O'Reilly    
 Published on O'Reilly (http://oreilly.com/)
 See this if you're having trouble printing code examples


Reader Comments -- Netscape Navigator 6.0 to Fail Standards Compliance

Your 1,307 Responses...

07/01/2000

s. Books on various programming languages, web technologies and operating systems.

How does one choose the right books, though? Well, you can start by elminating any books by O'Reilly as potential purchases. If they condone this type of nonsense, then who knows what kind of tripe you're going to find in their books?

Thank you, David, for making the choice that much clearer.

P.S. Anyone care to guess which browser I'm using to post this message? :>

A Logical Guy


November 14th, 2000   9:50 PM

Why would someone change from an earlier version of NS if version 6 is not standards compliant? NS 4.x doesn't meet the standards either, so one may as well stick with a 4.x version or use Mozilla, with it's more up-to-date patches.



The world's already waited 2 years, what's another couple of weeks?

Colin Kershaw


November 14th, 2000   9:31 PM

As someone who has preferred Netscape for years, now I feel they
should just pack it in or write utilities for IE. Let IE handle
compliance, so us web developers can get it right the first time.

John Ralston


November 14th, 2000   9:12 PM

Netscape 6 is not prepared to defend itself as a non-beta browser. There are simply too many issues that have been ignored. Please AOL, get a clue!

Snicker


November 14th, 2000   9:01 PM

This is absolutely pathetic. Netscape has yet to produce a decent browser that is compliant with the set standards. As a developer, I'm getting sick of having to develop for such a horrible piece of software. Wouldn't the world just be better if we rid ourselves of Netscape? (:

Pete Gullekson


November 14th, 2000   8:14 PM


i'm just a lowly web developer who wants a single set of standards to conform to :(

syberchic


November 14th, 2000   8:13 PM

This is not complicated... Either make 6.0 standards compliant or plan to get out of the market!


Just think what could be done if every developer on the planet didn't have to spent countless hours trying to adjust their code to make it "cross browser" compatible.


It is amazing that anyone uses Netscape at all now... If you screw this up, it will be amazing to find anyone who even remembers what Netscape was.

D.C. Developer


November 14th, 2000   7:24 PM

NN 6.0, in addition to exhibiting numerous JavaScript mishandling problems, has an anomaly demonstrated at app start-up. 90% of the time on my NT 4.0 SP6a machine the process starts, but the app GUI does not. Have seen a similar problem reported on the Bugzilla site.

It's a shame AOL felt it had to release this bugware as I like what appears to be a better GUI from the usability/aesthetics standpoint. Of course AOL inflicts 25 million users with its (most often buggy) proprietary internet s/w, so why am I not surprised?

Put it back in the garage until it runs without stalling and backfiring like my old 1962 Falcon.

Michael Shaw


November 14th, 2000   6:42 PM

What is with the fonts ? Why does Netscape 6 show the default font as a whole point lower ? Netscape 4.7 does not show this. Neither does IE 4.x/5.x ... Its a nice browser ... but still many NOTICEABLE bugs ...

At least Microsoft is good at hiding their bugs!

Jaroslaw Popowicz


November 14th, 2000   6:15 PM

Well, I am using Netscape 6 and IE5.5 , and I have to say that Netscape is a lot faster at downloading pages. If they can get things a little more stable, I am using that rather than IE?

Question: Why does Netscape display pages so good and so fast? Compared to IE? Is there some setting adjustments you can give me so I can use IE, and still get fast results? (ie, cache, advanced settings)

Rob L


November 14th, 2000   4:41 PM

It's Alpha quality. It failed my basic test suite, it wasn't even worth trying anything advanced.

PLEASE don't hand it to Microsoft on a plate like this!

David Stevenson


November 14th, 2000   2:12 PM

i've been a web developer since 1993 and ever since internet explorer version 4.01 was launch, it made netscape looks worst then dirt.

for the past 4 years, i've converted every person (that's a web desinger / developer) to see that IE is a much better browser to develop & design a website with. and for those who want to see how i challenge others, drop me an email... i'm more then willing to show you.

for many versions come and gone, netscape had never handle simple table width/height % or px the logical way or should i say the proper way... a 100% width of a table should suggest the size of the window being displayed, and if i were to create another table within it and add a few cell with different %, it should logically be calculated from the parent table width in pixel, but no... that's not the case, everything looks like hell! but that's how we the users... the human thinks math wise. do correct me if i'm wrong. and even Netscape 6 full release still does it... if you don't believe me, try it on your own! if you don't know how to do it, email me and i'll show you! but think about that, that's just the simpliest and mostly used on websites.

every good developer or designer i know says that netscape should just dump the entire project down the dumps. its a waist of our time, and money to make website compliant to a browser that really reaks... our stress level are high because trying to make the sites complient and look good on netscape also. its literary creating a hell for us.

when we the designers and developers has a get togather, we joke and play down netscape like no bodies' business. frankly speaking, that's not good at all, not at all. plus, most people i know that like netscape, and the reason behind that its because they will have nothing to do with Microsoft, but even them... they're switching back to ie because they're tired of netscape.

just a note mr. netscape... even my mom likes IE more. that's really sad. pull your socks up, and shape up people!

hanns

hanns chong


November 14th, 2000   1:50 PM

If you compare Netscape 6 with Internet Explorer 5.5 you will see that Netscape follows almost perfectly follows the current HTML and CSS standards while IE fails in several ways. Just take a look at W3C's CSS test suite at http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Test/

Martin Vollrathson


November 14th, 2000   1:48 PM

I am completely disappointed in Netscape and its failure to adhere to its own open-source program. Please, implement the Mozilla fixes; don't make the mistake of releasing an unfinished product. Hurried short term gains make for long term failures.

Dan Smith

Daniel V Smith


November 14th, 2000   12:56 PM

I have struggled with Netscape compatibilty for good long time now. Since my site isn't a business or major e-commmerce site, I finally given up on trying to achive this - why should I write my code twice??

I hope other will follow this, maybe then something will be done about it - I notify visitors to my site with a pop-up that since they are using netscape, they will not be viewin gthe site as it is intended to be viewed and from that point on, I totally disregard Netscape compatibility in my pages.

I learned CSS from the W3C documentation, so I learned it according to standards - netscape's implementation of that has been partial, at best.

Maybe if people realized that all of a sudden, websites look like crap in NS, they will quit using it and force NS to actually conform to the standards.

And what is with NS6 taking 2 full minutes to load after launching? _ I guess that should be addressed in another story....

Eric Schuler


November 14th, 2000   11:41 AM

I think netscape should look more at the consequinces of releasing an unstable product. Microsoft who seems to have done a fairly good job with IE will continue to take the majority of users. Netscape needs to learn that in order for their browser to make it, they have to built a quality stable product.

Seth Novosel


November 14th, 2000   9:02 AM

To Netscape- FIX THE COMPLIANCE BUGS NOW

We just had a huge discussion on Netscape 6 in the Cooker (development) mailing list for Linux-Mandrake.

The general feeling is Netscape 6 is too buggy to include in the distribution and Mandrake should stick with 4.7X- Strike One

I have built several systems for other people and installed Netscape 4.7X and will continue to do so until the COMPLIANCE bugs are fixed. So are other computer builders- Strike Two

Web developers and embedded system builders will be looking at how well Netscape 6 handles the standards since evem IE 5.5 doesn't follow all of them. They will more than likely base their decisions on what browser to choose from thecompliance and stability of the product. NS6 has problems in both areas.- Strike Three

The way to take back a share of the market is to release a SUPERIOR product, not a buggy product. This apparently is not Netscapes philosophy- Game Over

Alternate OSes. KDE Konqueror is starting to shape up nicely. Once plug-in developers adapt their code to run under Konqueror, Netscape will be dropped by most Linux users. Why? a lack of standards compliance and too many bugs.

Sam Walker


November 14th, 2000   8:58 AM

I am a long time Netscape fan. And I have used beta browsers in the past. But this is the first time I have ever used a NS beta version 3 that was a dissapointment. I tried to use it just for browsing the web in general. But I deleted it from my computer last week because it is too dysfuntional. And I didn't even think about using a beta in this condition to test my web pages. I couldn't believe it when I read the article stating this is ready to release. If this is an indication of what is to come in version 6.0, I'll wait for 6.1, or maybe 6.5. And I definitely will not make any of my sites comply to this garbage.

Bruce Coffman


November 14th, 2000   8:52 AM

Iam appalled to note that Netscape is releasing its latest version with lot of Bugs that should have been fixed .Iam a web developer and its is a headache to test the compatibilty in both the the browsers and now this !!!.
Netscape should call it Beta version and they should release the version only after fixing those bugs.

krishnan thulsi doss


November 14th, 2000   8:52 AM

Iam appalled to note that Netscape is releasing its latest version with lot of Bugs that should have been fixed .Iam a web developer and its is a headache to test the compatibilty in both the the browsers and now this !!!.
Netscape should call it Beta version and they should release the version only after fixing those bugs.

krishnan thulsi doss


November 14th, 2000   8:38 AM

The best thing I can say about Netscape 6 is the speed and cleanliness with which the uninstaller works. In it's present state, the best thing web developers can do to ensure functionality of their sites is to include it in their browser check so as to exclude ver 6.0 from access! At least until Netscape get their act together. Who cares if ver 6.0 looks prettier than earlier versions if it's interpretation of fairly basic web code sucks!

John Hunter


November 14th, 2000   8:25 AM

I strongly agree that the release of Navigator 6.0 should be delayed until it is made standards compliant. To release the product with signifcant bugs will only further weaken the product and push users to IE. The process of developing cross browser compatible web pages and applications is difficult enough already. To further complicate the process by allowing known bugs is disastrous.

James C. Johnson III


November 14th, 2000   7:25 AM

Netscape, the browser has long been my favorite. I am severely disappointed in the lack of support for open standards. I am dismayed that the organization that defined JavaScript can not even comply in their own product. It is well understood that it takes time to produce a quality product, even more so when it is an "open" movement. IE is already more compliant than existing stable versions of Netscape. As developers, we care more about standards compliance and less about the browsers own look and feel. How could you allow so many resources to be spent customizing the browser, but not the rendering engine? Please put this one back on the drawing board... Let this version be a release candidate and not the final!

Demitrius Nelon


November 14th, 2000   7:05 AM

I also strongly agree with David. We had considered standardizing on Netscape when 6.0 was finally released; however, based on this article, we will continue with Explorer until these standards issues are addressed.

Steven Carter


November 14th, 2000   6:55 AM

Call me idealistic, but I thought the whole idea and driving force behind the Mozilla project was to develop a more-than-browser, compliant with existing standars and with the capability to adjust to what the future holds.

Being a company, Netscape is of course free to choose the way they want to develop their products, but this sort of behaviour can only result in one thing: that what little hope we held for Netscape in being able to produce any serious competition against IE, is lost.

Miki Wiik


November 14th, 2000   5:56 AM

Do it right the first time Netscape! If you know it's broken and you still release it as a final release and not a beta, you will lose what little following you have left.

Sam Morgan


November 14th, 2000   5:12 AM

I'm not a microsoft fan, nor a detractor, but here there's no mistake : netscape has no future going this way. Previous versions were already annoying (bloody proprietary layer tag !), but this one isn't even compatible with its own previous versions !
I don't know ONE web developper who likes this browser. If version 6 doesn't make up for all this, IE will definitely becomes the only browser. And maybe that's a good thing.

Hubert Razack


November 14th, 2000   4:36 AM

Netscape is one of the last firewall against Microsoft IE. If Netscape fails, it is the open road for Microsoft absolut monopoly. I am a developper for a big firm in mobile phone and I know that it is sometimes hard to make even minor changes approved. But if our phones don't met required standards compatibility, they are simply not sold. It is exactly the same for Netscape: with some much incompatibility, nobody would use it and so all the work done is of no use.

Please, fix the bug !

DI MERCURIO Sébastien


November 14th, 2000   3:51 AM

DHTML doesn't work in netscape 6.
Even dreamweaver cross-browser code.

I've been surfing 3 DHTML sites with netscape 6 final release and none of them worked. I assume it's because of the layer syntax incompatibility.
This is the most visible bug of netscape and it will crash netscape's reputation for sure.

Alban Cousinié


November 14th, 2000   1:05 AM

This has been ridiculous from the onset. How many hours have been lost trying to get cross-compatibility? When we are finally close to resolution, there are still basic incompatibilities. Admittedly, Microsoft still has some bugs on their end, but wow, what an incredible blunder Netscape. I memory leaked till it crashed my system, just leaving your browser open to a blank page! Maybe the leveraging of the lawsuit against Microsoft really does show their inability to compete in an innovative market.

Mark Jenkins


November 13th, 2000   11:19 PM

Do What Is Right...

Daniel V. Payer


November 13th, 2000   6:58 PM

This is Netscape's last chance to capture any browser market-share. I am happily using IE5 for Mac (as well as iCab and OmniWeb). I will refuse to use (and actively support) and so-called "standards-compliant" browser that is deficient in so many ways. IE5 at least tries harder.

Joshua Jabbour


November 13th, 2000   6:52 PM

I'm pleased to add my name to those asking Netscape to hold off until they have a truly standards-compliant browser.


What worries me the most is the prospect that the window for real standards compliance could well be closing. As Explorer gains market dominance, the incentive for Microsoft to steer clear of proprietary standards drops. We can't be too far now from the point where Redmond can simply tell the development community the standard is Explorer -- take it or leave it.


Netscape, you have an opportunity here that is very rare in the world of software development: the chance to genuinely get it right. I hope you'll take it.

Rob Cottingham


November 13th, 2000   5:49 PM


ftp://ftp.netscape.com/pub/netscape6/



Final version of Netscape 6 is out on there FTP site ........

As well as themes and such

Rob L


November 13th, 2000   1:22 PM

If netscape doesn't become compliant, any dreamed of market share will be lost.
As a designer myself, I'm tired of having to "rig" code so that it will look the same (or pretty close to it) in IE and Netscape. I'm getting to the point of not even wanting to bother making it look right in Netscape if it isn't a business project.
Standards are set for a reason! The idea is to come closer, not further away!

Brian


November 13th, 2000   12:28 PM

Netscape sucks - deal with it...

Oscar Jacobsson


November 13th, 2000   10:13 AM

Last chance Netscape. Release a standards-compliant browser or be forever forgotten...

Már Örlygsson


November 13th, 2000   9:28 AM

Lets join hands and welcome the Netscape six to the world - out of date hippy browser - can't you just conform your code



I think I'll sue for mental anguish.



Here’s a good idea, lets royally screw every corporate site that has been pain stakingly developed to be cross compatible with past versions of Netscape.




I think it's time the developing community has a public voice. I'm sure it would make an interesting headline. I'm sure alot of people will have some interesting opinions.

Luke Hansen


November 13th, 2000   8:50 AM

I knew there was a reason I never liked Netscape, and this just adds fuel to the fire. How awful-what are they thinking?! There are a billion web pages out there, and recoding is not an option: a better browser is.

Kimi B.


November 13th, 2000   8:29 AM

Here's one I hadn't encountered before...

Per ECMA 262, typeof should only return "function" if the object is native and implements a .call() method (printed page 47-48; PDF page 58-59). Regular expressions are a native object type and do not implement a call method. Therefore, this JavaScript URL:

<a href="javascript:alert(typeof(/regExp/));">
   javascript:alert(typeof(/regExp/));</a>

should return "object", not "function". It does return "object" in Explorer and Opera, but returns "function" in Navigator (4.7 and 6pr3).

Dave Brown


November 13th, 2000   8:28 AM

We are not going to take on the cost of re-coding all of our sites just because Nescape can't get it right. We are NOT going to develop for this browser or support it until a corrected version is released. I never thought I'd be happier using IE, yet here I am. I've tried the preview versions and I could care less if it's more compliant if even the simple Javascript/DTML won't work!

Jonathan Avedikian


November 13th, 2000   8:27 AM

We demand a recount!

And yes, what they said. We will also not support Netscape 6. So why would people download it and use it if they know the site they want to see won't look or function correctly? And yes, the people will know! Justice!

CRC


November 13th, 2000   2:30 AM

Flanagan,
You know, I know, and hundreds of other geeks know that this browser is the most standards complient browser out their. You make it sound as if this browser is powered by a 1972 Chevy hooptie, which it is not. Yes it will probably ship with some bugs come 6.0, however lets look at the options we are faced with... 1) Leave Netscape 4.x on the market and keep developing for that 'thing' or 2) release Netscape 6, an extremely standards complient browser.

Pat


November 12th, 2000   8:58 PM

I don't suppose you'll listen to the people that could make Netscape 6 a great browser.
Maybe when everyone has left you, you can sit around and tell yourself you did the right thing by ignoring those people.
Please get it right.

Miles Underwood


November 12th, 2000   8:45 PM

After trying Netscape 6 for about 2 weeks all I can say is I'm sickened beyond belief. It is so apparent that AOL's agenda is ruining Netscape even more. All this added crap that we don't want like AOL Instant Messanger and an AOL desktop icon, ooo i don't get enough of those from ICQ and Winamp??? This is the final straw...outside of windows there is very little choice for a good browser...and with microsoft setting more and more proprietory "standards" it's gonna just get harder and harder to compete with IE. I can only hope that microsoft is broken up into the crap that it is..

Christopher Hylarides


November 12th, 2000   6:38 PM

Please wait and fix these issues. We already have a perfectly good non-compliant browser (IE) so we're in NO HURRY to get another. On the other hand, there will be ENOURMOUS developer support for Netscape 6 if you resolve these issues!

Paul Tetley


November 12th, 2000   3:19 PM

Do it right!


Yes, it's late. So, keep in mind why we use Netscape - not just because we hate Microsoft. We are loyal to the Browser who's compliance with existing standards, consistency across platforms, and technical innovation were not at the cost of selling ourselves to a proprietary product. We need to see a product that is standards compliant - not just more so than IE!



Lead us, but with Integrity!

Roy Staples


November 12th, 2000   12:50 PM

Netscape Navigator 6.0 is the last bulwark against the degenerate Microsoft monopoly. Don't screw it up by making it noncompliant with Web standards.

Joseph T. Sinclair


November 12th, 2000   11:47 AM

I agree. I hope NS follows Flannegan's reccomendations before relasing NS 6.

A sloppy release will just make it harder to hold on to the few web developers who still support NS at all.

Lets not forget LDAP either.




Steve


November 12th, 2000   11:32 AM

I am tired of waiting for Netscape 6, but I am willing to wait longer for a Netscape 6 that is up to the standars as NS has been advertising.

Netscape will take a big risk if they release Netscape 6 and it isn't mostly perfect in this respect.

There are a *LOT* of web developers out there who are frustrated with Netscape. Many have given up caring whether or not their apps work in Netscape in addition to working in IE.

The ones who do support NS are dangling on a wire that might be broken if NS 6 is a pain to program for like NS 4.*.

I would hate to see that happen

Steve


November 12th, 2000   12:02 AM

That's really absurd. Does anybody here knows the standards? Does any one here tested Netscape 6? On the one hand you are bashing Netscape because it is 90% standards compliant and praize IE which is compliant only with the M$ proprietary standards.
What we have here with NS6(right now, minus a few bugs) is a working, usable browser thathas far better standards support than any other browser.
Getting it out of the door soon, and of course continuing work on the next minor
version with bugfixes, is more important than having a perfect release. Perfect releases don't happen, ever.

John Baker


November 11th, 2000   11:37 PM

Microsoft is currently engaged in an astroturf war against Netscape (it's a given). Is Mr. Flanagan part of it?

Jerry Quinnton


November 11th, 2000   10:52 PM

A Netscape with bugs will do nothing but help MS's attempt to dominate the browser market. Give the engineers an extra few weeks to fix these bugs.

Warren Smith


November 11th, 2000   9:28 PM

I agree. I will be downloading a new version whenever one is available but most user's will not. It will cause more backlash against Netscape than it will help.

Ray Hopper


November 11th, 2000   9:26 PM

I agree. I will be downloading a new version whenever one is available but most user's will not. It will cause more backlash against Netscape than it will help.

Ray Hopper


November 11th, 2000   8:12 PM

What? Netscape 6.0 seems kind of useful but with this many bugs that until now i didn't even know about makes me really mad. I'm glad i didn't download it when they had it available for that short time. By the sounds of it, N6 should stay a beta forever.

Brent Roberts


November 11th, 2000   6:47 PM

Netscape should be watching out when they post there stuff. It is not ready yet, and I see on www.activewin.com it says that they have released it on there FTP site. Is this correct? I tried it, but it said I do not have permission to view it. Is it coming out Soon?

Rob L.


November 11th, 2000   6:06 PM

As a user, the NN6 release will most probably be good enough as it is.
As a developper, I will still long for the day when I will be able to programme an application just by reading the W3C standards, without having to spend hours trying to find why this tag sequence or that piece of code aren't working.
Netscape and Mozilla project programmers are to be commended for their efforts in trying to make a good product.
What is not acceptable, is for AOL/Netscape management to force the release of a product with non-trivial bugs that are known and well documented.

With this release, Netscape is making sure that developpers will not use the NN6 platform for serious development, rendering the whole exercise of using NN6 pointless. We are then left with 'just another browser' against which there are other alternatives, less bloated and as worthy.

nka


November 11th, 2000   4:45 PM

CAN WE SAY <BLINK>PUBLICITY STUNT</BLINK>. How lame and stupid is this? Geez....duhh, I have alot of free time on my hands so I'll make crap up and hope I get some attention...duhhh. Read WC3, Netscape 6 is 110% more standard compliant than ANY IE version.

Nick Tomkin


November 11th, 2000   2:06 PM

Failing to ship NS 6 as a fully standards compliant browser will enable Microsoft to give the web the final kiss of death via Internet Explorer 6.0 for Windows. That event will probably spell the end of the renaissance of alternative and better operating systems, started by the availability of information and applications on the web.

AOL as the parent company of Netscape Communications must realise this. Shipping NS 6 in spring 2001 while maintaining a high degree of standards compliance are IMHO far more important than shipping before winter 2001.

Since Netscape is no longer a household name, a slightly delayed release will likely have little impact on it's direct marketshare. Developers however will be given a platform far more reliable across operating systems than Microsoft's offerings, an advantage far more valuable in the long run.

Ton van der Liet


November 10th, 2000   8:39 PM

Come on guys! If Microsoft did anyhting like this you would be all over it. The fact is Microsoft just deveops better products than Netscrape. It's this kind of thing that caused you to loose the browser war.

David Findley


November 10th, 2000   7:19 PM

I use Netscape Navigator because:
1. Internet Explorer is a huge, inefficient, proprietary, insecure mess.
2. Netscape Navigator is available on lots of platforms (including linux.

Anything else they give me is just a bonus. They are far more standards complient than IE and this makes them the better browser.

Waiting 'till 6.1, I'll keep Mozilla for now ;)
Jackson Dunstan

Jackson Dunstan


November 10th, 2000   6:27 PM

Hey, Netscape

We're trying to support you guys. But jeez!

Get with it, china's.

Mark von Delft
South Africa

Mark.von.delft


November 10th, 2000   6:03 PM

N4 already flopped now they're gonna ensure N6's demise before its released. seems like corporate suicide to me

nathan smith


November 10th, 2000   5:15 PM

This petition is lame. If Netscape releases a product that doesn't work, they'll crash and burn (unlike Microsoft's leeway as a corporate giant who can afford mistakes, Netscape cannot expect people to forgive a buggy product). If the product works and people are happy, then it's all well and good. Your little petition means absolutely nothing. Man, you're an idiot.

Brent


November 10th, 2000   4:44 PM

It's bad enough that N4 has degenerated into a steaming pile of doo, but why are you wasting your one chance at salvation by release N6 as a larger steaming pile of doo? The standards are not new and you SHOULD have no issue being compliant with them. WAKE UP! Your users are running out the door as it is. You don't need to chase them with a stick to make them leave faster.

Donna Williams


November 10th, 2000   4:35 PM

It is a shame that after a 2 1/2 year wait, Netscape didn't see fit to delay just another 2-3 months and get bug fixes for these in.

We're going to be recommending to all of our customers to wait until 6.1 or just use the latest stable Mozilla build.

- Bill Edney

William J. Edney


November 10th, 2000   4:33 PM

Put simply, my company will not support Netscape 6 in any form until the browser complies with DOM-0 and ECMA-262 standards that have been public for years.

Scott Shattuck


November 10th, 2000   4:29 PM

Netscape 6.0 isn't fully standards-compliant, but it's definately more compliant than anything else on the market right now. If you want to petition for compliance, you've got more immediate targets in IE, iCab, Neoplanet, etc...

Target


November 10th, 2000   4:25 PM

I am not a technician, I am just a loyal netscape user. Mainly I prefer Netscape's structured Bookmarks system to IE's alphabectic long lists.

Re Netscape 6, I say: take your time and get it right. If you don't, I'm going over to IE next round. I will be sorry to do it, but I will do it.

Sidney Lovas


November 10th, 2000   2:48 PM

Netscape, get with it! Standards are GOOD. Standards make us web developers want to write for your browser. As is, I have to write different code for IE and NS.

Comply with standards. Stop polluting the internet with the junk you've been giving us.

Jeff


November 10th, 2000   2:00 PM

I am a long time user of the internet, and as a result, I am a long time
user of Netscape. I'm still using the buggy Netscape 4.7 series because
it doesn't contain the ghastly security problems that plague IE. I am
at my wits end, I have just about converted over to IE because Netscape
is so buggy, and for what I hear, 6.0 is going to be no less buggy than
4.7


This makes me very sad. Mostly because this will now force the complete
transition to IE as "the browser". Web sites will no longer support
standards, they will support IE. This will give Microsoft the monopoly
in web browsing, and allow them to force any junk down peoples throats.


I have an impassioned plea to the Netscape developers. Make this browser
work properly. Support all the standards correctly. Make this a browser
that you would be proud to add your own personal name to. If you don't
do this, you, and you alone are allowing Microsoft to gain the position
they have desired, and do not deserve, which is the controller of the
content on the internet.


Jon Eaves


November 10th, 2000   1:44 PM

This is a far more serious issue for a web browser than it would be for another application. A developer in one of the mozilla bugs mentioned tongue-in-cheek that this might encourage developers to abandon Netscape for Mozilla. Unfortunately, most of the time, it isn't that simple.

Internet developers (as opposed to intranet or application developers) have no control over the browsers that users choose. However, they are typically forced to support the popular browsers that are out there. With DHTML, this often means working around existing bugs (such as the numerous bugs for Mac IE 5.0). It now looks like Netscape 6 adds yet another really f***-ed up browser to the mix (I don't know how else to phrase it).

Some users may get frustrated with web pages that don't work and may upgrade. However, most will instead blame websites for not writing compatible code!! QA departments will also complain to developers for not writing compatible code. The end result, developers who may currently like Netscape will become VERY upset with Netscape. It's not just that developers may switch to using Mozilla themselves (or use it when developing non-Internet solutions), they'll still have to support Netscape 6 on their sites!

Netscape is ensuring that there is not only bad will towards it, but that this bad will continues for a long time (until everyone moves off 6.0). Most users don't upgrade for minor releases.

We waited and waited and waited for a new version of Netscape, all the while receiving promises that it would be standards-compliant and stable. We could have waited another month. It wouldn't have made ANY difference. Instead, you blew the faith we had in you. So much for your remaining marketshare...

Scott Guelich


November 10th, 2000   12:41 PM

I am a simple user, not a developer. However, as my logs probably show, I use explorer more and more when I am in Windows. My reason is very simple - explorer manages to open sites easily that fail in Netscape (and sometimes Linux mozilla). I have simply grown tired of opening pages which don't work, even though I do not like Microsoft. Netscape does not only need to support standards, but also the common, botched standard (Microsoft) web pages. If they don't support all (or almost all) web pages, I will not use them. It is not a matter of principle, my principles urge me to use Netscape, but a matter of convinence.
Netscape must support all web pages or even its fans will stop using it.

Uri David Akavia


November 10th, 2000   12:22 PM

You bastards! I was really excited at the prospect of building an entire web-application based around the Netscape 6.0 browser, and now this. How frickin' typical.


I keep joking with friends about throwing bricks through Netscape's window on my drive home... perhaps that's the only way you guys can get the message - if it hits you in the forehead and causes you to bleed. Sheesh.


Get with it, or get out of the browser biz.

Sam Bennett


November 10th, 2000   11:49 AM

We're getting closer to standards compliance with Netscape 6.0 but we're obviously not there yet. In my 4 1/2 years of web development, I have become an "expert" on the differences in browsers and the various versions of each browser and their bugs. This has greatly increased the amount of time and effort that it takes to create a good product and my clients are the people who end up paying for this.

This release simply means that the frustrations continue and that I will have to continue to research browser quirks instead of being able to focus all of my attention upon good user-interface design and content delivery.

Michael Gronwold


November 10th, 2000   11:18 AM

Please take the extra time to bring Navigator 6 up to full standards compliance. Become the flagship again by releasing the best product you can release, even if it takes a little longer. The Web development community is willing to wait.

Scott Bynum


November 10th, 2000   10:59 AM

I've lost so much time lately adjusting webpages and making hack workarounds for the Netscape browser that I'm seriously considering sueing AOL/Netscape to make up for it.

Mark Thorne


November 10th, 2000   9:49 AM

AOL/Netscape: The flames of Microsoft's burning dominance fill your nostrils and you still waste time and energy in the wrong places with the wrong goals. Please, please, get your heads on straight! Get Netcsape 6 right or don't get it at all. It's better to be late with a quality product than to distribute broken and non-compliant code to the world on time!

Todd Hammer


November 10th, 2000   9:22 AM

I have been patiently awaiting this product (Netscape 6.0) for years. I am a web developer, and understand the importance of standards compliance. I already have to manage the differences between Netscape 4.7x and IE 5.x, and the last new platform I want to develop for is "the standard." I am going to be pissed off if now I have to account for Netscape 4.7x, Netscape 6.0, IE 5.x, and then "the standard" on top of that.

We've already seen the result of non-standards-compliance. PLEASE do not do the same thing, again.

Jeff K. Hoffman


November 10th, 2000   9:10 AM

The bugs they refuse to remove in Netscape 6, could result in web sites not using the affected features. This is a bad thing! I use netscape 4.x in Linux because it's the only browser with Java and Flash support, but it's so unstable I will switch it with the first alternative I get. Is this the way Netscape are going to win the browser wars? I don't think so!

Mgne P Zachrisen


November 10th, 2000   9:05 AM

Dear Netscape: The only way for you to remain relevant is to follow standards precisely. I write ECMA/DOM/CSS-compliant code as a base and am willing to test for and special-case dominant browsers which might fail to meet operate under that standard. But our web logs say there's no reason to support your browser in this way.

Dave Brown


November 10th, 2000   8:42 AM

I will not develop for Netscape 6.0, nor will I recommend the browser to others until it complies with standards!
Slava Mikerin
Developer

Slava Mikerin


November 10th, 2000   8:02 AM

Only if we have a browser that we can depend on, that we can learn once and then take for granted, can we spend our thought and creativity on the messages we are sharing through the web. Please help us do this by creating a stable, robust, and standard-setting (by adhering to the published standards) product. I've waited years for it; I will wait a little longer. People like me are your best hope for immortality anyway.

Ann Marie Thomas


November 10th, 2000   7:53 AM

Do it right the first time. It's always the right policy. Especially since this may be netscape's last chance.

Spencer Proffit


November 10th, 2000   6:00 AM

Netscape is already three years late in release, and nothing it can do will ever regain the market share it once had. Only those truly devoted fans will go to it: the average user, who gets IE preinstalled, will simply decline to go through the upgrade and install bit because he doesn't want to be bothered.

AOL could have adopted Netscape since they own a sizeable chunk of the company but have so far failed to do so.

In other words, what's the rush to get a new version out? Unless it offers substantial advantage over IE --- and I don't see that happening as long as there's ice at the South Pole --- nothing Netscape does is going to change the market.

But, if they release a bad, buggy non-standard version, they will risk alienating the few remaining users like they have now.

SO WHY NOT HOLD OFF AND GET IT RIGHT? WHAT'S ANOTHER THREE MONTHS COMPARED TO THREE YEARS?

I fail to understand the rush simply to get something out; unless, of course, the Microsoft practice of using the world as the beta-test site has now become the dominant paradigm for software engineering.

So I ask that Netscape hold off, and release a version that does what it advertises, and does it right the first time.

I've waited three years: I can wait a little longer.

And to be perfectly blunt: if the next version of Netscape is not right, I will probably go to Opera, even if it means paying for it.

J. Baltz

J. Baltz


November 10th, 2000   5:48 AM

Standards compliance is of the utmost importance to me in a browser.


If Netscape 6 is released with so many standards-compliance bugs, I will not adopt it, I will not develop to it, I will recommend against it on any occasion. And I know that many other developers, power users, and opinion leaders on the Web feel just the same way as I do regarding this.


If Netscape is looking for a way to die in the marketplace, then classifying standards compliance bugs as anything lower than a must-fix is an excellent attempt. Just the backlash in public-relations terms will see to that. Pity that it wastes what might have been an excellent chance to slaughter Microsoft instead (as MS richly deserves, no less for their fudging of standards-issues!).

Alex Martelli


November 10th, 2000   4:42 AM

I will not develop to yet another browsers arbitrary subset of the W3C standards. If Mozilla/NS6 does not fully and correctly support the standards it will fail. Simple as that. If it does, then developers will love it. IE nearly manages it, but not quite.


I am not confident. Many of my web sites (which work fine under IE and NS4) seem to crumble under current milestones - and there seems to be little changing in core rendering stuff. They are just fixing bugs in the interface now (although i have to say that M18 is a HUGE improvement over previous versions). I know I should submit bugs to bugzilla, but I don't have the time.

Jim Moores


November 10th, 2000   4:25 AM

I already develop primiarlly toward IE, because most of my intranet apps are used by shops which use MS products as standards.


If Netscape refuses to comply to the published standards, then it is one step backward for Netscape and one step forward toward accepting IE as a "standard" platform (as much as I hate that). One wants to use a browser that doesn't seem to implement features capriciously...


In a rush to "get something out" you loose sight of reliabilty... Customers (clients) can understand a "beta" that doesn't completely comply, but not a final product...

Stephen McConnell


November 10th, 2000   2:04 AM

One thing is clear to me: if Netscape wants to take back the ground they've lost to IE, they have to came out with a damn good product. It's not easy to beat Microsoft in usability or system integration terms, so the strong points for Netscape (and, for that matter, for all IE opponents) would be standard compliance and overall quality of the product. Ah, and cross-platform coverage... but this might not be a very important factor - the truth is that the battle will take place on Microsoft platforms, since users on other platform (Linux, Solaris, ...) will almost surely use Mozilla or platform specific browsers.
The request in quality for Netscape 6 is accentuated by their decision to put their product in the Open Source field - yes, the source is opened to everyone, but so are the bugs and all the problems of the product. Developing an Open Sourced project is not the same as developing a close source project - and Netscape has to realize that. I don't doubt Microsoft has the same problems with deadlines and the such, but they are not public (you can see this by comparing succesive versions of IE, such as 5.0, 5.01, 5.5 ...). And that's a big advantage, since if their product is buggy, nobody really knows it...
The fact is that if Netscape comes out with an unfinished and not close-to-perfection product, they don't stand a chance... Because all the bugs would be wide open to everyone to read about. Maybe they think there aren't many people looking in bugzilla for such things... I think they would be wrong, because if one person reads about the bugs and standad non-compliances, he/she would be capable to easily spread the word... and that would be the end for Netscape, . Not to mention web developers - they would surely came upon all those imperfections, and that might be just too much for them... since they already have too many browsers and versions to deal with. And not to mention Microsoft - my guess is they might lead a very adressive campaign if they feel their browser position is threatened, and every weakness in Netscape's product will be exploited.
The bottom line is that this is Netscape's last chance as a company, and if they don't bring a quasi-perfect product on the market, they're doomed...

Cotyso Bodea


November 10th, 2000   12:07 AM

I dont use netscape anymore - but if Netscape 6 is good I'll use it again and gladly. I design webpages and the bugs still in Netscape6 PR3 are not making it easier. Do it good, you won't get me using Netscape 6 if it's full of bugs.
break a leg, Don

Don Crowley


November 9th, 2000   11:31 PM

hey, open standards is "interesting".

But please don't rush through debug stage. NS keeps me and everyone who works for me up late at night.

Or how about this next time: make your browser default to being just like IE, if you can, for it is better (imho), and more readily integrated into other third-party apps. Face it, we only deal w/ NS on the level of courtesy and fairness, but it is becoming less and less cost-efficient...

Then, if you think you can do things that ie cannot, have that be added on and optional.

End user satisfaciton w/ your browser is heavily reliant on the developers who need to be able to figure it out w/in reason.

Thanks.

Faith Chiang


November 9th, 2000   11:08 PM

I agree with the update of the article. Netscape should not release a 6.0 before it is fully standard compliant.

As a web-developer, I know about the hell and frustration of browsers being slightly different than others. And then I am not talking about extra functionality added on top of the standards, but the implementation of the standards themselves.

And I detest using constructs like 'if (netscape)'.

I would be very pleased if all browser would be standards-compliant, so my nightmare would end.

Aschwin van der Woude


November 9th, 2000   10:47 PM

I am a technical manager for a web applications development team. Netscape browsers are absolutely inferior to Microsoft browsers. Netscape browsers suck, and people are finally starting to realize it. The sooner Netscape disappears, the sooner we can have properly behaving online applications which leverage ongoing standards efforts such as XML, XSLT, CSS, and even HTML!

If you can't deliver a decent product, don't deliver one at all (i.e. wake-up Nutscrape).

- Kevin

Kevin Silver


November 9th, 2000   10:24 PM

THINK STANDARDS!!!

It is a standard for a reason. So that we who develop can do so using the standards and expect our work to appear and function as we developed it.

I am so tired of doing work and then viewing it in NetTrash (Netscape) only to find text and Pictures everywhere except where I put them. Tables....Netscape.....HA HA HA HA HA.

Please focus on the standards issue. IT IS IMPORTANT.

David Hartsock


November 9th, 2000   10:24 PM

Isn't anyone paying attention nowadays? Netscape 6 is a netscape-badged version of Mozilla, a laudable open-source browser looking to become fully standards-compliant when the final version is released.

Netscape 6 has not been released yet. This is a preview we are talking about. Yes it has bugs, but i can't think of any ie release that didn't have bugs.

Perhaps Netscape is hurrying their release a little bit, but that doesn't mean we should say that it will fail standards compliance yet. IE itself is hardly w3c compliant in all respects, and if i want a web page to look good on ie, i have to to introduce quirks in the code to fit ie, which won't work on any other browser like netscape 4.x, opera, konquerer or even gecko.

No its not perfect, and no I don't think I will use Netscape 6 as my primary browser yet, but I will use mozilla (post netscape-release) and i know that their roadmap will look into all these details that you are lambasting them for.

All the best to the open-source effort. Long live Mozilla, and lets have a little less crap about lack of standards compliance.

Aditya Sengupta


November 9th, 2000   9:18 PM

As an outside Mozilla developer (working on accessibility of the project), I think Mozilla uses one of the coolest internal structures I have ever seen. However, something can be neat and useful, but if no one knows about it all the usefulness is lost.

We have to blame but ourselves for bad outreach. People outside the world who log on to our main Mozilla websites see a disconnected mass of information. We've simply done a poor job of describing what this beast can do!

With Mozilla, the user interface is the document. Everything is built on XML, CSS, DOM and Javascript. So not only is the web content inside the window based on standards, but the content outside the content window. Wow. If I was a company stuck in Win32, like Sonic Foundry, and I saw Linux, OS X and the TV platforms on the horizon I would want my software to be redigned using an OS-neutral, language-neutral platform. XUL is powerful enought to do that, and nothing before has. As cool as Konqueror is, it isn't cross platform. As cool as Swing is, it's not a standard or truly open source. XML, Javascript CSS & DOM are, and the engine running them all is open source, with a choice of licenses!

It's no wonder people don't understand - how can they when no vision has been put forth in any official place. We need to decide what the vision is, and implement the necessary connection to the public instead of expecting them to dig for it all. The better we are at teaching about Mozilla's true power, the more support and postiviteness we'll get.

Certain design decisions have been inadequately explained. I doubt people who complain about XUL being fluff understand the true potential here.

Finger pointing time is over. Let's work to show the world how awesome Mozilla is.

Aaron Leventhal


November 9th, 2000   9:13 PM

What the hell?... They are just crippling Netscape this way... :-(

Florin Andrei


November 9th, 2000   9:03 PM

The most infuriating developement of the internet is the divergence of standards between competing broswers and thier unsupported methods.

I think I speak for everyone when I say.. "you build something that works, and we'll ALL use it"


(i.e. for you schmucks @ Netscape - if you want your market share back, show us that you can surpass IE and we'll flock to you in the billions.)



Graham Robinson


November 9th, 2000   6:17 PM

This is scary. We already have a hard time supporting IE and Nav 4. I can see from the bugs listed in this article that we are going to have to jump through even more hoops in order to get our site working on Nav 6 if its released in this state. Please, I already spend enough long nights here at the office. I don't need any more.

Michael Mosier


November 9th, 2000   6:04 PM

Please incorporate the bug fixes and please do not release
the product except as a Mozilla 6.0-beta until it is compliant.

Release early and release often but call the spade a spade --
Mozilla is still Beta code.

Thanks.

-- kjh

Konrad J. Hambrick


November 9th, 2000   5:45 PM

I've used NS from the first release. Somewhere along the road I gave up surfing with it, simply because using a constantly crashing and freezing browser on the digital highway is as insane as riding on horseback over the Manhattan bridge.

I still use NS for testing purposes, but my standards have allready fallen to: as long as NS shows _anything_ it's good enough. The few NS-users that are left are hardly worth the costs and efforts in developing a site that really looks good with NS.

A release of NS6 that's as buggy as the latest pre-release and doesn't _fully_ supports the standards makes things a lot easier: why bother developing and testing for NS any longer? The last user will move to IE before the end of the year.

Piet de Geus


November 9th, 2000   5:23 PM

Thank you for the alternative to MS IE. Hoping to curtail virus infections, we'd like to avoid IE (as we also avoid LookOut ...err... OutLook). IF you can demonstrate Netscape 6 as a safer Browser - you might actually get people to pay a few dollars for each copy. IF you keep the costs low enough, many may buy just to avoid IE viruses and risk Netscape virus attacks.

thanks again,
keep up the good work,
enjoy,
Brandon Fouts
network admin.

Brandon Fouts


November 9th, 2000   5:23 PM

It boils down to this: We want to write HTML code once. We don't want to have to probe browsers. We want the browser to run our code so it works as the specification says it should. The specification didn't come out yesterday. Get it right. $0.02.

NoDak Curmudgeon


November 9th, 2000   4:58 PM

I think your right. If the bugs you reported realy exist then I beleive netscape should wait to release the product and just Get it Right. Thats the biggest problem of SoftWare today. The coding process gets rushed and released with way too many bugs. Also is Netscape not FREE??? if so, Then why do they care when the product officialy comes out...

Just a peice of my mind,
Westin Shafer

Westin Shafer


November 9th, 2000   4:33 PM

If Netscape 6.0 is not standards compliant, I will have to look towards another browser such as Mozilla, to run on my NT and Linux boxen. Currently, I run Netscape on both, but I'm thinking of upgrading when I upgrade to the Linux kernal 2.2.x on my Linux box. I prefer to avoid using IE on my NT box for obvious reasons.

Gavin Flower


November 9th, 2000   4:01 PM

Yes, please wait for your product to be stable before releasing it. I know of too many people who want to stick with IE now. Don't give them more reasons to not partake of a browser that supports multiple environments.

Mozilla and Netscape can be a great driving factor if it comes out and functions well. It will just wither and die if it comes out buggy.

Scott Hassel


November 9th, 2000   3:51 PM

I have always stuck with Netscape and think it is a product worth designing for. Please Netscape, give us a browser that we can once again use as our main platform in web design and coding... something that all the competitors will have to shoot for when developing their browsers.

Don't rush to release Netscape 6, or at least call it a beta version so that I won't have to worry about maintaining compatibility with a buggy release five years from now. Take the time to get this one right and fix the known bugs!

Chris Z.


November 9th, 2000   3:16 PM

Since Netscape has lost almost all of it's market share, I don't really bother to develop for it anymore. It's already a huge pain to make javascripts work in the big two (especially accross different versions) and I'm sure other languages that I haven't used are a pain as well.. Lets hope netscape 6.0 is as stupid as it looks and their percentage dwindles far enough so no one has to worry about accomidating their crappy browser anymore.

Paco Javy


November 9th, 2000   3:16 PM


kiowas72


November 9th, 2000   3:03 PM

This is really stupid, it is like going back to those dark days when we had to support both the browsers. As a web developer if netscape want me to support their browser they better be 100% compliant. By releasing a buggy version they may achive there release deadline but will delay everyone else's.

Rukesh Patel


November 9th, 2000   2:55 PM

I agree with David Flanagan. Netscape 6 is too important to the future of the web to be trifled with. As a web developer, I am prepared to wait a few more months to get a 100% standards-compliant browser. If Netscape is looking for support from the market before making such a decision, treat this as my contribution.

Years later, people will forget how late you shipped, but they will not forget if your released product had bugs. Remember Sybase System 10, the buggy "release" from which Sybase never recovered.

Ganesh Prasad


November 9th, 2000   2:50 PM

I completely agree: By naming the next release 6.0, Netscape is proclaiming "We have something new and wonderful here", the kind of thing that might make even people who don't normally use netscape say "Well, maybe they got it right this time". If they try it and still don't like it, you can bet they won't be upgrading to 6.1. Please, please, wait untill you have a quality product that won't dissapoint.

Jonathan Wilson


November 9th, 2000   2:50 PM

I completely agree: By naming the next release 6.0, Netscape is porclaiming "We have something new and wonderful here", the kind of thing that might make even people who don't normally use netscape say "Well, maybe they got it right this time". If they try it and still don't like it, you can bet they won't be upgrading to 6.1. Please, please, wait untill you have a quality product that won't dissapoint.

Jonathan Wilson


November 9th, 2000   2:42 PM

I don't want to loose my faith in Netscape so I agree.

Release it when it's ready. Do it the open source way!

Friedrich Lobenstock


November 9th, 2000   2:23 PM

I agree

Kaspar Houser


November 9th, 2000   2:01 PM

Best viewed with IE.

David Johnson


November 9th, 2000   1:51 PM

I was hoping that Navigator 6 would be the browser that led the way to standards compliance. If Netscape is willingly releasing a product that is not compliant, despite fixes for the problems being readily available, then they are just promoting the current situation -- browsers with separate implementations that need to be taken into account in web applications. Rise above this, and release 6.0 when it's ready!

Scott Hill


November 9th, 2000   1:23 PM

I work in a company that builds web apps that need to accomodate both browsers, and even worse yet, both Mac and PC. While some of the bugs listed are not necessarily what one would consider major showstoppers, it's been our experience that we spend a good portion of dev time (estimated at 1/3) making sure the functionality of the web applications is consistent across browsers and platforms.

It's distressing to me as a web programmer to know that amongst all the other tedious issues involved with getting consistent functionality, Netscape is considering to willingly release a version which will cause me to possibly toss one or more bugs on the growing pile of them which will require code work-arounds to make sure that stuff like cell padding doesn't affect our users' experience, depending on which brower they use.

Ibra Bordsen


November 9th, 2000   12:44 PM

To the PDT- You should know better!

I would like to use Navigator as my browser but at the moment I just use it for checking that my pages look half decent with it.

Anthony Geoghegan


November 9th, 2000   11:58 AM

If NN6 ships with bugs that affect the rendering of pages using standard DHTML/JavaScript practices, its market viability will drop through the floor. Microsoft has had a vastly superior browser for years. The time has come to either fish or cut bait. Releasing a browser that is inferior to IE is suicide.

Brock Jones


November 9th, 2000   11:49 AM

As a developer who has been working on the web for years I originally started out with netscape and held out against IE for a long time. Eventually I realised I was only hurting myself and my customers and switched.

