The Inquirer is reporting that America Online is to release a new version of the Netscape browser. The upgrade will be a “‘point’ release based on the latest Mozilla code” and “will be made available in the very early summer timeframe.”
AOL to Release New Version of Netscape
About The Author
Adam Scheinberg
Technology Executive o Web Developer o Father o Foodie o Music Snob o OS enthusiast
Follow me on Mastodon @[email protected]
Does anybody even use Netscape anymore? I thought everybody used Mozilla and have never really understood the different between the two.
Only a few holdover Netscape fans I know still use it. As soon as I told them Netscape and Mozilla are essentially the same and that Netscape as a seperate entity doesn’t really exist anymore, they got all offensive for some reason. But when I pointed them to the websites and showed them it was true, they stopped hyperventilating, got version 1.6 of Mozilla and all was right with the world again. They won’t be “switching” back to Netscape so I don’t know why AOL even bothers.
Netscape has some “value-added” features that add functionality to it not available with mozilla, and its preferences have defaults that are customized for the end user. Its the best browser out there for someone who wouldnt know to tinker, and could be made to do anything mozilla does by someone who can tinker. In otherwords, its better for the average user then mozilla. This could change tho, with moz’s new push for support phonelines and trying for end-user accessibility. Think of Netscape as a more-plug-it-in-and-go version of moz- i.e. Pop-ups are defaulted to block (except for a few sites that either pay, or are part of the AOL-TW family, like netscape.com, cnn.com and walmart.com are default allowed) and enhanced security settings.
Netscape — even version 7.1 — was well behind the main Mozilla trunk at the time of release. If I recall, Mozilla had released 1.1 when Netscape 7.1 synced up to the Moz 1.0 release.
Netscape may be nicely branded, but Mozilla has long been cutting edge in a low risk scenario. Today I’d call Firefox the best app on my PC. Forgive my pessimism, but I’m willing to bet that Netscape 7.2 is synced up to an outdated Mozilla by its release.
netscape 6.0 was based on the moz 1.0 framework. netscape 7.1 is moz 1.4, which is their stable app branch. 1.[5,6,7] is just building up towards their next application release, which is what the want people to build gecko apps on (hence the release of 1.4.1 right after the 1.6 beta was released)
So…AOL is going to trelease a new version of the netscape browser…even though that AOL integrates IE with it’s software? Did the contract with MS end now??
To the best of my knowledge, the only “features” that were added in were the ability to access AOL email accounts from the email client as well as integration of AIM into the browser. Aside from that, the only difference I’ve noticed is the fact that like all other AOL-owned programs, it clutters the desktop and Start Menu with unwanted free AOL trial links.
It also added a Netscape Radio client for listening to webradio, tweaked for better IMAP support, and had ICQ as well as AIM integrated (yes i know, same protocol.)
Also, forgot, it had a spellchecker before moz got it in version 1.5
From Mozilla’s Hall of Fame site (http://www.mozilla.org/university/HOF.html):
“Netscape 7.1 is the latest Netscape commercial distribution of Mozilla 1.4 for Windows, Mac OS, and Linux. Its user interface is tuned for end-users rather than developers, and it includes additional features such as AIM and a spell checker.”
I believe the contract expired a few years ago, but they still use IE becuase at the time it was easier to embed IE than the Mozilla Framework. Even now most browsers that use the Gecko Engine (Epiphany, etc…) still require Mozilla to be installed until Mozilla releases the Gecko Runtime Environment. Also I don’t know how Mozilla liscensing might affect the ability for AOL to embed Mozilla without making AOL open-source. Plus since there are many sites that are IE exclusive, it might be a pain for AOL to deal with customer complaints and such. I think overall its easier and cheaper for them to keep it the way it is and not switch to Mozilla.
Well, sometimes and I don’t know why. Maybe its because I mistakenly doubled clicked when I should have double clicked Mozilla.
Its soooooooooooo slowwwwwwwwwww, I hope they improve on the speed with this point release, trust me, its needed.
Wasn’t the netscape team disbanded by AOL?
