Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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!

Firefox 3 Plans and IE8 Speculation

Zonk posted more than 7 years ago | from the you-need-one-or-t'other dept.

The Internet 274

ReadWriteWeb writes "Information about the next versions of Firefox and Internet Explorer suggest that the two biggest browsers are heading in different directions. Mozilla has published a wiki page detailing its plans for the next version of Firefox, codenamed 'Gran Paradiso'. Among the mandatory requirements listed for FF3 are improving the add-on experience, providing an extensible bookmarks back-end platform, adding more support for web services "to act as content handlers" — all of which show that Firefox wants to be an independent information broker rather than a simple HTML renderer in its next version. Also in the works is Microsoft's IE8. According to ActiveWin.com, a Microsoft official at CES told them that work has already begun for IE 8 and it may be released as a final product 'within 18-24 months'. Looking ahead, it's obvious that IE will continue to hook into the advanced functionality that Vista offers."

cancel ×

274 comments

ZOMG FIRST POST (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17574120)

:P

That old saying about SMPT (3, Funny)

anss123 (985305) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574126)

Have Firefox implemented email yet?

Re:That old saying about SMPT (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17574158)

Has linux implemented USB drivers yet ? Oh wait they have but they are as buggy as hell.

Re:That old saying about SMPT (0, Offtopic)

2.7182 (819680) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574338)

I know shouldn't feed you, but please be aware of
[linux-usb.org] http://www.linux-usb.org/devices.html [linux-usb.org] .

I work with a lot of weird devices and have gotten almost all of them to work.

Re:That old saying about SMPT (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17575258)

I work with a lot of weird devices

We don't want to hear your perverted stories, you fucking sicko!

Re:That old saying about SMPT (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17574178)

do you mean thunderbird?

Re:That old saying about SMPT (0)

Daemonstar (84116) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574238)

Thunderbird [mozilla.com] is Mozilla's standalone e-mail client with extensions (addons) like Firefox [mozilla.com] .

Re:That old saying about SMPT (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17574318)

Simple Mail Protocol Transport? No, no I don't think they have. It's probably because of the DCMA, you know.

Re:That old saying about SMPT (1, Insightful)

mlk (18543) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574392)

Webbrowser != Email Client.

Does IE included a email client? Or does an IE client use the IE rendering component?

Re:That old saying about SMPT (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17574744)

No, they removed e-mail functionality [mozilla.org] to avoid cluttering up the 'Tools' menu.

Re:That old saying about SMPT (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17575976)

Hopefully by the time Firefox 3 is out, they'll have fixed the memory leak problem.

Re:That old saying about SMPT (1)

tolan-b (230077) | more than 7 years ago | (#17576252)

Well at least two people got your joke ;)

What's up with the code names, anyway? (3, Interesting)

KlaymenDK (713149) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574180)

"the next version of Firefox, codenamed 'Gran Paradiso'"

Why are they using code names?

I can understand how it could be necessary for things like the original Mac and Windows 95. But why for yet-another-version of an established product?

As I see it, either they might as well call it "the upcoming Firefox v3", or they should not (want to) discuss it publicly at all.

Or is it just to keep Marketing occupied with something harmless?

Re:What's up with the code names, anyway? (5, Informative)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574246)

I can understand how it could be necessary for things like the original Mac and Windows 95. But why for yet-another-version of an established product?


For the same reason Windows Vista used to be called by the codename 'Longhorn' or that Ubuntu 6.10 is referred to by the codename 'Edgy Eft'. Because when they start working on the release, they don't know what they will end up calling it. "FF3" could just as easily end up being FF2.5 instead of FF3 if they don't end up with all the features that they wanted.

Re:What's up with the code names, anyway? (1)

KlaymenDK (713149) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574450)

I can understand how it could be necessary for things like the original Mac and Windows 95. But why for yet-another-version of an established product?
 

 
For the same reason Windows Vista used to be called by the codename 'Longhorn' or that Ubuntu 6.10 is referred to by the codename 'Edgy Eft'. Because when they start working on the release, they don't know what they will end up calling it. "FF3" could just as easily end up being FF2.5 instead of FF3 if they don't end up with all the features that they wanted.
Yes and no. They ought to have a pretty clear picture of wether they are aiming for a an upgrade (minor version bump), a full resease (major version bump), or a new product altogether (new trade name). Yes, I realize that these are big projects, but they are (suuposed to) adhere to a roadmap. By the time you get to selecting which features to include, you'll know what order of vorsion bump you're aiming for. Or not. :-p

MS Longhorn: Sure, they need a trade name to stick on the box, and think Windows 2100 ain't gonna cut it. I can understand that.

