I just found Mozilla on my PC. Don't know where it came from.
Must admit, first thing I noticed, it's slighter faster than IE.
Must admit, first thing I noticed, it's slighter faster than IE.
Buy on AliExpress.com
Mozilla Firefox or Opera, choose your browser. (25 Viewers)
- Thread starter Martin
- Start date
Buy on AliExpress.com
Much ado about nothing, you say? Firefox' rise to power has made the list for top stories of the year. Ok so it doesn't top the list, still.. 
http://www.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=04/12/23/100251
http://www.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=04/12/23/100251
New statistic claims Mozilla has cracked the 10% barrier and now rides on 21%
story: http://www.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=04/12/29/0424213
stat: http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
story: http://www.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=04/12/29/0424213
stat: http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
When ZDNet Australia wrote yesterday afternoon about the fact that open source developers were debating the end of the Mozilla Suite (code-named 'Seamonkey'), a final verdict has not been reached. Now one has. The Mozilla Foundation announced today that "The [current] 1.7.x line will be the last set of Seamonkey products released and maintained by the Mozilla Foundation." The foundation cited the amount of work involved in maintaining both the stand-alone Web and e-mail applications Firefox and Thunderbird, as well as an integrated suite as at least one powerful reason not to continue official development of the suite. "We've committed to support the 1.7 branch some time ago," said the foundation. "If we ship 1.8 we'll need to support that as well, and we just can't manage that many versions as well as Firefox and Thunderbird releases."
#1 By AWBrian (1232 Posts) at 3/12/2005 11:20:09 AM
I'm startin' to see a pattern here. The "I told ya so" feels so good right now.
#2 By billmac (91 Posts) at 3/12/2005 11:29:20 AM
The beginning of the end for both Mozilla and Firefox. Typical opensource development with no adult leadership and quarreling factions that ultimately destroy everything they try to create.
All the experienced developers at Mozilla dont like firefox and are jealous of its limited success. While Firefox does not have any real developers but borrow the code from Mozilla and dumb it down for their stupid users.
#3 By chrishedlund (300 Posts) at 3/12/2005 11:46:24 AM
well put billmac...
#4 By fast_math (103 Posts) at 3/12/2005 12:11:46 PM
Who is to say Google wont snap this up?
After all they have been gathering, it wouldnt surprise me.
#5 By tgnb (765 Posts) at 3/12/2005 12:28:22 PM
LOL they've said they would phase out the suite in 2003.. Why is this a surprise to anyone? "I told you so" What the? What are you talking about?
This post was edited by tgnb on Saturday, March 12, 2005 at 12:29.
#6 By AWBrian (1232 Posts) at 3/12/2005 12:32:53 PM
lol @ tgnb
That's the thing...it's NOT a surprise...lol
This post was edited by AWBrian on Saturday, March 12, 2005 at 12:41.
#7 By ClosedStandards (610 Posts) at 3/12/2005 12:42:20 PM
Oh this is sweet news. ..when Firefox dies (probably within 6 months of this), cheapskate Windows XP and 2000 users will have no choice but to upgrade to Longhorn! MS's best decision was to refuse to upgrade MSIE on those old, insecure OS's. Sometimes, you just have to force people to spend money for their own good..
#8 By LinuxIsTheft (324 Posts) at 3/12/2005 1:48:00 PM
Lets have a "Name the next version of Netscape Contest" (tm).
Now that they've killed off Mozilla to hide the fact that every admitted security hole but one is in both Firefox and Mozilla (and the number of secret bugs is huge) meaning that Firefox is just a pretty front end to the crappy old junk Netscape 4, 5 6 , Mozilla, Firebird (and I'm sure I missed some) codebase, they must change names in the next 12 months.
I suggest Icarus.
