Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Mozilla The Internet

Phoenix 0.5 Has Arrived 346

Posted by timothy from the halfway-there dept.
mattrix was among the legion of readers to submit news that "Phoenix 0.5 (Naples) has been released. New stuff since 0.4 includes multiple homepages, download fixes, history, size, memory, accessibility and performance improvements and more. Get it now for Windows or GNU/Linux (i686). Background info: Phoenix is a web browser based on the Mozilla engine, but smaller and faster than Mozilla Navigator." Multi-tab startup page seems worth the upgrade to me, all else aside.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Phoenix 0.5 Has Arrived More

Phoenix 0.5 Has Arrived

Comments Filter:

  • Name change (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Cheesy Fool ( 530943 ) on Sunday December 08, 2002 @08:52AM (#4837236) Homepage
    Wasn't the name supposed to be changed for this release?

    • Re:Name change (Score:5, Interesting)

      by cioxx ( 456323 ) on Sunday December 08, 2002 @09:26AM (#4837354) Homepage
      Well, according to their forums, last time I checked the poll was split 60/40 in keeping the name Phoenix and battling it out with Phoenix Technologies for rights to use the name.

      I would guess either a) They are waiting to change the name with 0.6 -or- b) They are testing the patience of Phoenix Technologies [phoenix.com] ;)

      Either way, I don't like the idiotic request from PT. It's not like these two are competing technologies. And phoenix is a generic word. What are they going to do next? Patent the word "Technologies"?

      In any event. Phoenix is a straight up IE killer, and it's all that matters.

      • Phoenix Technologies makes a web browser (Score:5, Insightful)

        by yerricde ( 125198 ) on Sunday December 08, 2002 @09:40AM (#4837385) Homepage Journal

        It's not like these two are competing technologies.

        Actually, they are. Phoenix FirstView Connect [phoenix.com] is a stripped-down web browser. Mozilla.org Phoenix is a stripped-down web browser.

        Phoenix is a straight up IE killer

        And Phoenix Technologies' product is a straight up Pocket IE killer. So will be Gecko, once the Weenies [mozilla.org] reduce its footprint.

      • Re:Name change (Score:4, Informative)

        by petabyte ( 238821 ) on Sunday December 08, 2002 @10:44AM (#4837623)
        From phoenix's FAQ:

        14)

        I kept hearing that you were changing the name from Phoenix to something else. What happened?

        That was just a giant publicity stunt. We've observed that in the past, the open-source community has instinctively favored David when big corporations complain of trademark infringement. We wanted to cash in on this sympathy by asking the community to send us money to fight the legal battle (obviously we'd really spend it on cool stuff), but with all the taxing issues and whatnot we decided to can the idea.

        15)

        Uhhhh...really?

        No, not really. This isn't like an action flick where the evil madman reveals the intricacies of his plans to hostages and then leaves them alone with a bomb set to detonate in like 10 hours. When we're ripping you off, we won't explain how in the FAQ. The truth is that we'd already had this 0.5 released planned for awhile, so it was okay to release under the Phoenix name. But under no circumstances will any future release be called Phoenix.

        So it would appear that they will be changing the name for .6

    • Re:Name change (Score:5, Redundant)

      by Big Mark ( 575945 ) on Sunday December 08, 2002 @09:59AM (#4837470)
      From the phoenix site:

      I kept hearing that you were changing the name from Phoenix to something else. What happened?

      That was just a giant publicity stunt. We've observed that in the past, the open-source community has instinctively favored David when big corporations complain of trademark infringement. We wanted to cash in on this sympathy by asking the community to send us money to fight the legal battle (obviously we'd really spend it on cool stuff), but with all the taxing issues and whatnot we decided to can the idea.

      Uhhhh...really?

      No, not really. This isn't like an action flick where the evil madman reveals the intricacies of his plans to hostages and then leaves them alone with a bomb set to detonate in like 10 hours. When we're ripping you off, we won't explain how in the FAQ. The truth is that we'd already had this 0.5 released planned for awhile, so it was okay to release under the Phoenix name. But under no circumstances will any future release be called Phoenix.

      -Mark

  • Performance improvements (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 08, 2002 @08:55AM (#4837247)
    From the changelog:
    "Performance improvements

    0.5 is certainly our fastest release ever. You might especially notice a boost if you have a blank page (about:blank) as your homepage."