Ubuntu: They *know* that their releases are steadily incremented. If they can count, no need for funny names. Hmm.... but I can see how that gets boring...

Re:What's up with the code names, anyway? (2, Funny)

8ball629 (963244) | more than 7 years ago | (#17575142)

It's pretty standard to give a new project a code name.

I see both of your points though, it isn't very necessary but what if they don't end up calling it anything close to Firefox 3.0. What if they decide to go with a new naming convention by the time the release comes around? They could end up calling it Firefox Revolutions or Firefox Reloaded or... wait - those are Matrix movie names =\.

Re:What's up with the code names, anyway? (1)

Zonk (troll) (1026140) | more than 7 years ago | (#17575506)

Ubuntu: They *know* that their releases are steadily incremented. If they can count, no need for funny names. Hmm.... but I can see how that gets boring...
Ubuntu's numbers are based on the year. The format is Y.MM, so 6.06 = June 2006 and 6.10 = October 2006. Fiesty is scheduled for release in April, but what if they had problems and didn't release it until May. Continuing to call it 7.04 would be rather dumb. Or, if Ubuntu went into a Vista-like mess, would it make sense to call it 7.04 in December 2010?

Re:What's up with the code names, anyway? (1)

jacksonj04 (800021) | more than 7 years ago | (#17576372)

This is why you need build versions as well. Chances are people don't suddenly go "The last build was 2862, but it's a new year so we'll call it build 7001.

Re:What's up with the code names, anyway? (3, Insightful)

kfg (145172) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574772)

That's the rationalization, not the reason.

The reason is because code names are cool and they want to call it a really cool code name.

KFG

Re:What's up with the code names, anyway? (3, Funny)

Viper Daimao (911947) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574894)

Like Magic Man and El Diablo (which means fighting chicken I think)

Re:What's up with the code names, anyway? (1, Informative)

Amazing Quantum Man (458715) | more than 7 years ago | (#17575058)

El Diablo means "The Devil".

Re:What's up with the code names, anyway? (1)

Viper Daimao (911947) | more than 7 years ago | (#17575588)

Because it's not an overused /. cliché yet I knew someone wasn't going to get it. [wikiquote.org]

Re:What's up with the code names, anyway? (1)

Supergibbs (786716) | more than 7 years ago | (#17575590)

I believe he was quoting Talladega Nights.... I got ya Viper

Re:What's up with the code names, anyway? (1)

kfg (145172) | more than 7 years ago | (#17575760)

Which is a fairly common thing to name a badass chicken.

Of course if he were really "The Devil" he wouldn't end up in the stew pot quite so quickly, but I'm sure to another chicken he's a mean mother.

I think I'm going to start calling my fighting hydra "Cthulhu." He be bad and shit. Scourge of the daphnia. Tremble before his evil might.

KFG

Re:What's up with the code names, anyway? (3, Insightful)

Aladrin (926209) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574268)

It's not a 'codename' in the spy sense. It's a development name. It's boring to say 'firefox 3' and more fun to say 'gran paradiso'. The names are not for the public, they're for the developers. Any time they talk to the public, they call it 'firefox 3'.

Don't confuse news from third-party sources with news from the developers. The people that wrote this article are not on the team. Mozilla simply doesn't keep their development plans a secret. (They created a publicly accessible wiki.)

Re:What's up with the code names, anyway? (3, Insightful)

jalefkowit (101585) | more than 7 years ago | (#17575698)

It's a development name. It's boring to say 'firefox 3' and more fun to say 'gran paradiso'.

It also makes it clear that it's not for public consumption. If you called it "Firefox 3 Alpha 1" you'd have tons of Firefox fanboys rushing to download the "latest" version of their favorite browser. Firefox versions that don't carry the "Firefox" name aren't ready for prime time; labeling them differently sends that message.

Re:What's up with the code names, anyway? (5, Informative)

Rodness (168429) | more than 7 years ago | (#17576222)

It's boring to say 'firefox 3' and more fun to say 'gran paradiso'.

Not even because it's fun. Try reading the Mozilla forums sometime.

The browsers are given development codenames to SIGNIFICANTLY differentiate the development nightly/alpha/beta releases from the blessed official version releases. They don't want Grandpa Joe Sixpack coming along to download this "FoxFire thingy" he heard his kids talk about and accidently wind up with Firefox 3.0 Alpha 1, (which may or may not work as advertised because, well, it's an alpha) when he's obviously not interested in a development release.

