Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Netscape Mozilla The Internet America Online IT

New Netscape Browser Prototype Available 187

Posted by Hemos from the joining-us-here-in-the-present dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Mozillazine.org writes, "AOL has released a new prototype of Netscape Browser. This new version is almost identical to the first prototype but it's based on Mozilla Firefox 1.0 rather than 0.9.3. The browser does not contain the proposed new design concept or any new features, though there are some performance improvements. As before, only registered testers can download the prototype from community.netscape.com/nscpbrowser. MozillaZine ran an in-depth preview of the first prototype.""
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

New Netscape Browser Prototype Available More

New Netscape Browser Prototype Available

Comments Filter:

  • "Available" (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    As in... to beta testers, not the average Slashdot reader.

  • Linux (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 17, 2005 @12:05PM (#11386409)
    Why don't they make a linux version? Might help bring linux closer to the desktop - netscape still has more recognition that FireFox.

    • Re:Linux (Score:2, Interesting)

      by QCompson ( 675963 )
      Why exactly would this bring Linux closer to the desktop? Would people say, "Gee, I'd like to try a new internet browser, and the name Netscape sounds familiar... maybe I'll install a whole new operating system so that I can try out the new Netscape!"

      • Re:Linux (Score:1, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Maybe trying to get someone to swtich would be easier if they heard "no, there's no IE, but theres netscape"

        • Re:Linux (Score:3, Insightful)

          by naylor83 ( 836780 )
          These days I think saying it has Firefox would do more good than saying it has Netscape. Firefox has a much better reputation - Netscape seems to (somewhat unfairly so) be having a hard time ridding people of the memory of it's good old bad days.
      • Jeez I'd like to install linux, but I'm worried I won't be able to browse the web like I used to - oh Netscape? Really? OK, I'll give it a go!
    • Yeah, bad recognition. These days, almost nobody knows Netscape. Those who still know remember Netscape as a piece of buggy, unstable and sucky software. Using the Netscape brand will only do harm!
    • The people that AOL contracted out this development disagree. The useragent does not include Netscape.

      Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.2; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20050101 Firefox/0.6.4

      No clue what the hello Firefox/0.6.4 is supposed to mean.
      • Yeah, that is pretty bizarre. It makes no sense that they would leave out the name Netscape while giving it a version number that appears to indicate it's an earlier version of Firefox -- actaully more like Firebird, considering that it is numbered 0.6.x.

  • Isnt..... (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Bumjubeo ( 849737 )
    Isnt Netscape and Mozilla the same company?

    • Re:Isnt..... (Score:5, Informative)

      by Man in Spandex ( 775950 ) <prsn.kev @ g m a i l.com> on Monday January 17, 2005 @12:07PM (#11386439)
      Netscape = AOL
      Mozilla = Mozilla & contributors
      • cool deal. Thanks :)

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

      by msim ( 220489 )
      Netscape = a company
      Mozilla = community project that had resources donated to it from Netscape.

      netscape are just pulling code from GPL'd software and making their own branded product.
      The matter of Mozilla or Netscape making the better product is another topic altogether. ;-)

  • Why? stealing Mozillas thunder or what (Score:5, Insightful)

    by gilesjuk ( 604902 ) <giles@jones.zen@co@uk> on Monday January 17, 2005 @12:07PM (#11386429)
    They've just rebranded and repackaged firefox, why bother? it's stealing their thunder to help promote AOL.

    Anyone can tweak and rebadge an open source project, sure they're not breaking the GPL. But you have to ask yourself why would they do it?
    • Well, they did pay for it. I wouldn't call it "stealing" their thunder.
      • Well, they did pay for it. I wouldn't call it "stealing" their thunder.

        Actually, Firefox wasn't an AOL project at all. It was explicitely not an AOL project. Blake and Dave were striking out in a new direction with Firefox (then called "m/b" short for mozilla/browser, the CVS directory where the new app lived) and while it does rely on the Gecko core, it's not an application that AOL paid for.

        --Asa
    • Mozilla's thunder IS their thunder. Mozilla is based on the old Netscape code, and Netscape/AOL have played a tremendous part in developing Mozilla.

