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 8 Breaks IE XML

Zonk posted more than 9 years ago | from the thats-an-oops dept.

Netscape 398

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."

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

Does anyone use it? (5, Interesting)

coop0030 (263345) | more than 9 years ago | (#12645904)

I haven't tried out Netscape 8.0 (Firefox is fine with me for now), but what are some reasons people are switching to Netscape 8.0?

Does anyone have any stats on how many people are even using it? What are the website statistics showing?

To me this sounds like Netscape ran into a "too little, too late" situation with their newest iteration of their browser.

Re:Does anyone use it? (0)

DrinkingIllini (842502) | more than 9 years ago | (#12645964)

Quite a few older users who have used netscape for a long time will update simply because it is something they know. Other than that, I don't see anyone "switching" from FF or IE to netscape.

Re:Does anyone use it? (3, Interesting)

mrbcs (737902) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646083)

Agreed. I still use Netscape 7.2 on a win98 box because firefox seems to crash on me quite a bit. Gonna try updating the os to something a little more current and try again.

I tried the mistake called Netscape 8 the other day. It didn't last an hour. Back in the old days.. I used netscape 4.08 for years because it was the only one that was stable for me. I actually still use it a bit now and again, but it has tons of problems now.

Re:Does anyone use it? (2)

Metaphorically (841874) | more than 9 years ago | (#12645965)

As far as "too little, too late", I read that it's actually a whole different team of developers that AOL has hired. So really it's not even the same people making the effort, just AOL making a browser and slapping a well-known brand name on it.

Just what I heard, that's all...

Re:Does anyone use it? (2, Funny)

jeff_schiller (877821) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646057)

According to someone in the IE Blog, AOL "outsourced development of NS8 to a company called Mercurial Communications. "

Re:Does anyone use it? (3, Informative)

jeff_schiller (877821) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646097)

http://www.mcomi.com/EN/17/technologies/softdev.ht ml [mcomi.com] "Netscape had used Mercurial for a smaller project in the past, and based on that positive experience, chose them as a development partner for the Netscape 8.0 browser release. They did an excellent job, working under short deadlines and with complex requirements. Mercurial was a source of product innovation, as well as an excellent development shop. As a result of this experience, a number of other divisions of AOL are contracting with Mercurial for further work." Jeremy Liew, GM, Netscape.com (a division of AOL)

I guess Jeremy is now thinking "where's that Backspace button?"

Re:Does anyone use it? (5, Informative)

Will2k_is_here (675262) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646004)

I work the helpdesk part time at my University.

Users have used Netscape since NS 4 days. They don't feel comfortable trying anything else. NS7.2 tells them they have an outdated browser so they just upgrade. That's why they download it.

Re:Does anyone use it? (3, Insightful)

McGiraf (196030) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646038)

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.

Re:Does anyone use it? (2, Interesting)

pebs (654334) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646138)

I haven't tried out Netscape 8.0 (Firefox is fine with me for now), but what are some reasons people are switching to Netscape 8.0?

Surprisingly I know a good number of people using it. Though these are generally non-techies. Netscape's marketing seems to actually get some people to use it. I then have to go on to explain to them how Netscape is just a derivative of Firefox/Mozilla. Though in all these cases, these people have said they don't like IE or won't even allow IE usage on their PC. That's a good thing that they have awareness of that. Though Netscape allowing the usage of IE's rendering kinda defeats that.

This was a while ago (before Firefox 1.0), but one of my friends chose to use Netscape over Mozilla because Netscape setup a lot of plugins (Flash, etc) out-of-box.

Re:Does anyone use it? (1)

creimer (824291) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646284)

... but what are some reasons people are switching to Netscape 8.0?

If you design web pages, you would look at the pages in all the major browsers to ensure that your pages don't have any special problems.

The way NS 8.0 is going, running it in a VMware session is probably safer for now. It's borking IE... ouch! In the old days, you could depend on IE to bork itself and/or the operating system.