Another reason is that it's less confusing and ambiguous, especially when you have multiple versions of Firefox. It's easy to get confused about which feature went into which product when you have "Firefox 1.0", "Firefox 1.5", "Firefox 2.0", "Firefox 3.0" and so forth. At least from a developer perspective, there's more uniqueness to "Phoenix", "Deer Park", "Bon Echo", and "Gran Paradiso" releases from the associated mental imagery.

But keeping them distinct and less noticable from the end user perspective is the most important reason.

Re:What's up with the code names, anyway? (1)

ettlz (639203) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574708)

"Gran Paradiso". Sounds like a "professional" name for an old hooker.

Re:What's up with the code names, anyway? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17575234)

As I see it, either they might as well call it "the upcoming Firefox v3", or they should not (want to) discuss it publicly at all.
Thats a novel idea, have an open source, community driven project that no one discusses publicly. It's brilliant!

features (2, Insightful)

dcskier (1039688) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574210)

keeping up and cutting edge sounds great, but i hope if they plan on adding all of these features they spin off a lite verison too. is it just me or is firefox starting to get a bloated, almost like ie. features are great if they provide useful functionality; but sometimes lightweight, fast, and simple is all you need/want for just browsing around.

Re:features (5, Insightful)

chrismcdirty (677039) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574300)

I could have sworn the reason that Firefox came into existence was that the codebase of the Mozilla Suite was bloated, and had too many features that a lot of people didn't want in a web browser. And here they go repeating the past.

Re:features (1)

PingSpike (947548) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574644)

Same old story with software. A well liked application has to have 'new versions' all the time because people get a hard-on for new stuff. Eventually it gets so bloated with 'features' of dubious use that its interface becomes clunky or its performance suffers.

I like firefox because it added tabs and simplified the web browser interface (its options screens seem so straightforward and easy to navigate compared to IE's internet options). I think that improving the way extensions are handled would be a good goal, but otherwise it does everything I think a browser should do and just need occasional security updates.

Re:features (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 7 years ago | (#17575072)

There is actually ongoing work towards improving/cleaning up the codebase, see:

http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/roadmap/archives/20 06/10/mozilla_2.html [mozillazine.org]

The roadmap shows mozilla 2.0 as landing for Firefox 4.0, so they are being pretty conservative.

The problem with mozilla wasn't so much that they added features, but that they added every feature that anybody wanted.

Re:features (3, Insightful)

Caseyscrib (728790) | more than 7 years ago | (#17575412)

You can complain about bloating all you want, but so many of the features I've used in Firefox 2 have been incredibly useful. I've tried to welcome change and learn to do new things, because once you get into the habit it really makes your life so much easier. Online bookmarking, live rss feeds, the built-in spell-checking... these have all helped my productivity. Finding stuff is easier, reading stuff is easier, my internet experience is more pleasant. The little stuff really helps a lot. I wouldn't consider it bloating, because Mozilla is adding features that are helpful. Bloating is more reserved for stuff that makes your system run slower yet it doesn't really do anything (IE the window search dog or clippy).

Re:features (5, Insightful)

Anc (953115) | more than 7 years ago | (#17576178)

I could have sworn the reason that Firefox came into existence was that the codebase of the Mozilla Suite was bloated, and had too many features that a lot of people didn't want in a web browser. And here they go repeating the past.
What makes you think so? If you look at it closely, Firefox sticks to its assumptions. The new features are either supplementing or replacing previous ones, like the improved bookmarks system, or are mostly about streamlining the already existing usage paths.

It's hard to relate to your statement since you provided no concrete arguments or examples. In fact, it sounds as if you were implying that the sheer fact that there's a new release and therefore new stuff coming up means that the application is getting bloated. Perhaps they should halt the development, so not to introduce more bloat, huh?

Re:features (3, Interesting)

Reikk (534266) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574334)

I agree. I love firefox, _especially_ with adblock plus and filterset.g. It makes browsing the web so much better. However, I cannot use firefox when I'm using other applications. When I'm working with Visual Studio or Eclipse, the only option for me is Opera. Firefox takes up way too much memory.

Re:features (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17575254)

I love firefox, _especially_ with adblock plus and filterset.g.

It's important to note that Filterset.g is not open source [wikipedia.org] .

Re:features (1, Informative)

revelous (1048792) | more than 7 years ago | (#17575862)

I'd like to have the ability to save sessions rather than having to bookmark all the tabs and re-opening them again.

