Mozilla Will Be Netscape 6.0

menthos writes "In this story on Cnet, the talk is about the latest speech from an AOL executive. Some of the most interesting things include that they are preparing to launch the Netscape-branded version of Mozilla "this spring", and it will be labeled Netscape Communicator 6.0. "

Comments

Mozilla is good...

[jd]

...VERY good... but is it ready? The last version out the door was very flaky, hideously slow, and not particularly complete, IMHO.

This -summer-, maybe. But SPRING? AOL must be really into IE to do something =that= fatal to Mozilla.

It needs -much- more debugging, and (at the very least) testing time with all the new stuff Netscape handed out for it. Rushing isn't going to go anywhere, but down.

At the VERY VERY LEAST, Mozilla needs to be as fast as Netscape 3, feature-complete as per the current HTML/DHTML specs, be fully capable of SSL 3.0 at 128 bits (with security auditing, to ensure that unencrypted data isn't retained in vulnerable sections of the disk or memory), have ALL the features of Communicator 4.x, AND support IPv6.

If it's not at that point, it's not ready for shipping.

Re:Mozilla is good...

[ywwg]

Uh, have you used a nightly build lately? Mozilla is _fast_, at least as fast as Netscape 4.7 in linux. The UI is clean, and no longer are there lots of flashing rectangles as it draws the page.

Of course there are issues, but that is what bugzilla.mozilla.org is for. I've reported several bugs that have gotten fixed. People should stop complaining about mozilla and start doing what they can to help it. Not a prorgammer?
Report bugs!

I don't know what "last version out the door" you were referring to. The current version of Mozilla is complete as far as browsing goes. Complete mail, nearly complete news (there are issues with password-authenticated news), and a functional IRC client (more of a demo). It doesn't do java, AFAIK, and I don't know how plugins work, but otherwise it isn't missing a thing. Go check out <ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla/nightly> and download something with today's date.

Good

[finkployd]

With an inflated version number, how can we lose?

Why not just call it Netscape 2000 and get it over with.

Hell let's bring the linux kernel up into the current decade, considering that DOS 3 has been dead for years, it's embarassing that I have to use an OS that is still in the 2 series. I mean, get with the times, Linus.

Finkployd

Oh, and seriously, I'm eagerly awaiting this release, go Mozilla! :)

No you don't

[rm -rf /etc/*]

You don't want to beat IE. The only thing bad about IE is it's potential to be forced onto consumers. Having one dominant product in an area is bad. So what if Netscape overtakes IE? With AOL/Time Warner/Sun/Netscape/iPlanet/whoever, we have just as dangerous of a situation, a huge company that can force a product on the market. Whether it's netscape or IE, it's still going to hurt the general public.

Even with two, you can see this "browser war" as the media likes to call it is not beneffiting us. It's creating a bunch of web sites that either customize content to one browser, or maybe both netscape and IE. Great, so when I go to Nissan's website with iCab, all I see is a black background because it doesn't know what browser I have and uses JavaScript to check for IE or Netscape.

The only way *we* can win is with standards. Unfortunately, no one cares about this stuff. Websites want flash, and they don't seem to mind alienating customers by requiring the latest browser with javascript, flash, etc. Now a lot of people think Netscape/Mozilla can save us because it's supposedly standards compliant. Well, read the article here. Customized browser versions used to customize conent for the browser. Does that sound like an idea from a company who is really commited to open standards?

No, the web should be accesible to anyone. I'm sorry to say at this point though, it looks like we're all going to loose no matter who wins the browser war.

Re:No you don't

[rm -rf /etc/*]

No, www.nissan-usa.com. But that's irrelevant. iCab is just an example, the point isn't browser capability. What I'm worried about is why websites need to alienate users. I email every site I go that requires certain capabilities and ask them why I'm not good enough to access their site because I don't have netscape or ie. To me, that company is just saying "Well, we don't want your business." Hell, what about the blind? What does a web browsers text to speech engine do when it hits a website all done in flash?

Could you imagine watching a commercial on TV, but only seeing a text message that says "We're sorry, this commercial can only be viewed on a television that is larger than 32 inches." That's basically what all to many websites are doing on the web.

Mozilla still has many bugs, BUT...

[David A. Madore]

The Bugzilla bug-tracking system is sooo cool it makes you want to file bug reports just so you can play with it.

Why, you can even vote for your favorite bugs to determine which ones should be fixed prioritarily. I voted for bugs 4722 and 27505. I encourage Slashdot readers to give the Lizard a try and to file bug reports (or at least to votes for the ones you find more troublesome rather than complain about them here).

Wheres Netscape 5.0?

[thales]

A pre-release of 5.0 was the code Netscape opensourced to Mozilla. After the stuff Netscape didn't own was ripped out, what was left was a basket case. After 6 months Mozilla tossed it and started over. Netscape 5.0 existed but wasn't released. So the new browser IS 6.0.

Mozilla verion 7.62

[Crixus]

I just grabbed the latest Mozilla source, compiled it, and decided to call it version 7.62.

My version is higher than your version! (my dad can beat your dad, etc...)

I have the highest version number, so I win, right?

:-)