Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Netscape 6.1

michael posted more than 12 years ago | from the netscape's-still-around? dept.

Netscape 530

max2010 writes: "Netscape Browser Version 6.1 is released. Give it a try, grab the 25MByte junk of code for MAC, Unix and Windows at ftp.netscape.com." MSNBC has a brief story about the release.

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered


Damn icons (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2114256)

What I hate about Netscape these days is the excess of icons and links to AOL and others. It puts icons in the desktop, in the menu bar, in IEs links bar, everywhere.

Mozilla 0.9.3 = Netscape 6.1? (1)

mc2Kleen (190152) | more than 12 years ago | (#2114814)

Okay my question is if this is a big stability upgrade to Netscape 6.0 and is based on the latest Mozilla release, why didn't they wait for the final Mozilla release or 1.0? If it is that important that they release an upgrade, why don't they just wait a bit longer? Is 6.2 just on the horizon then?

notoriously buggy? (5, Interesting)

byoung (2340) | more than 12 years ago | (#2121011)

No "editorial bias" here:

AOL Time Warner released the first final upgrade to its notoriously buggy Netscape 6 browser, promising a smoother and faster ride for Netscape loyalists.

netscape loyalists?

Are they trying to position Netscape users as a bunch of militia members or something? Wait'll we see Rosie attacking Tom Sellick saying we have no right to keep using Netscape.

Beautiful example of objective reporting there.

Paul Festa -- not MSNBC (5, Interesting)

tswinzig (210999) | more than 12 years ago | (#2150706)

No "editorial bias" here

Note that the article was written by Paul Festa of CNET News.com. As soon as I read that article yesterday on CNET (about the upcoming release, with the same wording), I sent him a letter and CC'd Jai Singh (Editor-in-Chief) about it.

Paul Festa has been, throughout the browser wars, firmly on the side of Microsoft. At least, that's the opinion you tend to get after reading his articles.

He also has no memory of history. Here is an excerpt from my letter to him:

Paul writes, "Whether Netscape 6.1 can rally the Netscape faithful remains to be seen. While Netscape 6 encountered first delays and then scathing reviews, Microsoft assembled an overwhelming lead in the browser market."

You know Paul, that sounds strangely familiar. Those that forget history are "doomed" to repeat it. To add a little integrity to your article, you might also point out that the same was true in reverse when Microsoft started out with MSIE: Their first versions received scathing reviews (was usually LAUGHED at), while Netscape
assembled an overwhelming lead in the browser market.

Let CNET know you don't like his biased reporting by emailing their editors [cnet.com] .

And just so you don't think I'm some crazy, "Netscape loyalist," I actually use MSIE throughout the day and like it.

Re:notoriously buggy? (3, Funny)

bricriu (184334) | more than 12 years ago | (#2150979)

Well, they do kinda have a point, especially if you buy into the "browser wars" buzzword. By this point, if you're on a Windows box -- which most people are, especially those who read MSNBC for their "news" -- the odds are that you're using IE. I use a Windows box, and, honestly, I like IE... and I was one of the most die-hard against it, until it went to version 5.0 (SP1) while Netscape was still wasting away in version 4.x.

The point that he's trying to make is that by now, unless you have a major grudge against M$ (not that anyone on /. has such a thing) or have a Linux box (same difference? ;-)you've probably caved and gone with IE now. So loyalists are all that are left.

Re:notoriously buggy? (2)

Blue Neon Head (45388) | more than 12 years ago | (#2150427)

The point is that MSNBC should know quite well that referring throughout an article to the "buggy version 6" of a product competing with its owners' products if going to raise an eyebrow - and rightfully so.

It's also worth noting that there are plenty of other reasons not to use IE. Perhaps, for instance, you are disturbed by some of its more security-compromising features.

Bugger (1)

Saxerman (253676) | more than 12 years ago | (#2123191)

I still recall the trouble I had when I finally "upgraded" from Netscape 4.7 to 6.0 on my windowz boxen. When I finally made the jump to the more recent Mozilla I had everything Netscape provided in a more stable format, without the annoying install process.