Hope its better than FF2 (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17574218)

Well, I hope FF3 is better than FF2. FF2 crashes on me about 45 seconds into each browsing experience. And no, I do not have any add-ons included. While I really enjoyed FF1.5, I am an Opera user now. Love the "mouse shortcuts" on opera.

Re:Hope its better than FF2 (3, Funny)

Rik Sweeney (471717) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574954)

I'm not sure what you're talking about. FFVII was the best one (according to the fanboys who probably never finished it anyway). Personally I thought FFX was excellent.

You are talking about Final Fantasy aren't you?

Re:Hope its better than FF2 (1)

DirtySouthAfrican (984664) | more than 7 years ago | (#17575544)

This problem went away for me when I recreated my firefox profile (which had been around since the 0.3 days or so). I then imported my old bookmarks, and it worked like a charm since.

Re:Hope its better than FF2 (2, Interesting)

StonyUK (173886) | more than 7 years ago | (#17576134)

I had the same experience. For me it turned out that the Google Toolbar was causing the problem. I now use Googlebar instead and Firefox is solid and stable again.

Sticking with FF (4, Interesting)

shirizaki (994008) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574242)

Honestly with the issues I had with IE6 I moved to FF 1.5. Then when IE7 came out I upgraded, but found it almost as loose as IE6, just with tabs. Not to mention IE7 doesn't have extentions. I don't know what I would do if I didn't have half of the extensiosn I have for FF. I'm not even mentiioning the portable version I carry with all of my extensions on it.

Firefox 2 has ben extremely stable except with a few quirks, which stems from my computer being slow as hell. I look forward to what Firefox 3 bring to the table.

Re:Sticking with FF (1)

krakelohm (830589) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574958)

Sounds like you might wanna look forward to a new computer instead.

Re:Sticking with FF (1)

gaspyy (514539) | more than 7 years ago | (#17576224)

Actually IE does have extensions, although not as many and not as good.
You can find them here: http://www.ieaddons.com/ [ieaddons.com] (there's a link from IE Tools menu)

The Developer Toolbar is quite good (I'd say better than FF), there's also an inline search, Fiddler (a headers 'spy' for developers) and others. Some of them are not free though.

IE8? (5, Funny)

fullphaser (939696) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574262)

They just got IE7 out, give them 3-4 years, they are working on it.

Re:IE8? (1)

Mikachu (972457) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574408)

But Firefox 2.0 actually officially came out AFTER Internet Explorer 7 did.

Re:IE8? (1)

colonslashslash (762464) | more than 7 years ago | (#17575894)

And your point is?

The parent's joke is at the expense of Microsoft because it took them 5 bloody years to get from IE6 to IE7. Mozilla and Opera managed quite a few major releases in that time, probably because they are actually focused on making their browsers better, and aren't just developing because they feel they have to in order to maintain a slipping market dominance.

Re:IE8? (1)

xiong.chiamiov (871823) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574546)

3-4 years? You mean, 8? Meanwhile, the Firefox devs plan on releasing a new version number every year.
Issue one major release every year (Fx 3 in 2007, Fx 4 in 2008, etc.) since it helps drive upgrades and adoption
http://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox3/Firefox_Requireme nts#Release_Roadmap [mozilla.org]

Internet Explorer 8 (5, Insightful)

anss123 (985305) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574284)

"Looking ahead, it's obvious that IE will continue to hook into the advanced functionality that Vista offers."

Does that include the ability to only run on Vista?

Detachable tabs? (4, Interesting)

Hatta (162192) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574302)

Will they implement detachable (and attachable) tabs? Konqueror has had this forever, so Firefox has some catching up to do.

Re:Detachable tabs? (1)

zesty42 (1041348) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574500)

The articles were pretty vague, but "hooking into Vista" really has more of a Konqueror feel to it. I'm a newb, but I love Konqueror because it integrates into other apps and files that I use on my computer. It's becoming more of a all in one desktop browser/manager. I would expect that as web apps become more popular, this type of integration will be even more important.

Re:Detachable tabs? (1)

xiong.chiamiov (871823) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574592)

Tab mix plus? Granted, it's an extension, not by default, but it (along with adblock) is one of my "can't live without" extensions. The problem with Konqueror is that I can't use it on Windows. (well, not very easily)

Hole new set of features (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17574326)

Are they also raising the memory requirements for the hole features they are adding? Sorry, I'll be right back, I need to go make a leak..

Looking forward to Bookmarks improvements! (3, Interesting)

KlaymenDK (713149) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574344)

I for one am very much looking forward to improvements in the Bookmarks department.

