Mozilla scrolls this page and its 130+ threads quite wonderfully :)

1.1 sure scrolls better than 1.0 (from what I see here anyway)

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

It (Moz 1.1a) loads pages twice as fast as IE 6.0 does on my system too.

subj!

Yeah, that's weird: 1.0 final comes out, then a day or three later, a 1.1 alpha? Can someone in OpenSource please explain this kind of thing? It makes me think there were some major problems with 1.0 that needed fixed that quick!

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

I wouldn't really call myself "in open source", but I've been following Mozilla development closely, and think I can answer the question.

There was a version of code-in-development pre-1.0. At some point (quite a while ago), this version branched into a 1.0 branch and a 1.1 branch. The standard bugfixes went into 1.1 as before, but the bugfixes were not checked into 1.0 unless they were critical, caused no potential conflicts with existing code, and didn't even think about adding a new feature.

Thus, 1.1 is the "gee whiz lotsa new gizmos" branch, and 1.0 is the "just give me a browser that works" branch. These branches actually exist in parallel for quite some time, and there's nothing that would prevent 1.1 from being reached BEFORE 1.0, although that would probably be a bit silly.

Hope that helps. By the way, although you'd think 1.1 would be unstable from the description above (and the name "alpha"), it doesn't seem to be. Your mileage may vary.

I'm not "in opensource" but it might work like the Linux kernel etc...
Eg. the moment a stable version is released, they make a separate 'unstable' development branch. To start off with, the code in the alpha would be identical to the release, then they'd start adding stuff to it over time.
There's probably a separate 'bugfix' branch running that's aiming towards 1.0.1 but I'm not sure...

That explains it much better than my comment did.

Also answers a few questions / concerns that I had myself... such as why they didn't do anything about the bugs I was following (p3p, bad permissions on saved files etc) - because the branch had already started and they aren't critical bugs.

Sounds like this alpha is worth a look at...

Deryk, Catbus, thank you both for the information! Now, I don't know WHAT to do- take 1.0 off and get 1.1, or leave 1.0 in for now, or....LOL
So this is a "fork in the road" type of deal, eh? I can live with that.

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

I've been running 1.1 most of the day today. Seems stable. By default now it uses the download manager which I'm not crazy about at its current stage of development. Each download you start is moved to the bottom which is kinda annoying. It looks like you will be able to sort in the future though.

That's how open-source is better then closed-source, with open-source, more then one person is looking and the code, and fixing what he or she thinks need's fixed, this is how open-source thinges are better then closed source, don't you want Security problems to be closed in the shortest amount of time ?

Er, stay on topic. This wasn't a request for a flamewar. Mozilla is either good BECAUSE of open source or IN SPITE of open source. We can argue this 'til the cows come home. What's not arguable is that Mozilla is good.

The major 1.1 improvements are performance related. XUL fastload, JavaScript improvements, & HTTP pipelining to name a few. But if you don't notice problems, I'd recommend not fixing what isn't broke. Lots of web servers don't support HTTP pipelining, for example.

Fubar, I understand about "anyone can look at the code" and all that- but for the Mozilla Org to put this out *right afterwards* was what I questioned. I didn't need the "security fixed faster in open source" arguement. I am one of the weirdos that things we need both open and closed source, as to me they are complimentary.
And your post didn't help me with why the 1.1 was put out, but thanks for getting the "party line" out. I am not interested in the pissing contest between Open Source vs Closed Source, ok?

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

That's easy. Look at the timeline on the mozzila.org page.

The code split for 1.1 has been in the works for some time now. So it isn't like work on 1.1 didn't start until the day after 1.0 was released. One team was already working on 1.1 while others were still working on cleaning up the 1.0 release.

I kept my 1.0 on and just installed 1.1 over it. Was this a bad thing?

Everything seems to be running quite nicely...

Mozilla isnt better than IE and IE isnt better than Mozilla, they are different, they work differently, they render pages differently, they have different features, they have different settings/preferences. If Mozilla does everything the same as IE and IE does everything the same as Mozilla then you will have 2 of the same! They NEED to be different! Mozilla IS a good browser however it has some bugs which personally i find very annoying (read my other posts to understand) IE does not have these bugs and it works for how i want it to. When Mozilla has these bugs fixed then i will try it again and maybe then it will replace IE as my default browser. It is nice to have the choice as i really like the look of Mozilla (although i dislike the ChatZilla stuff i would drop that IRC is NOT part of web browsing, and i would make the Composer a seperate program also as it isnt really needed). I would like Mozilla to handle popups like PopUp Ad Filter does for IE (it is an excellent program). It is getting very old with this Mozilla is better than IE, IE is better than Mozilla etc.

http://tinyurl.com/btw

If you're happy with your browser, whichever it is and it serves your needs, then thats great. Thats the purpose of software :)

i have been to this site, it is very good, however i have NEVER had a problem with IE. Yes it has security issues (17 is alot i admit) but they have never affected me, well at least not to my knowledge, personally that site doesnt seem to be in favour of any browser other than Mozilla, what about Opera, etc? Also what about the things that IE or Opera have which Mozilla does not?

