Re: What is best fileformat (and settings) for screenshots?
Christopher Jahn wrote: And it came to pass that Travis Crump wrote: Christopher Jahn wrote: up too much bandwidth, and few programs support .PNG. Isn't that sort of a mute point if you are planing to post the screen shot to bugzilla where your target audience would be using mozilla... The word is moot, not mute. And it is only moot is Peter ONLY wants the format for posting to Bugzilla. If he's looking for a widely supported format, it ain't PNG, and if he's looking for a good format for mailing/posting, it ain't GIF. For screenshots of Mozilla in action? Actually GIF is probably the best choice: look at all the large, monochromatic screen space in front of you right now. GIF beats JPG by a good margin on that sort of thing. But PNG is certainly widely-enough supported too
Re: Speed and size
David Tenser wrote: That's what I'm trying to ask. On my Mozilla, it underlines words starting and ending with _underscores_ ... My question is where that is specified! Are there any CSS file that holds these formatting rules? I don't know, but this page : http://www.hmetzger.de/net6e.html tells you how to turn it on off (tips 13 20) -- gav
Weird behavior with MacOs X
Since I've upgraded Mozilla to 0.9.8, very often, the address bar, personnal bar and status bar disaspear. It's possible to get back some of them, but not all. Anyone else noticed this ?? -- Le Vintz. http://membres.tripod.fr/vnicolas/
Re: Movable, customizable toolbars.
David Tenser wrote: One thing that I've always thought of as a very simple, yet very useful feature that Mozilla lacks: The ability to add/remove buttons to the toolbar(s) and to drag/move toolbars, address fields, menus, etc. Even simple crappy Wordpad has this functionality (at least moving toolbars), and freebie Outlook Express can do anything with the toolbar, but Mozilla simply can't. You can add/remove some standard buttons like Search, but you can't even turn of captions on buttons, like you could in ancient Netscape 4.x Wordpad and OE both use the same widgets, built into windows. Not an option for Moz, since native widgets are far more work when you've got so many platforms to support. Anyhow, this IS coming in Moz. (search bugzilla for bugs with toolbar in the summary) -- gav
Re: Speed and size
gavin long wrote:
David Tenser wrote:
That's what I'm trying to ask. On my Mozilla, it underlines words
starting and ending with _underscores_ ... My question is where that is
specified! Are there any CSS file that holds these formatting rules?
I don't know, but this page : http://www.hmetzger.de/net6e.html tells
you how to turn it on off (tips 13 20)
Mozilla uses a different way though.
It's
span.moz-txt-underscore {
text-decoration: underline;
}
in Mozilla.
On my page I just use
.moz-txt-underscore {
text-decoration:underline;
}
So to disable it, the following line should be added to userContent.css:
span.moz-txt-underscore {
text-decoration: none;
}
--
Holger Metzger
Netscape 6 Tips: http://www.hmetzger.de/netscape6.html
URL association - telnet://
Hi, I've look through the archive but couldn't find an answer. I'm on Linux with Netscape 4.77 and decided to switch over to Mozilla 0.9.8. But upon running the new upgraded broswer, I realize the URL assiocation such as telnet://hostname is no longer supported as in netscape 4.7. As I've quite a number of bookmark links that I regularly use with telnet:// , wonder if there's any workaround to get this feature working again in Mozilla? Thanks in advance.
Re: Hot, tight teens get taught a lesson - and you'll see it without paying!
david avery wrote: not really - since most of the spam is coming in thru the maillist gateway not thru the newsserver but the maillist gateway can be filtered, cant it? for example, kernel.org filters html email. from http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/docs/lkml/#s3-9: Some structures are forbidden as they appear to be used way too much in SPAM mail. Specifically, messages with Content-Type: text/html either as the only (primary) message, or as ANY of component sub-messages are considered spam, and rejected outright without any info to the sender. and i guess a word-based filter would be easier to implement than a content-type filter
Re: How do you sync PalmPilot with Netscape 6.2.1 mail?
Mike Hatz (Remove the SPAM) wrote: One of the problems with that is that Mozilla (Dunno if NS6 will stomp on it) is that it keeps 'unsetting' the default MAPI checkbox for Netscape 4.79 which means that I need to check it manually from time to time, if I want to send e-mail from my palm pilot. Fixed couple of days ago: Bug 123596 and 122377 are relevant. -- Rob...
Re: Movable, customizable toolbars.
David Tenser wrote: Any color as long as it's black. BUT YOU CAN USE ALL KINDS OF DIFFERENT SKINS! Oh, well, not really, something like a grand total of SIX at last count [snip] Yeah, I was amazed by the fact that Mozilla have been around for several (?) years, and there's only like five skins available. And as you point out, few are viable alternatives to the two main skins. IIRC, skinning was first switched on in something around about Milestone 16/17, which was about 18-20 months ago. Since then, the skinning API has been constantly changing (which is why skins for Netscape 6.0 don't work on 6.1, Moz 0.8 skins don't work on 0.9.7, etc, etc.) This means that creating a skin is only part of the battle. You've also got to keep it up-to-date. (Respect to those who manage it: this means YOU, Mr Kayser) As such, there have even been some people within the project _discouraging_ the development of skins. The plan is to freeze the API for 1.0, meaning that skins will keep working, rather than having to be updated for every release. 2. Standards-compliant, which translates, Standards-compliant web browser, when it's convenient for AOL. I'm not sure how much involved AOL are in the Mozilla project itself. I'm probably wrong there, however, since Netscape is owned by AOL and many programmers of Mozilla are in fact Netscape developers. Be aware that JTK seems to regard everything as an AOL plot. Oh, and there are commies under the bed, too. Yes, much of the development work on Mozilla is done by Netscape employees. Netscape is owned by AOL. There are many other people involved, from various corporations, academia and private individuals like me. Anyway, I can't complain much about standard-compliance with Mozilla, aside from trivial issues such as favicon.ico. Favicons have little to do with standards - they're an extra. They also cause some heated debate. Be glad you missed the threads a month or two back. But Mozilla is going nowhere on the Windows platform as long as they don't also focus on the UI and associated functionality. It's happening, but some people seem to expect it to leap, fully-formed, into existence. Try going and downloading (say) mozilla 0.9, and giving that a whirl. Observe the downright sluggish UI. Then tell me there's no progress. because the only thing they seem to be doing is ignoring suggestions like this one, and fixing trillions of bugs. Well, and adding more bugs, according to the stratospheric bug count numbers in bugzilla. This has been said before, but it always needs saying: the raw bug count in bugzilla is not a measure of much at all. Many of them are duplicates[1], many are enhancement requests, of varying degrees of sanity[2], many are less than useful (my browser crashed). [1] anyone who wants to help thin THEM out, please do [2] mozilla needs to make my bed in the morning, mozilla needs a kitchen sink, Mozilla needs to make coffee. At least one of those is really in bugzilla. I was in fact going to say that too, but I stopped myself because in the end I didn't want to upset dedicated Mozilla lovers :) You are absolutely right. There are so many bugs, and many of them have been there for far too long. I have actually reported one bug myself (124703), and only one day after that, over 50 more bugs was reported. In the 11 days since the release of 0.9.8, there have been approx 2200 bugs entered into bugzilla. We can't get to them all instantly. One week later, my bug is still unconfirmed... Five days later, I'd confirm it if I could reproduce it. It may be WinXP only, which narrows down the field of testers somewhat. Thanks for a sane-and-sensible bugreport though. Is it someone in this newsgroup that agrees with me, or am I just being very negative at the moment? You are 100% dead-on brother. I'm glad to hear that I'm not the only one. I hope that someone highly involved in the Mozilla project gets to read this too, although I doubt it will make a difference. There are such people around. As to how much difference it will make... -- gav
Re: Real Player 8
What OS are you using? His email did say: User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win 9x 4.90;... So I am guessing Windoze. Win9x 4.9 is WinME, I believe -- gav
Re: How to use 3rd party email program?
Christopher Jahn wrote: And it came to pass that Stewart hector wrote: Hi I'm using Mozilla (.98) under Linux. How can I make it so when I click on an email link, Mozilla brings up another email program (in my case, KMail)? If this has not been implemented, I suggest that it is. Not everyone wants to use the emailer in Mozilla. This annoys me too, there is a bug in bugzilla about it http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11459. Fingers crossed, it will be fixed soon. At least there is a reasonable workaround, if you right click on a mailto link, you get the context menu entry Copy Email Address, then it is fairly painless to create a new mail message and paste the address in. (I'm on Windows, YMMV). So don't install it. Do a custom install, and don't install mail/news. Moz then uses your system defaults. This is not a solution for me, since I like to read news in Mozilla, but use other software for mail. Tim.
javascript files are not executed
In the location object and also in the location bar URIs related to a javascript file do not execute that script in the context of the actual document like implemented in Netscape 4.x but does destroy the actual document an display the source text. This happens independet from the Content-Type header sent by the server. This is not nice. If the server sends one of following Content-Type headers text/javascript, application/x-javascript, text/ecmascript, application/ecmascript the script should be executed in the context of the actual document without destroying that existing document like known from NN4.x. If the Content-Type header is text/plain, then the server expresses that this data is to be displayed as new plain text document, which is the behaviour Mozilla does allways. But this behaviour should be only, when told by the server using the Content-Type header text/plain. Greetings, Georg
Seg fault on www.smh.com.au
In moz 0.9.8, RH7.1, KDE2.2. On URL: www.smh.com.au Can anyone confirm a crash in mozilla when clicking anywhere on the page. This happens every time. I don't recall this in previous moz releases. Regards, ng
Re: Filtering / Message rules better in Outlook Express?
