Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Mozilla The Internet

Mozilla 1.1 Hits The Street 606

Posted by timothy from the posted-with dept.
asa writes: "Mozilla 1.1 has arrived!. This release has many new features including full-screen mode for Linux, Mac MathML support, a redesigned JavaScript Debugger, new window icons for the different Mozilla applications, view selection source, display HTML mail as plaintext, and much more. Along with all the new features, Mozilla 1.1 also contains many improvements to performance, stability, standards support, and web site compatibility. You can get Mozilla 1.1 by visiting the mozilla.org releases page or directly from ftp at ftp.mozilla.org. Now that 1.1 is out the door, the focus moves to 1.2 alpha, and beyond. If you're confused as to how all of these releases relate to each other, be sure to check out the Mozilla Roadmap and the community hub over at mozillaZine.org."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Mozilla 1.1 Hits The Street More

Mozilla 1.1 Hits The Street

Comments Filter:
  • I love Mozilla, the browser and email client are awesome and so much better than anything else. But before it even finished starting it gave me to error messages about some DLL. Then enigmail is complaining at me too. And why are 2 mozilla shortcuts added to my desktop? A cool new feature: view selection source. You can select some text and view the source just for that piece of the page. And tabbed browsing still rocks. Control-click a link or after typing a URL in the location field to open it quickly in a new tab, or hit control-T to pop a new blank tab. I just wish you could control click on the links in your toolbar.

  • After installation... (Score:5, Informative)

    by snake_dad ( 311844 ) on Tuesday August 27, 2002 @04:35AM (#4147158) Homepage Journal
    Check out the radial context menus [mozdev.org] or the mouse gestures [mozdev.org]. Look at edit->preferences->navigator->internet search, and edit->preferences->advanced->Scripts&Plugin s. And finally take a look at the preferences bar [xulplanet.com] to quickly enable or disable certain options. These are always the first things I install with any new Mozilla, release or nightly.
    • Having upgraded from 1.0 to 1.1 Mozilla has kept those settings, so no need to go running around. It hasn't even wiped history or cleared the URL bar history.
    • The radial menus would be okay if they used text instead of icons. With the iconic menus it takes forever to figure out what to click on when I want to use a feature that I dont use typically.

      They should take note from games that use radial menus. They all use text.

      • easy to fix! (Score:5, Informative)

        by Felipe Hoffa ( 141801 ) on Tuesday August 27, 2002 @10:45AM (#4148894) Homepage Journal
        Remember its open source, you can adapt it to your own needs.

        Just take the file piemenu.js in mozilla/chrome/radialcontext/content and change this line:
        this.labelTrigger= setTimeout("PieMenu.prototype.act.showLabels();", 900);
        The timeout is fixed in 900 by default, you can make it lower.

        While you are there you can find a lot of options, just don't be afraid to try.

        Fh

  • Mozilla has good karma. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by bjornte ( 536493 ) on Tuesday August 27, 2002 @04:35AM (#4147159)
    I've been a Moz 1.0 user since it was launched, and I've been very pleased with it. Many nice touches, like tabbed browsing (try ctrl-shift-clicking), banning images from ad-serves, anti-popup and so on. Best of all, it manages all the security routines my internet bank throws at it.

    Having downloaded Moz 1.1 the difference is not so great, as expected. Some minor bugs have vanished, like the frequent paralyzation of the http-input field.

    In general, there is nothing IE can do for me that Moz can't. And Moz is just... a smoother ride. Plus it's got good karma. Recommended.

    • I've been using Mozilla almost exclusively for a couple months now.

      The only thing I miss from IE is the auto fill-in when entering data in a form. That saved me a lot of typing. Mozilla's fill-in seems to only work on some pages, and then it only remembers one answer. IE lets remembers all of my answers to a single field.

      Other than that, I love Mozilla.

      • Re:Mozilla has good karma. (Score:4, Informative)

        by astrosmash ( 3561 ) on Tuesday August 27, 2002 @11:09AM (#4149093) Journal

        The only thing I miss from IE is the auto fill-in when entering data in a form. That saved me a lot of typing. Mozilla's fill-in seems to only work on some pages, and then it only remembers one answer. IE lets remembers all of my answers to a single field.

