Posted by
CmdrTaco
on from the good-luck-actually-downloading-it dept.
kvandivo writes: "It's now official. Netscape
is now shipping 6 (at least for windows, linux, and mac..)"
It'll probably be just a bit before anyone will actually be able
to download it from any of the official servers.
Because they left in the moronic bug where you have to run it as root the first time. -- Obfuscated e-mail addresses won't stop sadistic 12-year-old ACs.
Netscape 6 is the perfect example of why "blanket rewrites" never work out the way you intend them to.
First of all, let me say that I'm so far moderately impressed with NS 6. I've seen the prior PR releases and Mozilla builds, and this actually looks and feels like a "release" quality product. I always felt the Mozilla and PR releases just plainly sucked for polish and buginess. For NS 6, Netscape has done a tremendous polish job , and I'm very surprised they released it this early with this level of quality.
Now, having said that, their polish job wasn't nearly enough for this to be a *great* release. Rewriting a product is *always* chasing a moving target... and requires bug fix after requirements change after headache after political battle... ad nauseum.
The worst thing about rewrites is that usually developers are screaming for *another* rewrite by the time the rewrite is finished, because it has already begun to rot. I really, really, hope this isn't the case with NS 6.
The aftermath of this release is going to be:
- The impatient ones (i.e. 70% of web users) are going scream murder at Netscape's incompetence at releasing so many bugs. (ignoring that Linux 2.4 is over a year late, Netscape 6 is now around 1.5 years late, etc.)
- The slightly patient ones (leftovers, i.e. me) will be somewhat disappointed, but hopeful based on initial experience.
They really have to placate that last crowd. And if the code isn't clean, there's no time for another rewrite. If the majority of quirks aren't fixed in short order (i.e. Netscape 6.1 within 6 months), Netscape will probably remain a niche browser for UNIX platforms, while Windows and Mac users remain with IE. IE is just too good of a product now to choose not to use it for purely "but it's Microsoft" reasons.
For now I'm going to stick with NS 6 to get used to it more. At first I almost gave up on NS 6 really quickly for odd quirks, but they somehow cleared up after I rebooted my machine. (Go figure). Anyway.
The nightly builds from mozilla.org are already leaps and bounds ahead of the buggy product that Netscape is pushing onto the world. (2 frozen screens and reboots in the first 10 minutes of using 6.0, everything fine on the Nov 12th Nightly.)
Oh yeah, and a free clue to the Netscape rebadgers: I'm already online, so WHY THE F**K WOULD I WANT AN AOL ICON ON MY DESKTOP?
The nightly builds from mozilla.org are already leaps and bounds ahead of the buggy product that Netscape is pushing onto the world. (
Great. All Mozilla needs to do now is tell the rest of the world (apart from the techies and those in the IT Industry i.e. Joe Average who uses a browser), that they have a browser, and who they are. Most consumers will recognise Internet Explorer, and some might even recognise Nutscrape, but few will recognise Mozilla. Having a great browser means absolutely nothing if A) you can't ship release code (they've had two years), and B) noone knows who/what mozilla is.
>Oh yeah, and a free clue to the Netscape rebadgers:
>I'm already online, so WHY THE F**K WOULD I WANT AN
>AOL ICON ON MY DESKTOP?
Lessee...
- AOL owns Netscape
- AOL has a history of advertising itself by putting itself everywhere you look - your tv, your mailbox, your email, your toilet, etc...
Put these 2 together, and it's a wonder that installing Netscape doesn't automagically wipe out any internet connection settings you might already have and replace them with AOL -- all "To make your life easier" as AOL reps tell it. (A la AOL 6.0)
Don't get me wrong - I disagree with this "In your face" style of advertising something that 90% of people aren't going to want - but I see it as a perfectly plausible thing for AOL to do, considering their record.
Oh yeah you get that very difficult confirm dialog that says something like "You can't store this in the recycle bin are you sure you want to permanently delete it? " and then you have to move the mouse all the way over to the buttons and click on the right one. I guess if you didn't have any arms or legs that might be a difficult action to perform so you could technically say that the icons were 'undeletable'.
Well or you might be using that oh-so-impossible to use add-on TweakUI which makes it nearly impossible to customize Windows.
Damn MS, their just so ignorant of what the customer really wants.
-- "Do not be swept up in the momentum of mediocrity." - anon
I just installed Netscape 6, played with it for about 20 minutes, got sick, uninstalled it and in a few minutes I'm going to go shower after I post this with my handy dandy Internet Explorer 5.5.
My major concern was that it took 20 megs once loaded, and took a while to load on my win2kpro k6-2/500 & 256mb ram machine. The next thing is the size kept increasing on me. When I finally quit Netscape6 it was taking 37 megs up.
The rendering seems slower than IE. It may not be, but the way it renders pages seemed slow.
I'll be waiting for 6.1 before I try again, but at how it stands now... if you didn't know that Netscape was owned by AOL, you can certainly tell it is by looking at this.
I personally think that trying to apply the Open Source development model for Netscape 6 resulted in a bloated, overdone program that is inferior to Internet Explorer.
The nice thing about the Linux kernel (and Apache) is that at least they haven't suffered from an excessive case of "featureitis."
For Windows 95/98/ME/2000 users, they're not going to bother with Netscape 6 given its bigger-than IE bloat and very slow startup speed.
FTR, IE 5.0 for the Mac doesn't use Microsoft's Java libraries. Uses Apple's just-as-out-of-date libraries.;)
----
--
----
Am I the only one who thinks Microsoft is a misnomer? Perhaps Macrosoft would be a better fit?
Re:Internut Exploder vs. Nutscrape Nab-a-gator!
by
RayChuang
·
· Score: 2
I hope you better run fast from the anti-IE crowd here.:)
Personally, the biggest problem with Netscape 6 is that the interface leaves a bit to be desired in terms of ease of use; one nice thing about Internet Explorer is that Microsoft has bothered to use its excellent Usability Lab to give the interface a very good "polish" for ease of operation.
The
Mozilla RPMs provided by Chris Blizzard (http://people.redhat.com/blizzard/so ftw are/)
work fine together with the Galeon RPMs downloadable from Sourceforge. It's three RPMs you
have to install (mozilla, mozilla-devel, and galeon)
Indeed. I already have Chris' mozilla and mozilla-devel RPMs installed.
I though it would be trivial to then add galeon, but that requires gnome-libs-1.2
(even the -rh6 RPM). A quick trip to rpmfind.net, and I find a newer gnome-libs in Rawhide,
but that in turn depends on glibc-2.2. Short of upgrading to RH7, it's just not worth the hassle.
This is with both galeon 0.7 and 0.8
-- "The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike." -- Delos B. McKown
I don't believe ANY of those flamers here has ACTUALLY tried Netscape 6 FINAL!
I am testing it for 5 hours and it didn't crash.
I browsed over 100 sites, NONE appeared BAD
I don't have memory leak problems at all
So what the heck is the problem of you people??!?
Hahah, the author of that article must have hit the pipe a few too many times before writing that article. Quoth he:
Netscape does not own Mozilla, and if for some reason AOL cut the financial umbilical cord, Mozilla would continue to operate without the slightest of hiccups.
Ehehahahahehehahah
If Netscape cut funding for the Mozilla project, Mozilla would lose:
Dozens of its most active developers
the web site
the cvs server
the bug tracking system
the automatic build farm
a large collection of testcases and specs that live on hosts inside the Netscape firewall
many other important resources
If Netscape killed Mozilla funding, that would be a very serious blow which Mozilla might not survive.
Re:40mb download? Get lost
by
JurriAlt137n
·
· Score: 3
How in gods name can a browser be 40megs?? Thats the size of a small OS!
How old are you exactly? That's the size of a big OS...
--
People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
Linux distro+GTK+Mozilla > Linux distro+KDE (includes Konqueror)
Windows (includes IE) > Linux distro+KDE
Windows+IE+Mozilla > Linux distro+KDE
MacOS (includes IE) > Linux distro+KDE
MacOS+Mozilla > Linux distro+KDE
Need I go on?
though decisions for netscape
by
Cmdr.+Marille
·
· Score: 2
While many might blame netscape for releasing a browser that for many(including me) doesn't feel the way a finished and competitable product should feel.
But Then again it was about time, Netscape was getting into serious timing troubles with netscape 6. MS is about to realease a beta of it's "Version 6" Browser and Netscape had to act.
What is a bit sad tough is that Netscape maybe released it just a little bit too early.
Why? Because M19(the next Mozilla Milestone) is labeled "stability and speed improvements" in mozilla.org's seamonkey milestone plan(yes i know there is a second plan which describes the mozilla and ns trunks more exactly)
Still, maybe waiting another month may have lead to a much more improved product.
On the other side in one month netscape's market share may very well be nonexistend(at least on windows, which sadly is the criterium)
Maybe this was the right move by netscape. Maybe a inperfect final release was better then another month of delay.
Whatever happens to netscape, I'm going to keep downloading mozilla nightlies while still watching other browsers such as konqueror
--
"Mommy, mommy! The garbage man is here!" "Well, tell him we don't want any!"
-- Groucho Marx
Anybody know when they'll release one for Solaris? Or are they leaving that to Mozilla?
Win32 is speedy, but..
by
PacketMaster
·
· Score: 5
I got the full version early this morning from Netscape w/o any download lag at all. But I'm sure that's different now.
Things Different:
1) Load time is VERY fast.
2) Page rendering is on par with IE5.5
3) Most sites display correctly
Things the Same:
1) BIG FREAKING MEMORY LEAK!!I'm running Net6 on Windows 2000. Ever page I load increases Netscape's memory footprint by approximately 1.5 Mb. I let Yahoo's random page URL keep loading files and I ramped the memory usage up to about 85 Mb before I quit. Closing Netscape and reloading drop the footprint back to 4 Mb, which on first inspection is nice. However it quickly ramps up fast. Even entering data in this form box is increasing the ram count about 4K every 20 characters or so. Netscape 6 definitely should not have been released yet. This is sad and pathetic for the once innovative and powerful Netscape.
--
Some people take their.sig way too seriously
Re:Win32 is speedy, but..
by
[Xorian]
·
· Score: 2
BIG FREAKING MEMORY LEAK!!
I really don't understand why people put up with this kind of thing when there are perfectly good C/C++ garbage collectors out there. If you know you've got a memory leak, and you just can't fix it, it's downright criminal to ship a product without garbage collection.
Re:Win32 is speedy, but..
by
Forkenhoppen
·
· Score: 2
I had a similar problem with a build of Mozilla a few weeks ago. However, my problem appeared to a tad worse; I was running it under Windows 98, and for some reason it wasn't releasing the leaked memory even after closing down Mozilla.
I sure hope there isn't a similar problem with Netscape 6, or else things could get ugly.
According to CNET, IE5.5 is twice as fast as Gecko. We are not talking about a 20% difference...
What is stunning also is that CNET claims Java under Netscape 6.0 is also much slower... which is really missing the point. Netscape 6.0 supports a plugable JVM (OJI)! Which means you have JDK1.3 support right now and better later whereas IE only supports the MS JVM which, as we know, is now frozen in time.
When it comes to Java, Netscape is technologically way ahead. It is miles and miles ahead.
(Same for Mozilla, of course.)
Actually most browsers know have a plugable Java JVM mechanism... except for IE which bundles its own JVMs. That's quite a weakness of IE.
I agree. I think that the Gartner Group just did a study that showed that almost 90% of IE users were willing to use another browser if it only had a plugable JVM.
--
There is no longer anything that can be done with computers that is nontrivial and clearly legal. -- Paul Phillips
about:mozilla no longer works. It brings up the Book of Mozilla, but the N doesn't change into a fire-breathing Mozilla anymore! IMHO, this is the most disappointing aspect of NS6.
1) I just downloaded the Linux version. The installer is pretty slick and I got high transfer rates, but unfortunately I had to do it 6 times before it would actually complete the install without hanging.
2) Upon installing it insists that you register for their Netcenter website and the fonts where it asks you if you'd like spam along with your registration are so small that they're barely legible. Suggestion: Just click the link says "I'm under 13 years old" to get around the mandatory registration.
3) So far this version shows no improvement over the nightly snapshots I've been downloading from Mozilla's site. Suggestion: Download a recent nightly build from mozilla.org instead if you really insist on upgrading.
I've been an IE user for a while now mainly because Netscape has been losing the feature war. While I'm certainly not a Microsoft fan, I like Netscape and I like standards conformance (which Netscape has typically been better at), I use a browser a lot and I want to use what makes me feel most comfortable and lets me work the best.
With all that in mind, I was excited to see that N6 was out because I've liked the Mozilla and preview release builds, except that they were buggy and seemingly incomplete.
I like a lot of things in Netscape 6. The Gecko engine is great. It renders pages pretty fast, which is good. The "Modern" skin is pretty cool. Is it a good idea... well, that's another issue, but it's cool. There are a lot of features that I like in IE that weren't in Netscape 4.6.whenever-I-stopped-really-using-it like some of the sidebar stuff and the toolbar. (Yes, I know the toolbar has been in 4.7 or so for a long time, but it took them a long time to get it there!)