JTK wrote: Pascal Chevrel wrote: David Tenser wrote: Yes, it's obvious that Mozilla's aim is to make a near-perfect, secure webpage renderer. Gecko is the heart of it all. The problem is, too few real people are actually using Mozilla, so no one knows just how many security holes there is in it (and I bet it's *hundreds*, based on the the number of bugs reported every day). You simply can't say that Mozilla is a good replacement for IE when it comes to security. We simply don't know that yet. There are probable more mozilla testers than IE will ever have ! Mozilla has 0.73% market share at last count. According to laughably generous assumptions of geometric growth, Mozilla will break the 50% market share barrier some time in 2007. In no possible scenario does Mozilla now, nor will it ever, have more people leaning on it than IE does. The tree fell in the woods, and nobody heard it folks. JTK, you really behave childishly. We can all see you whining day after day, posting the same message 10 times a day. Don't you ever get bored ? As for your statitics, I could underline the fact that the last time you used it as an argument, it was 0.75%. I could also mention the fact that the very source you rely on says that Mozilla market share varies from 0.85% to 8.1% according to sources. I could also point out the fact that on my own website, Mozilla users were 0.5% last November and 3.5% in January, not so bad a growth for a browser not targeted to the general public and whch is not even finished. The site of one of my friends even gets 12% mozilla visitors (probably thanks to its Linux section). If you hate mozilla, why do you spend your days writing in this group ? Aren't you tired of bothering the others ? You remind me of an old dear who was my neighbour and spent its days complaining about her neibours, her neighbours' children, her neighbours' cars, her neighbours trees... Pascal
Re: Mozilla learn Spanish!
Te esta quedadando una pagina muy guapa, felicidades. Me parece un proyecto muy interesante, pues no he encontrado ninguna pagina en español sobre mozilla, menos la del proyecto nave pero parece que esta parado(el ultimo paquete lo sacaron para mozilla 0.9.5). Por ultimo, un asugerencia; podias meter un enlace para las nightly builds(para los impacientes ;)) Nada más, un saludo desde España. Lancer wrote: Please take a look, to see the progress of the site / Porfa, hecha un vistazo para ver el progreso del sitio http://www.geocities.com/charadew/ gracias / thanx
Re: Mozilla learn Spanish!
Lancer wrote: Please take a look, to see the progress of the site / Porfa, hecha un vistazo para ver el progreso del sitio http://www.geocities.com/charadew/ gracias / thanx ¿Qué quieres decir con *escritura MIME*. Me parece que no es español correcto. ¿Quieres decir *estructura MIME* o *redacción MIME*? La página te está empezando a quedar muy bonita. Cuando JTK la vea te va a acusar de ser comunista por ponerle un estrella roja en la palabra LatinMOZ. JAJAJA! Esperemos que ese payazo no sepa leer español. La estrella y el dinosaurio asomándose por encima del título se ven muy bien también. Pa'lante que vas por buen camino. Añade un area de otros enlaces para otra páginas de interés en español.
Re: Seg fault on www.smh.com.au
Works for me on 0.9.8/Win2k. ng wrote: In moz 0.9.8, RH7.1, KDE2.2. On URL: www.smh.com.au Can anyone confirm a crash in mozilla when clicking anywhere on the page. This happens every time. I don't recall this in previous moz releases. Regards, ng
Re: What is best fileformat (and settings) for screenshots?
And about the format, I always use png for screen captures. You can use .gif as well, but please don't use jpg as it introduces noise and can meke the capture useless. WHAT??!?! jpg is the most widely supported format - GIF takes up too much bandwidth, and few programs support .PNG. .png isn't something new. If you are using a program that doesn't support it then you shoud get a new version or another program. Mozilla supports .png and we are talking (at least I am) about screen captures to submit to bugzilla. If you take a screen capture and compress it to .jpg then the final image will be different than the original, the text will have lots of noise around them, any sharp borders (and there are lots of lines in a screen capture) will have noise, unless you compress the image so little that it becomes much bigger that a proper .png .jpg is perfecto for photos or that kind of images, but not for screen captures.
Reach your investment goals faster! Look here for more info..
Reach your investment goals faster! Make your money work for you! Optimize your investment return! We offer a highly specialized investment that offers a great return; almost three times better than short term CDs; and it's guaranteed! Individuals are constantly looking for effective ways to reach their investment goals, whether it is building a nest egg for retirement, a dream vacation or funding a child's college education. One way to accomplish these goals, while still maximizing savings, is by investing in Corporate Debentures (guaranteed return backed by the Corporation) which are being call the new CDs, only better! Discover how tens of thousands of investors have been enjoying far greater returns than with CDs. Click here for more info Unsubscribe Information This email was sent to the owner of the following Account/Username: wruser To "opt out" from future mailings of this type, visit This PageOr call 1-800-804-4352 and clearly spell out your email address. Please allow 5-10 business days for database request.
display problem with mozilla 0.9.8
This page does not display correctly: http://www.client.bouygtel.com/forfait.html I have no such problem with IE6. Regards, Arnaud. -- -- Arnaud Legout, Ph.D. Castify NetworksPhone : 00.33.4.92.94.20.91 2229, route des Cretes Fax : 00.33.4.92.94.20.88 06560 Sophia Antipolis E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] FRANCE Web : http://www.castify.net --
can't use netscape imap account with mozilla
Hi, I created a netscape free email account. With Netscape 6.2.1 I can access it - with Mozilla 0.9.8 I can't ... Does anyone know if accessing netscape freemail (imap) does ONLY work with Netscape 6.2.1 instead of Mozilla ? Thank You for any help Felix
Re: Seg fault on www.smh.com.au
ng wrote: In moz 0.9.8, RH7.1, KDE2.2. On URL: www.smh.com.au Can anyone confirm a crash in mozilla when clicking anywhere on the page. This happens every time. I don't recall this in previous moz releases. Works for me. mozilla-0.9.8-3mdk, Gecko/20020204 under Mandrake 8.2b1. Have you tried it using a new profile? Regards, Helge
Re: Movable, customizable toolbars.
2. Standards-compliant, which translates, Standards-compliant web browser, when it's convenient for AOL, and at the expense of 'defacto-standards compliant'. I completely support 100%, 1000% standards compliance, but not when it means that I can't view web pages that already exist and can be viewed on IE and NC4.7x browsers. Now you and I know that standards-compliance doesn't in any way make that impossible, but AOL doesn't seem to understand that. Or rather, they use that as an excuse to not do things right. That's a very funny joke. Gave me a good laugh, thanks. Oh, wait, how's it go? BWWHAHAAAHHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!
Re: How to use 3rd party email program?
Stewart hector wrote: In fact, for Mozilla to know that I use KMail, it would have to know about KDE... I suppose it could do... I suppose it couldn't be done. is there a environmental variable that it uses? No. Launching the default mailer only works on Windows. -- They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -- Benjamin Franklin
Re: URL association - telnet://
I've look through the archive but couldn't find an answer. I'm on Linux with Netscape 4.77 and decided to switch over to Mozilla 0.9.8. But upon running the new upgraded broswer, I realize the URL assiocation such as telnet://hostname is no longer supported as in netscape 4.7. As I've quite a number of bookmark links that I regularly use with telnet:// , wonder if there's any workaround to get this feature working again in Mozilla? This is a known bug -- check out http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33282 The workaround is to use Protozilla apparently (http://protozilla.mozdev.org/). Raj.
Re: Movable, customizable toolbars.
Good point David. The very same point is also made by mpt. Its his no.1 usability problem in Mozilla http://mpt.phrasewise.com/stories/storyReader$35 fyi, this problem is being addresed. Look at the following 2 bugs http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15144 http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=49543 Also look at this spec by mpt. http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/attachment.cgi?id=65067action=view CC yourself to the bugs and post your comments in the bug. But do read the comments in the bug first. Pratik. On 02/14/2002 05:41 PM, David Tenser wrote: One thing that I've always thought of as a very simple, yet very useful feature that Mozilla lacks: The ability to add/remove buttons to the toolbar(s) and to drag/move toolbars, address fields, menus, etc. Even simple crappy Wordpad has this functionality (at least moving toolbars), and freebie Outlook Express can do anything with the toolbar, but Mozilla simply can't. You can add/remove some standard buttons like Search, but you can't even turn of captions on buttons, like you could in ancient Netscape 4.x With an open source project involving hundreds of developers over a several-year time span, you would expect a very customizable program with lots of design/appearance preferences, but Mozilla is in fact very hard to customize... Ok, you can change skin, but that's about it. I admit that it's not the most important feature in a program, but the truth is that none of my friends usually stick with the default appearance of any program. Personally, I always remove the captions on toolbar buttons, I use smaller buttons, etc. In Mozilla, you can either display the toolbar, or not. Actually, the more I (try to) use Mozilla as my everyday browser and mail client, the more I'm starting to realize that Mozilla isn't as carefully planned as I thought it would be. By just reading the fact that there are _many_ developers involved in a project that has been going on for several years, you simply assume that this program is very outlined and is aiming to be the best alternative out there. At least I did. But appearantly I seem to be wrong, because the only thing they seem to be doing is ignoring suggestions like this one, and fixing trillions of bugs. Is it someone in this newsgroup that agrees with me, or am I just being very negative at the moment? I'm going to be positive too: Mozilla _is_ very standards compliant. I was editing my homepage the other day and I followed the book in CSS formatting, and it actually worked without a problem in Mozilla, but IE6 couldn't display it properly! :) On that point, Mozilla is superior, and something tells me that this (Gecko) is their main focus. Not the UI. I can just imagine the Gecko engine inside a Microsoft designed UI. / David
Re: display problem with mozilla 0.9.8
Open up Tasks-Tools-javascript Console and you'll see the problem Error: MT is not defined Source File: http://www.client.bouygtel.com/forfait.html Line: 70 Pratik. On 02/15/2002 09:21 AM, a wrote: This page does not display correctly: http://www.client.bouygtel.com/forfait.html I have no such problem with IE6. Regards, Arnaud. -- -- Arnaud Legout, Ph.D. Castify NetworksPhone : 00.33.4.92.94.20.91 2229, route des Cretes Fax : 00.33.4.92.94.20.88 06560 Sophia Antipolis E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] FRANCE Web : http://www.castify.net --
Plugin problems
Everytime I install a plug-in (for instance Java2 plugin) it says it has installed correctly, but then the plugin never works (even after browser shutdown/startup). Anyway I can manually install the plugin? Thanks, Craig.