        Have you tried "Edit->Fill In Form" from the main menu? That's where Mozilla keeps all of your saved form info. It works reasonably well most of the time, but it's not exactly intuative.

        I remember reading somewhere that work was underway to make form auto-filling more intuative, similar to what IE does, but I don't know if any work has actually been done or not -- it may have just been talk.

      • Re:Mozilla has good karma. (Score:4, Informative)

        by AntiTuX ( 202333 ) on Tuesday August 27, 2002 @11:35AM (#4149316) Homepage
        type this into your textbox:

        chrome://communicator/locale/wallet/index.html

        Fill in your form, and go whoopass :)

  • it took them forever to reach 1.0 (although the 0.9 releases were already really good), but now they're releasing a 1.1 after only a short time, and also working on a 1.2 Yeay Mozilla!

    If not "Release early", "Release often!" :)

    • Re:That's cool... (Score:3, Informative)

      by Jugalator ( 259273 )
      They're also simultaneously working on a 1.0.1 branch. Mozilla 1.0.1 RC2 [mozilla.org] was released a time ago (while they were working on 1.1 as well), and is still the current 1.0.x build. Mozilla 1.1 does NOT succeed 1.0.1, as evident by the "RC 2" status. 1.0.x is simply a separate branch for stability, while 1.1, 1.2, etc is for new technology and features. I'm pretty sure they'll go on with a 1.1.x branch even after 1.2 is released as well.

      In other words, it's not as simple as the Mozilla team moving from 0.9.x to 1.0 and proceeding to 1.1 and 1.2.

      • Re:That's cool... (Score:2, Informative)

        by Aanallein ( 556209 )
        I'm pretty sure they'll go on with a 1.1.x branch even after 1.2 is released as well.
        No, that almost certainly won't happen. 1.0 is intended to be the only long lived branch. See the roadmap [mozilla.org].
        • Ah, sorry for not checking it before guessing. :P I assumed they'd always do this to improve stability after releasing major updates. Sounds like the logical thing to do to me as long as they have the resources to do it.

          Anyway, thanks for the correction. ;)

          • Re:That's cool... (Score:3, Interesting)

            by BZ ( 40346 )
            There aren't the resources to do it. There aren't even the resources to do the two branches we're doing, really.

    • Re:That's cool... (Score:3, Informative)

      by asa ( 33102 )
      it took them forever to reach 1.0 (although the 0.9 releases were already really good), but now they're releasing a 1.1 after only a short time

      We branched for 1.0 around April 09. That day we began work on 1.1. Mozilla 1.1 was finished on August 26. That's more than 4 months of development.

      We branched for 1.1 around August 05. That day we began work on Mozilla 1.2. We should be seeing a Mozilla 1.2alpha pretty soon.

      --Asa

  • Coverage for other browser projects as well (Score:5, Interesting)

    by jukal ( 523582 ) on Tuesday August 27, 2002 @04:43AM (#4147180) Journal
    It is great, that Mozilla progresses and that Slashdot supports the work by directing traffic to their site. But I really hope that /. could give other and new browser projects coverage as well. Many of them [dmoz.org] have innovative ideas, and potential, and probably would not mind a few more volunteer developers. Slashdot is in great position to give these too the needed momentum. Why don't you release an article about one of them today already?

    • Re:Coverage for other browser projects as well (Score:5, Informative)

      by Plug ( 14127 ) on Tuesday August 27, 2002 @06:11AM (#4147382) Homepage
      While I'm the first to say that monopolies are bad, I like the fact that the OSS community has banded together enough to make something of the scale of Mozilla, instead of being tied up in lots of little sub-projects.

      I like the fact that Galeon exists, that K-Meleon exists, that Chimera exists - and because they're all based on Mozilla, they're all as good as each other at rendering web content. If they all started as projects from scratch then none of them would be anywhere _near_ as good as they are now.

