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!

Mozilla Severs Netscape News Legacy

Zonk posted more than 8 years ago | from the you-can-never-go-home-again dept.

Netscape 133

Juha-Matti Laurio writes "After years of official separation, Mozilla is just now shaking off some of the last vestiges of its parental association with Netscape. From the article: 'Mozilla's Usenet public newsgroups have been moved from netscape.public.mozilla.* to just mozilla.*. The renaming officially ends Mozilla's public Netscape news legacy after more than 8 years of active use. Most of the approximately 63 different newsgroups that began with the old moniker have now been officially abandoned.' Related: Earlier this week Netscape Communications released version 8.1 of its Netscape Browser."

cancel ×

133 comments

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

GNAA Announces Corporate Downsizing and Administra (-1, Troll)

Audal (950291) | more than 8 years ago | (#14590419)

GNAA Announces Corporate Downsizing and Administrative Reformation

Misha Borovsky (GNAP) - Hollywood - GNAA President timecop announced at a press conference this morning that the Gay Nigger Association of America is in the midst of a large effort to reduce operating costs and streamline business processes. "Layoffs of approximately fifty percent of the gay workforce are to be expected, as well as a shifting in administrative functions," timecop was quoted as saying. Analysts predict this corporate downsizing was made necessary due to over-investment into the New Orleans area, when it was announced last year that the GNAA would be opening a state-of-the-art branch office on the coast. The building was nearing completion and just opening for business when it was destroyed by hurricane Katrina, which has been recently found to be the responsibility of Jews. As George W. Bush is noted for not caring about black people, FEMA has refused to pay for the repairs, and the project was scrapped.

"We are also making internal changes to the corporate information technology intranet," said supers, CTO for GNAA Worldwide Operations. "Many of our information moving processes were running on the Lunix platform, and this was generating large costs due to system slowness and instability. After a careful usability study, we have found that we will be saving millions of dollars [USD] per year by switching to the Microsoft Windows 2003 Server System".

timecop ended the conference by announcing, "We'll always be there for the gay niggers of the world. With this restructuring of the organization, we are enabled to offer twice the service for a fraction of the cost. It's a new gay universe ahead."



About GNAA:
GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the first organization which gathers GAY NIGGERS from all over America and abroad for one common goal - being GAY NIGGERS.

Are you GAY [klerck.org] ?
Are you a NIGGER [mugshots.org] ?
Are you a GAY NIGGER [gay-sex-access.com] ?

If you answered "Yes" to all of the above questions, then GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) might be exactly what you've been looking for!
Join GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) today, and enjoy all the benefits of being a full-time GNAA member.
GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the fastest-growing GAY NIGGER community with THOUSANDS of members all over United States of America and the World! You, too, can be a part of GNAA if you join today!

Why not? It's quick and easy - only 3 simple steps!
  • First, you have to obtain a copy of GAYNIGGERS FROM OUTER SPACE THE MOVIE [imdb.com] and watch it. You can download the movie [idge.net] (~130mb) using BitTorrent.
  • Second, you need to succeed in posting a GNAA First Post [wikipedia.org] on slashdot.org [slashdot.org] , a popular "news for trolls" website.
  • Third, you need to join the official GNAA irc channel #GNAA on irc.gnaa.us, and apply for membership.
Talk to one of the ops or any of the other members in the channel to sign up today! Upon submitting your application, you will be required to submit links to your successful First Post, and you will be tested on your knowledge of GAYNIGGERS FROM OUTER SPACE.

If you are having trouble locating #GNAA, the official GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA irc channel, you might be on a wrong irc network. The correct network is NiggerNET, and you can connect to irc.gnaa.us as our official server. Follow this link [irc] if you are using an irc client such as mIRC.

If you have mod points and would like to support GNAA, please moderate this post up.

.________________________________________________.
| ______________________________________._a,____ | Press contact:
| _______a_._______a_______aj#0s_____aWY!400.___ | Gary Niger
| __ad#7!!*P____a.d#0a____#!-_#0i___.#!__W#0#___ | gary_niger@gnaa.us [mailto]
| _j#'_.00#,___4#dP_"#,__j#,__0#Wi___*00P!_"#L,_ | GNAA Corporate Headquarters
| _"#ga#9!01___"#01__40,_"4Lj#!_4#g_________"01_ | 143 Rolloffle Avenue
| ________"#,___*@`__-N#____`___-!^_____________ | Tarzana, California 91356
| _________#1__________?________________________ |
| _________j1___________________________________ | All other inquiries:
| ____a,___jk_GAY_NIGGER_ASSOCIATION_OF_AMERICA_ | Enid Al-Punjabi
| ____!4yaa#l___________________________________ | enid_al_punjabi@gnaa.us [mailto]
| ______-"!^____________________________________ | GNAA World Headquarters
` _______________________________________________' 160-0023 Japan Tokyo-to Shinjuku-ku Nishi-Shinjuku 3-20-2

Copyright (c) 2003-2005 Gay Nigger Association of America [www.gnaa.us]

Dear Audal (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14590546)

Dear Audal,

You seem to have a lot of drive and enthusiasm, which is obviously not finding a productive outlet, have you thought about getting some part-time work in IT? Perhaps try doing some volunteer work!

Maybe you've not yet graduated and are going through that 'difficult' stage. Girls don't seem to like you, the sporty kids bully you. We've all been there, it'll pass. The simple fact that is girls mature faster than boys.