Here's the bottom line of my impressions with N6: it's all in the little things!!!
There are two things that are ticking me off enough to possibly send me back to IE. First, arranging the bookmarks. This should be easy: I have imported "toolbar favorites" from IE, I want them to be in my N6 toolbar. I'm a pretty smart guy and I have no idea how to do this. Drag-an-drop isn't supported, so I can't move them. Cut and paste are supported (even though "cut" is enabled in the edit menu. There's a menu command "Set as Personal Toolbar Menu"... which apparently does nothing! I know it's stupid, but these are the things that make me choose IE, not the engine. (Well, I shouldn't say that. If the engine was unacceptable it would influence me. But, being a typical web user, most engines I find are "acceptable", so it's not typically a factor.)
Second big annoyance, I now have five icons on my desktop (I'm using Win2000): Netscape (I wanted this one), "Free AOL Unlimited INternet" (fine, AOL owns Netscape... I'll bear it), "Net2Phone" (quit installing this!), "RealPlayer Basic" (I already had it), "Take5" (See previous, I hate this thing).
Goal for Netscape: Don't tick off you customers by installing worthless things. It may convince some people, but I think it angers more.
Another goal: Do less, do it well. I frankly, don't care about skins. If I did, I would use WindowBlinds. But I do care about being able to set up my "toolbar favorites".
I'm going to continue trying N6, because I like Mozilla and believe it can turn out good products, but I really hope the quality improves.
--
"Let your heart soar as high as it will. Refuse to be average." - A. W. Tozer
For arranging the bookmarks, look at the "Manage Bookmarks" item at the top of the bookmarks menu. For adding things to the toolbar, use "Manage Bookmarks" and move or copy the appropriate items into the "Personal Toolbar" folder. For the icons, every windows program tends to add those. Drag 'em to the wastebasket and get rid of them if they bother you. Sorry, but I find every Windows product leaves cruft on my desktop I need to clean off, so Netscape doesn't bother me any more than any other one.
I've been an IE user for a while now mainly because Netscape has been losing the feature war. While I'm certainly not a Microsoft fan, I like Netscape and I like standards conformance (which Netscape has typically been better at)...
Ummm...both IE and Netscape suck at being standards compliant.
The only browser that is fully standards compliant (as far as HTML is concerned) is Opera, which is designed from the ground up around standards compliancy.
Yes, yes, I know the Mozilla people say the same thing, but I'm not sure how standards compliant they are. Maybe I'll test it against one of the W3C tests or something...
Mozilla (and hence Netscape 6) are more standards compliant than Opera according to many test suites. This link was posted above:
http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~dbaron/css/te st/results
After trying out Netscape 6, I have to say this: WHY BOTHER.
I have a long litany of complaints:
1. Downloading the program is DOG slow. Even on a fast broadband connection waiting for the components to download is like trying to pour molasses in winter.
2. Starting the program takes a LONG time. The load speed is like 1/3 that of Internet Explorer 5.5 Service Pack 1.
3. The unintuitive interface drives me nuts! You can tell that Microsoft has put its investment in its Usability Lab very wisely with the "polished" feel of IE 5.5 SP1.
4. The Messenger module for email and newsgroup access is still inferior to Outlook Express 5.5 in terms of easy of setup and usability.
In short, if this is what "open source" development can do, Netscape is rapidly going to be a has-been.
-- Raymond in Mountain View, CA
How about comparisons to Navigator 4.7x?
by
RichiP
·
· Score: 2
I've been reading a lot of comments comparing NS6 to current Mozilla... and of course current Mozilla works heaps better!
Netscape may have jumped the gun, but would someone who uses NS4.7x care to make a comparison of the two browsers (and mail readers)? I remember it was the same people here who had been asking Netscape to pull out and stop supporting NS4.7x. Now that NS6 is out, why don't you compare that with the old browser and tell us whether it's an improvement or not and how is it an improvement, if ever???
In the installer, the little "Activation" window popped up that wanted my name, e-mail address and ZIP code. I couldn't think of any good reason to give these things to them, but I thought I'd read the privacy policy and see what their intentions were.
The link to the privacy policy didn't work. In fact, none of the little links did a bloody thing. Two problems: a) No privacy policy is a bad thing. b) Links don't work? Call me demanding, but I enjoy a good A tag every now and again.
Obviously, they didn't get any personal information.
Now I've got "Please wait..." written in the middle of a 400x400 window that's been hanging out there for the past 5 minutes. Looks like 6.0 is a dud.
No, this is not a warez advert.
I found this while searching the FTP server for a full download because I cannot use the net to download an installer which will in turn download other components.
Anything less than 100% shouldn't be tolerated when it comes to standards support; that's what standards are all about. I don't care if it's 99% compliant; IE5.5/Windows is supposedly 99% compliant too. That's not good enough when 100% is possible. ----------
Does anyone else think it is odd that a commercial browser is 'release' quality when they take a slightly buggy beta release from an open-source project, add a bunch more much, much buggier features and then pop it out the door?
I'll probably have ESR scratching my name on a bullet for saying this, but I think the Mozilla/AOL combination illustrates some of the natural incompatabilities between commercial marketing-department-driven software and open-source developer-has-an-itch-to-scratch-driven software.
I keep up to date with the Mozilla code on Linux and I don't see any sort of AOL crap. That tells me that for this product, the poor developers branched their code and started adding all that AOL fluff. As far as most of us are concerned, that effort would have been better used fixing bugs on that branch.
I hope this product stays alive; I'd really like to see it survive. I just hope the marketing doesn't get in the way of stability.
First impressions:
Yeah, all the bugs aren't fixed
True, but I wasn't expecting them to be. That said, it's actually usable as an everyday browser (which is more than can be said for M18). The main problem with it, though, is that it's slow. Sure, it's much faster than M18, and in normal use, it's fine, but try scrolling down in long document or switching to another virtual desktop for a while, and then switching back. NN4 is significantly faster in both cases.
It also still renders Slashdot's spacer images in the titles of articles with a greenish line around them, so they look like little green squares.
The Linux version doesn't seem to have that bug for me...
Why oh why do they need to do these damn small install files that go out on the 'Net and get everything?
They don't! The installer lets you choose which components it will download. Worked for me, and I didn't get the news, mail, IM or the other useless bits. I would be using Galeon, but until they either provide a complete self-contained RPM or make it an easy compile, I can't be bothered.
I still don't want an installer, though. I want a full install program. Net access from home isn't cheap here in Europe. I want to be able to download the whole thing at work, burn it to CD and take it home. Sigh.
-- "The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike." -- Delos B. McKown
There are several bugs in Netscape 6 that webmasters will have to work around for a while, just like they have to work around Netscape 4, IE4, and IE5 bugs now. So while it's great that Netscape 6 does a better job at adhering to standards than IE5 does, that alone doesn't justify releasing a product that isn't free of bugs.
On the other hand, I think Netscape had good judgement as to the timing. I don't think waiting another month after branch point would have eliminated all of the nasty bugs, but I think it would have set back the development of the Mozilla trunk and hence NS 6.1+ several weeks. I'm glad the weeks of rtm triage spam and "I can't believe you're not going to fix this for NS 6.0" flamewars are over for now. (Waiting another month before the branch point probably wouldn't have helped much either, because new bugs would have been introduced during that extra month.)
I'm not saying that waiting another month wouldn't have reduced the number of bugs, just that it wouldn't have helped as much as it might seem it would have. And NS did need to get a new browser out the door with NS 4.76 rotting and with IE gaining more and more marketshare.
> One benefit of the small downloader is that you
> don't have to download EVERYTHING and then only
> install a few parts.
That is exactly what the NS6 installer provides: it downloads only the components you need. The original poster is complaining that it downloads them separately instead of all at once.
> won't be using NS6 until (1) the bugs are mostly
> out (2) its mozilla and (3) I can get rid of the
> sidebar, integrated IM and other add-ons i don't
> need.
So use Mozilla.
Netscape Themes vs. Mozilla Themes
by
GeekLife.com
·
· Score: 2
Why will Netscape not let me import their themes into my nightly build of Mozilla? Is this a technical issue, or a marketing one?
And, if a marketing one, anyone know a workaround to get some of those Netscape themes into my Mozilla? -----
to describe Mozilla to Joe Sixpak
by
dpilot
·
· Score: 4
Simple, Mozilla is the director's cut version of Netscape. That's terminology Joe Sixpak can understand.
-- The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
Re:Internut Exploder vs. Nutscrape Nab-a-gator!
by
Pope
·
· Score: 2
(IE opens the source in Notepad; Netscape just shows it to you) Since when do we all run windows? I'd rather be able to copy/past the source into ANY editor I want, not what MS tells me to (which I don't have to deal with anyways, cuz I don't run windez)
Pope
Freedom is Slavery! Ignorance is Strength! Monopolies offer Choice!
-- It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
Actually, needing "another month" to fix the most glaring bugs is not "true for every project". What is true for every project is the appearance that another month would be enough to fix all the bugs. Brooks (of the Mythical Man Month) called this the 90% problem. In reality, it takes approximately as long in calendar months (not programmer months) to do the last 10% of a project as it does to do the first 90%. When you take into account that the "fantasy factor" (the multiple of the actual versus predicted time to finish a project) is probably 2x or 3x, it can take a really long time to do the last 10%. I'm willing to bet it will take six months or more to get a dot release of Netscape 6 out the door with most of the outstanding defects fixed.
Walt
Re:Is this a different 6?
by
buttfucker2000
·
· Score: 2
It's the same one - both have build id 0811
-- Free Anne Tomlinson!!
Re:Mozilla and Secure Transactions
by
DeadSea
·
· Score: 3
Word of warning. Before you try this, make sure that the directory that Mozilla is installed in is writable by mozilla. After you install the psm you will have to keep the directory writeable due to a bug. If you don't mozilla will crash each time you visit a secure site.
> If Netscape killed Mozilla funding, that would be a very serious blow which Mozilla might not survive.
Sure. It'll die overnight and get forgotten, like linux, freebsd, gnome, KDE or debian.
NO. If netscape stopped funding, it'll loose developers. It would be pretty hard, but I highly doubt it would be fatal. (And I am sure that there are half a dozen highly succesfull companies out there that have a vested interest into fighting against IE and would found the Mozilla project almost instantly...)
Re:Netscape 6 CDs in Time-Warner magazines
by
roca
·
· Score: 2
> Did any of the compliance bugs named in
> Flanagan's petition to postpone the release get
> fixed before the final release?
No. NS6 went to manufacturing almost immediately after that showed up.
Re:Internut Exploder vs. Nutscrape Nab-a-gator!
by
AFCArchvile
·
· Score: 2
Oooohh, god forbid that it won't run in emacs or vim!
Please. Those two editors are the definition of bloatware. Notepad.exe is only 45KB, and it's a standalone program. How big is the entire Emacs package? At least 512KB, and probably more. Vim isn't much better.
-- "Ancillary does not mean you get to rule the world." --U.S. Circuit Judge Harry Edwards, speaking to the FCC's lawyer
The NS6 installer also lets you save the install files to disk. There is an option in the dialogs that says that precise thing. At least it is so on the Win32 version... not sure about the others.
--
How does Konqueror compare to Netscape 6 ?
by
SpinyNorman
·
· Score: 2
The specs for Konqueror sound pretty complete and impressive, so I'd be interested to head from anyone who could give a comparison of Konqueror vs Netscape 6/Mozilla both in terms of features and performance/usability etc. I don't care about the mail/news stuff in Netscape - just how it compares as a browser.
Oh, and why is there an option to download a UK version, but the installation doesn't give you the option to install UK English (yep, I had to go with the US English pack). Is there really any difference, or is it just labelling on ftp server?
OK, found the problem (It's still me)
by
MarcoAtWork
·
· Score: 3
OK, I found the problem (at least in mozilla, I'll retry NS6 ASAP).
I have the proxy set up as 'autoconfigure' which is just a way that simplifies IS's life, since theoretically NS goes to the autoconfig URL, and gets the proxy settings, hosts not to proxy, etc. etc. etc.
Well, it turns out that this feature seems broken in Mozilla, in fact, if I remove the autoconfig, and specify the proxy server manually, everything works just fine. I will try this on NS6 as soon if it finishes downloading.
yep, that was it, now even NS6 works
-- --
the cake is a lie
Re:OK, found the problem (It's still me)
by
Number6.2
·
· Score: 3
This "problem" does not supprise me. The Fine Folks at Mozilla, while developing a damnfine browser, seem to be in denial about proxy servers: the proxy "feature" was fixed and broken about three times in the last six months (at least in Linux. YMMV).
Needless to say, Moz works like a champ now (thanks guys!). I guess most of these Netscape types don't have to live behind a firewall (it doesn't seem like they have to test through a firewall, either...)
Having said that, For God's sake, Moz/Netscape guys, don't stop! We wouldn't complain if we didn't care!
Stirring the pot since nineteen mumblty mumble...
-- "If god did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him"
--Voltaire
" That tells me that for this product, the poor developers branched their code and started adding all that AOL fluff. As far as most of us are concerned, that effort would have been better used fixing bugs on that branch."
