Slashdot Mirror


AOL Lays Off 50 Netscape Coders

xcable points out a CNET story which begins "America Online on Tuesday said it has laid off 50 employees involved in Web browser development at its Netscape subsidiary amid a reorganization of its Mozilla open-source browser team," and offers a reminder that "AOL recently made a deal with Microsoft to use IE in future AOL releases." This adds a bit more detail to yesterday's (updated) story about the establishment of the Mozilla foundation.

19 of 713 comments (clear)

  1. If... by Soukyan · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If Mozilla surpasses IE in the next couple years, do you think AOL will try to bail on Microsoft? This could get interesting. The litigation is over for now so the browser wars must begin again... as if they ever ended.

    1. Re:If... by Gerv · · Score: 5, Insightful

      if they had worked on the portable Gecko completely and forgotten (Or at the very least, pushed right back) things like XUL and skined interfaces, they could have written a handful of application shells for their supported platforms and dropped in an excelent browser engine.

      So, Mr. Know-It-All Anonymous Coward, pontificating from on high, here's a pop quiz. If you have to implement an entire widget set in your browser to have any hope of supporting styleable form controls etc. (as outlined in CSS2 and above), is it better to:

      a) Write one user interface for all platforms using those same controls, and use that UI as another testbed for them
      b) Write five or more separate user interfaces, and have to keep them all up to date and in sync?

      Without XUL, there would have been no Netscape help in doing Mozilla for Linux, Mac, BSD etc. because there would have been no incentive to chase such a small part of the browser market.

      Gerv
      (gerv@mozilla.org)

    2. Re:If... by Gerv · · Score: 5, Informative

      What was the choice to go with XUL instead of a cross-platform toolkit like Qt or Wx?

      I wasn't in on that decision, as it was before my time, but I can make a guess. Back in October 1998:

      - QT wasn't free
      - GTK wasn't ready (although we do use bits of it)

      And anyway, like I said, you need to have control of the widget set if you want to be able to modify it to allow animated GIFs on buttons, and other stuff you need to support CSS2 styling.

      Gerv

    3. Re:If... by keith73 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It could happen. As Peter-Paul Koch theorized in this article (slashdot thread).
      MS may lose ground in the browser market because they have frozen IE at version 6 SP1. The next version, 7 will only be available on the next Windows OS. With that a few years away, then the adoption of the new OS and browser taking another few years, the other browsers out there, Mozilla and Opera mainly, will make gains in the market because of standards, constant updates and new features being added, support for new technologies that may emerge in the next few years, etc.
      In other words, IE will become the rabbit, taking a siesta under a tree while a bunch of turtles slowly creep by.

      You can't simply dismiss the possibility with a wave of the hand.

      - keith

      --
      -- Does anybody know where the 'any' key is on the keyboard?
  2. Whaaa???? by Bob+Abooey · · Score: 5, Interesting
    They laid off 50 workers and the article claims that to be less than 10% of the Netscape workforce?????

    What the hell are all those guys doing there?

    --

    All the best,
    --Bob

    1. Re:Whaaa???? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      ---------- Forwarded message ----------
      Subject: Netscape is dead
      Resent-Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 14:14:05 -0700 (PDT)
      Resent-From: champions@netscape.com
      Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 14:13:27 -0700
      From: Daniel Veditz
      To: champions@netscape.com

      well, the final whackage happened this morning... No more Netscape client.
      Of the handful of apps people left three I know of (Seth included) were
      transfered to Photon (AOL Communicator), the rest laid off. The Gecko team
      (backend), which mostly survived the December cuts, was dismantled. A lot
      were cut, a few found other jobs in AOL, none are going to be working on
      Gecko.

      Mozilla development is now going forth under a new "Mozilla Foundation" --
      see the mozilla.org site for details. AOL's kicking in a chunk of change
      and some machines to get it started, and then it's on its own.

      The evangelism team was cut in half and disbursed, so the revamped
      devedge.netscape.com site is now dead.