      What's more its the mostly BSD-ish MPL in this case, not the GPL -- and the MPL is designed explicitly so that the code can be used in projects this way. If the Mozilla powers that be wanted to avoid it, they would have used a difference license.
      • I personally wouldn't give AOL that much credit, after all they had the chance to use Netscape/Mozilla in their product but never did IIRC.
        • Well, they used it in one of their products - Netscape. And I believe (I could be wrong) Gecko is used in AOL's compuserve client.

          It is a shame AOL's official client doesn't use gecko - it would have just about forced sites aroudn the 'net to become compliant, and to stop using silly IE-only technologies for functions that can be accomplished with plain HTML or sane plug-ins. But that was a business decision, and the company used its support of Mozilla as leverage deals with MS for what it thought was its
      • Please check sources before modding informative. The original Mozilla suite was based off of Netscape code. Firefox was built from the ground up by the Mozilla foundation.

        • "Please check sources before modding informative. The original Mozilla suite was based off of Netscape code. Firefox was built from the ground up by the Mozilla foundation."

          I think it is you who should check sources... :)

          Firefox is built on Mozilla technology: Gecko, XUL, etc. It was not built from the ground up at all, but started off stripping features and getting down to a bare bones browser, and then expanding technology as necessary to produce Firefox.

          Firefox is "Mozilla 2.0" in a way.

          • Although I'm having trouble finding a link now, I quite clearly remember reading that firefox was being developed as a bit of a hobbiest project by someone who later showed the product to the mozilla foundation; bringing the beginning of Firefox. However, I must have been a bit confused by the wording of the article as I have found more information on it just now which states that the original codebase was the inspiration of it in the beginning, just as you have said.

            I apologize. Please don't take my confu

    • Re:Why? stealing Mozillas thunder or what (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Tough Love ( 215404 ) on Monday January 17, 2005 @12:36PM (#11386758)
      Anyone can tweak and rebadge an open source project, sure they're not breaking the GPL. But you have to ask yourself why would they do it?

      Excuse me, but its a basic principle of open source that you can modify it to suit yourself. AOL is working very much within the spirit of open source. I say, go ahead and tweak and fiddle. Hey, if the AOL browser comes up with anything cool, it goes straight back into Firefox, right?

      The best possible result is, AOL comes up with something they like and instantly swings another, what is it, 10% of IE users over to Firefox overnight.
      • Hey, if the AOL browser comes up with anything cool, it goes straight back into Firefox, right?

        I don't think so. IIRC, the MPL allows them to keep changes to themselves.

      • Re:Why? stealing Mozillas thunder or what (Score:5, Informative)

        by magefile ( 776388 ) on Monday January 17, 2005 @01:11PM (#11387192)
        Hey, if the AOL browser comes up with anything cool, it goes straight back into Firefox, right?

        Not necessarily. Moz is licensed under the MPL, which is very BSD-like.
      • Hey, if the AOL browser comes up with anything cool, it goes straight back into Firefox, right?

        Did AOL give all the IP rights to the Mozilla Foundation, or did they just open-source the code?

        The reason I ask is, when someone open-sources code, don't they retain IP rights? In most cases, can't they then release their own proprietary version, altered however they want, with no legal obligation to open-source the alterations? Meaning, if AOL kept the IP rights, they don't have to open-source the changes.

        • when someone open-sources code, don't they retain IP rights? In most cases, can't they then release their own proprietary version, altered however they want, with no legal obligation to open-source the alterations? Meaning, if AOL kept the IP rights, they don't have to open-source the changes. Or is that wrong?

          We don't really care if they give the code for new features back or not. The gold is in the good ideas.

  • Wow. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by JanusFury ( 452699 ) <kevin.gadd@gm[ ].com ['ail' in gap]> on Monday January 17, 2005 @12:07PM (#11386432) Homepage Journal
    Does Netscape know anything about user interface design? That has to be one of the most horrible interfaces I have ever seen, especially coming from such a big company.

    • Re:Wow. (Score:5, Interesting)

      by AnonymousCowheart ( 646429 ) on Monday January 17, 2005 @12:10PM (#11386479)
      Exactly - they're also breaking consistancy in Windows. They have the file menu on the upper right corner [prospero.com] instead of the left, like almost every windows app out there.
      • I think you mean "the menus". The file menu is in the same position as usual, relatively speaking.

