Three New Releases (And Other News) From Mozilla

An anonymous reader writes "A couple of interesting releases by mozilla.org. First of all Mozilla 1.5 was released. This is supposed to be the last version of the old Mozilla suite. Mozilla Firebird 0.7, the stand-alone browser by mozilla.org was also released today. It includes many new features, e.g. Web Panels. For more information see the newly designed product page for Firebird. A third release is the stand-alone version of the Mozilla mail-program Thunderbird , which has now reached version 0.3. The Mozilla Foundation also launched new end user services, like CD Sales and Telephone Support. As an effort to target more end-users, a redesigned website was also created. As always MozillaZine has all of the stories, too. Give these new releases a try, but please use a mirror if possible."

mozilla 1.5 to be the last??

[pbranes]

They've been saying that for a while, and I haven't seen any evidence of that. I really hope that 1.5 is their last integrated release, and they can focus on thunderbird/firebird. I use both of these at home and at work now, and I am very please with their simple gui interface and small download sizes (I'm on 56K at home).

What are the implications..

[adeyadey]

..of the recent software patent lawsuit (won against MS/explorer) for Mozilla?

AA With X11

[nicolas.e]

The two releases have many new features which look good, However, the one i looked for the most, gtk2/xft is not included in the precompiled binaries. I can easily understand that some people can not use xft, but i think they are not the majority. It would be just great to download and just have these fonts. It is quite boring to wait for the 2-3 hour compilation of mozilla to look at the *great* antialiasing...

The old extensions as non-root bug..

[Mr Smidge]

Crucially, have they fixed the bug in the Linux build that stops non-root users using some extensions properly?

I remember this being quite a task to solve..

Re:Looks don't make a brand

[Chris_Stankowitz]

The website redesign won't make Mozilla more successful. Advertising is what's needed, plain and simple. How the site looks won't affect people's awareness of Mozilla, advertising will.

Making the site UI more streamlined does make sense though.

Its all part of a joint effort. They are not just re-doing the website for shits-&-giggles. Its all an effort to look more "professional" as they offer new services.

Firebird website burned my eyes

[JasonUCF]

Holy shit!

1. I use Firebird almost exclusively.

2. I (heart) 0.7

3. I (heart) everything those developers are after, even if they're naming their projects after cars ( COME ON! NOT A TROLL! )

4. The firebird redesign looks like it was done to appeal to 13 year olds! What the fuck! My eyes bled when I saw that page. My wife, a professional graphic designer, just shook her head and walked away. For such an awesome piece of software, you'd think they'd have a better piece of design on the webpage? Geeez... find a better pro bono designer! Mod me down, fine, but you shouldn't, because I don't want a flame war, I want to know what the fuck they were thinking. Kitsch is nice and all, but, geeeeeeeeeeeeezzzz......

Re:MozillaFirebird is the best

[Daath]

Indeed! That is one thing that I cannot live without anymore! An efficient built in popup blocker :)
The AdBlock plugin is also nice, although it loads the ads and then hides them... Ideally it should just not load them ;)

Dunno about 13 year olds, but...

[djeaux]

... I was restoring my 16 yr old daughter's laptop (after a particularly NASTY Kazaa episode) & decided to go with Firebird. In the past, she had told me that she preferred Netscape 7.1 to MSIE anyway, and knowing that Netscape was dead-in-the-water, I asked if she ever used the mail client. When she answered "no", I installed Firebird.

So last night, I ducked into her room & asked which browser she was using. She answered "Firebird ... and it is GOOD"...

I'll have to ask her opinion of the new Firebird homepage, though :-D

Re:mozilla 1.5 to be the last??

[jvervloet]

As I see it, there are (were?) two problems which make the switch from I.E. towards Firebird `frightening' for modal Windows users: (1) the lack of a Windows installer, and (2) the troubles for installing e.g. a flash plugin.

I don't know whether these things are fixed in the new release, but as long as they aren't, I will recommend Mozilla as I.E. alternative instead of Firebird. It would be a pity if Firebird users switched back to I.E. because of these little problems.

Mozilla beta site looks great

[lay]

This is the kind of site that the mozilla folks should focus on: an appealing product site that shows a different image from the "developer-oriented" or "cutting-edge-freak" current website.
This is a great advantage towards public perception of Mozilla as a very good browser. It shows maturity on a project. Congratulations to all the folks at the Mozilla team and thank you for providing us with a serious browser.

Will they be intergrated?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm all for making the browser load faster and having the peices be seperate (for those who only want the browser or email), but what if I want all of them? Do we now need to keep track of 4-5 seperate products and hope that different versions of each intergrate well with each other?

I know I'm not the only one who regularly uses *all* of Mozilla's features (meaning browser, mail, address book, composer, and chatzilla) on a regular basis. Will there still be a *bundled* package/suite like there currently is?

If this hasn't already been discussed, *please* bundle the seperate apps (firebird, thunderbird, etc) together in a nice and integrated package called "Mozilla Suite vX.x" (or something similar). There are more people using all of the features than you may think.

Just my $0.02...

-={ PyroGuy }=-
"Everything should be made as simple as possible..., but not simpler" - Albert Einstein

Re:Looks don't make a brand

[3Suns]

Um, actually they often do. I still maintain that IE beat out Netscape solely by 1) being persistent and not getting uninstalled, and 2) having a more striking and recognizable icon.

Seriously, back in 1997 or so when IE was trying to overcome Netscape, most people had both browsers installed: Netscape because they were used to it, and IE because it came w/ the OS. People have crowded desktops, and they generally don't much care which browser they use. Which icon is going to stand out more, Netscape w/ it's square, busy, low-contrast "N" logo, or the bold, simple, stylized "e" for IE? Sooner or later people got used to IE, realized they didn't need 2 browsers, and got rid of the easier one to uninstall.

Agree

[twocents]

While the benefits are not always immediately tangible, a good, clean design makes a better impression. It does take a bit more time, I know because I'm as guilty of sometime just throwing things up on the Web as well, but it's tough to think much of a product if you are new to the product and the Web site is terrible.

And the site certainly doesn't need to be fancy, just clean and informative.

I've been doing some work with ImageMagick of late, and I love the power this set of tools provides. I actually worked with the tools well before ever visiting the main Web site. To my surprise the site, while easy to navigate, is very stark and unimpressive compared to the tool-set. This is not a bash at all, but simply what I consider to be an example of a site that doesn't shine nearly as brightly as the product.

A contrast to the above is the Open Source project Gallery's Web site. This site is visually stimulating, which is great considering the product is a visually oriented product.

There are so many sites that have little or no content that keep piling on the Flash, piling on the glitz, so it's nice to see sites, such as the new Mozilla site, that offer something useful and look good.

Here's to presentation that equals the content.

Re:Looks don't make a brand

[Mr Smidge]

I have managed to convince a number of my friends to swtich to using Mozilla or Mozilla Firebird, but I always kept in mind that people are inherently lazy and non-techies often don't really care, so long as something is good enough.

The factor that has convinced them to at least 'try' Firebird has been popup blocking. But I've often found that it is *then* all the other great features (tabs, speed, simple configuration etc.) that make them stay. So go ahead.. when numerous people complain that their computer is slow, suggest it as an alternative.

"You could always use a different internet browser you know. I'll install one that blocks popup adverts and is much faster, if you like. And if you don't like it, I'll get rid of it for you" - 90% of people I've said that to have agreed, and probably a further 90% of them have stuck with it. Let's educate the masses!