Slashdot Mirror
Netscape 8 Breaks IE XML
An anonymous reader writes "Microsoft has alerted users that Netscape's latest browser appears to break the XML rendering capabilities in Microsoft Internet Explorer. Dave Massy, a senior programme manager for IE, warned users in a blog posting that after installing Netscape 8, IE will render XML files as a blank page, including XML files that have an XSLT transformation. What a week for Netscape 8.0; first the browser needed several fixes hours after its release, then it was discovered that without IE installed, Netscape 8.0 will not install, and now IE needs Netscape uninstalled to work."
Or rather booo....
I'd love to know what kinda crap their QA department is getting right now.
-- Dave
up 12 days, 22:30, 2 users, load averages: 993.20, 994.21, 994.56
*makes note to limit user processes...
I stopped using Netscape after AOL bought it! Kept using NS4.7 (and later IE), until Firefox appeared.
Repeat after me: Netscape, Is, Now, Just, A, Brand.
I see no reason to use netscape since mozilla came out and now i use firefox.
I think Netscape it just mozilla a few (minor) versions back + netstcape "branding" modifications.
But i could be wrong, I did not used it in a while, I have note even seen it installed anywhere.
I'm wondering why they even bother to release it instead of promoting mozilla and/or firefox, seems like a waste of energy to me.
instance where an arbitrary and totally meaningless deadline for launch wrecked havoc on software.
Releasing Netscape based on Firefox 1.03 after 1.04 was available with important security fixes was completely idiotic if a key differentiator of Netscape is supposed to be superior security!
And then releasing an updated version within 24 hours based on 1.04 to show the world they could simply have delayed the initial launch by a day in the first place proved their mismanagement (any excuse about changing to 1.04 being complex and delaying the launch too much went out the window).
Now their bragging rights about being able to switch betweeen IE and Firefox rendering is damaged because they didn't test enough to find out if their product breaks existing functionality like displaying XML?
Not Netscape-specific but for software in general...Managers, get a clue, if you don't like deadlines given by engineers then remove features until they can provide timeframes that are acceptable. And you engineers that are too cowardly to say "No, that cannot be done by that time unless we eliminate/postpone some of the requirements" get some balls.
Well, you are part of that community. How would you react?
Anyone who generalizes about slashdotters is a typical slashdotter.
Lots of people seem to be down on NS, first because of the patches and now this. But AFAIK, they have the only mainstream browser with two rendering engines. Even though the version number is "8", this is really a spanking new product. Any truly innovative product is going to have growing pains. So far, none of these are fatal flaws that can't be fixed with a patch. Cool down and give 'em a chance.
I found it to be high praise for Firefox and damnation of IE that NS reverts to Firefox rendering when it considers a web-site to be even semi-suspect. Basically, they said IE is dangerous and Firefox is safe(r ).
You *could* screw up a *nix system with a bad installer, but it is harder to do for a couple of reasons:
1 -- you usually only need to run the installer as root if you are doing a system-wide installation. If it is just for you it is easier just to install it in your home folder. Personally, I do that fairly often. I have an updated version of whatever I was installing in my space and can fall back on the system-wide version if I foobar it somehow.
2 -- *nix apps are generally more self-contained than Windows apps. The fact that much of the configuration information for Windows programs resides in the registry is just asking for problems. For example:
If program A uses protocol X and program B does so also, installing B may change registry entries concerning protocol X so that they match its needs. Program A stops working with protocol X.
The *nix tradition of self-contained configuration files avoids the collisions that can arise in the registry.
So again, YES, it is possible for an installer to completely wreck a *nix box BUT it is much less likely.
Life is short: void the warranty.
Yeah, install AIM these nowadays and your desktop and start menu get filled with all sorts of AOL cruft.
When "Elf" came out, AIM was pushing these horrible "LOUD" ads for it on the AIM client (I managed to block most of it by blocking access to their ad server).
I know AOLs hurting for money and trying madly to get some revenue, but they need to make sure they don't chase away potential clients with obnoxious behavior and poorly written software.
Don't anthropomorphize computers, they don't like it.
I disagree. I use both Firefox and IE. Some sites work best in one, some work best in the other. I can't believe you think it's okay for the installation of a piece to break its rival software without alerting the user. Not cool. tk
Countless times. I agree with you.
The people who install Netscape may use both browsers until, "hey, this page doesn't render in IE but it does in Netscape. Let's use Netscape for everything."
I think this is a good thing. Hey MS, how's it feel to have other people breaking your functionality?
Try this... I know it must happen on other sites, but I was "fortunate" to find this.
...there are problems with NS8, let's face it.
1) Navigate to http://www.ascd.org/ w/ Firefox. Move through the site via the dropdown DHTML menus. Works.
2) Navigate to http://www.ascd.org/ w/ IE. Move through the site via the dropdown DHTML menus (albeit drawn differently). Works.
3) Navigate to http://www.ascd.org/ w/ NS8. Note that IE engine is being used. Move through the site via the dropdown DHTML menus. Get caught in a recursive site-provided "Page Not Found" loop. Change engine to Firefox for site. Same issue.
I'm afraid it's worse than simply "a waste of time". Apparently, Netscape 8 incorporates the IE rendering engine, and uses it by default for "trusted" sites. This is a seditious act by AOL to tie the Netscape brand to the Windows platform, and shits on the web standards the Mozilla team has worked so hard to support.
Now that Netscape 8 has been shown to corrupt IE installations, Microsoft can make statements about how alternative browsers are a security issue. Thanks a lot AOL. Netscape would be better off dead and buried.
They're just trying to address one of the major complaints that people have had about non-IE browsers.
The complaint that it's not IE? Why even bother then, everyone capable of running IE (Windows users) already have it. Running IE with a different skin is no different than firing up iexplore.exe.
Since you didn't grok my comment about web standards, I assume you're not a developer. Here's the deal: IE is not very good at supporting web standards like CSS, PNG, etc. It also encourages sloppy markup. By incorporating IE, Netscape will lessen the pressure on developers to write standards-compliant code. At the same time, the reliance on IE destroys the cross-platform nature of the browser, and by proxy, the web itself.
Even with Firefox having a 10% marketshare, there is still the entrenched concept of there being two browsers: IE & Netscape. What happens when Netscape has, essentially, become just another IE wrapper? Nothing good can come of this.
Remember the deals AOL made in the past to keep their icon in the Windows default install. I sense something similar is afoot.