After all this time of trying to support this shoddy piece of software I now give up completely. I will not write _any_ code to support netscape again. If people insist on using it and complain about my sites I will explain to them _why_.

As many people have said on here - do it right or don't bother.

Dave Kelly


November 9th, 2000   11:08 AM

I have used Netscape since 1994, and have refused to use anything else. I am currently using 4.76. I work for a very large canadian phone company who's entire intranet is based on Netscape communicator.



As of the next release, I will not run a Netscape branded browser if it turns out to be the garbage it is now. And I will gladly recommend my opinion as fact to all.



Thank you

D. C.


November 9th, 2000   9:51 AM


There isn't much more to say. It's pretty obvious to me, without true standards compliance, developers will continue to ignore Netscape. Mozilla may live on to some degree, but AOL will effectively destroy the Netscape name brand if they continue on this course.

Chris Felaco


November 9th, 2000   9:42 AM

I am so tired of having to write dumbed down code for the people who still cling to their Netscape browser. It was so exciting to think that Netscape was finally going to release a decent browser and allow the field of web development to move forward.

Silly us to believe that.

Carrie Gordon


November 9th, 2000   9:25 AM

Could it be that Netscape hasn't noticed that it's number 2 in an essentially 2-horse race? Many developers I know (not necessarily the ones I prefer to work with) don't even consider Netscape important any more and only test in Netscape if required to do so.

Netscape's only hope in remaining viable is to deliver a fully compliant browser after having promised one. Disappointing their market at this point may be, if not suicidal, evidence of having lost the will to live.

Ray Gulick


November 9th, 2000   9:25 AM

Could it be that Netscape hasn't noticed that it's number 2 in an essentially 2-horse race? Many developers I know (not necessarily the ones I prefer to work with) don't even consider Netscape important any more and only test in Netscape if required to do so.

Netscape's only hope in remaining viable is to deliver a fully compliant browser after having promising one. Disappointing their market at this point may be, if not suicidal, evidence of having lost the will to live.

Ray Gulick


November 9th, 2000   9:13 AM

I would like to say that, as a professional web developer ( dealing specifically with clientside GUI design, javascript, css, dhtml, etc.), I have been consistently frustrated by netscapes history of noncompliance with standards. NS 4 & all subsequent versions thus far are fussy and intolerant of such simple things as the DOM and even little things like adding style attributes to td's that work. Another annoyance is that Netscape, while being one of the driving forces behind javascript, has a browser that is less flexible in it's treatment of said scripting language than microsoft's. That is an embarrassment. Don't go off half cocked, as you have in the past. Make sure NS 6 is compliant with javascript,css,dom,dhtml, and will at least validate xml dtd's BEFORE you release it for public use. Otherwise you will seriously alienate developers like me, eager to take advantage of the latest goodies, and further contribute to my animosity towards your browser. This is one of the few areas I can think of where MS's solution is actually the best.. It is much more flexible and allows much richer manipulation of tags and attributes as well as a more complete object model ( that treats EVERY element as an object that can manipulated ).

-John Mellberg
Web Developer

John Mellberg


November 9th, 2000   9:11 AM

As a web developer, I have enough trouble already making sure that my code works the same way, or as close to similar as possible, in the various browsers and versions of browsers that are out there. I've been looking forward to Netscape 6 simply because it has been told to me that many things that IE is capable of will now be possible in Netscape (which means, to a certain degree, less "match up" code for me to do). However, I'm now hearing that Netscape 6 is failing to meet certain standards, which means more coding, debugging, and time for me. Please, please, please do not rush this product!!! It has the potential for greatness, and I'm sure I'm not the only one who would be willing to wait a little longer for a nice, robust product. Thank you.

Kerry Coffman


November 9th, 2000   8:23 AM

I am a professional Web Site Developer for a "big dog" company (One that hasn't eaten it in recent months, nor will any time soon) and I am also a graduate student in Human Computer Interaction at DePaul University. I think that I can speak to the need for getting things to the level that they can and should be, but I make no promises on spelling! While I would love to have a browser which is standard and compliant, for my own sanity, there are greater issues. Namely, putting out a product which will begin to raise the level of expectations for consumers about what they should be getting. If half the cars in this country were sold with all of their turn signal levers and various other devices in various places, there would be an outcry. This is nothing less. Let NS and IE augment their browsers cosmetically and with whatever embellishments they wish. If they want to throw in stock tickers and whatnot, that's fine, but please, get the basics to where they should be. The differences should be in what is elective, not in how the browsers fundamentally work.
Thanks,
Sammy

Sam Spicer


November 9th, 2000   8:12 AM

PLEASE NOT AGAIN!

I'm not sure if I would describe these Netscape bugs as crippling to my career as a web developer (unlike the shambles that was Netscape v4!) but we have all been waiting a long time for the glory days of cross-browser compatibility and many of us are sick sick sick of writing reams and reams of branching code and finding amazing ways of getting round inadequacies in browser support only to find that it invalidates other areas that were assuredly supported.



Remain true to your programmer's code and make it 100%, not 99% standard.

Ben Caesar


November 9th, 2000   8:09 AM

I'm a long-time Netscape user (now on 4.75) and would definitely
prefer to wait a while longer if it would result in a more stable
Rel 6.x product. It is to everyone's benefit to see Netscape once
again viewed as a superior browser.

Steve Kreuzburg


November 9th, 2000   7:55 AM

I would like netscape to be as best as it can be. Not because I don't like IE, but |_inuX needs a browser!

andrejoid


November 9th, 2000   7:12 AM

As a developer I found it extremely frustrating to conclude that making a website Netscape-compliant takes about as much time as it takes to develop all the ASP, Java, and JavaScript on which most of the sites I build are founded. If Netscape 6 is indeed released as the piece of crap that it is at the moment, I think we'll have to make the decision to let customers know that we won't go through the trouble of building their sites to be Netscape-compatible; and that's a sad thing, as I think I speak for everybody at my company when I say that we all hated to switch to IExplorer several years ago when Netscape became unusable... Everybody here had hoped to be able to start using Netscape again one day, but alas,...

Apparently Netscape has different plans, for nobody in his/her right mind, not even MicroSoft, would release a useless piece of shit like Navigator 6 in it's current state, unless it's all part of a greater scheme...

Yiri T. Kohl


November 9th, 2000   6:54 AM

Netscape 6 will be the most standards-compliant browser on the planet when it is finished by any objective measure. I find the headline on this article to be misleading and request that Tim O'Reilly or staff fix it.

Netscape: Please finish Netscape 6. Thank you for listening to the WSP when they encouraged you to move to Gecko. Don't switch now, just before your success.


djo

David Orme


November 9th, 2000   6:40 AM

I am working on a browser based site application that has always intended to support IE and Netscape. This will most certainly change that directive.

My work site with over 3500 employees currently lists Netscape as the supported browser of choice. Many have already been working to change to IE.

I've already seen many customer sites switch from a Netscape to IE preference.

A release of 6.0 with this many known and ignored issues should prove to be the final nail in the coffin.

Too bad the paper pushers don't have a clue...

David Card


November 9th, 2000   6:35 AM

Do it right, or don't do it at all. As a developer, I have all but given up on worrying about "Netscape Compliance," but I will have major propblems if I have to worry next about "Netscape 4x Compliance," and "Netscape 6 Compliance!"

Jeremy Kane


November 9th, 2000   6:01 AM

As of Netscape 6.0 pr3, this software is NOT ready.I am a developer and a user. I have been trying to use Netscape 6 pr1, pr2, pr3 - exclusively. I have purposely limited myself to using this browser and email program. There are web pages that I have sent in that crash the browser or totally lock it up. Software that is crashing regularly should by definition be not ready to ship.

TOMMY COX


November 9th, 2000   5:57 AM

I was dismayed to find that NS6 doesn't appear to support the 'true doc'
embedded font technology. Wasn't this something that Netscape came up with
themselves (with Bitstream)? I like Bitstreams 'Web Font Wizard', at least it
worked for me (which is more than I can say for Microsoft's WEFT), I'd probably
buy this software but if it doesn't work with future versions of Netscape why
on earth should I?

David Grant


November 9th, 2000   5:52 AM

If the software does not work, it does not matter how soon it gets shipped.
Fix the major issues, or fall to Redmond...

Jeff Lumley


November 9th, 2000   5:05 AM

I agree with the article version 2 of Flanagan.

Hope PDT will slip the release date.

a++;

Gilles DUMORTIER


November 9th, 2000   4:53 AM

I`m not a friend from microsoft products but IE is for me the better browser, especially in the XML environments. Be aware the standards (W3C) !!!!

Oliver Wick


November 9th, 2000   4:07 AM

As a developer who had to deal with the 4.x browser mess of past, I think Netscape lost the browser war not because of Microsoft's abuse, but because Netscape 4.x was so bug ridden that developers gave up on it and pushed corporate clients to abandon it. I'm willing to give Netscape one more chance to get it right. Blow it this time and it's over.

Howard Keziah


November 9th, 2000   3:56 AM

First thanks for all the great standards compliance work you have allready done. Second please dont screw it up by leaving gaps, I will not use Netscape if you mess this release up. I know people who are depending on it being 100% standards compliant and are using it as a develpment platform. At the moment they are livid and intend to stop using it if you continue to break the standards in this way.

Andy

Andrew Barnes


November 9th, 2000   3:35 AM

Greetings,
Please wait to release a "final" version of Netscape 6 until it meets all the standards of HTML, CSS, Java, XML, and DOM.
One of the reasons that I have been anxiously waiting for Netscape 6 is that it was to adhere to the standards. If it does not do so, I doubt that I will waste my time with it.
Thus far, I have been unable to test any pre-release version of Netscape 6 (except for PR1) as the install has failed on my machine.
Even some of the simplest things seems to still be out of whack (when using a friend's PR2 version). One of the obvious ones is that if you set a cascading style sheet (CSS) to use a large font (say point size 24) for anchored text (as in a hyperlink), the underline is through the text making it look like strikeout text.
PLEASE don't release Netscape 6 if it does not meet the recognized standards.

Brian Bell


November 9th, 2000   2:46 AM

It's bad for the web if Microsoft get a browser monopoly. Make Netscape 6 fully standards compliant and as bug-free as possible so that there is an overwhelming reason to use it.

David Leader


November 9th, 2000   2:08 AM

I think everyone signing this petition really believed Netscape 6 would be truly standards compliant. In light of the knowledge that you started over from scratch to create a fully compliant browser, "most compliant" is a real let-down.

We all, individually and collectively, would have benefited so much, it is difficult for me to imagine you are about to release a compromised NS6 !

Please consider again holding off on release until your product is truly standards compliant.

Thank you, Steven Dahout

Steven Dahout


November 9th, 2000   1:30 AM

Netscape has, and always will be, a third rate product. These are sad times we live in, when an ambitious project can't compete with microsoft.

Sadder still, is that Internet Explorer is a better developed, tighter coded package than netscape may ever be. See what happens when AOL buys things?

Benjamin Kuz


November 9th, 2000   1:12 AM

I won't use a lower-quality product and my choice doesn't depend on the version-numeration. I used to use Netscape 1-2 years before but Microsofts IE became better than Netscape, so I started to use both products. At the point of time
as I heard from the "What's related" - snooping, I stopped using Netscape.
AOL is the wrong firm for that product,too, I think , they'll try to take every chance to snoop with their products, and in my eyes they have a humble reputation, like Microsoft.

Arne Wolf Koesling


November 9th, 2000   12:47 AM

I think, that this behaviour of Netscape is like Microsoft's. It needs time to correct the mistakes in the main source, when some bugs can be found.

Vojtech Kysela


November 9th, 2000   12:37 AM

I'm a web developer for one of the largest Air Force bases outside the United States. I've stuck with Netscape since I got on the web, and have always designed with it in mind, but my duties now require me to design for Internet Explorer as well, since most of our users use it instead.


The biggest pain is having to design for both. I understand that feature bloat happens, but the standards are there for a reason. If you ship Navigator 6 without full standards support, you will lose the few developers you still have.


Please note my opinions are my own, not those of the United States Air Force.

A1C Jeffrey Spaulding


November 9th, 2000   12:32 AM

I really need a _good_ browswer, not just some IE-like junk...

Adrian Kollarovics


November 9th, 2000   12:06 AM

I won't use this banana-software... It's everybody's own decision, N. is not the only browser.

Dirk Vogel


November 8th, 2000   11:54 PM

Think twice ,please!

Richard Waneyvin


November 8th, 2000   11:53 PM

Cooooome onnnnnnn.

Patrick Kelleher


November 8th, 2000   9:36 PM

Netscape 6.0 should be very, very good not to be overwhelmed by open source Mozilla, which benefits from its open source state. There should be a good browser for all major platforms (Linux, Un*x, Win etc.) and if it's not Netscape, it's Mozilla. So far, Netscape is competition for MSIE, and I pray it remains so.

Ondrej Krajicek


November 8th, 2000   8:51 PM

I am an university instructor and use the Web extensively in my teaching. I don't have time to create multiple versions of Web pages or to think up work-arounds for browser bugs which shouldn't exist in the first place. I prefer Netscape just because it seems to be more intuitive to use than IE, and my students seem to have the same preference.

Netscape, my point is this: if you don't fix the bugs, you'll alienate a very important clientile: college professors and students. Nobody wants buggy software: that's part of the reason some consumers dislike Microsoft. Since you already have patches for some of these bugs, for goodness' sake, come to your senses, and implement those patches! As for the rest of the bugs that you do not have patches for yet, we would be willing to wait longer for those to be resolved, too.

Your only weapon against Microsoft is perfection since the Evil Empire seems to have you beat at everything else, including marketing.

F. Vance Neill


November 8th, 2000   8:30 PM

As a web developper i'm tired of trying alaways non-compliant tricks to do things in netscape. If netscape 6 gets worse in terms of non-compliance they are toasted.

calixto davila


November 8th, 2000   8:20 PM


To the controlling factors in Netscape:

By all means, release a robust browser.
Your supporters have placed a lot of faith into
the work of Mozilla and the principles it represents.

Mass distribution of a bug-ridden browser which fails
to raise the bar in compliance will set Netscape far
behind Internet Explorer.

With the weak foundation of 4.6x, Mozilla is truly
the last hope of competitive browser technology.

With the underperformance of the PR1 and PR2 releases,
the official release -- whenever that may come -- must
be a STRONG showing. Stable to the end-users and
inviting to developers.


-- Eric J. Bragger

Eric Bragger


November 8th, 2000   7:35 PM

netscape, you guys are idiots if you do not produce a standards complient browser! that is your ONLY hope to fight microsoft and stay alive. otherwise, i might as well use IE, and so will everyone else.

kevin walchko


November 8th, 2000   6:56 PM

Indeed, we have waited a long time for this release.

So long that, indeed, it is well worth now going the extra mile and waiting for
a finished product from Netscape.

Navigator 4.5+ had a lot of bugs. Too many bugs for a non-beta product. I have personally programmed this browser for over a year and see how much better the product from Microsoft is in almost every category, in quantum terms.

Please do not do this to us again. We are tired of it.

Please make the next release of Netscape6 a beta and wait to finish the job.

-Thanks,
Chris Balz.

Christopher M. Balz


November 8th, 2000   6:49 PM

Netscape is being put to a painful, public death.

Mike Brown


November 8th, 2000   6:00 PM

Common now:

You've got the wrong focus. Stop being a tunnel-visioned manager and look around. You're focus should be on product correctness not on meeting a deadline. The world is not going to end if you don't meet the deadline. It will end if you put out a product that does not work correctly.

Michael LoJacono


November 8th, 2000   5:24 PM

Corporate arrogance and blatant marketing stupididy appears to be NNs project development team's modus operandi. I don't understand it.

All I can do is echo the majority opinion of previous comments concerning the frustration of building web pages that are cross-browser compatible and meet current web coding standards. Microsoft and Opera obviously understand these issues and attempt to design their products accordingly. They may not be perfect, but they work in ways that NN only wishes it could. Why would someone who wants to be a realistic competitor in today's browser market not try to match (if not beat) their major competitors ability to meet these generally accepted standards and capabilities?

Netscape, if you want a competitive product, you've got to pull your collective corporate and PDT heads out of your dorsal posterior expulsion valves and get with the program (literally and figuratively). Right now, you're looking more and more like the latest software version of the Edsel of yore.

David R. Perl


November 8th, 2000   5:19 PM

My biggest concern is that we get a great product from Netscape. As a devout Linux user and anti-Microsoft enthusiast (although I disagree with the Justice department lawsuit), it pains me greatly to admit that Microsoft's Internet Explorer is really a better browser with much more functionality.

I agree with David's article, and hope the Netscape development team will take it to heart. They need to take their time and give us the best browser possible. I am very anxious to retract my previous statements.

Jerry Read


November 8th, 2000   5:08 PM

As a professional developer I expect, and need standards in order to develop good, robust applications.

Some standards, such as CICS, SQL and even QWERTY keyboards may have developed from closed organisations - but they have value

Netscape and Microsoft have been facing off over who provides better standards support, and currently it seems that the race has been won my Microsoft - not because their product is perfect, but because it provides a good, stable development platform for developers with no nasty surprises, and no missing functionality.
Currently the best way to build a site that works on both platforms is either to build two code bases to support object models and implementations that have little overlap, or simply develop for IE and if it works in Netscape good, if not... direct people to download a browser that works !

NN6 / IE5.5 ? Personally I don't care what my users choose, but I want to not care when I'm developing

Jeremy E Cath


November 8th, 2000   4:53 PM

I think this idea that "the browser wars are over" misses the real importance of what Netscape is capable of providing to AOL.

In the near term, marketing Netscape as browser should be a means to an end.

The means should be using an open source application that everyone understands and needs as a delivery mechanism for deploying, in essence, a new operating system.

The ends (for Netscape) should be building products and services on top of this open platform. Stuff like, say, AOL 7.0, fancy thick-client 3D MUDs, etc.

Think about it: Mozilla provides a lot of the stuff that .NET does -- good XML/DOM technology, SOAP-style RPC, net-plumbing, a multi-language interface, etc. A lot of this stuff is the kind of thing that the open-source community will plausibly contribute to, and in novel ways.

In any case, it doesn't accomplish anything for AOL if people decide that
Netscape is buggy or is weakly-interested in standards compliance.
I think people have to like it.






Marcus Daniels


November 8th, 2000   4:38 PM

I have been doing web design for 5 years, and development for 3..

Although its true I do it as a career, and do get paid for it, primarily i am developing and designing because I love doing it, its is a hobby... the most frusterating thing that can happen is getting all excited about a project, sitting down getting ready to hammer out a beautiful webpage with amazing functionality, interactivity, and clean looks .. only to get discouraged when you start on your first page and realize all the stuff you are planning on doing wont work as is in netscape, and youll have to spend hours of grunt work finding a way to force netscape to at least display the page in a usable, if not elegant, way.

Well fuck that. I dont care for netscape.. I Design because I enjoy it. I dont enjoy slaving away to make my pages work in netscape. so why should, or would I?

Honestly I dont care if netscape fucks this up or not, it makes no diffrence to me - however if they release Netscape 6, as a browser that properly displays my page, then "Mad props to netscape".

Jer


November 8th, 2000   4:36 PM

Standards compliance is crucial. In the past, you have criticized Microsoft for failing to meet standards (i.e. DOM). Now this. Please please PLEASE fix these problems before releasing NS 6.0!

"Hypocrisy" is a nasty word. Don't give people an excuse to use it against you.

David Rowell
Sr. Site Developer
Sapient Corporation

David Rowell


November 8th, 2000   4:12 PM

grrr...I can't believe this is turning out to be such a mess! Is it really that hard for browser makers to say "The DOM includes this, so let's make sure that it's supported."??? Mozilla's Open Source system (while still a pretty good idea) will always be inherently flawed so long as the product is ultimately being determined by a for-profit company such as Time-Warner.

Dan Burrowes


November 8th, 2000   3:43 PM

Same as above.

Jacqueline Belick


November 8th, 2000   3:41 PM

If NN6 is released without fixes, web developers will stop catering to it at all. Expect more NN users to be redirected to an IE download page.

Anonymous


November 8th, 2000   3:21 PM

Irate web developers: If the release of NS6 bothers you, then ignore it. Let the few NS6 users that wander by your site look at an ugly page, go back to NS4, or leave your site forever - that's your perogative. Don't try to keep NS6 from those who really care. The Internet is harsh, people!

David K. Gasaway


November 8th, 2000   3:04 PM

Netscape already has Mozilla, there is no reason to release "Betas" of Netscape 6 when all they are is a milestone build of Mozilla with a few license and naming changes. Netscape should continue to release versions of Mozilla, but without the claims that it is a finished product until it actually reaches such qualifications accordint to Mozilla's own standards.

Matt Heinzen


November 8th, 2000   2:37 PM

-November 8th, 2000 10:40 AM




Web developers need to come to grips with the real state of affairs in the web world. Things have been quite comfortable for them for a while. But truth is, new releases can break existing code - it's happened before, and will happen again. Sure, your code might be standards-compliant, but it also tip-toes around compliance issues in current browsers. Netscape 6 is more compliant that any other browser - learn to fit in the new features that work, and you'll be doing great!



Personally, I avoid sites that use MSIE-only features abusively, so if want to reach the absolute maximum users, you'd better cope. The cases where a site needs a MSIE feature to build or maintain a userbase are rare.



Many important NS6 fixes will come later, but don't try to hold it back. The initial release may not win people back from MSIE, but that's okay. At this point, Netscape is almost stuck in a power-user niche, so they can handle it. Other users may not be knowledgeable, but they're probably at least strong Netscape supporters. If they don't like NS6, they can go back to NS4 and probably won't give a thought to MSIE.



David K. Gasaway




In actuality, Netscape isn't really stuck in a 'power-user' niche persay. But it is really setting itself up to be a 'legacy' browser. Which means the number of loyal netscape users can only really continue to fall.


I think there are generally 3 groups of people using netscape.



1. Those who hate microsoft for whatever reason.

2. Those who *have* to use it to ensure compatibility when developing.

3. Those who don't know the differences between IE and Netscape.



If the average user really knew how much more capable IE is than Netscape, it would literally cut its client base in half.

Gregory T. Loker


November 8th, 2000   2:36 PM

Well ... I'm using Windows and Mac Systems and (right now) NN6-- really sucks toxic waste.

Erik Schmidt


November 8th, 2000   2:36 PM

Ok,
First off I make many web sites and have noticed many problems whith NS6. One of the biggest ones is it's failure to comply with CSS it does not support different coloured links, it does not support the hover function, and it doesn't support specific fonts. Im sure there are other problems with CSS that I have missed. What is up with the roll over images they dont work properly and take a minute to appear then they turn into broken images.

The support of DHTML is also making things hard to do. I DONT CARE IF IT WAS INVENTED BY MICROSOFT THEY SHOULD STILL SUPPORT IT PROPERLY BECAUSE MANY PEOPLE USE IT

My web site bizcents.com displays fine in NS4.x and IE4.x+ but in NS6 a bunch of the cells are really wide, the DHTML menus dont work, spacing is really messed up, roll over images dont work. Im going to have to make a special version for NS6.

Overall I think that NS6 is going to be great but they have to get many things worked out.

Jeff Hume

Jeff Hume


November 8th, 2000   2:34 PM

As a webdeveloper, I'd vote for Netscape to take a little longer and get the standards compliance right.

You've waited this long and now your first release will be an important event. Get it right or you'll only dig your present hole deeper.

Besides, the more times you release buggy updates, the more kludges we, the developers, have to support since many users won't be up to date. Already we still have to support Netscape v3, v4.x and MSIE v3, all with serious problems. Please don't make NS 6.0 another problem on our list.

Jeff Wilkinson


November 8th, 2000   2:01 PM

Arg.

I've been doing web development for almost all of my programming career. Back in the olden days, NS was FAR superior to IE. Let's face it, in many ways NS was the 'killer app' of the internet. Now, I (and probably most other web developers) HATE it. It's horrible to code for. It creates SO much extra work. I held out hope that NS 6 would solve these problems and FINALLY allow us to take advantage of all the great feature/specifications that are supposed to be standardized, but instead it looks like we'll all have to create even more bloated HTML 3 code since NS feels it's ok to release a broken browser again. It's sad when a solution doesn't solve any problems, just creates more.

NS pointy haired managers! Listen up! By breaking your pact with the development community and releasing a browser that doesn't live up to either it's promise, or your companies promises, you further alienate us and FORCE us to code for the ONLY WIDLY AVAILABLE COMMERCIAL BROWSER THAT WORKS --> IE. We all want to see NS 6 succeed! I believe it's not only a test for NS, but in some ways a test of the whole open source paradigm! DON'T LET DOWN THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE STOOD BY YOU! YOU'RE ALIENATING ALL THAT YOU'VE GOT LEFT!


I hope this gets read in IE. It would be a pity if the petition couldn't be read because the reader was using a broken browser.

Joe Maisel


November 8th, 2000   1:52 PM

Point NS6b at http://www.webreference.com/js/tips/000907.html and notice how the example does not work as expected. Take IE there to see it work.

Gary Keim


November 8th, 2000   1:42 PM

Every day people ask me, "Why doesn't this page look as good in Netscape?" Or ,"Why doesn't this page work like it does in Explorer?"

And every day I say, "Because Netscape sucks."

What else can I say?

Netscape is a limited product. All web developers know it and live with it every day. How many times have you cringed when you discover that a client is having problems with a site you designed because they're using Netscape.

But I'm not going to Bad-Mouth Netscape. I want Netscape to succeed. I want N6 to blow everyone away. I can only assume that Netscape is in financial dire straits, and they need to get N6 out now.

Furthermore, I can only pray that they come to realize that putting out ANOTHER substandard product will do more harm than good.

With the kind of careless management they seem to be under(aol), it's only a matter of time before we all bow our heads and have a moment of silence while netscape is put to rest.

Trent Navillus

Trent Navillus


November 8th, 2000   1:25 PM

I strongly urge Netscape to follow Mr. Flanangan's recommendations.


The company I work for already avoids using Netscape whenever possible due to standards compliance issues. If Netscape 6 ships with such egregious bugs as failure to be compatible with existing HTML (the DL in DD example), or other base level DOM compliance issues, especially those with ready fixes, than I can only imagine that we will move further from supporting Netscape. And once we go, it is almost impossible to come back.


Please understand that it is not an issue of loyalty to one browser or the other, but an issue of time and money. We simply cannot afford to write two different versions of everything, let alone go back through all our existing web code and "fix" things that used to work. This means our choices are to go with the lowest common denominator, or abandon one platform. Since our users want the best UI, the most features, etc. and we want to produce the most with the least effort, that mean we look for standards.


I understand that these are relatively minor issues compared to the overall progress in making Netscape standards compliant (if not more so than anyone else). But management may not. What they will see, from developers, from QA, from the news, is that Netscape failed to comply with (some) standards, and that it is not compatible with (some) existing HTML. And they will shy away.


Further, it seems to me that you are abandoning the very things that make an open source software project stronger than other methodologies - that important problems can be recognized and fixed relatively quickly. Don't abandon the work of the people who make Netscape 6/Mozilla possible. We've waited already. We can wait a little longer. Please make it worth the wait.

Eric Anderson


November 8th, 2000   1:15 PM

These bugs prevents many users to use Netscape 6.0, many of the websites use dynamic javascript links

Srini


November 8th, 2000   1:15 PM

These bugs prevents many users to use Netscape 6.0, many of the websites use dynamic javascript links

Srini


November 8th, 2000   1:14 PM

These bugs prevents many users to use Netscape 6.0, many of the websites use dynamic javascript links

Srini


November 8th, 2000   1:00 PM


My name is Stephen, and for two years now I have been studying HTML, CSS, and Javascript. Internet Explorer has been my browser of choice for several reasons:



  1. They have a much more fully featured DOM, from my perspective, and Netscape's seeming refusal to implement a better one only encourages me to continue learning, using, and developing for Internet Explorer.

    The thought that Netscape will be releasing a brand new DOM for their version 6 browser only makes life that much harder for web developers.</li>
  2. Netscape and Internet Explorer have very different implementations of basic HTML. While I don't have the time to compile a list, I will say that having to implement CSS in order to set basic HTML attributes shouldn't be necessary, and this more often than not happens in Netscape browsers.</li>
  3. Netscape's implementation of CSS is nowhere near as complete as Internet Explorer's. On occasions where I have been able to do something really spectacular in Internet Explorer utilizing CSS, that same feat will either work poorly or won't work at all in Netscape's browser, often causing it to crash.</li>

This is only a short list of things that irritate me about Netscape, but if I had hours to spend at the keyboard, there wouldn't be a moment without typing. While others have argued these points better that I have, I hope that this will help make a difference.

Stephen Hock


November 8th, 2000   12:22 PM

I personally gave up designing pages to work in netscape about 4 months ago. It was right about the time I finally got fed up with all the errors I was getting using the program and switched over to IE, prior to that point I was completely pro NS. Now I try to convince all my friends to switch over to IE whenever I get the chance.

I work for a webhosting company in Masachusetts and if a page works in IE but not in NS we really don't care. It costs way too much, in time, effort, and money to try and code a page or app to work properly on IE and NS. If NS would simply stick to the standards and apply the bug fixes I think I would use their browser again, but as it stands now it is a complete waste of my time.

In my opinion NS is becoming to web browsers as AOL is to ISP's, the only people who use it are too ignorant to realize there are better options out there.

That's my two cents.

Craig Henderson


November 8th, 2000   12:21 PM

I find it totally ridiculous to think Netscape would publish 6.0 without being compliant. What is the point? Is Netscape purposely trying to alienate its users. There are some that are only holding onto their loyalty by their fingernails and others that finally let go.

Netscape has some great features but if both IE and Netscape can't get their acts together to be compliant many web developers won't have a hair left on their heads.

Sarud Jamal


November 8th, 2000   12:16 PM

I agree that for me this is Netscape's last chance to make a good product.
If Netscape 6.0 is non-standard compliant or buggy, I will be forced
to look to a competitor for my browser.

Please take the time and energy to improve Netscape 6.0 and
make it standards compliant.

I'm willing to wait for a superior product.

Terry Carruthers


November 8th, 2000   12:15 PM

We no longer feel Netscape has or will have enough market share to warrant writing multiple versions of our site. Netscape 6 PR3 still does not run JavaScript correctly (DOM support is awefull). IE has overtaken Netscape 92% to 7%. We currently filter out most DHTML for Netscape and give them the simple version.

Steven Roussey


November 8th, 2000   12:10 PM

Not only am I a developer, I teach web design. For the past year or so I've had to disappoint my advanced students time and again with "here's this great feature, but you can't use it if you're developing for Netscape." The groans are audible every single time -- people want something that can not just stand up to MSIE, but beat it back into the ground. But I always had a ray of hope to offer -- "Just wait for Netscape 6"...

... so much for that hope.

I don't care who gets the market share -- I care about being able to design to a set of standards, not the whims of some corporate hack project manager who makes the decisions of what stays and what goes according to the company's bottom-line. I can't believe that the developers at Netscape or at Microsoft actually want to serve up what their companies expect us to swallow without complaint ... they must have the worst jobs in the world right now. To have standards, to have solutions, and to be told not to implement them. I don't think I could stay in a job like that.

For the longest time now, the 'experts' in our community have been hailing Netscape 6 and Gecko as the product by which all others will be judged. How wrong were they to put their faith and the weight of their names behind this?

Perhaps its time to look to Opera and iCab for some leadership -- there certainly doesn't seem to be any company on this side of the Atlantic that has the courage to demand quality and deliver quality.

Netscape, you have a great shot at making the web a better place both for users and developers, but only if you stick to the standards. Forget about backwards compatibility -- MSIE has taken some giant steps backwards in that department and has gotten properly flamed for doing so. Stick to the standards, and deliver on the standards.

Bob Boyle


November 8th, 2000   12:08 PM

Please fix this stuff. I as well as the other developers at my company believe this is vital to the success of this product and to netscape in general.

Brant Boehmann


November 8th, 2000   12:07 PM

I'm truley hurt by the news. I have argued that Netscape is better then IE for a long time and have been awaiting the killer product that will hopefully settle the argument once and for all. It apears like that will not happen anytime soon. I have always liked netscape but as javascript becomes more and more used then the need to support it becomes more important. Please fix the release and don't make me a liar.

Patrick Fisk


November 8th, 2000   12:03 PM

As I have been trying to increase the use of CSS in my web applications, I have been very frustrated by the number of times Netscape Navigator fails to implement agreed standards. This has caused a lot of extra work, and some of the CSS standards seem unworkable in Netscape. Please wait until these sort of bugs have been fixed, then release a version that will make a decent contribution.

Peter Bennett


November 8th, 2000   11:58 AM

Like David said, this is Netscape's last chance to make a good product. I'm more than willing to wait for a superior product. Make the changes guys.

Matthew Hinton


November 8th, 2000   11:40 AM

I would rather wait and pay for a standards compliant browser than to see an inferior product released. We've waited this long. Please incorporate the bug fixes.

george tucker


November 8th, 2000   11:38 AM

Please, oh please, make sure 6.0 is compliant before release! I've fought these particular inconsistencies for years now.

Daniel Lautenschleger


November 8th, 2000   11:28 AM

I hate buggy software - so please - take the time to eliminate the errors in the navigator

Erich Weber


November 8th, 2000   11:22 AM

I've been doing web/graphic development for only 1 year, but I've already developed an extreme dislike for Netscape browsers and the hack code I have to write to ensure cross-browser compatability with IE. I've spent many additional hours changing the code so that it works in IE as well as NS. I've grown tired of having to rewrite sometimes entire pages because the few developers on the Netscape team feel that it's not important to adhere to the standards that thousands of developers use.

I was excited for NS6.0 to come out, hoping that the majority of the anti-standard bugs would be fixed. I'm in great dismay to hear that Netscape refuses to apply ready-to-go patches to bugs which they know exist. If NS6.0 is as buggy as I'm guessing it'll be, I may decide to stop coding for NS compatability all together. I'm tired of staying up till 2 in the morning for the soul fact of fixing things that don't work in NS, but work flawless in IE. And I refuse to stay up any more late nights because some hack team of "developers" decide the only thing worth developing is something to piss off every Webauthor in the world.

I have better things to do than be inefficient and unproductive for my clients because NS doesn't care about the world-wide community of web developers.

Ryan Baldwin


November 8th, 2000   11:18 AM

As a "Web Developer" the MOST important thing to me is
does it comply with the most popular browsers out there.
Right now IE has ilke approx 80%-90% of the market share.

The why is not the issue. This is just a fact. The only
thing that could grab any market share from Microsoft's IE
would be a ground breaking Browser that is easier to use,
offered more features, was backward and present compliant
and something that would extend the standards into something
that is desirable(Like IE ActiveX automatically downloaded
plugins).

NS6.0 is offering no of these. I guess they don't want a
market share... Hrmph... sad.

Christopher Holmok


November 8th, 2000   11:15 AM

Netscape,
Nobody was forcing you to rush Netscape 6 out the door, so why did you? You had a loyal following of people who were willing to wait -and wanted to wait- until you got it right. Internet users are tired of being expected to use products that are only half-completed. Web developers are even more tired of having to code work-arounds for every Netscape bug. Finally you had the oppurtunity and the support to do it right but you were still too concerned about time. Please don't ship this until it's ready.

-kris


November 8th, 2000   11:15 AM

I've been doing web/graphic development for only 1 year, but I've already developed an extreme dislike for Netscape browsers and the hack code I have to write to ensure the cross-browser compatability with IE. I've spent many additional hours changing the code so that it works in IE as well as NS. I've grown tired of having to rewrite sometimes entire pages because the few developers on the Netscape team feel that it's not important to adhere to the standards that thousands of developers use.

I was excited for NS6.0 to come out, hoping that the majority of the anti-standard bugs would be fixed. I'm in great dismay to hear that Netscape refuses to apply ready-to-go patches to bugs which they know exists. If NS6.0 is as buggy as I'm guessing it'll be, I may decide to stop coding for NS compatability all together. I'm tired of staying up till 2 in the morning for the soul fact of fixing things that don't work in NS, but work flawless in IE. And I refuse to stay up any more late nights because some hack team of "developers" decide the only thing worth developing is something to piss every web developer in the world.

I got better things to do than being inefficient and unproductive for my clients because NS doesn't care about the world-wide community of web developers.

- Ryan Baldwin

Ryan Baldwin


November 8th, 2000   11:04 AM

As one of the primary browser vendors, Netscape has an important role in the evolution of the web. The software they create has to be accommodated by website developers worldwide. However, the lack of quality assurance makes me think they will be cursed more than commended. As a webmaster, I have to work late nights because of Netscape. Because simple things that work flawlessly in IE cause problems in Netscape.

Willing or not, Netscape is responsible for these late nights - not just for me, and not just in the U.S. Thousands of hours are wasted, and will continue to be wasted if Netscape 6 is released prematurely.

Therefore, I plead that Netscape stop this problem where it starts. Release Netscape when it's ready, not when the schedule dictates. Web developers worldwide will sigh with relief, for the hard work of few will prevent the tedium of many.

Michael Kane


November 8th, 2000   10:57 AM

MOZ deserves better than this.

As it stands if the new browser cannot meet the standards, and is not reverse compatible to the 4.XX versions, then it will be the death of all future NS browsers.

I have not, and will not design for it until it becomes REAL. Solid counts for more than early. And broken (beyond reasonable bugs) is worse than non-existing.

Please fix 6 before releasing it on an unforgiving world. Put more effort into 4.XX, release the updated 4.XX as 7.XX and when 6 is ready (really ready), if ever then make it 8, 9, or 10.

Do it right, MOZ deserves it, and the world demands it.

Paul Gray


November 8th, 2000   10:50 AM

As a web developer I am tired of constantly trying to hack my html and css to work in netscape. I am disapointed that there appears to be no end to this netscape problem in sight. The only thing that I can apparently hope for is that the mozilla team will continue their efforts and will eventually fix all of their problems. Hopefully when that happens Netscape will still be around to integrate the mozilla code into another release.



Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then
beat you with experience.

Ira Miller


November 8th, 2000   10:48 AM

As a web developer, I am very aware of the diversity of web browsers.


Typically, when a new browser comes out, it at LEAST supports backwards
compatibility with existing standards.


If Netscape 6.0 is released without backwards compatibility with existing standards, I will refuse to use or support it and will strongly recommend against others using or adopting it. It will be easy to talk any clients out of supporting N6 as well, based on additional cost to get their sites to work
in N6 as well as all the other browsers.


I want to see Netscape release a browser that lives up to the expectation that it will be an improvement over previous browsers, If not, well ... maybe Microsoft has won the browser wars after all, and it's death to all standards.

David LaCroix


November 8th, 2000   10:48 AM

As a web developer I am tired of constantly trying to hack my html and css to work in netscape. I am disapointed that there appears to be no end to this netscape problem in sight. The only thing that I can apparently hope for is that the mozilla team will continue their efforts and will eventually fix all of their problems. Hopefully when that happens Netscape will still be around to integrate the mozilla code into another release.


Ira Miller
------------------------------------------------------------------


Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then
beat you with experience.

Ira Miller


November 8th, 2000   10:44 AM

I'm a webdeveloper.

First i'll thank you Netscape for what you have "done" for the web, now what you are doing is driving users/developers away from Nescape-Navigator to IE because of your plans to publish a buggy browser version, only to be in time. Why are you guys so ignorant.

It's very hard to develop sites which works with all major versions of Netscape. Most of the clients i'm working for are switching to IE, because of its stability. And the fakt that pages which are designed for 4.0 are also working with 5.0, 5.5 und so on...

IE is fast and stable browser, so guys do not let the old spirit die and try to give IE a good fight with a good browser...


H. A.

H. A.


November 8th, 2000   10:43 AM

I am apalled at Netscape's carelessness here. Do they not understand what reputation their version 4.x(i liked 3) browser has with nearly everyone? Netscape 4.x, bluntly put, sucks. I have used every public release of version 6.0 and I was quite pleased with the progress they were making, it actually began to restore my faith in Netscape. The prospect my web apps would work correctly in both excited me as a developer and as a consumer. I use operating systems other than Windows and Netscape(mozilla) is the only viable alternative to IE, since IE is not on most other platforms(mainly linux). Rushing this product to market will only gain them one thing, a label of laziness and poor quality(which they already have as far as I am concerned).



We already have an internal corporate on Netscape, which I was hoping to lift for version 6.0. I guess the ban will be in place until 7.0 if this continues.

Chris Newbill


November 8th, 2000   10:40 AM

The complaints against Netscape are a load of bunk. People seem to expect that Netscape should be bug-free upon release. This simply doesn't happen with point-0 releases. The truth is, this is a very complex project they are working on - it is a fresh, standards-compliant, and mostly platform-independent project with a huge store of barely tested code behind it.

How well did IE perform when it was in a similar situation - when it was first released? Yet, look where it is now. I think Netscape should consider NS6 an entirely new product, and give it a new name and all. But it looks like that isn't going to happen.

When Netscape finally brought in Mozilla code to start Navigator 6, they were faced with an important decision. They could either concentrate on transforming Mozilla to Netscape, or put their hands all over the code at once. The latter was certainly not an attractive option. They have to juggle priorities for implementing interface, rendering, networking, security, e-mail, newsgroups, etc.

Web developers need to come to grips with the real state of affairs in the web world. Things have been quite comfortable for them for a while. But truth is, new releases can break existing code - it's happened before, and will happen again. Sure, your code might be standards-compliant, but it also tip-toes around compliance issues in current browsers. Netscape 6 is more compliant that any other browser - learn to fit in the new features that work, and you'll be doing great!

Personally, I avoid sites that use MSIE-only features abusively, so if want to reach the absolute maximum users, you'd better cope. The cases where a site needs a MSIE feature to build or maintain a userbase are rare.

Many important NS6 fixes will come later, but don't try to hold it back. The initial release may not win people back from MSIE, but that's okay. At this point, Netscape is almost stuck in a power-user niche, so they can handle it. Other users may not be knowledgeable, but they're probably at least strong Netscape supporters. If they don't like NS6, they can go back to NS4 and probably won't give a thought to MSIE.

David K. Gasaway


November 8th, 2000   10:23 AM

As a lead engineer at a large web development firm, I will encourage my clients to design sites that simply refuse to work when Netscape 6.0 is detected, advising users to "upgrade" to either a working mozilla, an older Netscape, or to IE 5.x. Users and site developers shouldn't have to put up with this sort of short-sightedness. The Mozilla team has done a lot of hard work, and is willing to go that extra mile. Netscape is beyond foolish in not respecting the work and working pace of the Mozilla team and deserves to be punished not just by the developer community but by non-adoption of their standards-shirking browser by the user community.

Manni Wood


November 8th, 2000   9:31 AM

I'm a novice, and I uninstalled the beta version of Netscape 6 simply because it was unattractive, unclear and just generally confusing to use. I still use Netscape 4.7, but after hearing all these arguments, and being basically unskilled in the use of browsers anyhow, I believe I'll stick to what I've got untill approvements come about for the new Netscape browser (if they do.) I've actually found the Netscape browser to be consistently stronger than the IE I have and prefer it greatly. Too bad I can't upgrade...

Lola Strickland


November 8th, 2000   9:21 AM

There was a time when Netscape was "the" platform to develop for. However, this has not been the case for some time now. The Netscape 6 bungle is further evidence that Netscape could care less about how difficult development on their platform is, or how much hacked code we have to write to get their hacked code to work...

Buck Poe


November 8th, 2000   9:20 AM

While I applaud Netscape for their goal of compliance, Netscape 6 is at odds with the reality of currently-deployed browsers and the sites written to work with them. While Netscape 6 provides rich possibilities for DHTML, a great deal of existing DHTML does not work. We would have to make extensive changes to sites we have created in order to make them work with Netscape 6, although they work fine across Netscape and IE 4 and above, and very often v3 and above.

It will be difficult to sell the programming time necessary to perform these retro-fits before Netscape 6 is well-accepted -- and difficult for Netscape 6 to become well-accepted without these retro-fits in place.

The best chance Netscape has is if Microsoft forges ahead in the same direction with IE6 as Netscape has with their 6th-generation browser. However, from a strictly economic view, Microsoft may as well deal the death blow now and look at W3C standards later. If IE6 provides backward-compatibility with proprietary extensions, as well as support of W3C standards, then Netscape will be left at the margins.

Mark Kolmar


November 8th, 2000   9:01 AM

I *used* to be a big netscape fan. But with every single release they seem to fall further and further behind. If they think that releasing based on ship dates instead of product quality is going to help them, I think its time for new leadership.


As a web developer, it takes an extraordinary amount of effort to keep my applications multi-browser compatible. And for most of us, we try at all costs to avoid having to build gateways to split into subsites based on client type. However, it seems that Netscape is trying to push us into what is seeming more and more like an inevitability.... "I'm sorry, this site uses advanced features, and thus, you will require Microsoft Internet Explorer."

Gregory T. Loker


November 8th, 2000   8:58 AM

Ship it NOW!
Do it, ship now!

I was a loyal NN user until IE5, it is quite simply better.

I am tired of the browser war and I feel that if Netscrape 6 is released now, it will begin the "end of Netscape", this will let IE take over.


The bs about N6 and the downloads and the crashes and the "we need javascript testers" when no js worked and the crashes and the ctrl-alt-del-> end task and the crashes and the java and and and and and... have led me to hate Netscape.

Aleph Dev


November 8th, 2000   8:54 AM

Dear Netscape,



Please release 6.0 ASAP. I want every end-user to install it, hate it, and switch to the better browser (we all know what that is).

Nothing could make me happier than a horrific deployment of 6.0.
Well, one thing could make me happier -- a class action suit against Netscape filed on behalf of web engineers for the Netscape monopoly on terrible browsers.


Thanks,
Steve Jansen

Steve Jansen


November 8th, 2000   8:39 AM

I have been working on websites for over a year now and during that time I have endured a continual struggle dealing with the incompatabilities of Netscape. I would strongly recommend that you rename the upcoming release of Navigator 6.0 as a beta and reopen the tree and allow your engineers to apply the patches they've already created. And that you refocus your attention and efforts on standards compliance.

The web will suffer until we work together towards standards compliance.

susan sheard


November 8th, 2000   8:29 AM

As a Linux and Solaris user, Netscape is a kind of natural browser to me. But I have to admit that the Netscape 4 series is the worst application I use commonly, it has nothing besides in terms of instability.

I would really appreciate Netscape delivering a stable and standards compliant browser, because that's the best way to save us from an Windows and Mac-only web with IE setting standards. Once Microsoft doesn't has to follow standards any longer because of lack of competitors, don't you think they will define their own?

It took so long time anyway... just hold on a bit longer and accept the help of the open source community!

Jörg Cassens


November 8th, 2000   8:22 AM

I have been an Internet Explorer user as long as I've been desinging web pages, but I had anxiously awaited the release of Netscape 6.
I've seen all three preview releases; they are nothing as I expected. The program itself fails terribly as far as properly implementing CSS. The interface is terrible and has only improved slightly- I would never skin a browser.
Sadly, it's looking like I'm going to have to stick with IE.

Katelynn Corrigan


November 8th, 2000   8:20 AM

As a web programmer who's been doing this since there was a web, I have been waiting for the day when we get target platforms that are standards-compliant. I see that I must keep waiting. I am very disappointed that Netscape 6 appears to drop the bal - yet again - in this area. Why should I develop for your platform???

Kris Rudin


November 8th, 2000   7:54 AM

First, I want to say that I've used Netscape as my browser of choice for a little over 4 1/2 years. I think Netscape Communicator is a fantastic concept in that it has so many easy features built in to it. I think the mail client is the best intigrated program available. I've used each release up to 6.0 Beta. Now, having said that...

I have reverted back to version 4.76 and even then I have concerns. I am currently running WindowsME and even with version 4.76, it's difficult to get netscape to close fully after exiting. 90% of the time I have to press CTL-ALT-DEL and choose End Task to stop the system hang. 6.0 wasn't any better and this is just a smattering of the problems I've encountered. I won't even get into the Java problems because I could go all day.