      Instead of a million ICQ clients out there that implement 80% of the functions, if we had one decent ICQ library that all the clients used, then they could all use that library (Yes, I know there a couple of libs that are getting there - there weren't when I looked a couple of months back.)

      I think it's a great thing that there is a standard library (Gecko) for rendering web pages that other projects can implement and build on. While I don't want to suggest the stifling of competition, I don't want to see people wasting time developing an alternative to something that is the best there is, and that they can just grab and use.

      With the addition of calendaring, Mozilla is almost in a position to take on the IE/Outlook combination. Who would have suggested that a year ago? Mozilla is more than just another in the sea of browsers.
      • Jabber could be such a protocol. You might be interested in reading about their proposal to get their library into kde as "the standard" p2p protocol for kde.
        See here [kde.org] for an interesting discussion.

        I for one would greatly like this.
      • > While I'm the first to say that monopolies are bad, I like the fact that the OSS community has banded together
        > enough to make something of the scale of Mozilla, instead of being tied up in lots of little sub-projects.

        I completely agree with this. But I also think we are approaching the point in which people need to intentionally keep their eyes open for other ongoing projects as well. Otherwise, it is possible to just focus too tightly, and loose focus. Even in the case of Gecko, it clearly currently is one of the best (if not the best) of it's kind. Still, some day there might be something else based on completely different design (that cannot be easily implemented within Gecko). I believe such a new radical improvements easily originates from fresh minds that have not yet fixed their thoughts to certain way of thinking. It would be a shame if something like that was left unnoticed because of too fixed focus. :)

  • Thought you guys would like this (Score:5, Funny)

    by dcstimm ( 556797 ) on Tuesday August 27, 2002 @04:45AM (#4147187) Homepage
    Thought you guys would like this:-) http://linux.darylstimm.com/mozilla1280.jpg [darylstimm.com]
    • It's a Gecko (well, a lizard at least) eating the Microsoft butterfly, no need to panic, moderators.

      dcstimm: Blame your high userid (I didn't realise they'd hit half a million, heh) and moderators not bothering to check links. Although tbh I would have prefered it without the butterflies :)

  • But Mozilla still has some weaknesses (Score:5, Funny)

    by norculf ( 146473 ) on Tuesday August 27, 2002 @04:47AM (#4147192) Journal
    1.1 is still a very immature version, compared to the Internet Explorer family of technologies, which is currently in version 6.x and still being improved daily.

    When will Mozilla feature speedier web browsing, and better integration with best-of-breed Microsoft products such as MSN messenger and Outlook XP?

    A theme that more closely matches the award winning Windows look-and-feel would also be helpful.
  • Well, exactly 24 hours ago I upgraded to 1.1beta because bugzilla claimed it fixed a problem I was having with IFRAME. Now 1.1 is out, and I downloaded it while I was writing this comment. At this rate you should save your bandwidth, and look for 1.2b tommorow night!

    Also I predict a low chance of rain tommorow, since I did not wash my car. I will keep you posted.
    • At this rate you should save your bandwidth, and look for 1.2b tommorow night!

      Actually, not quite that soon ;-) and not 1.2b. Mozilla 1.1alpha, however, is right around the corner. Expect to see it sometime in the next couple of weeks.

      --Asa

  • That funky graph (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Zaffle ( 13798 ) on Tuesday August 27, 2002 @05:24AM (#4147283) Homepage Journal
    I just want to know what program they used to generate that funky [mozilla.org] milestone graph. Anyone know?
    • Photoshop. Or, as the case may be, Gimp. Either way its a 15 minute job. 10 for someone who knows what they're doing.

    • Re:That funky graph (Score:5, Interesting)

      by asa ( 33102 ) <asa@mozilla.com> on Tuesday August 27, 2002 @11:13AM (#4149134) Homepage
      I just want to know what program they used to generate that funky [mozilla.org] milestone graph. Anyone know?

