MozillaZine

Mozilla 1.2 Beta Released

Wednesday October 16th, 2002

Mozilla 1.2 Beta is here! With this latest release come new features like link prefetching, viewing toolbars as text/images/both, GTK theme for Linux Mozilla (when in the classic theme), filter after the fact and filter logging in Mozilla Mail, bookmark groups as start page, and much, much more. Along with the new features come many stability and performance improvements and new code for yet to be enabled features like XFT font support. Check out the Release Notes for more details and a list of known issues. As usual, builds are available from mozilla.org's web site or FTP server.


#1 first post!

by ph1nn <ph1nn@earthlink.net>

Wednesday October 16th, 2002 10:41 PM

Reply to this message

sweeeet, just finishing downloading it. Very nice Mozilla team!

#2 Woot - that's some cool stuff.

by ChuckChunder <paul@operamail.com>

Wednesday October 16th, 2002 11:17 PM

Reply to this message

I haven't really been following mainline Mozilla development as closely since the release of 1.0 and it's nice to see that interesting additions are still being made.

In respect to link prefetching I think it should be possible to prefetch a page with a query string when rel=prefetch as the page designer would have to specifically cause that. (The reasons stated for not doing it when rel=next are sound though).

Also I like the idea of just having it on and not having a UI for it as it should just work, but I wonder if that is entirely fair to those who pay for their bandwidth. Does prefetching know to stop prefetching if the item being downloaded has a mimetype the user does not want to see (ie Java if they have java turned off, or images if images are turned off for example)?

#3 Re: Woot - that's some cool stuff.

by macpeep

Wednesday October 16th, 2002 11:54 PM

Reply to this message

How does prefetching work with popups? Without popup blocking turned on, it will potentially result in a whole lot of new windows! Nevertheless, this sounds very interesting. There was talks about it way way back when Mozilla had just been released. I was strongly advocating it but back then, the counter argument was that it would cause too much traffic.

#4 Prefetching only downloads it to cache.

by ChuckChunder <paul@operamail.com>

Thursday October 17th, 2002 12:05 AM

Reply to this message

It doesn't create new windows for the resources it retrieves. It just means the resources will already be in cache if they are requested by the user.<bR><br> Also because prefetching needs to be specifically directed by the person creating the page it shouldn't cause an unwanted increase in traffic.<br><br>I suppose Mozilla only knows if it is idle. Eg if you have another app doing an FTP download then the Mozilla prefetching could grab bandwidth from that.

#9 re: prefetching and network bandwidth

by darinwf

Thursday October 17th, 2002 4:07 AM

Reply to this message

That is correct. We don't yet have a good way of determining whether or not another application is competing with mozilla for network bandwidth.

#14 re: prefetching and network bandwidth

by darinwf

Thursday October 17th, 2002 5:41 AM

Reply to this message

... and because of this, we only prefetch a single document at a time (instead of tying to load several documents all at once, as we would normally do when loading a regular web page).

#52 Screen Shot

by ScLAD

Thursday October 17th, 2002 2:10 PM

Reply to this message

Here is a screen shot I made. Using the GTK-X theme in Gnome 1.2 on SuSE 8.0

<http://students.cs.byu.ed…r929/gtkNativeMozilla.png>

#54 Screen Shot

by ScLAD

Thursday October 17th, 2002 2:13 PM

Reply to this message

Sorry, wrong thread :-(

#64 I hope there is a preference to turn off prefect..

by PaulB <pbergsag@home.com>

Thursday October 17th, 2002 10:10 PM

Reply to this message

Hopefully there will be a preference to turn OFF prefetching. I don't need it since I have a high speed internet connection. I don't want it because I can decide for myself which links I want opened. I don't want it because I do not want to increase the bandwidth I use. If there is no way to disable prefetching, some companies may be forced to bann Mozilla since it will increase bandwidth usage on the network.

Also I am concerned that prefetching may become a security headache. I believe someone could add a link to a page with a transparent font colour which could direct a user to porn site, or some link with other evil outcomes. Don't some companies monitor employees internet surfing and would flag any link to such sites such as porn?

I am not at all happy with prefetching and will not use any version of Mozilla with it unless prefetching can be permenantely disabled. Whose bright (opps I mean dumb) idea was it to include prefetching? Come on links should not load automatically in the background unless I first give my authorization. Is Mozilla now not concerned with security???? Sure it may improve speed on dialup, but at what cost? I believe Mozilla is sacrificing security for a speed boost on slow internet connections.

#65 Put this in your prefs.js

by skeeter

Thursday October 17th, 2002 10:49 PM

Reply to this message

Put this in your prefs.js

user_pref("network.prefetch-next", false);

#66 Should be in the regular preferences

by PaulB <pbergsag@home.com>

Thursday October 17th, 2002 11:25 PM

Reply to this message

We should not have to turn it off. A potential security threat should be turned off by default!

#67 Re: Should be in the regular preferences

by Balboa

Friday October 18th, 2002 2:14 AM

Reply to this message

It's no more a security threat than framesets are. Or iframes, or css, or objects... the list is pretty long. Read the "Security?" thread.