I know I am part of the small minority still trying to suffer with the non-MS browser. I fail to see why anyone in this small majority (which should include only the geek fringe) would want to suffer with more Netscape. At least Mozilla says it is still in beta, which holds the promise of an eventual stable release.

Netscape 6.1 = (Mozilla 0.9.3 + branding) (4, Interesting)

BroadbandBradley (237267) | more than 12 years ago | (#2123193)

Branding = AOL/Netscape inspired bookmarks and messenger.
add the AOL messenger in the sidebar, and a dictionary.
oh, and don't forget the product registration and mynetscape account setup. You can bypass the registration, but the myNetscape portal is a nice addition to the browser if only to backup bookmarks and adress book.

I dove in, and found the pool empty. (1)

Above (100351) | more than 12 years ago | (#2124362)

Hoping to upgrade my tired Netscape 4.7 setup I decided to give Netscape 6.1 a go. I tried on a Windows 98 box, not wanting to push my luck yet with a Unix version. The install went smoothly and quickly, it appeared all was well.

That lasted for about 3 seconds. The installer auto-launched Netscape 6.1, which promptly hung. I let it sit for 3 minutes before CTL-ATL-DEL'ing it. I reran it then and it came up. I went right for the preferences, to make sure they were acceptable. Boom, a crash while closing a section in the preferences menu.

Launch again. Go to my own web site, it hangs mid-download on the home page. 3 minutes later it's CTL-ATL-DEL again.

Launch again, go to the netscape web site, move the scroll bar, bam, another crash.

Go to the control panel, deinstall Netscape 6.1. Go to slashdot and post about experiences, using Netscape 4.7.

I might try Mozilla again. 3 months ago it was still unstable on windows and very slow compared to 4.7 or IE. I find it sad, but I think Netscape (and possibly Mozilla) are going to be too little to late to get any market share and use. I may be using 4.7 for a very long time.

great features, too late (4, Insightful)

fetta (141344) | more than 12 years ago | (#2130073)

If Microsoft had ever released IE for Linux, this would be even more of a dead issue.

A valuable lesson here - it doesn't matter how good the technology is if you take too long to produce it and don't market it well. (of course, that same principle could be applied to almost any product.)

Re:great features, too late (2, Interesting)

antis0c (133550) | more than 12 years ago | (#2149238)

IE Already exists for Solaris, in fact I'm running it right now on my Sun Ultra5... Which means Linux is probably around the corner. Whats a better way to compete with Linux than to create products for it? Futher pentrating the market.. Sigh..

Re:great features, too late (3, Informative)

Sabalon (1684) | more than 12 years ago | (#2148824)

not likely.

IE was out for HPUX and Solaris years ago - and there is still no Linux version. I don't really see MS making anything for Linux. Partially because it would give some validity to the OS, and partially because it runs on the same hardware as Windows - which means if someone no longer had to boot Windows to view a web page or read a doc, there is one less OS sell.

Re:great features, too late (1)

Swaffs (470184) | more than 12 years ago | (#2147897)

Not to mention that it wouldn't look good when it ran so much better on Linux than on Windows.

Re:great features, too late (0)

Mao Zedong (467890) | more than 12 years ago | (#2149598)

Are you insinuating that Mozilla is a good product? The reason most folks do not use Mozilla/Netscape anymore is because IE is a *Better Product*! Ding.

Re:No it's not... (5, Interesting)

visualight (468005) | more than 12 years ago | (#2147898)

Step one - clear your cache
Step two - load up the biggest waste of bandwidth page you can find in IE. Make a mental note of the time it took to load the page.
Step three - repeat with Mozilla.

Even with my cable modem there's a marked difference. When I load /.'s front page IE takes about two seconds to get from the top banner ad to the bottom of the page. With Mozilla I can't time it. The whole page just pops up.

And besides, I think Mozilla looks real cool with the Aqua theme I downloaded. Only problem I have is that it freezes when I try to download 78,000 headers from alt.binaries.images.

