The Fix is In!

Sunday February 27th, 2000

For those of you on Win9x, grab today's (2-27-00) build. The performance fix is in (the disabling of timing code) that results in a substantial speedup. For example, in today's build, Tinderbox loads in 5 seconds on my line, vs. 14.56 seconds on the 2-25-00 nightly. Reload: 3.9 seconds, vs. 14.23 seconds. Other pages show the same speedup (and you can run two builds side-by-side to see for yourself).

#1 Other platforms too?

by Waldo

Sunday February 27th, 2000 1:18 PM

Is this a win** only fix? Or will the benefits of the timing code being removed also affect other platforms? Also, this just a fix to a slowness problem that's only been around for a week, right?

Slightly offtopic-- someone in the .ui newsgroup submitted these splash pages at and there's been talk about maybe having a mozillazine splash page contest. Just thought it might be fun, albeit pointless... I suppose it's more important we have a splash that goes with the overall ui and look of mozilla than simply a cool splash on its own. We don't just want everything cool, we want it all (splash, ui, throbber, etc.) to match w/itselftoo. Hmmm.

And finally, did anyone else notice that in recent builds if you click on one of the stories in the side panel (say, in the Mozillazine panel) the appropriate page loads on the right, but with a strange header that contains links to My Netscape, Netcenter, Download Netscape, etc. Not all panels do it. Anyone know how that comes to be there?


#5 forget splash pages

by pbreit

Sunday February 27th, 2000 2:03 PM

let's forget about splash pages. they serve no practical value and will just remind users that mozilla is a bloated app while ie is a lean and fast os feature. i want moz to load nearly as fast as a window would after double-clicking a directory.

#7 Then we all suffer...

by mozineAdmin

Sunday February 27th, 2000 2:07 PM

The reason IE loads faster than Communicator is that it loads many dll's at bootup - something that I would do without -- if MS gave me a choice.

IE certainly isn't lean by any measure, and Mozilla is already faster in many other respects.

#9 Re: Then we all suffer...

by aengblom

Sunday February 27th, 2000 2:20 PM

You may do without, but many wouldn't. For most modem users, the internet means signing on (maybe even starting AOL) and then opening a browser. That task takes time. When I was on my campus network, I opened up my browser all the time. Netscape was such a bother if I closed it, I had to wait 5 - 10 seconds to type in the url i wanted. For the future with always-on internet connections, a checkbox that would load netscape fast (but decrease overall system rescources) might be an idea worth looking at.

On the other side, as my computer has reached over a year and a half of heavy use and bug fixes, my IE opens slowly (it also has to load a proxy now which does't help) and crashed 60-70% of the time I print anything! Arrgh! Need something better! :)

#24 "Lean" on Mars maybe

by Kovu

Sunday February 27th, 2000 6:17 PM

Ha! Get this guys, IE is "lean"! That's very funny, yuk, yuk. Mozilla's going to have a splash screen, so does IE, so does Netscape.

#29 Re: "Lean" on Mars maybe

by Tanyel

Sunday February 27th, 2000 11:18 PM

Internet Explorer seems "lean" compared to Mozilla. Netscape seems to run much better though, even with Internet Explorer constantly loaded. I hope Mozilla is eventually that way.

#46 Re: forget splash pages

by Quelish

Monday February 28th, 2000 9:00 AM

I kinda like splash pages. They're a "lost art" if you ask me.

But as a compromise, how about keeping the splash screen and setting up an option in the configuration to not display it on startup? Winamp does that, and it seems to work pretty well.

#47 Re: Disable splash

by WillyWonka

Monday February 28th, 2000 10:53 AM

Why put a pref when its already a command line. Its easy to set the icons properties (In windows) to send the command line option -quiet.

On the other hand, if it were a pref , it would never come up (no matter how you ran the program)... but I'm not even sure the prefs have been read by the time the splash screen is displayed.

