Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Mozilla The Internet IT

Mozilla 1.7.5 Released 454

Posted by CowboyNeal from the here-comes-the-lizard dept.
shokk writes "Mozilla 1.7.5 is out for all platforms. See the changelog for more details. Quite a few bug fixes are in this. A number of the bugs are Firefox/Mozilla specific, so you can expect that these will be avilable in the upcoming Firefox 1.1 Deer Park (that's good browser!) release. Is the Mozilla suite no longer at the forefront of browser technology, long surpassed by Firefox and Thunderbird? Will we ever see a Mozilla suite composed of Firefox and Thunderbird to keep it all simple? What are your reasons for running the old standby suite over the Firefox/Thunderbird combo?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Mozilla 1.7.5 Released More

Mozilla 1.7.5 Released

Comments Filter:

  • Summary is incorrect (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 18, 2004 @12:51PM (#11124660)
    Nearly all of the 1.7.5 Mozilla Suite fixes are in Firefox 1.0. Firefox 1.0's code is Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20041107 Firefox/1.0. This is a small upgrade for Mozilla 1.7 to reach Firefox 1.0 parity. Firefox v1.1 will be based on Mozilla 1.8 (currently at 1.8 alpha 5 [mozilla.org]), and Mozilla 1.8 should be released first. I wouldn't say either one is ahead in terms of technology, since they share so much.

    Whether we'll one day have a suite of applications replace the actual suite seems to vary month to month and depends on who you ask. Personally, I would've liked that as a goal for Mozilla's 2.0 release.



    PS: Mozilla 1.8/Firefox 1.1 should have the new user stylesheet code to support a color override for it.slashdot.org!

  • Why I still use Mozilla... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Tet ( 2721 ) * <.ku.oc.enydartsa. .ta. .todhsals.> on Saturday December 18, 2004 @12:52PM (#11124664) Homepage Journal
    What are your reasons for running the old standby suite over the Firefox/Thunderbird combo?

    Quite simply, it's a better browser. The killer feature for me is searching. I hate the wasted real estate in Firefox from having a separate location and search box, and ease of use is dramatically better in Mozilla than in Firefox. In Mozilla, I just hit Ctrl-L, type my search commands, hit up arrow and enter. I haven't found any way of achieving the same thing in Firefox, and I hate the small size of the box I'm given to enter my search terms.

    For email, I don't use either. Until something else comes close to the power of mh, I see no reason to change. But I also found out a major failing in Thunderbird yesterday. My other third uses it, and it turns out it can only get mail from a POP3 or IMAP server. It can't read from a local mbox file. How braindead is that?

    • Re:Why I still use Mozilla... (Score:5, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 18, 2004 @12:55PM (#11124681)
      Right click on a toolbar in Firefox, and you can add/remove/re-arrange all you want. Don't want a search? Remove it. Don't want a Forward button? Gone. Ctrl-L still takes you to the address bar, and you could easy set up bookmark keywords for your searches that way.
      • Right click on a toolbar in Firefox, and you can add/remove/re-arrange all you want. Don't want a search? Remove it.

        Great, but what if I want to have location and search in the same text box?

        • Re:Why I still use Mozilla... (Score:3, Informative)

          by Anonymous Coward
          Then read the rest of what I wrote. Setup up bookmarks with keywords for the searches you want. For example, to search PHP's manual I have a bookmark with:

          Location: http://www.php.net/manual-lookup.php?pattern=%s
          K eyword: phpman

          Then, if I type "phpman array" in the location bar, it does a search of the manual and takes me there. I also have one for Slashdot like:

          Location: http://slashdot.org/search.pl?query=%s
          Keyword: /.

          Then I type "/. something" which Slashdot probably won't find, but that's not rea
          • You can right click on most text input elements, and select "Add a Keyword for this Search..." and the URL (with equivlent %s) is filled in for you. It even works on POSTed forms such as those used by Allmusic guide!

        • Re:Why I still use Mozilla... (Score:3, Informative)

          by Anonymous Coward
          I've always used this method, and it seems to work for me.

