Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Netscape The Internet

Netscape 7.1 Released 468

Posted by simoniker from the brand-new-browserscape dept.
Phil writes "Netscape has just released the eagerly-awaited Netscape 7.1 (previously known by its codename, 'Buffy') for Windows, Mac OS and Linux. The new version is based on Mozilla 1.4, which is due out later today. Netscape 7.1 features many improvements over 7.02 including even better CSS support, spam filters, find-as-you-type, automatic image resizing, more customization via about:config, Web development tools, Palm synchronization and more. Plus, for the first time, ChatZilla (Mozilla's IRC client) is included in the full install. More information can be found at Netscape Browser Central and in this MozillaZine article. The release is available from Netscape's download page, via FTP or on CD."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Netscape 7.1 Released More

Netscape 7.1 Released

Comments Filter:

  • How does mozilla handle old caches? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Thinkit3 ( 671998 ) * on Monday June 30, 2003 @12:56PM (#6332275)
    I hate getting old data because the browser is caching. Is it easy to totally turn caching off? Under certain circumstances, in mac IE, you can even hit reload and get an old copy.

    • Re:How does mozilla handle old caches? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Acidangl ( 86850 ) on Monday June 30, 2003 @12:57PM (#6332292)
      shift click reload, pulls a new version the page

      • Re:How does mozilla handle old caches? (Score:5, Funny)

        by dschoettlin ( 450711 ) on Monday June 30, 2003 @01:31PM (#6332647)
        shift click reload

        but what if you don't have two hands free while browsing for pr0^H^H^H stuff?

      • Here's a suggestion: if Reload has been clicked in the last second, and is clicked again, then perform a full reload instead of the default partial.

        This is similar to the graduated selection gestures on Macintoshes and some terminal applications (click more often to select character, word, line, or paragraph).

        I'm surprised more interface elements don't support graduated power, where a single click gives a happy-and-useful partial solution, a double-click does the same but is more inclusive in an obvio

    • Re:How does mozilla handle old caches? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by bgarcia ( 33222 ) on Monday June 30, 2003 @01:00PM (#6332325) Homepage Journal
      This is one of my pet peeves about Mozilla/Netscape.

      If you really, really want to reload a page, you have to hold down the shift key while clicking on the reload button.

      I have no idea why the developers think it is useful to have a reload button that does something less than a full reload, nor do I know why they believe that a "shift-reload" (which is completely undocumented BTW) is an appropriate user interface for doing a real reload.

      • Re: load (Score:5, Informative)

        by arth1 ( 260657 ) on Monday June 30, 2003 @01:07PM (#6332405) Homepage Journal
        A reload that doesn't reload everything is very useful if you don't want to spend time reloading all the graphics on a page too. On a page like the /. front page, the difference on a slow line can be 3 seconds versus 30 seconds.
        It's also useful if a page is incomplete.

        More of interest with the Netscape release is

        a) What has changed from the previous version of Netscape, and
        b) What has changed from the corresponding version of Mozilla that it's built on.

        If it's just adding the same AOL add-ons (or should I say ad-ons?) to a newer version of Mozilla than before, I'd say move on, there's nothing to see here.

        Regards,
        --
        *Art

        • Re: load (Score:3, Informative)

          by Stonent1 ( 594886 )
          Note that if you are running a nat with squid, you may have caching enabled. I found out that my squid config was caching and causing heck trying to participate in online forums, I couldn't see my own posts because they were caching. Also some ISP's by default pipe port 80 through a proxy.
      • If you really, really want to reload a page, you have to hold down the shift key while clicking on the reload button.
        I've heard this before, but my experience tells me otherwise. When I tap F5 on a frequently updated page such as Slashdot or Fark.com [fark.com], new stories appear without having to hold down shift.
      • Reload does really do a reload, but I think it may just compare the timestamps and only get a fresh copy if the page has actually changed. Shift-reload, reloads everything, including images, stylesheets etc. whether they are cached at proxies or not.

      • because (Score:5, Insightful)

        by SweetAndSourJesus ( 555410 ) <JesusAndTheRobot&yahoo,com> on Monday June 30, 2003 @01:10PM (#6332434)
        A full reload is pointless on most sites. Why bother reloading title.gif when you want to see if there are any new slashdot stories? It's a waste of bandwidth.

