×

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!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

427 comments

LOL (0, Offtopic)

relex (807030) | more than 9 years ago | (#10132848)

FAILED FP

Re:LOL (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10133018)

YOU FAIL TO FAIL IT!
IT'S A FAILED FAILED FP!

Dumbass.
Lameness filter encountered. Post aborted!
Reason: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.

Corporate sellout. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10132856)

I liked the old one better. They've clearly jumped the shark.

This what we get for trusting the Americans to build a web browser.

But gotta love the Linux bias (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10132936)

- Download Now for Linux, English (8.1MB)
- Other Systems and Languages

Nice try (4, Informative)

kikta (200092) | more than 9 years ago | (#10132969)

Mozilla.org has been looking at your user agent for quite a while to determine which OS you are using and offer you the appropriate download.

If you use Windows or a Mac, you'll get offered the downloads for those initially instead.

GNAA (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10132857)

FRIST POSTAGE

Hrmph... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10132859)

Slicker != Sleeker

"Sleeker" == "more sleek". (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10132903)

What planet did YOUR dictionary come from, Beavis? It's a clumsy word, but it's perfectly legitimate modern English. I applaud anybody who does grammar/spelling/usage flames/complaints on Slashdot, but in this case there's nothing to complain about.

Re:Hrmph... (3, Funny)

Rei (128717) | more than 9 years ago | (#10132955)

What I found amusing was that when I clicked on their new website in Konqueror, it crashed. Subtle coding ploy? ;)

It worked the second time... I got a grin out of it, though.

Re:Hrmph... (1)

supun (613105) | more than 9 years ago | (#10133079)

Works for me with KDE 3.2. The page does check out as 4.01 Strict, however the CSS has an error and warning.

For fun validate Microsoft web pages :)

About Time.. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10132860)

Yay.. Now I can stand to look at the page !

jerk post (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10132869)

the poster of this
first post is the biggest jerk
the world's ever seen

Latest nightly is already called (5, Informative)

acariquara (753971) | more than 9 years ago | (#10132871)

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20040901 Firefox/1.0 PR (NOT FINAL)
as of 09/01/2004... Broke some extensions BTW!

Re:Latest nightly is already called (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10132973)

If you check the extensions page you can filter by 1.0PR and it's set to that by Default. Pissed me off trying to get the gmail notifier for 0.9.3

Re:Latest nightly is already called (1)

BrynM (217883) | more than 9 years ago | (#10132984)

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20040901 Firefox/1.0 PR (NOT FINAL) as of 09/01/2004... Broke some extensions BTW!
I'm not a developer - Just a user... Where do you see a 1.0 in the Firefox nightlies [mozilla.org]?

Re:Latest nightly is already called (3, Informative)

ernstp (641161) | more than 9 years ago | (#10132989)

Asa Dotzler (Mozilla.org's QA guy!) says:

Last night our champion hackers got a new update infrastructure landed into Firefox 0.9 branch builds and set up the new server and the new server-side code, moving away from the slow Java based stuff to some much faster not-Java based stuff. Grab today's branch builds and go hammer on this new stuff. Update should be working better and everything should be faster, hopefully.

http://ftp24moz.newaol.com/pub/mozilla.org/firef ox /nightly/latest-0.9/

Great new look! Same old shit... (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10132878)

So /. renders really poorly in Gecko, as do a myriad of other sites.

Is that Firefox's problem for not gracefully accepting broken HTML? Or is it those web developers who write the broken HTML?

Re:Great new look! Same old shit... (1)

el-spectre (668104) | more than 9 years ago | (#10132925)

THAT is the issue web developers have been fighting for a long time. If you want a browser that will render line noise, go for MSIE. Of course, this only encourages bad coding (see the decline of HTML quality since 99 or so....)

Re:Great new look! Same old shit... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10132958)

I believe it was Larry Wall who said that a program should do what the user wants and do its best to figure out what the user wants, even if the user put in incorrect commands.

But then again, he's talking about Perl and you're talking about line noise. Big difference there.

Re:Great new look! Same old shit... (1, Funny)

schon (31600) | more than 9 years ago | (#10133089)

he's talking about Perl and you're talking about line noise. Big difference there

Judging from some of the perl scripts I've seen, it's not as big as you think. :o)

Re:Great new look! Same old shit... (2, Funny)

el-spectre (668104) | more than 9 years ago | (#10133122)

If we're talking about 1 programming language and 1 interpreter, this is ok (I'm a perl fan myself). But since we're talking about scores of browsers from different makers in different countries, the standards should be adhered to.