          In user.js, add this line:

          user_pref("keyword.URL", "http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&q=");

      • Re:Why I still use Mozilla... (Score:4, Insightful)

        by gnugnugnu ( 178215 ) on Saturday December 18, 2004 @01:55PM (#11125025) Homepage

        you could easy set up bookmark keywords for your searches that way.


        You are missing the point entirely.

        Mozilla "out of the box" does more of what some of what some of want and are used to and it is not worth switching to Firefox if we have to waste time adding it all back in.

        Frankley I'm amazed that the Firefox developers saw fit to compltely remove the search option from the location bar. Those who knew about it could keep on using it and newbies could use the easier to find search box.
        What harm would it have been to leave well enough alone?

        I for one regularly need use Mozilla Composer to correct ugly ass webpages into something less harsh on the eyes and more readable. I like having Chatzilla around too. Just because I could add it back in doesn't mean I think that would be a worthwhile way to spend my time.

        Fact is that I do use a lot of the suite, some of it more often than other parts but just because I dont use it often doesn't mean I want to get rid of it. The improvements to the gecko rendering engine are shared between Mozilla and Firefox which is what is really important and any improvements I have seen in firefox do not outweigh all the little annoyances and missing bits I would have to add back in.

    • Re:Why I still use Mozilla... (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      You don't even need the search box in Firefox, you can search directly from the location bar by using quick searches.

    • Re:Why I still use Mozilla... (Score:5, Informative)

      by djocyko ( 214429 ) on Saturday December 18, 2004 @12:57PM (#11124694)
      In Mozilla, I just hit Ctrl-L, type my search commands, hit up arrow and enter. I haven't found any way of achieving the same thing in Firefox,

      Hit ctrl-k, enter search terms, hit enter.

      and I hate the small size of the box I'm given to enter my search terms.

      Can't help you there.
    • "The killer feature for me is searching. I hate the wasted real estate in Firefox from having a separate location and search box, and ease of use is dramatically better in Mozilla than in Firefox. In Mozilla, I just hit Ctrl-L, type my search commands, hit up arrow and enter. I haven't found any way of achieving the same thing in Firefox, and I hate the small size of the box I'm given to enter my search terms."

      Exactly. I just hate the separate search box. After a couple of months using Firefox every day,

    • Re:Why I still use Mozilla... (Score:5, Informative)

      by Kristoffer Lunden ( 800757 ) on Saturday December 18, 2004 @01:02PM (#11124724) Homepage
      In Mozilla, I just hit Ctrl-L, type my search commands, hit up arrow and enter. I haven't found any way of achieving the same thing in Firefox

      Without using Mozilla, it is hard to know exactly what you mean and what happens when you use up arrow, but I think it can be acheived - I don't use the search box at all, instead I use a combination of:

      1. about:config -> keyword.URL set to http://www.google.com/search?oe=UTF-8&q= instead of the default (not very intiutive no), which causes Firefox to search on Google with anything entered that doesn't look like an URL, which is anything that hasn't got a dot embedded in the first word I think(?).

      2. Keywords on bookmarks, making it possible to search wikipedia with "wp search terms", CPAN: "cpan search terms" and so on. Look in the Quick Searches folder for examples. I suppose Mozilla has this too, though.

      Maybe that helps, that is, if you do want to try a switch. :)
      • in mozilla the bottom entry on the URL history list is always "google for ....", so hitting UP instead of DOWN takes you to the last entry instead of the first. its actually not a list entry, its a button thats populated with the last item you hovered over but in this case that last item is the location bar (you can hover over a history item, then move out of the list and onto the button and search for something in your history, pretty useless feature but its there).

        i also consider this to be a great feat

    • Re:Why I still use Mozilla... (Score:4, Informative)

      by astoltz ( 540893 ) on Saturday December 18, 2004 @01:04PM (#11124731)
      Thunderbird 1.0 will read a local mbox file. Setup a "movemail" account instead of an "Email" account. I had to fix some permissions so Thuderbird could write the .lock file, but other than that, it's working fine.
      • I think movemail support is on Unix systems only... if you are on another platform it is not available.