In a few years, you'll look back on these days and laugh! :)

Anyway, take care.

AC.

Re:Dear Audal (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14591083)

Dear Anonymous Coward,

You seem to have a lot of time on your hands and nothing to do with it. Replying to the most blatant of trolls on Slashdot is not a productive use of time. Perhaps you should consider taking your own advice. Or, if you insist on dispensing pointless advice to people who don't want to hear it and will undoubtedly disregard it, perhaps you should consider getting a job as a high school guidance counselor. That way, you would at least get paid for it.

Sincerely,
AC

Re:Dear Audal (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14591255)

Dear Anonymous Coward,

You shouldn't talk to yourself.

Sincerely,
AC

Netscape (-1, Flamebait)

PlayCleverFully (947815) | more than 8 years ago | (#14590424)

They are still around? They dont really fit into the "browser wars" at all.

Maybe, but I doubt it.. People are either going to go with Internet Explorer or FireFox/Opera for customization.

Re:Netscape (2, Informative)

j3rryh (909483) | more than 8 years ago | (#14590466)

I d'led NS 8 just to see what they'd been up too for the past 4 years and I was amazed to see it used the freakin IE engine. bizarro, no?

Re:Netscape (4, Informative)

MooUK (905450) | more than 8 years ago | (#14590805)

It uses both the IE engine and the Mozilla engine, IIRC. You can switch between them.

Or you can get a similar effect in Firefox on windows using the IE Tab extension. Can be very handy.

Re:Netscape (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14590852)

Almost as bizarre as your version of English.

Re:Netscape (1)

lasindi (770329) | more than 8 years ago | (#14591858)

I d'led NS 8 just to see what they'd been up too for the past 4 years and I was amazed to see it used the freakin IE engine.

I don't know where you got that idea, but Netscape still uses Gecko (the Mozilla/Firefox rendering engine).

Re:Netscape (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14592076)

You're partly right. NS8 uses both Gecko and IE's engine and you can toggle between the two.

Re:Netscape (5, Funny)

Mercano (826132) | more than 8 years ago | (#14590484)

There still arround, they've just become the Switzerland of the browser wars.

Re:Netscape (3, Funny)

Tony Hoyle (11698) | more than 8 years ago | (#14590600)

You mean they now produce stunningly accurate clocks? Cool!

Re:Netscape (1)

Trashman (3003) | more than 8 years ago | (#14592871)

And the best chocolate too.

Re:Netscape (3, Interesting)

petermgreen (876956) | more than 8 years ago | (#14591018)

netscape 7 was essentially a screwed about with version of mozilla with various advertising type crap added (not banner adds but things like popping up its own search sidebar whenever you used google)

i dunno about netscape 8 but i hear it uses the IE rendering engine by default.

Re:Netscape (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14591085)

Uh, wrong. I used Netscape 7 for years. The only thing I can think of that could be what you're talking about is the sidebar displaying the links when you do a google search. That's in Mozilla too, if I'm not mistaken. They did have a Netscape search thing, but that was different and easily avoided. Sure, Netscape 7 had a lot of extra junk in it, but it did have more polish than Mozilla - NS 7 still had developers working on it, and they spent a lot of time killing bugs. If they had stuck with the Suite instead of moving to the terrible, terrible piece of software that is NS 8, I'd still be using it. As it is, I'm relatively happy with Firefox, even though it seems slower and hogs more memory.

Oh, and NS 8 only uses Trident by default for some sites that they specify in a list to use it on. Supposed to increase compatibility. I'm not a big fan of it, though.

Re:Netscape (0)

4D6963 (933028) | more than 8 years ago | (#14591485)

At the risk of being badly modded, I agree, and I even wonder, why do they still bother with developping their browser? Nobody cares about it anymore. Netscape Communicator was at its best at 4.x.

Re:Netscape (1)

aamcf (651492) | more than 8 years ago | (#14592480)

Its best at 4.x!

Netscape 4.x was evil, unless you disabled JavaScript. 3.x was better. In fact, Netscape 4.x was so bad it made me use IE4.

Includes (5, Insightful)

someguy456 (607900) | more than 8 years ago | (#14590452)

Sadly, today's Netscape is just a shadow of its former self: "What's Included in the Download? Installation may include Netscape 8.1 Browser, Netscape ISP, McAfee, Rhapsody, Real Arcade and WeatherBug." Sad.

Re:Includes (0, Flamebait)

user24 (854467) | more than 8 years ago | (#14590510)

so it's still just a bunch of useless freeware wrapped around a second-rate browser, eh?

Honestly, why are they even bothering?

Re:Includes (4, Interesting)

storem (117912) | more than 8 years ago | (#14590569)

I briefly browsed around the browser's website, and was please to see it still holds an archive of most Netscape releases since 4.7x

http://browser.netscape.com/ns8/download/archive.j sp [netscape.com]

Re:Includes (1)

MikeURL (890801) | more than 8 years ago | (#14591674)

Hey man, thanks for that! I just installed 4.7 and it is quite the blast from the past.

Re:Includes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14592708)

http://browsers.evolt.org/ [evolt.org] for a large archive of quite a few browsers.

Re:Includes (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14592721)

Hehe, I had a laugh the other day. I was poking around my old cdroms and found a single .tar.gz on a cdrom, a backup of 1 of my old machines from 2002! Had a blast getting it to run in a virutal machine under vmware. Redhat 6.0, Hedwig :) Totally custom though. I even got that latest 2.2 kernel rolling just for fun once it was up.

