Kuro5hin.org: technology and culture, from the trenches
create account | help/FAQ | contact | links | search | IRC | site news
[ Everything | Diaries | Technology | Science | Culture | Politics | Media | News | Internet | Op-Ed | Fiction | Meta | MLP ]
We need your support: buy an ad | premium membership

[P]
Mozilla 0.9.1 released

By Cloudane in News
Sat Jun 09, 2001 at 01:04:37 AM EST
Tags: Software (all tags)
Software

Slashdot and Betanews are reporting that Mozilla 0.9.1 has been released.

Do not let the minor increase in version number fool you - the improvements are substantial, and very noticable!


Amongst many bugfixes and small additions, the most notable changes (paraphrased from Betanews) are:
  • An overhauled "Modern" skin, which uses new icons and a lighter color.
  • Many bugfixes, providing "greatly enhanced stability" [It does seem very stable so far]
  • Bi-directional text support for Arabic and Hebrew
  • A new status bar, which combines the old taskbar and statusbar to save screen space (this is reflected on both skins)
  • Mozilla Mail now supports typedown addressing against an LDAP server
  • Many performance improvements in both networking and layout [it actually seems about twice as fast at downloading and rendering webpages]
  • XSLT support is now enabled, but still incomplete, and buggy.

    Some Windows users might also be interested to know that you can now run Mozilla with the "-turbo" switch, and it will remain in memory (like Internet Explorer) so that it'll launch instantly.
    That means the old "it takes too long to load" line is no longer an excuse to rush back to IE ;)

  • Sponsors

    Voxel dot net
    o Managed Hosting
    o VoxCAST Content Delivery
    o Raw Infrastructure

    Login

    Related Links
    o Slashdot
    o Slashdot [2]
    o Betanews
    o Mozilla 0.9.1
    o Also by Cloudane


    Display: Sort:
    Mozilla 0.9.1 released | 49 comments (42 topical, 7 editorial, 0 hidden)
    Heh! (3.50 / 2) (#2)
    by id10t on Fri Jun 08, 2001 at 02:57:15 PM EST

    Ironically enough, that happens to be the browser I'm using to read this page!

    --------

    "Still! `Old friend!' You've managed to kill just about everyone else, but like a poor marksman you keep missing the target!"

    Admiral James Tiberius Kirk, ST: The Wrath of Khan

    --------

    id10t

    And I'm using it already! (3.00 / 1) (#3)
    by DesiredUsername on Fri Jun 08, 2001 at 03:13:00 PM EST

    The performance is *much* improved. www.pickthehottie.com still doesn't work, though. No crashes so far (about 5 hours). We'll see what happens.

    Play 囲碁
    DIE ALREADY (2.66 / 6) (#6)
    by DeadBaby on Fri Jun 08, 2001 at 03:45:08 PM EST

    I don't see what the fuss is with Mozilla. It still takes 30MB of ram for ONE WINDOW, about 5MB more per window. It's slow, it has lots of rendering problems, the fonts commonly get all stuck together when scrolling, the UI hasn't been improved at all (over Netscape 4), the sidebar is annoying, it's not any faster than IE6, for some reason the menu's still randomly break and won't work anymore, under Linux it crashes about as much as Netscape 4 did, Under win32 it seems more stable but has more "issues"

    I know it's a beta but Jesus... It's some bad software. The worst part is, it has improved, A LOT and it's still pretty much un-usable. Can't they just let the horrible thing die and get it over with?

    "Our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark. In our obscurity -- in all this vastness -- there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves. It is up to us." - Carl Sagan
    The big deal? (3.00 / 1) (#16)
    by psctsh on Fri Jun 08, 2001 at 06:35:02 PM EST

    How ignorant are you that you missed the *entire* point of Mozilla? It's entire purpose in life is as follows: The mouse scroll button opens links in new windows. That's the crux of Mozilla--the center mouse button clicky thing.

    Believe you me, I tried to go back to IE. After my "wow shiny toy" feelings for it wore off, I decided to remove it from my harddrive--but two hours later I started getting frustrated with the mouse. Every time I'd click a story link in kuro5hin or a page link in google, I'd sit there and wait for the page to load--but nothing happened. Then I'd realize what was going on, and I'd have to right click and go to the freaking "open as new window" option. What a pain in the ass. And don't try to delude yourself by thinking I'm about to "shift click" or something, 'cause that would involve a complete reorganization of my posture.

    So try the damn program. It's like crack for lazy nerd people.

