MozillaZine

Firefox, Thunderbird Minor Upgrades Released

Tuesday June 29th, 2004

mozilla.org today released upgrades to both Firefox 0.9 (0.9.1) and Thunderbird 0.7 (0.7.1) to fix some minor bugs present in both releases. Both releases correct some flaws in the extension system that some users may have been experiencing, as well as a new icon set for the navigation toolbar on Windows and Linux in Firefox 0.9.1. All users of both products should get this upgrade. Builds are available for Firefox 0.9.1 and Thunderbird 0.7.1, as well as updated release notes (Fx, Tb) for both.


#1 Torrents ?

by gdeka <gdeka@myrealbox.com>

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 12:32 AM

Reply to this message

anyone

#3 Re: Torrents ?

by eealex

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 12:57 AM

Reply to this message

Why torrents for downloading these two small files.....?

#19 Re: Re: Torrents ?

by kwanbis

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 5:52 AM

Reply to this message

torrents are good for mozilla.org ... don't know why they are not listed by default

#34 Re: Re: Re: Torrents ?

by vfwlkr

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 11:53 AM

Reply to this message

Whats with this craze of torrents?

ftp download from mozilla.org is at a decent enough speed.

#40 Re: Re: Re: Re: Torrents ?

by kwanbis

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 1:22 PM

Reply to this message

so? it only means that mozilla's servers are ok, but they have to pay with that ... with torrents, all who download share a little bandwith

#47 Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Torrents ?

by Jugalator

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 3:24 PM

Reply to this message

If they don't care about torrents, that is obviously no issue for them, at least not currently.

Or else they need to seriously reconsider how they distribute their files.

#70 Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Torrents ?

by scottj

Wednesday June 30th, 2004 4:09 PM

Reply to this message

If mozilla.org is having problems with bandwidth costs, they should setup a torrent tracker on one of their servers. This is simple to do and will save tons of cash. I'm sure they could easily have a PC sitting around somewhere seeding all of the popular releases. But this is really their responsibility. They need to be the ones to initiate the torrents. That's the only reliable way it will work.

#63 Re: Torrents ?

by markie_j <mark@barrenfrozenwasteland.com>

Wednesday June 30th, 2004 3:47 AM

Reply to this message

Bittorrents are designed for sharing larger files, which is why they're used for the suite. There's no need for Torrents to download files that are only a few megabytes.

#2 Uninstall required again?

by ogiesen

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 12:37 AM

Reply to this message

Will I have to uninstall 0.9 again before installing the upgrade?

#4 Re: Uninstall required again?

by berkut

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 1:10 AM

Reply to this message

Yes, but keep your profile.

#31 Re: Re: Uninstall required again?

by kwanbis

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 10:46 AM

Reply to this message

why would you have too? it is supposed to be a minor update ... in fact ... i updated without uninstalling ... no problems

#33 Re: Re: Re: Uninstall required again?

by vfwlkr

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 11:52 AM

Reply to this message

It still *might* cause problems. Best to uninstall 0.9 first.

#5 A few minor problems with 0.9.1

by meyergeorg

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 2:55 AM

Reply to this message

Ok, looks good, just a few questions:

0.9.1 lists an update to do - it's 0.9.1. Yes, I'm sure I upgraded (Using linux-gtk2-xft builds)

about:plugins is now a plain list instead of the ordered nicely one before - bug or supposed this way - if supposed - why?

Thanks

George

#6 Re: A few minor problems with 0.9.1

by quis

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 3:07 AM

Reply to this message

I've never had cause to use about:plugins before, but on the Win32 build that I'm using it doesn't seems "plain", there is a styled header for each plugin, and a blue-headed table underneath with some other information in. Not sure what you're seeing, maybe it's just something missing in the Linux builds.

#7 Re: Re: A few minor problems with 0.9.1

by meyergeorg

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 3:13 AM

Reply to this message

No, it's even more plain here: Black text on white ground and hardly any text formating. What you are seeing is what I was used to see as well.

