Slashdot Mirror
Firefox-Based Netscape 8 Beta Goes Live
pigmelon writes "According to BetaNews, 'America Online's Netscape team has opened its doors to the public, releasing the first beta of the revived Netscape Web browser. (screenshot) Based upon Firefox, Netscape version 8 focuses on security and user privacy, and supports rendering with both Mozilla's Gecko and Microsoft's Internet Explorer browser engines.' Before downloading the beta, remember that it uses Firefox 1.0, which contains some vulnerabilities."
Does it fix the shyte rendering of slasdot?
If needed.
s cape_Browser_80_Beta_Goes_Live/1109870204 l /Netscape_Browser/1101836316/1
http://www.betanews.com.nyud.net:8090/article/Net
http://fileforum.betanews.com.nyud.net:8090/detai
In case of Slashdotting, break mirror.
Unfortunately you can't install extensions cause they all say they don't support Netscape.
Ugly.
Horrible color scheme and very cluttered.
One thing caught my eyes is the merged top menu bars, so the page title and file menu options are on the same line now.
Is there such plug-in for FireFox?
Rock that crushes, Paper & Scissors that don't matter.
Jesus, that screenshot is like the browser version of my grandfather's "retirement shirts". Except, only if he lived inside Spencer's Gifts, and was a science fiction drama from 1963, and had ADD. And rabies.
What is the advantage of a separate browser? Why not make an AOL theme for firefox, drape it with AOL extentions/plugins and just use firefox?
What's so wrong with using standart window captions, buttons and so on? There's a reason for that: consistency ammong applications.
Leave themes and eye candy for the OS level, and obey it if present; but please, not a single application should implement it's own custom UI controls, that's just wrong.
Holy crap! That has to be the worst browser interface I've ever seen. Awful color scheme, buttons everywhere, three different input bars (one for searching, one for addresses, and one for "shopping"?; worse, the most important bar, the address bar, is too small to show even the domain portion of a normal URL, and is not in a properly prominent position), funky menu positioning (by putting the menu in the title bar, I suppose you can no longer grab that part of the bar to drag the window), etc. Netscape really needs to invest in some competent UI designers ASAP.
Ok, so who's the brainiac that figured it would be a good idea to take a screenshot with a "Microsoft is making progress" headline/news item?
Don't think that a small group of dedicated individuals can't change the world. It's the only thing that ever has.
Sadly it seems to be a windows only release.
Just when you think the Internet can't get any uglier or more difficult to use we get another browser with piss-poor interface.
/love/ the way they use completley non-standard UI elements throughout and the grace us with the standard windows scroll bar on the right.
Why the heck do I need the weather below my address bar?
Why is the menu bar over by the close/minimize/maximize widgets (don't miss click the help menu or your window will vanish to the task bar)?
I
I think i'll leave my family/neighbors/girlfriend with Firefox or Mozilla thank-you. They may not be the perfect interface but they're an order of magnitude more useful than this monstrosity.
And no, it doesn't run on Mac OS X, Linux, BSD, or anything but Windows. I guess that's a good thing in this case.
Someone please explain to me why, if you knew of the existance of Firefox 1.0 (or 1.0.1 now), you would still choose to download a bastardized version of it from Netscape?
Let's be honest. You're going to get the same rendering engine (at least for the most part, probably with more problems though) but with a bloated skin, no theme support, no extension support, and the Netscape icon.
I think it's totally worth it, ha.
A browser with the security of MSHTML and the sleek looks of a morbidly obese person's arse.
"All Mozilla Products are great for me but when Netscape touches it, it turns to crap. This kept opening IE over and over. I had 30 windows open for IE. Firefox still rules!" Wonder how long they'll keep that on the front page?
Monster Zero is the reason we cannot live on the surface, but must live forever live underground like this.
One of the higherups where I work sent an email a couple months ago out complaining about this or that vulnerability in IE. He finished the email with "I guess that's just one more reason I should be using Netscape." Not Mozilla, not Firefox, but Netscape. Switching to Netscape is something I told him to do. In 1995. Ten years later, not only hasn't he switched yet, but he still thinks the only choice is between IE and Nutscrape. I don't think most computer users pay that much attention to new software (though Firefox and Mozilla are hardly new) nor to the technical aspects of software (the claim that Firefox and Netscape are both based on Mozilla will be met with a blank stare, followed by, "so I should use Netscape, and I'll be secure, right?" (and then followed by continued use of IE, because finding and downloading a new browser is still too much to deal with).
Comment removed based on user account deletion
That theme looks like a Howard Johnson's had sex with my clock radio.