    [ Parent ]
    I didn't even know I could do that... (3.50 / 2) (#17)
    by ZanThrax on Fri Jun 08, 2001 at 07:45:28 PM EST

    The main reason that I started in with Mozilla is that I didn't want to use IE. Now that I've gotten used to the level of control over cookies, there's no way in hell I'm going back to IE, whose "can they have a cookie please" dialog tries to convince you that cookies are a good thing, and whose "never show this dialog again" type option sets the options to always accept cookies. Mozilla still has some rendering (scroll this page) problems (and is bloated as hell), but at least I have control and I don't feel dirty when I use it.


    There is no them. There is only us. We are them.


    [ Parent ]
    Actually (3.00 / 1) (#23)
    by psctsh on Fri Jun 08, 2001 at 10:25:41 PM EST

    The reason I started using Mozilla was a combination of factors--for one, I was tired of IE taking down my system when it crashed (which, even though rare, was sufficiently annoying), and wanted to browse using something not "integrated" in with the OS. The second reason was that I wanted my browser to open links in new windows by double clicking the link. The only way this was possible was to use an open-source browser. Ironically though, after downloading all the source and tools and such, I accidently hit the middle button...

    I don't know, it has a couple of other good features, such as the blocking of foreign images (keeps pages from taking 20 minutes to load ads), the control over cookies, etc. As for it's rendering speed, I'd say it's comparable to IE on my computer, and I'm not really worried about losing 25Megs of memory to a process.

    As for your link, what's wrong with it? I scrolled it and didn't notice any formatting errors or slowdown...actually, the only site I had trouble viewing is msdn.microsoft.com. Just try to read the text in the search field.

    I want to know what the deal is with this latest version though. Right now I'm using .8.1 and it works beautifully; this article prompted a [shortlived] upgrade, and the new version crashed when I went to (1) click post on a comment here, and (2) vote on a submission.

    [ Parent ]
    The background image (3.00 / 1) (#30)
    by ZanThrax on Sat Jun 09, 2001 at 12:35:26 AM EST

    transparency fucks up and turns black as soon as I scroll, so that the text on most of the main section becomes unreadable without highlighting it. I've never seen the problem elsewhere though. As for .8, I skipped it because it refused to run for me. I tried it when it was first released, and never once got it to actually load; it either locked or crashed. I gave it another try a couple days before .9 came out and had similar results. I doubt that I'll be switching to this new one either, because I hate spending hours setting everything up and getting my bookmarks and cookie permissions restored.


    There is no them. There is only us. We are them.


    [ Parent ]
    Hours? (3.00 / 1) (#37)
    by bigbird on Sat Jun 09, 2001 at 12:09:38 PM EST

    I doubt that I'll be switching to this new one either, because I hate spending hours setting everything up and getting my bookmarks and cookie permissions restored.

    Back up your user profile. Upgrade mozilla. Overwrite the default profile with your previous user profile.

    The release notes show what files are created by Mozilla. It may take some trial and error, but should not require more than a few minutes.

    Consider switching to unix. My .mozilla directory keeps my preferences safe no matter how frequently I change to a new nightly builds.

    bigbird

    For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. Rom 1:16
    [ Parent ]

    Cookies, cookies, I dont need your stink'n cookies (none / 0) (#43)
    by rawg on Sat Jun 09, 2001 at 04:43:17 PM EST

    I dont know why people are always worried about cookies. What is the fuss all about? I can track you without cookies. I can crack your box without cookies. I dont need cookies.

    But cookies make it easy for web monkeys to build nice sites.


    [ Parent ]
    Cookies have nothing to do with (none / 0) (#44)
    by ZanThrax on Sat Jun 09, 2001 at 05:08:01 PM EST

    nice sites. They are useful for web monkeys to add functionality to sites (like the cookies that let me use k5 and web boards); but most cookies don't add any viewer-discernable functionality, or at best are used to add functionality that I don't want, such as refusing access to files (fileplanet's new policy) or tracking what I do, or simply gathering saleable information. And yeah, my box is probably incredible hackable. There are certainly other ways to track my activity than cookies, but I don't care to make activities I dissaprove of easier, and I truly resent IE's dialog box that makes it sound like letting banner ads set cookies is a good thing.


    There is no them. There is only us. We are them.


    [ Parent ]
    Works fine for me (none / 0) (#48)
    by geoffeg on Sun Jun 10, 2001 at 08:03:04 PM EST

    I just scrolled the page (with mousewheel and scrollbar) and didn't notice a problem. I'm using a CVS compile that I did last night.