#89 Or links

by thelem

Sunday October 20th, 2002 6:45 AM

Reply to this message

Whats to stop someone from doing <a href=<http://www.sex.com/>>Mozilla Splashscreens</a>

Or even worse a pop under to a porno site - you're happily browsing away at work, your boss comes along and you close down your browser window(s) and what does he see?

This is not a security risk, and only prefetches pages which are very likely to be the next one to be read.

#5 "bookmark groups as start page"

by bugs4hj <bugs4hj@netscape.net>

Thursday October 17th, 2002 12:24 AM

Reply to this message

You can't select a groupmark (set of tabs) as your homepage! You can only use a set of open tabs to act as a your homepage, but that's totally different. That's not what the text says.

Again, you can't select a groupmark (or a folder) as you home page, period.

#11 Re: bookmark groups as start page

by JBassford <jasonb@dante.com>

Thursday October 17th, 2002 5:08 AM

Reply to this message

> You can't select a groupmark (set of tabs) as your homepage!

Actually, you can. All you have to do is browse to a bookmark group then set it as your home page (after closing any extraneous tabs). Functionally, you're then using a bookmark group. In fact, this allows you to do what you want PLUS set a previously unsaved group of tabs as your home page. That's additional functionality. I wouldn't be complaining about being able to do *more* than what "the text says".

Being able to go into Bookmark Manager and clicking on a checkbox to have a specific Bookmark Group as your home page is <http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=141907> - and it should now be easily implemented.

#87 Re: Re: bookmark groups as start page

by bugs4hj <bugs4hj@netscape.net>

Sunday October 20th, 2002 2:40 AM

Reply to this message

Oh no, this is not the same thing. I know what I'm talking about because I wrote it 2 years ago for MultiZilla. My tab groups can be deep nested, now try that with mozila, good luck :)

#6 Standard screenshot request

by ChuckChunder <paul@operamail.com>

Thursday October 17th, 2002 12:42 AM

Reply to this message

Anyone got some screenshots of Mozilla with with a GTK theme (or three)? I'd like to see what "GTK theme for Linux Mozilla" means in practice, and it's a while until I can get to my Linux box.

#49 Here's one from gnomedesktop.org

by mbrubeck

Thursday October 17th, 2002 1:57 PM

Reply to this message

This one was posted to gnomedesktop.org: <http://crumb.ca/crap/Screenshot.png>

#53 Screen Shot

by ScLAD

Thursday October 17th, 2002 2:12 PM

Reply to this message

Here is a screen shot I made. Using the GTK-X theme in Gnome 1.2 on SuSE 8.0

<http://students.cs.byu.ed…r929/gtkNativeMozilla.png>

#7 Security?

by jss <jeremy+mozillazine@jeremysanders.net>

Thursday October 17th, 2002 2:24 AM

Reply to this message

Are there any security aspects to this? Couldn't someone make a web page with these links to make it look like I've been looking at illegal material (e.g. child pornography)?

#8 Re: Security?

by bertilow

Thursday October 17th, 2002 3:54 AM

Reply to this message

"Are there any security aspects to this? Couldn't someone make a web page with these links to make it look like I've been looking at illegal material (e.g. child pornography)?"

That can already be done very easily with ordinary HTML and CSS. Images can be included in the page, and hidden with CSS. The images will be downloaded to your cache, without you knowing it. It can also be done with JavaScript, of course.

Even whole HTML pages can be included in iframes, again hidden with CSS.

So this prefetching thing does not really add any such security issues, besides perhaps making this kind of naughty behaviour even easier than it is already.

#10 Re: Security?

by darinwf

Thursday October 17th, 2002 4:09 AM

Reply to this message

Exactly.

#33 Re: Security - defecting from IE6 to Moz and NS .

by DJGM2002

Thursday October 17th, 2002 10:41 AM

Reply to this message

That seems to be exactly what was happening to a friend of mine who was using IE6 on WinXP. Now he has disabled IE through ZoneAlarm, and thanks to me is now a fulltime user of Mozilla and Netscape.

#12 Release notes: show toolbars as text/icons/both.

by JBassford <jasonb@dante.com>

Thursday October 17th, 2002 5:32 AM

Reply to this message

The release notes say "A long requested feature, show toolbars as text/icons/both, has been implemented." This is slightly misleading in that there's an open bug on it not working with the Modern theme under Win32 (<http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=171013>) - which is a common enough combination to make it something that should have been mentioned.

#13 Corrected link.

by JBassford <jasonb@dante.com>

Thursday October 17th, 2002 5:34 AM

Reply to this message

<sigh> This main page has a terrible URL parser.

<http://www.mozillazine.or…rg/show_bug.cgi?id=171013>

#50 Real corrected link

by mbrubeck

Thursday October 17th, 2002 1:58 PM

Reply to this message

#15 Great! But,

by pepejeria

Thursday October 17th, 2002 6:20 AM

Reply to this message

Something that scares people of new Mozilla versions is that even though they unintall the old installed version, they get serious problems. Such as not being able to download files, Mozilla not starting at all, etc etc. Difficult to explain to somebody you recommended the browser that he has to go in the application data folder (that is hidden by default) to delete a certain file so the new version works. This also happends on MAC. Just helped somebody install the new version and he was not impressed when the browser didnt even start...

