Beta
×

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 7.0 is Out

CmdrTaco posted more than 12 years ago | from the stuff-to-download dept.

Netscape 632

MrJones was one of many many users to submit that Netscape has released Navigator 7.0 unto the world. With their dwindling market share, it'll be interesting to see what affect this has on internet users. But here's hoping it makes a dent.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Sorry... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4165293)

Couldn't resist.

FIRST POST!!!

fnp (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4165297)

fnp = first netscape p05t

yea! (-1)

trollercoaster (250101) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165300)

IE sux
M$ blows
I won't use winblows on my b0xen
fuck micro$shaft

now, mod me up whores!

EFFECT (4, Funny)

yesthatguy (69509) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165301)

Argh! Things don't have an affect!

Re:EFFECT (0, Troll)

Steve Franklin (142698) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165376)

No, you're right. They "impact upon." ;o) Please reserve your argh!s for TRUE abominations!

EFFECT vs impact (1)

chipotle_pickle (541351) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165446)

I prefer impact because it's spelled the same way for the noun and verb, unlike affect and effect. It's affected to complain too much about impact.

Re:EFFECT (5, Funny)

Citizen of Earth (569446) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165472)

Argh! Things don't have an affect!

Aw, that statement makes me feel bad.

yor momma is on CRACK (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4165303)

I AM FUCKING SECOND... doh

What's the difference between it and Mozilla? (0)

justanyone (308934) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165304)

What's the difference between it and Mozilla?

Where is a link to a page describing the differences?

Why bother?

Re:What's the difference between it and Mozilla? (4, Insightful)

(startx) (37027) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165319)

the difference is AOL. Netscape == mozilla + aol cruft - nifty pop-up blocking features. Plus netscape has the brand name appeal.

Re:What's the difference between it and Mozilla? (2)

DrXym (126579) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165402)

Mozilla is also tested less and therefore suffers from more bugs.

Re:What's the difference between it and Mozilla? (2, Informative)

mwjlewis (602559) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165333)

Here [netscape.com] is the Netscape 7 reviewers guide. (PDF)

Re:What's the difference between it and Mozilla? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4165334)

Mozilla is good, up to date and works.

That's pretty much the difference between mozilla and netscape.

Re:What's the difference between it and Mozilla? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4165359)

That's the difference between the browser Mozilla and the company Netscape? How do you compare a browser to a company?

Ooooh! You meant the difference between Mozilla and Navigator, right?

Re:What's the difference between it and Mozilla? (2)

cr@ckwhore (165454) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165476)

Yeah... Netscape is older versions of mozilla, with a different desktop icon, and some AOL crap thrown in for that "added user experience".

No thanks

Yawn... (0, Troll)

Raul654 (453029) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165307)

I'm surprised to see netscape is still around, but it's kind of like a tree falling in a forest... anyone who might be interested in using it is already using moz.

Re:Yawn... (2)

Arandir (19206) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165367)

Well, I'm running it on my Windows partition at work. Why? Several reasons, all trivial. The largest of the trivial reasons is that IT will be less upset with me using Netscape than with Mozilla.

But to be fair about the whole thing, I'm running Mozilla under Solaris.

Yes, but ... (5, Insightful)

nbvb (32836) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165308)

But where is the platform support?

Some of us have SPARCs on our desk. Or PA-RISC machines. Or RS6k's.

These were all supported with Communicator ...

NS7 is useless to me till I can run it on these platforms...

--NBVB

Re:Yes, but ... (0, Flamebait)

PotPieMan (54815) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165346)

Somehow I doubt you have an RS/6000 on your desk, dude.

Re:Yes, but ... (3, Informative)

Jeffrey Baker (6191) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165372)

Guess you are just ignorant, dude. IBM RS/6000 workstations [ibm.com]

Re:Yes, but ... (1)

wilsonjd (597750) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165380)

I have an RS/6000 44P model 170 next to my desk (it's not ON my desk, but most PCs aren't ON my desk. If I wanted to lose more desk space, I could actully put it ON my desk.) There are RS/6000 workstations that are in use by real people (mostly engineers.) Just as there are Sparc workstations, and HP workstations, etc. Not EVERYONE has a PC!

Re:Yes, but ... (1)

ink (4325) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165381)

Somehow I doubt you have an RS/6000 on your desk, dude.