I also have a quick question, go to Microsoft.com in IE and then Mocrosoft.com in Mozilla, you will notice that IE has nice JScript menus for the links however Mozilla does not show this, the Microsoft site has had these menus for at least the past 18 months (perhaps 2 years) however Mozilla STILL does not support them. Why is that? Just because they are not a standard? If not then WHY are they not a standard? I have seen loads of sites use this sort of thing, for example Blackcode.com uses it very nicely but Mozilla cant load the page correctly! It is all good having standards, but it isnt that bad supporting MORE than the standards, is it?

Microsoft is using it's broken version of java to display the dropdowns. They work fine on many other sites.

Mozilla certainly supports DHTML cascading menus:

http://www.brainjar.com/dhtml/menubar/demo.html

It just has to be properly done.

JScript is different than JavaScript, but it would seem the real reason it doesn't load properly is that Microsoft has hard coded their site to only support IE.

toolbar.js:
...
if (navigator.userAgent.indexOf("MSIE") != -1 &&
navigator.userAgent.indexOf("Windows") != -1 &&
navigator.appVersion.substring(0,1) > 3)

ToolBar_Supported = true;
if(!RTL){
if (document.compatMode == "CSS1Compat")
{
//alert("strict!");
Strict_Compat = true;
}
}

...

That is the reason this time round fewt, not because of some conspiracy against Sun.

Funny I didn't mention conspiracy theory, however isn't it odd that it's hard coded to only support IE? :-P

"I also have a quick question, go to Microsoft.com in IE and then Mocrosoft.com in Mozilla, you will notice that IE has nice JScript menus for the links however Mozilla does not show this, the Microsoft site has had these menus for at least the past 18 months (perhaps 2 years) however Mozilla STILL does not support them. Why is that?"

If you got Microsoft.com with Internet Explorer it actually brings you to a different webpage then if you goto Microsoft.com with any other browser. If you don't goto Microsoft.com with Internet Explorer then it brings you to a version of their website without things such as those menus.

Ok change it so that Mozilla is known as IE in the registry and then try it, you are correct in saying that you are shown a different page, IE6 users get ms.htm as the default file, however if you force the page ms.htm to be opened in Mozilla the new effects still do not work.

Odd? No. Not at all.

They KNOW what the capabilites of IE are and they know that they aren't going to suddenly change or go away.....so they can utilize a very rich feature set is the vistior is using IE.

While they COULD go to the trouble of testing for each separate browser and coding to its particular feature sets, based on market share for different broswers, it just isn't worth it.

They went with the much simpler (and more common) logic of:
If broswer is IE then use IE features.....if anything else then use a more limited set that should work in any browser.

I'd take issue with it if their choice was to not display the page at all if the broswer was not IE.....but I have no problem with the choice to code for one specific broswer and then just use a simpler web page for others rather than trying to chase individual browsers and changing feature sets.

good point! it is like when sites detect your browser size and load a better suited page, when this happens people scream about privacy rights (a little over the top i think)

It´s a fantastic browser. The pages load fast, the tabbed windows are almost as good as Netcaptor or Crazy Browser. I wish they could fix so you can open bookmarkpages in a new tab too, though. And I would like to close a tab with a middleclick, otherwise they really made a great browser. I´ve used it day and night since the release and it hasn´t crashed yet.

You can close a tab by middle clicking the tab...

even for a 1.0 you'll find that this bird still wont scroll correctly in framed windows or windows with text boxes. The basic UI is lacking what i'd consider a good feel. I want to see the web development features closer at hand than a drop down menu. Also the address bar is goofy. sometime it selects the whole url. sometimes it doesnt. sometimes it only selects the whole url. sometimes it doesnt let you type at all.

in short. you can complain about IE but with open source churning out just as many irritations its clear that its an option and not a solution. congratulations on a good foundation. now fix the damn thing. and yes, it does load slowly on complex tables with scrolling. anyone who uses phpMyAdmin with all the tables and javascripts they have built into the new one will be able to tell you. "ok" doesnt quite cut it when you have "superb" right next door.

I've noticed those location bar probs only with certain skins (notably the KZilla KDE theme). One thing I found which helps is to simply hit ctrl+L, it should focus every time and select the whole text. Also double-clicking in the location bar as opposed to single clicking seems to work every time.

Hope that helps

Providing you're happy with the lack of

* Ability to stop popups and still let through the ones you "ask" for by clicking on a link

* Tabbed browsing

* Ability to block images from any site (eg. doubleclick.net)

* Ability to look at and manage cookies

* Ability to stop sites from meddling with the status bar text

* Full skinning ability

* Generally being in full control of things

If ever IE offers all these things, then yes it'll be a far superior browser :) As it is I can't see the occasional glitch and slow scrolling on some bizarre site to really outweigh the advantages... at least in my opinion.

This is the best browser I have ever tried - some of the skins, especially the Orbit one are really nice. I have this browser running shockwave, flash, java, pdfs - basically it does all i want in a clean tabbed interface. Compared with IE this browser is stable and does not crash windows explorer - plus it has so many features.

* Ability to stop popups and still let through the ones you "ask" for by clicking on a link
There are 3rd party applications that have done this for a long time now.

* Tabbed browsing
This is something that depends on the user's preference, I for one cannot stand tabbed browsing, however if it were added so that those that do like it could use it, that would be great.

* Ability to block images from any site (eg. doubleclick.net)
Nice feature, definetely not something worthy of switching browsers for though.

* Ability to look at and manage cookies
You can look at and manage cookies and IE6 even supports P3P which Mozilla does not (unless you compile it from the source - something that no average user will ever do).

