inform people who propogate this. Their confusion seems to be that Mozilla's menus are slow to appear the way swing drop down/menus are.
Re:very unstable. (Score:2)
I'd say less than 50%, but I have to agree with you. The Microsoft groupie at the ISP I used to work at and I would always have shouting matches whenever he thought we should put the latest and greatest IE on our install CD and have it be the exclusive option. He won out, and tech support would have to deal with it utterly destroying several machines.
To this day I have a machine that will run quite well (for Windows) :-) if installed with 98lite [98lite.net], but if you put standard Windows 98 on it, either with IE4 or SE with IE5, the machine will bluescreen and fry. Without IE, the machine is fine...
Re:Isn't Wells Fargo the one that blocked NS6? (Score:2)
Did they do the same thing for IE?
Just because you can't type 100wpm doesn't mean the rest of us can't. Geeze.
Re:Opera-like gestures (Score:4)
Ian
#1 Thing you can do to help Mozilla (Score:3)
I could reel them off- they don't recognize mozilla and/or use javascript to restrict using it with their products. Products like livelink.
To preserve the web we MUST complain and force those companies we can to SUPPORT THE STANDARDS. If they support mozilla their code should work with IE. There's little reason anymore for products to not support mozilla, konqueror and IE. It's not tough and we deserve it.
Re:Quick Launch?? (Score:3)
It's not an illusion that with quicklaunch turned on, I can close Mozilla windows without first checking to make sure that I'm not closing the last window.
also opera (Score:3)
Then there is Konqueror, which, while I think it has a disgustingly ugly interface, the latest version which I just tried out yesterday is absolutely great. It renders things (IMO) almost as well as Mozilla, some things even better. It's very good, without Mozilla I might use it.
But there is also Opera. I dislike it because it is not Free, as in closed source. You can get a free (as in beer) version, but it has a banner ad that always displays in the top. Aside from that, it is absolutely excellent. It's very fast, and (other than the damn banner ad) it has a pretty slick interface. It's definately different than any other browser interface out there, better or worse it's definately interesting. It renders html extremely well, not as good as Mozilla, and not quite as good as Konq, it seems to have a few nasty rendering bugs here and there, but it's still really great. One really great thing about it is it is EXTREMELY light weight. The version, with QT statically linked, is under 3 megs!
Funny story, last night I accidentally rm -rf'ed my
Enough friggin rambling from me...
So anyway, my point is that now we actually have multiple alternatives on Linux. Imagine that! I was worried it would never happen, but check it out, the state of browsing the web in Linux is almost on par with windows! Only thing lacking now is plugins(if you even care about that sort of thing). For those that do, there is a wine based plugin being developed by codeweavers that will allow windows plugings to be used in Linux! Quicktime, Active _BLAH_, etc. is all going to work.
Things are really looking up. Soon Distributions will be shipping with perfectly stable IE rivaling browsers, one of the most important thing Linux has always lacked which turned away many newbies.
Re:understaffed IRC client developer team (Score:2)
But that's probably just me. If software doesn't include the kitchen sink today it's not complete.
You'll have to thank jwz for that. During the very initial stages of Mozilla Project planning and development, the Netscape developers were soliciting ideas from people on what they wanted in the new web browser.
More than a couple people announced that they would like to have the browser, mail, composer, etc all as separate programs. We argued that there was no technical reason to lump them all together in one big monolithic program, especially when the users only actually uses one (maybe two) at the same time and the different parts never really talk to each other either.
jwz told us to go to hell, the kitchen sink method was what he wanted and managed to convince everyone else of the same. Enter Mozilla.
Re:Can I change the UserAgent string? (Score:2)
Mozilla does NOT come with a powerful tool called gcc. Lay off the bong.
Re:Always getting better... (Score:2)
I tried experimenting with the mail client in 0.9.1 (whist 0.9.2 was downloading) and it seems very nice and complete except that it takes *ages* for the damned interface to render.