#17 Re: Other platforms too?

by gerbilpower

Sunday February 27th, 2000 3:42 PM

I've been using the Mac builds on and off for the past couple of weeks and this problem, if it did affected Macs, most noticable on Win32. In fact a few days ago Mozilla on an iMac (233MHz/266MHz/333Mhz, not sure, but has 64 megs of RAM) was BLAZINGLY faster than than the Win32 build on my AMD K6-II 450MHz with 96 megs RAM

With today's builds, not sure if the Mac builds are faster than all but it certainly did not seem slower, but Moz speed is up dramatically on my computer and it feels much more even now.


#23 Please eliminate the splash screen

by FattMattP

Sunday February 27th, 2000 6:17 PM

Well, this is my personal opinion, but I don't like splash screens. Splash screens may look neat the first time, but they get old the 2nd through the nth time.

Nothing interferes with my productivity like launching Netscape just to have a Window that I can't move, can't close, and can't send to the back, obscure what I am doing until Netscape finally finishes loading. If Mozilla does this, I think it's a big mistake. Nothing should be obscuring the existing user interface until the final interface of the program is ready and is displayed.

#27 Re: Please eliminate the splash screen

by beastie

Sunday February 27th, 2000 6:38 PM

Run mozilla.exe with the -quiet parameter.

#32 Nah, not on mac

by Waldo

Monday February 28th, 2000 12:09 AM

Before the splash screen, launching mozilla would create a LONG-ASS period of staring at nothing-- locked out of the computer while the app is loading.

A splash screen at least can be used to tell you what's going on (ie, "Loading thing #1...initializing thing #2...") to let you know that it IS doing something and help pass the time..


#36 Re: Please eliminate the splash screen

by rkl

Monday February 28th, 2000 3:38 AM

Maybe a toggle box on the splash screen then: "Show splash screen every time" then ? Or put it in the Preferences somewhere if it's too early to put it in the splash screen.

Personally, like someone else suggested, I'd like a status line on the splash box that says "Starting this, loading that etc., so that we've got something to look at while it loads and actually provides *functionality* rather than just, as Americans would say, "eye candy".

I have no problems with splash screens - they give user comfort that something is actually happening other than a large amount of disk activity for 20 seconds. I wouldn't agree with putting too much effort into them though - animation or other whizzy effects aren't needed.

#48 Re: Re: Please eliminate the splash screen

by Kovu

Monday February 28th, 2000 11:02 AM

If you look at the Moz splash screen, it has a black box at the bottom specifically for "Loading this, loading that," etc. Here's a hack I did from screen captures of both the Moz and NS splashes, showing the Moz splash with NSs "Loading Plugins" bit. They'll get to it. For now they're concentrating on beta stopper bugs, and I wouldn't have it any other way, myself.

#41 Re: Please eliminate the splash screen

by uksi

Monday February 28th, 2000 5:37 AM

Well, actually, besides the fact that you already know how to disable it (mozilla.exe -quiet), you can also send the splash screen to the back. It doesn't stay on top at all... So, when I've been using Mozilla last couple of days, I would just click back into the application I was using and--pah--the splash screen didn't bother me at all.

#2 "For those of you on Win9x..."

by Kovu

Sunday February 27th, 2000 1:43 PM

This evidently has little to do with other platforms. If you're asking if other platforms would benefit from the same disabling, that I don't know.

#3 What I want to know...

by Kovu

Sunday February 27th, 2000 1:44 PM

Was the code that was disabled necessary or just testing code? In other words, were they just ganking the code for a quick fix to a bug, and will have to deal with it eventually, or is it just testing code that can stay gone/problem solved...?

#4 Answer: It was just testing code. (n/t)

by mozineAdmin

Sunday February 27th, 2000 1:52 PM

#6 Best I have seen so far

by Dennis

Sunday February 27th, 2000 2:05 PM

I usualy don't say much, but this is getting very good. Keep up the good work. (I still check for scroll wheel every new build I try)

Posted with Build ID: 2000022708, Dennis

#8 Scroll wheel issues?

by mozineAdmin

Sunday February 27th, 2000 2:09 PM

The code is already there... are there issues that you have with your particular scroll wheel?