#9 By Halcyon-X12 (5017 Posts) at 3/12/2005 2:27:56 PM
#1 Agreed, it was inevitable, everybody knows these projects are best dealt with by an open community. For years the OSS community has been incorporating code from Mozilla into products such as K-Meleon, Epiphany, Galeon, Camino, and others. Mozilla software will now be moving toward a more traditional OSS development model. It was counterproductive for Mozilla (and RedHat in the case of Fedora Core) to have tried to manipulate the development process. As many projects have shown, including the XFree86 project, OSS development suffers when it is placed under restrictive management designed to satisfy narrow goals. However, as X.org, CentOS, and Firefox have shown, there is always the option to fork and regain productivity, and there are always people willing to continue developing good software.
#10 By Halcyon-X12 (5017 Posts) at 3/12/2005 2:58:34 PM
If anyone's interested in finding a more detailed explanation of the process, check these out:
http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/mitchell/archives/2005/03/community_trans.html
http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/asa/archives/007707.html
#11 By sodablue (5098 Posts) at 3/12/2005 3:41:25 PM
I think the primary problem was that there never has been any consumer demand for a "suite".
#12 By cupsdell (24 Posts) at 3/12/2005 3:52:45 PM
Well, there is some demand for a suite. Despite the availability of Firefox, Thunderbird, and other standalone components of Mozilla, a few percent have chosen to stick with Mozilla (just as a few percent have chosen to stick with Netscape), and these few percent are a large fraction of those who use Gecko-based browsers.
Mozilla proponents says that (a) a suite is easier to upgrade, since there is only once thing to upgrade, (b) a suite is better integrated, (c) Mozilla has features which Firefox lacks because Firefox was designed for less technical users, and (d) Mozilla is available on more platforms.
There is some indication that volunteers may join together to make a suite similar to Mozilla.
#13 By montanagrizzly (368 Posts) at 3/12/2005 5:47:16 PM
We've known for years this was coming ... a shame since the suite was head-and-shoulders abover Firefox in my opinion.
#14 By AWBrian (1232 Posts) at 3/12/2005 7:26:00 PM
"There is some indication that volunteers may join together to make a suite similar to Mozilla."
With all the name changes, terminated projects and the like from OSS, how on earth will the consumer understand what is happening? Where is the consistency. This is one way to lose your customers. MS has done the same.
#15 By Halcyon-X12 (5017 Posts) at 3/12/2005 9:14:25 PM
They found Firefox/Mozilla in the first place... Anyway, how they handle this remains to be seen.
I'm startin' to see a pattern here. The "I told ya so" feels so good right now.
#2 By billmac (91 Posts) at 3/12/2005 11:29:20 AM
The beginning of the end for both Mozilla and Firefox. Typical opensource development with no adult leadership and quarreling factions that ultimately destroy everything they try to create.
All the experienced developers at Mozilla dont like firefox and are jealous of its limited success. While Firefox does not have any real developers but borrow the code from Mozilla and dumb it down for their stupid users.
#3 By chrishedlund (300 Posts) at 3/12/2005 11:46:24 AM
well put billmac...
#4 By fast_math (103 Posts) at 3/12/2005 12:11:46 PM
Who is to say Google wont snap this up?
After all they have been gathering, it wouldnt surprise me.
#5 By tgnb (765 Posts) at 3/12/2005 12:28:22 PM
LOL they've said they would phase out the suite in 2003.. Why is this a surprise to anyone? "I told you so" What the? What are you talking about?
This post was edited by tgnb on Saturday, March 12, 2005 at 12:29.
#6 By AWBrian (1232 Posts) at 3/12/2005 12:32:53 PM
lol @ tgnb
That's the thing...it's NOT a surprise...lol
This post was edited by AWBrian on Saturday, March 12, 2005 at 12:41.
#7 By ClosedStandards (610 Posts) at 3/12/2005 12:42:20 PM
Oh this is sweet news. ..when Firefox dies (probably within 6 months of this), cheapskate Windows XP and 2000 users will have no choice but to upgrade to Longhorn! MS's best decision was to refuse to upgrade MSIE on those old, insecure OS's. Sometimes, you just have to force people to spend money for their own good..