Click on a message and it takes a second or two to actually display it. Hit Reply and you sit there wondering for awhile if Mozilla actually registered the mouse input....
I would use Mozilla's Mail client if it were just plain faster. I've got an Athlon 750 with loads of memory, so it's not like my machine is too slow.
Re:understaffed IRC client developer team (Score:2)
I guess you have a point about the ability to install the different components.
I guess what I disagree with is the fact that the framework for Mozilla (and components) is just proportionally huge compared to the parts that actually "do stuff".
I realize they did it this way on purpose so that they could have a common development environment for all components and make it more or less cross-platform at the same time, but I wish they would have postponed the idea until they could figure out a way to do it without bloat and without slowness, which are my ONLY TWO GRIPES about Mozilla.
Re:Can I change the UserAgent string? (Score:2)
If you'd be so kind...
Re:got it. thanks all (Score:4)
What we really need is -turbo mode for linux
Don't forget that Linux has exceedingly powerful disk caching. I've got 384MB of RAM and after I start and application once (including mozilla), it never has to access the disk to load again.
Gotta love those unix-clone boxen.
Using 0.9.2 right now (Score:5)
2 or 3 years ago, Linux users had every right to be concerned with the general direction of Web browsers in Linux versus The Competition. But if Mozilla development continues at this rate, we have nothing to worry about, and there is a fine alternative, Konqueror, if for some reason Netscape/AOL/Time-Warner is prevented from continuing development of Mozilla due to the new anti-GPL/viral clauses in their EULAs.
Mozilla may never have swept away the competition, but I strongly believe that it has saved us from a much more terrible state of affairs just by existing. There are two types of Open Source success: Apache, Perl: The instant hits. Linux, Mozilla: those that steadily improve over several years, rise to prominence, and eventually vanquish the competition. Although the entrepreneurs with capital obviously want to fund the former, companies like IBM, HP and Compaq know that the latter is what will lead to eventual World Domination.
Re:Quick Launch?? (Score:2)
Tony
fonts look ugly in 0.9.2 (Score:2)
Anyone else seeing the same problem?
Roland
Re:Multi-user installation: here's how (Score:2)
It is pretty easy.
apt-get install mozilla
Re:Quick Launch?? (Score:2)
Windows defaults to ALWAYS loading IE and Office into memory permanently (assuming Office is installed). Anytime you want to use a competitor's product you will find unpleasant things from Microsoft.
All your apps are belong to BG. And your $$.
Re:*n?x version? (Score:2)
However, as unices swap to cache much more aggressively than Windoze, the second start of mozilla will be MUCH faster than the first. If you combine that with long uptime, the only difference is the lack of the box locking up...
Different icons for Mail / Navigator info: (Score:2)
Slow typing in URLbar info: (Score:2)
Re:Mozilla shrinking (Score:2)
But why is he downloading "the code" at all if he doesn't know what CVS is and how to use it?
Perhaps he meant that he wanted to download the precompiled version. I have to think that almost all the files are recompiled between releases and so it would be completely impractical (for users and developers) to do what he proposes. Just download the whole thing. It's not that big of a deal even on a modem.
Re:Quick Launch?? (Score:2)
Quick Launch?? (Score:2)
Anyone know what this does? A seach of mozilla.org turned up nothing. Having to choose stuff like this inside the installer pisses me off, because I can't get to the help yet to find out what the fsck it does.
I mean, hey, I'm all about faster startups (ahem), but if it's an opt-in kind of thing rather than opt-out (and the fact than some people apparently wouldn't want it), that makes me kinda nervous.
got it. thanks all (Score:2)
But I rebooted and shore nuff, Windows took forever to load, I'm down 34 megs of RAM (out of 256), and starting up mozilla is just like hitting CTRL-N for a new window.
The true test will be whether or not it effects my Quake game.