        Here's what I do on Windows to read the mbox-format archives I have lying around from previous Unix accounts:

        1. Create a new folder within Local Folders.
        2. Locate the new folder within your Moz/TB profile on disk, usually in C:\Documents and Settings\blahblah...
        3. Delete the folder message file (zero bytes). Don't delete the foldername.msf index file.
        4. Copy the mbox-format file to this location using th

    • Re:Why I still use Mozilla... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by rseuhs ( 322520 ) on Saturday December 18, 2004 @01:11PM (#11124779)
      Quite simply, it's a better browser.

      Exactly.

      Firefox feels a little too much "dumbed down" for me.

      An example is that I coulnd't find a preference in Firefox to turn off gif-animations (v0.9 IIRC). Yes, I'm pretty sure there is some way through extensions or about:config, but what's the point, it's the same browser engine anyway.

    • quite simply, it's a better browser

      This is qualitatively a subjective response. I personally do not share your assessment. If the difference in searching styles is what makes or breaks a browser for you, then more power to you. Personally, I don't spend that much time disecting an individual web page to worry how the browser searches.

      What does matter to me is speed and extensions. Last time I checked, Firefox blows Moz away in both. To be fair, I don't know whether Firefox extensions work in Moz and
    • I believe this post solves your problem:
      Thanks, Kristoffer ! [slashdot.org]
    • Of course it can read from a local mbox file... See menu "Tools" > "Account Settings" > "Add Account" > "Movemail". I use it on a regular basis.
    • Well...

      If you just control + L you can enter a search, but it gives the first hit.

      Me, I have been using the google search via control + k.

      The side search feature was neat, but yeah... I hate that wasted space as well. With the above two commands I pretty much avoid the mouse through my entire run.

      I'll have to give the new mozilla a run, but I switch to firefox for speed. It was running signifantly faster then mozilla and thus my switch.
    • Because they don't make Firefox for MacOS9. (They don't update Moz either, but there is a 1.3 version.)
    • You can still do that in Firefox, I hit CTRL+L, then type "google search terms" and it searches google.
    • I had a similar complaint about FireFox when I first started using it. But I found these two solutions:

      1) Use "Control-K"

      or

      2) Use "Control-L" and then "Tab"

      I prefer to use the second method.
    • "What are your reasons for running the old standby suite over the Firefox/Thunderbird combo?"

      Why should it be a standby suite? If something doesn't work on Firefox, it won't work on Mozilla navigator either. Most of us would interpret "standby browser" to mean Lynx, Links, emacs, or Internet Explorer, i.e. something which might work when the primary browser fails.

      Why is it "old"? Mozilla just released a major version today, which makes it newer than Firefox 1.0

      Why are the reasons for running Mozilla n
  • Seriously. When you have multiple avatars on a forum RPG, logging out and in over and over again is error prone. So I have Mozilla be "STrRedWolf", KHTML be "Sandra Felis" and Firefox be "Dr. Mikail Markov" and post as usual.
    • I used to use two different email clients similarly: one for work and one for personal mail. Since my ISP stopped supporting the old version of Eudora I used to use, I've gone to using multiple personalities in Thunderbird, but the unified interface means that I often send email using the wrong account.

      Having wildly different appearance might be a nuisance when I wanted a feature from one not present in the other, or when I hit the wrong key, but it kept it very clear in my mind whether I was sending pers

  • Upgrading (Score:4, Interesting)

    by StevenHenderson ( 806391 ) <stevehenderson.gmail@com> on Saturday December 18, 2004 @12:56PM (#11124686)
    What are your reasons for running the old standby suite over the Firefox/Thunderbird combo?

    Might seem silly, but when upgrades come out for the Moz suite, IT teams need only upgrade/test one piece of software. Might seem insignificant, but at my school EVERY computer had Moz installed, and that would mean a lot of work.

    Also, Mozilla suite has a higher version number which, for some reason, keeps ignorant IT managers more at ease.

  • The Composer (Score:3, Interesting)

    by DarkFencer ( 260473 ) on Saturday December 18, 2004 @12:56PM (#11124691)
    I use Firefox exclusively for web browsing, but if I need to use an HTML editor for simple stuff every once in a while, I still have the Mozilla suite installed for Composer.

    Thats about it though. I haven't used the full suite for web browsing (I use Evolution for e-mail) for almost two years now.