Re: display problem with mozilla 0.9.8
Pratik, sorry, but I do not understand we you wanted to show me. I indeed have this error in the javascript consol. Thus, I suppose this is a javascript problem. But why this page display correctly with IE6? Is it an already known bug of mozilla, or do I miss something? Regards, Arnaud. Pratik wrote: Open up Tasks-Tools-javascript Console and you'll see the problem Error: MT is not defined Source File: http://www.client.bouygtel.com/forfait.html Line: 70 Pratik. On 02/15/2002 09:21 AM, a wrote: This page does not display correctly: http://www.client.bouygtel.com/forfait.html I have no such problem with IE6. Regards, Arnaud. -- -- Arnaud Legout, Ph.D. Castify NetworksPhone : 00.33.4.92.94.20.91 2229, route des Cretes Fax : 00.33.4.92.94.20.88 06560 Sophia Antipolis E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] FRANCE Web : http://www.castify.net --
Re: display problem with mozilla 0.9.8
Sorry for writing in French, I am just explaining that this page uses proprietary NS4 tags and that he should file a Tech Evangelism bug in bugzilla. Salut Arnaud, La page que tu viens d'indiquer est codée avec les pieds, il y a un script débile de détection de navigateur au départ qui déduit que tu utilises Netscape 4 et qui t'affiche la page avec des balises propriétaires abandonnées par Netscape depuis 1998. Ce qu'il faudrait faire c'est créer ce qu'on appelle un tech evangelism bug dans Bugzilla, la base de données des bugs de Mozilla, ça revient à indiquer à un responsable de Netscape que ce site est mal codé et il peut ensuitecontacter le responsable du site pour lui demander de régler le problème (en plus, Tristan, le responsable pour l'Europe de l'ouest est très sympa). Pascal Arnaud wrote: Pratik, sorry, but I do not understand we you wanted to show me. I indeed have this error in the javascript consol. Thus, I suppose this is a javascript problem. But why this page display correctly with IE6? Is it an already known bug of mozilla, or do I miss something? Regards, Arnaud. Pratik wrote: Open up Tasks-Tools-javascript Console and you'll see the problem Error: MT is not defined Source File: http://www.client.bouygtel.com/forfait.html Line: 70 Pratik. On 02/15/2002 09:21 AM, a wrote: This page does not display correctly: http://www.client.bouygtel.com/forfait.html I have no such problem with IE6. Regards, Arnaud. -- -- Arnaud Legout, Ph.D. Castify NetworksPhone : 00.33.4.92.94.20.91 2229, route des Cretes Fax : 00.33.4.92.94.20.88 06560 Sophia Antipolis E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] FRANCE Web : http://www.castify.net --
Re: Movable, customizable toolbars.
Kryptolus wrote: JTK wrote: [Who the fuck cares what he wrote] ROFLMAO! JTK == Just Talks Krap ?? -- Software is like sex, it's better when it's free - Linus Torvalds Anti-spam e-mail address, change _AT_, sorry for the inconvenience
Re: URL association - telnet://
Seo Boon NG wrote: Hi, I've look through the archive but couldn't find an answer. I'm on Linux with Netscape 4.77 and decided to switch over to Mozilla 0.9.8. But upon running the new upgraded broswer, I realize the URL assiocation such as telnet://hostname is no longer supported as in netscape 4.7. As I've quite a number of bookmark links that I regularly use with telnet:// , wonder if there's any workaround to get this feature working again in Mozilla? I think this will help you. Take a look at Protozilla. It allows you to define your own protocols and point to the programs that handle them. http://protozilla.mozdev.org/
Re: Plugin problems
Craig Tataryn wrote: Everytime I install a plug-in (for instance Java2 plugin) it says it has installed correctly, but then the plugin never works (even after browser shutdown/startup). Anyway I can manually install the plugin? Thanks, Craig. Most plugin installers do not recognize mozilla, so you have to copy the files from you Netscape plugins directory (assuming you have Netscape installed also). If not, you can copy from the IE plugin directory, but this does not seem to be as reliable. There is also a newsgroup for plugins you can check, as well as one just for Java issues.
Re: display problem with mozilla 0.9.8
a wrote: This page does not display correctly: http://www.client.bouygtel.com/forfait.html I have no such problem with IE6. I believe the problem lies in the sites use of JavaScript. Just looking at the first chunk of code they have this: NS4 = (document.layers); IE4 = (document.all); ver4 = (NS4 || IE4); IE5 = (IE4 navigator.appVersion.indexOf(5.)!=-1); isMac = (navigator.appVersion.indexOf(Mac) != -1); isM = (NS4 || (IE4 !isMac) || (IE5 isMac)); Now the first line will fail as there is no document.layers object The 2nd line will fail as there is no document.all object Because of the first 2 lines failing to pass their tests the 3rd line will fail. Because the lines above it failed the 4th line will fail. Since I'm on windows the 5th line will fail. And since mozilla didn't pass the previous 5 lines of code, the 6th line will fail. I'm sure it just gets worse from there :)
Re: can't use netscape imap account with mozilla
Felix Kater wrote: Hi, I created a netscape free email account. With Netscape 6.2.1 I can access it - with Mozilla 0.9.8 I can't ... Does anyone know if accessing netscape freemail (imap) does ONLY work with Netscape 6.2.1 instead of Mozilla ? Yes it only works in netscape (It may be possible to get it to run in 0.9.4.1 of mozilla). It's one of the features that Netscape added to their release to make it different from mozilla.
Re: display problem with mozilla 0.9.8
Arnaud [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Pratik,
sorry, but I do not understand we you wanted to show me.
I indeed have this error in the javascript consol. Thus, I suppose this
is a
javascript problem. But why this page display correctly with IE6?
Is it an already known bug of mozilla, or do I miss something?
You missed something.
The javascript does a browser check and then does different things depending
upon the browser detected. In other word the author wrote versions tailored
to specific browsers but Mozilla was not on of them. The code concerned is:
isM = (NS4 || (IE4 !isMac) || (IE5 isMac));
The Array MT is declared, however it is declared as such:
if (isM) {
MT = new Array(7);MA = new Array(7);
}
I snipped most of the initilisation code etc because it isn't needed.
In Internet Explorer the following values are returned:
document.layers = undefined
document.all = [object]
This results in isM = true and MT is therefore declared.
In Netscape 4.x the following values are returned:
document.layers = [object LayerArray]
This also results in isM = true and MT is thereforce declared
In Mozilla (and, incidentally also in Opera) this is what happens:
document.layers = undefined
document.all = undefined
This results in isM = undefined therefore MT is not declared.
If memory serves me correctly, document.layers and document.all are both
proprietary commands. It is therefore no surprise that they do not work in
anything except the browser that they were created in (remember, current
Mozilla is very different to old Netscape).
If you want to test the variables for yourself I put up a little test
script:
http://www.fidei.co.uk/test.html
--
Colin
*Drop DEAD from the email address to reply*
Re: display problem with mozilla 0.9.8
Pascal Chevrel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in news:3C6D42C1.1000101 @free.fr: Sorry for writing in French, I am just explaining that this page uses proprietary NS4 tags and that he should file a Tech Evangelism bug in bugzilla. Not really, the script is designed to detect Internet Explorer versions 4 and 5. It is also designed to detect Netscape 4.x. It is not designed to detect Mozilla and it does not detect Mozilla. This is an example of bad coding as in not providing an alternate or any form of explanation. It is not a bug within Mozilla as all browsers that are not any of the above should respond as Mozilla does, example = Opera which does the same as Mozilla. -- Colin *Drop DEAD from the email address to reply*
Re: display problem with mozilla 0.9.8
cw wrote: Pascal Chevrel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in news:3C6D42C1.1000101 @free.fr: Sorry for writing in French, I am just explaining that this page uses proprietary NS4 tags and that he should file a Tech Evangelism bug in bugzilla. Not really, the script is designed to detect Internet Explorer versions 4 and 5. It is also designed to detect Netscape 4.x. It is not designed to detect Mozilla and it does not detect Mozilla. This is an example of bad coding as in not providing an alternate or any form of explanation. It is not a bug within Mozilla as all browsers that are not any of the above should respond as Mozilla does, example = Opera which does the same as Mozilla. This is precisely why he should file a *Tech Evangelism* bug. Bugzilla definition of Tech Evangelism bugs : For reporting web pages that must be upgraded to support web standards and Mozilla Pascal
Re: Movable, customizable toolbars.
gav 'n' cal wrote: mozilla needs to make my bed in the morning, mozilla needs a kitchen sink, Mozilla needs to make coffee. At least one of those is really in bugzilla. I've seen two of them... -- Hvis svaret er Anders Fogh så er spørgsmålet dumt.
Re: Movable, customizable toolbars.