      There will not be any more Netscape releases. When asked about security
      firedrills execs said they'd assemble a "SWAT team" to address it and
      possibly push out a bugfix, but I'm guessing the PR would have to be
      pretty bad for them to go to that expense.

      Dunno what happens to the newsgroups. I suspect they're already unofficial
      and function only because Markus makes time for it every once in a while.

      Good luck to us all,
      -Dan Veditz

      P.S. I'm still employed, folks already working on the AOL client were not
      affected. But there's rumors of another layoff/reorg after the next AOL
      client ships so my time may still come ;-)

  3. The Register by KingDaveRa · · Score: 5, Informative

    The Register have an interesting take on this too here

  4. Re:As always, more proof of the old saying: by lovebyte · · Score: 5, Funny

    We have to complete our assimilation of the Alpha quadrant.
    Wrong. MS does not support alpha chips anymore. Hey, even Compaq/HP does not support them anymore!

    --

    I'll do it for cheesy poofs.

  5. Re:They've sort of laid off Mozilla as well... by Gerv · · Score: 5, Informative

    slow poison to Mozilla

    Not at all. Mozilla will continue, overseen by the new Mozilla Foundation.

    And if a gift of $2M is "slow poison", then perhaps we should get them really annoyed - they might shower us with even more money. ;-)

    Gerv
    (gerv@mozilla.org)

  6. $2 milllion over 2 yrs? by jlusk4 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    $2e6/50 = $20,000/yr

    And, if that 50 was only 10% of the Netscape workforce, and we split that $2 mil over 500 users, that's a Christmas bonus, not a salary.

    So, $1 mil/yr for the Moz Foundation is chump change. An earlier statement that "5 coders is plenty for Mozilla" seems kind of silly to me. I wonder how big the IE team is.

    Thanks for the good time, honey, I'll call you. Here, buy yourself something nice.

    Now we get to see how Moz survives as a *real* open-source project (i.e., w/out funding). At least it's got a good code base (right?).

    John.

  7. Re:They've sort of laid off Mozilla as well... by mpsmps · · Score: 5, Informative
    According to wheezy's post on Mozillazine:

    That article plays some number games, sadly. There is no such thing as "Netscape staff." Netscape is a brand. I repeat: NETSCAPE IS A BRAND. When the statement "less than 10% of Netscape staff" is made, that should translate to "less than 10% of AOL's Mountain View campus." The bottom line is, 100% of former Mozilla developers in the employ of AOL are no longer working on Mozilla. I don't know of any exceptions.
  8. Re:Big Deal by syle · · Score: 5, Funny

    Hey! Without my job at Netscape, I would never have the free time to post this comment!

    --

    /syle

  9. Sigh by 4of12 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    So Microsoft has more than enough cash on hand to buy out AOL/TW.

    If the marketplace were completely free and unfettered, you'd think that Microsoft would, rather than pour money down the hole that has been MSN, simply buy out AOL with its 30 million subscribers.

    But Microsoft won't do this because they know they can't; that the DoJ would immediately ask questions about unfair market consolidation were such a buyout offer made.

    So instead MSFT pours money into MSN and leverages its dominant products of Windows, Office and Explorer to subsidize MSN.

    As AOL dies slowly over a few years, this will be viewed as "OK", the marketplace in action, and no inconvenient questions will be raised except by AOL management and stockholders.

    Since MS can rely upon a steady revenue stream from Windows and Office to subsidize its efforts into taking over new markets they enjoy an advantage that AOL and other competitors simply don't have.

    People buy Windows and Office like they're a standard, a necessity, that's no more avoidable than paying gasoline taxes.

    Yes, Microsoft has the enviable position of just collecting taxes - like a government. And competing against the government is a no-win situation.

    It is a foregone conclusion that AOL will lose. They will wither to nothing, or simply to a marginally-sized pet, like Apple, who would have died long ago if Microsoft had decided to not release Office for Mac.

    --
    "Provided by the management for your protection."
  10. Netscape was just a bargaining chip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    AOL kept them around long enough to extract that $750M from Microsoft without having to waste time and money pursuing the antitrust complaint.