How it was in Mozilla was actually better than Firefox now, the context menu in the app/toolbar menus were so good you'd hardly ever need to use "Manage Bookmarks".
Anyway, people are allegedly no longer using bookmarks in favour of tag clouds and what-have-you ... probably why it was never deemed important enough to implement the store-your-bookmarks-on-an-FTP which has been discussed for so long.

Re:Looking forward to Bookmarks improvements! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17574582)

How about better support for sites that aren't compliant? Fuck the new features. Make sure the main one (browsing!) works on all sites.

Re:Looking forward to Bookmarks improvements! (3, Informative)

Majin Bubu (455010) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574668)

Actually, Google offers a tool that does bookmarks syncing, among other things. Not perfect, but it mostly works. Has potential dangers to privacy, but is very convenient.

I predict for IE 8... (4, Funny)

rsilvergun (571051) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574366)

It will include an improved add-on experience, provide an extensible bookmarks back-end platform, add more support for web services "to act as content handlers" - all of which show that Internet Explorer wants to be an independent information broker rather than a simple HTML renderer in its next version. Oh, and it'll come up not long after Firefox v.3...

It worked last time :).

'within 18-24 months' (0, Flamebait)

It's a thing (968713) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574398)

Translation: several years.

IE8 and Vista Integration (3, Funny)

andrewd18 (989408) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574454)

MS-Approved Craplets For Everyone!

mohD up (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17574480)

I wonder if... (5, Funny)

ProppaT (557551) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574484)

I wonder if this will be known as FFVI in Japan?

Re:I wonder if... (4, Informative)

Elf_h34d3r (955909) | more than 7 years ago | (#17575552)

Mod Parent Up!

It seems to be common to misuse FF as the FireFox abbreviation. Indeed, I can produce countless IRC logs of instances when users bash each other for using incorrect abbreviations.

Often, the FF acronym is associated with Final Fantasy, (FFVI was released in America as FFIII for anyone who doesn't get the reference).

For the record, the proper abbreviation is Fx [mozilla.org] .

Re:I wonder if... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17575650)

That's six...I hear verizon has some job openings...

Rushing IE8 (2, Funny)

krunoce (906444) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574528)

According to ActiveWin.com, a Microsoft official at CES told them that work has already begun for IE 8 and it may be released as a final product 'within 18-24 months'

Hole-y crap!

Re:Rushing IE8 (0, Offtopic)

Chyeld (713439) | more than 7 years ago | (#17575404)

Microsoft Food for Windows

Monday, 10 AM -- Chicago, Illinois -- Start-up software developer Cuisine International announced CUISINENET, the first internetworking program to seamlessly integrate word and food processing. Called breakthrough for small restaurants and snack bars, Cuisine Chairman Mark Meigs confidently predicted sales of thousands of copies with shipments soon to begin.

Monday, 4 PM -- New York -- Cuisine International shares closed sharply higher on announcement of new CUISINENET product.

Tuesday, 9 AM -- Redmond, Washington -- Microsoft Chairman William H. Gates, III announced that Microsoft Food for Windows would soon enter beta testing. Gates described the product as the first of a projected family of products to include Food for Windows, designed for small commercial dining establishments; Personal Food for Windows, designed for home kitchens; Portable Food for Windows, designed for lunchboxes; and, of course, at the high end, Food for Windows NC (Nouvelle Cuisine) designed for large institutional dining rooms. Asked by a reporter about CUISINENET, Gates said that he had never heard of the product, but was not surprised by it, because the software business is highly competitive, and Microsoft has to compete on the merits with many strong competitors, as the FTC had recently concluded.

Tuesday, 3 PM -- Chicago, Illinois -- An angry Mark Meigs showed reporters a copy of the nondisclosure agreement signed by Bill Gates, under which Cuisine International had informed Microsoft a year earlier about plans for CUISINENET. Meigs said that in hindsight, he should never have signed the agreement, as the only thing he learned from Microsoft was that Gates was considering making changes to Windows.

Wednesday, 9 AM -- Redmond, Washington -- Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates announced that Microsoft would soon publish specifications for the Windows Open Kitchen Architecture (WOKA), a series of design specifications to permit manufacturers of toasters, ranges, and other kitchen appliances to integrate their products into the forthcoming Microsoft Food for Windows line. Asked about reports of a nondisclosure agreement with Cuisine International for a similar product, Gates said that the other product was really at most a niche product, and would probably have less functionality than the food-related features that Microsoft would be building into the new Unsaturated FAT File System which would be part of DOS 9.0. Gates said that he doubted there would be much interest in a dead-end solution that would not be able to keep up to date with advances in WOKA. Gates added that over 11,000 manufacturers of kitchen appliances were already having serious discussions with Microsoft about WOKA, and that he expected almost all important eaters of food to standardize on the WOKA environment.