What was funny is that I fired up Netscape, hit my my company's Citrix secure gateway, and it handled the new ssl certificate from Thawte no problem, insalled without a hitch! This while everyday at work we are getting calls from IE 6.whatever users having difficutly getting their browser to "trust" the certificate issuer. Hehe. Now 2002 isnt that old, but I think even then I was "hangin on" to RH 6.0, so it probably as circa 2000 browser at least. I even took a screen shot to poke fun at my co-workers :)

Re:Includes (0)

icepick72 (834363) | more than 8 years ago | (#14590609)

I would rather think of Netscape as having provided intial codebase and support to produce the Mozilla project as successor and as Netscape having been transformed from the ashes and rising like a Fire Bird, oh @^$@$@$! wait ... wrong analogy .. the um, ... now hot Firefox product.
Regardless, Netscape has evolved purposely. The shell of the Netscape browser you now see bundled with all kinds of other software is just a marketing piece based on the new successor, (same gecko engine internals as Firefox). The suppression of Netscape is just some sad chrome features and a white elephant being put to rest and bowing to its next evolutionary step. Netscape may no longer be recognized for what it was, but right now Firefox is what it is and that's most important. Netscape played the role that caused its own downfall into something greater. That's a pretty cool ending.

Re:Includes (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14590627)

I would rather think of Netscape as having provided intial codebase and support to produce the Mozilla project as successor and as Netscape having been transformed from the ashes and rising like a Fire Bird, oh @^$@$@$! wait ... wrong analogy .. the um, ... now hot Firefox product.

Hey... given that analogy, they should call it Phoenix! I can't believe no one has thought of that yet. :)

Re:Includes (0, Redundant)

Zantetsuken (935350) | more than 8 years ago | (#14590661)

ya, but Firefox sounds a lot cooler and more unique than just looking to mythology for names - dont get me wrong, mythology has some great screen names, but for marketing something, it would be better (I think) to come up with something that sounds mythological but unique

Re:Includes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14590824)

Apparently, you may have missed my joke [mozilla.org] . Someone logged in got a +5 Funny for the same jake posted a couple of minutes later, though, so comedy has survived unscathed. (Of course, you may also have been kidding, in which case I would certainly have egg on my face.)

--
Still posting anonymously because I don't care about getting credit.

Re:Includes (4, Funny)

EvilMonkeySlayer (826044) | more than 8 years ago | (#14590637)

Yes, you could even say it was reborn in a "phoenix" like event...

Re:Includes (1)

Jacek Poplawski (223457) | more than 8 years ago | (#14591847)

You can't use the word "phoenix", because it's patented, so maybe.. hm... a fi-re-fox?

Re:Includes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14591972)

You're on Slashdot, you have the karma bonus, and you don't know the distinction between patents and trademarks? :O

Re:Includes (1)

lseltzer (311306) | more than 8 years ago | (#14592632)

Funny, the way I remember it after Netscape released their source and everyone had some time to look at it they determined it was a pile of shit, threw it out and rewrote essentially from scratch, although borrowing some basic design.

Re:Includes (1)

carl0ski (838038) | more than 8 years ago | (#14592070)

Is it Possible Googles recent stake in AOL

they will use that to market Netscape and Google related tools?

Do I even need to say anything? (0, Flamebait)

Nuclear Elephant (700938) | more than 8 years ago | (#14590454)

After years of official separation, Mozilla is just now shaking off some of the last vestiges of its parental association with Netscape.

Related: Earlier this week Netscape Communications released version 8.1 of its Netscape Browser."

Netscape 8.1 is using an odd mix of code (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14590481)

Updated code from 2002 is missing [glazman.org] for some reason. Who knows what else isn't right/secure.

Finally (5, Insightful)

thelem (218540) | more than 8 years ago | (#14590502)

The renaming of the newsgroups has been one of the failures of the mozilla projects, and has dragged on for years.

It caused problems back before even Netscape 6 was released. The newsgroups were intended for developers, but because they were called "netscape.public.mozilla.x" they would get loads of noise from people looking for help with Netscape 4. Thats died down now, or at least moved on to questions about Firefox. Having said that, I'm a fan of what Mozilla.org has done, and if the names of their newsgroups are my biggest criticism of them then they must be doing something right.

This change should also help reduce the amount of spam on the newsgroups, since they will only be accessible through the mozilla news server and google groups

Re:Finally (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14590736)

What tard decided to create a whole new hierarchy rather than legitimate new groups in comp.infosystems.www.browsers?

Re:Finally (1)

Lehk228 (705449) | more than 8 years ago | (#14591424)

mozilla is more than a browser, it is also an email client and news reader.

Re:Finally (1)

Bing Tsher E (943915) | more than 8 years ago | (#14592904)

Don't forget that Mozilla also has a Composer component.

In a world, seemingly the one that the 'Firefox Community' wants, where content creation is restricted to vi hackers and people who buy FrontPage, the 'web browser' becomes a pretty-button-clicky consumer-only thing. Which is really disappointing.

It's a good thing with classic Netscape, and classic Mozilla, that a WYSIWYG HTML editor is installed by default. It's a simple step to point out to someone that a program they can use to easily CREATE web content is right down there on a tab they can click.