Re:Does anyone use it? (2, Funny)

ThePromenader (878501) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646286)

I use it only for testing pages, and sometimes to look at complicated source code 'cause it makes it into pretty rainbows : )

All right for the thumbs-up/thumbs-down comments, but perhaps these would have a little more weight if one could understand HOW one application can break another? I haven't found a word about it here nor in the article. What exactly is the modified "common" dependancy (file?) that makes them incompatible?

You're outta here! (5, Interesting)

TripMaster Monkey (862126) | more than 9 years ago | (#12645907)

  1. Netscape browser needed several fixes hours after its release.
  2. Netscape browser will not install unless IE is installed.
  3. Installation of Netscape breaks IE.

Back in the day, I was a big Netscape fan, and I waas really hoping that this new release would bring them back as a player, but enough is enough, guys. Three strikes, and you are OUT.

One more thing...
<zealot>
Firefox rules...IE sucks...let's fight!
</zealot>

^_^

Montreal? (1)

montreal!hahahahah (880120) | more than 9 years ago | (#12645929)

hahhahahhahah!

More whitespace please!

Re:You're outta here! (2, Funny)

downsize (551098) | more than 9 years ago | (#12645956)

1. Netscape browser needed several fixes hours after its release. 2. Netscape browser will not install unless IE is installed. 3. Installation of Netscape breaks IE.
too bad for #2 otherwise, it sounds like something I would want to enforce an update for all domain users :-} - although, since IE is installed by default....

Re:You're outta here! (5, Funny)

0x461FAB0BD7D2 (812236) | more than 9 years ago | (#12645988)

You're thinking that Netscape 8 breaking IE is a flaw, while it's clearly a feature. Hence, #3 is not a strike, it's a home-run.

And you're too slow! (4, Insightful)

Spy der Mann (805235) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646036)

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.

Re:And you're too slow! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12646126)

So you're the jerk that makes my boss require me to make netscape 4.7 compatible web pages. :p

Re:And you're too slow! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12646275)

Repeat after me: Netscape, Is, Now, Just, A, Brand.

How many times?

Re:You're outta here! (1)

Rei (128717) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646087)

Take #2 out, and you have the inverse of the old days - remember back when a new install of IE would break Netscape, and was broken as heck?

Re:You're outta here! (2, Interesting)

Java Pimp (98454) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646093)

Actually, for me, Netscape was "outta here" when I started finding AOL links in every back corner of my computer.

wewt (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12645924)

eff pee

But wait! (1)

Marthisdil (606679) | more than 9 years ago | (#12645927)

Since this is Slashdot, I'll go ahead and do the following for all your MS haters:

1) It's somehow MS' fault that Nutscrape sucks badly and screws up.

2) "This is good - it means people will blame MS and IE for Nutscrape not working"

3) And from us sensible people - Nutscrape has sucked for a long time - why are they bothering to try and make a comeback?

Re:But wait! (1)

DigiShaman (671371) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646180)

No no no. It's Nutscrape Navacrater or Internet Exploiter

Re:But wait! (1)

raolin (512968) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646224)

Actually, my reaction was more along the lines of :
"How the devil did Netscape 8 make it through testing without these issues being found and corrected".

I don't see where an anti-MS reaction is warranted or even to be expected.

crap (1)

netrage_is_bad (734782) | more than 9 years ago | (#12645931)

Now how would a user fix this?

Re:crap (1)

0x461FAB0BD7D2 (812236) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646028)

By using Gecko to view XML files instead?

Selective Slashdot Acceptance (0, Offtopic)

jeff_schiller (877821) | more than 9 years ago | (#12645932)

Hm, I tried to report this story yesterday and it was rejected. Go figure...

Re:Selective Slashdot Acceptance (4, Funny)

TommydCat (791543) | more than 9 years ago | (#12645974)

If I recall correctly, your submission came up as a blank screen...

Re:Selective Slashdot Acceptance (2, Funny)

ari_j (90255) | more than 9 years ago | (#12645976)

You didn't spell it "senior programme manager" is all. How can the editors get wet over a story when you spell everything correctly? (Note to the people who think "programme" is the correct spelling - no, it's not. A "senior program manager" at Microsoft is an American job and deserves an American spelling.)

