MozillaZine

Mozilla 1.3 Beta Going Live as We Speak

Monday February 10th, 2003

Asa Dotzler writes: "mozilla.org has released Mozilla 1.3beta. New in 1.3 Beta are improvements to the Mozilla junk-mail controls for automatic filtering of spam, an editable about:config page for tweaking just about every pref that Mozilla offers, image auto-sizing, dynamic profile switching and more. The latest release can be downloaded from the Mozilla Releases page and more on what's new can be found at the release notes. This release also marks the end of the Mac OS X CFM builds which have been replaced by the new Mach-O builds."


#1 It's about that time

by DeepFreeze3

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 1:56 AM

Reply to this message

5-button Intellimouse support is almost here ... :-)

#19 Re: It's about that time

by MozSaidAloha

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 8:52 AM

Reply to this message

I think 5 button mouse support was added in 1.3a. Does your mouse work with 1.3b?

#33 Re: It's about that time

by Sir_Psycho <sirpsycho@fuckhedz.com>

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 12:41 PM

Reply to this message

It should work since 1.3a and if it doesn't you can always use the software that comes with your mouse to assign hotkeys to those buttons

#2 Release notes missing popup manager

by simifilm

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 1:58 AM

Reply to this message

The release notes don't mention the improved popup manager. I'm sure for many users this is the most interesting new feature in 1.3beta. Maybe this should be corrected.

#6 Yes please mention it

by AlMalossi <AlMalossi@gmx.net>

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 5:01 AM

Reply to this message

It's a very important tiny thing

#39 Re: Yes please mention it

by skeeter

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 2:00 PM

Reply to this message

Couldn't agree more, Since hooking in Gecko to TopStyle and HTML-KIT as internal browsers I've been plagued with that MozillaControl until now. HAPPY HAPPY HAPPY HAPPY

#3 mozilla.org link is wrong

by MODatic

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 2:36 AM

Reply to this message

The mozilla.org news post links to the 1.3a release notes, simple for me to fix by replacing the a with a b....

What is the deal with uninstalling GRE? With all the nightlies that I've uninstalled that have GRE, they have always left their GRE intact. The GREs do have their own uninstallers that I have clicked on but they do nothing!

Other than that, a very good improvment, has a lot of new things I've beeen waiting ages for.

#4 Wrong link

by gssq <gabrielseah@hotmail.com>

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 2:38 AM

Reply to this message

Mozilla.org links to 1.3a's release notes on the front page in the left table.

I *still* don't quite understand the difference between Mac OS X CFM builds and Mach-O ones. Nevermind *boggle*

#8 Re: Wrong link

by bzbarsky

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 6:15 AM

Reply to this message

They are different binary types. CFM builds use the OS-9 compatible APIs in OSX and the OS-9-type binary format. They are restricted by some quirks of the OS-9 api (like 31-char filenames). They are built using codewarrior.

Mach-o buids use the Unix apis in OSX and the Mach binary format (hence the name). They are built using gcc.

#5 What happened to the URL bar?

by fnord_2000

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 4:35 AM

Reply to this message

When I double click under Windows 2000, it now behaves like OSX, only highlighting an individual word instead of the entire line. I guess I can understand why some people might like this, but I personally HATE it. It's honestly my biggest frustration with using my girlfriend's iBook. Is there a preference setting (or a line I can add to prefs.js) to revert it to its earlier behavior?

#7 Re: What happened to the URL bar?

by wyoung

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 5:22 AM

Reply to this message

If URL bar (in your terminology) is the same as address bar, then have you tried triple-clicking? doing this selects the entire line for me.

#9 Re: What happened to the URL bar?

by WillyWonka

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 6:30 AM

Reply to this message

You shouldn't have to tripple click.

#12 Re: What happened to the URL bar?

by wyoung

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 7:05 AM

Reply to this message

No, of course not. But it just means that you don't have to go changing any options. For some people (the original poster excepted), having the single word selecting is preferable.

#36 Re: Re: What happened to the URL bar?

by WillyWonka

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 1:47 PM

Reply to this message

The thing that makes it really annoying is that depending on where you click in the textbox, it operates differently. Sometimes it requires 1 click. Sometimes 3.

If you click the text, it selects all. If you click the space to the right of the text, it places the cursor at the end and you have to now triple click to select all.

On my 1600x1200 display 9 times out of 10 I click the white space and have to triple click and it's annoying.

#37 Re: Re: Re: What happened to the URL bar?

by WillyWonka

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 1:55 PM

Reply to this message

oh, and there is one more case where it selects all. (In classic) if you click the white padding (Just above and below where the text normally goes, there are a couple pixels of white - the mouse cursor is a Pointer as opposed to an I-beam) it will select all.

So, if you mean to click to the right of the url but you're a couple pixels into the upper/lower white zone, then it will select all.