Yeah, yeah. There's still a composer you can use with Firefox, and it's simply a matter of downloading and installing it. That's a big leap from 'installed by default' however. Do telephones come by default with just an earpiece? Should any communications device be by default a one-way channel? Should a 'community' that hopefully believes in open two-way communication be promoting a 'browser-only' worldview?

shades of Dr. Evil (5, Funny)

42Penguins (861511) | more than 8 years ago | (#14590506)

This reminds me of Austin Powers...

Under the Ballmer-McBride thesis that open source is evil, Netscape is Scotty and Mozilla is Mini Me:

Netscape, you're semi-evil. You're quasi-evil. You're the margarine of evil. You're the Diet Coke of evil. Just one calorie, not evil enough!

Times have changed. (3, Insightful)

gasmonso (929871) | more than 8 years ago | (#14590508)

While is sad to see Netscape fizzle away, it was the browser that took on IE and fought the good fight. Mozilla and Firefox are the next evolution in the fight against IE. There is one constant in this universe though and that is Internet Explorer :( Hopefully this stiff competition will make IE a good browser once again.

http://religiousfreaks.com/ [religiousfreaks.com]

Uh, what? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14590533)

IE was the browser that took on Netscape, not the other way around. All Netscape did was lose, partly because IE at the time was superior and partly because Microsoft broke the law.

And WTF are you smoking? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14591478)

All Netscape did was lose, partly because IE at the time was superior and partly because Microsoft broke the law.

Um, you were right everywhere except when you said that IE was superior. It never has been, and never will be. Watch how much better a PC runs without IE by removing it with LitePC. [litepc.com] Seeing is believing.

Unforunately the new Netscapes (since version 8) are garbage now that they "require" IE. It's a shame, really. The older versions of Netscape were good (except for 6.0, of course.)

Re:And WTF are you smoking? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14591559)

I was as much a Netscape loyalist as anyone, but IE 5.x blew away Netscape 4.x in terms of features and stability. That time between Netscape 4.x and Mozilla betas was rough.

Re:Times have changed. (4, Informative)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | more than 8 years ago | (#14590577)

"While is sad to see Netscape fizzle away, it was the browser that took on IE and fought the good fight."

You don't really believe that Microsoft invented the web browser, do you? When Netscape was born, Bill Gates didn't even think the internet was particularly important. And Netscape was just building on the university-developed NCSA Mosaic browser.

Back in the mid-90s, Netscape was THE dominant browser. But it got stagnant as the corporation tried to figure out how to make money off of it. Meanwhile, Microsoft built a browser that was comparable in quality (neither one was great), and used it's monopolistic position - combined with some rather unethical tactics - to grab users away from Netscape.

Re:Times have changed. (3, Insightful)

Psiren (6145) | more than 8 years ago | (#14590797)

...and used it's monopolistic position - combined with some rather unethical tactics - to grab users away from Netscape.

While there is an element of truth in that, Netscape was more responsible for its downfall than Microsoft was. They made a lot of poor decisions, and failed to make the browser experience better, instead preferring to get into a feature war with IE, one they were ultimately to lose.

A good example of this was Netscape not working with roaming profiles. At my place of work (before my time, but I've discussed it at length with my colleague) they were unable to use Netscape because of this. Numerous discussions with the company resulted in nothing productive - they just weren't interested. That was responsible for a good number of enterprises switching to IE.

The Mozilla foundation have so far done a good job on focusing on making the browser better, adhering to standards (yes, they still have some way to go) and making the user the focus. Lets hope they continue this way, esepcially when IE 7 is released. I'd hate to see another feature war break out.

Breathing (4, Insightful)

Dr. Evil (3501) | more than 8 years ago | (#14590964)

Netscape used to be able to charge corporations money to use their browser.

When Microsoft gave away IE for free, it cut off Netscape's revenue source. I blame the downfall in software quality on Netscape's inability to find a new revenue stream.

Or to put it another way... even if they implemented roaming profiles, you'd still be paying Microsoft and not paying Netscape.

Re:Breathing (3, Informative)

NutscrapeSucks (446616) | more than 8 years ago | (#14592168)

When Microsoft gave away IE for free, it cut off Netscape's revenue source. I blame the downfall in software quality on Netscape's inability to find a new revenue stream.

Well, that's true, but let's not forget that Netscape's REAL business was Enterprise server software. The rise of Apache had a lot more to do with Netscape's poor finances than the rise of IE did.

In conclusion:
+ Netscape browser gets beat down by IE
+ Netscape web server loses against Apache and IIS
+ Netscape groupware gets squeezed off the map by MS Exchange and IBM Notes
+ Netscape application server (Kiva) gets overwhelmed by Java stuff like BEA and WebSphere

Endgame: Netscape ends up a as a lame portal company.

Re:Breathing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14592901)

True. Netscape then tried to maintain its remaining revenue stream, that of selling server-based software. Microsoft then committed major commercial fraud, claiming that Netscape servers could only run properly on NT Server releases, and that NT Workstation could not run them, and oh-my, look! If you bought NT Server, you received this very nice Microsoft IIS software.

It was fraudulent, but it helped ruin Netscape's remaining source of income. It's taken years for open source projects such as FireFox to climb back up out of the crater that this left in browser development, and there's still not a really good replacement for the calendar functions of Netscape. (The tight integration of MS's Exchange calendar functions with Outlook, and with IE, continue to help it dominate the calendar world.)