You're right. I have 3.

Re:Yes, but ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4165383)

Somehow I doubt you have an RS/6000 on your desk, dude.

Hello, Steven!

Re:Yes, but ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4165393)

well, I have one under my desk. Is that close enough? Keep in mind IBM does make RS/6000 workstations. I've been using them for years, starting with an old 66?MHz 3BT.

Re: RS/6000 on your desk (2)

markhb (11721) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165400)

Why do you doubt? Allay your concerns. [ibm.com]

Re:Yes, but ... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4165420)

It's a shame you can't delete your own posts isn't it?

Go onto ebay.com, and take a look. You'll find RS/6000s come/came in all shapes and sizes, including standard desktop configurations.

AS/400s may be different, I haven't checked. But the RS/6000 was widely marketed as a workstation unit, and some versions even look like those old PS/2 units.

Posted as an AC because you'd probably want to correct your own posting rather than have everyone reading some smartRS/6000 correcting you, and because this is off topic.

Please, moderators, don't mod this up. Mod PotPieMan's correction up when it comes.

Re:Yes, but ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4165375)

Then I guess Netscape will lose the tenth of a percent market share you represent. I can hear them trembling in their shoes.

Re:Yes, but ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4165423)

Some of us have SPARCs on our desk. Or PA-RISC machines. Or RS6k's.

Doesn't mozilla run on SPARCS? As for the other 2 platforms I think you're shit out of luck.

Re:Yes, but ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4165480)

Mozilla runs on all three.

Why use Netscape (5, Funny)

Skyshadow (508) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165311)

Why should/would I use Netscape instead of Mozilla? Not getting enough pop-up windows in my life? Feel the need for a more closed solution?

Re:Why use Netscape (2, Insightful)

Ravagin (100668) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165445)

Maybe you're not a computer geek and you've never heard of Mozilla, but you know the guy down the hall who does all the website stuff is always complaining about Netscape 4 and you want to upgrade....

No anti-popup ads support (3, Informative)

ChazeFroy (51595) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165312)

There's no anti-javascript popup ads support. I'm sticking with Mozilla [mozilla.org] .

Re:No anti-popup ads support (5, Informative)

DrXym (126579) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165370)

Yes there is, there is just no UI for it. If you want to enable support then read this [ufaq.org] or search for a popup blocker ui extension.

Link to the pop-up blocking... (3, Informative)

edgrale (216858) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165415)

http://ufaq.org/files/adblocker.xpi

I have not tried it with the final version of Netscape 7, but it should work unless they've blocked it some how.

netscape 7.0 (0)

hatrisc (555862) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165315)

well... i hope this brings back netscape users who have crossed over to circle 7 of hell. (ie)

6, 6.1, 7? (3, Interesting)

n-baxley (103975) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165316)

Why the quick jump to version 7? Is it just to match AOL v.7 or some other strange reason that my small non-marketing brain can't figure out?

Re:6, 6.1, 7? (5, Insightful)

Salsaman (141471) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165341)

I think the numbering change was partly for marketing reasons, and partly because this is the first release based on mozilla 1.0.

Netscape 6 was based on mozilla 0.9.4 which is pretty old now.

Re:6, 6.1, 7? (1)

Azar (56604) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165468)

> Netscape 6 was based on mozilla 0.9.4 which is pretty old now.

I think you need to clarify WHICH Netscape 6.x browser you are refering to. Netscape 6.2.x was based off of 0.9.4. But the original netscape 6.0 was based of off M18. It was before they were even using real numbers. The Netscape 6.0 code that was back-ported to Mozilla was released as Mozilla version 0.6. Then the next version of Mozilla was 0.7 and so on and so forth...

So the code for the original Netscape 6.0 is almost 2 years old!

Two Words (2, Insightful)

citizenc (60589) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165342)

"Version Inflation" -- to your average luser, "the higher the version number, the better it must be."

Re:6, 6.1, 7? (1)

TheAlmightyQ (306969) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165360)

You're suprised? They already demoonstrated they're inability to count when they jumped form 4.75 to 6.0.

Re:6, 6.1, 7? (2)

Explo (132216) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165364)

Why the quick jump to version 7?