George

#26 Re: Re: Re: A few minor problems with 0.9.1

by FordP

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 8:42 AM

Reply to this message

I had that problem a couple of builds ago. It isn't the build it is a plugin or extension that you installed that incorrectly writes chrome data. Your best bet is to rename your profile chrome directory and install extensions until you find the culprit. My culprit was StumbleUpon. It installed and worked although it didn't use the extensions manager.

Cheers

#12 Re: A few minor problems with 0.9.1

by oaaltone <aaltonen+mozillazine@gmail.com>

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 4:50 AM

Reply to this message

I also uninstalled 0.9 and installed 0.9.1 and am still being told there is an upgrade available: Firefox 0.9.1.

#35 Re: Re: A few minor problems with 0.9.1

by vfwlkr

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 11:54 AM

Reply to this message

Tools -> Options -> Advanced -> Software updates (uncheck all boxes)

#62 Re: Re: Re: A few minor problems with 0.9.1

by tnleeuw

Wednesday June 30th, 2004 12:10 AM

Reply to this message

Hi,

I have the same problem, but disabling checks for updates doesn't seem the right solution for me. Is this acknowledged as a bug? Is the bug nominated for 1.0 release?

#14 Re: A few minor problems with 0.9.1

by Steffen

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 5:13 AM

Reply to this message

> 0.9.1 lists an update to do - it's 0.9.1. That's because 0.9.1 has an internal version number of 0.9 (pref: app.version) to allow the installation of themes and extensions which state they're only compatible with Firefox versions up to 0.9, which does not include 0.9.0+ or 0.9.1. On the other hand, <http://update.mozilla.org/update.rdf> states that 0.9.1 is available, to inform 0.9 users of the update. Unfortunately, 0.9.1 users receive this notification as well. That's why the release notes say: "You may see status notifications for available updates when there are none."

about:plugins WFM with the default theme. Other themes need to be fixed, as I posted in the themes forum two weeks ago: <http://forums.mozillazine…org/viewtopic.php?t=85200>

#16 Re: Re: A few minor problems with 0.9.1

by mlefevre

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 5:36 AM

Reply to this message

The release notes said that already for 0.9 - it's not about this particular issue.

I don't know if it's the right thing for UMO to mention 0.9.1. I filed bug 249015 about it to keep track of it anyway - it may well be a WONTFIX bug.

#18 Re: Re: A few minor problems with 0.9.1

by meyergeorg

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 5:43 AM

Reply to this message

Yes, with the default theme about:plugins works as usual, thanks for that hint. I didn't think this could be theme related.

IMO, it wasn't a good decision to allow themes and extensions with an 0.9 to work, because people may get confused. Yes, I know, a bit of work for the theme and extension authors, but still stuff like that causes bad press...

George

#20 About:plugins

by neilparks1

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 6:19 AM

Reply to this message

There's nothing in "about:plugins" that affects the chrome area of the browser. If the display is theme-dependent, then that's a major design flaw that needs to be addressed.

#57 This is a bug???

by ArKay

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 6:16 PM

Reply to this message

This stupid notification icon seems to hinder the adblock button at the right bottom from showing, this is so annoying. :(

#8 Installion quirk in Firefox 0.9.1

by DP3_001

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 3:41 AM

Reply to this message

After installing Firefox 0.9.1, a box popped up giving me the option to "Launch Firefox Now", and it looked weird. Half of it was covered in a red colored bar. I think I also noticed the same thing happening with Firefox 0.9.

#9 Clarification

by DP3_001

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 3:43 AM

Reply to this message

Specifically, half of the "Launch Firefox Now" wording was covered with a red colored bar thing.

#10 And one more thing ...

by DP3_001

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 4:04 AM

Reply to this message

I also found I had to download & reinstall the Macromedia Flash plugin because, for some reason, it got erased. But everything else (i.e. extensions, bookmarks) was still there.