David Tenser wrote: You can customize Mozilla to be a totally different browser if you really want and have the time. On the other hand, you could also make your own web browser from scratch if you had the time and knowledge, so that doesn't help the average user. It seems for me that Mozilla doesn't aim for the big market. It aims for developers. It does actually aim for end users, but apparently there are more important bugs to be fixed. Well, and adding more bugs, according to the stratospheric bug count numbers in bugzilla. I was in fact going to say that too, but I stopped myself because in the end I didn't want to upset dedicated Mozilla lovers :) You are absolutely right. There are so many bugs, and many of them have been there for far too long. Yes. Absolutely. But every single day, bugs are being fixed. New bugs are also introduced, but the number of bugs getting fixed is far higher than the numbers of bugs being introduced. Of the new items in Bugzilla that are actually real, non-duplicate, not-just-a-request-for-a-new-feature, valid bugs, most of them has always existed but just hasn't been discovered yet. Only a few of the new bugs are regressions. So just because 50 new bugs are filed, it doesn't mean that 50 new bugs are introduced. I have actually reported one bug myself (124703), and only one day after that, over 50 more bugs was reported. One week later, my bug is still unconfirmed... Not anymore... ;-) Is it someone in this newsgroup that agrees with me, or am I just being very negative at the moment? You are 100% dead-on brother. I'm glad to hear that I'm not the only one. I hope that someone highly involved in the Mozilla project gets to read this too, although I doubt it will make a difference. Thanks for your thoughts JTK. Do yourself a favor: Don't listen to JTK. He is always whining about how Mozilla sucks, and whenever something he has complained about gets fixed, he takes the credit for it. He also seems to believe that Mozilla is part of a secret conspiracy between AOL, China and Stalin. *Of course* Mozilla's bugs should get fixed and *of course* Mozilla's message filtering should be better than Outlook's. And those things are being worked on. It might not get fixed as fast as we want, but it will get fixed at some point. That is what JTK fails to see. He doesn't believe that any work will be done on Mozilla unless it is screamed about in the newsgroup. Yes, I realize that what I just wrote sounded strange, since the UI _is_ the Gecko engine, as you so cleverly pointed out. Actually the UI is just _rendered_ by Gecko, it isn't part of Gecko itself. Ok, the page may be rendered faster according to some advanced benchmarking tests, but the average user (I keep getting back to that user!) won't even notice it. She will only notice that the program loads slowly and is slow overall. ...but try comparing the performance of todays Mozilla with the performance of a build from, say, six months ago. And six months from now it will be much better than it is today. My point is that *everybody* wants Mozilla to be the best browser on the market. Simply screaming about how much Mozilla sucks won't help. I'm not saying that you are like that, but JTK certanly is. I'd stay away from him if I were you. (And I'd stay away from mozillaquest.com as well, BTW). What will help (unless you want to write some code, of course) is testing, filing bugs, spotting bugs that are duplicates of other bugs, and helping with QA. See http://mozilla.org/quality/help/. If you just want to use Mozilla and just file an occasional bug every once in a while, that's also OK. -- Hvis svaret er Anders Fogh så er spørgsmålet dumt.
Re: Movable, customizable toolbars.
Stuart Ballard wrote: mozilla needs to make my bed in the morning, mozilla needs a kitchen sink, Mozilla needs to make coffee. At least one of those is really in bugzilla. I've seen two of them... You mean like http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=122411 ? Yeah, that's one of them. You can search for bugs containing CPCP in the summary to find the other one I was talking about. (Yes, CPCP does stand for Coffee Pot Control Protocol...) -- Hvis svaret er Anders Fogh så er spørgsmålet dumt.
Re: Filtering / Message rules better in Outlook Express?
Matt Williams wrote: David Tenser wrote: Matt Williams wrote: David, for those of us who are novice users what are the things you would like to see added/changed/fixed. Various things. Some examples (please let me know if something requested here is already in there!): * General: better toolbar customizations The ability to add/remove any button/command Ability to turn off captions Ability to move around buttons in the toolbar Ability to move the whole toolbar. Perhaps even the menu and address field, like in IE? As an average user these all sound both good and useful * General: Ability to change keyboard shortcuts. This is something that many programs lacks, including IE. If you use a particular feature often, you should be able to assign a keyboard shortcut to it. Excellent * Browser: Ability to change icons on bookmarks. For instance, a sun on my local weather homepage. I don't see that option here, but maybe it's in there already? This smacks me as cosmetic at best. What gain does the average user get from having icons when it is the words we read? It is a cosmetic suggestion. The gain for the average user (or at least for myself) is that it's much easier to find a bookmark if it has a picture associated with it, especially if the list of bookmarks is very long. * Mail client: better filtering options. Forwarding Multiple actions (like forward message AND move it to folder) Coloring (color all love letters red! :) ) Excellent * Mail client: Option to use one single Inbox folder for all accounts I find it confusing to be able to click on different Inboxes just to read all new email. Of course, I could set up filtering rules to move all mail to one Inbox... As an average user who subscribes to 15 birding listservs with 200+ messages arriving every day, I would find your suggested enhancement extremely painful. I would hate to have to sift through all my Birding e-mails to get to my business and/or personal e-mails Of course, this is a matter of taste. Personally, I view it as if there's just one inbox that all mail goes into. Then you can create subfolders that different mail goes to, depending on account, subject, etc. So even with a unified inbox, you could specify to move all listservers to go into a sub folder. * Mail client: The default action when clicking on Get Msgs should be to get ALL new messages, not just the highlighted account. If you only want to download a particular account, click the little arrow. Right now it's the opposite logic. Again, I would find your suggestion cumbersome, although much less so than your concept of a unified Inbox. Actually when I think of it it's not that it is bad, it just doesn't really add any efficiency to my workflow I just find it weird having to select each and every Inbox and press Get Msgs. Why would I only want to check one account at a time, and if I wanted to, I could click on the little arrow next to the button and select that account. I guess I'm used to this behavior from Outlook. * Mail client: When loading the client, you can't click the Get Msgs button. I'm sure the bug is already reported so I don't report it. So if I understand you correctly the issue is that Get Messages doesn't work unless you are clicked on an actual folder rather than an account. How would you decide which account to choose for those users who have three or four accounts in their profile (as I do)? Again, I think the button should download all accounts :) But actually, when starting the program, one account _is_ highlighted, so having the button disabled on startup is still a bug. Maybe I should report it after all. / David
Re: Speed and size
I can't find userConcent.css! Where is it located?
Holger Metzger wrote:
gavin long wrote:
David Tenser wrote:
That's what I'm trying to ask. On my Mozilla, it underlines words
starting and ending with _underscores_ ... My question is where that
is specified! Are there any CSS file that holds these formatting rules?
I don't know, but this page : http://www.hmetzger.de/net6e.html tells
you how to turn it on off (tips 13 20)
Mozilla uses a different way though.
It's
span.moz-txt-underscore {
text-decoration: underline;
}
in Mozilla.
On my page I just use
..moz-txt-underscore {
text-decoration:underline;
}
So to disable it, the following line should be added to userContent.css:
span.moz-txt-underscore {
text-decoration: none;
}
Re: Speed and size
David Tenser wrote: I can't find userConcent.css! Where is it located? In a folder called chrome which is located in your profile directory. Your profile directory is usually located here: C:\Documents and Settings\your-windows-user-name\Application Data\Mozilla\Profiles\your-mozilla-user-name\some-random-number.slt\ (On Win2k, that is, but I think it's the same on WinXP.) -- Hvis svaret er Anders Fogh så er spørgsmålet dumt.
Re: Speed and size
Thanks! Jonas Jørgensen wrote: David Tenser wrote: I can't find userConcent.css! Where is it located? In a folder called chrome which is located in your profile directory. Your profile directory is usually located here: C:\Documents and Settings\your-windows-user-name\Application Data\Mozilla\Profiles\your-mozilla-user-name\some-random-number.slt\ (On Win2k, that is, but I think it's the same on WinXP.)
Re: Movable, customizable toolbars.
Matt Williams wrote: David Tenser wrote: Exactly my point. You can customize Mozilla to be a totally different browser if you really want and have the time. On the other hand, you could also make your own web browser from scratch if you had the time and knowledge, so that doesn't help the average user. It seems for me that Mozilla doesn't aim for the big market. It aims for developers. What is that, 5% of the market? Maybe 10? For what it is worth, I am an average user and with the help of the Netscape newsgroup I find that 6.2.1 meets most of my needs. I find that the posts to the newsgroups that complain the most are from people who are much more in the mold of developers. I think most of the average users are quietly using Netscape as the latest incarnation of The Silent Majority Read here http://mpt.phrasewise.com/stories/storyReader$35 Interesting reading about the lack of usability in Mozilla. At least I agree with the author. Any color as long as it's black. BUT YOU CAN USE ALL KINDS OF DIFFERENT SKINS! Oh, well, not really, something like a grand total of SIX at last count, if you search really hard and don't mind a lot of stuff not working. But that XUL was sure worth it! Pfhht. One quick question . . . how does having a skin make your life easier or more productive? If not, why put so much effort in supporting skins in Mozilla? Truth is, most of the users doesn't care much of skin support in a browser. Yeah, I was amazed by the fact that Mozilla have been around for several (?) years, and there's only like five skins available. And as you point out, few are viable alternatives to the tvo main skins. Who cares? And why do they care? My initial point was that there is much effort in making Mozilla skinnable, with a solid API foundation to work with, but most users would benefit from customizable toolbars instead of skins. Anyway, I can't complain much about standard-compliance with Mozilla, aside from trivial issues such as favicon.ico. But Mozilla is going nowhere on the Windows platform as long as they don't also focus on the UI and associated functionality. The average Windows user does not care if the Gecko engine renders the page with higher precision and (maybe) speed compared to IE. Why don't they? If they don't what do they care about? They care more about simplicity and usability than page rendering speed. But Mozilla is making progress here, so lets wait and see what happens in this area. Yes, I realize that what I just wrote sounded strange, since the UI _is_ the Gecko engine, as you so cleverly pointed out. This is why Mozilla is so slow! Ok, the page may be rendered faster according to some advanced benchmarking tests, but the average user (I keep getting back to that user!) won't even notice it. She will only notice that the program loads slowly and is slow overall. Your loading comment may be right, but compared to the loading of Windows NT its licketty split, so I guess everything is relative. As an end-user of both IE and 6.2.1 I find them to be of comparable speed. Can you give me some URLs that show the speed differential that you refer to. I refer to the loading speed, which is constantly improving. Again, read here for more info: http://mpt.phrasewise.com/stories/storyReader$35 Thanks to Pratik for the link. / David
Re: How to use 3rd party email program?