        It sucks that the shift-reload trick is undocumented, but you could easily fix that [mozilla.org].

        This is my 700th post. Hooray for me!

      • Re:How does mozilla handle old caches? (Score:4, Informative)

        by DrXym ( 126579 ) on Monday June 30, 2003 @01:23PM (#6332565)
        Check your cache settings. You can tell Mozilla / Netscape to reload a page in various ways from every time, never, once per session or when the page has expired.


        Basically Moz / NS tries to do the expected thing by default, but sites are inconsistent about their expiry settings and sometimes it doesn't work the way you think it should.

    • I have the opposite problem. IE loads every page, regardless of whether it has the page on hand already or not. Especially irritating on those 360k-per-page web-based discussion boards, going back and forth on threads. And you can forget keeping any text you type in a text box if you go forward or backward in history.

    • Re:How does mozilla handle old caches? (Score:5, Informative)

      by mobets ( 101759 ) on Monday June 30, 2003 @01:29PM (#6332630) Journal
      I find the prefbar [xulplanet.com] handy for such things. It has a Clear Cache button. The newer versions even have checkboxes for turning caching off.

  • I'll continue to use Mozilla (Score:5, Interesting)

    by sstory ( 538486 ) on Monday June 30, 2003 @12:59PM (#6332311) Homepage
    I'll continue to use Mozilla firebird and thunderbird, thank you very much. Why? Same code, basically, but Mozilla doesn't litter every spot on my computer with AOL icons, in my favorites, start menu, programs menu, etc.

    • Re:I'll continue to use Mozilla (Score:5, Interesting)

      by OmniVector ( 569062 ) <se e m y h o mepage> on Monday June 30, 2003 @01:02PM (#6332347) Homepage
      this is one of the things that has always bothered me when i see netscape installed on someone's machine. To the average user netscape and IE are the only two browsers in existance.

      mozilla has very little exposure outside the geek world. i know it's catching on, but 99% of the people at work have never heard of it.

      • Re:I'll continue to use Mozilla (Score:5, Informative)

        by kelnos ( 564113 ) <bjt23@cornel[ ]du ['l.e' in gap]> on Monday June 30, 2003 @01:23PM (#6332566) Homepage
        To the average user netscape and IE are the only two browsers in existance.
        i would venture to say that the average user is even unaware of netscape these days. i'm a university student - i find that an interesting perspective since most of the people here get a new computer to bring with them to college. back when i started 4 years ago i saw netscape all over. now most of the 1st- and 2nd-years i know have their fresh windows installs and never bother to download netscape (4.x or 7.x) because IE is fine for their purposes.

        there is the random anomalous person i see using netscape 4.x (almost always not on windows). i don't know anyone using netscape 7.x. fortunately most of the more tech-savvy people i know are using mozilla (or i gently recommend it every now and then).

        on a related note, why use netscape 7 over mozilla? perhaps the integration is a little better, but i don't see anything essential in netscape7 that i can't get out of mozilla. plus with mozilla i get much more frequent releases and the option to grab a nightly or build my own (granted these last two options don't interest that many people). as an added bonus you lose the "netscape activation" and all that bundled AOL crap.

      • ...and that's the reason. (Score:5, Insightful)

        by mblase ( 200735 ) on Monday June 30, 2003 @01:29PM (#6332624)
        To the average user netscape and IE are the only two browsers in existence.

        ...And that's exactly why this is a good thing. If your Joe Surfer coworker or family member is complaining about, say, popup ads in IE, and you tell them about Mozilla, you have to explain what it is and why it's good and where they can get it, and then they'll forget the URL two minutes later anyway. Where if you tell them Netscape.com has the latest version of their browser and a built-in AIM client, they'll actually perk up and listen. You can educate them about the value of Mozilla later on when they're a little more savvy.

        • One of the sales guys at my workplace is a computer novice and was complaining about the popup culture these days.

          I e-mailed him a direct link to the latest Mozilla exe file to allow him to block popups.

          IMO Popups blocked and tabbed browsing are two major advantages of Mozilla over IE.

      • Though I use it, I wouldn't reccommend others use Mozilla yet. Why? Because the mechanism for saving your old mail is not yet developed. You have to physically find the file which contains your old mail and transplant it. This is an important capability which is missing.