#10 My bet is...

by aengblom

Sunday February 27th, 2000 2:26 PM

My bet is that most users don't understand how the scrollwheel works in Moz. It works very differently in IE. For moz (as far as i've found with my mswheelmice) you must press down on the wheel when the pointer is over the scroll bar. This "locks" the scroll bar and allows the user to move around in the page. I find this technique far less helpful than IE's implementation. That allows you to click anywhere, move in any direction etc.

#16 Re: My bet is...

by Ben_Goodger

Sunday February 27th, 2000 3:40 PM

this is not true on windows.. scrolling while anywhere over a scrolling document scrolls the document....

#19 Re: Re: My bet is...

by Tanyel

Sunday February 27th, 2000 4:51 PM

It seems necessary to click on the window before the scroll wheel works. It would be better if just moving the cursor over the window was enough. It should also work for scrollbars within forms, not just the main scrollbars.

#26 Unrealistic I think

by Kovu

Sunday February 27th, 2000 6:25 PM

You have to take into account that A) the browser window has to be the active window and B) that such a feature would go nuts with frames pages.

#30 I think some people enjoy disagreeing with me.

by Tanyel

Sunday February 27th, 2000 11:36 PM

In Internet Explorer, I managed to separately scroll through both frames of a Website and the only thing I clicked on was the "Home" button I used to reach the Website.

In Netscape, I was able to scroll through the "Response" part of this form by clicking on it, and able to scroll through the entire Webpage by clicking outside of the form. I switched between them both several times.

Is it still unrealistic?

#54 Re: I think some people enjoy disagreeing with me.

by Ben_Goodger

Monday February 28th, 2000 6:36 PM

I just tested the example you gave and verified that this works like IE in Mozilla. (Win98, HP Wheel mouse)

#55 Re: Re: I think some people enjoy disagreeing with

by Dennis

Monday February 28th, 2000 7:22 PM

I seem to be in the minority for working/non-working wheel mice. I do have the latest Logitech drivers. Could someone point me to some place to get different/generic mouse drivers? Or should I breakdown and get a different mouse?


#57 Just get a different browser n/t

by Tanyel

Monday February 28th, 2000 9:47 PM


#58 :)

by Tanyel

Monday February 28th, 2000 9:54 PM

I think you are right. It was not working when I posted the original message. This is good.

#59 Hey Flunkie

by Tanyel

Monday February 28th, 2000 10:01 PM

Try using the scrollwheel with the cursor outside of the browser window, but while the browser still has the focus. I would like to know what happens.

#61 I love Access Violations </sarcasm> (n/t)

by Hendy99

Tuesday February 29th, 2000 12:51 AM


#40 Other apps don't scrollwheel without focus

by leafdigital

Monday February 28th, 2000 4:56 AM

Try it with other apps - when I tried (can't now, I'm at work & have a wheelless mouse) I found that the scrollwheel *never* seems to work unless the window has focus.



#45 Are we misunderstanding me again?

by Tanyel

Monday February 28th, 2000 7:44 AM

If you are using the Web browser, it will probably have the "focus". I was not saying the scrolling should work while you are playing solitaire. I was saying the scrollwheel should work for whatever part of the browser window the cursor is currently over, without having to click on a particular element inside the browser window. This has already been implemented in Internet Explorer, except for the part concerning forms. The form window scrolling has been implemented in Netscape, for goodness sake. It can be done, and it would make using the browser much easier.

#50 Totally agree

by damian

Monday February 28th, 2000 1:27 PM

That sounds like a seriously good idea. I'm sure it isn't too far-fetched either. I think it should be available as an option in preferences, just in case people don't like or weren't expecting this behaviour. Could also include making the keyboard scroll in the frame or list box that the mouse is over. You should write this as a suggestion in bugzilla, being as specific as possible about how it should work.

#12 Re: Scroll wheel issues?

by Dennis

Sunday February 27th, 2000 2:51 PM

I am using a Logitech First Mouse Plus - Three button including wheel button.

Logitech MouseWare Control Center version 8.62.192

Mouse Driver version: 8.61

It works with everything else, Netscape version 4.7, Word Perfect Suite 8, StarOffice 5.1a, etc. but does nothing in Mozilla. I have checked Edit|Preferences|Mouse Wheel and tried different settings to no avail.

