MozillaZine

Mozilla 1.7 Released

Thursday June 17th, 2004

an alias writes: "Today, the Mozilla Foundation released Mozilla 1.7. This release includes Multiple Identity support for Mozilla Mail, support for the /ignore command in ChatZilla, big improvements to Mozilla's pop-up blocking, and much, much more.

"The 1.7 branch will replace the 1.4 branch as the stable development baseline, with Mozilla Firefox and Thunderbird releases and the next major version of Netscape expected to be built from it. More information about Mozilla 1.7 can be found in the Mozill 1.7 Release Notes and downloads are available from the Releases page or the mozilla1.7 directory on ftp.mozilla.org."


#1 next netscape-version?

by rehabdoll

Thursday June 17th, 2004 4:42 PM

Reply to this message

I didnt know there would be any more netscape-releases..

#5 RE: next netscape-version?

by Gunnar

Thursday June 17th, 2004 5:25 PM

Reply to this message

Well, supposedly there will be a Netscape 7 version based on Mozilla 1.7, which I am very much looking forward to. <http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=15045>

Gunnar

#14 Re: RE: next netscape-version?

by Jugalator

Friday June 18th, 2004 1:15 AM

Reply to this message

Why are you looking forward to it?

Isn't it just a rebranded version of Mozilla?

#15 Re: Re: RE: next netscape-version?

by PC1

Friday June 18th, 2004 1:35 AM

Reply to this message

It is the commercialized version of Mozilla. Image blocker is disabled. There is a default "Whilte List" for the popup blocker for AOL business associates as AOL, Bank of America, etc...

The netscape version has some features disabled and more AOL advertising stuff. It is better to stick with Mozilla unless you want to take those things by hand (in the js prefences files, default settings, and/or about:config settings).

#18 RE: Re: Re: RE: next netscape-version?

by Gunnar

Friday June 18th, 2004 4:52 AM

Reply to this message

Well, yes, it is the commercialized version, but:

- the image blocker is easily reenabled, plus you can always work with a modified usercontent.css file - Netscape's spellchecker is IMHO better than Mozilla's - I use Netscape mail - I use the integrated AIM - I install it for friends and family - I just like the name NEtscape :-)

#8 RE: next netscape-version?

by Gunnar

Thursday June 17th, 2004 5:51 PM

Reply to this message

Well, supposedly there will be a Netscape 7 version based on Mozilla 1.7, which I am very much looking forward to. <http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=15045>

Gunnar

#22 anytime soon

by guygrolimond

Friday June 18th, 2004 7:23 AM

Reply to this message

You bet! If there is a Netscape to follow, it will most likely be soon....last time it was released almost at the same time. The netscape ftp site shows no signs of anything i could see.

#2 Long time coming

by Simplex

Thursday June 17th, 2004 5:12 PM

Reply to this message

This release shrunk the build bar by half!

#3 Cool!

by aguafuertes

Thursday June 17th, 2004 5:14 PM

Reply to this message

I love the suite because of it's integrated tools for developers. I don't want to miss the fantastic DOM Inspector. Is this feature available for Firefox? And does it have the same functionality?

#4 Re: Cool!

by wgianopoulos

Thursday June 17th, 2004 5:22 PM

Reply to this message

the DOM inspector IS available for Firefox. It is included in the installer builds as well, just make sure you do a custom install and select Developer Tools. I have not used the DOM inspector in the suite so I cannot speak to your functionality question.

#16 I see...

by aguafuertes

Friday June 18th, 2004 2:04 AM

Reply to this message

Thanks, I already downloaded Firefox and checked it out. I even like it better on Firefox, DOM Inspector doesn't have to open the URL itself! Nice!

#6 CDs!

by SomeGuy

Thursday June 17th, 2004 5:26 PM

Reply to this message

Official Mozilla 1.7 CDs are on sale! And they have a guide book now! <http://www.mozillastore.com/products/software/>

Buy one... better yet, buy a dozen! :)

#7 Please test!

by doron

Thursday June 17th, 2004 5:42 PM

Reply to this message

Lots of stuff was added since rc3 (some are my fault :), so please test and report any issues to bugzilla. I have a bad feeling that a 1.7.1 will be needed due to gecko regressions and security hole patchs.