    • Re:I'll continue to use Mozilla (Score:4, Insightful)

      by garcia ( 6573 ) * on Monday June 30, 2003 @01:04PM (#6332374)
      I am VERY annoyed with AIM doing the same thing on Install.

      Click here to DE-SELECT Netscape.com as your homepage.

      Do you want AIM icons on your desktop and start menu (check here for no (each)).

      Yet the fucking installer STILL puts AIM icons (AOL for Broadband) on my Desktop and an AIM icon in the quick launch tray...

      Maybe if they stop this horseshit for AOL I will think about it. Until then I will stick with IE on my Windows machine.
    • But neither does the Netscape branded version. There are a few extra buttons here or there, but for the most part they can be disabled from the pref dialog. I don't know what icons you mean either since it didn't put any there when I installed it.

      The principle difference these days between the two is that the NS branded version has a spell checker, radio (Spinner) and AIM client built in and offers to installs stuff like Shockwave, JRE, WinAmp etc. It also is supported in the sense that security issues se

    • Favorites? Start Menu? Programs Menu? (Score:5, Funny)

      by psoriac ( 81188 ) on Monday June 30, 2003 @01:54PM (#6332887)
      Good grief, did you just admit to using Windows? On Slashdot? Are you INSANE?

  • Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Monday June 30, 2003 @12:59PM (#6332314)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • Why? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I'm probably not the first to ask, but why? Why don't they just let Netscape die in peace and tell people to go use Mozilla? It doesn't add anything of value.

    • Re:Why? (Score:4, Informative)

      by Patik ( 584959 ) * <cpatik@g m a i l . c om> on Monday June 30, 2003 @01:03PM (#6332370) Homepage Journal
      Why don't they just let Netscape die in peace and tell people to go use Mozilla?
      Because of name recognition. A lot of people have heard of Netscape and know that it's a web browser, but hardly anyone has heard of Mozilla.

      Then again, those same people probably remember Netscape as that crappy old browser that didn't display tables (and more) properly, and was eventually beaten by Internet Explorer.

    • Re:Why? (Score:5, Informative)

      by edwdig ( 47888 ) on Monday June 30, 2003 @01:18PM (#6332521)
      1) Executives might be willing to try Netscape, but not Mozilla, due to name recognition.

      2) Mail client can check AOL accounts & Netscape webmail accounts

      3) Integrated AIM. There's integrated ICQ too, but it's worthless as it uses the same UI as AIM (i.e. no single message mode).

      4) Spellcheck (yes it's available as an addon to Mozilla)

      5) Java and the most popular plugins are included. So it's easier for the average person to set up.

      6) Probably not the case on this release due to simultaneous releases, but in the past, Netscape took stable Mozilla branches and did futher bugfixes before releasing, resulting in a better product.

      I'd use Netscape over Mozilla if they'd just leave in the "Block Images from Server" option in Netscape.

  • Mozilla 1.4 (Score:5, Informative)

    by jasondlee ( 70657 ) on Monday June 30, 2003 @01:00PM (#6332329)
    Mozilla [mozilla.org] 1.4 is out too. jason

    • Re:Mozilla 1.4 (Score:3, Interesting)

      by DeadSea ( 69598 ) *
      I just tried 1.4 and a recent fix that was in the nightly that I've been using for the last two weeks didn't make it in. The Mozilla developers finally fixed it so that the new mail notification can play sounds! Before, no matter what sound you specified, it would always beep the system beeper. Too bad the fix didn't make it into 1.4, I was looking forward to using an actual release for a while...

      • Re:Mozilla 1.4 (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Ark42 ( 522144 )

        Really? I have had the Wee-woo! sound forever, not a default Ding! or Beep!
        As far as I know it still works in 1.4 final which I just downloaded. ( I know it worked in RC3 ).
    • I am downloading mozilla-win32-1.4-installer.exe from the BitTorrent link posted here [slashdot.org] but for paranoia's sake I would like to check it against the official Mozilla release. Does the Mozilla project post MD5 checksums for its releases anywhere? I didn't see them in the download directory.