Besides, real programming languages have enough built in intelligence (scoping, flow control structures, etc) to make some assumptions. Basic HTML does not.

BTW: Only GOOD perl looks like line noise :)

Re:Great new look! Same old shit... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10133159)

I believe it was Larry Wall who said that a program should do what the user wants and do its best to figure out what the user wants, even if the user put in incorrect commands.

It's a pity he didn't subscribe to that philosophy when he wrote Perl.

Finally sheesh (3, Insightful)

(54)T-Dub (642521) | more than 9 years ago | (#10132882)

I'm glad that the creative designers behind the firefox look finally got a crack at the homepage. IMO it gives the browser much better more credibility if it has a professional looking website. Not just like some hodge-podge browser. *warning ... blatant plug to get me free stuff following

Re:Finally sheesh (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10133075)

People who post about free ipods should be auto-modded to -1, Annoying Asshole.

Fuck you and your stupid fucking i-pod.

The Previous Design (5, Insightful)

adam mcmaster (697132) | more than 9 years ago | (#10132883)

Why not actually compare it to the previous design [archive.org] they had?

Re:The Previous Design (1)

Neophytus (642863) | more than 9 years ago | (#10132944)

The new design isn't a poor excuse to show off CSS positioning effects, it uses them to it's advantage. Everything joe blogs needs is clear to show, anything else is much more clearly displayed due to the lack of clutter.

Re:The Previous Design (1)

YetAnotherName (168064) | more than 9 years ago | (#10132961)

Compared. The older design's bold black and intense orangish yellow, combined with serif fonts, make it look amateurish compared with the previous design's Verdana font and soft colors.

But now ... now they've gone corporate!

But I guess beauty's in the eye of the beholder ...

Duh (5, Funny)

over_exposed (623791) | more than 9 years ago | (#10132884)

...release candidates of the latest browser are getting closer by the day.

Isn't that kind of how time works?

Re:Duh (2, Funny)

someguy456 (607900) | more than 9 years ago | (#10133002)

Isn't that kind of how time works?

Not if its Duke Nukem Forever, in which case the release date actually gets a little farther away every day

Re:Duh (1)

LoudMusic (199347) | more than 9 years ago | (#10133140)

...release candidates of the latest browser are getting closer by the day.

Isn't that kind of how time works?


It may depend on who's time [zapatopi.net] you're refering to. But yeah, I laughed at that too.

Woot (2, Interesting)

Commander Trollco (791924) | more than 9 years ago | (#10132886)

Nice.

Sorta OT, is anyone else irritated with how they are hiding the zipped binaries for windows now? You used to be able to get them as easily as the installer, and before that there was no installer. I just don't trust it...

Re:Woot (2, Informative)

PReDiToR (687141) | more than 9 years ago | (#10133010)

They stopped showing the Zips on the main page because they wanted to test the installer properly.

There were still problems with it on 0.9, I don't know if they are fixed yet.

Firefox (3, Insightful)

danormsby (529805) | more than 9 years ago | (#10132892)

I'm a big fan of Firefox. Only bit I don't like is upgrading the software where "installing over the top of an older version may cause unpredictable problems [mozilla.org]."

Soon as that is fixed I'll recommend it to my mother.

Re:Firefox (1)

DaScribbler (701492) | more than 9 years ago | (#10132951)

Pretty typical, and to be expected while it's still in beta though.

Re:Firefox (1)

harumscarum (675595) | more than 9 years ago | (#10132995)

ditto. I have copied over a couple of versions and it is always something, but it is beta so fuck it. When 1.0 hits though they better get that fixed or I will have to uninstall it and then I will stick it to them by reinstalling it.

Great UI Improvements (5, Insightful)

grape jelly (193168) | more than 9 years ago | (#10132906)

I, for one, think they have made some great UI improvements. Most people don't hit moz.org seeking news and whatnot about the project. Instead, they just want to know where to get The Better Browser(TM). More than once, I've had to hold a few slower-than-I'd-like hands in finding where to download the latest and greatest version of Moz and variants. I just wonder why they featured FireFox so prominently and put the full version of Moz in the "bottom" row.

Re:Great UI Improvements (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10132939)

Mozilla Firefox is a newer better browser that is more constantly updated than Mozilla. Everyone wants Firefox at the moment so you have to look for Mozilla "The browser that nobody wanted"(TM)

Re:Great UI Improvements (4, Interesting)

Lispy (136512) | more than 9 years ago | (#10132980)

Try Firefox and you'll know.

