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 1.6 Released 756

Posted by michael from the version-inflation dept.
Jack Comics writes "Asa Dotzler of the Mozilla Foundation has announced this evening the release of Mozilla 1.6. The Mozilla 1.6 release notes can be found here."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Mozilla 1.6 Released More

Mozilla 1.6 Released

Comments Filter:

  • Keep 'em coming... (Score:5, Informative)

    by natron 2.0 ( 615149 ) <ndpeters79@gmail ... minus physicist> on Thursday January 15, 2004 @10:50PM (#7994611) Homepage Journal
    More security fixes and the ability to reload the source view...nice.

    • Re:Keep 'em coming... (Score:5, Funny)

      by iammaxus ( 683241 ) on Thursday January 15, 2004 @10:57PM (#7994687)
      "...the ability to reload the source view"

      Great! Now it's so much easier to read slashdot the Hardcore Way

      • Re:Keep 'em coming... (Score:5, Interesting)

        by ender81b ( 520454 ) <wdinger@g m a il.com> on Thursday January 15, 2004 @11:11PM (#7994813) Homepage Journal
        Shudder. Ancient HTML 3 code... oh the horror.

        As an aside, Anybody know when Moz will officially be branched off into firebird/thunderbird components? I thought this was supposed to happen around 1.6 apparently I was wrong.

        • Re:Keep 'em coming... (Score:5, Informative)

          by brasten ( 699342 ) on Thursday January 15, 2004 @11:36PM (#7994975)
          From what I've been reading, more people are interested in the suite over the *birds than originally anticipated, so they'll be keeping it around for a while.

          However, most developers working on the suite are focused primarily on the Gecko engine, with very little work being done on the front-end of things. Since the *birds are obviously Gecko-based as well, they are essentially being worked on by most Mozilla developers, even if indirectly. So it's not like the *birds are missing out on much development effort.

          • Re:Keep 'em coming... (Score:5, Insightful)

            by Malc ( 1751 ) on Friday January 16, 2004 @12:09AM (#7995179)
            "From what I've been reading, more people are interested in the suite over the *birds than originally anticipated, so they'll be keeping it around for a while."

            Grrrr. This is a pet peeve of mine. Why do so many people find the word "suite" to be synonymous with "monolithic app"? There's absolutely no reason. The suite can consist of the *birds where each component runs in its own process space. There are plenty of other tightly coupled suites out there that do this very well. Why would anybody want to run it all in one process space? It was a fundamental architectural mistake made by Netscape a decade ago, and just pure foolishness when the open source Mozilla team copied it!

            As far as most users are concerned, they click an icon on their desktop (or in the app) for whatever they want to do, be it browsing, mail, IRC, calendaring, etc. A window appears and they do their thing. Why does it matter if that window comes from the same process or not? It doesn't. In fact, it's preferable if it doesn't. Crashes, or blocking actions won't tie up or interfere with the other process(es) (which is a major problem with the current suite).

            Once the *birds implement the same functionality from a UI and extensions perspective, and the same integration with each of the other components as the current suite, there is no reason to continue with this monolithic monstrousity. I like the Mozilla products. I use the components (mostly mail/news and browser), I want the suite. I don't want a monolithic single process app.

            • Re:Keep 'em coming... (Score:3, Interesting)

              by brasten ( 699342 )
              "Once the *birds implement the same functionality from a UI and extensions perspective, and the same integration with each of the other components as the current suite, there is no reason to continue with this monolithic monstrousity."

              Yes, I happen to agree with you... being a Firebird/Thunderbird user myself. I don't think whether the current suite is a monolithic monstrousity or a multi-process paradise matters to some. There are - apparently - those who desire the integration between components tha

            • Re:Keep 'em coming... (Score:5, Insightful)

              by WuphonsReach ( 684551 ) on Friday January 16, 2004 @01:12AM (#7995541)
              Some of us wish that Firebird had multiple processes so that a crash in one window wouldn't wipe out the other 4 windows with half a dozen tabs each....