  • Wow ! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Vanieter ( 613996 ) <lpsavoie AT gmail DOT com> on Monday June 30, 2003 @01:00PM (#6332331)
    Netscape could resist naming it Netscape 8 ? The apocalypse is near !

  • IRC client? (Score:4, Funny)

    by rocco2nr ( 632976 ) on Monday June 30, 2003 @01:01PM (#6332333)
    Winamp 3's IRC client is better than Mozilla's

  • eagerly awaited by whom? (Score:4, Funny)

    by sulli ( 195030 ) * on Monday June 30, 2003 @01:02PM (#6332348) Journal
    AOL ad sales reps?

  • Good - competition (!) (Score:5, Insightful)

    by krray ( 605395 ) * on Monday June 30, 2003 @01:02PM (#6332350)
    I've been personally hooked on OS.X since its beta days. Originally the only games in town were OmniWeb (preferred), IE (ack), and Netscape (good 2nd choice).

    Back in my Windows days IE never really got my attention -- it was always Netscape (up to 4.79 was decent).

    The releases of Netscape that followed (Windows or OS.X) were pretty much not installed/forgotten. On the Windows end it was Mozilla/Opera and on OS.X 99% Safari.

    This Netscape will get installed and hit the distribution cycle. It is very fast on OS.X and worth taking a look at (!)

  • Great. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Dark Lord Seth ( 584963 ) on Monday June 30, 2003 @01:02PM (#6332352) Journal
    Netscape 7.1 features many improvements over 7.02 including even better CSS support, spam filters, find-as-you-type, automatic image resizing, more customization via about:config, Web development tools, Palm synchronization and more.

    Just what I needed! Develop my website which doesn't exist or sync a palmtop which I don't have! Could someone hand me a dictionary and point out what the word "bloat [reference.com]" means?

    • Re:Great. (Score:2, Insightful)

      by trout_fish ( 470058 ) *
      Well I don't need CSS support or spam filters, so maybe they should be removed too.

    • Re:Great. (Score:3, Funny)

      by duffbeer703 ( 177751 )
      Bloat sucks. Who the hell needs SSL support or graphics anyway.

    • Re:Great. (Score:3, Informative)

      by edwdig ( 47888 )
      Web development and palm sync are optional features. The fact that they exist in no way effects your install if you choose not to install them.

      Mail/News - optional
      Address Book - optional
      Web Development Tools - optional
      IRC Client - optional
      Java - optional
      Plugins - optional
      Palm Sync - optional
      Any other stuff only in Netscape releases - optional

      The only things that are required to be installed are the browser and Composer. Composer is required because text entry boxes in the browser use the same code Compos

    • Not so bloaty as before (Score:5, Insightful)

      by mblase ( 200735 ) on Monday June 30, 2003 @01:34PM (#6332681)
      ...for one thing, you can choose to install it without the mail/news or IRC chat client at all, cutting down on the size. Don't use the email, you don't need the Palm sync -- but those who do might appreciate it.

      If you get the browser, then you still get Composer with it at minimum. If you want a browser only, then feel free to contribute to the development of Mozilla Firebird [mozilla.org], which is even more streamlined than the browser-only install.

      Chill out, the Moz developers know that bloat is a common complaint, and they're doing what they can about it. But one thing at a time, since every feature you don't want is one some other user can't live without.

    • Re:Great. (Score:3, Informative)

      by tundog ( 445786 )
      I too was prepared to call this code bloat, but really this is part of a larger trend - the application as an integration portal.

      There classic route with browsers has been standard, standard, standard. This is great for service deployment. When browsers first hit the scene, companies jumped on it because it drastically cut their support and development costs. No longer a Mac version, a linux version, a sun version etc., just one 'web' version.

      The problem though, is that browsers are limited in what they

  • *wipe brow* (Score:3, Funny)

    by jmays ( 450770 ) * on Monday June 30, 2003 @01:03PM (#6332360)
    I was sweating while I was attempting to download it before the article (on slashdot) went live ... just made it under the wire.