    Does this mean that Phoenix renders a blank page faster than any other browser?

    • Re:Performance improvements (Score:5, Funny)

      by Loki_1929 ( 550940 ) on Sunday December 08, 2002 @09:08AM (#4837299) Journal
      "Does this mean that Phoenix renders a blank page faster than any other browser?"

      On a P4 3.06GHz (with SMT enabled), Radeon 9700 pro, 1GB PC2700, 18GB Cheetah X15 15,000 RPM SCSI hard drive, the Opera browser rendered a blank page 0.00000000234 nanoseconds faster than Phoenix 0.5. I suppose this means there's room for improvement before 0.6 in the blank page rendering benchmark.

    • Re:Performance improvements (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Angry White Guy ( 521337 ) <CaptainBurly[AT]goodbadmovies.com> on Sunday December 08, 2002 @09:10AM (#4837304)
      Yeah, it doesn't have to check with windows update first, so it can get right down to business.
      • Yeah, it doesn't have to check with windows update first, so it can get right down to business.
        Do you know how to make it (IE) NOT do that? I've got customers who share a 56k dialup connection for a 20+ computer network (Yeah yeah, I'm trying to get them out of the stoneage) and even for the ones on high speed this is annoying as all hell. Even worse on low-end Pentiums with pre-PIO hard drives where IE takes forever to start to begin with, then it has to Phone Home ...

        If Mozilla or Phoenix ever forced me to "Check For Updates" with one of their releases, it would be the last time any of my computers ever loaded it.

        • Tools/Options/Advanced

          Second browser option: "Check for Internet Explorer Updates". Amazing what one sees when they take 10 seconds to look. And out of the box, mozilla does check for updates.
    • I know that you were aiming for "Funny", but in all seriousness, Phoenix is little bit behind in loadtime from IE 5.5/6.x on 2000/XP when dealing with launching the browser at first.

      But given the tabbed browsing, it gains a 10-fold speed advantage over IE when time is concerned.

      Once phoenix.exe shows up in the services, the loadtime beats IE. It's just the fist instance which is a bit slow. (Note that i'm not talking about page rendering time, rather than the browser loadtime set to about:mozilla for the homepage parameter)
      • I believe that IE is loaded all the time in XP except with service pack 2, becuase I think the IE interace determines how the explorer shell draws directories in my computer and such. So if IE really is loaded all the time, all its doing is creating a new windows, which is of course faster than loading a browser (even if phoenix is 5-7Mb) into memory fresh.

        -Kaplan

  • Where? (Score:4, Funny)

    by rutger21 ( 132630 ) on Sunday December 08, 2002 @08:59AM (#4837260)
    New stuff since 0.4 includes multiple homepages

    So, where are Phoenix' other homepages?

    • Re:Where? (Score:5, Informative)

      by thing12 ( 45050 ) on Sunday December 08, 2002 @09:02AM (#4837273) Homepage
      So, where are Phoenix' other homepages?

      Tools/Preferences/General/Location(s):

      You can enter the URL's separated by pipes (|). Or just click 'Use current page(s)' when you have your tab set open to the pages you want. It's way cool.

  • just unzipped.. (Score:3, Informative)

    by gl4ss ( 559668 ) on Sunday December 08, 2002 @09:00AM (#4837263) Homepage Journal
    ..(win32) over the earlier (0.4) release.
    nothing fscked up.

    seems to work just as nice as before.

    great job.

    if somebody is still holding back.. try it, you'll be glad, especially if you like to have your browser SIMPLE & FAST.
    • SIMPLE and FAST are why I still use Netscape 3.04 by *preference*. (And is there any chance someone could dredge up and release the NS3.x source package? Pleeeeeeeeeeze??)

      Side note: I've noticed that as a general rule, the more time people spend doing real work online (not playing games or random browsing), the more likely they are to prefer a simpler browser. So there really is a user market for a fast and basic browser.

      BTW thanks for the "nothing broke in this release" recommendation. Am presently downloading phoenix to give it a look, as a potential alternative for those few sites where I'm presently forced to switch to Mozilla. (We don't serve IE's kind around here. ;)

  • nice browser, but still too big (Score:5, Interesting)

    by g4dget ( 579145 ) on Sunday December 08, 2002 @09:01AM (#4837267)
    Phoenix is a nice browser. But it's still an 8.9M download for Linux. Does XUL really have that much overhead? How far can this be squeezed down?