              (A habit that you form once you have a tabbed browser...)

              Thunderbird 0.4 has worked well for me for the last month (replaced Moz 1.4). It's finished enough that it's useable for me at least.

            • Re:Keep 'em coming... (Score:3, Interesting)

              by abertoll ( 460221 )
              Why would anybody want to run it all in one process space? Because... you can keep common parts of the program loaded into memory for faster startup.

      • Re:Keep 'em coming... (Score:5, Funny)

        by teamhasnoi ( 554944 ) <teamhasnoi@[ ]oo.com ['yah' in gap]> on Thursday January 15, 2004 @11:28PM (#7994921) Journal
        HA! I cut the cable to my monitor and I read Slashdot by looking at its VERY ELECTRONS!

        Not really. I have a nice old lady read it to me, 'cause I'm scared of the Metal Ones.

  • Any news on AmiZilla? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Amiga Lover ( 708890 ) on Thursday January 15, 2004 @10:51PM (#7994620)
    How are efforts in AmiZilla going? Is the Amiga Mozilla port any closer?

  • Where is 2.0?? (Score:4, Funny)

    by smd4985 ( 203677 ) on Thursday January 15, 2004 @10:51PM (#7994626) Homepage
    This is all good and well, but I'm looking forward to Mozilla 2.0, which will integrate the superior FireBird and ThunderBird.

  • Am I the only one... (Score:5, Funny)

    by revmoo ( 652952 ) <slashdot AT meep DOT ws> on Thursday January 15, 2004 @10:52PM (#7994640) Homepage Journal
    Who has been tempted to do a string replace on the mozilla source, replacing all instances of 'mozilla' with 'mozirra'? :-)

    • Re:Am I the only one... (Score:5, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 15, 2004 @10:58PM (#7994707)
      Well, if you're going to do it, at least get it right...

      MOJIRA!!!

      • "Mojira" (Score:5, Interesting)

        by BitwizeGHC ( 145393 ) on Friday January 16, 2004 @12:54AM (#7995457) Homepage
        The name takes on new meaning when you realize that "moji" is a Japanese word for a character or ideograph. So "Mojira" could theoretically be the Japanese name of a "text-monster", which is somehow fitting for the Mozilla browser.

      • Re:Am I the only one... (Score:4, Funny)

        by jesser ( 77961 ) on Friday January 16, 2004 @06:22AM (#7996594) Homepage Journal
        http://www.mojira.org/ [mojira.org]

  • awesome (Score:4, Funny)

    by McAddress ( 673660 ) on Thursday January 15, 2004 @10:53PM (#7994641)
    I see the browser wars being rekindled. oops, never mind, those are the flames being thrown at me.

    • Re:awesome (Score:5, Insightful)

      by PReDiToR ( 687141 ) on Thursday January 15, 2004 @11:05PM (#7994764) Homepage Journal
      The browser wars have already been won.

      FireBird has beaten IE and we are just waiting for the inertia to bury the old stalwart.

      Are you telling me that you aren't waiting with baited breath for tonights nightly 0.8 build that really says 0.7+ in it?
      The fact that there are nightly builds and every week a couple of builds optimised for Athlon/P4 or older processors should entice you to at least try it, free of charge, and see if it actually works for you.

      Most people that have tried it are still trying it, and a fair number of us have it as default browser.

      • Re:awesome (Score:3, Insightful)

        by TechnoPops ( 590791 )
        Firebird has won the browser wars? That's quite the statement to say, since it seems IE still has a good ~85% chunk of the market [upsdell.com]. I think it still needs to carve quite a big piece out of Microsoft's share before we can start claiming any victories.

  • Fantastic! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by PovRayMan ( 31900 ) on Thursday January 15, 2004 @10:53PM (#7994646) Homepage
    Another release of Mozilla is a great thing, but I've been personally more interested in Firebird / Thunderbird. As we all know Mozilla will eventually fully break up into the seperate projects, and my interest is completely oriented on the progress of Firebird / Thunderbird.

