AOL to Release Netscape 7.2 Based on Mozilla 1.7

securitas writes "ZDNet's Evan Hansen reports that AOL will release Netscape Navigator 7.2 based on Mozilla 1.7 code this summer. The update comes a year after version 7.1 and after Microsoft stopped standalone development in Internet Explorer. eWEEK's Matt Hicks offers analysis of the new Netscape release, citing studies that say while Microsoft has a 93.9% browser market share and 87% of business users use IE, 25% still use Netscape and 11% use Opera -- the math works because people use multiple browsers. Hicks asks the question 'Is the Netscape Browser Being Reborn or Just Stabilized?' Hicks interviews several people in the know including a former Netscape engineer, an industry analyst, and Opera Software CEO Jon von Tetzchner."

Comments

Re:Why?

[Bill_Royle]

With Netscape, you get AOL shortcuts on your desktop.

Wait, you said advantage?

Re:Why?

[byolinux]

Netscape is a name that non-geeks have heard of.

If you ask some clueless decision maker if it's okay to deploy Mozilla, you'll probably get turned down on the basis of "I've not heard of that" whereas people who've used the web for a while, will have heard of Netscape.

My mother's heard of Netscape, she thinks she uses it every day, even though she actually uses Firefox.

(Sorry mum!)

Re:I have to ask

[Oxide]

Netscape has the commercial name and history that people and business know and trust.

Why replace the default browser?

[anshil]

Don't take me wrong I'm a mozilla fan and linux user.

But honestly if I'm running windows, what real motiviation is there to download a replacement browser when IE is already installed, and works?

I can't be mad at any secretary 'cause she uses IE instead of Mozilla/Netscape. Of course of political reasons she shouldn't, but practically?

If you sell an operating system, you practically just have the ultimate power to drive any other software out of business by bundeling and installing it by default.

Re:Why replace the default browser?

[barks]

Besides the fact that Mozilla was the first on the scene to include an option to block out pop-ups (I haven't bother to check has IE included that option yet?) that alone should be a reason for people to download a separate browser.

I laugh when I see a cheesy newbie ISP commercial that promotes "We have pop-up blocker technology!!!" Shit no kidding, so does my free Mozilla browser.

Re:Why replace the default browser?

[Feztaa]

I think you've got that totally backwards.

The problem is that when you buy windows and you get all that stuff bundled with it, all that stuff is made by microsoft. When you get a set of linux distro install CDs, it comes with 10 browsers, 20 mail clients, a few media players, 5 instant messaging clients, and a million other things. The problem isn't that nothing is bundled with linux, the problem is that EVERYTHING is bundled with linux. But that bundling isn't bad, because each program that gets bundled has it's own independant development community that is just a loose group of individuals, and isn't even commercial to begin with.

When you install linux, the hassle isn't because you have to go find stuff yourself, the hassle is because everything is given to you and you have to choose what you want to use.

The idea here is that when MS bundles MS's own media player into windows, you have no incentive to buy any other media players, so the media player market collapses because nobody ever uses anything but WMP anyway. When Mandrake bundles xine, that doesn't illegitimately control the market because a) you can easily remove xine, b) Mandrake doesn't get any benefit from you using xine or a competitor, and c) competing media players come with the system too, so nobody is being locked out.

Re:Why replace the default browser?

[Mr_Silver]

Tabbed browsing and pop-up blocking? And your last line is what is causing a lot of these anti-monopolistic lawsuits against MS.

My office is full of non-techincal people. Looking around most people only have 1 (yes, one) IE window open. When I mention tabbed browsing, most people confirm my observations - that is, they only have one (and occasionally two) windows open. With cases like this, tabbed browsing could be seen as overkill to a problem that doesn't really exist (for them).

With regards to pop-up windows, the next service pack will contain a pop-up blocker for windows, but most of the clueful people have google toolbar already installed which does that for you.

Mozilla and it's tabbed browsing, mouse gestures, pop up blockers, type ahead find and the raft of other nifty features is great for the "power surfer" but I swear that based on the people in my office, it's not something they particulary need or feel the need to have enough to even go out and try.

Note that i'm not saying these features are bad, they're very good, but the problem with adoption here is that a lot of people don't realise that the average Joe doesn't surf the web in a way that Mozilla would benifit him. If he only goes to a few websites then there is a chance he'll never see unwanted pop up adverts.

I asked my mother about pop up adverts last month and she'd only ever come across one in the two years she'd been surfing the web. Granted, she wasn't surfing a very large number of sites - but it was difficult to sell a feature to her when she didn't really know why she needed it.

Re:netscape is 5.5 times better than mozilla

[Elendil]

Shouldn't it be 7.2/1.7=4.24 times better? See, we're already closing the gap! Go Mozilla!

Re:Call me crazy...

[pubjames]

They might be letting Mozilla and others gain a bit more ground

I doubt it. I think they've just stopped work on IE because they will have a completely new version in Longhorn. This new IE will include lots of new MS "standards", and they will really promote that heavily. They'll of course be competing with themselves again, trying to get people to move from the current IE to the new version, and so the more incentive people have to do that the better. In other words, it's actually in their interest to let the current version of IE slide so people will have more incentive to upgrade to the all new version in Longhorn.

Browser stats

[eliasen]

Where do they get the stats that IE is 93% of the market? That's never what I see. Admittedly, if you have a bad site with broken HTML that only IE will display, IE will make up the majority of your browsers. Everyone else just goes away. It's a Catch-22. But if you have a site that is standards-compliant, and platform-neutral, the numbers are much, much better. Here are my stats from the past month:

MS Internet Explorer 62.1 %
Mozilla 10.9 %
FireFox 9.3 %
Opera 4.5 %
Safari 2.9 %
Netscape 2.8 %
Unknown 2.2 %
Galeon 1.6 %
Konqueror 1.0 %
Firebird (Old FireFox) 0.6 %
Others 1.7 %

Re:Will real browser gain market?

[byolinux]

You're very wrong, and here's why...

Computers *are* consumer devices now, or at least can be. Not all of them are, but then not all VCRs are too.

Computers can be easy to use, people should certainly never need to build a computer from scratch, or reinstall their OS beyond putting a CD in the drive and turning the machine on, and as for systems programming - you're out of your mind. Perhaps you wish computers were some elitist, holier-than-thou priesthood, but I'm afraid you're wrong, wrong, wrong. WebTV failed because people want to do more than surf the web. They might have kids who want to do homework, or they may study themselves, or they might just enjoy exploring what a computer can do for them. So what if it breaks now and then? It should be easy enough for a user to restore.. perhaps we need machines with a read-only file system and all files to be store on a USB pendrive or something to assist this.

You come across as arrogant, but not stupid, so forgive me; but when you say ignorant people shouldn't be using computers, you're right. Sadly, you're the ignorant one.

I call you crazy

[RoLi]

The only reason why Microsoft doesn't continue development is because they are happy with the status quo.

Continue developing Internet Explorer would be BAD for Microsoft

You know why?

Because any change is a threat to the status quo.

Because if IE7 can handle transparent PNGs and lots of sites start to use it, millions of IE6 users will upgrade. And when they upgrade there is the danger that they might upgrade to Mozilla and not IE7.

The same goes for CSS2/3, SVG, etc.

Developing IE is not in the interest of Microsoft, they would be stupid if they would do it at this time.

But there are a couple of reasons why IE will lose its domination in the next couple of years: Linux is making inroads, Mac-users are switching to Safari, Playstation3 will probably run Mozilla and cellphones run Opera.