    *Shrug* They fix bugs so fast lately that it's hard to expect anything small to be broken for more than a week.

    Geoff

    [ Parent ]
    MSIE new window (4.00 / 1) (#22)
    by fluffy grue on Fri Jun 08, 2001 at 09:43:31 PM EST

    Not normally one to point out good things in Microsoft software, it pains me to mention that in MSIE, you get the same functionality by shift-clicking a link. Middle button is much easier, though. :)
    --
    "Is not a quine" is not a quine.
    I have a master's degree in science!

    [ Hug Your Trikuare ]
    [ Parent ]

    I know... (none / 0) (#25)
    by psctsh on Fri Jun 08, 2001 at 10:35:22 PM EST

    ...but did you?

    [ Parent ]
    Oh (none / 0) (#26)
    by fluffy grue on Fri Jun 08, 2001 at 10:43:57 PM EST

    I glossed over that bit, since you made it sound like there was no functionality for that, not that you were just too lazy to have the keyboard within reach.
    --
    "Is not a quine" is not a quine.
    I have a master's degree in science!

    [ Hug Your Trikuare ]
    [ Parent ]

    Stupid question time! (3.00 / 1) (#7)
    by _Quinn on Fri Jun 08, 2001 at 03:53:09 PM EST

       (I know, it's you're favorite time. :))

       Could someone explain to me how make arstechnica.com readable in Mozilla? It's readable (but ugly -- like most sites) in NS 4.7x on Linux, because I've jacked up the font size enourmously, but Mozilla doesn't seem to want to render arstechnica's fonts as large as, say, kuro5hin's. (I need font size @ 200% to make the text large enough, but that completely hoses the rest of the page.)

       This might actually be a 'how do I get better font support in Linux?' question. If it is, I'd appreciate it if you could point me to a non 'self-extracting' archive of the infamous MS webfonts. Thanks.

    -_Quinn
    Reality Maintenance Group, Silver City Construction Co., Ltd.
    d'oh! (none / 0) (#8)
    by _Quinn on Fri Jun 08, 2001 at 03:53:49 PM EST

       that would be _your_ favorite time.

    -_Quinn
    Reality Maintenance Group, Silver City Construction Co., Ltd.
    [ Parent ]
    Font de-uglification (4.00 / 1) (#9)
    by Skippy on Fri Jun 08, 2001 at 04:12:35 PM EST

    Check out the HOW-TO:

    http://www.linuxdoc.org/HOWTO/mini/FDU/index.html

    The short version - change the order of the 100dpi and 75dpi fonts in your XF86config file. This usually makes a big difference. What distro are you using? The "hand holding" ones usually have pretty fonts as part of the base install.

    # I am now finished talking out my ass about things that I am not qualified to discuss. #
    [ Parent ]

    That's not true (none / 0) (#10)
    by DeadBaby on Fri Jun 08, 2001 at 04:53:53 PM EST

    Mozilla under Mandrake 8 is pretty much un-usable due to awful fonts.
    "Our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark. In our obscurity -- in all this vastness -- there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves. It is up to us." - Carl Sagan
    [ Parent ]
    infamous MS webfonts (2.00 / 1) (#35)
    by Moghedien on Sat Jun 09, 2001 at 10:00:56 AM EST

    That self-extracting MS webfont-archive should be extractable using any unzip program. The only thing self-extractable about the archive is that it contains a mini-unzip program in the header, otherwise it's just a regular zip-file.


    ---
    [57 68 6F 20 63 61 72 65 73 2E]


    [ Parent ]
    Not anymore (4.00 / 1) (#36)
    by fluffy grue on Sat Jun 09, 2001 at 12:01:10 PM EST

    Microsoft doesn't use zip, they use their own proprietary format (go figure). There's a Linux program called 'cabextract' which can grok those though.
    --
    "Is not a quine" is not a quine.
    I have a master's degree in science!

    [ Hug Your Trikuare ]
    [ Parent ]

    Re: Not anymore (none / 0) (#42)
    by Moghedien on Sat Jun 09, 2001 at 03:00:58 PM EST

    Hm. You're right. They must've changed format for the archives intended for Win32. The Win16 archives are still zip though.

    ---
    [57 68 6F 20 63 61 72 65 73 2E]


    [ Parent ]
    You need to steal some truetype fonts from Windows (2.50 / 2) (#39)
    by para_droid on Sat Jun 09, 2001 at 12:43:13 PM EST

    See http://www.hazalthorn.freeserve.co.uk/TrueType.html for instructions.