Wednesday, 10 AM -- Redmond, Washington -- Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates announced that he would be giving the keynote speech at the American Bakers annual convention on "Nutrition at Your Fingertips." Gates played down speculation that he would use the Bakers convention to introduce Microsoft Food for Windows, saying only that alpha testing was proceeding ahead of schedule, and the product would be shipped when it was ready.

Wednesday, 11 AM -- Redmond, Washington -- Microsoft Corporation announced that its Chairman, William H. Gates, III, had made a donation of over $250 of personal funds to the Cordon Bleu to begin an endowment fund for the Bill Gates Professorship of Advanced Cookery. The famous French cooking school confirmed that it had agreed to be a beta site for the much discussed Food for Windows application sweet.

Thursday, 9 AM -- New York -- PCWeek Magazine reported in a copyrighted story that it had obtained a copy of correspondence from Microsoft to Cuisine International, demanding that the small developer of kitchen software cease using the Cuisine name, as it infringes on the trademark for Microsoft Food for Windows NC. Microsoft added that Chairman Mark Meigs would also have to change his own name as Mark infringed a copyright on the Windows Edit menu, Meigs infringed the trademark on Meigs Field in Microsoft Flight Simulator, and Chairman infringed the trademark on Bill Gates's title which he had acquired with personal funds from Mao's estate. Also, Microsoft advised that while the company did not actually have to move out of Chicago, use of the name on press releases infringed a trademark on Windows 4.0

Thursday, 4 PM -- New York -- Cuisine International stock closed at 0-bid, 1/16-asked.

Friday, 9 AM -- ? -- An anonymous spokesman for an unnamed Midwestern software developer announced the discontinuation of operations. Undescribed legal problems were cited as the reason. Others speculated that a failure to appreciate the competitive nature of the software business may have led to the company's sudden collapse.

Monday, 9 AM -- Microsoft Internal Mail

From: billg

To: mikem

Re: Food Program

Please see if you can reassign one of the 3,000 engineers from the OS/2 virus development project to do a feasibility study on a food-related program. Not sure what it would do. Low priority.

-------

The Moral of the story: Never trust Microsoft.
Sub-Moral A: Never trust the proposed feature list of a Microsoft product.
Sub-Moral B: Never trust the proposed release date of a Microsoft product.

Main priority (1, Interesting)

slack_prad (942084) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574552)

I think their main priority should be to make it lightweight. Smaller memory footprint. Pleeeeeease.

I'd be happy... (1, Interesting)

loraksus (171574) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574630)

... with no added features as long as it stopped crashing.
Granted, this only really happens when I have 50 or so tabs open across a few windows, but that is fairly normal usage for me and boy is it annoying.
Yes, my ram's good. No, it doesn't matter if I have any extensions. No, nothing on the "yeah, this problem really doesn't exist, but if it did, you could try these steps to fix it" problem denial page.

The built in session restore feature is nice (as long as your connection can handle 2500 outbound connections at "once" as the dozens of images and the like load up, but ff 2.0 crashes at least once a day for me.

I still use it over opera and ie, but...

Re:I'd be happy... (2, Interesting)

ivan256 (17499) | more than 7 years ago | (#17575414)

With flashblock installed, I have never had a FF2 crash. I currently have 20+ tabs open in two windows. I've actually got a few flash things running, but most of them are blocked.

Try it. You may be pleasantly surprised. You'll have less crashing *and* less CPU wasting flash ads running in the background.

Fit and Finish? (4, Interesting)

adavies42 (746183) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574664)

Is anyone working on the little things? Stuff like the URL bar not getting the focus half the time when creating a new tab, or the status bar not saying "Done" when a page is actually finished? The continuous minor irritations of things like that are what make up a large part of a user's general feelings about a product, and one of the reasons I"ll always prefer to use Safari when I can.

Re:Fit and Finish? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17574966)

Pah... Safari has broken "save as webarchive" features, I have loads of pages I saved that take up many Mb each that always come up blank in Safari, I use it as little as possible.

Re:Fit and Finish? (1)

adavies42 (746183) | more than 7 years ago | (#17575486)

App-specific web archives FTL, that's what wget's for. Browsers are for browsing.

Re:Fit and Finish? (0, Troll)

Nocturnal Deviant (974688) | more than 7 years ago | (#17575772)

meh i use camino, safari doesent have tabs -.-, but camino doesent have my precious add ons ='(, well im going to be making this mac use linux soon so, who cares.