#8 By LinuxIsTheft (324 Posts) at 3/12/2005 1:48:00 PM
Lets have a "Name the next version of Netscape Contest" (tm).
Now that they've killed off Mozilla to hide the fact that every admitted security hole but one is in both Firefox and Mozilla (and the number of secret bugs is huge) meaning that Firefox is just a pretty front end to the crappy old junk Netscape 4, 5 6 , Mozilla, Firebird (and I'm sure I missed some) codebase, they must change names in the next 12 months.
I suggest Icarus.
#9 By Halcyon-X12 (5017 Posts) at 3/12/2005 2:27:56 PM
#1 Agreed, it was inevitable, everybody knows these projects are best dealt with by an open community. For years the OSS community has been incorporating code from Mozilla into products such as K-Meleon, Epiphany, Galeon, Camino, and others. Mozilla software will now be moving toward a more traditional OSS development model. It was counterproductive for Mozilla (and RedHat in the case of Fedora Core) to have tried to manipulate the development process. As many projects have shown, including the XFree86 project, OSS development suffers when it is placed under restrictive management designed to satisfy narrow goals. However, as X.org, CentOS, and Firefox have shown, there is always the option to fork and regain productivity, and there are always people willing to continue developing good software.
#10 By Halcyon-X12 (5017 Posts) at 3/12/2005 2:58:34 PM
If anyone's interested in finding a more detailed explanation of the process, check these out:
http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/mitchell/archives/2005/03/community_trans.html
http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/asa/archives/007707.html
#11 By sodablue (5098 Posts) at 3/12/2005 3:41:25 PM
I think the primary problem was that there never has been any consumer demand for a "suite".
#12 By cupsdell (24 Posts) at 3/12/2005 3:52:45 PM
Well, there is some demand for a suite. Despite the availability of Firefox, Thunderbird, and other standalone components of Mozilla, a few percent have chosen to stick with Mozilla (just as a few percent have chosen to stick with Netscape), and these few percent are a large fraction of those who use Gecko-based browsers.
Mozilla proponents says that (a) a suite is easier to upgrade, since there is only once thing to upgrade, (b) a suite is better integrated, (c) Mozilla has features which Firefox lacks because Firefox was designed for less technical users, and (d) Mozilla is available on more platforms.
There is some indication that volunteers may join together to make a suite similar to Mozilla.
#13 By montanagrizzly (368 Posts) at 3/12/2005 5:47:16 PM
We've known for years this was coming ... a shame since the suite was head-and-shoulders abover Firefox in my opinion.
#14 By AWBrian (1232 Posts) at 3/12/2005 7:26:00 PM
"There is some indication that volunteers may join together to make a suite similar to Mozilla."
With all the name changes, terminated projects and the like from OSS, how on earth will the consumer understand what is happening? Where is the consistency. This is one way to lose your customers. MS has done the same.
#15 By Halcyon-X12 (5017 Posts) at 3/12/2005 9:14:25 PM
They found Firefox/Mozilla in the first place... Anyway, how they handle this remains to be seen.
This is what was expected by most anyway.
I've set up both, but I still prefer the Suite. Ironically though, I have firefox set up as my default browser because it loads faster and is naturally "lighter."
I just upgraded to Mozilla 1.7.5 recently from 1.5 and I hope they keep up with updates and stuff.
I've set up both, but I still prefer the Suite. Ironically though, I have firefox set up as my default browser because it loads faster and is naturally "lighter."
I just upgraded to Mozilla 1.7.5 recently from 1.5 and I hope they keep up with updates and stuff.
:LOL:
Microsoft plays catch up with tabs
By Gregg Keizer, TechWeb
Microsoft last week divulged a few more details about its upcoming Internet Explorer 7, and admitted that its implementation of tabs -- one of the most-requested new features -- will be just "catch-up" to rivals such as Firefox and Opera.