    Firebird is a great browser about to hit 0.8 and stepping closer towards the great 1.0 release that took Mozilla years to obtain. Thunderbird is still in need of lots of work, but the progress is fantastic and I exclusively use it even in its immature state.

    For the Mozilla devs who browse /., thanks for all your hard work in making free software that suits my wants and needs. Keep up the great work!

    • Re:Fantastic! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by HanzoSpam ( 713251 ) on Thursday January 15, 2004 @11:12PM (#7994814)
      Firebird is a great browser about to hit 0.8 and stepping closer towards the great 1.0 release that took Mozilla years to obtain.

      Well, yeah, but you have to consider Firebird uses the Gecko rendering engine, the same as Mozilla. Having a pre-written rendering engine wasn't an advantage enjoyed by Mozilla.

      Thunderbird is still in need of lots of work, but the progress is fantastic and I exclusively use it even in its immature state.

      I've been using it across Linux, Windows, and MacOS X, and I haven't had a single problem with it. I'm not really sure how much more work it needs, since it seems pretty clean of bugs, unless they're planning on adding some more features.

      I hope not. Creeping featuritis has been the death of too many fine pieces of software that were fine just the way they were.

      • Re:Fantastic! (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Phleg ( 523632 )
        Having a pre-written rendering engine wasn't an advantage enjoyed by Mozilla.

        *ahem* Netscape ring any bells?

    • Posting from Firebird/Win2K... (Score:4, Informative)

      by frostman ( 302143 ) on Thursday January 15, 2004 @11:39PM (#7994987) Homepage Journal
      Here I post from Firebird/Win2K, and for what it's worth:

      1. Firebird crashes about twice a week, and I have to kill the process before I can relaunch.

      2. Sometimes my Bookmarks Toolbar icons mysteriously disappear, only to be regenerated when I revisit the sites.

      3. Handling of unknown character sets is a Bad Joke.

      4. Plug-in loading is pretty spotty.

      5. There is no obvious indicator of Javascript errors on sites; I have to open the JS console when I suspect an error.

      6. It's kinda slow to start on my slower computer (TransMeta 800Mhz), though it's snappy on my faster one (Duron 1.2Ghz).

      7. It's still the best browser I've ever used, and I would tear out my hair if I had to live without it.

      Go Firebird!!

  • Mozilla Growing (Score:4, Interesting)

    by lukior ( 727393 ) on Thursday January 15, 2004 @10:55PM (#7994672)
    All slashdot readers know about the benefits of Mozilla but I am happy to see some more mainstream magazines giving props to the browser. I noticed it won some magazines comparo of browsers for the end of 2003. Perhaps this is due to the fact that we keep seeing improvements in Mozilla while it seems like IE has been a stagnant product for some time.

    • Re:Mozilla Growing (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Joseph Lam ( 61951 ) on Thursday January 15, 2004 @11:02PM (#7994745)
      ya, most ppl out there that I met don't know what's 'Mozilla' nor its relation with Netscape the browser. Most companies still build IE only websites, some better ones build IE+Netscape, but Mozilla still remains to be the 'underground'.

      More promotions, either by the press or by us /. readers are important.

      • Re:Mozilla Growing (Score:4, Informative)

        by bunratty ( 545641 ) on Friday January 16, 2004 @12:09AM (#7995174)
        Most companies still build IE only websites, some better ones build IE+Netscape
        It's rare for me to visit a web site that doesn't work perfectly or near perfectly in Mozilla. Today I ran across one for the first time in about a year. It uses document.all for navigation, which means that users must be running IE or Opera and also must have JavaScript enabled for links to work. When the developers finally realize that over 20% of visitors can't navigate their site, I think they'll quickly fix it.