  • merge (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Gherald ( 682277 ) on Saturday December 18, 2004 @12:57PM (#11124695) Journal
    It was my understanding that Firefox and Thunderbird were engineered to completely replace Mozilla.

    Does anyone know when this is supposed to happen, i.e. when will the code branches merge into a single whole?
    • I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought Firefox and Thunderbird were already meant to be "replacements" for Mozilla. They've both hit 1.0, and they're supposed to replace Mozilla. Now.

      Now, the some of the fixes developed in Firebird and Thunderbird are being back-ported just as maintenance for people still using Seamonkey, but the suite isn't being actively developed.

      So it's not that Firebird/Thunderbird isn't replacing Seamonkey, but the Mozilla developers are being considerate to

    • It seems to me, there's really no advantage to merging Firewox/Thunderbird into a single product - and meanwhile, Mozilla "fills the bill" for people who *do* prefer these types of apps bundled into one program.

      So much depends on your OS preference and situation.

      EG. On my Apple Powerbook running OS X, I'm pretty comfortable using the built-in "Mail" application. It does all of the basics I need (even things like spam filtering) and is tightly integrated into the OS (address book, etc.). I do, however,

  • What are your reasons for running the old standby suite over the Firefox/Thunderbird combo?

    Because I can patch it from Redhat Network

    • Re:Laziness (Score:2, Informative)

      by >:^D ( 135101 )
      The upcoming Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4 (and recently released Fedora Core 3) include Firefox as the default browser. They also include Thunderbird, though Evolution is still the default. Yay, laziness!

  • What are your reasons for running the old standby suite over the Firefox/Thunderbird combo?

    Simple. Because it works. There isn't enough reason for me to switch.

    Also, because Firefox seems to have a problem running on my computer, and has every time I've tried it (0.7, 1.0, etc.) - If I try to save anything (^S), it hangs and has to be "kill -9'd"

    I'm beyond the age where I care enough to build it from source and debug it myself, and since they're no entry in Bugzilla that I could find for it, it's pr

  • Why have two projects going at the same time? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by EnronHaliburton2004 ( 815366 ) on Saturday December 18, 2004 @01:00PM (#11124713) Homepage Journal
    Will we ever see a Mozilla suite composed of Firefox and Thunderbird to keep it all simple?

    What are the reasons for keeping two different project sets going at the same time? More and more it seems like the Mozilla Suite is becoming the "Legacy Trunk", and Firebox & Thunderbird are the next-generation R&D releases.

    It seems if we could dedicate more developers to a single development tree, it would be more efficient? Just one primary development trunk, no need to sync in changes from Firefox/Thunderbird -> Mozilla and from Mozilla -> Firefox/Thunderbird.
    • "It seems if we could dedicate more developers to a single development tree, it would be more efficient?"

      Sure, that's why nature only ever puts one species in each evolutionary niche, right? Oh wait...
    • ...it seems like the Mozilla Suite is becoming the "Legacy Trunk", and Firebox & Thunderbird are the next-generation R&D releases.

      It seems if we could dedicate more developers to a single development tree, it would be more efficient? Just one primary development trunk, no need to sync in changes from Firefox/Thunderbird -> Mozilla and from Mozilla -> Firefox/Thunderbird.

      Firefox is the actively developed application, and Mozilla is in maintenance mode. Like you said, it's the "Legacy Trunk".

  • Mozilla Suite for me (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Spad ( 470073 ) <`slashdot' `at' `spad.co.uk'> on Saturday December 18, 2004 @01:01PM (#11124716) Homepage
    I much prefer the suite to FF/TB.

    I still can't stand FF as a browser - it simply isn't as good as Mozilla for my uses. If I'm going to use both the browser and mail components then why the hell would I want to sacrifice performance and features (such as opening email links in a new Mozilla tab by middle-clicking) by running two seperate programs?
    • Mozilla does just what I want, even it it does take some time to load. I like having an integrated Browser/HTML Editor/E-Mail client.