#25 Re: And one more thing ...

by mr_anon

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 8:38 AM

Reply to this message

This is probably because the Flash plugin is stored in the application directory, while extension and bookmark information is stored in the profile directory.

#44 Plugins

by neilparks1

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 3:05 PM

Reply to this message

Save your plugins directory. All are completely reuseable with every new FF release.

#11 Re: Installion quirk in Firefox 0.9.1

by Shinglor <shinglor@optusnet.com.au>

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 4:44 AM

Reply to this message

Yeah, that happens to me every time as well.

#13 Re: Re: Installion quirk in Firefox 0.9.1

by Grauw

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 4:50 AM

Reply to this message

Me too. It's strange, but barely a showstopper though.

~Grauw

#30 Re: Installion quirk in Firefox 0.9.1

by Simplex

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 9:37 AM

Reply to this message

That's <http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=225281> and it's kind of annoying. As you can see from comment 15, ben hasn't figured out how to fix it, and is asking for help. Anyone???

#64 Re: Re: Re: Installion quirk in Firefox 0.9.1

by markie_j <mark@barrenfrozenwasteland.com>

Wednesday June 30th, 2004 3:52 AM

Reply to this message

does that for me as well, except it's blue for me

#15 Messy, messy , messy

by an0n1m1ty

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 5:18 AM

Reply to this message

- The "Launch Firefox Now" installer bug (how long will it take for such a minor bug to be fixed?) - Incorrect update detection (having uninstalled 0.9 and installed 0.9.1 I am now told that "Firefox found the following updates: Firefox 0.9.1) - Releasing an release candidate, new version, then patches within two weeks? That's just clumsy I'm afraid. - Don't like the new default theme either - boring and generic. - Buggy Rheme and Extension managers (tiny bugs but still bugs). - Still no single window mode by default.

Still the best goddam thing since sliced bread though.

#22 Hmm...

by Jugalator

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 6:56 AM

Reply to this message

"(how long will it take for such a minor bug to be fixed?)"

It's obviously not getting a high priority exactly because the bug is minor. You shouldn't look for polish like that in a pre-beta release anyway.

"Don't like the new default theme either - boring and generic."

That's because there's a theme manager for people like you.

"Buggy Rheme and Extension managers (tiny bugs but still bugs)."

That's because it's not 1.0.

"Still no single window mode by default."

That's because it's just a minor patch to 0.9. Expect that in maybe 1.1, 1.2 or so...

#17 Installing extensions

by PC1

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 5:40 AM

Reply to this message

1) Will installing multiple extensions and restarting once introduce any errors? It is a pain in the neck to restart FF every time.

2) Is there a way to have extensions installed by default in a customized firefox installation? I was able to install PubMed toolbar extension in Mozilla 1.6 by default, but Firefox seems a different stroy.

3) I found an extension "Switch Proxy Tool" <http://update.mozilla.org…ox&id=125&vid=187> which is nice for using "privoxy" <http://www.privoxy.org/> and/or anonymous proxies. In this age (GW) of degrading privacy, wouldn't it be nice if Mozilla Firefox came (default install) with a list of anonymous proxies?

#21 Re: Installing extensions

by polidobj

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 6:56 AM

Reply to this message

1. That's a yes and a no. It depends on the extension. I installed 5-6 extensions at once and all but one worked. I uninstalled that one and reinstalled it by itself and it worked.

#23 The new Winstripe theme

by Jugalator

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 6:59 AM

Reply to this message

Great job on fixing it! :-)

It looks MUCH better now, with not only improved icons but also fixed icon sizes / spacing.

The "New Tab" icon still looks like a toaster to me though, but I don't use it so whatever... ;)

#36 Re: The new Winstripe theme

by vfwlkr

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 11:56 AM

Reply to this message

ditto! Glad they replaced those triangles with arrows.