In my years of using Netscape, I've seen features improve and quality worsen. I am hoping that by sharing my honest opinion of a browser I prefer to use that this issues will be carefully scrutinized and repaired. I am also hoping the quality assurance of Netscape/AOL improves and less problematic releases are made in the future. Netscape will continue to be my browser of choice until the slowing lack of qualiity and the problems make using it a chore/hassle to use rather than a convenience. Unfortunately, it seems to be heading that way. I will be positive and pray that Netscape will do better for its consumers and its own reputation.

Robert Kerr


November 8th, 2000   7:53 AM

First, I want to say that I've used Netscape as my browser of choice for a little over 4 1/2 years. I think Netscape Communicator is a fantastic concept in that it has so many easy features built in to it. I think the mail client is the best intigrated program available. I've used each release up to 6.0 Beta. Now, having said that...

I have reverted back to version 4.76 and even then I have concerns. I am currently running WindowsME and even with version 4.76, it's difficult to get netscape to close fully after exiting. 90% of the time I have to press CTL-ALT-DEL and choose End Task to stop the system hang. 6.0 wasn't any better.

In my years of using Netscape, I've seen features improve and quality worsen. I am hoping that by sharing my honest opinion of a browser I prefer to use that this issues will be carefully scrutinized and repaired. I am also hoping the quality assurance of Netscape/AOL improves and less problematic releases are made in the future. Netscape will continue to be my browser of choice until the slowing lack of qualiity and the problems make using it a chore/hassle to use rather than a convenience. Unfortunately, it seems to be heading that way. I will be positive and pray that Netscape will do better for its consumers and its own reputation.

Robert Kerr


November 8th, 2000   7:52 AM

Standards compliance? Why comply with standards? Why even have standards?! There is not enough sarcasm in the world with which to address this issue.

Jane Haskin


November 8th, 2000   7:51 AM

The "browsers war" has been devastating enough within the programmer’s community and contributed to lots of painful "work around" fixes. Do we need a buggy browser on top of that? No wonder Microsoft is wining that war.
I would like to see a rock solid version of Navigator that adheres to industry standards and is reliable even if it takes 6 more month of development work. Good software (like good programming) takes time.

Ricardo Alvez


November 8th, 2000   7:50 AM

with netscape 6, we will have to continue in programing wrong html- and other code in order to take into account the netscape-users.
webdesign for netscape-browsers is very disillusioning. i can´t understand, why its not possible to create a browser equivalent or better than MS IE....

Daniel Pfanner


November 8th, 2000   7:45 AM

Will Netscape/AOL Bill Gates mit seinen Bugs Konkurrenz machen? Wir brauchen funktionierende Software. Kein Browser mit bekannten Bugs ausliefern!

s.piel


November 8th, 2000   7:38 AM

Do not buckle under to marketing deadline... support standards now! Simply put, Netscape marketing is being shortsighted. And poorly lead! The Netscape browser share will continue to slip if a less than standard compliant browser is released. MSIE will continue to bite more and more from AOL/Netscape with a Netscape 6 release, and course of action, that fails to meet the standards. (A reversal of personalities if you will... who is the fierce creature here? Is Netscape really just a technological "dinosaur" or the
terror-of-Redmond "Mozilla")

Some of these "unimportant bugs" will break many of the marketing/shopping/"profit and ad revenue" sites so important to the Netscape marketing lemmings. Then where will Netscape be? Very much at the bottom of the browser stack.

Timothy Stone


November 8th, 2000   7:38 AM

MAKE A BETTER BROWSER THAN MS/IE, NOTHING ELSE MATTERS.
DON"T STOP HALFWAY.

James E. Owens


November 8th, 2000   7:37 AM

To whom it may concern,

I have been developing for the web for about 4 years now and I have to say that the last few years of Netscape 4.x have been nothing short of excruciating. The post-crash quality-assurance bug tracker has apparently been all but ignored by the Netscape development staff. I can assure you that neither I, nor the rest of my company's development staff will support NS6 development until the program functions at least as well as IE4 (which it currently does not.) So, my parting words to the Netscape Development Team are...

QUIT FUCKING OVER WEB DEVELOPERS!!!! LIKE OUR DAYS AREN'T LONG ENOUGH ALREADY THAT WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH A CRAPPY-ASS, GO-WHINE-TO-THE-JUSTICE-DEPARTMENT-BROWSER THAT CRASHES WITH LITTLE OR NO PROVOCATION. DO THE RIGHT THING.

Casey Gum


November 8th, 2000   7:36 AM


Whether the standards compliance issue is operating system dependent or not is irrelevant, it exists in Windows operating systems and in so many widespread and even basic and fundamental ways as to be too many to list. To argue the case that Netscape should not fix compliance issues in their final release is arrogant elitism at best. Most mainstream Internet browsers are using a Windows operating system.




So if you are serious about building a decent product then get it to work for the majority or don't release it. Call it beta as long as you want and have no compliance, no one cares, but releasing it and telling a public who doesn't know better that it is compliant is ridiculous. That is what this is about and if you are arguing against this you either need to become a realist or not say anything.


Jeffrey Williams


November 8th, 2000   7:15 AM

How standards complient is Internet Explorer 5.5 (WIN)? How complient is Netscape 4.7? Now, look at how complient Mozilla and Netscape 6 are.

Face it, there is never going to be a perfect browser. We have to get a good, solid, browser to the market. If it's not 100% complient, it's not going to be the end of the world.

If we can get a browser that is more standards complient the either of the major two, then we did our jobs. Standards change anyway, and you'll only be able to use "100% standards complient" until new standards are published (and look at how many are currently in the works!).

If you keep fighting about what needs to get done, NOTHING WILL GET DONE.

The "driver's" of the project are the people who should decide what is important, and they make sure it gets done.

Orrin


November 8th, 2000   6:26 AM


This is ridiculous. Everyone knows what this is really about but now one has the gaul to say it in a nutshell. I have tested various Mozilla releases from it's original coneption to m18(Netscape 6 PR1,PR2 & PR3 included) on several different platforms(Linux, Solaris, Macintosh, OS/2, Windows, etc.) and the
only times I experience these headlong problems are when running Netscape 6
pre-releases on Windows no less. Why, Simple because of Explorer. The damn
thing is the GUI and represents the most common set of the public Windows API
set for that matter.



Now I'm not trying to turn this into a flame war but I think what's going on here is quite obvios. To prove it I even installed Netscape 6 PR3 on the original Windows 98 with no windows or explorer updates. Guess what it ran as
flawlessly as it did on other operating systems. But as soon as I updated explorer to 5 or greater guess what started happening. That's right I started
having major problems with Netscape 6. The bottom line is Microsoft uses a hidden API structure internally and hands a second less intuitive API set to third-party developers. The result is that Microsoft software always runs
better then that of it's third party competition on Windows.



Case in point the macintosh. Totally third party no strings attached placed
Netscape 6 well over Internet Explorer 5.5. Too bad Microsoft didn't release
a version for Linux as well. Oh and by the way aside from bugs caused from Windows there are very few ulterior bugs in Netscape 6. The fact is the rendering engine,while a tad bit slower then Explorers pre-loaded bloatware,
is 5 times more compliant and 10 times more well engineered then that of I.E.
5. Even the loading of complex tables with multimedia components far exceeds
that of it's two largest competitors.



Now as for why this article on O'Reilly's oreilly.com was published in the first place is simple. Some guy out there just wanted to make a name for himself. Yeah, I'm talking about you Mr. Flanagan. You wanted exposure and since Microsoft bashing isn't in style much anymore you figured Netscape bashing could
get you as much notereity. I got it now why don't you join the bandwagon of Howard Stern or Bill Clinton bashers. Bet you there's a TV spot in it, I almost guarantee it. For all those taking this article seriously, sure there are some valid points, but in any bashing article you have valid points, doesn't mean the summation is correct.



As for people who read this statement I am sure there will be responses and some negative. However, I have not said anything that isn't true and I have not reached the point of bashing Microsoft. There are things not here about Microsoft that have been known for years that qualify as bashing material. I have not used any of that material though because I wanted to concentrate on just the technology and compliancy, not the other more shady affairs. Lastly,
to reiterate a great point. While Mr. Flanagan herendously bashing Netscape I haven't heard a whisper from Mr. Flanagan petitioning against the release of iCab or IE6 or Konqueror. Why go figure. To add on in Mr. Flanagan's book in
which he claims to define W3C compliancy he makes no mention as to DOM1, which
by the way has been a thorn in Microsoft's side. This brings up two questions
in my mind.

A) What is Mr. Flanagan's true intentions with this book and this obvious cheap
marketing tactic ?

B) If his intentions are not commercially motivated and Mr. Flanagan wants to go on about unbiased W3C compliancy (Not showing any relevance to relevant standards such as the Document Object Model) does he actually know a damn thing ?

(Personally I think it's Mr. Flanagan that fails standards and horrificly at that)



As for the rest I'll leave that up to the reader. ;)

waltert3@mailbr.com.br


November 8th, 2000   6:23 AM

I am a Systems Engineer currently working on an intranet development project for the USAF. I believe I could probably whip out a better quality browser with Visual Basic's browser creating wizard.

Jayce Gayton


November 8th, 2000   6:19 AM

Besides fixing the bugs, what is needed is a thorough set of standard tests which are run before the product is released. I would rather wait for a higher quality product than be disappointed with a series of quick releases.
Does Netscape/Mozilla have a quality assurance organization, or are they depending on the marketplace for that?

Mike Aigen


November 8th, 2000   6:17 AM

I think it's about time Netscape was held responsible for the shoddy standards compliance of NS6. As a web developer I've been working around the bugs in NS4.x for years and just when I'm thinking I don't have to worry about it anymore *poof* here's another shoddy browser for me to have to learn the bugs and workarounds. Just a waste of all of our time.
And also, anybody scope out the memory consumption of the damn thing? It's horrid, a complete insult. And slower than molassas in january to boot.

It's time to give up, Netscape.

On the other hand, I think the mozilla project's doing a fine job and they should keep on, since eventually, *someday* they'll have a decent browser. I'm not holding my breath, though. I'll stick with Opera and IE

Zakariya


November 8th, 2000   6:11 AM

Netscape 6 is the most standard compliant "product" on the "market" today.

Wowie


November 8th, 2000   6:05 AM

To tell someone or something to 'eat shit' clearly shows immaturity. Now, I dislike Internet Explorer v.Anything, simply because it has asserted itself as the best internet browser in all existance. However, it is not. Anyone who was around the internet 4 years ago knows that Internet Exploder was rarely heard of, and about as standard compliant as dirt. There was Netscape and Mosaic, really, to choose from 4 years ago. My point? If you're going to say something, make it worth while. "Eat shit" is really just showing your ass, and it was rather stupid of you to do so, in my opinion.

Now, on to the issues (something the presidential campaigning never really got around to).

Netscape should be delayed, and all its holes plugged. It's like setting a ship to sea with a hull breach. More importantly, Netscape should make v6.0 compliant to all forms of online document standards. Truthfully, they would be the first browser company to do so.

Anonymous


November 8th, 2000   5:56 AM

Eat shit Netscape! You suck!

love Heywood

Heywood Jablowme


November 8th, 2000   5:42 AM

I agree since it's a big hassle to make every HTML page work on major browsers due to deviations from standards. The internet community must get compliant browses so we, the developers, can focus on things that matters instead of this constant hacking. We also need support for emerging standards like XML.

Tony Schon


November 8th, 2000   5:40 AM

Having only used Mozilla fleetingly for development I suppose I fall into the group of people who have not really performed an in depth analysis of its conformedness to standards. However I have bumped into a couple of the faults mentioned and took it to be an expression of onstability.

Now, the way it works on ongoing projects (or so is MHO) is that you release when you want to show people what you have. If you have known bugs you call it "Beta" or "Prerelease" or something. It would seem that there is no contest of Netscape's right to make a release but rather a general opinion that one should call a shovel a shovel and make the upcoming release a beta.

Nathan Droft


November 8th, 2000   5:33 AM

Dear Netscape,

Release a buggy product *again* and you will be dead-in-the-water. The Free Software Community is hot on your heals... if your product is not better than the free stuff, why would we pay for it?

MRA

Michael Roy Ames


November 8th, 2000   5:21 AM

ok,
here are my 2 cents.
I used an alpha or beta or Communicator 6, and it did not work for me.
I am a web developper, on a mac, and I find IE to not support all the standards that I want to use. When I make my page in what I believe to be standard HTML, CSS and javascript, I do not get the same pretty result in IE as I do in Netscape 4.7 . I want this "goodlookingness" to continue with Netscape 6.
I do not want a buggy release of NN6 that does not support standards because
then we are crewed... off to IE we go... since it is the lesser of 2 evil.

conclusion ?
FIX THE DAMNED THING, AND NOT IN A HALF ASSED WAY!

The Admiral


November 8th, 2000   5:06 AM

Dave...GO FUCK YOURSELF

Ever look at this from an end user's point of view??? ...or a business person's point of view for that matter?

There's more to computing and the internet that what codeheads like you see.

Netscape is a BUSINESS....and has to balance between releasing a fairly stable product and releasing it in a timely manner to protect its marketability.

Netscape has REAMINED SOLVENT in the face of microsoft....that is an amazing feat by itself. AOL, Netscape's parent company, has transformed itself from the laughing stock of everyone paying attention to a respecatble internet goliath.

Please do not write back arguing that netscape DID sell out to AOL and that AOL is only as big as it is because of the tons of internet illiterate people out there....the fact is..what Netscape and AOL accomplished takes BALLS and a great deal of business pizazz.

I am in the IT field but my parent are not....I dont use AOL..but they do...and I LIKE AOL because it helps me keep in touch with my parents...get the drift? So....quit hogging bandwidth and go back to kissing microsoft's ass until you have something good to say :)

KAPIL


November 8th, 2000   4:53 AM

Netscape continues to make development difficult for the web, and I wish that would just put up or shut up. Netscape was good, but IE has long since been surpassing them with CSS and DOM. Before I ever use NN6, I will go with Mozilla or IE.


They need to come in behind developers, not just please their shareholders and their masters at AOL.

Maurice Reeves


November 8th, 2000   4:46 AM

Haven't web developers delt long enough with Netscape being to specific? Now we have to deal with Non-standards complience? What next, are they going to re-write HTML and call it NML? Don't become Microsoft, Netscape!!!

John Leask


November 8th, 2000   4:41 AM

OK, so I have to provide a comment. Well here it is: no comment!

Patrick Verkaik


November 8th, 2000   4:35 AM

sounds like the end of netscape...

yay no more catering for a crap browser!!!

pity that basically lets microsoft do whatever they want :(

Lanson


November 8th, 2000   4:30 AM

Finally a standards compliant browser! I thought...
This serious misstake from Netscape will really boost
even further the use of IE even though that one s*cks
as well.
I do like the mozilla project though. Open source is here
to stay.

magnus lindahl


November 8th, 2000   4:14 AM

I have used serveral test versions of Netscape 6.0 and have to say it's the worst browser ever created. It lacks support for open standards and, for that, should be delayed. Netscape has, and always will, suck as a browser with regards to flexibility and programmalibity.

IUnknown


November 8th, 2000   4:13 AM

I have used serveral test versions of Netscape 6.0 and have to say it's the worst browser ever created. It lacks support for open standards and, for that, should be delayed. Netscape has, and always will, suck as a browser with regards to flexibility and programmalibity.

IUnknown


November 8th, 2000   4:12 AM

A real fellow Netscape user here since 1.x ones... I continueusly test those preview things even while they cannot even uninstall themselves..
Shocking, Netscape is dead... Plugins are invented by Netscape, and guess what? You cannot install plugins to Netscape 6 (ridicilously except wmedia, which only registers file type)...
No plugin??? Wake up people, if we OK -no plugin- situation, we use Opera! It is better than all.
Bye to netscape, sadly

Ilgaz Öcal


November 8th, 2000   3:59 AM

Why can't Netscape wait to deliver a product that is actually doing what they are anouncing the whole time, namely being a product of 6th generation, not another new branch with new bugs, but a product based on and evolving already tested products? (although the last part is only partly true for versions >4.73)
And another thing:
IF they have to deliver the buggy version, maybe the Autoupdate (which would be mandatory in this case) can be modified to really _update_ the Browser if fixes are available, _not_ download a completely new version/product?

--
.sig under construction

Achim J. Latz


November 8th, 2000   3:49 AM

Here we go again... This is ridiculous... Netscape, you championed the angle of standards compliance, dont give developers one more reason to use Flash, and ditch the whole HTML thing once and for all...

Ben Davies


November 8th, 2000   3:33 AM

As a interface programmer I spend 50-60% of my time making things work in netscape, when only 20% of people use Netscape I think this is a wast of time. Get things sorted Netscape.

Andy Bettger


November 8th, 2000   3:26 AM

Full compliance to todays standards ought to be the first consern for all browser developers.

John Bredal


November 8th, 2000   3:21 AM

They are missing a massive opportunity to regain market share in releasing a product full of critical problems (sound familiar??!)

David Geran


November 8th, 2000   3:15 AM

Please don't release anything that isn't standards compliant this time!

Robert Nyman


November 8th, 2000   2:50 AM

I'm also for postponing the next release of Netscape until it more closely adheres to the current standard.

Kevin Luu


November 8th, 2000   2:44 AM

please, do this right this time...

Nicolas Ballinas


November 8th, 2000   2:40 AM

Simply put this stinks. It's hard enough right now to deal with an old version of Netscape, but that combined with a new uncompatible version? Ridiculous!

nate


November 8th, 2000   2:31 AM

I have always been a great supporter of the Mozilla endeavour, and of Netscapes support of it.

It has been my hope that the product of these two years or so would be a fully standards compliant browser, that would enable a new generation of Web applications.

Netscape must realise it is not going to win back any greater chunk of market share by getting a browser out now or in Six months time. The market share will be based on it's usefullness, and therefore it's uptake by developers.

Netscape. Hold back. Check in dem bug patches.

Daniel Bambach


November 8th, 2000   2:23 AM

So when you going to do a parallel article about all the gaping security holes/driving a coach and horses through standards issues in IE? Oh, let me guess, not enough space and life's just too short. I've been a web developer since 94 (yeah, right back when Bill was saying the Internet was a geek novelty that wouldn't go mainstream before he "discovered" the net in 96) and have continually been driven to distraction by attempting to code to the crud coming out of Redmond. What happened to balance?

Gecko Mozilla


November 8th, 2000   2:15 AM

C'mon. Netscape is light years ahead of IE in terms of standard compliance - also be fair - the only reason you were able to write this article is because Mozilla opens their source and buglist. With IE, MS just let us find the bugs when it's too late. I for one have used most of the Mozilla milestones (with varying degrees of satisfaction) and am well looking forward to Mozilla release/NS 6 but this kind of FUD could sink it before it starts.

Paul Davis


November 8th, 2000   2:02 AM

Nuff said.

Just get it compliant. It's your last and only chance to compete with IE.

I've been with you from Netscape 2.
At the moment I'm still using Communicator 4.7x (Netscape 3 was the best), though I have to admit that IE is the better browser right now (more options, less bugs, more users)).

I was kinda hoping that you guys would beat the shit out of IE with Netscape 6.0.
But till now, you didn't.

If I have to choose between making two different sites to make it compatible with both browsers and just making one, I'd choose the last option.
And right now it wouldn't be in favour for Netscape I'm afraid.

I'd hate to see you guys disappear. Please get it full-proof!

S. Witte


November 8th, 2000   1:57 AM

I have worked extensively with Netscape's Messaging server product on Solaris, as well as their Directory server product (also on Solaris). The Directory product has been pretty good, but it makes a few "optimizations" at the expense of being strictly in compliance with standards. I don't necessarily object to that per se, but that's maybe another issue.

I do object to the way their Messaging server works, however. In a number of cases (enough that I will not list them here) I or others in my group have come across bugs or simple design flaws in the product where it totally ignored something which is standard, or implemented it incorrectly. On a number of occasions we have had to actually quote sections of RFC821 or RFC822 to their engineers, and occasionally they even come back and tell us that we are wrong. It's not a matter of opinion, it's the RFC!

In some product lines I would not care. But email is the "killer app" of the Internet, it is more well established than any other use of the network, and the standards documentation that define how it works have been around for years and years. There is absolutely no excuse for some of the bad behavior I have seen in the product.

I realize that this doesn't directly apply to their browser technology. In fact, the browser is maintained by the AOL arm of the company, and the server products are maintained by iPlanet (which is on the Sun Microsystems side of the fence). But I just felt I should point out that I have seen this type of ignorance of standards in favor of shipping product in other products which have come out of Netscape.

Dan Lowe


November 8th, 2000   1:53 AM

This is yet another nail in the coffin lid for Netscape.


I have been designing web sites and intranet based systems now for 6 years.
Over that period of time we have seen Netscape move from being pretty much the
only browser, thru best browser, a pretty good browser, the browser thats an
alternative to IE, to where we are today:-


A browser thats coming from a company that worries more about deadlines
than quality and adherence to standards.


Im very saddened by this, as although my work has always been cross browser
compatible, often at the expense of cutting edge technology, or requiring two
sets of code with a browser detect-and-redirect script, I have always advocated
Netscape over IE specifically because of its better support for standards.


It seems that this can no longer be the case. I wonder just what Netscape will
have going for it now that its traditional rival IE looks to support common
standards and is so freely available - even if its not part of the OS any more
;-)


 


Please Netscape - if you must roll out 6.0 roll it out as beta, then go back
to the code and get it right....


As another thought, how much time and energy has been poured into the extra
bloatware gubbins that comes with netscape???

Do we really want an email client, news client web design package.... etc etc
etc... now if it made good coffee... ;-)


--

Christopher J Williams - still using Netscape (just)

Christopher J Williams


November 8th, 2000   1:26 AM

*sigh*

I really was hoping Netscape 6 would be a really worthwhile browser to develop for. I was hoping that I'd be able to tell people that it was worth using this in favour of IE5.5, due to its full compliance etc., but it appears not.


Ah well, I guess I'll still check my pages work, but I'm probably going to keep IE 5 as my main browser for a short while at least.

Tom Knight


November 8th, 2000   1:21 AM

*sigh*

I really was hoping Netscape 6 would be a really worthwhile browser to develop for. I was hoping that I'd be able to tell people that it was worth using this in favour of IE5.5, due to its full compliance etc., but it appears not.


Ah well, I guess I'll still check my pages work, but I'm probably going to keep IE 5 as my main browser for a short while at least.

Tom Knight


November 8th, 2000   1:20 AM

I want the browsers to support HTML 4.0, CSS 1 and ECMAScript (the "official" version of JavaScript).

I have to and want to work for costumers, and I don't want to spend my time working around lousy bugs...

khofstaetter


November 8th, 2000   1:17 AM

Your one and ONLY chance to compete with IE is to be standards compliant to the point where everyone involved in making web pages clearly prefer to work with NS6 before IE. If you're not these people will just ignore your browser, and as they do, pages won't work with it, and it won't stand a chance of catching on. It's compliance or all your work will be wasted, that's the truth. Now do the right thing. Please.

Martin Sandin


November 8th, 2000   12:29 AM

Remove the crap from NS! I want a webbrowser not a email client with newsreader and html editor!

Johan Hallberg


November 8th, 2000   12:24 AM

räv

Henric Larsson


November 8th, 2000   12:20 AM

So where's mozilla's value, in AOL tabs ?????

pfff.

David Bourget


November 8th, 2000   12:17 AM

Hi,
I am webmaster for a very big multinational. We test web pages for all possible browsers available on the market. Most of the time we have to create seperate webpages for IE and Netscape, just because they differ too much. To me Netscape 3 Gold still was the best browser ever. IE is not just a browser, it is a shell. However we all can see that IE is widely used and web sites that doesn't work with a Netscape browser are increasing by the day. This will continue, be sure of that, certainly when Netscape 6 turns out to be a non-compliant browser.
We are following Netscape 6 very closely and already discouvered irritating things (some of them are mentioned in the article). If the final release isn't improved (bugs solved) we simply won't support Netscape 6 on our web sites.
Let's say this: Netscape 6 HAS TO BE 100% bug-free to be even able to compete IE6! You can download preview releases of Netscape 6, I ask myself why because they simply won't listen...

kerr dave


November 8th, 2000   12:14 AM

As a Linux user I really hope that version 6 of Netscape is up to the standard. I am sick and tired of it not supporting all of the features that IE does.

James Clarke


November 8th, 2000   12:01 AM

<h3>Browsers, Pussies and Standards</h3>

I build websites and networks for a living. This is my day, night, and weekend job. It is what I have decided to do with my life.


I belong to the Web Standards Project. I joined on the first day.
Why? Because I was tired of having to code around
browser i n c o m p a t i b i l i t i e s.
I even made my own Banner.
<img src="http://www.lemurzone.com/images/awsp.gif" width="402" height="24" alt="Web Standards Project" border="1">

I want the browsers to support HTML 4.0, CSS 1 and ECMAScript (the "official" version of JavaScript).



These three Standards alone would create a web that with Correct Coding and Validation would create a web available to everyone connected to the web.(There are more, but these are my picks)


<h3>Browsers</h3>

Netscape and Microsoft both belong to the W3C. They are both on the committees that create the Standards. None of these Standards are surprises. Nor were they experimental when the WSP called the browser Makers to support these Standards.


I use Microsoft's Internet Explorer for my browser.
Am I happy with it? No I'm not.
Reason #1 Web Standards and Internet Explorer 5 Part 2
Reason #2 The Microsoft Internet
Reason #3 You are being Screwed Again!!


<h3>Pussies</h3>

Chris Nelson is the creator of Mozillazine, a website allegedly created to follow the development of Mozilla, Netscape's Standards Compliant Browser Code, the Gecko rendering engine.

He wrote an article in response to a posting by David Flanagan : Netscape Navigator 6.0 to Fail Standards Compliance
.

He says as a member of the WSP I am a pussy.

Poor Chris, let's address the whines and bitches first. You wrote;


The first conflict was with the raving loonies of the WSP. The WSP whines and bitches about standards compliance. They create a petition[1] to convince Netscape to switch to development of their "Gecko" rendering engine technology, which promises greater standards compliance. They take credit for the Mozilla project moving to this new technology.

Chris; I refer you to the following email referenced in the link above[1]


<table width="100%" border="0" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="1">
<tr><td bgcolor="#faf9f6">

Re:Web Standards Project - NGLayout Petition

submitted by The WaSP

Monday October 26th, 1998 10:24:00 PM

Reply to this message
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#ffffff">Today Netscape informed The Web Standards Project that it has agreed to include NGLayout in Nav 5. </td>
</tr></table>

It worked! It may be petition envy on your part, but we will put that aside for a moment.


You then drone on about all the interest that other sites are getting as a result to Flanagans article. You made reference to folks not having made "a modest assessment of Netscape 6's standards compliance". (Did You Read Flanigans article and follow the links?) Then by God, you stand up on your hind legs with this gem;


"In any case, this crap will no longer will find a home in MozillaZine. So, take a good long look. Gaze into Mr. Flanagan's eyes. Because he's the last guy with an axe to grind against Netscape that you will see in these pages. The last armchair-marketer to get a say on this site. You'll have to go elsewhere to get your fix. (However, I allow myself an exception to clobber the hell out of the WSP if they continue to act like pussies.) 

I think that Richard Nixon said something along the same lines in the 60's. There is hope for you.

Atta Boy!! Don't let us raving loonies get away with a single pixel that might possibly interrupt your career as an armchair-marketer! Click on the link if you can't wait!



The absolute crown jewel of your argument was this:

"Netscape is in the unenviable position of choosing between bug-fixes and product release - the Scylla and Charybdis of software development."

This excuse was tried in Nuremberg following World War II. It didn't work then. it's not gonna work now.


<h3>Standards</h3>

Standards are for everyone. Not just so I and the rest of the raving loonies who believe that the web is for everyone can save a little time coding once, but by using the standards for enabling accessibility, for the handicapped, having sites that render quicker, separate content from presentation, and generally the make the web a better place for you too.


But Wait!! There's More!!


Being a raving loonie with an internet connection, a little time and just to prove that I really care about standards, I made the following inquiry's about your article


Here is the W3C result of your article: http://www.mozillazine.org/talkback.html?article=1708
You don't close your

tags either!


Your Style Sheet Valid with warnings.


Bobby doesn't find anything!


It is a real good thing that Netscape is not Standards Compliant. You would be in a world of crap. BTW, you should close all those

tags. It looks like this


the armchair-marketer bit


I see your site presents banner advertisements. Do your visitors know that you are invading their privacy? I didn't see any notice or opportunity to opt out.


Even I have a privacy policy


Why doesn't your website disclose that you set cookies on the hardrives of ever visitor to your site? Heres Mine!


<pre>6859
!ee180009653101030003!00000000-00002297-00006c54-3a08b8bd-00000000-
*204.245.29.51*servedby.advertising.com/02658540672293848932156374402
937886042581!ee180009653101030003!00000000-000022ca-00006c54-3a08c0
79-00000000-*204.245.29.51*098370419229378864*82965!ee1800096531010
30003!00000000-00002147-00006c54-3a08ce08-.245.29.19*
servedby.advertising.com/0133396582429384906*50040
!ee180009653101030003!00000000-000022ce-
00006046396582429384906249862988829378872*
</pre>

Your ad server has a privacy policy at least.


You should for the next week or so see a dramatic upturn in hits to your article. You may generate enough revenue to seek some help for your petition issues.


your friend in cyberspace....the head lemur.


Anonymous


November 8th, 2000   12:01 AM

I have a programmer working for me and she was taught to use the standard compliant codes/tags set by W3C. Guess what? She hates developing for Netscape because it's not standard compliant.

The other thing is that Javascript which is working in IE5.x and Netscape 4.7x is not working in Netscape 6 preview 3. Should I ask the programmers to recode again and charge our clients extra money so that they have a version that works on NS4.7x & IE5.x and another that works only in NS 6?

I tried Mozilla as well and most of the time it crashes my machine, something that NS 4.x does very often.

Fare thee well NS.

Kenny


November 7th, 2000   11:52 PM

Shuffling through the comments above, a lot of people appear to be expressing their pent-up rage about having to develop for NS 4.7 as it became increasingly obsolete.



Some of those folks, though, don't appear to be making the essential distinction between the 4.x codebase and 6, which is grounded on Mozilla/Gecko. You Web developers used to the pestilential nightmare of making things work on a browser too old to properly support them won't necessarily have the same experience with the upcoming release - it's from the same company, but it's completely different technology, redone from the ground up.



That said, I move on to the criticism levelled against NS 6 today.



It looks to me like W3C standards are trying, not so successfully, to hit a rapidly changing target of advancing browser technology. The items Mr. Flanagan mentions are parts of DHTML, the Web's current bleeding-edge technology. It doesn't yet fully work anywhere.



Let's not get ahead of ourselves. We're complaining here about the imperfect implementation of features designed to make a Web browser a full-featured user interface platform for other programs, at a time when the leading Web browser can't even render 'small' text small and 'medium' text medium.



I'd say it's the job of Web standards to plow along a ways behind the bleeding edge, organizing the chaos that edge has left behind to ensure these two things:





That is the criterion I will be judging browsers' standards compliance by in the next year or so. I will be looking for 'small' text rendered small, 'medium' text rendered medium, and 'points' to really mean typographic points instead of some random other choice of unit. I will be looking for lists rendered as lists and headings as headings.



Once those basics are fully dealt with, more advanced standards will have a solid foundation to grow on.



DHTML will come. It may not come yet, but it will arrive eventually - and its birth will probably be as painful as CSS'. Screaming about it won't really bring that standardized day one second closer; it'll only discourage and infuriate those who are working to bring it about.



Download and try out that beta before complaining about it; and keep watch of progress toward a standardized Web rather than screaming like an angry kid about even the tiniest deviations. You'll only be able to get results by differentiating positive moves from perceived backslides and providing feedback about each.





Jack Doe


November 7th, 2000   11:50 PM


As a web developer, nothing bothers me more than browsers that aren't fully standards compliant. I try to develop everything based on HTML standards, and when a standard doesn't function properly, it's very frustrating. No browser is totally bug free and renders pages as they should be displayed. When I heard that the Mozilla project was aiming for 100% compliance of published standards, I was very pleased. Netscape was once a leader in the browser market, and when they delivered a fully standards compliant browser, they would re-emerge as the leader, and force Microsoft to adopt all the standards.



Alas, the Netscape management team has chosen to ship a buggy product on-time. Some bugs as simple as a spelling correction aren't even being made. This is ridiculous! I believe most people would prefer a quality product that is late, than the other way around.



If the Mozilla project doesn't get up to speed fast, there will be no reason for anyone to stick with them. The Netscape browser is slower than IE and is *not* standards compliant. Many people have waited a long time, and have had high hopes for the Mozilla project, only to be let down. This marks the death of Netscape as a viable browser, and projects a negative (and incorrect) image on the open source and free software communities.

Jon Lehman


November 7th, 2000   11:49 PM

I heartily agree with David Flanagan's comments. However, I would take them further and say that I would like Netscape to shut down and die. Netscape is the worst browser I have ever had the misfortune to have to work with. The day Netscape ceases to exist I will drink champagne and my working life will improve tremendously. I would like to dance on Netscape's grave.

Kola Krauze, Webdesigner, Sweden


November 7th, 2000   11:48 PM

its slow and buggy and I would never use it. I have tried it every now and then and each time have been dissapointed. I use IE 5.5 and am quite happy with it. I also like the way the toolbars behave and that I can arrange them to only take up one line. Netscape is much slower in loading AND in use/rendering.

Adam

November 7th, 2000   11:41 PM

Please do not consider backward compliance with NN4.XX. NN4.XX sucked
rocks in every respect that a browser possibly could. Mozilla/Gecko is a winner.


Do _not_ burn a (relatively/known) buggy product to CD just don't -- save
yourself that embarassment, you've endured enough throught the NN4.XX series.
You have helped create the best browser yet. Ship nothing less

addendum


November 7th, 2000   11:35 PM

iCab, Internet Explorer, Konqueror, Lynx and more are all less standard complient than Netscape 6. Where is the petition for those borwsers? This petition is silly.

Jan D.


November 7th, 2000   11:31 PM

netscape, I appreciate the resources that you have contributed to the Mozilla
project. It is a shame that you'd consider throwing all that away, which is
what you're doing if you do not implement simple/available fixes in your
release version of Netscape 6.0. You have done so well (WRT the current status
of Mozilla) in developing a stable standards compliant browser. Why not realease
that browser rather than releasing an image of Mozilla from 3 months ago.

brent verner


November 7th, 2000   11:28 PM

Hey, remember Lotus 123?

That's where Netscape is headed.

Pick a set of core specifications (like Netscape 4.7 compatibility) and deliver it. Make it stable, fast and useable. Give the users a clear path to the future and deliver on it. Trying to fit 100% of all these standards into the first release is far far too ambitious at this point.

Netscape is loosing market share on an hourly basis and soon will find itself where Lotus 123 was seven years ago.

Chris


November 7th, 2000   11:13 PM

Most people I know develop primarily with Netscape because it is a bit more strict about compliance, and if it works on Netscape it'll almost always work on IE. If Netscape 6 is less compliant than 4x, I think you'll find a mass exodus to IE, both for users and developers. Unless, of course, we go for Mozilla and skip Netscape6 altogether.

If hundreds (thousands?) of web pages that are already out there are found not to work in Netscape6, do you actually think people are going to spend the time to make their code "comply" with Netscape's LACK of compliance? That would be completely absurd. Deliver what you promised. Anyone can tell you that a client would rather have a good product delivered late than a shoddy one delivered on schedule.
Fix it.

Glenn Berry


November 7th, 2000   11:02 PM

I work for Griffith University's multimedia unit on the Gold Coast, Australia.

The University policy is that we must develop for Netscape 4 or above. This is the biggest pain in the *ss for us as multimedia developers, but it has taught me a few things.

Internet Explorer is not standards compliant. It supports 90-95% of the documented standards, but then extends the standards with new and undocumented features. These features add really "cool" things to web pages, but are really quite dangerous to the development of the web as a whole. Once people become locked into using IE, that becomes a monopoly. Once the dominant browser is IE and everyone develops for IE innovation becomes stifled and no one is interested in anything that isn't IE compliant. This means in the end you have no choice but to use IE to view web pages ("Sorry, your browser doesn't support this web page" messages etc.) I would rather have open, well documented standards that clearly define interoperable functions and protocols (have you ever tried finding anything in the MSDN???)

Netscape on the other hand has, in my opinion, excellent documentation and quite a nice developer support site. The security model of Netscape is also much more reassuring than for IE. Sure, some of the funkier features aren't all working 100%, and it has major problems with Javascript and DHTML, but at least it works to some "standard" that other people can develop for. This leaves the option open for people to use whatever browser they please.

Opera is an excellent cross-platform browser, it doesn't support many of the funkier Javascript features, and DHTML support is also a bit flaky, but it displays standards compliant HTML, and it's frigging fast too. The version without Java support weighs in a little under 2MB for download. (http://www.operasoftware.com)

I seriously hope that Netscape 6 isn't a buggy piece of sh*t like the 4.x series has been, as Netscape already has a bad enough name for bugs and crashing. It would be really refreshing to have a standards compliant browser that actually works correctly 99% of the time!

Gareth Oakes


November 7th, 2000   11:01 PM

Netscape used to be the best browser out there.
What is going on now is atrocious. There is no excuse for not complying to standards, especially when the fixes are avaliable. Sorry NS, I'm strictly IE now.

Joshua Reeves


November 7th, 2000   10:46 PM

It is unfortunate that both Microsoft and Netscape have chosen to ignore the encouragement of international standards bodies.

Traditionally in any industry, especially one that is so dependant on technology, a great deal of time and effort is spent on standards compliance. Imagine for a moment what would happen if this persistent disregard occured in other industries...


And that's not all... We should pause for a moment and consider the impact of decisions such as this one, realizing the effort and time that must be expended by thousands of individuals to create these standards, design to these standards, and use the final product from these standards.

Does a few weeks really make a difference? I can't help but think -- no -- it doesn't make any difference at all.

Netscape, in choosing to release the source code to Mozilla, you made a brave and admirable choice. You garnered tremendous respect among the developers of this world, the individuals who will ultimately decide what the 'net looks like, and what browsers it is compatible with. Don't endanger that respect now by failing to implement a few forgotten areas of the standard, you stand to lose everything you gained and more...


Sincerely,

Finnian F Burn

Senior Systems Consultant

Netbridge Systems Integration

fburn@netbridge.com.au

Finnian Burn


November 7th, 2000   10:36 PM

My 2c: NS6 is going to be late no matter what -- AND -- what's the point of subscribing to an Open Source model if the results of that effort are not used? It would be lovely if Mozilla were able to continued development of their Open Source browser, and continued to release milestones, nightly builds, pre-releases and the occasional major release completely independently of Netscape.


Hell. This model works for Gimp, Linux etc!


Who needs AOL / NS? Especially if they're not going to play the game.

Andrew Forsberg


November 7th, 2000   10:17 PM

I remember a time when I fully supported the Netscape browser...

I wasn't impressed with your Beta 6 release... It seems to me that it's all just a money grab now!

It's the year 2000 maybe it's time for change.

Jason


November 7th, 2000   10:11 PM

Quite simply, Internet Explorer 5.5 is less standards compliant than Internet Explorer 5.0. Mozilla is MORE standards compliant than any existing version of Netscape on the market. Who is moving in the right direction?

If you want to talk about open standards, and compliance with industry standards, lets make it fair. Take both browsers (IE and Moz) and compare them point by point on standards compliance. Don't cheat by using Mozilla's bugtrack database, unless Microsoft is willing to open theirs up. Oh.. I forgot Internet Explorer doesn't have bugs does it?

Let them ship the browser so we can SEE our choices.

-- Dennis

Dennis Baker


November 7th, 2000   9:57 PM

OK. I don't cary which company makes my browser, as long as I can develop for them as defined by the standards. I am unable to do this in
Netscape. It is a programmers nightmare to be developing inter-browser apps. Seriously, IE: everything is fine. Netscape: crashes, missing functions, missing support, bugs.. Madness.<br />
Please delay the release of the product until it at least supports most of the IE features, rather ones that are defined by standards. I want a browser that works and supports what I need. You need to deliver on that.<br />
-PK, in developer and consumer interests, consumer experience comes from developers.

PK


November 7th, 2000   9:51 PM

I agree that there is no perfect browser. However this point is no excuse for releasing a browser that isn't fully backward compatible with previous versions. For example, the bug #49120 stated in David's article (that doesn't allow HTML HyperLink properties to be set until the user interacts with it) is just plain wrong. Some JS code that has run since Netscape 3.x will cease to run on Netscape 6.x. Web developers will have to revisit old JavaScript code to make it compatible with Netscape 6. It is intensive enough to try and code JavaScript for older versions of browsers. But to then have to change old code for new versions of browsers is just absurd -- it multiplies the work load.

I strongly urge Netscape to postpone the release of its newest browser until the browser is at least backward compatible with previous versions of Netscape. Even if the Gecko engine is the best thing since sliced bread, we shouldn't let that take the focus of our attention off the real issues. It is understandable if bugs slip in without being noticed. However many important bugs are documented in the Bugzilla database and there is no need to produce a final version that includes the worst of them.

John Kane


November 7th, 2000   9:23 PM

Come on Netscape, this is the reason that I used IE 5.5 to view web pages. And I like MS no better than you do. Developers will use and develop with the compatible browser(s), not the incompatible one(s).

John Akers


November 7th, 2000   9:06 PM

The utter lack of knowledge about Netscape 6 within the people who are posting on this site blows me away. I cannot describe my frustration in words. Let's get this straight right off the bat...

Netscape 6/Mozilla utilize THE MOST STANDARDS COMPLIANT rendering engine available in a commercial browser.

Neither IE 4, IE 5, IE 5.5, IE 6 whatever junk that is, Opera or anything else for that matter can compete with the standards compliance of the Gecko rendering engine (the one used in Mozilla/Netscape 6). Now c'mon people we all know there is no such thing as perfect. There is no way a browser is going to be fully 100% standards comliant if not for its impossibility but for the simple reason that the standards aren't always up to par with the cutting edge.

To all the people claiming to be developers afraid of having to redesign owrkarounds for this new version of Netscape 6 I tell you outright, you lie. Any good developer would have seen the performance of the browser before making derisive comments about its "performance" implied by the 5% truthful headline on this article.

For those of you who don't know, and it seems to be an overwhelming majority of you, IE is less standards compliant than Netscape 6/Mozilla. All this time that you have been coding your web sites and projects you have been coding to proprietary MS extensions to W3C standards.

Again, I cannot explain in words the enormous amounts of ignorance concentrated on this page. Any REAL developer KNOWS that Gecko is the superior engine not only in standards compliance but in speed and other factors as well. It's standards compliance has been documented in MANY instances and 3rd party published reports. Not only that but the Gecko engine will be used in upcoming internet appliances as well as on computers so you all better get used to it. Get used to standards compliance.

For those who want to become enlightened, download at nightly build at http://www.mozilla.org and relieve yourself of the burden of ignorance.

Armen Abrahamian


November 7th, 2000   8:57 PM

I used to be a high supported of Netscape... even refusing to move to IE cause of my attachments to the Navigator platform. Then for my job I was required to use IE and slowly but surely I was turned and now i can't go back. Especially not with all of these bugs. This is absolutly unaccetable.

Doug G.


November 7th, 2000   8:56 PM

I am using N4 for a long time and endure some compatible problem with Windows.I.I can wait N6 for a long time.I don't care wait more longer.I just want to see a killer application born to replace M$ IE.But if N6's developer team act wilfully to push out a immature N6. I think I just say "I'll seriously consider to use IE although it make me feel disgusted but I can't endure a immature software". :(

Frank Chang


November 7th, 2000   8:48 PM

For GODDAMN SAKE make a BROWSER.

rsk


November 7th, 2000   8:44 PM

Just fix it! Pleeeeeze!

Bill Phillips


November 7th, 2000   8:43 PM

Nuff said in the 977 other comments... get on the ball

John Gokey


November 7th, 2000   8:39 PM

Please think more than once before you release Netscape 6 !


As a web programmer / developer and an open-source user, I am highly disappointed with Netscape 4.xx series because it has so many bugs that it is really hard not to have it crashing at least once a session. We need a stable browser for all platforms, a browser that can be better than IE and a browser that follows the standards. If Netscape doesn't support the basic stuff that is needed for normal developing/browsing, who is going to develop for it? When are we going to have a version of Netscape that doesn't crash on Linux platform once a day? Guys, please(!), fix the known bugs and everybody will be thankfull; even if the release is delayed, we will wait! Millions of Linux (and other systems') users want to help you compete with Microsoft, so please help us and we will help you!


P.S.: Do you really want us to port "IE" to Linux?

Will Buben


November 7th, 2000   8:37 PM

For many years now the one of the highest priorities for IT professionals has been to get the next service pack or next patch so that a product does what it claims to do. A product's integrity and future relies on the ability to perform and function effectively and efficiently. Surely releasing a flawed and inferior release of N6 will only add to Microsoft’s strangle hold.

Geoff G


November 7th, 2000   8:35 PM

For many years now the one of the highest priorities for IT professionals has been to get the next service pack or next patch so that a product does what it claims to do. A product's integrity and future relies on the ability to perform and function effectively and efficiently. Surely releasing a flawed and inferior release of N6 will only add to Microsoft’s strangle hold.

Geoff G


November 7th, 2000   8:28 PM

It's really, really simple: we've been waiting for a truly standards compliant browser for a couple of years now. You're almost but not quite there. C'mon Netscape---don't choke in the final stretch. We can wait the extra days, weeks, or (god forbid) even months it'll take you to do the final cleanup, but we CAN'T live with a buggy browser. Especially not one that can be crashed by valid JavaScript.

Do the right thing. You know what it is.

Greg Phillips


November 7th, 2000   8:17 PM

Its crunch time. Everything depends on N6. Linux depends on N6. Open Source depends on N6. A superbly stable N6 that is fully, not almost fully, but fully standards compliant is necessary to convince the world that its safe to not buy Microsoft. Let the marketing people win this battle and you lose the war... no, WE lose the war. I can't convince users to accept Linux without a stable, standards compliant browser. I can't convince management to accept Open Source if the mother-of-open-source-projects fails to deliver stability.

Richard Draucker


November 7th, 2000   8:04 PM

We've waited a long time for 6.0, what's another month or two to make Netscape more stable, faster, smaller, and more bug free? You need to release a great product now, or Netscape won't be around much longer. Please don't let us live in a Microsoft world. Don't fall to thier level and release buggy products to be close to on time. Please listen to your developers. Thank you!

Cindy Z


November 7th, 2000   7:58 PM

Please take time and make a stable, secure, and bug free product. I will be glad to wait until it is completeled. Let's not go down to Microsoft's level and release buggy products just to be close to on time.

Larry Z


November 7th, 2000   7:50 PM

I used to be a loyal Netscape user until the initial release on version 4. Constant crashes and the release of IE 4 quickly changed my browser preferences on my computer. MS is by no means a perfect product, they have a bad habit of allowing developers to write bad code. For instance missing a closing table tag will cause content to be displayed incorrectly on Netscape products, as it should be, however this will not cause a problem on IE. I was very happy when upon your first beta release of version 6, your announcement of standards compliance. Yet I am now extremely disheartened by the fact that this does not seem to be the case, and there is little concern on fixing these shortcomings before going gold. Please reconsider your position on this. As a developer I understand the concept of a freeze date, but considering your timeliness to market is pretty much shot all ready, it might be a better idea to at least wait until compliance issues have been sorted through before release.

Greg Groth


November 7th, 2000   7:50 PM

I completely agree -- WebStandards needs to be a focus for any popular open-source browser. Netscape/Mozilla was supposed to be the choice to support standards. What happened?

Aaron Swartz


November 7th, 2000   7:43 PM

Maybe if Netscape concentrated on the basics and didn't try to compete with Microsoft by adding excessive features (that basically nobody uses), they would actually get it right!