Yes no one at AOL currently is employed to develop NETSCAPE or mozilla, it wouldn’t take much for them to just rebrand the current mozilla release.
… for those not in the browser biz, I believe NetScape is the only name they know of an alternative browser.
this can *only* be good for Mozilla and the options on the market.
Thank you AOL for doing somehing good =)
Netscape announced it was to abandon Netscape Navigator after the Mozilla Foundation announced it would abandon the Mozilla Suite (“Seamonkey”).
Some weeks ago, the Mozilla Foundation changed its agenda: Mozilla Suite would continue to exist. Now, Netscape says it will relase another Netscape Navigator.
Does anyone still doubt Nestscape’s Navigator future is tightly tied to Mozilla Seamonkey?
netscape 6.0 was based on the moz 1.0 framework.
If I remember correctly, Mozilla was around M16 to M18 when Netscape 6 was released, not Moz 1.0. Now, Netscape 7 may have been Moz 1.0, but most definitely not Netscape 6.
One way to remember this is that Netscape 6 didn’t have tabs, which were introduced in Moz 0.96 (or was it 0.95, I forget exactly, its been a while).
Does anyone still doubt Nestscape’s Navigator future is tightly tied to Mozilla Seamonkey?
So they’re not going the way of Firefox then?
As for Netscape, I remember definitely that Mozilla 1.0 was NOT out at the time of Netscape 6. I’m pretty sure NS6 was pre Moz 0.8.
One thing’s for sure – those people who are still using Netscape 7.1 will be in for quite a shock speed-wise when the upgrade
Thanks for the reply. Kind of figured that was the case, but obviously did not know.
Actually I don’t really care for the idea of a new “Netscape” release. In the end it’ll just hurt Mozilla. Perhaps AOL should just distribute a plain version of Mozilla? well they can toss some AOL bookmarks in there and change some of the default settings, but in the end they should just leave it named Mozilla. Mozilla needs the exposure. And if people get the idea that Netscape and Mozilla are the same thing, all the Netscape holdovers and people unaware of Mozilla might just go Mozilla??
They can call it “Netscape Mozilla” on the Netscape web site.
Because really I see another Netscape release as being bad for Mozilla. It’s going to take away attention from Mozilla, and right now Mozilla needs all the attention it can get if it’s going to try and take on IE.
Just my two cents…
While I have heard quite a whining on the part of mozilla advocates I don’t see how entirely the release of a new version of Netscape is as bad for the mozilla foundation as they claim. While Netscape releases have historically lagged behind mozilla releases I think that there are some people who either never get the message that the code base is the same as Netscape or are just more comfortable with a name they have known for years. For these users maintaining the Netscape browser name has value to the mozilla foundation. Ultimately the more people using the gecko code base the more webmasters write their pages with gecko in mind. This doesn’t help the mozilla name, but it does keep the gecko usuage from falling in server logs. I’ve never heard anyone complain about K-meleon or Galeon or other gecko based browser hurting the mozilla foundation so why should Netscape be different?
I think NOT maintaining the Netscape browser going would be a bad decision for AOL. As the Netscape usuage has falled so has the use of Netscape.com. The fewer people that go to Netscape.com the less value it has to the AOL empire. Not maintaining the browser devalues the web site and the Netscape trademark. Releasing a new version of the Netscape browser costs almost nothing. Slap a NS logo on top of the mozilla logos, add proprietary AOL mail support, AIM, ICQ, etc and you have a new NS browser. If the AOL mail support alone kept a few thousand people from quitting AOL it would probably be worth the money to release a new Netscape browser. I think that AOL is just trying to protect their assets which is something they haven’t been doing for the last 5 years.
I know some people who are using Netscape and, despite my trying to explain to them, they see Mozilla as simply a browser for testing purposes while Netscape is ‘the real deal.’
Regardless, even if they use Netscape instead of Mozilla, as long as it’s one less person using Internet Explorer, then I could care less which browser they use, whether it be Netscape, Mozilla, Opera, Safari, or whatever.
Netscape was never the perfect browser; at least not if you were a (hangs head in shame) web designer. I am still to this day amazed anything would be based off of Nyetscape after the debacle that was NS 4.x, and cannot believe the number of people still using V4 despite it’s endless array of flaws, errors and crashes.
