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 Firebird Soars Into View

CowboyNeal posted more than 11 years ago | from the birds-planes-and-browsers dept.

Mozilla 514

About a zillion people wrote to announce Mozilla 0.6, but asa was the first: "Mozilla Firebird 0.6 (formerly Phoenix) is available for download. This release features a fresh new look, a redesigned preferences window, preliminary support for Mac OS X and much more. Read why you should be using Mozilla Firebird and get the latest release." I'm not exactly clamoring for a new web browser, but it looks worth checking out.

cancel ×

514 comments

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

aol roxors (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979563)

frosty piss

cum (-1)

(TK)Max (668795) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979564)

, THE CUMHOUND ," e`--o
ll Seeks to suck( | __,'
ll~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~' \_;/
X YOUR GENITALS L
/) .====D___________. )
(l ( UU this is what(( l
``-' he lives for ``-'

pIST fIST (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979565)

This is my pist fist.

It has been drinking and battering my purple head for over an hour

Whatever. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979575)

If it is okay to steal another group's name (as long as we call it a code name) then Mozilla.org should return to calling its project Phoenix. If this is not the case then the claim that Firebird is only used as a codename is just propaganda to strenghten Mozilla.org's position in its attempt to rape the Firebird database project.

Re:Whatever. (1)

dbglt (668805) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979600)

Mozilla doesn't _seem_ to be doing it on purpose, but the Phoenix stunt they pulled was little more than a shameless publicity stunt. Hardly see where they get code name from...

Re:Whatever. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979715)

"phoenix from the flames" perhaps......

the name firebird seems to follow this theme too

do a google search if you're unfamiliar! ;-)

Re:Whatever. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979752)

Try here [livius.org] for example...

a better search would probably be "phoenix from the flames mythology" or "phoenix from the flames greek"

Re:Whatever. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979722)

Yeah, because some database project that nobody had heard of upto this point holds the sort of recognition that the Mozilla guys could only dream of. After all, its the only way they can gain some page views! Who's heard of Mozilla, Netscape or AOL?

The database developers are whiney little bitches who don't understand that nobody, and I repeat nobody, could possibly confuse a web browser and a database. Besides which, no one cares about their database anyway!

FreeBSD (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979577)

Does anyone know if this works under FreeBSD Linux emulation? Or (preferably) when the native version will be out?

Re:FreeBSD (4, Funny)

AmunRa (166367) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979619)

Use the source [mozilla.org] Luke!

Re:FreeBSD (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979668)

I'm sure the parent post was marked funny because of the enormous time required to compile mozilla...

Re:FreeBSD (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979800)

Enormous? My computer compiled Mozilla 1.3 in about 2 hours. The whole new KDE + Qt took about three times that.

Opera (4, Interesting)

dbglt (668805) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979584)

Has anyone compared this firebird you speak of, to the mysterious cult of opera? I'm quite happy as an opera cultsman, yet i am open to bribery :P

Anyone wanna point out to me some features that firebird has/plans on having? Most of the ones on the list look pretty basic...

Re:Opera (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979615)

I use Opera on windows, linux and embedded linux. Firebird is much more enjoyable, stable, quick and pleasant to use. The only reason I still use Opera is embedded linux support -- but etfrot has a workable alternative.

Re:Opera (5, Interesting)

mrd_yaddayadda (629895) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979616)

I'm an Operaphile. Straight up front I'll say that but from my very very brief look at Firebird (.6) I'm impressed. One of the things I can't live without in Opera are the mouse gestures. I know that there has been a - imo - rather crappy implementation of the idea available for Mozilla for a while but it seems that it's finally getting there.

I tried previous releases of Phoenix and while I thought it promising it always has seemed very rough around the edges understandably but this seems to be getting close. Allied with Thunderbird this could be a good mix...

Worth trying for a while at least.

Re:Opera (4, Informative)

Dylan Zimmerman (607218) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979763)

Well, if you want mouse gestures, you can always get StrokeIt. It adds mouse gestures to Windows as a whole. Essentially, it recognizes a gesture and performs a macro based on which gesture it was and which application is active. It can even do global gestures like close, minimize all, and restore all.

http://www.tcbmi.com/strokeit/

Re:Opera (3, Interesting)

J_DarkElf (602111) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979627)

The only advantage I see in having a XUL-based browser is that it is quite easy to add extensions to it, such as support for additional standards such as Ruby, or adding support for features left out of the main distribution, such as the 'site navigation' () bar.

