Netscape 7.2 To Be Released August 3rd

Following up a story from May, linux2004 writes "for those who thought Netscape was dead after firing all their staff and spinning Mozilla off into a non-profit foundation, then think again. It was announced a while back that Netscape would continue releases of their browser suite and now the release date has been confirmed as August 3rd as a free download or by buying a CD. I don't think it'll take the attention away from Firefox but will be a decent upgrade for those using Netscape 7.1. The 7.2 release will be based on Mozilla 1.7 and will probably have the usual Netscape additions."

Comments

The best idea

[jb.hl.com]

A better idea would probably be a Netscape branded Firefox. That would kick ass.

Re:The best idea

[PoprocksCk]

I totally agree. But it shouldn't just contain Firefox. I think Netscape 8.0 should give you the option to install several components, just like always. I think it should have Netscape Navigator, based on Firefox 1.0, Netscape Mail based on Thunderbird, and Netscape Composer based on Nvu. I think they should scrap the AIM addition -- most people that use AIM use it already, and wouldn't be willing to switch to a half-baked Netscape-integrated version. Then again, maybe they could give the option to install regular AIM in the Netscape installer? Who knows, the possibilities are endless!

Glad to hear it

[bpowell423]

I use Netscape 7.1 right now, rather than Mozilla or Firefox because I have some online financial sites that recognize Netscape and IE, but refuse to work with Mozilla. I refuse to use IE whenever possible, so, I'm glad to hear that Netscape keeps marching on.

Only reason is the Netscape mail extension

[nayigeta]

Otherwise, I do not see a reason to move away from Firefox.

Unfortunately, it is unlikely that Thunderbird will support Netscape mail, being proprietory.

An open-source warning?

[mccalli]

OK, I'm mostly pro-open source but this one is interesting. What happened here is that a company had a product, fired the staff developing that product, and then still released a new version utilising the continuing free labour of those who it had put out of a job.

Bit of a cautionary tale perhaps?

Cheers,
Ian

Re:An open-source warning?

[_Sprocket_]

OK, I'm mostly pro-open source but this one is interesting. What happened here is that a company had a product, fired the staff developing that product, and then still released a new version utilising the continuing free labour of those who it had put out of a job.

That's an interesting point. However, you're cutting out a whole lot of Netscape history. By the time Netscape released an Open Source codebase, it was already a doomed company. Creating the Mozilla project was a final defiant action. AOL's purchase of Netscape was both added life and final blow to what we knew as Netscape. It was an indication of Netscape's position as well as a corporate shift that caused a mass exodus of Netscape talent. But at the same time, it did present some continued corporate sponsorship to the Mozilla project.

The parent's timeline makes it sound like the decline of Netscape's employment started at, or was a direct result of the Open Source process. But this decline was already well underway. And it could even be argued that the Mozilla project maintained value in even a small number of Netscape jobs.

There is one major issue that would be easy to overlook. If Netscape had remained proprietary, it would have simply faded away with so many other codebases wiped out by the dot-boom collapse. And as many of us know, a failed product is not a great source of employment in itself.

Is Netscape Sun?

[grunt107]

This is a rather odd pattern. Sun gives OOo as a free [no $ - N$ for the rest of this] alternative to Word and sells a slightly more advanced version called StarOffice...

Now Netscape is doing basically the same thing. Add in the other Linux vendors that offer something N$ and another with a price tag and spinoff of the old business model (lower optioned item at cost/loss to hook 'em and high-profit items to upgrade them later) is created.

The real question for the software world is if this is a viable model in the long run?

In OSS, there are quite a few individuals that keep the N$ items going, but is there much incentive for the priced offerings (other than businesses for support/peace of mind)?

It will be interesting to watch this trend unfold

Firefox launch

[levell]

I'm not sure whether it'll help or hinder the Firefox launch, I don't really think it'll have much effect either way. What might do though is agreeing to advertise it so if you're webmaster of a high traffic site or have a say in what goes into a dead-tree magazine click the link...

Does anybody take them seriously anymore?

[grasshoppa]

I know I don't. I am grateful to them for the mozilla project, don't get me wrong, but netscape is little more than an AOL whore.

It's akin to MS taking the latest mozilla, turning it into IE.

Re:take attention away from Firefox?

[linuxci]

Firefox is getting so much press now that I'm sure a lot more people know what it is compared to, say, even just a month ago.

But it's still good that a browser with long time name recognition is still in the race and it gives people choice, and choice is good if it's standards compliant choice. Many web stats show that Mozilla is above it's Netscape branded cousin now in market share but I still know people who were happy with 7.1, these people preferred a suite and perhaps Netscape use their marketing dollars on this while Mozilla directs its marketing efforts towards the standalone Firefox and Thunderbird.

Re:take attention away from Firefox?

[finkployd]

I'm not sure how true that is anymore. After the recent IE debacles, just about every news source (printed, online, radio, tv) was talking about alternative browsers for a while. Firefox and Opera were always the two mentioned. I think more people have heard of it (although still probably never tried it) than you think.

Finkployd

Since it's basically Gecko...