  • But No One's mentioned the most important feature (Score:5, Informative)

    by Hal The Computer ( 674045 ) on Thursday January 15, 2004 @10:58PM (#7994710)
    As listed in the Release notes mozilla's greatest feature yet:
    One step closer to the kitchen sink, about:about has been implemented. Typing about:about in the address field will give the user a nice list of available about:s.
    By the way, if you haven't yet, if you use mozilla, you need to check out about:mozilla [about]

    • By the way, if you haven't yet, if you use mozilla, you need to check out about:mozilla

      Now it'll be slashdotted in no time...

  • Cool.. what about SVG? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Wheaty18 ( 465429 ) on Thursday January 15, 2004 @11:00PM (#7994726)
    I'm currently running the Windows version of Mozilla 1.5 over IE. I recently downloaded the SVG-enabled version of Mozilla, and it's pretty neat. Any ideas when SVG support will be officially merged into the Mozilla stable tree?

  • use the mirrors (Score:5, Informative)

    by a.koepke ( 688359 ) on Thursday January 15, 2004 @11:01PM (#7994734)
    When downloading this you should have a look at the mirrors list and find one near you.

    http://www.mozilla.org/mirrors.html [mozilla.org]

  • Who uses the suite? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Trillan ( 597339 ) on Thursday January 15, 2004 @11:04PM (#7994759) Homepage Journal

    Just curious, who uses the suite instead of Firebird/Thunderbird... and why?

    I prefer the individual applications, primarily due to launch speed, but also due to what I think is a superior interface of components in the components-as-apps approach vs. the components-in-suite approach.

    • Re:Who uses the suite? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by antdude ( 79039 )
      I like to have my email, newsgroups, and browser running at all time.

      Also, Prefbar [mozdev.org] only seems to work with Mozilla. :(

    • It does everything I want, the way I want. I have the all the prefs set just how I like 'em. For example turning off the icons on the toolbar and showing only text buttons. I don't really need firebird's pretty icons. =)

      I run mozilla for weeks at a time, launch speed is irrelevant. The only thing firebird offers me is less features and more bugs. No thanks.

      I've been waiting for years for mozilla to be finished, and I'm not going back to another half finished browser and mail ever again. Call me up

    • Re:Who uses the suite? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Prof.Phreak ( 584152 ) on Friday January 16, 2004 @01:56AM (#7995752) Homepage
      I was using Mozilla (the whole package) for a while. Then sometime last summer I switched to using Firebird/Thunderbird, and then about a month ago I switched back to plain Mozilla. Here's why:

      Most of the time I have a browser and e-mail open anyway, so why have 2 applications open when you can have one? Also, Mozilla, as it is, is far less buggy than Firebird/Thunderbird. I've encountered some really annoying bugs that just annoyed the hell out of me. Also, does anyone really notice the startup speed? (I haven't. I compile Mozilla with all the optimizations, etc., and I really don't see any `speed' difference between this and Firebird).

      Now, on my Windows machine, I do use Firebird, but that's simply because I have no need for e-mail there.

      (also, the occasional need for ChatZilla makes one more useful than the other).

      So as far as I'm concerned, I hope they still keep the intergrated package alive later.

    • Re:Who uses the suite? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by snake_dad ( 311844 ) on Friday January 16, 2004 @04:29AM (#7996258) Homepage Journal
      I like the Mozilla user interface better, and the preferences section too. In Firebird many things are being dumbed down, and to get the same functionality as in Mozilla you need to download and install several extensions, that may or may not work. And then do the same thing with each update :-/ Mozilla gives me one single archive to download, extract, copy plugins over, (make backup of profile directory just in case) and run.
    • I like the idea of breaking things up from a technical/development/organizational standpoint but I don't like firebird UI.

      I like the way the middle click opens a new window in Mozilla, and I don't like tabs. Currently I have 8 browser windows open, my xchat window is open, I have 4 eterm windows open and 4 random windows minimized. That's because I was shutting down for the day and exited a bunch of applications.

