Firefox 2.0 Posted a Day Early 564
A number of readers alerted us to the [link removed] day-early [accidental] posting of Firefox version 2.0. At this writing the top page at mozilla.com still doesn't mention its availability. One reader pointed us to [link removed] a mirror and another recommended a comprehensive review of Firefox 2.0, with many screenshots, over at mozillalinks.org. Update by RM: - links above removed at request of Mozilla release people. They asked us to link to this note instead. They're only asking us to wait until Tuesday Afternoon (U.S. Pacific Time) for the official 2.0 download, which isn't long. (Patience is a virtue, etc.)
As pointed out in MY story submission... (Score:1, Informative)
So, don't just download that one and install it. It DOES matter, with the inline spell-checker.
Or else you'll end up doing your neighbour a favour by changing his tyre.
Re:Language (Score:3, Informative)
http://releases.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firef
Linux Version:
http://releases.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firef
Everything else you should be able to find here:
http://releases.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firef
For the sake of non-Windows users (Score:3, Informative)
Its not a day early (Score:5, Informative)
SO it is ontime, not early.. you people of slashdot are just slow.
Re:Quick Question; (Score:4, Informative)
Options -> main -> startup -> when firefox starts -> show my windows and tabs from last time.
Re:Ubuntu Edgy (Score:3, Informative)
Snappy and uses less memory (Score:5, Informative)
It also feels much snappier in general, if only because it's not sprawling all over the paging file (I don't know what other speed tweaks it has).
All my extensions except undoclosetab updated automatically (and that's built in now) so that was probably the smoothest upgrade I've ever had. Though I use the LittleFox theme and I was on version 1.5, which looked very strange in FF2.0. But after a manual 'look for updates' for themese it found LittleFox 1.7 which looks great.
So far I'm very pleased with it.
Re:Ubuntu Edgy (Score:3, Informative)
Firefox 3.0 (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Wikipedia Support for Firefox 2 Added (Score:4, Informative)
BitTorrent links (Score:5, Informative)
http://bittorrent.mozilla.org/ [mozilla.org]
(2.0 is not there yet, but use that link when it gets updated)
Unofficial torrents (Website ads are NSFW):
http://torrentspy.com/torrent/891929/Firefox_2_0_
http://torrentspy.com/torrent/891930/Firefox_2_0_
(The first link is US version, second is GB version)
(posted AC to avoid karma-whoring)
Re:Firefox 3.0 (Score:2, Informative)
Gecko is the last engine that doesn't have a working "display: block-inline". Quite annoying. I have even ignored a few of IE6.0's bugs as 7.0 is shipping now, but it's hard to ignore the lastest Firefox.
Re:I'll wait thanks (Score:4, Informative)
http://ilias.ca/blog/2005/11/looking-at-ftp-sites
http://ilias.ca/blog/2006/04/looking-at-ftp-sites
What is amazing is that Slashdot seems to do this with every release. What kind of editors we have here?
How to get rid of the hideous tab bar gradients: (Score:5, Informative)
1. Copy the
2. Unzip the classic.jar file. Copy ~/fff/1/skin/classic/global/browser.css to your ~/fff directory.
3. Now copy the
4. Unzip the classic.jar file. Copy ~/fff/browser.css into ~/fff/2/skin/classic/global/browser.css. Just overwrite the file, because it sucks.
5. From ~/fff/2, you can just do zip -f classic.jar. -f is freshen; zip will report that it updated the one file.
6. Copy ~/fff/2/classic.jar back to where you found it in the NEW firefox install. I had mine in
7. Restart firefox, and let GTK render your widgets without any ugly gradients!
PLEASE stop linking to unreleased builds (Score:5, Informative)
OFFICIAL STATEMENT (Score:5, Informative)
md5sums (Score:5, Informative)
dec219811d989aeed2b8c7e338cc0b03 firefox-2.0rc3.tar.gz
don't think there's been that many changes
Re:Software Update (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Actually it's 45.6 Mb (Score:3, Informative)
A MEGA-anything is a million. It has nothing to do with RAM manufacture, a filesize has no reason to be measured in power-of-two quantities.
Comment removed (Score:4, Informative)
Re:New feature worth having (resume session) (Score:4, Informative)
30 bugs/hour??? (Score:1, Informative)
Aaaand there's another bug as I'm writing this
Re:OFFICIAL STATEMENT (Score:3, Informative)
Re:BitTorrent links (Score:5, Informative)
Re:But still the dang extra button chrome crap (Score:3, Informative)
While we're at it, set browser.tabs.closeButton to 3 to revert the tab close buttons to 1.5's behavior.
Not sure about the search button, but for that you can download an extension that behaves in a way you prefer.
Re:I smell a conspiracy (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Actually it's 45.6 Mb (Score:3, Informative)
Sorry, the SI guys were in before.
A MEGA-anything is a million. It has nothing to do with RAM manufacture, a filesize has no reason to be measured in power-of-two quantities.
It's because, as everyone knows, data is slightly compressible. If you define the height of a single bit as 1 arbitary unit, when you stack 1024 of them on top of each other, the weight of all those bits squashes them down so that the stack is only 1000 units high. As soon as you pull one out of the stack to look at it, it springs back to its original size.
More seriously, this "maybe-bytes" rubbish annoys the crap out of me. A megabyte has been 2^20 bytes for all of the 25-odd years I've been in this field, and has been understood to be so by the vast majority of skilled professionals. It's completely normal for specialised fields to slightly redefine some terms for greater utility, and, in computing, powers of two have far more utility than powers of ten.
Besides, SI deals with physical quantities. Bits are abstractions with no physical reality, so they don't fall within the scope of SI.
Re:Getting rid of individual "close tab" buttons (Score:2, Informative)
Re:BitTorrent links (Score:3, Informative)
You know, it's not karma "whoring" when you post a useful post. Don't try to put the moderating system up-side-down, because of some ill-understood posting moral considerations.
Re:BitTorrent links (Score:2, Informative)
Re:So that's how they do it (Score:3, Informative)
It does not have your history... but it could if it tried a brute-force attack. Neat trick, btw :-D.
The javascript is at http://www.gnucitizen.org/projects/attackapi/build /lib/AttackAPI/HistoryDumper.js [gnucitizen.org] and it works by making an 'a' tag, then checking if it was visited or not. So it is able to see if a link has been visited before, but it can't dump your history in a normal fashion. I bet it probably isn't exactly a feature... but hardly something to be paranoid about.
Re:Feeling Lucky Google Search Result change!! No! (Score:3, Informative)
For anyone curious:
Go to about:config (type it into the location bar)
Select: Keyword.URL
Change the value to this: http://www.google.com/search?btnI=I'm+Feeling+Luc
All is well.
Re:New version (Score:1, Informative)
I am a bit disappointed about how tabs work now too, but the changes are probably for the best. Scrolling the tab strip with my mouse-wheel was I nice discovery. Too bad it's still not easier for non-developers to customize the interface. Opera lets you change the preferences through a user-friendly dialog, but in Firefox you're required to manually type in about:config, then "browser.tabs" and then not be confused with various programming terms.
For myself, I changed browser.tabs.tabMinWidth to something small so it behaves like before 2.0 and browser.tabs.tabCloseButtons to 0 (only ever displays a close button on the active tab). I'm also thinking of adding some CSS to my userChrome.css to have tabs with system appearance [userstyles.org] again.