Standards support is virtually identical in Gecko and Presto -- Presto does certain things a little better, Gecko has support for SVG and some other things Presto does not yet support. Unless you for some reason need SVG and MathML support, I do not see any reason to move to MF from Opera. But of course that is my opinion ;-)

Alas The Browser Formerly Known As Phoenix is still at least twice as slow as Opera 7.11 on my system, so it will remain a secondary browser for me. It is certainly at least the second-best browser around!

Re:Opera (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979682)

Yes, it has replication mechanisms, fully Ansi 92 sql and non locking commits :-)

Re:Opera (5, Informative)

theprancinghorse (594307) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979697)

I used the Opera 7.1 beta for GNU/Linux for a couple of weeks and find that it loses out to Firebird in the following areas:

  • It is does not have type ahead find [mozilla.org] .
  • It does not have as sophisticated cookie and image blocking facilities.
  • You cannot limit the functionality of Javascript in ways that Firebird provides.
  • It is no faster than Firebird 0.5 or 0.6 in any respect.
  • It has an annoying advertisement.
  • It does not work well with Java applets (for me atleast).

The first 3 points are the major reason I chose to stick with Mozilla Firebird. Plus, you get a number of cool extensions for Firebird which you can install at a click of a button.

I found that the Tab management in Opera 7.1 was superior that Firebird's out of the box. But there is an extension called "Tabbrowser extensions" which make Firebird Tabs behave as well as Opera.

I for one don't see a reason to spend good money on Opera given that Firebird exists.

Re:Opera (4, Interesting)

Bander (2001) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979748)

I was one of the Opera faithful for a couple of years, but switched to Phoenix/Mozilla Firebird about six months ago and haven't looked back since.

Opera started losing favor when the Daily Python site kept coming up in Greek (not that there's anything wrong with that, I just can't read Greek) and their tech support was completely unhelpful.

Mozilla Firebird is close to everything a browser should be. And nothing more, which is at least as important.

-- Bander

Re:Opera (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979798)

sorry, bub. 'the firebird' was a ballet [amazon.com] , not an opera.

Great Work (4, Interesting)

mbrod (19122) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979587)

I would just like to say good job to the developers and the project managers. The direction this part of Mozilla has gone has really put the icing on the cake for it being the best browser IMHO.

I use it Phoenix (ermmm I mean Firebird) now on every platform at work and at home. Love it.

Never have any popup problems, very quick and couldn't do without opening links in the background under a new tab as I browse the web then go to them when I am done reading what I am currently on.

Re:Great Work (5, Interesting)

sisukapalli1 (471175) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979642)

Just a few weeks ago, I felt that Mozilla was good enough and that there was no need to try anything else -- till I downloaded Mozilla Firebird (some nightly after 0.5), and boy is it good...

Here are the main things:

The customization is tremendous. I managed to shave off a couple of toolbars from the screen -- only one toolbar with more buttons and options than what I put with Mozilla 1.4b.

The extensions are wonderful too. Simple things like NukeImage, Tabbrowser extensions, Adblock, and a tonne of other extensions.

So, right now I use both Mozilla and Mozilla Firebird, and I see the little Mozilla offsprings dethroning parent Mozilla very soon.

Soon it will be the time to say, "The king is dead, long live the king."

S

Re:Great Work (3, Informative)

Proneax (609988) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979730)

So, right now I use both Mozilla and Mozilla Firebird, and I see the little Mozilla offsprings dethroning parent Mozilla very soon.

The Developers have stated this will happen [mozilla.org]

Re:Great Work (1)

blurfus (606535) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979765)

Ditto to that...

I have been using Mozilla for a couple of years now and decided to download Firebird (Phoenix 0.4 at the time) to try it out.

I must say I am very pleased. It has a simpler, get-to-the-point interface that's is highly customizable not to mention the much-smaller, simpler installer (around 6MB)

If I understand correctly, there will be (or are already) tons of plug-ins for it to do things like mouse gestures, and such.
I know you already can block pop-up windows, do image re-sizing, and skin the browser with your favourite theme(s) but these are considered 'standard' nowadays.