      I used a combination of Paint Shop Pro and the Gimp. I'm actually interested in finding some kind of CVS graph program that would generate a picture like this from CVS data. It obviously wouldn't be able to predict the future but it should be able to build an image of CVS activity (branches, checkin volume, tags, etc). I have tried in the past to take some cvs measurements and use checkin volume to determine the thickness of the branch lines but it was just too much effort. If something like that could be done programatically I'd be as happy as a pig in shit. :)

      --Asa

  • Not Quite Finmished yet (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Nailer ( 69468 )
    Unpackaged tarballs are the tool of the devil. Other applications rely on Mozilla and I'm not going to install an unpackaged version and then have to force install every other package that relies on it, and deal with a nonstandard install, uninstall and query routine.

    I'm going to run away and try and cook up some Linux packages, so I can have myself a nice little LSB-compliant RPM.

    If you beat me to it, post a URL to this page...

    • nonstandard? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by wiredog ( 43288 ) on Tuesday August 27, 2002 @06:17AM (#4147403) Journal
      Since when are tarballs nonstandard? They've been the default, works-on-everything, way to distribute software for decades.
      • I don't know about your own GNU/Linux systems, but almost every app I install on my systems (every app on my current system) comes from a package.

        This allows for automated installation and recompilation, querying, verification of files, package signing, and uninstallation. Its also part of the Linux Standards Base.

        • Use checkinstall! (Score:5, Informative)

          by Moritz Moeller - Her ( 3704 ) <mmhNO@SPAMgmx.net> on Tuesday August 27, 2002 @07:15AM (#4147558)
          http://asic-linux.com.mx/~izto/checkinstall/

          Checkinstall is a god-send. You can install everything from source and get an automatic RPM/DEB package built AND installed at the same time.

          Deinstall anything cleanly and it even checks broken dependencies!

          I never type
          su -c "make install"
          anymore, for me it is
          su -c checkinstall

          That is easier to type, too. :-)

      • Re:nonstandard? (Score:4, Insightful)

        by foobar104 ( 206452 ) on Tuesday August 27, 2002 @08:01AM (#4147749) Journal
        OP didn't say tarballs are nonstandard. He said that lots of software depends on Mozilla, and that if he installs from a tarball instead of his preferred package format, he'll have to do special things to install lots of other pieces of software, like forcing them to ignore dependencies and so on.

        And he's right. If you want to use a package management system, you have to use it all the time, otherwise chaos ensues and the cure is worse than the disease.
    • There is usually a directory for Redhat RPMs, but I don't see one for this release.

      For example RPMs for Mozilla 1.1 beta [mozilla.org] (a week old, they would probably work for you), and also for the latest nightly [mozilla.org].

  • odd (Score:2)

    by iomud ( 241310 )
    Oddly enough mozilla crashed 4 times in the past hour on os x, 1.1b crashed very rarely. I cant wait till chimera is as feature complete as mozilla so I can ditch the ui.

  • Obligatory Godzilla Comparison (Score:3, Funny)

    by Captain Large Face ( 559804 ) on Tuesday August 27, 2002 @05:54AM (#4147343) Homepage

    "Mozilla 1.1 Hits The Streets"

    Presumably [in a Internet Cafe] in Downtown Tokyo?

  • Those of you who use the tabbed browsing feature in Mozilla (read: almost everyone!) may notice a change in "features" between Mozilla 1.0 and 1.1.

    When you have only one tab open, and you instinctively middle-click or Ctrl-W or whatever, your tab bar will disappear - even if you told Mozilla not to hide the tab bar when you only had one window open, with the preferences option.

    This behaviour can be considered a feature or a bug - instead of the Close Tab button doing nothing or being disabled when there's one tab, the button now hides the bar. I told Mozilla never to do that! I want the tab bar there at all times!

    The bug is at http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=159191 (copy and paste this into a new window, bugzilla doesn't allow links from Slashdot.)

    Also, why do tabs now have to close left to right, prey tell? I open Slashdot in my first tab, read everything I want, and read the first page that loads (normally the first tab) and work my way through articles. With this setup, you will just get sent back to Tab 1 every time.

