"Netscape is pleased to announce the immediate availability of Netscape Navigator 9.0 Beta 1. The release is now available for download from browser.netscape.com for Windows, Mac, and Linux. Some of Navigator 9's new features are listed here; for a complete list, see What's New in Netscape Navigator 9? at browser.netscape.com."
Post a Comment
Member since:
2005-07-26
Fans: 0
Member since:2005-07-06
Fans: 0
Resizeable Textarea was originally a Firefox extension and was further developed by Justin Watt to become the Resizeable Form Fields extension available at either
https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/3694/ (version 0.2.1) or http://justinsomnia.org/files/resizable-form-fields-0.2.4.xpi (version 0.2.4).
I suspect that Netscape either bundled this extension with their release or added the equivalent code to the base browser.
Member since:
2007-03-24
Fans: 2
Member since:
2006-12-01
Fans: 0
Member since:
2005-07-06
Fans: 7
Member since:2005-07-06
Fans: 4
Member since:2005-07-06
Fans: 7
Netscape, meet Dead Horse. Dead Horse, meet Netscape.
Do they even have a browser presence anymore? I don't have any of the numbers (and nor do I feel like tracking any down), but I would assume they are somewhere behind Opera in the market penetration segment.
All companies I've done outward facing website programming work for have tested against the following platforms/browsers:
IE (Windows and Mac)
FF (Windows and Mac)
Opera (Windows and Mac)
Safari
I'm not kidding when I say I forgot Netscape existed for maybe a year or so until I saw this headline. And I build websites for a living.
I think if I was an engineer on the Navigator team, I'd lie to all my programmer friends and just say I worked on Real Player. It's that bad.
Member since:2005-07-06
Fans: 4
Do they even have a browser presence anymore? I don't have any of the numbers (and nor do I feel like tracking any down), but I would assume they are somewhere behind Opera in the market penetration segment.
I would suspect that there are probably more people still using Netscape 4 than there are users of current versions of Navigator. Last time I saw any stats, around 2000-2001 or so, the breakdown was along the lines of NS: 15%, IE: the rest.
I like to imagine that the imagine that the current Netscape development process is similar to that old Dilbert strip - "Sure boss, I can remove the URLs from all our webpages. I'll just replace them with Uniform Resource Locators - but it will take six months."
Member since:2005-07-06
Fans: 7
Some stat pages (and we all know how reliable they are, but still somewhat useful for seeing just how little used NN actually is):
http://www.thecounter.com/stats/ (effectively 0%)
http://www.upsdell.com/BrowserNews/stat.htm (~.15%)
http://www.webreference.com/stats/browser.html (~1.77%)
Stats from my own personal site from the last 10,000 hits (first column is hits out of 10,000, last is version #):
7 0.07% Netscape 7.2
3 0.03% Netscape 7.1
1 0.01% Netscape 8.0.4
That's 11 hits out of the last 10,000...and going back further yields more of the same type of trend.
The point of this post isn't to bore anyone to tears (sorry if it does) but it is to point out that by and large NN has well under 1% market penetration. Which begs the question...who the hell over at AOL keeps signing on to develop new versions? And why are AOL shareholders (err, Time Warner I guess) standing for this humongous waste of money on what is effectively a DEAD platform? Firefox would have been long gone, and IE replaced years ago by either a rewrite, or with MS endorsing a different platform and branding it out under the MS trademark.
I mean seriously folks...what gives here?
Member since:2006-06-22
Fans: 0
I think if I was an engineer on the Navigator team, I'd lie to all my programmer friends and just say I worked on Real Player. It's that bad.
Ben Goodger, Firefox's lead developer worked on the very same Navigator team along with quite a few Mozilla/Firefox contributors.
There is nothing to be ashamed about. It was a case of the management not listening to the programmers if you have ready any of their thoughts of how Netscape sank. Those last few releases and version 6 etc, not a single developer wanted to put it out but management made them work on it and release it.
Member since:2005-07-06
Fans: 7
"Ben Goodger, Firefox's lead developer worked on the very same Navigator team along with quite a few Mozilla/Firefox contributors. "
The key word there is worked, which is the point I was trying to make. They had a shedload of talent, and lost all of it due to poor management.