* Ability to stop sites from meddling with the status bar text
Once again, this is a 'nice feature' but I'm wondering what kinds of sites you go to that play with the status bar text enough to upset you.

* Full skinning ability
This is a 'joke'. Skinning ability on top of any application does not in any way make the product better. Yes it's a 'nice feature', it lets people have a pretty interface but it doesn't change the way Mozilla works and in fact with many of the skins it makes it far less intuitive and harder to use.

* Generally being in full control of things
How are you in control of things? If you want to say that Mozilla has more options/preferences etc that's one thing. But how do you have more control with Mozilla?

Finally, Mozilla, glad it's finally made it to v1.0 (if not a bit prematurely based on the number of outstanding bugs). I've used it for a while with both the Modern skin plus 2 or 3 others I downloaded and it's only crashed a few times. Overal it's a fairly good product but for the moment it doesn't offer me anything that would make me want to switch from IE6.

* Ability to stop popups and still let through the ones you "ask" for by clicking on a link

popup stoppper. panicware.com

* Tabbed browsing

netcaptor. http://www.netcaptor.com/

* Ability to block images from any site (eg. doubleclick.net)

registry hack. or i think the hosts file will allow that. either way, you can do it.

* Ability to look at and manage cookies

IE6

* Ability to stop sites from meddling with the status bar text

pffft. i guess. would only be handy for surfing geocities pages and porn sites. i retired from that arena shortly after college ;)

* Full skinning ability

XP skins things nicely.

* Generally being in full control of things

like javascript and XML? the interfaces for these are much more nicely laid out in IE. one bonus for mozilla is that the javascript consol they have catches more of the javascript errors. other than that. IE is superior because its more stable on any windows platform, and its well supported because of its majority ranking. i hate the view source tool with mozilla but the frameset management is decent.

"How are you in control of things? If you want to say that Mozilla has more options/preferences etc that's one thing. But how do you have more control with Mozilla?"

For one you can control exactly what JavaScript is allowed to do. Not all of the options are built into the GUI however. If you want to say, prevent JavaScript from being able to close your window, you add the following to your prefs.js file:
user_pref("capability.policy.default.Window.close", "noAccess");

The second thing that comes to mind is the ability to define a style sheet for all webpages in userContent.css in the chrome folder of your profile directory. So you can add things such as:
img[width="468"][height="80"] { display: none; }
(Btw don't even bother trying something like this with IE. IE doesn't have this ability for one, and second IE doesn't support CSS well enough for this to work in IE)

That right there will get rid of a lot of banners. As for NULLedge claiming that you can simply use IE to look at and manage cookies, this could not be further from the truth. IE is able to blocks cookies from certain sites, but you are not able to view cookie data within Internet Exploiter, err, Explorer. http://eq.hackersrealm.net/moz/ is a clear example of managing and viewing cookies in Mozilla. You have much more control.

Want to know one of the biggest reasons I stick with Mozilla? Aside from being able to have the BUILTIN ability to do many common things. Being able to have tabbed browsing, pop-up blocking, image blocking, annoying status blocker, pause/resume support for downloads, skinning (with or WITHOUT XP), etc... without 20 different plugins and addons. Just having those features come standard. But even more importantly Mozilla is not plagued with exploits. Any known exploits are fixed. Internet Exploiter on the other hand has 18 exploits without patches available to date. Some which Microsoft has been aware of for over a year, and has done nothing about. Regardless of how they get fixed (some complained about Mozilla not having nice tiny patches) 18!!!! exploits without patches? That is pathetic. Some should make you a little worrysome if you're an Internet Exploiter user, like this one: http://www.malware.com/lookout.html

http://jscript.dk/unpatched/

http://tinyurl.com/btw

For tabbed browsing, stopping popups, and stopping unwanted images you have to have 3 seperate tools constantly running?

Hmm...

Well said.

Noooo... not another click, I can't possibly load another program... must go on... >click

...skinning (with or WITHOUT XP)...

Windows Blinds!

The nice thing about that, is it will skin other windows too to match, not just IE.

Woah, you just said exactly what my laptop thinks when I use IE for development!

netcaptor handles pop up's as well. so 2 if you're counting IE and Netcaptor as seperate apps. I'd guess using both together still loads faster and scrolls better than mozilla.

Because people will scream "anti-trust" and "monopoly abuse" for anything new MS adds. Same when they were going to add Antivirus "they would put all AV companies out of business!". Look at the "firewall" bit: many people cried foul, and "they are going to put all firewall makers out of business!".
With the *licensed from Roxio* basic burner software in XP, there have been people even here in BetaNews that have claimed it would "put Roxio, Nero, and all others out of business".

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

Unfortunately not everyone has $20 to spend just to skin some programs on their computer, or is unwilling to pay for such a feature. Again, I am talking about *BUILTIN* features that are included with the program, and for free. If you get a bunch of plugins and addons can get a lot of the features Mozilla has. However with Mozilla you don't need to bother because the features come with the program, builtin, out of the box. Also are no addons, plugins, or patches that can protect you from the 18 (!!!!) exploits for Internet Explorer currently that have no available patch (some have been out for over a year with no patch), again things such as http://www.malware.com/lookout.html, http://www.malware.com/yelp.html, and http://security.greymagic.com/adv/gm006-ie/ and others (http://jscript.dk/unpatched/).