Chris Cox


November 7th, 2000   7:29 PM

As a web developer I am constantly annoyed by Netscape's habit of not sticking to the standards.

DHTML and JavaScript is elementary (relatively speaking) to implement for Internet Explorer, but have always got to be re-done for compatibility with Netscape, which means double the work. And when one considers Netscape's lack of proper CSS support, one is just about ready to rip one's hair out.

Why can't Netscape produce a quality product such as Internet Explorer, that follows the standards and that makes web development easier for us, rather than insisting on handling everything in such a different manner.

Haroon Chowdhary


November 7th, 2000   7:27 PM

How about we let Netscape do it their way and we use the browser we like best. When no one uses Netscape then maybe they will make their browser compliant.

But why does Netscape have to be compliant? Is this not a democracy. Can they not make their software their way?

Hey, I got a great idea. How about all you negative comment people start your own software company and write your own compliant browser. Oh yeah, thats right, you people don't know how to program. You only know how to bitch and moan.

SpotPerkins


November 7th, 2000   7:17 PM

It's simple Netscape. If you're 100% compliant I'll use NS6 as the basis for the interface I'm developing for NASA. If not, I'll go with another product. You either are, or you're not. You either deliver on the Mozilla promise, or you don't. You decide.

John Le'Brecage


November 7th, 2000   7:07 PM

I find the suggestion that Netscape would release yet another buggy, non-standards compliant browser extremely frustrating. I, like so many others out there, spend a large amount of time redeveloping perfectly good pages so they work around all the problems in current Netscape browsers. This time could be better spent developing higher quality content and functionality

Netscape has held us back long enough, and I only hope this latest error of judgement proves to be a fatal one, so we can all get back on with the business of creating quality web content.

Miles


November 7th, 2000   6:43 PM

Netscape has been the bane of developers for quite awhile. It's also one of the least stable commercial programs I've ever used. I for one will be glad when it's dead and gone and web developers can go back to concentrating on content and design rather then making the 3% of the population who use Netscape happy.

Eli Blac


November 7th, 2000   6:38 PM

Shape up Netscape, you've touted 6.0 as a standards compliant browser from the start, so why all the hesitation all of a sudden to make it so.

You'll draw more flak from breaking compliance for developers than you will for delaying the browser yet again, which we're all used to already anyways.

R.D.


November 7th, 2000   6:34 PM

I'm amazed by how much effort my company has to spend in trying to deal with standards non-compliance. We've basically stopped at this point, since our tracking shows such almost everyone uses IE. I once thought NS6 would bring sanity to the situation... maybe I should have looked closer if, what I'm hearing now, is true.

David Whatley
www.play.net
dw@play.net

David Whatley


November 7th, 2000   6:30 PM

Nail in the coffin...

Evan


November 7th, 2000   6:18 PM

I whole heartedly support every facet of this argument. The Netscape project has failed, with the failure most accurately summarised as 'Too little too late'. IE is truly the better browser. What makes me angry now is that because of all the DOJ problems MS has had, we are unlikely to see an IE for *NIX, which is a tradgedy.

What concerns me a lot more though is WHY the project has failed. This could be the first truly dangerous dent in the reputation of open source development. Answers will be needed, fingers will be pointed. Could it simply be a lack of number of developers?

AndrewH


November 7th, 2000   6:17 PM

I whole heartedly support every facet of this argument. The Netscape project has failed, with the failure most accurately summarised as 'Too little too late'. IE is truly the better browser. What makes me angry now is that because of all the DOJ problems MS has had, we are unlikely to see an IE for *NIX, which is a tradgedy.

What concerns me a lot more though is WHY the project has failed. This could be the first truly dangerous dent in the reputation of open source development. Answers will be needed, fingers will be pointed. Could it simply be a lack of number of developers?

AndrewH


November 7th, 2000   6:13 PM

We are developers and speak with some considerable experience. We have just completed a two-person year development cycle for a new web-based service that uses lots of Javascript, CGI, PERL, DHTML, etc. We have found Explorer to be a breeze to work with.

Most of our work has been in developing the extra code that makes Netscape work. I say work, not work beautifully. At one point we were in favour of dropping Netscape compatability. As it is, the implementation is cludgy at best. But it does work, thanks not to Netscape but to our considerable three-month effort to make it work.

I, personally, would be happy if Netscape just went away. And it used to me my browser of choice.

John Crittenden


November 7th, 2000   6:04 PM


I think Netscape 6's standard compliance is enough for today's use. I do really hope Netscape to release its 6.0 within this year. And then release 6.0x to enhance standard compliancy.

If you say Netscape6 pr3's a:hover is broken so Netscape6 is not standards compliance, you should try some nightly builds.

Jerome


November 7th, 2000   6:04 PM

Dear god, these guys don't release a browser in 2 years and now they decide to rush and put out something that's less compliant than IE4? Either get it right or don't release. I don't care if Mozilla "gets it right" later. The average user doesn't know what Mozilla is and will be using whatever Netscape puts out. Please put us developers out of our misery and don't release YET ANOTHER version of Netscape that I have to spend 2x the time making workarounds for.

Sureshot


November 7th, 2000   6:02 PM

Please, please fix the bugs before going gold...

Mark


November 7th, 2000   6:02 PM

Netscape, come on!

I wanna start using the 'scape once again, but dammit you have to do this...for all of us!! Windows 2000 was postponed for like ever, and look at how well that turned out. ALSO, you must do the self installing plugins deal that IE does. Highly cool!

Greco Maldonado


November 7th, 2000   6:01 PM

What was the battle with Microsoft all about? If you going to release a buggy software when you have all the resources to make it a good one, I believe you should shut up and let MS do their stuff.
I have been using NSPR2 and PR3 and am very impressed with it in all aspects, so I believe you owe it to yourself and us to allow a little extra time and do a decent release.
We have waitied a long long time for NS6, a little more is not going make any difference. Please make it right and give you, Netscape, a true fighting chance in the browser market again.

thanks,

Ifte.

Iftekhar Amjad


November 7th, 2000   5:41 PM

Please fix all known standard-compliant bugs before release of Netscape Navigator 6.0. Netscape Navigator used to be my favorite browser, but now I know that not all Web sites are rendered correctly in Netscape, so I use IE for browsing. I also use IE while I am developing Web sites and then check it later for bugs in NN. Please make our jobs easier.

Sandra Carlquist


November 7th, 2000   5:41 PM

Come on! Sheesh! Oh no! We can't put in a little extra effort to even TRY to release a BETTER product than anyone else. Then we would'nt be able to WHINE about being the underdogs, and how mistreated and we are and how the big bad OTHER BROWSER is so unfairly marketed and bundled. KILL THE BUGS FOR ONCE! DO IT!

Scott P


November 7th, 2000   5:39 PM

Very relevant and true points. I absolutely agree.

Eugen Marculescu


November 7th, 2000   5:37 PM

Very relevant and true points. I absolutely agree.

Eugen Marculescu


November 7th, 2000   5:30 PM

After abandoning Netscape browsers, for the most part, after 4.x was released, as a developer I was looking forward to N6 and the hope for a more compliant browser. It appears I will have to *wait* for the Mozilla release, if ever, to see that come to fruition. I urge the N6 developers to follow David's suggestions and release N6 as a beta and work with the Mozilla team to correct the current bugs as described. Give us poor developers a break here folks.

Phil Constant


November 7th, 2000   5:24 PM

I'm dissapointed about this. I thought the whole point of releasing a new product was to improve upon the previous one. I guess I'm wrong. What's the point of releasing a product that fixes old problems, but introduces new ones? I understand that no product is going to be perfect right off the bat, but please! Can we have a good netscape? Is that too much to ask?

The most vexing issue is that we have fixes that *could* be applied but are not... Grr.. oh well, I guess it's back to using the cool features of IE5.x and lumping NS6 in the pack with NS and IE 3-4... sigh 8^(

-James

James Woods


November 7th, 2000   5:23 PM

As a developer I am committed to developing site that work in all platforms...don't make my job difficult.

Samantha


November 7th, 2000   5:19 PM

Please wait. Offer a stable and standards compliant browser. I'm growing to like IE and that scares me. You don't need the bad press right now, or do you care?

Jeff Leadsman


November 7th, 2000   5:13 PM


Deja vu. For years I've ben waiting for Netscape to fight back
and give us a decent, standards-compliant browser to match IE5.
Now, reading what such a respected expert as Dave Flanagan has
to say about the state of the upcoming release of Netscape 6,
I can't help but have that deja vu feeling.

It all started with Communicator 4. I was a loyal Netscape user
back then, and I can clearly remember downloading Communicator 4
to test all the new cool stuff (you know, CSS, DHTML, HTML4),
only to find out their implementation was miserably buggy or
non-standard or both -- you coded according to the W3C specs,
but Navigator didn't do was was supposed to do or showed things
wrong. I was dismayed. Some months later, a friend of mine
downloaded IE4 and told me it was worth a try... even for such a
furiously loyal Netscape user as I was. I did give it a try, and
gasped when all of the new stuff I was struggling with on Navigator
ran without a hiccup on IE4. I knew it was a turning point in the
browser wars.

And then came the news about the Mozilla project, and the opening
of their source, and suddenly I had hopes again. And started waiting.
And waited. And waited for two years... and then, after all that
time, they are going do it again. Another buggy and non-compliant
product released to destroy their reputation among developers.

I cannot understand why. Marketing reasons? Nah, it can't be, they
currently don't profit from their browser, do they? This makes me
wonder if there is a legion of pointy-haired bosses running Netscape
at this moment.

Fare thee well, Netscape. Most probably I will never see you again
on my PC, nor will our clients.

Marco A. Bravo M.


November 7th, 2000   5:11 PM

I believe that I speak for all webmasters web-wide when I say standards compliance is a must in all browsers. I hate nothing more than writing up a very nice, good looking page, and have it completely ruined by a browser like netscape 6.
A buggy netscape 6 will be the crowning point of netscape's downfall.

tom


November 7th, 2000   5:07 PM

I'm just going to use Mozilla's releases from now on and forget that Netscape ever existed. They want to release a standards compliant browser which is not standards compliant!

ps, Mozilla shouldn't use the "classic" theme by default!

Nick Read


November 7th, 2000   5:07 PM

Many of us have been Netscape loyalist for many years. We have stuck with and defended Netscape even through the worst of times. One reason we have pushed and stuck with Netscape is its' compliance to standards. We have pushed Netscape on our clients, our employers, and our friends. We stuck with it even when we had to pay for it to get advanced versions, even while IE was free.

You MUST stay the course in terms of compliance.

If, in fact, there is a rush to release a non-compliant version to get CDs burned, then I implore you to include a automatic SmartUpdate that will activate upon installation that will automatically install a new standards compliant version, presuming one will be available.

Please, stay the course when it comes to design standards. We love Netscape. We would be heartbroken and devastated if you break our faithful relationship.

James A Grant, Internet Commerce Designs


November 7th, 2000   5:06 PM

Lack of standards compliance is holding things back. But we know this.

Stephen De Gabrielle


November 7th, 2000   5:05 PM

Please.... Netscape is on its deathbed, releasing a buggy browser is the worst mistake to make right now! I am a designer/developer and have supported Netscape since the beginning, please don't make me switch to IE or have to say to my clients, "Don't use Netscape, it's just not a good piece of software."

Elisa Del Vecchio


November 7th, 2000   4:57 PM

Releasing software that refuses to conform to standards simply because "Marketing" says so is a terrible practice that has given us things like Windows. It's insulting to the developers of the Mozilla project, as well as to any software developer. At this point, I think I'll probably spend a few dollars, and buy Opera; though I have always supported Netscape, to intentionally release the software in a buggy state (esp. after the length of time that they have been waiting) shows a blatant arrogance and disregard for their users.

Mike Murray


November 7th, 2000   4:54 PM

Leave the lizard alone man. What do you want, a Netscape that aspires to standards compliance or an IE that wants to own the standard?

Contribute some code and quit your bitchin!

Murray Barton


November 7th, 2000   4:51 PM

Listen to the man and fix it. 'Nuff said.

Eliot Stock


November 7th, 2000   4:49 PM

As a webmaster my plea is simple - standards please. Nothing more, nothing less.

Allan Moult


November 7th, 2000   4:48 PM

Netscape needs to keep up with IE. There should be regulations so that both platforms function the same. I know many designers are tired of having to deal with all of Netscape's problems. I like a variety over a monopoly, but not if Netscape can not keep up with the demands of today's internet market. Too many designers and builders have to waste large amounts of hours to get a project to work in both browers. The browers must learn to comply to the same code in order for there to be any progress. Netscape has to stop trying do things differently and keep up with current code in order to survive.

nivek nydlog


November 7th, 2000   4:37 PM

Too little too late. Get the Netscape application crap off of it and make the web browser we need on multiple platforms.

Tim Frick


November 7th, 2000   4:36 PM

I am a internet support technician. In that capacity I find it ludicrous for a browser to be released that is not even close to compling with open standards. For me this will only be generating many problems with the end user when they use the browser and are unable to view and navigate all sites they want. This will call many problems for the tech support industry as well, in which the end users will be calling irate because of problems they are having with a site. This will be something that we can not fix, except by telling them to use another browser. This could cause many customers to decide to switch ISP's because they do not understand what is going on and blame the ISP. Netscape by not complying with the standards is only forcing people who want full functionality in their browser to use internet explorer. This defeats the whole point of choice and personal decisions that is suppossed to be inherent in the internet.

James Demarest


November 7th, 2000   4:36 PM

Releasing Netscape now might be good in the short term, but after people realise that its a buggy, uncompliant product they won't use it anymore and it may turn them off Netscape forever. If you want to win back some market share then the only way to do it is by having a quality product. Like it or not, IE 5.5 is streets ahead of Netscape 4.72 and is streets ahead of NS 6 ... until all the bugs are fixed.

Tristan B


November 7th, 2000   4:23 PM

I use Netscape for all my web based work/play. I run Linux FULL time. I do not use Windows at all, at work, or home. Netscape is the only web browser I can use. Please ensure that this product will be of high quality and meet standards. I am counting on it too be good.

Thank you.

Jeff Neuffer


November 7th, 2000   4:21 PM

i have been forced to tell all my friends to stop using Netscape so that they may see the enhanced features of my web sites that actually function properly in Internet Explorer. Netscape is an extreme thorn in my side, and if they would simply adhere to the standards that IE does, the world would be a better place, and the company would not be destined for exile from the market. Netscape is a joke in it's current form.

zane jacobson


November 7th, 2000   4:21 PM

Because of its non-compatibility, Netscape is rapidly becoming the Apple of the browser world. Now, it's not that Apple makes a bad product, some would say it is superior to Microsoft. The problem is that Apple is not willing to use platforms that the majority of the world uses. That leaves them out-of-step and rapidly running out of market-share. If you want your product to continue to hold an increasingly smaller portion of users you go ahead and release Netscape 6 now and worry about fixing it up when it is convenient for you.

Terry Harvey


November 7th, 2000   4:18 PM

I have been a long time, highly loyal user of Netscape, virtually as long as I've had access to the World Wide Web. The idea that the newest edition of my favorite browser would be released virtually incomplete, despite the warnings of bugs, and the presence of fixes, strikes me as very disenheartening. I've resisted the IE line of browsers, as I dislike their interface, and quite simply feel more comfortable just USING Netscape. However, if Netscape 6.0 is as incompatable as it seems, I, and countless others like me, will utilize a competing browser simply out of practicality. Please, take a little extra time to finalize your browser. You will have earned both the appreciation and the loyalty of countless users.

Thank you for you time,
Brent Logan
UVa School of Medicine, Class of 2004

Brent Logan


November 7th, 2000   4:15 PM

This is no different than any other netscape release. They ignore the standards make their own, then rush a release.

They have lost the browser wars, which they could have won and now they are making the same mistakes as before. I wish they had have learned, they are about to blow their last chance to offer a decent browser to the community. If they blow this it will be the end of any chance of competing against MS.

well I guess they will do what they did last time and claim that MS doing the integration thing that lost them the war. All of those who know better will know that this has nothing to do with it, it is that netscape have not release a better browser for years.

Get your act together netscape, your about to lose even more of your dwindling market.

Stewart James


November 7th, 2000   4:14 PM

As a web developer, I have had to struggle with niggling incompatibilities between IE and Netscape. I'm sure many other developers have had the same experience of fighting to get it working in just those two browsers, any other browser be damned.


A new major browser, with its own set of quirks (different to both IE and older versions of Netscape) will just increase the challenge exponentially. If the errors were the same as old Netscape, I'd pretty much just be writing for two browsers. But fundamental bugs such as have been recorded will require code that is incompatible with the two main browsers.


Please, just release the fixes that have already been made! Many people don't upgrade their browsers often, and if the first version they get is buggy, those buggy browsers may just stay with them for years.


The developer community can oppose this by simply refusing to develop specifically for it unless requested. If users find many sites unusable, they will not use the browser. And then maybe Netscape will reconsider its policy.

David Cummins


November 7th, 2000   4:13 PM

Simple. If Netscape 6 is a buggy mess, there will be no 6.1. IE 5.5 is too good, and has too much of a lead.

JK

Jeff Kirvin


November 7th, 2000   4:13 PM

I am a Linux user, and in the past there has only been 1 browser available: Netscape. It has been dodgy right from the beginning, and I always hoped that either you guys would get it right eventually, or a third browser would enter the fray. Mozilla is a great engine, and because they are opensource etc, they will fix all the bugs, nomatter how long it takes. If you read the list of bugs the reporter has mentioned - they are *not* insignificant. On my machine at work, and at home, I have installed Mozilla, Netscape 6 pr, Opera and Konquerer. You are now not the only alternative to IE - there is real competition for the first time in a long time. You are making a mistake not fixing these problems. If you really want to win back the market, at least invest time and money to making the browser stable, uncrashable. The full complience with web standards could wait until Netscape 6.1, but I will be using Mozilla if Netscape is unstable, and so will many other people. Windows users will just keep using IE.

Luke Worthy


November 7th, 2000   4:11 PM

I guess the people who ruined Netscape the first time are still in charge.

Ric McGredy


November 7th, 2000   4:10 PM

NETSCAPE or maybe it is AOL ? How in the world can you hype standards compliance? Come on get it right! I am sick of buggy broswers.

Fix it! It will do your rep no good to release something more buggy than IE 5.5!


Mark Holm


November 7th, 2000   3:57 PM

As a developer, standards compliancey across browser platforms is essential to timely development. Our current solution to this dilemma has been to drop Netscape altogether. Version 6 of Netscape is their last chance, in my eyes, to compete in this market, and the most important question is whether or not it is standards compliant. If they put this browser out without taking care of this aspect, they really need to stop wasting our time.

Mark E. Smith


November 7th, 2000   3:55 PM

Incompatible browsers break the Web. Please don't let this happen!

Tom Bullers


November 7th, 2000   3:51 PM

Yesyesyes. I am sick of having to redevelop web-hacks to cope with Netscape. Please do not release v6 until it is at least as standards-compliant as IE5.5

Thankyou.

Ben Gracewood


November 7th, 2000   3:51 PM

Basically it comes to this.
If Netscape 6 doesn't fix bugs that don't exists in there early version, web sites will stop supporting it.
If sites don't support it, users will stop using it.
Which is a lot worse than having the competition release a new version.


I am a loyal Netscape user, but not see my site will overrides my loyalty

Paul Meisel

Paul Meisel


November 7th, 2000   3:50 PM

As developers and technologists, we all benefit by being able to bring dynamic, usable, and trouble free applications to the web for clients of all varieties. The more time we spend developing workarounds, watching browsers crash, and explaining to clients why they cannot have a feature due to a bug that appears occasionally on one platform or browser, the less time we can spend accomplishing these goals. Releasing an incomplete or unstable version of a major browser will cost us all dearly.

David Gantenbein


November 7th, 2000   3:48 PM

I have been using Netscape web browsers since version 1.0 for several reasons including the availability for numerous operating systems, and I have been very impressed by the work done by the Mozilla Project. I find it astounding that the Netscape engineers are willing to risk their reputation by releasing a version of Navigator with so many outstanding bugs. Standards compliance among web browsers has always been a sore spot for me personally, and if Navigator 6.0 does not implement the standards, it is not worth using. I am not a fan of Internet Explorer, and it is appalling how Microsoft tried to force the use of their browser. It will be a sad, sad day when IE is considered the superior browser especially considering its laughable support for multiple platforms.

Patrick Hartling


November 7th, 2000   3:46 PM

And so the battle is lost...
As a web developer of many years, I had long hoped for the day when I could stop wasting time on finding fixes for browser bugs and workarounds for the incompatibilities between Netscape and Internet Explorer. Instead of time being wasted on such things, time could be spent on innovation which would be truly cross platform. Netscape 6 promised so much - a brave new world of standards compliance. And now, what would've been Netscape's ultimate achievement has been thrown away, all on the word of a few marketing gurus.

No one doubts that Netscape 6 is long overdue. Realistically it should've been released years ago. But we put that aside and continued to be forgiving of the slippage as there was so much promise - not only standards compliance but an open codebase too! And now that open codebase is being shut down. Not literally, not yet anyway, but by virtue of the fact new developments, fixes and tweaks, are being quarantined from the Netscape 6 release.

I can only hope that Netscape/AOL realize that they will gain nothing by this action. Unless developers openly embrace new browsers, it is pointless in releasing them. That being so, why release a browser to which there are known bugs and incompatibilities, and to which developers will likely actively avoid? I'm sure Netscape would say that they will fix the problem in a later version. This however only pollutes the browser market further which leads to more time being spent on avoiding the nuances of certain browser versions.

Get it together Netscape/AOL. You won't be helping anyone by a premature release. In the mean time, I shall continue to dream of Mozilla...

And the beast shall come forth surrounded by a roiling cloud of vengeance. The house of the unbelievers shall be razed and they shall be scorched to the earth. Their tags shall blink until the end of days.
from The Book of Mozilla, 12:10 - Netscape 4.75

Jeff Keena


November 7th, 2000   3:43 PM

You guys have a moral obligation to fix these issues. I would much rather a better product that is late than one that does not meet expectations. You guys are getting really close, don't give up now! Help the industry move forward with a strong release.

Graham Stephenson


November 7th, 2000   3:43 PM

I can't believe that Netscape is trying even harder to make IE the only browser worth having.

Chris Estes


November 7th, 2000   3:41 PM

Please just release it asis! That way when your browsershare drops below it's current 11% (StatMarket) we can all stop supporting/swearing at what has been a buggy, non-standards, incompatible POS since the beginning.

Mark Jones


November 7th, 2000   3:39 PM

In a nutshell: be standards compliant or don't bother. I will not allow (much less encourage) the use of Netscape in our organization unless it is standards compliant. Netscape is playing catch-up and to be honest, this type of thing shows why...

Tim Ferrell


November 7th, 2000   3:38 PM

Please, the software has been in development for so long; just take a bit more time and do it right. The web will be a better place once there is a truly standards compatible browser on the market.

Phillip Fox


November 7th, 2000   3:38 PM

Netscape 6 is already really late. It would be better to make it a little bit later than to ship it with major standards problems. If Netscape is planning to get 6.1 out there really darn quick, it could maybe be okay to ship broken, but I'm uneasy about it. Netscape 6 ought to work correctly with standard web pages, plus it should decently render pages written for Netscape 4. The worst possible thing would be for Netscape 6 to have its own oddball quirks that must be coded for. (I eagerly wait for the day when web sites no longer bother to detect what kind of browser the user has, but just cheerfully serve up standard code and expect the browser to do the right thing.

Steve R. Hastings


November 7th, 2000   3:34 PM

If Netscape continues with this course of action (not fixing standards compliance bugs before release), it will be an absolute disaster for Netscape and the whole industry. I implore Netscape to reconsider their position.

Netscape, we're relying on you to do the right thing.

Jim Saiya


November 7th, 2000   3:31 PM

As developer I find the reasoning of Netscape management completely irresponsible and inexcusable. One would think that market forces will take care of that attitude. I'm working with IE for now.

Peter Ponca


November 7th, 2000   3:30 PM

I think it's sad that due to the past lack of compliance issues, my browser of choice is no longer Netscape, but IE. Most of my clients agree with me. The first phase of development for any web-based product is inevitably done in the 'trouble-free' IE browser and then ported back to Netscape as time and money allows. Failure to 'keep up' just doesn't make good business sense.

Michele Wickham


November 7th, 2000   3:26 PM

I've been doing web development for over 4 years now. I've struggled with Netscape since version 1.0 and I.E since version 3.0. I'm tired of the game I have to play to get a page to consistently render between different browsers and versions. Emerging standards such as XML/CSS/DOM are all attempts to separate the content from the formatting which would make every web developer's life easier in the long-run. I agree sometimes the standards are vague but not supporting basic API functions is inexscusable. Either adopt and support standards or accept the fact that your product will not be accepted or used.

Jon Prather


November 7th, 2000   3:25 PM

Our company maybe produces twelve websites a year and so far we've been force to make our sites work with Netscape 4+ which has not always been easy. Please make Netscape 6 at least as compliant as IE5, so we can focus on making great websites instead of getting stuff to work with whatever browser.

Douwe M. Osinga


November 7th, 2000   3:20 PM

I can't imagine the reasoning behind condemning Netscape 6 to be yet another non-compliant browser. Perhaps Netscape might offer an explanation? It must have been a deliberate decision. As a designer and programmer, I find it inexcusable.

Nicole J. LeBoeuf-Little


November 7th, 2000   3:19 PM

The standards-support of Mozilla is what makes it worthwhile. Netscape 6 is pointless without it. Those at AOL should be mindful that computer gurus who get excited about this sort of topic hold the sway of a great many computer novices, who are AOL's primary target audience. These concerns should not be ignored.

Chris


November 7th, 2000   3:19 PM

Netscape has already slipped far behind in the browser wars. As a website developer I find any version of netscape tedious and frustrating to use.

Get it right this time or forwever be banished from mainstream use.

JV

Jamie Vuyk


November 7th, 2000   3:18 PM

When I first got the internet a few years ago I was forced to use IE and didn't mind it but a friend urged me to use NN. I came to like it and favor it over IE. It was better, safer, faster, had more features etc. But then IE came out with 2 browsers before NN was able to come out with even 1! I fought it for the longest time even though I knew it was better in almost any way I could find I stayed loyal to NN. But latley it seems that the new one will never come out and for what I do with web pages right now I'm having a lot of trouble adapting it to NN because it's not up to standards. I've finally given up on NN since the new one has been such a disappointment. When I'm in WIN I use IE and when I get Linux back I'll be (probably) using KDE's new browser if it's as good as they boast it is. I've given up on NN. I've always said NN was better and fought for it but now it's not worth it.

Chris Boden


November 7th, 2000   3:14 PM

Comply with the standards or become irrelavant.


Web developers can make a case for using any browser which fully supports standards, even if it's not IE. Otherwise, don't bother.



J. Bauer


November 7th, 2000   3:12 PM

Mr. Flanagan's book "JavaScript: The Definitive Guide" is my JavaScript bible. It is very well written and easy to read. If Mr. Flanagan says Netscape 6.0 needs better ECMAScript support, then I say so too!

Please AOL, make Netscape 6.0 a kick-ass product, not an also-ran.

Ralph Howes


November 7th, 2000   3:11 PM

I'd also like to state the following; If you would like to have me as a Netscape user, please support open standards.

It's the least you can do.

Heimo Hakkeri


November 7th, 2000   3:10 PM

When I first started coding in HTML 4 years ago, I used Netscape exclusively. IE3 had just come out and was not widely used, and life was good. Then came the browser wars and the bane on devleopers we call cross-borwser DHTML. IE and Netscape were the battlers and we were the casualties.

Netscape's stubborn refusal to accept standards has driven me further and further away with each point release, to which now I don't even care about version 6.0. It will be buggy, it will not be stanrads compliant, and it will make more work for developers like me who have to spend so much time figuring out why our standards complaint HTML and JavaScripts don't work, and concoct ways around it.

It's no wonder IE won the browser war. You know when you code something the right way, it will look exactly like, or extremely close to what you want, in IE. Netscape 4.0 is, and always has been, the one to worry about.

I'm sick of it.

I know many developers who share my feelings.

Hey Netscape, get compliant or get lost!!!!!

-JF

Jeff Fox


November 7th, 2000   3:10 PM

It makes no sense to release a broken product. To do so decreases
market share. Since the brand itself is the biggest thing left to
market at Netscape, releasing a browser with standards compliance
problems will relegate Netscape to obscurity.

Cameron Kellough


November 7th, 2000   3:06 PM

I never truly expected that Netscape would get with the program despite how optimistic most people were. Perhaps trying to convince everyone who still uses Netscape to delete it entirely from their systems would be an easier task than getting an acceptable browser from Netscape.

Michael Brown


November 7th, 2000   3:04 PM

I work on several systems in a day (win95/NT, linux and solaris) and I find it very convienient to use Netscape simply because it is a cross-platform web-browser. I would hate to see a much awaited netscape release 6.0 fail the standards compliance merely to meet a deadline.


I would rather wait for some more time than work with a buggy web-browser.

Hemang


November 7th, 2000   3:02 PM

As a staunch Netscape supporter and user since 0.9, and abhor using anything from M$, I hate to see any release of Netscape which is a step backwards.

Get it standards compliant, and get it released!

Most importantly get us developers out of having to deal with Netscape 4.x fiascos with compliancy, period.

There simply isn't room in the reputation and credibility arena for anything less.

Ken Knull


November 7th, 2000   3:02 PM

I think Netscape is making a mistake here. It won't be just the developers who are pulling out and not supporting Netscape, but a lot of users will start to lose faith in using Netscape when pages mess up and say that they only support IE/Mozilla/Opera/Lynx/etc. :)

Netscape complains it doesn't get a share of the browser market cause MS puts IE right into the OS, but then it decides to put out a product that it very well knows has bugs and is going to drive both web developers to drop support and users to consider switching. Looks like they're going for a long walk off a short pier.

Mark Estey


November 7th, 2000   2:56 PM

Speaking as a web programmer who spends hours of time testing on three different platforms and 5 different browsers I URGE you, Netscape, to realign your priorites. Browser compliance shouldn't be the %50 of my daily job that it amounts to now. The standards that are published are there for a reason. With the in-house coding power that you have, it seems as though this should never have been a problem. But now, even with the combined power of your in-house people and the rest of the world who are working on Mozilla you STILL can't get it right. This is, in a word, inexcusable. Please rethink your position.

Brad McCrorey


November 7th, 2000   2:55 PM

I never truly expected that Netscape would get with the program despite how optimistic most people were. Perhaps trying to convince everyone who still uses Netscape to delete it entirely from their systems would be an easier task than getting an acceptable browser from Netscape.

Michael Brown


November 7th, 2000   2:53 PM

A significant attraction of Navigator 6 is the promise of standards compliance.
Without it, the motivation to upgrade Navigator, or to stick with Navigator at all, is greatly diminished.

Frank Woodward


November 7th, 2000   2:48 PM

Anything less standards compliant than IE5.5 is NOT helpful to any of us. Netscape please do not release Navigator 6.0 until it is respectably compliant. If you can't make it compliant, do us all a favour and don't release it at all.

Peter Fagan


November 7th, 2000   2:45 PM

back in 95 when i started coding in java, i swore i would never write another line of code (jscript, javascript or java) for web browsers after an incredibly
frustrating 6 week applet project/war.

5 years later, i found myself writing another (huge) applet, and expected _something_ to have gotten better. instead, things have gotten worse. app and os crashing, deviant vm implementations and assorted stupidities (to wit: a code signing model that's lexically scoped). Netscape has never been standards compliant, and never will be.

back in 95, ie wasn't even an issue, it's java was crappy(ier), it's javascript
was nearly non-functional, and it crashed constantly, nobody used it. Today, Netscape has filled microsoft's place at the bottom nicely, as ie has risen to the top.

i beg netscape to hang up it's gloves and cede the browser wars to microsoft. that way i won't have to re-write every damn thing i do for the 30% of the market that is stuck with netscape.

McClain Looney


November 7th, 2000   2:45 PM

Dear Netscape Marketing Department:
If you would like to have me as a Netscape user, please support open standards.

Roger Wong


November 7th, 2000   2:43 PM

Netscape,

Lip service will get you nowhere. Do it right the first time.

Adam Talmadge


November 7th, 2000   2:42 PM

You never should frozen the code. The freeze should have taken place after standards compliance had been achieved!

Unfreeze the code. Don't print the disks. Distribute this as a beta, but don't release another partially compliant browser to the market! There are already enough of those!

Standards compliance is not something that you can give up on. Look at another segment of the computer industry. How many "99% IBM Compatible" computers do you see these days? If you're going to do it at all, do it right.

Alan Kantz


November 7th, 2000   2:40 PM

I'm a designer, not a programmer. I waste many many hours trying to get my designs to function properly in Netscape. I'm looking forward to getting rid of my javascript booleans - if (ns) then.... With a venue as large as the web, standards are a necessity. Standards exist. It would be negligence on the part of Netscape to ignore them.

Joe Moak


November 7th, 2000   2:39 PM

I can already see the nightmares to come. If Netscape does end up releasing such an inferior product.

Hank McCauley


November 7th, 2000   2:36 PM

I have invested a great deal of time converting a web application to comply with the W3C DOM. Everything works great under IE5 however Netscape Navigator 6.0's lack of support for numerous DOM capabilities and outright bugs have prevented me from completing the port. I thought Netscape 4 was a mess, Netscape 6 is an unstable disaster.

Releasing a buggy product means that all web developers will have to cope with those bug and instability for some time. Even with newer releases, those that purchased PCs preinstalled with Netscape 6 will in most cases refuse to download subsequent releases.

Ken Mori


November 7th, 2000   2:33 PM


Please, just *one* standards compliant browser?!?

Thomas Trelvik


November 7th, 2000   2:30 PM

As a developer, I waste hundreds of hours per year trying to make Netscape work, nothing fancy, just trying to make workarounds to make NS function due to lack of standards compliance. Time is money. Its nearing the point when we will drop support for Netscape due to small marketshare/high cost of development. I, for one, would actually be glad to see that at this point. While I don't like having only one choice of product, I would much prefer to develop for IE because, put quite simply, it works better. It does what it is supposed to do with (Java)ECMAscript, CSS, etc. I want a competitor to IE, but I want one that works at least as well, or I'd prefer if you just put out the cat, turn off the lights, and call it a day. In the long run, if v6.0 is not standards compliant, and continues to cost money in additional development time, we will drop support for NS, and once this happens enough, Netscape will finally die. V6.0 is you last chance, not just with us, but with a lot of developers out there. If you screw this up, its over.

William Byrd


November 7th, 2000   2:28 PM

What do people want when looking at web pages? They want to see the page *correctly*. If Navigator 6.0 won't show pages correctly, people will go to other browsers. I'll use IE 5.X if Nav 6 is full of bugs. So, what's the advantage to rushing out a product that's flawed?

Does Netscape really think people will forgive them for bugs, or are they just tarnishing their reputation for quality even more by failing standards compliance? How do they expect me to trust them when I have other free alternatives out there? I just don't see the rationale in their (current) plan.

William Melick


November 7th, 2000   2:28 PM

Please take the time to fix the bugs before releasing NS6.

David Kahle


November 7th, 2000   2:27 PM

It just blows my mind that even 6 years after releasing Navigator 1.0, Netscape (AOL) is still perfectly unable to come up a fully standard-compliant browser!With an over 80% Internet Explorer market share, this will certainly be the fatal blow to Netscape. IE may not be perfect (and you may resent Bill Gates), but it represents a far better development platform than Netscape. Perhaps things would have been different if some people had cared a little more and ca$hed a little less.

RIP, Navigator. 1994-2000. Thou shall be remembered as "The big browser that couldn't".

Christian Vachon


November 7th, 2000   2:26 PM

I would like to take David Flanagan's request one step further, and ask that all developers renounce all support and/or use of the Netscape product, barring the complete implementation and compliance of open standards.

Ever since their second generation browser, I have found more and more reasons of disgust toward the Netscape product. Why do they have to make me hate them even more?

Al Kahler


November 7th, 2000   2:24 PM

It's fortunate that we have so many standards to choose from! :-)

Tom Phoenix


November 7th, 2000   2:22 PM

Netscape, defer the release for a couple of weeks and
fix the bugs. The developer community will be thankful
for your responsible behaviour.

Nigel Stewart


November 7th, 2000   2:22 PM

IE is already the better browser in almost all respects, but when it comes to standards compliance it ain't perfect. One area that Netscape could be better than IE is standards compliance. Why can't Netscape realise that this is a potential opportunity that may allow them to grab back some market share from IE? If Netscape Nav had better support for web standards, a lot more developers would develop for it and it recommend it to users of their sites. This would surely do more for Netscape's market share than stuffing their browser full of crap consumerism features (shopping channels, etc).

Chris Naunton


November 7th, 2000   2:20 PM

I use Linux, and as such, have almost no choice but to use Netscape as my browser. I have yet to see any other serious alternative that I can use for my daily web surfing needs. The thought that Netscape's next version browser will be a bug-laden standards-violating monstrosity frightens me somewhat. It will let Microsoft win, and then the monopoly lock we all began to fear when they started shipping IE with Windows will come true. With no serious browser competing against them, MS will be able to dictate the course of the HTML "standard", relegating the W3C to the status of an organization full of sound and fury, but whose actions signify nothing. I don't think anyone wants that, least of all Netscape. But that's the effect their actions are going to have anyway.



And now I'm wondering why there isn't any real free (speech) browser floating around there that has reached critical mass. That would solve a lot of problems.

Rafael R. Sevilla


November 7th, 2000   2:20 PM

I am a web applications developer and your failure to release a version of Netscape Navigator that is at the same level as IE5 in terms of standards compliance is causing me and everybody in the industry a lot of grief. Our clients want to leave their users the choice as of which browser to install in their machines, but as long as Netscape Navigator doesn't match IE, all these people are being forced to use IE5.


This is a terrible situation, these people are using IE not because it is their choice or because it is better, but because their favorite browser cannot match standards like IE can. Until this situation is solved I will distribute the link to the O'Reilly story to all my clients so they understand why they are forced to stay using IE5+.

Pedro A. Vera-Perez


November 7th, 2000   2:19 PM

I can appreciate that the engineers at Netscape actually want Navigator 6 to see the light of day and not be held up by endless bug fixes and feature requests. But there is also the danger of serious backlash, as demonstrated here, if they don't comply with standards. Make the next release a beta release and take care of the final standards issues. Be on the right side of this issue, instead of opening yourself to the marketing powers at Microsoft which will exploit the fact that Navigator is not a standards-compliant browser. And worse, don't become the bane of my existence. The bad taste will linger longer than the time it takes to implement the bug fixes.

Timothy O'Connor Fraser


November 7th, 2000   2:18 PM

I thought Netscape 6 might finally restore Netscape as a useable product with some hope of competing with IE. Obviously, the company is determined to ensure that that does not happen. That is very sad, indeed.

Geoff Mitchell


November 7th, 2000   2:18 PM

Netscape 4.x worked reasonably well and since I am a Linux user I have had no choice, not until Mozilla Milestone 17 came. Mozilla is today fully usable, and at least development is leading somewhere. Netscape 6, on the other hand, will never be a choice as long as they continue package thier browser with all those commercial applications. Even if they didn't there is no reason not to use Mozilla which it is based on. I mean - Mozilla updates on a daily basis, and by the time new Netscapes are released they will already be outdated in comparison.
Too bad netscape but you loose... I have a feeling AOL is quite a big factor for this.

Erik Almqvist


November 7th, 2000   2:16 PM

Hypocrites!

Try validating this article or the O'Reilly home page.

anonymous


November 7th, 2000   2:15 PM

I am shocked that AOL/Netscape would release such an inferior, unstable, non-compliant upgrade to 4.7. I would like to support Netscape but I have trouble defending to collegues why Netscape 6 is so slow and non-compliant. The release of Version 6 in it's current state will be a major headache to web developers such as myself. AOL needs to do some serious thinking before releasing this lemon!

David Sica


November 7th, 2000   2:14 PM

Be good developers, do your job, release a good product
and stand behind your promises.

And please improve the interface. Now where is my
home button? And whats up with the collapsable toolbars
that aren't in the right place anymore when you expand them?

It's like Netscape has added all sorts of neat features to
the UI but totally failed on improving the useability of
the core application.

Joshua Gunder


November 7th, 2000   2:12 PM

Has everyone forgotten that Mozilla split from the Netscape codebase?

Who cares about Netscape when we know that Mozilla will be ok??

Jon Thor Williams


November 7th, 2000   2:08 PM

I've discussed the issue of standards compliance n times, and I'm not going to repeat what has already been said.. Not making them standards compliant at this point is stupid-stupid-stupid-stupid.

Morten W. Petersen


November 7th, 2000   2:07 PM

I agree with this article and have no plans of supporting Netscape at any point in the future. I would be a VERY happy web developer if Netscape would just dissapear!

Joshua Decker


November 7th, 2000   2:05 PM

As a developer, I swore I would never ever bend over backwards again to satisfy a DOM that is browser specific which means W3C standards must be supported. Never ever again will I bend over backwards to make something work for a browser when the developer community has spoken and asked for a standard to be followed.

Netscape has practicly 0 market share now and are ridding the reputation of a browser that supports standards. If they want to make their business profitable, all the power to them...if they do it at the expense of the development community then I say developers no longer support Netscape.
The problem is the general public doesn't even know what W3C is and they'll upgrade their system to Netscape 6.0 and go on all those simple sites and everything will be ok. Once sites start using the full potential of the DOM then what??? Back to having code that verifies if it's IE or Netscape? What's the point of standards if you don't follow them?

Netscape, for the love of God don't screw the developers!



Lior Amar
CTO of OSTnet
lior@ostnet.com
www.ostnet.com

Lior Amar


November 7th, 2000   2:05 PM

At this stage of the game, releasing a non-standards compliant web browser is simply inexcusable. We have waited this long for v6 -- take the time to do the right thing and support the standards.

Scott Davis


November 7th, 2000   2:04 PM


Netscape should delay the release until the browser is compliant. Not much
else makes sense - the best thing the netscape browser can offer is standards
compliance and a committment to continue being compliant.

jeff putnam


November 7th, 2000   2:04 PM


Netscape should delay the release until the browser is compliant. Not much
else makes sense - the best thing the netscape browser can offer is standards
compliance and a committment to continue being compliant.

jeff putnam


November 7th, 2000   2:03 PM

Are they TRYING to let Microsoft Internet Explorer take over the browser universe. Please make Netscape compliant with Open Standards

Stan Barton


November 7th, 2000   2:02 PM

...and they wonder why Microsoft won the war...

Me


November 7th, 2000   2:01 PM

Just do it!

Tilly McGillicutty


November 7th, 2000   2:01 PM

After such a long wait for this next-generation browser, it seems reasonable
to take a little more time to actually get it right.

Guy McArthur


November 7th, 2000   2:01 PM

Netscape: Listen to this man. He wrote the book, literally, and is one of the smartest men the business.

If you want to do this the Microsoft way (release software and have the general public beta test it) that is your option, but not good business.
I've always thought you were better than that.

Eric Richardson


November 7th, 2000   2:00 PM

What good is a browser if it is not compatible? The same standards that Netscape doesn't seem to care about are the same ones that have allowed the internet to flourish as it has. There are plenty of opportunities to exercise non-conformity, but a browser is not one of them. The real shame is that Netscape is the dominant browser for Linux/Unix users, and the fact that it hasn't kept up doesn't bode well for the future of these operating systems, especially in the modern workplace, where a browser is a neccessary tool.

Nathan McMinn


November 7th, 2000   1:59 PM

I agree with Mr. Flanagan -- you need to concentrate first and foremost on standards compliance. If you don't, the Netscape blip will simply disappear off everyone's radar screen -- it will be irrelevant. I will not develop for it, I won't even use it if it is not compliant with all open standards. I have waited so long for a better browser, putting up with 4.x's many bugs -- what Netscape is planning now would be a slap in the face to the last of the Netscape holdouts. Netscape will have left us, not the other way around. I will finally have to admit that Microsoft has a superior product, and Netscape will have earned the contempt I once had for Microsoft.







Scot Zumbehl


November 7th, 2000   1:50 PM

I have used Netscape for years, and was happy with a standards-compliant that did not feel as much pressure as Internet Explorer to follow Microsoft's (now accepted as industry-damaging) policy of "embrace and extend". I am not at all interested in many of the bells-and-whistles that are supposed to be included in the new Netscape, and I feel that they detract from the product. A browser is a tool. I want a browser that FOLLOWS (not defines) industry standards. I want one that does so using minimal resources, and that does not include commercial hype and other proprietary garbage.

Bill Neurauter


November 7th, 2000   1:50 PM

What todays webdesigners have to put up with is to adapt websites and its designs to comply with two browser, netscape and explorer. Since Netscape hasn't been upgraded (properly) in 2 years (imagine what that is in Internet-years) it has fallen behind completely. Plus the fact that it has a random behaviour and crashes alot.

It is too bad if netscape continues to release browsers with these kinds of known bugs. I feel sorry for the guys and girls that have to adapt sites to a faulty browser.

Joakim Holmback


November 7th, 2000   1:49 PM

i am tired of web browsers that do not render html properly. please do not create another browser that carelessly dismisses the hard work of the w3c and makes life for web designers difficult.

kristofer nelson


November 7th, 2000   1:46 PM

I would hate to see a good app go bad. Take your time, and realease a product worth wild for all to use.

Scott Wolf


November 7th, 2000   1:44 PM

I am a professional web developer for a large internet consulting firm. It gets harder every day to convince clients that IE is not the only browser that matters. If Netscape 6 gets released without these fixes, my task will become impossible -- existing sites will break, and Netscape 6 won't be part of the target browser spec on new projects. As people download 6 and watch sites fail, they will return to their previous browser (or download the latest IE).


I hope that the individuals responsible for the release decision understand that browsers need to be functional to be popular.

Dave Owen


November 7th, 2000   1:44 PM

I am becoming rather alarmed at the apparent belief at Netscape that even the smallest noncompliance with standards will be sustainable in a Netscape 6.0 release.

Noting a discrepancy in the release notes results in a product which is just as defective.

Perhaps marketing heads at Netscape -- if they have any -- think that they will be able to establish a marginally noncompliant browser if they throw in a lot of bells and whistles. That won't work. If I want AOL Instant Messenger, net2phone, or any of those products, I know how to download, install, and operate them without messing with another larger product. Users can identify the difference between a huge download and a small one. Not everyone has DSL or cable modems and vast wastelands of hard drive space yet. Don't confuse your power users with the real user base to whom your competition caters: the average, only semi-computer-literate individual.

If you're aiming for use in the enterprise, beware! I can think of no user base which is presently more zealous about software standards (except perhaps the military, but the military shies away from extravagant web coding).

A themeable but noncompliant browser is of no use to me. A torn painting is not substantially improved by a pretty frame.

Moreover, any appeal that "chroming" might have for independent developers will be lost if the product cannot behave as it ought, according to standards, every time.

I would echo the author and the others who have spoken here: Release a final product which is fully standards compliant. If you do not, expect no mercy, and when the time comes to axe the deadweight, go first to those people controlling marketing who think that all it takes to succeed in the software world today is a pretty product that almost gets the job done. You don't need them.


Timothy Hadley


November 7th, 2000   1:43 PM

It is too easy for users to switch to one of your competitors, especially when your biggest competitors' product is already in place on their PC. Netscape must exhibit the engineering prowess to create a product great enough to loosen the clutches of the other products on the users and allow them to honestly select the Netscape package over all others. Not conforming to the standards is no way to achieve this. If display or functional anomalies exist, the users will simply shelve the Netscape product and revert back to an old (and possibly far less capable) package that, if nothing else, doesnt have any big problems.

I'm pulling for Netscape, but this is getting harder and harder to do.

Monty

Monty Scroggins


November 7th, 2000   1:39 PM

I agree with the author...you are already so far behind, that if you don't come out with something that is satisfiable to standards, then people will wonder why you were taking so long.

Do the right thing...incorporate good standards.