Re:Selective Slashdot Acceptance (1)

Hungus (585181) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646067)

Don't worry it will be outsourced soon to India, and since India uses proper British spellings this will not be an issue.

Who uses Netscape? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12645936)

If I'm not wrong, Netscape is related to the Mozilla Foundation, which makes the web browsers Mozilla and Mozilla Firefox. Why would anyone use Netscape?

What can you expect? (0, Troll)

cybersaga (451046) | more than 9 years ago | (#12645938)

What else do you expect with AOL in charge?

AC/DC (1)

WickedClean (230550) | more than 9 years ago | (#12645941)

Netscape needs to run a commercial with AC/DC's 'Dirty Deeds' song playing in the background. Sounds like they are trying Microsoft tactics.

Variation on a theme (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646033)

s/DOS isn't done until Lotus won't run/Netscapie no escapie until IE dIE/

Finally, IE the way I want it. (4, Funny)

yotto (590067) | more than 9 years ago | (#12645943)

*IE needs Netscape uninstalled to work.* /me runs out to install Netscape 8.

Yea for QA Testing! (2, Insightful)

AcquaCow (56720) | more than 9 years ago | (#12645945)

Or rather booo....

I'd love to know what kinda crap their QA department is getting right now.

-- Dave

NOT A BUGGGG (0, Redundant)

SimianOverlord (727643) | more than 9 years ago | (#12645951)

F-E-A-T-U-R-E!

kbpkmnv kbpkm nvkbp kmnvkbpkmnv kbpkmnvkbpk mnvkbpkmn vkbpkmn vkbpkmnvk bpkmnvkb pkmnvkbpkmnv

Windows without IE (1)

spadadot (879731) | more than 9 years ago | (#12645953)

From : http://www.flexbeta.net/main/comments.php?catid=1& shownews=13318 [flexbeta.net]

How is it possible to have "a copy of Windows that did not have IE installed" ???

I would really like to know this, please post instructions ! :)

Re:Windows without IE (1)

kidgenius (704962) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646005)

You can use installers like 98lite, or, if you choose, you can remove IE from your system. Then when you go to install netscape, it won't work.

Re:Windows without IE (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12646134)

I used an IE-free install of Windows '98 for many years without problems. Finally, I gave in and re-installed IE because I wanted to use certain third-party apps that relied on parts of IE.

Re:Windows without IE (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12646043)

Buying it!

http://www.litepc.com/ [litepc.com]

Re:Windows without IE (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12646064)

How is it possible to have "a copy of Windows that did not have IE installed" ???

I would really like to know this, please post instructions ! :)

You have to delibrately uninstall IE using a third-party uninstallation tool like 98lite [litepc.com] from LitePC Technologies [litepc.com] .

In other words, you can't install Netscape on a delibrately hacked version of Windows 98. Wow, go figure.

Re:Windows without IE (1)

petermgreen (876956) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646177)

iirc the original release of win95 didn't ship with IE either (i think osr2 did though).

whats also a pita is if you install IE 4 with windows desktop update on windows 95 (i've only tested this with original release dunno about osr2) then do an over the top reinstall of windows 95 then you CAN'T install IE4 on the resulting system (i found this one out the hard way).

if you plan to do an over the top reinstall on such a system you MUST remove IE first!

Re:Windows without IE (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12646076)

This guy's using 98lite, a tool to strip components from Win98, including IE.

http://www.litepc.com/ [litepc.com]

Re:Windows without IE (1)

pebs (654334) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646185)

How is it possible to have "a copy of Windows that did not have IE installed" ???
I would really like to know this, please post instructions ! :)


I assume something like:

1. Install Windows 98
2. Uninstall Internet Explorer [google.com]

Un(evil) (3, Funny)

xbhatti (262449) | more than 9 years ago | (#12645958)

Having a hard time. Who is evil here?

Not a bug, it's a feature (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12645959)

Pity it doesn't bork IE completely, otherwise I'd recommend NS in place of firefox.