Misc Icons (1)

PBCODER (513561) | more than 12 years ago | (#2130078)

I'd really like to go back to Netscape but I think 4.08 was the last version that wasn't OS invasive. Can anyone suggest a good browser that is not OS invasive, is safe, and will load 90% of the current web pages without crashing, and doesn't come bloated with extra software addons? F/P

Re:Misc Icons (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2148822)


Re:Misc Icons (4, Offtopic)

nomadic (141991) | more than 12 years ago | (#2150331)

I've been using Opera [opera.com] for the past few days, and it seems pretty good. More stable than either IE or NS on W98, and it seems to support just about everything I've run into.

Re:Misc Icons (2, Informative)

SylvesterTheCat (321686) | more than 12 years ago | (#2150730)

I cannot say about the 'OS invasive' part, but I have been using Opera 5.x (both win32 & linux) and I like it a lot...

The free version has a small ad-window, but it isn't too annoying.

Size? If you do not have jde installed, you have to get the larger version (~10M, IIRC), after that updates are small (~2.5M).

Re:Misc Icons (0)

brainy (121004) | more than 12 years ago | (#2150976)

What about Opera? It's very standards-compatible, and no addons that I know of. You can even choose to download without a JVM. It renders pages pretty quickly, doesn't crash much. It has that little ad window in the free version, but it's not too invasive.

Stephen King, author, dead at 54 (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2149423)

I just heard some sad news on talk radio - Horror/fiction writer Stephen King was found dead in his Maine house this morning. I'm sure we'll all miss him - even if you didn't read his books you've probably enjoyed one of his movies. Truly an American icon.

Mozilla and netscape have missed the boat (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2149553)

Sorry AOL and mozilla folks, but IE is just so much better now. Faster, smoother .. less to no crashes. MS now owns the browser. Netscape and/or mozilla better have something amazing HIDDEN up there shirt or they have no hope in the long run.

25MB my arse. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2149556)

25MB is for those dumb fucks (read /. article writers/editors) who can't select 'custom install' and remove all that crap AOL tack on to Mozilla like instant messenger, real player etc.

wow. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2149557)

by the time I finish reading the list of bugfixes, version 7 should be out.

What really annoys me about Netscape 6/Mozilla... (1)

UnnDunn (60288) | more than 12 years ago | (#2149693)

... is that the Gekko rendering engine is really nice and fast, but everything else is either buggy or not finished.

Pretty symptomatic of OSS, in my experience.

Galeon :) (1)

Balinares (316703) | more than 12 years ago | (#2114813)

Yep, and that is the great thing about Galeon [sourceforge.net] . I wrote a post [slashdot.org] about it a few days ago, I'm not gonna repeat myself, but basically, Galeon is the same engine as Mozilla, in a nifty, fast GTK interface. Definitely worth a try!

Another thing is symptomatic of OSS: reuse of nifty things to make niftier things still. ;)

Re:What really annoys me about Netscape 6/Mozilla. (0)

Mao Zedong (467890) | more than 12 years ago | (#2150377)

Not really. A time ago, I had the misfortune of trying Skipstone & Galeon, and it was only a tad bit faster than the full blown Mozilla shithole.

Just out of curiosity (2, Interesting)

Swaffs (470184) | more than 12 years ago | (#2149810)

Does anyone know what build of Mozilla this is based on?

Re:Just out of curiosity (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2110783)

It's branched from 0.9.2.

MAC (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2149876)

>25MByte junk of code for MAC, Unix and Windows Since when is "Mac" (short for "Macintosh") an acroynm ("MAC")?

WOW (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2112034)

Fuck of you jew bastard. Just fucking relax.

Brilliant lead writing... (5, Funny)

wrinkledshirt (228541) | more than 12 years ago | (#2149888)

AOL Time Warner released the first final upgrade...

If it's the first one, doesn't that preclude the possibility of it being the final one?

I'm so confused.