I am pretty sure I will be using this browser more often and eventually replacing any other on my desktop.

A bit old. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979589)

TexStar already has this

We all know Phoenix/Firebird sucks... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979594)

So what about the name Suckbird?

It's great. (3, Interesting)

The J Kid (266953) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979598)

I've got it and it's great.

It's fast, zippy and speedy too!
If you haven't been using the Nightlies lately, the new default theme will seem to you as a breath of fresh air.

It's hands down the best browser for Linux.

Difference between Firebird and Mozilla? (3, Interesting)

kevin_conaway (585204) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979613)

The article mentions that this is a faster, less bloated version of Mozilla. What are they trying to do here, what are hte main differences between Mozilla and Firebird and why do they seem to be advocating one of their products over another? kc

Re:Difference between Firebird and Mozilla? (2, Flamebait)

Lost Canadian Abroad (178362) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979648)

... what are hte main differences between Mozilla and Firebird and why do they seem to be advocating one of their products over another?

If you are asking about the difference between the current Mozilla Browser and Mozilla Firebird Browser then it's basically a directional change.
Read the Mozilla Road Map [mozilla.org] to see why this is being done.

The difference between Mozilla, in gerneral, and Firebird is that one is a web browser and one is a RDBMS.

And the Mozilla crowd said people wouldn't confuse the two....

Re:Difference between Firebird and Mozilla? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979737)

People only confuse a web browser and a database if they're thick or being intentionally obtuse in order to try and appear clever. I'm not sure yet which one applies to you, but it could quite possibly be both.

Font Magnification (5, Insightful)

Teckla (630646) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979599)

For those of us without electron microscopes handy to read the tiny, tiny fonts on many web pages, Mozilla/Mozilla Firebird also allows text magnification that *always works*.

There are tons of web pages whose text can't be magnified in Internet Explorer without first turning on the accessibility options, and doing that is very annoying.

-Teckla

Re:Font Magnification (2, Interesting)

dbglt (668805) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979620)

This is hardly ground-breaking - this has been around since the early days of opera (not that long ago :) Just because IE doesn't offer it... it does not make firebird/whatever they want to call it now/and now better

Re:Font Magnification (4, Informative)

Stuart Gibson (544632) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979623)

As of course does Opera (and has done for some considerable time). Of course, Opera can magnify everything (including images) for those with poor eyesight or for, ahem, closer inspection of thumbnails.

Alternatively, you can specify the minimum size of font you will accept (in pixels) which means you never need to magnify text as anything specified above the size will stay as the author intended, yet small text won't drop below your specified limit.

Yes, I know you need to pay for Opera and not Phoenix/Firebird, but that's fine. No need to start a holy war, just passing on the information :)

Goblin

A browser that puts the user's interests first (4, Insightful)

Ed Avis (5917) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979638)

The Mozilla Firebird developers seem to be the first mainstream developers to finally realize that a browser doesn't have to follow every stupid thing that a 'web designer' dictates. A browser does not have to pop up moronic Javascript windows just because the site says so. It doesn't have to allow the site to obscure the status bar just because the site wants to. If the Javascript specification allows these things, well then the spec is broken and it's right for the browser to ignore it and do (by default) what the _user_ is most likely to want. Font resizing that always works is another instance of this.

(One more thing I wish they would fix, however, and that is links that open in a new window. It shouldn't be up to the web site to control opening new windows in the user's browser, it's confusing to the novice (as Nielsen points out) and annoying to many experienced users. The default browser settings, IMHO, ought to open all links in the same window and let the user choose whether to do something different by middle-clicking instead of left-clicking. I hope the Firebird people can fix this one remaining annoyance in a future release.)

Re:A browser that puts the user's interests first (4, Informative)

zdzichu (100333) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979660)

(One more thing I wish they would fix, however, and that is links that open in a new window.[...])

You can fix it by yourself [texturizer.net] :

// disable target="_blank" (open in same window):
user_pref("browser.block.target_new_wind ow", true);


Check this page [texturize.net] for more interesting tweaks.

