Re: mozilla and hotmail

BigRedFed authored the following: > if your going to check all, why not just click removal all from this > folder? But a lot of people like to click all then UNCLICK the ONE they need to keep. :) > > Bundy wrote: > >> Holger Metzger authored the following

Re: mozilla and hotmail

Holger Metzger authored the following: > Dazzle wrote: > >>Is there anyway of getting Mozilla to check e-mail from a HotMail account? >> >>Mozilla 0.9.9 on Windows and Linux. >> >>all help appreciated, > > > Not in Mozilla Mail. But it works fine in the browser. :-) Not True. http://bugzilla.

Re: mozilla and hotmail

Holger Metzger authored the following: > Roope Lehmuslehto wrote: > >>Holger Metzger wrote: >> >> >>>Not in Mozilla Mail. But it works fine in the browser. :-) >>> >> >>It doesn't work event at browser... >> > > > It works absolutely fine in the browser. Try checking the box to mark all messag

Re: How big is Mozilla now?

CaT authored the following: > On Sun, Mar 24, 2002 at 08:19:17AM +0000, Bundy wrote: > *36 lines snipped. learn to cut back on your quoting people! fark...* > >>BLOATWARE ALERT >> >>IRC Client = bloatware and will never make it to a NS build. It's a > >

Re: How big is Mozilla now?

Pascal Chevrel authored the following: > > > Bundy a dit : > >> Pascal Chevrel authored the following: >> >>> >>> >>> Bundy a dit : >>> >>>> grayrest authored the following: >>>> >>>>> C

Re: How big is Mozilla now?

Pascal Chevrel authored the following: > > > Bundy a dit : > >> grayrest authored the following: >> >>> Colin Blake wrote: >>> >>>> Can someone on a fast machine count up how many lines of C, C++, XUL, >>>> JavaScript, etc Mozil

Re: How big is Mozilla now?

grayrest authored the following: > Colin Blake wrote: > >> Can someone on a fast machine count up how many lines of C, C++, XUL, >> JavaScript, etc Mozilla is now? >> > > a lot :] > > grayrest > Around 10meg+ WITHOUT JAVA or Plugins Opera 3.5meg and 11meg with JAVA!! -- Kyle

Re: Ted Bundy posts again.

Senator Dan Burton authored the following: > Ted Bundy wrote: > > >>They finally fixed one of my bugs I was following. I checked the code to >>make sure that Drudge didn't change, they didn't. Fixed bug. >>Nice going for a change. >>Netscape still suck

Latest nightly fixes Drudge Report bug it appears.

They finally fixed one of my bugs I was following. I checked the code to make sure that Drudge didn't change, they didn't. Fixed bug. Nice going for a change. Netscape still sucks. -- Kyle

Re: 0.9.9 is so good?

Dan authored the following: > 0.9.9 works for me so well, is it worth my time trying the nightleys? > Dan > If you are tracking a bug yes, if not, stay with what you got. If .9.9 comes out with a new feature or something, they will post it. -- Kyle

Re: Mozilla is the best

The Undertaker typed: > I've always used OE, and I'm happy to say that I've switched to Mozilla, > I've found it a 100% better than damn Microsoft's load. I hope that > everyone will learn to use the better email/news program. > > Thank you for Mozilla/Netscape. > Well, tell us why you think

Re: Moz displays form fields to fat?

Kryptolus typed: > Sid Vicious wrote: > >> I go to this page in IE and Moz and get to wildly different looks. >> Anyone know why? IE looks fine, and Moz looks funked out (too fat >> fields). >> >> http://www.benway.com/misc/Dragonguys.html >> >> > > You're experiencing > http://bugzilla.mozil

Re: www.drudgereport.com - hopelessly screwed-up html?

flacco typed: > This site has never rendered well for me under Mozilla - table cells are > misaligned, push up and down all over the page. > > w3.org validator won't even validate it. > > w3.org says mozilla.org is not w3c either. (like that means anything) The problem is Mozilla failure to

Re: "Quick Launch"

Andreas R typed: >>I'd like to refer again to IE, :-( which jumps back to front almost >>instanly, no matter how long i haven't use it. > > > IE always consumes your memory, since it's integrated with Windows. > IF you use Quick Launch, then at least it's your own choice if you want to. > > The

Re: MozillaZine :-/

Sören Kuklau typed: > Well then, so there's that "Salon on Mozilla" news post, whose comments > are at [1]. And then there's that thread in it started by the > MozillaZine founder himself, Chris Nelson, called "Interesting...". It's > about how far we've got - in the author's views, of course.

