Mozilla 1.0 Officially Here 961
hhg writes "People of the world, rejoice! At last, the long awaited Mozilla 1.0 is released, and has emerged on the ftp.mozilla.org ftp-server. Let the release parties loose!" And there's even an Ann Arbor party now ;) Congratulations
to all the developers that contributed to the mighty lizard. And bahtama writes "The latest IE gopher hole patch is out! :) ... Check the release notes and then grab it from here."
A little song... (Score:2, Funny)
mozillazine (Score:5, Informative)
Congrats to all the hackers on the moz project. Fantastic job and well worth the wait.
Re:mozillazine (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:mozillazine (Score:3, Informative)
Gerv
Re:mozillazine (Score:4, Funny)
"stick a fork in it, it's done"
Ding Dong, IE is Dead! (Score:2, Funny)
Ding dong, the wicked browser's dead!
It knew when you were sleeping
It let the virii in
And tried to blame it on other apps
But now we know it's Spring
Ding dong, IE is dead!
Which IE, Microserf IE
Ding dong, the wicked browser's dead!
[noone expects a thousand munchkins to defeat a wicked witch, but you just need a minor event or two
-
Re:Modded up if bashing IE, down if bashing Linux (Score:2, Funny)
Face it, if you really want to read a bunch of pro-ms stuff, head to microsoft.com. Complaining that slashdot is pro-linux is like complaining that the pope is pro-christianity, or that Senator Hollings is pro-bribery.
Re:Modded up if bashing IE, down if bashing Linux (Score:5, Funny)
And yet in that post Linux is not mentioned once. Not even indirectly. Do you even know what Mozilla is?
Well, I'll have to go download it... (Score:5, Funny)
...but I'll have to bundle up - my office just froze over.
..and maybe I won't have time - I think an attractive girl just mentioned that she may want to talk to me.
Re: ftp mirror... (Score:5, Informative)
what next? (Score:5, Funny)
Next, Slashdot sold out (Again)
Then, mozilla was released.
Coming up Warcraft III and Duke Nukem forever released.
Re:what next? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Maybe Bill Gates will have an attack of kindnes (Score:3, Interesting)
While Gates has surpassed the Carnegies, Rockefellers and Fords in total dollars given to charity, philanthropic experts say comparisons to givers from the Gilded Age may be unfair.
"Yes, it's more money than anyone has ever put into a foundation," Englehardt said. "Is it a larger percentage of his worth? Probably not." One of the things that makes comparisons to the Carnegies and Rockefellers difficult, explained Englehardt, is that they gave before the income tax, and thus tax deductions, was created.
"In real dollars, it's more than they gave. Relative to what it can do, it's probably smaller than what the Carnegies' or Rockefellers' money could do."
Ellen Lagamenn, a New York University history professor and expert on philanthropy, said comparisons between Gates and the late greats are premature.
"I don't think these comparisons at the moment are very accurate or apt because Bill Gates is at the beginning of his philanthropic life," she said. "We have a whole record for Carnegie and Rockefeller. I think the issue is what Bill Gates is doing and how sensibly he is doing it. It seems to me he is heading in the right direction."
While benefactors such as Carnegie, Mellon and Rockefeller represented the burgeoning wealth arising from oil, steel and railroads, those of the late 20th Century are bearing gifts from the revolutionary age of information technology. And, like Rockefeller, Gates stands accused of being a monopolist.
Gates' $750 million gift to the Global Fund for Children's Vaccines came less than three weeks after United States District Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson ruled that Microsoft used its monopoly power to thwart competition. The ruling was seen as a threat to Microsoft stock, but share prices rebounded after Jackson appointed a federal judge to mediate between Microsoft and the U.S. Department of Justice prosecutors.
In a percentage of total wealth, it's not the same.
Also, many of the "generous" givers - i.e. Standard Oil (Rockafeller) gave very generously to help cover up their image of anti-consumer/anti-competitive greed. So, from that angle, BG fits right in.
Go do some research - most of these scumbags only give to help "reinvent" their image.
Gates may give, but look at the actions of the firm he ran. If you think that'll help re-invigorate his image with me, you been smoking somthing...
So, the origional poster was right! "Bzzzt - you win a years supply of toilet paper..."
Cheers!