Re:A browser that puts the user's interests first (1)

Ed Avis (5917) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979700)

Thanks for the tip! I still think it should be the default setting though; 'not-annoying by default' is the best principle. (Although perhaps most web users do not share my feeling that opening in a new window is annoying.)

But the site you mention seems to be down: texturize.net redirects to www.texturize.net and there is no such host. Or something like that.

Re:A browser that puts the user's interests first (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979764)

the site you mention seems to be down

That second link should be this [texturizer.net] .

actual link (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979751)

Check this page for results

That second link should be this [texturizer.net] .

Also... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979661)

It doesn't have to allow the site's webmaster to earn enough income from pop-ups or advertising to allow them to continue running the site...

Re:Also... (1)

Ed Avis (5917) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979690)

Quite right. It always seemed that the Netscape-branded browsers had a conflict of interest, since Netscape was trying to make money from some half-assed 'portal' at the time. If you want a decent web browser, you have to make sure that the people making it are reasonably well separated from advertisers and don't have any product of their own to sell. The same goes for most other network-connected software of course (imagine if the companies developing email clients were also the same people doing direct marketing; or look at RealPlayer).

Re:A browser that puts the user's interests first (1)

MindStalker (22827) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979717)

I'm pretty sure the specs declare most of these features as optional features not absolutly nessesary for a browser. The specs in making these optional more had PDAs and such in mind, but there is no reason a desktop can't be as simple as a PDA.

In other news... (0, Funny)

The-Bus (138060) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979624)

Pontiac releases the new Pontiac Phoenix GT.

Web panels? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979626)

Anybody know what the Web Panels thingy does? (View->Sidebar->Web Panels) I can't really get it to do _anything_ at all :)

Re:Web panels? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979646)

Web Panels was backed out from 0.6 but they must have forgot to remove that. At least the Web Panels bookmarks are gone and don't keep coming back!

Yeah... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979635)

But is it faster than Opera? ;P

Oh Great... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979637)

Now we have another gazillion years to wait for a 1.0 release.

How about XUL? (1)

axxackall (579006) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979644)

Will Mozilla browser UI be based on XUL? If not - does it mean that XUL is dead?

Re:How about XUL? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979687)

Why don't you follow the links in the article and find out?

Re:How about XUL? (1)

DarkOx (621550) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979688)

They are using XUL.

Re:How about XUL? (3, Informative)

DrXym (126579) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979689)

The Mozilla browser is based on XUL. So is Firebird.

Why do /.'ers think people should switch? (1)

Isomer (48061) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979647)

Why should I use pheonix over other (non IE) browsers? The "why" page lists a whole heap of reasons which don't really make me feel like I should be leaving mozilla, other people are saying why should they leave opera, the page feels a lot more geared towards IE users. Surely some one here uses Pheonix enough to give good comparisons between Mozilla/Opera and why we should switch.

Re:Why do /.'ers think people should switch? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979684)

The biggest difference is that Pheonix/Firebird is only the browser. No composer, no email client.

Re:Why do /.'ers think people should switch? (2, Insightful)

Azureflare (645778) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979716)

I think the only solution is for you to try it out. No one else is going to tell you "OHH this is what you really like, and Phoenix does it better for you!!!" You're the only one who knows what you like about your web browsers. Download it, give it a whirl. Personally, I download all major browsers available for linux, and then choose the one that appeals to my tastes. Remember, this is only version 0.6; it's a very young project, so there will probably be a lot of adjustments in the future.

BTW I tried opera, and I really liked it, but under linux for some reason it's incredibly slow, compared to Konqueror and Mozilla (Loading time of the application and viewing of webpages). I used version 6 for a while, then tried 7; I still find myself going back to galeon and/or konqueror. Firebird is fast, the UI is great.

Re:Why do /.'ers think people should switch? (2, Interesting)

DrXym (126579) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979757)

Firebird has less chrome / overlays than the entire Mozilla, less XPCOM components and .xpt files and a simpler UI. This makes it start up a bit quicker, and run a bit better. That means that if you're just browsing, or intend to use a third party mail application it would be better than Mozilla.


Personally I just take the hit on startup for Mozilla since I have it running all day so a few seconds startup makes no odds. I also reckon that aside from a few annoyances the mail/news component is second to none (and miles better than Outlook Express) and needless to say I use that all the time too. So in my case, it makes sense to use Mozilla.