Now if you addon to, and modify a Ford Escort enough, it is probably possible to make it as fast and almost as good as a Viper. But if both were free, and you had the option of the Viper with what it can already do, or the Escort and you need to get a bunch of modifications done to it (not all of them free) to be like the Viper, I personally would stick with the Viper. If you have to addon to, and modify computer program A, to be as good as computer program B. And you needed modifications and addons (not all of them free) to bring you some of the same features to computer program A that program B has, I personally would stick with computer program B. Esspecially when a lot of things about computer program B cannot be transfered to computer program A, with or without addons.

I guess most of them make sense, though they do involve hacking that you shouldn't really have to do.

Netcaptor costs money, the half decent version of popup stopper costs money (I bet even then you have to hold down a key to let a "wanted" popup through)... Mozilla is free... I'm unemployed, so you can imagine which my choice is :)

Quite silly really...

The firewall doesn't have much more than 2 settings - "on" and "off". Packages give much more flexibility.
The built-in CD burning stores files on a multisession disc... and that's it... a package like Nero will do much more.
Etc..

A lot of that seems to be "in your opinion" rather than fact, eg. the value of disabling certain images... the highly irritating Microsoft "boost your security" vertical banner currently distracting me whilst writing this post being one of them.

As for p3p, it is enabled in Netscape 7.0. Never thought I'd say this, but I now prefer Netscape over Mozilla (which is not so bad when you know how to keep the AOL stuff under control)

Thanks, you explained what I was hoping to get across perfectly...

prefs.js is a wonderful example of how you're in control of the browser. Even with Netscape 7.0, where they've disabled the anti-popup support in the GUI, you can still get to that setting from prefs.js

Having all this stuff as standard is also wonderful, especially if you're unemployed, can't afford the average $15-30 for each plugin you want and aren't into piracy.

Oops, not to mention the most important lack of holes!

I did have some concerns over how security updates would be applied once holes are found (with IE, it's a simple Windows Update, but not sure about Moz). But then, anyone intelligent enough to be using Mozilla is intelligent/wary enough to look out for security updates and apply them.

Do you think that was Microsoft's choice, or what they agreeded upon with third party manufacturers. Remember, pressing an ISO isn't that hard, because the IMAPI instruction is already present in the OS, courtesy of Roxio. Even if MS recalled their tool, there is another perfectly usable one available on line.

I feel your pain, that's why I stopped using my 486DX2 laptop a few years ago. I really don't see a need to upgrade really. I mean, Mosaic and Netscape 1.0N run just fine on it still.

I like how on Mozilla 1.0, the blink tag has been thrown in for nostalgia. Is that compliant with the latest W3C adopted standard?

Oddly enough my laptop is less than 6 months old.

Toshiba with 1Ghz processor\256 megs ram

*shrug*

I've gone back to Windowblinds time and time again, I just don't like it. Every system I've put it on ends up with stability problems and runs sluggish.

I think you got it right James. If some other product has something that Microsoft's product does not, the whingers come from every place imaginable. However if Microsoft wants to add anything to their products which the competitors do not have, the same whingers come out yelling monopoly abuse and throwing law suits all over the place. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

That's because a lot of your points for choosing Mozilla are nothing more than personal preferences. Skinning adds absolutely nothing to the browser - so why mention it as this big feature of Mozilla? having control of your status bar text?!? once again, what sites do you go to! Tabbed browsing, once again a personal preference... etc etc etc.

"As for p3p, it is enabled in Netscape 7.0"
I know it is, so is a lot of AOL bloat and spyware. Like I said, you can compile p3p for Mozilla, but your average user will use the pre-compiled binary which does not have it. I didn't mention Netscape as you were comparing Mozilla to IE.

I second that! There was all this hype (suprise suprise) over 3.0 being exponentially more stable/faster than the previous versions... when I finally did try it out I was heavily dissapointed but not the least bit suprised!

" Because people will scream "anti-trust" and "monopoly abuse" for anything new MS adds. Same when they were going to add Antivirus "they would put all AV companies out of business!". Look at the "firewall" bit: many people cried foul, and "they are going to put all firewall makers out of business!".
With the *licensed from Roxio* basic burner software in XP, there have been people even here in BetaNews that have claimed it would "put Roxio, Nero, and all others out of business"."

This has to be one of the most redicules excuses for a product I have ever heard. When Microsoft includes their product on 90% of the computers in the world, and forces things onto the market, yes people scream "monopoly" because that is exactly what it is. But if they add pop-up blocking or tabs support? PALEASE man, give me a break. The only people that would consider such ignorance is those who are also too in love with Microsoft to open their eyes and not be close minded about everything.

I agree, Microsoft's ability to add anything is limited because of sue freaks and companies who don't want to innovate but just take snipes with lawsuits for a few crumbs off the legal table.

However, it is what it is. Having to use a bunch of third party stuff isn't very attractive. Mozilla has spoiled me, I don't even use IE at home anymore. I was a total IE advocate, but Mozilla is just too damn good :) Sure it has bugs, but this is version 1.0! Good things in store for this browser I believe.

"But if they add pop-up blocking or tabs support? PALEASE man, give me a break."

Any what eaxctly makes you think that the companies that make and sell pop-up blocking software are any less entitled to protection under the law than Netscape, AOL, and Real are?

