Netscape 8.0 Released 313
Mr. Christmas Lights writes "CNet is reporting that Netscape Navigator Version 8 has been released. The 8.0 Beta debuted back in March, with the final version being based on Firefox 1.03, and includes Trust Rating, a feature which identifies sites as safe or unsafe. Netscape 8.0 also includes a toggle which allows switching between Mozilla and Microsoft's rendering engines as needed. The Main Netscape 8 page has more info, and the 'Download Now' page is already serving up the new browser."
No thanks... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:No thanks... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:No thanks... (Score:2, Funny)
Is that what the Mozilla Foundation calls themselves? If so, that's hilarious! : p
Re:No thanks... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:No thanks... (Score:2)
Ok...but then again if the search box didn't come with those pre-loaded, don't you think everyone would probably add them in anyway? They are some of the most-used sites on the web.
Re:No thanks... (Score:3, Interesting)
Browser is the The Platform [msdn.com] - expect new IE versions to have a .NET controls integration built into. (integrating that in Mozilla - either mono or dotgnu would be inviting a patent lawsuit).
Re:No thanks... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:No thanks... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:No thanks... (Score:2)
Re:No thanks... (Score:3, Informative)
Earlier rumours said that 8.0 was going to be based on Internet Explorer.
It sounds like you're thinking of the AOL Browser [eweek.com], which is based on IE.
Re:No thanks... (Score:3, Interesting)
But pesonally, I don't have a problem with somebody trying to build a value added browser.
You and I may be into to the level of control we have over Firefox, but the average person without a geek support team is going to pretty much use the browser out of the box and isn't going to have the goodies we searched out and installed. It's the difference between painting the pinstripes on your car yourself or getting them as part of a standard trim package from the manufacturer.
Heck, I'm a happy u
Re:No thanks... (Score:4, Interesting)
Now if I could only use the Web Developer extension...
Based off of firefox (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Based off of firefox (Score:2)
Re:Based off of firefox (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Based off of firefox (Score:3, Funny)
Freedom of choice is just a hippy concept
Re:Based off of firefox (Score:4, Insightful)
I chose those three sites for a reason, because ALL THREE of them have problems with when used with Firefox. Having a "render in IE" option will come in handy for sites like these, because good ol' Joe is going to be pissed at you if you tell him that he can't use those sites anymore with his new web browser.
Re:Based off of firefox (Score:2)
Will it use IE's javascript engine? IE's DOM? Without those, I know of a few sites that won't work , regardless of how the pixels are rendered.
Re:Based off of firefox (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Based off of firefox (Score:3, Informative)
Build a site correctly and it won't be necessary to have code forks or multiple versions -- even to support mobile devices, screen readers, text browsers, etc. This has been true for years, it's unfortunate there are still those stuck in a 1997 world of nested tables, image slices, and browser-specific code.
Re:Based off of firefox (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Based off of firefox (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Based off of firefox (Score:2)
Trusting trust (Score:5, Funny)
Well... and why exactly should I trust AOL Time Warner?
Re:Trusting trust (Score:2)
Re:Trusting trust (Score:3, Insightful)
Depends what you're trusting them to do. The question you want to ask is not "Do I trust them to always to the right thing in every circumstance?" but rather "Do I trust them to objectively evaluate whether any given website is dangerous (from an IT security perspective) or benign?" Maybe you do and maybe you don't (I'm not convinced I do), but it's a simpler question than the overbroad "Do I trust them?" and, on the whole, more likely to be ans
There's still a market, believe it or not (Score:3, Interesting)
I, personally, question the time and money required to put out a new version of Netscape when there's a perfectly kickass Firefox to use, but my opinion is moot. There's still a market for Netscape, albeit a small one.
Re:There's still a market, believe it or not (Score:2)
Re:There's still a market, believe it or not (Score:2)
Re:There's still a market, believe it or not (Score:2)
Re:There's still a market, believe it or not (Score:2)
And a lot of people have made IE-shell browsers, MS provided the system libs and can't stop you from using them. (Using the JET redistributables to make an Access clone is a no-no, I think.)
Corporate Crapware(tm) (Score:5, Informative)
Thanks, but no thanks.
CAREFUL: Corporate GARBAGE WARE (Score:2)
In the weird Alice-in-Wonderland AOL/Netscape world, a browser is defined as anything they want it to be. "Words mean only what I say they mean."
Install the new version of Netscape, and get the security vulnerabilities of a media player and AIM client, too.
Wait.. let me get this straight: (Score:2, Funny)
really? Both? At the same time?
Recent security vulnerabilities (Score:5, Informative)
I also found the following line from the CNET review pretty amusing.
Netscape 8 is based on Mozilla.org's successful and mostly secure Firefox browser
Certainly not a false statement or anything but I thought the use of the phrase "mostly secure" was pretty funny.
