OSNews

No need to wait, just uninstall the old Adblock and download it again:

http://downloads.mozdev.org/adblock/adblock-0.5-dev.xpi

Worked for me.

Well... mine worked without having to re-install.

However, greasemonkey does not work. Any clue when a compatible release can be expected?

Well! I found it!

There is a preview of Greasemonkey that works with FF 1.5 . Get it from the link below. Remember you need to rename the bin to xpi before opening it with FF.

http://mozdev.org/pipermail/greasemonkey/2005-September/005679.html

:)

You'll have to wait a while for your favourite extensions to work - it was a shock to the system seeing adverts again!

If that's the case, I can't see myself finding my way over to Firefox yet.

My biggest complaint with Firefox is that every time they come out with a new version I have to wait for the extensions to be fixed... Deinstall the 'old' extensions... Install all the 'new' extensions... Reconfigure all the 'new' extensions... and in my most humble of opinions, unless I'm crossing a major version I shouldn't have to do that.

Still though, it's good to see it constantly improving and a lot of the fixes that have been made on 1.5 were previous gripes that I had with Firefox (just not my main gripe). However, I'm sure it won't be long before things stabilize a little more and I find my way into the wonderful world of extensions.

"My biggest complaint with Firefox is that every time they come out with a new version I have to wait for the extensions to be fixed... Deinstall the 'old' extensions... Install all the 'new' extensions... Reconfigure all the 'new' extensions... and in my most humble of opinions, unless I'm crossing a major version I shouldn't have to do that."

YMMV, but I didn't have to do that. I only have Adblock installed, but Firefox seemed to take care of the upgrade - at least, it said it was checking for updated versions of my extensions when I first ran 1.5, and Adblock is still enabled and working, so it seems to have done the trick.

Have you tried Camino at all? It uses Mozilla/Firefox's rendering code, but is a proper native Cocoa app.

Just tried Camino its has a much more native feel. Still stands slightly but better than firefox. Firefox is cross platform and slowly the team are doing a great job of making each version more native to its OS so i cant fault them there. Im not against firefox. I use on windows systems and as a second browser for OS X. Its good.. I guess i just prefer Sarafi on OS X. Since Camino is built for OS X more effort has gone into the UI for it. I guess its the themes of it that annoy me but i can always change it

Can I use Firefox extensions on Camino?

Doesnt appear you can use extensions like that on camino? I wonder if its the roadmap or if not make that suggestion to them.

Firefox extensions won't be supported under Camino. If I remember right, they rely on XUL, which Camino doesn't support. (I emailed the dev about it some time ago). Camino is just the Gecko rendering engine with a native interface.

When I learned Adblock wouldn't work under Camino, that was almost a deal breaker for me. However, if you do a search on google for 'userContent.css adblock', you'll find there is more than one way to do it.

Also, if you feel more comfortable with Safari, check out Pith Helmet. Very nice shareware adblocker.

Hope that helps.

Is there a native browser for Windows based on FF the way we have Camino for MacOS X?

I would love to see an effort of developing a browser based on Gecko that uses MFC or preferable .NET. It will lead to a faster browser but moreover, other will get a framework to intergrate Gecko into their applications. This will only lead to wider adoptation for FF and other Moz products.

For now, if I want a browser in my application, the only way for me to have it is by embedding IE... not something I like very much. I'm sure any effort to build a native browser will be widely supported.

Umm... what exactly about the OS X Firefox theme doesn't fit in with the rest of OS X?

It fits in perfectly.

does not fit in, it adds yet another theme for it. Also there is not OS X like buttons or proffessional look to it. They need to redo the buttons and maybe adapt to a more native theme (pick one). Sorry but even some Firefox users admit Safari has a more natural look.

But at least they now introduce a more OS X preference panal to it! (hurrah no windows look a like!). Its getting their though.

Also iApps intregation will be good if they wish to compete with apple. But then again the whole movement of Firefox is to take back the web. So using Safari is not going against that philosophy.

Yet another theme? The browser windows looks almost exactly like any other native cocoa application. Yes, it has it's own style icons... but then so does ANY application.

Admittedly the UI widgets rendered on web pages don't fit in with the native look and feel, but as for the rest of the browser I don't see any particular problems. Care to point out any?