    Microsoft paid what is pocket change to them to deliver the final blow to the stake in the heart of what was once their biggest competitor in the browser arena. AOL/TW got badly needed cash, Microsoft got another seven years of IE dominance amongst the mouth-breathing internet user set. Web pages will continue to be designed so they'll look good for AOL retards instead of being designed to comply with established standards so they look good in all standards-compliant browsers.

    As usual, Microsoft wins, the other party to the agreement thinks they won but will later realize they didn't, and the internet-using public loses.

  11. Re:Big Deal by SpriteGF · · Score: 5, Informative

    Failed in the sense that it never dug Netscape, as a browser and company, out of the hole. But I'm sure glad to see that Mozilla rose out of all that effort.

    As to what they were doing, you should check out ex-mozilla, a list of all the ex-employees that have accumulated over the past --- decade? --- and a little description each wrote up of what they did and what they're now doing. Bittersweet.

  12. Re:Netscape Probably Hurt AOL Sales by donutz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Tieing yourself to a browser more than 9 of 10 people don't want to use seems like a good way to cut sales, not increase them.

    That's a little more harshly stated than I think the reality is. What survey has shown that 9 out of 10 people don't want Netscape/Mozilla? And if that survey exists, did people get to try the advanced features that these browsers have that IE lacks?

    I think it's more an issue of 9 out of 10 people don't know there's a better browser out there, so they use what comes with their computer.

  13. You see, grennis.. by Marc2k · · Score: 5, Funny

    Bob Slydell: The Netscape developers.
    Bill Lumbergh: Who're they?
    Bob Porter: You know, squirrely looking guys, mumble a lot.
    Bill Lumbergh: Oh, yeah.
    Bob Slydell: Yeah, we can't actually find a record of them being current employees here.
    Bob Porter: I looked into it more deeply and I found that apparently what happened is that they were laid off five years ago and no one ever told them, but through some kind of glitch in the payroll department, they still get paychecks.
    Bob Slydell: So we just went a ahead and fixed the glitch.
    Bill Lumbergh: Great.
    Dom Portwood: So um, the Netscape developers have been let go?
    Bob Slydell: Well just a second there, professor. We uh, we fixed the *glitch*. So they won't be receiving paychecks anymore, so it will just work itself out naturally.
    Bob Porter: We always like to avoid confrontation, whenever possible. Problem solved from your end.

    --
    --- What
  14. Does this mean that AOL will abandon pre-XP users? by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    AOL has announced that it will use IE for the browser for seven years. Microsoft has announced that there will no longer be a standalone version of IE. So, if AOL is to still work on existing Windows boxes, then it must remain at IE6. But, it's hard to beleive that they won't want to move to the latest and greatest (tongue in cheek) IE when it ships, but that would force AOL to either maintain separate code bases or drop support for current versions of Windows. If they choose the separate code bases, then using the least common denominator approach, AOL won't be able to include future web features, because they don't exist in IE6. Dropping support for older versions of Windows, is a very calculated risk. There are two possible outcomes. Facing a forced upgrade, either AOL's would switch to a different ISP or shell out the bucks for a new version of Windows (and possibly new hardware). My bet would be to switch ISPs, but I'm sure AOL and MS are counting on people buying a new version of Windows, instead. If they are right, that's not a bad investment for MS $750M to get AOL users to all buy a copy of the next version of Windows. At 35 million AOL subscribers and a $100 upgrade cost, MS stands to gross $3.5 billion dollars. Not a bad return on investment.

  15. It's an IE web (unfortunately) by wilsonjd · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The problem with Joe Average User trying to use any browser other than IE is that there are too many websites out there that ONLY work on IE. They don't use web standars, they use IE-specific code. Try to view those pages on Mozilla (or nearly any other browser that is standards-based,) and they simply don't work. It's a chicken-egg problem: those sites won't change, because 90% of users use IE. Users won't change, becuase many sites won't work outside IE. I had always hoped that if AOL switched to Mozilla, it would FORCE those websites to change, because of the number of users AOL has. Unfortunetly, it doesn't look like it will happen.