Now if only the toolbar wasnt wider than qute, and there was a line separating tab from content (e.g. google.com)

#38 Re: Re: The new Winstripe theme

by pbox

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 12:02 PM

Reply to this message

No, no, no. I don't want line separating the tab from the contents. I like it like this. Some themes do that, so you could consider those. (Modern for Firefox, if memory serves well.)

#46 Re: Re: The new Winstripe theme

by mgillespie

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 3:14 PM

Reply to this message

Anyone know if it's possible to MOVE the seperator between the URL and Google bar, as it looks ugly crunched up in the corner there....

#24 cannot install extensions with firefox 0.9.1

by gSalsero

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 8:17 AM

Reply to this message

I just uninstalled firefox 0.9 and installed firefox 0.9.1. IT kept all of the extensions I had, but it won't let me install any new extensions. I even tried downloading the installation file and dragging it over firefox. It just ignores it. When I click on the install link, it looks like it tried to download it, but then nothing happens. I restarted firefox and still nothing. Has anyone else seen this?

thanks.

#42 Re: cannot install extensions with firefox 0.9.1

by Ferretface5

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 1:47 PM

Reply to this message

Yes, exactly as you said.

#54 Re: Re: cannot install extensions with firefox 0.9

by polidobj

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 5:27 PM

Reply to this message

WFM Be sure Tools->Options->Advanced->Allow Websites to Install Software is checked.

Or if you prefer about:config make sure that xpinstall.enabled is true.

Oh and because I had to look for another extension to install to test this, I installed Flat Boomark Editing. I may not use it often but when I do it'll be nice to use.

#78 Re: Re: Re: cannot install extensions with firefox

by gSalsero

Tuesday July 6th, 2004 12:32 PM

Reply to this message

thanks, that helped

#79 Re: cannot install extensions with firefox 0.9.1

by rjbreneman

Tuesday July 13th, 2004 9:28 AM

Reply to this message

I installed the 6-29 build and still cannot install by clicking on the xpi file link. Other file types do respond appropriately. If I r-click open in new window, the installer will come up okay (but not r-click open in new tab).

#80 Re: cannot install extensions with firefox 0.9

by rjbreneman

Tuesday July 13th, 2004 9:32 AM

Reply to this message

Oh, and I do have xpinstall.enabled set to True.

#81 Re: cannot install extensions with firefox 0.9.1

by dranjha

Tuesday July 27th, 2004 5:47 PM

Reply to this message

I have firefox 0.9.2 installed. i seem to be having the same problem. i click the install link, there is some browser activity, yet nothing happens. I've tried all sorts of extensions; none of them work. Does anyone know how to fix this problem?

#27 Thunderbird Threads fixed?

by TheMatt

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 8:46 AM

Reply to this message

Folks, I don't have access to my Thunderbird XP box right now, but I have to ask, as the threading bug been fixed in 0.7.1? When I upgraded to 0.7, I noticed that whenever I enabled threading on any folder, when I restarted Thunderbird, that folder lost the threading. So, I had to enable it every time I started on every folder. That gets very annoying.

#37 Re: Thunderbird Threads fixed?

by pbox

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 12:00 PM

Reply to this message

Curious,

I used 0.7 and never had trouble with the threaded state being lost. I am subsribed to several maillists and threaded is the best way of viewing those. It all worked without a hitch. 0.7.1 likewise. MAybe something got borked with updating you profile between 0.6 and 0.7? Just gassing.

#28 Theme changes

by ph1nn <ph1nn@earthlink.net>

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 9:13 AM

Reply to this message

Well i see they updated the theme, maybe it looks slightly better but not really, the new reload button lookslike a blue blob or something. I still think it needs work

#29 Re: Theme changes

by mlefevre

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 9:34 AM

Reply to this message

Nobody has said it doesn't still need work - they are still working on it, and they've got another couple of months to work on it before 1.0.