As it is, I still daily pull my hair out over DHTML issues with all versions of NS/Moz. God help you if you use plugin or Javascript positioned content with Mozilla 1.x, or even try to do anything client side, since it runs like molassas in june.
I want to like Mozilla, and I want to hate IE, but as a web designer (hangs head in shame… again) I can’t bring myself to do it. When a Javascript positioned <div> content updating at 40ms intervals pegs the cpu use up to 80% on my Barton 2500 under Winblows, and uses so much CPU under linux that the mouse doesn’t even update its position, I really have to wonder what half brained monkeys are handling coding Gecko… Not that Opera or Konqueror are winners in that department, though at least those don’t suck the machine down into the unusable speed range.
On top of the fact CSS STILL DOESN’T work right. I love how W3C compliant means that it doesn’t generate an error when it encounters a tag, not that it actually renders what the tag is supposed to do.
Six months ago when I was still just a ‘tech, I was promoting Mozilla and using it daily. Today now that I (cringe) work in… web design (shudder) I can’t stand it, and having to cross code for it and the half dozen other browsers out their is just pissing me off.
It’s bad when Opera is rapidly becoming a better browser than Mozilla, and both are still in the stone age page-rendering wise compared to IE.
Try to use Mozilla Firefox (ex-Firebird).
All professional web designers first test their design on Mozilla/netscape and then on IE.
Most virus writers take advantage of IE’s ability of rendering badly coded or non-standard html. Outlook Express uses same IE engine to render html content.
Mozilla combined with Extensions is a much better browser than IE. Opera is not free so its not in same league.
Firefox? It STILL doesn’t support OS large fonts right, which is why I keep going back to regular mozilla for testing. Go ahead and install XFree at 100 dpi and see how well it works, or even worse “Large Fonts” under Windows.
But then, that’s a common gripe of mine in general is programs that don’t support ‘large fonts’ properly. Is it really so hard to test for? God forbid someone should actually be running 1600×1200 on their 19″ monitor.
Oh, and is it just me, or does Mozilla use freetype to render it’s content… Even under Windows? Is this part of why positioning content in it is so @#$5ing slow and why the fonts look just fugly compared to IE/Opera?
And when the @#$% are they going to fix proper inheritance of text attributes between block types? I’m sick of having to restate the font settings every time I start a table when your not supposed to have to.
Yeah, Gecko works great, sure it does.
If web designers are testing on Mozilla first, it’s because that’s where the most corrections have to be made. HTML and CSS are not rocket scientry, so why does Gecko make them such?
Did I say Corrections? I meant Workarounds. Restating the same blasted CSS class in every tag just in case Mozilla up and decides to start ignoring them.
I want to hate IE, really I do… Too bad I have yet to see anything else deliver the performance I have come to expect.
On top of the fact CSS STILL DOESN’T work right.
If you were referring to Mozilla/Netscape, I hope you were trolling. If you design for the web then you must know that the box model on IE < 6 is incorrect. So basically you have to apply ugly hacks to get IE5* and IE 6 to render the same.
Wait a minute, I just read this
—It’s bad when Opera is rapidly becoming a better browser than Mozilla, and both are still in the stone age page-rendering wise compared to IE.
statement of yours. Now I know you are trolling. There are so many things IE can’t render or read that Opera and netscape like html>body #something for example.
From the article:
Back then, I said AOL should take advantage of the “de-facto outsourcing” of the Mozilla development – now in the hands of the independent Mozilla Foundation and programmers worldwide – simply taking the latest code and sticking the Netscape logo, plug-in(s) and other proprietary extensions present in Netscape on top of it.
Just like they have been using the open-source community for years?
anonymous troll :
> On top of the fact CSS STILL DOESN’T work right
you mean that IE can do that ? :
body > h2 + blockquote[cite]:after {
content: “Quote from: ” attr(cite);
display: table-cell;
}
> Did I say Corrections? I meant Workarounds.
> Restating the same blasted CSS class in every tag
> just in case Mozilla up and decides to start ignoring them.