    [ Parent ]
    Mozilla's Turbo feature (3.00 / 2) (#11)
    by Andrew Dvorak on Fri Jun 08, 2001 at 05:04:30 PM EST

    I am using Mozilla under Windows (much faster and stable than the latest version of Netscape 6, by the way) and am interested in using the "-turbo" or "/turbo" feature but I cannot find documentation on using this or information on how this works.

    Can somebody either explain this feature or point me towards something documenting such?

    Have you visited OReally.net? The answer is *obvious* and you should do so now!



    Moz Turbo in Win (4.60 / 5) (#12)
    by quam on Fri Jun 08, 2001 at 05:36:09 PM EST

    You should have a shortcut to Mozilla on the desktop. On shortcut > Right Click > Copy. Paste shortcut on desktop (Mozilla (2)). Now, modify the properties of Mozilla(2) and for the target, add -turbo.

    Target should now appear as: "C:\Program Files\Mozilla\bin\mozilla.exe" -turbo
    (depending on the location of your mozilla executable).
    Then, move Mozilla(2) to the StartUp folder (if you always want Mozilla to have turbo capabilities upon boot).

    To try out turbo, run the -turbo shortcut and then execute Mozilla.

    -- U.S. Patent 5443036 concerns a device for encouraging a cat to exercise by chasing a light spot.
    [ Parent ]
    Viewer.exe (3.00 / 4) (#14)
    by delmoi on Fri Jun 08, 2001 at 06:12:31 PM EST

    If you want use the mozilla layout engine without dealing with slow moz load times or large memory use with '-turbo' You can load viewer.exe. It's actualy a pretty cool prog. A bare-bones web browser. Loads a new instance almost as fast as mozilla.
    --
    "'argumentation' is not a word, idiot." -- thelizman
    What a great update (1.80 / 5) (#18)
    by psctsh on Fri Jun 08, 2001 at 07:51:45 PM EST

    You forgot to mention one of the major features in v.9.1: it crashes whenever the submit button gets clicked.

    Yes, overall I think that this new version is phenomenal, considering the new features--
    *it's shiny pretty look fun bright
    *it's incredibly stable (unless you want to use one of those obscure submit forms)
    *you won't get confused when reading instructions on bomb-making
    *an extra 10 pixels for viewing the ads at the...actually, I'm going to stop right there.

    Is this supposed to be a stable release? Excuse me while I go back to my wonderful b.8.1

    RE: what a great update (4.00 / 1) (#19)
    by Cloudane on Fri Jun 08, 2001 at 08:09:16 PM EST

    No problems here with clicking submit buttons. Anyone else have that problem?

    [ Parent ]
    I'd imagine (none / 0) (#24)
    by psctsh on Fri Jun 08, 2001 at 10:29:53 PM EST

    that it's specific to very few machines...I don't believe anyone would release a major upgrade if this happened to even 10% of it's users. That being said it happened to me on 3 (out of 3 forms I encountered) occasions: Once when I tried to post a comment, and twice when I tried to vote. Oh well, I guess I'll wait for some patches or something...

    [ Parent ]
    no submit problems here (1.00 / 1) (#49)
    by cetan on Mon Jun 11, 2001 at 10:49:36 PM EST

    I'm not seeing that bug. Curious though. I've found that sometimes, profile managment is a good thing with mozilla. I keep a profile for nightlies and a profile for the current official release.
    ===== cetan www.cetan.com =====
    [ Parent ]
    In other news (2.25 / 4) (#20)
    by rebelcool on Fri Jun 08, 2001 at 08:09:16 PM EST

    Today I am wearing a nice set of pants. Tomorrow, I may choose to wear jeans with bigger, better pockets.

    No -turbo switch here (no, THAT isnt a turbo switch)

    Laugh. It's good for ya.

