Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Mozilla Now Even Includes The Kitchen Sink

CowboyNeal posted more than 11 years ago | from the funny-feature-creep dept.

Mozilla 295

zzxc writes "Mozillazine reports that a 'kitchen sink' easter egg has been added into Mozilla by a patch to bug 122411. It shows an ASCII art animated kitchen sink. This was prompted by people complaining about Mozilla's bloat - that 'it includes everything but the kitchen sink.' You can see this xhtml demo by going to about:kitchensink in a recent Mozilla nightly, or at mozilla.org with an older mozilla build. Please note that this is not actually included in the browser package, so it doesn't add to mozilla's bloat. Instead, about:kitchensink directs the user to the xml document on mozilla's website."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

werd to teh motha fuckn grasshoppers! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5360098)

And ALL my dead troll homies.

EMA br0g!!!!11

YOU SUCK! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5360099)

Terrorists sacrifice their lives to guide you americans back into the real world.. away from your propaganda and fascism..

Better than IE (0, Troll)

idiotnot (302133) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360100)

Where going to a page like that could result in the sink filling with the BSOD....

Re:Better than IE (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5360111)

In IE6, try this:

about:mozilla

Re:Better than IE (1)

idiotnot (302133) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360118)

Alas, I am Windoze-free, having only my iBook to keep me company today. And IE 5.2 for the Mac doesn't reproduce the "feature"

Re:Better than IE (2, Insightful)

darien (180561) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360139)

Neither does Windows, unless you count showing a blank blue screen on request as a "feature." I wish people would stop posting this as if it were somehow funny and interesting.

My guess is that this was going to be an Easter Egg, but someone somewhere along the line thought better of it.

Re:Better than IE (2, Informative)

BlueWire (9674) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360450)

When I try the link [mozilla.org] in my IE6 I get... :

---
The XML page cannot be displayed

Cannot view XML input using style sheet. Please correct the error and then click the Refresh button, or try again later.

Parameter entity must be defined before it is used. Error processing resource 'http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/DTD/xhtml11.dtd'. Line 85, Position 2

%xhtml-prefw-redecl.mod;
-^

---

Now is MS bitching about the W3 or Mozilla?

HAR HAR HAR!!! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5360300)

that is so fuckin original and hilarious!!
who would have seen a BSOD joke coming, even though BSODs are pretty much rare anymore.
you are a comedic genious!!

Next addition... (4, Funny)

gmuslera (3436) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360102)

about:everything will redirect to wikipedia, google or something like that, so really will include everything.

Re:Next addition... (4, Funny)

erpbridge (64037) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360251)

No, it will redirect to www.everything2.com/ [everything2.com] . After all, that site truly does have everything (and if you find something that's missing from Everything, you make that thing and Everything is that much closer to being everything.

(did I say that right?)

does it include fixes? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5360103)

Keep the kitchen sink. I'll settle for them fixing the fucking browser link problem.

The back button is COMPLETELY broken now. When I press it, I get a fucked up rendition of the previous page - or it tries to load an IMAGE from the previous page. Or it tries to load an IMAGE from the existing page. Or I'll click on a link and instead of the link, I'll get the image that the link was around. Or I'll load/reload a page and it will have a TON of things convered into numbers/letters (hex?) like A57 D827 a123 - don't get me wrong - 1.3b is a great browser... as long as you have no intention of ever visiting a page you were already at and can tolerate 50% of the pages being fucked up as is.

Re:does it include fixes? (1)

iion_tichy (643234) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360252)

I don't have any such problems. What did Bugzilla say?

Re:does it include fixes? (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5360419)

That's what beta's are for.

Who needs a kitchen sink? (5, Funny)

Lobsang (255003) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360104)

I don't care for the kitchen sink. Could you please include a car washer instead?

Re:Who needs a kitchen sink? (1)

56ker (566853) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360175)

I don't know of an ASCII art car washer - just this ASCII art animation of a cow & a car - which can be found here [demon.co.uk] .

Re:Who needs a kitchen sink? (1)

56ker (566853) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360207)

I've found some car related ASCII art on this page [kersbergen.com] . Still no car washer - perhaps you could draw your own.