Re:Fit and Finish? (2, Informative)

adavies42 (746183) | more than 7 years ago | (#17575874)

Ex-squeeze me? Safari's had tabs for at least a couple years now.

Re:Fit and Finish? (1)

Kelson (129150) | more than 7 years ago | (#17575926)

safari doesent have tabs

Are you using Safari 0.5 beta or something? I'm fairly certain Safari has had tabs since the beginning.

Information Broker = Your new corporate overlords (1)

popo (107611) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574712)

I'm a little concerned about Firefox 3's new direction as "Information Broker" -- especially after reading TFA.

It seems to me that what we're about to witness is the steady creep of corporate interest into the browser.

Already, Mozilla makes millions from its partnership with Google (via the search box in the upper right).
As information broker, I think we're going to see pre-selective integration with applications and web services.
This is great for Amazon, Google, eBay, Yahoo!, etc.

So have we traded Microsoft for a handful of competing companies who sought to dethrone the former?

Re:Information Broker = Your new corporate overlor (1)

elcid73 (599126) | more than 7 years ago | (#17575518)

Meet the new browser, same as the old browser.

Oh boy, here we go. (1)

Overzeetop (214511) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574732)

improving the add-on experience

Yeah, it could be better - though officially supporting and easing the search for addons would be fine with me.

providing an extensible bookmarks back-end platform adding more support for web services "to act as content handlers" -- all of which show that Firefox wants to be an independent information broker rather than a simple HTML renderer in its next version.

Whoa, hey, time to get off this train. I understand this whole convergence thing, and sometimes it's good, but I'd rather try and stay a bit more basic. I'm really not interested in a 40MB FF download, and the resource hogging that goes with it. I know that the pressure is to produce a be-all, end-all application, but I'd really just prefer an efficient browser. In fact, if I had my choice (and I don't - I don't/can't do code), I'd have the whole thing installable in a single sub-folder that could just be moved wherever, whenever I wanted. The install program would simply create the folder, copy the files, and put a shortcut in the start menu - and that's just because I'm lazy.

extensible bookmarks back-end platform ? (2, Insightful)

arjay-tea (471877) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574734)

"extensible bookmarks back-end platform"

Can somebody translate this to English?

Re:extensible bookmarks back-end platform ? (1)

Kelson (129150) | more than 7 years ago | (#17575998)

Assuming it's the "Places" concept they were working on for Firefox 2 and postponed, it boils down to this:

Put bookmarks (and history, etc.) in a lightweight database instead of a big long HTML file. This will make it possible for the user to store a lot more bookmarks before performance degrades, will make it easier to search, etc.

The end (1)

jfengel (409917) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574770)

I find it interesting that there are no radical changes even on the drawing board, and that IE and FF have reached essentially the same state. We'll have vicious flame wars about how Opera users cannot imagine how FF users live without Feature X, and vice versa, but in general the web browser appears to have reached the end of their iterated approximation to the Right Web Browser.

And it's not as good as you'd hoped. Ajax applications aren't quite good enough for prime time, but there doesn't appear to be any way forward without sitting the IE/FF/Opera/etc developers in a room and getting them to agree. And even if they did, the violation of the basic web browsing contract with respect to the "back" button isn't going to have a pretty resolution.

Similarly, basic CSS pages look pretty good, but advanced ones aren't reliable. That's as much to do with CSS's failures as the browsers: designers are forced into contortions which push the edges of the implementations.

It appears to me that the next advance will have to be a step backwards before it goes forwards. For years the browser advanced because programmers added incompatible features which the other browsers gradually took up. That was easy when it was Netscape running the show, and IE was quick to follow. Now IE runs the show, and isn't willing to follow FF, at least not quickly.

Perhaps stasis on the browser side is a Good Thing. Make the existing feature sets more bullet proof, and the innovation will come from the web sites themselves.

Re:The end (1)

FLJerseyBoy (948957) | more than 7 years ago | (#17575616)

Somewhat off-topic, but (emphasis mine):
That's as much to do with CSS's failures as the browsers: designers are forced into contortions which push the edges of the implementations.
I've never understood this. Who (besides their clients) is forcing designers to do anything? Designers deciding that they "must" "push the envelope" because they "must" get this pixel aligned with that one -- or whatever the silly issue -- seem analogous, now that I think of it, to browser builders who decide they "must" (for the most inconsequential reasons) include Feature X, Y, or Z. Maybe we need a new term, Design Bloat or something like it.