Um, between 6.1 and 7.0 have also been 6.2, 6.21, 6.22 and 6.23 ;)

Re:6, 6.1, 7? (2)

DA_MAN_DA_MYTH (182037) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165410)

I think I'd be more suprised from the jump from Netscape 4.79 to Netscape 6

Re:6, 6.1, 7? (2)

uncleFester (29998) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165463)

Why the quick jump to version 7?

Because it's obviously better than IE6.

Tongue-in-cheek, whoring karma, etc etc...

-r (using Moz1.1, ironically)

(ObOpera: I've been using it quite a bit lately, and it does rock.. but it also has a greater tendency to explode suddenly compared to the other two.)

CNet Review - "Don't switch browsers" (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4165317)

The CNET review of 7.0 is here [cnet.com] .

Title: Don't switch browsers

Summary:
We had high hopes for Netscape 7.0, but we're sorely disappointed, especially by the missing pop-up suppressor. There's no practical reason to switch from either IE or Mozilla.

Re:CNet Review - "Don't switch browsers" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4165439)

That doesn't make sense. If NS7's missing the pop-up suppressor (which it really isn't) is a reason not to switch from Mozilla then it is a reason to switch from IE.

Netscape? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4165321)

People still use netscape? oic. . .

Steroptypical response (5, Insightful)

Roadmaster (96317) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165325)

"Um, so what, Netscape is dead, use mozilla"

"yeah, big deal, it's based on Mozilla 1.0 when the Mozilla Organization just released 1.1, kudos to Netscape's already outdated browser".

Yes, but a lot of the time it's easier to:

1- have users download the familiar Netscape product instead of "that mozilla dinosaur thingy".

2- Introduce Netscape to organizations; at least it's a familiar name and brand for them.

I'm a rabid mozilla user, but still I'm pleased to see that Netscape is still alive, if maybe under AOL's life support infrastructure.

Re:Steroptypical response (4, Interesting)

SquadBoy (167263) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165437)

My experience has been just the oposite. http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=38925&cid=4165 421

Re:Steroptypical response (4, Informative)

DrXym (126579) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165456)

Netscape 7.0 is based off the extremely stable Mozilla 1.0 branch and pounded on for months to make it even more stable.


Mozilla 1.1 is more cutting edge and therefore has a few cute new features but will definitely have a lower MTBF.


In other words its horses for courses. Either take the features, or take the stability.

Netscape's Assault on Biblical Values (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4165328)

As a member of the moral community, this news deeply saddens me. It has been several years now since we have slain the hideous dragon of Netscape and replaced it with the more virtuous Microsoft Internet Explorer, a browser that is infinitely more pro-family, pro-American, and pro-virtue. Now, we see the final dying gasp of Netscape, its last-ditch attempt to do further damage to the moral fabric of a great nation. Well, I say: let them try! For with every beat of my heart I shall hhehhehehehe ahh, piss on it. I don't have this in me today. hehhehe sorry

Negroes: a sub-human species (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4165331)

It is simple:
Negroes are a lesser race.
This is a truth that dare not speak its name -- not in public anyway. That truth is something which we all know. That is something which we all agree upon in private. It is a truth so strong that many refrain from mentioning it in public out of fear of being "impolite".

That truth is that Negroes, although a hominid species, are in fact less than human. They are more primitive and animal-like. Negroes are inferior in all attributes which we consider human. They often excel in animal-like attributes like running fast. But at their core, Negroes [206.244.69.51] are not human. They are sub-human.

Re:Negroes: a sub-human species (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4165464)

Niggers are so dumb they think they are "Sticking it to the man" when they convert to a religion founded by a slave owner (islam). Haha, dumb ass wogs, the arabs where the first people to raid africa for slaves. Man, niggers are so dumb. Fucking beasts.

Netscapes Market Share Down to 3.4% (2, Informative)

Mongr (238) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165332)

Data shows Netscape browser usage down to just 3.4%

Microsoft's rival browser, Internet Explorer, by contrast, has an estimated 96%
of the market, according to Internet research firm WebSideStory.

http://computerworld.com/newsletter/0%2C4902%2C7 38 50%2C0.html?nlid=AM

Re:Netscapes Market Share Down to 3.4% (1)

IncohereD (513627) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165427)

This is based on sites who've installed "HitBox" software to monitor their users. These numbers are based on visits to the kind of sites who support that sort of thing.