Re:Who needs a kitchen sink? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5360217)

Or even a toilet, so that we do not have to stop browsing to take a bathroom break :-)

Re:Who needs a kitchen sink? (1)

elfkicker (162256) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360414)

Try this [productivity.net] .

Old news... (5, Funny)

mrselfdestrukt (149193) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360109)

But IE has had something like that for years. Sometimes it redirects you to a nice blue screen.

Re:Old news... (5, Interesting)

lithis (5679) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360180)

actually, it does. try about:mozilla [about] in ie.

Re:Old news... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5360337)

for all us linux users(im sure im not the only one) can you tell us what you get?

Re:Old news... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5360472)

Background colour will be blue. No text or anything.

I don't get the joke, though. They are

trying to simulate a BSOD crash? Huh? M$ may think Mozilla programmers are weenies, but if an OS crashes because of a browser, it's the OS' fault, not the browser's...

Re:Old news... (1)

Peterus7 (607982) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360261)

Does Mozilla take you to a nice pleasant red screen then perhaps?

Well, I know for sure MS wouldn't do easter eggs just for silly suggestions...

everything but the.. (5, Funny)

seelevarcuzzo (625460) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360112)

if we can blame mozillas bloat on everything *including* the kitchen sink, what can we blame windows bloat on? does microsoft have an easter egg including the appliance section in best buy somewhere?

Re:everything but the.. (4, Informative)

gmuslera (3436) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360130)

There is not comparision. This not add bloat to Mozilla exactly, nor a lot of time to developers. In the Microsoft side, instead, you have easter eggs of the size of a flight simulator [eggscentral.com] .

In IE6 (4, Interesting)

zzxc (635106) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360121)

Trying this in internet explorer 6, you get:

The XML page cannot be displayed
Cannot view XML input using style sheet. Please correct the error and then click the Refresh button, or try again later.

The system cannot locate the resource specified. Error processing resource 'http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/DTD/xhtml11.dtd'.

Re:In IE6 (2, Informative)

JohnKFisher (518955) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360198)

Page loads fine in Safari!

Re:In IE6 (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5360238)

And Safari is fully standards compliant right?

Come on now. If it didn't work and gave an error then some would justly say that there is an irony when a browser that has as one of its chief goals standards compliance includes a component that points to something not written to standards. This is even more ironic if you remeber the troubles and positions people were put through for sticking to standards and not accepting grandfathered hacks for old browser compliance. But since it doesn't work in Internet Explorer 6.x and gives an error that points to W3C guidlines none are going after IE6x compliance except in round about ways.

pingmeep

Re:In IE6 (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5360301)

You said you a geeksta
But you neva hack nuttin
We said you a weaksta
And you need to stop frontin'
You say gnu/linux on slashdot
But you didnt install nuttin'
You been postin a long tyme
But you aint crack nuttin

Re:In IE6 (4, Informative)

ptaff (165113) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360323)

IE has trouble with XHTML. They spend so much time making sure people don't use standards...

Have a google search with:
site:w3.org xhtml "cannot be displayed"

This is an old bug, Microsoft seems to be too absorbed with DRM to care about it.

Re:In IE6 (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5360338)

It doesn't appear to be an IE parsing error, it looks like it was blocked from IE at mozilla.org. As in if I use proxomitron to fake my user-agent it displays.

Good thing... (-1, Offtopic)

EpsCylonB (307640) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360122)

mozilla never needs to go on holiday.

kitchen sink? (5, Funny)

matt4077 (581118) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360125)

Next time, please complain "Mozilla has everything but a red light district". Can't wait for the animated xml-porn

Re:kitchen sink? (5, Informative)

56ker (566853) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360158)

And a comment like that would go amiss without a link to the ASCII pr0n archive [asciipr0n.com] - and for the people still reading this interested in Star Trek ASCII art - try here [calormen.com] .

IE includes the kitchen (1)

ExEleven (601282) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360126)

The thing is, Mozilla may be bug, but compare it with the IE6 installer and you must have included the Kitchen, House, Garage, Housing estate, town, and everything else.