Netscape's calendar software got picked up by Stettor, then sold off to Oracle, who have succeeded in completely ruining it by treating it as a poorly implemented dangling tag on the king-size mattress of Oracle software: it's safer to just remove it so it doesn't get caught on anything.

In other news.... (4, Interesting)

sillybilly (668960) | more than 8 years ago | (#14591369)

Bullshit.. I remember that mystical feeling of the early days of surfing the net, in a library, way back in 1994, with Nescape 1.0. Yahoo was a neat place, had a lot of categories, while it was young, run by two hillbillies as a startup, there was Webcrawler as a search engine, then Altavista later a little better (nothing as good as google though that showed up in 1999, or ICQ in 97), and even Ebay was around. Back in 94 forget looking at the library catalog index to find a book, walk to the shelf, when you could just sit down at the same computer and just have the answers right at your fingertips. And you could have all that from home, via a SLIP dialup, with Trumpet Winsock/Win3.1, manual logins! Yay! And all this came alive because of Netscape - gopher, news, ftp, telnet and such have fallen mostly by the wayside, and http became the major dominant force of the internet, all because of netscape making it so accessible. Microsoft had no clue, was just simply left in the dust, they thought of the internet and www as you think of gopher or ftp these days - insignificant user experience, clumsy and frustrating to use, and who needs it anyway? Netscape, riding on NCSA's Mosaic's back, proved it differently. Netscape 2.0 had neat javascript (plus bundled news and especially email) - who would have thought an C-like syntax is masterable by the masses, when average joe needs either cobol or basic? Then holy cow, Netscape 3.0 with java! Yahoo games, chess, card games, pool, it all rocked! Secure sandbox too! Good old days when the web used to be secure, unlike the activex junk today, plus all the downloadable instant messenger backdoors and spyware 'innovations' that happened since then. Or blogging, you no longer have to go to the confession booth to repent your sins, you can put it all in writing online! Be honest please, and personal! Gee, what progress since then to please you the customer! Back then Netscape 3.0 was miles ahead of IE 3.0, even though by 4.0 you could feel the pressure lowering on the company to stop doing what it was doing, including sabotagelike deliberate crappy work - 4.0 was pretty much crap compared to the revolution 3.0 was, dhtml was a mess compared to the perfection that secure java applets were. If netscape were allowed to flourish, I believe the whole computing experience would be different today - I can't tell what they would have invented, but I'm sure it would have been more nice stuff - for instance you could be having an online desktop, with wordprocessors and all your needs, from any-isp service provider at a low cost, all you need is hardware, boot via some free bios program, log on from anywhere in the world to your service provider, and there you go, at 10bux a month everything included, connection, software, everyting, if there is enough competition, because netscape didn't try to hog the market, they didn't try to be yet another AOL and "everything goes through me" service provider, but they let local isp's live too. Today even if you had such an webmail service type of world, it would be only 3 players - yahoo, gmail and hotmail. Barrier of entry humongous. What about local ISP's, mom and pop shops? Talk about an information economy where there are only 2 players and the rest of the population is excluded, can only be p4wns. Unfortunately there were powerful forces vested in the current monopolistic desktop model. After Netscape was exterminated, what has happened? Nothing! We're just milking the same old cash cows from way back 1993, Win31 + MS Office + some database on the network somewhere, all with a new face slapped on it, and ok, some stability improvements, but with all those trillions invested, you better get some stability, and even so I dont' think the customer is getting a fair return. Why innovate if the money is flowing in, why be stupid and undercut yourself, why lower the cost of computing, and have everyone better off when that means making yourself worse off? Of course you won't. And most importantly, don't let the market turn into a competitive place where there are hundreds of service providers, with many word processor programs sticking to some free and interchangeable standard format, competing for your favors as a customer, instead of dictating the terms to you, because if you don't like it, you can always click the "Not Accept" button, and then find another service provider to please you as the customer, if you can, because we make sure to exterminate anyone and anything that ever springs up, embrace and extend, assimilate, and displace. Resistance is futile, you will be exterminated, get out of the software business, don't you know what OPP is?

Re:In other news.... (5, Funny)

Caldeso (912961) | more than 8 years ago | (#14591528)

I remember that mystical feeling of the early days when people used paragraphs.

Re:In other news.... (1)

danielk1982 (868580) | more than 8 years ago | (#14592106)

for instance you could be having an online desktop, with wordprocessors and all your needs, from any-isp service provider at a low cost, all you need is hardware, boot via some free bios program, log on from anywhere in the world to your service provider, and there you go, at 10bux a month everything included, connection, software, everyting

You say that as if its a good thing. Besides thin clients are nothing novel. They serve their purpose in certain environments, but for home use would be horrible. My cable connection is fairly stable, but i would not depend on it to always be there. Shit happens the night before a report is due.

And I don't know where you're getting the magic figure of "$10 per month" from? My cable company charges me 45bux (CDN) for nothing but an internet connection. I can reasonably conclude that I'd pay more than $45 if they also hosted my OS along with a bunch of apps.

And finally I don't quite understand why Netscape was the only company that could have made this happen. In fact a few tried, and failed.

Re:In other news.... (1)

moosesocks (264553) | more than 8 years ago | (#14592206)

you have clearly grown used to the days of the internet before the <p> tag was invented....

boring rehash (1)

twitter (104583) | more than 8 years ago | (#14591403)

While there is an element of truth in that, Netscape was more responsible for its downfall than Microsoft was. They made a lot of poor decisions, and failed to make the browser experience better, instead preferring to get into a feature war with IE, one they were ultimately to lose.