The TRUE philanthropists are the Mozilla people. (Score:3, Insightful)
One last note. Moderators may not reply to stories they moderate, so they often only moderate stories in which they have little interest. Because of that, moderators often don't follow the entire discussion threads closely.
Therefore, it is probably necessary to explain that this discussion of Bill Gate's charity is VERY much on topic.
The true philanthropists are those who contributed to Mozilla, and those who contribute to other open source projects.
Someone who annoys the whole world with buggy software, so that he can make money, is not a true philanthropist. It matters little if he gives a small part of that money to a worthy cause.
Talkback packages only (Score:3, Interesting)
without talkback going to be availible.
Have they or will they remove debug information?
The pacakage is still ~10megs for windows. I was
hoping to see some reduction for 1.0 since I
still use a lowly 56K Modem.
Re:Talkback packages only (Score:4, Informative)
Most likely not, talkback helps them debug!
Have they or will they remove debug information?
The debug menus have been removed since 1.0RC3
The pacakage is still ~10megs for windows. I was hoping to see some reduction for 1.0 since I still use a lowly 56K Modem.
Simple solution, use the Net Installer! [mozilla.org] It is a 200KB download that lets you choose the options you want, and then download them. If you don't want/need Chatzilla or Mail & News, you can install a smaller package.
As for 10 megs for the full package, that's not big AT ALL! Remember that it comes with Mail & News, an IRC Client, a browser, a WYSIWYG editor, and an address book.
Re:Talkback packages only (Score:4, Insightful)
Call me an old fart, but "net installers" (aka stubs) annoy me. (This isn't a Mozilla criticism - IE is just as bad.)
If I don't want the email/news/chat cruft (and I don't), but I do want the basic browser on 3 systems, why should I download a 200K .exe three times, click on the same options three times, and download the same few-megabytes browser, three times?
Just gimme a damn URL where I can get the installer that contains everything needed for the basic browser. (That is, tell me where to find the thing the stub's downloading). Then let me download it ONCE. I can then FTP or copy it on my LAN, or even burn it to CD and use SneakerNet to get it to other machines.
General question: I'm seeing stubs more often, and I just don't get the idea. Apart from marketing ("Look! Upgrade your Netscape! Only 200K download!" - conveniently ignoring that it's only the stub, and thereby obfuscating the size of the real download) purposes, what value is added by these "network installer" stubs?
In principle, can't it be replaced by a web page with radio buttons that say "do you want your download to include/exclude $FOO, $BAR, $BAZ", and upon clicking "submit", give you a page with the corresponding packages/zips/tarballs/whatevers?
Re:Talkback packages only (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Talkback packages only (Score:3, Insightful)
For chrissakes, you are replying to a response [slashdot.org] which clearly exemplifies the main reason stubs are provided -- people on slow connections that don't want to install certain parts of the program! Why should they have to download everything?
Mozilla provides a complete download as well.
Sheesh.
Re:Talkback packages only (Score:3, Informative)
Did you already have a version of Mozilla installed previously?? If so, you need to uninstall it first, or else everything but PSM will be required. If Moz is not previously installed, you can turn the other options on and off. For example, right now I only have the browser & address book installed.
Re:Talkback packages only (Score:2)
Re:Talkback packages only (Score:2)
emerge mozilla
And it will be compiled with MY build options that I have compiled my ENTIRE system with.
Derek
Well done (Score:2)
In other news.... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:In other news.... (Score:3, Funny)
And Dilbert got an office with a REAL DOOR. REALLY! I'm not kidding! Look at today's comic [dilbert.com]!
Mirror list - Please don't /. the main site! (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Mirror list - Please don't /. the main site! (Score:5, Insightful)
If you have this many mirrors, why don't sites set up a separate secured FTP site that ONLY the mirrors can connect to? That way, the damn mirrors would actually be useful!!!
Finally... (Score:2)
I've been using Mozilla 0.9.x under Mandrake 8.2 for a while, and when I compare it to Internet Explorer, I have to say Mozilla is simply better. And I have to say, Mozilla-mail is also better than Outlook in many aspects.
Long live to Mozilla!
Re:Finally... (Score:2)
My migration from OE to Mozilla has been painful. I am sticking to it but I just want to say that things have a lot farther to go to where the email side is as robust as the browsing.
Please!! Count to ten and then decide (Score:5, Informative)
Unless you are having problems.. try this weekend after the mirrors have had time to catch up!