Installer freezes Windows? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979650)

Has anyone else noticed that installing FB causes Win 9x explorer to hang/crash?

Re:Installer freezes Windows? (1)

dbglt (668805) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979664)

Home users still use Windows 9x? Get off the drugs and get a pirated copy of something better, or upgrade to a *nix system :P

Re:Installer freezes Windows? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979750)

Firbird or Camino? Make up my mind! (2, Interesting)

mercan01 (458876) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979651)

Just out of a vague and morbid sense of curiosity, I thought Camino was supposed to be the firebird of OSX? Not that I mind the choice, but it just seems odd that they'd release two browsers that seem to occupy the same niche.

Re:Firbird or Camino? Make up my mind! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979685)

They're different teams, different people... different projects with different origins.

Yes, they do use the same code base though.

Browsers seem to be the new text editor; where once, when a coder was stepping up from 'hello world' they would move to making and releasing a text editor out of some time honoured tradition (or as a substitute for anything better to do quite yet) now it seems we have browsers.

It's not all bad

Re:Firbird or Camino? Make up my mind! (1)

ZenPirate (562047) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979731)

Camino still "feels" a bit faster.Especially load time.

Different widget sets (4, Informative)

Phantasmo (586700) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979749)

Firebird is built with XUL, the Mozilla project's cross-platform widget set, while Camino is built with Cocoa, Apple's "application environment".

Camino is Mac OS X's answer to K-Meleon [sourceforge.net] for Windows and Galeon [sourceforge.net] for GNOME.

Native UI versus write once, compile anywhere.

Re:Firbird or Camino? Make up my mind! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979753)

firebird doesnt use aqua, camino does, big difference, but thats why firebird is so much faster.

Great (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979670)

now Mozilla isn't even a browser anymore but also a relational database :-)

Building from source (5, Informative)

huhmz (216967) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979675)

I just built Mozilla Firebird from source, actually i downloaded the source yesterday, but didn't want to start the build that late in the night because well... it takes a while to build ;)

The reason I wanted to build from source is that I wanted nifty anti aliased fonts which the nightly builds doesn't offer.
So...
wget http://64.12.168.21/pub/mozilla/nightly/latest/moz illa-source.tar.bz2
tar -xjf mozilla-source.tar.bz2
cvs -d :pserver:anonymous@cvs-mirror.mozilla.org:/cvsroot checkout mozilla/browser mozilla/toolkit

Now we are ready to choose build options.
cd mozilla
vi .mozconfig

here is what my .mozconfig contains

export MOZ_PHOENIX=1
mk_add_options MOZ_PHOENIX=1
ac_add_options --with-pthreads
ac_add_options --disable-mailnews
ac_add_options --disable-ldap
ac_add_options --enable-xft
ac_add_options --disable-jsd
ac_add_options --enable-crypto
ac_add_options --disable-accessibility
ac_add_options --disable-composer
ac_add_options --disable-tests
ac_add_options --disable-debug
ac_add_options --enable-optimize="-O3 -march=pentium3 -mfpmath=sse,387"
ac_add_options --enable-strip

All the --disable- options are beause I only want Firebird and not the composer, mail, news etc
the --enable-xft is the important one if you want nice anti aliased fonts.
My --enable-optimize is just some optimizations for my p4 (-march=pentium4 was buggy last time I tried). If you have an or lower than pentium3 then choose diffrent options (man gcc) or use the more standard "-O2"
The MOZ_PHOENIX=1 is what tells the build process to build Phoenix (well Firebird its called now but the option is still MOZ_PHOENIX) and not the standard mozilla browser.
To start building:
make -f client.mk build

This will take a really long time. Also the configure process might complain that you are missing some library like Xft or libIDL, in that case you will have to install it (apt-get install libidl0 libidl-dev)
After the build is complete all the necessary stuff is in dist/bin/ so I copy that to /opt/firebird:
cp -r -L dist/bin/ /opt/firebird

(the -L option because the dir contains a lot of symlinks that will break if you don't use -L)
Now you can run firebird with /opt/firebird/MozillaFirebird

I don't know if this is exactly the official way to do it but that's how I did it.
Good luck

Mozilla Firebird Help (2, Interesting)

djst (673988) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979678)

For more information about Mozilla Firebird and how to customize it, change themes and install extensions, visit Mozilla Firebird Help [texturizer.net]

Among other things, you'll find instructions on how to disable two of the new features: smooth scrolling and automatic image resizing.