New software... Oh, who cares... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2149925)

Eh, before long, at this [slashdot.org] rate, Web browsers (and everything else, for that matter) will be patented to hell and back... "Hey, sir, I invented a software device to retrieve information instantaneously off any TCP network and display it with a just-in-time interpration of a markup language in a commingled display interface!" And there, you have it. :/

... Alright, so mod me down to hell and further, that's as off-topic as it goes. I live in Europe and that software patent thing really comes as a tough, tough blow. :/

MSNBC headline is biased/inaccurate (4, Interesting)

John Harrison (223649) | more than 12 years ago | (#2150064)

AOL releases new Netscape beta
Final upgrade to buggy version 6

The release isn't a beta. The article itself mentions that the beta came out in June. Strange that MSNBC would miss a tiny detail like that. :)

fp! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2150150)


Re:fp! (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2149883)

A.D. 2001
6.1 was happening

CTO: What happen !!
ADMIN: Somebody set up us the crap.

USER: We get web page.
CTO: What !!
USER: Main browser turn on.

NETSCAPE: How are you gentlemen?
NETSCAPE: All your memory are belong to us.
NETSCAPE: You are on your way to crash.

CTO: What you say !!
NETSCAPE: You have no change to shutdown make your time.
NETSCAPE: Ha ha ha ha ....

CTO: Take off every 'IE6' !!

CTO: You know what you doing.

CTO: Move 'IE6'.

CTO: For great browsing [microsoft.com] .

Why? (2, Troll)

Swaffs (470184) | more than 12 years ago | (#2150151)

Why would anyone use Netscape when there's Mozilla? What advantages are there?

Re:Why? (2)

The Dev (19322) | more than 12 years ago | (#2112038)

Well, 6.x is just as slow and bloated as Mozilla, but Netscape 4.7x is much faster than either.

The only reason I upgraded from Netscape 3.02 to
4.xx was to use the IMAP mail client. 3.02 was probably the fastest web browser ever made.

Is there any actual feature advantage to Mozilla/Netscape6.x over Netscape 4.78?

And what is all the fuss over IE? Every once
in a while I hunt down a windows machine to try
it out and it still sucks just as bad as the old
days. I really hate the was it moves things around on the screen as it renders the page. Blah.

I use Netscape 4.7 because.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2113820)

It's faster than Mozilla on my system. Now, I may be doing something wrong, but I've had internet access for 6 or so years and am now using an Athlon 500MHz, Win98, and a dial-up modem. I greatly prefer Netscape 4.7 to IE5,and although I like Mozilla /5.0 (0.9.2), but it takes twice as long to load a page as Netscape 4.7,

Re:Why? (2, Interesting)

re-Verse (121709) | more than 12 years ago | (#2149372)

Its aimed to the great ignorant masses. It hooks in to netscape.com and all of the portal madness that entails.
Its fluffier than mozilla, and unlike mozilla, it won't expire in 30 days, asking for you to download the newest nightly. Yes, i know, it IS mozilla, but its mozilla with a AOL facelift.

You or i will use mozilla, and will probably get violent if someone tried to force us to use netscape ( i went from 4.x to mozilla about 3 months ago in linux and windows), but there are a lot of simpletons who like a browser they can understand.

BTW did you see the advertisment? "Less confusing! Less buttons!"

I think that sums it up.

Re:Why? (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2152030)

expire? what are you smoking?

Re:Why? (3, Interesting)

Verteiron (224042) | more than 12 years ago | (#2149486)

Mention "Netscape Navigator" to Joe Internetuser and he might have a clue as to what you're babbling about. "Mozilla", while sporting an infinitely cooler name, doesn't have nearly as much recognition. Your average user might be willing to try Netscape because they at least know the name, but why should they try Mozilla? Most people don't know (or care) about the connection between the two.

For us geek types, Mozilla is the way to go. But it's important that Netscape stick around, making these releases, so that the rabble can remember there ARE alternative to the great AIEEE!!

Re:Why? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2149554)

why in the hell would anyone use mozilla at all?

Re:Why? (3, Interesting)

Karn (172441) | more than 12 years ago | (#2150854)

Netscape comes with plugins, Mozilla doesn't. Big deal for a slashdotter? No. For your average user? Yes.