    COG. Build your own community. Free, easy, powerful. Demo site

    Opera is much better anyway. (2.40 / 5) (#27)
    by Surial on Fri Jun 08, 2001 at 11:12:19 PM EST

    (either = MSIE and Netscape)
    Check out Opera. It loads faster than either, the installer is a lot smaller than either, has way less memory overhead than either, and has all this:
    • SHIFT+CTRL+CLICK on a link to make it appear in a new window without that window becoming the foreground. In other words, you just stay on your own page.
    • If Opera does crash, it does so 'nicely': Your system usually still works (in win9x, Opera Linux never crashes the system), and if you start opera again it'll open all the windows that were open when it crashed. (Sure, no crashes at all would be nicer, but this is almost as good).
    • It shows virtually every page just as well as IE. There are lots of 'IE-optimized' pages that look better on Opera than on netscape.
    • Free these days.
    • Supports XML, WAP, and all that, if you really care about such things.
    • built-in lightweight ICQ, MAIL and NEWS support, but I'd rather use external programs for those.
    • Generally just brilliant.
    • Runs on Windows, Unix, BeOS, OS/2, Mac...
    The alternatives are IE, which a lot of people don't want to use (M$ and all), Netscape, which has announced they wont be making any more browsers, and Mozilla, which, well, sorry, but it doesn't even come close to Opera. IE doesn't even come close to Opera. As far as I'm concerned, Opera and w3m are all the browsers that I'll ever need.

    <disclaimer>I don't work for Opera, I'm just a very happy Opera user, and I get the feeling a lot of you aren't aware of its existence.</disclaimer>
    --
    "is a signature" is a signature.

    Opera rules (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by Eloquence on Fri Jun 08, 2001 at 11:46:28 PM EST

    I've registered Opera. The UI is the best of all browsers, and the new mouse gestures rule. I've had one problem with all versions of Opera I've used so far though: Some pages sometimes never load completely, i.e. they stall in the middle and never finish. I can stop but the page output is then garbled. No idea what the cause is. My advice is: Try it out for a month or so before you buy it -- there are some strange problems on some systems, and you may want to test if yours is affected.
    --
    Copyright law is bad: infoAnarchy · Pleasure is good: Origins of Violence
    spread the word!
    [ Parent ]
    sad (1.00 / 1) (#32)
    by majcher on Sat Jun 09, 2001 at 06:06:05 AM EST

    I've tried to use Opera many times over its life cycle. I really, really, really want to like it - now, more than ever. I just don't, though. My primary GUI platform nowadays, for better or for worse, is Windows, and Opera is just a dog all around on that. I've been "stuck" with IE5.5 for the last year or so, and it's been not so bad. Again, I've really, really, really wanted to like Mozilla, but until recently it just hasn't been up to it. This latest build is *almost* enough to push me over... but not quite. I reckon I'll still be using IE for my primary browser, but I'm keeping Moz .9.1 handy for more and more frequent use.

    Anyway, all this browser stuff is for suckers. This whole web thing is a big scam. Really.
    --
    http://www.majcher.com/
    Wrestling pigs since 1988!
    [ Parent ]
    Opera (4.00 / 1) (#33)
    by Cloudane on Sat Jun 09, 2001 at 06:49:34 AM EST

    Opera is absolutely superb in Windows. I use it as my main browser on that platform, and it works perfectly...

    Last time I tried the Linux version though, I didn't like it much. Some of the nicer features from the Windows version were missing, things like Java and Flash didn't work, and the interface looked "swollen". The buttons seem about twice the size.
    If they've fixed any of those things yet, I may give it another try :)
    Remove the nospam. to reply
    [ Parent ]
    buttons??? (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by axxeman on Sun Jun 10, 2001 at 05:50:31 AM EST

    What do you mean by "buttons"?

    I honestly can't see how anyone can use Opera in any other way than fullscreen with keyboard shortcuts.

    lec·tur·er (lkchr-r) n. Abbr. lectr: graduate unemployable outside the faculty.
    [ Parent ]

    Konq (2.00 / 1) (#45)
    by FnordLord on Sat Jun 09, 2001 at 06:37:33 PM EST

    What about Konqueror? It is the KDE Web Browser, and I've found that it REALLY KICKS ASS!

    [ Parent ]
    Mozilla "Features" (none / 0) (#31)
    by Tachys on Sat Jun 09, 2001 at 01:54:51 AM EST

    In Mozilla it has a feature when ever you do a search on google or bugzilla, the taskbar pops out showing all the titles from the results

    Bug 56969 is logged on address this. But the response from the Mozilla is basically "It's not a bug it's a Feature."

    To turn it off, in preferences under Navigator choose Internet Search and uncheck the checkbox.

    Does anyone like this feature?

    Does anyone use the Mail and News Clients?

    Does anyone use any XUL apps?



    RE: Mozilla "Features" (none / 0) (#34)
    by Cloudane on Sat Jun 09, 2001 at 06:55:26 AM EST

    I really *hate* that feature. Does anyone even use the sidebar for anything else? When I installed Mozilla, the first thing I ever did was switch it off.