#17 Read my lips

by stupiddog2

Thursday October 17th, 2002 7:44 AM

Reply to this message

M o z i l l a i s n o t a n e n d - u s e r b r o w s e r. P e r i o d.

#23 Oh, but it is...

by bmacfarland

Thursday October 17th, 2002 8:50 AM

Reply to this message

Despite what anyone in the Mozilla organization says, end-users can and do use Mozilla. I'm not saying that Mozilla has to cater to them, they certainly shouldn't if they don't want to.

From a practical standpoint though, where do you point someone who wants to try to a Gecko-based browser instead of IE? You can point them to Netscape, but everyone I know doesn't want links on their desktop for AOL. The don't want Winamp, RealPlayer, and whatever else is piggybacked on it. They don't want to go someplace to turn on the pop-up blocking. They want to use themes that may not be compatible with Netscape. They may want to try some of the functionality like tabs and mouse gestures, which didn't work for Netscape originally. Pointing someone to Netscape doesn't give any of the latest cutting edge stuff. It's hard enough to convince someone to go download a new browser (especially if it's not a broadband connection), learn a new look and feel (common response "you mean ctrl+enter doesn't insert 'www.' and '.com' in the location bar? This software is a piece of crap"), deal with sites that they deem "don't work" (common response "why doesn't a story on CNN.com look right? There's a Netscape banner at the top of the page."), just so they can do what they already did before, surf the web.

Other Gecko-based browsers are great, and we really need them, but they are also trailing Mozilla sometimes by a couple of releases.

And what development knowledge do you really need to use Mozilla? I think I went in and editted some XUL once to move a button to a different toolbar, and even then I did it just out of curiousity. If there are only a couple of minor issues and it doesn't hurt the developers, then why not make it more friendly for the end-user? The only thing that I can think of that would be extra work for Mozilla would be supporting the end-user and Mozilla doesn't and shouldn't take that responsability. I think that's 98% of the reason why Mozilla likes to not be a end-user browser.

(All comments about Mozilla's intentions are my feelings and impressions from following for two years and do not represent Mozilla's actual thoughts, opinions, or intentions. All comments about end-user's feelings have been gathered over the last year or so of trying to extend Gecko-based browsers to friends and family.)

#24 Re: Read my lips

by pepejeria

Thursday October 17th, 2002 8:54 AM

Reply to this message

Sorry, but this is one of the most stupid replies I ever seen. What does it have to do with Mozilla not being and end-user browser? Its still a serious bug that should get lots of attention.

#34 Troll

by buckminster

Thursday October 17th, 2002 11:00 AM

Reply to this message

Is the troll back?

#56 but...

by zreo2 <aa@globecom.se>

Thursday October 17th, 2002 3:32 PM

Reply to this message

Well.. Netscape is a An End - userbrowser.period and it has the same problem :/ So it's just a big bug. If you update frequently you don't get bothered with this. But if you, for example, update from Netscape 6 you might not be able to use the browser until som cache files and other files has been deleted. Guess this must be considered as a serious bug :(

#16 anyone else experiencing this problem?

by kabooom <kaboom@mail.portland.co.uk>

Thursday October 17th, 2002 7:12 AM

Reply to this message

Using Mozilla 1.2Beta: open up 3 tabs, right click on the 2nd tab (middle one) and choose 'Close other tabs' in the menu. for some reason, it doesn't seem to work anymore. im going back to Mozilla 1.1

#20 Yep

by metalcrypt <michelr@metalcrypt.com>

Thursday October 17th, 2002 8:02 AM

Reply to this message

It closes the left tab, but the middle and right tab remain open.

#27 WFM

by mesostinky

Thursday October 17th, 2002 9:53 AM

Reply to this message

Hmm, works for me on XP. I just did it with the parent being the first tab and the above two posts being the middle and last tabs. Right clicked the middle on and the other two closed fine.

#28 Correction

by mesostinky

Thursday October 17th, 2002 9:55 AM

Reply to this message

It works if the tab you want to keep is not selected. If you go to the middle tab and select it and choose "close other tabs" then all of the tabs close.

#26 Re: anyone else experiencing this problem?

by mlefevre

Thursday October 17th, 2002 9:39 AM

Reply to this message

yes.

it's apparently another symptom of the problem mentioned in bug 173703 - <http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=173703>

hopefully will be fixed before 1.2 final.

#88 Re: anyone else experiencing this problem?

by bugs4hj <bugs4hj@netscape.net>

Sunday October 20th, 2002 2:42 AM

Reply to this message

Try MultiZilla, you won't be hit by that bug.

#18 Palm Sync Not Yet Enabled?

by DPEvers <evers@battelle.org>

Thursday October 17th, 2002 7:53 AM

Reply to this message

I have not been able to find it mentioned in the release notes, and thought it had been resolved for inclusion in 1.2. Can anyone with better knowledge comment whether this feature has been included?