Tony Schreiner, a Microsoft developer with the IE team, posted the lengthiest-yet description to the company's blog of how tabs would be implemented in the upcoming IE 7. The browser is expected to roll into beta sometime this year.
"Our philosophy for tabbed browsing is to keep the user in control of the experience," claimed Schreiner at the start of the blog. He then went into detail on some of the tab features IE 7 would sport.
tabs would be turned on by default, Schreiner confirmed. In some situations, windows would continue to open in new, separate frames rather than in a new tab, but ordinary pop-ups would open in a new foreground tab.
"This seems to correlate with scenarios where showing a window on top of the current window is desirable, such as replying to posts on message boards and getting a close-up view of items on shopping sites," said Schreiner.
Users would be able to open links in a new tab by middle-clicking on a three-button mouse, or Ctrl-clicking links. Keyboard shortcuts would be available for switching between tabs -- Firefox, for instance, uses Ctrl-Tab -- and users would be allowed to open tabs in the background or foreground, or open them in a new window.
At the moment, the plan is for each tab to operate on its own thread (as will each frame). Each tab is on a separate thread, and the frame is also on its own thread. Schreiner admitted that this would boost the memory footprint of IE, but argued that it would allow the browser to "feel faster and provide an overall better user experience".
One of the more surprising lines in the blog, however, is an admission that IE is behind the times, something many users -- and all Firefox proponents -- have been saying for months.
"This core functionality is largely catch-up to other browsers which support tabs," said Schreiner. "[But it's] a necessary foundation for future work."
Schreiner wouldn't spill the beans on every aspect of tabs in IE 7. When blog readers posted queries about such features as moving tabs (to better arrange the tab lineup) and asked how tabs would look, Schreiner deflected the questions. "The UI and configurability are something we can't really talk about right now," he said. "[But] there will probably be another blog post about this closer to or shortly after Beta 1 release."
Microsoft plays catch up with tabs
By Gregg Keizer, TechWeb
Microsoft last week divulged a few more details about its upcoming Internet Explorer 7, and admitted that its implementation of tabs -- one of the most-requested new features -- will be just "catch-up" to rivals such as Firefox and Opera.
Tony Schreiner, a Microsoft developer with the IE team, posted the lengthiest-yet description to the company's blog of how tabs would be implemented in the upcoming IE 7. The browser is expected to roll into beta sometime this year.
"Our philosophy for tabbed browsing is to keep the user in control of the experience," claimed Schreiner at the start of the blog. He then went into detail on some of the tab features IE 7 would sport.
tabs would be turned on by default, Schreiner confirmed. In some situations, windows would continue to open in new, separate frames rather than in a new tab, but ordinary pop-ups would open in a new foreground tab.
"This seems to correlate with scenarios where showing a window on top of the current window is desirable, such as replying to posts on message boards and getting a close-up view of items on shopping sites," said Schreiner.
Users would be able to open links in a new tab by middle-clicking on a three-button mouse, or Ctrl-clicking links. Keyboard shortcuts would be available for switching between tabs -- Firefox, for instance, uses Ctrl-Tab -- and users would be allowed to open tabs in the background or foreground, or open them in a new window.
At the moment, the plan is for each tab to operate on its own thread (as will each frame). Each tab is on a separate thread, and the frame is also on its own thread. Schreiner admitted that this would boost the memory footprint of IE, but argued that it would allow the browser to "feel faster and provide an overall better user experience".
One of the more surprising lines in the blog, however, is an admission that IE is behind the times, something many users -- and all Firefox proponents -- have been saying for months.
"This core functionality is largely catch-up to other browsers which support tabs," said Schreiner. "[But it's] a necessary foundation for future work."
Schreiner wouldn't spill the beans on every aspect of tabs in IE 7. When blog readers posted queries about such features as moving tabs (to better arrange the tab lineup) and asked how tabs would look, Schreiner deflected the questions. "The UI and configurability are something we can't really talk about right now," he said. "[But] there will probably be another blog post about this closer to or shortly after Beta 1 release."