Thanks again for all the responses. Cheers.
Re:Quick Launch?? (Score:2)
Heheh, yeah. "You there! Mozilla developers! I demand faster code! Post-haste! Rapidement! NOW!" If only it worked that way.
I am completely sympathetic to their situation, but still, it's little details like this that make me remember that this is a volunteer effort and not a professional project.
Re:Quick Launch?? (Score:2)
Re:*n?x version? no (Score:2)
Yes, there is. IE5 runs on (at least) HP-UX and Solaris. But the HP-UX version is buggy and deathly slow, so Moz still doesn't need -turbo.
Re:Opera blows chunks with Slashdot (Score:2)
Not always. MSIE 5.5 running atop Windows98 exhibits similar behavior ... I always assumed there was something funky with the markup of the comment pages and all those form controls, but I keep forgetting to take a snap of the page and run a validator against it ...
Running this Mozilla article at "score=2, nested" turns up 223 errors, 501 warnings with CSE HTML Validator [htmlvalidator.com] (granted, I enable most every error check). Definitely some nesting issues with form markup present even here, though.
That's a markup error every 380 characters, and a warning condition every 169 characters. Talk about overachieving! :)
Re:Stable now (Score:2)
there is a plugin called
'Total Recall', I believe.
It isn't shipped with the browser,
ironically, as people are screaming
about how the moz team is adding too many features...
oh well.
Dante.
Re:Quick Launch?? (Score:2)
This is documented in the Release Notes [mozilla.org].
Re:Mozilla shrinking (Score:2)
Does anyone have an accurate tabulation of how the memory usage of mozilla has changed with time?
Re:Mozilla shrinking (Score:2)
(Offcourse this is a feature that brings advantages to those users of the nightly builds, only - I assume that, every of these parts changes from release to release quita a bit)
Responsiveness & std. X options (Score:2)
Next, Mozilla often just sits there saying "Resolving www.whatever.xx" in the last line, when it has already loaded data from that exact site. Kinda annoying when nothing's moving for nothing (obvious).
And last, it would still be nice when Mozilla supported the -geometry standard X switch, or at least *something* siimlar, so I can place coordinates and a size for when it starts up. I
don't want to use the mouse for placing Mozilla on startup. This was filed for quite some time as a bug now, but it seems it's not important enough to get fixed.
- Hubert
understaffed IRC client developer team (Score:2)
But that's probably just me. If software doesn't include the kitchen sink today it's not complete.
- Hubert
No plugins on (Net)BSD either (Score:2)
- Hubert
Re:Quick Launch?? (Score:5)
-inq
Re:My rule of thumb: (Score:3)
Or GNOME an OpenOffice, StarOffice, etc. Those too take longer to compile.
Notice how those are some pretty impressive apps, that have quite a bit of functionality behind them...
In fact, most major applications should take much longer to compile than X. Would you really want your apps to be smaller than your GUI framework? (Mind you the GUI framework just ties things together, it essentially isn't even an app).
Have you ever tried to compile mozilla yourself? There are a billion options you can append to ./configure Which is what makes Mozilla amazing in the sense that you can customize it so well to what you want it to be like on multiple operating systems
Think before you speak
Sunny Dubey
Oh. My. God. (Score:3)
It's probably more to the point that Mozilla is now more stable than Konqueror. It would be petty for me to compare the development time spent on the two projects. And the rendering engine for Konqueror still needs a lot of work, whereas the Mozilla's is complete and compliant. And the XML support is as sexy as hell....
This version just might replace Konqueror (my current Linux browser) and IE. I would miss the whiz-bang features of the latter. But I did a total reinstall only a few weeks ago, and already the damn thing has managed to start misplacing memory...
__
They'll be back! (Score:5)
It seems to me now that all that Microsoft has won was a single battle in the browser war. Internet Explorer was, undoubtedly, one of the best programs MS ever wrote. It was quite fast (initially), supported many of the web standards and had excellent internationalization. However, while Mozilla had to retreat and regroup, it was well worth it.