Open to suggestions, Dennis

#14 Re: Re: Scroll wheel issues?

by Hendy99

Sunday February 27th, 2000 3:30 PM

Tried using Office97 compatible scroll only? Works like a charm :)

#18 Re: Scroll wheel issues?

by Dennis

Sunday February 27th, 2000 3:56 PM

Yes I have tried Office97 compatible scroll only. That does NOT work here. It does nothing for Mozilla and breaks part of the scroll in Netscape 4.7.

#20 Re: Still no go -Scroll wheel issues?

by Dennis

Sunday February 27th, 2000 4:58 PM

I just updated to Logitech's 9.00.94 Control Center and 9.0 Drivers. Still cannot scroll in Mozilla on this Windows 95 machine.

I have tried all the settings I can think of. Any further comments appreciated. Dennis

#13 It works fine for me..

by peternn

Sunday February 27th, 2000 2:54 PM

The scrollwheel works fine for me. No problems at all...

#15 Re: Scroll wheel issues?

by wookie

Sunday February 27th, 2000 3:34 PM

My scroll wheel used to work but after they submitted the fix it stopped working. I was just hoping it would start working again someday.

#11 Trackpoint support?

by cmpute

Sunday February 27th, 2000 2:45 PM

How about Trackpoint support? I have an IBM ThinkPad, and everytime I use Mozilla I try to scroll with the trackpoint's scroll feature, just to be reminded that it doesn't work. But it is only with gfx scrollbars it won't work, with standard Windows scrollbars there's no problems.

Guess I should try and learn to use BugZilla, and post a bug about it :-)

#25 My scrollwheel works perfectly

by Kovu

Sunday February 27th, 2000 6:22 PM

I've got Win9x, the above build, and a Kensington scrolling mouse and all I have to do is click in a page and scroll up or down. No locking scrollbar or anything. Actually it's been this way for at least the last month. Couldn't tell you why your isn't working the same way.

#28 Scrolling Mouse - no go

by barryp

Sunday February 27th, 2000 10:40 PM

I've got a MS IntelliMouse & WinNT - and it's never worked with Mozilla. Works fine with IE, Netscape 4.7, and several other apps - so it seems like Mozilla is definitely the odd man out here.

#51 Re: Scrolling Mouse - no go

by beastie

Monday February 28th, 2000 2:04 PM

I have the exact same setup and everything works fine. The only thing is that I have to left-click in the appropriate frame before the wheel will be recognized.

#56 Re: Re: Scrolling Mouse - no go

by barryp

Monday February 28th, 2000 7:49 PM

That's bizarre. Just for the record, I've got WinNT 4.0, SP6a, a Microsoft Intellimouse 1.1a ps/2 compatible, and just dl'ed Intellipoint 3.1a english drivers today, and Mozilla from last night's build - and it still doesn't work, no matter where I click.

The only thing that -does- work, is clicking on the scrollbar with the wheelbutton, which then locks the scrolling of the window to mouse movements (but not the wheel).

I'm a bit surprised how dependent I've become on that wheel, and it's very annoying to have one program that it doesn't work with

#65 Re: Scrolling Mouse - no go

by beastie

Tuesday February 29th, 2000 10:44 AM

I didn't know about that clicking on the scrollbar thing. I don't know if I like it or not.

I'm running with sp5 and a 1.1a mouse, so pretty much the same setup as you. The main difference is that I've never installed IntelliPoint. I'm using the basic "Microsoft PS/2 Mouse with Wheel" mouse driver. I wonder if that's it. Maybe try changing your mouse driver to this basic one and see if it works. If it does, file a bug that the wheel doesn't work when IntelliPoint is installed.

#60 Re: Best I have seen so far

by Tanyel

Monday February 28th, 2000 10:11 PM

I see the mouse wheel options make use of the various shift keys to scroll up and down, or to go through the history list. It would be nice if one of the options was to scroll horizontally instead of just vertically.

#21 Mozilla likely to be primarily a Windows app

by GJK

Sunday February 27th, 2000 5:18 PM

It's looking more and more like Mozilla will be engineered primarily to be a Windows app. Mac and Unix users are certainly seeing a second-rate app in the milestones and nightlies.

