Netscape 6.1

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

Re:I thought they said they were done with browser

[iceT]

Yeah, no more pesky end-table HTML tags...

we can finally kiss JAVA good bye.. everything will be VBScript!
W3C can finally disband... If people are only writing to the browser, then there's no need for a standard.

They say there's no Netscape Loyalists.. Bullsh*t! IE renders nicely. I'll give it that, but it's everything ELSE that SUCKS, and that's why I can't STAND to use it!

Re:Freudian slip?

[cyb3r0ptx]

Ha, I thought that was intentional.

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

p.

Re:Why?

[GunFodder]

How come zealots of tools that lack major functionality always turn it into a badge of honor? "Plugins? Those are for luzers! Music and video don't belong on a computer!" Why don't you prove you are a real geek and go back to lynx on a vt100?

Re:Mozilla 0.9.3 = Netscape 6.1?

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's see:

• Microsoft changes licensing terms allowing OEMs to install the software they want to.
• WinXP release date approaching.
• New version of AOL coming out any day now.
• AOL making OEM packaging deals fast and furious.
• AOL doomed if Microsoft can keep using IE to leverage MSN.

It's not rocket science, folks...

great features, too late

[fetta]

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

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

Re:Why release before Mozilla? U_dummy_U

[Anonymous Coward]

"Mozilla is still not production.." You dont seem to realize Mozilla will never be "Production" . It will always be "Developmental" that is the reason it exists; to support the spin off of versions that can be polished into production by any Producers..

Re:Paul Festa -- not MSNBC

[Jeffrey Baker]

AFAIK IE 2.0 was the first release. It didn't even support tables.

Re:How much deeper does this hole get?

[TheFrood]

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

Basing 6.0 on Mozilla 0.6 (or whatever it was) was an incredibly stupid idea. But building 6.1 now off the Moz-0.9.2 source is the right thing to do. First, because Moz-0.9.2 is actually very stable -- the Mozilla folks are setting very high standards for Moz-1.0, and Moz-0.9.2 is already better then Netscape 4.x. Second, and more importantly, releasing 6.1 now gets 6.0 off the market and out of sight as soon as possible.

Even if 6.1 isn't a perfect browser yet, it at least gets rid of the abomination that is 6.0.

TheFrood

Re:Why?

[shepd]

>Someone will have to source a decent GPL spellchecker library or write one and a dictionary before Mozilla will have anything similar.

This was done before Linux even existed (I believe I read about ispell [gnu.org] in a book that was printed before the Linux "revolution").

Newer stuff like aspell and pspell would be well suited to Mozilla. It should be in there, and I'd help do it, but my skillset is currently limited to simple TurboC, Assembly, Turing, and Visual Basic (and another language I won't speak of). :-/

Re:Why?

[shepd]

>How come zealots of tools that lack major functionality always turn it into a badge of honor?

Because the plugins are separate.

Remember the Unix code of coding: Do One Thing, And Do It Well.

A web browser should browse the web, nothing more. A plugin should plugin to the web browser to add enhancements.

Just like you could (in some strange fashion) consider grep a plugin to find when used like this:

find . -iname blah.txt -exec grep -i hello {} \;

That doesn't mean grep should be embedded in find. Infact, if it was, you yourself would likely cry out in horror (or so we would hope).

Re:Mozilla ... Netscape ... what't the difference?

[evocate]

By almost any technical measure, IE is a better browser than Netscape/Mozilla (N/M). Opening the source has not obviated the need to program better than Microsoft's IE engineers. Some open-source projects are *going to fail*. If you believe that the mark for which N/M must shoot is IE, then you must also believe that N/M is a failed project. It is also the first high-profile open source project failure

Open source projects usually have simple beginnings and humble aspirations. Most start as hack jobs to "scratch an itch" and grow incrementally to become powerhouses. Linux is a prime example. There are many many others. Mostly, these projects set their own bars. Success is defined from within the community, not by comparison to some commercial competitor. Linux was to be the best kernel Torvalds could write, not a better kernel than NT. Apache was to be the best web server, not a better server than IIS. Perl... well, what are you going to compare Perl to? The point is these projects defined their own success. They didn't let Microsoft define it for them.

The open source N/M project has never defined success for itself. It has been chasing Microsoft the whole way - matching bullet points and comparing market shares. Successful open source projects don't usually work this way. A successful open source web browser will start simply, iterate constantly, have fantastic leadership (like Torvalds, Cox, Behlendorf, Wall, etc.), remain *solid*, and define success on *its* terms, not terms set by CNET or MSNBC or even Slashdot. And what should those terms be? Easy: happy, loyal, rabidly fanatic users. Users who will only give up the product when someone pries it from their cold dead fingers. I mean... isn't that how you feel about the successful open source products you love?

Good, hopefully R.I.P. Netscape 4 really soon

[brocktune]

I write web-based intranet applications. The sooner Nutscrape 4 dies, the better. Its proprietary DOM and weak CSS support cause me to write and test all my stuff twice. I had high hopes for Netscape 6.0, but its performance on Windows is abysmal. If Netscape 6.1 performance is close to the latest Mozilla, it will be a lot easier to convince people to dump NS4. None of the IS departments of our customers would ever allow Mozilla or Opera. For the few brave souls willing to venture away from IE, it's Netscape or nothing. A robust mainstream browser on Windows other than IE goes a long way towards keeping browsers standards-compliant. Yes, I realize Gecko is the same on NS and Mozilla, but try telling that to Fortune 100 companies. I'm looking forward to the day when I can write DHTML for one browser and it works everywhere.

Re:Mozilla ... Netscape ... what't the difference?

[BorgDrone]

By almost any technical measure, IE is a better browser than Netscape/Mozilla (N/M)

I have a different opinion.

• IE's HTML parser is crap, if the HTML is fscked it guesses what it should look like. it shouldn't do that
• try loading a page that is not reachable, not only does the IE window loading the page hang but ALL IE windows are completely locked up
• IE is integrated into windows, there is a Mac version but it was developed independent from the windows version. what does this tell us: IE is not at all portable
• mozilla is WAY more flexible than IE will ever be. a few examples: you can modify the GUI or even build completely different applications based on mozilla in XUL, Mozilla can be easily embedded, and not just through an activeX component, it can e.g. even be embedded in a java app.
• Microsoft keeps adding useless non-standard features claiming 'webdesigners' want them (marquee anyone?) , but they still don't have decent PNG (alpha transparency) support, something LOTS of designers would like.