MozillaZine

A Look Back

Friday March 31st, 2000

For Mozilla's second birthday, we have put together a brief timeline of screenshots, showing the progression of Mozilla. Without further ado, behold, A Look Back...


#1 Well done.

by fresh <icos@arez.com>

Friday March 31st, 2000 8:25 PM

Reply to this message

This is very well done. Wish I could find an old MozillaClassic binary...

used to have em.

-Andrew (<aniese@efront.com>)

#13 Re: Well done.

by Hendy99 <gbhendy1@bigpond.net.au>

Sunday April 2nd, 2000 8:47 AM

Reply to this message

Yes, I wouldn't mind getting my hands on the final MozClassic build, just to see what they did :)

Great work guys!

#15 classic build URL:

by Ben_Goodger

Sunday April 2nd, 2000 7:16 PM

Reply to this message

#18 Re: classic build URL:

by Hendy99 <gbhendy1@bigpond.net.au>

Monday April 3rd, 2000 6:13 AM

Reply to this message

Must agree that they should've tried to ship this before aiming to ship a gecko based product :)

---Posted with Mozclassic---

#20 Not bad, got an older one ?

by Flibble

Monday April 3rd, 2000 8:12 PM

Reply to this message

These 2 were pretty cool, though has anyone got a March 31 1998 build (the 1st one at a guess)?

#2 Nice Throbber!

by ywwg

Saturday April 1st, 2000 1:39 AM

Reply to this message

Is that throbber at the bottom of the page going to be the official one? It rocks!

#3 Re: Nice Throbber!

by jonde <joona.nuutinen@pp.inet.fi>

Saturday April 1st, 2000 2:09 AM

Reply to this message

yeah, but one thing that isn't so great in it: it doesn't look very...continuous, like the current 4.x one. But still, it's Great!

#4 looping the loop

by macpeep

Saturday April 1st, 2000 3:30 AM

Reply to this message

Yeah, I was thinking that too. It looks really nice, but it's as if a few frames of animation is missing when it loops. The N jumps a few pixles to the right. I sure hope they will fix that..

#5 Re: looping the loop

by thelem

Saturday April 1st, 2000 7:07 AM

Reply to this message

If you look closly it's not that the N jumps, rather that the right vertical of the N gets corrupted as the light returns down the left vertical. Look at it again.

#6 Re: looping the loop

by kerz <jason@mozillazine.org>

Saturday April 1st, 2000 9:12 AM

Reply to this message

All better. It didn't like its width/height tags.

#9 Didn't the new skin come in October?

by gerbilpower <gerbil@ucdavis.edu>

Saturday April 1st, 2000 3:58 PM

Reply to this message

Didn't the skin, the current one that people both loath and love, was released in late-October? It's listed as January 2000 on there and I know that's not correct.

<:3)~~

#10 My bad

by kerz <jason@mozillazine.org>

Saturday April 1st, 2000 4:14 PM

Reply to this message

sorry, i had the wrong date on that the shot of that, thanks for the pointer

#11 ooops, wrong thread

by gerbilpower <gerbil@ucdavis.edu>

Sunday April 2nd, 2000 3:03 AM

Reply to this message

I don't know how but how did my message end up in this thread?

<:3)~~

#7 Re: Evil Throbber!

by WillyWonka

Saturday April 1st, 2000 9:46 AM

Reply to this message

ugh... lens flairs. Don't be fooled people. Its the old throbber with a lens flair covering up most of the image. They didn't do any REAL work on the animation... its a cheap hack IMHO

Sorry, I just don't like lens flairs - they are used way too much. "Hmm this picture doesn't look too good. I know I'll add a lens flair! There, good enough to win a competition..." <sigh>

#8 Re: Evil Throbber!

by emperor

Saturday April 1st, 2000 1:49 PM

Reply to this message

It doesn't cycle when you put it on another HTML page, is there anything significant about that?

#12 Very well done

by danielhill <danielhill@hotmail.com>

Sunday April 2nd, 2000 4:27 AM

Reply to this message

Applause for the mozine people for the look back. I was thinking about how Mozilla had progressed myself.

I also wondered if it would have been better PR to have released Netscape 5 (or even 4.5) based on MozillaClassic before the first anniversary. It would've got a more CSS1 compliant browser out there.

Netscape and Mozilla.org wouldn't be under so much pressure and scrutiny to produce something quickly, and they could take their time and add more funky features.

#14 But....

by FrodoB

Sunday April 2nd, 2000 10:49 AM

Reply to this message

MozClassic really wasn't a substantial improvement in terms of standards support over 4.x. It still used the same rendering engine that had been abused for 4 versions of the software. Sure, it had some exceedingly cool new features, but it wouldn't have given much improvement in standards support.

#16 Re: But....

by danielhill <danielhill@hotmail.com>

Sunday April 2nd, 2000 9:16 PM

Reply to this message

It could do most of CSS1, right? It would've brought NSCP up to line with IE4.

It would've been an interim release until the good stuff (Netscape 6) was ready. Keep the press off their back. Keep the fans happy.

#17 Re: Re: But....

by basic <_basic@yahoo.com>

Sunday April 2nd, 2000 10:38 PM

Reply to this message

But it could have meant more bugs to work around and slower dev on the current Moz.

#19 Mozilla Animation

by steviebaby <shunt2@netscape.net>

Monday April 3rd, 2000 12:45 PM

Reply to this message

I was looking at the history section. You know how there have been three upper-right hand corner "Mozilla Is Working" animations, right? I like the second more than the third! BRING IT BACK, PLEASE!

#21 Re: Mozilla Animation

by astrosmash

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 3:06 AM

Reply to this message

Just change it yourself:

- package/chrome/global/skin/default/animthrob.gif

Or even better, use the rad new Netscape throbber