So to rephrase, "If I worked there now... ;-)
Member since:2005-08-18
Fans: 15
"I'm not kidding when I say I forgot Netscape existed for maybe a year or so until I saw this headline."
So did I. I actually haven't thought about Netscape for a good many years so I figured I check out their site.
Turns out that it is still what it was last time I checked (years ago): some shitty portal service thingamabob.
Member since:2005-07-06
Fans: 1
I don't know why you say Navigator is that bad considering the new version looks to be pretty much exactly the same as Firefox with a couple of add-ons. The fact that you seem to think it needs separate testing, when in fact it uses the exact same rendering engine as Firefox, just goes to show how clueless you really are.
Member since:2005-07-07
Fans: 0
All companies I've done outward facing website programming work for have tested against the following platforms/browsers:
IE (Windows and Mac)
FF (Windows and Mac)
Opera (Windows and Mac)
Safari
Navigator is based on the Mozilla/Firefox code. There is no need to test against it specifically.
I'm not kidding when I say I forgot Netscape existed for maybe a year or so until I saw this headline. And I build websites for a living.
Well you are a little clueless but it doesn't matter because:
A. No one uses Navigator
B. If anyone actually did it it would render the same
I think if I was an engineer on the Navigator team, I'd lie to all my programmer friends and just say I worked on Real Player. It's that bad.
I admit that I absolutely hated the old realplayer but I think the new realplayer is actually very good. I use it to listen to real streams, mostly news sites and it works quite well along with fitting in nicely with my GNOME desktop.
Member since:
2006-09-19
Fans: 0
I don't know if I'm even gonna try it someday, but being a linux user, I was quite surprised to find that the new version is (as in the old days) multiplatform!
Does that mean that they abandoned completely the double-engine capability in favour of a far more strict compliance to the Firefox codebase (thus the extension compatibility...)?
Member since:2005-08-02
Fans: 0
Yes, the IE rendering mode seems to have been thrown out. As far as I can tell, it really is little more than a skinjob of Firefox 2 with a few features thrown in to integrate the browser with the new Netscape.com. Some of which are already available as Firefox 2 extensions.
Member since:
2006-06-01
Fans: 0
Sounds like none of the previous posters have tried out this new browser, instead just rehashing ancient history. I say "new browser" because it bears NO resemblance to the Netscape of old. I downloaded it onto my Intel iMac and I have to say that it is very fast at loading pages, feels noticeably faster than Firefox actually. I like the look and the new features, while not all are anything I need, they work and are pretty cool. Someone has put some good thought into the program.
Member since:
2005-07-06
Fans: 1
It looks and works almost exactly like Firefox, but with a somewhat different theme and a couple of extra features. One nice thing I found out is that the Netscape site says that extensions are supposed to work if they are built for Firefox 2. Still, Adblock Filterset.G refused to install, informing me that it only supports Netscape browser "up to version 8.12". (WTF?) Themes are also uniformly not supported unless specifically built for Netscape 9.
I was also disappointed to see that there is no built-in AIM support, which was the one feature I was really holding out for. As far as the other features, most of them are integrated with the Netscape.com portal (submit sites to the portal, find out when other "friends" have submitted sites to the portal, rate sites, get notified when you have new Netscape mail). So it really is most useful to people who use Netscape's services (and apparently there are some, somewhere, because there are sites being submitted, commented on, etc).
The three features useful to non-Netscape people--the ability to manage news feeds separately from "live bookmarks"; the "Link Pad"--which is like a short-list of bookmarks, each of which disappears when you click on it; and the mini-browser--which as far as I can tell is just a full browser put into the sidebar, may be nice for newbies but are really just minor conveniences for any seasoned Firefox user; no reason to go switching browsers anytime soon.
Edited 2007-06-07 13:31
Member since:
2006-01-22
Fans: 0
True, although the naming of the product is suggestive. Navigator was always just the browser part, while Communicator (the suite) included mail/news, composition, and various other bits over the years.
The FAQ on the site seems to indicate that the mail/news part will return, although in separate form. As nostalgia, it's a bit sad; Communicator was excellent when it was first introduced (over a decade ago now), due in large part to the integration. However, the market seems to have moved on.
Who knows, perhaps Netscape will make a resurgence one day...
Member since:
2006-05-06
Fans: 0