    • Re:nice browser, but still too big (Score:5, Interesting)

      by yobbo ( 324595 ) on Sunday December 08, 2002 @09:21AM (#4837346)
      Yet the windows installer is about 6MB. Instead of asking about the overhead of XUL, perhaps you should ask about the overhead of linux ports?

      Don't get me wrong - I don't use windows at all. But builds of mozilla and phoenix ports are consistently larger than their windows counterparts. Why?

      • But builds of mozilla and phoenix ports are consistently larger than their windows counterparts. Why?

        The Linux port of Mozilla statically links GTK+ and Glib.

      • Are the linux versions of these browsers really "ports?" I thought Mozilla was written natively for linux and natively for Windows (or ported to Windows). Maybe there is just some code built into Windows that allows that version to be smaller than linux's. Anyway, I thought the mozilla project was/is native to linux, not windows.

      • Re:nice browser, but still too big (Score:4, Informative)

        by BZ ( 40346 ) on Sunday December 08, 2002 @03:22PM (#4839130)
        The main reason is that MSVC++ produces much smaller (and faster) code than g++ does. This is especially true because g++ 2.9x is being used, with only -O (not -O2, because that produces buggy code) optimization.

        Moving to gcc 3.2 (once the Sun people get off their friggin' asses and compile Java with it) will help perf and footprint a lot (15% improvement or so last I heard).
    • Uh, from the readme:

      No, we have plenty more to trim out and we're slowly getting to it. Our current targets are 5mb for Windows and between 7 and 8mb for Linux, but these are just guesses. It's entirely possible that we'll beat those (case in point: we had previously targetted 6mb for Windows).

      There is a reason they are called readmes... :)

  • Name Change? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by reidbold ( 55120 ) on Sunday December 08, 2002 @09:06AM (#4837282)
    I though we were supposed to see the debut of the new name for .5, what gives?

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by account_deleted ( 4530225 )
      Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • As it's said on http://mozillazine.org/ [mozillazine.org] :


      0.5 will be the last release to be called Phoenix. Version 0.6, expected in January, will have a new name. And they really mean it this time.

    • Re:Name Change? (Score:2, Informative)

      by mattrix2k ( 632351 )
      Basically the name change has been delayed until 0.6.

      From the FAQ [mozilla.org]:
      I kept hearing that you were changing the name from Phoenix to something else. What happened?

      That was just a giant publicity stunt. We've observed that in the past, the open-source community has instinctively favored David when big corporations complain of trademark infringement. We wanted to cash in on this sympathy by asking the community to send us money to fight the legal battle (obviously we'd really spend it on cool stuff), but with all the taxing issues and whatnot we decided to can the idea.

      Uhhhh...really?

      No, not really. This isn't like an action flick where the evil madman reveals the intricacies of his plans to hostages and then leaves them alone with a bomb set to detonate in like 10 hours. When we're ripping you off, we won't explain how in the FAQ. The truth is that we'd already had this 0.5 released planned for awhile, so it was okay to release under the Phoenix name. But under no circumstances will any future release be called Phoenix.

  • Phoenix forums, themes and extensions (Score:5, Informative)

    by h2so4 ( 33298 ) on Sunday December 08, 2002 @09:08AM (#4837297)
    The best place to discuss Phoenix is at the Mozillazine Phoenix forums [mozillazine.org].

    Extensions are available here [texturizer.net] -- including radial context and mouse gestures.

    Themes are available here [texturizer.net] and there's a beautiful page of similar-but-different themes here [freewebz.com].
    • Anybody, not have scrolling work with this release (using a laptop touchpad in win32, if that makes a difference)?

  • Themes... (Score:4, Informative)

    by breon.halling ( 235909 ) on Sunday December 08, 2002 @09:09AM (#4837302)

    And don't forget to head on over to themes.mozdev.org [mozdev.org] for some tasty chrome! Orbit 3+1 is my personal favourite.