#30 Re: Palm Sync Not Yet Enabled?

by mlefevre

Thursday October 17th, 2002 10:08 AM

Reply to this message

palm sync is not yet included in the default build. discussion of it is in the bug <http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=155417>

#19 AGAIN no localisations possible

by TheK <kl@3dots.de>

Thursday October 17th, 2002 7:58 AM

Reply to this message

As the version numbers in numerous files are again not updated (as on 1.2alpha), it's again not possible to build Mozilla 1.2beta translations. If it'll stay this, I expect several localisation projects to die. See bug 174989 for more.

#21 Re: AGAIN no localisations possible

by KaiRo <KaiRo@KaiRo.at>

Thursday October 17th, 2002 8:11 AM

Reply to this message

#22 Page info?

by WillyWonka

Thursday October 17th, 2002 8:34 AM

Reply to this message

Is it just me or is View->Page info not working properly? Specifically the Forms, Media, and links tabs

#25 Re: Page info?

by pepejeria

Thursday October 17th, 2002 9:05 AM

Reply to this message

Check out bug 170143.

#29 Couple of questions...

by bmacfarland

Thursday October 17th, 2002 10:07 AM

Reply to this message

From the release notes... "A long requested feature, show toolbars as text/icons/both, has been implemented." How do I change this setting? I don't see anything in the preferences, and nothing in view --> show/hide --> navigation toolbar. Those are the two places I would think this would be.

Secondly, there is a new pop-up section in the Privacy & Security of the Preferences, but still a section in the advanced --> scripts and plug-ins. The one in the Privacy & Security applies to the pop-up manager, but shouldn't the ones in the advanced --> scripts and plug-ins be moved to the pop-up section? What's the difference between these two? They seem to overlap to some degree, but I'm not quite sure where.

#36 Re: Couple of questions...

by mlefevre

Thursday October 17th, 2002 12:01 PM

Reply to this message

you didn't look hard enough in preferences. in the "appearance" section (the category itself, not the subcategories), you will find the options. note that you can't select stuff that the theme doesn't support (e.g. modern doesn't have text, so whatever you do, you'll just get pictures).

the pop-ups stuff does indeed overlap and it doesn't make sense to have both - use whichever bit you want to use. i guess the UI will be rationalised at some point in the future...

#40 Thanks

by bmacfarland

Thursday October 17th, 2002 12:27 PM

Reply to this message

Thanks. I hadn't looked at the Appearance itself having deemed it mostly empty once before.

#38 Re: Couple of questions...

by JBassford <jasonb@dante.com>

Thursday October 17th, 2002 12:11 PM

Reply to this message

#31 Woah !!

by Salsaman

Thursday October 17th, 2002 10:10 AM

Reply to this message

What happened to the Close tab 'X' button ? My head hurts...

#32 No more grippies

by xerxes

Thursday October 17th, 2002 10:20 AM

Reply to this message

Hey, the grippies that enable you to quickly collapse toolbars are gone. Itís still on the sidebar though. It may seem trivial but this feature was one of the selling points for me way back to Netscape 4.x.

#37 Good !!!

by Kommet

Thursday October 17th, 2002 12:05 PM

Reply to this message

They were confusing, didn't function as new users expected, and allowed newbie users to collapse toolbars in an unusual way (i.e. differently than any other application). Grippies are gone (and have been for almost 2 weeks) until they are made to not suck. There are bugs filed to have grippies drag the toolbars (like in IE), which is more in line with expectations and established UI designs.

Believe me, this issue garnered a LOT of discussion on both sides, but after reading everything written I was convinced that grippies gotta go! :-)

You can still hide toolbars with the View menu for now. The Sidebar will keep its grippy because its use isn't confusing (multipane views are common), and because it provides actual functionality (resize sidebar).

For a full discussion, check out: <http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=112534>

Use Grippies to Drag Toolbars: <http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=172818>

#43 Awe....

by cginzel

Thursday October 17th, 2002 12:38 PM

Reply to this message

I liked the grippy as they were... but I guess we are getting more consistent toolbar behavior. but I definitely look forward to the collapse feature coming back!

#59 Re: Good !!!

by xerxes

Thursday October 17th, 2002 4:05 PM

Reply to this message

Well, I just went back to 1.1 to get my grippies back. I use this feature allot to maximize screen space when I'm on the internet so it was worth it. It is strange that a feature that has been around for years can vanish overnight because a few people voted for it in bugzilla.

#69 Re: Re: Good !!!

by pepejeria

Friday October 18th, 2002 2:30 AM

Reply to this message

No need to go back to 1.1, just use the fullscreen instead.

#74 Re: Re: Re: Good !!!

by Trucoto

Friday October 18th, 2002 6:12 AM

Reply to this message

Fullscreen mode it's too cumbersome: you can't switch windows with the taskbar, you can't use the menus, etc. The grippies were the most valuable thing to gain some space in certain pages, one click away. I came back to 1.1 as well.

