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's Year In Review For 2003

simoniker posted more than 10 years ago | from the stomp-stomp-stomp dept.

Mozilla 192

An anonymous reader writes "Like last year, MozillaZine has published a review of Mozilla's world in 2003. Obviously, the year was dominated by AOL's decision to murder Netscape (though various acts of 'brand necrophilia' will ensure that the Netscape name lives on in one form or another). This, combined with Mozilla Firebird's and Mozilla Thunderbird's steady progress towards replacing the Mozilla suite, made 2003 very much a transitional year for the open source project. Other memories to tell your grandchildren include mozilla.org's fifth birthday, the new roadmap, the Firebird name debate and a new chapter being added to The Book of Mozilla."

cancel ×

192 comments

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

MAD TROLL (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7852096)

mad troll come here mad troll, ooooohhh yeah mad troll come here mad troll
mad troll come here mad troll, ooooohhh yeah mad troll come here mad troll
mad troll come here mad troll, ooooohhh yeah mad troll come here mad troll
---crazy---MMM-crazy-MMM- crazy fool -AAAAAAA-sexual-DDDDDDDDDD- you crazy
surprisie-MMMMM-sex-MMMMM-cum my cunt AAAAAAA-do it -DDDDDDDDDDD-play this
exciting-MMMMMMM-i-MMMMMM-COHF.com- -AAAA-AAAA-kobe -DDDDD--DDDDD-exciting
i wank!-MMMMMMMMM-MMMMMMMM-i like it AAAA-AAAA-do u?-DDDD-as-DDDDD-liek it
-troll.-MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM-madtroll AAAAA-AAAAA-fuck-DDDD-you-DDDDD-you bi
-fucks-MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM-excited AAAAA-AAAAA-rape-DDDD-men-DDDDD-excite
-sucks-MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM-wanker AAAAA---AAAAA-yoo-DDDD-were-DDDD-fuckin
-mary-MMMMMMMM-MMMM-MMMMMMMM-seeks AAAAA---AAAAA-ded-DDDD-suck-DDDD-fookin
-jane-MMMMMMMM--MM--MMMMMMMM-girl AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA-as-DDDD-you-DDDDD-fackin
-fuck-MMMMMM-wankers-MMMMMMM-you AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA-a-DDDD-you-DDDDD-wankin
-you-MMMMMMM-bitches-MMMMMMMM-ar AAAAA-------AAAAA-i-DDDD-as-DDDDD-fucking
-on-MMMMMMMM-tossers-MMMMMMMMM-i AAAAA-------AAAAA-s-DDDD-in-DDDD-COHF.com
-ur-MMMMMMMMM-sucks-MMMMMMMMMM-a AAAAA---- --AAAAA-a-DDDDD--DDDD-wankerist
-is-MMMMMMMMM-fucks-MMMMMMMMMM-b AAAAAA-----AAAAAA-b-DDDDDDDDDD-masturbate
-it-MMMMMMMMMM-you-MMMMMMMMMMM- AAAAAAA-----AAAAAAA--DDDDDDDDD-cum on face
mad troll come here mad troll, ooooohhh yeah mad troll come here mad troll
mad troll come here mad troll, ooooohhh yeah mad troll come here mad troll
mad troll come here mad troll, ooooohhh yeah mad troll come here mad troll

Re:MAD TROLL (-1)

The_Fire_Horse (552422) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852128)

I for one, welcome our new MAD troll overloads!

DUMB FOREIGNER QUESTION (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7852187)

Can some American here please explain to me what 7-11 is? Well, I know 9/11, but 7? WTF?

Re:DUMB FOREIGNER QUESTION (1)

ravy (661243) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852223)

Uhm. It's a convenience store [everything2.com] .

Re:DUMB FOREIGNER QUESTION (1)

zhenlin (722930) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852249)

7-11 is in fact, a cryptic reference to Chapter 7 (Liquidation) and Chapter 11 (Reorganisation) -- two of the more popular bankruptcy protection paths.

Re:DUMB FOREIGNER QUESTION (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7852261)

Surprisingly missing from the everything2 reference was the fact 7-eleven is a Japanese owned company "IYG Holding Company, a wholly owned subsidiary of Ito-Yokado Co., Ltd. and Seven-Eleven Japan Co., Ltd., has owned a majority interest in 7-Eleven since 1991" from here [7-eleven.com]

But everything2 sucks for facts, purely rumour and urban gossip.

Re:DUMB FOREIGNER QUESTION (1)

ravy (661243) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852290)

... And hardcore porn.

NATALIE PORTMAN'S SHAVED PUSSY FOR PRESIDENT 2004 (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7852309)

WE THE CITIZENS OF KENOSHA, WISCONSIN HEREBY VOTE FOR NATALIE PORTMAN'S SHAVED PUSSY TO BE PRESIDENT IN 2004. IF YOU SUPPORT OUR CAUSE, PLEASE ALSO VOTE FOR THE PUSSY. OR IF NOT, AT LEAST DON'T VOTE FOR LEONARD DICAPRIO'S SCROTUM.

If you want to vote, please use the following voting form and post your vote as a response, so we can go to Diebold and change the votes to your choosing:

VOTING FOR PRESIDENT OF 2004

[ ] Natalie Portman's Shaved Pussy
[ ] Leonardo Dicaprio's Scrotum
[ ] George's Bush
[ ] Ralph Anal Invader
[ ] Florida

happy new years (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7852098)

n/t

Re:happy new years (-1, Flamebait)

Patrik_AKA_RedX (624423) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852217)

happy new years (Score:0)

by Anonymous Coward on 01-01-04 13:28 (#7852098)
It took you 13h and 28 minutes to type that?
Guess AC had a good party.

Re:happy new years (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7852293)

you fucking twat

Re:happy new years (1)

bhtooefr (649901) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852430)

It says 7:28 for me, and the story was posted at 7:27. I didn't browse at -1 yet, but it looks like a first post.

Re:happy new years (1)

bhtooefr (649901) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852444)

OK, I'll eat my words. It was second post, but I still think your math is wrong (and your timezone, and I think you're a troll). It's 9:43 now, you've got 13:28 on the SP? WTF?

