Two comments

First, what broke recently? Previously, clicking a to an exe, zip, mpeg, any type of non markup document would make mozilla save it, or open it. Now, I click and I get nothing. Just says "Document: Done", never downloads anything at all. I have to right click and save as. Also something h

Re: MP3's & Navigator

Ben Basten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 24 Aug 2001: > Im having a problem with some MP3's on our site, when a user tries > to audition our MP3's all they can see is binary streaming into a > new browser window. This goes for Navigator on PC and Mac.

Re: P.S. (was: Re: IE6.0 Released)

JTK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 29 Aug 2001: > 3. Anyone who wants to try to tell me that '*perception* (all that > matters) is that we're faster than IE' needs to explain to me then > why not a single, verifiable, repeatable number indicates that

Re: browser spoofing

Pratik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 30 Aug 2001: > Jay Garcia wrote: > >> Bob Davis wrote: >> >> >>>When I go to www.capitolone.com and I spoof to be ie5.5 it still >>>detects me as mozilla and tells me to go away. >>>Is this because of >>> >>>nav

Re: P.S. (was: Re: IE6.0 Released)

Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 30 Aug 2001: > > goto cnet.com > goto chip.de > their numbers shows that netscape 6.1 is faster than IE in page > loading. > But I'm sure you don't believe this numbers. And I haven't seen > one > site st

Re: P.S. (was: Re: IE6.0 Released)

"{-- Rot13 - Hateme" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 30 Aug 2001: > DeMoN LaG wrote in > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: > >> Actually numerous tests have proven that Mozilla/Netscape 6.1

Re: IE6.0 Released

"Sauron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in news:9mnkhc$qkk2 @secnews.netscape.com, on 31 Aug 2001: > "Christopher Jahn" wrote: >> And it came to pass that JTK wrote: >> [...] >> > 3. Long startup times almost always translate >> > directly into system resource hoggage, and certainly do in this >> > c

Re: P.S. (was: Re: IE6.0 Released)

Ben Ruppel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 31 Aug 2001: > Anyone who *perceives* that mozilla is faster than *any* version of > IE in respect to *anything* has to be on crack. > I dunno, the latest nightly kicks the pants off IE6 on my system, and do

Re: P.S. (was: Re: IE6.0 Released)

Ben Ruppel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 31 Aug 2001: > Just curious, what are your system specs? What OS? To be > scientific, could you repeat the following with both IE6 and > Mozilla? It seems that some users just don't experience my > problems

Re: Netscape 6.1 Stinks

Joseph DeVito <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 02 Sep 2001: > To All, > Since thay try to release this in beta it sucked. It sucks now > and > will continue to do so unless they fix it. Each time I download it > when I go into preferences and

Mozilla moved my profile...?

Well, not really moved it. Created it in an odd spot I would guess. I just noticed because I never looked before... I run Windows 2000. My profiles are set up with .CG242268-B\ as their home folder. My personal home folder is jim.CG242268-B\. Mozilla is using jim\application data\Mozilla\

Build help

Try for the first time tonight to build Mozilla. Was hell figuring out how something like CVS works, but anyway, this is what I'm getting: C:\moz_src\mozilla>nmake /f client.mak build_all Microsoft (R) Program Maintenance Utility Version 1.50 Copyright (c) Microsoft Corp 1988-94. All rights

Re: Proposal for a Transcendent Open Object in Mozilla

JTK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 11 Sep 2001: > > AOL's on top of it. When they finish buying AT&T's cable business, > they'll show the world how to run the web. The AOL way. > > "You've got a monopoly!" > Highly doubt that, considering Microso

Re: Build help

JTK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 11 Sep 2001: > Looks like you don't have a proper path to your MSVC++6.0 stuff. > It apparently can't find cl, though why nmake would be found is > odd. What's your environment look like? There's a whole boatload >

Re: Mozilla got the right name

Canasta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 17 Sep 2001: > Sorry, Gervase; I can't resist. > > QUIRKS! > > I know, I know. > Also keep in mind, there are numerous platform specific files in the tree, if you just pull the entire tree and build you'll hav

Re: feature wish

Rob Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 18 Sep 2001: > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, jesus X <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > writes >>Rob Allen wrote: >>> The biggest problem is that it requires 2 hands - left for "alt" >>> and right for "left arrow"! >> >>

Re: Mozilla got the right name

Colin Thefleau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in 9o7c8g$fbi$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:9o7c8g$fbi$[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 18 Sep 2001: > > OK I have to apologize, the dist directory in the mozilla build > tree is only 3.6 MB which actually is really reasonable if not > exceptional. I compiled mozilla with

Re: 0.9.4 uses more resources

Gordon Burgess-Parker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 19 Sep 2001: > Bob Davis wrote: > >> I have win98se. >> This is a followon to my previous msg about slashdot crashing. >> It seems that if I reduce the size of a slashdot page by changung >> nested

Re: has anyone tried to build mozilla under win32 with one of the win32 GCC ports?