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
The new Netscape browser is based on Firefox, but it looks, well, awful. It doesn't look as bad as some of the previous betas, but it still doesn't look good. It breaks many of the Windows design standards, such as its substandard menus, windows, icons, and title bars. Secondly, when I'm browsing the Internet (or doing anything else with my computer), I don't want to be looking at all of these flashy icons and weather and shopping and all of this other stuff. Why is the RSS icon on the URL box blocking the full URL? Where do AOL hire its UI designers from?
Next, another feature about this browser is that it can switch its rendering engine from Gecko to IE's rendering system. Well, why? IE's rendering system doesn't support the latest web standards, and even for web pages that uses a lot of IE-only extensions (ActiveX, for example), Firefox handles these situations with a couple of extensions.
Besides that, this will hurt in trying to remove substandard and nonstandard technologies from the Internet, such as ActiveX and non-standard HTML. Windows-only web developers need to get out of their Microsoft-funded cave and hop on the nearest bus to Standards Land and start dumping MSHTML, their Visual Basic-designed ActiveX programs, and ASP in favor of CSS and XHTML (standard web pages), Java or Perl/Python (standard programming languages), and PHP (to replace ASP). It will make the Internet a better and safer place for the rest of us.
In short, what's the point of this Netscape release? Firefox and Mozilla is spreading like wildfire, and they are better browsers. Safari, Opera, and Konqueror do their jobs nicely, too, so what's the point of Netscape?
Mitchell Baker is opening Mozilla China Center. FYI, English translation is here.
There is a spark in every single flame bait point.
1) Netscape releases source to Netscape browser, which by that point really sucks.
2) This source spawns Mozilla, which becomes pretty good.
3) This source spawns Firefox, which becomes even better (and actually popular)
4) Firefox gets used as the basis for a new Netscape browser, which (if the screenshot is any indication) really sucks...
There is no "5) Profit!".
The sad thing is that a lot-- and I mean a lot-- of users (particularly Windows-only folks, which is still 90+% of the population) think that the only two browsers out there are IE and Netscape. When I say "I don't use IE", I sometimes get a response like "So you use Netscape?"
Netscape's name-brand recognition among the great uneducated masses of Internet users might actually convince millions of otherwise-competent people to use this abomination.
With spending like this, exactly what are "conservatives" conserving?
"this Firefox UI is great and easy to use, so let's add a bunch crazy buttons and just generally shit all over it! Oh and throw in a theme that makes our customers want to claw out their eyes. And for extra confusion, make sure some of the pages load with IE so people are never sure what behaviour they're going to get!"
Netscape releasing an ugly, bloated browser with millions of useless features that nobody in their right mind would use? Now there's a surprise.
(Not.)
The worst of all worlds.
(Now that was serious.)
I've been hoping someone would do this.
(Unserious, more like fearing someone would do this.)
I guess I'll switch.
(Nearly coughing after fit of maniac laughter.)
No, not really. Sticking with Firefox. It seems to be what Netscape could have been had Netscape not believed its own hype and what IE should have been if only MS could see past proprietarily customizing everything that doesn't move fast enough.
(Looks like that IE-based browser that came with Flyswatter prominently packaged, but forget the name of it off hand...)
If my grammar and spelling are off, I am [distracted/tired/careless] (take your pick)
I don't know much about the Mozilla license, but could AOL (AOL did buy Netscape right?) (a) stop the development of Mozilla (change the license to closed source/proprietary) or (b) sell Netscape (Gecko engine of coruse)?
I think that the user interface is really bad on this one. The buttons for search fields/etc. is too large. I personally do not like the light green/blue color they have given it. Combined with orange buttons just makes the contrast too high.
The menus in the top are located on the right unlike their usual place on the left. This is something that will cause irritations.
thomasdamgaard.dk.
I don't use AOL myself, but there are ~20 million people who do, including my mother-in-law. Including Netscape/Zilla/Firefox on the AOL coaster would help get those people off IE.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
I dunno, my nVidia card can rotate the screen, and my LCD monitor can rotate (meant for access to inputs on the back of monitor). I don't think I'd actually use my monitor that way, but I could if I wanted to.
Now, I'm no expert on the Mozilla Public License, but it seems to state pretty unequivocally that if you make modifications you have to release them under the same license (just as with the GPL) including source code. Whereas the Netscape browser license says:
3. RESTRICTIONS. Except as otherwise expressly permitted in this Agreement, you may not: (i) modify or create any derivative works of the Beta Browser or documentation, including customization, translation or localization; (ii) decompile, disassemble, reverse engineer, or otherwise attempt to derive the source code of the Beta Browser, or in any way ascertain, decipher, or obtain the communications protocols for accessing the AIM Service, or the underlying ideas or algorithms of the Beta Browser (e.g. in an effort to develop other applications or services that provide similar or substitute or complimentary functionality to the Beta Browser);
and so on. There is no mention of the Mozilla license and no source code. How is this legal? Did they buy special rights from the Mozilla Foundation or something?