Re:IE includes the kitchen (1)

ExEleven (601282) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360216)

I should have previewed this last post of mine, what I was trying to say is that IE6 must be includeing the whole kitchen, because its like 10x bigger.

Re:IE includes the kitchen (2, Funny)

calethix (537786) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360434)

IE6 IS the kitchen.. and Windows is the house. Or maybe a better analogy would be that IE6 is the toilet of the Windows bathroom. :)

Nice but... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5360135)

Does it have a garbage disposal for all those pop-ups and spam?

Easter Eggs (5, Interesting)

FrostedWheat (172733) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360137)

Give this a go: about:mozilla [about]

Anyone know any more of these 'features'? :)

Re:Easter Eggs (5, Funny)

bheerssen (534014) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360159)

Hey man, you're going to slashdot my site!

Re:Easter Eggs (1)

56ker (566853) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360165)

I know of ones in Opera - for instance you can see the history using opera:history. I don't know of any others. However as those features in Mozilla are based on the xml page - wouldn't it be up to the individual webmasters how they used them?

Re:Easter Eggs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5360236)

how the hell is that an easter egg? You can access the history simply through the menus, or shortcut, and when history is open, it even says opera:history in adressbar.. just like if you open the opera cache, it says opera:cache in the adress bar etc.. so this is NOT an easter egg at all.

Re:Easter Eggs (5, Informative)

damiam (409504) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360167)

about:config [about] will show all of your current preferences and (in recent builds) allow you to edit them. Other than that and about:plugins [about] , I don't think there are any more interesting about: eggs.

Re:Easter Eggs (1)

stevey (64018) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360283)

Interestingly I cannot right click upon an 'about:foo' link and select 'Open in new tab'.

I wonder if this is a bug, or a deliberate feature..?

(Debian unstable,version 1.2.1-9 if it matters)

Re:Easter Eggs (1)

JohnCub (56178) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360480)

it doesn't work in win32 1.3alpha either.
I think http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=153379 is the closest bug but it's marked WONTFIX.

minor detail, I suppose.

Re:Easter Eggs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5360182)

Random: If you type about:mozilla in Internet Explorer, you get a blue screen in your browser. The reference is res://mshtml.dll/about.moz. If you look at the source, it's basically empty except for the background color property. I know this has been around for a while (at least two versions ago).

Re:Easter Eggs (5, Informative)

bheerssen (534014) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360186)

There used to be more of these about: pages in the old netscape (4.x and lower). Most of them went to the home pages of various developers on the netscape project. The about:netscape page used to display a different quote from the Book of Mozilla. If you put something in that the browser didn't understand, such as 'about:whatever', the resulting page would read "Whatcha talkin' 'bout Willis?"

Have a look here [fairding.com] , they list most of the about: URIs, as well as some other forgotten easter eggs.

Re:Easter Eggs (2, Informative)

bheerssen (534014) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360199)

Here I go replying to my own post. What a dork ;)

Anyway, if you want to try some of these tricks, you can get an old version of netscape from http://browsers.evolt.org/index.cfm/dir/navigator/ [evolt.org] .

Re:Easter Eggs (4, Interesting)

stevey (64018) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360299)

Wow - Ctrl+Alt+F still takes you to the FishCam!

I remember the first time I discovered this by accident!

Going META (4, Interesting)

hysterion (231229) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360223)

Anyone know any more of these 'features'? :)
This would be cool:

bug 56061 - about:about [mozilla.org] : RFE to display a clickable list of all the supported about:*

Re:Going META (1)

WalrusSP (124853) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360257)

How about this interesting message upon clicking the link to bugzilla in the parent post:

Sorry, links to Bugzilla from Slashdot are disabled.

Re:Easter Eggs (2, Informative)

Cokelee (585232) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360383)

Using IE6, clicking that link results in going to res://mshtml.dll/about.moz the page displays nothing, but they took the time to make the background blue.

<HTML>
<HEAD>
<BODY bgcolor="#000080" text="#FFFFFF">
</BODY>
</HTML>

Ascii art (4, Interesting)

gmuslera (3436) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360138)

is more than this... the kitchen sink can even be controlled by mouse turning it on and off.