Anyone else get a 404 on the Trust Rating page?
Re:Recent security vulnerabilities (Score:2, Interesting)
I've sent a report to Mozilla concerning what may be yet another exploit. As mentioned before in previous comments (Recently in the FF vs Opera story) I am now 100% sure that there is still a security hole in Firefox that is allowing pop-ups, pop-unders, and SOMEHOW is allowing Spyware to get in on one's machine. It's been narrowed down to either Flash, or an exploit in how FF renders HTML. I've been getting calls recently from people whose computers I've repaired, or reinstalled
Re:Recent security vulnerabilities (Score:2)
Re:Recent security vulnerabilities (Score:2)
Re:Recent security vulnerabilities (Score:3, Funny)
It's safe against those "mostly harmless" attacks.
Why do you need a switch for Render Engine? (Score:2)
Re:Why do you need a switch for Render Engine? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Why do you need a switch for Render Engine? (Score:3, Informative)
I feel like i'm repeating myself [slashdot.org] over and over.
Re:Why do you need a switch for Render Engine? (Score:5, Informative)
2) tabs
3) better UI
4) plugins like adblock (presuming IE's renderer sees the final version of the DOM... that'd be an interesting test)
5) less clutter
6) one set of proxy information for IE, one for Firefox (again, presuming the IE renderer gets the data from Firefox, not its own HTTP stack)
Re:Why do you need a switch for Render Engine? (Score:3, Informative)
Yes [cnet.com], yes it does.
rating system? (Score:5, Interesting)
Who are these "trusted security partners" and why should I trust them?
Re:rating system? (Score:5, Informative)
Useful feature... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Useful feature... (Score:2)
Re:Useful feature... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Useful feature... (Score:2)
Full Circle (Score:3, Interesting)
(Mosaic->)Netscape->Mozilla->Firefox->Netscape
Re:Full Circle (Score:2)
NCSA Mosaic->Spyglass Mosaic->Internet Explorer
Or rather (Score:2)
NCSA Mosaic->Spyglass Mosaic->Internet Explorer->(IE rendering)->Netscape
Re:Full Circle (Score:2)
had enough of Netscape (Score:2, Interesting)
it has it's uses (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:it has it's uses (Score:4, Informative)
IE or Moz (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:IE or Moz (Score:2)
Boy, there's one area of web development that sure would be significantly improved by adding another menu option... I mean, it takes *forever* to do that now.
I don't understand (Score:4, Insightful)
How much time was spent duplicating efforts just so they could call it 'Netscape' instead of using that time to improve Firefox by putting out some great extensions?
Re:I don't understand (Score:5, Insightful)
Unfortunately a large percentage of Americans (probably the world) make their decision of what product to use based solely on brand name instead technical merit or overall quality. This is why advertising is such an important aspect of selling a product. While Firefox has had a lot of media coverage lately I think your average user still has no idea what it is, or if they do, are probably still a bit wary to switch from what they already know. This is why the Netscape brand is so important; many people know it and trust it and won't use anything else.
Re:I don't understand (Score:2)
Re:I don't understand (Score:3, Insightful)
What you don't understand is called branding.
What Netscape doesn't understand is that by putting the IE engine as an option, web sites will start making IE only websites, and say "Netscape or IE". They will then instruct the user to configure their browser to use the IE rendering engine by default, and the web will become a little less standards friendly.
-Adam
Re:I don't understand (Score:2)
What do you mean start? This is what already happens.
Why the hell... (Score:2, Interesting)
I thought the whole point of not using MSIE was to NOT use it.
I mean, when I use netscape, I want netscape, not some other substandard browser running things in the background.
This will cause a shitstorm for developers running netscape.
Trust Rating (Score:5, Interesting)
But this may appeal to someone. Let's see: they have to be clueful enough to want something other than IE, and clueless enough not to want Firefox or Opera. Pretty slim pickings.
I guess there's still something left to the Netscape name as a brand, but they're quickly killing it.
Am I Alone in Appreciating New Release? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Am I Alone in Appreciating New Release? (Score:2)
Re:Am I Alone in Appreciating New Release? (Score:2)
Whats neat is being able to set certain sites to always use IE and the rest to use Firefox by default, very damn handy. The only catch is it still (rightfully) identifies itself as Netscape/Mozilla.
All we need now is for extensions to work (adblock!). I'm guessing that some already do i
A million web developers just cried out in horror (Score:5, Insightful)
"If a site is considered trustworthy, Netscape automatically renders it using the Internet Explorer method, for maximum compatability."
WHY?!
Re:A million web developers just cried out in horr (Score:2)
And how is the User Agent send in those cases?, Netscape or IE or a mix of them.