Is support for being able to use 3rd party emailers going to be implemented in non windows versions? In fact, for Mozilla to know that I use KMail, it would have to know about KDE... I suppose it could do... A suitable plug in could be written for the major linux WM - GNOME and KDE to allow this. Unfortunately the users of other WM would be moaning And it became to pass that on the Friday 15 Feb 2002 3:34 pm, Christian Biesinger did write as thus: Stewart hector wrote: In fact, for Mozilla to know that I use KMail, it would have to know about KDE... I suppose it could do... I suppose it couldn't be done. is there a environmental variable that it uses? No. Launching the default mailer only works on Windows.
Re: Movable, customizable toolbars.
I'm glad to hear that. gavin long wrote: David Tenser wrote: One thing that I've always thought of as a very simple, yet very useful feature that Mozilla lacks: The ability to add/remove buttons to the toolbar(s) and to drag/move toolbars, address fields, menus, etc. Even simple crappy Wordpad has this functionality (at least moving toolbars), and freebie Outlook Express can do anything with the toolbar, but Mozilla simply can't. You can add/remove some standard buttons like Search, but you can't even turn of captions on buttons, like you could in ancient Netscape 4.x Wordpad and OE both use the same widgets, built into windows. Not an option for Moz, since native widgets are far more work when you've got so many platforms to support. Anyhow, this IS coming in Moz. (search bugzilla for bugs with toolbar in the summary)
Re: How to use 3rd party email program?
I suppose it couldn't be done. Why is that then?There is no reason why Mozilla couldn't be made aware of KDE, but it would be a kludge though - Mozilla being made aware of a specific WM - especially when its meant to be platform independant. Something IMO, shouldn't be done... is there a environmental variable that it uses? No. Launching the default mailer only works on Windows.
Re: Movable, customizable toolbars.
Read here http://mpt.phrasewise.com/stories/storyReader$35 Interesting reading about the lack of usability in Mozilla. At least I agree with the author. That's good news. MPT is the owner of the User Interface Design component. He's well placed to get these fixed. -- gav
Re: Movable, customizable toolbars.
Pratik wrote: Good point David. The very same point is also made by mpt. Its his no.1 usability problem in Mozilla http://mpt.phrasewise.com/stories/storyReader$35 Interesting reading! fyi, this problem is being addresed. Look at the following 2 bugs http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15144 http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=49543 Appearantly, mpt (Matthew Thomas) is thinking exactly as I am thinking about these issues. I hope to see that his suggestions are incorporated into Mozilla soon. Also look at this spec by mpt. http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/attachment.cgi?id=65067action=view This is exactly as I want it to be!! If (or when) Mozilla gets this customizable, I bet many more will use it instead of IE. Very insteresting reading, I urge everyone who hasn't already read it to read it. This is relevant stuff. / David
Re: Movable, customizable toolbars.
David Tenser wrote: [1] anyone who wants to help thin THEM out, please do [2] mozilla needs to make my bed in the morning, mozilla needs a kitchen sink, Mozilla needs to make coffee. At least one of those is really in bugzilla. The kitchen sink, right? :) That, and the coffee maker. In the 11 days since the release of 0.9.8, there have been approx 2200 bugs entered into bugzilla. We can't get to them all instantly. I understand that. But isn't that one h*ll of a lot of bugs in one program? ...as you wrote so nicely yourself: Yes, you are right about that. Many bugs are dupes. And many users don't know how to write a good report. Precisely. And out of those 2200 bugs, approx 1000 of them are already closed, 600 of them as duplicates (and there are many duplicates among the rest which just hasn't been marked as such yet). Five days later, I'd confirm it if I could reproduce it. It may be WinXP only, which narrows down the field of testers somewhat. Thanks for a sane-and-sensible bugreport though. You're welcome. It's funny, after mentioning the bug report here, things have started to happen! Thanks Jonas Jørgensen for confirming the bug. You're welcome. :-) -- Hvis svaret er Anders Fogh så er spørgsmålet dumt.
Throbber URL
Is there a way to change the url of the throbber? I would assume it wouldn't be too tough to do. I've been using Netscape 6.2.1 for quite a while as my default browser, but some of the little things that haven't been fixed it that ver have been fixed in the latest Mozilla, and I was just getting fed up with it. I used that throbber to get to netscape.com all the time (e-mail etc) and would like to be able to send the mozilla throbber there. Thanks! -Scott
Re: Movable, customizable toolbars.
David Tenser wrote: Matt Williams wrote: One quick question . . . how does having a skin make your life easier or more productive? If not, why put so much effort in supporting skins in Mozilla? Truth is, most of the users doesn't care much of skin support in a browser. Truth is, not much effort is put into that. -- They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -- Benjamin Franklin
Re: Speed and size
Holger Metzger wrote:
gavin long wrote:
David Tenser wrote:
That's what I'm trying to ask. On my Mozilla, it underlines words
starting and ending with _underscores_ ... My question is where that
is specified! Are there any CSS file that holds these formatting rules?
I don't know, but this page : http://www.hmetzger.de/net6e.html tells
you how to turn it on off (tips 13 20)
Mozilla uses a different way though.
It's
span.moz-txt-underscore {
text-decoration: underline;
}
in Mozilla.
On my page I just use
.moz-txt-underscore {
text-decoration:underline;
}
So to disable it, the following line should be added to userContent.css:
span.moz-txt-underscore {
text-decoration: none;
}
Holger, when I open userContent.css with WordPad I see the following:
/*
* This file can be used to apply a style to all web pages you view
* Rules without !important are overruled by author rules if the
* author sets any. Rules with !important overrule author rules.
*/
/*
* example: turn off blink element blinking
*
* blink { text-decoration: none ! important; }
*
*/
/*
* example: give all tables a 2px border
*
* table { border: 2px solid; }
*/
*
/*
* For more examples see http://www.mozilla.org/unix/customizing.html
*/
Something doesn't appear to be right, or do I insert .moz-txt-underscore
{text-decoration:underline;} as an additional line in that file?
Also, when I performed a Find on user.js I came up with no matches.
Therefore I couldn't follow your suggestion in Tip 13. Any thoughts?
Re: Movable, customizable toolbars.
If not, why put so much effort in supporting skins in Mozilla? Truth is, most of the users doesn't care much of skin support in a browser. Who is putting so much effort? No one that I can see. You admitted you're new here, why are you making such presumptions? My initial point was that there is much effort in making Mozilla skinnable, with a solid API foundation to work with, but most users would benefit from customizable toolbars instead of skins. Most users would benefit from neither. I doubt most people have moved or customized the toolbars in any program. Blake ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Filtering / Message rules better in Outlook Express?
Well, the oldest comment for that bug is from 1998!! Does this mean that they haven't had the time to add this feature in four years? / David Christian Biesinger wrote: David Tenser wrote: I've been using Mozilla for a week now and I was thinking of completely switch to it starting from today. Then I discovered the lack of a feature that I use very often: The ability to set up a message rule/filter to forward any incoming email message to another email address, based on conditions. This feature has already been requested, but not been implemented yet. This is the link to the bug report: http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11034
Re: Throbber URL
user_pref(addressbook.throbber.url, http://www.somedomain.org;); user_pref(compose.throbber.url, http://www.somedomain.org;); user_pref(editor.throbber.url, http://www.somedomain.org;); user_pref(messenger.throbber.url, http://www.somedomain.org;); user_pref(browser.throbber.url, http://www.somedomain.org;); user_pref(calender.throbber.url, http://www.somedomain.org;); in your user.js/prefs.js. Scott Fiddelke wrote: Is there a way to change the url of the throbber? I would assume it wouldn't be too tough to do. I've been using Netscape 6.2.1 for quite a while as my default browser, but some of the little things that haven't been fixed it that ver have been fixed in the latest Mozilla, and I was just getting fed up with it. I used that throbber to get to netscape.com all the time (e-mail etc) and would like to be able to send the mozilla throbber there. Thanks! -Scott
Re: Filtering / Message rules better in Outlook Express?
Does this mean that they haven't had the time to add this feature in four years? No, it means that few of Mozilla's distributor's customers have been clamoring for it, and thus it's not a priority. Why would a feature be added because a bug filer wanted it? Do you think that's how things work in other software projects? Blake
Re: Filtering / Message rules better in Outlook Express?