        Sorry for the nitpicking ;)
      • Wow, I think this is awsome! I'm sick of seing that wasted space on my title bar. I wish more programs could look like this. Isn't using Mozilla/Netscape/Firefox all about being different anyway?
        • Isn't using Mozilla/Netscape/Firefox all about being different anyway?

          Wearing fishnets and painting your nails black is all about being different. Using Firefox/Mozila is all about having control over browser and having a better alternative to the de facto browser monopoly.

      • Re:Wow. (Score:2)

        by jafac ( 1449 )
        instead of the left, like almost every windows app out there.

        . . . and almost every X-Windows app, and every Mac OS and Mac OS X app.

        This one's a real head scratcher it is.
      • [looks at screenie]

        Yuck. My first thought was, "Good gods, the layout is built like Windows Media Player."

        I get the feeling that whoever designed this new look never does anything more complex with a browser than merely following links from one page to the next. Or at least believes that users never do anything so gauche.

    • I don't know, I kinda like the way its laid out, judging from the screenshots. In actual practice it could prove horrible.
    • The first thing I look for in a browser UI is the back and forward buttons. Those small, circular buttons have maybe a third of the clickable area of the square buttons of a square button but take the same amount of screen space. What's the point?

      Obviously they put looks ahead of usability.

    • Re:Wow. (Score:2, Informative)

      by ShadeARG ( 306487 )
      It's better than the older preview [wangrepublic.org]
    • This isn't Netscape who doesn't know anything about UI. The interface more than likely is AOL's idea.
    • That has to be one of the most horrible interfaces I have ever seen
      The funny part is that, as weird as that proposed new design is, it's lightyears ahead of the first beta they put out. By comparison it looks downright pretty. It's a step in the right direction, but a very small one, and one of many that must be taken take to arrive at a good interface.

  • ... Profit? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by DeathFlame ( 839265 ) on Monday January 17, 2005 @12:07PM (#11386438)
    1) Color Scheme No one likes
    2) Move the menus from there top left location to the top right...
    3) In fact let's just move completely away from the familiar IE look people are used to, and scare them off
    3) Built in Toolbars most people don't want
    4) ...
    5) Profit?

    • Re:... Profit? (Score:1, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      On the positive side, if someone ever asks you to name a bad application of the hyperbolic tangent [wolfram.com], now you know the answer: as a transition between the title bar and the menu items in a web browser.
    • Let me finish:

      1) Color Scheme No one likes
      2) Move the menus from there top left location to the top right...
      3) In fact let's just move completely away from the familiar IE look people are used to, and scare them off
      3) Built in Toolbars most people don't want
      4) Scrap it all and ship Firefox 1.0
      5) Profit?

  • Sacrilege? (Score:4, Funny)

    by Almond Paste ( 838493 ) on Monday January 17, 2005 @12:09PM (#11386462)
    I still think IE is the best, most reliable and compatible all-round browser, especially since SP2, with pop-up blocking etc. Go ahead, hang me!
    • hahaha, and you got modded funny.

      Every now and then, the mods restore my faith in humanity.
    • Not sacrilege, but a feature of this new Netscape Browser is to allow the use the IE rendering engine for pages that you select: it's on a context-sensitive menu.

      Someone in the Mozillazine pages says that this should switch off after you close the tab or the window it's in to remind people of standards compliance of the Gecko engine.

    • Re:Sacrilege? (Score:2, Redundant)

      by jellomizer ( 103300 ) *
      I still think IE is the best, most reliable and compatible all-round browser, especially since SP2, with pop-up blocking etc

      But not secure. I tent to use firefox as much as possible and switch to IE only when needed.
  • does not contain [...] new features, and [...] only registered testers can download

    Yay for out of context quoting!

    Aside from being an alternative, how is this in any way better than Internet Explorer or Firefox itself?

  • What has AOL done to Netscape?!? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by IO ERROR ( 128968 ) * <{error} {at} {ioerror.us}> on Monday January 17, 2005 @12:11PM (#11386488) Homepage Journal
    Now that Firefox and Thunderbird have taken on a life of their own, is "Netscape" still relevant? Why would I want to use Netscape (or even Mozilla) instead of Firefox/Thunderbird/all my favorite extensions?

    Don't get me wrong, I like having more options to choose from. I just want to know why, at this point, I should choose Netscape? After all, that MozillaZine review basically said the interface was horrible...