Breaks IE? (2, Funny)

taijirad (584518) | more than 9 years ago | (#12645960)

So, does this mean IE was working before?

Open Source QA (0, Troll)

webappsec (854813) | more than 9 years ago | (#12645961)

Usually doesn't work out that well....

robust opsys layout and design - ayup (1, Flamebait)

motorsabbath (243336) | more than 9 years ago | (#12645968)

Always humorous how one app can destroy another with impunity in the Win32 world. How do people deal with it?? Blech.

Re:robust opsys layout and design - ayup (1)

petermgreen (876956) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646046)

oh i'm sure you could do it on *nix without too much trouble assuming you are root (which most app installers are going to need).

fact is if an installer runs amock on any platform you can end up with a pretty fucked up system.

Re:robust opsys layout and design - ayup (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12646155)

Why would non-system software be installed as root?

There should be a simple apps group and members (installed applications) should not be able to modify each others files.

Use something like GNU stow to keep them totally separated if need be.

Re:robust opsys layout and design - ayup (4, Insightful)

gunnk (463227) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646240)

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.

LINUX USERS (1)

queef_latina (847562) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646250)

Isn't it a form of rape, forcing your operating system preferences on other people? Why can't you enjoy your niche operating system without biting your nails over "blah blah blah viable desktop alternative" or "blah blah open source solution this" or whatever you repulsive faggots are shitting out your mouths these days?

Computers aren't supposed to be an end to themselves, and only disgusting pedophiles watch star trek.

Switching back (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12645971)


That does it!

I'm switching back to Mosaic.

What exactly does NS8 do? (1)

otis wildflower (4889) | more than 9 years ago | (#12645973)

I R'd TFA, but not the blogpost. What exactly does Netscape do that breaks IE?

Take it from MS... (1)

SamMichaels (213605) | more than 9 years ago | (#12645980)

Turn every release into a big beta test. At least they actually called it a beta with the anti-spyware program....and of course that's the one that didn't have many bugs (since someone else programmed it).

/imperial march (2, Funny)

Rs_Conqueror (838344) | more than 9 years ago | (#12645982)

without IE installed, Netscape 8.0 will not install, and now IE needs Netscape uninstalled to work."

Microsoft couldn't have planned it better themselves...

Brilliant! (1)

Hansele (579672) | more than 9 years ago | (#12645987)

All part of Netscape's evil revenge plan to eliminate IE. Once XML is eliminated, the next step is to replace the Window's START button with a Netscape NOW button!

How stupid can you be? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12645991)

" then it was discovered that without IE installed, Netscape 8.0 will not install,"

WELL DUH. This is the Netscape with both Gecko and IE rendering engines. It needs both, but can only deliver Gecko they can't redistribute IE component so it has to come with the OS.

DUH! Why is this such a huge discovery?

Soft import? (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646253)

Then why couldn't Netscape Browser 8 soft-import the IE control and only call it when both 1. the user asks to view a page in IE and 2. IE is available?

Re:How stupid can you be? (1)

TrappedByMyself (861094) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646283)

I just thought they need IE installed so they can break it.

Evil Mozilla ! (1)

bushboy (112290) | more than 9 years ago | (#12645996)

Yes, it's a fact !

Netscape has become the Evil Lizard !

The Phoenix that rose from the ashes finally finds it's evil prey !

Moooo hahahaah Mooooooooo hahahaha !

Re:Evil Mozilla ! (1)

Turn-X Alphonse (789240) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646167)

Phoenix as in what firefox was called when I started using it? ;D

Seems ironic maybe (1)

smashin234 (555465) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646007)

I kind of think it is funny, but first I must say that every company has hiccups occasionally when a product first comes out.

But the funny part, IE for years unfairly competed with netscape, and now netscape is doing it back to them by destroying their browser's ability to handle XML documents...

Now the question, did they do this on purpose you think and not think about what would really happen?

Re:Seems ironic maybe (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12646229)

Of course they didn't do it on purpose. It's a bad installer, and horrid dependencies on top of it, that's all. It's a typical buggy windows program if you ask me, but your post reeks of bias towards some evil plot.