Tab behavior (1, Interesting)

tmark (230091) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979683)

I've been using Mozilla and Netscape, and I couldn't stand how opening a link in a new tab also switched focus to that tab. I don't know about previous FireBird versions, but this one opens a new tab but keeps focus on the current window, which is how I think it *should* work.

Re:Tab behavior (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979699)

Konqueror and Opera have had this fuctionallity for ages, right click the link, and click "open up in background tab"

Re:Tab behavior (1)

Tyreth (523822) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979778)

Konqueror has not had tabs at all for ages. It is only a recent (3.1) addition.

Mozilla has had it as an option for quite a while, just turned off by default.

Galeon [sourceforge.net] , using the mozilla browser, has had it on by default for a long time.

On a slightly related note, I've heard they've fixed up the problem with slow tabs in Konqueror in CVS - I'm looking forward to that.

Re:Tab behavior (3, Informative)

Gandalfar (599790) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979702)

Edit -> Preferences -> Tabbed Browsing -> Load links in the background

should do the trick :)

Re:Tab behavior (1)

Ryne (78636) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979741)

What I don't like is that when you open a new tab by clicking on a link and then closes that tab, it doesn't remember which tab you viewed last. Instead it closes the tab and shows the one furthest to the right in the tablist. I think Opera remembers the order you have watched the tabs if I'm not mistaken.

Re:Tab behavior (1)

Tyreth (523822) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979766)

You and the rest of the world.

That aggravated me, but I think there was an option. Doesn't really matter though since I use Galeon fo now.

Re:Tab behavior (1)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979799)

This was an option at least in Phoenix 0.5 which is several months old by now. Are you sure you just didn't notice the option? It was set to "switch to new tab" by default I think. Not that it matters now when you've got it the way you want. :-) But I still think they might just've changed the default.

What's annoying me is that the middle-click on empty area and move the mouse up/down to scroll in the page doesn't work. :-( Sure, scroll up with the *weel* does, but that's tedious IMHO.

I know there's a Mozilla plugin for this functionality but I don't know if that's compatible with 0.6 and I also recall it being a bit buggy. Grr.. You'd think that after this time, they'd at least implemented full scroll wheel support.

Gotta Love Firebird/Phoenix (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979692)

Having just downloaded 0.6 after using 0.5 for four months, the following stands out to me:
  • Much better default theme (I still use Orbit Blue personally, but the default is now bearable unlike the ugly theme they had before)
  • Easy to copy settings from old version (save your bookmarks.html file in your settings and drop it in the same place in 0.6)
  • The about:config page is very powerful; I don't think I even need the preferential extension any more but it was very useful in 0.5
  • Go to Tools->Options->Privacy->Download Manager History - I thought they were fixing the comment here for 0.6, oh well
  • Under settings Firebird creates a Phoenix and Mozilla directory (on Windoze at least). I guess that'll change eventually as well.
I haven't personally noticed the speed difference yet, but then again I'm on a dual 1700. It will be interesting to try on my old 166 and 200 boxes. Finally, congrats to the Phoenix/Firebird/Mozilla team on 0.6. It looks to be a very worthwhile upgrade and is definitely worth a try.

Re:Gotta Love Firebird/Phoenix (1)

BigHobson (673989) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979735)

I also would like to congratulate the team involved with Phoenix/Firebird as a whole. I was using 0.5 for a while after moving over from Opera. I think that 0.5 and 0.6, the later i have just upgraded to, are far superior to the standard Mozilla. I really noticed a drop in speed when i tried Mozila while using Opera, but never noticed anything when using Phoenix. So far i have been impressed with Firebird, the about:config is nice, and i noticed a speed difference, which was for the better. Thanks again the Firebird team.

Mac OS X version is pretty zippy (4, Informative)

hrbrmstr (324215) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979693)

I haven't tried a ton of SSL connections yet, but so far it's given a 15-25% speed improvement (perhaps more) to browsing on my Mac (dual 867MHz G4).