If you had really been keeping up to date with the mozilla code as well as the development process (or looked at even one of the preview releases or even read a slashdot thread about them) then you would know that the Netscape developers did not branch and _start_ adding all that AOL fluff. TFrom the beginning there have always been two CVS trees, one for Mozilla and one for Netscape which pulls the Mozilla CVS tree and overlays all it's proprietary code. This parallel track has been going on since the beginning. The branch that did happen, (if you were paying attention you would have seen this in the nightly build directories starting on 9/22) _was_ a bug fixing and stability push branch. It was NOT a start "adding all that AOL fluff" branch. I repeat, that work has been going on in parallel since the beginning. I have been keeping up to date. It looks as if you haven't.
-Asa
> Somebody please tell me that my code no longer
> works because they actually extended the object
> model
No, they did something even better. They actually implemented the W3C standards.
Re:Opera is too standards focused
by
Cato
·
· Score: 2
Opera is also very annoying in its insistence that standards conformance is more important than being able to view a page - it sometimes is unable to view the page at all, showing a blank screen.
Most of the time it works well (it is my main Windows browser, and is very fast indeed), but the standards conformance should be selectable - i.e. a button that says 'do your best and forget standards'.
Unfortunately the Opera people seem to think selectable standards conformance is not important. The IETFers disagree, saying 'be strict in what you send and liberal in what you accept' - since Opera is on the receiving end of HTML, a 'liberal' option would be far more useful, and in the long run would promote web standards by selling more copies of Opera.
40Mb or 2Mb? Guess which one I went for...
by
nagora
·
· Score: 2
Opera beta 2 for Linux is about 2Mb (=10min) download. Netscape 6 is 40 (=3hrs 20min). Neither quite work, but Opera admits it's a beta.
Someone take Netscape outside and put it out of our misery.
TWW
-- "Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
Re:40Mb or 2Mb? Guess which one I went for...
by
roca
·
· Score: 2
You should have run the Netscape installer and opted not to download all the optional components (e.g. the 28MB JVM).
Did they even QA this ? Also security problems
by
MarcoAtWork
·
· Score: 4
What about making the installer application proxy-aware ? I am behind a fairly fascist firewall that doesn't allow anything through (I have to use a proxy for http) and obviously the installer application just hangs.
Fortunately the ftp site also carries the big tar file which I could download easily (and much faster than I thought, very close to 100KB/s average)
That said my first impression is not that good since besides taking like years to start up (on a p3-550 w/ 128 megs) every time I try to access a site, *any* site, I get the following
got a request
JavaScript error:
line 0: uncaught exception: [Exception... "Component returned failure code: 0x80004005 (NS_ERROR_FAILURE) [nsIBrowserInstance.loadUrl]" nsresult: "0x80004005 (NS_ERROR_FAILURE)" location: "JS frame:: chrome://navigator/content/navigator.js:: OpenBookmarkURL:: line 714" data: no]
JavaScript error:
chrome://navigator/content/sessionHistoryUI.js line 150: gURLBar has no properties
If the URL is typed in directly I just get the gURLBar error, and not the previous one, in any case it doesn't work.
Also interesting that opening up the preferences dialog gives this on the console
we don't handle eBorderStyle_close yet... please fix me
*** panel to load is = chrome://communicator/content/pref/pref-navigator. xul
*** queueing up a panel...
this is on a fairly vanilla RH 7 box, which should have been QA'd by the NS folks I think... the second time I ran this abomination it doesn't even give me an error, it just refuses to load any page (I still get the errors if I click on the bookmarks tho).
An interesting tidbit, the default setting is to *save* all the data from previously submitted forms and passwords to sites (check in the preferences), and you can even display that previously entered data. If you leave your netscape unattended, prepare to be burned (IE at least *asks* you the first time if you want to save the passwords/form data)
-- --
the cake is a lie
Too bad the Java doesn't actually WORK!
by
KlomDark
·
· Score: 2
Konqueror is nice, but it's still a bit unfinished. The Java part works, once in a while, most stuff will not work. I've yet to be able to open my.yahoo.com with Konqueror. It will be very very nice, when it's done...
Re:It clashes with my windows theme...
by
irix
·
· Score: 2
If you had been actually watching (or better yet, participating in) the development process then you would know that any non-bandaid fixes that happened in the branch were contributed (subject to reviewers@mozilla.org) back to the Mozilla trunk. There won't be a big merge of branch to trunk since it was happening with almost every checkin for the last 6 weeks. One of the reasons that Mozilla nightly builds are as strong as they are is because of all the work that happened on the Netscape push to 6.0
Thats deeply unrealistic. W3C recent standards are extremely complex (I have the schema spec before me: its in three parts, over around 300 pages, is very informally written, and deeply confusing). 100% compliance is very hard, when you also want 100% compatibility with buggy web pages.
Put bluntly: if you think 100% compliance and compatibility are possible, go do it. The world will beat a path to your door.
I tried the Mozilla 13 Nov nightly under Mandrake 7.1 last night. It might render more accurately than Netscape, but it doesn't look as good. The fonts it was using are just atrocious, and quite hard to read. I prefer the fonts Netscape uses. Actually, I prefer to reboot back into Win2K and use IE. So, is this font problem an issue with Mozilla, or just the X Window System in general? I am quite impressed with the look under Windows of decent fonts, and anti-aliased everywhere.
> It was close. So close. Another month, maybe two at most, to fix the most glaring standards-compliance and stability bugs. That's all it would have taken.
This is true for every project. But there is a day where you have to ship. If they had waited a couple of month, then there would still have been a few remaining bugs. You would have whinned the same way.
See how linux 2.4 is slipping. More than a year late. Sure, it doesn't matter, it is free software. But for netscape6, it matters. The marketshare is almost 100% IE. In a few month, the web would be IE only. Be glad they released something. Be _very_ glad.
No Junkbuster Proxy w/Netscape 6
by
cowboy+junkie
·
· Score: 2
A huge downside for me is that NN6 only supports HTTP 1.1 through the proxy, which means that you can't use the Junkbuster proxy. Sadly, that means I'm stuck with IE unless I want to return to the land of the neverending banner ad.
I have been keeping up to date. It looks as if you haven't.
I followed the instructions here to get the source via CVS and every day or so I run 'gmake -f client.mk' which updates my source files and rebuilds. Is there something I should do to be more up to date than that?
.. I have my cookie prefs in Netscape (4.75/X11 Linux) set to "only allow cookies from the originating server as the page" and the download links (click here... no, now click here... no, now click HERE...) stop if you don't have 'accept all cookies' on.
Maybe it was a glitch. Anyone else see this happen?
-- ZOMG I WOULD LOVE TO KNOW ABOUT YOUR FEELINGS ON MACINTOSH VERSUS WINDOWS, VI VERSUS EMACS, AND HOW YOU'RE NOT A DORK
I ran into the same problem and even after I allowed all cookies, it still gave me the same message. I just clicked on the "Introducing Netscape 6" link in the headline and it took me directly to the download link.
Why oh why do they need to do these damn small install files that go out on the 'Net and get everything? What I really want is a web interface
that will let me pick my components and then send me an installer package custom made for my selections. It can't be that hard.
Sounds like the sort of thing a corporate sysadmin would say. Who's time can be better spent than doing the same thing X times...
I'm posting this from OS Xb in Carbon Mozilla! Granted, it crashes unexpectedly and the fargin' MENUS are almost never in the same place twice (which is really weird), but compared to IE, this thing feels better. I always feel like I'm interfacing with molasses whenever I use IE, on any platform (MacOS 9, OS X or windez).
Oh, and Copeland was dead years ago, and *rightly so.* Apple told Adobe they'd have to re-write all their apps from scratch just for Copeland, and Adobe told them to take a hike.
Pope
Freedom is Slavery! Ignorance is Strength! Monopolies offer Choice!
-- It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
I've tried it (Celeron 366, 128MB RAM, NT4) - here is my take:
- It's relatively fast (but Konqueror is faster and IE is faster too).
- It takes a long time to load.
- It loads the JRE on startup - why? That makes it take 24-25MB memory and I've got it up beyond 40MB just browsing af few sites. You can disable Java, and it will of course not load the JRE, but it still takes about 17MB!
- It's a pain to manage bookmarks - I tried to rearrange the imported bookmarks from IE, but I gave up at last:-(
Greetings Joergen
Netscape Had better pull this one off
by
zrk
·
· Score: 3
I think this is make-or-break time for them. It's about time they released something, but on the other hand, one would hope all standards have been adhered to, not just 'interpreted' or adapted like IEEEEEEE.
B: "Hey rocky, watch me pull a Netscape out of my hat?"
R: "Again? That trick never works"
Get it from ZDNet's download center, and since it's just the basic install file, use the UK's servers for your download. It went pretty fast for me.
First impressions: Yeah, all the bugs aren't fixed, which kind of sucks, cause there's a pretty nasty JS one that I posted about two weeks ago that hasn't been fixed in the nightlies and severely hampers some Intranet work I do. It also still renders Slashdot's spacer images in the titles of articles with a greenish line around them, so they look like little green squares.
If you've been using Mozilla for the past six months, you won't notice anything new, other than the fact that it takes up twice as much memory, loads a bunch of AOL shortcuts (I'm using the Win32 version) on your desktop and will allow you to integrate RealPlayer 8, Flash, etc. with your download.
Second Impressions: Why oh why do they need to do these damn small install files that go out on the 'Net and get everything? What I really want is a web interface that will let me pick my components and then send me an installer package custom made for my selections. It can't be that hard.
In the past, it was possible--though not too easy--to simply locate where the XPIs are which the installer downloads (it's on Netscape's FTP site somewhere) and download them into the same directory as the installation program. It seems to be intelligent enough to check the current directory before trying to download the files. So to get it at work, just download all the XPI files and save them with the main installer.
The incomplete URL is ftp://ftp.netscape.com/pub/netscape6/[language]/6. 0/[platform]/[platform2]/xpi
where [language] is one of english, english_uk, french, german, or japanese (some might be incomplete); [platform] is unix, windows, or mac; and [platform2] is linux22, win32, or macos8.5 (respectively). Hope that helps.
I would be using Galeon, but until they either provide a complete self-contained RPM or make it an easy compile, I can't be bothered.
Huh? I test Galeon regularly but I've never compiled neither Galeon nor Mozilla. The Mozilla RPMs provided by Chris Blizzard (http://people.redhat.com/blizzard/so ftw are/)
work fine together with the Galeon RPMs downloadable from Sourceforge. It's three RPMs you have to install (mozilla, mozilla-devel, and galeon) and I don't see why they should be packaged as only one, and loose the modularity.
If you want to try Galeon 0.8, you might have better luck with more recent Mozilla builds than M18 (Blizzard has those too).
Why oh why do they need to do these damn small install files that go out on the 'Net and get everything? What I really want is a web interface that will let me pick my components and then send me an installer package custom made for my selections. It can't be that hard.
The installer for Win32 had a checkbox: "Save Selected Components Locally" or something like that. It created a Netscape 6 Setup folder on my machine, which has all the bits it downloaded. Is that what you're talking about?
-jon
--
Remember Amalek.
The installer _is_ proxy-aware
by
kinkie
·
· Score: 2
The installer _is_ proxy-aware, and will even support proxy authentication (which I need).
Pity that it will fail...
It was close. So close. Another month, maybe two at most, to fix the most glaring standards-compliance and stability bugs. That's all it would have taken.
But no, they had to hand the project over to the marketers. So in the end, we get a Mozilla nightly plus a zillion ads foisted on us in every aspect of the interface. An interface which breaks every single standard known to man (it doesn't even get Windows quite right.
At least the speed issues are more or less resolved. But all the same, I'm sticking to Mozilla for now. NS6 should be treated as an unfinished project, because frankly it is. ----------
You're using a web browser, aren't you? There exists no browser that exists that supports any set of standards perfectly. Hence, you are supporting software which does not fully support standards.
Only because there is no browser that supports them perfectly yet. But it can be done. Mozilla is so close to doing just that, that it's painful to see Netscape's marketroids release the incomplete version.
You're right. Gecko is the closest thing out there to 100% standards-compliance. But unlike most other things in this world, perfection is possible when you're implementing standards. And when perfection is an attainable goal, nothing less is good enough. ----------
You can always spend an extra month fixing bugs in any reasonably sized project. In the Open Source world you can usually say "You'll get it when it's ready", however Netscape has commerical pressures and had to set a firm date.
Also, there are very few parallels between Mozilla/Netscape6 and Linux 2.4, so don't try to make them. I wish people would stop saying 2.4 is late. It's not. Linus said he'd like a shorter development cycle, aimed at getting 2.4 out at the end of last year. That didn't prove to be achievable, but that doesn't make 2.4 late.
One of things people have to realise is that there was no hard target for functionality in 2.4 (other than to fix the performance problem the MindCraft benchmarks exploited). If 2.4 was shipped in Dec 99 it would have been with less additional functionality than the 2.4 which is likely to be released next month.