Great! (1)

m85476585 (884822) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646008)

I've always wanted a way to break IE! If Windows won't let me uninstall it, I will break it!

Obviously, MSFT should change XML in IE (1)

WillAffleckUW (858324) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646041)

to comply with the Mozilla standard.

After all, standards rule over companies, right?

.

.

[pin drop]

.

I'd love to see the reaction from the /. community (1, Flamebait)

iibbmm (723967) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646055)

If installing IE7 caused Firefox to fuck up somehow.

Re:I'd love to see the reaction from the /. commun (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12646123)

MSIE having an inflated user base on account of abuse of a desktop monopoly has resulted in badly formed pages fucking up in standards compliant browsers for years.

Re:I'd love to see the reaction from the /. commun (1)

iibbmm (723967) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646197)

That's a horrible way to look at it. The problem lies with the developers/webdesigners, not the publisher of a browser that is more 'lenient' than it should be. If people checked their sites' compliance before shooting it off into the open, you wouldn't have any problem. It's like blaming Ferrari for not putting a speed limiter on their cars, allowing people to drive over the speed limit* *I see the hilarity in comparing IE to a Ferrari. Shut up.

Re:I'd love to see the reaction from the /. commun (2, Insightful)

top_down (137496) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646133)

Well, you are part of that community. How would you react?

Re:I'd love to see the reaction from the /. commun (1)

iibbmm (723967) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646231)

The same way I react to this. It's absurd, but I doubt it's intentional. I simply can't believe it made it through the QC program. I'll rephrase : I'd like to see what the average response to this would be, and compare them. I'm interested in the bias.

Re:I'd love to see the reaction from the /. commun (2, Interesting)

Adrilla (830520) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646249)

I can already tell you the argument in that case:

Netscape breaks IE: They both use the same rendering engine. It was an honest mistake.
IE breaks Firefox: MS did it on purpose because they were losing marketshare.

So it breaks IE???? (3, Funny)

darkonc (47285) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646056)

I think I'll just quietly install NS8 on all of my clients' boxes before they fix this 'feature'.
No need to tell them about it, though... Just leave them using Firefox.

get mad (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12646061)

and buy a mac.

too bad (1)

mindwar (708277) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646081)

too bad. the dual engine rendering was a feature i'd wanted to check out

Firefox, IE, Netscape, Opera.. (1)

Flamekebab (873945) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646084)

I tried Netscape a while back, never really liked it, it seemed like a bloated version of IE.

Then came Firefox, my browser of choice. Basically, Netscape became valueless and I know of only one person who prefers it to anything else now, is this (flawed) release going to do anything to change this? Some how, I doubt it very much.

Isn't Netscape somewhere between Opera and Firefox?

At least Opera feels a bit more "properly" different.

I'd be enormously suprised if Netscape wins any more users, especially with the "Spread Firefox" campaigns. Perhaps the Netscape bods ought to take some lessons from Firefox?

FF inspiration (1)

photomic (666457) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646088)

Maybe this will inspire the Firefox team to one-up this achievement. I'm thinking something that completely uninstalls IE forever. Nothing like competition to encourage innovation, I say.
--
BTW, what's with the post captcha?

Microsoft did the same thing with IE 4.0 (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12646118)

This is nothing new. When IE 4.0 first came out for Windows 95 and NT in 1997, it broke Netscape so it would not run at all. Even worse, if you attempted to uninstall IE, then NOTHING on the PC would function. Nothing short of a reformat would fix the mess. For this reason (and others) I vowed to never allow IE to infect any PC I care about.

It's amazing how quickly everyone forgets the IE 4 chaos....

Sounds like yet another... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12646120)

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.

Could it be true? (4, Funny)

jeffphil (461483) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646121)

!seineew era sreenigne epacsteN :)

How nice (1)

Cliff.Braun (825786) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646131)

Of Microsoft to let us know that another browser is bad. that would be the initial reaction, in this case it seems justified though.