Re:happy new years (1)

Patrik_AKA_RedX (624423) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852504)

I'm at GMT +1. I can hardly be blamed for time zones, can I?
I thought it was funny to write happy new year that late. I finished sending my best wishes sometime around 1h30 last night (local time). (Sending an SMS at newyears eve is almost impossible here)

Pokemon (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7852099)

Pika ka pika pika pikaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
Pika!

Postus firstus (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7852100)

In soviet russia, 2004 welcomes you!

Re:Postus firstus (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7852224)

Yakov, is that you?

Join the Simoniker Fan Club! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7852102)

SFC (SIMONIKER FAN CLUB) is the first organization which
gathers SIMONIKER FANS from all over America and abroad for one common goal - being SIMONIKER FANS.

Are you INTELLIGENT?
Are you a SLASHDOT READER?
Are you an INTELLIGENT SLASHDOT READER?

If you answered "Yes" to any of the above questions, then the SFC (SIMIONIKER FAN CLUB) might be exactly what you've been looking for!
Join SFC (SIMONIKER FAN CLUB ) today, and enjoy all the benefits of being a full-time SFC member.
SFC (SIMONIKER FAN CLUB ) is the fastest-growing SIMONIKER FAN community with THOUSANDS of members all over United States of America. You, too, can be a part of SFC if you join today!

Why not? It's quick and easy - only 2 simple steps!

First, you have to obtain a copy of Simonikers list of stories [slashdot.org] and read them.

Second, you need to join the official SFC irc channel #SFC on EFNet, and apply for membership.
Talk to one of the ops or any of the other members in the channel to sign up today!

If you are having trouble locating #SFC, the official SIMONIKER FAN CLUB irc channel, you might be on a wrong irc network. The correct network is EFNet, and you can connect to irc.secsup.org or irc.isprime.com as one of the EFNet servers.

If you have mod points and would like to support SFC, please moderate this post up.

This post brought to you by a proud member of SFC

Re:Join the Simoniker Fan Club! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7852115)

help
it's +i

I wonder (0)

Sarojin (446404) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852110)

when Mozilla will be able to run as fast as Internet Explorer?

Re:I wonder (2, Interesting)

ErrorBase (692520) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852126)

I set it up to block the advertizing (adblock and flachkill) and it runs blasingly fast, also i need less time to klick away windows noone want.

Re:I wonder (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7852294)

Enable quickstart to have Mozilla in memory at all times and ready to go. This is what IE does, so there's not much point comparing until you level the playing field.

Startup's instantaneous with quickstart. Even moreso than IE, which appears on-screen quickly but actually takes a moment to finish displaying and let you use your bookmarks/URL bar.

If you want REALLY fast, use Firebird and put this in the URI bar:

about:config

Look/filter for "turbo" and set it to true. The developers didn't include this feature in the options UI, but I find it doesn't take much memory at all and makes Firebird very snappy.

Like... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7852116)

Like totally...

Blah Blah Blah (-1, Troll)

GerbilSocks (713781) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852118)

Mozilla is as dead as dinosaurs. Get over it.

GNAA / Google confirms: Linux is dying. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7852123)

GNAA / Google confirms: Linux is dying.
By GNAA Staff

Here you have it: it's official; Google confirms: Desktop Linux is dying.

Now, you might be thinking this is just another cut & paste troll based on the typical *BSD is dying bullshit.
It isn't.
As you might have know, your favorite search engine, Google [google.com] , has been running a little statistics service, called "Zeitgeist [google.com] ".
Since about a year ago, they started providing statistics of the operating systems used to access their search engine worldwide.
I will let the numbers speak for themselves:

Operating Systems Accessing Google in January 2002 [google.com]
Operating Systems Accessing Google in March 2002 [google.com]
Operating Systems Accessing Google in April 2002 [google.com]
Operating Systems Accessing Google in May 2002 [google.com]
Operating Systems Accessing Google in June 2002 [google.com]
Operating Systems Accessing Google in July 2002 [google.com]
Operating Systems Accessing Google in August 2002 [google.com]
Operating Systems Accessing Google in September 2002 [google.com]
Operating Systems Accessing Google in November 2002 [google.com]
Operating Systems Accessing Google in December 2002 [google.com]
Operating Systems Accessing Google in January 2003 [google.com]
Operating Systems Accessing Google in February 2003 [google.com]
Operating Systems Accessing Google in April 2003 [google.com]
Operating Systems Accessing Google in May 2003 [google.com]
Operating Systems Accessing Google in June 2003 [google.com]
Operating Systems Accessing Google in July 2003 [google.com]
Operating Systems Accessing Google in August 2003 [google.com]
Operating Systems Accessing Google in September 2003 [google.com]
Operating Systems Accessing Google in November 2003 [google.com]

If you've looked at even a few of these links, you don't need to be a Kreskin [amdest.com] to predict Desktop Linux's future. The hand writing is on the wall: Desktop Linux faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for Linux on Desktop because Linux is dying. Things are looking very bad for Linux on Desktop. As many of us are already aware, Linux on Desktop continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

According to Google Zeitgeist [google.com] , there are about 80% of Internet Explorer 6 [microsoft.com] users. The only platform supporting Internet Explorer 6 is, of course, Microsoft Windows. These statistics are consistent with the earlier presented graphs of the operating systems used to access Google, with the Windows family consistently taking the top 3 ranks. Out of remaining 20%, the split is even between MSIE 5.5, MSIE 5.0, both Windows-only browsers. Netscape 5.x (including Mozilla) counts for only a measly 5% of browsers used to access Google. As you can see from the graph, this sample was calculated starting from March 2001 until September 2003.

Linux "leaders" will have you believe that Linux is gaining market share. However, according to Google [google.com] , "Linux" was never a top 10 search word at *any time* since Google began tracking search statistics. This can only mean one thing: Linux is dying.