Michael


November 7th, 2000   1:38 PM

I'm appalled that the Netscape division of AOL would even think of releasing a non-standards compliant browser. During the browser wars I remember IE adding all the cool non-standards compliant functions that would break a perfectly good web page. Now it seems the positions are reversed, and instead of NS trying to one-up IE via standards, they're doing what? I don't get it. How do they expect to get any market share from this crap they're trying to push.


It's not even so much the masses who will choose what gets used. It's the web development community who will decide how they make their webpages. Developers like standards. They make life easier.


And please, MS, if NS does itself in, make a Linux/*BSD compatible version of IE!

Taavi Burns


November 7th, 2000   1:36 PM

at pandell we restrict most of our web based app functionality to ie5. it would be nice to support both platforms, but not worth the effort if developing for netscape remains needlessly difficult

-gord

gordon mcdowell


November 7th, 2000   1:32 PM

I have used Netscape for years, and was happy with a standards-compliant that did not feel as much pressure as Internet Explorer to follow Microsoft's (now accepted as industry-damaging) policy of "embrace and extend". I am not at all interested in many of the bells-and-whistles that are supposed to be included in the new Netscape, and I feel that they detract from the product. A browser is a tool. I want a browser that FOLLOWS (not defines) industry standards. I want one that does so using minimal resources, and that does not include commercial hype and other proprietary garbage.

Lonny Eachus


November 7th, 2000   1:31 PM

I have used Netscape for years, and was happy with a standards-compliant that did not feel as much pressure as Internet Explorer to follow Microsoft's (now accepted as industry-damaging) policy of "embrace and extend". I am not at all interested in many of the bells-and-whistles that are supposed to be included in the new Netscape, and I feel that they detract from the product. A browser is a tool. I want a browser that follows (not defines) industry standards. I want one that does so using minimal resources, and that does not include commercial hype and other proprietary garbage.

Support the standards FIRST. Then, if you feel it necessary to include extras, include settings so users can turn them off!

Lonny Eachus


November 7th, 2000   1:30 PM

Netscape: This is a no-brainer. You're in crunch time right now, and you should be excited/accepting of these IMPORTANT bug fixes. Make the right decision.

On another note, PLEASE make the NS Instant Messenger compatible with AOLIM AND ICQ (also owned by AOL!). To me, this is also a no-brainer!

Brian White


November 7th, 2000   1:29 PM

When you are the first out with a new idea, you can implement it any way you wish. Once an installed base of competitors products are in circulation, you need a bridge to be able to use their data models or structures. No bridge to a neutral industrial standard equals no business.
Prime examples of this was the NeXT computer. (This is being written on one).
Netscape needs standards compliance first. Would you buy a car that can not be used on the current roadways? Who cares about the other features...

Wake up and smell the coffee before it is too late.

Gerold Rupprecht


November 7th, 2000   1:29 PM

When you are the first out with a new idea, you can implement it any way you wish. Once an installed base of competitors products are in circulation, you need a bridge to be able to use their data models or structures. No bridge to a neutral industrial standard equals no business.
Prime examples of this was the NeXT computer. (This is being written on one).
Netscape needs standards compliance first. Would you buy a car that can not be used on the current roadways? Who cares about the other features...

Wake up and smell the coffee before it is too late.

Gerold Rupprecht


November 7th, 2000   1:28 PM

As a member of a development team focusing on webhosted application, we're extremely disheartened by the pending release of Netscape 6. Even though we run Linux and use Netscape almost exclusively internally, we have recently discussed (last week in fact) developing for IE. This is due almost completely to Netscape's inability to handle CSS properly. Various issues with CSS and DHTML have cost so much time in doing multiple versions of pages - or sacrificing look/feel/features - that we started considering if we shouldn't just develop out web applications exclusively for IE.

I'd like to strongly request that the release of Netscape 6 be postponed until standards compliance is achieved - or at least is equal to that of IE 5.

-
Corwin Grey
Application Development Team
http://www.projectsoftwaregroup.com

Corwin Grey


November 7th, 2000   1:26 PM

I do web development and am constantly frustrated by Navigator 4.x. I do some work with 6 pr3, and have been looking forward to have a browser that rivals IE's standards compliance (finially). Now that I have learned that netscape does not plan to even fix minor bugs that have patches that already work, I am ready to write off netscape and all of its products as a complete failure. It's sad when a company can't wait another week or month to get basic standards compliance finished on a product people have been waiting for for over two years.

Karl Shea


November 7th, 2000   1:23 PM

Too many people have worked too long for this to be screwed up now.

Netscape 6 is a symbol. To fail in its' mission would be disasterous.

People will have to choose to use Mozilla over Netscape 6.

Michael Merker


November 7th, 2000   1:18 PM

!

Stefan Gmoser


November 7th, 2000   1:15 PM

I use Communicator 4.7, Mozilla and NS6pr3. I like how all of them work. I think NS6 will be a great product, if done right. You only get one chance to do it right when working with standards-setting code. Think with your heads, not with your marketing hype. Take advantage of the benefits your open-source developers are providing you, and Use The Source, Luke.

Chris 'Xenon' Hanson


November 7th, 2000   1:14 PM

Netscape Navigator should give up the ghost. Netscape has not been relevant for 3 or more years now. Microsoft Internet Explorer 3 matched Netscape, IE 4 surpassed Netscape, IE 5 made Netscape 4.7 and 6.0 look like jokes, IE 5.5 makes Netscape 4.7 and 6.0 look sorry-ass. Even Netscape realized that their 5th generation (and I use that term loosely) browser was a piece of crap and after 2 years of so-called development, they finally chucked it and went to 6.0. AOL should just write off Netscape as a loss.

I hated having to develop WWW sites for the least common denominator - I now refuse to do so. If we, as developers, want standards we need to stop worrying about minimalization (as is the case when we develop pages so that Netscape and Opera can read them) and give our support to Microsoft Internet Explorer. The self-styled elitists among us need to stop bashing Microsoft and get realistic. Developing for Microsoft's software has made many of us rich. I'm not saying we should be indebted to Microsoft, but neither should we be indebted to Netscape, Opera, Sun Microsystems or any other company just because they supposedly support "open standards".

Please AOL, put Netscape out of its misery by killing it and take the loss of money you so unwisely invested (another term that I use loosely) as a tax write-off!!!

Post Script: I know that Opera supports Cascading Style Sheets as well as anyone. However, Opera is far behind in terms of add-on/plug-in support, their interface is dismal, and they charge money for their browser.

Robert Ternes


November 7th, 2000   1:14 PM

We desperately need a serious alternative to Microsoft IE, and Opera is just not it. I have been playing with Mozilla's releases for a long while now, and the Netscape distribution is appalling. It is slow to load, incredibly unstable during that boot process, and frustrating to consider using. It does not render javascripts properly, nor does it handle Flash or many other attributes with finess. I used to be a Netscape booster, but I have used MS IE for over 6 months now because Netscape have not put forth the effort that is to be expected from a company as big as AOL. Honestly, this latest release is a joke, and I refuse to touch Netscape again until they do meet web standards. Block this release, label it beta, and fix the problems... please! Thank you for this opportunity to have our say.

Kyp de V.


November 7th, 2000   1:12 PM

How can those Netscape folks call themselves 'engineers' if they willingly and knowingly release products that contain defects. It's literally a disgrace to the community of engineers. Do you think civil engineers decide to forego a bearing column, just so that the public unveiling of a new building will be on time?

Hell, it may not be life or death but it's the commitment to producing quality work that enable the engineering community to earn the respect of the public. You people should be ashamed of yourselves.

Please, oh, please do not let the petty marketing or internal politicking of Netscape sway you from releasing a quality product. If you folks are truly engineers, you would do what's *right*, not what makes a manager happy.

Victor Chan


November 7th, 2000   1:08 PM

THe only chance that netscape has, is to release a browser that is 100% standards compliant. Otherwise there is no reason to even try it.

please delay netscape 6 until it is standards compliant.

mike chambers

mesh@speakeasy.org

Mike Chambers


November 7th, 2000   1:08 PM

Forget about netscape, mozilla is what I want, not some AOL Product. I feel that corporate tactics leave the user in the middle with a shitty product. I feel we could completly ignore netscape if there was an acceptable browser for *NIX. I dont feel that the Netscape / Mozilla crew's share the same ideals. I would like to see an open source browser that does not rely on the needs of a corporation.

Chris

Chris Johannesen


November 7th, 2000   1:07 PM

Standards, people. Get them right first. The current state of browsers is maddening.

David Hendler


November 7th, 2000   1:04 PM

Do the right thing...call the release a beta and reopen the code. I have been holding out for Navigator 6, putting up with 4.x in the hopes that I could upgrade my department to a standards-compliant non-Microsoft browser. But if Nav 6 is not compliant, I can't wait any longer. IE 5.5 will get put on all our boxes.

John Q. Heywood


November 7th, 2000   1:02 PM

Drop the sidebar (nobody needs it), drop the skins (nice to look at but ultimately useless) and put in the standards compliance! I have been a Netscape supporter for years, but if you screw this up, I will change to another browser!

Karsten F


November 7th, 2000   1:01 PM

Now, I'm not a web designer by any standard, but the sites that I have/do work on, though limited, I really strive to keep compatible and compliant to the demands of the different browsers. I can't even really claim that I know what I'm doing, but at least the desire to make something that surfer A using IE, and surfer B using netscape can both see easily is there, and a goal like that is noble in itself. Reading the different pages of various web developers, kind enough to lend me their advice, apparently have goals similar to mine with thier pages. If NN6 will be released in the state that it's being claimed, then they may as well release nothing at all. What a foolish move they would make. Where's the logic?

-adm

Adam McWaters


November 7th, 2000   1:01 PM

Are you INSANE Netscape ?!?!?!?!?!?! You are bastardizing the Mozilla code and turning it back into the POS that Netscape 4.x is.

Mike Jasnowski


November 7th, 2000   1:01 PM

Netscape: your browser is already late. Please don't make it buggy, too. If it's a top-quality, standout browser with strong features, and most importantly, if it is stable like a rock and has strict standards compliance, then all the waiting will have been worth it. But if it's a piece of crap, then Netscape will have finally shot itself in the foot for the last time.

I mean that seriously. Keep going like this, and you won't be around long enough to put out Netscape 7.0. Your market share has declined dramatically, even though many people are desperately searching for good alternatives to Microsoft. In the meantime, Netscape is eating itself alive, because it can't supply the "good" in that emphasized section.

You've hired your engineers to be smart about how to write code. Listen to them! Let them do their jobs!

But above all: fix your bugs. Give us a browser that works, stably, correctly, in accord with the standards, every time, with no crashes, and the Internet will beat a path back to your door. It's not like we've forgotten where to find you.

You just need to convince us that it's worth coming back.

Kai MacTane, a long-time Netscape suppor


November 7th, 2000   12:59 PM

I will not use the provided html tags as a service to those already using Netscape v6 as they may or may not be rendered properly for you. Come on, this is ridiculous. This, well hell, this make Internet Explorer look good! Egads

Joe McGuire


November 7th, 2000   12:58 PM

What is wrong with the dolts at Netscape?


Why the hell are they including such things as AIM (Asshole Online Idiot Messenger), net2phone or the crappy email/news client, etc when they should be concentrating on things like standard compliance, which is a position that they were much better on than M$ but have surrendered that position long ago. Remeber the days when M$ were spanked black and blue for not complying to the standards as well as Netscape did? Well, those days are long gone.


Also, why are we still forced to either have Javascript on when there are lots of sites where I do not want JS enabled (Geocities comes to mind immediately). I hate those fscking pop-up windows and those annoying ad scripts.


And whats with the installer, only giving download progress on the currecnt file? Where is the overall download progress bar? Also, it completely ignored my existing Netscape settings and went off on it's own. Why?


Who the hell do they think they are putting Asshole Online shortcuts on my desktop. If I want a crapass ISP who gives shitty, "I don't give a rats ass, I have your credit card" service and creates software that completely screws my network setup, I will hunt for it.



Much as I hate to say it, I consider IE to be a better browser at the moment, with things like the ability to select which sites have things like javascripting ability or any other form of scripting.



Come on, Netscape. Get your act together! Or is the AOL influence washing through Netscape like a sewage tide?

William Keay


November 7th, 2000   12:57 PM

What is wrong with the dolts at Netscape?



Why the hell are they including such things as AIM (Asshole Online Idiot Messenger), net2phone or the crappy email/news client, etc when they should be concentrating on things like standard compliance, which is a position that they were much better on than M$ but have surrendered that position long ago. Remeber the days when MS were spanked black and blue for not complying to the standards as well as Netscape did? Well, those days are long gone.



Also, why are we still forced to either have Javascript on when there are lots of sites where I do not want JS enabled (Geocities comes to mind immediately). I hate those fscking pop-up windows and those annoying ad scripts.



And whats with the installer, only giving download progress on the currecnt file? Where is the overall download progress bar? Also, it completely ignored my existing Netscape settings and went off on it's own. Why?

Who the hell do they think they are putting Asshole Online shortcuts on my desktop. If I want a crapass ISP who gives shitty, "I don't give a rats ass, I have your credit card" service and creates software that completely screws my network setup, I will hunt for it.

Much as I hate to say it, I consider IE to be a better browser at the moment, with things like the ability to select which sites have things like javascripting ability or any other form of scripting.

Come on, Netscape. Get your act together! Or is the AOL influence washing through Netscape like a sewage tide?

William Keay


November 7th, 2000   12:56 PM

I refuse to use Netscape 6 if it isn't standards compliant. None of the web developers here will use it either. I will them remove netscape permanently from all machines as I can't expect the next version (Netscape 6) to be standards compliant.



This is sad as I have always voted for Netscape; always thought they were more about sticking to standards and making it compliant so that it works across the board. In the back of my mind I always thought that eventually Netscape would come out on top again. If thats not to take place. It'd hurt me to do it but I'd have to remove Netscape. In the long run it'd be better as the sites that I administrate are business minded and the clients would like everyone to be able to view their pages. They don't really care about the holy browser war (I'm a die-hard IE hasn't won the war yet). They just want it to work. When it works it goods for me and them; Guess what?! Being non-standard doesn't work. Not good for them; Not good for me.




Your choice, I know you can make it happen;

Otherwise me and a few of my sysadmin friends will be held hostage and call you traitors to the cause.
-Christopher Warner

Christopher Warner


November 7th, 2000   12:53 PM

Its amazing to me how many of these statements are made with so little insight into the complete product. Every measurement of standards compliance I've seen has shown that Netscape/Mozilla beats IE5.X on standards compliance hands down. I use Mozilla nightly builds so perhaps I'm not in immediate touch with the state of Netscape's current release but I bet it STILL beats the Windows IE5.X compiance. Release it and then make it better, that's how this business works.

Lee


November 7th, 2000   12:52 PM

Its amazing to me how many of these statements are made with so little insight into the complete product. Every measurement of standards compliance I've seen has shown that Netscape/Mozilla beats IE5.X on standards compliance hands down. I use Mozilla nightly builds so perhaps I'm not in immediate touch with the state of Netscape's current release but I bet it STILL beats the Windows IE5.X compiance. Release it and then make it better, that's how this business works.

Lee


November 7th, 2000   12:50 PM

Netscape has always been the worse of the 2 giants because of their standards compliance... What makes people think that release 6 will fix that? Cuz it's 'open source'? Doesn't mean anything if it's still controlled by a company who doesn't care about standards...

Standards don't make money, Advertisement and "features" that nobody will use make money... and to a corporate body, that's all that matters: money...

Maybe some day we'll live in a world where there's true "standards compliance" but then again, it means we lose our individuallity too... So which is better? Mass uniformity as the expense of individuallity, or having to design for 2 platforms and completly expressing oneself as one feels? Netscape users see my page as "Get a REAL browser" and I'd personally like to keep it that way.

PhaseBurn


November 7th, 2000   12:50 PM

As a professional web site developer, I have to express my concern and frustration with the whole Netscape debacle. It's one thing to want to provide a viable (and even attractive) alternative to IE, it's completely another to send an anticipating public back into Bill's arms because of a pathetic attempt. I can appreciate the difficulty in rewriting an application from scratch, but one would think more time would be spent on making it better. Building up a fully functional, flexible, and solid interpreter for css, html, dhtml, and ECMAScript would be so much better than trying to be fancy with themes and shopping buttons. Please, we beg you, keep your code from the public at least until you can get it right. We really need some competition in the market, not another joke application like IE 3 was. C'mmon... common sense folks!

Matt Mc


November 7th, 2000   12:50 PM

Releasing a projuct with known bugs is a big mistake. There will be plenty of unknown bugs appear once real users get their hands on it.



The fact that the accompanying mail client does not include roaming access is a show stopper at this company.

Paul J. Shane


November 7th, 2000   12:49 PM

It's because of crap like that I'm using IE to send this message. Once apon a time Netscape was all I used. Now it's almost unbarable to use. I've been looking forward to Netscape 6 for quite some time and now... I really don't care. Let them do what they want. I'm not using their product. It sucks. It doesn't matter how much I hate M$. If it means using a product from a compnay I hate or using a product that sucks I'll do the former every time.

Mike Heath


November 7th, 2000   12:47 PM

Don't do it to us again. You won't be forgiven.

Since many web developers will be forced to recode their dynamic HTML pages to support NN6, it doesn't make sense to force them to code around more non-compliance issues, especially when you already have the fixes, and they've been carefully code-reviewed... USE THEM! If you release with these known compliance issues, you will be roasted by the press (and Microsoft's FUD patrol).

After waiting so long, an extra month or two will not make any difference. You won't get another chance to salvage your reputation. NC4 was a disaster--it handed the browser market to Microsoft on a silver platter!

NC4 was released with a non-functional JVM, and Java hasn't yet recovered from this failure (it took over a year for a functional 1.1 compliant JVM to appear on NC4). Don't rush out another product that will forever haunt web developers.

Ken Settle


November 7th, 2000   12:46 PM

I may not bee the sharpest tool in the shed, but from what i have seen of the world, if people arnt happy about a product, regardless of how manny bells and whistls, how sleek and high speed it wants to look, if it doesnt function the way the *majority expects it should, then it is useless.

I realize *all* software has bugs. Whether they are actual bugs from poor programing or "bugs" from what some user thinks it should function for her/him, this is a reality. OPEN standards are what the "majority" agree upon. What the "majority" expects from a certain product. If this (or any other) product fails to come to par for the "majority" then the product has failed its indended use. Would you be happy with your brand new RX7 if every time you made a turn there were loud poping noises? if the stering whele was loose? if the clock decided what time it wanted to be? (personaly i wouldnt appreciate it)

My point being: if people dont like it, they will find another way.
This is the human way, it is natures way of selective eugenics. If we are blocked we (humanity) will find its way around.

I bring RH7.0 as case in point. Regardless of whether RH thinks "its the best product we have released", the consensus doesnt think so. and they ultimately are who, will or wont, use your product.

The failure of ,marketing/development-team/programers/whoever, to effect needed and necessary changes in software that is currently being developed is basicly thuming the nose at the customers, which is what software and buissness is all about. please correct my if im wrong. (i dont think businesses pay good money and put out software for their health)



"A "No" uttered from deepest conviction is better and greater than a "Yes"
merely uttered to please, or what is worse, to avoid trouble."
"Is it not enough to know the evil to shun it? If not, we should be sincere
enough to admit that we love evil too well to give it up."
- Ghandi

P. Prior


November 7th, 2000   12:45 PM

This is just another example of how far Netscape has fallen behind.

Shane Denton


November 7th, 2000   12:43 PM

Please do not release a non-standards compliant web browser, we've already waitied this long, why not a few months more. Doing this will merely give M$ more ammunition against Netscape. Make NS6 beta again and let the Mozilla team do it's work and patch it.

Chris Hemmah


November 7th, 2000   12:41 PM

Releasing Netscape 6 in its current state would be a huge mistake. I believe that it would cause people to move to IE & other browsers, and that, in my opinion would be very bad. I use Netscape whenever possible because of its reputation for supporting the various open standards. If one of the major browsers stops supporting the various standards, even if it is due to serious bugs in the code, other vendors may feel free to intentionally stop their support in favor of proprietary standards.

Morgan Terry


November 7th, 2000   12:39 PM

To put it simply, the reason Netscape is not getting market share is that it is not able to work on sites that follow the standards. Therefore any bugs that move Netscape away from standards should be considered "Fatal". Otherwise what is the point of working on it? I feel sorry for the poor programmers working on this thing that that they realize is going to be useless. They have no doubt put tons of work into it and its being sabotaged by bad management. That just sucks.

And I have to laugh when I hear people say "Its not a critical bug so they can ship without it." Bugs priority levels are a matter of politics. Think about it...what really does it take to change the priority of a bug...click...click. The real issue is of standards and the internet. As any of you who has actually developed a real internet site knows getting an app to work across IE and Netscape is no fun at all. IE generally follows the standards and Netscape doesn't. Its that simple. Netscape is doubling the cost of development for every project that has a requirement to support it. That has a huge drag on everything we do. If we could get rid of Netscape completely we would all be better off.

Its amusing to hear people who I suspect love to harp on MS for lack of standards call for Netscape to release another browser that doesn't follow standards. Netscape made up layers, what the heck is a layer?(This is rhetorical)
And Netscape doesn't support events on all elements of the DOM. I guess this is a feature. Even areas where you would suspect a non-Microsoft app to be strong such as Java support Netscape only supports as a plug-in.

michael ashby


November 7th, 2000   12:39 PM

I struggle on with NN 4.6 as my primary personal browser but for work - already one project is completely IE5+ specific, the other is heading that way. This is because of the functionality provided by DHTML, CSS and the DOM. If Netscape can't get the DOM compliant in this release then we won't support it and so another bunch of users will be directed to Microsoft.

Chris

Chris McKay


November 7th, 2000   12:37 PM

I'm not a big-time developer or webmaster for a large company. I maintain an informational site at 68caliber.com and I am working on a number of smaller sites in the same genre as 68 for others who appreciate my skills, but I feel that I must add my own small voice to the crowd.

I've been developing web sites for about 6 years in my spare time. Making a little money and even getting my name mentioned in 2 national sports-related magazines because of them. I've always strived to be cross-browser compatible, writing one page for all and not branching into creating separate Netscape, IE, other pages. Due to failures of companies like Sun (HotJava), Opera, and Netscape to keep their browsers current with accepted standards, this is becoming harder to do.

To Netscape: Back when Netscape Communicator 4 came out, you guys had the best browser. I wouldn't have dreamt of using MSIE. But Since then, significant improvements have not been made. It seems that its more important to bundle Real Player and AOL Instant Messenger than to make your browser compliant with web standards; benefitting both the user and the developer.

There is a reason why Netscape lost and continues to lose market share. My log files show that between all of the sites I maintain, Netscape is used only by 23% - 28% of visitors. You are losing the browser war thru your lack of willingness to modernize. I personally think its pathetic, especially when you went to court blaming MS's "illegal monopolistic tactics" for your loss of market share, when you clearly are distributing an inferior product.

In addition, I've been forced recently to use Netscape again. I switched my home computer that I work off of to Linux. Netscape was the most modern and compliant browser I can find and I was absolutley APPALLED by the fact that the JVM is so unstable as to make any web site using Java Applets COMPLETELY USELESS; including my own site (this has been remedied since its discovery). I thought it was the fault of Linux, but I can run my Applets using Appletviewer with no trouble at all. So I lay the blame squarely on Netscape's shoulders.

Enough accusations. I beg you to fix your problems. Step away from the marketting side of the business and just make the browser useable to both developers and users alike. If you build a better product, people will use it. I'd like to see Netscape start to retake the market from IE, but I fear it won't happen. I have no faith in Netscape as a company and doubt you guys are going to do anything about it. Are you assuming Bill Gates is just going to let his company get split up, then give up IE and allow Netscape to win the browser war by default? Looks like it to me.

In conclusion I'd just like to say, "Netscape. Fix it.", bfore web developers just start using a JScript tag to print out "To view this page, please download Internet Explorer." when Netscape is detected. If I thought I could get away with it...I would...but I need the ad $$$s...so for now I'm forced to work-around your product and deliver a less-than-complete experience to my viewers. (Thanks for that BTW)

David Holstein
Vice President Of Propaganda
www.68caliber.com
Webmaster
www.webzone.net/drford

(If I misspelled anything...I'll fix it when Netscape 6 in Linux supports my VR applet I spent weeks designing)

David "FUna" Holstein


November 7th, 2000   12:36 PM

There are always reasons for not being able to apply patches and fixes into a code base before a scheduled release. I am sure that Netscape does not want to fall into the delayed release pattern that Microsoft is so famous for. Additionally, Netscape does have to generate revenue in order to continue their presence, and maintain their financial backing.

With this said, it is disappointing that DOM and CSS standards will not be fully supported. Unforturnately, this will push a number of development efforts to focus on the IE browser. If there is no legitimate competition on the browser front, then I would expect a migration away from Netscape. We've all been waiting patiently for the 6.0 release, don't make it a disappointment from the start.

William Parker-Combes


November 7th, 2000   12:32 PM

I think there would be no practical benefit in delaying the Netscape release further. All that would accomplish is more people using Netscape 4.7 and IE 5.5, neither of which are as standards compliant as the current Netscape beta.

David Chan


November 7th, 2000   12:31 PM

I think there would be no practical benefit in delaying the Netscape release further. All that would accomplish is more people using Netscape 4.7 and IE 5.5, neither of which are as standards compliant as the current Netscape beta.

David Chan


November 7th, 2000   12:31 PM

I think there would be no practical benefit in delaying the Netscape release further. All that would accomplish is more people using Netscape 4.7 and IE 5.5, neither of which are as standards compliant as the current Netscape beta.

David Chan


November 7th, 2000   12:30 PM

As simply a user, I've already been dismayed at the number of bugs in the current Netscape. Why give Microsoft more reasons for people to use IE?!?

Kelly Petlig


November 7th, 2000   12:30 PM

We have waited what seems like over two years for the _new_ netscape. If we can wait this long, we can go another couple of months. Please, beta the cade and fix the compliance issues. We will all be thankful.


John Hughes

John Hughes


November 7th, 2000   12:29 PM

As simply a user, I've already been dismayed at the number of bugs in the current Netscape. Why give Microsoft more reasons for people to use IE?!?

Kelly Petlig


November 7th, 2000   12:25 PM

All I know is that when I make a webpage with tables in notepad or dreamweaver, then view it in netscape, it looks like crap. Netscape 4.7x and 6 both mishandle tables that do not have exact widths and heights for every cell. In other words, its near impossible to do a proper table to vary in size (yet still keep absolute widths for some of the cells.) Internet Explorer works better, for all html. I'm not talking about Microsoft-specific code, but even standard javascript, layer, and table code. Highlight text when you pass over it in netscape? of course not. What are the new features in every version of Netscape? Shopping buttons and bundled AOL applications. Great new features, guys, now how about properly function tables, layers, frames, and javascript?

Ian Spencer


November 7th, 2000   12:20 PM

The comments saying that the author is unrealistic to say that they
shouldn't be allowed to do a code freeze for release have clearly not
examined the statement in detail. The statement is a call for Netscape/AOL
to release the known-noncompliant code as a *beta*; not to not release it at
all. Yes, large projects often ship with known bugs. However, when your
user base tells you that you have a number of important issues left to fix
before releasing the product, *and* you already have fixes in place for testing,
then this is the perfect time to release the code, with fixes, as a *beta test*.

The real motivation, of course, is not that they really need to ship the code,
but rather that they want to get ahead of MSIE's version number (also the reason
for the jump from 4.x to 6.0). This is clearly a case of marketting forcing
a quetionable technical move. The potential customers are saying ``this will
be a mistake!''. It seems pretty foolish to ignore such statements.

chad brown


November 7th, 2000   12:16 PM


If Netscape 6.0 is released with bugs this serious, I don't think I can commit to building DHTML web sites compliant with NN 6.x and IE 5.x to my clients. There were enough serious omissions in NN 4.x to make life for DHMTL developers unnecessarily complicated, but for NN 6.x to be WORSE than 4.x is simply not acceptable. I'll have to start telling our prospective clients that we can't commit to NN 6, and given Netscape's dwindling market share, we should simply ignore NN 6.x users and post a message on their home page that says "best viewed with Internet Explorer".




The humiliation of being a marketing tool for Bill Gates hurts, but not nearly as much as trouble shootings a host of cludgey work-arounds in front of a client whose contract says "compliant with NN 4.x and higher, IE 4.x and higher". Netscape used to be the browser of choice, and the browser for the people. But with a release as hyped and as disappointing as NN 6.0 is shaping up to be, Netscape will become the browser of committee thinking, and the browser for "consumers", the mindless victims of marketing who eat advertising and crap cash.


Michael Andersen


November 7th, 2000   12:16 PM

As a web developer and designer, I look to open standards when I code, and I expect the browsers I use and target to comply with those standards. When a browser yields unexpected results during HTML rendering and JavaScript/DOM processing, it makes my job much more difficult. Instead of developing for one set of standards, I must take these variations into account and develop work arounds, or even worse, ignore the faulty browser altogether, targetting only Microsoft's Internet Explorer. This costs me time, my clients money, and Netscape, it's reputation. I really want to see Mozilla/NS6 emerge as a new standard for web browsers, accurately incorporating finalized standards that I and thousands of other developers are eager to use. Please take the time and effort to correct these known problems and bugs.

Chris Bryant

Chris Bryant


November 7th, 2000   12:16 PM

You are destroying your own user base with your continued refusal to fix simple problems with Netscape that interfere with it's core purpose, viewing web pages, in favor of fixing problems with all the bells and whistles that you have added that your most loyal users don't care about. This course of action can only lead to the death of Netscape. PLEASE, fix the standards bugs first, then worry about the extras.

Mark Persuitte


November 7th, 2000   12:09 PM

I do not understand what is this all about... Netscape has decided to release Netscape 6.0. Ok so it has bugs, and so there are some bug fixes... as any reasonable person would understand there are some deadlines to meet. Netscape 6.0 must go out, there is always time to fix those bugs on 6.01 or whatever Netscape may decide to call it. It is not that other products do not have as many compatibility bugs, it's just that Netscape 6.0 is open sourced and so it came out faster than in other cases. If Netscape stalls this release longer Netscape 6.0 may just become obsolete.
Do not tell me that this is a sincere concern that you are having about Netscape's bugs. If it was so why didn't you make a petition about the 20.000 bugs discovered on Win2k just a few weeks before release? You could have then started a petition to force microsoft fix those bugs.
This fuss is only discrediting Netscape while it is trying to put on the market a product that just might save what's left of it's market share or even expand it a bit.
I believe you should stop using blinkers and give Netscape a fair chance...

Mitritsakis Valerio Paris


November 7th, 2000   12:06 PM

Please don't ship a non-compliant browser. We've waited this long. If you don't adhere to the standards, what are they? The market will move around you without the support of the developers, and I for one request standards compliance.

Jeff Wiegand


November 7th, 2000   12:05 PM

I am a Web developer who writes code for sites that need to run cross-browser because they are often aimed towards a general public whose browser usage is very diverse. Although Netscape has a much smaller portion of the market than IE, it takes up a vastly disproportionate amount of development time for me and my co-workers to "sniff and workaround" Netscape-only issues (often even branching for different versions of Netscape).

I would strongly urge Netscape not to release a product that continues to flout and frustrate the good will of the developer community. Especially as DHTML, DOM, and sophisticated client-side scripting become more and more prevalent in consumer and business sites, it is crucial that any good browser will adhere to standards and, most of all, not introduce new discrepancies in areas that actually worked correctly in previous releases!

Netscape, Internet Explorer, and Opera are not just browsers. They are development platforms for sophisticated online applications. Netscape should realize this and not bow to the imperatives of the marketing team. The success of your browser is dependent on how well it supports the running of applications that users demand, that we the developers write code for.

Thank you for your attention.

Kathleen Bennett


November 7th, 2000   12:04 PM

I have been championing Netscape for years. Then you were bought by AOL and immediately began to add unnecessary crap while ignoring serious problems. I have yet to view a working version of Netscape 6 for the Mac.

It's time to rethink your strategy, you're letting Microsoft scare you into acting like them, i.e. creating bad software just to get it out the door.


  1. Seperate the mail, news and web browser. It's unnecessary bloat and impairs freedom of choice.
  2. Bring back the roaming access feature.
  3. Get rid of your JVM and use external JVMs
  4. Fix the BUGS NOW!


At this point the only reason I continue to use netscape at all is the roaming access feature. I am waiting eagerly for iCab to be done so that I will have a good browser to use. It really pains me to admit that IExplorer is technically better than Netscape.

Robert Schmid


November 7th, 2000   12:01 PM

This is in response to Troy Roberts posting below:


Troy, this is not about a code freeze on a buggy product, but about a code freeze for a product that is still not standards compliant. Compliancy first! Then the code freeze.


As nurb has written below:


really netscape


its the web developers that will make or break your browser. make them happy or they will just forget about you altogeather.





>November 7th, 2000 11:34 AM
>
>I can not believe the author or many of the responses herein. Netscape decided >to freeze their code. This means that they will only fix show
> stoppers, not every little bug that comes along. You might say, "Hey, I want >those bugs fixed. I want them to wait and ship good code." Well,
> maybe, you have never worked on a large project before. It is not possible to >ship a large program with absolutely no bugs. What you do is
> freeze, stablize, and the release. Pick up any bugs in the next release. >"Wait, thats just how Microsoft ships all their bug ridden crap", you
> say. But you don't seem to understand the this is how software works. Look at >other open source projects. Look at the Linux kernel, it will
> ship with known bug when 2.4 comes out. Does that mean it should not be >released? No. It means that large projects are very very difficult
> to make bug free. Eventually, you have to chose to release or stay in beta >forever. Pick any othe Open source project or product on the
> market that is at least 100,000 lines of code. Each of them will have known >bugs.

> It is a matter of choice when to freeze a software set. If you freeze too >early you end up with many bugs in the release. If you freeze to late
> you prolong the beta. Netscape made the choice. You do not have to agree, but >you should not act as if they are purposely attempting to
> make a buggy product.
>
> A rational evaluation of Netscape 6 yields that it is a good product and is on >track. I personally believe that it will be more standards
> compliant than other browser on the market currently (Yes. IE has many bugs >and standards problems).
>
> Please, give some serious thought to your position before you spout off about >things you seem to know very little about. Take the time to
> investigate the compitition. Take the time to test the product at hand. Then >attemp to render a non-bias report (Of course this would require
> you to act like a journalist).
>
>
> Troy Roberts

Tim Hawes


November 7th, 2000   12:01 PM

I do not understand what is this all about... Netscape has decided to release Netscape 6.0. Ok so it has bugs, and so there are some bug fixes... as any reasonable person would understand there are some deadlines to meet. Netscape 6.0 must go out, there is always time to fix those bugs on 6.01 or whatever Netscape may decide to call it. It is not that other products do not have as many compatibility bugs, it's just that Netscape 6.0 is open sourced and so it came out faster than in other cases. If Netscape stalls this release longer Netscape 6.0 may just become obsolete.
Do not tell me that this is a sincere concern that you are having about Netscape's bugs. If it was so why didn't you make a petition about the 20.000 bugs discovered on Win2k just a few weeks before release? You could have then started a petition to force microsoft fix those bugs.
This fuss is only discrediting Netscape while it is trying to put on the market a product that just might save what's left of it's market share or even expand it a bit.
I believe you should stop using blinkers and give Netscape a fair chance...

Mitritsakis Valerio Paris


November 7th, 2000   12:00 PM

It seemed ironic to be solicited to protest against Netscape and be led to a page containing hundreds of protests containted in a *table*. Sit around waiting for a page to display because the content is in a table, when the content isn't even *remotely* tabular.

Netscape counts on most of its users to be of similar caliber. So, what's the beef?

Mark

Mark Fuller


November 7th, 2000   11:55 AM

Maybe what is called for here is a Linux style numbering. Although I am disappointed that 6.0 might not have every last subtle compliance problem fixed (I leave javascript off now since I can't selectively disable the irritating popups), I would rather have the next version out.

That said, they should have a downloadable 6.1.0 with all the patches noted (and probably a few more) ready the same day. Put all the disclaimers up, but do both. I often use "unstable" Linux kernels that don't crash with my configuration but incorporate some new very useful technology.

It isn't going to end at 6.0, and there should be a 6.0.1, 6.0.2, etc. which should backfill the fixes.

If they have to start selling something, I can understand. I don't like their apparent bad attitude over the compliance patches but maybe it is understandable (if any cause more severe bugs than they solve, people paid to be responsible get into trouble, not the submitter).

There should be a way of compromising. Maybe a huge pre-release with the patches so we can all test it (not the unstable milestones but a release candidate).

tz


November 7th, 2000   11:53 AM

Netscape, this is unacceptable -- to be releasing a product with this many bugs, some of which grossly violate existing HTML standards and break things (Javascript) which work fine in previous versions of your product.



And then you have the gall to wonder why you'are losing so much market share to Microsoft. Buggy products like this are the reason why!

Doug Muth


November 7th, 2000   11:53 AM

Fails Standards Compliance... Really?!? Which version? As a developer I cannot recall a time where I ever appreciated the Netscape browser. I found myself looking for ways to try to accomodate it.

(Since when does 'TD WIDTH="1"' mean a pixel width of 4 anyways?)

Most of the time, I recommend that to my clients not to use it because of its lack of functionality.

(Don't you think that ' SPAN STYLE="font-size: 1px;" ' should show a font size of 1 pixel)

Whatever the version, I doubt very much I will see much along the lines of change.

kc

(Oh... I love how a FORM tag leaves a blank space... why use BR)

kc


November 7th, 2000   11:51 AM

ummmm ... Opera.
I'd rather pay $$$ for a standards compliant browser than use a sub-standard marketing tool of a bloated company.

Gary Kahn


November 7th, 2000   11:50 AM

Dittos on the above comments.

Do the right thing!

Bryan Hall


November 7th, 2000   11:48 AM

<rant>As an independant web developer, I not only find Netscape's overriding marketing ethic repugnant, I am directly insulted. Fractioning already tenuous standards only results in more specific case scenarios and unforseen bugs that reflect upon my work. When User X running Netscape 6 can't see a page that anyone else running a modern browser can, it will of course be both my job to fix the problem and explain to management why exactly my code doesn't work properly. Not only that but introducing new bugs and incorrectly supporting Netscape specific features from previous releases?!? Paugh!
Why even bother? The first time a standard user's machine won't display their favorite site or their machine locks up, they'll un-install Netscape and vow not to install again regardless of whatever wonder patches are foisted upon them.</rant>

Brendan Lough


November 7th, 2000   11:48 AM

<rant>As an independant web developer, I not only find Netscape's overriding marketing ethic repugnant, I am directly insulted. Fractioning already tenuous standards only results in more specific case scenarios and unforseen bugs that reflect upon my work. When User X running Netscape 6 can't see a page that anyone else running a modern browser can, it will of course be both my job to fix the problem and explain to management why exactly my code doesn't work properly. Not only that but introducing new bugs and incorrectly supporting Netscape specific features from previous releases?!? Paugh!
Why even bother? The first time a standard user's machine won't display their favorite site or their machine locks up, they'll un-install Netscape and vow not to install again regardless of whatever wonder patches are foisted upon them.</rant>

Brendan Lough

November 7th, 2000   11:38 AM

My biggest frustration with the Netscape browser is encountering inconsistencies between versions. A perfectly legitimate JavaScript function that executes properly for one version suddenly requires a work-around for another. Bugs happen, but if there are bugs in your browser that you know about and even have a solution for, there is no reason to wait until a later version to fix them, subjecting your coding public to yet another batch of headaches-inducing coding paradoxes. Please realize that such inconsistencies do nothing to instill loyalty from the web development community. For your own sake, if not ours, please try to release as stable and bug-free a product as you can each time around.

Stefan Langer


November 7th, 2000   11:38 AM

Get it together, Netscape.


You're dragging down the entire industry with your abysmal product. I don't care at ALL about:



Apart from a faster rendering time, which is STILL slower than IE, it seems like the above list is where you've spent all your efforts. I got an idea, HOW ABOUT RENDERING HTML?!?!?


This is ridiculous. Netscape used to be a standard and is now a complete burden on the entire web development community. The lack of CSS compliance is stunning; That's been the number one complaint about Netscape for the past 3 years now and they didn't do anything about it. Supposedly there's going to be true Java 2 support; I'll believe it when I see it. I wish they would just go away altogether rather than release another half-baked piece of garbage. I'm no fan of Microsoft, but at least they produce a product that works!

Michael Young


November 7th, 2000   11:36 AM

Which is more painful: the failure of Netscape to make good on its promise of standards compliance in 6.0, or watching Microsoft better support open standards.

Jamie Leslie


November 7th, 2000   11:34 AM

I can not believe the author or many of the responses herein. Netscape decided to freeze their code. This means that they will only fix show stoppers, not every little bug that comes along. You might say, "Hey, I want those bugs fixed. I want them to wait and ship good code." Well, maybe, you have never worked on a large project before. It is not possible to ship a large program with absolutely no bugs. What you do is freeze, stablize, and the release. Pick up any bugs in the next release. "Wait, thats just how Microsoft ships all their bug ridden crap", you say. But you don't seem to understand the this is how software works. Look at other open source projects. Look at the Linux kernel, it will ship with known bug when 2.4 comes out. Does that mean it should not be released? No. It means that large projects are very very difficult to make bug free. Eventually, you have to chose to release or stay in beta forever. Pick any othe Open source project or product on the market that is at least 100,000 lines of code. Each of them will have known bugs.

It is a matter of choice when to freeze a software set. If you freeze too early you end up with many bugs in the release. If you freeze to late you prolong the beta. Netscape made the choice. You do not have to agree, but you should not act as if they are purposely attempting to make a buggy product.

A rational evaluation of Netscape 6 yields that it is a good product and is on track. I personally believe that it will be more standards compliant than other browser on the market currently (Yes. IE has many bugs and standards problems).

Please, give some serious thought to your position before you spout off about things you seem to know very little about. Take the time to investigate the compitition. Take the time to test the product at hand. Then attemp to render a non-bias report (Of course this would require you to act like a journalist).


Troy Roberts

Troy Roberts


November 7th, 2000   11:34 AM

Please don't release yet another subpar browser. There are more than enough of those currently out there. It is worth waiting for a browser that supports the current standards. I'm a big Netscape fan, and always have been. Having used IE, because we are a Windows only workplace, and not every machine has Netscape on it, I can say that I do not like IE. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that I hate it. Part of this comes from the fact that I don't want to have to learn yet another broswer and how to work around its bugs. If you fix the problems with the current Netscape 6.0 builds before you release them, and therefore create a (pretty much) standards compliant browser, then yes, it is another browser to learn to work with, but I won't have to learn to work around its deficiencies. If the browser is released in its current state, it is just another piece of crap that I have to learn to work around if I want to use it.
Please don't make Netscape 6.0 that second one. I've been waiting for 6.0 to be released for quite a while now, since it was supposed to be standards compliant, and I am willing to wait some more.

Thank you.

Rick Pufky


November 7th, 2000   11:33 AM

Please don't release yet another subpar browser. There are more than enough of those currently out there. It is worth waiting for a browser that supports the current standards. I'm a big Netscape fan, and always have been. Having used IE, because we are a Windows only workplace, and not every machine has Netscape on it, I can say that I do not like IE. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that I hate it. Part of this comes from the fact that I don't want to have to learn yet another broswer and how to work around its bugs. If you fix the problems with the current Netscape 6.0 builds before you release them, and therefore create a (pretty much) standards compliant browser, then yes, it is another browser to learn to work with, but I won't have to learn to work around its deficiencies. If the browser is released in its current state, it is just another piece of crap that I have to learn to work around if I want to use it.
Please don't make Netscape 6.0 that second one. I've been waiting for 6.0 to be released for quite a while now, since it was supposed to be standards compliant, and I am willing to wait some more.

Thank you.

Rick Pufky


November 7th, 2000   11:30 AM

This is more evidence (if more is needed) of Netscape Inc.'s complete lack of understanding of it's product and the marketplace in which it is fighting. It should come as no surprise, too, since there hasn't been a Netscape Communicator release that hasn't been filled with bugs and relatively unusable.

In this case, Darwinism will win and Netscape Communicator will finally come to the end of its slow demise to (finally and thankfully) market-share death.

Jonathan Dale


November 7th, 2000   11:26 AM

Netscape/AOL: Do yourself (and the world) a favor and give us a decent (and speedy) browser that adhears to the standards. If the broswer sucks no one is going to use it so no one is going to see any of the other fancy marketing stuff you seem to care more about.

Scott Foust


November 7th, 2000   11:26 AM

If Netscape 6 is released with known severe flaws, I will refuse to write code for this browser. Pushing flaws on the development community is an unacceptable practice and I will not support it.

sincerely,

Patrick Corcoran


November 7th, 2000   11:25 AM

To whome it may concern;


I would like to register my protest to Netscape 6.0's incompliance with open standards. Open standards are of increasing importance today as networks become more interconnected but no more homogenous.


Netscape enjoys a near exclusive market in areas overlooked by Microsoft's Internet Explorer. However, this market is small by comparison and many emulators exist which allow one to run Windows software on a variety of platforms, with or without Windows. Such software includes VMWare and Wine.


Placing a browser which does not support the current open standard on the market will not help Netscape at all. Indeed, it will likely hurt Netscape, and if Netscape's parent company, AOL, adopts the browser, will only hurt AOL.


Please consider waiting to release your product until it works properly and meets the market needs. This is not about cash tomorrow, this is about having income in a year from this project. I, myself will not use a browser that does not display pages properly, even if I have to rune Internet Explorer on my Linux box using Wine.


Very Truly Yours,

Chris Travers

Chris Travers


November 7th, 2000   11:24 AM

This is indicative of why Netscape has all but lost the "Browser Wars". The folks there no longer care about releasing something for the "user" and more about picking his or her pocket. It is a shameful day when I support the monopolistic leviathan over the underdog.

Jonathan Jason Sy


November 7th, 2000   11:24 AM


Netscape, you are doing yourself and your customers a huge disservice.


I work for a rather large coorporation that bundles your browser with its
OS. Continuuing bugs and competitor induced compatibility issues are
eroding your market share within this company. If you release the 6.0 browser
with even more problems than the 4.x browsers you will basically be sealing
the doom for support for your product in this company. The alternatives
will make my job a nightmare.


Please, fix the bugs, slip the release.


And tell your managers that
Dilbert is supposed to be for _entertainment_only_ - its not supposed to be
a management howto manual.

Dan Doner


November 7th, 2000   11:24 AM

If Netscape 6 is released with known severe flaws, I will refuse to write code for this browser. Pushing flaws on the development community is an unacceptable practice and I will not support it.

sincerely,

Patrick Corcoran


November 7th, 2000   11:24 AM

The only thing I can suggest to you, Netscape, is that you first concern yourself with creating a product with a solid foundation before you try to impress potential users with fluff (such as all the unnecessary shooping tabs, etc). Build a solid, stable product that fully supports modern standards, and you will be surprised to see people come to YOU.

Sincerely,
John Quigley
CS Major @ The University of Vermont

John Quigley


November 7th, 2000   11:23 AM

As a developer, the issue of compatibility comes up on every single project.

Netscape has no followers any more here at work. Many of us were die-hard Netscape users when we started, but once we learned what we were missing out on, in order to be competitive we all were forced (through logic and reason) to the other side of the browser fence.

All I can really say is that Netscape is lucky that they got such a stronghold right at the beginning, because most of us around here look forward to the day when they either catch up <u>All the way</u>, or just quit their weak attempt.

If they're more concerned with releasing their flawed product rather than making sure they focus on quality, I hope they do lose. What sort of strategy is that? It worked with Microsoft and windows, but that was close to a monopoly.

I think this release could be a pivital point for Netscape. If they can step up to the plate and deliver, they might be able to salvage some of their following. If not, they might find their only users as people who are not technical enough to know how to uninstall.


-signed former Netscape die-hard

Anonymous


November 7th, 2000   11:21 AM

It is vital that a solid standards-driven Web browser be built. As much as I am not a fan of Microsoft, Internet Explorer is the closest to that realm in the free browser world that I have found.