  • Better java support (Score:3, Interesting)

    by mao che minh ( 611166 ) * on Monday June 30, 2003 @01:03PM (#6332369) Journal
    Although I prefer Mozilla overall, I keep an install of Netscape around because of it's more efficient use of Java under Linux (for the rare occasions when I really need to access some Java program). I can get Java going decently in Mozilla, but I get tired of having to make fresh symlinks and other small changes each time I overhaul Mozilla.
  • Is there any way to enable IE-like wheel-button click-to-scroll behaviour?? Mozilla would be OK if I could simply click my wheel button and zoom down a page. I've searched for an extension [mozdev.org] but no joy so far.
  • The new version is based on Mozilla 1.4, which is due out later today
    If you are a savy ftp digger, know a savy ftp digger, or can follow this link [mozilla.org] you can get it right now... before its slashdotted :)
  • Looking at the new set of features this release offers (palm synchronisation, IRC client), it strikes me as though the project is trying to cover as many areas as possible that come loosely under the umbrella of "information exchange". Good things for this release are improved CSS support, image resizing on the fly etc. - advancements that improve the surfing experience. I wish they'd concentrate more on this area insted of bolting on the kitchen sink too..
  • Netscape 7.1 for windows, linux, mac

    Netscape 4.x for solaris, sgi and many other oses. Why is the numbering so whacked?

    • Re:Why are version numbers so uneven (Score:5, Insightful)

      by arth1 ( 260657 ) on Monday June 30, 2003 @01:22PM (#6332553) Homepage Journal
      Because Microsoft released Internet Explorer 5 -- Netscape wanted to be "one better".
      This numbers game is also why you now have Redhat and Mandrake 9 -- SuSE will surely follow suit, or jump to from 8.2 to 9 or 10 (even though SuSE 8.2 has more newer stuff than RedHat 9), knowing that customers are stupid enough to buy the highest number, even if the products are different.

      There's also the jump from SunOS 2.6 to Solaris 7 -- presumably to catch up with IRIX 6.2 and NT 4 and NT 5 (which Microsoft promptly relabeled 2000 to be ahead in the numbers game).

      Did I mention the jump from Java 1.1 to Java 2 (which is Java 1.2)? Or the weird BIND 4 to BIND 8 version jump?

      Now I'm saving to buy myself Windows 2003. Proof by numbers, it's *got* to be 0.15% better than Windows 2000!

      Regards,
      --
      *Art

    • Stupidity, Reality (Score:4, Insightful)

      by fm6 ( 162816 ) on Monday June 30, 2003 @01:29PM (#6332617) Homepage Journal
      In the case of Solaris, it's corporate stupidity. Sun tells us that Solaris users don't need Microsoft software, but won't subsidize maintenance of Solaris Netscape. And given the number of Solaris desktops, it's hardly suprising that AOL won't do it for free.

      In the case of IRIX, SGI is just facing reality: they've never made a dent in the desktop market, and it's not worth spending money to make their workstations do things people can do more cheaply with Wintel systems. When I worked there, they didn't even have up-to-date Quicktime codecs!

  • if only they'd bring back the mail notification program that 4.x had.

    That's the sole thing holding me back from switching people at the office over to 7.x

  • Mozilla 1.4 released (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 30, 2003 @01:11PM (#6332439)
    [mozilla.org]
    http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla/releases/mozill a1.4/

  • Code name: too appropriate! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by fm6 ( 162816 ) on Monday June 30, 2003 @01:15PM (#6332487) Homepage Journal
    The whole Mozilla/Netscape effort is, alas, a prime example of the Buffy Syndrome [csis.org]. As Anthony Cordesman summarizes:
    ...each series of crises only becomes predictable when it is over and is followed by a new and unfamiliar one.

    While uncertainty is the dominating motif, the "Buffy paradigm" has the following additional characteristics:

    • What expertise there is consists largely of bad or uncertain advice and old, flawed, and confusing technical data.
    • The importance of any given threat changes constantly, past threat behavior does not predict future behavior, and methods of delivery keep changing.
    • Arcane knowledge is always inadequate and fails to predict, detect, and properly characterize the threat.
    • The more certain and deterministic an expert is at the start, the more wrong they turn out to be in practice.
    • The scenarios are unpredictable and have very unclear motivation. Any effort to predict threat motivation and behavior in detail before the event does at least as much
    • Risk taking is not rationale or subject to predictable constraints and the motivation behind escalation is erratic at best.
    • It is never clear whether the threat is internal, from an individual, or from an outside organisation.
    • The attackers have no firm or predictable alliances, cooperate in nearly random ways, and can suddenly change method of attack and willingness to take risks.
    • All efforts at planning a coherent strategy collapse in the face of tactical necessity and the need to deal with unexpected facts on the ground.
    • The balance between external defense, homeland defense, and response changes constantly.
    • No success, not matter how important at the time, ever eliminates the risk of future problems.
    Of course, Cordesman is talking about terrorism, not software. Still...