I think a lot of hardcore Netscape/Mozilla users avoid sites that perform detailed information-mining like the plague. And there was no indication of whether they kept track of IPs with the page hits... maybe netscape users just find what they're looking for faster. :)

Re:Netscapes Market Share Down to 3.4% (1)

Dragon213 (604374) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165487)

Not to mention the fact that IExploder is so integrated into WinBlows, that you can't remove it if you wanted to (has been since IE 4.0) it's simply easier for most users to use what's already there. Not to blame M$ for anything....nope, not blaming them for their unethical software-integration so you can't install software from a competetor......

Re:Netscapes Market Share Down to 3.4% (1)

phorm (591458) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165490)

An then we count the amount of windows machines that come with Internet Explorer... and the ones that come with Netscape.

And then we count in all the components of windows and/or activeX thingies that probably show up as IE

And then we wonder we used to love Netscape. And we remember that we started hating it when it began to crash continuously, and switched to IE. And then we remember that the crashing started after installing Office XX or other MS-type software...

AOL AOL AOL (4, Insightful)

exhilaration (587191) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165335)

Wasn't AOL supposed to be phasing out Internet Explorer in favor of Netscape?

Think of what might happen if the gazillions of AOL users started using Netscape when they upgrade to the next version of AOL!!!!!

AOL has the power to change the browser demographics of the web.

Wait until they patch it up (0, Troll)

indiigo (121714) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165336)

Wait for 7.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1, it'll be the one that makes everyone switch back!

Actually.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4165337)

I don't hope it makes a dent. For 95% of computer users in the world, Internet Explorer is the best option. Windows users should use IE because its the best Windows web browser. People should not start making choices just because they hate Microsoft.

I like FreeBSD and Linux, and other open source products because they are the best products for me. But for everyone else, go on and use IE!!

Re:Actually.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4165457)

Have you actually USED Mozilla? I find it's much better than IE on Windows. It's fast, more secure, supports more standards *correctly*, has pop-up blocking, tabs, etc. The list goes on and on. IE6 is the one that's going to have to play catch-up now.

In fact, between IE 5 and 6 they did almost nothing. They added some better CSS support and such, but hardly anything innovative. They can't even get proper PNG support working without a directx hack.

Mozilla needs to be advertised! (2, Insightful)

smd4985 (203677) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165343)

Forget netscape - we need to get the word out about how good Mozilla is. As a tech guy I've heard all about Mozilla and I use it all the time - but the average user thinks it is a new monster in JP4 or something! If Mozilla could get its name out (ie Super Bowl Ad), it would REALLY catch on....

Re:Mozilla needs to be advertised! (3, Interesting)

SquadBoy (167263) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165478)

Or do what I do. Use it at work, test with it. I've had *many* cases where it is faster and/or better than IE. Show people the popup blocking. Show people the pretty themes. Most of the company I work at (~400 people) use Mozilla at least some of the time and a good chunk of those use it almost all the time. Word of mouth works great for Mozilla because it *really* is better in many ways.

Print preview, Spell-checker (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4165345)

Print preview, Spell-checker, faster GUI and more Stability (i hope so) are fine. Are there other new features? And what happend to Issue 163648?

Feature list (0, Troll)

PhysicsGenius (565228) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165350)

-Quick launch
-Tabbed browsing
-Bookmark groups of tabs
-Website icons (address bar)
-Full screen mode
-Download manager
-Click to search

All seems fairly familiar from Moz. However when you actually do the download, check out the new License (not on the download page, the one in the file). It expressly forbids linking with GPL software. Yikes, what happened over there?

Mozillazine has more info... (5, Informative)

edgrale (216858) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165351)

So that you wont have to /. mozillazine.org here's the text with links:

Netscape Communications Corporation today launched the final version of Netscape 7.0. This latest release is based on Mozilla 1.0.1, making it the first Netscape browser to be built upon post-1.0 code. The new version boasts several enhancements over the 0.9.4-based Netscape 6.2, including tabbed browsing, the ability to save complete web pages, print preview, site icons (Favicons), a download manager, full screen mode (Windows only), Quick Search within Mail Newsgroups and Address Book, return receipts, mail labels, (Secure Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions) S/MIME mail encryption, CSS support in Composer and one-click web page publishing.