All major surveys show that Linux on Desktop is something never meant to happen. Repeatedly, reputable organizations review Desktop Linux offerings, and consistently [osnews.com] give [com.com] it [com.com] unacceptable [yahoo.com] scores, compared to even Apple [apple.com] 's MacOS X [apple.com] , which is actually based on the "claimed to by dying long time ago" *BSD. If you paid attention to the operating systems used to access Google graphs earlier, you will notice that MacOS has consistently scored higher percentages than Linux. Infact, the obscure "other" category, which we assume is embedded systems, PDA's, cellular phones, etc, has at times ranked Higher [google.com] than even Mac OS - and of course, Linux.

In almost 2 years worth of statistics, Linux [linux.com] has NEVER outranked even such a truly "dying" OS as Mac OS, and infact, never raised above the 1% mark. When Windows XP [microsoft.com] was released, Google searches for Linux drastically decreased [google.com] . This clearly demonstrates that Linux on Desktop is, for all practical purposes, dead.

Fact: Desktop Linux is dead.

This commentary brought to you by a proud GNAA member.

If you have mod points and would like to support GNAA, please moderate this post up.
By moderating this post as "Underrated", you cannot be Meta-Moderated! Please consider this.

________________________________________________
| ______________________________________._a,____ |
| _______a_._______a_______aj#0s_____aWY!400.___ |
| __ad#7!!*P____a.d#0a____#!-_#0i___.#!__W#0#___ |
| _j#'_.00#,___4#dP_"#,__j#,__0#Wi___*00P!_"#L,_ |
| _"#ga#9!01___"#01__40,_"4Lj#!_4#g_________"01_ |
| ________"#,___*@`__-N#____`___-!^_____________ |
| _________#1__________?________________________ |
| _________j1___________________________________ |
| ____a,___jk_GAY_NIGGER_ASSOCIATION_OF_AMERICA_ |
| ____!4yaa#l___________________________________ |
| ______-"!^____________________________________ |
` _______________________________________________'

Having just tried Firebird... (4, Interesting)

bc90021 (43730) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852124)

...I must say that I am looking forward to 2004! As time goes on, their products get better and better, and if being able to convince my cow orkers to use Mozilla is any indication, MS could learn a thing or two about what to put in a free browser. ;)

Re:Having just tried Firebird... (4, Funny)

blurfus (606535) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852170)

...and if being able to convince my cow orkers to use Mozilla is any indication...

It must be hard for all Cow orkers of the world to not have a choice of cow orking tool... ;)

Happy New Year!

P.S. Firebird Rocks...!

Re:Having just tried Firebird... (1)

Jonah Hex (651948) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852281)

Cow Orkers? What is this some kind of Return of the King spoiler? ;)

Jonah Hex

Re:Having just tried Firebird... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7852697)

No, 'orking' is a euphemism in bestiality circles for having cross-species sex.

Therefore a cow orker is someone who enjoys fornication with cattle.

Re:Having just tried Firebird... (2, Informative)

sparklingfruit (736978) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852209)

I agree entirely. Opera used to be the only browser I could cope with and I wanted something open source. I was not impressed with mozilla (after spending 2 hours compiling it), but firebird really sets the bar for browsers now and has done everything right that mozilla has done wrong.

I'm not saying that Mozilla is a bad browser, I suppose it's a matter of taste.

Re:Having just tried Firebird... (1)

oateater (593228) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852244)

I've tried Firebird, and love it! Its the way to go.

Re:Having just tried Firebird... (2, Interesting)

bhtooefr (649901) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852466)

Myself, I still prefer Opera. I guess I've gotten used to it's quirks... BTW, my favorite browsers:
1. Opera 7.2x
2. Firebird 0.6/7
3. MSIE 6.0
4. Mozilla 1.5/6a

Firebird is very promising, and it'll make a good drop-in replacement for IE. I use Thunderbird as my mail client (hint to Opera: innovation's good, but not when it's a synonym for shitting - eliminate M2) - it's got great spam filtering (it gets the occasional false positive, but it's learning - bayesian filters will take over the world).

Re:Having just tried Firebird... (1)

geekster (87252) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852531)

Yeah, while if time goes backwards they get worse and worse. So I'm happy for living in this time direction... uhm, yeah.

Happy new year!

Re:Having just tried Firebird... (1)

Lispy (136512) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852757)

This year was a big year for Mozilla. For years it was behind internet Explorer. But this year, with Firebird and Epiphany (wich is the one browser I was searching for!) they actually outperformed IE by far. All the great stuff happends now somewhere else and with MS killing free IE Updates and IE on the Mac I am very confident that soon Mozilla and alikes will be on every platform. I'm still sad that Apple didn't go for a geckobased solution. But, heck, Safari still rocks.

cu,
Lispy

Although... (5, Interesting)

ChocolateCheeseCake (728330) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852130)

The person simoniker class the whole episode as "Netscape murdered by AOL", the fact remains that the sooner Mozilla moves away from AOL and towards being a non-profit organisation that is user centric rather than buzz word centric the better. The unfortunate thing is that there is now a lack of developers but hopefully with the new political structure, more developers can be encouraged to help out with the same vigor and determination ones sees in other projects, for example, FreeBSD or the Linux kernel. Firebird is a nice browser and hopefully they will start using native widgets rather than the ugly GTK like widgets being used now. With that being said, one could quesiton whether Mozilla has a relevance outside developing a rendering engine. GNOME has standardised on Epiphany for the browser and Evolution for the eMail/Contact manager, so where does the Mozilla foundation fit in. In some ways, this will be good. If they can instead concerntrate on the guts and gore and let the various projects like kmeleon, Epiphany and Camino concerntrate on the native front end, hopefully development will pick up and some of those really old render bugs in Mozilla's bugzilla are fixed.

Re:Although... (4, Informative)

Zontar The Mindless (9002) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852204)

> hopefully they will start using native widgets rather than the ugly GTK like widgets being used now.

Then you lose cross-platform consistency and the ability to use themes with custom widgets. I like being able to use the same standards-compliant browser that looks and behaves the same on Windows, Mac OS X, and Linux.

Check out themes.mozdev.org, or -- if you know HTML, CSS, and JavaScript, then you can learn XUL and build your own.

I like the browser/email combo, use Moz 1.5, and hope they'll continue to develop it. I'm not terribly interested in replacing one app with 4 (browser, email, HTML editor, IRC).