... fix the most glaring standards-compliance... bugs...
i really wish people would stop propogating this mistruth... the standards compliance already far exceeds that of IE and Netscape 4.x. if you don't believe go take a look at the dom in IE and then in Mozilla and compare it to the w3c's recommendation for dom2. I can't even do basic things like getElementById in IE... so unless you think 99% of standards compliance is not good enough for you, don't complain! (99% is close enough for me)
Why is perfect standards compliance a bad idea for HTML? Two words: platform widgets. Netscape's decision to use cross platform widgets, as I understand it, was because CSS2 demands that every platform's widgets be able to do stuff that they're not designed to do - stretch, change colors, etc. So to solve this problem, Moz renders its interface, using ugly XP widgets that aren't even the ones they wooed us with way back when.
If anything, the W3C should be chastised for leaning towards standards (such as XHTML too) that are way too complicated and strict and not in the spirit of HTML - a people's programming language which has a loosey-goosey interpreter that allows mistakes that non-programmers tend to make - and that's a good thing!
My prediction is that when somebody takes the "Netscape Gecko(tm)" engine, gets rid of the XP widgets, the XP interface, dolls it up to look all cool-and-draggy like IE5, makes it do all those cool geeky banner/doubleclick elimination features, releases a strong Mac, Unix and Win32 version, all under the GPL (if that's truly possible) this will be a great browser, with both geek and non-geek support. When I tell Windows that my menus are supposed to be gray and in size 16 arial bold, that's how I want it, dammit. I'm not going to load some dang theme. I want the interface to get the hell out of my way so I can use the browser. The best thing about IE5 is that in 5 seconds from the default install, I can customize it exactly how I want it - small and out of my face. No menus to navigate, just clickin' and draggin. On the other hand, if I wanted everything big and out in front with a big ol' "go" button, I could do that too. It's not about whether it's possible to change things around or not in Moz, it's about whether it's more convenient that it is in IE5. And it isn't. 100% standards compliance is a dumb idea. All I want is a browser that loads fast, runs fast, has a brilliant non-interface, is reasonably standards compliant, loaded up with geeky features (tucked away for joeschmoe yet still easy to find and use, of course) with a small memory footprint. I thought this was the promise of Mozilla, but I guess I was wrong. Rather, this is the promise of IE6 - and THAT'S SCARY.
An interface which breaks every single standard known to man (it doesn't even get Windows quite right.
Try the "native.windows" theme on mozilla.themes.org. It gives Moz a Windows/IE look-and-feel and seems to fix some of the interface issues by using native-looking widgets. It also just seems quicker, although I'm sure that's only due to my own f-ed perceptual associations between IE and the default moz interface. --
Sky Pilot is a bit cumbersome at first, but it's growing on me quickly!
--
Thrakkerzog
Interesting (yes, it's still me)
by
MarcoAtWork
·
· Score: 2
Just out of curiosity, I downloaded a mozilla nightly, and I get exactly the same uncaught exception error, so after all it's not really netscape's fault.
I will submit a bugzilla entry right away.
-- --
the cake is a lie
At least that's constant 25 MB.
by
bkosse
·
· Score: 2
I've been running this single session of NS6 all day and I'm at 43 MB total size. This is such a huge improvement over the prior Netscape which by now would be well over 150 MB due to nasty leaks in form input handling.
Netscape.com proclaims that Netscape 6 is here, but the download page only proclaims the preview release 3. The ftp site has the proper version. What's up?
I have installed it, and everything seems to work, however:
Motif-isms in buttons and lists are gone, and correct fonts and charsets are used, as opposed to what Netscape 4.x does.
To disable gtk themes I had to change $HOME to the directory without.gtkrc, as nothing else worked.
SSL didn't work correctly until I made netscape installation directory writable by user running it.
There were no problems with Java or Flash plugin -- Java is actually the reason why I am using it instead of Mozilla, as later Mozilla snapshots changed the API and don't work with latest Java plugin anymore.
-- Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
Re:It is nice, but DELETE YOUR OLD PROFILES!!!!
by
kaisyain
·
· Score: 2
Really? It's slow as molasses on my Windows NT box:-(. Guess I'll keep using IE until Mozilla becomes an actual challenger.
I'm working on downloading it now, should be done shortly. Netscape sites are really, really slow.
How To get java for netscape6 to work with mozilla
by
richie123
·
· Score: 2
Netscape 6 is out, but as everyboddy knows, its a total POS. The thing is totally unstable under Linux, a pukes on dozens of web pages. However I have found that the java plugin that comes with ns6 works perfectly with mozilla (something the sun plugin won't do). so all you have to do is install ns6 and copy java2 from the plugins directory into mozilla/plugins and symlink the javaplugin_oji in the folder into mozilla/plugins.
Does anyone else think it is odd that a commercial browser is 'release' quality when they take a slightly buggy beta release from an open-source project, add a bunch more much, much buggier features and then pop it out the door? I'm sorry, I really like mozilla, but I think Netscape may be shooting themselves in the foot if this release isn't 'perfect' or at least much more stable than what IE on Windows is. Any major screw-ups and you can kiss the little bit of market share in the Windows world they have left goodbye. I really think they should be cautious with this one.
Slow moving marsupials and the women that love them
--
Slow moving marsupials and the women that love them
Next time, on Geraldo...
Lynx is all you'll ever need, there is nothing to see on the internet. It is only data. You do not need flash. You do not need PNG. You do not need MPEG. It is all a corruption of what the internet is for. Transfer of data. SO:P on you mister bitchy boo.
My adventures in Netscape 6
by
ThatField
·
· Score: 2
I downloaded it. Now I'm quite disappointed. Took me 3 tries of the download/install for it to actually install without any errors. Then when I finally got sick of it not finding my previous Netscape profile, yet it would consistently find the profiles of everyone else on this system, I realized that it's not worthwhile after about 2 1/2 hours and a very bad attitude that filled the air with swear words. So I uninstalled it, and found it doesn't *really* get uninstalled (using Windows 98 SE for all this). So I went and installed the latest IE 5.5 SP1 instead, which says a lot...considering I'm running FreeBSD on my laptop these days. Ya know what I mean?
The Mozilla nightly builds are better. How could AOL even think this crappy version passed off as a commercially viable product would go over? I mean, they're not my favorite company, but they didn't get rich by releasing software they should've worked on for another month or two. It's been a long day...goodnight.
The Opera browser is 100% W3C compliant and does a very good job in retaining compatibility with bugged web pages. It also gives you several options for 'fixing' a bugged web page -- a button toggles the formatting of the page on or off, and you can even set it to lie to the server about what browser it is. This really is a dynamite little browser that puts both IE and NS to shame.
Opera also has dozens of features that the other guys seem to have missed. I was so excited when I heard that Mozilla/NS 6.0 had a 'zoom' function...then I saw they only changed the text size. Opera can zoom into or out of a web page, changing text size, table sizes, and resampling any inline images. It also has a new 'fullscreen' mode that's amazing...I'm wondering if I can sneak Opera into work to replace Powerpoint for presentations. By comparison, NS 6.0's new features seem mostly limited to cookie control and changing skins.
I downloaded NS 6.0 for NT this morning. Some bugs in the user interface, but I haven't found any fatal bugs yet. It's nice and I might use it for work (where NS is allowed and Opera is not), but the NS/Mozilla tech is not good enough to replace the Opera browser I use at home.
-- Genocide Man -- Life is funny. Death is funnier. Mass murder can be hilarious.
The Opera browser is 100% W3C compliant and does a very good job in retaining compatibility with bugged web pages.
Oh, c'mon, you didn't *really* mean that, did you?
As for the standards part, sorry to remind you, but Mozilla and so Netscape 6 have the crown for the most standards compliance around (and they're still not 100% conformant). Opera does a good job, but every browser still have issues.
Now, about compatibility with buggy web pages you gotta be joking... some time ago I tried to test some pages from where I work in Opera, just to see how it behaved. Most HTML there is written by lazy designers using Dreamweaver, so it is a complete mess and a total junk, unless you are willing to spend some hours to fix it. IE shows them OK (after all, Dreamweaver outputs for IE). Mozilla does just as good a job as long as you fix the Javascript issues (just add DOM compatibility to the scripts). NS4 does OK also. But Opera completely garbles the thing. I was so shocked by the horrid result that I never touched Opera again.
You may argue that "Opera is supposed to be about compliance, not buggy HTML", but in the real world we have buggy HTML in every place you go, thanks to old browsers not conforming to standards. And in that Mozilla kicks the hell out of Opera. Just check bugzilla and look for bugs with the "compat" keyword.
You may like Opera, it may be fast and all, but please, get facts a little straight before claiming things like "100% compliant".
Very interesting information there -- thanks for digging it up! And along with all the other responses to my post; you've all definitely made the point that Opera is not 100% W3C compliant. I believe they *claim* it is...and it's always been good enough for me, in testing my own web pages. I'll dig into this myself; I want to know what bugs there are that I haven't noticed.
But I'm pretty baffled about the differences we're seeing in buggy web pages. Opera allows you to fiddle with the rendering of web sites, by changing zooms, toggling formatting or images, changing browser designation, etc. I've seen some bugged web pages that at first didn't render well in Opera...but after a few button clicks I have always been able to tweak them to readability. And unlike NS4.6/.7, it's never crashed on me on a bad web page.
If you abandoned Opera because it initially gave you garbled results on a bad web page, you might want to try it again. Press the Background 'load/off' button, which I've found solves 90% of the problems. (I've also found it works better in v3.6 than 4.0, unfortunately, but it's still helpful.) Fiddle with the page a bit and I think you'll find that Opera gives you the tools to make sense out of any piece of crap on the web.
All of course, just in my own humble experience.:)
-- Genocide Man -- Life is funny. Death is funnier. Mass murder can be hilarious.
Re:Opera is too standards focused
by
Azghoul
·
· Score: 2
> Opera is also very annoying in its insistence that standards conformance is more important than being able to view a page - it sometimes is unable to view the page at all, showing a blank screen.
This is one of the silliest things I've heard in a while, and a prototypical liberal point of view. This sounds like the Gore campaign: "What? The election rules say X? Well let's change 'em to match what we want!"
Or outcome-based education: As long as it sounds good to you, your grammar is correct.
FAR, far better for a browser to say, "This is what HTML should be, if the authors screw it up, it's not our fault." then to try to figure out how to display incorrect HTML.
Because I use Linux and I have yet to find a way to get Mozilla nightlies to use Java. And I need the Java support along with all the plugins and such.
That being said, I have both Mozilla installed and N6. When I hit a page that needs java, I crank up N6. But I use Mozilla for everything else. As soon as Mozilla gets all the plugins and Java I will be able to remove both N4 and N6. I know N6 is supposed to suck, suck, suck, but I have found it to be pretty good. Mozilla Nightlies are buggy too. Using N6 is like using a milestone build instead of a nightly. It just has the advantage of Java support and a few extras that are from AOL/Netscape.
-- "Doubt your doubts and believe your beliefs."
-- Switchfoot, Ode to Chin
Here's my initial reaction. I haven't had time to really try it out yet. It seems rather rough and ready with some glitches that make it look and feel less than professional. I am impressed with how it looks from the themes side of things.
That damn menu bug is still there: I have to hold down the mouse button the whole time or the menu vanishes.
It looks good, and it's very refreshing.
It can be really slow: clicking through the preferences dialog, there's a significant delay between my click and the dialog pane appearing.
If I open a new window from one that is maximised, the new one comes up full size (not maximised), and partly off the screen.
Ctrl+O browses the local disc. Consistent functionality with other products would be nice. It seems silly that Ctrl+O and Ctrl+L functionality can't be merged in a seamless manner. It would simpler in use that way.
Various text fields and text on other controls such as drop lists doesn't fit correctly and gets cut-off.
For some reason, Java was trying to use a proxy on 127.0.0.1:8000. It's supposed to be using my browser settings, but I have it set up for a direct connection (HTTP has a greyed out proxy set from when I was playing around with Junkbuster). I had to actually remove the entry, even though it is disabled.
I miss the drop list completion in combo boxes that I've got used to with IE.
Is it me, or does going back and forth in the history remember my position? This was one of the features that made me give up Netscape in favour of IE. If this is the case, a big "YAY" is in order!
Resizing the window is abysmal: the screen updates are dreadfully slow.
I've been using nightlies since day one. On a whim I decided to install PR3 yesterday and I wasn't impressed. The main Mozilla tree is *far* more stable and usable!
I do remember the days of IE4.0, however. It's pretty much at the same level 4.0 was when it came out. I'll be waiting for 6.1, hopefully when the PDT gets their act together and ships all the pending bugfixes.
Don't ask me why they've branched the tree so early - Mozilla has gone into a climb to 1.0 and the tree has been keeping stable as they do it. If we're lucky, they'll just merge the NS6.0 changes onto the Moz1.0 codebase and they'll have a decent little 6.1 release.
*sigh*
And now hopefully we can have them dedicate much more time to performance and memory footprint. I know it's been getting better but between it and chrome rendering speed, they are definately the biggest barriers to acceptance.
that's the sound of my normal, everyday breathing.