David Tenser wrote: Matt Williams wrote: David Tenser wrote: Matt Williams wrote: David, for those of us who are novice users what are the things you would like to see added/changed/fixed. Various things. Some examples (please let me know if something requested here is already in there!): * General: better toolbar customizations The ability to add/remove any button/command Ability to turn off captions Ability to move around buttons in the toolbar Ability to move the whole toolbar. Perhaps even the menu and address field, like in IE? As an average user these all sound both good and useful * General: Ability to change keyboard shortcuts. This is something that many programs lacks, including IE. If you use a particular feature often, you should be able to assign a keyboard shortcut to it. Excellent * Browser: Ability to change icons on bookmarks. For instance, a sun on my local weather homepage. I don't see that option here, but maybe it's in there already? This smacks me as cosmetic at best. What gain does the average user get from having icons when it is the words we read? It is a cosmetic suggestion. The gain for the average user (or at least for myself) is that it's much easier to find a bookmark if it has a picture associated with it, especially if the list of bookmarks is very long. * Mail client: better filtering options. Forwarding Multiple actions (like forward message AND move it to folder) Coloring (color all love letters red! :) ) Excellent * Mail client: Option to use one single Inbox folder for all accounts I find it confusing to be able to click on different Inboxes just to read all new email. Of course, I could set up filtering rules to move all mail to one Inbox... As an average user who subscribes to 15 birding listservs with 200+ messages arriving every day, I would find your suggested enhancement extremely painful. I would hate to have to sift through all my Birding e-mails to get to my business and/or personal e-mails Of course, this is a matter of taste. Personally, I view it as if there's just one inbox that all mail goes into. Then you can create subfolders that different mail goes to, depending on account, subject, etc. So even with a unified inbox, you could specify to move all listservers to go into a sub folder. You are right, however I have found that there are times when Yahoo is down and in those times where that is true it Netscape has to give the Yahoo server time enough to respond. In your proposed scenario, getting my mail quickly from my PacBell account would be compromised by the up or down status of Yahoo. With some luck and creativity there is a solution that can accommodate both our ideas/needs. * Mail client: The default action when clicking on Get Msgs should be to get ALL new messages, not just the highlighted account. If you only want to download a particular account, click the little arrow. Right now it's the opposite logic. Again, I would find your suggestion cumbersome, although much less so than your concept of a unified Inbox. Actually when I think of it it's not that it is bad, it just doesn't really add any efficiency to my workflow I just find it weird having to select each and every Inbox and press Get Msgs. Why would I only want to check one account at a time, and if I wanted to, I could click on the little arrow next to the button and select that account. I guess I'm used to this behavior from Outlook. * Mail client: When loading the client, you can't click the Get Msgs button. I'm sure the bug is already reported so I don't report it. So if I understand you correctly the issue is that Get Messages doesn't work unless you are clicked on an actual folder rather than an account. How would you decide which account to choose for those users who have three or four accounts in their profile (as I do)? Again, I think the button should download all accounts :) But actually, when starting the program, one account _is_ highlighted, so having the button disabled on startup is still a bug. Maybe I should report it after all. / David
Re: How to use 3rd party email program?
Stewart hector wrote: A suitable plug in could be written for the major linux WM - GNOME and KDE to allow this. Unfortunately the users of other WM would be moaning This is probably semantic, but I just thought I'd point it out anyway. Gnome is not a Window Manager. Just try running Gnome without a Window Manager running and howl in frustration as you can't move or resize any of your windows... Gnome is a desktop environment.
Re: Movable, customizable toolbars.
Jonas Jørgensen wrote: Precisely. And out of those 2200 bugs, approx 1000 of them are already closed, 600 of them as duplicates (and there are many duplicates among the rest which just hasn't been marked as such yet). Sorry but this is wrong. Look at this URL: http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/reports.cgi?product=Browseroutput=show_chartdatasets=NEW%3Adatasets=ASSIGNED%3Adatasets=REOPENED%3Adatasets=UNCONFIRMED%3Abanner=1 There are like 7000 new, 5000 assigned and 1400 unconfirmed bugs. (not counting Mailnews). -- They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -- Benjamin Franklin
Re: Movable, customizable toolbars.
David Tenser wrote: [snip] Five days later, I'd confirm it if I could reproduce it. It may be WinXP only, which narrows down the field of testers somewhat. Thanks for a sane-and-sensible bugreport though. You're welcome. It's funny, after mentioning the bug report here, things have started to happen! Thanks Jonas Jørgensen for confirming the bug. Yep. That's about the only way anything seems to happen in Mozillaland these days.
Re: How to use 3rd party email program?
Stewart hector wrote: I suppose it couldn't be done. Why is that then?There is no reason why Mozilla couldn't be made aware of KDE Yes, but how can it know if the user is using KDE, and if he is, what mailer he's using? -- They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -- Benjamin Franklin
Re: How to use 3rd party email program?
Very much semantic ;-) another example: FMMV a window manager, KDE an environment. Many people now do use VM == environment Actually, I did run GNOME without a WM behind it. accidentally once... it was, as you'd expect, pointless! And it became to pass that on the Friday 15 Feb 2002 9:31 pm, Travis Crump did write as thus: Stewart hector wrote: A suitable plug in could be written for the major linux WM - GNOME and KDE to allow this. Unfortunately the users of other WM would be moaning This is probably semantic, but I just thought I'd point it out anyway. Gnome is not a Window Manager. Just try running Gnome without a Window Manager running and howl in frustration as you can't move or resize any of your windows... Gnome is a desktop environment.
Re: Movable, customizable toolbars.
Christian Biesinger wrote: Precisely. And out of those 2200 bugs, approx 1000 of them are already closed, 600 of them as duplicates (and there are many duplicates among the rest which just hasn't been marked as such yet). Sorry but this is wrong. Look at this URL: http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/reports.cgi?product=Browseroutput=show_chartdatasets=NEW%3Adatasets=ASSIGNED%3Adatasets=REOPENED%3Adatasets=UNCONFIRMED%3Abanner=1 There are like 7000 new, 5000 assigned and 1400 unconfirmed bugs. (not counting Mailnews). Yes, but I was replying to this: In the 11 days since the release of 0.9.8, there have been approx 2200 bugs entered into bugzilla. We can't get to them all instantly. -- Hvis svaret er Anders Fogh så er spørgsmålet dumt.
Re: Movable, customizable toolbars.
David Tenser wrote: [snip] Read here http://mpt.phrasewise.com/stories/storyReader$35 Interesting reading about the lack of usability in Mozilla. At least I agree with the author. Oh man, THANK YOU for that link. Here, suck this down all you Mozillapologists; this is from the owner of the User Interface Design component according to Gavin Long: Navigators current toolbar layout is fundamentally broken. The problem is with everything else [other than rendering a web page], where Mozilla is breathtakingly slow. Yep, you heard the man: BREATHTAKINGLY SLOW. Mozilla is currently heavily lopsided towards expert users, and people who prefer using the keyboard to using the mouse: as mentioned above, it has not enough toolbar buttons, and conversely it has too many menus. Menus are the most difficult GUI control to use, so you need to keep them as simple and uncluttered as possible. Mozilla, unfortunately, does the opposite. And finally: Like other browsers, Mozilla can appeal to the authority of the World Wide Web Consortium, and the recommendations produced by the Consortium on how browsers should behave. [...] But such an appeal to authority will cut no ice with users, most of whom have never even heard of the W3C, let alone care about its recommendations. If a site works in Internet Explorer, and even (in many cases) in Netscape 4.x, but not in their Mozilla-based browser, without any other information users will naturally assume that the problem is with Mozilla. They will assume that because that is of course in fact where the problem lies. Save your breath Mozillapologists, these aren't my words, they're from the guy who's in charge of the UI design himself. Talk to him if you have problems faceing reality.
Re: Movable, customizable toolbars.
Christian Biesinger wrote: David Tenser wrote: Matt Williams wrote: One quick question . . . how does having a skin make your life easier or more productive? If not, why put so much effort in supporting skins in Mozilla? Truth is, most of the users doesn't care much of skin support in a browser. Truth is, not much effort is put into that. *COUGHnootherreasonforXULtoexistHACK*
Re: How to use 3rd party email program?
One way to check if KDE is running is to see if one of: KDesktop or kwin is running - this should be enough to test if KDE under normal circumstances. You could test if kicker is running, but some people do stop this from running. No doubt there is a better way than these methods.. though KControl allows you to specify your preferred email client, which is stored in some config file within ~/.kde/share/config, I expect. And it became to pass that on the Friday 15 Feb 2002 9:59 pm, Christian Biesinger did write as thus: Stewart hector wrote: I suppose it couldn't be done. Why is that then?There is no reason why Mozilla couldn't be made aware of KDE Yes, but how can it know if the user is using KDE, and if he is, what mailer he's using?
Re: Movable, customizable toolbars.
Christian Biesinger wrote: Jonas Jørgensen wrote: Precisely. And out of those 2200 bugs, approx 1000 of them are already closed, 600 of them as duplicates (and there are many duplicates among the rest which just hasn't been marked as such yet). Sorry but this is wrong. Look at this URL: http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/reports.cgi?product=Browseroutput=show_chartdatasets=NEW%3Adatasets=ASSIGNED%3Adatasets=REOPENED%3Adatasets=UNCONFIRMED%3Abanner=1 There are like 7000 new, 5000 assigned and 1400 unconfirmed bugs. (not counting Mailnews). OF!!! NOT COUNTING THE MOST BUGGY PART OF MOZILLA?!?!?!? Holy mother of God. Dare I ask what the numbers look like if you *DO* count Mailnews?
Re: Throbber URL
Where is user.js/prefs.js? Thanks Travis Crump wrote: user_pref(addressbook.throbber.url, http://www.somedomain.org;); user_pref(compose.throbber.url, http://www.somedomain.org;); user_pref(editor.throbber.url, http://www.somedomain.org;); user_pref(messenger.throbber.url, http://www.somedomain.org;); user_pref(browser.throbber.url, http://www.somedomain.org;); user_pref(calender.throbber.url, http://www.somedomain.org;); in your user.js/prefs.js.
Re: display problem with mozilla 0.9.8
Pascal Chevrel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: This is precisely why he should file a *Tech Evangelism* bug. Bugzilla definition of Tech Evangelism bugs : For reporting web pages that must be upgraded to support web standards and Mozilla Ahhh, didn't know that one :0) -- Colin *Drop DEAD from the email address to reply*
Re: Throbber URL
Scott wrote: Where is user.js/prefs.js? Thanks Travis Crump wrote: user_pref(addressbook.throbber.url, http://www.somedomain.org;); user_pref(compose.throbber.url, http://www.somedomain.org;); user_pref(editor.throbber.url, http://www.somedomain.org;); user_pref(messenger.throbber.url, http://www.somedomain.org;); user_pref(browser.throbber.url, http://www.somedomain.org;); user_pref(calender.throbber.url, http://www.somedomain.org;); in your user.js/prefs.js.
Re: Movable, customizable toolbars.