You obviously know very little about the legal world if you think that just because it's a feature that YOU want, that no one will rush to sue Microsoft over it.

Some of us liked having the browser, media player, and Internet access functions included at no extra charge and without addtional installation. That hasn't stopped lawsuits over it. What exactly makes you think that there wouldn't be lawsuits over other functions, just because they're ones that YOU want to see included.

Ah, so in your opinion Mozilla is only a good broswer for a small minority out there?

Not a problem if it is, I just wanted to be clear that you were actually saying that. (Since, by definition, that means that you must think that it is NOT a good browser for the vast majority out there who are not "... intelligent/wary enough to look out for security updates and apply them.")

Tux, I explained the way I did because that is what I have seen posted here in the past when things were discussed on being put in Windows OSes, Media Player (remember the fights about the MP3 encoding?), and other items. You can just ask around- it happens. So, if you know from past experience it will happen, why put it in?
And my default browser is "MyIE", which uses tabs. I have ad and popup blockers installed, plus firewalls, and antivirus. All that "should come with the OS for free!", yet if it does, there are anti-trust worries and crap like that.

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

The junk needs to be ripped out and sold as the plus pack. An OS provides the OPERATING SYSTEM, not the MIDDLEWARE. It provides the common interface and environment for executable programs to run on. It should do nothing more.

Well, this brings us back to a similar theme to the monopoly thing. I'm not saying it isn't *suitable* for the masses, just that the masses don't use it - talk to your local Joe Delluser about Mozilla (or perhaps even Netscape) and he'll look at you with a blank face. Why would he have heard of other browsers when Microsoft had convinced him IE was the only one?

Intelligent perhaps isn't the correct term (though it often ties into it).. 'experienced' is more near the mark - chances are those people using Mozilla are experienced computer users due to the above problem. And usually, an experienced user will know about security etc enough to download and install patches.

2.x works nicely on mine...

I use it to get the older "new interface" used in early betas of Windows XP :) Not really for eye candy, but because I find it useful to have disabled windows turn red when a modal dialog box pops up. Shame they ditched that idea with the Loony - er, Luna interface.

Ok Fewt, then *EVERYONE* should abide by that, meaning: NO GUI sold with the OS (as it is just the "kernal", correct? Everything else gets sold as addons- networking, notepad, etc under windows; all the "extra junk" ripped out of OSX, Linux and Unix just get the command-line kernal you love so much, while having to buy KDE by phone (remember, as you say "It provides the common interface and environment for executable programs to run on. It should do nothing more") because network/internet dial is NOT part of the OS. Dang, even DOS6.0 has many "middleware" programs, right?

See how stupid that sounds?!?!

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

For "skinning", why not try StyleXP for WindowsXP? I use it, and it works very well.

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

I'd be ok with that. It wouldn't have to be command line, basic GUI is ok. The only 3rd party app that was ever bundled with DOS was MSAV and they cought hell for it. I don't care if notepad, wordpad, and calc aren't part of the OS, they aren't part of the OS anyway.

No GUI! The GUI isn't part of the OS! You would have to buy that too, ya cheapskate! >:P~~

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

It wasn't until NT.

It truly is a great browser. If you haven't tried this beast since before about 0.96, try it now! Major improvements have been made!

Funnily enough, I recently switched from Mozilla to Netscape 7. A bit backwards most people will say, but I have a good reason...

Cookie privacy levels (p3p) are enabled in Netscape.

They're not in Mozilla, and for all we know they may never be. Bugzilla thread about it:
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=128639

As long as they continue debating that (as they have for months) rather than actually doing something... Netscape is my browser of choice.

It was slightly annoying that they removed the ability to stop popups - presumably for AOL's own marketing reasons - but there's a very small .xpi addon to bring the option back here:
http://www.hmetzger.de/adblocker.xpi

And a bunch of tips for removing AOL crap, re-enabling features they've removed etc here:
http://www.hmetzger.de/net6e.html

I'm not sure how you can stand NS 7 when you're worried about privacy. Netscape is so full of marketing\advertising bloat, who knows what they're sending in terms of personal info.

True, there's probably a good bit of spyware from AOL in it by default... but not if you know what you're doing (anybody concerned with privacy usually does) - I told it not to download that horrible spyware/adware package called "Realplayer" or a few other bits, skipped the registration with Netscape.com (simply by hitting cancel), set a blank homepage and never touch the radio feature or net2phone. The only way I can think of for them to spy now would be through Netscape itself... and if that were the case I think we'd soon know about it.

Netscape 6 and 7 both report information back to netscape/ aol on sites etc people have visited plus anonymous usage statistics through the browser

Mozilla is great for browsing the internet from Linux/Windows/Macintosh machines, the cross platform support makes it a truly universal browser!