#44 I'll miss the grippies

by mbrubeck

Thursday October 17th, 2002 12:40 PM

Reply to this message

I understand the reasons for removing the grippies (they aren't standard, don't work as most users expect), but I'll miss them anyways because I was used to them and used them often. Using the View->Show/Hide submenu is much slower, and Full Screen doesn't work correctly on my Windows multihead box at work (stupid ATI drivers). It would be nice to be able to right-click on a toolbar and have a menu option to hide it, at least...

#55 Not as good as before, but better than now

by SubtleRebel <mark@ky.net>

Thursday October 17th, 2002 3:10 PM

Reply to this message

"It would be nice to be able to right-click on a toolbar and have a menu option to hide it, at least..."

Ideally I would prefer that grippies were at least offerred via a hidden pref for the loyal Mozilla users who want to be able to __minimize__ the Toolbars rather than only being able __hide__ them.

However, I agree that if we can not be allowed to have the minimize feature, it would certainly be nice to have a context menu option to hide them instead of being force to go through a menu and submenu in order to almost accomplish what we were previously able to do with a simple click.

Is there a bug filed requesting the context menu item? The hardest part of implementation would probably be the fact that the toolbars themselves do not offer a lot of real estate to click on for a context menu.

#73 Re: I'll miss the grippies

by leafdigital

Friday October 18th, 2002 3:19 AM

Reply to this message

Gawd, I can hardly believe there's anyone in the whole world who liked grippies. For me and everyone I knew the grippies had one sole purpose: as a mis-click magnet. Every time you slightly missed the file menu or the back button, BOOM, not only does whatever you wanted not happen (fair enough) but there goes the toolbar/menu you were trying to click on!

That said, perhaps for those who actually need to hide toolbars it would be useful to add key shortcuts. There's already a key shortcut for the sidebar, maybe (if we're not running out of keys!) shortcuts could be added for the toolbars.

I would strongly suggest that in the unfortunate event that any similar section returns (grippies or more-standard-but-still-stupid draggable toolbars), we at least ensure that it does *not* apply to the menu bar. I believe even Microsoft have now given up that particular insanity.

--sam

#93 Re: Re: I'll miss the grippies

by os2baba <milindr@bellsouth.net>

Sunday December 1st, 2002 10:35 PM

Reply to this message

I'm sorely missing the grippies from the later Mozilla builds. I used them extensively. I did not know what they were called. It took me a lot of searching to know that they were called grippies and then find the bug request to have them restored. Unfortunately, it's been marked as 'WONTFIX". Pretty autocratic!

- Milind

#51 UI polish....

by macpeep

Thursday October 17th, 2002 2:03 PM

Reply to this message

No big deal one way or the other but what I don't like is how stuff like this gets checked in even though it causes obvious visual bugs in the UI. Under modern, there is now no spacing under the URL bar and throbber, which causes the navigation toolbar to be vertically mis-aligned.

The browser is starting to be very nice now and I've finally switched from IE 6 to Mozilla as my primary browser. There are still a lot of small quirks though. Sometimes when you click on a link and then just as it starts loading and displaying you click back, you end up somewhere that isn't where you were a moment ago but further back in the history. Also, sometimes the back button is disabled when you arrive at a page after clicking on a link.

Other weirdness includes stuff like some HTML generated from DocBook with XSL displaying wrong for no good reason at all. Some nested structures just start going wrong after a certain depth or certain amount of elements. The files validate correctly and hand-checking them and simplfying also shows that there's no logical reason to why they would fail to render right at the point that they do. IE displays the stuff correctly. But all in all, the browser is very stable. Still not a single crash for me for Mozilla 1.1 after two weeks of use as the primary browser on three separate machines (all with Windows 2000).

Some UI quality issues still remain.. The progress bar in the classic theme is very obviously misaligned, the borders around various widgets in the Mail & News app are extremely inconsistent. It's hard to find two tree widgets that would have the same borders, in fact! In the Mozilla help window, there are column headers for some of the trees even though there's no title in the column. Clicking on it once reverses the sort order. Clicking on it twice hides it and there's no way of getting it back. What's up with that?!

In Mail & News, the Get Msgs button is *STILL* disabled until you press the folder or thread pane.

These kinds of issues are still keeping me from wanting to switch from Netscape 4.8 to Mozilla for email.. I don't really understand why these kinds of relatively simple issues haven't been fixed yet. Some of these have been in there - and very obvious and in-your-face for quite some time now. Perhaps there should be a period of, say, a month, with polish issues getting a very high priority. Make sure all status bar are the same height, all widgets align, all borders are consistent and correct, pressing "delete" works in all trees as expected etc. Also, whenever there's a UI change, not only should the code be reviewed but also the impact on the UI. Many of these issues shold not have made it into the application in the first place. Just look at some of the dialogs! The errors are really clear and glaring! It looks like placeholder layouts just stuck around..

I would love to fix a lot of these issues myself but I really don't have the time to learn XUL, CSS and the Mozilla UI architecture (layout of files in directories, overlays, etc.) to the level that would be required. The application itself is now very solid, IMHO. Rendering speed is excellent and performance in general is quite acceptable and good, even on slower systems like my 550MHz Celeron laptop. Stability is *at least* on par with IE, at least for Mozilla 1.1 which I've been using lately. But the UI is still very poor quality in many areas, perhaps most of all in Mail & News. This is very unfortunate because it gives a much worse picture of Mozilla than is warranted.