  • Pheonix vs Mozilla on Win32 (I prefer mozilla) (Score:5, Interesting)

    by j2gEEk ( 467944 ) on Sunday December 08, 2002 @09:11AM (#4837307)
    The reason i prefer mozilla on win32 is quicklaunch. With quicklaunch enabled in my system tray, it launches significantly quicker than even pheonix. If pheonix was quicklaunch enabled (heck, the code's already there, right?), it would be my browser of choice on w32. Until then, I'll stick with the "big mo".

    Jake
    • The reason i prefer mozilla on win32 is quicklaunch

      That's my major reason for preferring mozilla too. The other personal gripe is mozillas ctrl-enter in the addressbar for opening a site in a new tab has been removed from phoenix since 0.4.

    • Re:Pheonix vs Mozilla on Win32 (I prefer mozilla) (Score:4, Interesting)

      by JanneM ( 7445 ) on Sunday December 08, 2002 @09:21AM (#4837347) Homepage
      This is not intended as a flame or anything, but what is the point of quicklaunch, really? I realize it must be important in Win32, as so many people are talking about it. I mean, I start things like Phoenix and Evolution, and then have them running continuously, until I need to reboot or restart phoenix due to a memory leak or something - it's usually running for weeks at a time.

      My guess is that the work pattern is different on a Win32 desktop, and that you normally start an app, use it, then close it before you start another. Is it due to the lack of virtual desktops, or some other UI-related issue? I would not think it's resources, as Windows should swap out unused apps just like other OS:s.

      • The work pattern needn't be any different on Win32. I don't get this fixation with startup times either. My preference is Opera, and I usually start it once per boot. Then I have it running.

        The nice thing about Opera though, is should I decide to shut it down, it will come up -- when I run it the next time -- in the exact same status as when I shut it down, including positioning inside documents. Can moz/phoenix do that yet? That's a pretty important feature to me.

        Also, there's no lack of virtual desktops, should one want them. They're even included in the nVidia graphics drivers nowadays, so there's a nontrivial amount of people who _could_ use virtual desktops on Win32 without the need to switch "explorer" or install any extra software whatsoever.

      • Re:Pheonix vs Mozilla on Win32 (I prefer mozilla) (Score:4, Interesting)

        by thing12 ( 45050 ) on Sunday December 08, 2002 @09:49AM (#4837429) Homepage
        This is not intended as a flame or anything, but what is the point of quicklaunch, really? I realize it must be important in Win32, as so many people are talking about it. I mean, I start things like Phoenix and Evolution, and then have them running continuously, until I need to reboot or restart phoenix due to a memory leak or something - it's usually running for weeks at a time.

        Yep, exactly... people are whining because Mozilla doesn't start as fast as IE because its binary is 2x the size and actually takes much longer to be loaded off disk. Quicklaunch just adds that same amount of delay to the startup time after you log into your computer by preloading the massive binary. Phoenix on the other hand seems to take about as long to load the first time from a cold boot as IE does. And if you already have pheonix loaded it takes steps to speed it up even more and spawns a new thread from the existing browser.

        My guess is that the work pattern is different on a Win32 desktop, and that you normally start an app, use it, then close it before you start another. Is it due to the lack of virtual desktops, or some other UI-related issue? I would not think it's resources, as Windows should swap out unused apps just like other OS:s.

        My guess is that you're right about the work pattern. In older versions of windows resource handling was so poor that it seemed common to close apps when you weren't using them - of course this is all fixed now - but here's the rub: with quicklaunch enabled you aren't even conserving resources by closing Mozilla! Also worth noting is that virtual desktops are available as a powertoy for XP... but again the work pattern issue rises - people don't know how to use a modern system effectively.

        Who knows, maybe people will wise up eventually.

    • You can also use quicklaunch with Phoenix.
      Just run "phoenix.exe -turbo"

  • Differences from K-Meleon Browser? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 08, 2002 @09:11AM (#4837308)


    Could someone enlighten me to any differences between this broskwer and The K Meleon [sourceforge.net] Browser? I have been using the latter a lot recently and am wondering why phoenix gets so much more press..

    • Re:Differences from K-Meleon Browser? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by C14L ( 622656 ) on Sunday December 08, 2002 @09:42AM (#4837391)

      and am wondering why phoenix gets so much more press.