With any luck, they'll have incorporated all the current Mozilla bug fixes by Netscape Communicator 6.097g Cesium Edition PR1 (Now with HappyChannelBars!(TM)).
Or better, look at it this way: if AOL/Netscape came out tomorrow and announced that AOL 6.0 was going to rely heavily on a major open-source community codebase, would you be excited to use it?
If there is one single thing that annoys me most about IE it's the damn "Organize Favorites" window. That thing is insane! It's too damn small to work with. You can't resize it. It's a pain to move the bookmarks around. I hate the "Add to Favorites" window too. I like the Netscape "File Bookmark" and "Edit Bookmarks" much much better.
-- It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
I had problems with Java using the installer that downloads the components form the install (Debian 2.2 x86). So I just downloaded the full version under the./sea directory and java works fine.
Re:It is nice, but DELETE YOUR OLD PROFILES!!!!
by
cybrthng
·
· Score: 2
I'm running NT Workstation 4.0 SP6 on a PIII 450 with 128 megs of ram and it runs fine.
I also have Oracle Jinitiator running, the oracle enterprise manager and Outlook up. So memory is pegged all'round.
I do get some chugs under big websites like www.absolutesega.com, but Cnn, news,com, slashdot.org, sega.net, oracle.com, metalink.oracle.com all work great!
Now to quickly leap into action!
by
ackthpt
·
· Score: 2
And wait about 6 months for all the bugs (well, a bunch anyway) to be eradicated, eradication bugs eradicated and word to leak out that it's actually worth getting due to some nifty new feature.
--
--
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
I've been working on a page that makes fairly heavy use of CSS, particularly the notoriously buggy "float" and "clear" functions. It looks like shit in IE 5 or NS 4.7 (and crashes NS 4.5, so watch out).
NS 6, M18 and IE 5.5 all render it quite nicely. However, Gecko takes a little under ten seconds to render it from my hard drive. IE takes a little under two. That's a pretty bad gap. And I suspect that ordinary users, who don't care about standards compliance or open source, are going to be even less patient with it than I am.
Many thousands of hard drives cried out in the collective pain of a 35MB download for a web browser!
Use Konqueror - it's fast, stable, renders everything, and uses Netscape plugins and Java.
It is nice, but DELETE YOUR OLD PROFILES!!!!
by
cybrthng
·
· Score: 4
Netscape 6.0 is amazingly fast/smooth under Windows NT. They did a good job to get it out, but it still has its bugs.
The *MOST* Important thing to do is remove *ANY* old mozillareg.dat's, and OLD Netscape Beta profiles and any old stale files.
I had an old profile that it upgraded, but everything just acted goofy, crashed, or rendered wrong (don't know why). After deleting the old profiles and creating a new one everything runs MUCH better, LOOKS much better and doesn't act goofy.
I'm glad they released this one. Its good to have a product they can get contsructive criticism from as well as build a foundation from. Better to ship now to get the product out then delay another 32 months to bloat it.
Re:It is nice, but DELETE YOUR OLD PROFILES!!!!
by
cybrthng
·
· Score: 2
It's kind of sad to go to Netscape's home page and see that a news story about the Florida election battles has better page placement than an announcement about a major new version of their flagship product. Well, that is, if they still consider Communicator to be their flagship product.
6 for Mac, in a word, Blows. In a few more words..
by
Xel
·
· Score: 2
I just got finished uninstalling Netscape 6 after 5 hours of crashes, improperly displayed web pages, slow slow SLOW load times (on a PowerMac G4), and a poorly designed, kludgy interface that takes up far too much screen real estate (even on my 21" display). The Netscape window has more buttons, widgets, links and arrows than a Rube Goldberg nightmare. Common fonts such as Times don't display correctly, all my AOL Instant Messenger preferences were hosed, I couldnt customize my bookmarks list and the preferences window ALONE had more bugs than I've found in Windows ME and Apple OS X combined. I'm sticking with IE.
-- "Eagles may soar, but weasels dont get sucked into jet engines."
IE on Mac != IE on Windows. Two seperate browsers, two seperate rendering engines. M$ just confused the name.
Re:Wait for 6.1! - Found a bug already.
by
dat00ket
·
· Score: 2
I don't suppose anyone's gotten it to work in windows 98 with two monitors?
For me it works fine if it's on the primary display, but if it's on the secondary display the menus and buttons don't work.
Let's see if I can figure out bugzilla....
First impressions, CSS conmpliance and SSL probs.
by
Fross
·
· Score: 2
So it's there. i download it. 20 megs. not too bad considering (note, i didnt get mail, news, or half the plugins.) Nice installer.
Boot it up, loads quite quickly. Go to Slashdot, looks okay. the Gecko engine is showing its stuff, very nice indeed.
Go to news.bbc.co.uk. Not bad. again fast rendering.
Go to an e-commerce site that uses CSS and SSL quite extensively. this works on NS 4.75 and IE5.5 very well, i use it every day.
Netscape 6's handling of CSS is even worse than 4.75, from what i can tell. sometimes it even stops rendering CSS from a linked file halfway through the page. and when viewing pages under SSL, it is SO slow it is unreal.
This looks like a particularly buggy mosaic milestone with AOL tags bunched on it. i will wait for a 6.x release i hear good things about, but nothing until then.
Quite interesting -- it was Internet Explorer 5.5 that was showing the cached version, even though it's supposed to expire the cache whenever I restart the browser--I'd just started the browser and loaded/. when I saw the news.
I'd be surprised if MS was deliberately making that page in IE5.5 show an old version, so I'm going to assume that it had to be propogated to all the netscape servers.
Personally, I am stuck with Netscape 4.7 and probably will be for a very long time. Why? Because I don't want a browser that looks like the 6 o'clock news! I like the way things used to be, when people used UNIX and in particular Motif. Yes, I'm a Motif fan, because I like things to get to the point, get the job done, and be as austere, professional, and efficient as possible. I can't stand the way Linux has turned the formerly respectable UNIX world--a world in which rock solid big iron runs satellites and life-critical medical equipment--into a world where UNIX companies are adopting desktops that make college students drool because of their k3wl graphical effects. It's sickening.
If development had been focused on top quality, professionalism, and usability, rather than translucent windows and pictures of naked women, we would by this time have a browser entirely based on Motif and using ToolTalk for all its media translation services. We'd be living in an Open Systems (but not necessarily open source) world with truly usable software, not shit like Mozilla.
I want to be able to actually USE my software, I don't care if it "looks cool"!
And no, this is not a troll, I'm tired of getting moderated down as a troll because I don't like the dumbass trendy look of things like GTK and Qt.
Re:Mozilla and Secure Transactions
by
crumley
·
· Score: 4
What OS are you using mozilla on? If its Linux
or Windows, its really easy to add SSL support.
Under the Debug Menu, choose Install PSM. Then
follow the directions on the page that you get
taken to.
--
-- Preventive War is like committing suicide for fear of death. - Otto Von Bismarck
Mozilla only runs on one platform, and that is its horribly bloated abstraction library. That runs on multiple platforms.
IE works on Windows, through another horribly bloated abstraction layer on UNIX (Solaris and HP-UX) and on Macintosh. Mozilla doesn't really support more platforms - just more configurations of UNIX.
Debian's X configuration is always screwed up out of the box. Garunteed.
Sorry... but replaced Debian a while ago. It just never works out of the box with TNT2 cards, at least not in my experience. Had problems with a V3 as well.
Links Panel for NS6/Mozilla
by
hodeleri
·
· Score: 2
Be sure to grab some themes at Netscape Theme Park, as well as here. I am using the new Orbit theme, and Sky Pilot. Both themes react very well, and make browsing a lot of fun.
Re:Fast on win32, slow on linux
by
ghazban
·
· Score: 2
I found it quite stable and fast. Maybe you didn't remove your.mozilla (or.netscape depending on which is used.. I haven't investigated)
Memory usage seems to be system dependent.
by
bkosse
·
· Score: 2
But, like I said, I'm just glad I'm no longer using 150 MB of memory. Yech.
Of course, I've upgraded (yes, a huge upgrade for Linux users, at least) to the 11/16/2000 (21) build of Mozilla. Wow it's a massive improvement over standard Netscape.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd describe it as more of a movie that's been edited for TV: Running time trimmed.
:)
That is to say the development was trimmed, as is the uptime of the damn program!
After all, a Director's Cut isn't always a bad thing. Netscape 6.0 will always be a bad thing
Uh... there IS source to Mozilla. Where have you been?
--
Obfuscated e-mail addresses won't stop sadistic 12-year-old ACs.
Win dain a lotica, en vai tu ri silota
Right, that's why we're talking about Mozilla 0.9 and not Netscape 6.0.
--
Obfuscated e-mail addresses won't stop sadistic 12-year-old ACs.
Win dain a lotica, en vai tu ri silota
Because they left in the moronic bug where you have to run it as root the first time.
--
Obfuscated e-mail addresses won't stop sadistic 12-year-old ACs.
Win dain a lotica, en vai tu ri silota
Netscape 6 is the perfect example of why "blanket rewrites" never work out the way you intend them to.
... ad nauseum.
First of all, let me say that I'm so far moderately impressed with NS 6. I've seen the prior PR releases and Mozilla builds, and this actually looks and feels like a "release" quality product. I always felt the Mozilla and PR releases just plainly sucked for polish and buginess. For NS 6, Netscape has done a tremendous polish job , and I'm very surprised they released it this early with this level of quality.
Now, having said that, their polish job wasn't nearly enough for this to be a *great* release. Rewriting a product is *always* chasing a moving target... and requires bug fix after requirements change after headache after political battle
The worst thing about rewrites is that usually developers are screaming for *another* rewrite by the time the rewrite is finished, because it has already begun to rot. I really, really, hope this isn't the case with NS 6.
The aftermath of this release is going to be:
- The impatient ones (i.e. 70% of web users) are going scream murder at Netscape's incompetence at releasing so many bugs. (ignoring that Linux 2.4 is over a year late, Netscape 6 is now around 1.5 years late, etc.)
- The slightly patient ones (leftovers, i.e. me) will be somewhat disappointed, but hopeful based on initial experience.
They really have to placate that last crowd. And if the code isn't clean, there's no time for another rewrite. If the majority of quirks aren't fixed in short order (i.e. Netscape 6.1 within 6 months), Netscape will probably remain a niche browser for UNIX platforms, while Windows and Mac users remain with IE. IE is just too good of a product now to choose not to use it for purely "but it's Microsoft" reasons.
For now I'm going to stick with NS 6 to get used to it more. At first I almost gave up on NS 6 really quickly for odd quirks, but they somehow cleared up after I rebooted my machine. (Go figure). Anyway.
-Stu
of money!!!
The nightly builds from mozilla.org are already leaps and bounds ahead of the buggy product that Netscape is pushing onto the world. (2 frozen screens and reboots in the first 10 minutes of using 6.0, everything fine on the Nov 12th Nightly.)
Oh yeah, and a free clue to the Netscape rebadgers: I'm already online, so WHY THE F**K WOULD I WANT AN AOL ICON ON MY DESKTOP?
I personally think that trying to apply the Open Source development model for Netscape 6 resulted in a bloated, overdone program that is inferior to Internet Explorer.
The nice thing about the Linux kernel (and Apache) is that at least they haven't suffered from an excessive case of "featureitis."
For Windows 95/98/ME/2000 users, they're not going to bother with Netscape 6 given its bigger-than IE bloat and very slow startup speed.
Raymond in Mountain View, CA
FTR, IE 5.0 for the Mac doesn't use Microsoft's Java libraries. Uses Apple's just-as-out-of-date libraries. ;)
----
----
Am I the only one who thinks Microsoft is a misnomer? Perhaps Macrosoft would be a better fit?
I hope you better run fast from the anti-IE crowd here. :)
Personally, the biggest problem with Netscape 6 is that the interface leaves a bit to be desired in terms of ease of use; one nice thing about Internet Explorer is that Microsoft has bothered to use its excellent Usability Lab to give the interface a very good "polish" for ease of operation.
Raymond in Mountain View, CA
Indeed. I already have Chris' mozilla and mozilla-devel RPMs installed. I though it would be trivial to then add galeon, but that requires gnome-libs-1.2 (even the -rh6 RPM). A quick trip to rpmfind.net, and I find a newer gnome-libs in Rawhide, but that in turn depends on glibc-2.2. Short of upgrading to RH7, it's just not worth the hassle. This is with both galeon 0.7 and 0.8
"The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike." -- Delos B. McKown
I don't believe ANY of those flamers here has ACTUALLY tried Netscape 6 FINAL! I am testing it for 5 hours and it didn't crash. I browsed over 100 sites, NONE appeared BAD I don't have memory leak problems at all So what the heck is the problem of you people??!?
Are you using 2.0Final or a prerelease? Try upgrading to 2.0Final if not.
Ehehahahahehehahah
If Netscape cut funding for the Mozilla project, Mozilla would lose:
- Dozens of its most active developers
- the web site
- the cvs server
- the bug tracking system
- the automatic build farm
- a large collection of testcases and specs that live on hosts inside the Netscape firewall
- many other important resources
If Netscape killed Mozilla funding, that would be a very serious blow which Mozilla might not survive.How in gods name can a browser be 40megs?? Thats the size of a small OS!