#41 Re: Re: Re: Re: What happened to the URL bar?

by skeeter

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 2:04 PM

Reply to this message

That works like a charm, super when one can have the cake and eat the frosting too. ;-)

#76 Re: What happened to the URL bar?

by wyoung

Wednesday February 12th, 2003 12:18 AM

Reply to this message

Can't honestly say I've had the benefit of this revelation in the Classic theme, since I don't use it. But will tuck that little tidbit away for future reference... :)

#85 Re: Re: What happened to the URL bar?

by WillyWonka

Wednesday February 12th, 2003 7:31 AM

Reply to this message

I just checked. The padding in modern has the same problem.

#10 Re: What happened to the URL bar?

by motobass

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 6:38 AM

Reply to this message

I'm using Windows 2000 at work and I get the whole address bar with just one click or try Ctrl-L.

#11 Re: Re: What happened to the URL bar?

by pepejeria

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 6:54 AM

Reply to this message

or CTRL + D

#58 Re: What happened to the URL bar?

by Tar

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 7:16 PM

Reply to this message

or more convenient: Alt+D

#30 Re: What happened to the URL bar?

by Dracos

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 11:16 AM

Reply to this message

Ever since about 0.9.3 (I think), I've been getting the entire url in the address bar selected, which annoys me. Before this, the text cursor would just be placed in the address bar as near as possible to where I clicked. I've wanted the old behavior back ever since this changed. I think double click should select the whole url, and triple click is lame.

#72 Re: Re: What happened to the URL bar?

by james

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 11:49 PM

Reply to this message

Try adding the following to your user.js (create the user.js file if it doesn't exist): user_pref("browser.urlbar.clickSelectsAll", false);

That way the url bar should act the same as every other text box in the app.

#75 Re: What happened to the URL bar?

by Tar

Wednesday February 12th, 2003 12:15 AM

Reply to this message

But then Alt+D / Ctrl+L doesn't select entire URL, weeeee :( This is a regression, 1.2 times it selected all if clickSelectsAll was false.

#13 MachO Build

by jarrettwold <jarrettwold@bitz.net>

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 7:10 AM

Reply to this message

My god, the difference between CFM and MachO is light and day. Consider me switched on OS X to Mozilla. I've always liked Mozilla. Just didn't like the speed aspect.

Perhaps there were some major optimizations between 1.3a and 1.3b, however this speed increase is amazing. My G3 500 iBook thanks you ;)

#28 Re: MachO Build

by jstrickland

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 10:50 AM

Reply to this message

I completely agree with you. I started using the MachO version a couple of weeks ago. The difference was phenomanal. I just hope that they will soon address Bugzilla Bug 86553, which would allow the Mozilla Biff in the Dock to bounce and notify when new mail is received. The current little "bonk!" sound just isn't enough. However, overall, I have to say, "Great job, Mozilla Developers!"

#32 Serious Bookmarks Bugs

by BjarneDM <mozilla@mathiesen.info>

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 12:05 PM

Reply to this message

I do hope they'll soon discover the root cause of bugs 192011 & 192124 as these are a *serious* hindrance for using 1.3b daily. If I have to do some serious bookmark editing, I presently have to revert to 1.2.1.

On the other hand, stability has improved considerably, and Mozilla is no longer crashing left and right all over the place.

#62 To experience real speed change this setting....

by PaulB <pbergsag@home.com>

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 7:35 PM

Reply to this message

Mach-O is much faster, but if you want to seem more tangible speed increase you might change the paint delay setting. To do this go to the loaction bar. This is where you type urls. Type in the location bar "about:config" without the quotes and hit the return key. This will bring up all Mozilla's hidden preferences settings. Scroll down to the item "nglayout.initialpaint.delay". Double click on this item and a popup window will appear where you can change its value. Try a lower value and surf to a few pages and see if the pages load faster. Remember to clear the cache before loading the page so that the page is retrived from the internet and not the cache. On a high speed cable internet modem I have found that a value of 200 makes my connection (seem?) very speedy. Your mileage may vary with different values depending on your connection to the internet, ie high speed vs dialup.

#66 ?

by ph1nn <ph1nn@earthlink.net>

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 9:33 PM

Reply to this message

are you sure about nglayout? i searched down about:config and didnt find nglayout.initialpaint.delay anywhere in that section (or anywhere) Sounds like a good tweak tho

#67 Yes...its there. Look again. eom

by PaulB <pbergsag@home.com>

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 9:56 PM

Reply to this message

.

#68 nope

by ph1nn <ph1nn@earthlink.net>

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 10:05 PM

Reply to this message

definately not there for Mozilla 1.3b for linux

#95 its there for MacOS X Mozilla.

by PaulB <pbergsag@home.com>

Wednesday February 12th, 2003 4:59 PM

Reply to this message

I can send you a screen shot to prove it if you want ;) I have never used the Linux build and can not say one way or the otther if the ability to change the paint delay value is there or not.