And that is ascii art is particulary appropiated, all those letters seems to be flooding mozilla zine and slashdot discussion forums.

Playing "catch up" to EMACS (4, Interesting)

Speare (84249) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360148)

Several releases of Emacs have also used a kitchen sink as a launcher icon.

Why is this XML? (0, Offtopic)

thinthief (13759) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360150)

Besides the XML declaraton at the top, is there anything else about this page that couldn't be done with regular old XHTML? All I see is CCS, Javascript, and a little HTML.

Re:Why is this XML? (1)

damiam (409504) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360176)

It is XHTML, you dummy.

Re:Why is this XML? (-1, Flamebait)

NineNine (235196) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360203)

You don't understand... Mozilla is all about "standards"... arbitrary rules established by the W3C that have no bearing whatsoever on modern society. So, of course, they have to show off how well they're adhering to these nonexistent "standards". Very impressive. I've recently established a standard in which everyone in the US drives on the left side of the road. I'll be implementing it today.

Re:Why is this XML? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5360375)

Hey fucktard, be grateful for those standards - they're what allow to to post here (not tk mention run your lameass site). Geez, what kind of an asshat are you, anyway, to complain about the only thing that stops Microsoft stomping all over everybody else?

in related and more serious news :) (5, Informative)

cetan (61150) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360151)

The Mozilla 1.3 branch has been closed in prep. for release. There's a mention of it on Mozillazine [mozillazine.org] as well.

The outstanding bug list has been mirrored here:
http://www.phule.net/mirrors/bugs-2003-02-22.html [phule.net] because it's not very nice to bugzilla.mozilla to link directly to it. At least not from /. :)

Re:in related and more serious news :) (3, Interesting)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360316)

How about my all time favourite mozilla bug? The 'I know counters have been part of the CSS spec for over 4 years, but we're still not going to support them' (bug 3247). To be fair, IE's support is even worse. Take a look at this page [sucs.org] . It all validates, but the only browser to render it correctly is Opera 7. (6 renders everything except the javascript.) IE and Moz both give up on the heading numbering, although they all seem to support the pagination (look at a print preview), which is nice.

wheres.. (-1, Redundant)

odyrithm (461343) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360154)

the women?

If it has a kitchen [sink] (1)

NeoMoose (626691) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360157)

then it better be able to make me a sandwich.

Re:If it has a kitchen [sink] (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5360379)

well, they are workinh on a way to let it help you make coffee:
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi? id=46647

Actually not working yet... (2, Informative)

ksheka (189669) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360160)

...at least using the build I downloaded a few hours ago (Build 2003022108 on WinXP)

2003022108 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5360311)

Doens't work on the 2003022108 (last night) release either.

Wow, just what mozilla needs (1, Interesting)

Zakabog (603757) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360161)

I just loaded the xml page in mozilla, isn't it great, mozilla sucks up 17% of my linux PC's ram (Redhat 8.0, 380 something megs of ram, PIII 600) and 40% of my windows PC (Windows XP, 256MB, Athlon XP 1800+) so naturally to make it a more efficient web browser it needed an animation of a kitchen sink, which uses up 60% of my CPU in linux (just loaded the site in mozilla and checked top) and 50% of my CPU in windows (loaded the site in mozilla again and checked the task manager.) Anyone else think that they should add this stuff AFTER they make the browser suck up less memory and CPU. At idle mozilla uses hardly any CPU (but sucks up tons of ram), but I think it's kind of weird that it requires 50% of a 1.5 ghz computer just to show an animation of a kitchen sink that is all text.

Oh, those memory stats are mozilla with about 13 tabs open, if I have 20 copies of IE open and minimize all but one it uses around 12 megs of ram (although I never use IE and the bloatedness of mozilla doesn't bother me, it still seems like an issue that needs to be worked out.) Also, the xml page doesn't seem to work in IE, is it specific for mozilla? It's kind of hypocritical to talk about sites that just don't work in Mozilla and other browsers, and that you shouldn't support companies that make sites like that but when a site like this works only in Mozilla it's just fine (although it's only an animation of a sink so who cares if it doesn't load in IE, it's just the fact that it will not work that matters.)