  • same stupid problems (Score:3, Informative)

    by BigBir3d ( 454486 ) on Monday June 30, 2003 @01:34PM (#6332673) Journal
    www.cnn.com

    Using Netscape 7.1 for Windows (I am at work, ok?) I still can't vote in a poll properly (pop-up appears, but the vote data is loaded in main window, leaving pop-up blank).

    Unrequested pop-ups are not being blocked.

    I guess this is going into the "Recycle Bin" in the next minute or two...
    • www.cnn.com

      Using Netscape 7.1 for Windows (I am at work, ok?) I still can't vote in a poll properly (pop-up appears, but the vote data is loaded in main window, leaving pop-up blank).

      I think Netscape 7.1's Good Taste algorithms are working just fine. Good CSS support and preventing people from voting in Wolf's damned sensationalistic and myopic polls is win-win :)

  • As an ex-Netscape hater... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by AndyMoney ( 621470 ) <andrewbmoore@g[ ]l.com ['mai' in gap]> on Monday June 30, 2003 @01:38PM (#6332712) Homepage
    ... I have to say that Netscape/Mozilla has not only shocked me with improvements in reliability and speed, but has in fact pulled me away from IE/Outlook Express which I swore were the greatest Web/EMail tools. I remember back in the days of Netscape 4.X. The darn thing would take forever to load, suck up my computer's resources, and consistantly crash on specific web pages. Being a web-developer made it worse... It was such a pain having to remove nifty DHTML effects from my company's website (or incorperate code to modify HTML output for Netscape) because some people out there were still using it. I think I'm going too in depth on my point here... Compared to what Nescape USED to be, the current Mozilla/Netscape software is incredible. And this is coming from a WINDOWS user. ;) The best thing Nescape ever did was make their browser open srouce (in my opinion). And... The free Bayesian spam filter in the Mozilla mail client has amazed me. I NEVER thought that free technology existed that provided such reliable and accurate spam filtering. I am down from 14 spam messages per day to maybe 1 at most per day. I've only had 2 false positives since I started using it 3 weeks ago. Alright. I'll stop rambling on this matter. I've just been waiting a while now to outlet my good experiences with Mozilla, especially after hating it so much in the past. *Two thumbs up*

  • Mozilla 1.4 binaries are up... (Score:3, Informative)

    by iceT ( 68610 ) on Monday June 30, 2003 @01:39PM (#6332726)
    Get 'em before the rush:

    ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla/releases/mozil la 1.4/

  • Who uses Netscape? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Merk ( 25521 ) on Monday June 30, 2003 @01:44PM (#6332786) Homepage

    It's so strange. I look at the writeup for the new Netscape release, and when the poster talks about the new features, the links they provide are links to mozilla.org pages. I look at the Netscape [netscape.com] main page and I can't even tell that they make a browser. The "Downloads" link is tucked away in the upper-left corner. Even today, when they're releasing a new version, there's no hint of it even on their main page!! Instead the big deal is "10 things everyone should do before turning 30". Whaa?? Then, there's the awful pain of trying to install the Netscape version. The last time I installed a version of the Netscape-branded Mozilla, I had AOL crap littering my system everywhere.

    On the other hand, when I go to the Mozilla [mozilla.org] site everything is clear. It's obvious where to download the version of Mozilla I want for the platform I want. It's also normally 2 or 3 versions ahead of the Netscape-branded release, and the install process is clean and painless.

    Given all that, who are the poor sods downloading and installing Netscape?? I guess they have enough knowledge of computers to be able to install an alternative to IE, but not enough to be able to know about Mozilla? Can there really be more than a handfull of these people, and can't they be rescued and re-educated?