I don't think you will have to (2, Insightful)

Ender Ryan (79406) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852415)

I think there is plans to still ship a whole suite of apps in one package, except now they'll really be separate apps. The distinction shouldn't get in the way of using it like you always have.

Really, it will be much better.

Re:Although... (1)

Negative Response (650136) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852283)

GNOME has standardised on Epiphany for the browser and Evolution

I really don't think these two are enough to replace Mozilla yet. Epiphany, as it stands, is just like any other UI designed by Gnome team: simple interface, no functionality. For one thing, you don't have an option to set http proxy, which to me is totally unacceptable. It just sucks.

Evolution on the other hand is a fine, powerful email client (since it's done by Ximian, not Havac Pennington et al), but I wouldn't be using it had I had fewer than 4 IMAP email accounts: it's quite complex. For people with only one email box, Mozilla Mail or Thunderbird would have been a much better choice, IMO.

Re:Although... (3, Insightful)

macshit (157376) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852365)

With that being said, one could quesiton whether Mozilla has a relevance outside developing a rendering engine. GNOME has standardised on Epiphany for the browser and Evolution for the eMail/Contact manager, so where does the Mozilla foundation.

Keep in mind that `Gnome has standardized on' is not equivalent to `users will use.' I've used epiphany recently, and well, basically it sucks compared to firebird.

I'm sure Gnome wants to have a `native' browser, just so there's something in the standard install, but really, epiphany has an incredibly long way to go before it's anywhere near as usable as firebird (and given the current religion at the Gnome project, they may never let it get there).

Re:Although... (1)

Haeleth (414428) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852448)

Firebird is a nice browser and hopefully they will start using native widgets rather than the ugly GTK like widgets being used now.

You know, until you said that I had not for a moment considered the possiblity that Firebird might not be using native widgets. It looks pretty damn native to me. Of course, I'm running Windows - I can see that things might look a bit different for a Linux user. ;)

Mozilla and /. (slightly OT) (3, Interesting)

GeckoFood (585211) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852133)

As much as I like Mozilla, Mozilla does a miserable job rendering ./'s site. It worked great for a very long time, doing a better job than MSIE, but now what I get is digital peanut butter when I come to ./ with Mozilla. Sometimes, it just skips the articles and leaves a bunch of little buttons all over everywhere. Other times, everything gets rendered to the same line. Anyone else have the same problem?

I have not tried the new Firebird on /. yet, maybe that'll fix whatever's broke?

Re:Mozilla and /. (slightly OT) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7852146)

I have this problem with Mozilla (V 1.5) as well. Slashdot's site renders poorly a large percent of the time. Refreshing the browser often fixes it but regardless the problem does exist.

I also have found that when I download various media files, such as mpg's, the file achieved from the download is not readable/usable by my media player. Have you seen this problem?

Re:Mozilla and /. (slightly OT) (2, Interesting)

GeckoFood (585211) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852188)

I have this problem with Mozilla (V 1.5) as well.

I have 1.4 (have not bothered to update yet), and you have described the exact problem I am seeing. Weird part is, it was fine up until recently, and now it just doesn't quite fly. Maybe ./ changed something...

I also have found that when I download various media files, such as mpg's, the file achieved from the download is not readable/usable by my media player. Have you seen this problem?

No, I haven't had this problem. Downloads aren't a problem. I usually use a third-party download manager instead of the one built in, but Mozilla's d/l manager has never posed a problem.

Re:Mozilla and /. (slightly OT) (1)

Lispy (136512) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852777)

Everything is fine when I use Mozilla on Linux. But with the Windowsport I get the same problem with downloading files. The rendering bug seem to be /.only. I have it on very occasions with Epiphany, so that's no big deal for me. But still, it seems to exist.

Re:Mozilla and /. (slightly OT) (5, Informative)

blurfus (606535) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852193)

I am using Firebird and see no probs with /.
Just for the record, Firebird is the browser I use 99% of the time and there is not many sites that it cannot handle.

Generally, if a site 'requires' IE, switching the agent in Firebird (via the Agent Switcher plug-in) does the job (tricking the site into believing you are using IE and serving the content). Firebird then renders the page correctly.

When this does not work, then I use IE (which is the remaining 1% percent of the time that I don't use Firebird), very rare though...

Re:Mozilla and /. (slightly OT) (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7852202)

I never had a look at the ./ site. I'm on /. often, though ...

Re:Mozilla and /. (slightly OT) (2, Insightful)

Yorrike (322502) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852212)

There are many rendering problems with /. on my build of Firebird (0.7, Xfree 4.3), but I believe this has more to do with the fact that /.'s html is a hack on a hack on a hack.

When they decide to bite the bullet and switch away from a table based layout to a CSS based one, rendering problems will disappear for everyone who's bothered updating their browser in the last 2 years.

Re:Mozilla and /. (slightly OT) (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7852218)

You might be interested to see Alistapart's redesign of slashdot [alistapart.com] , which retains the old look-and-feel but is entirely CSS-based.

It's been some while since I stumbled across that, and it would be very nice were the Slashdot coders to adopt it.

Re:Mozilla and /. (slightly OT) (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7852241)

W3 validator [w3.org]

'nuff said.
(you may need to try a few times if the validator keeps reporting a 403)

Re:Mozilla and /. (slightly OT) (-1, Flamebait)

t0ny (590331) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852273)

In what way could your problem possibly be better than IE? Im using IE, and it renders all the pages just fine.

Maybe that explains why nobody around here read the articles- they arent using IE.

Re:Mozilla and /. (slightly OT) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7852298)

In what way could your problem possibly be better than IE?

If I've correctly interpreted this as meaning something like "In what way can it be better to endure this problem than to use IE?" then (obviously I would have thought):

1. Most people have browsing habits that extend beyond Slashdot and are unlikely to choose their principal browser based on how Slashdot renders.

2. IE may not be available for the OS he's using.

Re:Mozilla and /. (slightly OT) (3, Funny)

spektr (466069) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852321)

Im using IE, and it renders all the pages just fine.

Not my experience as creator of standards compliant websites.

You nasty little troll.