#22 That's unfounded

by mozineAdmin

Sunday February 27th, 2000 5:50 PM

Please back up your claim with some real data. You imply that the Mac and Linux developers are doing a half-assed job, an implication I'm sure they don't appreciate. They're working towards platform parity, and it might not occur overnight. I believe your conclusion that "Mozilla will be engineered primarily to be a Windows app" is quite premature, and utterly unfounded at this point in the development process.

The news item for this forum in no way should give *anyone* the impression that Mac and Linux performance is taking a back seat to Windows performance. The fact is that this performance fix brings performance on Win98 back in line with its performance at Milestone 13. It's not an performance improvement in the code, and not even a fix of a regression. It is simply the turning off of timing instrumentation that was slowing down the app.

#49 Re: That's unfounded

by GJK

Monday February 28th, 2000 11:34 AM

By all means no, I do not believe that Mozilla's Mac and Linux developers are doing a half-assed job. In fact, I'm sure they're doing a herculean job, probably in spite of what those developers are used to experiencing in the form of resistance from their management.

It's my impression, however, from running milestones on all three platforms for quite some time now, that it "feels" much more finished under Windows than either of the other two. We're used to thinking of beta as a feature-complete stage, where the application itself doesn't change significanly prior to release. If Mozilla goes to beta now, it will not be anywhere near as "finished" an app under Mac OS or Unix as it is under Windows. That's my impression, and I challenge anyone to try the same comparison and find differently.

#53 Resistance smishtance

by Kovu

Monday February 28th, 2000 5:23 PM

One thing perhaps you could take into account is that there are far fewer developers for those platforms in existence, and the same goes at any company. If Mac and Linux users want to help out more to take up some of the slack, they should, but there are just not enough of them out there to keep up with the others. If I wanted to cry about lack of support for an Amiga build, I could, but again, there just aren't the developers out there. Actually I think the Mac and Linux builds are doing pretty good considering the huge lack of developers.

#63 Re: That's unfounded

by johnlar

Tuesday February 29th, 2000 7:33 AM

Well, its mainly unfounded. But they are putting more importance to features in the windows builds. This is mainly due to the fact that windows users expect a bit too many features. Mainly mail/news is one of those features that is windows only, simple because windows users expect it.

#66 GJK

by GJK

Tuesday February 29th, 2000 12:02 PM

I just can't see how my opinion's so unfounded. Have you actually _used_ the builds on different platforms?

I hope Mozilla's a great cross-platform browser as much as anyone. Based on the evidence so far, though, I certainly have cause to be critical. Remember, the company says this product's going beta within sixty days. There's easily six _months_ worth of work left to really achieve platform parity.

#64 Re: That's unfounded

by johnlar

Tuesday February 29th, 2000 7:33 AM

Well, its mainly unfounded. But they are putting more importance to features in the windows builds. This is mainly due to the fact that windows users expect a bit too many features. Mainly mail/news is one of those features that is windows only, simple because windows users expect it.

#39 Re: Mozilla likely to be primarily a Windows app

by locka

Monday February 28th, 2000 4:33 AM

Maybe other platforms are not as fast as they can be yet but they're still pretty fast. I downloaded the Linux version not long back and the browsing speed was better than the NC4.6 I had running on the same box.

I think the key thing to remember is that from a engineering standpoint, it's better to get things complete and working correctly in the first place before screwing around with optimizations (aside from obvious one liners and the like).

IMHO the biggest problem affecting performance at the moment (aside from the reflow issues) is the memory leakage and the amount of temporary memory being used.

#31 Very Impressed

by JCaris

Monday February 28th, 2000 12:03 AM

I downloaded the build and must say that I am very impressed with the progress. I have been using Mozilla off on on, mostly experimently. Quite frankly, I found that Netscape was more stable and faster. However, I can now say fairly confidently that Mozilla is definitely faster than Netscape now and it is getting very stable. It is starting to look like I will be able to open many windows--as is my browsing habit--without Mozilla crashing. I am considering switching over to the browser full time.