Honestly. Mozilla includes everything and the kitchen sink. That's overkill for most users. As the Gnome folks learned the hard way a few good options are much more welcome than every little tidbit of configurability.

Firefox is lean, fast forward, and one tool for the job. Just what mom needs. And what I need. The features can be added with extensions, if you really have to. Most people love Firefox from day one because they "get it".

Mozillas default interface also resembles the old Netscape Navigator interface wich feels kinda old to the people that switched over to IE back in 1996.

Re:Great UI Improvements (1)

Gooba42 (603597) | more than 9 years ago | (#10133037)

Wasn't it official that Mozilla was going to be unsupported? Like, bugfixes but no new development?

Firefox is their flagship product now. Mozilla in its previous incarnation was a bloated hulk which many of us are trying to forget.

Web design to match browser (2, Interesting)

usefool (798755) | more than 9 years ago | (#10132909)

Is there anything significant in this relaunch? Are they designing (show-casing) a site that utilises every feature in Firefox, for instance?

No, but it's broken in IE =D (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10133019)

All the images flicker strangely in IE. Cross-browser testing anyone? ;)

Re:Web design to match browser (1)

r3m0t (626466) | more than 9 years ago | (#10133028)

Utilises every feature in Firefox?

You can't make the websites do that. It's just a standards-compliant web browser, for fucks sake. All you need is a standards-compliant site which works in Firefox but not in IE. But people use hacks to make complex CSS layout stuff work in IE, so such a site will not appear naturally.

You Don't Know, Sonny Boy!!! (0, Flamebait)

stinkyfingers (588428) | more than 9 years ago | (#10132913)

You and your generation can have your new-fangled Mozilla Foundation website! Mark my words, though. The sooner you become slave to all their fancy-shmancy websitery, the sooner they'll be charging you for it.

Kids today!

Re:You Don't Know, Sonny Boy!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10132960)

I seriously doubt any corporation would charge for a web browser (excluding Opera, "the fucked up browser"(TM) I even think IE is better than that POS -_-)

Slow News Day? (5, Insightful)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 9 years ago | (#10132933)

Ok, this is bordering on infatuation. "Mozilla Organization has launched its new Web site and it's looking a fair bit sleeker than it used to. No new product releases to go with the new look" This is effectively saying we looked at 500 submissions and this was the best of them.

Slow news day or infatuated with Mozilla? Heck, I like Mozilla and use it at home and work, but I don't drop everything to see what's happened with their website in the last day. Gee willikers.

Here's some other fine articles which could probably have been posted:

Philadelphia Considering Free or Low Cost Wireless For All [forbes.com]

Microsoft to Exploit Japan's Post Offices to deliver SP2 (their word, not mine!) [japantoday.com]

The Road Ahead, According to Steve Ballmer [computerworld.com]

X-Rays Reveal Mummy Faces (Low Cancer Risk to Mummy) [iol.co.za]

Owls Use Poop to Lure Beetles [discovery.com]

Re:Slow News Day? (1)

stratjakt (596332) | more than 9 years ago | (#10132959)

To be fair, the Philly story was posted, and will doubtless be posted again tomorrow at the latest in case you missed it.

D'oh! (1)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 9 years ago | (#10133043)

To be fair, the Philly story was posted, and will doubtless be posted again tomorrow at the latest in case you missed it.

Indeed! To which I utter the required "D'oh!" and slap my forehead in the prescribed manner.

There's still the Owl/Beetle thing.

I wonder if Philly will leave browser choice open to the individual or if this represents too large a carrot to ignore and some big company tries to pull a hammerlock worthy of Olympic wrestling on them to lock every user into a particular one which just happens to require a fat O/S and hardware to accompany it. Probably should forward the 'sleek' Mozilla.org page to the movers and shakers in Philly....

Re:Slow News Day? (1)

yokimbo (525881) | more than 9 years ago | (#10133025)

I guess I'm infatuated. I dropped everything here at work to check it out.

Now that they've redesigned the website, when are they going to redesign their clothing line?

Interesting... (4, Interesting)

InternationalCow (681980) | more than 9 years ago | (#10132934)

how Firefox is being plugged. It's pretty obvious IMHO from the site that Firefox has the wind in its sails so to speak, as it's offered for download (geared to your OS, nice) with a biggo font. If you want Mozilla, you have some more clicks to go. Does that mean that Mozilla will be superseded at some point by Firefox??