Netscape's willingness to sacrifice basic functionality for doodads and gewgaws is why I dropped them with Communicator 4.0. I don't need email integrated into it. What I need is a solid, standards-compliant Web browser. After that, everything else is gravy.



In this era when we're all realizing that infomediaries are needed, why won't Netscape realize that building such features into a Web browser really is a value-added feature--thereby realizing that they can monetize that? Build a solid, bare-bones Web browser that works, and sell the extras in stores and online as a value-added upgrade. I think I'd consider that to be a good thing as a consumer.

Geof F. Morris


November 7th, 2000   11:19 AM

Everything that has need to be said has been, just adding my name.

Chad Day


November 7th, 2000   11:18 AM

Microsoft is kicking your ass. Mozilla was supposed to demonstrate the benefits of Open Source and how it can be better than closed source.
Clearly the Open Source software development model sucks.

Another thing, dont ignorantly blame AOL for this mess.

All you people that say Microsoft sucks ..why dont you compare the browsers and see which one wins in terms of standards compliance and ESPECIALLY stability and speed.

Microsoft is the clear winner.

-Johan

PS> Mozilla, prove me wrong.

Johan S


November 7th, 2000   11:15 AM

Standards compliance and stability are the only way to go. All of the shopping and search tabs in the world won't decide what browser I use. What will decide is whether or not the browser in question will render the pages I want to look at properly, and do so without crashing. It would also be a major bonus if it would do so while consuming only a reasonable amount of ram, or have developers forgotten that not everyone has a dual 800Mhz CPU workstation with 512 megs of ram in it? That horsepower is for compiling you applications, not running them! You can rest assured of one thing Netscape: At least I will never use IE, at least until they release a version for *nix, and only then if it works better than something else I have. Clean up your act, or find another business.

Drew Sanford


November 7th, 2000   11:14 AM

Hey Netscape. You can't very well claim full support for standards compliance when you fail in your standard support.

From Netscape's website, "... full support for XML, CSS level 1 and DOM (among others..."

So if you're promising full support. That's what you should deliver. Make sure it's fixed before you release.

Ben Ceschi


November 7th, 2000   11:12 AM

As a developer, I already urge my clients to not support browsers and platforms that would make development too costly. Currently this includes AOL and IE 4.5 for the Mac, but it appears that Netscape 6 will soon be added to this list.

Andrew Smull


November 7th, 2000   11:12 AM

Consider what a drubbing Netscape and AOL will get in the popular and trade press in releasing software with bugs that were fixed but not accepted by the product development team. Any advnatage gained by an earlier release will be quickly negated as users and developers discover these problems.

The good news is that Mozilla will live on and compete with the Netscape-branded offering. There will be a standards-compliant platform, one way or another.

Mark J. Gardner


November 7th, 2000   11:11 AM

I for one, will be encouraging my clients and business partners to support Explorer if this happens. I hardly even make an attempt to check Netscape work unless I get a specific complaint about it.

Chris Baley


November 7th, 2000   11:07 AM

Maybe AOL is trying to imitate MS...

Anyway, here ya go:
Please release Netscape 6.0 whenever it's ready, not before.

Guillaume Lafrance


November 7th, 2000   11:06 AM

Please, do the right thing.

Matt Smith


November 7th, 2000   11:06 AM

Standards compliance on the web is something that needs to be taken very seriously and I encourage you to do so. Yes, maybe Mozilla is more that just web browser, but 99.9% of your customers aren't going to care about that.

I've been a netscape user for several years now, and I'm fed up as it is. Its infuriating when I have to stand up and walk over to another machine to use IE in order to view a web page that doesn't even use plugins!

Michael Crozier


November 7th, 2000   11:05 AM

I'd agree... a delay's far better than shipping a buggy browser, especially when many of the bugs have been fixed.

Tim O'Toole


November 7th, 2000   11:03 AM

Please, do the right thing.

Matt Smith


November 7th, 2000   10:58 AM

Many of us who are developing applications for the Web are counting on standards compliance to ease the burden of supporting multiple browsers. Compliance with standards means working code; just having the intent is not good enough. The only thing worse than having multiple browsers that don't provide working standards compliance is having just one that doesn't. Please don't let that happen.

Dennis Irwin


November 7th, 2000   10:58 AM

I know AOL is the king of non-standards but Netscape can be use to destroy the reputation or make it permanent. If they want to kill Netscape they are doing a great job maybe they should add even more bugs and make it totally incompatible with ALL standards. If not then make it compliant before even thinking of releasing it.

As it is our company change to IE as the default browser because of all the problems with Netscape 4.x. But with IE 5.5 Netscape is been looked at as the solution since it has a some problems. But so far with Netscape 6 it maybe that IE will definately win thank to Netscape itself. That will be sad that we have to pick between very sucky and super sucky software (you can code what you want to be).

I would say, either fix the bugs immediately or prepare to fade away.

I wonder if that is the reason AOL recommends IE over Netscape.

J. Joseph


November 7th, 2000   10:52 AM

For a long time I have noticed netscape getting worse and worse. Or maybe it's just IE getting better and better.

In any case, netscape has become a horrible web browser. The linux versions of netscape 4.x barely work, and the windows versions aren't much better. Mozilla seems to be a bit better than netscape, but it's still nowhere close to where IE is. Hopefully this situation will get better in the future, but I honestly don't see it happening.

Netscape needs to either 1) Give up or 2) Start over.

Carey Tilden


November 7th, 2000   10:52 AM

Do the right thing.

Ian Muttoo


November 7th, 2000   10:50 AM

This is totally disheartening. I spent some time listening to the product team at Spring Internet World in LA this past spring. They hailed NS6 as the most compliant browser to date. They showed off the xul, xml, and other rich features claiming this would bring about the next browsing/web app revolution. This revolution is going to be hard to bring about with a broken application.


No wonder AOL software has always been built on IE.

Russell Smith


November 7th, 2000   10:48 AM

Please, don't publish Netscape Navigator with bugs in standards Compliance

Marek Cervenka


November 7th, 2000   10:45 AM

Standards compliance is one of the core promises of the Mozilla project. Netscape 6 will become the embodiment of Mozilla that most users and working developers will be exposed too. The Netscape marketing department needs to understand that standards compliance is one of the chief selling points for their product and unnecessary compromise will hurt the credibility of both the Mozilla project and Netscape.

No software is perfect on initial release. However, if there are fixes that can be made to ensure the greatest possible standards compliance without unduly jeopardizing stability, then I urge Netscape to implement as many of those changes as possible.

The Microsoft machine may habitually shove late beta product out the door and call it a “release” but I don’t think Netscape can afford to adopt that strategy.

Mark Giglione


November 7th, 2000   10:45 AM

Hmm... As a web developer, I usually have to develop my site for the least common denominator. This means basic CSS and JavaScript commands. If this version of Netscape is released, then that common denominator will drop. This means that either A) I redesign everything B) I bloat my code or C) I fork my pages. None are acceptable. I might just write off Netscape 6 and not develop for it and damn anyone who uses it to broken pages. If this starts to happen on a wide scale then Netscape's market share will drop even more.

The only people who are happy with a shoddy on-time release are the middle managers and the accountants.

Robert Dixon


November 7th, 2000   10:43 AM

The stardards need to be fixed. I am finding that most of the W3C standards are working better in IE5.5 then they do in Mozilla M18. its driving me nuts!

Sean C


November 7th, 2000   10:42 AM

Duh - if the browser doesn't work (i.e., it doesn't render pages properly,
and isn't standards-compliant) it won't be supported.


The effect of holding back will be that thousands of pointy-haired bosses,
designers, and developers will move from supporting 4th-generation
browsers (note plural) to Explorer because: "well, everyone can just
switch to IE, it works better, and it's easier to support".


Please don't let this happen.

Bob Donahue


November 7th, 2000   10:42 AM

Please fix these standards-related defects before releasing Netscape 6.


The promise for NS6 was for a standards-compliant browser; anything less
will be a great blow to your reputation.

Richard Bullington-McGuire


November 7th, 2000   10:41 AM

For better or worse NS6 has been touting itself as *the* standards compliant browser. I find it sad you plan to release it without fully fixing all the bugs that can adversely effect sites that use DHTML.

What then, makes you better than IE? IE, at this time is more compliant than NS4. But I really want FULLY compliant, not MORE compliant. Haven't web developers spent enough time finding work arounds to buggy browsers? FULLY compliant has been the pulpit NS has been banging on since Gecko was released - and I hate to see this decay into yet another case of corporate hypocracy.

Due to the long, (OK really looong!) development cycle, I would guess most of the damage has already been done - one more month will not make a difference. As is, it will be hard enough to get the userbase to adopt NS over IE without having to have them upgrade a short time later.

Regardless, I wish you luck - for those of us who want DOM compliance, you are our best hope for setting an example of a browser done right. Please don't fail us.

David Snyder


November 7th, 2000   10:40 AM

Come on, Netscape, listen to the Mozilla-folk. Put those fixes in, DON'T release bad software for the sake of getting it out the door. I would say I expect that type of behavior from M$, but IE5 was relatively good on release compared to what NS6 would be if released today. The java gaffes are atrocious. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE correct these compliance issues before release. My domain thanks you.

Damon A. Schmidt
aka Zeitgeist
http://www.godmonkey.com

Damon A. Schmidt


November 7th, 2000   10:39 AM

For better or worse NS6 has been touting itself as *the* standards compliant browser. I find it sad you plan to release it without fully fixing all the bugs that can adversely effect sites that use DHTML.

What then, makes you better than IE? IE, at this time is more compliant than NS4. But I really want FULLY compliant, not MORE compliant. Haven't web developers spent enough time finding work arounds to buggy browsers? FULLY compliant has been the pulpit NS has been banging on since Gecko was released - and I hate to see this decay into yet another case of corporate hypocracy.

Due to the long, (OK really looong!) development cycle, I would guess most of the damage has already been done - one more month will not make a difference. As is, it will be hard enough to get the userbase to adopt NS over IE without having to have them upgrade a short time later.

Regardless, I wish you luck - for those of us who want DOM compliance, you are our best hope for setting an example of a browser done right. Please don't fail us.

David Snyder


November 7th, 2000   10:38 AM

I have been following netscape 6 for some time and am quite disappointed in it so far. Please fix the bugs and problems before releasing it. I used to be a netscape fan (at least until netcrap 4 came out). Up till then netscape led the way. I feel IE is a better browser that is easier to develope for. I was hoping Netscape 6 would solve this problem and close the gap between teh two browsers. From what I have seen so far is Netscape 6 broadens this gap and a lot of current websites that work in IE and Netscape browsers will not work in Netscape 6... Please do yourself and all of the web devel people a favor and release a product that works!

Lotus

Lotus Pait


November 7th, 2000   10:35 AM

I agree completely with David Flanagan's comments. Please reconsider putting
this product out until ALL these bugs are fixed.

I was a great fan of Netscape since version 2.0 but becomes really disappointed since the 4.0 release. On Linux I use now Mozilla and Konqueror. On Windows and Mac: IExplorer.

Without removing those bugs, I think that Netscape misuse the potentiality of the opensourceproject "Mozilla": it's a shame!

I have a filmmaker background and I can tell that standards are very important. In 1895 Edison invented the first filmcamera and at the same time the 35mm filmformat. This standard was accepted worldwide and the filmindustry was born. Nobody has ever had the idea to make a 32mm or 30mm filmformat for his or her own businesses...

Netscape: be aware, this will in the end turn against you!

Konrad Maquestieau


November 7th, 2000   10:30 AM

Isn't it about time developers can start saying "It works in Netscape, but not IE" instead of the other way around??

Netscape 6 can have as many bells and whistles as they like (most of which I will instantly turn off), but if it doesn't display pages properly, who will use it?

Mark Evan Jones


November 7th, 2000   10:25 AM

Hey people, do the right thing (as you know in hearts) and the $$$ will follow.

Felix Lee


November 7th, 2000   10:24 AM

I think you know you the right way to do this thing, Netscape/AOL, and it is about time you did it. Get it right, non-standard is not useful!

Troy Johnson


November 7th, 2000   10:23 AM

Save our hair. Don't annoy your developers. Do the right thing. We waited long
enough for NS6; an extra week or two isn't going to make a difference.

Geoff Schmidt


November 7th, 2000   10:23 AM

Quit acting like Microsoft!

Nate Tanner


November 7th, 2000   10:22 AM

Netscape - fix bugs related to standard compliance if you don't
want remaining developers move to IE.

Igor Mendelev


November 7th, 2000   10:21 AM

I thought that standards compliance was what netscape 6 was supposed to address...

Surely it is madness to refuse to include fixes for bugs if they exist already, what are they scared of? Full standards compliance is surely a higher priority than a short slip of the release date. I've already tested the PR3 release and found it to be pretty unreliable still, especially when it comes to running java applets. Netscape - GET IT RIGHT!!! We want a compliant browser (and browser vendor!!!)
alex@digicode-systems.co.uk

Alex Clements


November 7th, 2000   10:21 AM

Please don't release NS6 until it is right. The issue isn't really that you're rushing it out, as others above have pointed up, in thoughts that you are instantly going to be competing with MSIE, so why not do it right? If you do, it will be easier for all of us to encourage its use. But if you don't, it will be like falling off a log to ignore it and tell others to do the same.

Trip Kirkpatrick


November 7th, 2000   10:20 AM

Please, take an example from Debian developers: Do not release a program with KNOWN bugs! Respect the standars!

José Daniel Muńoz Frías


November 7th, 2000   10:20 AM

As a Linux enthusiast, I am constantly dismayed by the lack of a good, reliable browser for Linux. This is ironic given that Linux was basically born on the web. My Netscape (any version) will crash about every 30 minutes or so during heavy surfing, and will occasionally even freeze the OS itself. The one desktop application that Linux must absolutely have is a good browser. If the network is the computer, then the browser is the OS. Come on, Netscape, help us out.

Chris Turner


November 7th, 2000   10:19 AM

As a Linux enthusiast, I am constantly dismayed by the lack of a good, reliable browser for Linux. This is ironic given that Linux was basically born on the web. My Netscape (any version) will crash about every 30 minutes or so during heavy surfing, and will occasionally even freeze the OS itself. The one desktop application that Linux must absolutely have is a good browser. If the network is the computer, then the browser is the OS. Come on, Netscape, help us out.

Chris Turner


November 7th, 2000   10:18 AM

I thought that standards compliance was what netscape 6 was supposed to address...

Surely it is madness to refuse to include fixes for bugs if they exist already, what are they scared of? Full standards compliance is surely a higher priority than a short slip of the release date. I've already tested the PR3 release and found it to be pretty unreliable still, especially when it comes to running java applets. Netscape - GET IT RIGHT!!! We want a compliant browser (and browser vendor!!!)
alex@digicode-systems.co.uk

Alex Clements


November 7th, 2000   10:17 AM

0. Release dates are set by marketing, not development.
1. Only compliance to the the de facto standards counts.
2. IE is better and faster anyway.

Forget Netscape.

K Vainstein


November 7th, 2000   10:17 AM

I'm with David, AOL/Netscape should not release the 6.0 version
with these bugs, that appear to have existing fixes. Having these
non-compliance bugs in a beta release is one thing, but in the
first release is another, and will discourage development for
Netscape Navigator (which is already far behind in market share to
IE (75% IE to 17% NS according to yesterday's webref.com's logs).

Mozilla/Netscape 6 was initially touted as *the* standards-compliant
browser, and many develpers pinned their hopes on one of the two
major browser vendors seeing the light. Writing cross-browser
JavaScript/DHTML is becoming more difficult every day (as our experts
will tell you), with these
growing differences between browsers, releasing another major
version without stamping out these DHTML-complexity-increasing
bugs is a bad idea.

The folks at Mozilla/Netscape/AOL have done an admirable job in
creating Mozilla/Netscape 6 (however long it took), we just need to convince
AOL's accounting dept to let the techies do their job and finish
it up.

- Andy King
Managing Editor
WebReference.com

andy king


November 7th, 2000   10:16 AM

Failure to deliver a fully standards compliant browser will crush the hopes of developers the world-over, forcing us to toss Netscape into the rubbish heap of failed crusades of the past.

Barry Weiss


November 7th, 2000   10:15 AM

I love Netscape, and prefer it to IE because it is my preferred mail reader too. I want to be able to use it as my browser full-time, but compatability issues like to ones outstanding in version 6 prevent me from doing so. If you release 6.0 without FULLY supporting existing standards, I can't use it. Don't even bother.

Christina Garden


November 7th, 2000   10:14 AM

I'm with David, AOL/Netscape should not release the 6.0 version
with these bugs, that appear to have existing fixes. Having these
non-compliance bugs in a beta release is one thing, but in the
first release is another, and will discourage development for
Netscape Navigator (which is already far behind in market share to
IE (75% IE to 17% NS according to yesterday's webref.com logs).

Mozilla/Netscape 6 was initially touted as *the* standards-compliant
browser, and many develpers pinned their hopes on one of the two
major browser vendors seeing the light. Writing cross-browser
JavaScript/DHTML is becoming more difficult every day (as our experts
will tell you), with these
growing differences between browsers, releasing another major
version without stamping out these DHTML-complexity-increasing
bugs is a bad idea.

The folks at Mozilla/Netscape/AOL have done an admirable job in
creating Mozilla/Netscape 6 (however long it took), we just need to convince
AOL's accounting dept to let the techies do their job and finish
it up.

- Andy King
Managing Editor
WebReference.com

andy king


November 7th, 2000   10:13 AM

I don't pretend to know the various factors and considerations that go into the decision-making process in cases like this, but all I can say is that as a web developer, I have my hopes pinned on your 6.0 browser. Please address the bugs upfront! I want you to succeed, and as far as I'm concerned, that means full standards compliance. Good luck!

Michael Barrish


November 7th, 2000   10:11 AM

I'm using Netscape since 1.0, still using it, but now I do use more Mozilla. I'm using it for web programming and testing, the XUL interface do look a good idea, it's a future perfect software window.

But, Netscape do need to get a compliant browser on the market, or they will surely suffer from it, how can it be worst to wait a little longer, if it's better why not?

Francis Fillion


November 7th, 2000   10:10 AM

Fix the sucker before you release it.

Ben Galbraith


November 7th, 2000   10:10 AM

I strongly concur.
It seems that if a buggy non-standard release is acceptable, they could have shipped a year ago.
I understand and applaud their determination to make tough decisions on what to accept and what to punt on for release criteria; but I also encourage them to revisit the customer's perspective.
The chance to win the browser war has been lost. But here's a chance to take the high ground, and bring back much needed respect for Netscape.
Standards Compliance and removing crashing bugs should be at the top of the list for release criteria.

Wayne Steele


November 7th, 2000   10:08 AM

As a web developer, I'm continually running into frustrating problems with Netscape's standards compliance, particularly in the area of CSS. I'm tired of having to limit my pages to those things that Netscape can handle, rather than taking advantage of all that should be possible with HTML 4.

Dave Dean


November 7th, 2000   10:07 AM

You would have thought that the Netscape gang would have learned something from Microsoft. But apparently not. The couldn't beat Microsoft playing their own game, what makes Netscape think they can beat Microsoft playing Microsoft's game. <mine, mine, mine, back, back, back>.

Daffy had a better shot getting the genie's treasure.

Philip Grillo


November 7th, 2000   10:06 AM

Guys, PLEASE don't release a non-compliant version of the browser.
"Just Say No" to Steve Case and his band of marketers, and fix the damned
thing. I am stuck in a Microsoft world at work, where I am the only Netscape
user, and I use Netscape at home on my Linux boxen, and I have been a big
supporter of Netscape years. But if you release a sub-standard, non-compliant
piece of crap, you will finally do what Bill Gates has not been able to do,
and that is drive me away.



Good thing Opera has it's Linux version almost ready.

Sigh.

Andrew Wallace


November 7th, 2000   10:06 AM

I teach an advanced web development course at the local University, and sadly, we have to do everything in IE, because Netscape 4 dosen't properly support the standards I'm supposed to be teaching. This is somewhat disapointing, since I don't use windows on my own systems, but am forced to use IE, in order to plan lessons for my classes. One of the reasons IE is becoming so much more popular than Netscape as a browser is because of the sheer number of things IE supports, which Netscape does not. Releasing a broken browser which still does not support any of the current standards will not help you - it will only help Microsoft, and give them more points for advertizing. I can see Microsoft's next ad for IE now: "Use our browser, we can spell, and our competition can't. Oh, it works better too."

Terry McKay


November 7th, 2000   10:06 AM

Guys, PLEASE don't release a non-compliant version of the browser.
"Just Say No" to Steve Case and his band of marketers, and fix the damned
thing. I am stuck in a Microsoft world at work, where I am the only Netscape
user, and I use Netscape at home on my Linux boxen, and I have been a big
supporter of Netscape years. But if you release a sub-standard, non-compliant
piece of crap, you will finally do what Bill Gates has not been able to do,
and that is drive me away.



Good thing Opera has it's Linux version almost ready.

Sigh.

andy

Andrew Wallace


November 7th, 2000   10:04 AM

I urge netscape to not release the buggy code. If netscape 6 fails, businesses will assume that it is the open-source bazaar model that has failed.

Brian Abent


November 7th, 2000   10:03 AM

I am a professional site developer working on projects ranging from common small-business sites to web-based applications used by police departments nationwide. I've personally spent more than a hundred hours simply identifying and attempting to work around the flaws found in Netscape's 4.X range of browsers, so to hear that tested fixes for known bugs in the new Netscape browser aren't going to be included in the initial release is Really Bad News.

While the development of public-accessable web sites will obviously have to continue with the burden of "working around" a flawed product, this is not so for the private, web-based Law Enforcement software I also help develop. We CAN solve the problem of a browser delivered by a company that refuses to include fixes for known and serious bugs; we'll advise our clients not to use it.

Regards,

Chris Wenham

Chris Wenham


November 7th, 2000   10:02 AM

Please get Netscape 6's standards compliance to a reasonable
level before release, and make sure it is stable. (Fix the
blocking problems with the search results window also.;) I'm
using Netscape 6 PR3 on Linux to post this...

Don't skimp on the Java support either!

I'd suggest keeping the product in beta until you start getting
some glowing reviews... ;-)

Terry Sikes


November 7th, 2000   10:01 AM

If Netscape 6 is released before it meets standards compliance then
all web developers will ever after be stuck supporting this flawed
implementation and no other web browser developers will ever have something
to shoot for.

Joshua Marinacci


November 7th, 2000   10:00 AM

Please get Netscape 6's standards compliance to a reasonable
level before release, and make sure it is stable. (Fix the
blocking problems with the search results window also.;)

Don't skimp on the Java support either!

I'd suggest keeping the product in beta until you start getting
some glowing reviews... ;-)

Terry Sikes


November 7th, 2000   9:59 AM

netscape has always been my favorite browser....until recently. i am an html developer and have become increasingly fed up with netscape. if microsoft's internet explorer completely buries netscape --and clearly it is doing just that -- it won't be because i.e. is a superior product, it will be because the folks at netscape just don't get it. if they're not going to shape up, then good riddance.

j. m. greaney


November 7th, 2000   9:59 AM

The W3C should have some sort of 'mark' like Java does, so that they could keep Netscape from claiming that their browser is 'compatible' with HTML.



Netscape has also been having problems with their Java compliance; you will note that the Java logo does not appear in the about screen!



Netscape will just lose if it tries to go proprietary. Microsoft already has that territory staked out. Developers will code to the 'standard' such as it is and make exceptions for IE because it has market share. It isn't worth it to code to a non-conforming browser if it doesn't have market share. The only way they can survive is to embrace the standards fully.

Fran Taylor


November 7th, 2000   9:59 AM

Totally agree with David. As ađ web designer, I have been waiting for the release of ns6, in the hope of finally being able to use some of the cool features of the DOM and CSS. But no.. this only means that there is one more browser that I have to write specifically for.. Now I have to worry about the ie and ns4.x families of browsers AND ns6.. (not to mention all the other brands, and also the legacy versions of ie and ns, witch I don't care about anyways though..)

Sindri S. Sighvatsson


November 7th, 2000   9:55 AM

save me from MS.

Matt Burke


November 7th, 2000   9:55 AM

Someone said that web developers make or break the success of browsers. This is obviously not true, Netscape 4.x sucks major ass, and we still have to support it, for millions of people use it, and the people who pay our salaries don't want to loose that customerbase. Commercial web developers can not fight back.

However, "hobby-sites" (ones not funded by salaries [I know everything is funded by salaries]) should print out something like "GET A REAL BROWSER", if Netscape in fact releases a non-compliant browser, and someone tries to view the page using it.

I believe that this would have an influence, quite simply because there are so many "hobby-sites" out there. Ie. all open-source projects qualify!

Maro

Maro


November 7th, 2000   9:55 AM

save me from MS.

Matt Burke


November 7th, 2000   9:53 AM

Realeasing a buggy, half-vast version as Netscape 6.0 would be a marketing disaster that would destroy every bit of credibility Netscape might have left. I have been waiting patiently for years for v. 6.0, and I would rather wait another month or two than get a buggy piece of garbage.

John F. Sowa


November 7th, 2000   9:53 AM

I'd like to say I was shocked to read this article, but I can't. Unless my memory is already failing me, AOL is the master here and we all know their toon.

I am disappointed by what I just read, and urge whoever in the development team that still cares about a quality product and getting back into the battle, to fight for a quality release.

Jason

Jason


November 7th, 2000   9:51 AM

Please don't release a known-buggy product. Do it right the first time.
Schedules aren't as important as a working browser. We would rather wait and get a release thats worth using.

Thanks!

Michael Turner


November 7th, 2000   9:51 AM

There was a time, long ago, when I looked forward to the release of new versions of the Netscape browser. I remember when it was in competition against Mosaic (yup, been around *that* long ;-) and they started adding silly tags like <BLINK> in order to get people to preferrentially use Netscape over Mosaic (or the very early IE).


Then, when Netscape decided to expand out of its core business (browsers), things seemed to go horribly wrong. And as a result Netscape Navigator started to lag behind Internet Explorer in terms of implementing features and even standards. When I wrote a book on CSS, I was dismayed at how many more elements were supported in Opera or IE over NN. Then along came Mozilla, which seemed to solve the problem of Netscape's perennial problem of dealing with Web standards.


Then I saw the preview releases of Netscape 6. Uck. What happened to the Web standards implementations guys? I was truly shocked at what I saw (or rather, what I didn't see).


As a professional Web developer, I really want to see improvements in the implementation of Web standards, so that I can reliably build Web sites without having to constantly aware of the bugs in certain browsers that standards were supposed to overcome. Argh.


Author of Core CSS (Prentice Hall)

(I may write for the competition, but I am definately behind O'Reilly in this case ;-)




Keith Schengili-Roberts


November 7th, 2000   9:47 AM

Get with it Netscape. If 6 isn't compliant, I won't be designing for it. It's taking forever to replace the egregious Netscape 4, do it right for christ's sake. Your terrible browser has already caused me enough headaches.

Larry vanKampen


November 7th, 2000   9:47 AM

Dear Netscape,
As a developer, I am requesting that you delay release of Netscape 6 until some of the serious remaining issues are fixed.
I write with the perspective of a developer and I am concerned that a buggy netscape6 will delay progression of a more powerful internet.

Please consider your long term future over the short term one. Many developers are hoping that netscape 6 will bring netscape back into the game. A buggy netscape6 may discourage some of them, like me, to abandon it.

topherZ

Christopher Zimmermann


November 7th, 2000   9:41 AM

I knew that when AOL bought Netscape, that it was the beginning of the end for this browser. I had hopes for the Mozilla Open Source Project to actually do what it intended and create the first truly compliant browser so that developers like myself could finally code for the HTML specification, as agreed upon. Sadly, all hopes have been dashed. Netscape is now relagated to the garbage heap. They might as well just stop with version 4.7 and call it quits!

Patrick Beart


November 7th, 2000   9:41 AM

I just hope that all of the AOL users do not start using a buggy netscape browser that will make coding web pages difficult. Then again, if they do, perhaps people will realize all of the problems. You have to smack someone for them to realize their mistake.

Shawn Palmer


November 7th, 2000   9:40 AM

Please wait just a little bit to get the fixes noted by David F., or else call this a beta release with a a follow up that has the fixes. Thank you.

Jeff Martin


November 7th, 2000   9:38 AM

As a web developer, I find it irritating that Netscape would fail to support standards. It is a constant struggle to build a complex web application that works across many browsers. It would be trivial to create a standards compliant site, and assume that it will be viewable on any platform. Unfortunately, Netscape prevents this. I should not have to have two sets of code--one standard, and one Netscape specific. This is absurd.

Ryan Williams


November 7th, 2000   9:38 AM

I currently use Netscape as my default browser because I know if I can make features work in NN, they will work anywhere. I would love to make IE my default browser. It sounds like, however, that I'll get to stick with NN as the lowest common denominator.

Do a good release, please.

David Graham


November 7th, 2000   9:35 AM

I am a web manager for a software company. Currently we do not support Netscape due to non-compliance with CSS. We had been hoping to support Netscape 6, but will only do so if it is truly compliant. If not we will drop all Netscape support...

JW Morgan


November 7th, 2000   9:35 AM

I work at a research center with 6000 outside users. They access our very critical cancer data via HTML, so browsers, for us, are not toys. Our standard browser for HTML development has been Netscape 4 for a while, but we will not be moving to Netscape 6 until it complies with all standards, including and especially javascript. I expect it will be ready by about 6.3.

Jason Powers


November 7th, 2000   9:30 AM

After all these years we have followed you, yet you fail us. Mozilla was our one last hope that developers could finnally code for the one "true" browser. Your failure to release the true working browser will cost you dearly. Programmers will no longer be content to program around your bugs but will return to the days of 3.0, but no longer saying you need Netscape.

Christopher Morris


November 7th, 2000   9:30 AM

All I have to say is please balance out on features/stability and release schedule for NS6 :)

Nathan.

Nathan Tran


November 7th, 2000   9:29 AM

Please don't give us another crappy non-standards-compliant browser to be IE's whipping boy. That sucks.

Joseph Enrique


November 7th, 2000   9:28 AM

While I think it's long overdue for Netscape 5 to be released (made even more obvious by the fact that it's been renamed to Netscape 6), it makes no sense to refuse to accept bugfixes that have already been reviewed and tested, especially with trivial fixes and ones which affect standards compliance. Standards compliance was the only reason the Netscape release was delayed for years; to omit such bugfixes at this late stage is insulting to those who believe in standards. Since those people are a large fraction of Netscape's waning supporters, alienating them is shortsighted.

Don't allow a long delay for standards-compliance bugs that you don't know how to fix, if the browser will still be stable and usable. Do incorporate the fixes for problems that have been solved, or you'll look like fools, especially with fixes as trivial as fixing spelling errors in messages...

Deven T. Corzine


November 7th, 2000   9:27 AM

C'mon Netscape - your browsers have had... display problems until now, so please get it right for once!

Ross Burton


November 7th, 2000   9:27 AM

Netscape:


Fix the bugs in NN 6 and you will win the support of the Web Development community; release NN 6 as is and you will lose whatever dwindling support you have left. Pretty simple, really.




R.S. Willcox

Web Developer

Randall S. Willcox


November 7th, 2000   9:26 AM

I use to think Netscape was THE browser to use and IE was a not worth the effort. I was angry at Micro$oft for releasing IE and not following standards. Now we have Netcrap 6 about to be released which is about to do the same thing that IE did a few years ago. I feel betrayed. I don't like Micro$oft. But, I have to admit that they do have a better browser and they are better at following the standards.

I was hoping that Netcrap 6 could turn the browser wars back around. If this release is published and is full of bugs and is not following standards, Netscape will end up in the same trash heap as many other software products. Better to delay and get it right than release it and get bad press.

These are my thoughts, your milage may vary.

Randall Woodman


November 7th, 2000   9:25 AM

really netscape

its the web developers that will make or break your browser. make them happy or they will just forget about you altogeather.

nurb


November 7th, 2000   9:25 AM

really netscape

its the web developers that will make or break your browser. make them happy or they will just forget about you altogeather.

nurb


November 7th, 2000   9:25 AM

Please get the standards compliance correct first. Too much time is wasted by web developers writing to both IE and NS. Put compliance first.

John Selph


November 7th, 2000   9:25 AM

I used to think Netscape was THE browser to use and IE was a not worth the effort. I was angry at Micro$oft for releasing IE and not following standards. Now we have Netcrap 6 about to be released which is about to do the same thing that IE did a few years ago. I feel betrayed. I don't like Micro$oft. But, I have to admit that they do have a better browser and they are better at following the standards.

I was hoping that Netcrap 6 could turn the browser wars back around. If this release is published and is full of bugs and is not following standards, Netscape will end up in the same trash heap as many other software products. Better to delay and get it right than release it and get bad press.

These are my thoughts, your milage may vary.

Randall Woodman


November 7th, 2000   9:24 AM

As a small time web site developer, I try to develop HTML pages that look the same on both Netscape and Internet Explorer. Recently this has become VERY hard. Trying to develop dynamic content for Netscape is extremly difficult. While I am a fan of Netscape, Internet Explorer is much easier to build webpages for simply because the browser is generally standards compliant. I urge Netscape to do the same; fix Netscape 6.0 before releasing it commercially. Please!

Michael Cameron


November 7th, 2000   9:24 AM

I have been talking the Mozilla project up to all of my friends because the goals were on the mark. Please, don't burden us - the web developers - with yet another compromised browser. You've already alienated every other segment of your user base; don't alienate the hopeful among web developers who are truly your last hope. The only reason we're sticking around is our hope of standards compliance. Take that hope away, and you have nothing besides a group of disgruntled web developers and a browser you cannot sell.

Jonathan Blake


November 7th, 2000   9:24 AM

Another worthless browser from Netscape? Nothing new. Netscape is a goner anyway, and the sooner it dies the better. People are sick and tired of continuous struggle trying to support NS with its ridiculous implementations of standards that has been out there for years. Please release 6.0 as soon as possible!

Kirill


November 7th, 2000   9:23 AM

I am sad to hear that Netscape is failing in the stated objective to produce a standars compliant browser.


I have been saying for years that all browsers suck and I was hoping that NS 6 would change that, sadly I was wrong.


Then again what can we expect from the company that started breaking from HTML standars with tags such as <CENTER> and <BLINK>?

Rob Rutherford


November 7th, 2000   9:21 AM

Back to the drawing-board, guys. We're sick of being caught between two corporate agendas, and it's time somebody cared about quality.

Barry King


November 7th, 2000   9:19 AM

Ever hear of a code freeze?

For all you web developers out there, that's the point where the client, after hearing your latest excuse as to why their corporate website is still not done yet, turns red and says "I don't care if the monkey does not dance. I don't care if our logo is not spinning and not on fire. I want a goddamn website. Have it done by Friday or you do not get paid."

It is the point in the lifecycle of a project where you DON'T ADD NEW STUFF. You know what works, you know what doesn't. You set a release date and gauge what will and will not make it in by that release date. High priority items get in. Lower things often get dropped. That means that you'll have oustanding issues with the final release. No matter how long they delay it, there are going to be bugs there, so at some point you have to draw a line and say "We are never going to make the monkey dance and catch fire. It's one or the other. These are tough times and tough choices must be made." And no matter which one you decide is needed more, someone, somewhere is going to complain "The macarena monkey is neat, but why isn't he burning? I need him to be on fire because XYZ corp.'s flying dolphin does it too!"

Jobo Denballa


November 7th, 2000   9:18 AM


Do the right thing...listen to the web design/development community and fix the bugs they (and your own developers) say are needed.

If Netscape loses the support of these groups, they're sunk.

Jason Allgire


November 7th, 2000   9:16 AM

While I don't really believe that Netscape will listen to the voice of reason and change their minds, I feel obligated to at least speak out in the vain hope that someone at Netscape is listening. As so many people have said before in the petition, the cost for developers and users of not getting Netscape 6 right the first time is more than the cost of delaying the release a little longer. What happens when normal users take the time to download and install Netscape 6 on their 56k modems only to realize that frames don't operate correctly (Bug #46828 which took the developers begging and pleading with the the PDT to accept the patch that fixes the bug. It's still not 100% guarenteed to be in the the release.) After frames don't work, or web sites don't behave correctly users won't bother downloading Netscape 6.01 that fixes these problems, they'll jump to a different browser (Opera, IE, etc).
Netscape: Take a step back and consider the flack you'll receive from developers and users alike before you decide to stick with things Marketing wants (which in and of itself is infamous for destroying good products).

Casey Peel


November 7th, 2000   9:14 AM

I totally agree with Mr. Flanagan - the bugs still existing in the Mozilla bug database, after 2 1/2 years in the project cycle, are horrifying. I was forced to switch to IE after holding out on Netscape for a long long time and until I am shown otherwise, I can't begin to consider going back. And seeing the DOM and CSS implementations so shoddily managed is a strong reminder of why I switched, and why I'll stay. I really don't like Microsoft, but I don't have a choice.

Ross Snyder


November 7th, 2000   9:13 AM

OH PLEASE! The last thing we need is another browser that doesn't follow the rules. Come on Netscape - it's simple, if the browser follows the rules, all the rules, release it. Until then, don't release.

KAS


November 7th, 2000   9:11 AM

I really am sick of netscape, so I say BRING IT ON

Im all for the premature release of netscape 6, as it will almost certainly mean the downfall of netscape.. and for that, I would almost be willing to pay.

When NS6 goes 'gold', hits the shelves, and drags the company down to a 1 or 2% user base, I'll be there laughing, and when im done, ill run home and design webpages will all the fun toys netscape has been depriving us of using for the last 2 years.

JT


November 7th, 2000   9:09 AM

What can I say that hasn't already been said by hundreds of others? A premature, non-compliant release of the Netscape browser will harm everyone, from the company, to its customers and users, to the web developers. Rushing a buggy release will do nothing to bolster an already suffering reputation. Taking the time and care to patch known bugs BEFORE distribution can do nothing but help all concerned. I, for one, wouldn't mind a bit waiting for a new Netscape browser that is fully functional and compliant with open standards. I'd prefer it. Ship a product with known public bugs, and I'll never have a reason to touch it.

Rob Abrazado


November 7th, 2000   9:08 AM

Flush Netscape down the drain and use IE exclusively.

T.A.B.


November 7th, 2000   9:08 AM

Netscape, I hope for the sake of your company that you delay the release of NS6.0 until the remaining major non-compliance issues/bugs are worked on.

There is an entire development team here waiting for your company's market share to drop below a significant number so we can drop support for your buggy and unreliable browsers.

Netscape didn't lose the browser wars because of Microsoft's monopoly and tactics, it lost because of Netscape shipping a sub-par, bug-ridden product.

Sing Chan


November 7th, 2000   9:07 AM

Let's see:

Disregard for Standards,
Disrefard for bug fixes
Disregard for common practices
Disrefard for inhouse developers
Disregard for outside developers
Constant focus on the marketing boys


Wow, I am so proud of Netscape, they are even adopting Microsoft's approach to the development of standards and practices. How special!

Here I was waiting for Netscape 6.0 to redesign my site... Here I was proud that over 45% of the people who come to my site use Netscape...

Why does it have to be Microsoft's competition that drives me to use Microsoft's products.

Ted Tschopp


November 7th, 2000   9:06 AM

From my experience developing high level DHTML for cross-browser use, I am continually amazed at those people (Windows users) that still claim that developing for NS is easier than developing for IE.. and that NS (again, on Windows) is better. To those people I say you must not have been doing anything very advanced at all.

Everything I try seems to work first in IE and then tweaked for NS. It becomes so frustrating. It is dissappointing to find that the the problems that have plagued the users and developers of web applications for years now are STILL the problems plaguing us!

Aren't we in the future yet?

Todd Poston

Todd Poston


November 7th, 2000   9:05 AM

Well... I use IE on Windows almost exclusively. It's really good. But I think Mozilla's not that far. K-meleon was a good proof-of-concept. If it becomes more stable and compliant, I might start switching over. I've been keeping my fingers crossed for several years now, I can keep them crossed a bit longer. Keep up the good work.

Kai Carver


November 7th, 2000   9:04 AM

Another bug-ridden and non-standards-compliant browser would be detrimental to the Netscape brand name and the entire World Wide Web.

mark burdett


November 7th, 2000   9:02 AM

For the sake of the good Netscape name, please ensure the best standards
compliance practical in Netscape 6.0 final.

Frank Warmerdam


November 7th, 2000   9:01 AM

I can't even get NS6 on my Mac to load right without crashing on the homepage (Which is an Excite@Home page with a Flash pop-up screen). So I don't even touch it!

Adam Bell


November 7th, 2000   8:59 AM

Please Please Please Please Please

Netscape can only win by putting off the release a little (who ever heard of an on-time release helping anyone except marketing? it has very little effect in the long run) in order to release a standards compliant browser. See Intel's latest "effort" (releasing a product at 1.13 GHz first is great, if you don't mind all the awful PR when everyone finds out it doesn't actually work). Same thing.


If Netscape doesn't support the standards that a large part of the industry has agreed upon, M$ by default becomes "standard" rather than having multiple products that implement standards to varying levels of accuracy. This is only bad for consumers and developers and Netscape alike.


Tech folks can always just fall back on Mozilla in its various incarnations- it seems the good developers over there are doing the work that should be done- but whether or not Netscape acknowledges this will make a real difference in the future of that company and the technology used by millions of consumers.

Hans Kieserman


November 7th, 2000   8:59 AM

In our computer lab we offer both Netscape and IE. Due to difficulties with Netscape's interface with our on-line course management software, most of our students use IE already.

It looks like there will be no reason for me to update Netscape when it comes out. I'll probably end up eliminating it alltogether.

Jay C. Batzner


November 7th, 2000   8:57 AM

Please Please Please Please Please

Netscape can only win by putting off the release a little (who ever heard of an on-time release helping anyone except marketing? it has very little effect in the long run) in order to release a standards compliant browser. See Intel's latest "effort" (releasing a product at 1.13 GHz first is great, if you don't mind all the awful PR when everyone finds out it doesn't actually work). Same thing.


If Netscape doesn't support the standards that a large part of the industry has agreed upon, M$ by default becomes "standard" rather than having multiple products that implement standards to varying levels of accuracy. This is only bad for consumers and developers and Netscape alike.


Tech folks can always just fall back on Mozilla in its various incarnations- it seems the good developers over there are doing the work that should be done- but whether or not Netscape acknowledges this will make a real difference in the future of that company and the technology used by millions of consumers.

Hans Kieserman


November 7th, 2000   8:56 AM

Standards First!

Mark Knutsen


November 7th, 2000   8:54 AM

Standards compliance should be Netscape's #1 priority. After all this time, I am appalled that Netscape has spent its time and resources adding meaningless features instead of concentrating on what is the browser's main problem, both for developers and users.

As much as I hate most things Microsoft, when a Windows user asks my advice on what browser s/he should use, I can not in good conscience recommend Netscape over IE. Please fix the bugs that the Mozilla team sends you, make Netscape 100% open standards compliant, and you will win back many of the users and developers you've alienated over the years, such as myself.

Drake Emko


November 7th, 2000   8:52 AM

It has been nearly three years since netscape went open source. I cringe at every crash (1 every 10 minutes when viewing sites with java) with netscape 4.7 on linux. If there is anything that netscape can do to make this situation worse it would be to release a buggy product for 6.0. The press will fry netscape into oblivion, rightly so. I've seen the permenant damage that can be done releasing a product prematurely. All the rules are especially true here, given the spotlight. I'd rather wait another six months, I've waited this long.

iksrazal


November 7th, 2000   8:51 AM

I agree that it's time Netscape/AOL thinks about what's really important when developing a browser. Marketability and market share should come after usability user-friendliness, and standards compliance. What good is a browser if it does not support standards compliance? Then your users won't be able to fully benefit from the technologies developed over the past 5 years. This will lead to loss of market share, poor marketing strategies, and the death of the browser.

Mike King


November 7th, 2000   8:51 AM

The browser war is far from over. It is true that Netscape has lost a battle, and they do reside on the losing end, but it is far from over. Netscape needs to look beyond the immediate, wait until their browser is standards compliant. If they do not, it is very likely they will loose the browser war, as people toss out the non-compliant browser for a more compliant one. Compliance is a major issue, now. Moreso than ever, websites are measured for their compliance to open standards.

Netscape, please, please, please wait until compliance bugs are fixed. I work in a predominantly windows-based environment as a web developer, and if you do not take the time to release a standards-compliant browser, there is a good chance our environment will switch to IE.

Tim Hawes


November 7th, 2000   8:49 AM

While I love the Mozilla project, and I beleive that what they have done so far is nothing short of incredible, I can't beleive the fact that Netscape is pulling back bugfixes just to keep up with a release date. It would be different if this was mission critical, but the world has already been waiting for 2 years, another few months won't matter at all.

It would also be different if these bugs were not in the Standards Compliance area, which is the area in which mozilla is supposed to be the mother of all browsers. By compromising this, you compromise the entire mozilla process.

Marc D. Chapman


November 7th, 2000   8:49 AM

As a developer of a newly started web development company, I am sick and tired of html not looking the way it was developed because of the netscape browser. We try and make sure our projects work under both IE and Netscape, but we prefer IE. I have been eagerly awaiting Netscape 6 since I read that it WAS SUPPOSE IT COMPLY WITH STANDARDS. It would be nice to have a multi-platform standards compliant browser available. Since there isn't now, its quite frustrating to develop under linux with a sub-standard browser.



For now I'll continue to develop for IE. And soon for Mozilla, since they apparently know how to apply bug fixes.



Frustrated developer,

Dan Downs

Dan Downs


November 7th, 2000   8:45 AM

What is supposed to make Netscape 6.0 unique, worth waiting for, worth owning, and worth writing for is complete compliance with web standards. Releasing Netscape without the compliance is like M&M's that melt in your hands, Polaroid without the instant, or Frosted Flakes without Tony. What's the point? Do we really need another flakey version of Netscape? I hope the development team manages to realize that adherance to standards and not release date is what is really important here.

Dennis Kelley


November 7th, 2000   8:43 AM

Why is it so DAMN hard for you (Netscape PTP) to relase a bug-free, web standard compliant user-agent? The standards are well documented and the bugs are well tracked. What is the problem? I am a web developer that is sick & tired of trying to develop web pages for two separate browsers. I could ridicule Microsoft's IE4.0 or IE5.0 for there lack of compliance, but they are way ahead of the curve in making attempts to comply, leaving you (Netscape [insert any version here]in the dust! I was excitedly looking forward to the release of the Netscape 6.0 but it appears that Netscape has dropped the ball, AGAIN! Down with Netscape!

Frustrated Web Developer.

Tony Tosi


November 7th, 2000   8:43 AM

We don't need another buggy browser. I design web pages for a living and I'm in charge of browser choices for an ISP. It's really a pain trying to develope for the lowest common denominator (Netscape). If Netscape 6.0 is pushed out before it's ready, with compatibility bugs (which are the biggest issue in the readiness of netscape), then I have no choice but to discontinue all support of Netscape. We will recommend Internet Explorer to all new customers (we should be right now, but we gave it a chance and waited) and simply not support any netscape users. This seems severe, but it just is not acceptable to create a semi perfect browser for reasons that aren't valid.



I don't want to seem retaliatory, I simply hope that Netscape wakes up and starts to make better choices. If they don't, we'll see where their priorities lie and who they're really making the browser for.

James Yoneda


November 7th, 2000   8:42 AM

My involvement in web authoring goes back to the "early days" (c. 1994). Many of us who were around at that time have unpleasant memories of Netscape's arrogant disregard for web standards (HTML 3.0, anyone?). Their tendency to ignore the W3C and go their own way was mimicked by other companies, leading to the mess that HTML is in today. We will never know what could have been, had Netscape been willing to embrace intelligent standards and listen to those who actually write web pages. How ironic that their main competitor, Microsoft, was the first to "find religion" and support web standards.

Netscape 6 is a final chance for redemption. Will NS/AOL take advantage of this opportunity? The choice is theirs.