Re:Please!! Count to ten and then decide (Score:5, Informative)
Their bandwidth must be pretty hefty (Score:2)
D
mirror in sweden (Score:4, Informative)
Ann Arbor Party (Score:2, Interesting)
New 1.0 Start Page and User FAQ (Score:4, Informative)
FAQ: http://mozilla.org/start/1.0/faq/ [mozilla.org]
Don't bother looking at these in IE 5.0, its PNG support is rubbish [libpng.org].
Re:New 1.0 Start Page and User FAQ (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:New 1.0 Start Page and User FAQ (Score:2)
Re:New 1.0 Start Page and User FAQ (Score:4, Insightful)
Yeah, though in IE6 we needed to use a different tail PNG because IE6 gets the gamma wrong, and IE5's support is so b0rken we just don't put them on the page at all (you'll see a weird slideshow effect).
IE will become the new Netscape 4: the b0rken pizza ship that no-one wants to code for any more, because it's just too painful. I so so so wish we hadn't had to allow for the thing.
Beonex Communicator 0.8-stable based on Mozilla 1 (Score:5, Informative)
While the ultimate goal of the Mozilla project is to produce source code that can be used by other projects and companies, the Open-Source project Beonex tries to make a browser for end-users out of it. (See Beonex vs. Mozilla [beonex.com]). Beonex Communicator stays relatively true to Mozilla. Special emphasis is being put on security and privacy. The software is configured defensively, to avoid security holes to appear in the first place. For example, it sanitizes incoming HTML-email to the largest part.
The current version is available for Windows [beonex.com] und Linux [beonex.com] and bases on the final Mozilla 1.0 source code.
BTW: Congratulations to the whole Mozilla project!
Disclaimer: I am a member of the Beonex project.
I hope, Slashdot will also run this as main news article.
mozilla is an end-user browser (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't mean to deprecate your efforts, but I think this "Mozilla isn't about producing an end-user product" idea has always been wishful thinking--and is becoming less plausible every day. Mozilla is clearly destined to become the prominent browser in the free software community and the web development community, and a popular browser among computer users at large.
I'm not saying it's a bad idea in principle to separate the development of the engine and the finish; I just don't see how it can happen in this case. The core features and the user interface of a browser are not separable enough. In order for Mozilla to produce a browser for testing purposes going to want it to be a good user interface. The evidence bears this out: users file usability bugs in bugzilla, the developers take them seriously, and as a result, vanilla mozilla has an overall better user interface than any earlier Netscape browser.
The Mozilla developers seem to agree on the value of a reference user interface, in order to prevent excessive variation in the interfaces of derived products. For example, they insist upon limiting the number of user-configurable variables, which would not make sense if they were only about the basic technologies. In order for their reference interface to be credible, they have to invest resources in usability. The way I see it, the "reference interface" position amounts to a committment to an end-user product, even if they don't realize or admit it.
On top of this, Mozilla already has all the visibility in the free software and web development communities. If Mozilla refuses to provide an end-user product, it will mostly create user confusion. Mozilla has all the developers. Mozilla has all the infrastructure. It only makes sense for Mozilla to do the last 10% and provide an end-user product. Maybe someday beonix or galeon or someone else will overcome this barrier (just as GTK and QT have finally displaced athena as free widget sets for X), but it will take a long time.
Of course, in some markets, vanilla Mozilla won't be the king. Among Joe PC, it will a Netscape or AOL branded version. Users of embedded systems will get whatever modified version their manufacturer included. But even the popular computer press reviews Mozilla, so the message that it is not for end-users doesn't seem to have gotten through. And among the slashdot demographic, Mozilla is it. Let's face it: how many of us will download Mozilla 1.0 to "test" it? Most of us want to use it! Mozilla is already a great end-user browser, and will keep getting better.
new king (Score:4, Insightful)
Say goodbye, IE! Man am I glad to see you go.
(BTW, I hear in the next (last?) WinXP patch, you'll be able to strip IE from your system entirely? Where can I find detailed information about this?)
PS. I've been using Mozilla for about a month or two, and despite aforementionned rough edges, this thing absolutely blows IE out of the water in all respects except market share.