#96 I don't see it either

by D0ktorGiggle

Wednesday February 12th, 2003 6:07 PM

Reply to this message

It's not in my os x mach0 1.3b either, using a fresh profile.

#86 Re: ?

by WillyWonka

Wednesday February 12th, 2003 7:40 AM

Reply to this message

Just thought I'd let you know. Find doesn't work in about:config <http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103911>

And no, I don't see it either. You might have to add it manually.

#14 WTF?

by LukeyBoy

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 7:34 AM

Reply to this message

It's been said, but I'll say it: Triple click is necessary to select the whole URL? When the hell would I want to highlight a word in a URL? Oh, members.home.ca/~bob, I'm too lazy to type bob - let's double-click. Seriously. If there's a bug filed for this, could someone post the number? That way everyone can vote this "feature" away.

#15 Re: WTF?

by LukeyBoy

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 7:50 AM

Reply to this message

Ah, apparently more people find this annoying than I. See the bug at <http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=188567>

#22 Re: WTF?

by Malc

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 9:42 AM

Reply to this message

It seems to me that this make the behaviour more consistent with everything else. In a month or two, we will all have forgotten this change as the new behaviour sinks in to our subconcious. It's funny how a small change - even if it's correct - can completely throw people off. But it passes. We get used to it. Let's be honest, it's not really that big a deal compared with some of the other issues that make certain things very hard to do.

#31 a single click selects it.

by joschi

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 11:31 AM

Reply to this message

this is much more consistant behavior across the whole app, now selection in the url bar acts more like selection of regular text. consistancy is good for ganny type users :)

#38 Re: a single click selects it.

by WillyWonka

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 1:59 PM

Reply to this message

"a single click selects it."

Not if you click the right of the text and vertically in the center (Where your cursor is an I-Beam).

#40 i noticed that after posting...

by joschi

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 2:02 PM

Reply to this message

yeah, that's weird.

#47 Re: Re: a single click selects it.

by Paper

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 3:56 PM

Reply to this message

Clicking to the right of the text gives you the cursor at the end of the url, which makes it really easy to press backspace a few times to remove a directory, or to modify a URL parameter. Clicking on the text hilights it all. I think it's perfect.

#87 Re: Re: Re: a single click selects it.

by WillyWonka

Wednesday February 12th, 2003 7:45 AM

Reply to this message

yes, but move the mouse cursor up or down a couple pixels until the pointer changes from the i-beam to an arrow and then click. It still looks like you're in the textbox, but you're really not. You're clicking on padding around the textbox and it selects all.

So if you're running at a high resolution, most of the url bar doesn't have text. Which means you're more likely to click to the right. Also, the textbox is smaller so it's much easier to hit those pixels above/below the real textbox. This makes it increadibly frustrating. Every time I click on the damn bar, I have to wait to see if I should single click or tripple click.

#16 Wingdings no longer displays

by VMD

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 7:58 AM

Reply to this message

I have a Wingdings (span style="font-family: Wingdings;") on my webpage that no longer displays. Worked fine in 1.2.1. Otherwise everything seems real nice. Thanks again Mozilla.

#60 Re: Wingdings no longer displays

by stylo

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 7:27 PM

Reply to this message

Yeah, I saw that before, too. The functionality was removed because not the W3C standard. Apparently, it is supposed to work in non-standards mode only, but last version I checked it didn't. (no beta dl yet) Works fine in IE, of course, so just find a glyph that defaults to something acceptable in moz. That's what I did.

#17 Annoying alert message in 1.3b

by PC1

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 7:59 AM

Reply to this message

There is an annoying change in 1.3b

If you use "hosts" file in windows to block "adservers". Mozilla will "Alert" you that the "Document contains no data". I even used the file "cookperm.txt" from <http://pgl.yoyo.org/adservers/> to prevent Mozilla from loading images from those same servers. I still get the same message.

Duh, this is the idea behind blocking ads. Why on earth do I have to click "OK" every time an Ad is blocked. I know that Mozilla is telling you that the IP address 127.0.0.1 is sending no data back, but this is a pain in the neck.

Please get rid of this "Alert".

Is there a preference to disable this message?

#18 Re: Annoying alert message in 1.3b

by mlefevre

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 8:43 AM

Reply to this message

I replied to this in one of the newsgroups you posted it to at <http://groups.google.com/…0ID-106624.news.dfncis.de>

the additional point you mention here about the same thing happening even when you have image loading disabled is that mozilla still contacts servers when it's not loading images from them - there's a bug to improve that as well.