      At work, I run Firefox under NT4 (!) and editing HTML there is a pain in the ass - no 'Edit Page' option there. I am sure there are other ways to do this, but what I actually do at work is sufficiently taxing that looking things up (with no internet access) would just be a distraction.
    • I concur.

      The tab menu also seems to be better than in FF. So many times on FF I accidentally choose the Close Other Tabs rather than Close Tab. If FF and Mozilla will have this customizable, that would be nice. Until then, I will keep using Mozilla.

  • It's obvious (Score:3, Funny)

    by EdwinBoyd ( 810701 ) on Saturday December 18, 2004 @01:01PM (#11124720)
    Now that Firefox has become popular I have to use Mozilla to prop up my feeble ego by running against the current and sneering at those along the way.

  • 1.7.4? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by slavemowgli ( 585321 ) on Saturday December 18, 2004 @01:06PM (#11124748) Homepage
    Whatever happened to 1.7.4?

  • Firefox != Mozilla (Score:3, Insightful)

    by TheEvilOverlord ( 684773 ) on Saturday December 18, 2004 @01:14PM (#11124794) Journal
    The underlying rendering code might be the same, but the interface (and the features) are completely different.

    Firefox is lightweight and quick and I use it on slow/low memory machines, but I prefer mozilla simply because it still looks and behaves like netscape. Firefox is for those people that use IE and switch over.

    It might sound silly but there are subtle interface differences and keyboard controls, etc that are missing in Firefox. I went from using netscape to mozilla (when it was stable enough) and I've always disliked IE.

    I'm sure Firefox will gain netscape behaviour features at some point, but I guess at that point certain users will start complaining about bloat.

    Until there is a compelling feature to move I'm not going to, and I wish people wouldn't make it into some open source guilt trip not to use Firefox! Damnit! I only recently started using mozilla mail over PINE! (and that was for the junk filtering).

  • Here's Why I Run Mozilla (Score:4, Informative)

    by Matt Perry ( 793115 ) <perry DOT matt54 AT yahoo DOT com> on Saturday December 18, 2004 @01:17PM (#11124817)
    I run Mozilla because it gets new development first. Two examples:

    1. I, along with a bunch of other people, funded a developer to add roaming profile support. It's in the 1.8alpha builds but AFAIK hasn't made it into Firefox yet. Roaming profiles was a huge loss for me when I stopped using Netscape 4. I'm glad to have it back and I'm glad that open source allowed me to do something about it rather than just sit around and complain about it being gone.

    2. The new Google Groups displays messages in a proportional font and doesn't have a setting to display it in monospace. This really screws up messages that are meant to be monospaced such as source code. Google has some kind of algorithm that attempts to see if the line should be monospaced but it works poorly [google.com] and shows a mixture of proportional and monospaced lines in some messages. That can make things more difficult to read.

    As of Mozilla 1.8a3 I can limit stylesheets to a specific web site which allows me to fix my google groups problem. The following code in my chrome/userContent.css file lets me show google groups messages in monospace:

    /* Display messages on google groups in monospaced font */
    @-moz-document url-prefix(http://groups-beta.google.com/) {
    DIV[class=mbody] {font-family: monospace ! important}
    }

    Right now the Mozilla trunk is where the action is for new features. Eventually new development will focus on Firefox, at which point I'll probably switch over. Until then, there are new features that I need and those needs aren't being met in Firefox (yet).

    • As of Mozilla 1.8a3 I can limit stylesheets to a specific web site which allows me to fix my google groups problem. The following code in my chrome/userContent.css file lets me show google groups messages in monospace:

      Well, you can still edit the userContent.css file in Firefox, it just doesn't support specific websites. However the `class="mbody"' attribute is probably very unique, so you shouldn't notice a difference on other websites

      And even if Firefox is behind in some core features, the ability to u

  • Why I like the suite (Score:4, Interesting)

    by edwdig ( 47888 ) on Saturday December 18, 2004 @01:20PM (#11124846)
    Type ahead fine works better in the suite. I prefer a links only search if i just start typing, with / for the fulltext. Firefox always does fulltext.

    Type ahead find doesn't work in the View Source window of FireFox.

    Type ahead find doesn't work in Thunderbird.

    Too many options have been removed from the preferences window in FF/TB. The new design isn't very usable for the more complicated tabs (such as Advanced).