#35 gtk+

by robdogg

Thursday October 17th, 2002 11:23 AM

Reply to this message

I remember reading somewhere that Moz 1.2 will be ported to GTK+ so that it can display anti-aliased fonts. I haven't read anything about this in the release notes. Is this happening?

#39 Code not enabled?

by Kommet

Thursday October 17th, 2002 12:16 PM

Reply to this message

From the news item we are replying to: "... and new code for yet to be enabled features like XFT font support." XFT is what provides text antialiasing, if I'm remembering this correctly, not GTK+ which draws the widgets.

#42 GTK, Xft, and antialiasing

by mbrubeck

Thursday October 17th, 2002 12:35 PM

Reply to this message

First, Mozilla already uses GTK+. You probably heard about the port to GTK+ 2.0, which is currently in progress. <http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92033>

This is a separate issue from antialiasing. Mozilla 1.2 beta includes new support for handling fonts with Xft2 for better font configuration and redering. This is not enabled in the default builds because Xft is not yet commonly available (RedHat 8.0 is one of the first distributions to ship it).

Mozilla has had support for antialiasing on X11 for a while now, using the Freetype library. <http://ufies.org/archives/cat_mozilla.html> However, the new fontconfig/Xft code will provide better configuration and will not require any special X server extensions.

#41 The MailNews server open arrow is not working

by johann_p

Thursday October 17th, 2002 12:30 PM

Reply to this message

At least with the modern theme, a collapsed folder tree for a News or Mail server does not show the little arrow/triangle anymore that will expand the tree when clicked. However, clicking the white space where it it should be works. When the tree is expanded the triangle/arrow down icon is shown. Known bug?

#46 Re: The MailNews server open arrow is not working

by mlefevre

Thursday October 17th, 2002 1:34 PM

Reply to this message

yes, that's known <http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=174831>. it was on the blockers list for 1.2beta, but didn't quite make it in. it's fixed as of a couple of hours ago, so if you grab a nightly build tomorrow, the problem should be gone (and of course won't appear in 1.2final)

#45 My download manager refuses to work

by megaloB <megalob@jps.net>

Thursday October 17th, 2002 1:21 PM

Reply to this message

I blitzkrieged the /Application Data/Mozilla folder and I still get nada on the download manager. Is this a known issue?

#47 Re: My download manager refuses to work

by mlefevre

Thursday October 17th, 2002 1:36 PM

Reply to this message

wrong folder to nuke... broken download manager is likely to be fixed by uninstalling and reinstalling (or, if you're into blitzkrieging things, nuke \Program Files\mozilla.org)

#48 I should change my name to retard

by megaloB <megalob@jps.net>

Thursday October 17th, 2002 1:38 PM

Reply to this message

Dankeshein.

#70 Phoenix backport?

by IriseLenoir

Friday October 18th, 2002 2:50 AM

Reply to this message

When are / Are bookmarks and history quicksearch and toolbar customisation going to be ported from Phoenix to Mozilla?

#57 still no other mail-clients?

by ctulhu

Thursday October 17th, 2002 3:40 PM

Reply to this message

Can anyone explain me why it is still impossible to use another mail-client with mozilla in linux?

#60 Re: still no other mail-clients?

by the_new_guy

Thursday October 17th, 2002 4:52 PM

Reply to this message

Maybe because nobody implemented that feature yet?

Just stop whining.

#68 Re: Re: still no other mail-clients?

by pepejeria

Friday October 18th, 2002 2:28 AM

Reply to this message

He had a question, i dont see how that can be whining.

#61 Use other mail clients

by GAThrawn

Thursday October 17th, 2002 5:45 PM

Reply to this message

Unfortunately you're right. Currently Mozilla will use your system's default mail app on Windows and Mac OS if you set this pref (which certainly works as I use Moz with Outlook 2000 at work):

user_pref("network.protocol-handler.external.mailto", true);

Unfortunately a number of issues are holding up the equivalent Linux functionality, see:

<http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11459> "need option for mailto: to launch external mail app or open a webmail url" <http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=140635> "Mozilla access to GNOME URL-handlers for externals" <http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33282> "URL: telnet:// unregistered in Linux"

You could also try installing Protozilla <http://protozilla.mozdev.org> (see <http://bugzilla.mozilla.o…show_bug.cgi?id=11459#c30> ) which worked fine for me on Windows before the above pref was enabled.

#58 where are ascending/descending icons?

by mbokil

Thursday October 17th, 2002 3:56 PM

Reply to this message

I just noticed that in mail 1.2b there are no icons when you attempt to sort a column by clicking on the title. Where did they go? I liked those little direction icons!

#62 where are ascending/descending icons?

by mbokil

Thursday October 17th, 2002 5:56 PM

Reply to this message

I just noticed that in mail 1.2b there are no icons when you attempt to sort a column by clicking on the title. Where did they go? I liked those little direction icons!