    • Nobody that's who (Score:3, Insightful)

      by bogie ( 31020 )
      Only a few companies still use Netscape. I frankly don't even know why AOL/Netscape even bothers anymore. I mean it's not like they are trying to gain marketshare from IE. If they were don't you think they would do more than put up a link on Netscape.com and rely on other websites to link to it for PR?

      Netscape died a long time ago but luckily was reborn with Mozilla. Netscape may not give a crap about spending dollar one on PR for Netscape, but conversly it just shows how good Mozilla is that it continues

  • Linux Users Get the Shaft on this release. (Score:5, Informative)

    by Dolemite_the_Wiz ( 618862 ) on Monday June 30, 2003 @01:46PM (#6332805) Journal
    In the Release notes [netscape.com], Linux users need to be aware of the following:

    - Pages with Flash will, in worst cases, crash or hang your browser.
    - Netscape will hang if a Flash plugin tries to play audio and the audio device is already in use
    - Flash may crash with Exported X Display
    - Java is not included with the Linux installer for Netscape 7.1. Download Java version 1.4.2 or later at the Java web site
    - You may encounter problems if you install Netscape in a root user environment then run as another user.
    - Loading a page that contains a Flash plugin may cause Netscape to lock up if you are using an audio application.

    Everyone else need to be aware of the following:

    - For security reasons, Netscape does not allow connections to certain ports. To override this on a per-port basis, add a comma separated list of ports to defaults/all.js
    - POP email becomes unusable if the profile is stored on a network drive.
    - Stll no NTFS Support
    - Netscape does not warn the user of a low disk space condition.
    - Netscape may temporarily hang during LDAP autocomplete if network connectivity is broken.
    - Do not share a profile between Netscape and Mozilla browsers. Doing this can lead to unpredictable results, which may include loss of Search settings and preferences and unchecked growth of the Bookmarks file (large enough to freeze your system).
    - When visiting a SSL enabled site, the lock icon will take on a yellow background, and will not indicate the strength of the SSL encryption used, whether it is 40 bit, 56 bit, or 128 bit.

    Dolemite
    _________________

  • Do we need all of these? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Luzumsuz Lazim ( 603227 ) on Monday June 30, 2003 @02:28PM (#6333183)
    ...features many improvements... including spam filters,... Palm synchronization and more...

    I hate this. I am a relatively smart person, above average for sure, and I live within computers all day, yet these densely packed programs manage to confuse me. Does it have to support Palm synchronization or do we really need to combine the web browser and the mail client? If they feel that they are good at these areas as well, they can produce a separate product(s) which can communicate with each other, but can also work independently.

    Adding more properties is not the challenge, adding them transparent to the user is the challenge. I want to see neither millions of buttons in toolbar nor millions of options when i press the 2nd mouse button on the canvas. Ex. can someone tell me why do I need to press the 2nd mouse button and choose the "back/forward" in the pop-up menu, which may appear in different locations w.r.t. the pointer depending on the pointer position, instead of just clicking the "back/forward" icon in the toolbar?

    Well I am sure that someone will find an absurd reason for this, thus let me respond it beforehand: Then, I need the "Sort the lines shown on this page w.r.t. the second word on each line" item in the same pop-up window. I need this once in every about 3 months. I can hear another reply. Here is my answer: Be realistic. Most of the users do not disable the toolbar. Thus, instead of making it complex to keep the minority happy, it can be programed as a dynamic menu depending on the toolbar status. (Well, I must admit, I didn't install Netscape 7.1 yet, but this is the defacto behavior for almost all browsers I saw -- Himm... I'm not sure about Safari I should check this next time I use it.) If Netscape 7.1 addresses these kind of issues, can someone point this out for me?

    The bottom line is that we need simple looking but powerful software, not a messy software with kitchen-sink included.

  • Netscape is good (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Bulln-Bulln ( 659072 ) <bulln-bulln@netscape.net> on Monday June 30, 2003 @02:29PM (#6333191)
    Yeah, Netscape is good. I haven't read all the comments here, but there are (as always) comments like ''Why not use Mozilla instead?''
    I tell you why:
    Netscape has more features and is easier for people without good computer knowledge.

    I prefer Mozilla Firebird, but the plain MF is not for normal users.
    They have to ''unzip'' it, they have to copy Flash and other plugins into the plugins directory, they have to install Java manually and so on.