Re:Wow, just what mozilla needs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5360178)

that composer and Chat crap must be removed!!! I WANT them to remove this outrageuous crappy gfeatures or i'll stop browser the net with their crap.. dont give me "phoenix" now.. since it's the other extreme... NO features but still lame when more than 10 tabs are open.. BTW did you ever open more than 20 mozilla tabs on a P3/500? ..it's "bye, bye mozilla fame" then...

Re:Wow, just what mozilla needs (1, Insightful)

Guilly (136908) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360230)

I wonder what kind of a crappy setup you have. I have a athlon 2000+ @ 1.82 and mozilla sucks up a big fat 31 megs of RAM and 1% of my CPU in XP with 13 tabs open (12 slashdot comment pages and the sink). Sure if you load 12 pages with flashy widgets it will get worse but that's with any browser.

Re:Wow, just what mozilla needs (5, Insightful)

damiam (409504) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360239)

It's kind of hypocritical to talk about sites that just don't work in Mozilla and other browsers, and that you shouldn't support companies that make sites like that but when a site like this works only in Mozilla it's just fine

The page is valid XHTML [htmlhelp.com] . If IE can't render it, that's its problem. Most of the IE-only pages are not standards-compliant, and that's the problem.

Re:Wow, just what mozilla needs (5, Insightful)

.com b4 .storm (581701) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360244)

It's kind of hypocritical to talk about sites that just don't work in Mozilla and other browsers, and that you shouldn't support companies that make sites like that but when a site like this works only in Mozilla it's just fine

Oh what a load of troll-scented crap. This isn't a "site", it is a silly easter egg built into the program. This is not a page with actual information, it's not meant for consumption by the general public (i.e. my grandfather is not going to search on Google for "kitchen sink", find this, and be disappointed that it does not work in IE). It is a "feature" specifically for Mozilla users.

Would you complain the same way if a Mozilla skin or XUL extension didn't work with IE? Of course not. It's not meant to.

Re:Wow, just what mozilla needs (0, Flamebait)

anotherone (132088) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360310)

FLIBBERTY GIBBERTY IF I TRY TO GO TO WOMENCENTRAL.MSN.COM WITH OPERA TWO LINES ARE OBSCURED BY CSS ELEMENTS! IT'S OBVIOUSLY A MICROSOFT CONSPIRACY TO KEEP PEOPLE FROM USING SHITTY BROWSERS!



Yeah, do you remember that? Slashdot is hypocritical, and always has been. You're right, it's a silly animation and I personally think it's retarded that slashdot is reporting on an easter egg anyway. But don't say that it's not hypocritical because you KNOW that if the exact same thing happened with Microsoft closing something to anything but IE, you and the rest of slashdot would throw a giant hissy fit about it.

Re:Wow, just what mozilla needs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5360401)

Yeah, do you remember that? Slashdot is hypocritical, and always has been. You're right, it's a silly animation and I personally think it's retarded that slashdot is reporting on an easter egg anyway. But don't say that it's not hypocritical because you KNOW that if the exact same thing happened with Microsoft closing something to anything but IE, you and the rest of slashdot would throw a giant hissy fit about it.

the difference is that that page is perfectly valid XML, a standart set by w3c. its not mozilla making a page that only works on mozila, its mozila useing a standart that IE didn't bother to implement

Re:Wow, just what mozilla needs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5360430)

replying to my self:

if your thinking XML is a horribly new standart that IE didn't have any chance to implement yet, its 5 years old. IE just doesn't really care about standarts

Re:Wow, just what mozilla needs (1)

jedrek (79264) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360289)

Of course, try phoenix. It takes up less than 5% (22mb on a 512mb system) of my RAM even though I have like 5 windows with 15 tabs each open. Hm... actually, thanks to the fact that I actually checked, I see that emule is an another ram rampage... time to upgrade.

Cool! BUT... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5360162)

...where are these stupid Composer and that crappy IRC Chat "features" for?