You don't remember a little anti-trust trial do you?

IE has yet to deliver a decent browsing experience. Others, having failed to learn from Netscape's demise that it's not possible to do business on M$, have improved IE with pop-up blocking "toolbars" but IE itself is about three generations behind every other major browser. Compare it to KDE's excellent desktop integration, and you realize that M$ is never going to catch up.

Re:boring rehash (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14591832)

"You don't remember a little anti-trust trial do you?"

How could we forget. It allowed Netscape's founders to make a lot more money selling the company then they would have made if MS had never entered the browser market. Competition was inevitable, they were just lucky it came from a company with a lot of legal baggage so they could play the victim card and sell the legal candy to AOL for big bucks.

Re:boring rehash (1)

cyber-vandal (148830) | more than 8 years ago | (#14592856)

More like lucky for them Microsoft were willing to do anything to derail the possibility that customers could move to other platforms. Were MS prepared to compete like everyone else then there'd be a lot less vitriol directed at them.

Re:boring rehash (1)

heinousjay (683506) | more than 8 years ago | (#14592112)

Let's not revise history too much. IE was a vastly superior browser around the transition out of version 4. Sure, Microsoft used their monopoly position unfairly to take over the market, but at the time, they also provided a much better experience. It wasn't until IE was the clear cut market owner that Microsoft stagnated on the browser, leaving us with the relatively ancient pile of shit we all now love to ignore.

Re:Netscape lacked roaming profiles? (1)

adtifyj (868717) | more than 8 years ago | (#14591522)

It sounds like this topic was certainly before your time!

As far back as I can remember, Netscape profiles could be shared across Unix machines using NFS, and I presume the windows counterpart also worked the same. File locking was in place to prevent the profile being trashed. And then in version 4.5 (October 1998), Netscape allowed the profile, including calanders, to be stored on a central server using Internet protocols. It was not until many years later that Exchange offered the same level of functionality for Windows workstations, and Internet Explorer still does not natively allow Favourites to be retrieved over the Internet.

Re:Times have changed. (1)

delirium2005 (950376) | more than 8 years ago | (#14592218)

What happens if a feature war breaks out between IE and FF?

Re:Times have changed. (2, Interesting)

dot_bull (950360) | more than 8 years ago | (#14590808)

Except MS invented nothing like a browser. They bought SpyGlass, hired ex-NeXT developer Chris Franklin to work it over and created IE. Just to set the record straight, as if anyone gives a hoot.

Re:Times have changed. (1)

EvolveFuzzy (950359) | more than 8 years ago | (#14590823)

To be accurate. IE uses the Mosaic codebase. Netscape Communications, called Mosaic Communications at the time, opted not to license the NCSA Mosaic codebase and stole the programmers instead.

Re:Times have changed. (1)

kernelistic (160323) | more than 8 years ago | (#14591595)

Marc Andreesen and Eric Bina wrote NCSA's Mosaic and went on to start Netscape Communications Corp. Please stop the FUD and read up [ibiblio.org] .

Re:Times have changed. (1)

EvolveFuzzy (950359) | more than 8 years ago | (#14591949)

What FUD am I spreading? Andreesen and clark opted not to license the Mosaic codebase and instead recruited the programmers Andreesen had written Mosaic with. Article you linked to said the same damn thing.

Re:Times have changed. (4, Interesting)

imsabbel (611519) | more than 8 years ago | (#14590876)

Microsoft didnt need monopolistic tactics to defeat netscape.
with the later 3.x versions, and especially with the evil 4.x ones, Netscape Navigator managed to evolve into a PIG of browser.

He used to have netscape installed on 64Mbyte machines in the university datacenter, and people BEGGED the admins to allow the use of IE5, just because netscape 4.73 was slow, and when it wasnt slow, it was buggy, or crashed, or swapped around like crazy.

It took the mozilla developers 2+years plus a complete change of the rendering engine to somehow salvage the trainwreck netscape navigator had become.

Re:Times have changed. (2, Informative)

Breakfast Pants (323698) | more than 8 years ago | (#14591060)

Just to be fair IE 5 of course was always conviently preloaded into memory even if you weren't using it...

Re:Times have changed. (1)

heinousjay (683506) | more than 8 years ago | (#14592132)

Every version since 4 has the rendering engine as part of the GUI system. The entire browser isn't preloaded, just the core. The UI is a regular application that makes use of system components. It's a rather efficient design that allowed for much nicer UI in general, and has been a positive, overall.

It's also paralleled by KDE with KHTML, and OSX with Webkit.

Re:Times have changed. (1)

TallMatthew (919136) | more than 8 years ago | (#14592598)

Netscape Navigator managed to evolve into a PIG of browser.

Not to mention those damned fonts. Anybody remember Netscape 4.02 for Solaris?

*shudder*

Re:Times have changed. (1)

Compuser (14899) | more than 8 years ago | (#14591245)

The grandparent poster was kind of right. Netscape took on Mosaic
which became IE. After a brief success, it lost, begat Mozilla and
started a long guerilla war.
Quite similar to how Unix took on VMS which became Win NT. After
some not so brief success of Unix, Win NT started to kick Unix' butt.
Unix begat several OSS children (Linux having highest profile).
Unix was never quite defeated so the war is more of an open combat
type today.