#24 Re: Re: Annoying alert message in 1.3b

by PC1

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 10:16 AM

Reply to this message

Michael Lefevre <<news+03@michaellefevre.com>> wrote in message news:<<b2al1n$1a8adc$1@ID-106624.news.dfncis.de>>... > In article <<ace2897b.0302102252.8586fa1@posting.google.com>>, PC One > wrote: > > An annoying change in 1.3b > > > > If you use "hosts" file in windows to block "adservers". Mozilla will > > "Alert" you that the "Document contains no data". Duh, this is the > > idea behind blocking ads. Why on earth do I have to click "OK" every > > time an Ad is blocked. I know that Mozilla is telling you that the IP > > address 127.0.0.1 is sending no data back, but this is a pain in the > > neck. > > strange that it's changed for you in 1.3b - mozilla has been doing this > forever, and this has been a frequently-reported issue since before 1.0. > if you weren't seeing the error alerts before, I guess you have something > on your system that was making the usual error not happen...

I have been usig Mozilla since 0.97. I started using "hosts" file and the cookperm.txt file at version 1.2.1. I have used this at my computers at home (Win2000 and Win98) and at three other computers at work (WIn2000). I never had this problem till now (at least at home; I cannot verify the other computers till I return from my vacation). The files I am using have some added hosts.

I would like to mention that it does not occur in Phoenix 0.5 except when directly clicking a link going thru one of those servers as in <http://www.qksrv.net/click-645730-8264422>

It does not occur with Opera (6.05 and 7.01).

> > > Please get rid of this "Alert" > > You can get rid of the alerts by enabling error pages. The error pages > stuff isn't finished yet, so it's not enabled by default (I guess that > will change eventually), but you can turn it on with a hidden pref. see > <http://www.geocities.com/pratiksolanki/> for that. >

I just included the option: user_pref("browser.xul.error_pages.enabled", true); and no more alerts. I am getting ""Net Reset Error ...." in the place of the Ad.

> Alternatively, if you use the IP of a webserver instead of 127.0.0.1 (or > even run a webserver on your own machine), that will also get rid of the > errors as you'll get a 404 from that server.

What about putting the IP of a router? Will that work?

One more issue. When trying <http://slashdot.org/slashdot.xml> I get a codded page instead of something like <http://my.opera.com/custo…slashdot.org/slashdot.rdf> to use in the sidebar. The mozdev project for that <http://slashzilla.mozdev.org/> never worked with me.

Thanks

#25 Re: Re: Annoying alert message in 1.3b

by PC1

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 10:19 AM

Reply to this message

The above message is on the news group. Sorry about the formating...

#107 Thanks!

by Ander

Sunday February 23rd, 2003 1:02 AM

Reply to this message

Yeah, I was getting the same annoying message since moving up to 1.3b. I'd figured it was the ad-blocking, but didn't know how to fix it. Thanks for the help!

#108 Re: Re: Re: Annoying alert message in 1.3b

by gkast1 <gkast1@yahoo.com>

Thursday December 2nd, 2004 7:42 AM

Reply to this message

Hi! The same thing is happening here -- I upgraded to Firefox 1.0, and started getting "The document contains no data" [gripe: is there something to be said for _a tad more informative_ error messages?]. The about:config proposed fix did not help; now I am geting "Net reset" plus "The document...".

It is not just an annoyance; it terminates my uploads.

BUT!...: The problem only occurs when I upload to Yahoo! groups' Files area. Other uploads, e.g. to <http://www.yousendit.com>, work without a hitch!

I don't really have the time to grab a magnifying glass and play gumshoe; does anybody know about this? Is there a fix?

thanks!!

#26 Re: Annoying alert message in 1.3b

by morg

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 10:45 AM

Reply to this message

Try enabling error pages. Put the following line in user.js:

user_pref("browser.xul.error_pages.enabled", true);

#29 Re: Re: Annoying alert message in 1.3b

by PC1

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 10:50 AM

Reply to this message

I just included the option: user_pref("browser.xul.error_pages.enabled", true); and no more alerts. I am getting ""Net Reset Error ...." in the place of the Ad. It seems it works. (I included more details in the above message and in the news group <http://groups.google.com/…ape.public.mozilla.builds>

Thanks

#20 Talkback Finally Enabled In Mac OS X Mozilla

by jstrickland

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 9:29 AM

Reply to this message

I am glad to see that Talkback has been enabled in 1.3b for Mac OS X.

#21 RPMS for Red Hat Linux 8.x with Xft support

by madsen

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 9:34 AM

Reply to this message

Great Work - as usual !

Will there be any "Red Hat Linux with Xft support" builds available soon?

#93 Re: RPMS for Red Hat Linux 8.x with Xft support

by vocaro <trevor@vocaro.com>

Wednesday February 12th, 2003 12:33 PM

Reply to this message

They're now available here: <ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub…illa1.3b/Red_Hat_8x_RPMS/>

Trevor

#23 Talkback Finally Enabled In Mac OS X Mozilla

by jstrickland

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 10:03 AM

Reply to this message

I am glad to see that Talkback has been enabled in 1.3b for Mac OS X.