In regards to Safari having a more natural look... yeah, if you happen to like that hideous monstrosity that is "Brushed Metal".

As for Camino. Personally I prefer the look of Firefox.

I'm not a OSX user, but is it not true that you can drag native windows around by grabing _any_ area of the window. Not just the borders?

Yes its true you dont need to grab the boarders to move an app. Firefox still has boarders where apple on their apps seem to remove all boarders. So anything that is not in the main document you can use to drag the window around.

just to note you do get the boarders on apple apps if you push the button on the right of the window then you need to use boards only cos it useally makes the windows way more minimalistic which can be nice.

Maybe this is another thing Firefox needs to change, no boarders until you push that button. But again that maybe personal preference. So you dont need to flame if you disagree. But we all like continunity in OSes right?

The window looks fine cos obviously it is a native cocoa app.

Maybe it is just the icons that are annoying them. Im not a big fan of the more white look in it but again all of it can be re-themed.

Im not a big fan of the Brushed Metal look especially in Finder. But on safari it does look nice. It would be better if apple maybe choosed the more new iTunes 5 look for safari or even mail look. Brush metal has had it day.

As i said Firefox has come alone way since its first incarnation. We just need a theme that has more mac like buttons (ie smaller?) and not quite as white. The problem is easily address with themes so its not an issue.

But as i said one thing firefox have done right is the preference. The old one was terrible this one is so much more mac like. Needs improvements but 100% better.

Maybe again more mac like UI renderings with buttons on websites and they are there basically. Nothing wrong with firefox is one my fav browsers. As i said even Safari has issues on some renderings that firefox nicely addresses. Also the firefox rendering engine is far superior.

I agree. It is my main browser in OS X. I don't care for Safari too much but it's definitely better than IE.

"One thing us mac users do need is a more native theme for firefox! It just does not look right on the desktop."

No *we* don't. Speak for yourself. I happen to like the look of Firefox in OSX just fine, mainly because it looks just like Firefox in Ubuntu, Fedora Core, and Windows XP. I don't want it to look like a native OSX app. The main reason I use it (other than AdBlock) is because I can run the same application on all the different OS's I use.

That's why I use Thunderbird too.

well your entitle to your own viewpoint as am i. Their are pro's and cons on both side of the argument which is a waste of time going over here.

Overall thumbs up to the firefox team for a superb broswer cant wait for the final version.

Remember boys and girls: The Internet is not nessaray the "e" button on the desktop.

hmmm...web != internet
The web uses the http protocal over port 80 or 443. This is only two of ~65000 ports available.

The internet was around long before the web. It's quite annoying that this confusion has been created.

yes we know there is a difference but at end of the day who cares?

The more browsers ignore ACID2 test the more people will finally realize that its't not really important how your browser renders incorrectly written CSS because they are incorrect to begin with.

From http://www.webstandards.org/act/acid2/:

Note: some 827 people (rough estimate, contents may have settled during shipping) have written to point out that the CSS used in the test is invalid. This is deliberate, as a means of exposing the ability of user agents to handle invalid CSS properly.

...and from http://www.webstandards.org/act/bug/:

Browser makers cannot be held responsible for the misbehavior or poor display of sites that use broken markup, invalid styles, or screwy scripts.

Does this make any sense to you?

Thanks for the tip! Scrapbook seems like the tool to use instead of bookmarks in many cases.

https://addons.mozilla.org/extensions/moreinfo.php?application=firef...

Personally, I can't do without Platypus;

https://addons.mozilla.org/extensions/moreinfo.php?application=firef...

Platypus allows you to do quick edits of a page and to save the page layout as a script. The next time you visit the page -- or the whole site -- you only see what you want. Very very practical.

"It's faster "
Glad to hear that - some friends lost in the windows world has been going back to IE because of speed :-(

Here you go:

http://www.openclipart.org/cgi-bin/navigate

They share the same preferences and settings folder.

I just did the same thing. If Firefox is running, it will always create another window of the same version, so make sure that all instances of Firefox are closed, then it should work fine.

What I did is to change the shortcut for both versions to add the "-P" command line switch to the target. This forces the Profile Manager window to come up before launching the browser. Then I created a new profile for the beta. Each time Firefox starts, I choose the new profile if I'm running the beta, and choose the old profile for 1.0.6.