Wise boss (1)

bored (40072) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646132)

Back in the mid 90's my boss in response to me bitching about windows said "Its not that M$ writes good software, its that everyone else's software is worse" This was shortly after we dumped all our unix servers in favor of NT. Yes, at that time linux was around and we had even tried it for a while. I showed it running on one of my machines and my other boss managed to lock it up in under 3 minuites. The general consensus at the time where I worked? Linux was just another unix complete will all the usual unix problems.

Bwahahahahaha!!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12646143)

This is further proof that when you try and make the move to closed source softwares, it breaks everything. Viva Firefox!!! Death to the Netscape infidels!!!!

This must be... (1)

Kymermosst (33885) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646145)

payback for bundling IE in the first place.

Netscape's Revenge!

(It's funny, laugh.)

all i can do is... (1)

Phil246 (803464) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646150)

laugh heh.
there isnt anything i can say which can sum it up as well as just laughing

just some info... (3, Informative)

Run4yourlives (716310) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646154)

the New netscape is owned by AOL, and really has nothign to do with Mozilla... that connection has long ago been severed.

I lot of folk in this thread seem not to realize that.

Netscape bashing (1)

sktea (692457) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646162)

It seems only yesterday [slashdot.org] when someone [theinquirer.net] accused Mozilla of inappropriately bashing Netscape? Never mind the facts, let's just focus on the emotive language.... I'm concerned that people "out there" will interpret Netscape's problems as reflecting on Mozilla, which they most certainly should not.

Turn about is fair play ;-) (1)

killtherat (177924) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646190)

Hey, how many time have we seen Microsoft break other people's apps and simply say 'tough shit'. Now sombody does it to them and it's the end of the world...

But seriously, is this some soft of dll conflict or something?

The biggest unanswered question is... (3, Funny)

guttergod (94044) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646210)

If it already is broken, do you *really* break it?

AOL is full of idiots (0, Troll)

Dracos (107777) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646219)

The IE/Gecko switching is one of the absolute dumbest ideas ever. EVER. Whoever thought of that should be fired and blacklisted from IT forever, and everyone else who didn't fight it tooth and nail should all be flogged with cat5 cable.

AOL won't be happy until they have utterly destroyed Netscape.

Just Growing Pains for an innovative product (2, Insightful)

HighOrbit (631451) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646223)

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 ).

XML in IE (0, Flamebait)

wan-fu (746576) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646238)

IE actually performed XML in a compliant way? If I recall correctly, it was doing some non-standard stuff anyways. I'm not surprised it gets broken.

give me a break (1)

xnot (824277) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646260)

Um, isn't the point of installing Netscape 8 to use it as your web browser instead of IE? In other words, WHO CARES if Netscape breaks IE in the process of being installed?

God sakes, microsoft has a hissy fit every time people install alternatives, but then on their own time they feel perfectly justified in hijacking filetypes or even breaking other programs on purpose to keep people from using 3rd parties. People blame the authors of those program, instead of microsoft who caused the original problem by tying their old and pathetic web browser into the operating system.

I would have preferred it better if Netscape UNINSTALLED IE in the process of being installed.

hmmm (1)

Paranoia Agent (887026) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646279)

Do other browsers come with this feature?

Smells funny... (3, Funny)

FhnuZoag (875558) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646285)

Really, just looking at the Microsoft Fanboys referenced in that article.

"Internet Explorer (7?) is all I need."

"Honestly, the rubbish you [Microsoft] have to put up with... my heart goes out to you guys. Keep up the good work with IE7"

Yes, people, we are eulogising about software that hasn't even been released yet.

I thought the point with Netscape is that it is meant to be an IE-replacement - hence the render using IE engine feature. Whether it respects an obsolete, badly coded application it is designed to get rid of is kinda irrelevant.

Obviously, this is a bug that needs to be fixed, but let's not start burying Netscape yet. More competition is always good.

Bug or Feature? (0, Redundant)

redbeard_ak (542964) | more than 9 years ago | (#12646290)

"IE needs Netscape uninstalled to work"

I wonder if that is a bug on Netscape's part or a feature?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?