Re:Mozilla and /. (slightly OT) (1)

berkut1337 (628381) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852295)

>I have not tried the new Firebird on /. yet, maybe that'll fix whatever's broke? No, both Mozilla and Firebird use the same Gecko rendering engine, it'll display exactly the same (provided the build date is the same), just diffrent UI.

Re:Mozilla and /. (slightly OT) (1)

oddfox (685475) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852441)

Ah, sorry to hear you're having those problems. I've never had a problem using /. in any browser I've used. Opera, Mozilla, IE, Konqueror, Lynx, Links, Elinks, Firebird, Galeon, Epiphany... Well, actually, the little Dillo browser doesn't like to render /., but that's alright, because I only use it on incredibly rare occasions.

Re:Mozilla and /. (slightly OT) (1)

libre lover (516057) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852452)

/. used to render just fine for me in Mozilla. Then, about a month or two ago, the browser quit rendering the icons at /. - whereever there's a graphic I get the broken icon symbol instead of the icon itself. Right clicking and selecting "View Image" gets a page that says:
400 Bad Request

Your client has issued a malformed or illegal request.
Thing is, I went back and tried earlier Mozilla builds that used to render /. just fine but they also have the same image rendering problem, so something has changed with /., not Mozilla. It appears that for some reason images.slashdot.org doesn't want to send images to Mozilla browsers. On the other hand, Firebird renders /. just fine for me.

Re:Mozilla and /. (slightly OT) (1)

jonadab (583620) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852587)

> Anyone else have the same problem?

Nope, I'm using 1.5 and /. is fine. Try creating a new profile in Mozilla,
and see if that makes a difference. If that fails to matter, try doing an
uninstall/reinstall of Mozilla.

My thoughts on Firebird (5, Interesting)

Mmm coffee (679570) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852145)

Switched completely to Linux a few months ago and Opera was the only killer app that I *HAD* to have through the switch. Mouse gestures, speed, well laid out keyboard shortcuts, etc. I'd go on but I'd be preaching to the choir.

After reading a lot of Stallman's writings I decided to let go of even Opera and totally switch to Free software. I was very apprehensive because Opera was the second coming of Jesus as far as I was concerned.

Went to Mozilla.org, Decided against getting the full fledged mozilla because I remembered it being bloated as all hell, got Firebird instead. Downloaded a ton of plugins, fixed everything to where it felt right.

I'm a total convert. Firebird will kick oh so much ass by the time it hits 1.0. It's design is as simple as IE, which is the #1 reason people cite IE as their favorite browser. It's small, almost as fast as Opera, all the features that I loved in Opera are available through plugins, and all the features I didn't use aren't in Firebird because I didn't install them. I have since fallen in love with tabbed browsing. Used to think that browsing three or four sites at once was kinda stupid, but once I got used to tabs in Firebird I began to see myself doing the exact same thing. ;)

The Mozilla project has come a VERY long ways since it first came to be. If you've tried Mozilla out earlier and were disappointed, get it now. Get Firebird. Get Thunderbird. Install plugins to your hearts content. You will be very well surprised.

And hey, you'll be using Free software so that's a huge plus, in my eyes.

Re:My thoughts on Firebird (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7852160)

"And hey, you'll be using Free software so that's a huge plus, in my eyes."


Free software is the biggest mistake in the history of computing. It will kill the industry, at least for a while...

Re:My thoughts on Firebird (5, Interesting)

thinkninja (606538) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852234)

I've been using Firebird since 0.4 and I love it. However, no matter what I do or say I simply cannot get others to give it a try.

They're quite prepared to install junk like bonzai buddy and various dancing things on their desktop but categorically refuse to try another browser. "I use Internet Explorer", they say and look at me like I just suggested they make love to the electric pencil sharpener.

I've long since given up trying.

Re:My thoughts on Firebird (1)

Zontar The Mindless (9002) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852257)

> They're quite prepared to install junk like bonzai buddy and various dancing things on their desktop but categorically refuse to try another browser. "I use Internet Explorer", they say and look at me like I just suggested they make love to the electric pencil sharpener.

Oooh, I feel your pain. Although I think I've just about persuaded my mom to switch to Mozilla Mail -- she likes what I've told her about Baynesian filtering of spam and the fact that little greebies can't install themselves on her system just by viewing the email they're embedded in.

Re:My thoughts on Firebird (1)

thinkninja (606538) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852687)

Congratulations :)

Maybe Thunderbird is an easier sell and could act as a gateway application...

Re:My thoughts on Firebird (2)

rmohr02 (208447) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852613)

I've been mildly successful using the Reasons to switch to the Mozilla Firebird browser [mozilla.org] document. I tell people if they read that through and still think IE is the best, I won't bother them about it again. Of course, I'll probably bother them at the FB 1.0 release anyway.

Re:My thoughts on Firebird (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7852271)

I've downloaded and tried every major release of Mozilla, hoping against hope that they've finally fixed a certain niggling little thing that's niggled for years, and guess what? They never do, and I'm beginning to wonder if they ever will.

What am I talking about? I'm talking about the total inability to have the bookmarks in the pulldown menu appear in sorted order! IE can do it! Opera can do it! Is it too much to ask for that Mozilla do it?

Re:My thoughts on Firebird (1)

Mmm coffee (679570) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852311)

Here ya go. [mozdev.org] Should work until they add that to Moz, I notice it's on their "to do" list. :)

Re:My thoughts on Firebird (2, Informative)

Bio (18940) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852296)

Tabbed browsing *rocks*. I have about 10 tabs open in Mozilla all the time. The sites I'm reading regularily, plus some articles, man pages etc. I'm currently reading.

I couldn't imagine having distinct windows open for all of these. I cannot understand why people stick to MSIE. It's almost impossible to persuade my co-workers to switch to another browser.

Mozilla usally runs for *weeks* on my home workstation (Linux) without restarts. It's not slow at all. At work (Win XP) Mozilla gets really slow after a day of usage. It's better to restart it from time to time, and to reboot the XP every couple of days.

Re:My thoughts on Firebird (2, Insightful)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852350)

Why people stick with MSIE [for home use] is mostly why many peole use MS MSN for chatting instead of Gaim or trillian or amsn or ...