      My window manager is set up so that I can take advantage of Fitt's Law [asktog.com] to switch between win

  • Mirrors (Score:3, Informative)

    by DerOle ( 520081 ) on Thursday January 15, 2004 @11:07PM (#7994785) Homepage
    Find a mirror here [mozilla.org] as the main download server is already dead.

  • The Mozilla Roadmap? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by 110010001000 ( 697113 ) on Thursday January 15, 2004 @11:08PM (#7994794) Homepage Journal
    The roadmap has implied for some time that 1.4 was the last unified (XPFE) Mozilla-based release. 1.5-1.6 was supposed to be the Firebird transition period, during which Mozilla-the-unified-browser was supplanted by Thunderbird and Firebird. Perhaps that was too ambitious, and they've changed their mind, but the roadmap still indicates otherwise.

    What's the deal? It really looks like the new roadmap is "build in all the features people REALLY bitch about into XPFE Mozilla, then once Firebird/Thunderbird is more stable, we'll transition to those". I'm fine with that, but shouldn't they just come out and say it?

  • I don't understand their QA process (Score:3, Interesting)

    by pterry ( 100705 ) on Thursday January 15, 2004 @11:16PM (#7994837) Homepage
    On 2003-06-01 I submitted a bug report [mozilla.org] (see my mirror [bigpond.net.au] if bugzilla doesn't let you follow a link from slashdot). I read the bug reporting guidelines and did all the right things. I created a stripped-down test case and attached it, adding the keyword "testcase". I set the Severity to Major since I think it's somewhat serious (see for yourself). The bug got confirmed by a QA person... and then ignored. There have been several releases since then (final, non-beta releases), and my bug has remained.

    What I'd like to know is: why are releases made with known Major bugs, and what does it take for a bug to get seen to and not sit in Bugzilla, ignored? It has certainly made me feel that there is little point in reporting any further bugs. Could someone explain Mozilla's QA process to me?

    • why are releases made with known Major bugs, and what does it take for a bug to get seen to and not sit in Bugzilla, ignored

      If the next release of Mozilla had to wait until all known major bugs were fixed, it might be years until that next release. The chances are that almost no one experiences or notices that particular bug, or even if someone else does notice it there are more serious bugs they experience. As you can see, no one has voted for the bug to be fixed and no one else has complained that it'

  • Mozilla is great, but I stopped using it today... (Score:5, Informative)

    by DaedalusLogic ( 449896 ) on Thursday January 15, 2004 @11:17PM (#7994847)
    Because Firebird plays nicely "out of the box" so to speak with MS Outlook, and my customers want that. I know it's a horrible notion to some the overall goal is to convert folks on using these pieces of OSS has to be gentle and user friendly. Business users get Firebird suggested to them and home users Mozilla. I haven't touched IE for daily browsing in a couple years now thanks to these awesome browsers.

  • IE6 users.. (Score:5, Funny)

    by zcat_NZ ( 267672 ) <zcat@wired.net.nz> on Thursday January 15, 2004 @11:20PM (#7994872) Homepage
    If you're running Internet Explorer, you can upgrade to Mozilla 1.6 here [wired.net.nz]

    (If you're not running IE, you won't see anything. My redirect exploits the ^A bug and uses IE conditional comments to make it look like an official MS page for downloading Mozilla)

  • NTLM and Proxy Server (Score:5, Informative)

    by falsification ( 644190 ) on Thursday January 15, 2004 @11:23PM (#7994891) Journal
    If you have Microsoft Proxy Server or some other NTLM proxy at work or wherever, take a good hard look at 1.6. It's the first Mozilla version to have a built-in NTLM solution.

    For the first time, Mozilla will work on many corporate networks.

    • Re:NTLM and Proxy Server (Score:5, Informative)

      by thegrommit ( 13025 ) on Friday January 16, 2004 @12:05AM (#7995142)
      If you have Microsoft Proxy Server or some other NTLM proxy at work or wherever, take a good hard look at 1.6. It's the first Mozilla version to have a built-in NTLM solution.