Netscape 7.0 also has several features not found in Mozilla. These include the ability to access Netscape Webmail and AOL accounts directly from within Mail Newsgroups, a button to easily toggle the display of My Sidebar in Navigator and P3P (Platform for Privacy Preferences) support for automated cookie handling. Improved instant messaging features including file transfers, Buddy Alerts and Buddy Icons are provided by AOL Instant Messenger for Netscape and ICQ for Netscape. There's also a round throbber with a cool animation.

Netscape 7.0 can be downloaded from Netscape's web site [netscape.com] or FTP server [netscape.com] . More details can be found at Netscape Browser Central [netscape.com] or in the Release Notes [netscape.com] .

Re:Mozillazine has more info... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4165391)

There's also a round throbber with a cool animation.

Big deal, I've had that feature for years.

NS7.0 vs Mozilla (5, Informative)

DrXym (126579) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165354)

Before anyone asks, the primary reason to use Netscape over Mozilla is stability. Netscape releases are traditionally clobbered a lot harder than Mozilla which means they crash less. End users like that. It also has some extra frills like AIM/ICQ integration, a spellchecker and links to AOL content such as their Spinner/Radio and My Netscape etc..


If you prefer bleeding edge code with more bugs then use Mozilla. It doesn't have any of the above and has the popup blocker UI. Web developers will also appreciate stuff like the DOM inspector and JS Debugger modules.

Re:NS7.0 vs Mozilla (1)

static55 (599927) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165389)

netscape is generally more stable than mozilla? would it be appropriate to put ns7 into a production environment instead of mozilla?

Re:NS7.0 vs Mozilla (1)

hey (83763) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165395)

That's why I have been using Netscape 6.x for a long time now - and I am very happy with my choice. No crashes.

Stability? (2)

barzok (26681) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165465)

I think Mozilla 1.1 Beta has crashed maybe 3 times for me. 1.0 crashed fewer than that. I restarted the browser and I was back in business.

IE6 brought my home 2000 Server machine to its knees last night and the one at work down this afternoon. At home it took 10 minutes to log me out so I could log in and start over, at work I had to hard reset as it wouldn't even log out properly. And it's far from the first time for either of those boxes it's happened.

Re:NS7.0 vs Mozilla (2, Informative)

iksowrak (208577) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165482)

Netscape 7.0 isn't any more stable than the Mozilla 1.0.1 it's based on. Release candidates, betas and nightly builds of Mozilla are the (potentially) unstable builds.

NETSCAPE IS FOR FAGGOTS (-1, Flamebait)

redhotchil (44670) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165355)

FUX

ROXXXXXXXXXXXXX yeah we are leet

Nutscrape 7 (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4165371)

Dear Commander Taco,
Nobody gives a hoot in hell about this.
You are wasting your life with this pathetic website. Unless of course this college dorm room project you call "slashdot" is the best you are capable of. In that case, I pity you.

Re:Nutscrape 7 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4165454)

what is the url to YOUR website, huh, you sick son of a BITCH??

stop complaining about this site if all you can do is psot anosymously on it

Where's the FreeBSD version? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4165373)

Linux is just too unstable and kludgy for me.

Should make a dent if included in AOL (5, Informative)

joncarwash (600744) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165377)

From the article, it appears as though they are testing Netscape 7 to be included with the next AOL version. If this indeed goes through (and finally replaces IE, which has been included in AOL because of an agreement with MS from just before AOL purchased Netscape), this will surely make dent due to the large AOL subscription base.

Although Mozilla [mozilla.org] has been available for a while and is a favorite among developers, it accounts for little among regular users. Netscape is much more recognized by name and will be advertised like crazy (banner already up on cnn.com [cnn.com] ).

Also, Microsoft's upcoming Win XP update will include the option of providing alternate "middleware" including browsers. According to this article [com.com] , Netscape 7 will be compatible with Win XP's alternate Middleware option. This should give PC makers as well as end users the option to switch without lots of hassle.

Netscape 7 life expectancy (3, Interesting)

Azar (56604) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165378)

I would like to see Netscape recover a decent market share. At least 20-30% of the browser market. But I'm not sure how much life it has left in it. Most Netscape geek users prefer Mozilla and the pop-up blocking (myself included) and those who -were- big Netscape fans have quite a sour taste left in there mouths after 6.0. Netscape really jumped the gun on that one. A case of a premature introduction doing more harm than good. Everyone I know who still uses Netscape has reverted back to 4.7 and grumbles everytime you mention Netscape 6.x.