Re:new king (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm seeing more and more people switch to IE every day. Complete cluelessness of Netscape is to blame for this. Even though Mozilla is a rock solid browser I doubt these people would be willing to run Mozilla after finding out that Netscape 6 is derrived from Mozilla code base.
Re:new king (Score:4, Interesting)
More recently, I have come across a bug that prevents IE from saving a photo as anything, but a BMP when the cache gets full (or something). This is a problem at work because I use IE to browse web accessible database of large image files.
For both CPU's I had to switch to Moz. Thankfully, it was there when I needed it. IE is still a pleasure to use... but only when it works.
Re:new king (Score:3, Interesting)
1)K-Meleon has never crashed on me, even with 100 windows open. I don't think I can go back to a web browser which ever crashes. It's just too inconvenient to lose those 100 windows.
2)I enjoy coding under dos(in fact, despite the fact that dos is quite dead, and real-mode hardware coding is not paticularly useful anymore, I'm working on an RPG for dos right now), and the dos emulator under w2k is less than stellar. For example, they don't emulate the latest version of EMS.
3)I have achieved remarkable stability and speed under 98, and the thought of spending a couple hundred dollars for 2k just so I can run Internet Explorer without crashing the shell doesn't really appeal to me.
If I had cable and therefore needed security(patched security.....), I'd buy it in a heartbeat -- probably before I went to subscribe to cable. As it stands however, there isn't really any reason to put Windows on a standalone PC.
User discussion newsgroups (Score:5, Informative)
Please, don't use the developer groups for your questions. A good place for user discussion where you can ask for support or discuss and propose features is the new newsgroup:
snews://secnews.netscape.com:563/netscape.mozilla(Note that slashdot adds a space inside the link)
Re:User discussion newsgroups (Score:3, Informative)
It's finally here! Yay! (Score:2, Informative)
Hit 'em where it hurts (Score:5, Funny)
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)
Bombing them is one thing, but not giving them access to Mozilla? That's just mean.
Re:Hit 'em where it hurts (Score:2)
Re:Hit 'em where it hurts (Score:2)
Last time I checked, the Taliban didn't control any areas .... still, what with the red star and all it'd probably be seen as a symbol of communism anyway :)
a serious question (Score:2)
Re:a serious question (Score:3, Informative)
No worries. It's enough alike to keep him happy. In fact, had I not erased his entire hard disk earlier in the day ("Why shouldn't I open attachments again?"), Mozilla probably would have been able to import all of his settings automatically.
1.0 is only PR (Score:2)
I have been using Mozilla almost exclusivly for one year.
Mozilla has been the best browser out there (free, stable, feature rich (tabbed browsing, image blocking, fastest rendering)) for six months.
Why 1.0 is news is beyond me.
Mozilla could be improved by making new windows open faster (although tabbed browsing really helps), and adding many of the thousand of feature requests that are in the bugzilla database. Here are bugs for which I am currently voting [mozilla.org]. I'd like middle mouse button to open forms in new windows, junkbuster functionality built in, an easy way to switch SMTP servers, and the Reply-To on mail to be set to the person mail was sent to to begin with when replying.
Re:1.0 is only PR (Score:2)
If you want to see my votes you will have to copy and paste the link location so as not to send the referer url to bugzilla.
Bookmarks problems still exist though (Score:3, Informative)
Come and get Java and Flash! (Score:4, Informative)
First see if you NEED to download Java! (Score:4, Informative)
I don't know why the installer does not do this automatically if it detects Java, but all you have to do is go to the Mozilla plugins directory and make a symbolic link to the plugin. In the case of JDK 1.4, the plugin resides in ${JAVA_HOME}/jre/plugin/i386/ns610/libjavaplugin_
In Windows, in some directory that looks like that, there are some dll's you can copy to the Mozilla plugins' folder to make the Java plugin work.
it doesn't have to beat IE to win (Score:5, Insightful)
As long as Mozilla has its foot in the door with a significant niche of web users, as long as it is Free software that can never disappear simply because a company goes under, as long as it guarantees a viable browsing solution for all the platforms Microsoft would rather you forgot, then it has won. It will prevent Microsoft from completely dictating web standards, from creating a world where only Windows can browse the web.
The problem Microsoft (and others of its ilk) has with Free software is that it doesn't go away. When Mozilla first came out, there was a huge hype, but that hype evaporated and turned (in some quarters) to derision when Mozilla didn't deliver right away. For most MS competitors, that would have been the end. But Mozilla kept plugging along, getting better and better...it never has to go back to square one with a new company and codebase.