#63 I may wait util 1.2final

by gwalla <gwalla@despammed.com>

Thursday October 17th, 2002 8:18 PM

Reply to this message

Bug #49397 currently looks like too big a problem for me to switch just yet. I have my eye on it (CC'd on the bug) and I'll probably switch over from 1.1 once it's fixed.

#71 Something I just noticed...

by paladine241 <steppenwulf241@lycos.com>

Friday October 18th, 2002 3:02 AM

Reply to this message

I just noticed that the cutesy background pics that go along with composer/mail/address book/ et cetera are gone... they must have gotten chunked with the grippies... Prelude to movable toolbars, I wonder? *asks hopefully*

#72 Re: Something I just noticed...

by paladine241 <steppenwulf241@lycos.com>

Friday October 18th, 2002 3:05 AM

Reply to this message

forgot to mention that I was referring to Modern theme, btw.

#75 7.0 spell check no longer works

by VMD

Friday October 18th, 2002 8:07 AM

Reply to this message

I installed the spell check from Netscape 7.0. It works great with 1.1, but does not work with 1.2b, at least not for me.

#84 Re: 7.0 spell check no longer works

by MozSaidAloha

Saturday October 19th, 2002 12:22 AM

Reply to this message

Yeah, it sucks.

According to my testing, here's how the spellcheckers and builds stack up:

The NS spellchecker works with 1.0.1 and 1.1.

The MozDev spellchecker works with 1.0 and earlier.

#76 Old themes are not compatible :(

by Dennis_Hawks

Friday October 18th, 2002 8:30 AM

Reply to this message

I've just downloaded this Mozilla 1.2b release and found out that my favourite theme Orbit is not compatible with this version of Mozilla. But I am sure it did work with 1.2a release! How can I make this theme work with this beta???? Please help me.... Apart from that I really enjoying this Beta! It works quite smoothly. Hopefully, Mozilla 1.2 Final will be very soon! But I am also waiting for Opera 7 beta to be released!!! These are the 2 browsers that I really love! It will be a great competition between them!!!

#77 Re: Old themes are not compatible :(

by D00msday

Friday October 18th, 2002 9:40 AM

Reply to this message

This version is compatible <http://www.mozdev.org.uk/…s/morbit-1_2-20020917.xpi> To install it from mozdev go to <http://themes.mozdev.org/themes/orbit.html> and install version 0.0.6.3.5

#78 Image blocker needs new powers

by jimbo2000

Friday October 18th, 2002 12:36 PM

Reply to this message

Mozilla has a great feature: blocking images. This is great for blocking those annoying ads that almost every page has. But a lot of the sites also seem to have Flash ads which can be just as annoying. I was recently on Yahoo mail. I blocked the ad image. When I reloaded the page, I found a flash ad in it's place. Maybe yahoo is trying to be "smart". But it would be great if one could somehow block these pesky flash files too.

I know you can right click on the flash ad and select it not to play, but it would be nice if we could block dem suckaz

And I defently think a flexible toolbar is very important for mozilla. A flexible toolar can give you a "free" feeling. Otherwise, it's like your trapped with what you are given. We need to have the toolbar customizable like IE. Phoenix toolbar is heading in the right direction. But I think it would be nice to be able to drag all tollbars into one row like IE.

I do like the fact that we can use image buttons only in the classic theme. Until now, I used to think the "Classic" theme looked pretty ugly...but now that it is saving me some space, I dont mind it...in fact I actually like it now.

Also, as someone else mentioned, Mozilla's UI needs to be cleaned up and made consistant. I see a lot of places where there are borders.

Mail/news still looks like a very buggy product. Mozilla is very stable, but that does not mean it is bug-free. It has a lot of things that still dont work right...not even in 1.0...which is supposed to be a finished product.

I dont want to sound like I am bit*hing. I do love Mozilla. In fact, I switched to Mozilla as my primary browser as far back as 0.9. I cant imagine switching back to IE now. The two killer features for me are tabbed browsing and pop-up blocking. It truely is a nightmare surfing the web without those two features. But to be honest, Opera and Netcaptor also offer these features. So Mozilla being buggy does not help it's cause.

All said and done, Mozilla is still a great product...it defenetly has the potential to be what NS once was.

Oops...looks like the password manager is messed up. It is showing me the "Title" of my post in the user/pass choices.

#81 Re: Image blocker needs new powers

by dratliffe

Friday October 18th, 2002 3:10 PM

Reply to this message

> Mozilla has a great feature: blocking images. This is > great for blocking those annoying ads that almost every > page has. But a lot of the sites also seem to have > Flash ads which can be just as annoying. I was recently > on Yahoo mail. I blocked the ad image. When I reloaded > the page, I found a flash ad in it's place. Maybe yahoo > is trying to be "smart". But it would be great if one > could somehow block these pesky flash files too. > > I know you can right click on the flash ad and select > it not to play, but it would be nice if we could block > dem suckaz >

Yeah and maybe we can dry up Yahoo's advertising revenue so much that they'll go out of business and thus be prevented from displaying any advertisements at all ever! Woo hoo!

