Slashdot Mirror
Browser Wars II: CompuServe Strikes Back
securitas writes "Today CompuServe (an AOL subsidiary) launched CompuServe 7.0 with Netscape as the underlying browser. CompuServe started testing Komodo, a Gecko-based client, last year, and is now experimenting with Gecko-based AOL clients. CompuServe's 3 million-member user base is seen as a testbed before turning AOL's 34 million members into Netscape users later this year." Update: 04/16 20:54 GMT by T : Also an interesting story at CNN on the upcoming Mozilla 1.0. RC1 is very nice, as have been most recent builds.
I hope this spells the end of ActiveX website "enhancements." Having a large segments of people using a standards-based, non-Windows-specific browser will definitely improve the usability of the Web
Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
Why does anyone think that the key to escaping the so-called "microsoft deathgrip" lies in an alternate web browser? It makes A LOT more sense to say "maybe if Apple would port their OS to X86 architecture, there would be some progress away from MS," or even something like "maybe if the Open Source community could come up with a decent office suite that is actually WORTH the $0 price tag, there would be some progress away from MS." But how in the hell does a browser have anything to do with it? I (and many others that I know) use various Mozilla builds on various Windows versions, and we're still hooked on MS because we like the REAL products, Windows and Office.
I think this whole "browser war" gets way too much emphasis these days. It made sense 7 years ago when Netscape wasn't free and was trying to compete. Today, who gives a shit what browser comes out on top?? Shouldn't you be more concerned about competing with Microsoft's OTHER software?
Not likely. A staggering number of AOL'ers are still using versions 3.0 and 4.0 of the AOL client, so I can only assume that similar percentages of compuserve users are doing the same thing. I don't think we can count on all of Compuserve, let alone 34 million AOL accounts, to suddenly be running on Gecko code any time in the near future.
Forcing an update download on customers is possible, however. Certain online games are now in the practice of forcing a patch on users on a weekly basis. This same model could work for the big ISP's to keep their customers updated with the latest technology.
It could also play into the hands of pushers of spyware and adware. What better way for LEO's to spy on someone suspected of a crime than to 'push' an update to his AOL or Compuserve account?
The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
No, I'm not talking about W3 standards. While those are a good thing in theory, they're only good in practice when BOTH of the major players in the market embrace them in the same fashion.
For example, while CSS is great for type control (in the main), it sucks for element placement because by the time you go through all of the necessary browser workarounds and browser detects and different versions of the same content, you may as well have just built the damned thing using tables.
All this talk about how Mozilla rocks and IE blows, or vice-versa, is completely beside the point. We can't have a better Web until the two dominant forces in the Browser Universe start applying standards in the same fashion.
Of course, O'Reilly would be bummed, because they'd no longer have to publish books like the CSS Pocket Guide (which delineates in great detail the myriad ways in which different tags are supported by different browsers).
I'm still pessimistic, but overall if Netscape finds a way to regain enough marketshare to become viable again, it may encourage Netscape and IE to compete solely on the basis of features not tied to the rendering engine.
Hey, a guy can dream, right?
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
> Today, who gives a shit what browser comes out on top?? Shouldn't you be more concerned about competing with Microsoft's OTHER software?
No.
Today browsing is absolutely vital for anyone with a computer. If we drop the ball, then the internet will be a proprietary windows-only thing in a matter of years (like dropping html in favor of word format, or that kind of thing).
No OS will ever be able to take off, as _everything_ that people will use will be totally proprietary.
Mozilla is the _most_ important application today.
As much as a troll as this is, you exemplify the wrong attitude that has become dominant in the open source world. Beyond the hype, the purpose of open source is to improve software, period. Open source isn't about defeating the evils in the world or getting things for free, it's about moving technology forward. You don't spend a Saturday in a soup kitchen because you get something tangible from it. If Microsoft decides to take the high-quality TCP/IP stack code written by FreeBSD and integrating it into Windows 2000, then let them. By hundreds of people contributing their effort into that TCP/IP stack, they have made Windows 2000 more stable. That, my friend, is the goal in the end, better software. Not because someone paid for it, but because someone decided it needed to be done the right way.
<Amanda`> I just went out to the parking lot in my bathrobe to exchange warez CDs.
Hello, we are talking about 3 Million people! Can't anyone else see that this is just a shoot load of beta testers? Compuserve will probably get zounds of customer feedback saying this or that is broken, and by knowing what real users need, the dev teams can fix the bugs really need to be.
Bye!
Today, who gives a shit what browser comes out on top??
I do.