How old are you exactly? That's the size of a big OS...
People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
Linux distro+GTK+Mozilla > Linux distro+KDE (includes Konqueror)
Windows (includes IE) > Linux distro+KDE
Windows+IE+Mozilla > Linux distro+KDE
MacOS (includes IE) > Linux distro+KDE
MacOS+Mozilla > Linux distro+KDE
Need I go on?
While many might blame netscape for releasing a browser that for many(including me) doesn't feel the way a finished and competitable product should feel.
But Then again it was about time, Netscape was getting into serious timing troubles with netscape 6. MS is about to realease a beta of it's "Version 6" Browser and Netscape had to act.
What is a bit sad tough is that Netscape maybe released it just a little bit too early.
Why? Because M19(the next Mozilla Milestone) is labeled "stability and speed improvements" in mozilla.org's seamonkey milestone plan(yes i know there is a second plan which describes the mozilla and ns trunks more exactly)
Still, maybe waiting another month may have lead to a much more improved product. On the other side in one month netscape's market share may very well be nonexistend(at least on windows, which sadly is the criterium)
Maybe this was the right move by netscape. Maybe a inperfect final release was better then another month of delay.
Whatever happens to netscape, I'm going to keep downloading mozilla nightlies while still watching other browsers such as konqueror
"Mommy, mommy! The garbage man is here!" "Well, tell him we don't want any!" -- Groucho Marx
Anybody know when they'll release one for Solaris? Or are they leaving that to Mozilla?
I got the full version early this morning from Netscape w/o any download lag at all. But I'm sure that's different now.
Things Different:
1) Load time is VERY fast.
2) Page rendering is on par with IE5.5
3) Most sites display correctly
Things the Same:
1) BIG FREAKING MEMORY LEAK!!I'm running Net6 on Windows 2000. Ever page I load increases Netscape's memory footprint by approximately 1.5 Mb. I let Yahoo's random page URL keep loading files and I ramped the memory usage up to about 85 Mb before I quit. Closing Netscape and reloading drop the footprint back to 4 Mb, which on first inspection is nice. However it quickly ramps up fast. Even entering data in this form box is increasing the ram count about 4K every 20 characters or so. Netscape 6 definitely should not have been released yet. This is sad and pathetic for the once innovative and powerful Netscape.
Some people take their .sig way too seriously
According to CNET, IE5.5 is twice as fast as Gecko. We are not talking about a 20% difference...
What is stunning also is that CNET claims Java under Netscape 6.0 is also much slower... which is really missing the point. Netscape 6.0 supports a plugable JVM (OJI)! Which means you have JDK1.3 support right now and better later whereas IE only supports the MS JVM which, as we know, is now frozen in time.
When it comes to Java, Netscape is technologically way ahead. It is miles and miles ahead.
(Same for Mozilla, of course.)
Actually most browsers know have a plugable Java JVM mechanism... except for IE which bundles its own JVMs. That's quite a weakness of IE.
about:mozilla no longer works. It brings up the Book of Mozilla, but the N doesn't change into a fire-breathing Mozilla anymore! IMHO, this is the most disappointing aspect of NS6.
1) I just downloaded the Linux version. The installer is pretty slick and I got high transfer rates, but unfortunately I had to do it 6 times before it would actually complete the install without hanging.
2) Upon installing it insists that you register for their Netcenter website and the fonts where it asks you if you'd like spam along with your registration are so small that they're barely legible. Suggestion: Just click the link says "I'm under 13 years old" to get around the mandatory registration.
3) So far this version shows no improvement over the nightly snapshots I've been downloading from Mozilla's site. Suggestion: Download a recent nightly build from mozilla.org instead if you really insist on upgrading.
4) It won't render NVidia's Linux Drivers page. Lame...
numb
That's the 'favorites' icons. When something gets added to your bookmarks, if favicon.ico exists on the server it uses it as the icon.
Free Anne Tomlinson!!
With all that in mind, I was excited to see that N6 was out because I've liked the Mozilla and preview release builds, except that they were buggy and seemingly incomplete.
I like a lot of things in Netscape 6. The Gecko engine is great. It renders pages pretty fast, which is good. The "Modern" skin is pretty cool. Is it a good idea... well, that's another issue, but it's cool. There are a lot of features that I like in IE that weren't in Netscape 4.6.whenever-I-stopped-really-using-it like some of the sidebar stuff and the toolbar. (Yes, I know the toolbar has been in 4.7 or so for a long time, but it took them a long time to get it there!)
Here's the bottom line of my impressions with N6: it's all in the little things!!!
There are two things that are ticking me off enough to possibly send me back to IE. First, arranging the bookmarks. This should be easy: I have imported "toolbar favorites" from IE, I want them to be in my N6 toolbar. I'm a pretty smart guy and I have no idea how to do this. Drag-an-drop isn't supported, so I can't move them. Cut and paste are supported (even though "cut" is enabled in the edit menu. There's a menu command "Set as Personal Toolbar Menu"... which apparently does nothing! I know it's stupid, but these are the things that make me choose IE, not the engine. (Well, I shouldn't say that. If the engine was unacceptable it would influence me. But, being a typical web user, most engines I find are "acceptable", so it's not typically a factor.)
Second big annoyance, I now have five icons on my desktop (I'm using Win2000): Netscape (I wanted this one), "Free AOL Unlimited INternet" (fine, AOL owns Netscape... I'll bear it), "Net2Phone" (quit installing this!), "RealPlayer Basic" (I already had it), "Take5" (See previous, I hate this thing).
Goal for Netscape: Don't tick off you customers by installing worthless things. It may convince some people, but I think it angers more.
Another goal: Do less, do it well. I frankly, don't care about skins. If I did, I would use WindowBlinds. But I do care about being able to set up my "toolbar favorites".
I'm going to continue trying N6, because I like Mozilla and believe it can turn out good products, but I really hope the quality improves.
"Let your heart soar as high as it will. Refuse to be average." - A. W. Tozer
I've been reading a lot of comments comparing NS6 to current Mozilla ... and of course current Mozilla works heaps better!
Netscape may have jumped the gun, but would someone who uses NS4.7x care to make a comparison of the two browsers (and mail readers)? I remember it was the same people here who had been asking Netscape to pull out and stop supporting NS4.7x. Now that NS6 is out, why don't you compare that with the old browser and tell us whether it's an improvement or not and how is it an improvement, if ever???
In the installer, the little "Activation" window popped up that wanted my name, e-mail address and ZIP code. I couldn't think of any good reason to give these things to them, but I thought I'd read the privacy policy and see what their intentions were.
The link to the privacy policy didn't work. In fact, none of the little links did a bloody thing. Two problems: a) No privacy policy is a bad thing. b) Links don't work? Call me demanding, but I enjoy a good A tag every now and again.
Obviously, they didn't get any personal information.
Now I've got "Please wait..." written in the middle of a 400x400 window that's been hanging out there for the past 5 minutes. Looks like 6.0 is a dud.
-Waldo
No, this is not a warez advert.
0 /windows/win32/sea/N6Setup.exe
0 /unix/linux22/sea/netscape-i686-pc-linux-g nu-sea.tar.gz
I found this while searching the FTP server for a full download because I cannot use the net to download an installer which will in turn download other components.
ftp://ftp.netscape.com/pub/netscape6/english/6.
ftp://ftp.netscape.com/pub/netscape6/english/6.
Check the URLs for spaces, I don't know why they are inserted when I post.
Try ftp1,ftp2. Mirror if you can. Thanks
--Ben
There are three degrees of standards-compliance.
Zero, mediocre, and perfect.
Anything less than 100% shouldn't be tolerated when it comes to standards support; that's what standards are all about. I don't care if it's 99% compliant; IE5.5/Windows is supposedly 99% compliant too. That's not good enough when 100% is possible.
----------
I vividly remember how people used to think that it won't ever be released. I wasn't far to beleive it too.
Sure, I'll stay with Mozilla, but I rejoice that the popularity of Netscape will boost Mozilla acceptance.
Maybe we are going to avoid a Web hard-coded for IE, after all.
So hoora for them. But they should get a bug-free 6.1
(How much time until the first security hole popus up ?)
Cheers,
--fred
1 reply beneath your current threshold.
I'll probably have ESR scratching my name on a bullet for saying this, but I think the Mozilla/AOL combination illustrates some of the natural incompatabilities between commercial marketing-department-driven software and open-source developer-has-an-itch-to-scratch-driven software.
I keep up to date with the Mozilla code on Linux and I don't see any sort of AOL crap. That tells me that for this product, the poor developers branched their code and started adding all that AOL fluff. As far as most of us are concerned, that effort would have been better used fixing bugs on that branch.
I hope this product stays alive; I'd really like to see it survive. I just hope the marketing doesn't get in the way of stability.
Someone else would pick it up.
A lot of companies don't want to cede total control of the Web to Microsoft.
Anyone got an RPM for it?
-- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
Yeah, all the bugs aren't fixed
True, but I wasn't expecting them to be. That said, it's actually usable as an everyday browser (which is more than can be said for M18). The main problem with it, though, is that it's slow. Sure, it's much faster than M18, and in normal use, it's fine, but try scrolling down in long document or switching to another virtual desktop for a while, and then switching back. NN4 is significantly faster in both cases.
It also still renders Slashdot's spacer images in the titles of articles with a greenish line around them, so they look like little green squares.
The Linux version doesn't seem to have that bug for me...
Why oh why do they need to do these damn small install files that go out on the 'Net and get everything?
They don't! The installer lets you choose which components it will download. Worked for me, and I didn't get the news, mail, IM or the other useless bits. I would be using Galeon, but until they either provide a complete self-contained RPM or make it an easy compile, I can't be bothered. I still don't want an installer, though. I want a full install program. Net access from home isn't cheap here in Europe. I want to be able to download the whole thing at work, burn it to CD and take it home. Sigh.
"The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike." -- Delos B. McKown
On the other hand, I think Netscape had good judgement as to the timing. I don't think waiting another month after branch point would have eliminated all of the nasty bugs, but I think it would have set back the development of the Mozilla trunk and hence NS 6.1+ several weeks. I'm glad the weeks of rtm triage spam and "I can't believe you're not going to fix this for NS 6.0" flamewars are over for now. (Waiting another month before the branch point probably wouldn't have helped much either, because new bugs would have been introduced during that extra month.)
I'm not saying that waiting another month wouldn't have reduced the number of bugs, just that it wouldn't have helped as much as it might seem it would have. And NS did need to get a new browser out the door with NS 4.76 rotting and with IE gaining more and more marketshare.
--
The shareholder is always right.
> One benefit of the small downloader is that you
> don't have to download EVERYTHING and then only
> install a few parts.
That is exactly what the NS6 installer provides: it downloads only the components you need. The original poster is complaining that it downloads them separately instead of all at once.
> won't be using NS6 until (1) the bugs are mostly
> out (2) its mozilla and (3) I can get rid of the
> sidebar, integrated IM and other add-ons i don't
> need.
So use Mozilla.
Why will Netscape not let me import their themes into my nightly build of Mozilla? Is this a technical issue, or a marketing one?
And, if a marketing one, anyone know a workaround to get some of those Netscape themes into my Mozilla?
-----
Go here then, don't bother with the bloat.
Simple, Mozilla is the director's cut version of Netscape. That's terminology Joe Sixpak can understand.
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
(IE opens the source in Notepad; Netscape just shows it to you)
Since when do we all run windows? I'd rather be able to copy/past the source into ANY editor I want, not what MS tells me to (which I don't have to deal with anyways, cuz I don't run windez)
Pope
Freedom is Slavery! Ignorance is Strength! Monopolies offer Choice!
It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
Actually, needing "another month" to fix the most glaring bugs is not "true for every project". What is true for every project is the appearance that another month would be enough to fix all the bugs. Brooks (of the Mythical Man Month) called this the 90% problem. In reality, it takes approximately as long in calendar months (not programmer months) to do the last 10% of a project as it does to do the first 90%. When you take into account that the "fantasy factor" (the multiple of the actual versus predicted time to finish a project) is probably 2x or 3x, it can take a really long time to do the last 10%. I'm willing to bet it will take six months or more to get a dot release of Netscape 6 out the door with most of the outstanding defects fixed.
Walt
It's the same one - both have build id 0811
Free Anne Tomlinson!!
Word of warning. Before you try this, make sure that the directory that Mozilla is installed in is writable by mozilla. After you install the psm you will have to keep the directory writeable due to a bug. If you don't mozilla will crash each time you visit a secure site.
> If Netscape killed Mozilla funding, that would be a very serious blow which Mozilla might not survive.
Sure. It'll die overnight and get forgotten, like linux, freebsd, gnome, KDE or debian.
NO. If netscape stopped funding, it'll loose developers. It would be pretty hard, but I highly doubt it would be fatal. (And I am sure that there are half a dozen highly succesfull companies out there that have a vested interest into fighting against IE and would found the Mozilla project almost instantly...)