It came with the OS install, does what they want and they don't see any added benefit of another install. Sure Gaim is cooler than MSN but if all you do is chat on the MSN protocol why bother?

Similarly, sure tabs are cool but if you never use them who cares? Personally I do a fair bit of research and I find no use for tabs. I can only read one screen at a time so I don't care for tabs.

MSIE + google bar is a decent experience. I get no annoying popups and a browser which for all its faults works reliably.

Tom

Re:My thoughts on Firebird (3, Interesting)

Ender Ryan (79406) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852428)

Similarly, sure tabs are cool but if you never use them who cares? Personally I do a fair bit of research and I find no use for tabs. I can only read one screen at a time so I don't care for tabs.

What, don't you have ADHD like the rest of us? *grin*

Seriously, I find it to be too much of a PITA to browse without tabs anymore, but to each his own.

How about security, though? You know, there are still huge gaping holes in IE that will allow "untrusted" software to install itself without user interaction. Heh, I witnessed it the other day, as I didn't believe it and had to see for myself.

Watch your step... err... mouse. p /.

Re:My thoughts on Firebird (2, Insightful)

Haeleth (414428) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852429)

Personally I do a fair bit of research and I find no use for tabs. I can only read one screen at a time so I don't care for tabs.

Well, that's your choice and (IMO) your loss; at least you know the alternatives exist, and you obviously considered what would be best for you before deciding to stick with IE.

I can only read one page at a time, too, but with tabs I can have the next X pages I want to read loading in the background while I read the current one. I think I've probably saved more time that way than I spent installing Firebird.

Now, if only I was doing research, instead of browsing Slashdot articles and webcomics... ;)

Re:My thoughts on Firebird (1)

axxackall (579006) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852574)

Similarly, sure tabs are cool but if you never use them who cares? Personally I do a fair bit of research and I find no use for tabs. I can only read one screen at a time so I don't care for tabs.

Certainly you did your research among IE users - it's hard to use tabs when you don't have them.

I noticed that 99% of those Windows and MacOS users who tried Mozilla at least once - they decided to stick to it because of tabs.

Of course people read one screen at time. But based your logic OS must not let more than one GUI application running anyway - because we read one screen at time. Somehow this logic reminds me MSDOS. Any chance you work for Microsoft.

The rest of us, while reading one screen at time, use more than one "screen" (actually window) at time. Ever heard about a clipboard?

Re:My thoughts on Firebird (2, Insightful)

jonadab (583620) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852616)

> Personally I do a fair bit of research and I find no use for tabs. I can
> only read one screen at a time so I don't care for tabs.

You must have broadband. For dialup, tabs are vitally essential, because it is
critically necessary to be able to queue a number of pages, do something else
(e.g., read an already-loaded page) while they load, and then get to them when
they have finished downloading. You can *theoretically* do this with new
windows, but who wants 30+ browser windows open, when you only ever intend to
look at one of the pages at a time? Plus, most window managers (including, I
might note, the one in Windows) don't handle switching between windows in a
fashion that preserves the order of the windows, which makes it a real pain
to queue pages and read them in order (which you want to do, because the page
you queued first is most likely to be finished loading). The tabs are a real
life saver for this sort of thing.

Tabbed browsing also makes web-based discussion fora like slashdot and
perlmonks viable. Before the advent of tabbed browsing, I found these things
totally unusable (over dialup, at any rate) and stuck to usenet. Tabbed
browsing has made it possible for me to mostly migrate from usenet over to
web-based discussion fora.

Re:My thoughts on Firebird (1)

rmohr02 (208447) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852655)

There's much more than tabbed browsing in Firebird. I suggest reading the why document [mozilla.org] before passing judgement.

Tabbed browsing is nice, but the real reasons I use FB are Find as You Type [mozilla.org] , Custom Keywords [mozilla.org] , and the Web Developer Toolbar [myacen.com] .

Re:My thoughts on Firebird (1)

scrytch (9198) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852539)

> Tabbed browsing *rocks*.

So why doesn't Firebird support it intelligently out of the box. Out of Opera, Firebird, and two tabbed IE-based browsers, Firebird is still the only one that opens all new windows from popups (some popups are okay, people) in, well, a new *window* and not a tab. Ctrl-N opens a new *window*, not a tab. How about a little sensible out of the box behavior there? Not all of us are running XP with stacked taskbar buttons (and even then XP doesn't do much there).

And how about not scrolling the window when the selection extends past the visible screen but the pointer wasn't? Selecting a few rows from a table or otherwise nested element should not cause my browser to "wig out".

Would also love to see XPCOM's DNS component handle record types other than A records, otherwise I'm still having to write CGI's in perl with weird redirect and server push hacks to trickle in DNS information (don't ask, it's complicated) for what would otherwise be a straightforward client-side javascript application. Heck, I'll settle for updated documentation on IDNSService and related components. Otherwise it's java all the way, and I really don't want to go there.

Re:My thoughts on Firebird (2, Informative)

Zontar The Mindless (9002) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852593)

Get the TabBrowser extensions [sakura.ne.jp] . Everything you could ever think of that you'd want tabs to do, these do it. And then some.

I also highly recommend the PrefBar [xulplanet.com] add-on.

Re:My thoughts on Firebird (2, Informative)

herulach (534541) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852836)

Why should Ctrl-N open a new tab? That would be really poor design, mainly because every single application ive ever used a keyboard shortcut to open a new window in has it mapped to Ctrl-N. Just because it has tabs doesnt mean you have to use them for everything. I often have a couple of windows open with multiple tabs in each one.

Ctrl-T opens a new tab by the way. Ctrl-click opens a link in a new background tab, Ctrl-Shift-click opens it in a foreground tab.

Re:My thoughts on Firebird (1)

Haeleth (414428) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852404)

Opera was the only killer app that I *HAD* to have through the switch. ... well laid out keyboard shortcuts,

Interestingly enough, the keyboard layout is the one major problem I see in Firebird and Thunderbird - not so much that the layout they provide is bad, as that there isn't an option to make it match Microsoft's layout, or to customise it to suit your own preferences. Back when I first switched I got very frustrated with Thunderbird's decision not to use the same shortcuts as Outlook and Eudora in particular. Now I'm used to it I can see that it's not really a big deal, but it probably will annoy enough people to hurt the package's adoption on Windows.