Daniel Veditz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 21 Sep 2001: > Jonathan Wilson wrote: > >> As opposed to using visual C++? >> Other than the use of NMAKE, what other visual C++ only >> technologies does mozilla use? >> Is there any reason why a "port" to

Re: View Page Source shows source of former page....again

Jon Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 21 Sep 2001: > According to Mozilla apparently they view this as a feature, not a > bug. When people complained about it, they say it doesn't affect > the majority of users. > > I myself have stopped worrying ab

Re: IE6.0 Released

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Hall Stevenson) wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 22 Sep 2001: > > When you say 'people' I assume you mean geeks or nerds, right ?? > They're the only ones who care about being compliant with > standards. Ask your co-workers if they know what W3C standards

More build mishaps

makedep.cpp Microsoft (R) Incremental Linker Version 6.00.8168 Copyright (C) Microsoft Corp 1992-1998. All rights reserved. /out:makedep.exe makedep.obj LINK : fatal error LNK1104: cannot open file "nafxcw.lib" NMAKE : fatal error U1077: 'C:\WINNT\system32\cmd.exe' : return code '0x2' Stop. NMAK

Hmm...

Almost got a working build. New to the whole process with nmake and such. Below is where my build process is bailing. What does it mean? Installing .\_xpidlgen\nsIDOMXMLDocument.h into ..\..\..\..\dist \include\nsI DOMXMLDocument.h +++ make: export in c:\mozsrc\mozilla\dom\public\idl\ht

Re: why AOL wont use MOZ: The problem and the solution

"Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 24 Sep 2001: > > PC people don't have this problem because type and creator codes > don't exist. They exist on Mac so that Mac people don't have to > futz around looking for an appropriate progr

Re: why AOL wont use MOZ: The problem and the solution

Michael Gratton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 24 Sep 2001: > > > DeMoN LaG wrote: > > [snip] > >> File associations mean I can have anything that ends in .mp3 be >> sent to Sonique to play. > >

Re: why AOL wont use MOZ: The problem and the solution

Jason Fleshman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 25 Sep 2001: > > Or at the very least find some way to duplicate the Windows > right-click/Open With functionality. If a file's on the desktop > but associated with the wrong app, it's a mild pain to hav

Re: why AOL wont use MOZ: The problem and the solution

Michael Gratton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 25 Sep 2001: > In any case, the real hassle with the using filename extensions is > the fact they are mutable - and hence liable to break. The main > reason no-one trusts what Window's thinks the type of a

Re: why AOL wont use MOZ: The problem and the solution

Jason Fleshman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 26 Sep 2001: > DeMoN LaG wrote: > >> Jason Fleshman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 25 Sep 2001: >> &g

Re: Javascript?

Mike Koenecke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 26 Sep 2001: > Seemed like it *used* to work. Perhaps it's some of that squirrelly > crap that only works in Internet Exploder? Easiest way is to just save the source, open it in notepad and search for "do

Re: why AOL wont use MOZ: The problem and the solution

"Garth Wallace" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in news:9p5gk4$mhm1 @ripley.netscape.com, on 29 Sep 2001: > "Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... >> >> The characters :: are somewhat equivilent to Unix |, or PC's / > > Actually, PCs use "\" and UN

Re: why AOL wont use MOZ: The problem and the solution

Mama Cass <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 29 Sep 2001: > In netscape.public.mozilla.general the people heard DeMoN LaG say > these wise words: > >> To be even more picky, Dos/Windows uses \'s, Unix and linux us >> /'s. Linux is n

Re: General quality comments: Mozilla

Mama Cass <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 29 Sep 2001: > In netscape.public.mozilla.general the people heard Esben Mose > Hansen say these wise words: > >> Again, I'd would bet that it is only stable /enough/, >> /sufficently/ feature-complete etc. But I wouldn't know,

