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

Good.

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe my stoopid admins will upgrade my machie from Netscape 4 to the new version...

Oh man!

[Doomie]

Unbelievable:

Netspace is not dead!
Doom III is out!

And both of them on the same day... Crazy... This must be some conspiracy against slashdot users :)

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?

[finkployd]

Yes, don't try to make money writing someone as general as a web browser. Like OSes, Word Processors, ftp clients, etc they are now commodities (unless you are Microsoft). Go find something someone actually needs and is willing to pay money for and write that.

Finkployd

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

Re:Is Netscape Sun?

[azaroth42]

You mean like ID gave away the first levels of DOOM and then sold a more advanced version (ie with more levels)?

This is hardly a new model.

--Azaroth

Re:it's not the first time...

[linuxci]

It's the first release since the Mozilla *Foundation* was founded just over a year ago. It was formed July 15th, 2003 and Netscape 7.1 was released June 29th, at the time it was expected to be the last Netscape release.

Re:Glad to hear it

[will_die]

Had that problem with firefox then got user agent switcher and use that when I need to lie about my brower type.
You can mess around with the message that is send, so for instance you can report that you are internet explorer running on a commodore-64.

Re:Does anybody take them seriously anymore?

[Patik]

Yes. Most people have never heard of Mozilla but they have used Netscape. It's good that Netscape keeps making releases because it keeps the amount of gecko-based browsers up, which impacts how web designers develop their sites. Most people also don't care about corporate politics or whether a product is free or Free.

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?

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:take attention away from Firefox?

[garcia]

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.

While this is very true you forget that most people don't get their news from the online sources that we (those that actually care to stay up on the news and CE) do.

I don't know a single person outside of my more computer literate friends that knows that IE has vulnerabilities or what Firefox is. In fact, a quick check through my webserver logs finds that the just about the only people using FireFox are those that are coming from slashdot URLs.

here's "why netscape"

[ChristTrekker]

Corporate execs are more comfortable with a known brand name. Even though Mozilla (and FF, Camino, K-Meleon, etc) are based on the same code, they are not "Netscape". When execs are made aware of the faults and deficiencies of IE, they may think "I wish it was still like the old days, when we could at least choose between IE and Netscape." Lo and behold, here's Netscape 7.2. If you mention Opera or Firefox to them, you'd get blank stares.

Also, some of these execs want an all-in-one solution, not a perceived patchwork of FF+TB+whatever to meet basic internet needs.

Plus, "Mozilla" sounds like something only a geek could love. "Netscape" sounds like a polished product, like the marketing team actually spent more than 5 seconds to think of it. That's important to execs.