Slashdot Mirror
Peeking at Netscape 8
Andrew Sayers writes "It seems like Netscape 8 has hit blogland, with generally positive review at blogspot.com - although it makes the point that the IE rendering mode could hurt Firefox in the long-run, because it gives sites an excuse to stick with their old IE-only designs." Ah, remember when the release of a Netscape mattered?
Ah, remember when the release of a Netscape mattered?
No, cant say I do.
...as "Peeing at Netscape 8" and thought how, finally, here's an article that a geek could appreciate.
Remember that you can use IE conditional comments
<!--[if IE 5]>
You are using Internet Exploder. Please switch to Firefox
<![endif]-->
to Spread Firefox.
Minimal extra work means you can spoof the gold UI bar, which has the advantage of scaring people. Use Internet Exploder's proprietary features against itself. Standards forever!
Review talks about how pleasing the new toolbar interface is. GAG. Its absolutly horrendus.
If I have windows I have IE(no choices here), if I want netscape rendering I have Firefox/Mozilla. Getting a bloated version of mozilla to replace essentially mozilla seems a little silly.
Having a dual rendering based browser just doesn't make any sence.
I really like the idea of multi bar. On firefox I have several toolbars that I love and really can't do without, but do not use them all at the same time. Is there a firefox multi bar extension out there somewhere?
Ah, remember when the release of a Netscape mattered?
Actually, this one matters quite a bit. For example:
the IE rendering mode could hurt Firefox in the long-run, because it gives sites an excuse to stick with their old IE-only designs."
This release isn't a good thing. It's a blow to the progress that Firefox and Mozilla have made, and more to the point, it's a significant FU to the developers, as it reduces all of their hard work to a painfully ugly IE add on.
"Live Free or Die." Don't like it? Then keep out of the USA
Ah, remember when the release of a Netscape mattered?
For me, it went something like this:
Netscape 1.0: Hey, cool! This World Wide Web thing is awesome!
Netscape 2.0: Backgrounds! Word!
Netscape 3.0: Different fonts, better frames, more plug-ins... keep it coming!
Netscape 4.0: Why won't these links work? *click click click click* Grrrr...
Netscape 6.0: Oh God.
Netscape 7.0: Whatever, I'm using IE now.
Netscape 8.0: Whatever, I'm using Firefox now.
The coolest voice ever.
Even 6.2 is nicer than 7.0, and any new release is a step further on the road to a horrendious browser that might be orange, black, and royal blue for its theme colors!
why post it? I thought it was "News for nerds, stuff that matters." There is so many things that matter that are not accepted for post, I think the editors should be ashamed of saying something like "Ah, remember when the release of a Netscape mattered?" and then just posting it.
Is there much point to using Netscape since it uses the same engine as Mozilla and Firefox and Camino?
Netscape was more relevent when it based on the old Mosaic engine because that made Netscape unique. I'm sure they could revamp the old Netscape engine if they wanted to, they would just have to put some money into it... and we all know AOL will never do that. Why use Netscape to browse with the Gecko engine, when you can use a more streamlined and optimized Firefox browser. Firefox was designed by people who know the secret tricks to really get the best out of Gecko, because they are the same programmers who actually made Gecko!!
I still keep a copy of Netscape 2.0 Gold - does everything Internet Explorer can do.
... and in the DRM, bind them.
FTA: "Considering the recent popularity of Firefox, and the brand name Netscape holds, I can foresee this being a very popular browser. It could not only be a threat to Internet Explorer, as Firefox has been, but also Firefox itself."
Netscape? Strong brandname? Yes people who have been on the net for awhile know of them, but the way I see it the Netscape PR department have their work cut out for them to match the media buzz that surrounded FF 1.0 release, let alone convince people they should switch from IE/FF (back) to Netscape.
Don't get me wrong, I love and use firefox, but you won't get it installed on an old PI-233 with 32MB RAM.
Internet Explorer DOES install and work on that configuration.
Netscape is that dialup service that competes with Netzero right?
"It's a blow to the progress that Firefox and Mozilla have made..."
Why is it a blow to Mozilla and Firefox? Are Moz and FF copying what Netscape is doing? No? Are Moz and FF still available in configurations you prefer? Then what's the problem?
", and more to the point, it's a significant FU to the developers, as it reduces all of their hard work to a painfully ugly IE add on."
How is this a Fuck You to the developers at Mozilla? I seem to recall that Mozilla wouldn't exist without Netscape, and there's that small issue of Netscape basically paying Mozilla's way when it went independant. If anyone has a right to base a browser on Mozilla, it's Netscape.
Oh, and some businesses NEED a browser that can view IE code, because some business apps require it. You don't have to like that, by way shoot Netscape for providing an alternative to IE that fills a need?
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
If you want third party browsers, you should look at Opera or Konqueror. This is NOT a third party browser. Contrary to popular belief, if you take two songs and mix them up, the result is NOT a brand new song. It's a (re)mix.
The "new" Netscape just takes either the IE or the FF engine and slaps an interface on top of it. AOL thus tries to ride on Netscape's reputation and make it look like it still has something to say in browser world. It doesn't. This is just marketing.
Your insights are valid, but not applicable for this release of Netscape. Maybe next time?
Just
Ah, remember when the release of a Netscape mattered?
It still does, especially if you're a fed. Many gov't agencies still use Netscape, and will make use of this new release simply because they're all still stuck in the 90's. I don't know firsthand, but I'd be willing to bet Firefox didn't get much attention from the government. Most feds only know "IE" and "Netscape."
it makes the point that the IE rendering mode could hurt Firefox
More than Firefox. The Microsoft HTML control (the IE rendering engine) is inherently insecure by design. It's not possible to use it in a way that doesn't open up cross-zone attacks because "security zones" are such a deep part of its design. The IE rendering mode has the potential of hurting anyone who uses it but think they're somehow safer because they're not using IE.
You are completely correct, I watched my roommate who is not at all a computer science person convince his redneck friend to use firefox last week and I was surprised to see one of his first points was that it is related to netscape.
It helps to establish familiarity I guess.
forget it.
blogspot.com is a free hosting site for blogger.com weblogs. Saying "a review at blogspot.com" is like saying "a review at geocities.com" - it's meaningless, as anyone could have written it. If Slashdot is going to link to random bloggers, at least make it clear that the author is a random blogger as opposed to part of some semi-legitimate sounding site.
At any rate, the reviews by Danial Glazman (author of Nvu and Mozilla Composer) and Blake Ross (of the Firefox team) are far more enlightening.