You have just shown the world that you don’t have a clue in CSS congratulations ! Just show us ONE valid testcase with valid HTML and CSS where mozilla is not applying correct cascading behaviour ! Good luck !
To summarize :
NS6.0.0 : M18 (not even 0.6 !!)
NS6.1.0 : 0.9.2
NS6.2.0 : 0.9.4
NS6.2.1 : 0.9.4.1
NS6.2.2 : 0.9.4.1
NS6.2.3 : 0.9.4.1
NS7.0.0 : 1.0.1
NS7.0.1 : 1.0.2
NS7.0.2 : 1.0.2
NS7.1.0 : 1.4.0
NS7.2.0 ? : 1.7.0 ?
> Does anybody even use Netscape anymore? I thought everybody
> used Mozilla and have never really understood the different
> between the two.
I still have avout 1% of Netscapa 7 users on my site. It is a good think in my opinion, it means that 1 more percent of people with a decent browser
Netscape is just a branded version of mozilla targetted at end-users, no tweaking, no plugins to install, no developper menus… The ICQ integration was one of the really cool advantages it had over Mozilla. You could receive an email from a friend and if he was online start chatting with him directly from the email!
Netscape: Kewl sounding and looking name compare to Mozilla or them other browsers. Kewl looking logo as well! I love the AIM that comes with it because it’s a strip down version with some simple but nice features with no adware or spyware either. The ability to use Netscape Email Client to check my Netscape web-mail is also a great pluse. It’s base on Mozilla 1.4 and that is a very good version of Mozilla.
Really I can’t think of any bad things to say about Netscape but the fact Netscape should always be here and really Netscape should be the true name of Mozilla. Sad fact is AOL owns Netscape now and I bet if AOL did not most of you guys would not go so nutz over it.
Some has sed it’s old and slow … RIGHT, Netscape 7.1 opens up on my 1.1 ghz athlon system in around 1 second (about the same if not faster then mozilla 1.6) It also surfes the web fast as well. I notice in some ways it might be slower on my dial up then 1.6 but then I sometimes notice it’s faster. One thing I notice it’s faster is the cache. If I click back it loads the page so fast you dun see it being loaded.
Hey I love Mozilla and I love Netscape both are great products but Netscape is not some evil crap that should die it should be kept alive.
–Idoxash
“On top of the fact CSS STILL DOESN’T work right. I love how W3C compliant means that it doesn’t generate an error when it encounters a tag, not that it actually renders what the tag is supposed to do.”
… I’ve seen web-sites built out of pure CSS in such a way it’s pure art and let me tell you Mozilla/Netscape beat’s the immortal crap out of IE any day. Your issues are simple! Your one of those fresh out of the college dun know how to code crap. If your not fresh out of college you should invest in some really great CSS books. Before you say such things learn to code CSS first then come back and give us your opinion.
Yah I seen where some things works in IE and some things works in Net/Moz for exacmpe this OSAlert site here. In Moz and Net the scroll bar does not show up green but in IE it does. LOL, but I’m not about to use IE for one simple scroll bar. OSAlert just needs to use standard valid code so things works on all browsers.
–Idoxash
“On top of the fact CSS STILL DOESN’T work right. I love how W3C compliant means that it doesn’t generate an error when it encounters a tag, not that it actually renders what the tag is supposed to do.”
Interesting. Actually it is IE that does not handle the style sheets correctly per the W3C specification. By coding to strictly IE “standards”, your style sheets will work with very few browsers EXCEPT for IE. As for the javascript, java runs slow on windows as well, and should not be used on web pages anyway except in extremely low doses like maybe a pull down menu or small applet, all IMHO of course.
>Six months ago when I was still just a ‘tech, I was
>promoting Mozilla and using it daily. Today now that I
>(cringe) work in… web design (shudder) I can’t stand it,
>and having to cross code for it and the half dozen other
>browsers out their is just pissing me off.
That because you do not understand building webpages. Web designers are like girls with pink boots and use DreamWeaver Frontpage and IE. Webcoders use vi and Mozilla/Firefox.