Mark Haun

Mark Haun


November 7th, 2000   8:40 AM

Netscape has lost any respect I might have ever had for them. As a former web programmer, I have seen for myself the horrors of dealing with non-compliant browsers. Netscape has shown that they care more about appearences than having functional code. Fscking losers.

Joe Yandle


November 7th, 2000   8:40 AM

Dear Mr Flanagan, you are dead wrong. Show me a more standards-compliant HTML browser on the market than Mozilla/NS6? IE? No. Show me a more XML-compliant browser? A browser with support for MathML, even partial - IE? No. SVG support, even partial - IE? No. XLink, even partial - IE? No. 'Nuff said.

Jari Perkiömäki


November 7th, 2000   8:40 AM

Netscape, You need to take the high ground and remain loyal to the open-source, open-standards that you claim to be a part of.

Mike Christiansen


November 7th, 2000   8:39 AM

I'm all for one-upping microsoft, but releasing as "final" a product that's not really final sounds too much like microsoft's own practices. I agree, Netscape should call it a beta and fix up the problems.

Adam Howard


November 7th, 2000   8:39 AM

It is simple common sense. Fix the bugs before Netscape 6 is released. The world has waited this long, it will wait until these bugs are fixed. The Netscape marketing department seems to have forgetten that cool websites that work are an important selling point, fixing these bugs is simply Netscape's best hope to regain marketshare.

Tyler Bannister


November 7th, 2000   8:38 AM

I'm really disappointed about this decission :( I see the future of the Internet only in open-standars and applications that follow them unrestricted. I'm also reporting bugs as far I found some and to hear that not all of them will be fixed is hard! I see in Netscape 6.0 the one and only chance to choose my OS indipendent of the availibilty of the Internet browser. If more and more developers focus on M$ where will be the indipendance?! Netscape should show them that there is a good and standard compiled alternative so it is no more required to use M$ specific extensions (VBS/ActiveX)! This can not be achived if Netscape/AOL follow the current way :(

Raphael Bossek


November 7th, 2000   8:38 AM

AOL just doesn't get it. That much is clear. What reason does anyone have for using Netscape instead of IE (or something else)? Open Standards compliance has never been and never will be something M$ does well. If it is somehting Netscape does well, then that is a significant delimiter.

Just stating the obvious.

Henry Meyerding

Henry Meyerding


November 7th, 2000   8:36 AM

A 'stable' branch -- Netscape 6 being a stable branch of Mozilla -- is only of value if it contains significantly fewer bugs than the trunk. Hence, it makes sense to fix any and all bugs found, even during a feature deep-freeze, as long as they do not introduce significant instabilities.

Sean Cier


November 7th, 2000   8:35 AM

Netscape engineers need to get over it - they already lost the browser wars! Delaying a release of 6.0 won't make a difference in their market share. They should delay to deliver the appropriate compilance. Won't give them anymore customers either way. :-)

Paul Nelson


November 7th, 2000   8:29 AM

Netscape has promised compliance with web standards since it started remaking its browsers. We've suffered through years of headaches with the 4.X versions. I aligned myself with the other petitions asking that Netscape get it right this time.

Mike
Web Developer
Inter-American Telecommunication Commission

Michael Smith


November 7th, 2000   8:28 AM

I'd been hoping to see some imitation of standards compatibility in the v.6 release. Unfortunately, the project's manager's have yet again diluted the value of what could have been a great project.

Ryan Punt


November 7th, 2000   8:25 AM

I agree completly with what is said in this petition. Please make Netscape 6 the best it can be by fixing the know bugs, I can wait.
John Brier

John


November 7th, 2000   8:25 AM

Dear Netscape, by forcing another non-standards-compliant release, you gain nothing but the ridicule of unimpressed users and the scorn (and probable exodus) of programmers such as myself. Do you really think that anything less than a fully standards-compliant browser has a chance against the much slicker Microsoft Internet Explorer? Standards compliance is your only possible selling point. As the current underdog, you *have* to do better just to hold your own. Take more time if you need it so that you can impress the users and developers rather than reinforce the impression that your products aren't up to snuff.

Ashley Jacobs


November 7th, 2000   8:23 AM

I hope that Netscape will come to its senses and stop being driven by its marketing goons. It is better to slip a date than to deliver a shoddy product. Netscape need to prove that it is commited to quality, and I'm guessing it got into its some of its current fix by ignoring its developers (lets not forget that the rest resulted from the monopolisting dirty tricks of the gnomes of Redmond). I'm more than happy to use 4.x and Mozilla until then - I refuse to use the product of those who would attempt to destroy my freedom to code and use the software and digital media of my choice.

Will O'Donovan


November 7th, 2000   8:23 AM

I have been rigorously defending Netscape from the urinals of history for several years now. A sizable percentage of the web development crowd has a good mind to flush Netscape and crown MSIE the undisputed and perpetual king of browsers (le roi est mort, vive le roi). This would include the end of this nonsense of coding two versions of a script because of DOM incompatibilities. Why support two DOMs if the second one is a fringe?

Were these sorts of mindsets to take hold, Netscape 4.76 users would have to join their compatriots using Netscape v2 or v3 in disabling JavaScript (or CSS) support to alleviate nasty-looking content with screens full of JavaScript (or VBScript!) errors. Granted, v4 has a JavaScript console rather than popping up obnoxious error messages, but it is still a pain.

If the Netscape/Mozilla teams plan to give up on their browser, perhaps I should do the same. Please say it ain't so, Mo' :(

Shane Beasley


November 7th, 2000   8:20 AM

We developers would much rather have the release be well-oiled than be here tomorrow. We can certainly wait another few months; we have been waiting for a while, so please concentrate on getting it right the first time. Don't mimic the Microsoft strategy.

-Jonathan Barlow
BARLOWnet.com

Jonathan Barlow


November 7th, 2000   8:19 AM

I think I speak for a lot of peopel when I say it should be done, and done right, by now. Netscape, you get the award for worst open source project ever.

Wayne Vinson


November 7th, 2000   8:19 AM

What was the point of open-sourcing Mozilla if they ignore the project's advice? We'll take your code, but ignore warnings about the code we take?

Joel York


November 7th, 2000   8:18 AM

News Flash!!! This just in!!!

  • Netscape has lost the second battle of the "Browser Wars."

    News Flash!!! This just in!!!
  • That might be OK.

    Netscape now has a chance to regain every inch of ground lost in the second battle. By releasing a 100% standards compliant browser, Netscape can win back the favor of the users and developers who now break down in tears when they think of the Netscape Glory Days.

    Remember when we all laughed at IE3 and lauded Netscape 4.0? Why were we so cruel to MS? What was it about Netscape that captured our hearts and minds? A: It was the fact that the little guy could make a product that worked better than MS. It was fun to see. It was (almost) based on _standards_.

    The reason Netscape lost? A: Because IE 4.0 came closer to the elusive Fountain of Standards Compliance. Something is going terribly wrong when even Slashdot posters extol the virtues of a MS product.

    If Netscape wishes to lose the most important Battle of the Browser Wars, they should proceed with their premature release of a browser that still fails to meet DOM 0 specifications. On the other hand, if Netscape would just wait for basic standards compliance from their own engineers, they just might have a chance in the future.

    I'm tired of cheering for MS and wishing I didn't have to support Netscape. How about you?

    Sincerely,
    Matt Blanchard

    Matt Blanchard


    November 7th, 2000   8:17 AM

    I have supported the use of NEtscape in every office I have worked in. It is (and i might have to say was) my favorite browser.

    I have tried the NEtscape 6.0 Beta and was shocked at the UI design and how much slower my computer operated (imac with 32meg of memory) /

    I also was shokced to see how it worked with other email systems.

    I hope that AOL/NEtscape fixes the product before unleashing it on the people that have trouble de-installing software.


    -rich pickens

    Rich Pickens


    November 7th, 2000   8:17 AM

    I rescend my previous statements about the concerns I have with Mozilla / Netscape. Please refer to http://www.mozillazine.org for a very well documented justification for where Netscape 6.0 is. I think that this is suitable and that a release of 6.0, even a buggy version is very understandable. The bugs listed before, though significant, are certainly not a justification for a hold up on the release.

    How many users will be affected by these short-comings?

    I am hoping for optimizations in both memory and footprint, and I see them happening every day. More power to the Mozilla team and keep up the good work. This is about moving forward, not backward. OSS lets us manage the public, and as long at Netscape posts patches with a reasonable turn around .. then I honestly believe all will be well ...

    Thanks

    Jason Key

    Jason Key


    November 7th, 2000   8:17 AM

    As has been noted by most everyone on this petition, you will be sealing your fate if you do not fix your standards compliance before release. Think very, very hard about what you're about to do. Especially you managers at Netscape - not fixing bugs and standards compliance - especially known ones with known fixes! - is mismanagement at its worst.

    Paul Ulich


    November 7th, 2000   8:17 AM

    I've used Netscape forever at this point, both on Unix and Windows systems. Netscape's quality seems to have gone continually downhill, with memory leaks under Linux and ever more random crashes on Windows platforms. Netscape 6 at this point is so long overdue it's pathetic, yet every single Mozilla alpha or beta release I've tried is obviously just that- not release quality. An early buggy release will do NOTHING to improve Netscape's image at this point; indeed, the best Netscape should hope for is to release a solid product, and hope to gain back a few customers.

    Scott Wegener


    November 7th, 2000   8:16 AM

    Please remember one reason free software is so great is because there is no deadlines. Don't publish a "final" version when there is know bugs worth fixing.

    Laust M. Ladefoged


    November 7th, 2000   8:15 AM

    I agree! It should embarass Netscape when Microsoft even comes close to producing a more standards-compliant browser.

    I am the author of Sams Teach Yourself JavaScript 1.5 in 24 Hours, ISBN 0-672-32025-8. I'm sure Netscape's behavior in this situation will find mention in David's next JavaScript book as well as mine. I've always been a Netscape fan and would love to be able to write something nice about them.

    Michael Moncur


    November 7th, 2000   8:15 AM

    To those that decide at Netscape:

    Please consider that the main competitive advantage that NN 6.0 will have in the market is strict standards compliance. The press will give you only one good shot at getting this right. Sure, you want to be out there sooner rather than later, but at what cost? You need the blessing of the community of web professionals. Please do the right thing, and hold the release until it is right.


    Regards,


    Ron Thigpen

    Raleigh, NC

    Ron Thigpen


    November 7th, 2000   8:13 AM

    Mozilla is very good
    It just so happens that I use Mozilla milestone 18 as my main browser. It is very stable, and very nice. To hold it to a higher standard than IE, Opera, NetPositive, or Netscape 4.x is just absurd. It's still preview software, the bugs aren't even all fixed yet.

    Joel Schopp


    November 7th, 2000   8:11 AM

    Netscape should accept the input from the many individuals here as valuable research that didn't cost them a penny. They should take the advice of the people here and release the current 6.0 as a beta version and fix the bugs and compliance problems before public release.

    Netscape - Save yourself. There is still time.

    Page Ballenger


    November 7th, 2000   8:11 AM

    I too have waited patiently for the day when there would be a competitor to the ie browser. I too have downloaded many of the mozilla builds to 'test' out the new features - and I too have had it crash my entire system. But I hadn't lost hope. The fact is the developers, like myself have struggled and will continue to struggle to implement cross-browser solutions if these standards are not fully compliant. I haven't lost hope but it is definitely waning.

    www.thinksource.com

    Ryan Schaeffer


    November 7th, 2000   8:11 AM

    I develop HTML, DHTML, and CFML applications that must work on both IE and Netscape. It now seems that I must develop two entirely separate sets of applications, as simply developing toward standards will only work with IE. I praise IE for it's speed and standards complaince, but I wish there was an alternative, too. Netscape, are you listening?

    Bryan Klingner


    November 7th, 2000   8:10 AM

    As a professional web developer, I am very concerned with standards issues in the browsers with the largest marketshare. Everything I have heard regarding Netscape 6, up to this point, has been largely positive, and it sounds like it will indeed be the most standards compliant browser available when it is released.

    However, if there are serious standards compliance issues--issues that will break or cause problems with existing sites--they most certainly need to be addressed before release. Minor problems, typos, or other such things can be corrected in interim versions of the non-Beta product.

    I would not suggest releasing yet another beta version, but believe Netscape should redouble their efforts toward fixing any serious compliance issues before release of the final version. If they can fix them by the projected release date, fine, if not, then postpone it a few days. Just don't release something that's going to make us have to rewrite our pages AGAIN.

    Matt Rasnake

    Matthew Rasnake


    November 7th, 2000   8:10 AM

    One of the main reasons for starting the Mozilla project was to release a *fully* standard-compliant broswer. Web users have been asking for this for years. If NS won't release it, then IE will continue it's dominance. Worse yet, it could introduce a fork between the Mozilla codebase (which hopefully will be standards compliant) and the NS base (which, it appears will not be).

    NS6 has already been delayed forever. People are willing to wait for quality. If, after this long wait, NS ships a buggy broswer that doesn't support the standards, then this entire rewriting effort will have been for naught. Even if it means that the ship data slips back a bit, these bugs *must* be fixed to bring the browser into compliance with CSS, HTML, ECMAScript and DOM standards. All of the whiz-bang add-ons (my sidebar, Moz-based Jabber, Moz-based IRC, XMLTerm, etc) won't make up for non-standard rendering!

    Please fix these bugs!

    Derek Morr


    November 7th, 2000   8:10 AM

    i'd really love a reason to come back to netscape, but if they continue to suck, i'll continue to use exploder.

    Johnny Brocolli


    November 7th, 2000   8:10 AM

    i'd really love a reason to come back to netscape, but if they continue to suck, i'll continue to use exploder.

    Johnny Brocolli


    November 7th, 2000   8:09 AM

    i'd really love a reason to come back to netscape, but if they continue to suck, i'll continue to use exploder.

    Johnny Brocolli


    November 7th, 2000   8:09 AM

    Net$cape has conceded the non-AOL 'browser' market to M$. This release is essentially meaningless since it has nothing to win general consumer market share back.

    It amounts to 'we spent the money and we have to release something'. There is no other discernable strategy.

    Hopefully this is the last release and we can move on and develop for a single marginally acceptable defacto standard.

    Erich Cantoni


    November 7th, 2000   8:09 AM

    Releasing a non-standards compliant browser will destroy Netscape finally...

    Why not just do it properly so that we actually have two working browsers again?

    James Semple


    November 7th, 2000   8:08 AM

    Please take the time to introduce a standards-compliant browser. It will improve your reputation in the Web community, and it will make it much easier for us to work on NS as a development platform.

    Jeremy Lang


    November 7th, 2000   8:07 AM

    Releasing a non-standards compliant browser will destroy Netscape finally...

    Why not just do it properly so that we finally have two browsers again?

    James Semple


    November 7th, 2000   8:06 AM

    "Time to Market" comes before "Quality": once again this sorry principle is applied to the development process of what could be an important tool...

    Am I alone in thinking that this is why we need Open Source software developments?

    Wouter Van daele


    November 7th, 2000   8:03 AM

    This is my signature.

    Thomas Bartels


    November 7th, 2000   8:03 AM

    Standards compliance is necessary in order to preserve the sanity of DHTML developers everwhere.

    Sean G. Evans


    November 7th, 2000   8:03 AM

    what can i say?

    here in germany netscape has been in a downward spiral ever since IE5.0 and this will now go on until they crash - i hope.

    well, here is one developer who will strongly recommend people to use IE5+.

    it is going to be hell to develop sites for clients who (quite rightfully) insist on cross-browser compatability and a fancy design, though.

    stefan bruemmer


    November 7th, 2000   8:02 AM

    Until recently, there was only one company who was willing to release a buggy software package for the sake of a schedule. This company got away with it because they hold a monopoly in the PC industry. Their tactic was to release poorly-written and designed software to get a foothold, and then improve it with successive versions. They typically didn't get it right until version 3.

    Now you want to follow in their footsteps, by releasing software you know to be buggy just for the sake of meeting a schedule. You fought to have Microsoft brought before the DOJ because of monopolistic practicies. If you hate Microsoft so much, why are you following their developmental practices?

    Take a page from the video game developers of the world. Release Version 6 "when it's ready". If for nothing else than for us web developers who will have to find ways to make our websites work with your buggy browser.

    Geoff Sowrey


    November 7th, 2000   8:02 AM

    Business as usual at Netscape. Dump the code basis into the hands of the consumer regardless of stability.

    Joel West


    November 7th, 2000   8:01 AM

    Netscape, this is bad news. Don't let Microsoft be the most compliant browser. The only reason to use a Netscape browser on a Windows platform is to show political preferences.

    I don't like Internet Explorer (for some UI reasons), but it netscape can't supply a useful browser to me, I'm forced to use IE.

    Michael R Head


    November 7th, 2000   8:00 AM

    ignore the standards and release a non compliant browser.
    shoot yourself in the head and watch IE take over.
    i was a vehement pro netscape advocate in the first browser war.
    if you're going to do stupid things like refuse to slip
    ship date a week or even a MONTH to incorporate ready to go fixes
    (yes, i KNOW that means more testing etc.) that would
    bring you in line with a standard, you WILL lose the second
    browser war. and you will deserve to lose.

    PLEASE don't throw it all away for the sake of some marketing chumps.
    it's much easier to build a good reputation for netscape 6
    than to release it too soon and spend the next 6 months
    justifying to your bosses why nobody gives a shit about your
    browser.

    i think the most ironic thing is you're following the MS path here.
    take something and add your own custom extensions to it to make it
    'yours'.

    netscape deserves better than this.

    monkey


    November 7th, 2000   7:59 AM

    Stop creating non-compliant browsers



    This is absurd. All these advanced features now available yet unusable because they aren't standardized. It's like a barrel full of candy your not allowed to touch!

    Josh Kenzer


    November 7th, 2000   7:56 AM

    As a web developer, it's all been said above. Get it right, guys.

    As a consumer of the product,

    I work a little too hard to avoid using the Evil Empire's products. Do you really want me and others like me to have to suffer these bugs?

    Sean O'Brien

    Sean O'Brien


    November 7th, 2000   7:55 AM

    I as the 42nd President of the United States of America, husband of Hillary R. Clinton who is running for her Senate Seat in NY warning you that this sorts of non-compliance browser will not be tolerated and will not be allowes to be use by general public. Please make Netscape 6.0 bug free and compliance approved.

    The President of USA

    Bill Clinton


    November 7th, 2000   7:55 AM

    Well, this is unfortunate. I've been struggling with keeping my pages cross-platform compatible in the hopes that the next Netscape version would be up to snuff and everthing would be ok. Check this out Netscape:



    This page is best viewed in Internet Explorer or Opera.

    Sasha Sklar


    November 7th, 2000   7:53 AM

    all right. i'm trying my hardest to continue rallying for netscape, but i'm tired of writing script after script to cater to the lowest level of standards compliance. NS used to raise the bar for the web--let's see if you can pick it up off of the floor for the next rev.

    get it right, guys--we all want the best to come out of NS6.

    - s!desh0w

    s!desh0w


    November 7th, 2000   7:53 AM

    Give us a viable alternative to IE. We don't want to use MS products in my division. Standards compliance is the only way to keep management on side.

    Jonathan Cole


    November 7th, 2000   7:53 AM

    It's bad enough that IE is the best available web browser for Windows and the Mac. What's worse is that Netscape is ensuring us that IE will remain the best available web browser for both platforms for the foreseeable future.


    Let's lose all the feature bloat in Netscape 6.0 and just work on a compliant web browser, is it that hard? As it stands now I will never, never, never (am I being clear?) never, never, use Netscape 6.0.

    Christopher Longo


    November 7th, 2000   7:51 AM

    I had high hopes for v6 after seeing the preview. I dumped the 4.x versions in favor of IE mainly because of its lack of support for CSS standards. Seeing the list outstanding bugs, there is no way I will use or recommend NS6 to anyone.

    R.I.P. Netscape.

    Glenn Carr


    November 7th, 2000   7:50 AM

    Hey, this is open source. If you don't like how it works, change/fix it and make your own distribution.

    david andersen


    November 7th, 2000   7:49 AM

    As a web developer I have to say Netscape 4.x was really bad. It was non standards compliant, it was unstable (on my linux box at least) and I allways ended up trying to work around it's limitations.

    I beg you to fix netscape 6.0 so that it will be as standard compliant as posible so that we (web developers) can have a peacefull life in the future.

    PD. Except for the fact that they are very unstable on linux, I think Mozilla and Netscape 6 are excelent products.

    Paul Pacheco


    November 7th, 2000   7:48 AM

    http://www.geocities.com/mentifex/standard.html

    is a white paper on the Standards in Artificial Intelligence

    that implicitly call for bug-free JavaScript compliance to run

    http://www.geocities.com/mentifex/js-mind.html (q.v.).

    Arthur T. Murray


    November 7th, 2000   7:46 AM

    Please. Remember that proper operation, and customer satisfaction (ALL customers, to include the technologically literate) come first!

    Red Lloyd


    November 7th, 2000   7:46 AM

    I seem sometimes to spend half my life writing different versions of my
    code to generate HTML that works with different browsers.

    I really want to stop doing this. And if Netscape 6 defines another broken
    browser version, I just won't have the time to work with it...

    Tom Ritchford


    November 7th, 2000   7:45 AM

    OK, listen up. Mozilla (and NS6 which is based on it) is already *far* more standards compliant than IE. True, it is not yet 100% there, but it is very close.

    There comes a point in the development of any project when you say: that's enough; let's release what we've got. I understand why Netscape want to release a product now - getting to 100% compliance could take weeks, months, but rest assured the Mozilla team will be working on it.

    In the meantime there will be enough in NS6 to get it working 99.999 % of the time. The remaining bugs are trivial and probably documented, the ones which have been fixed in Mozilla will find their way into the next release of Netscape.

    I think the Mozilla team deserve our thanks for all the hard work they've put in making a great, open, cross platform product, and one which continues to get better day by day.

    GF


    November 7th, 2000   7:42 AM

    I'm a professional web developer in NYC. We have to make the websites we
    develop look and function the same in every browser. That is next to impossible
    with Netscape 4.7 being so horribly non-compliant (need I mention using frames
    in NS 4.7?) IE 5 for the MAC is the most compliant browser to date. Don't let
    Micro$oft gobble up your remaining marketshare by letting down all your fans
    with a buggy Netscape 6. For Christ's sake, you skipped Netscape 5, this
    release should be 2 versions worth of improvements.

    Don't go the way of the DODO.

    The ANTI-Coder


    November 7th, 2000   7:42 AM

    I used to be a Netscape cheerleader. I'd tell all my friends they better get with it and use Netscape as their default browser. Then I started to use IE for a while and never went back to the way Netscape handles HTML. Now that Netscape 6.0 is out, and I've witnessed the horror... I feel like barfing on my dog. Please do the entire world a favor and put off this release until it's something more than just a skinnable piece of horse balls, or don't release it at all. Thank you!

    Taber Buhl


    November 7th, 2000   7:42 AM

    I run the daily builds of Mozilla almost all the time, and they're wonderful.

    You've got to make sure that the first non-beta of Netscape 6.0 is equally wonderful, and has all of these bugs fixed, or we'll be stuck with a buggy 6.0 out there that's hard to get rid of, and makes it hard to convince people that supporting anything other than IE is worth their time. Nobody wants that.

    Karl J. Smith


    November 7th, 2000   7:41 AM

    You have to be kidding, I always thought the MS represented the big money grubbing companies. I stuck with Netscape from version 1.0 and, until it crashed on me one to many times, I always convinced myself it was the better browser, since it was not MS. Oh to what depths have you sank Netscape?

    spurkey


    November 7th, 2000   7:40 AM

    Standards compliance is the most important browser attribute.

    Dave Richardson


    November 7th, 2000   7:39 AM

    The Web will be an expensive place to do business, as long as we don't have open standards compliant browsers. How about developing a reference rendering engine that browser makers can adopt in their own products. We have existing products already to choose from (Mozilla, IE). We need to convince the powers that be on the virtues of a standard browser engine.

    Carlo Moneti


    November 7th, 2000   7:38 AM

    If Netscape wants to know why it's losing (has lost?) the browser war, this is the reason - not what ships with an OS. If Netscape wants to catch up with IE, they should focus less on "shopping" tabs that no one will ever use, and more on making a browser that can display pages properly. Interesting idea, eh?

    Jayson Avner


    November 7th, 2000   7:38 AM

    Ah, damn, what we want is to say "This is how it should be", and then fire up a page on Netscape 6 / Mozilla, the promise of standards compliance was made, keep it.

    Svend Tofte


    November 7th, 2000   7:38 AM

    As a user, I reluctantly crossed over to IE from Netscape a couple of years ago when IE started to outperform your product. As a web developer, I am contemplating returning to the old days of "this site optimized for . . . " in order to ween my visitors off the increasingly non-compliant Netscape browser. Hope this helps you see the light.

    Hugh Brooks


    November 7th, 2000   7:37 AM

    If Netscape wants to know why it's losing (has lost?) the browser war, this is the reason - not what ships with an OS. If Netscape wants to catch up with IE, they should focus less on "shopping" tabs that no one will ever use, and more on making a browser that can display pages properly. Interesting idea, eh?

    Jayson Avner


    November 7th, 2000   7:36 AM

    Aggressive standards compliance - nothing else with do!

    Do not release a buggy product!

    We have waited this long - a little longer won't hurt

    None STANDARD is none usefull

    Jim Massey


    November 7th, 2000   7:36 AM

    This is pretty discouraging. Yet another browser version with a whole new set of bugs to work around. C'mon, get a solid version in as a baseline for once.

    Greg Henderson


    November 7th, 2000   7:35 AM

    Netscape,

    Don't give up the fight. Release a compliant browser and start taking back market share. Show MS how it is /really/ supposed to be done.

    Robert Bernhard


    November 7th, 2000   7:34 AM

    Let me start by saying NS6 is (going to be, for those of you that say it is not released yet) the more standards compliant browser than IE.

    For everyone who has ever been involved in the software industry these things should not come as a surprize.
    When developing software there, every time a releasedate is aproaching two parallel development paths are followed:
    1. Concetrating on ongoing development toward the release after this one.
    2. Concentrating on testing, stabilizing and polishing the release version.

    Path 1. is being persued by the mozilla organisation and is being conducted in public (more on that later)
    Path 2. is being persued by AOL/Netscape

    The reason this happens is when path 2 is finished path 1 has progressed and has aquired new features, found and fixed flaws that were not apparent when path 2 started.
    This does not mean these things will not be available to people using the release version, allthough it does mean it will be in a next release. The reality is when you want to release a version the line for that release has to be drawn somewhere and in real life this line has to be drawn somewhere before perfection.

    I would be very much surprised if this would not prove to be the case in many other industries. I for one would not like to wait until <insert your favorite car manufacturer here> has a car in the showroom that according to their engineers is the best possible car they can produce. And the minute they do I take pity on any of their customers choosing to buy the next model.

    The only reason why netscape is being given so much critisism I can think of at this point is because the efforts leading to their next release is out in the open. This is something some people are not used to and as a result have trouble putting into perspective.

    So there; the way I see it this is for the most part a complaint about software development out in the open.

    As for the points in your petition:
    1. Renaming Navigator 6.0 to beta and incorporate patches
    This will only lead to the same discussion come the time for the new release date. See above, again there will be new patches and features in the development branch, someone will browse bugzilla and a website will run a story like this.
    NS 6.0 scores better than the competition on standards compliance tests, this way you deprive us of having the most standards compliant browser at this time shipping to end users.

    2. Refocus on standards compliance.
    Your gripe with Netscape cannot possibly be about standards compliance. They are about to ship the most standards compliant browser they have ever put out. Arguably even the best in this field available today.

    3. Postpone final release until it is more "robustly standards compliant"
    Yo are reiterating point 1. Anyone interested see point 1.

    That's it for me, I don't normaly take the time to post in forums, but I feel this needed to be said.

    Rob


    November 7th, 2000   7:33 AM

    Good points --all of them. The only thing that matters in the long run
    is quality. Perhaps mountainview is stressed over slowly diminishing users.
    But if this ships as a half-assed product, folks will flee fast and in droves.

    gleeco


    November 7th, 2000   7:33 AM

    Please make sure that you comply to all standards before releasing the new version of Netscape Navigator. If not, then NN will be truly dead!

    Patrik Grip-Jansson


    November 7th, 2000   7:33 AM

    I join the others in saying that if Netscape doesn't get its act together, I'm going to stop porting to it. I'm tired of my work running successfully in IE and Opera, and having Netscape screw it up. I'm tired of spending time to find a way to trick Netscape into rendering correctly; expecially when it seems that the Netscape team can't meet me halfway. Netscape, please take all the time you need; the world isn't ending tommorow.

    -James

    James Beck


    November 7th, 2000   7:33 AM

    Even as someone who hasn't done a whole lot of work in HTML and JavaScript, I still have been bitten by non-compliance issues in MS and Netscape browsers in the small amount of web code I have written. It is a terrible burden on developers. In my opinion it is far worse to introduce yet another browser with yet another new and unique set of non-compliance issues than to hold off and get it right. Browsers don't go away quickly -- web developers today are still writing code to work around bugs in browsers from two generations ago. Introducing another browser with a new set of compliance issues means at least two generations of headaches for your developers. Don't do it! The current browser is OK as-is. Make the next one great! Not just a different shade of OK.

    Bill Baxter


    November 7th, 2000   7:31 AM

    I agree.

    John Murden


    November 7th, 2000   7:30 AM

    It is my firm belief that if Netscape 6.0 is released without the previously mentioned bug fixes (among others) and complete standards complaince, it will lose its last chance to regain market and mind share from Microsoft IE. I strongly urge that NS 6.0 not be released until it is complete and correct, otherwise there will be no more Netscape after the proposed debacle.

    Jay Turley


    November 7th, 2000   7:29 AM

    Thank you for NOT complying with established standards. The new set of standard-compliance bugs in your new Navigator makes my long work hours even longer, challenges my mind, forces me to look for complicated solutions to easy problems, increases the stress level, and slowly convinces me to IE... Your decision shows a very thoughtful approach to development/business/customer relationship...

    Monika Buczak


    November 7th, 2000   7:28 AM

    Please, please, please fix these standards-compliance bugs before releasing Navigator 6.0. It is already much too difficult to create pages that work properly on all of the major browsers. Once Navigator 6.0 is released with bugs, there's no going back -- there will always be users out there who haven't upgraded to the dot release.

    Steve Newman


    November 7th, 2000   7:28 AM

    Please Comply with the Standards First before anything else.


    Aren't you people are still in Karma hell for the blink tag? Get a little karma and comply so the rest of the world can start building pages without double-coding EVERYTHING!

    James Ellis


    November 7th, 2000   7:28 AM

    Netscape, Please don't embarass yourselves. Release a great browser a little late, not an ok one punctually. I know of many developers who are waiting to laugh at you when you make your NN6 release. Give them pause not reasons!

    Chris Kankel


    November 7th, 2000   7:27 AM

    I agree completely with Mr. Champeon's statement. I can't say it better. Please adhear to standards.

    Kurt Schlatzer


    November 7th, 2000   7:19 AM

    Netscape, I urge you to delay the release of a browser known to contain serious standards compliance holes and other bugs, until such bugs and failures to comply are fixed. Surely you understand that by alienating the folks who develop for your platform, you risk your audience's ability to view the content you wish to deliver.

    Steven Champeon


    November 7th, 2000   7:19 AM

    As a web developer and ad-hoc IT person, I'm enormously disappointed in this rush to get NN6 out the door. My only consolation is that neither of the businesses I work with will likely be installing NN6 as anyone's default browser. Everyone I work with is basically happy with IE5, and, given Mr. Flanagan's review of NN6, I see no reason to force any of my co-workers to switch from one faulty browser to another.

    Andrew Ortolano


    November 7th, 2000   7:17 AM

    If NS fail to brig us the strongest standard compliant browser alive, they will yet again get behind in their race for popularity.

    WE DEVELOPPERS DON'T WANT TO WAIT FOR NS6.1 TO START CODING!!!

    François St-Maurice


    November 7th, 2000   7:16 AM

    As a Web Developer, I am very aware of the flaws with the current release of Netscape. Were it up to me, I would choose to no longer support Netscape. Having to comply with Netscape's flaws severely limits my work. With the release of Netscape 6, I hope for an industry-wide ultimatum: we, the Developers, will support a standards-compliant browser, nothing less. If Netscape 6 is found to be non-compliant, it will be no longer supported by any developer. The diminishing percentage of market share that Netscape still owns will be ignored until it is gone.

    David Woods


    November 7th, 2000   7:13 AM

    Remember all the excitement when Mozilla was pledged to be the first fully standards-compliant browser? Remember how angry we all were when IE release after release failed to address concerns of web developers, users, standards committies? Why am I getting a sense of deja vue here?

    This child of OpenSource -- first darling, then something that our opponents kept using as an example of a failure of an OpenSource approach -- where is it going? How long has it been in the making? Long enough that marketing folks has gotten all too uptight and really want to ship, no matter what...

    Andrei Popov


    November 7th, 2000   7:13 AM

    As you can see from my comment below, my HTML coding skills have been daunted by my inability to program correctly. Don't make the same mistake I did Netscape! :)

    Jason Martinetti


    November 7th, 2000   7:11 AM

    Thank you Netscape for giving me one more reason to recommend Internet Explorer to my clients!

    Jeremy


    November 7th, 2000   7:10 AM

    The poor level of support for standards highlighted here will only serve to marginalize Netscape even more. Quality is important and NS 6.0 MUST surpass the version 4 series browsers if it is to gain any significant user base. Certainly my own experiences with the buggy and bloated mozilla beta releases make me want to stick with NS4.7x for browsing and find other solutions for email.

    Exchanging one set of problems for another is *not* an improvement

    Blaine Horrocks


    November 7th, 2000   7:10 AM

    Not complying with established standards is simply stupid. Standards are produced, reviewed and implemented to make developement and use of a language/tool more universal. To deny or to fail to implement accepted standards will not enhance the N6 product, but will more likely reduce even furthur the community of users writing pages for or implementing N6. It is unfortunate that I have been required to choose between browsers due to a lack of standards support in the NS* browsers.

    Dr Mike Way


    November 7th, 2000   7:09 AM

    Dear AOL/Netscape,

    Compliance with open standards is the one show stopper feature that Netscape6 has the opportunity to provide. Technical users and developers are concearned about these issues and their recommendations have weight with less technical users. Do not discount the trickle down effect.

    IE will likely never comply with open standards but, despite currently high market share, in an open world they will never survive.

    Play by the rules and you will win.

    I would wait another year for standards compliance. Good things take time.

    Don't give up, fix it!

    Thom Farrell


    November 7th, 2000   7:09 AM

    I can't say much really because I am so stupified as to why, after all this time, Netscape 6 still won't be 100% (or at least close to being) standards compliant. I've been a die-hard Netscape user for years and have been developing for almost as long. I can't stand having to develop for multi-browsers, and though I might have to for IE and their ever-changing feature set, knowing I can write in 100% HTML4 would ... well, just make sense after so long.


    From the top:
    The following tags are permitted: <b> <i> <p> <A> <li> <ol> <ul> <em> <br> <strong>

    I hope this isn't v6's only supported tags!!

    Jason Martinetti

    Jason Martinetti


    November 7th, 2000   7:08 AM

    AOL/Netscape, I beg you to delay your version until the mozilla version is ready. If you are planning to fork it now, it is suicide for your browser.
    Please fix your compatibility issues and then release your delayed product.
    A delay is better than a poor product. Thanks!

    Brian Z


    November 7th, 2000   7:08 AM

    Releasing a buggy product will do nothing to slow the trend of the Netscape userbase switching to IE. I am a web-developer - a year or so ago, I developed using Netscape & checked it against IE. Now I use IE and check it against Netscape. If Netscape releases a new product that chokes on standard html/javascript, I will not support it.

    Benjamin Liberman


    November 7th, 2000   7:07 AM

    The continued viability of Netscape as a web browsing platform is crucial for those of us who use desktop machines which don't run IE and aren't ever likely to unless Microsoft gets hit over the head with a really big stick. (in other words, Linux and *BSD)


    Significant standards compliance bugs - ones which cause reasonable web pages to be inaccessible - are a risk to this viability. Basically, if you own the market (like IE does now) then people work around your bugs, but if you don't (Netscape) then people say "tough", and the web fills up with pages your users can't access, and the spiral continues.

    Peter Desnoyers


    November 7th, 2000   7:06 AM

    I must agree completely with the article.

    I work in an all-Microsoft shop, designing an internet application that will work only in IE 5.0+. Every day I have to defend Netscape, saying the traditional "Just wait...it will be better!". I install the "preview" releases and use them. i use it as often as possible. I even prefer it to IE. But, at this point I might as well let go of that tuft of grass I'm holding onto (dangling from the cliff over the gulch of Microsoft Domination) and just fall. What is the use, if the marketing engine has taken over the development cycle, making it more importatnt to release code than fix a misspelled word. This is truly a sad day.

    I sincerely believe that Netscape/AOL has more to lose by releasing a broken browser as 6.0 than it has to gain by meeting a release date, or even than it has to lose by slipping the date a few months to work in the patches.

    Sign me --
    Just another Netscape evangelist on the verge of defecting.

    Mike Colville


    November 7th, 2000   7:06 AM

    For a lightning fast, standards compliant, and small footprint web browser, check out iCab, www.icab.de. This web browser beats both IE and Netscape, and even supports tags such as <BLINK> <MULTICOL> and more. The only catch is you have to have a Macintosh.

    Michael Stewart


    November 7th, 2000   7:05 AM

    As a web developer, I will be extremely disappointed if Netscape ships this buggy version. Sure, geeks will usually be current with any application by installing patches, but you cannot expect the regular public to do the same. Non-computer savy people are still using Netscape 3 and IE 4. You think when these people finally upgrade to Netscape 6.0 that a month later, they'll download and install the patch for 6.1? Not likely.

    I know that not all bugs can be fixed. But please, let's at least fix the big ones for the official release.

    Dave I


    November 7th, 2000   7:02 AM

    Please don't blow your IMO only chance to gain back some
    market share from IE. If what ... says is even half true,
    and I see no reason to doubt him, it will be a major
    dissapointment in netscape, and by proxy, in mozilla and
    open source software.

    Roland Nagtegaal


    November 7th, 2000   7:01 AM

    Please make Netscape6 standard compliant. If not Netscape, then who?

    Edward Yavno


    November 7th, 2000   7:01 AM

    The last thing you want to do is alienate the opensource community more. IE has overtaken Netscape already in so many ways. If you ignore standards compliance you give Netscape users one less reason to continue to use it and begin to reflect the ugly "adopt and extend" side of IE that remains despite its other standard-compliant benefits.

    Paul S. Johnson


    November 7th, 2000   7:00 AM

    Netscape, please allow standards compliance to be have higher priority than
    marketing deadlines. I realize that the deadline slipping that has happened
    so far has caused problems, but shipping a non-compliant product won't help.
    The best way for Netscape to win, is to ship the best product.

    Jim Crumley


    November 7th, 2000   6:57 AM

    Please don't blow your IMO only chance to gain back some
    market share from IE. If what ... says is even half true,
    and I see no reason to doubt him, it will be a major
    dissapointment in netscape, and by proxy, in mozilla and
    open source software.

    Roland Nagtegaal


    November 7th, 2000   6:56 AM

    I've always preferred to use Netscape, but the Internet is built on open standards and if they can't provide an environment that supports that it is very difficult to develop for them.

    Éimhín McManus


    November 7th, 2000   6:54 AM


    I agree that Netscape should be fixed. Shame to see the project die like this, because of marketing / business people not having a clue what people want from Netscape.

    Roman Sulzhyk


    November 7th, 2000   6:50 AM

    You guys didn't loose ground to Microsoft because of "unfair competition," you lost because of crap like this.


    Get a clue and deliver a solid, quality product, regardless of whether you are in danger of missing some arbitrary deadline.

    Tim Hughes


    November 7th, 2000   6:49 AM

    From a development point of view I think Netscape is just aload of...



    **** ******** ****** ***** ******.

    <br
    excuse my french !!!!

    Gary McAllister


    November 7th, 2000   6:48 AM

    I agree with Mr. Flanagan. Netscape should not distribute a non standard compliant version of its product as it could worsen its reputation (that is already not too good). Netscape must be careful if they don't want developers to abandon Netscape support for future development.

    Frederic Bergeron


    November 7th, 2000   6:48 AM

    Some points to consider:


    1. Programmers respect standards, not necessarily because they think standards are better than proprietary solutions, but because standards offer the best hope that a programmer's work will endure, and offer the programmer the opportunity to avoid specialising in niches.

    2. Programmers lead the adoption of new technology. If programmers give it the thumbs up, then they will start writing for it, then users will start using it, and then you have a chance of establishing an "internet scale" product. If not, it's doomed from the start.

    3. Programmers (web developers especially) are fed up to the teeth with the Web standards non-compliance situation. One of the reasons that so many programmers hate Microsoft is not the purported low quality of their products, but the way that Microsoft increasingly force their own solutions down the throats of the internet programming community.

    4. Of course, as any experienced programmer will point out, there are plenty of unknown non-compliances, probably more than known, and fixing just the known ones now will probably not make much difference with the technical quality of the shipped product -- the others will be discovered pretty quickly. A post-release series of patches is inevitable, so in practical terms what's the difference if a fix is in the release or a patch?

    5. The technology is not the point here. There is now a high risk that the list of known Netscape 6 non-compliances could become a political rallying point for these frustrated programmers -- that is, it could rapidly acquire much more significance than it actually merits technologically. Those journalists have to write something about Netscape 6!

    6. Wherever there is a risk, there is an opportunity. If Netscape were to make the gesture of sacrificing their release schedule for the sake of complying with Web standards, they would instantly win the respect and goodwill of all those frustrated and jaded programmers. Thats an intangible asset that could be worth millions of dollars, amortized over one or two years.


    Andrew Bettison


    November 7th, 2000   6:46 AM

    Some points to consider:


    1. Programmers respect standards, not necessarily because they think standards are better than proprietary solutions, but because standards offer the best hope that a programmer's work will endure, and offer the programmer the opportunity to avoid specialising in niches.

    2. Programmers lead the adoption of new technology. If programmers give it the thumbs up, then they will start writing for it, then users will start using it, and then you have a chance of establishing an "internet scale" product. If not, it's doomed from the start.

    3. Programmers (web developers especially) are fed up to the teeth with the Web standards non-compliance situation. One of the reasons that so many programmers hate Microsoft is not the purported low quality of their products, but the way that Microsoft increasingly force their own solutions down the throats of the internet programming community.

    4. Of course, as any experienced programmer will point out, there are plenty of unknown non-compliances, probably more than known, and fixing just the known ones now will probably not make much difference with the technical quality of the shipped product -- the others will be discovered pretty quickly. A post-release series of patches is inevitable, so in practical terms what's the difference if a fix is in the release or a patch?

    5. The technology is not the point here. There is now a high risk that the list of known Netscape 6 non-compliances could become a political rallying point for these frustrated programmers -- that is, it could rapidly acquire much more significance than it actually merits technologically. Those journalists have to write something about Netscape 6!

    6. Wherever there is a risk, there is an opportunity. If Netscape were to make the gesture of sacrificing their release schedule for the sake of complying with Web standards, they would instantly win the respect and goodwill of all those frustrated and jaded programmers. Thats an intangible asset that could be worth millions of dollars, amortized over one or two years.


    Andrew Bettison


    November 7th, 2000   6:46 AM

    It is truely a sad state of affairs when companies release products that are far from complete. Things have only gotten wose over these last few years, with more and more companies main priority being a release date, instead of a good product.

    Up until recently, I had been a strong supporter of Netscape, using their product and developing websites that worked with Netscape. Over the last year, it has become increasingly harder to do so with Netscape's lack of compliance to current standards.

    I feel that Netscape has has now lost thier goals. They no longer wish to create a browser that is STABLE and settle for getting one released on an arbitrary date that was most likely writen on a calendar by a high level executive. It does little good to release a product that looks nice and has some good features and a shopping tab, things that are suppose to bring in revenue for the company, when very few people are going to be able to use such a product because it has so many bugs and errors in the code.

    Many developers have already stopped trying to create websites that can be seen properly with Netscape. With the new version having just as many problems as previous versions did with reguards to standards compliance, the trend is going to continue to show a stready flow of developers no longer supporting the Netscape product.

    One other aspect that might not have crossed your minds is that Netscape is no longer the "only" choice for people and corporations using UNIX. IE is now available for those users and it does not that all the bugs that Netscape has with reguards to fonts being completely dropped, causing all words on a website to not be shown. It does not have the problem of the mail folder becomming unreadable from netscape causing it to crash. It is actually stable. I am sorry I am now just ranting.

    Please believe me when I say that people do not care as much as you believe they would if you hold back on the final release date in order to bring out a better product.

    Brian J. Summers


    November 7th, 2000   6:43 AM

    Shipping products with known bugs may be common practice with closed-source software, in fact, Microsoft calls these "features." Open source changes the rules, since there are many people who are familiar with the code, and all bugs are posted for the world to see. This is supposed to make the software better. I really think Netscape should emphasize standards compliance, and apply every available bug fix. Come on, guys!

    John Craig


    November 7th, 2000   6:43 AM

    I'm a web developer who has had to deal with designing pages with DHTML effects that work *well* on both Netscape and IE. While I understand why Netscape wants something it can call "6.0" ASAP, I have a feeling these bugs are really going to hurt them with developers. If the fixes are available, put them in!

    Christopher Ishida


    November 7th, 2000   6:43 AM

    Shipping products with known bugs may be common practice with closed-source software, in fact, Microsoft calls these "features." Open source changes the rules, since there are many people who are familiar with the code, and all bugs are posted for the world to see. This is supposed to make the software better. I really think Netscape should emphasize standards compliance, and apply every available bug fix. Come on, guys!

    John Craig


    November 7th, 2000   6:43 AM

    The answer is pretty simple if you want to embrace reality.

    "Netscape is proud to make available to the world the Beta1 version of NS6!"

    This is where we are currently at. No one will deny this FACT.

    Simple and to the point.

    Please embrace truth, and let us developers move forward making this a worthy piece of software. We are all very proud of where we are at and where we are going. No reason to hurt the project now by lying to the world and raising everyone's expectations.

    The truth can liberate Netscape in this particular case.

    --pete


    Pete Collins


    November 7th, 2000   6:42 AM

    Please end the pain and make our lives easier. I quit using Netscape years ago due to bugs and I'd be nice to have a usable choice instead of wasting time on workarounds.

    Matt Perkins


    November 7th, 2000   6:41 AM

    Please! Please! Please! make this standards compliant Netscape!! I have used your browser for years now .. and have hated IE as a result of its lack of standards even though we all know MS does have the resources to get it right.

    I understand commercial needs to deliver, but wasn't that the purpose of delivering an OSS version? There are no financial rewards to delivering on a specific date, but there are significant impacts to assuring lost market share as a result of poor delivery. OSS can be slower .. but it is also much more thorough.

    Ship a 6.0 we can all be proud of, and watch the market move towards you. Otherwise we will all be affected by the apathy of the general public.

    Jason Key


    November 7th, 2000   6:40 AM

    I simply agree.

    Though I understand the temptation to release, this industry is too lax about bugs like this. You can't rely on patches. It takes too long for them to be adopted and they will never do so reliably, as every fresh install from that CD reintroduces the bugs long after they have been patched.

    Not all software has bugs and we don't need another browser version and another set of bugs and incompatabilities added to the mix already out there.

    The earlier versions of the browsers are fine with vanilla HTML. Until the new standards are properly implemented they are not practical to develop for.

    PartialCompliance^4 or PartialCompliance^6 = useless

    Cortlandt Winters


    November 7th, 2000   6:39 AM


    This is Navigator's last good shot at becoming the ubiquitous, standards-compliant browser. There are numerous developers who have been long time fans of Navigator; for some, not giving up on the Netscape platform has been based on anti-MS (and other) sentiments... even though market share and reliability of IE's feature set is undeniably impressive (though not flawless).