    I like right clicking a link in an email and selecting "Open in New Tab".

    TB/FF don't have a window menu, making it slower to navigate between multiple windows.

    Those are the main ones I can think of. Probably more that I don't run into as often.

    • Type ahead fine works better in the suite. I prefer a links only search if i just start typing, with / for the fulltext. Firefox always does fulltext.

      Firefox used to behave this way, and I agree, it was nicer. As of 1.0PR it stopped distuingishing between links and text. Now there is only an option for "begin finding when you begin typing." how annoying.


      Type ahead find doesn't work in the View Source window of FireFox.

      Not true. Works fine for me. sure you have the latest version?

    • Type ahead fine works better in the suite. I prefer a links only search if i just start typing, with / for the fulltext. Firefox always does fulltext.

      Starting with a (') in Firefox will do a links-only TypeAhead Find.

      There is also an [unfortunately hidden] option called accessibility.typeaheadfind.linksonly. Setting this to true does exactly what you want.

      Type ahead find doesn't work in the View Source window of FireFox.

      Works for me...

      Too many options have been removed from the preferences window i

    • TB/FF don't have a window menu, making it slower to navigate between multiple windows.

      What's wrong with tabs?

  • Edit - Preferences (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Erik Fish ( 106896 ) on Saturday December 18, 2004 @01:23PM (#11124866) Journal
    Last I checked FF had an extremely abbreviated preferences window with the rest of the options available through an enormous about: page. I like Mozilla's prefs interface better.

    Moz is also a great drop-in replacement for people who are used to NS 4.x (a population that includes many of the users I support).

  • The smallest possible reason but big enough for me (Score:3, Informative)

    by lavalyn ( 649886 ) on Saturday December 18, 2004 @01:24PM (#11124867) Homepage Journal
    Firefox seems to use an internal clipboard. Mozilla suite doesn't. Meaning that if I were to select a location or copy a url in Mozilla I can expect to middle-click it into an xterm, for example, for a wget. Or that if I select a link from elsewhere, I can middle-click that into the location bar. Not so for Firefox.
  • First off, I like to install only what I need. Mozilla is suffering from serious bloat. Secondly, the Mozilla browser still has the look and feel of the old Netscape, which I can't stand (or maybe I just have bad associations with NN 4.x). Firefox seems to be fresh, light, and fast, while Mozilla seems old, bulky, and slow. And yes, I've also standardized the entire company with Thunderbird, too.
  • I remember one of the biggest complaints about Mozilla was that it was a huge, integrated mess. Now that we have what everyone was clamboring for, what do people ask for? An integrated suite! This just goes to show you that you can't please everyone no matter what you do.
  • I still stick to Moz because the Form and Cookie Managers in Firefox are nowhere near as robust. Mozilla allows me to double-click, say, the "Name" field on a form and it'll automatically plug in my name. Firefox simply comes with that IE-style drop-down list, which I've always found annoying (especially for search boxes). Plus, with Moz, in three clicks I can fill out all major fields on a standard form that asks for name, address, e-mail, and phone. That's just convenient.

    And then there's Mozilla's c
  • But otherwise at home I use Mozilla. The integration between the two programs is just less hassle for me and easier to use.

    But at work, everyone uses firefox now. Anyone notice that firefox picks up the favicon.ico on all sites that IE can't? It's odd, but cool for FF.

  • Composer: I give lectures and use Composer (a lot) to create 'poor man's Power Point' presentations...the advantage of this to me is enormous: I don't like Power Point - I no longer use any MS products, .html is quick and easy, I can embed any media I want into a page, and it does exactly what I need it to. I rely in Composer heavily and would be lost without it even though I have tried other methods of creating slides for my lectures.

    Chatzilla: this is very handy, easy to use, and I like the interface...
  • in debian Tbird and Ffox comes each with their own launch scripts that try to detect if another mozilla family member is running. if one is runnig you can't launch the other. so if i'm reading e-mail i can't launch URL from Tbird and if i'm browsing i cant read e-mail...

    plus, the suite already have a (primitive) calendar that is quite handy sometimes.