If you once would try and build a webpage with coding in stead of clicking you would see its mostly not the browser but the code that is making the mistake.
“…and its preferences have defaults that are customized for the end user. Its the best browser out there for someone who wouldnt know to tinker…”
AND
“Think of Netscape as a more-plug-it-in-and-go version of moz…”
Hmm…That’s interesting. I found that there is far more tinkering that must be done in Netscrape than Mozilla (Both Mozilla suite and FireFox). Especially that fucking lame user/nag wizard in Netscape. I also really don’t appreciate Netscrape leaving crap-ass AOHell ads/links on my machine.
Further, Mozilla FireFox blocks pop-ups by default.
“Six months ago when I was still just a ‘tech, I was promoting Mozilla and using it daily. Today now that I (cringe) work in… web design (shudder) I can’t stand it, and having to cross code for it and the half dozen other browsers out their is just pissing me off.”
So…six months ago you weren’t a web designer? I now see your problem. You lack experience.
If you really knew anything about web development, you’d stay away from IE. Moz is the best in terms of compliance…and as far as content positioning, it is actually more accurate in Mozilla. IE doesn’t know what the fuck it is doing.
IE is for sloppy coders who do not understand DOM, CSS, or JavaScript. IF you know and understand standards, things get real easy.
“I also really don’t appreciate Netscrape leaving crap-ass AOHell ads/links on my machine.”
That’s funny you say that. Last night I installed Netscape 7.1 and it only left one ad link for their aol net service on my desktop. That was the only shortcut, only link, only thing it dun! A far better improvment compare to wut it use to do.
–Idoxash
Netscape has one advantage over Mozilla — It’s name recognition. When Mozilla 1.0 was released I started putting forward arguments to management for deploying Mozilla Mail to the employees. Management liked what they heard, but they had a problem with it – it had no name behind it. As a result, I immediately modified my arguments for Netscape 7.0, and they agreed to test deployment to a small group of workers (that later became a complete company migration). We later migrated the users to Netscape 7.1 because of the additional features it offered, but I was still not able to convince of a case for Mozilla. Earlier last week I was finally able to get management to listen to reasoning for a possibility of upgrading to Mozilla 1.6.
My selling factor is that Mozilla 1.5 / 1.6 allows you have your signature below the reply but above the quoted text. A feature that the install base has been missing from LookOut. I hope it’s enough!
The public would be better off without AOL and Netscape.
They are just tools for AOL to try to sell you advertisements. Much like TV. No reason to give them an extra revenue stream when they hardly provide us any new innovation or technology.
I don’t like AOL. And I’d never work for them again.
> anonymous troll :
Oops, new box, forgot to refill in the various boxen.
>you mean that IE can do that ? :
> body > h2 + blockquote[cite]:after {
> content: “Quote from: ” attr(cite);
> display: table-cell;
> }
Wow, that’s quite a piece of work. Rather arcane and complex snippet to complain about.
Try this on for size:
<style type=”text/css”>
<!–
.font_a {
font-family:Arial;
text-decoration:none;
}
.font_u {
font-family:Times;
text-decoration:underline;
}
–>
<body class=”font_u”>
This underlines in both IE and Moz.
<table class=”font_a”>
<tr><td>This should NOT be underlined</td></tr>
</table>
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot, over?
</body>
Renders properly in IE, but not Mozilla, and is about as simplistic a use of CSS as your gonna get. Mind you, I’m just using underline as an example, there are multiple SIMPLE tags that Mozilla just flat out ignores.
But, as usual we could go around in circles for hours on which is better. Both are flawed; I just find it odd that if I code for IE as my target, it works on my first try but comes up wierd on Mozilla, while if I code for Mozilla it works after dicking with it for a few hours; but after getting it working in mozilla IE works with few if any other changes.
For my use, Mozilla’s CSS just plain does not deliver, and it’s Javascript is slow as molassas.
While IE… Well, you did point out it’s bad points; there are plenty I’ll admit, but most can be avoided if you actually leave security at medium and install a few third party solutions alongside it. (which is admittedly a hassle)
I didn’t mean to troll, I just wanted to call a spade a spade.