      It's been available in Windows builds for quite a while (since at least 1.4). The key difference is that the new method is cross-platform.

  • Top posting is bad (Score:5, Insightful)

    by FattMattP ( 86246 ) on Thursday January 15, 2004 @11:24PM (#7994893) Homepage
    Another frequently requested MailNews feature, a preference for placing the user's signature above the quoted text, has been added.
    Nooooo! Argh, this will only encourage top-posting.

    • Bad for YOU, maybe. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by pclminion ( 145572 ) on Friday January 16, 2004 @12:16AM (#7995213)
      Saying "top posting is bad" is like saying "EMACS is better than vi." A matter of opinion ONLY.

      Bottom-posting is more useful to outsiders to the discussion, since they can follow the temporal flow of response and reply. However, top-posting is more convenient for those enagaging in the discussion, since they presumably already know who's saying what, and therefore it's better to have the most up-to-date information at the TOP. They can scroll down to get context if necessary.

      Please, don't turn top-posting into yet ANOTHER religious issue... We don't need more of them.

      • Any sort of "quote the entire freaking message I'm replying to" is wrong, be it "Microsoft spits on your pathetic standards" top-posting, or "AOL Me-Tooer" bottom-posting. Both are wrong, wrong, wrong.

        Only quote the bare minimum necessary to maintain context. If someone needs the entire prior conversation, forward them the entire conversation, ideally using "bounce" or similar feature so that they have access to individual messages and can have their email client do intelligent things like threading wit

      • Saying "top posting is bad" is like saying "EMACS is better than vi." A matter of opinion ONLY.

        Yeah, but how many users do you think actually has an opinion on this? 99.99 % of the bottom-quoted email I get is there because their email program encourages it, not because they think it is convenient.

        Bottom-posting is more useful to outsiders to the discussion, since they can follow the temporal flow of response and reply.

        I don't think bottom-quoting help with the temporal flow at all! You have to start

    • A truly useful extension would be one that would work on the receiver's end and move top-posts to the bottom, or bottom-posts to the top (whichever way the receiver prefers to see it). So regardless of how the poster did it, you'd see it in your preferred method.

      I know... technically difficult, but even if it only handled the simple cases...
    • And what's wrong with that?

      >> Another frequently requested MailNews feature, a preference for placing
      >>the user's signature above the quoted text, has been added.
      >
      >Nooooo! Argh, this will only encourage top-posting.

  • Eolas and Mozilla? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Saeed al-Sahaf ( 665390 ) on Thursday January 15, 2004 @11:54PM (#7995069) Homepage
    I submitted this story [eweek.com] today, but as usual, since I am not a friend of the /. Editors, they shot it down big time (within minutes of when I submitted it), but I'm not bitter (that's a joke, OK?)! The guy from Eolas who brought the action against Microsoft about his browser patent, is in talks with "major Linux players." In fact, according to the eWeek story (rejected by /.), he's an Open Source contributor. Read between the lines, because this bodes VERY well for Mozilla. While W3 and Microsoft are hemming and hawing about what this kind of patent meant to them, and it means something very bad for Internet Explorer, I suspect Mozilla will not be a target. Perhaps it's wishful thinking, but "what if" this guy is into Open Source, and saw a nice way to screw MS? I know, "so what, he still has a patent for something that is obvious and should not be patented." Well, my position is just the same as with SCO / IMB. Lessor of two evils, and my enemies' enemy is my friend (for now).
    • Read between the lines, because this bodes VERY well for Mozilla. While W3 and Microsoft are hemming and hawing about what this kind of patent meant to them, and it means something very bad for Internet Explorer, I suspect Mozilla will not be a target.

      A dumb patent is a dumb patent, and should be overturned as a matter of principle, no matter who it advantages tactically. Dumb patents in general are a threat to open source. Actually, they are a threat to anyone wanting to make good software.