    • Re:Tab bar issues in Mozilla 1.1 (Score:5, Informative)

      by Aanallein ( 556209 ) on Tuesday August 27, 2002 @06:14AM (#4147391)
      why do tabs now have to close left to right, prey tell?
      Because this allows for hugely more efficient browsing if you follow more than one link per page.

      Imagine googling for a specific subject. You open the first five links and keep the results page open for further searching if by some strange impossibility the first five results werent what you're looking for. So now you hit ctrl-pagedown to go to the next tab, which has the first search result. You quickly glance over the page but it isn't what you were looking for. ctrl-w closes the tab.
      Now with the old behaviour, the tab to the left would be focused. But you don't want that tab! You want the next result. So you have to manually focus the next tab again (oh, bother). And when you close that one, the same friggin first tab focuses and you once more have to manually go to the next one...
      With the new behaviour however, the tab to the right gets the focus - when you're done with the first search result and close the tab - the second search result shows. And when you're done with that one, the third one shows. No other actions needed than closing tabs.

      Imagine the use of this for reading forums, or archived mailinglists, or... well, everything that consists of a collection of links where it matters in which order you read them. Yes, it is somewhat disconcerting to see the behaviour change like that when you were used to the old way - but change is good! Give it a few minutes, really try to see the use of it, and you'll almsot certainly come to see that the new way to do this is a vast improvement.
      • I like that way of doing it in some instances, but usually it isn't what I want. I would expect it to behave like alt-tab on windows where ctrl-pgdn (soon to be ctrl-tab, btw) or closing a window goes back to the tab you used most recently.

  • The size of the binary has jumped by a full megabyte from 1.0 to 1.1. I understand lots of new functionality has been added, but i hope there are also efforts to maintain(decrease?) the size of binary. There are still dialup users in some places :(


    I would love to see a browser-only Mozilla variant weighing around 3-4 MB (Opera-sized).(I understand there is the Net-installer stuff, but it still takes upto 7MB)

    • In case you're under Linux, use Galeon. I've been using it exclusively for quite a while. OK, you'll still have to install the core Mozilla packages, as Galeon renders via Gecko, but even on my old K6/233+96MB RAM box Galeon used to run just fine. My Debian package seems to only depend on mozilla-browser... admitted, that's a >9MB _package_ already.

  • Galeon2 (Score:2, Informative)

    by daserver ( 524964 )
    Galeon 2 is under development but it's still not there. Come on, I really need a great browser for gnome2 :) http://galeon.sourceforge.net/galeon2/

  • still missing... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by guile*fr ( 515485 )
    i wish they:
    - clean up their dir hierarchy
    - get rid of that crappy shell script launcher
    - improve the openning of urls from cli (to use
    -remote an instance of moz must be running)
    - use a ~/.mozilla/addons for things like mouse
    gestures, for now u have to launch moz as root &
    install the extra app

  • Dynamically enable/disable plugins (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Quixote ( 154172 ) on Tuesday August 27, 2002 @06:39AM (#4147466) Homepage Journal
    I'm looking for a feature (that others have requested too) that will allow me to dynamically enable/disable a plugin (Hint: Flash ads, or stupid Java tickers). I know I can just muck around with the plugins directory, but that is more of a permanent change. It would be nice to have a dropdown menu about all of the plugins installed, and enable/disable them like that; or you could bind some hot keys to enable/disable specific plugins.

  • It's very sad to notice that XML tag matching problem, due to an error when converting tags to uppercase, is still there.

    I wish I had knowledgement to fix this.

    It's really sad to know that any version of Mozilla cannot be used to edit XML, such a feature should be considered very important, but this bug exists since 0.8.x version (I don't remember exactly which)

  • For those who would like to switch to Mozilla but feel a bit uncomfortable by it's appearance I'd suggest you try out few of my pointers to get MSIE look & feel [kodu.neti.ee] for Mozilla.

    The instructions shown on the page barely scratch the surface on how much Mozilla can be tweaked for your needs, no other browser comes close. For example if you'd like to use different keyboard shortcuts in MSIE - yeah good luck with that, but in Mozilla little fiddling with XUL and voila :) Power of OSS!