I found an addon for Mozilla I think is really cool. It's a very well done calendar with a built in alarm, reocurring events, several view types, and a sweet UI to boot. Check it:

http://www.mozilla.org/projects/calendar/

I really love how you can just click a link and it autoinstalls addons for you. ShibbY! ;)

Well after a few days i have had to go back to IE6 sadly. I have had 4 crashes of Mozilla since i isntalled it and i am getting very stressed with the newsgroup client not being able to sort posts in Threads and by Date (most recent post at the top) and then save that configuration for when i load it next time! Also if you have Mozilla rezied to it isnt full screen you cannot access the bookmarks you have if they are not in the window, IE6 can do this perfectly well with an additional menu. I think i will wait for 1.1. It is nice but i think there should have been an RC3 and 4

I have to agree, nothing compares to IE6. Its a shame Netscape have become so user UNfriendly. Mozillas Chat client is so slow Id advise u to stick with MIRC. Its newsgroups features arent exactly anything better than outlook express. Mozilla does in fact resemble older versions of Netscape in more ways than one eg it does not load pages with complex tables correctly. That has always been a problem with Netscape until recently. Also, claims that it loads pages (ie u already have browser open) faster than IE6 are absolutely misleading. My page has complex tables and a bunch of scripts and it took 3x as long to load. HOpefully they will fix this in future releases. I did like the password manager though. Im still playing round with it as my alternative browser to get to know the features better. Mozilla is good in concept and if the creators can improve the basic features such as displaying my webpage correctly, then it will be a serious competitor to Internet explorer 6.

To access the bookmarks while in full screen mode hit F9. Dont bash a prodct that you simply dont know how to use properly.

LOL, so you measure how good a browser is by how good it can render YOUR pages? How about you build a page that is written standards complient? Where is your page? Let us have a look at what it is you think Mozilla can't handle well. All pages i visit with it seem to be working fine.

Is your page published and viewable by any chance? I'd like to make the comparison myself and see if my machine makes any difference. I'd also like to see what Mozilla considers a 'complex' table.

Thanks.

No, don't bash it for the wrong reason, there is a good reason to bash it for that, which is bad UI design.

The biggest thing I like about Mozilla 1.0 is it is TOTALLY unobtrustive.

*begins bashing linux*

i suggest the following urls for complex code comparisons.

http://whatthedilly.com/main.wtd (lots of tables with features and pop ups and such
http://download.cnet.com/ (download something. mine usually crashed)
http://winamp.com/ (download winamp 2.80a. again mine crashed)

I zipped through all 3 of those without a hitch. The whatthedilly one was a bit slow on the scrolling, kinda jumpy. No crashes though, and it loaded quickly. Thats a poorly designed site in the sense theres just waaay too much stuff on it per page. My laptop would probably croak given it has small amount of video ram.

My settings:
XP Pro (Default blue skin)
Moz 1.0: Internet Explorer Skin
1.4ghz, 256 ram, 128 meg video ram

dont know how to use it? i have been using it since it first started from the very first build released, and i have used pretty much every build that has ever been officially released.

(hysterics)

It's going to take some time for Mozilla to match IE in "Every" area that we have gotten use to. With the massive support that Mozilla has behind it, time is all we need :)

Gimie

If you knew how to use it then you would have known how to display the bookmarks in full screen mode.

i am not talking about full screen mode! i am talking about if the main window has been resized so it is very small, eg if you have several programs up and you resize the window so it doesnt take up as much space. Doing this cause options to be hiden. Next time read my post all the way through before shoting your mouth off at me.

Nothing compairs to IE6 huh? http://tinyurl.com/btw

"i suggest the following urls for complex code comparisons.

http://whatthedilly.com/main.wtd (lots of tables with features and pop ups and such
http://download.cnet.com/ (download something. mine usually crashed)
http://winamp.com/ (download winamp 2.80a. again mine crashed)"

All of those URLs worked fine for me, Mozilla did not crash, and they looked the same as in IE6.
http://tinyurl.com/btw

I stand corrected. :)

sorry to get stressed like i did it is just i get annoyed when people say oh you did it wrong making out as if i have done no research into the problem myself. It gets very annoying and i wasnt in the best of moods before hand. The problem is annoying though and it is, what i consider, a major design flaw, it was the second most reported problem with Windows 95/NT in Explorer so i am surprised Mozilla have been so lazy about sorting it out as it isnt actually that complex to implament. I hope they fix it soon, along with the arrow key problem in preferences and all the truncations in the program!

I have to admit: Mozilla 1.0 is really a good browser. Supports almost all Web standards, but its major problem is the starting speed. It takes too much time to load. They added the QuickLaunch feature, but that's only a workaround. They must speedup the program loading time. For now I will continue using IE, because I don't like to wait almost 10 seconds to start browsing the Web.

I'm not sure I understand that problem. I keep quicklaunch running, so the browser starts in about 2 seconds. Same as IE. In fact IE does pretty much the same thing, it loads with the OS and stays running in the background just like quicklaunch.....

How do you think IE starts so fast? The browser core loads into memory when Windows starts. This is exactly what quicklaunch does for Mozilla. It loads the main pieces into memory so the browser instantly starts up.

Would you rather they do it transparently so you don't know what's running on your machine?

I think it's an amazing feat for programmers from so many different locations and diverse backgrounds to produce a new product from the ground up. I look forward to reaping the benefits of similar projects in the future. I did have some problems with Mozilla 1.0. First I lost my "back" button on the Icon bar along with the corresponding entry in the drop down menu (couldn't fix it with a reload). Also, can't use a chat program (Java based I think) at one of my favorite websites. I know this is not the place to post problems, so don't flame me. These are the only things that will stop me from using Mozilla as my primary browser....

Have you read the release notes?

Fixes for those problems are discussed at http://tinyurl.com/btw

Impresive, most impressive...

Anyone have any problems with it loading images under XP?

I'm running XP Pro both at home and work - haven't had a single prob.

XP Pro here, no problems rendering graphics or fonts.