This keeps the bookmarks, extensions, etc., separate. But you can still only run one version at a time.

Firefox is great in that it's slimmed down and just a browser by default. But there are numerous extensions that can optionally add extra functionality.

Given that Opera is smaller, faster, and has less of a memory footprint than does Firefox, I'd hardly call FF 'slimmed down.' And as somebody else already pointed out, the extension system is a pain in the ass and isn't really working. I gotta install at least half a dozen extensions just to get even near the same functionality as Opera, and then have half of those break almost every time they release a minor point upgrade. In fact, it's getting to the point where I don't even bother with minor point upgrades anymore.

Simple solution! Use Opera! It seems to suit your needs! However, the same doesn't apply for me and ~10% of the worlds internet users.

"Firefox is great in that it's slimmed down and just a browser by default. But there are numerous extensions that can optionally add extra functionality."

"Slimmed down" ??? You gotta be kidding! Opera is also just a browser by default. Install it and launch it, and you will only see the browser. The other applications are hidden (email, chat, rss, usenet, address book, download manager, bittorrent manager, bookmarks). I don't like to have to look for extensions on the Internet, download them, install them, see that them are not supported for my version of Firefox, and the extra stress. I prefer to have them all discretely installed in my Internet suite. I use them if and when I want.

"I prefer to have them all discretely installed in my Internet suite."

Well I don't. So use your Opera, and I'll use my Firefox. Why are you making such a big deal?

Like you, I preferred the old Mozilla Suite. Firefox is nice and simple but I actually liked having 20 million options and being able to configure it exactly how I want. However, not even the Mozilla Suite can match the configurability of Opera. I tried Opera out about a year ago and got totally hooked. About 6 or 8 months ago I purchased my license and I haven't looked back. I was sad to see the Mozilla Suite discontinued but it didn't really affect me because I was already using Opera.

That said, I think it's great that the new Firefox has so many improvements. It's a great browser and has done wonders for advancing web standards by forcing companies to realize that there are more browsers out there than IE.

So, while I continue to happily use Opera, I actually recommend Firefox to my less computer savvy friends. It's easy to use, secure, and I find that people are more likely to try a browser that they've actually heard of (so keep up the advertising!). However, for those that do not look at computer use as a necessary evil, I always recommend that they try out Opera.

I think that web browsers are kind of like Linux distros. You pick the one that best matches your needs/wants. I think Firefox has come a long way in letting people know that they don't have to use IE. Choice is better for everybody. Keep up the good work!

How come I've never heard of these security-protocols.com people? And I can't make head nor tail of that vulnerability. At first glance it would seem to be exploitable only to fill a buffer with hyphens, and the 'example' doesn't seem to work either - going to:

https://---------------------------------------------

just does a Google search on a lot of hyphens, for me...

You don't enter that string in your browser location bar. In the advisory, it is code so it goes into a file if you want to test locally. Read the rest of the advisory, you can go to

http://www.security-protocols.com/firefox-death.html

and successfully hang your firefox browser, including the latest beta. WARNING to firefox users, if you just want to see how that page is coded, use wget or curl, or you will not be reading osnews without restarting firefox.

Nice going to the team that found this. Hopefully mozilla will have a fix soon.

Temporary fix:

1) Put about:config in your address bar and hit enter.
2) type network.en in Filter: field
3) Double click on network.enableIDN down below that to set it to FALSE. Leave it alone if it's already set to false.

Neither Epiphany nor Galeon are available for non OS like Windows and OSX.

Deep Park Alpha 2 is actually code name for alpha version of Firefox 1.1 (later renamed Firefox 1.5)

So knowing more and explaining to others (though the way it was done was not perfect) is now considered bad?

To me it looks much like the option/preferences UI used MacOS X.

Also, just in case I wasn't clear, IE6 is faster in use, ie it shows the pages quicker than FireFox, even using dial-up.

Also, I'm not a troll, I mean what I say, I find the IE6 has features that I need, off line browsing, speed of browsing, so I use it.

Yes, I hate MS as much as the next sane person, heck I've tried Linux, and use Amiga OS4, (with not brilliant Web-browsers), but after trying the alternatives I find it better.

Sorry, if that means you think I'm troll because of it.

(Not tried Opera in a while, may give that another go sometime.)