#48 Re: Re: Theme changes

by Jugalator

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 3:31 PM

Reply to this message

I'm happy with how it is now, at least with back/forward/reload/stop/home. I don't use the others regularly so I can't tell for sure about those yet. I don't really see what the "blue blob" thing is all about. It's two "reload" arrows, in the same vein as the Windows XP standard reload icon, only that the arrows are blue now and not green. If you can't see it's arrows you need new glasses. :)

#32 BUGS!!!!

by FoXMuLD3R <foxmuld3r@gmail.com>

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 11:33 AM

Reply to this message

0.9.1 lists an update to do - it's 0.9.1. Yes, I'm sure I upgraded (Using final BUILD EXE Win32) and in this site, links not work correctly....

<http://batepapo.uol.com.br> Just click in the Left side, and nothing happen... a Nightly Build of 0.9.1 work's well this... but in official 0.9.1 i'snt!

#39 If anyone is interested, I got Pentium 4 builds

by mgillespie

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 12:21 PM

Reply to this message

Firefox 0.91 Pentium 4 (SSE2) optomised here: <http://www.mgillespie.plus.com/Mozilla/Firefox.htm> Thunderbird 0.71 Pentium 4 (SSE2) optimised here: <http://www.mgillespie.plu…m/Mozilla/Thunderbird.htm>

The Firefox is done, and uploaded, the Thunderbird will be finished compiling in a hour or so...

#41 Re: If anyone is interested, I got Pentium 4 build

by draconb

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 1:40 PM

Reply to this message

Do I need to uninstall my regular FF / TB installs before I install yours? What files does it replace / do I need to backup anything?

#45 Re: Re: If anyone is interested, I got Pentium 4 b

by mgillespie

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 3:12 PM

Reply to this message

No, the install removes the previous install automagically from the install directory... The only caveat is that you must select the same directory from my installer, as to where you previously installed FB (default is C:\Program Files\Mozilla FireFox).

PS. Having some problems with the Thunderbird 0.71 P4 release, as the source has only just been posted on the FTP, and build the wrong CVS code :-(

#43 Re: If anyone is interested, I got Pentium 4 build

by draconb

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 1:50 PM

Reply to this message

Do I need to uninstall my regular FF / TB installs before I install yours? What files does it replace / do I need to backup anything?

#50 Re: If anyone is interested, I got Pentium 4 build

by tono

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 4:36 PM

Reply to this message

Good god that's fast.. thank you.. can't wait for thunderbird

#69 Re: Re: If anyone is interested, I got Pentium 4 b

by mgillespie

Wednesday June 30th, 2004 12:09 PM

Reply to this message

Thunderbird 0.71 SSE2 Pentium 4 build is now up...

<http://www.mgillespie.plu…m/Mozilla/Thunderbird.htm>

#71 Re: Re: Re: If anyone is interested, I got Pentium

by draconb

Wednesday June 30th, 2004 4:45 PM

Reply to this message

The TB build you just did no longer works for me, I had your previous installed (.7) and it ran fine. This version only starts up, but uses little memory and never displays the gui, I can only see it in the task manager. I tried installing over my previous .7 build from you, and uninstalled and reinstalled your .71. Same problem with both.

Your FB build is AWSOME! Let me know if you need any more help - email me@ <draconb@sbcglobal.net>

#74 Re: Re: Re: Re: If anyone is interested, I got Pen

by tono

Thursday July 1st, 2004 12:35 AM

Reply to this message

It works perfectly for me, although I installed over my old Official .7.1 install that might make a difference.. also it's fast as hell.

#75 Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: If anyone is interested, I got

by draconb

Thursday July 1st, 2004 5:23 AM

Reply to this message

Ah Ha!