...and the longer it holds on with the high quality it has demonstrated so far, the more companies will jump on to its bandwagon. Everyone except for Microsoft benefits from open standards, and almost everyone knows it.
Sorry to be the ungrateful user, but... (Score:5, Informative)
This bug is why mozilla insists on adding .exe extensions to anything delivered as application/octet-stream, .txt to text/plain, and likes to fool around with lots of other extensions depending on your exact setup (on my machine it tries to rename every mp3 file to .mpga).
Not bad at all. (Score:3, Interesting)
However it still has a few problems. from Klassy.com [klassy.com]
1. Image alignment. Seems to not support the Align=AbsMiddle property of an image tag.
2. Lacks support for IE style layers. Its too much to expect web site devlopers to use more then one layer type. Its time to bite the bullet and support the MS style.
These are the only real problems I can find after a breif test. Overall looking very good (other then the Netscape 4 interface).
Re:Not bad at all. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Not bad at all. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Not bad at all. (Score:3, Informative)
The "Modern" interface is much nicer:
1. Click Edit | Preferences | Appearance | Themes | Modern.
2. Close Moz *and* QuickLaunch (right-click the system tray icon and choose "Exit Mozilla").
When you start Moz again, you'll have the Modern theme.
Long time coming (Score:2)
I've been using the builds since 13 or 14, and I must say, they've done a remarkable job in coming so far.
I can't seem to download it right now, but should it fix the small number of issues I saw with RC3, this should be an amazing product.
But no rest for the weary, the 1.1 branch is allready underway.
Thank You! (Score:5, Informative)
Oh, and all the developers too
w00t! (Score:2, Troll)
Regardless, great news! Me == happy.
Congratulations! (Score:2)
Enormous thanks and my congratulations to everyone involved with Mozilla! And to all those doubters and cynics who've been whining about bloat, performance, features,... or indeed anything at all: you can stop it now. Mozilla is the best web browser in existence today (looking only at the browser component): it supports FAR more standards than anything else, AND it copes with old broken non-compliant HTML, AND it renders pages fast, AND it (the browser) starts up like greased lightning in -turbo mode
Not only is it a category killer browser - irtonically hte individual apps are themselves (pretty much) category killers. mail/news easily trounces Outlook for me - apart from the secuirty stuff, it does threading. Yep, no threading in Outlook! And what's more --- no ads (Opera), no security holes (IE), and best of all, Mozilla is Free (Libre) Software.
Many thanks also to those of the rest of us who kept the faith, spending long expensive nights downloading another flakey nightly build, who never hit EXIT on a moz process until it had crashed...
Personally I feel more involved with Moz than any other Free Software project, I've been testing, logging bugs in Bugzilla, reading the docs, status reports and mozillazine ever since the news was first announced here on Slashdot. Anyone else out there coming to the London party? Gervase?
A million thanks to everyone who hacked code or helped out on the project in any way. Mozilla is the most enjoyable software I've ever used, apart from Perl that is. Oh frabjous day! Calloo, callay!!! =) *does a little dance*
PS: and a special thanks to Asa and the rest of the evangelist types who turn up here reliably and calmy refuting the FUD and bollocks that have come from Slahdotters over the years. Go back a couple of years and pick out a Slashdot moz story -- you lot /hated/ it and it sometimes seemed no-one else believed it would ever work...)
The ONLY thing annoying me... (Score:5, Insightful)
I fortunately replaced the splash screen on my copy at work (in Windows, drop a file called mozilla.bmp into the Mozilla directory, and that becomes your splash!) before I showed Mozilla off to my boss. Had he seen the regular splash screen, I don't know if he would have taken it seriously.
Seriously, the browser is professional, the splash screen should be too.
Re:The ONLY thing annoying me... (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.lotekk.net/index.php?page=moz&sub=spla
Very professional, and very fitting!
Re:The ONLY thing annoying me... (Score:4, Informative)
Here are some:
first - the Bugzila page. Full of links and attachments: http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32218
http://latinmoz.f2g.net/mozillation/
http://www.vorstrasse91.com/moztips/tricks.html (those are quite nice...)
http://www.geocities.com/mozamp/mozspla
Enjoy.