If one company controls 99% of web browsing, they could eventually move to controlling 99% of webservers by implementing "features" that only work with their server/browser implementation. I believe that's why MS came up with IE in the first place.
Sounds conspiracy theorist, right?
Read this, then.
They're known for this sort of thing. I used to be a huge MS hater, and I've grown to tolerate them over the past 2-or-so years (since Win2000, really), but it's crap like this that puts me back on the skeptic team.
S
You've got the right idea, but you're slightly backwards in terms of the execution.
I fully agree that Mozilla is probably the BEST open-source project to date, but it is by no means the MOST IMPORTANT. A browser is an add-on, a "helper" application at best. True, web services are becoming more and more vital to computing, and everyone who uses a computer really needs a browser. But a "browser war" is not the way to come out ahead in this arena.
People generally don't switch browsers. That is a fact - cold, hard, and undeniably true. Microsoft has been onto this trend for at least 5 or 6 years now...that's why they bundle their own. So a "browser war" doesn't help anything, because it doesn't get MS off the desktop. That's what I was pointing out in my original post - I'm one of the rare few who use a non-MS browser in Windows...but Microsoft isn't even SLIGHTLY hurt by this fact, because their REAL PRODUCTS - windows and office - are still the best on the desktop for me and probably 85% of the rest of the world's PC's. So how does the open source community hope to gain anything by fighting a pointless "browser war"? Why not just focus on making a better browser AND a better desktop environment, so they have something to BUNDLE it with? That's what will make MS more competitive. But the open source community is distracted by the pointless bickering over whose browser handles java plugins better.
My point, to paraphrase once more, is that the "browser war" has been blown WAY out of proportion and is becoming a distraction to what open source SHOULD be doing. I'm not trying to downplay the significance of a solid open-source browser.
Yeah, I'm sure that all those paying subscribers can't wait to have their services disrupted so that they can be guinea pigs for AOL. I'm sure they have nothing better to do than send Compuserve "zounds of customer feedback" saying that the things they want to do are now broken.
<sigh>
Don't get me wrong, Mozilla is great and I love/use it, but there are still some very serious issues:
Hope those CompuServe users can hang in there until 1.2 or so.
(I'd link, but they don't take referrals from SlashDot... here's the Mozilla Bugzilla Home Page.)
There is no need to use a SlashDot sig for SEO...
I realized last night that I'm now completely dependent on the superior feature set of Mozilla's web browser.
I ran across a web site which had obviously been written to cater to MSIE browsers, and eschew web standards compliance. The pages didn't load (at all) in Mozilla 0.9.9, so I decided to give Konqueror a shot before giving up entirely. Konqueror rendered the pages (kudos to the K-people!) but made me realize why I like Mozilla so much. Pop-up windows, animated gif ads, and the clutter of multiple windows was enough to make me groan more than once while trying to navigate the site.
Oh, and before anyone posts "Konqueror does that, you moron!" realize that I'm not trying to rain on the K parade, just extoll the virtues of my fair web browser.
To avoid the dreaded Off-Topic, I'd just like to close by saying that I hope the experiment works, and Compuserve users get a chance to take control of their web browsing experience. Hopefully the privacy and anti-annoyance controls aren't removed when they turn it over to the consumer users.
People shape laws. Not the other way around.
How about adding a page to slashdot to show current/past statistics of browsers that are used to access SlashDot? A link from the main page would also be nice!
-- &&
> Both companies will continue their practices as
> they always have in order to appear to have the
> 'better product'.
You seem to have forgotten that the Gecko engine is open source. There are plenty of non-Netscape people working on Gecko and we will not deviate from Mozilla.org's stated policy of standards support, nor would we stand by and allow Netscape employees to violate that policy (which, by the way, they have shown absolutely NO sign of wanting to do).
the only cool part of the mozilla project is the engine, and that's only if you're a developer and interested in building your own browser.
You're entitled to your opinion, even though it's wrong.
XUL is very cool. Need a browser with no menus of buttons, as an interface to a web-based application for a control-freak client? I got Mozilla (in the M18 days) to do this with a few hours of messing around in the various xml files (and a very small bit of javascript hacks to stop that damn throbber from exiting). No C or C++ coding at all. And I am not a browser or Mozilla developer - perl coding is my speed.
Browser came up to a pre-determined URL and user had no visible way to go anywhere else. (Unfortunately, the project was cacelled before I figured how to inhibit the control-* keys, oh well....)
"that's not encryption - it's a new perl script that I'm working on..." - from some Matrix parody