Re:Times have changed. (1)

geobeck (924637) | more than 8 years ago | (#14591248)

When Netscape was born, Bill Gates didn't even think the internet was particularly important. And Netscape was just building on the university-developed NCSA Mosaic browser.

Interestingly enough, only one of my browsers contains the following text in its About dialog:

Based on NCSA Mosaic. NCSA Mosaic(TM); was developed at the National Center for Supercomputing Applications at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Guess which one.

Re:Times have changed. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14590594)

it was the browser that took on IE

Actually, is the other way around: Netscape was the leader, so IE took on Netscape

Reality distortion field.... (1)

imsabbel (611519) | more than 8 years ago | (#14590601)

Netscape were the KINGS of the internet in the middle 90s.
Tons of webpages used their propritary tags, and those stupid "use netscape 2.x" tags were more common than any IE-only bias that followed later. As long as netscape had 95%+ market share, they werent nice guys in any way (or why would they have invented the blink tag, and the frame creep?)

Re:Times have changed. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14590681)

religiousfreaks.com is a good sig for you. I see you in various article's threads spouting this type of bullshit. keep fighting the god fight buddy

Re:Times have changed. (2, Informative)

Shelled (81123) | more than 8 years ago | (#14590955)

"Mozilla and Firefox are the next evolution..."

Correct if you mean 'Mozilla the foundation'. The Mozilla suite is dead and will see no further development by the Mozilla foundation. It's now an independent community project called Seamonkey. If I read the news groups correctly the team is substanitally the same one responsible for the old suite. See: http://www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/ [mozilla.org] The best bet is one of the nightly build releases under the 'contrib' branch of the trunk tree. Gecko/20060116 SeaMonkey/1.0b is working well for me.

Re:Times have changed. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14591040)

do you have to pimp your url on every story? we could see it in the post header if we really wanted to.

Re:Times have changed. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14591566)

you're an idiot.

Re:Times have changed. (1)

G-funk (22712) | more than 8 years ago | (#14591891)

Erm, no. Netscape 3.x was massive, bloated, and just about the buggiest software I've ever seen. IE 3 was the young upstart that fought the good fight. Try thinking about what actually happened, rather than "microsoft is teh 3n3m3y!!!11one".

Internet Explorer as universal constant? (1)

SleepyHappyDoc (813919) | more than 8 years ago | (#14591941)

If IE is a universal constant, than the age of the universe must be about 15 years or so. Now that would give the Creationists something to talk about. :P

back at microsoft (0)

wwmedia (950346) | more than 8 years ago | (#14590519)

they must be poping bottles of champagne, because of this @ microsoft in redmond

I wonder when they'll get rid of "ns*" then... (5, Interesting)

_xeno_ (155264) | more than 8 years ago | (#14590570)

I wonder if this means they'll slowly start to rid themselves of the "NS" prefix that's everywhere inside the code base...

All XPCOM interfaces start with "nsI," cross-platform support is based on the "Netscape Portable Runtime," most functions start with "NS_"...

I wonder if they have any plans to slowly transition over to "mozI" or "Moz_"? Somehow I doubt it (massive plugin breakage), but still - the remains of Netscape are still all over the code.

Re:I wonder when they'll get rid of "ns*" then... (5, Interesting)

Pneuma ROCKS (906002) | more than 8 years ago | (#14590763)

I wonder if this means they'll slowly start to rid themselves of the "NS" prefix that's everywhere inside the code base...

That's a massive job, even if done slowly. I don't think it'll happen, specially because it would mean constantly breaking pending patches and blocking access to different groups of files at given times. It would also break common code between other Mozilla and Mozilla-related technologies, like Seamonkey or Camino. It's good that bugs fixed on one app can be easily migrated to the other. I think the ns is there to stay, just like the Kung Fu Death Grip [mozilla.org] and such. It doesn't do much harm, anyway. A little annoyance to developers.

Re:I wonder when they'll get rid of "ns*" then... (2, Insightful)

Andrew Tanenbaum (896883) | more than 8 years ago | (#14590839)

Why consider the prefix to be an annoyance? Moz/FF was built on the shoulders of giants (Netscape), and we should not actively work to deny this.

Camino (2, Insightful)

tepples (727027) | more than 8 years ago | (#14591160)

Why consider the prefix to be an annoyance?

Because on the Mac OS X platform, NS meaning Netscape conflicts with NS meaning NextStep.

Re:I wonder when they'll get rid of "ns*" then... (1)

Pneuma ROCKS (906002) | more than 8 years ago | (#14591479)

Moz/FF was built on the shoulders of giants (Netscape), and we should not actively work to deny this.

I agree. Netscape was a pioneer browser and a very important piece of Internet history, as well as the predecessor of one of the greatest current browsers, the greatest IMO. All I'm saying is that now Mozilla and Firefox are different entities that Netscape, and their code should reflect that.

It's also a matter of consistency. Maybe not now, but in the future young people who want to contribute to the project will see the NS all over the code and find it odd, or even distracting. It's always weird to program on something that has so many age layers, and see a combination of coding standards. The "moz" prefix is a good standard to follow, and it would be desirable to have in the name of the interfaces, variables, etc. as well. It's not that I'm against Netscape, it's just that Mozilla is something else.

Re:I wonder when they'll get rid of "ns*" then... (1)

DerPflanz (525793) | more than 8 years ago | (#14592511)

just like the Kung Fu Death Grip and such.

What is that exactly? I tried your link, and a google search, but I cannot find what it actually means.