I have a question, though. In a previous build, I imported my bookmarks and other settings from Netscape over into Mozilla. I have now lost those settings and want to redo the import. However, I cannot figure out how. I believe it was initially done during setup, but am not sure. Can someone tell me how to get to this feature so I can reimport my settings? Thanks.

Joel Caris -- Posted with Mozilla Build ID: 2000022708

#33 Re: Very Impressed

by Waldo

Monday February 28th, 2000 12:13 AM

Dunno about your platform, but on the mac I just copied the bookmarks.html file from my Netscape preferences folder over teh bookmarks.html in the documents folder (well I think it's like documents/mozilla/users50/mozProfile/) which is created when you run mozilla for the first time.


#34 Re: Very Impressed

by JCaris

Monday February 28th, 2000 3:01 AM

Hmmm, tried that and it didn't work. I'll have to play with it some more and see if I can get that to work.

Joel Caris

#35 New Question

by JCaris

Monday February 28th, 2000 3:25 AM

Ok, I got the bookmarks into Mozilla, realizing that my mistake was that I needed to rename my bookmarks.htm file in Netscape to bookmarks.html for Mozilla. Now, I have another question. How do I set a folder to be the Personal Toolbar folder, so that the bookmarks show up on the top toolbar? I have basically consolidated all my used bookmarks into a series of folders accessible through the personal toolbar in Netscape 4.7 and I want to do the same in Mozilla. I know it's possible using the personal toolbar at the top. I just need to know how to designate a folder as my personal toolbar. Thanks to anyone who can help.

Joel Caris -- Posted with Mozilla Build ID: 2000022708

#37 Re: New Question

by basic

Monday February 28th, 2000 4:06 AM

You are suppost to be able to do it in the menu->Bookmarks->Manage Bookmarks (Alt/Ctrl-B)

But it doesn't work yet. I heard somewhere that drag-n-drop might be implemented too, but it was a long time ago (obviously it is still not hooked up). The only way I can think of is to edit/hack bookmarks.html yourself. The "folder" you are interested would be "Personal Toolbar Folder". Shouldn't be too hard.


#44 Here's how

by asa

Monday February 28th, 2000 6:59 AM

Joel, If you want to import all your 4.x settings/information then delete your mozregistry.dat file and run mozilla -installer. The -installer option will open a Profile Manager and selecting one of your old 4.x profiles from the list will let you migrate the profile. You can also run mozilla -ProfileManager at any time to select another 4.x profile or another 5.0 profile you've created. I believe that you must first kill that mozregistry.dat file. Good luck and if this doesn't work for you stop in at #mozillazine on IRC and I'll be glad to help troubleshoot with you.


#38 M14

by basic

Monday February 28th, 2000 4:15 AM

Can we expect M14 soon? Like next week? Since we are starting to see M15 nightly builds...


#52 Re: M14

by thelem

Monday February 28th, 2000 3:33 PM

In short, yes. This is always the case with new milestones (it signifies branching has occured, so the finishing touches are being put to the new milestone).


#42 Performance Improvements Still Needed

by theforest

Monday February 28th, 2000 6:07 AM

I've been testing nightly builds and milestones for quite some time and have noticed some improvement in the area of performance. However, I hope that further performance improvements are yet to come. There are still certain web pages that mozilla takes an extraordinary amount of time to load. An example is the Java 1.2 API documentation on Suns website ( Mozilla takes over 20 seconds to fully load this page, compared to less than half of that for the "other" browsers. Keep up the good work- its definitely getting there.

#43 That's a known issue. (n/t)

by mozineAdmin

Monday February 28th, 2000 6:19 AM

#62 "Leak" status ;-)

by basic

Tuesday February 29th, 2000 1:39 AM

Anyone know what is Mozilla's overall "leak" status? ;-Þ

Opening a second (or third) window in Moz is a pain. And the memory is not free"d" after that! (Win98 32MB RAM here)

I would be willing to add more RAM to my PC for better performance, but I think Moz can do better. Can anybody point me to the right bug to track in bugzilla? (or the right newsgroup?)