<html>
<head>
<style type=”text/css”>
<!–
.font_a {
font-family:Arial;
text-decoration:none;
}
.font_u {
font-family:Times;
text-decoration:underline;
}
–>
</style>
</head>
<body class=”font_u”>
Ok, let’s test, shall we? This underlines in both IE and Moz.
<table class=”font_a”>
<tr><td>This should NOT be underlined</td></tr>
</table>
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot, over?
</body>
Take that Mozilla.
You forgot your <!DOCTYPE>
Without it, Mozilla goes into “quirks mode” and doesn’t assume your code is standards-compliant (since it doesn’t know which standard with which it complies).
Try:
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN”
“http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd“>
<html>
<head>
<style type=”text/css”>
<!–
.font_a {
font-family:Arial;
text-decoration:none;
}
.font_u {
font-family:Times;
text-decoration:underline;
}
–>
</style>
</head>
<body class=”font_u”>
Ok, let’s test, shall we? This underlines in both IE and Moz.
<table class=”font_a”>
<tr><td>This should NOT be underlined</td></tr>
</table>
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot, over?
</body>
It’s still not totally standards-compliant, but I just tested with HTML 4.01
Trying again…
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN”
“http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd“>
<html>
<head>
<style type=”text/css”>
<!–
.font_a {
font-family:Arial;
text-decoration:none;
}
.font_u {
font-family:Times;
text-decoration:underline;
}
–>
</style>
</head>
<body class=”font_u”>
Ok, let’s test, shall we? This underlines in both IE and Moz.
<table class=”font_a”>
<tr><td>This should NOT be underlined</td></tr>
</table>
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot, over?
</body>
Wow man, that simple change fixes it for Mozilla…
And breaks it in IE… Yeah, that makes sense.
Yup Mozilla (and opera 7.5 BTW) was right !
With correct code (a DTD is COMPULSORY in HTML), mozilla does not underline the text in the cell and guess what ? It won’t display it even if you remover text-decoration:none as the CSS2.1 specs clearly says that text-decoration values are NOT inherited.
In quirks mode, IE6 and Mozilla reproduce bugs that were in IE4 and NS4 to allow them to display old pages without breaking them, but any serious designer wouldn’t code without a DTD, wopuld you ?
why is AOL Bothering Releasing another Netscape Browser? as i thought Netscape 7.1 was supposed to be the last Netscape browser, the problem i have with Netscape is that it forces AIM an ICQ client on the user even if the user doesnt even use AIM or ICQ so why cant AOL give the Netscape download an Option to people to download the AIM/ICQ client, apart from that Netscape is a good browser but i think Mozilla Rules an or Firefox
I use Netscape 7.1 (Sillydog.org Streamline version) primarily because it allows me to access my two Netscape webmail accounts via the e-mail client, which Mozilla Mail or Thunderbird can’t. I’ve applied a few user.js tweaks (the same ones I’ve used in Firefox and Mozilla 1.6) and the speed on a newer PC with DSL is just about the same as with other Mozilla releases (and it smokes IE on my PC). It’s extremely stable, never crashes, and I rarely run into a site it can’t deal with. Yes, Netscape stumbled on a few of it’s releases, but 7.1 is fine!
Those with an axe to grind againts AOL, I understand you’re poor opinion of that company. They basically ran Netscape into the ground. But when the new release comes out, keep and open mind. It is basically a great browser. The couple of minutes you spend doing a custom install and deleting the AOL icons will be worth it!
I’ve been a corporate web designer for going on 8 years and I feel a good one insofar as design, search engine placement and fulfilling my clients’ needs. It has been more than just successful.
I flatly gave up on Netscrape’s (most modern versions) inability and refusal to read new code and the code is does read renders way uncool. I can’t justify to my clients two websites…one for MIE and one for the finicky Netscrape for price reasons and server space. So, it’s out the door with Netscrape for good, can’t deal with it, don’t want to. Nice try Sun and AOL…Bye! Netscrape R.I.P. Who cares if it’s a Microsoft world; it works, it’s standard and I like it.