    • Until now, the only reason I can think of is because of the name. A lot of people know what's Netscape and that it had a somewhat good past when it was up against IE.

      I guess they thihk bringing the name back in the browser war will help them.

      I don't see "any" feature that looks interesting in the current phase of the netscape browser.
    • because AOL will package it with every internet deal they give from now on?

    • Now that Firefox and Thunderbird have taken on a life of their own, is "Netscape" still relevant?

      That question pretty much answers itself. What I find really strange is that anybody at AOL is even working on Netscape, given AOL's dwindling (and never high to begin with) comittment to the product. Possible explanations: what's left of the staff at Netscape is going through the motions just to justify their continued employment; AOL is going through the motions to justify to Time-Warner stockholders all th

      • Dwindling? They axed all browser development some time ago and fired all the old Netscape developers. Netscape is only a low cost ISP, and an AOL brand now. AOL outsourced the development of the new Netscape-branded, FF-derived browser to some other company, they couldn't even do it in house.

        Actually, I think they realized FF was becoming popular, decided they could squeeze some more brand equity out of the Netscape name to promote their Netscape ISP offering, and that's what motivated this decision.

    • Don't get me wrong, I like having more options to choose from. I just want to know why, at this point, I should choose Netscape?

      In all honesty, it doesn't sound as if there's any reason for you to switch. That aside, there are still quite a lot of people out there who are hooked on the Netscape branding.

      I know at least two people who've simply always used Netscape, beginning with version 4, since it was installed from the CD provided by their dial-up ISP in the late 1990's. They won't consider u

    • What was market share of Netscape (4.x, closed source) when Mozilla decision was made? Where Firefox begun? %2? %3? I hope it goes well on windows since its finally a decision at right path.

      You must be a clever guy, much more clever than me since I will ask:

      "What has amateur coders with geek fantasies made to Netscape brand to go under 1% levels?"

      and dive under -1 ;)

      I don't know if you can get into the beta's forum but please check if you can. Beta testers are AVERAGE users and they look fairly happy ab
    • Why choose Netscape now? I guess the ability to switch to IE rendering on a given page might be nice for some people. But honestly, there is no real killer reason.

      In my eyes, The Mozilla Oragnization is now carrying the torch. Sure, Netscape is still alive in a sense, but Mozilla is the future of that browser family. Netscape has a name that makes many people nostalgic, but that's about all it has to set itself apart today. The software lives, but it is found elsewhere.

  • Netscape leaves a bad taste in the mouth (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 17, 2005 @12:13PM (#11386511)

    We are sorry, but you will need to enable cookies and Javascript to use your Screen Name with this site.

    Click here to return to Netscape Channels or here to try again after you have enabled cookies and Javascript in your browser.

    http://my.screenname.aol.com/badbrowser.psp?site do main=channelsns&authLev=1&siteState=OrigUrl=http%3 a%2f%2fchannels.netscape.com%2fns%2fforum_center%2 fforumsmemauth.jsp%3fseamlesswebtag%3dhttp%253a%25 2f%252fcommunity.netscape.com%252fn%252fpfx%252ffo rum.aspx%253fwebtag%253dws-nscpbrowser%2526redirCn t%253d1&RefUrl=http%3a%2f%2fslashdot.org%2findex.p l&source=login&lang=en&locale=us

    sorry but visiting Netscape reminds me of visiting a domain squatters site or those other seedy portals, hijacked by their demands and presenting as little content as possible with maximum advertising prominence, why anyone would want to visit Netscape by choice is a mystery, its a horrible experience

    uggh

  • Brand Recognition (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Eric Hysen ( 845632 ) on Monday January 17, 2005 @12:13PM (#11386515) Homepage
    This looks a lot like the iPod+HP strategy to me. Netscape is still a fairly well-known brand, and many users will probably trust a browser from them more than they would from a company they know nothing about (Mozilla). Despite the fact that the Netscape Browser is inferior to Firefox, it's still easily better than IE and will help reach the goal of reducing malicious programs that spawn through Microsoft's security holes.
    • Hopefully this will make it so when I go to a website that requires "IE 6.0+ or Netscape some version +" that it will finally work in Firefox, which probably has more marketshare than Netscape.
    • Despite the fact that the Netscape Browser is inferior to Firefox, it's still easily better than IE and will help reach the goal of reducing malicious programs that spawn through Microsoft's security holes.
      Exactly. Netscape doesn't have much to offer to make it a better choice than Firefox. But as a Firefox-based browser (at least primarily), each IE user that converts to it is a win for all of us.