Re: General quality comments: Mozilla

"Garth Wallace" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in 9pacbs$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:9pacbs$[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 01 Oct 2001: > "Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... >> >> Photoshop is Like Unix, in that It needs all the System RAM

Re: why AOL wont use MOZ: The problem and the solution

"Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 01 Oct 2001: > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> >> Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > In fact pure UNIX using command line, is more likely to cause >> > damage, minor or

Re: General quality comments: Mozilla

"Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 01 Oct 2001: > MacWorld, and MacAddict magazine both say that The more System RAM > you have available for UNIX to use the better it runs. In fact > they suggest the bare minimum install on any

Re: General quality comments: Mozilla

"Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 02 Oct 2001: > > And True UNIX is supposed to be Platform independent, But because > of the way UNIX is written it will take advantage of the RISC > Processor and all the RAM you can give it. NO

Re: performance

Patrick Gallagher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 02 Oct 2001: > Patrick Gallagher wrote: > > oops... I'm not using quicklaunch - and running windows NT 5.1 with > 256MB of PC 133 RAM on a P3 866/133 > > Excuse my lack of knowledge here, but what is

Re: why AOL wont use MOZ: The problem and the solution

"Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 02 Oct 2001: > > > Patrick Gallagher wrote: >> >> Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T. wrote: >> >> > >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> > >> >>Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >>

Re: performance

Jay Garcia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 02 Oct 2001: > > Win2k but shows as NT 5.1 in the User-Agent String. > Why? I have Win 2k SP2 installed and my UA string is Windows NT 5.0, not 5.1... Just curious as to why/how -- ICQ: N/A (temporarily)

Re: why AOL wont use MOZ: The problem and the solution

Chris Hoess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 02 Oct 2001: > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, jesus X wrote: >> "Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T." wrote: >>> How about the INIT command. I'm trying to remember from my >>> Windows 3.1.1. days. >> >> As I have said

Re: performance

Patrick Gallagher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 03 Oct 2001: >> > > Yes, Windows NT 5.1 is Windows XP > The answer I was looking for. Thanks -- ICQ: N/A (temporarily) AIM: FlyersR1 9 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ = m

Re: Collapsible Tree Menu: IE only?

William Leese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in 9qt5sp$2fuo$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:9qt5sp$2fuo$[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 20 Oct 2001: > Hello, > > A while ago i was looking for a simple, fast collapsible and > expandable tree menu for quick navigation. Having looked at a large > amount of scripts to do

Re: About all those browsers...

Gervase Markham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 21 Oct 2001: > Colin Thefleau wrote: > >> I do a small test to find out which browser renders better and >> under which environment. This is very simple and only takes care >> of text now. I think the res

Re: How or will this work in Mozilla? Works in IE, Netscape

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim) wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 24 Oct 2001: > Hope this is the proper newsgroup for this inquiry and my apologies > if it is not. > > I am working with a web designer to develop a site for my employer. > Neither of us are great wiz's at it but we

Re: is there a list of html/jsd/dom things that dont work in mozilla?

Jonathan Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in news:3BD74FD4.7080909 @tpgi.com.au, on 24 Oct 2001: > Like document.layers and document.all and so on? > > Very simple. http://www.w3c.org If it is listed here, it (should) work in Mozilla -- ICQ: N/A (temporarily) AIM: FlyersR1 9 email: [EMAIL

Re: Tab Browsing Update

Garth Wallace <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 25 Oct 2001: >> clicking both buttons ( chord) > > What's the solution for a *one*-button mouse? Double clicking both buttons ;) -- ICQ: N/A (temporarily) AIM: FlyersR1 9 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ = m

Re: msn , coincidence?

Pratik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 26 Oct 2001: >> But, Visse warned, "the experience may be slightly degraded simply >> because they don't support the standards we support closely, as >> far as the HTML standard in those browsers." > Sounds to me

Re: UserAgent; MSN&MyNetscape display probs

Garth Wallace <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 28 Oct 2001: > Nigel L wrote: >> >>OK, so now that MSN lets us in, ya gotta wonder, what is so >>special there, anyway? And how long before they charge a >>nickel for every page hit? > > It w

Anyone been having problems building recently?