#27 Disabling Plugins

by PC1

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 10:46 AM

Reply to this message

Is there a way to disable and enable plugins as Flash, Activx, and Shokwave without using external applications as JTFlashManager at <http://www.jtedley.com/jtflashmanager/index.php> or to bookmarklets (after the page loads) as in <http://www.squarefree.com/bookmarklets/zap.html>

#49 Re: Disabling Plugins

by morg

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 4:58 PM

Reply to this message

No.

Look for the plugin manager bug to be fixed eventually. That will make it possible. (I think.)

#34 For others who are annoyed by address bar changes

by fnord_2000

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 12:44 PM

Reply to this message

I realize that many may consider me a moron for being annoyed that double clicking no longer selects the entire address bar. After all, they say, single clicks and triple clicks both still highlight the entire URL. However, it DOES matter to me, and it seems that there are a few other people who it matters to as well. Therefore, I'll post what I found on a bugzilla bug addressing the issue. To restore the old behavior, add the following line to prefs.js: user_pref("layout.word_select.stop_at_punctuation", false);

That is all.

#42 Re: For others who are annoyed by address bar chan

by mbokil

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 2:06 PM

Reply to this message

I agree man, the way the address bar was changed was lame. not as user friendly anymore. I think this is what happens when engineers make functionality changes without usability testing.

#77 Re: What happened to the URL bar?

by wyoung

Wednesday February 12th, 2003 12:31 AM

Reply to this message

I've noticed that the selecting of single words is much the same as in IE. What this means is that if I'm editing the address in the urlbar, I can just CTRL+(optionally SHIFT+)arrow around, and edit/select the parts I want and correct it a lot faster (sometimes) than I can with the mouse. This is especially true on high screen resolutions. However, having said that, it's useful to know that I can disable this functionality if I so want. Thanks for the research you did on bugzilla, fnord_2000.

#35 grippies are back! yah!

by mbokil

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 12:49 PM

Reply to this message

Hey, i just noticed the toolbar grippes are back. yah! psyched.

-mark

#48 yay for slowing down window opens!

by Paper

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 4:01 PM

Reply to this message

the reason they were removed was because they slowed down opening new browser windows. They were put back, even though the speed issue was not resolved.

Grippies are so misleading when you can't actually move the toolbars with them. That's what users expect when they see grippies..

#51 Booo...

by morg

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 5:04 PM

Reply to this message

I don't like grippies. To get rid of them, add this to your (profile name)/chrome/userChrome.css file:

toolbargrippy { display: none !important; }

#57 Re: grippies are back! yah!

by WillyWonka

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 6:52 PM

Reply to this message

Just what I wanted. A 1% preformance hit. YES!

#106 Re: grippies are back! yah!

by SubtleRebel <mark@ky.net>

Saturday February 15th, 2003 9:45 AM

Reply to this message

I am also glad that they are back.

The way that they were removed before was rather annoying. There was no way for users to restore the "grippies" if they wanted to.

Now, if you want the "grippies" they are there and if you do not want the "grippies" then you can disable them. Giving users options is much better than dictating what you think users should want or need.

Also, I do not see how the presence of "grippies" could possibly cause a 1% change in performance. What are you measuring the performance of?

#43 what happened to close all other tabs

by albertn

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 2:15 PM

Reply to this message

What happened to the option that when you right click on a tab, you can close all tabs other than the one you clicked on?

#50 Re: what happened to close all other tabs

by morg

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 5:00 PM

Reply to this message

It's gone. If you really need this, you can just open a new window with the one tab you want to keep and close the old window.

#59 Re: what happened to close all other tabs

by Tar

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 7:27 PM

Reply to this message

Some people with fat clumsy fingers and lack of concentration in their head got rid of it :( <http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103354> those bastards!

To get it back u'll have to hack the chrome/en-US.jar/locale/en-US/global/tabbrowser.dtd and chrome/toolkit.jar/content/global/binding/tabbrowser.xml reversing the changes of this evil patch: <http://bugzilla.mozilla.o…?id=93290&action=view>

#69 What happened...

by jveaton

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 10:34 PM

Reply to this message

I hope there is some easier way to restore this feature, at least as an option. I do a lot of laptop research on the web and found the feature a real timesaver for following paths (the folks at Opera must have felt the same way & have included the feature) It appears (from the link TAR provided) that the feature was removed from Mozilla because several users would inadvertently close other tabs rather than close the active tab, a problem I can understand but never had. On the other hand, one solution proposed -- clicking the "x"on the tab bar to sequentially close windows -- has always been a problem for me: as I move the mouse pointer from the bottom of the page toward my target, I tend to move past it and hit the "x" on title bar - shutting down the entire program. So, restoring the choice would allow us to pick the solution that minimizes our pointer problems - a significant benefit. Rather than eliminate the feature, it would be niftier if one could restore a set of tabs easily (perhaps it can be done & I don't know it) -- something equivalent, on the fly to the "start where I left off" feature in Opera.