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

http://www.cs.hmc.edu/~j...yboard-help/newest.html

I have been using Mozilla all day now (at home and at work) and i must say that i am VERY impressed! I have it setup just how i want it and i just gotta say i love it :) there are some problems, mainly truncations and UI issues but the functionality is great, no crashes loads as fast as IE does when i have the Quick Launch option enabled (as IE uses a Qucik Launch option by default which cant be turned off) it loads pages a little bit faster than IE (about the same as Opera) the window popup stoping works great and the mail and newsgroup cilents are AMAZING! it is worth installing Mozilla just to use it as a mail client as it is so much faster and smoother than OE5/6. I truly excellent download, i am looking forward to an update to sort out some of the little bugs it still has. One of the greatest browsers ever, totally customizable and even though i didnt think it would be that good i am making pretty good use out of the sidebar! finally something myself and fewt agree on "MOZILLA KICKS ARSE!"

I second that. I've been using it all day, not one error or crash. The quick launch is awesome, it definitely loads as fast as IE. Those were 2 of my biggest complaints with earlier Mozilla builds - stability and speed. Now those are taken care of, and the tabbed browsing makes it so useful. I also hated in older builds how when you clicked in the location bar, it didn't highlight the URL. Small thing, but annoyed the hell out of me.

I honestly never expected the community to churn out anything that could rival a Microsoft product. Very professional.

Now lets see how Netscape can ruin their version of it.

Oh and another cool thing: all of my .NET web applications seem to be working fine with Moz 1. Not sure who to thank on that one, but it definitely makes my life easier :) It's not like I went to any special lengths to make those apps work with anything other than IE 6.

Go to the Mozilla default page ( http://www.mozilla.org/start/1.0/ ) and leave your mouse over the party link. heh heh

But he wants it so that is the default when he clicks a link.

I never thought I'd say this, but I'm extremely impressed with Mozilla 1.0 I tried many of the milestone releases and was sure it wouldn't go anywhere as they were so bug infested.

Very very sweet job. It may not replace my IE 6, but it will definitely stick on my computer.

One thing I can't seem to figure out in the prefs is out how always open links in a new tab?

Correction to my pre-coffee statement:

Can't figure out how to always open links in a new tab

Yes, I am too impressed with the final version, especially when all other milestone releases sucked big time.

Edit --> Preferences
Navigator --> Tabbed Browsing
Middle-Click or control-click of links in a web page
Ok

highlight a link and click your middle button (or scroll wheel.

Thanks fewt.

What I was looking for is a way to left click the link as usual and have that one open in a tab. I use my middle button for scrolling, and ctrl+click is kind of unintuitive. It's not a big deal, but would just be a nice feature.

My only other gripe is the amount of RAM it's using. Hopefully they can minimise that in future releases. 27 megs seems a lot, especially on my laptop :/

Awesome browser.

$37.00 for 256MB Dimm on Pricewatch, I ordered one for my notebook this morning haha.

There may be a mod you can make to the config file to allow new tab left clicks, but I can't say for sure. You can type about:config in the address bar and see all of the options that can be changed by editing the file. You can find the config files (XML based) here..

\Documents and Settings\%USERNAME%\Application Data\Mozilla\Profiles\default\tsi8qjx5.slt

I need more RAM for my Vaio...

I had been promising it to myself for months haha It went form $70 to $50 to $40, and I figure it'll only go back up from $37 haha.

3 tabs open, and using 18.5meg here. MyIE, with 3 tabs open, uses 15meg. I can live with that (1gig of DDR PC2100 on WinXP, hehe)
I am impressed with Mozilla- but I will *NOT* recommend the Aol/Netscape version to ANYONE. Just Mozilla so far as an alternative to IE.

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

To bad it can't do like the MyIE addin (it is like Netcaptor, only better): just left click and drag a bit to open a link in a new tab.

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

Edit > Prefences > Navigator > Tabbing Browsing > then Uncheck "Hide the tab bar when only one tab is open"

Then when you want to open a link in a new tab just drag the link into the empty tab area.

Thanks, Tux0Racer!! I also set it up to open new tab with a middle mouse click.
I'll keep playing with Mozilla for a bit :) I am impressed with it!

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

Let's see, a new video card (for Doom3), replacement DVD drive (a certain family member broke mine when he didn't even ask to use my computer), a CD-RW drive, a new Power Supply (cheap a** CompUSA one that has given nothing but BS), new PocketPC 2002 device (or maybe a Smart Phone, if it has inking technology), and more RAM for my notebook....

If anyone would like to contribute to the CPUGuy needs to pump some life into his 2yr old system fund, call me at 1-900-555-l33t

Mozilla 1.0 is really great. Displays pages faster then IE on my machines and it apears to be more stable too. I like features like tabs, image/cookies/forms/password manager, sidebar... excellent work Mozilla programmers!

I can retire my Netscape 4.7x profile. =)

http://eq.hackersrealm.net/compair.php

http://eq.hackersrealm.net/compair.php
One thing wrong on there.

"Sending Params from Keywords (i.e. being able to use "g penguins" to search google.com for the word penguins)"
Internet Explorer v6 can do that.
Mozilla just makes it easier. With IE you just edit the registry, which is still not hard to do. In Windows XP you can also use Tweak UI to add it in the registry.

It's not hard to do, but only quasi technical people are willing to attempt it.