\bin\xpic leanup.exe +++ make: install in c:\mozsrc\mozilla\security +++ make: install in c:\mozsrc\mozilla\security\nss 1 file(s) copied. +++ makecopy: no such file: ..\..\dist\WIN32_O.OBJ\lib\nssckbi.dll gmake.exe: Entering directory `c:/mozsrc/mozilla/security/nss/lib' cd crmf; gmake.e

Re: MSN Passport & NS6.1 "data security issues"

"Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 30 Oct 2001: > Does Moz and N6 use SSL (Secure Sockets Layers) asCommunicator and > IE do? Could this be the difference? > > (I am posing this as a question rather than stating in a sentence.)

Re: Thanks!

Jay Garcia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 30 Oct 2001: > Erik Pukinskis wrote: > >> I wasn't sure where to direct this, so I'll post it here: >> >> I just upgraded to WindowsXP/IE6 and whenever I try to watch the >> quicktime trailers on apple.com wi

Re: Thanks!

"Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 31 Oct 2001: > I'm waiting on updating to 6.2 until Communicator 4.7.9. Netscape > is supposed to fix the problem of Netscape6 taking over all of > Communicator's preferences. 6.2 changed absolu

Re: Thanks!

Garth Wallace <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 31 Oct 2001: > > Remember, Philip uses a Mac, so experience > with the Windows version doesn't necessarily > translate. > If he is unable to run Netscape 4.x and Mozilla/Netscape 6 concurrently because he

Re: Thanks!

Henri Sivonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 01 Nov 2001: > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, DeMoN LaG > wrote: > >> If he is unable to run Netscape 4.x and Mozilla/Netscape 6 >> concurrently because he

Re: Thanks!

"Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 01 Nov 2001: >> >> You don't need to copy the link even with an external email app. I >> use Eudora Light 3.1.1 (running in the Classic environment on OS >> X) for email. When I double-click a l

Re: CNet deception

Syd Logan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 03 Nov 2001: > Not knowing any better, my read of the whole thing is that they ran > 6.2 in order to generate the IE vs. 6.2 evaluation in which we > "tied" IE, but they did not produce an in-depth evaluation of

Very cool website (browser related)

Lists a few IE only detections, and a few Mozilla only detections. Seems to me Mozilla is being acknowledged by the web authoring community. -- ICQ: N/A (temporarily) AIM: FlyersR1 9 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ = m

Re: Very cool website (browser related)

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Art Wagner) wrote in news:3BE482BA.6050203 @westek-systems.com, on 03 Nov 2001: > Great. Now:What Site?? > Did I forget to post the link... No... Path: secnews.netscape.com!not-for-mail From: DeMoN LaG Newsgroups: netscape.public.mozilla.general Subject: Very cool w

Re: please read.... I'm going to rant!

dman84 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 04 Nov 2001: > Scott, I'm going to rewrite my rant again soon.. So I agree with > Simon.. we need to help Mozilla, give them some contructive > positive feedback on how to manage Open source projects better than >

Re: Worth it?

"Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 04 Nov 2001: > Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > > >   > Pratik wrote: >   > > Appears to look right for me on Communicator 4.7.8. The > opening

Re: CSS homepage crashes Moz, fixed elements slow scrolling down

Jason Antony <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 10 Nov 2001: > > Robert O'Callahan wrote: > >> >> Do Opera and IE even support "position: fixed"? > > > Opera 5.12 [win32] does a great job. Visit the CSS homepage and > you'll see what I mean. > > IE 5.

Re: CSS homepage crashes Moz, fixed elements slow scrolling down

DeMoN LaG wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 11 Nov 2001: > Jason Antony <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 10 Nov >> Would someone confirm its compliance? > > Nope, IE6 doesn't

Re: question about "mailto:"

Mike Koenecke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 09 Nov 2001: > On or about Sat, 10 Nov 2001 04:30:23 +0800, madog > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> allegedly wrote: > >>mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] starts oe, how can i change it to mozilla mail ? >> >>thanks > > Wow; t

Re: A way to force a complete reload?

Rob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 11 Nov 2001: > In Netscape 4.x, Shift-Reload forces a complete reload of a page > regardless of what is in the caches. I find this very usefull > sometimes; for example, on some web cams, and when working on a > web page to make sure

Re: mozilla.org favicon

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 14 Nov 2001: > > That is awesome. I never knew that Mozilla had full PNG support! > This is something I have wanted for a long time. The fact that it > looks so crappy in IE is just a perk. ;) I have IE6 installed, and I c

Re: question: why do people continue to use ns4.x instead of ns6/mozilla?

"Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 14 Nov 2001: > > If they are placed in plugins folder how do you tell Moz or > Netscape Mac that they are in the folder? > > In Communicator if a plugin is in the folder once the application >

Re: favicon

David Hyatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 16 Nov 2001: > > > I'm seeing a lot of ridiculous assumptions and accusations being > made about the general architecture of the feature itself. If > you're going to hurl inflammatory remarks in this newsgro

Re: Table widths freaking out ...

Alex S <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 19 Nov 2001: > I am not sure how/where to file a bug. If this is not an > appropriate group, please direct me where to go. > > Anyway... I am experiencing a strange bug that appears with both > Windows and OS X'

Re: Moz mail

alpha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 20 Nov 2001: > > I see that you think that I'm a idiot who can't set up a mail > account. But after been using alot of difftrent mail clients and > when using mozilla mail and when I cannot set it up in the normal >

Re: build numbering system

Stephen Compall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 20 Nov 2001: > Well, here I am, working with 2001112008 and a buggy news client. > (http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=01) > > Speaking of really long versioning, how exactly are the builds

Re: Moz mail

alpha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 22 Nov 2001: > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, n@a says... >> alpha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 20 Nov 2001: >> > >> > I see that you think that I'm a idiot who can

Re: Updated Spel checker faq

Gerv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 22 Nov 2001: > > Does Mozilla have a spell checker? > > -Gerv > I dunno, I think the last one was more sarcastic... -- ICQ: N/A (temporarily) AIM: FlyersR1 9 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ = m

Re: Wow this page really kills Mozilla fast!

"Joni K." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in 9tquq0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:9tquq0$[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 25 Nov 2001: > jdavis wrote: > >> http://www.abit-usa.com/ >> >> Immediately the browser pretty much freezes though the page >> continues to load and finishes loading, but no interaction is >> po

Re: favicon

Mike Cramer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 26 Nov 2001: > 4) The debate has nothing to do with web standards, because both > favicon.ico and tags are valid no matter how you slice them. You are completely wrong. is a valid web standard. Auto fet

Re: Please check this site

Ole Kasper Olsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 26 Nov 2001: > Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T. wrote: > >> 2 seconds flat downloading the opening page with Communicator >> 4.7.9 and 384K DSL Connection. > > 0.5 second flat downloading the opening page with

Re: Mozilla 1.0: JTK/Hixie performance criteria suggestions?

JTK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 26 Nov 2001: > > In other words, performance of half-as-good as min(IE,NS4.x) is not > achievable, and will not be part of the release criteria for > Mozilla 1.0. All that matters is a circled box on a calendar... >

Re: New Features Wanted

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris Hill) wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 26 Nov 2001: > On Mon, 26 Nov 2001 22:50:42 +, Ian Thomas > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>Robert Zaichkowski wrote: >>> 1. ActiveX support >>> >> >>IIRC this has been considered several times (I think th

Re: New Features Wanted

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris Hill) wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 27 Nov 2001: >>They are as secure as fort knox compared to Active X >> > > Please explain I've never seen a malicious Netscape plugin (even when Netscape had 80%+ marketshare). I've seen dozens of malicious

Re: New Features Wanted

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris Hill) wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 27 Nov 2001: > >>Java and Netscape's plugins don't get access to the rest of the >>system, in general. I remember Heat.net's plugin installer was a >>Java applet, before it could do anything I was prompted a h

Re: New Features Wanted

"Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 27 Nov 2001: > > > Pratik wrote: >> >> On 11/27/01 08:56 AM, Jay Garcia wrote: >> >> >> > If you set your "quote" color to "red" for instance, the new >> > reply will be in "black". I find

Re: W32/Badtrans@MM virus and Mozilla

Christopher Jahn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 27 Nov 2001: >> > > No. The SAVE dialogue will not result in infection. If you > save the file to disk, you are STILL not at risk. It is only if > you RUN the file that you become infected. > And Mo

Re: Mozilla 1.0: JTK/Hixie performance criteria suggestions?