FF3 (0, Redundant)

Echnin (607099) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574876)

No, no! this [wikipedia.org] is FF3. :(

Mozilla now doing embrace-extend? (0, Flamebait)

nursegirl (914509) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574904)

I'm very confused about why it's generally considered OK for Firefox to be moving out into the microformats arena. Is it because it's not a monopoly? Or because microformats have been created by others? Would it be evil for MS to start embracing microformats?

Re:Mozilla now doing embrace-extend? (2, Insightful)

Kelson (129150) | more than 7 years ago | (#17576256)

You got half-way there with the part about microformats being created by others. The key is that microformats (the "extend" part in this case) discussed so far are described openly and free to use.

If Firefox starts supporting, say, hCard and hCalendar by making it possible to send the data to the Thunderbird address book or the calendar app of your choice, there's nothing to stop Opera, Apple, or indeed Microsoft from doing the same thing. Other browser developers don't have to reverse-engineer the features, or sign an NDA, or pay for a patent license.

Embrace is good. Extend is OK too, when done in a way that makes the third step, "Extinguish," difficult to do.

Various codenames for IE 8 (1, Funny)

192939495969798999 (58312) | more than 7 years ago | (#17574922)

Crashula, Crashenstein, and the Crashback of Bloatre Lame!

SQLite (4, Informative)

obender (546976) | more than 7 years ago | (#17575020)

It's probably not so clear from the article but Firefox3 contains a relational database, sqlite which can be accessed from Javascript. This allows for a whole new class of applications to be implemented as extensions.

Re:SQLite (1)

appavi (679094) | more than 7 years ago | (#17576048)

SQLite is not a new feature in Firefox 3. It is already available in Firefox 2.0 [mozilla.org] .

What version of IE will it comply with standard? (1)

stretchsje (999497) | more than 7 years ago | (#17575280)

After all the promises of better CSS support in IE7, the Acid Test [webstandards.org] still looks downright embarrassing.

Seen elsewere but... (1)

Psicopatico (1005433) | more than 7 years ago | (#17575344)

...but indeed very funny:

Do you want to see the features Firefox is going to include? Go get Opera.

*ducks*

CSS (1)

lonechicken (1046406) | more than 7 years ago | (#17575430)

Web Standards & Compatibility (e.g. ACID2, CSS2.1...
Should I hold my breath as to whether some CSS "bugs" ever gets fixed in Firefox? Ever since version 0.x beta whatever, a couple of CSS things still irk me that might not be bugs but really look "wrong."

Add CSS borders around images and then make them change colors when hovering. Looks like it should in IE. In FF, it looks like a bucket underneath the image instead of a box around the image. Something like |_|
Make a div or table float to the left or right and place a table of data beneath it. In FF, the floating item is super-imposed into the table instead of pushing it down.

Re:CSS (3, Informative)

Kelson (129150) | more than 7 years ago | (#17576344)

When you get a chance, check out the current nightly trunk builds. Just after Firefox 3 alpha 1, they merged in the "reflow branch" which includes a bunch of CSS improvements and passes Acid2 [howtocreate.co.uk] .

FIX CSS ALREADY (1)

mookie-blaylock (522933) | more than 7 years ago | (#17575514)

After dealing with IE7 in a lot more hands-on basis, it seems like some of the more obvious bugs have been fixed. And yet, some of the far more annoying ones (bizarre li padding -- either the whitespace bug or too much padding in a LI despite padding/margining to 0 (and yes, I've got a valid doctype)) still are around. Of course, MS "fixed" the !important hack, which would have made the situation reasonable. I know, hacks are bad, but IE conditional comments feel far more offensive than the !important hack.

...no plans for privacy features within FireFox ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17575612)

In FireFox 2.0 some aspects of privacy features have been banned from GUI configuration. Without knowledge about the configuration settings in about:config the users cannot disable loading of pictures that come from external sites to the site where an HTML file has been loaded and it's almost impossible to deny the usage of the new 'super cookie'. It would be very welcome if the FireFox development team would accept privacy as one of their goals.

mo3 3own (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17575668)

geeting togetHer to Of OpenBSD versus

How about some real security (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17575776)

Stop crashing for no apparent reason like Firefox 2 (I reverted to Firefox 1.5). Try reaching Common Criteria EAL 2. Allow plug-ins to crash without taking out the browser. Limit rights and access given to plug-ins. That would be a nice start.

multi-threaded UI yet? (2, Interesting)

Tumbleweed (3706) | more than 7 years ago | (#17575872)

Anyone know if this is in the pipeline for FF3? *sigh*
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>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...