0000B4B5E831
Is it safe to upgrade my old Mozilla (Ximian)? (Score:2)
Thank you in advance.
WARNING - do not upgrade to Mozilla from Netscape (Score:5, Informative)
Near the end of the release notes [mozilla.org], there is the warning
The bug report itself contains this pathetic comment:
that is to say... If Netscape can't use a Mozilla profile(and vice-versa) without causing nasty corruption then it shouldn't be trying. We should offer to import and create a new one without harming the old one - just like we do with other browsers that we like/share users with/ and support but with which we have incompatible profiles. (uhh 4.x)
Believe me, I'm overjoyed to mark bugs that stem from this behavior as invalid (and I will) but that doesn't strike at the core issue. Lots of users, QA, and developers have spent a ton of time chasing down these demons - no one knew of this incompatibility. Isn't there something to be done?
Re:WARNING - do not upgrade to Mozilla from Netsca (Score:3, Informative)
The 1.0 relnote for this bug is good but not enough. The solution should be that
Netscape creates its own registry.dat and doesn't touch Mozilla's. That should
be done for the next major Netscape release, or there will be a lot of users
with profile corruption caused by sharing profiles between Netscape and Mozilla.
That could lead to user frustration.
It sounds like it is actually a problem with current netscape builds.
Re:WARNING - do not upgrade to Mozilla from Netsca (Score:5, Informative)
NOTE: you can't start the profile manager unless Mozilla is fully shut down.
Just think. . . (Score:3, Funny)
. . .Mozilla could advertise itself as the most Gopher-Friendly [slashdot.org] browser on the market!
Mozilla slower then NS4.7 on Solaris (Score:4, Informative)
While this monster is by no means a speed demon, Mozilla is so slow it is unusable. Takes 30 seconds to start up, 1-2 seconds to register a click. The rendering of pages is fine, but everything else is really, really slow.
Netscape4.7, on the other hand, is fine. Not fast, but perfectly usable.
I also use Mozilla all the time on a Win98 & RH7.2 (Dual boot/366Mhz/512Mb), and it's way way FASTER then Netscape4.7.
Why is Mozilla so slow on Solaris?
Re:Mozilla slower then NS4.7 on Solaris (Score:3, Informative)
"The problem, here, is not the OS, it is the Ultra 5. Ultra 5s were marketed as low-end workstations when they were first sold, which makes them very-low-end today. Ultra 5s were intended as basic administrator workstations with absolutely no frills. As a counter example, I have a 440MHz UltraSPARC IIi-based workstation with UltraSCSI disk drives, 512MB of RAM, and Solaris 8, and Mozilla/Netscape works beautifully. What I have that the Ultra 5 doesn't is bandwidth."
To make a fast Sun build, use the Sun Forte compiler instead of gcc - being tweaked for the OS and architecture, it does a lot better.
Netscape 4.x (Score:3, Interesting)
If Mozilla had been a straight source release of Netscape 4.08, would it have reached version 1.0 sooner? What would the current Mozilla version be like now? Would both paths tend to converge to the rewritten-from-scratch browser we have now?
It's a pity that 4.x was never made free, because Mozilla 1.0 has some pretty high system requirements. I'm going to check out the last of the 'Mozilla classic' builds which were a cleaned-up Netscape 4, to see how well they perform.
Re:The ONLY thing annoying me... (Score:4, Interesting)
Oh it all starts out nice "we need a prettier splashscreen, here I made one check it out." Then the accusations of satanism [mozilla.org]and communism [mozilla.org] begin (seriously). [to view the links you'll have to copy the link location into the address bar. Bugzilla doesn't accept direct links from slashdot]
Long story short, they can't change the splashscreen because of the legal wrangling necessary. But ANYONE can change the splashscreen to anything by putting at .bmp file named mozilla.bmp in their /mozilla directory.
Personally I think the best ones are here [mareotis.com], and no it's not listed on the big list of splashscreens given before.
Is there a good CD image to distribute? (Score:5, Interesting)
I can put one together myself, but I'm not certian what the best (most easily understood) directory structure would be... Perhaps something like this:
- Root
- Linux
- Suse
- Redhat
- ...
- BSD
- FreeBSD
- NetBSD
- ...