#11 Definitely will need a 1.7.1 (for the Mac)

by pkb351 <pbergsagel@shaw.ca>

Thursday June 17th, 2004 9:24 PM

Reply to this message

On MacOS X memory leaks have been reduced, but the amount of memory leaked is still far too high IMHO. Withing 20 minutes of surfing memory usage can be as high as 82MB+. I reported this on the memory tracking Bug 246245 at Bugzilla.

Other than the memory leak issue on the Mac this looks like a good release (so far).

#26 Re: Definitely will need a 1.7.1 (for the Mac)

by doron

Friday June 18th, 2004 12:35 PM

Reply to this message

I meant more in rendering terms, not leaks :) We will always leak.

#31 "We will always leak"

by gwalla <gwalla@despammed.com>

Saturday June 19th, 2004 1:59 PM

Reply to this message

Has anyone considered garbage collection?

#9 Works good here

by zero0w

Thursday June 17th, 2004 7:31 PM

Reply to this message

Having browsed many sites I used to surf, 1.7 is working great here.

#10 Some obvious changes....

by zero0w

Thursday June 17th, 2004 7:49 PM

Reply to this message

Can someone post the ChangeLog between 1.7 RC3 and final? Especially concerning font encoding and selection part....

#21 Re: Some obvious changes....

by roseman

Friday June 18th, 2004 6:56 AM

Reply to this message

i second the motion - i am happy with 1.7rc3, and am worried if anything changed since then... (worried it might be for the worse) - at least 1.7rc3 is a known quantity. a changelog for 1.7rc3 to 1.7final would be MOSSST welcome! :)

#23 Re: Some obvious changes....

by durbacher

Friday June 18th, 2004 10:18 AM

Reply to this message

<http://bonsai.mozilla.org…18&cvsroot=%2Fcvsroot> is the list of the checkins to the 1.7 branch during the time in question. I'm not sure when exactly the releases were tagged, so I'm not sure about the first and last patches in the list.

#12 No press release?

by aha <aha@pinknet.cz>

Thursday June 17th, 2004 11:37 PM

Reply to this message

Previews of future applications got press release, but great, stable, mature product no?

#17 Re: No press release?

by mlefevre

Friday June 18th, 2004 3:34 AM

Reply to this message

Previews of future applications are more interesting - and those are what mozilla.org wants to "sell" to the world in general. A new version of a stable, mature product which has almost nothing in the way of new features that aren't also in the new products isn't worth publicising.

#13 20 Language Packs are ready!

by channy <channy@mozilla.or.kr>

Friday June 18th, 2004 12:09 AM

Reply to this message

In this release, each localization contributors have tried to make each language packs at the same time of release time. They will be included in Mozilla 1.7 CDs too. Please refer to <http://www.mozilla.org/pr…n/mlp_status.html#moz_1.7>

#19 Firefox Listed before Mozilla on Mozilla Homepage

by peterlairo <Peter@Lairo.com>

Friday June 18th, 2004 5:18 AM

Reply to this message

I find it interesting that Firefox 0.9 is listed above Mozilla 1.7 on the Mozilla homepage. A paradigm shift is in the air. ;-)

#24 Re: Firefox Listed before Mozilla on Mozilla Homep

by Waldo_2

Friday June 18th, 2004 10:31 AM

Reply to this message

Interesting...it's stil a technology preview, but I guess they're transitioning it over to the primary spot to get more attention. Given that 0.9 is somewhat more buggier with respect to its new features than previous new features were in earlier versions, I don't know whether this is a good idea, a bad idea, or just an idea. I'm leaning either towards the first or the last, personally.