[Denyer]

...this could be a damn good thing. The non-technical people in marketing and sales probably remember Netscape, so if anything a slight shift towards standards-compliant code which works in more browsers is likely.

That's as long as Netscape don't introduce additional bugs into their branded version, of course.

Re:take attention away from Firefox?

[seasunset]

I suppose that even Netscape its not a known brand (ie by average users). Most of current Internet users are either post-Netscape dominance or didn't care that much and don't remember.

Summarizing: Netscape nowadays is almost as minoritary as Firefox for Joe user.

[Writing this post on Mozilla 1.7 BTW]

Netscape/Mozilla/Firefox

[hcdejong]

I'm all for choice in the browser market, but why bother fielding 3 browsers, all based on the same code? AFAI can see, the functionality of all three could be achieved with a basic browser plus plugins/extensions/installation options. What's the reasoning behind The Way Things Are?

Re:Netscape/Mozilla/Firefox

[kryptkpr]

Mozilla - Bloated everything and the kitchen sink browser+mail+news..

Netscape - Same as above, but full of AOL branding.. built-in AIM, and all of their other bullshit.

FireFox - A lightweight, fast, extendable browser that's right for 98% of people who just watch to ditch IE.

This is good news

[PaulJS]

This is brilliant news there's still some web sites I know that say they support Netscape and not Firefox, if this can get the Netscape marketshare up until Firefox becomes a household name (and it's on its way - there's a lot of marketing planned around the 1.0 release) then it'll encourage webmasters to fix their bugs.

Also it means there's a recent secure browser that people can switch to from IE if the pre-1.0 version number puts people off Firefox (I know the Mozilla suite is 1.7 but they never really did aim that one at end users and doesn't have the new extension management stuff Firefox will have).

If you look at the copyright notice in the Netscape Store article linked to in the story you'll also notice that the store is run by MozSource which is the retail arm of the Mozilla Foundation.

Mozilla was paid by AOL.

[nlinecomputers]

As I understand this Mozilla was paid by AOL to set this up for them. Not that this changed any of the procedures to create Netscape. Ever since Mozilla was founded they have crated Mozilla first and then rebranded and added the custom Netscape code on top after they rolled out Mozilla. One of the reasons the 1.7 codebase was locked is because Netscape was based on it. All the past locked branches have been timed with Netscape launches. Ex: Moz1.4 = NS7.1

Re:Oh man!

[jav1231]

I've been using Firefox. I can't possibly imagine why I'd want Netscape. I wonder what the percentage of users on Firefox/Mozilla vs. Netscape would be? I guess I just don't understand why they don't just move to the Mozilla name completely.

AOL Should've Donated the Netscape Name

[tabdelgawad]

That way we wouldn't have had to go through the 'Phoenix-Firebird-Firefox' saga. I seriously doubt AOL is currently making any money on the 'Netscape' brand, but a Firefox-renamed-Netscape would actually have a chance of gaining some market share.

It's probably still not too late ...

Re:Netscape additions

[DrCash]

That's what I like about Mozilla's Firefox, which I've been using for about a month now (previously using Opera, but Firefox I have found is far superior). With Firefox, you download a really light, simple browser. Then, if you want additional functionality, go to their extensions page and simply add-in what you want to add. With Netscape, they give you all this stuff you don't need - email app, netscape composer, etc. Although the Winamp and AIM apps are useful, and I do use that - just not Netscape's versions - I prefer to download those separately, so they're not connected to my browser. Still, Netscape's far better than - *gag* *choke* - Internet Explor^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H ...

Re:Perfect Timing

[DrCash]

It's really not hard convincing other people to use other browsers. Most of your average users on the internet (the non-techies, mom-and-pops, teeny boppers, etc) just use whatever comes with the computer because they don't have the knowledge to starting making additional major changes to their computer (or they just don't want to screw it up because they don't want to pay their geek friends to come and fix it - and laugh at them miserably - when they do screw it up). So that's exactly why IE is the browser of choice for 94% of the web.

Once these same people start using the web a bit more, get used to things better, and finally get fed up with all the damn spyware, spamware, pop-ups, and start complaining to their techie friends about it, they realize that their techie friends haven't even used IE since like, the dark ages (if ever). So by word-of-mouth, they'll finally upgrade to something decent - hopefully that will be Mozilla Firefox (because it rules).

I've also noticed that the G4/TechTV show, The Screen Savers, regularly plugs Firefox as it's browser of choice whenever someone asks what is a good browser replacement for IE (The Screen Savers rule!).

Firefox will become as big a brandname as NN/IE

[mbottrell]

Whilst many claim Firefox doesn't have the brand recognition that Internet Explorer does, it's getting a big push here in Australia.

Take a look at the front cover of the Sydney Morning Herald.
You can read the full article here.

Kudos to MozillaZine for running an article on it. :)
So yeah... people in Aust. are taking firefox seriously... most Aust. sites are getting hammered if they are not FF friendly. :)

Cheers,

M.

Evil MS and IE

[Bull999999]

Did anyone noticed that Office 2003 Service Pack 1 automatically sets IE as the default brower without even asking?