JTK wrote: Read here http://mpt.phrasewise.com/stories/storyReader$35 Interesting reading about the lack of usability in Mozilla. At least I agree with the author. Oh man, THANK YOU for that link. Here, suck this down all you Mozillapologists; this is from the owner of the User Interface Design component according to Gavin Long: Yes, mpt is the owner of the UI Design component in Bugzilla. The proof is right here: http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/describecomponents.cgi?product=Browser Navigator’s current toolbar layout is fundamentally broken. The problem is with everything else [other than rendering a web page], where Mozilla is breathtakingly slow. Yes. Well, what sort of answer did you expect? Though Mozilla's performance has been undergoing significant improvements lately, it is still too slow compared to other browsers. And not being able to drag toolbars around freely is not acceptable. But when has anyone ever claimed that Mozilla's toolbars or performance didn't need to be improved? I don't recall hearing that in this newsgroup. We are not saying that Mozilla is good enough, only that it is constantly improving, and certanly *not* that it will never get better. If Matthew Thomas didn't like Mozilla, why would he spend so much time doing all the great work that he does? -- Hvis svaret er Anders Fogh så er spørgsmålet dumt.
Get a REAL WOMAN for a night of lust with no commitments
Title: Sex2go.com Want to have sex tonight? HORNY HOUSEWIVES NAUGHTY NEIGHBORS THE GIRL NEXT DOOR They're all here!!! Over 100,000 REAL WOMEN are looking for men for REAL SEX at Sex2go. Email them! Meet them! FUCK THEM TONIGHT!!! NOTE: This is not SPAM! This email was sent to you because your email was entered on a website requesting to be a registered subscriber. If you did not request this email, click here to unsubscribe
Re: Hot, tight teens get taught a lesson - and you'll see it without paying!
Well then discontinue the mail list gateway. Should be exclusively newgroups only anyway. david avery wrote: Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T. wrote: Just moving to a secure server would get rid of most it. Kryptolus wrote: Robert Davies wrote: Is no one going to get rid of this guy? If only things were that easy ... not really - since most of the spam is coming in thru the maillist gateway not thru the newsserver -- --- Phillip M. Jones, CET |MEMBER:VPEA (LIFE) ETA-I, NESDA,ISCET, Sterling 616 Liberty Street |Who's Who. PHONE:276-632-5045, FAX:276-632-0868 Martinsville Va 24112-1809 |[EMAIL PROTECTED], ICQ11269732, AIM pjonescet --- If it's fixed, don't break it! mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/default.htm http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/america/default.htm http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/message/default.htm http://home.kimbanet.com/~pjones/birthday/index.htm
Re: What is best fileformat (and settings) for screenshots?
Christopher Jahn wrote: And it came to pass that Travis Crump wrote: Christopher Jahn wrote: up too much bandwidth, and few programs support .PNG. Isn't that sort of a mute point if you are planing to post the screen shot to bugzilla where your target audience would be using mozilla... The word is moot, not mute. Well I guess it could be a silent point as well. And it is only moot is Peter ONLY wants the format for posting to Bugzilla. If he's looking for a widely supported format, it ain't PNG, and if he's looking for a good format for mailing/posting, it ain't GIF. Other than text for text messages. what is the best format for sending images? I find that jpeg/jpg uses too much bandwidth. Gif if setup right looks almost as good and uses far less megabytes than jpeg. snip--- -- --- Phillip M. Jones, CET |MEMBER:VPEA (LIFE) ETA-I, NESDA,ISCET, Sterling 616 Liberty Street |Who's Who. PHONE:276-632-5045, FAX:276-632-0868 Martinsville Va 24112-1809 |[EMAIL PROTECTED], ICQ11269732, AIM pjonescet --- If it's fixed, don't break it! mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/default.htm http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/america/default.htm http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/message/default.htm http://home.kimbanet.com/~pjones/birthday/index.htm
Re: What is best fileformat (and settings) for screenshots?
Sören Kuklau wrote:
Peter Lairo wrote:
Hi,
when i need to make a screenshot, I am always unsure as to which
fileformat to save it to (gif, jpeg, png, etc.).
Since screenshots are usually only a few colors (no photos in the
shots), there must be some fileformat that keeps the filesize very small.
Also, what pixel size should I resize the file too (my monitor is at
1280x1024 - a bit high for most shots)? Currently, I usually resize to
640x480.
I would really appreciate any (detailed) suggestions. :)
BTW, this is only *semi* off topic, because I often need to post
screenshots to bugzilla. ;)
I use PNG. My preferred tool - on win32 - is HyperSnap DX, which has
both a lot of features and yet high performance. I mostly use either the
option Full Screen, Window, Button or Control or Region, so I can
crop away a lot of stuff which doesn't matter for the screenie - such as
the start button, which everybody knows what it looks like (ugly ;-) )
anyways. I save them in PNG, usually 24-bit, but sometimes also just
8-bit if it's too large of a screenshot and if there's not much
additional information given by a higher color depth (for example, for
black and white text display).
Mozilla has excellent PNG support (in contrast to IE 6 ;-) ), so that's
not the problem.
JPEG is pointless for most screenshots, unless you're doing screenshots
from a photoshop image.
GIF is less useful than PNG in case that PNG is supported by your
audience - in other cases, GIF might be sufficient (if not, you'll have
to use JPEG or something entirely different, such as those ugly huge
native bitmap formats).
--
Regards,
Sören Kuklau ('Chucker')
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The two programs I use for screen capture the Mac are SnapZ Pro, and
Screen Catcher both can handle png. But Mac people tend to use jpeg/jpg,
and gif. I have PhotoShop Lite Adobe recently named to it to something else.
--
---
Phillip M. Jones, CET |MEMBER:VPEA (LIFE) ETA-I, NESDA,ISCET, Sterling
616 Liberty Street |Who's Who. PHONE:276-632-5045, FAX:276-632-0868
Martinsville Va 24112-1809 |[EMAIL PROTECTED], ICQ11269732, AIM pjonescet
---
If it's fixed, don't break it!
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/default.htm
http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/america/default.htm
http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/message/default.htm
http://home.kimbanet.com/~pjones/birthday/index.htm
Newsgroups
For some reason I am unable to retrive newsgroup listing using Mozilla. When I attempt to download it, I either get a quick done, or please wait message. Please advice.
Re: What is best fileformat (and settings) for screenshots?
And it came to pass that Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T. wrote:
Christopher Jahn wrote:
And it came to pass that Travis Crump wrote:
Christopher Jahn wrote:
up too much bandwidth, and few programs support .PNG.
Isn't that sort of a mute point if you are planing to
post the screen shot to bugzilla where your target
audience would be using mozilla...
The word is moot, not mute.
Well I guess it could be a silent point as well.
And it is only moot is Peter ONLY wants the format for
posting to Bugzilla. If he's looking for a widely
supported format, it ain't PNG, and if he's looking for a
good format for mailing/posting, it ain't GIF.
Other than text for text messages. what is the best format
for sending images?
I find that jpeg/jpg uses too much bandwidth. Gif if setup
right looks almost as good and uses far less megabytes than
jpeg.
And won't show in several newsreaders that I know of.
--
}:-) Christopher Jahn
{:-( Dionysian Reveler
Mommy's all right, Daddy's all right, they just seem a little
weird
To reply: xjahnATyahooDOTcom
Re: What is best fileformat (and settings) for screenshots?
And it came to pass that A Martinez wrote:
And about the format, I always use png for screen captures.
You can use .gif as well, but please don't use jpg as it
introduces noise and can meke the capture useless.
WHAT??!?! jpg is the most widely supported format - GIF
takes up too much bandwidth, and few programs support .PNG.
.png isn't something new. If you are using a program that
doesn't support it then you shoud get a new version or
another program. Mozilla supports .png and we are talking
(at least I am) about screen captures to submit to bugzilla.
And if ALL you are talking about is Bugzilla, fine.
In general, tain't a very widely supported format.
If you take a screen capture and compress it to .jpg then
the final image will be different than the original, the
text will have lots of noise around them, any sharp borders
(and there are lots of lines in a screen capture) will have
noise, unless you compress the image so little that it
becomes much bigger that a proper .png .jpg is perfecto for
photos or that kind of images, but not for screen captures.
But Mozilla's news reader sucks eggs. And as most people have
the sense to post JPEGs, my current newsreader (a release a
month old) is perfectly adequate.
But for Bugzilla, fine.
--
}:-) Christopher Jahn
{:-( Dionysian Reveler
Mommy's all right, Daddy's all right, they just seem a little
weird
To reply: xjahnATyahooDOTcom
Re: How to use 3rd party email program?
And it came to pass that Stewart hector wrote:
And it became to pass that on the Friday 15 Feb 2002 1:36
am, Christopher Jahn did write as thus:
And it came to pass that Stewart hector wrote:
Hi
I'm using Mozilla (.98) under Linux. How can I make it so
when I click on an email link, Mozilla brings up another
email program (in my case, KMail)?
If this has not been implemented, I suggest that it is.
Not everyone wants to use the emailer in Mozilla.
So don't install it. Do a custom install, and don't
install mail/news. Moz then uses your system defaults.
I have done a custom install, and moz doesn't use system
defaults...
It does here, with Win98SE
In fact, for Mozilla to know that I use KMail, it would have
to know about KDE... I suppose it could do... is there a
environmental variable that it uses?
--
}:-) Christopher Jahn
{:-( Dionysian Reveler
Mommy's all right, Daddy's all right, they just seem a little
weird
To reply: xjahnATyahooDOTcom
Re: URL association - telnet://
Hi Neil and Raj, Thanks. protozilla workaround works great. I can now finally ditch netscape 4.7 for good :) Neil M. wrote: Seo Boon NG wrote: Hi, I've look through the archive but couldn't find an answer. I'm on Linux with Netscape 4.77 and decided to switch over to Mozilla 0.9.8. But upon running the new upgraded broswer, I realize the URL assiocation such as telnet://hostname is no longer supported as in netscape 4.7. As I've quite a number of bookmark links that I regularly use with telnet:// , wonder if there's any workaround to get this feature working again in Mozilla? I think this will help you. Take a look at Protozilla. It allows you to define your own protocols and point to the programs that handle them. http://protozilla.mozdev.org/
Re: What is best fileformat (and settings) for screenshots?