Re:Why? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2150977)

Let's see... 1) Stupid websites that use browser sniffers that only recognize two possible browsers 2) Stupid plugins (QuickTime anyone?) that refuse to recognize Mozilla as a browser it works with (and it does) Neither of these are Mozilla's fault, of course, but they seem like pretty decent reasons to me.

Re:Why? (2, Funny)

abdulwahid (214915) | more than 12 years ago | (#2151275)

The only advantage I can think of is when you tell someone what browser you are using they don't say, "Huh, never heard of it!"

Re:Why? (1)

GreyDuck (192463) | more than 12 years ago | (#2151369)

Because there are people who will never touch "that Mozilla thing or whatever" who will nevertheless give Netscape a chance. Most of 'em have no idea, even after all this time, that the two are related, or that one is spawned from the bowels of the other. Mind you, I think Netscape blew most of their remaining mindshare capital with the last few poorly-built ripoffs of early Mozilla builds. This may be the last chance Netscape has to regain any sort of credibility for the brand.

Not, mind you, that I expect it to work. Netscape will implode, the Mozilla team will be cut loose, but they'll still end up making a workable product that many of "us" will use regularly and

hi (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2150164)


fp (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2150165)

holy cow I did it

Oh WHOOPTY fucking DOO (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2150166)

That's so nice. I wish I was cool enough to release 6.1.. hey WTF happened to 5.x you fucknuts? Netscape can suck my sack for all I care. Idiots. Well, at least they make me actually feel better using IE.

*sigh* (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2150245)

First Microsoft's excellent IE 6, now this piece of Netscape trash. Netscape has no chance in the
Post-browser-war era.

Re:*sigh* (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2149366)

Even people running OS/2 can run Mozilla (which is what Netscape is, after all.) Mozilla is the people's browser, IE is for the whores.

this is majorly cool (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2150246)

fifth post. O and A, nationwide!

1st post (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2150247)

I am the luckiest man on earth.

Cool, but... (3, Interesting)

Carlos Laviola (127699) | more than 12 years ago | (#2150333)

Well, alright, Netscape 6.1 has been released. Isn't it much more worthy to keep tracking Mozilla's nightly builds though? I'd rather use it, since Netscape is based on it, and it's code is open, after all.

Great news for all 7 users waiting for it (1)

hackman (18896) | more than 12 years ago | (#2150403)

Great, 6.1 - just what we all were waiting for. I tried 6 and it nearly locked up my 400MHz machine.. absolutely ridiculous!

I used to hate IE, but I find myself transitioning slowly to it. Netscape 4.7 runs well on my slower machine (how hard can it be to look at web pages, jeez), but still crashes a lot.

*Sigh* I wish Mozilla would hurry up..

Freudian slip? (5, Funny)

sheetsda (230887) | more than 12 years ago | (#2150411)

25MByte junk of code

Doesn't he mean "chunk" of code? Little Freudian slip there? :)

Re:Freudian slip? (1, Insightful)

cyb3r0ptx (106843) | more than 12 years ago | (#2121010)

Ha, I thought that was intentional.

Without even trying it, I'm sure that slip was correct. Mozilla has only recently .9x gotten around to being useable for everyday use (at least for me), but I'll bet the codebase for NS 6.1 is even older.


The Inmates Run the Asylum (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2150416)

I swear that Slashdot is little more than a feeding ground for us trolls. Thank you CmdrTaco for helping us out!! Oh, ALL YOUR BASES ARE BELONG TO US!!! [goatse.cx]

Geez who cares? (0, Redundant)

Mittermeyer (195358) | more than 12 years ago | (#2150511)

This browser is so hideously laced with AOL advertising and linkages that it reminds me of, well, of, ummmmm, what's that company?

Frankly I keep a current copy of Netscape and IE around so I'm not locked out of any given site's functions, but I prefer something light like K-meleon or Opera, thankyewverymuch.

Re:Geez who cares? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2137747)

K-meleon used to (v0.4 last I tried) remove the registry associations for .htm and .html - even if told not to change those associations at install time - when uninstalled.