  • Simpler (Score:2, Interesting)

    by fermion ( 181285 )
    I know that everyone likes firefox, and when I am forced to use a lame MS machine I use firefox. However, when i set up average user I install moz.

    This is why. If I set up thunder as the email client, and then firefox as the web client, that leads to more choices, and choices are what often cause significant security problems for the average user. Perhpas they will open IE instead of firefox. If the web window is already open, then the use of IE will be less likely.

    So, in a setting in which the inhe

  • Is the Mozilla suite no longer at the forefront of browser technology, long surpassed by Firefox and Thunderbird? Will we ever see a Mozilla suite composed of Firefox and Thunderbird to keep it all simple? What are your reasons for running the old standby suite over the Firefox/Thunderbird combo?

    Could this writeup be any more inflamamtory? Maybe you should throw in some jabs at various operating systems, programming languages, and desktop environments. I mean seriously, it's like you're trying to create

  • I have 4 computers, 2 Mozilla, 2 Thunderbird.

    I like that when I start Mozilla Browser, it will check my email and tell me if there are new messages. Firefox/Thunderbird does not do this.

    The other issue I have is the way tabbed bookmarks open. On Mozilla, I just left click on the group of tabbed bookmarks. On Thunderbird I have to right click and specify to open in tabs.

    Another item that is odd, Mozilla has a button next to the tabs for a new tab. On one installation I can't seem to put the butt
  • I run mozilla instead of firefox/thunderbird because, well, I'm used to it and haven't seen anything that compells *me* to wanna switch. My wife runs firefox/XP, though. ;-)

    'Sorry for the lame reason.

    Mark
  • Firefox seems to be designed as a very good replacement for IE. It is faster, safer and has more features, but it cannot do what Mozilla does. I have always viewed the Fireefox and Mozilla as being for different crowds. Firefox is for those who want a fast and simple browser, but don't need the ability to customize all the settings. Mozilla is for the power users who want to tweak every portion of their browser. I for one hope no one ever replaces Mozilla with Firefox, because although I like Firefox, I

  • What are your reasons for running the old standby suite over the Firefox/Thunderbird combo?"

    1. Because it is a suite. I do want my email client to work with my browser and my irc client to work with my browser. The extensions that tie firefox to these other things seem to be lacking quality and availability outside of windows.
    2. Resource savings. Using a firefox/thunderbird combo I have to wait for the browser to startup and I have to wait for my mail clien to start up everytime I start it. When I

  • Mostly because it doesn't work that well. I couldn't even get Java to work with it for Pete's sake. There's not even a dialog to choose your Java!

    Sure, a lot of good work went into it and it seems to work for a lot of people, but really, a typical user doesn't want to futz with config files, downloading/installing extensions, etc. Something as basic as a browser should just work. Firefox doesn't for me. Opera does. Opera has everything bundled together nicely and it works great "out of the box". I t
  • That's a big problem for me. And why wouldn't the subject box let me put a question mark on the end of my subject??

  • Removed features (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Quixote ( 154172 ) on Saturday December 18, 2004 @03:45PM (#11125646) Homepage Journal
    I have been using Firefox for a couple of months, and surprisingly, there are features of Mozilla that I miss.

    For starters: Mozilla's preferences menu allows a lot finer control of the options than Firefox's. This is very puzzling: why would the Firefox team remove options and then turn around and hide them under the "about:config" panel? Is this some kind of an Easter egghunt or something?

    Second, cookies. Mozilla's cookie handling was great; FF leaves a lot to be desired. Usually I disable cookies; but some sites refuse to work without cookies, and in which case I have to enable session cookies. Mozilla had a convenient option under Tools. Even if I mistakenly denied the cookies from a site, one could go to Tools -> Cookies -> Allow session cookies to conveniently allow from the site. Under FF, if you disallow cookies from a site, you have to go to Edit -> Preferences -> Privacy -> Exceptions; and then hunt around for the site in that list (without any convenient search function). It takes much longer to enable session cookies for sites once they've been disallowed.

    While the FF team is doing a great job of coming up with a standalone browser, their "usability" decisions leave something to be desired.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Money is the root of all money." -- the moving finger

Close