Talk:Mozilla Application Suite

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Cleaned up the article of Firefox parts and some other tidbits[edit]

The article contained bits that were actually about Firefox, and some things were incorrect. Here I'll explain what I changed and why.

Mozilla supports tabbed browsing, which allows users to open multiple web pages in the same browser window. This feature originated in the Mozilla Suite, which in turn had borrowed the feature from the popular MultiZilla extension for Mozilla.

The second sentence doesn't make sense. It would make sense if this was written for Firefox.

When a user enters words into Mozilla's address bar without a search keyword (or with the "goto" keyword), Mozilla automatically redirects the user to the first result yielded by a Google search for the words.

This is a Firefox gimmick. Mozilla will throw an error.

Occasionally, an extension becomes part the official product (for example MultiZilla, an extension which added tabbed browsing to Mozilla, eventually became part of standard Mozilla).

MultiZilla adds much more than tabbed browsing. Also, there are a couple of missing words.

Beyond adding a new theme, users can customize its interface by moving and manipulating its various buttons, fields, and menus, and likewise by adding and deleting entire toolbars.

Toolbar customisation is a Firefox thing, and some other options mentioned can't be done in Mozilla either.

This mechanism enables features such as single-window mode and error-pages, or speeding up page rendering by various tweaks.

Single-window mode isn't available in Mozilla, and error-pages are a new feature of the Gecko 1.8-based browsers. Mozilla's latest version is based on Gecko 1.7.

Experimental features like HTTP pipelining often lurk hidden in the about:config menu.

In Firefox, not Mozilla.

Overall, about:config is much less relevant in Mozilla.

Like the Mozilla Suite, Firefox comes with 2 web development tools

Definite proof that part of the article is centered around Firefox. Obviously many people confuse the Mozilla in front of the Firefox with the suite.

The DOM Inspector is not available in any other browser, and the JavaScript Console is more advanced than the consoles available in other browsers.

This should say "non-Mozilla browsers".

While not installed by default, the tools are available via a "custom" install.

Again a Firefox thing. Mozilla installs them by default.

This is a screenshot of Firefox!

Please tell me if I got something wrong. -- BenoitRen 23:46, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Based on the source code of Netscape Communicator?[edit]

The article says the suite is based on the source code of Netscape Communicator. I may be wrong, but didn't the Mozilla developers throw away the Communicator source code completely because it was unmaintainable and start from scratch? What I mean is if nothing was reused really, the suite cannot be said to be based upon the old source code, right? Maybe someone with a bit of background information can clear things up.

  • You are right, about halfway through, the Mozilla developers threw it out in favor of writing their own source code. So, you are both right and wrong.Loompyloompy313 03:10, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

MultiZilla became part of standard Mozilla?[edit]

This is ridiculous. Who ever wrote that did never install and use MultiZilla, I guess. MultiZilla is (and probably always will be) much more than what Mozilla or now SeaMonkey has integrated -- even if you only look at tabbed browsing. We don't need to discuss people's opinion about MultiZilla here, but should try to get the facts right.


I am for the merge, however, which should remain the title page. There are arguments for both.

In favor of SeaMonkey remaining the title: SeaMonkey is the current incarnation of Mozilla Application Suite. Therefore, it should remain the title, with a section on Mozilla Application Suite.
In favor of Mozilla Application Suite remaining title: This was the original name of the product. Therefore, that is its name, which makes it the article title. Make a section on SeaMonkey.--Ljlego 21:34, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

That is the present descendant of the original Mozilla Suite, but SeaMonkey has its own version numbering starting over with 1.0 (while the Mozilla Suite is over 1.7), so there's still a case for treating it as separate but related. *Dan T.* 21:33, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm pretty against. Mozilla Application Suite was a product of Mozilla Foundation, while Seamonkey is a project of its own (with support from Mozilla Foundation). There are some uncounciliable afirmations about Mozilla Suite and Seamonkey (the main is "it's from Mozilla", we can't use it, it's denied to say Seamonkey is a Mozilla product). Asrail 01:01, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
Totally agree. --minghong 07:24, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
Oppose merge: The Mozilla Foundation plans to continue releasing security updates to the Mozilla suite although it has discontinued work on Mozilla 1.8. SeaMonkey is merely an unofficial continuation of the Mozilla suite 1.8 effort. They are, however, no two different lineages and thus should remain separate articles.--NeantHumain 16:30, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Oppose. Not until the programs merge. //Ae:æ 13:02, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't have a strong opinion for or against a merge. However, the SM page now is sparse and assumes knowledge about MAS - the basics are skipped over. Not good. So either a lot of MAS article material needs to be copied over there (which some people might oppose?) or the articles need to be merged. 13:12, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Switch to Firefox ?[edit]

This article lacks the important information, that although Mozilla Foundation wants users to switch to Firefox, Firefox is a relativly simple application for inexperienced users, who don't need advanced features like cookie, form, password managers, not a replacement in fact.

Death of Mozilla? Nooooooo[edit]

Well, the Mozilla Suite web page says to switch to firefox, so I just downloaded Firefox 2.0 and it is still a child's toy. Some of us like bloat! In particular, it is fantastically useful to me the way Mozilla has integrated web development tools with browsing.

Is there ever going to be a "real" Firefox to replace Mozilla? Or am I going to be using dead code for the next five years?

It would be very useful if someone updated this article to explain what is going on and where we should write :-) --Jaibe 08:27, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

ah, slightly more hacking and I figured out what was going on. I've slightly modified the bottom of the page so people like me that flip to the end of the article for recent news can find out about SeaMonkey--Jaibe 08:38, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Actually, SeaMonkey is now described in three different sections on the page. I've been thinking about asking Mozilla to mention SeaMonkey on the Mozilla Suite download page; thanks for some evidence that information about SeaMonkey is still hard to find. -- Schapel 12:13, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Firefox is a web browser, not an internet suite. One can use Firefox, Thunderbird, and Sunburd, or they can use SeaMonkey. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 17:15, 29 December 2006 (UTC).

"Many Firefox extentions also work with Mozilla"?[edit]

I know you can hack/port firefox extentions into seamonkey with xSidebar, but this page claims that many firefox extentions also work with mozilla? Is this true? If so, what extentions do and don't work? (talk) 17:41, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Mozilla Application Suite. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:33, 13 February 2016 (UTC)