Re: Mozilla 0.9.9 & Drudge Report

Brian Heinrich typed: > Bundy wrote: > >> Karl typed: >> >>> Mozilla 0.9.9 doesn't display www.drudgereport.com correctly. One of >>> the most popular Web sites. >>> >>> Karl >> >> >> >> Bug that deals with the h

Re: Considering Mozilla upgrade from Netscape

Brian Heinrich typed: > Christian Biesinger wrote: > >> Bundy wrote: >> [java under windows] >> >>> 1 file under windows? Name it. >> >> >> >> NPOJI610.DLL >> > > And you've found that file just using the JRE? I trie

Re: Mozilla and Real Player Plugin

RV typed: > dman84 wrote: > >> works for me, thanks.. just seen this fix on mozillazine for 0.9.9 >> discussion too.. > > > > I posted it there too (bandido) > To lurkers, it's mozillazine.org not .com or beware!! The Netster will grab your computer!!! -- Kyle

Re: Mozilla 0.9.9 & Drudge Report

Karl typed: > Mozilla 0.9.9 doesn't display www.drudgereport.com correctly. One of > the most popular Web sites. > > Karl Bug that deals with the horizontal line within a table tag with height attrabutes. The tag is W3C (like they matter) complaint although the site isn't, like most site. -

Re: Considering Mozilla upgrade from Netscape

Bamm Gabriana typed: >>>We won't discuss the other plug-ins. To Mozilla's defense, it's not >>>meant to be an easy to use end user product. >> >>Are you saying it's Mozilla's fault if the plugin's installation program >>doesn't install correctly in Mozilla? Fault and fact don't always equal. The

Re: Considering Mozilla upgrade from Netscape

Christian Biesinger typed: > Bundy wrote: > [Mozilla vs Netscape 6.x] > >> 1) It is more problem free... kind of... To get Java and plug-ins to >> work takes a little bit of effort. (moving files, and a few .js file >> tweaks) > > > I never needed to chang

Re: Considering Mozilla upgrade from Netscape

Till typed: > "nf" wrote in message ... > >>Question: >> >>I've been considering upgrading from my Netscape 6.2.1 to Mozilla .99 >>for the speed improvements that I have been hearing about. >> >>1) Is it as stable / problem free as my current Netscape installation? >>2) Can I still access my Nets

Re: New Skin for 1.0

Lancer wrote: > I guess Mozilla 1.0 should debut with New Skin... > > What do you think? > I agree when it is released in 2003.

Re: Mozilla .9.9 released for Windows

"Christopher Jahn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > And it came to pass that Bundy wrote: > > > "Holger Metzger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[

Re: Mozilla .9.9 released for Windows

"Holger Metzger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > DeMoN LaG wrote: > > The easiest thing to do is just plonk, killfile, or pass over anything > > by that little troll who started the thread > > People using Mozilla don't have a killfile or newsfil

Re: Mozilla 1.0: Ready for the corporate desktop?

"Pratik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > On 03/07/2002 11:09 AM, alpha wrote: > > In article , [EMAIL PROTECTED] says... > > > >>Just wondering what people on this forum think about Mozilla's usability in > >>a busi

Re: Mozilla .9.9 released for Windows

"Gervase Markham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > The easiest thing to do is just plonk, killfile, or pass over anything > > by that little troll who started the thread > > Our release numbering scheme is not the most transparent thing in the >

Re: 0.9.8 Minimize/restore issue

"Kryptolus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Mark wrote: > > High all, > > > > Using the win32 version of 0.9.8 for a couple days now. I have just > > noticed some odd behavior though. When I click the minimiz button, Moz > > doesn't minimize. It'

Re: For all the Einsteins, this is where you got Mozilla .9.9 from

Bundy wrote: > ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla/nightly/latest-0.9.9 > > Not even Garica knew about this, which shocks me. > > It's a peice of shit though. > > > > ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla/nightly/latest-0.9.9/mozilla-win32-installer.exe It's still a peice of shit.

For all the Einsteins, this is where you got Mozilla .9.9 from

Not even Garica knew about this, which shocks me. It's a peice of shit though.