Re:A million web developers just cried out in horr (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:A million web developers just cried out in horr (Score:2, Funny)
This in fact logical: only trusted sites should be visited with a browser as unsafe as IE.
Re:A million web developers just cried out in horr (Score:3, Insightful)
NS8 looks like a really bad idea to me.
Enhanced Tabs and Toolbars (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Enhanced Tabs and Toolbars (Score:2, Informative)
Just like in Firefox, you mean?
Outdated (Score:5, Interesting)
Not only that, but (Score:2)
Not only did it tell me that also, but when I finally got to the front page, I saw an ad:
Is it just me, or is adding IE to the mix a scary thought? And how careful and meticulous can they be, really, if their advertising says "let's you?"
too slow (Score:5, Insightful)
I think that's one of the biggest things Firefox has going for it. Security, extentions, stability, tabs, are all very important reasons, but Firefox is successful, because it is small. Being small, they are flexible and fast moving, able to change to meet evolving needs. Firefox will be the guerilla fighters in the upcoming browser war
Turning Trust Rating into an immune system (Score:2)
I wonder if the ultimate version
Re:Turning Trust Rating into an immune system (Score:2)
/. Editor tweeked the submittal a bit ... (Score:5, Interesting)
BTW, the first sentance was originally "The Wall Street Journal [wsj.com] is reporting that AOL will release Netscape 8.0 [wsj.com] - also being reported at BetaNews [betanews.com] and a growing number of sites. [google.com]" ... but he changed that to CNet which has the 5 page review ... the Firefox 1.03 reference is from BetaNews.
Finally, I had added this closing statement/question "While Netscape was the dominant browser years ago, it has faded dramatically ... does this release have significant enough features such that end-users will give it another try? Time will tell." ... and I personally think it's a bit too little too late - Firefox works darn well for me, and with the iview extension [mozdev.org], I have one-click access to IE if need be. But the browser wars are far from over as IE7 appears to be copying many of Firefox's features, plus Opera and Safari continue to get good press ... so time will tell!
*shakes head* (Score:3, Insightful)
While I understand that this is not targeted at the same demographic that downloads Firefox, couldn't they have included something to add some value for us?
If they had packaged in some FF extensions, at least a choice of themes...then maybe.
View using the IE rendering engine? Thanks a lot.
R.
What I wouldnt mind seeing is (Score:2)
And more to the point, the list of sites and pages and stuff that are set to "automatically trigger the IE mode"
Installer not proxy friendly (Score:3, Informative)
(lack of) Privacy (Score:5, Informative)
Re:(lack of) Privacy (Score:3, Informative)
The switch? (Score:2)
Why would anybody need or want to use a less functional renderer?
Re:The same netscape ? (Score:4, Informative)
It WAS good... (Score:3, Interesting)
*sighs and wipes Nutscrape off the computer*
Re:It WAS good... (Score:2)
Re:No Mac or Linux? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:No Mac or Linux? (Score:2)
Why SHOULD they make a version for Mac or Linux? All the Mac cultists will use Safari 'cause Steve says to, and judging by most of the comments here, most Linux users will give a knee-jerk "Why use anything other than Firefox?". I wouldn't waste time or money on a port either.
The Open Source community had better examine itself pretty hard on this. We complained for years about lack of corporate support, but once we make "our" version of something, not only do we d
Re:No Mac or Linux? (Score:2)
I think a matter of greater urgency, however, is examining the use of the concepts "us", "we", "our" (etc.) in conjunction with the implication of hypocrisy.
If person A posts one opinion about event X on a website, and person B posts a conf
Re:No Mac or Linux? (Score:3, Insightful)
Um, the problem is even worse when n > 2. Hypocrisy is a charge that only makes sense when n=1. In other words, when the same person utters the incompatible statements. Why is that so difficult to comprehend?
Re:No Mac or Linux? (Score:2)
Re:No Mac or Linux? (Score:2, Informative)
And if you weere designing pages on the Mac, and testing them in IE Mac and expecting them to look the same on a Windows box, I have some prime realestate under Manhattan for you.
Re:Linux version (Score:2)
Think about it.. OS X has Firefox and Safari as the two major browsers there (IE is still included, but its no longer supported). Safari is being aggressively updated, and Firefox is, well, Firefox. On Linux, I imagine people are fairly settled in their browser of choice (most likely you already know enough about computers to at least have made a good judgem
Re:OK to install alongside Firefox? (Score:4, Informative)
I have yet to try the final build of NS8, but I did try the beta and it co-existed peacefully with Firefox. If I remember correctly, NS8 stores its profile in \Application Data\Netscape\, and Firefox stores its profile in \Application Data\Mozilla.
Re:Added features... (Score:2)
It comes with all of the standard security hol-err, features of IE built right in!