I hope that the Netscape 6.x fiasco hasn't ruined 7.x's chances of making a resonable dent. Netscape 7.0 is everyting 6.0 should have been (and then some).

Long live Mozilla based browsers!

Did they fix the #1 bug? (2, Interesting)

Steveftoth (78419) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165384)

Mozilla still has a problem where sometimes the address bar doesn't work. Did they fix that? Do they even know what caused it in the first place?

All you have to do to fix it is close and reopen, but it's really annoying.

Re:Did they fix the #1 bug? (3, Informative)

iamsure (66666) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165449)

YES, they fixed that evil bug. I can report that after 24 hours of testing, on 1.0 I would see it at least twice an hour (if not more), and on 1.1, I do NOT see it any longer.

If you wanna search bugzilla for the bug, feel free.

it's not just the browser (5, Informative)

Ravagin (100668) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165387)

One of the main challenges faced in getting users to use standards-compliant browsers over obsolete programs such as Netscape 4-series is also the computers. At places still using older systems or franken-systems, Moz (may just be too hefty for Windows. It doesn't seem as much of a problem on PCs, because IE is available, but many people still use NS4 for the mail client (and I cannot in good conscience tell them that Moz's is overwhelmingly superior, despite weird stuff like NS4 Mail encoding all messages in Rot13 [sameperson.net] by accident). It is an even bigger challenge with Macs, because many older Macs just won't comfortably run IE/mac, so NS4/mac is the browser of choice for aging Macs.

But saturating the market with standards-compliant browsers is helpful anyway. I could only wish more people knew about Mozilla, for their sake.

Netscape is dead! Long live Mozilla! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4165388)

When I tell people to switch from IE, I never suggest Netscape. I suggest Mozilla. Besides the few feature difference, Mozilla sounds new and exciting to many people, while Netscape 4 did a lot of damage to the Netscape name. For those who still like Netscape anyway, I explain the relation between the two, and they're generally okay with not using Netscape if they're still using the same code.

the difference between Mozilla and Netscape? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4165394)

Mozilla installs, Netscape doesn't :(

When extracting the file "libpcl4.s" I get the error:

Error [-620]: A xpistub call failed.

This is on Gentoo linux.

Re:the difference between Mozilla and Netscape? (1)

tiedyejeremy (559815) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165473)

Installed fine for me on Win95b

Why doesn't /. have a hit box (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4165399)

Then it will really show that IE has won....crash bang ouch that hurts....stop it taco.

Memory Monster (1)

Rudy Rodarte (597418) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165411)

I used to use Netscape 7.I used the AIM, the eMail, everything. But, that bad boy would use up to 50,000k of my memory(so says the olde task manager) so it brought the system to a crawl... Thanks to you guys, I now use Mozilla, which uses a lot too, but not near as much as Netscape. Also, I understand there are no more pop ups on the web....

Re:Memory Monster (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4165483)

I'd bet the AIM was a big chunk of that. I've seen the regular client use up 20 megs!! It's really outrageous.

Please, AOLTW, switch to NS from IE for AOL.. (5, Interesting)

iamsure (66666) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165413)

Please,

As a webdesigner, a web game [sourceforge.net] developer, and as an internet user, please for the love of God, start the browser war back up.

When we have competition, at a scale over 20% for the browser, we will FINALLY see standards begin to matter!

AOL needs to:

- Aggressively work with computer makers to ship NS as the default browser in place of IE. More power to them if they also get AOL on it.

- Aggressively work to woo corporations to using Netscape again. Thats where Netscape was immensely powerful before, and where they can be again!

- Replace AOL's IE rendering engine with NS. They began with a closed beta, continued to Compuserve, moved it to AOL 4 Macs, now they need to do it on ALL of AOL.

With that, we may see a reverse in the tides. ANYTHING short of all of that, and it will be just a ripple.

PLEEEEEASE AOL, NS7 *IS READY*!

and? (1)

TillmanJ (223874) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165414)

So, Netscape has released another 'productized' version of Mozilla. Big deal. Let's take a look at the Exciting New Features it has:

  • tabbed browsing: congratulations! You're the last non-M$ browser to do so...
  • favicon.ico support: now there's something to base X.0 release on
  • 'click to search': ooh, just like Opera!