Cheers,
--fred
1 reply beneath your current threshold.
> Did any of the compliance bugs named in
> Flanagan's petition to postpone the release get
> fixed before the final release?
No. NS6 went to manufacturing almost immediately after that showed up.
Please. Those two editors are the definition of bloatware. Notepad.exe is only 45KB, and it's a standalone program. How big is the entire Emacs package? At least 512KB, and probably more. Vim isn't much better.
"Ancillary does not mean you get to rule the world." --U.S. Circuit Judge Harry Edwards, speaking to the FCC's lawyer
--
The specs for Konqueror sound pretty complete and impressive, so I'd be interested to head from anyone who could give a comparison of Konqueror vs Netscape 6/Mozilla both in terms of features and performance/usability etc. I don't care about the mail/news stuff in Netscape - just how it compares as a browser.
Oh, and why is there an option to download a UK version, but the installation doesn't give you the option to install UK English (yep, I had to go with the US English pack). Is there really any difference, or is it just labelling on ftp server?
OK, I found the problem (at least in mozilla, I'll retry NS6 ASAP).
I have the proxy set up as 'autoconfigure' which is just a way that simplifies IS's life, since theoretically NS goes to the autoconfig URL, and gets the proxy settings, hosts not to proxy, etc. etc. etc.
Well, it turns out that this feature seems broken in Mozilla, in fact, if I remove the autoconfig, and specify the proxy server manually, everything works just fine. I will try this on NS6 as soon if it finishes downloading.
yep, that was it, now even NS6 works
-- the cake is a lie
" That tells me that for this product, the poor developers branched their code and started adding all that AOL fluff. As far as most of us are concerned, that effort would have been better used fixing bugs on that branch." If you had really been keeping up to date with the mozilla code as well as the development process (or looked at even one of the preview releases or even read a slashdot thread about them) then you would know that the Netscape developers did not branch and _start_ adding all that AOL fluff. TFrom the beginning there have always been two CVS trees, one for Mozilla and one for Netscape which pulls the Mozilla CVS tree and overlays all it's proprietary code. This parallel track has been going on since the beginning. The branch that did happen, (if you were paying attention you would have seen this in the nightly build directories starting on 9/22) _was_ a bug fixing and stability push branch. It was NOT a start "adding all that AOL fluff" branch. I repeat, that work has been going on in parallel since the beginning. I have been keeping up to date. It looks as if you haven't. -Asa
> Somebody please tell me that my code no longer
> works because they actually extended the object
> model
No, they did something even better. They actually implemented the W3C standards.
Opera is also very annoying in its insistence that standards conformance is more important than being able to view a page - it sometimes is unable to view the page at all, showing a blank screen.
Most of the time it works well (it is my main Windows browser, and is very fast indeed), but the standards conformance should be selectable - i.e. a button that says 'do your best and forget standards'.
Unfortunately the Opera people seem to think selectable standards conformance is not important. The IETFers disagree, saying 'be strict in what you send and liberal in what you accept' - since Opera is on the receiving end of HTML, a 'liberal' option would be far more useful, and in the long run would promote web standards by selling more copies of Opera.
Someone take Netscape outside and put it out of our misery.
TWW
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
What about making the installer application proxy-aware ? I am behind a fairly fascist firewall that doesn't allow anything through (I have to use a proxy for http) and obviously the installer application just hangs.
:: chrome://navigator/content/navigator.js :: OpenBookmarkURL :: line 714" data: no]
. xul
Fortunately the ftp site also carries the big tar file which I could download easily (and much faster than I thought, very close to 100KB/s average)
That said my first impression is not that good since besides taking like years to start up (on a p3-550 w/ 128 megs) every time I try to access a site, *any* site, I get the following
got a request
JavaScript error:
line 0: uncaught exception: [Exception... "Component returned failure code: 0x80004005 (NS_ERROR_FAILURE) [nsIBrowserInstance.loadUrl]" nsresult: "0x80004005 (NS_ERROR_FAILURE)" location: "JS frame
JavaScript error:
chrome://navigator/content/sessionHistoryUI.js line 150: gURLBar has no properties
If the URL is typed in directly I just get the gURLBar error, and not the previous one, in any case it doesn't work.
Also interesting that opening up the preferences dialog gives this on the console
we don't handle eBorderStyle_close yet... please fix me
*** panel to load is = chrome://communicator/content/pref/pref-navigator
*** queueing up a panel...
this is on a fairly vanilla RH 7 box, which should have been QA'd by the NS folks I think... the second time I ran this abomination it doesn't even give me an error, it just refuses to load any page (I still get the errors if I click on the bookmarks tho).
An interesting tidbit, the default setting is to *save* all the data from previously submitted forms and passwords to sites (check in the preferences), and you can even display that previously entered data. If you leave your netscape unattended, prepare to be burned (IE at least *asks* you the first time if you want to save the passwords/form data)
-- the cake is a lie
Konqueror is nice, but it's still a bit unfinished. The Java part works, once in a while, most stuff will not work. I've yet to be able to open my.yahoo.com with Konqueror. It will be very very nice, when it's done...
they do
Do you even know anything about perl? -- AC Replying to Tom Christiansen post.
If you had been actually watching (or better yet, participating in) the development process then you would know that any non-bandaid fixes that happened in the branch were contributed (subject to reviewers@mozilla.org) back to the Mozilla trunk. There won't be a big merge of branch to trunk since it was happening with almost every checkin for the last 6 weeks. One of the reasons that Mozilla nightly builds are as strong as they are is because of all the work that happened on the Netscape push to 6.0
-Asa
Thats deeply unrealistic. W3C recent standards are extremely complex (I have the schema spec before me: its in three parts, over around 300 pages, is very informally written, and deeply confusing). 100% compliance is very hard, when you also want 100% compatibility with buggy web pages.
Put bluntly: if you think 100% compliance and compatibility are possible, go do it. The world will beat a path to your door.
I tried the Mozilla 13 Nov nightly under Mandrake 7.1 last night. It might render more accurately than Netscape, but it doesn't look as good. The fonts it was using are just atrocious, and quite hard to read. I prefer the fonts Netscape uses. Actually, I prefer to reboot back into Win2K and use IE. So, is this font problem an issue with Mozilla, or just the X Window System in general? I am quite impressed with the look under Windows of decent fonts, and anti-aliased everywhere.
> It was close. So close. Another month, maybe two at most, to fix the most glaring standards-compliance and stability bugs. That's all it would have taken.
This is true for every project. But there is a day where you have to ship. If they had waited a couple of month, then there would still have been a few remaining bugs. You would have whinned the same way.
See how linux 2.4 is slipping. More than a year late. Sure, it doesn't matter, it is free software. But for netscape6, it matters. The marketshare is almost 100% IE. In a few month, the web would be IE only. Be glad they released something. Be _very_ glad.
Cheers,
--fred
1 reply beneath your current threshold.
A huge downside for me is that NN6 only supports HTTP 1.1 through the proxy, which means that you can't use the Junkbuster proxy. Sadly, that means I'm stuck with IE unless I want to return to the land of the neverending banner ad.
I followed the instructions here to get the source via CVS and every day or so I run 'gmake -f client.mk' which updates my source files and rebuilds. Is there something I should do to be more up to date than that?
.. I have my cookie prefs in Netscape (4.75/X11 Linux) set to "only allow cookies from the originating server as the page" and the download links (click here... no, now click here... no, now click HERE...) stop if you don't have 'accept all cookies' on.
Maybe it was a glitch. Anyone else see this happen?
ZOMG I WOULD LOVE TO KNOW ABOUT YOUR FEELINGS ON MACINTOSH VERSUS WINDOWS, VI VERSUS EMACS, AND HOW YOU'RE NOT A DORK
Oops.
Michael J.
Michael J.
Root, God, what is difference?
Why oh why do they need to do these damn small install files that go out on the 'Net and get everything? What I really want is a web interface that will let me pick my components and then send me an installer package custom made for my selections. It can't be that hard.
Sounds like the sort of thing a corporate sysadmin would say. Who's time can be better spent than doing the same thing X times...
I'm posting this from OS Xb in Carbon Mozilla!
Granted, it crashes unexpectedly and the fargin' MENUS are almost never in the same place twice (which is really weird), but compared to IE, this thing feels better. I always feel like I'm interfacing with molasses whenever I use IE, on any platform (MacOS 9, OS X or windez).
Oh, and Copeland was dead years ago, and *rightly so.* Apple told Adobe they'd have to re-write all their apps from scratch just for Copeland, and Adobe told them to take a hike.
Pope
Freedom is Slavery! Ignorance is Strength! Monopolies offer Choice!
It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
I've tried it (Celeron 366, 128MB RAM, NT4) - here is my take:
:-(
- It's relatively fast (but Konqueror is faster and IE is faster too).
- It takes a long time to load.
- It loads the JRE on startup - why? That makes it take 24-25MB memory and I've got it up beyond 40MB just browsing af few sites. You can disable Java, and it will of course not load the JRE, but it still takes about 17MB!
- It's a pain to manage bookmarks - I tried to rearrange the imported bookmarks from IE, but I gave up at last
Greetings Joergen
I think this is make-or-break time for them. It's about time they released something, but on the other hand, one would hope all standards have been adhered to, not just 'interpreted' or adapted like IEEEEEEE. B: "Hey rocky, watch me pull a Netscape out of my hat?"
R: "Again? That trick never works"
Get it from ZDNet's download center, and since it's just the basic install file, use the UK's servers for your download. It went pretty fast for me.
First impressions:
Yeah, all the bugs aren't fixed, which kind of sucks, cause there's a pretty nasty JS one that I posted about two weeks ago that hasn't been fixed in the nightlies and severely hampers some Intranet work I do. It also still renders Slashdot's spacer images in the titles of articles with a greenish line around them, so they look like little green squares.
If you've been using Mozilla for the past six months, you won't notice anything new, other than the fact that it takes up twice as much memory, loads a bunch of AOL shortcuts (I'm using the Win32 version) on your desktop and will allow you to integrate RealPlayer 8, Flash, etc. with your download.
Second Impressions:
Why oh why do they need to do these damn small install files that go out on the 'Net and get everything? What I really want is a web interface that will let me pick my components and then send me an installer package custom made for my selections. It can't be that hard.
The installer _is_ proxy-aware, and will even support proxy authentication (which I need).
Pity that it will fail...
Netscape wasn't ready yet.
It was close. So close. Another month, maybe two at most, to fix the most glaring standards-compliance and stability bugs. That's all it would have taken.
But no, they had to hand the project over to the marketers. So in the end, we get a Mozilla nightly plus a zillion ads foisted on us in every aspect of the interface. An interface which breaks every single standard known to man (it doesn't even get Windows quite right.
At least the speed issues are more or less resolved. But all the same, I'm sticking to Mozilla for now. NS6 should be treated as an unfinished project, because frankly it is.
----------
Don't forget about theme park! There's a bunch of new quality themes you can download.
here is a link to theNetscape Theme Park.
Sky Pilot is a bit cumbersome at first, but it's growing on me quickly!
-- Thrakkerzog
Just out of curiosity, I downloaded a mozilla nightly, and I get exactly the same uncaught exception error, so after all it's not really netscape's fault.
I will submit a bugzilla entry right away.
-- the cake is a lie
I've been running this single session of NS6 all day and I'm at 43 MB total size. This is such a huge improvement over the prior Netscape which by now would be well over 150 MB due to nasty leaks in form input handling.
--
Ben Kosse
--
Ben Kosse
Remember Ed Curry!
Netscape.com proclaims that Netscape 6 is here, but the download page only proclaims the preview release 3. The ftp site has the proper version. What's up?
--
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
Really? It's slow as molasses on my Windows NT box :-(. Guess I'll keep using IE until Mozilla becomes an actual challenger.
A fast mirror of Netscape 6 will be available at ftp://ftp.heckard.com/pub/netscape6/http://www.hec kard.com/pub/netscape6/
I'm working on downloading it now, should be done shortly. Netscape sites are really, really slow.
Netscape 6 is out, but as everyboddy knows, its a total POS. The thing is totally unstable under Linux, a pukes on dozens of web pages. However I have found that the java plugin that comes with ns6 works perfectly with mozilla (something the sun plugin won't do). so all you have to do is install ns6 and copy java2 from the plugins directory into mozilla/plugins and symlink the javaplugin_oji in the folder into mozilla/plugins.
Does anyone else think it is odd that a commercial browser is 'release' quality when they take a slightly buggy beta release from an open-source project, add a bunch more much, much buggier features and then pop it out the door? I'm sorry, I really like mozilla, but I think Netscape may be shooting themselves in the foot if this release isn't 'perfect' or at least much more stable than what IE on Windows is. Any major screw-ups and you can kiss the little bit of market share in the Windows world they have left goodbye. I really think they should be cautious with this one.
Slow moving marsupials and the women that love them
Slow moving marsupials and the women that love them
Next time, on Geraldo...
Oh, really? And this isn't a modern browser... for what reason?
IE gives you the option to specify your own source viewer. It defaults to notepad.exe, but you can change it to whatever you prefer.