Re: Mozilla .9.9 released for Windows

"Kryptolus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Bundy wrote: > > Mozilla looks like is going in the wrong direction. The early builds of > > .9.8 were much better. The mail-news focus bug is horrible. 1.0 i

Re: Mozilla .9.9 released for Windows

"Jay Garcia" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED].; > On 03/05/2002 10:07 PM, Bundy wrote: > > Mozilla looks like is going in the wrong direction. The early builds of > > .9.8 were much better. The mail-news focus bug is horrible. 1.0 is

Mozilla .9.9 released for Windows

Mozilla looks like is going in the wrong direction. The early builds of .9.8 were much better. The mail-news focus bug is horrible. 1.0 is going to be way off in the future --Kyle

Re: Latest nightly's of Mozilla not good for mail/usenet

Patrick Gallagher typed: > Bundy wrote: > >> The last couple of nightly's seems have to a problem with the >> mail/usenet reader losing focus to other programs. I will be typing a >> message, send it and all the sudden either another program will pop-up >>

Re: Latest nightly's of Mozilla not good for mail/usenet

JTK typed: > Bundy wrote: > >> The last couple of nightly's seems have to a problem with the >> mail/usenet reader losing focus to other programs. I will be typing a >> message, send it and all the sudden either another program will pop-up >> or the Mozi

Latest nightly's of Mozilla not good for mail/usenet

The last couple of nightly's seems have to a problem with the mail/usenet reader losing focus to other programs. I will be typing a message, send it and all the sudden either another program will pop-up or the Mozilla itself will pop-up, putting the email/usenet client in the background. The l

Re: Setting default HTML page in Messenger

Randall Sell saideth: > Hello all, > > Excuse me if this question has already been asked... > > I'm running Netscape 4.79 > > Is there a way (registry settings, etc.) that I can control what > information appears in the main message window of Messenger when it is > first opened and no mail item

Re: uninstalling

Martin Hoeller wrote: > hi! > > i have 0.9.7 installed and want to upgrade to 0.9.8. > if i uninstall 0.9.7, do i lose my preferences or are they still there > after installing 0.9.8? > > thx, Martin > They are still there as long as you use the Control Panel to delete out the program. --

Re: Holy S**t!!!

Patrick Gallagher wrote: > To everyone doing programming work on Moz - The Feb 25th build is > unreal, the page rendering is blazing fast, Mail/News is working > perfectly, and everything seems far smoother than any build so far. I > checked some pages in NN 4.79, IE, and Moz, and Moz blew

Re: Cookie handling: Who wants this crap proprietary cookie stuff??

psmith wrote: >Mozilla cookie handling is too restrictive and annoying and would be > much better if it were operating the standard way that Netscape 4 and > Internet Explorer do. Anyone who has used Cookie Pal for example knows > how much smarter it can handle cookies. I am seriously con

Re: Latest Mozilla nightlies virus infected?

"Nigel L" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Mark Slater wrote: > > > Hi ppl > > Check this post on Mozillazine: > > http://www.mozillazine.org/talkback/read.php?f=2&i=443&t=443 > > > > Can anybody confirm that 2002022503 is infected with the > > "W

Re: Latest Mozilla nightlies virus infected?

RAV Antivirus for Linux i386 8.0.003 Copyright (c) 1996-2001 GeCAD The Software Company. All rights reserved. Scan engine 8.5 for i386. Last update: Fri Feb 22 11:07:06 2002 Scanning for 65944 malwares (viruses, trojans and worms). Scan started on Tue Feb 26 02:25:03 2002 regxpcom.exe - OK Sca

Relive the good old days of Netscape

March through history http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.netscape.com Enjoy, Kyle

Re: Netscape problem with XP

"Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Your correct about the WWW. But I was commenting the Comment about the > "internet" hasn't existed that long. So depending upon what we were > answering Your right and I am too. My first,

Re: Netscape problem with XP

"Sören Kuklau" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T. wrote: > > Actually the dept of defense created what we know as the internet, in > > the 60's. > > Yes, as the "ARPAnet". But the topic here is not the Internet nor the > ARP

Re: browser statistics - mozilla 10%!

"Flo Ledermann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... http://www.hitboxcentral.com/cgi-bin/hbcntrl.cgi?c=/statmarket/archive/smf_1 _101701&ct=statmarket SAN DIEGO, CA - Oct. 17, 2001) WebSideStory, Inc. (www.websidestory.com), the world's leading provi

Re: Excessive bugs mean Mozilla's death!

"JTK" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Ortwin Glück wrote: > WHOA there buddy. Now, Maozilla may be chock full 'o' bugs, but it's not THAT > bad. Now, I'm the first person to say where the lizard needs help, but in the > area of taking their time

Re: Excessive bugs mean Mozilla's death!

"dman84" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > but you don't have to figure in all the variables that mozilla has to > deal with, do you have any idea how many protocals, standards, and > platforms issues that mozilla has to deal with for you get a dec

Re: Excessive bugs mean Mozilla's death!

"Travis Crump" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > And I suppose your software is designed to run on 8+ operating systems > each of which has its own expectations for how a UI should intuitively > work, isn't lacking any conceivable feature, and is d