      IIRC KM was almost dead for quite a time. Both browsers are more or less the same. Phoenix uses XUL for its interface, KM doesn't. KM uses its own scripting that is very easy to do, so KM becomes easily costumizable by everybody. I use Phoenix now, because KM repeatedly crashed, and it corrupted also my bookmarks-file (especially letters like ä, ö, ü, etc and arabic or chinese characters were rendered unreadable (I use one bookmark-file for all browsers).

  • Clean up the skins mess for christ sake (Score:4, Insightful)

    by joshv ( 13017 ) on Sunday December 08, 2002 @09:12AM (#4837310)
    I wish the mozilla team would clean up the skins mess . I downloaded 1.2 recently and couldn't get a single downloaded skin to work. The same happened when I last downloaded phoenix a few weeks ago. I though the idea behind the 1.x release was to stabilize the APIs. If so, why is it so damned hard to have skins that work across multiple releases?

    -josh

  • What's Mozilla On? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Lu Xun ( 615093 ) on Sunday December 08, 2002 @09:16AM (#4837325)
    With the steady increase in computer power (led by the Moore company I believe) and larger disk drive space, why does anyone need a SMALLER browser? I had to upgrade my memory when I bought WinXP - that's how I knew it was better than the OLD windows. I think Mozilla should concentrate on their browser better, like making the GUI translucent, including the latest version of Flash, and packaging those handy (and FREE!) software packages that speed up your internet connection. For myself, I'll stick with IE - the browser that gets BIGGER all the time, and therefore BETTER.

    (remove tongue from cheek)

    • Well - there's more than PCs out there.
      Embedded systems are getting powerful
      enough to run something like Phoenix.

    • Re:What's Mozilla On? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Smidge204 ( 605297 ) on Sunday December 08, 2002 @10:01AM (#4837475) Journal
      My home network is comprized entirely of 100-160MHz Pentium machines running Win9x. Phoenix has so far impressed me very much with it's performance and size.

      It's nice to see that someone is actually making size and speed a priority rather than an afterthought, and without sacrificing functionality!

      So far so good!
      =Smidge=
      • My home network is comprized entirely of 100-160MHz Pentium machines running Win9x.

        Imagine a Beowulf cluster of those! It would be almost as fast as my laptop. ;)

  • Anti-Aliased Fonts for Phoenix on Linux/i386 (Score:5, Informative)

    by pryan ( 169593 ) on Sunday December 08, 2002 @09:18AM (#4837333) Homepage
    If you want to use anti-aliased fonts with Phoenix 0.5 on Linux for x86, you can grab pre-built Xft-enabled binaries.

    Xft Enabled RPMs and tarballs [ragweed.net] built under RedHat 8.

    Xft Enabled tarball [mspencer.net] built under Debian unstable.

    If you aren't running RedHat 8 or Debian unstable, then you may have to do some work to get these pre-built binaries to run.

    I am running the Debian unstable Xft-enabled Phoenix 0.5 binary. It works just fine, and looks ever so good.
  • Never been able to see a screenshot, ok i am curious and still happy with galeon. But i'd like to see if it will please my eyes or not in case i give it a shot.
    • OK. Here [mtu.edu] is a shot of 0.4 with bookmarks toolbar as it looks out of the box.

  • The full screen bug is not fixed. (Score:3, Informative)

    by io333 ( 574963 ) on Sunday December 08, 2002 @10:00AM (#4837471)
    I installed exactly according to instructions, wiping my old 0.4 installation and running the ProfileManager to create a new profile.

    Window sizing is still a mess, and if I quit the browser in fullscreen mode, the next time I start it up and then go to fullscreen, the titlebar is rendered over the top of the screen making the window unmovable until I re-exit and restart the program.

    Also, there is STILL no fullscreen button available in the toolbar customization options, forcing me to leave the mouse and go to the keyboard (F11) whenever I want to do that.

    Oddly, in bugzilla I've seen references to a fullscreen button, but I have no idea what they are talking about.

    It's also interesting that I submitted this story 10 hours ago (moments after the DL was available) and it was rejected. I suppose the /. editors all wanted to get their copy first before everyone here took down the servers?