  • One of the oldest computing companies? (Score:4, Funny)

    by rbarreira ( 836272 ) on Monday January 17, 2005 @12:19PM (#11386569) Homepage
    If you look at the taskbar in the screenshot [prospero.com], it proves that Netscape was already around in the 30's :)

  • The sound of... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by SunPin ( 596554 )
    nobody downloading this program.

    I doubt the /. effect will happen here.

  • Can someone tell me (Score:2, Insightful)

    by afstanton ( 822402 )
    exactly why anyone would want this when they can already get Firefox?

  • In the proposed design concept... (Score:5, Funny)

    by FuturePastNow ( 836765 ) on Monday January 17, 2005 @12:30PM (#11386676)
    Why does Netscape.com look an awful lot like Google?

  • The Official End of Netscape Browser (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Yes, you saw it before, and here it is again:

    With 'Display like Internet Explorer' enabled, Netscape uses IE to render pages, sends the user-agent of your installed version of IE to websites

    Translation: The New Netscape is Internet Explorer. The new netscape will catch ActiveX controls, viruses, spyware, and all the other good features of IE.

    Average Joe user will download the new netscape. The first page that doesn't display right they'll switch to the NetscapeIE, and they will never switch it to

    • Actually, I think it will only use the IE widget for specific pages.
      For example, if you open a new browser window, it will be in gecko mode.

    • I am a beta tester (Score:3, Informative)

      by superyooser ( 100462 )
      Netscape has a Site Controls section in the Options, which is something like IE's security zones. Settings/security profiles included are Default, Local Files, and specific sites, such as netscape.com and microsoft.com (needed for Windows Update). You can add as many profiles as you want.

      For each profile, you can set the Display Engine (Display like Internet Explorer/Display like Netscape, i.e. Gecko) and configure popup, image, ActiveX, Java, JavaScript, and cookie controls. If IE is selected as the disp

  • Netscape as I see it (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Orion Blastar ( 457579 ) <orionblastar@NoSPAm.gmail.com> on Monday January 17, 2005 @02:12PM (#11387780) Homepage Journal
    Netscape to me, is like Firefox, only with spyware and bloated AOL bundled applications.

    One of my Nieces visited our house recently for a party we had. She wanted to see one of her pop singers, and in order to see the video from AOL, some AOL software needed to be installed in Firefox, after that my system went crazy, locked up a lot, lost the network connection, and the software seems to want to phone home. I am told that the software installed is part of the Netscape browser bundle. I'll be sure to stick with Firefox sans the AOL software, after I get done reformatting my system to get their Spyware off my computer.

    Thanks, but no thanks. Netscape was cool before AOL bought them out. Now Firefox is cool.
  • Well, I never thought I'd see the day that Slashdot promotes AOL...
  • Although these menus do look weird at first, the idea seems interesting. Only some real life testing would tell if it's a good choice, but moving the menus is a good way to save some screen room.
    On the flip side, it's harder to "grab" the window to move it, but do people really do that a lot, now that tabbed browsing is going mainstream?
  • I am giving up my mod points to state that this is quite possibly the most ugly, disgusting, cluttered, useless, overdone and underthought interface I have ever seen on ANYTHING. Menus justified to the right? what sort of crack are they smoking. Even for a windows app this is bad. It's worse than realplayer. I've never seen so many useless options in my life. It's like the polar opposite of Safari.

    It's hideous, yet I can't look away.

  • Red headed stepchild (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Doc Ruby ( 173196 ) on Tuesday January 18, 2005 @12:23AM (#11392439) Homepage Journal
    Why does AOL keep revving up Netscape, while continuing to use the Spyglass/IE browser as the core of the AOL browser? It's confusing, and of course their browser itself is a travesty, as always.

Slashdot Top Deals

"I shall expect a chemical cure for psychopathic behavior by 10 A.M. tomorrow, or I'll have your guts for spaghetti." -- a comic panel by Cotham

Close