Re:I wonder when they'll get rid of "ns*" then... (2, Interesting)

Guy Harris (3803) | more than 8 years ago | (#14590948)

I wonder if this means they'll slowly start to rid themselves of the "NS" prefix that's everywhere inside the code base...

Probably not, for the reasons stated, just as I don't expect another company [apple.com] to get rid of its "NS" prefix in its code [apple.com] to sever itself from that code's history [wikipedia.org] .

Re:I wonder when they'll get rid of "ns*" then... (2, Funny)

SharpFang (651121) | more than 8 years ago | (#14591068)

Especially that current standards [w3.org] are ridden with it :)
Yeppers, w3c-blessed DOM standard has most functions duplicated with
"NS" version, like createAttribute and createAttributeNS.

Re:I wonder when they'll get rid of "ns*" then... (2, Interesting)

HeroreV (869368) | more than 8 years ago | (#14591118)

Unless "NS" is an acronym for "namespace." Although I think you're probably trying to make a joke.

Re:I wonder when they'll get rid of "ns*" then... (2, Interesting)

SharpFang (651121) | more than 8 years ago | (#14591262)

Well, both ways. The application of the "ns" extension is the same in both cases: to separate entries/functions from the standard namespace. So while most likely the w3c suffix means "namespace", and the prefix in Mozilla originates from NetScape, the conclusion would be Mozilla should abandon its Netscapish NS prefix and replace it with something like... NameSpace, short: NS?

Simply change the way you read it...

Re:I wonder when they'll get rid of "ns*" then... (1)

MikeWasHere05 (900478) | more than 8 years ago | (#14591359)

Whatdayamean it's hard to do?!

Edit > Replace > Find what: NS_, Replace with: Moz_ > Enter

;)

NS... (0)

mickyflynn (842205) | more than 8 years ago | (#14592223)

that is really there for National Socialist. They're trying to tell you something...

Ironic (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14590625)

Wasn't Netscape developed as a Mozilla killer? It seems to me that Mozilla was developed as kind of a class project and Netscape was developed in an attempt to make money.

Re:Ironic (4, Informative)

lenova (919266) | more than 8 years ago | (#14590757)

Wasn't Netscape developed as a Mozilla killer?

Nope... Netscape was meant to be a Mosaic-killer (Mosaic + godzilla = Mozilla)

Re:Ironic (1)

Bitsy Boffin (110334) | more than 8 years ago | (#14590761)

You're thinking of Mosaic, not Mozilla.

The thing is did anyone anywhere actually notice ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14590646)

Cat got your tongue? (something important seems to be missing from your comment ... like the body or the subject!)

Funny... (5, Interesting)

mark0 (750639) | more than 8 years ago | (#14590683)

I realized that a piece of paper I was scribbling some notes on today had been torn out of a give-away notebook from the Netscape Internet Developer's Conference which took place almost exactly 10 years ago.

At the time, their HTLM editor had no spell checker and I was trying integrate a third-party solution for a customer. I tried to talk to some of their developer relations folk to get some help. They refused to give up the clipboard format and I didn't have the chops at the time to reverse engineer it. At that time, I told them I believed that MSFT would eventually eat their lunch, seeing as how they treated their developers pretty well.

Whether or not that was a significant contribution to their current state, the prediction worked out.

Funny how the give-aways outlast the companies.

Spellchecker... (4, Funny)

IAAP (937607) | more than 8 years ago | (#14590815)

At the time, their HTLM editor had no spell checker a...

Still using that version? :-) (I have no right to throw stones - I knw!)

Netscape's still around (5, Interesting)

NorbrookC (674063) | more than 8 years ago | (#14590995)

They are still around? They dont really fit into the "browser wars" at all.

Actually they do. Even though they're not the browser anymore, they're still involved - If you're using Bugzilla, that's a Netscape product - and it's in Firefox. Netscape is a Mozilla-based product right now, and Mozilla only exists because Netscape opened its source.

Netscape is a case study in how to fritter away a brand. It wasn't that long ago in real time that Netscape had THE browser and THE portal. Then they tried to release "do everything" browser packages, networking systems, and a whole slew of other things which they really botched. AOL buying them didn't help in the least, since AOL didn't have a clue as to what to do with them. About the only thing they did right was to release their code base, and that was more an act of desperation than anything else. It took a long time for Mozilla to straighten out the mess. Now it's finally looking much better, and FireFox and Thunderbird are what Netscape should have been.

Re:Netscape's still around (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14591556)

wait, bugzilla is *in* firefox now? well... i guess when i go to http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/ [mozilla.org] it is in firefox...

More bad naming structure (4, Interesting)

mccalli (323026) | more than 8 years ago | (#14592474)

Probably too late for this to be read by many now, but sticking a top-level hierarchy as your organisation name is just pure nomenclenture. I agree that many others have done it, but I level this charge at them as well.

Should be comp.mozilla, not top-level Mozilla. There's also a comp.infosystems.www hierarchy, which would seem a better place.

Think of the typical Windows Start menu, and what a mess it is because companies keep sticking their name in it rather than the name of the product or anything tied to the product's purpose. Usenet has gone the same way unfortunately.

Cheers,
Ian

Re:More bad naming structure (1)

mccalli (323026) | more than 8 years ago | (#14592499)

just pure nomenclenture.

Er...just pure bad nomenclature that was supposed to read.

Cheers,
Ian

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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>