And a couple other minor GUI tweaks. I'm not saying that Netscape isn't making progress (okay, so I am), but is this really worth a whole version number?

Weird (1)

Hepkat (78639) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165419)

I checked /. about 10 minutes ago... no new on netscape, but I decided to upgrade(because netscape was already on my machine, it was just 10 versions old and I thought I'd see if they were making any progress... install version 7(not realizing it was brand new), set /. as my home page, and voila, notice that version 7 is out. creepy.

My Mozilla story (5, Interesting)

SquadBoy (167263) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165421)

many people hate Netscape what with the AOL stuff the ads etc etc. But just about everyday here at work I convert someone to Mozilla and/or show them some way in which it is better than IE. This has gotten to the point where next week I have a meeting with our MIS department to implement Mozilla in addition to IE as a standard. The moral of the story start using it and when people have a problem with IE test using Mozilla many times it will work and people will start to use it and love it. Also the whole blocking popup thing is a good way to sell people on it. :)

Not too much to get excited about (1)

McCart42 (207315) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165425)

Aside from the tabbed browsing, new to Netscape, it doesn't seem like 7.0 is that great an upgrade. Here's a CNET review [cnet.com] on the new version...as much as I generally distrust CNet's reviews of software, they're pretty much on the money with this one, it seems.

And it provides what kinds of improvements? (2)

gelfling (6534) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165429)

These seem like the thinnest of thin cosmetic crud type changes. This is really pathetic. Woowee now that I have no need to use the browser to launch AOLIM they integrate it, ooooh themes and skins, wow zipee !!!

It won't, sadly. (1)

Whatthehellever (93572) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165435)

With Netscape screwing with the Mozilla code, removing the ability to block popup ads and do ad filtering, it's destined to fail.


Long live Mozilla.

Re:It won't, sadly. (3, Informative)

sconest (188729) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165448)

You can restore the feature with this [ufaq.org]

You Discuss Someone Elses Marketshare?!?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4165441)

With their dwindling market share, it'll be interesting to see what affect this has on internet users.

In no way should anyone from VA being talking about marketshare!!

Slashdot effect? (5, Funny)

Andy Dodd (701) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165452)

Either it's not happening (the comments I've seen so far might explain why), or NS is withstanding it quite well.

I was shocked how fast I downloaded all 28 megs (NS, RealPlayer, Java 2, Flash, etc.) for a full install, even over my company's typically laggy connection.

Yes, I use NS7. It's more polished than Moz overall. I've been using the PR all summer (Why didn't they go through multiple PRs??? There was PR1 and that was it...) Yes, Moz might have some neat features, but overall I've had too many negative experiences with it. (Like refusing to access SSL pages - "Please download the PSM" - I DOWNLOADED AND INSTALLED IT, DELETED AND REINSTALLED IT AGAIN - WORK GODDAMNIT!)

Interesting how Netscape Radio compares to (say) Musicmatch's radio offering. Haven't checked to see if it runs under Linux yet (2 hours 'till I get home), but it's gonna hurt MM if it can compare, considering that it appears to be free.

Selling Linux Users AOL (1)

Hut-Moll (579880) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165467)

In the C|Net review [cnet.com] the reviewer was complaining about all the AOL ads in the setup program.

I wonder if the Linux version of NutScrape-7.0 has those ads too? They wouldn't be that stupid to include AOL ads for the Linux users. Would they?

I'll stick with Mozilla & Konquer.. thank you very much.

NS Communicator 4.8? (2)

Nate Fox (1271) | more than 12 years ago | (#4165486)

I was pokin thru their site the other day, and found this: ftp://ftp.netscape.com/pub/communicator/english/4. 8/ [netscape.com]

The funny thing is that 4.79 is listed at 11/7/2001, while this is actually brand new: 8/15/2002.

dunno why they're supporting this old ver, but whatever..

Coordinated Marketing Campaign (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4165489)

As a way of encouraging users to switch to Netscape, AOL announced that it would continue to rely on Internet Explorer as the lockin browser of choice for AOL subscribers.

Damn man... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4165492)

Damn man, I didn't know Netscape was gay.

Now here it is coming out!

Guess that's why I didn't know it was gay.

Stop saying Commando Taco is gay, it's not nice.

Watch techtv, news by and for people who use the stuff.

bye now
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?