Ah, I wasen't aware of that. I'll update that.

Google Search in IE Address Bar
Go play in the registry...

[HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\SearchUrl\g]
@="http://www.google.com/search?q=%s"
" "="+"
"+"="%2B"
"%"="%25"
"&"="%26"

I have a registry file with other cool search shortcuts in it:
Dictionary
Google
Spell Check
Thesarus
WHOIS

If you would like the reg file I have, just tell me...
Find my contact info here:
http://www.truweb.org/

Lets see how many objective and informed comments Betanews users can make:

I urge before you make negative comments about this or that not working please read the Release Notes as they contain important information

http://mozilla.org/releases/mozilla1.0/

Also have a look here:

http://mozilla.org/start/1.0/guide/

This document answers important questions such as:

* Aren’t the “Browser Wars” over? Will Mozilla affect the Internet?
* Why did Mozilla 1.0 take so long to complete?
* When is the user experience going to get really innovative?
* I’ve heard that the “bug count” keeps climbing. Is that true?
* What is the relationship between mozilla.org and sponsoring corporations such as Netscape and AOL?
* Doesn’t Netscape do most of the work (writing code and documentation, testing, etc.)?
* Will AOL use Mozilla?
* What licensing terms govern the Mozilla codebase?
* What other technology is there? Who might find it useful?
* What goes on at mozilla.org?

Some other really useful information can be found here:

http://mozilla.org/start/1.0/

Specifically a Reviewer's giude, a FAQ and technology demonstrations.

Congratulations Mozilla!

Thanks for the excellent links. I'm personally very impressed with Mozilla 1.0. It's taken a long time, but I think they've come a long way and created a wonder product. Not only in Mozilla itself, but also the technology behind the browser. It may not be long before IE is not my browser of choice.

Nate, thank you for recognizing the signifigance of this release and placing it at the top of your site. Initially sites like ZDNet and C|Net seemed to be bashing the Mozilla project because 1.0 took 4 years to produce (they have since updated their news topics a little, they are less harsh now).

In reality, most of the early Mozilla Milestone releases were just as stable as IE, and almost 100% secure - to this day, IE still has 17 unpatched vulnerabilities. I guess what I'm saying is that even though Mozilla 1.0 took 4 years, it's been a very useable working model this whole time, and much more secure than IE. Anyway, it took 4 years to get to "the chosen build", but it's been working all along. The term "1.0" is there just to prove the critics dead wrong! ;)

So, thank you for listening to your site fanziez :)

I posted this on ZDNet earlier in their Talkbalk area - before Nate Mook had a chance to post his news article about the Mozilla 1.0 Release:

Congrats all around to the Mozilla team for delivering such a fine product. I'm glad you took your time releasing it and making sure that it could compete and win against the current browser market. It's stable and secure - two things you don't find very often in today's internet suites. Nice job everyone!!!

M$ Internet Exploiter fans, if you upgrade to Mozilla 1.0, you will NEVER have to worry about sites like this one, ever again (go see if you are still vulnerable): http://www.jscript.dk/unpatched/

Is it just me, or is Mozilla 1.0 FAST (I say this about the Linux version *AND* the Windows version.). I installed it on my Win2K PC today, and for some reason I get xml errors when I attempt to open the preferences window though.

Rendering is blazlingly fast. Almost unbelievable to be honest. I have yet to do any real testing, but I imagine Mozilla 1.0 will load almost as fast as IE on Windows with it preloaded at startup. The only thing I don't like as much is the way it renders the whole page in one swoop. I am used to IE loading up the page as it goes, even if it takes a bit longer.

Mozilla does incrementally render. It might just be that the page is loading fast enough that it is hard to tell. Another reason is that Mozilla has a quirks mode to handle badly written pages and a strict mode for well-written pages. I would guess that it is more likely to incrementally render in strict mode since it expects well-written HTML. It does not have to load the whole thing and guess at what the author screwed up.

Only problem(s) I have with it so far:

1) ZoneAlarm Pro is giving a privacy warning on *each page opened* using Mozilla (I have my privacy settings high in ZAPro and IE. Will have to check settings in Mozilla soon)

2) Scrolling pages isn't "smooth", but I can live with that.

Otherwise, I just have to get used to the large tabs, and the way it tabs.

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com (posted with Mozilla 1.0)

"I guess what I'm saying is that even though Mozilla 1.0 took 4 years, it's been a very useable working model this whole time, and much more secure than IE."

you haven't visited the bug pages. stable? the old releases crashed all the time. thats bubkas. try sifting through bugzilla and looking for critical bugs. ;) theres lots. in fact I plan to have a field day with this new 1.0. at RC3 i was still crashing the browser religeously at download.cnet.com. LET THE TRIALS BY FIRE BEGIN

But why would you visit download.cnet.com anyway? Everything they have is old news and you have to register to download :)

Leaving the mouse on party link.. what does it do?

you have to watch, hehe....you will see something nifty.

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

http://download.com.com/...382398.html?tag=lst-0-3
handy tools. 21k.

P.S.
winamp.com crashed mozilla when I tried to download the new player 2.80a. I think its that javascript that pops up a download window thats doing it. (1.0 final)

Oh Nate, you are such a Mook! LOL!!
Seriously though, I am glad Betanews is getting back on track!

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

I just downloaded winamp280_full.exe from nullsoft without any crashes.