Mozilla has now grown to accomodate many of IE's "cool" features. And here we can see IE's greatest shortcoming: it was built with corporate thinking in mind. Mozilla has an excellent development team which is concerned solely with Mozilla's good functioning as a browser. On the other hand, Microsoft has now become concerned with integrated IM, their online "services" and other features which make IE unstable and bloated.
A couple of weeks ago I saw one of my friends (who is not deeply involved with the open-source movement) using Mozilla. The reason for his choice was the fact that Mozilla (even the earlier 0.8!) ran faster than IE 6. It gave me hope - I saw that open-source software can prevail upon commercial software in the trial of public opinion.
Re:Multi-user installation: here's how (Score:4)
No it does not. But when compiling it you just need to do:
BUILD_OFFICIAL=1
this will let mozilla knows where it is installed and will work fine for every user on the system.
Same graphics rendering problem as in 0.9.1. (Score:5)
I really want to use Mozilla as my main browser now because it seems to work very well, but I'm a hopeless picky pedant and a bug like this that appears very prominently really keeps me away.
This time (between 0.9.1 and 0.9.2) I did submit it via Bugzilla, but it got marked (once again) as a duplicate of an already solved bug. I guess the people responsible for the graphics rendering are having trouble duplicating what I'm seeing...
Re:Can I change the UserAgent string? (Score:3)
Add user_pref("general.useragent.override", "yourbrowserhere"); to the prefs or user.js. Works nicely on the Mac. This and other useful tips courtesy of the Mozilla end user docs [mozilla.org].
What about roaming? (Score:3)
OT Save context/URL trees in IE? (Score:3)
~
Re:A few things... (Score:3)
Re:Opera-like gestures (Score:4)
Re:Using 0.9.2 right now (Score:4)
Go ahead and prevent further development. I have the source code now and it was licensed to me here [mozilla.org].
This code is mine now, even if they AOL-ize the next version, I have this one to work from, and I'm sure hundreds of other people who want a superior alternative to Internet Explorer XP are willing to work on it.
Re:Crashes on startup, anyone else? (Score:4)
I have found old pref files cna cause crashes on new versions - this is known since the syntax can change.
The BEST way to tell if its an old profile blowing up in your face, start Mozilla in profile manager mode (varys on platform I think but usuall something like -Profile or -ProfileManager) Windows should create an icon for it in Start.
If it starts, delete any existing profiles and create a new one - your life should be much simpler then.
All I can say is - Right on! (Score:4)
BUt it was REALY unstable - corrupted attachments - hey its beta.
Well, After I installed Moz 0.9.1 (I think I had .8 before) all I could say was WOW> 0.9.1 has been ultra stable (crashed twice since it came out and I installed it - once on Win 2K and once on Linux) Sites render properly most of the time, the only problem was some gif artifacts when scroling a page. The mail client rocks - I have multiple POP and IMAP accounts going without a glitch.
Needless to say I switched over to using Mozilla full time for browsing and email with 0.9.1 and have never looked back - something I could not do before due to instability and other bugs.
Kudos to the Mozilla team - I just installed 0.9.2 and look forward to the improvements! Mozill ahas easily become my browser/email combo of choice!
What's better this time out (linux p.o.v.) (Score:5)
Several things are worth mentioning as major improvements recently:
Some things still need some work:
If you haven't tried mozilla recently (since 0.9) you owe it to yourself to download this one and try it out.
Macintosh Sidebar bug (Score:3)
To fix this problem delete the component registary it will make a new one and this problem goes away.
Mozilla 9.1 one had this problem to I reported it and in about a week the nightly didn't have this problem.
But it seems this problem has returned.
BTW, the Mac Mozilla now reads the System "internet plug-ins" folder
Re:Quick Launch?? (Score:4)
no wait...