    Haven't checked out the mail and news client yet. Last time, it was too slow... reminded me of a Java program.

    I don't even know what XUL is *hangs head in shame*
    Remove the nospam. to reply
    [ Parent ]
    Komodo uses XUL (none / 0) (#38)
    by DrEvil on Sat Jun 09, 2001 at 12:17:35 PM EST

    I just installed Komodo yesturday. Although I haven't really used it much the XUL interface looks good.

    I think XML defined interfaces will be the future of computing. Web based services will be extended to use a XUL like language which can be used to send interfaces to the client machine, much like how the X protocol works. And due to the open nature of XML the displays can be rendered on any machine with a display of some sort!

    [ Parent ]
    Komodo is buggy (none / 0) (#46)
    by ckuzak on Sat Jun 09, 2001 at 11:38:06 PM EST

    I was using a beta copy of Komodo for about a week and a half. I gave it up because it was just too buggy and slow. I was using it for Perl development but I was getting extremely agitated with the rendering engine. If i left the document and switched to another window, when I came back to Komodo, the mistake highlighter would highlight my entire code (even though nothing was wrong). The only way to alleviate this issue was to hit enter and cause Komodo to reparse the document. Anyhow, perhaps it is better with the new 1.0 version.

    [ Parent ]
    The best browser: (2.00 / 2) (#40)
    by tkatchev on Sat Jun 09, 2001 at 12:53:01 PM EST

    Is of course links. (Note the spelling!)
    <A HREF="http://links.sourceforge.net">
    http://links.sourceforge.net</A>

    The thing is amazing. Give it a try, really.

    Plus, it's the <B>ONLY</B> Unix browser to
    support Cyrillic properly. You may deride
    Microsoft, but at least they can implement I18N
    support decently. Unix implementations are so
    sad they would be funny if they weren't so
    horribly true. It's a real nightmare.


       -- Signed, Lev Andropoff, cosmonaut.

    slashdot morons? (4.00 / 3) (#41)
    by Ender Ryan on Sat Jun 09, 2001 at 01:02:29 PM EST

    Jesus, you'd think half the people who have posted in response to this article were slashdot trolls who can't even use their own computer.

    The latest Mozilla (0.9.1 or the nightlies) are extremely stable, much more stable than any version of IE, Opera, or Nutscrape I've ever used. I haven't had it crash once yet. I'm sure there are a few showstoppers here and there, but that would not be unique to Mozilla. If you would take the time and get your machine working properly you should have a similar experience.

    Please note, this is on 2 differnet machines with different versions of libc, and most of the other system libraries.

    As for Opera and IE, they're really good, in fact great. IE seems less stable to me, and Opera's interface leaves much to be desired(IMO, but that's all it is). Remember, those aren't free, and they have had years to mature. Mozilla is a completely new code base built completely from the ground up 2 years ago. In that two years they have built a browser as advanced as anyone else ever has in 5 years. The rendering engine is incredible, especially considering that it's so new.

    Personally, I think the Mozilla team should have built just a nice simple fast browser first, then added all the other components later, but that was their decision, after all it is their project.

    If you are going to criticize, please, get a fucking clue first. Until you have a fucking clue, please practice STFU, it's very helpful when you don't know what you are talking about.

    Also, please try changing to the modern theme before you say that the interface looks the same as 4.x, geez...

    If you still don't like the interface, you might like to try galeon, or kmeleon(sp?) in windows. I really like galeon, it's a nice simple gtk interface, it's extremely fast and has some nice features such as tabs for different windows. It's status is still listed as being alpha, but it's fairly stable, but there are some annoying glitches here and there. Should be excellent when it's done.

    posted with the latest nightly


    -
    Exposing vast conspiracies! Experts at everything even outside our expertise! Liberators of the world from the oppression of the evil USian Empire!

    We are Kuro5hin!


    Mozilla 0.9.1 released | 49 comments (42 topical, 7 editorial, 0 hidden)
    Display: Sort:

    kuro5hin.org

    [XML]
    All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. The Rest © 2000 - Present Kuro5hin.org Inc.
    See our legalese page for copyright policies. Please also read our Privacy Policy.
    Kuro5hin.org is powered by Free Software, including Apache, Perl, and Linux, The Scoop Engine that runs this site is freely available, under the terms of the GPL.
    Need some help? Email help@kuro5hin.org.
    My heart's the long stairs.

    Powered by Scoop create account | help/FAQ | mission | links | search | IRC | YOU choose the stories!