#74 Re: What happened...

by Tar

Wednesday February 12th, 2003 12:13 AM

Reply to this message

#79 Re: Re: What happened...

by bzbarsky

Wednesday February 12th, 2003 1:20 AM

Reply to this message

Making yourself heard in a RESOLVED bug by going into a hissy fit because you don't like the module owner's decision is stupid. All it does is waste everyone's time. Oh, sorry. It also pisses off developers and alienates them from the project.

Whynot make yourself heard in one of the bugs filed to suggest replacement positions for that option... by attaching a patch?

#81 Re: What happened...

by Tar

Wednesday February 12th, 2003 3:05 AM

Reply to this message

Well... in this case 103354 <http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103354> should have been WONTFIXed because it's just plain stupid to rip out perfectly good functionality and make people angry.

Put the Close Tab on top and Close Other Tabs on bottom and be done with it if some people don't bother to look what they click at. Let's take File menu for example: Work Offline is next to Exit - OMFG that's huge dataloss right there, View menu: Stop next to Reload 8| whaaa?!?! ahhh... what's the point...

I haven't familiarized myself with the art of making patches for Mozilla CVS yet, but every time I down the nightly I run its .jars through 9+ .diffs to make Mozilla usable from a 10-finger system users point of view (thanks for the easy customizability at least), by-default usability my ass...

And what good would a patch do if even the simplest things can't get a commited? <http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=182997>

Don't get me wrong, I thank every single Mozilla developer for their efforts but sometimes there are these annoying conflicts of interest :(

#84 Re: What happened...

by mlefevre

Wednesday February 12th, 2003 6:45 AM

Reply to this message

well if it's a choice between losing people like you that haven't familiarised yourself with CVS yet, and losing people like bz, who has done a huge amount for the project, then see you later...

if you think mozilla decisions are stupid, go and write your own browser, and be sure to do everything that all of your users want.

saying "you suck, you're stupid, but thanks for the effort anyway" doesn't make it better...

#88 Re: Re: What happened...

by WillyWonka

Wednesday February 12th, 2003 7:53 AM

Reply to this message

"And what good would a patch do if even the simplest things can't get a commited?"

Um, has anyone gone through the process of getting it reviewed, super reviewed, and approved? Doesn't look like it.

Attaching the patch is only 1/3rd or 1/4th (If the branch is close to being released) of the job. You have to go through the processes listed here <http://www.mozilla.org/hacking/>

Just attaching the patch won't get it put into mozilla. You have to let people know that the patch is there.

#44 Gaah! Type ahead find doesn't work with frames!

by Ripat <ripat@spray.se>

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 2:19 PM

Reply to this message

It seems like type ahead find doesn't work on pages with frames. As i type the text I want to search for it just jumps to the next character that I just typed. Too bad! Does anyone else have the same experience?

#45 Re: Gaah! Type ahead find doesn't work with frames

by Ripat <ripat@spray.se>

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 2:20 PM

Reply to this message

Running on Linux btw...

#46 Master password turned on all of a sudden?

by thoffman11

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 2:34 PM

Reply to this message

I never used the master password before, now when I go to a website that requires a certificate (I maintain a site that uses them) I get prompted for the password for the "software security device" and can't continue till I enter it.

What the hell is this?

#92 Re: Master password turned on all of a sudden?

by egoots

Wednesday February 12th, 2003 11:21 AM

Reply to this message

I started getting this when I upgraded to 1.3b as well. I am guessing/hoping that something got mucked up in the profile during upgrade? I did not see an obvious bugzilla bug for this yet... will keep checking.

#102 re:

by thoffman11

Thursday February 13th, 2003 6:36 AM

Reply to this message

I logged a bug for this, and it's since been confirmed.

#104 Re: re:

by egoots

Thursday February 13th, 2003 11:07 AM

Reply to this message

What is the bug number please? By the way, when I reset my Master Password... I no longer get these spurious prompts.

#52 autocomplete study

by morg

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 5:12 PM

Reply to this message

With Mozilla 1.3 beta, a study about autocomplete habits is being conducted. It could result in an improved autocomplete algorithm.

<http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104-984175.html>

#53 Clean it up.

by nilson <nilson@gmail.com>

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 6:29 PM

Reply to this message

I think that the mozilla.org community should focus on cleaning up the gecko (rendering engine) codebase. I downloaded Opera today to try it, and it is small (~3 MB), and very fast. Opera also supports CSS 2 better than moziilla. I think making mozilla smaller, faster, and more standards compliant should be their main goal, rather than new features.