- Windows
- Source
- DOCS
I'd like to have something burnable by next Wednesday for the Ann Arbor Destroyed by Mozilla [schnitzer.at] party...-Adam
Re: from the it's-only-been-how-many-years dept. (Score:5, Interesting)
June 5th 2002 - Mozilla 1.0 Released [mozilla.org]
Roughly, about 4.5 years.
UNCOs (Score:3, Informative)
Mozilla is dying! (Score:3, Funny)
Today in the news Mozilla has been shown to be decreasing by 99% of 0.0001% leading experts in the field to believe that Mozilla is, in fact, dying. Richard Stallman, founder of the upstart Free Software Foundation was quotae as saying, "It's GNU/Mozilla damn you GNU/Mozilla!!!!!" Eric Raymond was reached for comment but he shot both of our journalists dead proclaiming, "Git offa mah propherty you city boy!" Cmdr. Taco and Hemos were unavailable for comment as they are currently in an undisclosed location doing ungodly things to CowboyNeal who by all accounts, has been dressed up in a leather and latex montage and forced to consecrate with small asian monkeys.
In other news Linus Torvalds, founder of the Loonix software movement was found chastising pigeons in a NYC subway earlier today. He claimed they were in it with the queers. Bill Gates commented, "That's what happnes when you do not charge for your product, dimentia sets in and *WHAM!* you're gone." He then added, "Besides 640k should be enough for anybody."
Better Icons (for windows users at least) (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.grayrest.com/moz/resources/icons.shtml [grayrest.com]
They're nice looking, and more importantly, I can now differentiate between the browser windows and the mail windows...
Supposedly these and other icons are available from the following page, but it's really slow right now for me...
http://plugindoc.mozdev.org/icons.html [mozdev.org]
cnet review (Score:4, Funny)
shows the following as a boxscore for mozilla.
CNET rating: 7
The good: Fast; stable; free; includes full-featured e-mail client.
The bad: Incompatible with some sites built for Internet Explorer; chat client doesn't work with the big commercial IM systems, including ICQ, Yahoo IM, AOL IM, and Windows Messenger.
The bottom line: Until Netscape 7 comes out, Mozilla is the best free alternative to Microsoft IE. And it's faster, to boot.
Y'know, when the only bad things they can say about your browser is
1)it is standards-compliant; and
2)no, IRC does not work with AIM
then I think you've done a pretty damn good job. Congratulations!
If they follow everyone elses version standards... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:If this is true... (Score:2, Informative)
Perhaps we shouldn't get too frenzied to download until the mirrors are updated.
Re:good news for Linux? (Score:2, Funny)
um, is that such a good thing?:)
Re:good news for Linux? (Score:2)
As a niche OS, Linux only got fringe attentions from them, but now that it's becoming a formidable desktop platform, I fear that MS will bring it's PR machine into gear...
Re:Right on (Score:3, Insightful)
Except they aren't standards are they? They are secrets.
Re:Popup expunger? (Score:2, Informative)
Edit
Preferences
Advanced
Scripts & Windows
Uncheck 'Open unrequested windows'
Opera != open source (Score:2, Informative)
Re:IE patch? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:IE patch? (Score:2)
Why did they attach a comment that should have been mentioned in slashback and put it in such an historic post?
Clearly you missed the joke here. Bahtama was implying that Mozilla 1.0 is a patch for IE, by allowing you to no longer use IE anymore, an browse securely!
Of course, you know what they say about jokes that need explaining...
Where the parties are at (Score:4, Informative)
It looks like we'll finally be able to close out Bug #100309 [mozilla.org].
Re:strange choice of releases (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, we're already moving forward to Mozilla 1.0.1
--Asa
Re:Wheres the Spell Checker in Moz Email? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Mozilla Mail (Score:3, Informative)
--Asa
Re:OPEN SOURCE NEEDS MORE BABES (Score:3, Interesting)
Who is the user at madchat who is hosting those pictures? I can't find contact info.
And you want hot chicks? Hand hot chicks a copy of the Unix Administration Handbook, and make yourself avaliable to answer questions. It worked on me.
- Ceren E.,
that daemonette, who just wants to see the photographer's credits BACK on those pictures.
Re:So close, and yet so far... (Score:3, Informative)
Yes, but that only works on the same X display. If you have one Mozilla open on, say :0.0, there's
no way to open a new browser window on :0.1, which
I need to do for my monitoring...