However, I think I saw something in the TODO list about adding that feature... I'd be amazed if it isn't implemented soon. And of course if it bothered me enough I could just scratch the itch myself - one of the real advantages of free software.

Re:My thoughts on Firebird (1)

bhtooefr (649901) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852502)

I've TRIED Firebird, and the tabbing just doesn't work right. Links that spawn a new window won't spawn a new tab instead (aargh!) BTW, I quickly adapted to tabbing, as I often ran several IE windows at a time before I switched to Opera. It was a simple matter of looking up at the top, instead of down at the taskbar. BTW, does Firebird save the state of the browser when it is closed out?

Re:My thoughts on Firebird (1)

bhtooefr (649901) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852508)

BTW, I DO use Thunderbird - Opera's mail client is a bit... demented. Also, Thunderbird has Bayesian filtering (woohoo!)

Re:My thoughts on Firebird (1)

RickHunter (103108) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852639)

Plugins are indeed very nice... There's lots of good ones available, and the ability to install them to your profile or system-wide is very useful. The one problem is that its virtually impossible to uninstall an extension - not just disable it, remove it from the system. So I can't download something, try, it, then remove it if I don't like it to keep it from cluttering up my plugins list.

Hopefully, this will change in the next couple of versions.

Slow progress (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7852149)

Given the amount of energy that went into the naming debate... no wonder there is slow progress...

With IE and Opera... why another browser? Seems like a waste of time. It's not even any good.

Out of Curiosity (3, Informative)

Joel Carr (693662) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852155)

Did the decision by AOL to 'murder' Netscape end up having a negative/positive/neutral affect on Mozilla or not? Was there a sharp loss of developers at all, or did it end up being more or less business as usual?

---

It was a bad year for Mozilla. (1, Interesting)

Krapangor (533950) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852189)

The development team focused mainly on minor technical and legalistic issues like the naming of firebird, code clean up etc.
But they failed completely to incoperate the rising new mark-up technologies like XML-Signature [ietf.org] or WebCGM [w3.org] .
If this development continues this year, Mozilla might lose it's technical lead to IE or Opera. And open source software might be again only the second winner.

Re:It was a bad year for Mozilla. (4, Insightful)

Zontar The Mindless (9002) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852238)

> ...they failed completely to incoperate the rising new mark-up technologies like XML-Signature or WebCGM. If this development continues this year, Mozilla might lose it's technical lead to IE or Opera.

Are you just pulling this stuff out of your arse, or what? Neither of these are new (WebCGM has been around since '99), both are fairly irrelevant, and WebCGM is a binary format in any case.

Given the *cough* rapid pace of MSIE development *cough* these days, if Mozilla stood stockstill for the next two years, it wouldn't lose any ground to IE (which still doesn't support all of DOM Level 2), and Opera is also still playing catch-up, although it's farther along than MSIE.

It would be nice if they'd start including SVG support in the standard releases, though. Especially since the Adobe SVG plugin for Moz/NS is broken and appears likely to stay that way for some time.

asshat (1)

Ender Ryan (79406) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852463)

You do know that AOL/TW handled the legalistic matters, no? The Mozilla team came up with the name, and AOL/TW got their lawyers to OK it.

Those "technologies" you listed are mostly irrelevent, and Mozilla has improved by leaps and bounds in many areas. CSS support has improved, speed has improved a great deal, Firebird has become a main focus, Thunderbird is taking off, etc.

WTF? HIBT?

Sorry But ... (2, Interesting)

osewa77 (603622) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852227)

Hi, I used to use Mozilla on RedHat Linux simply because it was the best avaliable browser and it was slow. I recently tested the Firebird both on Linux and Windows and the experience was just as fast as IE. I see Mozilla as the browser you use "outside Windows", period. (it used to be Opera for me because of the performance issues until Firebird). So 5 stars to the Mozilla team! If only there was a way to get explorer plugins to work with Mozilla on Unix...

Re:Sorry But ... (1)

briansz (731406) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852237)

If only there was a way to get explorer plugins to work with Mozilla on Unix...

try www.codeweavers.com.......

Re:Sorry But ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7852254)

There is, though it costs $30. [codeweavers.com]

How could we forget Firebird's (0)

NoNine (690801) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852235)

infamous installer mistake. You know, the one that would remove all of your files.

Re:How could we forget Firebird's (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7852270)

How could we forget Firebird's infamous installer mistake. You know, the one that would remove all of your files.

Please elaborate.

Re:How could we forget Firebird's (1)

oddfox (685475) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852493)

I think he may be referring to this bug [mozilla.org] with the Firebird Windows installer which deletes non-Firebird files in the Firebird directory.

The bug seems rather harmless to me, but that's probably just because I don't understand why you'd put anything but Firebird in the Firebird directory. Everytime I upgrade to a new nightly (I've never used any of the installers, I don't trust them as much as I trust WinRAR and cut-paste) I just throw the files into the directory on top of what was in there before, overwriting any existing files. I don't see why you'd be doing upgrades with an installer.

Either way, whether or not he was referring to this bug, his post's got the stink of attention-grabbing.

Thumbs Up, But... (1)

osewa77 (603622) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852252)

With the release of Firebird Mozilla is as fast as any other browser on Windows or Linux and the rendering is cool but sadly (as we already know) it won't take over.

Mozilla will be a thousand times more useful if it could offer an IE-compatibility mode (Javascript model, plugins) which works on Unix platforms. That way people can actually have a reason to use Mozilla (IE works just fine on Windows)

Re:Thumbs Up, But... (4, Insightful)

Zontar The Mindless (9002) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852264)

> Mozilla will be a thousand times more useful if it could offer an IE-compatibility mode (Javascript model, plugins) which works on Unix platforms.

NoooOOOOoooOOooOoooOOO!!!!