    OTOH Netscape:
    It comes with good, licensed spell checking (sorry, but OSS spell checkers suck - at least non-english ones), there's AIM and ICQ support, all important plugins are bundled, and Netscape adds important settings to the Windows registry (the location where it's installed for 3rd party plugins - a small, but important setting).

    Currently I create installer builds of Mozilla Firebird (bundled with Flash and Java) for my friends, but that's only an acceptable solution for a handful of people.
    It's easier to point to a simple URL than giving a CD with my custom MF to everyone.
    Yes I know, there are also installer builds of Mozilla Firebird available on the net, but that's sometimes even too complicated for a few of my friends.
    When I say ''Get Netscape. It's on Netscape dot com.'' It's easy.
    When I say ''Get Mozilla Firebird. It's on geocities dot com slash blablabla slash ... umm... sorry, I forgot the adress. I tell you tomorrow.'' It's more coplicated. Also: what happens, if the person does not provide the installer any more? Who guaranties me and my friends that the webpage is still up in a month or two.
    AOL is behind Netscape. I can be sure that Netscape will last a while. Netscape is easy to find, easy to install, and easy to use. That's why Netscape is good.

  • Starting to get the non-geeks (Score:3, Interesting)

    by dimer0 ( 461593 ) on Monday June 30, 2003 @02:44PM (#6333338)
    This surprised me... Last week, I've converted two of my not-so-savvy neighbors up the block to Mozilla. They never want to use IE again.

    Popup blocking was their #1 concern. They were amazed how mozilla handled this. "Why doesn't IE do this?".. Ugh

    Once I showed them tabbed browsing, they were in love.

    Couple things, tho, that could help:

    1) First guy I installed Phoenix for, upgraded to Mozilla 1.4rc3 because of the friendly reminder he was running an old build. Umm.. Don't tell my non-savvy neighbors they need to switch product lines when their home page comes up.

    2) Would be nice if there was a bundle build you could grab with flash, java, etc - installed. Or at least something that goes and looks for the java plugin on your system and registers with that, instead of having to reinstall the java plugin to set the hooks that way.. (Is this possible?)

    The tide is turning, tho..

  • Netscape/Mozilla vs. Internet Explorer.. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by msimm ( 580077 ) on Monday June 30, 2003 @02:49PM (#6333366) Homepage
    Problem with the browser war is as an employee or a student there is a good chance you will *need* Internet Explorer, but what's the chance of needing Netscape?

    The business I work for tends to do a lot of work online, things like banking and payroll. We use the ADP web entry system (buggy) that is not compatible with Mozilla (haven't tried Netscape) we also have a international booking system which is not compatible with Netscape/Mozilla. A few key features like this is more then enough to turn the average use off of anything but the tool that works. I can't think a single example where it was necessary to use Mozilla instead of IE.

    I know none of this is really about Netscape or Mozilla, but Microsoft has their market pretty locked down with proprietary extensions and incompatibilities.

    Mozilla will win some users with features like pop-up blocking and on-the-fly html editing. But we need a real zinger to actually pull people away from a built=in browser that works on a larger part of the sites people visit.

    I've converted my work place over to Mozilla, but at least once a month someone comes to me complaining that they can't get a page to load and I have to tell them to use Internet Explorer (anyone who uses a site requiring activex more often already knows).

  • Eagerly awaited?? (Score:3, Funny)

    by deadgoon42 ( 309575 ) on Monday June 30, 2003 @03:17PM (#6333567) Journal
    I didn't even know it existed. The only people who use Netscape are people who are out of touch with reality and they probably are still using Netscape Gold. Ahhh, Netscape Gold.

  • Mozilla and (blush) systems resources (Score:4, Interesting)

    by drdale ( 677421 ) on Monday June 30, 2003 @03:40PM (#6333766)
    Okay, I confess that I'm a lamer. Not only do I run Windows, but I still run Win 98SE. But I decided to download Mozilla 1.4 today, making one feeble gesture toward geekhood. But you may remember that 98 still has the old system resources constraint, and Mozilla is an absolute pig for the resources. Makes it hard to run it along with any other programs. But it does seem to be pretty good about giving up the resources once it is closed.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Imitation is the sincerest form of television." -- The New Mighty Mouse

Close