  • And any moment now.... (Score:5, Informative)

    by Crypto Gnome ( 651401 ) on Thursday January 15, 2004 @11:56PM (#7995081) Homepage Journal
    As outlined in the Mozilla project roadmap , the Mozilla Firebird browser will eventually replace the Seamonkey browser as the premiere end-user browser from mozilla.org. As part of the journey towards that goal, from milestone 0.7 onward Firebird 0.x releases will occur at the same time (or approximately the same time). Firebird Roadmap [mozilla.org]

    Yes, you heard it right. This release of Mozilla is significant ALSO in that it heralds an impending release of FireBird.

    Of course, Firebird 0.8 was due out December 2003, so we're overdue for that anyways.

  • Courier IMAP mailbox view finally fixed (Score:4, Informative)

    by iceT ( 68610 ) on Friday January 16, 2004 @12:19AM (#7995234)
    I'm so happy, I could just SPIT.

    IMAP servers like Courier that store everything under INBOX (INBOX. namespace) FINALLY get displayed as a flat tree structure!

    Thank you, Mozilla Team!! Thank you, thank you, thank you!

  • Ask Jeeves? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Joff_NZ ( 309034 ) on Friday January 16, 2004 @12:42AM (#7995388) Homepage Journal
    From the Changelog:

    * Ask Jeeves searching has been added to Mozilla 1.6.

    WHY? FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, WHY??

  • vCard Support (Score:3, Interesting)

    by n-baxley ( 103975 ) * <nate@baxle y s . org> on Friday January 16, 2004 @01:04AM (#7995501) Homepage Journal
    I see that vCard support has been added, but there doesn't seem to be any UI for it. Can anyone tell me how to open a vCard that is sent to me from Outlook?

  • My favorite new feature (Score:4, Interesting)

    by ahg ( 134088 ) on Friday January 16, 2004 @01:15AM (#7995550)
    From the release notes:
    "Remove from server after x days" has been implemented for POP3 mail accounts.
    I have been yearning for this feature that I loved in Eudora in KMail. This is the first Linux mail client that I've seen that supports it.

    Anyone know if Thunderbird has this option yet?

    I'm now very tempted to install Mozilla and switch mail clients but I'd rather just have a stand-alone mail client like Thunderbird, and only have to transition mail clients once to get this feature.

    Thanks Mozilla team!

  • Does anyone else... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by anethema ( 99553 ) on Friday January 16, 2004 @02:10AM (#7995800) Homepage
    NOT want to have to install 3-4 seperate programs for all the stuff mozilla has? I occaisionally use mozilla composer for quick stuff, I use mozilla mail for my email, and I use mozilla for my browser.

    I like the mozilla preferences digalog, and i like the tools menu that has all the image, popup, and cookie controlls right there in a quick easy to use place.

    Also, its quickstart is very nice and its interface has some subtle differences from firebird..most of which I like better.

    I'm not saying discontinue firebird, since sometimes you just want a nice browser, and this is great.. But why discontinue the suite?

    Kind of like MS office, I dont wanna have to install all the programs seperate..its nice to just have them all together, and select what I want.

    Any thoughts?

  • Mozilla Visual Appeal (Score:3, Interesting)

    by pipingguy ( 566974 ) on Friday January 16, 2004 @02:30AM (#7995867)
    Slam me if you wish for being superficial, but Mozilla lacks the nifty drop-shadows and subtle visual cues that IE (and OSX?) features.

    I'm an "old skool" transformed-to-CAD draftsman originally trained with actual pencils, paper and a bit of artistic flair for focusing the eye on what's important, and I dislike Mozilla's lack of visual enhancements.

    I would switch to Moz immediately and permanently if it could do this (not because of the "cool factor" but because it is a better presentation).

    Have a look at www.milonic.com and see what they have been doing regarding DHTML.

    Please comment.

Slashdot Top Deals

I THINK THEY SHOULD CONTINUE the policy of not giving a Nobel Prize for paneling. -- Jack Handley, The New Mexican, 1988.

Close