#61 Re: Clean it up.

by asa <asa@mozilla.org>

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 7:29 PM

Reply to this message

" Opera also supports CSS 2 better than moziilla"

It does? Care to define better and prove it?

--Asa

#64 Re: Re: Clean it up.

by nilson <nilson@gmail.com>

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 8:04 PM

Reply to this message

>>It does? A tiny bit, I think, mabey it is just how the rendering engine works, i dont know, but when I have a div-box floating on the right of my site that has a fixed pos., and a semi-trans png background, when I scroll down the page in mozilla, the page background shows through, but is delayed by about 3px, if you know what I mean, in Opera doesnt happen. It may not be CSS. I dont know. It led me to beleive it was CSS, because the effect is created by CSS, but mabey not. Neither of the browsers support text-shadows, which I want, so CSS support is not complete in either. Mozilla is still my favorite browser, and im gonna uninstall Opera in 14 days anyway, because the ads kick in. I could never abandon Mozilla; It was my first "real" browser. :) Do you agree about the speed and size?

--nilson

#70 Re: Re: Re: Clean it up.

by asa <asa@mozilla.org>

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 11:14 PM

Reply to this message

I find Mozilla/Phoenix renders mos pages considerably faster. I've found that Mozilla/Phoenix renders pages correctly more often. I find the interface of both Mozilla and Phoenix to be more usable. I find the feature set in both Mozilla and Phoenix to be more sophisticated. Download size is not a problem for me but the 6MB download of Phoenix or a 12MB Mozilla doesn't seem at all unreasonable to me considering the capabilities of the applications (note that a typical IE install is claimed by MS to be 17MB).

--Asa

#97 Opera's CSS 2 Support

by AlexBishop <alex@mozillazine.org>

Wednesday February 12th, 2003 9:37 PM

Reply to this message

According to this page <http://www.xs4all.nl/~ppk/css2tests/intro.html> Opera's CSS 2 support is better than Mozilla's.

Alex

#65 Re: Clean it up.

by nilson <nilson@gmail.com>

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 8:07 PM

Reply to this message

Sorry about the extra posts. I was using Opera to write this b/c I was downloading latest Mozill, and it did not warn me about the http POST content, like good ole Mozilla would have.

--nilson

#80 Re: Clean it up.

by bzbarsky

Wednesday February 12th, 2003 1:26 AM

Reply to this message

The people working on the layout engine (all 7 or so of them) are in the process of doing just that. The silence that accompanies this effort is very impressive. Do the release notes mention any of the excellent work David Baron did to rip out tons of incorrect shrink-wrapping code? No. Do they mention the work Robert O'Callahan was doing? No. Do they mention Chris Karnaze's cleanup of fixed-position layout, especially in printing? No. Do they mention Brian Ryner's merge of layout and content (dropping over 100KB of compiled code size at a blow) and deCOMtamination of nsIStyleContext? No.

The release notes list whatever is perceived as "whiz-bang new shit". Work on improving core layout architecture is not perceived that way (and realistically, how many people reading the release notes care about the exact linking of libraries and the exact algorithms used for sizing floats?).

#94 Re: Re: Clean it up.

by nilson <nilson@gmail.com>

Wednesday February 12th, 2003 3:04 PM

Reply to this message

I'm glad to see that people are working on this. Although new features are great, I think that the core of the browser is a more important isssue.

Q. What would a browser be without a great rendering engine? A. Internet Explorer. :)

#54 Clean it up.

by nilson <nilson@gmail.com>

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 6:33 PM

Reply to this message

I think that the mozilla.org community should focus on cleaning up the gecko (rendering engine) codebase. I downloaded Opera today to try it, and it is small (~3 MB), and very fast. Opera also supports CSS 2 better than moziilla. I think making mozilla smaller, faster, and more standards compliant should be their main goal, rather than new features.

#55 Clean it up.

by nilson <nilson@gmail.com>

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 6:35 PM

Reply to this message

I think that the mozilla.org community should focus on cleaning up the gecko (rendering engine) codebase. I downloaded Opera today to try it, and it is small (~3 MB), and very fast. Opera also supports CSS 2 better than moziilla. I think making mozilla smaller, faster, and more standards compliant should be their main goal, rather than new features.

#56 Clean it up.

by nilson <nilson@gmail.com>

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 6:36 PM

Reply to this message

I think that the mozilla.org community should focus on cleaning up the gecko (rendering engine) codebase. I downloaded Opera today to try it, and it is small (~3 MB), and very fast. Opera also supports CSS 2 better than moziilla. I think making mozilla smaller, faster, and more standards compliant should be their main goal, rather than new features.

#63 Thanks to whoever improved the location bar

by PaulB <pbergsag@home.com>

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 7:51 PM

Reply to this message

I know many do not like the way you now select the URL. Before if I wanted to select part of a url, to correct an improperly typed url, or to move to another directory on the server, the way the selection worked I often ended up several times selecting the entire url and had to try again. Now I can easily select all or just a part of the url.