#20 Why still no official XFT builds?

by johann_p

Friday June 18th, 2004 5:41 AM

Reply to this message

Why is mozilla.org still not offering XFT-enabled builds for linux? I'd gladly use and official build with talkback, but I want XFT since without this, Mozilla sucks quite a lot in comparison on Linux. Why does Mozilla.org provide XFT builds regularily for Firefox but is unable to do so for Mozilla? Why? Can it be that hard to have one more compile at least for the official releases (if it is too much trouble for all the nightlies)?

#28 Re: Why still no official XFT builds?

by odonohue <mark.odonohue@firebirdsql.org>

Friday June 18th, 2004 10:23 PM

Reply to this message

After a day or cursing and pulling my hair out trying to figure out why 1.7 fonts looks so bad and yet the default Mandrake 1.6 install had good fonts. Yes this turns out to be my problem as well.

I found XFT and gtk2 builds available from here:

<http://www.scottbolander.com/mozilla-xft.html>

Cheers

Mark

#30 Friendly contributors but not mozilla.org

by johann_p

Saturday June 19th, 2004 2:02 AM

Reply to this message

Yes there are a few friendly contributors who share their builds ... you will find many of them giving info in the "Mozilla Builds" forum. But what I would like to know and never get an answer is why mozilla.org does not provide these important builds for Mozilla ... but always provides them from Firefox, even for the nightlies. I do not think it would be that much effort to make this one additional build and it would be of immense benefit for nearly all Linux-users. So what excuse do they have not to provide it? Anyone from mozilla.org reading this?

#25 This release sucks

by morg

Friday June 18th, 2004 11:55 AM

Reply to this message

Release 1.7 RC2 never crashed on me.

Release 1.7 RC3 crashed once on me after a long period of use.

Release 1.7 final crashed almost immediately out of the box.

We need to do a 1.7.1 to fix the crashers. Sorry, but that's reality.

#27 So long Seamonkey!! Hello Firefox!!

by DP3_001

Friday June 18th, 2004 12:38 PM

Reply to this message

There I was trying to download a simple extension (i.e. auotscroll) from Mozdev, and I kept getting this error message saying that it wasn't "a valid extension," and the download was prevented. I went to the usual places to try & get it someplace else, and it was nowhere. In short, I think this is the Mozilla Organization's way of telling people that the Mozilla Applications Suite is not for civillians anymore, and that we should go to Firefox ... which is fine with me. I never liked the former's butt ugly appearance anyway. Plus, Firefox is just easier to use. Let the corporations use MAS. It's their's now.

#29 Congratulations and Thank You!

by rollind

Saturday June 19th, 2004 1:35 AM

Reply to this message

I want to express my gratitude and offer my congratulations to all those whose hours of coding, tweaking, debugging, sweating, etc., etc., this release of a superb set of Internet tools represents.

I have used Mozilla as my default email program and browser for over 4 years and only Netscape and Mosaic prior to that. I appreciate the result of the combined efforts of all who contributed.

It's a fine piece of collaborative work.

#33 Re: Congratulations and Thank You!

by roseman

Monday June 21st, 2004 7:59 AM

Reply to this message

i remember mosaic 0.9 :) and i still keep netscape 4.80 around as an emergency backup, for re-downloading mozilla if i ever get mucked up (without having to resort to ms-ie) think i might still have netscape 3.02 gold on my DOS-box :)

#32 Download dialogs?

by brobinson

Sunday June 20th, 2004 9:47 AM

Reply to this message

Download dialogs appear to be incorrectly sized for their contents (dialog buttons at the bottom are cutting off when there are more options than normal in the dialog.

#34 Where are the Themes?

by ndebord

Tuesday June 22nd, 2004 5:43 PM

Reply to this message

It's pretty frustrating to look through the list of themes at mozdev or freshmeat.

Just try and find a theme that has been updated for Mozilla 1.7. Why weren't they ready and uploaded when this so-called "gold" release hit the streets?

N

#35 Re: Where are the Themes?

by zontar

Friday June 25th, 2004 7:56 PM

Reply to this message

When I installed 1.7, all of my 1.6 themes and add-ons still worked fine.