The two programs I use for screen capture the Mac are SnapZ Pro, and Screen Catcher both can handle png. But Mac people tend to use jpeg/jpg, and gif. I have PhotoShop Lite Adobe recently named to it to something else. Why do you need a screen capture program? It's it just apple+shift+f3? (That's just from memory... don't usually use macs. On windows it's alt-print screen for capturing the window and print screen for the entire screen) Then you just paste it into whatever paint program you use.
Re: Filtering / Message rules better in Outlook Express?
Tim Wunder wrote: David Tenser wrote: snip I just find it weird having to select each and every Inbox and press Get Msgs. Why would I only want to check one account at a time, and if I wanted to, I could click on the little arrow next to the button and select that account. I guess I'm used to this behavior from Outlook. Enable interval mail checking and check mail on startup. I find it wierd that you want to have to click the Get Msgs button in order to get new messages ;-) Tim Hehe... well, that's a solution to the problem. But I still think the button should download all accounts by default. / David
Re: Movable, customizable toolbars.
Blake Ross wrote: If not, why put so much effort in supporting skins in Mozilla? Truth is, most of the users doesn't care much of skin support in a browser. Who is putting so much effort? No one that I can see. You admitted you're new here, why are you making such presumptions? It's not a presumption. XUL. That's a _big_ effort in making Mozilla skinnable. My initial point was that there is much effort in making Mozilla skinnable, with a solid API foundation to work with, but most users would benefit from customizable toolbars instead of skins. Most users would benefit from neither. I doubt most people have moved or customized the toolbars in any program. Read about the #1 usability problem in Mozilla here: http://mpt.phrasewise.com/stories/storyReader$35 This article is actually written by a staff member of Mozilla, so this is serious stuff. If you doubt people wants to customize the looks of an application, you're being ignorant. Fortunately, my suggestions of a customizable toolbar is already assigned and will most probably be incorporated: http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/attachment.cgi?id=65067action=view / David
Re: Movable, customizable toolbars.
I didn't see this message until now, although this was posted before other message I've already replied to. This is because of a strange bug that was hiding two unread messages. I'm unsure how I could report this bug. The only way would be to send in the 4MB newsgroup file netscape.public.mozilla.general. I solved the problem by removing these files and download the headers from the server again. Comments follows: Jonas Jørgensen wrote: David Tenser wrote: I have actually reported one bug myself (124703), and only one day after that, over 50 more bugs was reported. One week later, my bug is still unconfirmed... Not anymore... ;-) Way to go! Thanks again. I'm glad to hear that I'm not the only one. I hope that someone highly involved in the Mozilla project gets to read this too, although I doubt it will make a difference. Thanks for your thoughts JTK. Do yourself a favor: Don't listen to JTK. He is always whining about how Mozilla sucks, and whenever something he has complained about gets fixed, he takes the credit for it. He also seems to believe that Mozilla is part of a secret conspiracy between AOL, China and Stalin. Everybody keeps saying that... I don't like to judge people based on other people's statements. Yes, I realize that what I just wrote sounded strange, since the UI _is_ the Gecko engine, as you so cleverly pointed out. Actually the UI is just _rendered_ by Gecko, it isn't part of Gecko itself. That's what I ment. Sorry if I failed to express myself correctly. Ok, the page may be rendered faster according to some advanced benchmarking tests, but the average user (I keep getting back to that user!) won't even notice it. She will only notice that the program loads slowly and is slow overall. but try comparing the performance of todays Mozilla with the performance of a build from, say, six months ago. And six months from now it will be much better than it is today. Got you. And I agree, from the three weeks I've been using Mozilla, I've seen progress in every aspect. Mail/news client is probably the most bugfixed program lately, it didn't work at all when I first downloaded Mozilla. My point is that *everybody* wants Mozilla to be the best browser on the market. Simply screaming about how much Mozilla sucks won't help. I'm not saying that you are like that, but JTK certanly is. I have never even been close to saying that Mozilla sucks. I will probably never have to say it either, since the program gets better and better almost every build. I'm sorry if I sound negative from time to time, but the truth is I'm all excited about this. I have always been a critic, I critizise my own work as much as anyone else's. I like Mozilla more and more. I even use it as my default mail client now, despite the lack of the forwarding filter option that I could really need. I'd stay away from him if I were you. (And I'd stay away from mozillaquest.com as well, BTW). What will help (unless you want to write some code, of course) is testing, filing bugs, spotting bugs that are duplicates of other bugs, and helping with QA. See http://mozilla.org/quality/help/. If you just want to use Mozilla and just file an occasional bug every once in a while, that's also OK. I'm trying to be as active as I can in the project. Unfortunately, my C programming knowledge is very poor, so I can't help with the coding. I do post every bug that I come across, unless I'm unsure how to do it (read the beginning of this email again!). / David
Re: Movable, customizable toolbars.
Pratik wrote: On 02/15/2002 05:17 PM, JTK wrote: snip Save your breath Mozillapologists, these aren't my words, they're from the guy who's in charge of the UI design himself. Talk to him if you have problems faceing reality. Another reality - His no.1 usability problem is being attacked. His page also says For the first time in two years, lack of speed is no longer the biggest usability problem with Mozilla. And this is not due to other problems becoming worse -- it is due to Mozilla becoming faster. Congratulations are due to all those who have been working on improving performance, particularly for startup time and in mail/news. However, there is still a long way to go. In other words, things *are* moving ahead and in the right direction. Indeed they are. What I'd like to see, though, is some progress from mtp's navigator chrome project. That's more important than speed, in my humble opinion. Does someone know how to get more information about this project, such as the daily progress? / David
Re: Filtering / Message rules better in Outlook Express?
In other words, the only way to get a feature implemented is to keep on posting it as a bug, which will lead to more overhead work for the poor guys who have to wade through the duplicates every day. Surely there must be more than one guy back in -98 who wants to have better filtering options in Mozilla? / David Blake Ross wrote: Does this mean that they haven't had the time to add this feature in four years? No, it means that few of Mozilla's distributor's customers have been clamoring for it, and thus it's not a priority. Why would a feature be added because a bug filer wanted it? Do you think that's how things work in other software projects? Blake
Re: Movable, customizable toolbars.
It's not a presumption. XUL. That's a _big_ effort in making Mozilla skinnable. Sorry, my bad. It's total misinformation, then. XUL has nothing to do with skinability. This article is actually written by a staff member of Mozilla, so this is serious stuff. If you doubt people wants to customize the looks of an application, you're being ignorant. Matthew Thomas (mpt) is not a staff member of Mozilla. And I say that if you think most people desire a different toolbar layout than the default, you're thinking too much like a technical user. From the feedback submissions I've read from Netscape 6.x, few users have requested toolbar reordering. Blake
Try Famizilla sidebar tab!!!! Nueva Famizilla Sidebar Tab!!!!
A new sidebar is avaliable for mozilla funs!!!, you can find it here: Una nueva Sidebar esta disponible para los Fanaticos de Mozilla!!!, puedes encontrarla aqui: http://www.geocities.com/charadew/
Re: Try Famizilla sidebar tab!!!! Nueva Famizilla Sidebar Tab!!!!
Lancer wrote: A new sidebar is avaliable for mozilla funs!!!, you can find it here: Una nueva Sidebar esta disponible para los Fanaticos de Mozilla!!!, puedes encontrarla aqui: http://www.geocities.com/charadew/ Why do you spam these newsgroups so often?
Re: Movable, customizable toolbars.
If you want the ability to: * Add and remove toolbar buttons * Add and remove menus and menu items * Change the look of the browser toolbars and toolbar buttons * Have native language menus Then you should be looking at K-Meleon: http://kmeleon.sourceforge.net/ Gecko engine, whatever interface you want and the ability to fully customize it to your heart's desire. Andrew Mutch David Tenser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Pratik wrote: Good point David. The very same point is also made by mpt. Its his no.1 usability problem in Mozilla http://mpt.phrasewise.com/stories/storyReader$35 Interesting reading! fyi, this problem is being addresed. Look at the following 2 bugs http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15144 http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=49543 Appearantly, mpt (Matthew Thomas) is thinking exactly as I am thinking about these issues. I hope to see that his suggestions are incorporated into Mozilla soon. Also look at this spec by mpt. http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/attachment.cgi?id=65067action=view This is exactly as I want it to be!! If (or when) Mozilla gets this customizable, I bet many more will use it instead of IE. Very insteresting reading, I urge everyone who hasn't already read it to read it. This is relevant stuff. / David
Re: Movable, customizable toolbars.
Blake Ross wrote: It's not a presumption. XUL. That's a _big_ effort in making Mozilla skinnable. Sorry, my bad. It's total misinformation, then. XUL has nothing to do with skinability. My sweet Lord, this is really too much. XUL has NO OTHER REASON TO EXIST other than skinnability and you damn well know it Mr. Ross. Stop lying to the people. [Insert: NO! IT'S... uhh... because... oh yeah, CROSS PLATFORM CAN'T BE DONE ANY OTHER WAY THAN POORLY! here.] Yeah yeah: www.wxwindows.org
Re: Try Famizilla sidebar tab!!!! Nueva Famizilla Sidebar Tab!!!!
i didnt want to spam, apologies. i just tried opening the new portal. sorry, i not gonna spam you again. Kryptolus wrote: Lancer wrote: A new sidebar is avaliable for mozilla funs!!!, you can find it here: Una nueva Sidebar esta disponible para los Fanaticos de Mozilla!!!, puedes encontrarla aqui: http://www.geocities.com/charadew/ Why do you spam these newsgroups so often?