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Hickson) wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 27 Nov 2001: > DeMoN LaG wrote: > >> IE does not have nightly versions > > > Don't be ridiculous. Microsoft have internal daily test releases > just like Mozill

Re: New Features Wanted

"J.B. Moreno" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 27 Nov 2001: > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > DeMoN LaG wrote: > >> > >> > Pratik wrote: >> >> >> >> Even better, u

Re: New Features Wanted

"J.B. Moreno" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 27 Nov 2001: >> >> Pretty cool feature I must say, not even my personal favorite >> XNews can do this > > Uhm, either I am misunderstanding you, or you are mistaken, from >

Re: New Features Wanted

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris Hill) wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 27 Nov 2001: > > I could write a Netscape plugin that ejected your CD-ROM, popped up > a message, and shutdown your computer. If I could convince you to > install it, it would work just fine. Netscape plugins

Re: New Features Wanted

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris Hill) wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 29 Nov 2001: > > It doesn't matter that Mozilla is open source, the Netscape plugin > API has been public for a long time and it is a binary interface. > > Here you go: > http://members.aol.com/Chris244/eject.

Re: New Features Wanted

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris Hill) wrote in news:3c0642ba.2370804616 @news.mozilla.org, on 29 Nov 2001: > On 29 Nov 2001 08:34:54 GMT, DeMoN LaG wrote: > >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris Hill) wrote in >>[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 29 Nov 2001: >>>

Re: How to switch of ad-popups, without deactivating javascript?

JTK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 29 Nov 2001: > > > Touche. But what's the percentages there? And at any rate, for > "alternative" OSes (in particular Unii) there's a plethora of Windows is not the end all be all of operating systems. Many, man

Re: New Features Wanted

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris Hill) wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 30 Nov 2001: > On 30 Nov 2001 03:53:30 GMT, DeMoN LaG wrote: > >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris Hill) wrote in news:3c0642ba.2370804616 >>@news.mozilla.org, on 29 Nov 2001: >>

Re: midi link produces 'save' dialog ins of sound

Ralph Cook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 30 Nov 2001: > I had to reinstall my system disk recently, and so had to reinstall > netscape. I use 4.7, since 6.x seems allergic to my machine (it > moves around very slowly and sneezes on me). > > There'

Re: Worth it?

Asa Dotzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 30 Nov 2001: > What gives you any authority to make statements like that? Are you > involved in any way in the planning that goes into this project. > Are you being intentionally insulting to the people that wo

Re: Worth it?

"Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 01 Dec 2001: >>Are you being intentionally insulting to the people that work long > hours trying to make _all_ of the product >better? Are you just > bitter or mean? > > No I am not biter or mea

Re: Worth it?

"Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 01 Dec 2001: >> >> Yeah... Sure. You seem to imply that the Mac going bye bye would >> affect Unix somehow? The Mac does not compete in the same market >> as Unix. The Mac has no bearing on

Re: Worth it?

"Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 02 Dec 2001: >> 1. I remember you once stating that you have limited experience in >> programing and as an example you mentioned that years ago you used >> to edit autoexec.bat files for MS DOS.

Re: Pettyness

Peter Lairo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 03 Dec 2001: > Demon, > > I think you are resulting to splitting hairs for the sole purpose > of degrading and insulting Phillip. Your arguments are often petty > and seem to deliberately avoid what Phillip i

Re: DOS was Re: Worth it?

"Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 03 Dec 2001: > I retired the summer after the first version of W-95 came out. We > mostly used Windows 3.1.1. at the four high schools were the only > ones allowed to try W-95. Am I remembering

Re: WTF! mozilla,

Jay Garcia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 06 Dec 2001: > > What "red star" ??? I have NEVER seen a "red star" on my desktop > representing Mozilla or any other application for that matter. > I've seen 3 logo's: A red dinosaur head A cute little green dino head (that is

Re: is -P profile option gone?

Anthony Ewell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 07 Dec 2001: > Hi All, > > I use to be able to start Netscape 4.7x with a -P option > ("Netscape.exe -P"place_profile_name_here"). This would shoot > me past the profile manager and start the requeste

Re: WTF! mozilla,

jon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 07 Dec 2001: > Chocobo_greens wrote: > >> On Fri, 07 Dec 2001 02:42:19 -0500, Malodushnikh wrote: >> >> >>>And the brutal repression of everything not red, white, and blue >>>begins in America. >>> >>> >> for your

Re: OT: Re: WTF! mozilla,

Chocobo_greens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in 9utuc0$ia4$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:9utuc0$ia4$[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 08 Dec 2001: > On Sat, 08 Dec 2001 15:16:23 -0500, Malodushnïkh wrote: > >> Killing and death happen everywhere in the world irrespective of >> ideology. Ask the people of Southeast A

  1   2   3   4   >