-Dustin

#82 Re: Image blocker needs new powers

by mbarrien

Friday October 18th, 2002 11:47 PM

Reply to this message

Regarding your first issue (can't block flash ads), there's already bug 94035, <a href="<http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=94035>">Allow blocking of any media type</a>, in bugzilla.

#83 Re: Image blocker needs new powers

by mbarrien

Friday October 18th, 2002 11:49 PM

Reply to this message

Regarding your first issue (can't block flash ads), there's already bug 94035, <http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=94035>, to allow blocking of any media type, in bugzilla.

(No HTML... I should read directions before I post... *grumble*)

#79 Xft doesn't work

by Kirby

Friday October 18th, 2002 12:50 PM

Reply to this message

I compiled Mozilla with Xft and GTK+ 2.0 support. I get antialiased fonts as root but not as normal user! What's going on? I already removed my old .mozilla folder. I'm using XFree86 4.1.0 and have Xft2/Fontconfig installed.

#85 Re: Xft doesn't work

by Ventifus

Saturday October 19th, 2002 2:06 PM

Reply to this message

Its a bit more complicated that that, unfortunately. You need to go into $MOZILLA_FIVE_HOME/defaults/pref/unix.js and change the following lines:

pref("font.FreeType2.enable", false); # Change to true pref("font.freetype2.shared-library", "libfreetype.so.6"); #make sure this is correct

now, go down a bit more where it says //pref("font.directory.truetype.3", "/u/sam/tt_font3"); and add your own truetype font directories here. Make sure that you get the .1, .2, .3 &c numbers right.

This *should* work. Run mozilla and open up font prefs and choose a font beginning with a Capital Letter.

#86 Support...

by Kirby

Sunday October 20th, 2002 2:27 AM

Reply to this message

But that's not XFT, that's Mozilla's own FreeType renderer, and the fonts look ugly for some reason. How do I use XFT?

#80 Image blocker needs new powers

by jimbo2000

Friday October 18th, 2002 12:56 PM

Reply to this message

Mozilla has a great feature: blocking images. This is great for blocking those annoying ads that almost every page has. But a lot of the sites also seem to have Flash ads which can be just as annoying. I was recently on Yahoo mail. I blocked the ad image. When I reloaded the page, I found a flash ad in it's place. Maybe yahoo is trying to be "smart". But it would be great if one could somehow block these pesky flash files too.

I know you can right click on the flash ad and select it not to play, but it would be nice if we could block dem suckaz

And I defently think a flexible toolbar is very important for mozilla. A flexible toolar can give you a "free" feeling. Otherwise, it's like your trapped with what you are given. We need to have the toolbar customizable like IE. Phoenix toolbar is heading in the right direction. But I think it would be nice to be able to drag all tollbars into one row like IE.

I do like the fact that we can use image buttons only in the classic theme. Until now, I used to think the "Classic" theme looked pretty ugly...but now that it is saving me some space, I dont mind it...in fact I actually like it now.

Also, as someone else mentioned, Mozilla's UI needs to be cleaned up and made consistant. I see a lot of places where there are borders.

Mail/news still looks like a very buggy product. Mozilla is very stable, but that does not mean it is bug-free. It has a lot of things that still dont work right...not even in 1.0...which is supposed to be a finished product.

I dont want to sound like I am bit*hing. I do love Mozilla. In fact, I switched to Mozilla as my primary browser as far back as 0.9. I cant imagine switching back to IE now. The two killer features for me are tabbed browsing and pop-up blocking. It truely is a nightmare surfing the web without those two features. But to be honest, Opera and Netcaptor also offer these features. So Mozilla being buggy does not help it's cause.

All said and done, Mozilla is still a great product...it defenetly has the potential to be what NS once was.

Oops...looks like the password manager is messed up. It is showing me the "Title" of my post in the user/pass choices.

#90 WinXP appearance in 1.2a was better

by oliversl

Sunday October 20th, 2002 8:06 PM

Reply to this message

If you use Windows XP default blue theme and Mozilla Classic theme, the toolbar looks better in 1.2a than in 1.2b Mozilla 1.2a looks more like and WinXP app with the fade colors in the toolbar. Phoenix 0.3 works like Mozilla 1.2a, don't know why Mozilla 1.2b don't got that appearance. Is a regresion?

#91 Great work with 1.2b !

by kiwiguy

Monday October 21st, 2002 12:36 AM

Reply to this message

Just a quick post to say "well done!" to the Mozilla team re the 1.2b release! Even for a beta release, this one has a great feel about it. I've been *itching* for an excuse to ditch IE in favour of Mozilla. The time to do that has now arrived ... ! :-) The only real "must have" still to come (imho), is the fix so that "vanilla XML" can be displayed nicely, and that fix seems to be fast approaching. I tell ya, I'm tough to please, but 1.2b has finally won me over ... well done Mozilla team, and keep up the good work ..:-)

#92 Form controls in WinXP looking good!

by oliversl

Thursday October 24th, 2002 2:34 AM

Reply to this message

The new native forms controls(checkbox, buttons, etc) in WinXP using the Classic theme look very nice. Sometimes I forgot I'm using Mozilla and thinks its IE :-p