I can't imagine them expecting me to use that crap only since it's in the same exe.

I never used something like a HTML compoyser in my whole life.. And having it included in the Mozilla exe wont change it...

Wow (3, Interesting)

Apreche (239272) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360166)

I figured the first post would say

"if you don't like the bloat, use phoenix!"

But it didn't. Instead someone pointed out about:mozilla which has been in there since like Netscape 2 I believe, maybe even before. I can't believe it got modded up and people didn't know about it. Anyway, if you want the kitchen sink and only the kitchen sink, use phoenix. ^_^

Re:Wow (0, Flamebait)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360484)

wrong as phoenix has doubles in size over the past few releases.. Now we have that damned sidebar back and I am sure that a large amount of the bloat coming from mozilla will get into it.

Although.. the search box is something that NEEDS to be added to mozilla.. right next to the URL box..

another easter egg (2, Interesting)

harks (534599) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360168)

in Internet Explorer, try going to about:mozilla its supposed to imply that mozilla causes BSODs. haha.

Re:another easter egg (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5360336)

I just tried that. (IE 5.0)

Going to about:mozilla [about] pulls up a screen of dark blue. No text, tho. I suppose that might be implying that Mozilla causes BSODs. On the other hand, maybe the IE programmers were feeling blue when the compared themselves to the competition.

On a whim, I tried some other about: URLs. I found that Mozilla just ignores anything that it doesn't recognize. IE, on the other hand, generates an HTML document from whatever text is given in the URL [about] . It's not standards compliant. The generated file is just the string -- no body tag or anything. Oh well.

about:mozilla (4, Interesting)

arvindn (542080) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360194)

In case you haven't done it yet, see "about:mozilla".

If you're stuck on IE, here it is:

And the beast shall be made
legion. Its numbers shall be increased a thousand thousand fold. The din of a million keyboards like unto a great storm shall cover the earth, and the followers of Mammon shall tremble.


from The Book of Mozilla, 3:31

(Red Letter Edition)

Also see The mozilla museum [snafu.de] and The hidden features of mozilla [rigaut.com] . Its about the old netscape, but still very enjoyable and sometimes hilarious.

For Future Reference; People... (1)

Daniel_Staal (609844) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360205)

Correctly word your bug reports!

They seem to follow them exactly: if you say they included everything but (...) they include the (...) Imagine if someone had said it includes everything but an atomic bomb! Do you really want them giving out atomic bombs? Be careful!

What is it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5360208)

Either my fonts are screwed up or Phoenix 0.5 cant render it correctly - looks like a bunch of animated garbage.

How recent a nightly? (1)

grahammm (9083) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360225)

How recent a nightly is needed for about:kitchensink to work? It does not work for me with build 2003022108

Help (-1)

fish500 (208702) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360229)

If any mod sees this could you please help me. See I did a silly thing a while back: I tested how low my karma could go by posting dumb crap. Found out that -50 is the lowest you can get. Anyway I like my uid of fish500 - I use it everywhere. I'd like to start participating in /. again but I can only post at -1 so no one sees me. If any mod has any pity and some extra karma to throw my way it would be great to see if I could get back up to 0 karma. I know I could just create a new user but I'm sorta trying this method as a little experiment.

Thank you for your time.

It was going to be a sink *and* a urinal (1, Funny)

kfg (145172) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360233)

But none of the developers could figure out why you'd need both.

KFG

If you enjoy ASCII art (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5360246)

Then you'll probably enjoy ASCII Art Farts [asciiartfarts.com]

Well, you know what they say (5, Funny)

back@slash (176564) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360275)

A million ASCII kitchen sinks flowing for a million years will produce the greatest works of literature known to man.

"It was the best of times, it was the blurst of times!!?? You stupid kitchen sink!"

opening kitchensink locally (1)

e**(i pi)-1 (462311) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360281)

Would somebody know why mozilla would show
http://www.mozilla.org/catalog/web-developer /examp les/kitchensink.xml
correctly but when opening the same file locally
file://localhost/home/user/kitchensink/ki tchensink .xml
it would produce an XML Parsing Error in Linux?
(Happens to me both with Mozilla 1.2.1, and 1.3,
works fine for me with Mozilla 1.2.1 in OS X).