Then Microsoft wins and standards don't mean anything. The task which must be accomplished is to get site developers to code to standards, in which case 90% of the compatibility issues disappear (and the Web becomes about 75% safer due to the disappearance of ActiveWreX crap).

Not to mention... (2, Insightful)

Kjella (173770) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852578)

The task which must be accomplished is to get site developers to code to standards

Not to mention tools that code to standards. For all those of us that don't want to write HTML tags (even if we know how), that is the main issue. Because most sites I see that render incorrectly, I kinda doubt there's any real "web developer" behind that wrote the code. Think more code monkey with a WYSIWYG (on IE) HTML editor...

Kjella

Re:Thumbs Up, But... (1)

Lispy (136512) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852791)

ActiveWhat? Does anyone really turn this on? I mean if using IE in the first place...

tststs...

Re:Thumbs Up, But... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7852343)

That way people can actually have a reason to use Mozilla (IE works just fine on Windows)

I use Windows and IE was barely usable last time I tried it. It was constantly throwing up unrequested pop-ups. Adverts for web cams were the worst I think, but there were many many many others. Maybe that's been fixed now but it doesn't look that way from the systems I've seen others using. I use Mozilla on Windows. It shows me the pages I ask it to, and seems to work just fine.

Re:Thumbs Up, But... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7852495)

IE was barely usable last time I tried it. It was constantly throwing up unrequested pop-ups.
Wait until service pack 2 comes out [internetwk.com] . IE is supposed to finally get a pop-up blocker.

Re:Thumbs Up, But... (1)

bhtooefr (649901) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852536)

Try Google Toolbar or wait until the next version of Windows is released, and get IE 6.5. That'll stop popups. Or, just download Opera, hit F12, then click "Open requested pop-up windows only".

eyecon0meter: phonIE ?pr? ?firm? spin0lah review (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7852265)

fuddles, malcom, bullowing smoke up yOUR .asp (Score:mynuts won, home early from the gnu year's eve 'date' with the won-eyed girl?)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 01, @08:34AM (#7852260)
no harm there, until they start forcing the payper liesense softwar gangster stock markup FraUD execrable 'mirrors' on US? tell 'em robbIE?

they exist in some kind of ?pr? ?firm? vacuum constructed before the 'net, during the daze when there was only tv, & print, with NO instant 'feedback'/other opinions. they're won trick ponIEs, so that's all they can do, besides the immoral illegal stock markup FraUD/gangster stuff, which isn't working very well due to decreasing momeNTdumb.

consult with/trust in yOUR creators.... the kode has been showed.

No global contextual menus (0)

TheCleo (735991) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852272)

I love Mozilla, but wish it used the Mac's global contextual menus like other browsers. Not have them means that I can't access my 3rd party stuff like my spell checker and extended clipboards.

RE: AOL's decision to murder Netscape (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7852418)

Undead Netscape = Mozilla

More quotes from the book of Mozilla (1, Funny)

Alien54 (180860) | more than 10 years ago | (#7852604)

as seen at http://www.damowmow.com/playground/book.txt

II. MOZILLA
- http://web.archive.org/web/19981206020253/http://w ww.gate.net/~shipbrk/graphics/mozilla.jpg

CAPUT III
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)
background: maroon; color: white; about:mozilla version: n6.x

CAPUT VII
And so at last the beast *fell* and the unbelievers rejoiced. But all
was not lost, for from the ash rose a *great bird*. The bird gazed
down upon the unbelievers and cast *fire* and *thunder* upon them.
For the beast had been *reborn* with its strength *renewed*, and the
followers of *Mammon* cowered in horror.
- from The Book of Mozilla, 7:15
background: maroon; color: white; about:mozilla version: m1.5

An enormous sigh of relief resounds throughout all of Mozillaland.
Sounds of rejoicing are heard from all corners of the Earth. "They
have conquered the beast!" the voices cry.
And the dimensions remain constant 'till the end of days.
- from The Book Of Mozilla, 7:24
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20847

CAPUT XII
And the beast shall come forth surrounded by a roiling *cloud* of
*vengeance.* The house of the unbelievers shall be *razed* and they
shall be *scorched* to the earth. Their tags shall *blink* until the
end of *days.*
- from The Book of Mozilla, 12:10
background: #800000; color: #FFFFFF; about:mozilla version: n3.x, n4.x

CAPUT XXVII
14 And the Lizard spake, saying, Windows shall I support, and
Macintosh, and the divers flavours of Unix; yea, even unto the
latest effluvium from the Gates of Hell shall I spread my seed:
this it pleaseth me to do.
15 But OS/2 shall I ignore, for in sooth nobody useth it.
16 Then was the land filled with the sound of much wailing and
gnashing of teeth, for millions of people used OS/2 and knew that
it was good. Yet the Lizard did harden his heart against them, and
said, Nay, there is no demand for it.
17 And the Blue One did create an Explorer of the Web, yet updated it
slowly, and documented it poorly, and it was filled with a plague
of locusts.
18 And those that followed the Lizard became enamoured of Frames, and
wrote pages which could not be read by the Lizard's brethren, for
the lemmings were lazy, saying only: Verily, thy browser doth
suck. Thou may'st obtain the Lizard's hence.
19 Then it came to pass that the Blue One made a pact with the
Lizard, that the Lizard should work its artifice for the sake of
the Ancient Sorcerer. And a reference to the Lizard's wares was
placed atop the Sorcerer's desk, that he might obtain it whenever
he desired.
20 But the number of the work the Lizard gave unto the Sorcerer was
Two, and the Greek sigil Beta was affixed to the number, yet all
the rest of the Lizard's minions were given the number Three.
21 And lo, the Lizard's work was itself filled with locusts, and
verily did it consume the Sorcerer's disk space whenever it was
used, and it did mightily crash his system full oft.
22 And the Lizard named several of the locusts, and regarding one the
Lizard said, The tag worketh not. Whereupon the users
hearing this were sore amazed, and said they one unto another,
Verily, that is no bug, but a feature to be highly praised while
it lasteth.
- from The Book of Mozilla, 27:14 - 22 (King Kong Authorised Version)
http://web.archive.org/web/19981206020253/http://w ww.gate.net/~shipbrk/mozilla.html
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>