    And finally, kudos to the Phoenix/Mozilla folk. It used to be that I always had to switch back to IE because there were things that only IE could do and I had to get them done. Starting with the 0.4 Phoenix release, I starting having to open up Phoenix from time to time to get things done because IE couldn't do them. Finally about two weeks ago I removed the IE icon from my quicklaunch because I just didn't use it any more -- Phoenix now does so many things that IE cannot do: Tabbed browsing, Password managing that actually works, spyware control though a decent cookie manager, no popups (!), obnoxious blinking banner add removal, bookmarks-menu-navigation all lined up on one toolbar, etc.
  • I guess that means I am going to be a troll now.
    Do we really need an update everytime there is a point upgrade in this browser.
    0.4 [slashdot.org] October 30th
    0.3 [slashdot.org] October 16th
    0.2 [slashdot.org] October 7th
    This doesn't even include the two seperate submissions to discuss the name change.

    I mean come on the last time there was an anouncement for Internet explorer that wasn't about a gaping security hole was over a year ago. Let's get some equal coverage here on this unbiased "news" site called Slashdot

    • Re:Not to be a troll, but (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Phroggy ( 441 ) <slashdot3@@@phroggy...com> on Sunday December 08, 2002 @11:22AM (#4837745) Homepage
      Let's get some equal coverage here on this unbiased "news" site called Slashdot

      Slashdot has NEVER claimed to be unbiased. From the FAQ:

      Personally, I have a pet peeve when people post comments saying things like "That's not News For Nerds!" and "That's not Stuff that Matters!" Slashdot has been running for almost 5 years, and over that time, I have always been the final decision maker on what ends up on the homepage.... We've been running Slashdot for a long time, and if we occasionally want to post something that someone doesn't think is right for Slashdot, well, we're the ones who get to make the call.


      If you're not happy about that, you don't have to keep coming back. :-)

      • Re:Not to be a troll, but (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Reziac ( 43301 ) on Sunday December 08, 2002 @12:55PM (#4838199) Homepage Journal
        As a further note -- if a story generates the usual array of comments, and if as many as half those comments are in some way related to the article, it must have "mattered" to enough of the people who come here regularly.

        After all, you don't have to read what doesn't interest you. Just like you don't have use IE if you don't like it. Even if Phoenix sucks and even if 0.1 releases are meaningless, it's still one more option for folk who don't like other browsers.

        (See, I wasn't either off topic. ;)

  • A sugestion to slashdot. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jellomizer ( 103300 ) on Sunday December 08, 2002 @10:12AM (#4837511)
    How about creating a new section on slashdot called Software Updates. That way every little version number changed can be published and discussed. (Like with Linux Kernels, OS X Updates, Mozzila and the like updates). This way it has the advantage that more of the smaller updates can be published without taking up the main space and still keeping the discussion on the topic. And this should get rid of a lot of "Why do you post every Minor version change" comments and the like.", It also has the advantage of beeing seen for a longer time on the sub pages.
  • In Gnome2, Galeon 1.2.5 loaded a rather large kuro5hin page [kuro5hin.org] 4 seconds faster for me. And this is an older galeon based on an older mozilla! So i'm sticking to galeon, need to get my base mozilla and galeon updated though, and test again.

  • Mouse Gestures in Phoenix (Score:5, Informative)

    by skunkeh ( 410004 ) on Sunday December 08, 2002 @10:19AM (#4837538)

    If, like me, you've been using Mozilla's mouse gestures feature for a while you're probably hooked. The good news it that they are available for Phoenix as well:

    http://texturizer.net/phoenix/extensions.html#gest ures [texturizer.net]

    Unfortunately there is no menu option to trigger them with the right mouse button (they default to being activated by the left button). If you want them on the right mouse button you will have to edit your prefs.js file. On Windows (depending on what version you are running) this can be found in C:\Windows\Application Data\Phoenix\Profiles\???\???\prefs.js

    Before editing the prefs.js file you will need to install the gestures XPI, then restart your browser and shut it down again (this will create the default mouse gesture preferences in the prefs.js file). Now open the file in a text editor and look for the following line:

    user_pref("mozgest.mousebutton", 0);

    Change the number to 2 for right mouse button (or 1 for middle mouse button) and you're done.

  • a note on two posts below (Score:3, Informative)

    by brettlbecker ( 596407 ) on Sunday December 08, 2002 @10:20AM (#4837539) Homepage
    1) do we really need all these .1 releases of phoenix?... You may not, and if so, fine, don't install them. But I'm glad they are releasing every .1 at the moment because it gives those of us who want to see the development a chance to do so. Look at how babies grow in the first year of life... this is still phoenix's infancy, and we should be watching as it takes its first steps.

