I think the current website with the nice download links along the left is better than the proposed one. http://www.mozilla.org/website-beta/

The new website looks very nice indeed. It seems that the design is by Dave Shea ( http://mezzoblue.com/ ) who is responsible for the css zen garden (http://csszengarden.com/ ) - (apologies if it says that somewhere more obvious then in the source code and I've missed it). In fact the only negative thing that I can find is that the Mozilla 1.5 box on the homepage is less distinct than the box for the 'technology preview' products*. However it's such a massive improvement over the old page that it seems almost rude to complain.

*Yes, before anyone points it out, there is a stray /ul which means the page doesn't validate. It also professes to be xhtml 1.0 whilst being sent as text/html.

...Arvid's new Firebird icon (the globe with the F-wing) as the icon for Mozilla Firebird. Good call. :)

I like the new site, like it a lot. It's definitely an attempt to get Mozilla in the mainstream, where it belongs...

WOW! GREAT WEB SITE!

I just looked at the store. Broken graphics / alt text all over the place. Looks quite unprofessional. I hope it'll be fixed soon.

Also, I wonder why Mozilla 1.4.1 is not offered on the CD. That's the latest 'long-term' release of Mozilla, right?

Regards, David

I like it; I think either the horizontal yellow bar or the grey vertical bar should enclose the mozilla.org logo though-- it seems too disjointed otherwise.

The sidebar "business" has been reduced thank god.

Although I don't like the new Firebird Product Page; it looks like it was designed for 800x600 screens and that flames icon is still ugly!! ;) PLus I don't like the slogan- "The best brwoser, bar none"--it seems "awkward" along with the graphic ;) Looks..."cheap".

And there's no clear links to FB Help, plugin resources, extensions, themes...!

Well, I purchased an annual subscription to Mozilla CDs this morning. Don't need 'em, but hey - anything that supports Mozilla.

Unfortunately, I wasn't sure if the annual subscription included the 1.5 CD or not, so I purchased a seperate 1.5 CD as well. The site should make this more clear.

Jack

Anyone having problems downloading the new releases, or is it just me?

Watching such an amazing project growing cooler all the time gets me completely giddyup. Fresh layout is open, welcoming, crisp and pleasent; end users are sure to stand in line when the site launches! One should check up on consistancy and markup before this happens, though: The index page throws a fatal validation error because of missing doctype declaration. The article about the redesign "which takes advantage of Mozilla's cutting-edge standards support" is declared XHTML1.0 despite of its eleven [severe] validation errors while the page about "hacking" claims to be coded HTML4.01 Transitional. Not that I wan't to be nosy about a beta launch; but you know.

I think it's important not to keep making public beta "branding attempts" and interim site designs. What the Mozilla Organisation needs more importanty now than ever is a complete, strict, professional and consistent brand guideline document which should be used and applied to all areas of branding. I'm hardly an expert on this topic and talk from personal experience only, but seeing all these new designs (different colours each time), logo treatments, product icons, etc. hitting the public eye so often is quite disturbing. For example, and granted Firebird has changed name so many times, but I've seen it's logo change just as many. Users must surely be finding it really difficult to accustom themselves with the different Mozilla products - when their names aren't changing then their logos are.

If time is playing the largest obstacle in achieving a completed design goal then more individuals should be contributing to the project - I for one would be happy to contribute. Maybe I missed the call for participation, if there was one in the first place? Who knows.

But definately keen to see how things progress over the next couple of months, and best of luck to those involved. ;)

I think it's important not to keep making public beta "branding attempts" and interim site designs. What the Mozilla Organisation needs more importanty now than ever is a complete, strict, professional and consistent brand guideline document which should be used and applied to all areas of branding. I'm hardly an expert on this topic and talk from personal experience only, but seeing all these new designs (different colours each time), logo treatments, product icons, etc. hitting the public eye so often is quite disturbing. For example, and granted Firebird has changed name so many times, but I've seen it's logo change just as many. Users must surely be finding it really difficult to accustom themselves with the different Mozilla products - when their names aren't changing then their logos are.

If time is playing the largest obstacle in achieving a completed design goal then more individuals should be contributing to the project - I for one would be happy to contribute. Maybe I missed the call for participation, if there was one in the first place? Who knows.

But definately keen to see how things progress over the next couple of months, and best of luck to those involved. ;)