I've tried:
  • IE (hey, it came with it!)
  • Safari (latest beta)
  • Camino (latest stable release)
  • Mozilla (the 'big daddy')
  • Opera (lags behind on this platform)


IE just rots. Safari, in its most recent incarnation, works well standards-wise, but one can really feel how different it and the Mozilla code really are (and I do like Moz better). It's also "slow". Camino is coming along well, but it too is "slow". SSL is painful on both of them (I tend to use IE on a PC to hit SSL sites).

Firebird is just plain cool. A bit rough around the Mac edges, but it's *fast*. Did I mention that it's fast?

The Camino team and these guys should team up. The combined browser would be unmatched.

Re:Mac OS X version is pretty zippy (1)

SlamMan (221834) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979712)

Not sure I follow you on tthe whole slow/SSL thing. I don't find either Camino or Safari slow at all, and haven't run accorss any problems with SSL (self signed or auth-ed) on either. I haven't gotten Firebird yet though.

MacOS X comments from release notes (1)

tbmaddux (145207) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979708)

Under "What's New" it says "Mozilla Firebird is available for Mac OS X. It's still quite rough around the edges but it's a start." Under "Known Issues" it says "Firebird on Mac OS X is new and still very rough around the edges. Expect platform inconsistencies."

Also, several annoying features (such as auto image resizing) require user.js hacks, which is a minor hassle. I already have Mozilla 1.3.1, Safari (v.74), and Camino 0.7. I switched to Camino from Mozilla, and Safari is starting to catch up. I might download Mozilla Firebird to check it out, but I doubt I'll get much use out of it right now. And each of these browsers has its own settings and bookmarks. It would be nice to have some sort of somewhat automated sync-ability of bookmarks between these different browsers for MacOS X, especially the 3 (!) Mozilla-based ones.

Two Things I Would Like to See (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979709)

1. Where are the Xft builds? Reading the Firebird forums, one notes that not everyone has Xft, therefore, Firebird is not built with Xft. One is told to build from source if one wants Xft enabled builds. Oh ok, Firebird can not do what Opera handles by default, in a smaller download no less. No prob, back to Opera I go.
2. The best feature I ever saw in any browser, was in the older Galeon builds. In the preferences, there was a checkbox, which allowed you to select a preferred download manager, such as Prozilla. When will Firebird have this?

I really, really, really would like to use Firebird. #1 above is a must.

History of Firebird (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979711)

Well Firebird originally started as a relational database and was bought by Ashton Tate which was later bought by Borland, then the product, called interbase back then was opensourced and firebird was forked,
you can find those incarnations there www.firebird.org. As it seems the relational database had another incarnation and the code now has been reworked to fit into the internet and graphical goodies age you can find the new firebird here
www.mozilla.org

Heres what the cow thinks..... (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979714)

____________________
< rm -R /opt/mozilla >
--------------------
\ ^__^
\ (oo)\_______
(__)\ )\/\
||----M |
|| ||

MooKore! At the herd of the Game!

The Win32 binary is a 6.66 MB Download (5, Funny)

Gruturo (141223) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979720)

6.66

Man. that's evil! :-)

No down arrow searches? (2, Interesting)

chefbimbo (637251) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979721)

One thing's for sure, even if I could care less for the cruft Mozilla comes with, I'm not gonna use Firebird until they support hitting down arrow to search on Google.

Re:No down arrow searches? (2, Interesting)

Tyreth (523822) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979797)

One thing I'd like to be able to do, is type anything in the address bar. If it isn't in a proper url format (no periods, for example) then it searches google with that text and the "I'm feeling lucky" option.

That way I can just type slashdot, or any of a thousand other websites I might visit commonly, and it will go there automatically. Also good for when I'm looking for something new and feel confident of my googling skills :)

This result could also be achieved by setting shortcuts, but doesn't seem as flexible and powerful.

Glendale!? (3, Funny)

tbmaddux (145207) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979723)

At the top of the release notes it says "Mozilla Firebird 0.6 (Glendale)" and at the bottom it lists earlier names of Pescadero, Santa Cruz, Lucia, Oceano, and Naples.

Glendale is making progress towards a trashy cityname, but for true consistency with Camino I suggest the code name for the final release of Bakersfield, or perhaps Fresno.