    Mozilla with MSIE skin & keyboard shortcuts - ultimate BOFH tool for getting some new users to our beloved browser.

  • I installed Mozilla 1.1 alongside 1.0. I do like the browser (for the few seconds I've used it), but the mail client caused me to go back to 1.0: I access my email trough IMAP on a Lotus Notes server, and my mail folders (except for Inbox) were totally messed up, and I couldn't access anything. If someone's got an idea what's happening...

  • Wrong forum, but I'll ask anyhow (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Hektor_Troy ( 262592 ) on Tuesday August 27, 2002 @07:10AM (#4147545)
    How do I change the various keyboard-shortcuts?

    Comming from [browser], it'd be easier to set up the keyboard shortcuts you're used to, than having to get used to a new set.
  • They're still there, and they still being sold at (Cafe Press's) cost: ShirtZilla [cafepress.com]

  • The Only Thing Else I Want (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Quila ( 201335 ) on Tuesday August 27, 2002 @07:25AM (#4147587)
    Please, please, please can I have the ability to rearrange the bookmarks live as in IE, rather than going to the bookmark editor every time.
  • Edit, Preferences, change Cache settings to "Every time I view the page" and instant lockup.

    The only amusing thing is that XP prompts you to send the error report to MS
  • They *still* haven't fixed the multiple open mozilla bug, that is I can't have two Mozilla's use the same profile without doing the Create New Window thing. This is a pain for those of us who use multiple desktops in KDE/Gnome and would like to just punch the Mozilla icon to start up a new window. This is an old bug and has caused a good deal of debate over time (http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12269 8) and had a stinking patch since 0.96 if memory serves.

    I *LIKE* Mozilla and I use it as my preferred browser but novice users are only confused by the whole profile notion and it is clearly not pleasant for (some) verterans too.

    * I was going to put a link to the bug in my post but when I tested the link I get "Sorry, links to Bugzilla from Slashdot are disabled." Sounds like a preemptive strike to me.

  • Download from giFT/OpenFT (Score:3, Informative)

    by RPoet ( 20693 ) on Tuesday August 27, 2002 @09:00AM (#4148113) Journal
    mozilla-i686-pc-linux-gnu-1.1.tar.gz can be had from giFT/OpenFT [sf.net]. Hash 41f7588955a35a0bafa63426eae04dc8.

  • Mozilla theme (Score:4, Informative)

    by weird mehgny ( 549321 ) on Tuesday August 27, 2002 @09:28AM (#4148333)
    Get this theme. [mozdev.org] Very, very smooth and clean. Several amplitudes better than the default theme. It's surprising that Mozilla doesn't come with this supplied as a standard...

  • Source code tarball?! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Rev Snow ( 21340 ) on Tuesday August 27, 2002 @09:54AM (#4148519)
    Could they make it any harder to find?

    I've clicked around forever and still
    can't find a simple *.tar.gz form of
    the 1.1 source code release.

  • Need integration with external e-mail (Score:4, Interesting)

    by KjetilK ( 186133 ) <kjetilNO@SPAMkjernsmo.net> on Tuesday August 27, 2002 @12:05PM (#4149636) Homepage Journal
    I'm running Opera, Mozilla and Konqi every day on my box now, and I really can't decide between them. Opera is a bit unstable and unfree, Konqi doesn't have tabbed browsing (will soon), and lacks a few other nice features too.

    Mozilla lacks something very important: It doesn't work smoothly with KMail which is my mail program of choice right now.

    Mozilla really needs to integrate well with other applications. Most importantly, it really needs a way to launch an application when users click on a mailto-link. This is bug 11459 [mozilla.org].

    Also quite important is that you can launch Mozilla and have it open a new tab (not window) from other applications. This is Bug 104204 [mozilla.org].

    I would encourage everybody to join in to get this working! :-)

Slashdot Top Deals

How many surrealists does it take to screw in a lightbulb? One to hold the giraffe and one to fill the bathtub with brightly colored power tools.

Close