Karma: Segmentation fault (tried to dereference a null post)
Netscape's name-brand recognition among the great uneducated masses of Internet users might actually convince millions of otherwise-competent people to use this abomination.
The old Netscape might have been junk. This new Netscape might also be junk. But who the heck cares? You don't need to like the smell of manure to appreciate roses at the flower shop.
Netscape's decision once upon a time to release the source code gave us an excellent browser. The license for that browser is such that anybody can take it and release their own abomination, so if Netscape itself wants to do that, more power to them.
What I don't get, is other than the amount of users that used to go to Netscape's portal (it was at the time, one of the busiest sites on the net), why did AOL buy Netscape?
.... so I ask again, why did AOL buy Netscape, and why are they continuing to pump out Beta versions, but never use it?
They bought Netscape, continued to use IE, started Mozilla then let Mozilla go (to become the Mozilla Foundation), and now they are developing their own browser, which is based on IE
I can only imagine that Netscape wants to use Netscape 8 to help market its ISP. After using this browser briefly today, I can not really understand who their target audience is. Is it power users? It seems to be intended for power users, it offers a level of control I have never seen before in a browser, multiple rendering engines, user-trust levels and containers, very detailed, site-specific settings. Also, check out the toolbar configuration GUI if you get a chance.. yikes. However, I don't think power users will touch this because they are already aware of firefox and Mozilla. Even though firefox does not have the level of control that this Netscape 8 beta has, who really wants to configure and manage all of that when firefox works perfectly well (minus IE-specific sites) without it?
As far as regular users go, I can not think of any reason why they would prefer this browser over something like IE or firefox. I have thought that for a while, IE has been so popular because of its simplicity. Even though it doesn't support features like tabbed browsing and typeaheadfind and RSS.. your average user doesn't want that stuff anyway, thus IE meets their needs so why change to anything more complex?
So, unless I am missing something, we have a browser here that power users will not use and average users will not use. Perhaps Netscape can get some people to use it if they bundle it with their ISP. It is only beta though, maybe it will get better..
However, I think that the general attitude on
Isn't this really an open source success story? "If you open the source code to your product, other developers will extend it and improve it in ways that you couldn't dream of (let alone afford), and you will be free to incorporate these improvements back into your product!". Isn't this the return on investment that the OSS community talks about?
If we're talking about the same uneducated mass of Internet users that were convinced to use IE because of Microsoft's brand recognition, isn't that a good thing?
I was so hoping netscape would put there name behind Firefox, instead of butchering a decent browser and making a mess of it again.
Firefox could grow by at least 10% if netscape proclaimed it as the next version of there browser and included download links on there primary netscape download page.
Sure, my ATI card can rotate the screen, and I can put my trinitron on its side, which is flat along one edge and would probably tilt my screen at just the right angle given the position it would hold on my desk. However, I haven't yet found a good use for a 1200x1600 display...
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Me. I demand some hazard yellow added to the interface immediately! Perhaps in some sort of warning box. A big caution sign, that's the ticket.
And then, on to the neon! Wheeeeee! Neon green, neon blue (Do they make neon cyan?), maybe we can even get some neon yellow and use that instead of hazard yellow.
And, dare we dream it? Yes, we dare.
Pink. I said it. PINK. BRIGHT PINK ALL OVER!
But don't worry, all these bright colors will be balanced out by the cyan. And the black. (Maybe some purple?)
For Netscape 10, we can just have someone vomit on the screen.
If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
I can't even count the number of times that I've opened IE or Explorer on clients computers only to find that the address bar has been removed. After seeing this and 'fixing' it on one occasion, the user of the particular computer asked me what I did to his web.. confused, I asked him what he meant. He apparently didn't want that on. I asked him how he got to different web sites. His reply, he just typed where he wanted to go in yahoo.
After that I realized, the address bar, is mainly a power user feature, that many web users don't understand, and don't care to use. I say don't complain, they are making a browser for a certain demographic, the AOL user, the CEO. They aren't hoping to get us to convert.
One solution, beside plugins (that do the same thing for you automatically, if I'm not mistaken) is to increase or decrease the font size in Firefox, then return it to normal. (CTRL+= or CTRL+- then CTRL+0)
Whatever part of the rendering causes the bug is not recalled when fields are resized for text size changes.
I hope this helps, it's what I use when Slashdot becomes completely uninterpretable.