Not Even The Half Of It! (5, Interesting)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 9 years ago | (#10132983)

how Firefox is being plugged. It's pretty obvious IMHO from the site that Firefox has the wind in its sails

Let's talk understatement here. You don't offer this kind of thing [mozillastore.com] without a significant commitment to the package.

Re:Interesting... (2, Informative)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 9 years ago | (#10133007)

yes. afaik that's the whole point.

and really why not: lighter, faster and just as good if not better. firefox tries to be what most people seem to be looking from mozilla anyways: a good web browser(very few use the extra stuff in the 'full' mozilla anyways and if they're available as seperate in the future there's no problem there either).

Re:Interesting... (1)

Sexy Bern (596779) | more than 9 years ago | (#10133083)

Also, I suspect that they acknowledge that Outlook won't be replaced any time soon in corporate-land, but the browser is a good candidate.

Re:Interesting... (4, Informative)

barcodez (580516) | more than 9 years ago | (#10133033)

Does that mean that Mozilla will be superseded at some point by Firefox??

Yes, this has been the plan for sometime. See the Roadmap [mozilla.org] in particular point (1.) under "a new roadmap" and also Rationale [mozilla.org]

Yup (4, Informative)

CurbyKirby (306431) | more than 9 years ago | (#10133042)

# Focus development efforts on the new standalone applications: the browser currently code-named Firefox, the Mozilla Thunderbird mail/news application, and standalone composer and other apps based on the the new XUL toolkit used by Firefox and Thunderbird. We aim to make Firefox and Thunderbird our premier products.


# Updated: Maintain the SeaMonkey application suite, currently built by default, for enterprises and other organizations with large existing Mozilla deployments. SeaMonkey remains an important product for many customers.

from http://www.mozilla.org/roadmap.html [mozilla.org]

Firefox is more popular (2, Interesting)

jeti (105266) | more than 9 years ago | (#10133098)

It looks like the start page for Firefox is accessed nearly eight times as often as the start page for Mozilla.

Re:Interesting... (1, Interesting)

Mprx (82435) | more than 9 years ago | (#10133105)

Downloads geared to your user agent is a stupid idea. Any Linux user probably already has Firefox, so the only reason they'd be going to the website would be to download the Windows version for family/friends.

It takes 4 clicks for a Linux user to download the Windows version from the front page now, compared to 1 click for the old version. Generally everything has been dumbed down, and is more ugly looking. This new design sucks.

what software.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10132937)

..do they use for content management?

They didn't change the structure though (1)

weeksie (634500) | more than 9 years ago | (#10132942)

The page looks great, and the fact that they can make a total style change so quick certainly says something for CSS but they don't seem to have changed the site structure. That for me has always been the single most frustrating thing about moz.org-- it can be quite a pain to locate information and it always feels a bit disjointed. It sure looks good though

The Wiki way? (1)

theKinkyRabbit (809823) | more than 9 years ago | (#10132956)

OK, maybe this is not new and was available on the old site, but apparently you can edit some pages, like Products [mozilla.org] and Roadmap [mozilla.org] (check the "Edit this page" link all the way down).

Was this previously available, or have I been living under a massive kryptonite rock for the past 2 years or so?

Re:The Wiki way? (1)

Neophytus (642863) | more than 9 years ago | (#10133046)

You need a Mozilla CVS un/pw combo. Just an easy interface for those who need to, and it's been there for a while.

Bad choice of hook (5, Insightful)

cicho (45472) | more than 9 years ago | (#10132974)

They shouldn't be using "Free download" as the prominent eye-catching link. "Free download" does not mean the software is free, only that it costs nothing to download it. This semantic fuzziness is often used by commercial software vendors (and spammers) as a way to entice people to download trial and/or crippled software. They should instead say something like "Free software", "Free to get, free to use", anything that doesn't have the bad vibe that comes with "free download"

Stallman's Purges (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10133100)

Oh, for fuck's sake...

Re:Bad choice of hook (1)

Phroggy (441) | more than 9 years ago | (#10133132)

They should instead say something like "Free software", "Free to get, free to use", anything that doesn't have the bad vibe that comes with "free download"

What bad vibe is that, exactly?

Consider the target market for Firefox....

Re:Bad choice of hook (4, Funny)

justforaday (560408) | more than 9 years ago | (#10133157)

They should instead say something like "Free software", "Free to get, free to use", anything that doesn't have the bad vibe that comes with "free download"

I'm sure posting a big flashing "Free as in Beer" graphic will boost it's popularity with the college crowd.