I hope this "improved" way of selecting a url remains in Mozilla. If, as some users desire, we go back to the previous selection method, could this be done with a preference. Please let the user decide this one. For me the Location bar's levele of usability has increased 100%. For others the way the selection method is now set, the usability has decreased.

I love the way the location bar now selects one word with two clicks; others hate it. I hope both methods are included with a preference setting.

#82 Re: Thanks to whoever improved the location bar

by Tar

Wednesday February 12th, 2003 3:34 AM

Reply to this message

Be sure to check out up.xpi <http://bugzilla.mozilla.o…id=103882&action=view> - giving you the Alt+Up accel to move up in server directories.

#71 Themes don't work.

by robdogg

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 11:32 PM

Reply to this message

I try to install a theme from deskmod.com and it the installation dies in the middle. Clicking Cancel does nothing. This happens onWinNT

#73 No talkback enabled tar.gz

by johann_p

Tuesday February 11th, 2003 11:57 PM

Reply to this message

As usually, I am missing a tar.gz for linux with an talkback-enabled build. I wonder why there is no such thing when there is a talkback enabled zipfile for windows, for example? I really hate to use the installers, so I prefer to just unpack the distribution to where it belongs.

#78 About URL bar - use Diggler ;)

by sinchi

Wednesday February 12th, 2003 12:51 AM

Reply to this message

You can use great thing named Diggler <http://diggler.mozdev.org/> I use it and have found it to be tiny and utterly usable tool.

#83 Odd sound?

by Trucoto

Wednesday February 12th, 2003 5:48 AM

Reply to this message

I noticed since 1.3b that an annoying sound is played now and then, like the "ding!" Windows uses by default on message boxes. I couldn't determine what that sound means, but for example, in one moment, every new tab would generate that sound once. But this is not always like that, I can't get what it means. Any ideas?

#89 Re: Odd sound?

by WillyWonka

Wednesday February 12th, 2003 8:06 AM

Reply to this message

It means that a popup has been blocked. A little icon should have appeared in the status bar beside the online/offline button. If you click it, a menu will popup allowing you to add the site to your popup whitelist.

#91 Re: Re: Odd sound?

by Trucoto

Wednesday February 12th, 2003 10:20 AM

Reply to this message

Oh, I see... thank you very much for clearing up that!

#90 Junk Mail controls

by jveaton

Wednesday February 12th, 2003 9:24 AM

Reply to this message

According to the release notes, Junk Mail controls should automatically move messages to a spam folder. I've set up the folder, clicked the appropriate radio buttons, and the Junk Mail still comes into my inbox -- properly marked as junk mail. I'm using the latest version of Orbit as my skin, on a w2k box. The question is, exactly what should Junk Mail be able to do now? And does it depend on the skin that is being used?

#101 Re: Junk Mail controls

by quarsan

Thursday February 13th, 2003 4:34 AM

Reply to this message

i'm having the same problem. i've done all i can but the spam keeps on flowing into the inbox with all the determination of a salmon returning to it's spawning grounds

#105 RTF_

by ecarlson

Thursday February 13th, 2003 10:04 PM

Reply to this message

I haven't figured what junk mail control does yet. I turned it on, and manually marked the >1000 messages in my old spam folder as spam, and I made a new folder for it to move spam to, but it hasn't even automatically marked a single message as spam.

I'm probably not using it correctly, but I thoroughly read the documentation many times, and I will repost it here in it's entirety for all to see: "Using Junk Mail Controls: text to come"

You can see how helpful the documentation is.

- Eric, <http://www.InvisibleRobot.com/>

#98 annoying mail bug

by quarsan

Thursday February 13th, 2003 12:24 AM

Reply to this message

my partner and i have an email addy each: <me@whatever.com> and <her@whatever.com> because we share the same internet connection only one of us can use their email. when i go to add mine and put in the server and username it says:

An account with this username and server already exists, please enter another user name.

thus rendering mozilla mail useless.

any ideas on how to get around this? i really, really want to move away from msoe, but unless i can get moz to handle two accounts on the same server/username, i can't

#99 I am missing this too, and may others

by johann_p

Thursday February 13th, 2003 2:45 AM

Reply to this message

This is an important feature that seems to be missing, since many ISPs allow email aliases and with Mozilla you cannot use them. Is there a bug in bugzilla for this?

#100 annoying mail bug

by quarsan

Thursday February 13th, 2003 4:32 AM

Reply to this message

i've looked through bugzilla and haven't found anything. but, to be honest, i don't really understand much over there. i thought i might just be missing something obvious, so i haven't submitted a bug.

this is the one thing stopping us moving over completely.

#103 multiple identity, alias, vanity address [missing]

by wsm

Thursday February 13th, 2003 8:37 AM

Reply to this message