--
--
Lynx is all you'll ever need, there is nothing to see on the internet. It is only data. You do not need flash. You do not need PNG. You do not need MPEG. It is all a corruption of what the internet is for. Transfer of data. SO :P on you mister bitchy boo.
I downloaded it. Now I'm quite disappointed. Took me 3 tries of the download/install for it to actually install without any errors. Then when I finally got sick of it not finding my previous Netscape profile, yet it would consistently find the profiles of everyone else on this system, I realized that it's not worthwhile after about 2 1/2 hours and a very bad attitude that filled the air with swear words. So I uninstalled it, and found it doesn't *really* get uninstalled (using Windows 98 SE for all this). So I went and installed the latest IE 5.5 SP1 instead, which says a lot...considering I'm running FreeBSD on my laptop these days. Ya know what I mean?
The Mozilla nightly builds are better. How could AOL even think this crappy version passed off as a commercially viable product would go over? I mean, they're not my favorite company, but they didn't get rich by releasing software they should've worked on for another month or two. It's been a long day...goodnight.
we'll try this again, with proper tags :-)
ftp://ftp.heckard.com/pub/netscape6/
http://www.heckard.com/pub/netscape6/
Opera also has dozens of features that the other guys seem to have missed. I was so excited when I heard that Mozilla/NS 6.0 had a 'zoom' function...then I saw they only changed the text size. Opera can zoom into or out of a web page, changing text size, table sizes, and resampling any inline images. It also has a new 'fullscreen' mode that's amazing...I'm wondering if I can sneak Opera into work to replace Powerpoint for presentations. By comparison, NS 6.0's new features seem mostly limited to cookie control and changing skins.
I downloaded NS 6.0 for NT this morning. Some bugs in the user interface, but I haven't found any fatal bugs yet. It's nice and I might use it for work (where NS is allowed and Opera is not), but the NS/Mozilla tech is not good enough to replace the Opera browser I use at home.
Genocide Man -- Life is funny. Death is funnier. Mass murder can be hilarious.
> Opera is also very annoying in its insistence that standards conformance is more important than being able to view a page - it sometimes is unable to view the page at all, showing a blank screen.
This is one of the silliest things I've heard in a while, and a prototypical liberal point of view. This sounds like the Gore campaign: "What? The election rules say X? Well let's change 'em to match what we want!"
Or outcome-based education: As long as it sounds good to you, your grammar is correct.
FAR, far better for a browser to say, "This is what HTML should be, if the authors screw it up, it's not our fault." then to try to figure out how to display incorrect HTML.
Btw: XHTML.
"How can this be!?!" you cry.
Because I use Linux and I have yet to find a way to get Mozilla nightlies to use Java. And I need the Java support along with all the plugins and such.
That being said, I have both Mozilla installed and N6. When I hit a page that needs java, I crank up N6. But I use Mozilla for everything else. As soon as Mozilla gets all the plugins and Java I will be able to remove both N4 and N6. I know N6 is supposed to suck, suck, suck, but I have found it to be pretty good. Mozilla Nightlies are buggy too. Using N6 is like using a milestone build instead of a nightly. It just has the advantage of Java support and a few extras that are from AOL/Netscape.
"Doubt your doubts and believe your beliefs." -- Switchfoot, Ode to Chin
the uninstaller is one of the quickest and cleanest I've seen. el_doop
Here's my initial reaction. I haven't had time to really try it out yet. It seems rather rough and ready with some glitches that make it look and feel less than professional. I am impressed with how it looks from the themes side of things.
That damn menu bug is still there: I have to hold down the mouse button the whole time or the menu vanishes.
It looks good, and it's very refreshing.
It can be really slow: clicking through the preferences dialog, there's a significant delay between my click and the dialog pane appearing.
If I open a new window from one that is maximised, the new one comes up full size (not maximised), and partly off the screen.
Ctrl+O browses the local disc. Consistent functionality with other products would be nice. It seems silly that Ctrl+O and Ctrl+L functionality can't be merged in a seamless manner. It would simpler in use that way.
Various text fields and text on other controls such as drop lists doesn't fit correctly and gets cut-off.
For some reason, Java was trying to use a proxy on 127.0.0.1:8000. It's supposed to be using my browser settings, but I have it set up for a direct connection (HTTP has a greyed out proxy set from when I was playing around with Junkbuster). I had to actually remove the entry, even though it is disabled.
I miss the drop list completion in combo boxes that I've got used to with IE.
Is it me, or does going back and forth in the history remember my position? This was one of the features that made me give up Netscape in favour of IE. If this is the case, a big "YAY" is in order!
Resizing the window is abysmal: the screen updates are dreadfully slow.
I've been using nightlies since day one. On a whim I decided to install PR3 yesterday and I wasn't impressed. The main Mozilla tree is *far* more stable and usable!
I do remember the days of IE4.0, however. It's pretty much at the same level 4.0 was when it came out. I'll be waiting for 6.1, hopefully when the PDT gets their act together and ships all the pending bugfixes.
Don't ask me why they've branched the tree so early - Mozilla has gone into a climb to 1.0 and the tree has been keeping stable as they do it. If we're lucky, they'll just merge the NS6.0 changes onto the Moz1.0 codebase and they'll have a decent little 6.1 release.
*sigh*
And now hopefully we can have them dedicate much more time to performance and memory footprint. I know it's been getting better but between it and chrome rendering speed, they are definately the biggest barriers to acceptance.
æeee!
The KDE requirement is not a big issue. IE requires Windows, so why can't Konqueror require KDE?
that's the sound of my normal, everyday breathing.
With any luck, they'll have incorporated all the current Mozilla bug fixes by Netscape Communicator 6.097g Cesium Edition PR1 (Now with HappyChannelBars!(TM)).
Or better, look at it this way: if AOL/Netscape came out tomorrow and announced that AOL 6.0 was going to rely heavily on a major open-source community codebase, would you be excited to use it?
10 PRINT "This is a"
20 PRINT "Haiku program."
Obliteracy: Words with explosions
If there is one single thing that annoys me most about IE it's the damn "Organize Favorites" window. That thing is insane! It's too damn small to work with. You can't resize it. It's a pain to move the bookmarks around. I hate the "Add to Favorites" window too. I like the Netscape "File Bookmark" and "Edit Bookmarks" much much better.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
I had problems with Java using the installer that downloads the components form the install (Debian 2.2 x86). So I just downloaded the full version under the ./sea directory and java works fine.
I also have Oracle Jinitiator running, the oracle enterprise manager and Outlook up. So memory is pegged all'round.
I do get some chugs under big websites like www.absolutesega.com, but Cnn, news,com, slashdot.org, sega.net, oracle.com, metalink.oracle.com all work great!
--
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
I've been working on a page that makes fairly heavy use of CSS, particularly the notoriously buggy "float" and "clear" functions. It looks like shit in IE 5 or NS 4.7 (and crashes NS 4.5, so watch out).
NS 6, M18 and IE 5.5 all render it quite nicely. However, Gecko takes a little under ten seconds to render it from my hard drive. IE takes a little under two. That's a pretty bad gap. And I suspect that ordinary users, who don't care about standards compliance or open source, are going to be even less patient with it than I am.
Use Konqueror - it's fast, stable, renders everything, and uses Netscape plugins and Java.
The *MOST* Important thing to do is remove *ANY* old mozillareg.dat's, and OLD Netscape Beta profiles and any old stale files.
I had an old profile that it upgraded, but everything just acted goofy, crashed, or rendered wrong (don't know why). After deleting the old profiles and creating a new one everything runs MUCH better, LOOKS much better and doesn't act goofy.
I'm glad they released this one. Its good to have a product they can get contsructive criticism from as well as build a foundation from. Better to ship now to get the product out then delay another 32 months to bloat it.
It's kind of sad to go to Netscape's home page and see that a news story about the Florida election battles has better page placement than an announcement about a major new version of their flagship product. Well, that is, if they still consider Communicator to be their flagship product.
I just got finished uninstalling Netscape 6 after 5 hours of crashes, improperly displayed web pages, slow slow SLOW load times (on a PowerMac G4), and a poorly designed, kludgy interface that takes up far too much screen real estate (even on my 21" display). The Netscape window has more buttons, widgets, links and arrows than a Rube Goldberg nightmare. Common fonts such as Times don't display correctly, all my AOL Instant Messenger preferences were hosed, I couldnt customize my bookmarks list and the preferences window ALONE had more bugs than I've found in Windows ME and Apple OS X combined. I'm sticking with IE.
"Eagles may soar, but weasels dont get sucked into jet engines."
You, sir, are a moron. And check your X configuration as well. Your FontPath is probably screwed up. Debian never got X right in the first place.
> should therefore be able to only download what I
> need
You can. Try the installer.
IE on Mac != IE on Windows. Two seperate browsers, two seperate rendering engines. M$ just confused the name.
I don't suppose anyone's gotten it to work in windows 98 with two monitors?
For me it works fine if it's on the primary display, but if it's on the secondary display the menus and buttons don't work.
Let's see if I can figure out bugzilla....
So it's there. i download it. 20 megs. not too bad considering (note, i didnt get mail, news, or half the plugins.) Nice installer.
Boot it up, loads quite quickly. Go to Slashdot, looks okay. the Gecko engine is showing its stuff, very nice indeed.
Go to news.bbc.co.uk. Not bad. again fast rendering.
Go to an e-commerce site that uses CSS and SSL quite extensively. this works on NS 4.75 and IE5.5 very well, i use it every day.
Netscape 6's handling of CSS is even worse than 4.75, from what i can tell. sometimes it even stops rendering CSS from a linked file halfway through the page. and when viewing pages under SSL, it is SO slow it is unreal.
This looks like a particularly buggy mosaic milestone with AOL tags bunched on it. i will wait for a 6.x release i hear good things about, but nothing until then.
Fross
Quite interesting -- it was Internet Explorer 5.5 that was showing the cached version, even though it's supposed to expire the cache whenever I restart the browser--I'd just started the browser and loaded /. when I saw the news.
I'd be surprised if MS was deliberately making that page in IE5.5 show an old version, so I'm going to assume that it had to be propogated to all the netscape servers.
Looks okay now.
--
If development had been focused on top quality, professionalism, and usability, rather than translucent windows and pictures of naked women, we would by this time have a browser entirely based on Motif and using ToolTalk for all its media translation services. We'd be living in an Open Systems (but not necessarily open source) world with truly usable software, not shit like Mozilla.
I want to be able to actually USE my software, I don't care if it "looks cool"!
And no, this is not a troll, I'm tired of getting moderated down as a troll because I don't like the dumbass trendy look of things like GTK and Qt.
What OS are you using mozilla on? If its Linux or Windows, its really easy to add SSL support. Under the Debug Menu, choose Install PSM. Then follow the directions on the page that you get taken to.
--
Preventive War is like committing suicide for fear of death. - Otto Von Bismarck
Dunno about NS6, but Mozilla has UI for customizing the sidebar.
IE works on Windows, through another horribly bloated abstraction layer on UNIX (Solaris and HP-UX) and on Macintosh. Mozilla doesn't really support more platforms - just more configurations of UNIX.
Debian's X configuration is always screwed up out of the box. Garunteed.
Then something in your Javascript is very broken. Mozilla's support of W3C DOM1 and DOM2 is better than any other browser's.
Sorry... but replaced Debian a while ago. It just never works out of the box with TNT2 cards, at least not in my experience. Had problems with a V3 as well.
http://segment7.net/mozilla/links/l ink s.html It displays all of the links from a document in the sidebar, and can be insanely useful. Go check it out!
--
Eric is chisled like a Greek Godess
marotti.com
It's great that they put something out.. they really had to. Now lets hope that they can put the service updates, etc. very quickly.
Congradulations to the Mozilla team for the hard work.
--------------------
Memory Usage: IE
Time to execute (time between execution and viable appearance of the window): IE
Java features: Netscape
Java speed: IE (they did tweak Java for speed and stability when they made Microsoft VM)
HTML Source options: IE (IE opens the source in Notepad; Netscape just shows it to you)
Minimum of invasive advertising: IE (Netscape installs the AOL icon by default; at least IE doesn't hawk MSN on its users)
Stability: IE
So the winner in functionality is IE; however, use what you like; browsers ARE a matter of personal preference.
"Ancillary does not mean you get to rule the world." --U.S. Circuit Judge Harry Edwards, speaking to the FCC's lawyer
Be sure to grab some themes at Netscape Theme Park, as well as here. I am using the new Orbit theme, and Sky Pilot. Both themes react very well, and make browsing a lot of fun.
I found it quite stable and fast. Maybe you didn't remove your .mozilla (or .netscape depending on which is used.. I haven't investigated)
It's CTRL-F5 in IE, not Shift-Reload!
But, like I said, I'm just glad I'm no longer using 150 MB of memory. Yech.
Of course, I've upgraded (yes, a huge upgrade for Linux users, at least) to the 11/16/2000 (21) build of Mozilla. Wow it's a massive improvement over standard Netscape.
--
Ben Kosse
--
Ben Kosse
Remember Ed Curry!