Links to the Alphas buried? (2, Insightful)

Beautyon (214567) | more than 9 years ago | (#10132985)

Links to the bleeding edge 1.8 Alpha versions are not immediately apparent...why?

Re:Links to the Alphas buried? (4, Insightful)

bizpile (758055) | more than 9 years ago | (#10133056)

Links to the bleeding edge 1.8 Alpha versions are not immediately apparent...why?

That was the first thing I noticed, I'd have to guess they are trying to go more mainstream and make downloading their brower less ambiguous for the masses.

New Zealand release names (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10132988)

Some Kiwi must have infiltrated the Mozilla.org marketing department, and renamed the upcoming release candidates after parts of Auckland/Coromandel (One Tree Hill, Greenlane, Mission Bay, Whangamata).

Those dirty Kiwis (JAFAs) will try anything they can get to get free marketing :P

ps. I'm from Wellington, NZ.

Sunbird (2, Interesting)

Feneric (765069) | more than 9 years ago | (#10132996)

It's a pity that Sunbird isn't given any sort of prominence along with Thunderbird... it's already very usable and fills its niche nicely.

Good to see their money is going to good use (3, Funny)

flend (9133) | more than 9 years ago | (#10133000)

Were they stuck for something to do when they realised they no longer had to keep renaming Phoenix/Firebird/Firefox?

Avid FireFox user... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10133006)

Since the 0.9.3 security update release of FireFox, I have had a significant number of browser crashes lately.

As much as I love FireFox, may IE burn in hell, I have become quite frustrated with FireFox. Yes, I realize that it's not version 1.0 yet, but being this close to 1.0, I never had it crash once until 0.9.3 was installed.

I was truly hoping that this would have been an update article to my favorite browsers.

Get a free iPod from freeiPods.com [freeipods.com]

Re:Avid FireFox user... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10133096)

Get a free iPod from freeiPods.com


Jesus fucking christ. Are people STILL falling for these pyramid schemes?

Don't work with MSN music (3, Informative)

methano (519830) | more than 9 years ago | (#10133009)

OK, so this is off topic. But I just tried the new MSN music site and some of the buttons (like search) don't work in FireFox. What a piece of crap. I'm going back to IE. (just kidding, about going back that is. The search button really is DOA).

Nice site - make sure you refresh (1)

Random BedHead Ed (602081) | more than 9 years ago | (#10133024)

If you've been to mozilla.org recently, make sure you refresh once or twice. I discovered an odd-looking page when I followed the link, and I was sure that the designers must have gone crazy. Turns out that my browser (Firefox) was using a cached version of their old CSS file and was applying it to the content of the new site. Yuck. Refreshing fixed this.

I think the site looks beautiful. Clean, slick graphics. The old site made great use of CSS, but the color scheme here is a lot more likeable. And they've really pushed Firefox, once a little project you had to surf through the site to find, to the forefront. Clearly they know what people are looking for these days. I'm waiting for the next release.

Qute (1, Interesting)

r.jimenezz (737542) | more than 9 years ago | (#10133034)

My only gripe with Firefox was when they stopped shipping Qute as the default theme. Mind you, the screenshot on the new home page clearly shows that it was taken using Qute :)

This of course is not a big deal. I still get Qute whenever I have to install Firefox.

Mozilla.org Relaunched (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10133038)

Mozilla.org Relaunched ... and all the Girlie Men website designers are dancing in their lighted loafers.

The rest of us just don't care.

Disappointment. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10133087)

How disappointing that they haven't taken this opportunity to rename any of their software.

Well...You finally got me (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10133093)

I d/l'ed the FireFox, and I'm sold. nice bloody browser. So where am I going to feel the pinch using FF over IE? Page rendering errors? Let me know folks.

Looks nice! (5, Funny)

lpangelrob2 (721920) | more than 9 years ago | (#10133115)

Rumor has it they also tried to change the name of the site to http://www.firelizard.com, but the technical barriers were too high to overcome.

(Yes, I use Firefox ;-) )

Thanks mozilla guys. (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10133153)

Looks nice, And valid [w3.org] too!
--
Slashdot only allows a user with your karma to post 2 times per day (more or less, depending on moderation). You've already shared your thoughts with us that many times. Take a breather, and come back and see us in 24 hours or so.
-
I'm still posting :-)
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

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>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...