Uh.. crap (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979727)

Under "Known Issues":

- Form auto-complete is still an unstable feature and may lead to crashes.
- Disabling of form auto-completion is not working.

Sweet.

Where's the "close other tabs" ? (1)

Graspee_Leemoor (302316) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979728)

On the 0.5 series there was an option when you right-clicked a tab to "close other tabs" (leaving you with just that one).

I found it useful. I noticed it disappeared in the 0.6 nightlies and thought it would reappear in this official 0.6 release.

No such luck!

graspee

Re:Where's the "close other tabs" ? (1)

Hakubi_Washu (594267) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979742)

Opera 7 has this (Close all but active Ctrl+Alt+W). I have to admit though, that Opera sucks on small screens...

Warning! Warning! Warning! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979736)

Massive herd of cows coming to stampede slashdot! They're coming, and they will attack at 14:15 UTC Today!

There is something to be said for Mozilla (4, Insightful)

DrXym (126579) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979743)

Obviously Firebird has it's uses but when you spend all day reading mail, news and browsing there is much to be said for an integrated all in one solution. It's the little things that you miss when you run seperate apps, for example middle-clicking on a link in a mail window and having a tab open in the browser, having a single password manager and so on. Mozilla is generally so rock solid, I'd be prepared to take a hit in stability for the better performance / footprint a single app brings.


Firebird obviously is useful if you want to use some other mail application but I think it is unwise to split the apps out without good reason, especially for the large number of people who love the integration of Mozilla.


I would much prefer this - design the apps so they can run seperately if desired, but also allow them to run in the same address space using chrome overlays. That is pretty much all Moz is doing right now, but it could be done much more cleanly so that you could mix and match the bits. This is quite feasible to do and it means the best of both worlds for everyone.

Fuck the Open Trolls Movement! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979759)

___________________
/ The MooKore Stampede \
\ has begun! /
-------------------
\ ^__^
\ (oo)\_______
(__)\ )\/\
||----w |
|| ||

Cowboyneal wan'ts to eat us at McDonalds! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979773)

_________________
/ But were are going \
\ to eat him first! /
-----------------
\ ^__^
\ (oo)\_______
(__)\ )\/\
||----w |
|| ||

Warez RobbIE now? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979774)

________________
/ Hes wanted for \
\ McFraud! /
----------------
\ ^__^
\ (oo)\_______
(__)\ )\/\
||----w |
|| ||

What's up with this: (1)

C32 (612993) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979776)

From known issues on 0.6:
Form auto-complete is still an unstable feature and may lead to crashes.
Disabling of form auto-completion is not working.

So I can expect random crashes and annoying-ass autocomplete that can't be turned off? Cool. Think'll stay with IE..

"Don't Ask At Startup" Broken? (1)

SpaceRook (630389) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979780)

I was pleased to start Firebird (on WinXP) and see that the profile selection now has a "Do Not Ask On Startup" option. However, it doesn't seem to work for me. (I still get asked to choose a profile even if I selected "Do Not Ask..." last time I opened it). Anyone else having this issue?

PS: I like the new "Back" and "Forward" buttons. I'll probably still download a new skin for them, but they are much better than the defaults for Phoenix (which always had my clicking on the mini-arrows that drop down a history list).

Mod points won't slay US! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979782)

____________________
< Slashdot will DIE! >
--------------------
\ ^__^
\ (oo)\_______
(__)\ )\/\
||----w |
|| ||

Cows know how to use proxies too! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5979784)

____________________
< fuck jamie@macarthy.vg >
---------------------
\ ^__^
\ (oo)\_______
(__)\ )\/\
||----w |
|| ||

About a zillion people wrote in... (1)

286 (620933) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979793)

hum.. I think I know why...

1. What can I do to help?

We need all the exposure we can get. Tell your family. Tell your friends. Tell your coworkers. If you're a student, get it distributed at your college. Submit a story to Slashdot and other news sites about the release. Make some noise on your blog. Spread the word!

I'll switch from mozilla (0, Troll)

SCHecklerX (229973) | more than 11 years ago | (#5979796)

If it gets to 1.0, and if it does cookie-blocking properly (deny all by default, allow as needed).
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>