Re:opening kitchensink locally (1)

lactose99 (71132) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360313)

Very strange, and unreproducable here. When I open the kitchensink.xml doc locally, it works.

Linux? (1, Troll)

Amsterdam Vallon (639622) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360285)

For some reason, this article got me to thinking about operating systems.

I just wish people would take the time or get the opportunity to see Mozilla perform on the Linux side of things.

I know there are probably a couple million who only use Mozilla at work, and at work they probably have to run Windows 2000 because their boss uses Lotus Notes or something. It's really a shame that they are forced to use the Windows GUI and strict C++ environment.

Suggestion: All you Windows folks should try out Mozilla on Linux. Get one of those Linux-On-A-CD distributions that you can just boot up from and instantly be running Linux. Get the latest Mozilla build (from ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla/nightly/latest/ [mozilla.org] ) and see what you're missing. It just -- *feels* -- so much different and better on the native Linux side of things. Kind of like how driving a car feels better outside on a spring day than inside on a turf track.

Just my two cents, though, but I really feel like Mozilla is so much more than many people see.

MOD PARENT +1 INTERESTING (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5360318)

How can a very insightful recommendation be moderated as 'troll'.

Seems like someone has a personal vendetta here. That's not cool, guys.

Re:Linux? (4, Interesting)

krray (605395) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360402)

I have to agree 100%. All too often people that have pretty much only used Windows spout off like this. They think they know it all because they _did_ visit the Apple store and in their un-biased/un-buying mood thought it *was* slow.

I sit on the side of seeing the EXACT same hardware running Windows, Linux (Netware, BSD, OS/2, and BeOS for that matter) all side by side.

I've seen IE on Windows and IE on the Mac. Compare Mozilla on Windows then to the Mac. Now take a look at Linux. How about Safari. Wow.

Now -- go to your Windows box. Transfer 8G out while getting 9G dumped to you while encoding a video stream while ripping a CD with the music playing and even have another operating system running to see IE6 about: mozilla
all while posting to /.

Go ahead try it... If a Windows user were to sit down and _learn_ to use Linux or a Mac as they did, at one point, _learn_ to use Windows then, and only then, do I think people will begin to understand. I show them daily... :)

Yeah, yeah yeah -- in Russia this may be off topic.

It dosen't work in konqueror. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5360295)

Even with apple's help.

Flame (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5360460)

And when Mozilla will have a decent logo and a acceptable homepage? The former is **ugly** and the latter seems written by a h4x0r.
Just one: to find the user documentation page you must click the developer documentation link. Wow!

I like easter eggs when they don't add bloat, but looks like this time mozilla developers have more important things to do before adding games.

No, I'm not good both at graphics and html.

ahem... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5360464)

for those of us that need a "Whole Kitchen sink browser, email client, html editor, i am glad mozilla is here for us...

hopefully Phoenix will be polished a little more and eventually make it to a 1.0.x release :)

now you can slap me with hot buttered penguins

Mozilla Doesn't Include the Kitchen Sink... Yet (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5360479)

You can see this xhtml demo by going to about:kitchensink in a recent Mozilla nightly, or at mozilla.org with an older mozilla build. Please note that this is not actually included in the browser package, so it doesn't add to mozilla's bloat. Instead, about:kitchensink directs the user to the xml document on mozilla's website.

No, it doesn't. If you read the later comments in the bug, you'll see that drivers@mozilla.org (the project managers) have vetoed about:kitchensink. It's not likely to get into Mozilla unless the patch can be modified so it only affects Mozilla (right now it affects most Mozilla-based browsers, including Phoenix, Galeon and K-Meleon). Even then, I still have doubts that it will get in.

Gross (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5360512)

Why's there poop coming out of the faucet?

What? (2, Insightful)

mkelley (411060) | more than 11 years ago | (#5360520)

We've been waiting three years for NTLM [mozilla.org] support in Mozilla, and a fucking easter egg makes the news and gets more support? WTF?

NTLM easily explained [toastytech.com]

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?