That's bad, basically killing all browsing (.htm/.html is now an unrecognised filetype, so IE prompts you to save pages rather than displaying them) until the associations are correctly replaced (which is easy enough if you are familiar with the registry but impossible otherwise).

Bad K-meleon.

Wow what a surprise (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2150512)

a new version and still a complete piece of shit that is more adware than browser - whoopee fucking doo - christ i wish someone would write a fully featured browser on par with IE that works as well so i could ditch it on my PC

netscape are dead (sorry guys)

A mirror anyone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2150668)

Does anyone have a mirror to download Netscape 6.1?

based on mozilla 0.9.1 (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2150671)


mozilla is better, and includes less crap - 25Mb, WTF?! IE6 (with OE6) beta is only 10Mb.

Re:based on mozilla 0.9.1 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2137746)

Are you sure that 10MB wasn't just the network installer?

Netscape.... (-1, Flamebait)

KajiCo (463552) | more than 12 years ago | (#2150672)

are they still around? I thought they were giving up trying to make a browser now that they found out they suck. Are they still trying? Therapy is a good way of helping you let go of things.

How much deeper does this hole get? (2, Flamebait)

shr3k (451065) | more than 12 years ago | (#2150717)

The more Netscape keeps releasing beta code, the more users it's alienating. I know it's tough not having the latest and greatest 5.x (err 6.x) browser to market, but come on. By the time we get to 6.2 (i.e. Mozilla 1.0 stable), there will be five Netscape users left.

sweet god in heaven (1)

nomadic (141991) | more than 12 years ago | (#2150754)

25 megs? What the hell did they put in it? Why can't they just release the damn browser by itself?

Re:sweet god in heaven (4, Interesting)

Tumbleweed (3706) | more than 12 years ago | (#2150515)

25 Megs _is_ rather amazing, especially considering the Mozilla release it's based on (v0.9.2) is only 8.32Meg in size (for the Windows version).


I'll be sticking with Mozilla v0.9.3 for now, thanks, though I _do_ wish they'd speed up the bookmarks manager by at _least_ an order of magnitude (at _least_!). Definite bookmark weirdness in v0.9.3 for me (on Windows).

Re:sweet god in heaven (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2150639)

If you really just want a browser(most people don't care) then use Mozilla, and quit crying like a little bitch.

Re:sweet god in heaven (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2111637)

+1, Insightful

Please mod up

thought this was funny in the MSNBC topic (1)

Puddin (155410) | more than 12 years ago | (#2150853)

August. 8 -- AOL Time Warner released the first final upgrade to its notoriously buggy Netscape 6 browser, promising a smoother and faster ride for Netscape loyalists. ROFL notoriously buggy. netscape loyalists LOL LOL LOL i use IE, cause netscape does stink, but that line was seriously funny

Re:thought this was funny in the MSNBC topic (1)

TVmisGuided (151197) | more than 12 years ago | (#2148823)

AOL Time Warner released the first final upgrade...


This begs the question...was it an editorial error, or did the "MS" in MSNBC slip it in, along with the headline proclaiming that this is a "new beta"?

We now return to our regularly-scheduled anti-Microsoft trolling and flaming, already in progress.

spell checker? (2, Interesting)

ehackathorn (168173) | more than 12 years ago | (#2151217)

Anybody know if they re-released their spell checker so I can use mozilla again for email?

Spelling error? (2, Funny)

Basset (6083) | more than 12 years ago | (#2153060)

I am sure max2010 meant to say "hunk of code" not "junk of code". Right? The 'j' and the 'h' are right next to each other on the keyboard.

Netscape was once the darling of open source, how times have changed.

Re:Spelling error? NOT (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2135994)

download the broswer - Junk is more than appropriate for the latest AOL umm i mean Nestcape browser

Did anyone else notice Micro-fud in the article? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2153591)

I'm assuming this is build from the 0.9.3 Mozilla release.. if so this should be pretty good for the netscape crowd. Faster and more stable than the 4.x series. This should finally give IE 5.0 a run for the money, 5.5 is slower and 6.0 blows chunks.. microsoft needs to up the FUD while they try and fix the crap that IE 6.0 has become.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account