You do need to install the official 0.7.1 and then the P4 Enhanced version. I tried installing it over a .7 and a clean install and both failed. Installing over my .7.1 (official) worked perfectly :)

Thanks for that bit of info :)

#76 Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: If anyone is interested, I

by mgillespie

Thursday July 1st, 2004 11:21 AM

Reply to this message

Unfortunatly, I cannot figure out how to use the official installer, the documentation is thin on the ground, hence the "provisional" NSIS installer. I think the official installer does some other "upgrade" magic, which mine does not... I will add the comment about installing over 7.1 Official if people have problems to the web pages. I will also try to figure out how to build the official installer before the next TB and FB releases...

I find them considerably faster that the stock builds, and am glad other people also see the same performance benefits....

#65 Performance?

by leafdigital

Wednesday June 30th, 2004 5:48 AM

Reply to this message

I'm just curious - what's the performance difference in these optimised builds? Is it mainly rendering that improves? By how much?

--sam

#49 A reminder of why I like Gecko, and hate IE.

by DP3_001

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 3:52 PM

Reply to this message

There I was reading this article about how the latest flaw in IE had allowed, yet again, a bunch of hackers (from Russia) to infect the computers of numerous users, and how alternative browsers like Mozilla Firefox don't have to worry about that. Soon afterwards, I went to a web page via an e-mail link that opened in IE, and had TONS of problems displaying correctly. Just for the hell of it, I copied & pasted the link into Firefox 0.9.1 and used it to go there, and (Surprise!! Surprise!!) it looked exactly the way it was supposed to. This kind of stuff just reminds me why I'm converting over to a non-Microsoft enviorment. There's no excuse for this type of crap.

<http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1105_2-5250697.html>

#53 Re: A reminder of why I like Gecko, and hate IE.

by polidobj

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 5:15 PM

Reply to this message

Ah that's an old one. :P Have you seen this one? <http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1105_2-5251981.html>

Send that one to your financial institute the next time you complain to them that you can't online bank with them using a gecko browser. (For those who can't bank online with gecko that is)

#58 Re: Re: A reminder of why I like Gecko, and hate I

by arielb

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 8:30 PM

Reply to this message

so much for the "reasonable" compromise of using firefox for 99% of websites and IE to get to your bank site. It's firefox only baby!

#59 Re: Re: Re: A reminder of why I like Gecko, and ha

by polidobj

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 9:11 PM

Reply to this message

Well they say you can still browse with IE with High security settings but good luck getting by with that. You can't download ANYTHING with IE in that mode. Although you could set it to high and then do custom to enable just file downloading but there's alot more I'd guess you can't do with those settings.

#60 Gecko loves my FI's web site :-)

by DP3_001

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 9:12 PM

Reply to this message

Don't have to. My financial instution's web site switched over to Gecko compatibility awhile back ... which was a good thing. Had TONS of display problems using IE. The problems disappeared when I used a Gecko-based browser. The minute I found out about the latter, I stopped using the former immediately.

#51 Firefox download page - Win95

by noelley

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 4:59 PM

Reply to this message

The download page for firefox still suggests the windows download for people using Win95 even though firefox 0.9.x doesn't work with Win95. I know the release notes say Win98 min, but might be good if the autodetect looked at windows version and suggested that firefox will no longer work with win95 rather than suggesting downloading the current windows version. It's just the sort of people who will download it and have it crash (as it does on 95) that will not look at the release notes but still complain that it doesn't work. It could instead point them to 0.8, as that did work with 95, but I guess as that has bugs and incomplete features and such, it's not a great way to go either - or better to the Moz suite as it still lists 95 in the 1.7 release.

Just some thoughts from someone stuck on Win95 at the moment!

#52 Great article on why to use FireFox

by darnell

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 5:13 PM

Reply to this message

<http://www.businessweek.c…tc20040629_7734_tc120.htm>

Good that a new release of FireFox just came out!

#61 Too bad it's author can't do his homework

by DP3_001

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 9:22 PM

Reply to this message

Mr. Wildstrom says that the Google Toobar only works with IE, not mentioning that there's a Gecko-compatible version at Mozdev. He could have easily found that out if he bothered to check.