    2) I do not understand the description of the "fullscreen bug" post below. When I go to fullscreen, there is no window titlebar, because it is IN FULLSCREEN MODE. Why would you want to move a full-screen window around? Where would you move it to? When I exit in fullscreen and then start phoenix up again, and then go to fullscreen mode again, it looks the exact same. I have the option to minimize, close, or 'restore' the window in the upper right,which brings back the titlebar, and that works perfectly. What, exactly is the problem?

    This is a fantastic browser so far... so much smooter than original mozilla or galeon, which I've loved for a long time now. The installation of new themes and extensions works almost flawlessly, excepting that occasionally replacing one theme with another results in only a half-success and requires more than one attempt. All of the new menu additions from the extensions site worked perfectly.

    I am very impressed, considering this is still a .5 release. Rock on, Mozilla people. Keep these .1 releases coming.

  • Not faster (Score:5, Informative)

    by Door-opening Fascist ( 534466 ) <skylar@cs.earlham.edu> on Sunday December 08, 2002 @10:43AM (#4837613) Homepage
    I don't mean to be a troll, but in my experience, Phoenix is no real improvement over Mozilla in terms of startup speed, at least for OS/2. Phoenix starts up about three seconds faster than Mozilla on a 200MHz 80586 with 64MB of RAM running OS/2 Warp v3, which isn't saying much when Mozilla takes damn near a minute to open.

  • Less Memory ? (Score:2, Informative)

    by jalilv ( 450956 )
    Not to flame or anything but Phoenix 0.5 takes longer to start and uses more memory that Mozilla 1.0 on my P166 48MB box with latest Debian build. May be this Phoenix build is not for me :-( I use 0.4 on Windows box and it sure beats the hell out of IE as far as speed is concerned. Will get 0.5 for Windows box once the /. effect is over :-)

    - Jalil
  • 15MB for Phoenix right after startup 16MB for Mozilla 1.2b right after startup (w/ default mozilla home page as start page)
    • This here machine has 1GB RAM, so memory footprint is the least of my concerns (I don't even let Windows have a swapfile). But how is phoenix for resource suckage on Win9*? That's a more-relevant figure for most Windows users anyway.

  • My Phoenix is Hiding in the Ashes (Score:3, Informative)

    by jefu ( 53450 ) on Sunday December 08, 2002 @01:55PM (#4838543) Homepage Journal
    First off, I must say, Phoenix is a great browser. Fast. Works really well on almost all pages.

    Phoenix with the pie menus, tab extensions and popup blocking has spoiled me. It has changed my browsing habits and expectations enough to make using other browsers annoying at best and at worst, well, lets just not say it. When I do need to run another browser (say IE for those pages that don't work right) it takes me about two pages before I'm ready to shoot it.

    BUT! Caveat Downloader!

    I just downloaded Phoenix 0.5 and installed the RadialContext extension. (Linux)

    And now phoenix won't start. Or, more exactly, it starts, shows one of those incredibly annoying "Did you know...." hints window and retreats into the background where it spawns a bunch of threads and stops. I'll be reporting this as a bug, but would like to find a way to fix it (if possible) first so I can use the browser I've come to rely on.

    If I don't load the radial context stuff (as now) the browser works fine.

    Sigh.

    • After several re-installs of phoenix and a fair amount of crankiness, I decided to find out what was wrong and fix it. It took a while and I'll bet I've now deleted and rebuilt the Phoenix directory about 20 times, but I found the error - so if you're a radial context user on linux and you get the same problem, edit the "pieIntegration.js" file in the chrome/radialcontext/content directory and comment out the call to "preloadPieIcons()".

      Not what I'd expected to spend the morning doing, but I learned something about the way mozilla/phoenix do things and its always a Good Thing to learn new stuff.

  • Helpful hints - at last! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Tim Browse ( 9263 ) on Sunday December 08, 2002 @03:12PM (#4839058)
    "Background info: Phoenix is a web browser based on the Mozilla engine, but smaller and faster than Mozilla Navigator."

    See? Now was it really so hard?

    If only all /. articles did not assume basic telepathy on the part of the reader.

    Tim

Slashdot Top Deals

Things are not as simple as they seems at first. - Edward Thorp

Close