#67 Re: Too bad it's author can't do his homework

by darnell

Wednesday June 30th, 2004 9:47 AM

Reply to this message

In a way Wildstrom is correct, since the Gecko-compatible version is not an "official" Google toolbar. You can't get if from Google.com and Google does not endorse it.

The Google Toolbar specs at: <http://toolbar.google.com/> do specify: " System Requirements

Microsoft Windows 95/98/ME/NT/2000/XP Microsoft Internet Explorer 5.0 or later The pop-up blocker requires Internet Explorer 5.5 or later."

Sure Wildstrom could have worked the Googlebar extension into his article, but technically he is correct.

#72 Forget correct. He's lazy.

by DP3_001

Wednesday June 30th, 2004 7:28 PM

Reply to this message

If that guy has Firefox or Mozilla installed on a computer somewhere within Business Week's HQ, then he would've known about the Gecko-compatible Googlebar. It's litterally the first thing you see when you go to Firefox Extensions, or Mozdev's Extension Room. You can't miss it. I didn't. I don't know how he doesn't know about it. It's not like it's a new thing. It's been around for awhile now.

#73 Re: Too bad it's author can't do his homework

by shodan

Thursday July 1st, 2004 12:32 AM

Reply to this message

Hang on, the Google Toolbar itself doesn't work, as pointed out above. Plus, the mozdev alternative "googlebar" is missing the PageRank score, so it isn't a feature-complete clone either. Since he didn't mention the alternative, it is quite probable he didn't see it but it's also quite possible that he did and considers it unfinished or lacking. I know that I do, since PageRank feedback is the only feature I really want from it.

#55 And this bug still has not been fixed

by darnell

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 5:37 PM

Reply to this message

<http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=246136>

Still can type any URL into the location bar, hit ATL + Enter to open that site in a new tab, close the tab and still see that closed tab's URL in the location bar while looking at a totally different site.

#56 Permissions Broken in F.Fox 0.9.1 for OS X/Darwin

by twinhark

Tuesday June 29th, 2004 5:50 PM

Reply to this message

Several of the files (probably a majority, including Firefox.app/Contents/MacOS/firefox-bin) in the default installation can be removed by standard users who do not own the files as individuals or part of a group.

#66 updated, not revised, release notes

by leet

Wednesday June 30th, 2004 6:19 AM

Reply to this message

In the future it'd be nice to have release notes explain the minor release fixes. When users have just upgraded to 0.9 they want to know why 0.9.1 would be released.

#68 Firefox: View Source/Save Page As...

by corydeppen

Wednesday June 30th, 2004 12:07 PM

Reply to this message

Prior to Firefox 0.9, I was able to use the View Source option on a page and save the source code as a file. However, after upgrading to 0.9, the "Save Page As..." option is disabled when viewing the source code. Is this a preference that I've overlooked, or is it still an outstanding bug? I've also tried the mozex extension, but unfortunately there appeared to be a bug with that extension as well.

Please advise if this is a preference I need to modify or if it's a bug that will be addressed in upcoming releases.

Thanks, Cory

#77 lost the "save link to disk" option

by gigaset <rixon2000@hotmail.com>

Thursday July 1st, 2004 11:28 PM

Reply to this message

"Is it my imagination, or have I really Is it my imagination, or have I really lost the "save link to disk" option on the right-click menu? I used to find it very useful, as it would automatically download the file to my downloads folder without asking any questions, and would handle filename clashes by itself... "

--isorg.

Has anyone answered this yet? Because I certainly thought we lost this feature. Is this true?

#82 Re: lost the "save link to disk" option

by supasonic

Wednesday August 4th, 2004 9:15 PM

Reply to this message

I thougt that this may have been an extention that is no longer on the firefox site. I too am looking for it and my even resort to writng and extension soley for this purpose if one does not already exsist. Some please tell me that it does.