    However, these same developers are _SCREAMING_ for a standards-compliant browser. Whether or not it comes from Netscape, MS, an independent OSS build,
    or fucking Mars (though a phat GPL'd browser would be great) doesn't matter.

    Releasing a next-generation browser that isn't compliant with standards (set
    forth long ago!) shows that Netscape is not serious about establishing Navigator as a development platform.

    Fuck time-to-market. How much longer would the dev community otherwise have to wait for a standards-compliant browser if it isn't done _now_ rather than later?

    For the love of god, please realize that the ultimate success of Navigator is dependent on Netscape recognizing it as a platform, not a downloadable goodie that is nothing more than a vehicle for getting instant messenger and netscape.com content/commerce partners in front of eyeballs (how nineties!).

    Yong Bakos


    November 7th, 2000   6:38 AM

    I am so tired of testing for browser versions, and adding advanced "cool" features only for IE users, and excluding Netscape users. I give Netscape users text menus, and IE users onmouseover layered menus.

    Please don't release an entirely new browser. At least be fully backwords compatible. Thank you for all the hard work you have done so far. I appreciate the free browser personally, but a buggy browser will make my life much harder.

    Robert Zwink

    Robert Zwink


    November 7th, 2000   6:37 AM

    Netscape owes all us developers who have stuck with them through thick and thin (very thin lately) to release a good, standards compliant product.

    AJR


    November 7th, 2000   6:36 AM

    Good, bad, or ugly, ... NS 6.0 WILL set the baseline for browser abilities and compliance for several years to come. It won't matter much if things are fixed in NS 6.1. The dream of developing to standards and running on any compliant browser are DOOMED if NS 6.0 ships with major compliance bugs.

    Yes, I want NS 6.0 so bad I can taste it BUT I want the dream not a broken facsimile.

    Randall J. Parr, Temporal Arts


    November 7th, 2000   6:36 AM

    Having read the comments of the 492 people who have preceded me, I can think of nothing original to add. Please goback to the workbench for a few more days or weeks and fix the bugs before release.

    Paul Graf


    November 7th, 2000   6:36 AM

    Netscape owes all us developers who have stuck with them through thick and thin (very thin lately) to release a good, standards compliant product.

    AJR


    November 7th, 2000   6:35 AM

    I agree with this, the most important thing of computing is standard but not time to deliver

    Carfield Yim


    November 7th, 2000   6:33 AM

    I cannot understand what would drive a company to release a web browser that doesn't even conform to the established standards. Not only is this unfair to the customers and users of the software, it puts an unfair burden on web designers to go out of their way to rewrite their standards-compliant code just to allow it to be displayed by a bad web browser.

    Andrew Viridis


    November 7th, 2000   6:33 AM

    Standards compliance will drive industry support.

    john dehope


    November 7th, 2000   6:33 AM

    This is ridiculous. Netscape is one of the founding pieces of software that brought the Internet to its prominence today, and as a developer this is a slap in the face. Let us now embrace the new browser of the future…. MS Internet Explorer



    Netscape should take responsibility for their product and fix it before they deploy it!

    Marty Spain


    November 7th, 2000   6:32 AM

    Vince published a note just as I was. When I refer to IE5 being standards based I am refering to the Macintosh version. The MacBU down in California managed to create a wonderful browser. I do forget how much the Windows version irritated the developers!

    Brad Siegfreid


    November 7th, 2000   6:32 AM

    Im a recent Linux convert and have been REALLY looking forward to a standards complient Netscape to use on my system. Guess I will just stick with Galeon. Who needs all the extra crappy marketing buttons on Netscape 6 anyway??? What a shame...

    JP Toto


    November 7th, 2000   6:31 AM

    I don't think that netscape can come back from dead.

    Also if I use linux and netscape 4.72, I must admit that MS IE 5 is a better product.

    Mozilla, even if it is open source, cannot reach the Micro$oft browser.

    I'll pray for a good browser on a linux platform (and don't tell me about strange thing like .net technology port)

    Gianluca


    November 7th, 2000   6:30 AM

    One of 3 things is going on here.
    1.> Mr. Flanagan was making a page and was upset when his code didn't work in Netscape because he has been using MS standards so long that he forgot W3C

    2.> There is an error in one of Mr. Flanagan's books (JavaScript: The Definitive Guide, Java in a Nutshell, and Java Examples in a Nutshell), and this is a good excuse.

    3.> Mr. Flanagan Just got a big check with a windows logo on it.. hmm.. (Wonder if it crashed)

    Neither MS or Netscape have a fully complient browser now, in fact neither are close. MS has their own non-standard standard. Most people just assume if IE supports it, it is standard. Netscape 6 (PR3) is the only browser that I have found that supports everything i've thrown at it, standard and MS-Standard.

    Now people complaining about all the problems listed on bugzilla, people sit down and be quite, learn something then do something. Complaining doesn't help, now all those who whould be working on those bugs you mentioned may stop to respond to crap like this.

    All those Designing 2 pages.. one for IE and One for Netscape... people sit down and be quite, learn to create a crossbrowser page. Not as hard as you would think.

    I'm not say'n Netscape is perfect, it has issues. But in my opinion, its the best option so far and its only in Preview release.

    Not only does this look bad for Mr. Flanagan but O'Reilly as well.

    BTW: I cannot support something like this. when the author appears to have his own issues with Netscape.

    I could take up a few more pages but i'll stop here.

    Joe W


    November 7th, 2000   6:30 AM

    I don't know what the problem is. I tried Netscape 6 PR3 and found it really good. It did the things you all said didn't work, I could DL in DD and everything. Are you on PR1 or PR2??? In fact, I am in Netscape 6PR3 right now. No problem.

    Nathan


    November 7th, 2000   6:29 AM

    I can't imagine what Netscape is thinking. It's a very cynical gesture to release a product that is not ready.


    b

    Bill Spornitz


    November 7th, 2000   6:29 AM

    I strongly believe that NS6 should be delayed until known important
    non compliance bugs are fixed.
    It is important to establish credibility in open source development.
    Otherwise, it'll be like following in the path of MS, who release
    products full of bugs, just to "get it out".

    Mauro Talevi


    November 7th, 2000   6:28 AM

    It is really painfull to see what has happened to Netscape. Once
    a beacon of inovation, now a pathetic tool for marktroid people in AOL to use and abuse.
    The Browser war was not won by Microsoft but simply lost by blind people at Netscape. It is really sad to see that they did not learn anything from earlier blunders and are prepared to do the greates blunder of them all, the final blow to an already moribund browser, by releasing a crippled non standard compliant browser that will shove netscape to the graveyard of once great companies.

    Manuel Eduardo Correia


    November 7th, 2000   6:27 AM

    It's pretty sad day when a product is released with known problems (bugs), even sadder when known solutions (patches) are not applied!

    Gezz Netscape, we expect higher quality of code, and higher adherence to Internet standards from you. This is the kind of crap Microsoft might have tried to pull 5 years ago. Given the cost of shipping bad code, and then trying to fix it, after the hose has left the barn, even they have improved their quality.

    We need the choice of a highly compliant, innovative, commercial browser. A Browser that is more functional, more web friendly, faster, smaller and Smarter than the other guy.

    It’s the professional thing to do. It’s the completive thing to do. It’s the Right Thing to do.

    Ian Irving


    November 7th, 2000   6:26 AM

    We lost the competition in browser for a long time. It's not only for the browser itself, but for the whole web enabling. I'd rather look at other choices than IE or Netscape.

    Yuantai Du


    November 7th, 2000   6:26 AM

    Vince published a note just as I was. When I refer to IE5 being standards based I am refering to the Macintosh version. The MacBU down in California managed to create a wonderful browser. I do forget how much the Windows version irritated the developers!

    Brad Siegfreid


    November 7th, 2000   6:25 AM

    If the Netscape 6 browser is released with all of these bugs it simply won't be adopted. No one in the groups I work with are at all excited about adopting a new browser, especially not in an enterprise environment where deployment consumes huge resources. If the first release is this buggy and this far from standards compliance, you can FORGET about it even being considered for adoption. The first impression is going to make or break the case, and it sounds like NS6 is poised for a hard fall.


    Why are these fixes not being permitted, why is the open source resource not being tapped? The release of NS6 is going to publicly showcase what Open Source can do . . . if it falls flat, it will mar the margins of respect that Open Source has been able to gain so far.


    Get with the program and do it right the first time! If the patches are there, there is absolutely NO excuse.


    I have been trying to use NS6 prerelease on M$ WinX and Linux and I'm sorry to say that it is not worth the effort for the number of times that it simply disappears . . . so, I don't use it, and I don't see why anyone else will . . . I had hoped for so much more from this, but it looks like I'll have to use IE and Konqueror (untried) for my browsing.


    Mad, doesn't even begin to cover it.

    MadArab


    November 7th, 2000   6:25 AM

    I use Linux at home. I use Netscape 4.52. It keeps crashing/hangs up. It hangs up most of the time when I use Java applets, therefore I usually disable Java.
    It is sad to say, but MSIE is much better than Netscape. I wish Netscape was a competition to MSIE, it doesn't seem to be any more...

    Asaf Gery


    November 7th, 2000   6:24 AM

    The only pains I've ever had with Web development were due to the weaknesses of the Netscape browsers.

    As far as I'm concerned the Web development world would be a much better place if Netscape would just "go away", or adhere to the IE "standard". Once again, Microsoft has proven that they may not always be first, but in the long run they will be the best for the developer and the user.

    Joe


    November 7th, 2000   6:23 AM

    As a user, I have steadfastedly refused to switch to IE for quite a long time now, even though there are some sites that simply don't work in NN anymore. However, I kept IE around as a backup for these occasions. More and more, I find myself starting out browsing in NN, and ending up in IE. If I have to switch browsers once, I don't usually switch back.

    As a developer, my maxim used to be "Code for NN, and fix it for IE". Somewhere around versions 4, it changed to "Code for NN, it will work in IE". Then it changed to "We HAVE to code for NN, and then add the cool features for IE only." If NN6 isn't ready for prime time, will this change once again to "Code for IE, screw NN"?

    Brendan Donovan


    November 7th, 2000   6:21 AM

    I wish I had time to read all the posts by fellow developers, but the few I have read echo all our opinions. We need a STANDARDS based browser. If its not, then we can't recommend it for our clients. The only thing a partially compliant browser will do is make our jobs more difficult. I've finally had enough. My focus is now on server-side programming as much as possible and testing on IE when I do need DHTML. I might do some testing with NN, but will only deal with problems if its an easy fix. I don't want to be running a half dozen versions of Navigator just to deal with all the little issues, especially with a browser market of about 13%.

    Brad Siegfreid


    November 7th, 2000   6:20 AM

    Netscape 6.0 may not be perfect. But it's more perfect then IE 5.5.
    Most of the sheep on here don't realise this, but the problems in Netscape 6.0 are only evident because they're not being hidden. They're there for everyone to see. Microsoft on the otherhand, hides their problems and just releases "service packs" every so often to fix things which you didn't even know where broken. You wouldn't notice these problems with Netscape if it weren't for the fact they're being publicized!

    And besides. It's a .0 release. Surely by now we've come to accept that 99% of .0 releases are less than 100% perfect. It's much better then Netscape 4.x, It's more compliant than IE 5.5, and it runs faster, on more platforms, with less crashes.

    Whats the problem?

    Release early, release often.
    96% standards compliant is fine with me, as long as we're pushing closer with ever further release, and we're not waiting too long inbetween those releases.

    On another note, standards compliance doesn't mean Microsoft compliant.
    So for all you people bitching about having to create two sites, one for Netscape and one for Microsoft, will still have to create two sites.
    The difference will be, now you'll be creating one for correctly implemented standards, and one for Microsoft.

    My $.02

    Vince Stratful


    November 7th, 2000   6:18 AM

    It would be nice if people would sign a petition after they have actually looked at facts as opposed to one person who's opinion is not balanced at all. Oh well.
    You cannot win an argument with an idiot.

    Simple


    November 7th, 2000   6:18 AM

    Three words, "Fix the bugs".

    William Campbell


    November 7th, 2000   6:18 AM

    We've waited this long for Netscape 6.

    What is Netscape 6? Netscape is the first complete browser for all platforms.

    The new baseline.

    Well that's what we wanted.

    Take the extra time. Do it right. You're stuffed if you don't.

    Capt. Stux *-Jedi


    November 7th, 2000   6:18 AM

    We've waited this long for Netscape 6.

    What is Netscape 6? Netscape is the first complete browser for all platforms.

    The new baseline.

    Well that's what we wanted.

    Take the extra time. Do it right. You're stuffed if you don't.

    Capt. Stux *-Jedi


    November 7th, 2000   6:16 AM

    Microsoft's Internet Explorer has been the faster/better/less-buggy browser on the Windows platform for a great deal of browser history now. Even the Mac users I know are using IE regularly. From what I've seen of the milestone builds and the preview release, Mozilla is still going to have some issues in terms of making headway. If it is to succeed, it should succeed in that area which it has been positioned most clearly: standards compliance.

    If Mozilla cannot, through a Netscape release, cannot manage standards compliance to the degree that it should, then developers won't build for it, and all will be for naught. If it's an issue of getting a competitive product out there 'on time', that ship has already sailed. Navigator/Communicator has been trailing for some time now.

    If you're going to sic this browser on the world, do it right.

    Geoffrey Wiseman


    November 7th, 2000   6:15 AM

    Agreed. Releasing a quality product should be the Netscape PDTs primary goal. Being based on open source code they already have the patches and it is just plain stupid and ignorant to release a product otherwise. I suggest that the Netscape PDT take this seriously or they will slowly piss off the select group of developers who still use Netscape. Anyway, quality should be the name of the game not mediocrity. After all, would Honda have a good reputation for making reliable cars if their Engineering team said that they new that a car would only start 7 out of every 10 times and still released it to the public anyway?

    John

    John Cammarata


    November 7th, 2000   6:12 AM

    Good, informative article. I've been supporting Netscape 6 during the development of our HTML/JSP pages, and I've had to rewrite a few so that they displayed correctly on Netscape 6. Quality is very important to me; if Netscape's management doesn't share the same concerns about quality in their product, then perhaps my efforts are best directed elsewhere.

    As noted in Bugzilla, reviewers will scrutinize the first release of shiny, new Netscape 6 after several years, not the patch release several months later. Ship a product you are proud of, not something that is merely passable.

    J. Tan


    November 7th, 2000   6:12 AM

    This is pathetic. I had high hopes for Netscape 6, finally as a big name browser that wouldn't suck.

    Instead, we get this.

    Oh well, I guess I'll stick to recommending IE to everybody still, no matter what I think of Microsoft, at least their browser works.

    Chris Eaton


    November 7th, 2000   6:11 AM

    You simply cannot continue to allow almost everyone to say "Internet Explorerer is better". This is your chance to prove them wrong, and to provide me with an altenative to IE.

    Kevin L. Corridon


    November 7th, 2000   6:11 AM

    Since the purchase of Netscape by AOL, it's getting from bad to worse.

    Version 4.7x were barely useable, so with KDE2 getting out, I won't use
    another Netscape products which is a SHAME, unless it is properly
    cleaned from bugs.

    So put out a clean product or put the code under GPL or disappear from
    the browser world.

    Yann Forget


    November 7th, 2000   6:06 AM

    Netscape, you have always been a pathetic company that was unable to hack it in the real world. When you didn't have any competition, you ruled the land, but the second a little competition stepped in, you crumbled, because the reality is your product is terrible.


    Microsoft didn't unfairly crush your company, your browser wasn't as good, and definitely not as easy to write code for. The current state of things shows this:


    If you can't take the hard work of developers across the globe and turn it into a product in a reasonable timeframe, then you should just drop the whole thing and go back to writing webservers.


    To use a little analogy: You are laying on your back trying to aim your gun at your feet, attempting to pierce your ear with a grenade pin, and there is a tank coming towards you. And you are complaining that war is unfair.

    BeavisBoy


    November 7th, 2000   6:06 AM

    I've stuck with Netscape over IE despite it's falling behind in features and standards compliance. I was waiting for Navigator 6 to make up the difference. If even part of the probrlems mentioned are true, I'll likely go with the flow and abandon Netcape for IE (or maybe give Opera another look).
    >KFW

    KFW


    November 7th, 2000   6:06 AM

    Netscape has consistently released product code that should have been labeled as beta, beta code that should have been labeled as alpha, and alpha code that was little more than headers. They need to recognize that internet time is not an excuse for sloppy adherence to standards -- both w3c standards and good coding standards.

    Charles Meier


    November 7th, 2000   6:04 AM

    ...but the flaws and bugs are not minor. They're glaring. Try using NS6pr3 on Windows98 on a sort-of decent-ish machine to do newsgroups.

    Usenet? what an ironic name - the news bit of Netscape6 is UNUSABLE and highly crash-prone. Go on, set up a handful of your favourite newsgroups on it. Then go back and add one or two more. I dare you.


    Minor deviations in a 'standard' aren't in an of themselves a disaster - I mean, look at the English Language. Now look at what Americans have done to it! See what I mean? ;-> We all live with that.

    Major misinterpretations or distortions are a prob, and so are huge bits of a program that simply don't work reliably or realistically.




    Ian Tindale


    November 7th, 2000   6:04 AM

    one of the goals of the web was to be platform independent for presentation.
    If I can code up a page so that all browsers can work, then I've done a good
    job. The minute I have to make exceptions in my coding because one (or more)
    browsers can't adhere to the published standard, then what's the point of
    having standards? Without the standards from the W3 Consortium, where would
    the World Wide Web be today? Please, please adhere to the standards published
    and fix the outstanding problems within Navigator. It is currently my
    browser of choice (as I am cross platform), but other alternatives do exist...

    Jerry Heyman


    November 7th, 2000   6:02 AM

    I agree with David Flanagan. Why release a product with known errors?

    //Anders

    Anders Johansson


    November 7th, 2000   6:02 AM

    I am developing web application since 1996 and I was very enthusiasm when I first discover DHTML. Netscape 4 was on a good way and very competitive against Internet Explorer 4. But now, and since the release of IE5, Netscape is far behind and it become very difficult to develop cross-browser web application. I think that Netscape is no longer in the course. Today, developing for both IE and Netscape is a real headache and Netscape is causing a lot of overhead. What we need is browser that respect standards like W3C and this, across platform and browser.

    Benjamin Caron


    November 7th, 2000   6:01 AM

    We do the great things which anyone think but nobody do it.
    The support of the open standard is the most import than any schedul.

    Roy jiang


    November 7th, 2000   6:01 AM

    I don't have the strenght to write down exacly what I've experienced whilst trying to work with Netscape Navigator.



    Instead I just agree with the most of you.





    Nestcape just doesn't do it for me



    Sincerly yours.

    geek

    geek


    November 7th, 2000   6:01 AM

    I agree with David Flanagan. To me it seems quite stupid to release a product with known errors. By the way why does it have to be so big culdn't one make a smaller browser that simply truncates all nifty animations and other stuff that is in the way when one try to watch pages. Also I think htere should be a switch in the Preferences to disable pictures.

    //Anders

    Anders Johansson


    November 7th, 2000   6:00 AM

    Well, nobody I know even uses Netscape anymore. It's just to buggy in the 4.x format. If you are going to release Netscape 6.x with known critical bugs, don't even bother. The only reason I use it now is because I run Linux. I haven't upgraded to KDE 2.0 yet, but the KDE browser sounds like it's the way to go. At first I thought the KDE developers were nuts to reinevent the wheel with a new browser, now they just look like they were some of the few that correctly predicted the future.

    Looks like the only hope for Mozilla is the GPL'ing of the code. Developers can then fix the problems and not be bothered with arbitrary marketing decisions.

    Adam


    November 7th, 2000   6:00 AM

    How many millions of development hours have been lost to this continuing hassle of incompatible browsers? Now that the web has become such an important part of peoples lives and businesses, to release yet another browser that doesn't follow the agreed-upon specs is criminal.


    I urge the good folks at Netscape to take the relatively small extra period of time that will let them release a product that we'll all love...not another one that we'll loathe.


    Chris Spurgeon
    Developer
    Electronic Ink
    www.electronicink.com

    Chris Spurgeon


    November 7th, 2000   6:00 AM

    I think every application has number of known bugs, and Netscape is not an exclusion. And that is good this list is open: who knows what will happen with your web applications in IE "developer platform"?

    Ivan Boiko


    November 7th, 2000   6:00 AM


    It is sad to know that NS6 will come out with the bugs listed in the article, but that shouldn't be taken to mean that the end of the world is close at hand ;-).


    Here are a few reasons why:-


    1. Nothing's perfect (the perfect, and rather lame, defense :-).
    2. It will still be more standards compliant than IE5.x (please correct me if I am wrong).
    3. There's always Mozilla. In fact, I'd prefer Mozilla to NS6.
    4. Remember Eric Raymond's "The Cathedral and the Bazaar" (I hope I've got the title right)? "Release early, release often"?

    I see no reason to hit the panic button over one article.

    Harshdeep Jawanda


    November 7th, 2000   5:59 AM

    Software vendors, at times, need to look beyond the bottom line, deadlines, etc. and strive for a complete, stable product. Netscape 6 as it stands now is definately not even close to ready. This article confirms it. Don't release the product until it's compliant and stable.

    Ryan Lubke


    November 7th, 2000   5:59 AM

    I love my Netscape and therefore I will wait another months or years for my new Netscape.
    But I will not accept another buggy or (in this case even worse) a non standard compliant version anymore.

    Do I have really to support the "damned" IE just because of Netscape is not able to release a standard compliant browser?
    That would be unforgivable!

    Reto Schnyder


    November 7th, 2000   5:57 AM

    How many millionsof development hours have been lost to this continuing hassle of incompatible browsers? Now that the web has become such an important part of peoples lives and businesses, to release yet another browser that doesn't follow the agreed-upon specs is criminal.


    I urge the good folks at Netscape to take the relatively small extra period of time that will let them release a product that we'll all love...not another one that we'll loathe.


    Chris Spurgeon

    Developer

    Electronic Ink
    www.electronicink.com

    Chris Spurgeon


    November 7th, 2000   5:57 AM

    To the People at Netscape
    I have been waiting patiently for a new browser from you. I can wait longer. I will not put up with buggy software. If I don't like it from one company, why should I take it from you? I have had instances where Netscape 4.76 has refused to allow me click on links, fill out forms. The bug reporting applet crashed too. I've tested my pages in 6, and, though I've used the W3C's recommendations, they did not work in your browser. So much for your promotional lines.
    FIX the problem. Listen to your developers, LISTEN to your users. Or just throw in the towel.

    V.C. David


    November 7th, 2000   5:55 AM

    Put the Programmers back in charge! We dont want another IE vs MS war, we finally want a browser that supports the W3C standards!

    andre anneck


    November 7th, 2000   5:54 AM

    Put the Programmers back in charge! We dont want another IE vs MS war, we finally want a brother that supports the W3C standards!

    andre anneck


    November 7th, 2000   5:51 AM

    I've been developing web pages since the 1.0 browsers. I've never been able to implement all the goodies, because none of the browsers out completely supported them. It would be nice to do this for once. Fix Netscape6!

    Jack Wenger


    November 7th, 2000   5:49 AM

    Netscape/AOL, come on! I have been waiting patiently for the one and only truly compliant browser and now I hear it will not be as I expected. Your browser sucks if it isn't 100% compliant. If I have to use a browser that is not 100% compliant, then I will choose IE over this pathetic excuse for making me wait so long and then not delivering the goods.

    I am 100% in favor of the suggestion made by Mr. Flanagan, get this browser to be 100% compliant, then release it. The positive press will be overwhelming from all circles on the planet and then you can again regain market share. If this browser is some weak sister of IE, then that is how it will be treated.

    Please reconsider this insanity that you apparently are willing to perpetrate on the world's internet community. This is your one chance to do the right thing, this moment in time will pass and I believe will end up passing your crappy excuse for another proprietary browser right by.

    I am dumbfounded, amazed and disappointed. I have nothing else left to say.

    Sincerely,
    Michael L. Deane

    Michael L. Deane


    November 7th, 2000   5:49 AM

    Netscape/AOL, come on! I have been waiting patiently for the one and only truly compliant browser and now I hear it will not be as I expected. Your browser sucks if it isn't 100% compliant. If I have to use a browser that is not 100% compliant, then I will choose IE over this pathetic excuse for making me wait so long and then not delivering the goods.

    I am 100% in favor of the suggestion made by Mr. Flanagan, get this browser to be 100% compliant, then release it. The positive press will be overwhelming from all circles on the planet and then you can again regain market share. If this browser is some weak sister of IE, then that is how it will be treated.

    Please reconsider this insanity that you apparently are willing to perpetrate on the world's internet community. This is your one chance to do the right thing, this moment in time will pass and I believe will end up passing your crappy excuse for another proprietary browser right by.

    I am dumbfounded, amazed and disappointed. I have nothing else left to say.

    Sincerely,
    Michael L. Deane

    Michael L. Deane


    November 7th, 2000   5:48 AM

    I have tred Netscape 6 PR1 to PR3,the PR3 can't support Chinese very well,If I change the Chinese font and change charset,I will can't see any english or Chinese.Netscape 6 is astable yet,and very slow.Maybe Netscape 4.x is better than Netscape 6...:(

    ID5


    November 7th, 2000   5:48 AM

    The war is not lost indeed. Do not forget that the war will not be fought on th e pc, the battleground will be the WAP device. The PC is dead long live the PC. (for makin the revolutione..)

    hansley


    November 7th, 2000   5:48 AM

    I think it is funny that this form probably supports more tags then Netscape 6 ;)


    Seriously, I think netscape needs to stop trying to be "commercial" and build a browser that WORKS. it crashed me out over 20 times the night I installed it. Listen to the people who use your product - FIX IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! AND, DO IT RIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    I would like to stop designing two different web sites for my company, because your stupid, useless browser doesn't except outdated markup...it is there, it makes the site look good and the usability wonderful - PUT IT IN YOUR BROWSER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    shawn parker


    November 7th, 2000   5:47 AM

    If you look at bugzilla, and list new/assigned/open bugs for the last 5 days you get approx 1200 faults at various levels of severity.


    As I understand it, the effort is going into fixing faults that impact stability of the software, instead of features.


    Because NS 6 is largely written in javascript, then ANY modification to the JS language system is going to impact on the behaviour of the product -- which must at this point contain workarounds.


    The reason I believe they are going for a release at this point in time has to do more with maintaining the public image of the product, and the Netscape web site. If they fail to do this, then ultimately the entire project will be nuked.


    Software release is a balancing act. But if you fail to release at all, then you will crop off the edge. Netscape need to make a release badly at this point and if smaller bugs are all you can see, then fine, we can all live with them for the moment.


    I am writing on a linux box. IE does not exist on this, so I am quite stuffed witout Netscape/Mozilla.


    Mozilla 1.0 is not due until 2Q2001 - a wait that long is not sustainable for Netscape. The branch from which Netscape is built will be 0.9 -- so there is a way to go yet.


    This is why I /cannot/ support this petition. It ignores reality of the situation.


    Finally NS6 will see the roll out of Java 2 on browsers. That ought to be another improvement for the world.

    Neil Corlett


    November 7th, 2000   5:45 AM

    I understand that churning out a product is the driving force behind your development, but what good is supporting an Open Source development strategy, and then totally ignoring the fruits of its labour?



    Releasing a non-standards compliant browser, especially in spite of fixes that exist to fix most of those problems, is not going to garner support for Netscape.



    Do yourselves a favour and accept the patches being given to you by experienced coders.

    Scott Seager


    November 7th, 2000   5:43 AM

    I am sorry, but somewhere between the release of Netscape 4.5 and Netscape's aquisition by AOL, I lost all hope for Netscape as a company. I hope to high heaven that they would fix up their browser. However, the Mozilla project stated its goals as being the best, most standards compliant browser around. If these accusations of DOM/CSS/etc. incompatibilities with the OPEN standards (not those dictated by anyone but the W3C) are true, then they have failed. Mozilla, wake up, apply real patches, and tell Netscape if they want to screw themselves, they are welcome, but that you will patch the tree anyway!

    Trever Adams


    November 7th, 2000   5:42 AM

    This is what is really going on (this is from personal experience).



    Programmer : Boss I want to make this part of the program run better.

    Boss : Why? It runs now

    Programmer : but It doesn't work right

    boss : so? it runs now

    Programmer : but It needs to be fixed

    boss : no it doesn't it runs now



    The problem is they put these people in charge who have no computer skills what so ever, and have this idea that programmers are perfect. Some of these people don't even think testing is nessicary. Netscape needs to put somone in charge That has been a programmer before, and not some neaderthall that went to college, joined a frat, drank his way through college cheating off of other people, and then came into the "real" world and got a job because he was in the same frat as the person recruiting for the company. But why do A silly thing like hiring a qualified person when a perfectly good idiot is available.



    Matt Poepping


    November 7th, 2000   5:41 AM

    Netscape is playing catchup, and can only succeed with full standards compliance. Rushing to market will be a false economy: people have watched and waited a long time for this product, and will only turn their backs on it if it is not what it was promised to be.

    Steve

    Steve Tinney


    November 7th, 2000   5:39 AM

    Hey. Do it right or don't do it at all.

    Dan Schaaf


    November 7th, 2000   5:39 AM

    I want to have a browser which is:



    Netscape has always been good on the former and weak on the latter; please sort it out - if Windows users are to be persuaded away from IE, they won't be swayed by the former, so address the latter. Some of the faults are too significant to be just ignored, even if "for later".

    George Buchanan


    November 7th, 2000   5:39 AM

    I want to have a browser which is:


    Netscape has always been good on the former and weak on the latter; please sort it out - if Windows users are to be persuaded away from IE, they won't be swayed by the former, so address the latter. Some of the faults are too significant to be just ignored, even if "for later".

    George Buchanan


    November 7th, 2000   5:37 AM

    Glad to hear someone standing up for the HTML/CSS/DOM standards.
    The standards are what binds the web together and the only way the
    best viewed in Netscape/IE tags all over the net will disappear.

    Jonathan Grimm


    November 7th, 2000   5:35 AM

    The path for remaining a viable contender in the Browser Wars has been made clear and that path is Standards Compliance. I for one am tired of having to develop every website twice just to support the various niggling little bugs that exist in IE and Netscape. I had all but given up hope of supporting Netscape in 90% of the pages I develop, now all hope is lost.

    Chris Crockett


    November 7th, 2000   5:34 AM

    Netscape ExCommunicator would be a more correct name for this lousy product since by using it you are put to shame by the rest of the Internet community.

    The only thing you ever need to know about Netscape 6.0 is what the friggin´ userAgent-string contains so that you can completely block it out of your web sites. Quite frankly, it sux major elephant balls as always with Netscape browsers.

    Just say No!

    Fredrik Wangel


    November 7th, 2000   5:33 AM

    Netscape's last best chance for not being relegated to the "Remember when people used to use Mosaic?" bin is to provide absolute, 100%, standards compliance. It is clear to me, as a web designer and developer, that since the AOL buyout of Netscape, that the primnary focus has been on how to use the browser as a marketing tool rather than how to make Mozilla/Netscape 6 a clearly better browser...AOL/Netscape's version numbering fiasco (I guess they forgot the number 5?) is a clear indicator of this, maybe they think that people will think a higher number makes it a better browser?

    Pete Ruckelshaus


    November 7th, 2000   5:33 AM

    Get it right! - I can wait!

    I don't want the waters polluted with more legacy tedium.

    Okay, how about a new 'standard': Prename 6.0 to 6.-99 - as in six point minus ninety nine! That should be about enough, I reckon?

    Ian Tindale


    November 7th, 2000   5:32 AM

    Come on Netscape ! This is your *VERY LAST* chance to produce a working browser.
    IF NS6 is as bad as NS47.latest, then NO ONE will use it, and you'll lose.

    Let the fixes in, or you'll be rolling out NS6.1 faster than you can see 'service pack'...

    Thomas Chiverton


    November 7th, 2000   5:31 AM

    What's the hurry? Netscape already lost the race a year ago , and with it the first round of the PR battle. The only recovery would be to release something so kickass that the press would trumpet it like a new Messiah. Instead, Netscape will take another, near fatal beating when they release a bugged-out version. The story the reporters will run will be generally titled "Too Little, Too Late" and give as much press to this grassroots, standards compliance issue as they will attention to the new "features" in the browser

    Brian Runk


    November 7th, 2000   5:31 AM

    C'mon guys. Pull the fixes in and put out a good product. I've never used IE, and I don't want to, and I'm depending on you guys to prove that the Mozilla open source model actually works. Take a couple months and get it right.

    Michael Wanggaard


    November 7th, 2000   5:31 AM

    I'm wondering why everyone is speaking about a browser war...
    If you release navigator 6 with such incompatibilities, the war is over !

    Cedric Marcone


    November 7th, 2000   5:30 AM

    IE5 is not fully compliant, yet its more compliant than any Netscape browser to date. The gecko engine is coming along nicely. I can't wait for someone to implement it CORRECTLY. Push the release back if it means becoming THAT much compliant.

    Lance England


    November 7th, 2000   5:26 AM

    I think this is Netscape's last chance to repair its browser's reputation for rendering bugs and instability. Netscape is not in a position where it can just expect web developers to work around a new set of bugs (not that it should do this, anyway).

    Ben Hutchings


    November 7th, 2000   5:25 AM

    Netscape is making a suicide with this..they already lost many many users with delays and ignoring standards. Personaly, I used to work with Netscape only, but I was forced to use IE, since it doesn't crash every 10 seconds and it's a bit faster. True, N6 beta is faster and I liked it, but it still has (too) many bugs..some thing that worked in 4.74 don't work in NS6. Netscape, snap out of it and start coding again and get rid of those coders that can't code right. As a profesiional web developer, I sometimes spend like an hour or 2 just to fix some stupid widths and heights problems, not to even mention frames. Shame on you, NS,

    Marko


    November 7th, 2000   5:21 AM

    I've been using Netscape's browsers since the Netscape 0.9 release. Initially I used Netscape's browsers because they supported more features than Mosaic. Then I used Netscape's browsers because they were platform-independent. Finally I used Netscape's browsers because they were the only graphical browser available for Linux. But all that has changed.

    For years, Netscape has built their reputation on defining the cutting edge of web technology, but that hasn't been true for over 2 years. So Netscape needs to do the next best thing: follow the standards, even if they aren't defining them.

    It has become apparent that Netscape has forgotten the release-early, release-often nature of open source software development (though once upon a time they practiced it). None of these issues would BE issues if they were fixed, and if the fix is there, apply it, test it, and ship it.

    W. Craig Trader


    November 7th, 2000   5:18 AM

    netscape is a lost cause, ive used it for many years and
    tried to stand by it even with the popularity of ie. but
    ie really is better now, and netscape isnt catching up.
    its unfortunate. id like to use it, but im forced not too
    because of the lack of compliance with standards that ie
    complies with.

    mike spenard


    November 7th, 2000   5:18 AM

    I'm fed up with hearing that Netscape is so buggy that everybody should abandon it in favour of IE5. I'm always replying that NN6 is on its way and is 100% standard compliant.
    Whatam i going to say if it's as buggy as NN4?
    AR (France)

    Arnaud Réveillon


    November 7th, 2000   5:17 AM

    Software laws per market


    Netscape's lack of integerating standard's and Microsoft's mastery of bullying new ones is the issue that has created this mess. Netscape was the better browser, now IE is just the browser we are left to use.Why not have the organizations that are responsible for creating, protecting, and distribution of what the standards are in the web browser market join forces with more powerful agencies. This formation can create a watchdog agency that approves what web technology complies with standards acceptable to the current available standards and markets. This will stop Microsoft from recreating its own standards that have made surfing hell for us Mac users. It will also stop Netscape from releasing products that created the frustration within this forum.

    It's a start, not a full solution. Imagine if every electrical appliance company had its own way of deciding standards. We would have to go to therapy every time we reached for the outlet. Why treat the technology that combines each of us any differently?
    nn@futurelab.se

    Nelson Neville


    November 7th, 2000   5:13 AM

    Standards would be pointless if the top two browsers failed to implement them. If IE's DOM was 100% compliant, and Netscape's wasn't, it would be a Microsoft standard, not a universal standard. They call standards so for a reason.

    Michael P. Lang


    November 7th, 2000   5:12 AM

    I grew up on Netscape, even with them releasing browsers that made things a headache to develop for I still stood by Netscape. But this is getting forking ridiculous, I thought the whole promise of Netscape 6 was compliance with standards.. I heard this and I jumped for joy. But now reading this article, I wonder if Netscape is trying to lose all of its user/support base.. If they are they are doing a mighty damn good job.. Get your crap together would ya..!

    Jeremy Dorfschmidt


    November 7th, 2000   5:12 AM

    Unbelievable. As if it weren't a pain in the ass enough to have to accomodate the already buggy and very non-compliant netscape browser. I'm a web developer and this is going to cause some major headaches. Particularly with the css implementation. This is ironicly one area that I wish Microsoft had a monopoly. Pretty much the only people who are using netscape now anyways are mac users and people who never upgrade and don't have a clue how to.

    Jeremy


    November 7th, 2000   5:11 AM

    If you don't like it, dammit, GO FORK.

    Mozilla's even GPL'ing this thing to suit forkers of any kind.

    Stefan Rieken


    November 7th, 2000   5:06 AM

    I have a headache already.

    Mark Howells


    November 7th, 2000   5:04 AM

    For development we only support IE thanks to a few unresolved Netscape bugs. If you would like version 6 on my desktop and not my trash can then get it right. You'll only get one more chance from me. If what you release sucks don't expect me to look again. I would rather wait for something that works and works well.

    David Cox


    November 7th, 2000   5:03 AM

    Standards are one thing, at least the proprietry standards used by some web browsers are documented by the companies that build them. Bugs however don't tend to get documented, they do tend to pop up when site builders least expect them. Web developers are unfortunately too busy to support buggy browsers. If Netscape 6 isn't up to scratch, no-one will bother supporting it.

    Personally I've been waiting perhaps 2 years for the standards compliant, bugfree Netscape. Surely we can all afford to wait a little bit longer!

    Cameron Hart


    November 7th, 2000   5:02 AM

    Standards are one thing, at least the proprietry standards used by some web browsers are documented by the companies that build them. Bugs however don't tend to get documented, they do tend to pop up when site builders least expect them. Web developers are unfortunately too busy to support buggy browsers. If Netscape 6 isn't up to scratch, no-one will bother supporting it.

    Personally I've been waiting perhaps 2 years for the standards compliant, bugfree Netscape. Surely we can all afford to wait a little bit longer!

    Cameron Hart


    November 7th, 2000   5:00 AM

    Netscape has been my browser of choice for quite a while now - perhaps out of habit, and perhaps because I switch between Unix/Linux and Windows frequently. However, this comment on the Slashdot front page really demonstrated to me just how bad things are:

    "IE not only has won the browser wars, it's clearly a better browser - and will remain so."

    That is just frightening, yet it made me consider switching to IE for a bit. The most die-hard fans will be lost if Netscape is not as compliant as it can be (even if 100% is impossible) and if 6.0 gets press like this! Mind you, it will as long as there are intelligent people who monitor how browsers do - and when sites like this are linked to the most devoted Netscape users, you'll find that you have major problems.

    Here at MIT, I've heard many complaints of people who use our Linux-based Athena network and who find that Netscape has errors or crashes frequently. It's the only browser available for them to use, and so they complain. They shouldn't have to, because Netscape should work. Even beyond that, however, a failure on Netscape's part will have far-reaching consequences. It's the only "major" browser available on Unix/Linux, and if it goes down, then there's no telling what will happen to those OS's. It's time to take a good look at the situation, from a distanced, carefully considered perspective, and realize that the proposed release of Netscape is so bad, in so many ways (including marketing and press) that it must be stopped, for your own good.

    Daniel Zaharopol


    November 7th, 2000   4:59 AM

    If Netscapes browser doesn't work as promised when Mozilla project started I think that IE is way to go in the future. It's shame that Microsoft is more standards compliant than Netscape.

    Veli-Pekka Kestilä


    November 7th, 2000   4:59 AM

    I agree with David's thoughts: Netscape 6's shipping schedule
    is entirely shot. We need an even-later but compliant browser more
    than we need a month-earlier, broken browser. Netscape Navigator
    is still important, and important enought to get right.

    Chris Tyler


    November 7th, 2000   4:57 AM

    Please get it right. Be remembered for producing the first standards compliant browser. I'm a web developer and I've got a sackful of non-compliant browsers, I won't be needing another.

    Mark Stockley


    November 7th, 2000   4:54 AM

    Well I hope they do release 6.0 and not as beta, the reason....people will final get fed up with the crap that Netscape has been trying to push for the last year and this might just put the nail in the N of Netscape. I am sick of developing websites to meet netscapes compliances and not W3C standards. I have been a fan of Netscape from day 1 but since these new breed of netcrape browsers began to appear I have no choice but to support IE and I must say I am very pleased with the quality of that browser (IE). I think netscape should pack up there bags and go home they are cooked, maybe they should be listed on the www.f**kedcompany.com website :)

    John Atkins


    November 7th, 2000   4:49 AM

    I am a web developer and I used to love Netscape. When IE 4.0 was released, this changed. Since the release of IE 4.0, Netscape has been a distant second in the browser market for people doing complex java/javascript browser interfaces. We have had many features blatantly not work on Netscape browsers that should work if they followed the standards more closely. I am very excited that the new Netscape browser will put a stop to this, but if these allegations are true, then Microsoft will have basically put a nail in Netscape. Web developers are not willing to wait another year or two for better versions, as we have timelines to stick to as well. We'll just recommend our browser of choice (IE) and get our paycheck.

    Steve Winer


    November 7th, 2000   4:49 AM

    The last thing we need is another non-complient browser. It's bad enough a lot of developers are developing 2 sites, one for Mac, one for Windows. Sometimes more, making the sites browser and platform specific. This would only make that much more work for them.
    Personally, I just redirect all Netscape users to a page that tells them to get a different browser, and I'll continue doing so until Netscape works as it should.

    Cameron Hanover


    November 7th, 2000   4:48 AM

    Well, you can forget your impassioned pleas to Netscape. The arguments are clear, I grant you: the product is so close to perfect, the alternatives are frightening, and it would be the last straw for many diehard Netscape fans. But face it:



    YOU ARE TALKING TO THE SUITS NOW



    And, quite frankly, they don't give a fuck.

    Barry de la Rosa


    November 7th, 2000   4:47 AM

    PLEASE Fix the bugs before you release this! Straying from open standards will only continue to hinder the ideal of everyone enjoying the web to it's fullest capability.

    Greg Huber


    November 7th, 2000   4:45 AM

    As a web developer, Netscape never fails to amaze me. No two versions of Netscape render a page the same, and apparently Netscape 6 isn't going to fix this. Now I'm going to have to make all my sites work with Netscape 4.x, Netscape 6.x, and IE 4/5. Has anyone at Netscape actually tried making a DHTML site using the DOM in Netscape 6 yet? Based on what I've seen, I think not.

    I used to be a huge Netscape fan, but I gave that up a few years ago when it became clear that Netscape didn't want to compete.

    Come on guys, get with it.

    Robert Roland


    November 7th, 2000   4:44 AM

    Somehow I find it ironic that as I write this, I see 404 people have signed the petition before me.

    Bit I digress. You're right; it is better that Netscape get the standards right the first time than to release a browser with only partial support for them. This is particularly crucial when already Mozilla is arguably IE5.5's equal; this could push it over the top once and for all.

    Or, to put it another way, I'd rather be right than happy. Netscape, the fixes are there; take the time to get it right, and be done with it. In the end, it will be better for everyone, including you.

    Beecher Greenman


    November 7th, 2000   4:37 AM

    Well, you can forget your impassioned pleas to Netscape. The arguments are clear, I grant you: the product is so close to perfect, the alternatives are frightening, and it would be the last straw for many diehard Netscape fans. But face it:



    YOU ARE TALKING TO THE SUITS NOW



    And, quite frankly, they don't give a fuck.

    Barry de la Rosa


    November 7th, 2000   4:37 AM

    Here's another plea that you hold release of NS6 until it complies with standards, esp. for known problems for which there are known fixes.

    Richard A. Wells


    November 7th, 2000   4:36 AM

    Mr. Flanagan, you are irresponsible, not to mention unrealistic and inaccurate. First, ALL SOFTWARE HAS BUGS, no matter what the PR people say. To those of you who thought that you would have a perfect browser, I'm not sure what kind of reality pill you need, but you sure need one. Second, and this is like the first point, if you wait until you have COMPLETE standards compliance, you will be waiting TOO LONG. There is nothing wrong with releasing a browser that is 95% compliant, because it kicks the tail off of anything else out there. Third, why are you complaining now, instead of earlier on, when you could have made a difference, Mr. Flannagan? Because you're not someone who cares -- you are a vulture, a PR prostitute who seeks out situations to exploit to get his name in the papers (all metaphorically speaking since this is the Net). That's where the irresponsibility comes in. The only reason you even get to SEE what bugs there are is because the development interface is transparent. If IE or Opera released a version, we'd all just have to deal with it -- no voice, no choice. But I don't see you trampling Red Hat or Suse or anyone else. Are they just not high-profile enough? That's hard to believe. Isn't this more ignornace masquarading as journalism? Isn't this just more ignorance masquarading as technical knowledge? Four, why do you think Netscape HAS a cut-off date? Because they want to ship a browser! Hello, every company will have a drop-dead date for a particular release, and you act as though this is some crime against humanity, that bug XYZ is not fixed by this release. Don't you know ANYTHING about software release schedules? Don't you know ANYTHING about the conflicts between PR and developers, much less the tech writers who end up having to document it all? No, you DON'T. This is obvious from your doomsday petition (a petition? when you could simply have participated?). But I suppose remaining on the outside to scare up media attention, and to make mountains out of molehills is your trade in hucksterism. Five, the bugs that you mention are not show-stoppers by any means. That's the irresponsibility again. Is it important that table cells be padded properly? Yes, but it's certainly not on the level of "crash on bootup" bugs, which have all been taken care of. Your role as a journalist is to be accurate, but these bugs aren't petition-worthy. There is no real reason why this should prevent the release of a 95% standards-compliant browser. People who live in the real world, Mr. Flanagan, know that there is a difference between goals and implementation. You don't get to be a great boxer in one year, or a great bicyclist, or a great writer. You go through process improvement and development cycles all your own, and even if you're not fully trained, you've got to get out there and fight, cycle, or write. It's the same thing for NS. Instead of swooping down from your judgement seat to peck their eyes out, you should be cheering them on. But the saddest thing of all, is that despite how much people complain about IE, the lack of willingness to support a better competitor shows how addicted people are to the shine and the glitter that Microsoft and its worldview offer people -- a comfortable grave where you don't have to make decisions, and standards requirements don't matter. Slam NS for not being perfect, but by the same logic, you'll have to crucify IE, because they don't EVEN try and have stated that standards compliance is not their goal. Seven, I really have to wonder about O'Reilly's technical prowess, if this kind of malformed, uniformed journalism gets through the gates -- how accurate are your books? All things considered, bad move guys, and the effort will only backfire...




    Mike Tulloch


    November 7th, 2000   4:36 AM

    Mr. Flanagan, you are irresponsible, not to mention unrealistic and inaccurate. First, ALL SOFTWARE HAS BUGS, no matter what the PR people say. To those of you who thought that you would have a perfect browser, I'm not sure what kind of reality pill you need, but you sure need one. Second, and this is like the first point, if you wait until you have COMPLETE standards compliance, you will be waiting TOO LONG. There is nothing wrong with releasing a browser that is 95% compliant, because it kicks the tail off of anything else out there. Third, why are you complaining now, instead of earlier on, when you could have made a difference, Mr. Flannagan? Because you're not someone who cares -- you are a vulture, a PR prostitute who seeks out situations to exploit to get his name in the papers (all metaphorically speaking since this is the Net). That's where the irresponsibility comes in. The only reason you even get to SEE what bugs there are is because the development interface is transparent. If IE or Opera released a version, we'd all just have to deal with it -- no voice, no choice. But I don't see you trampling Red Hat or Suse or anyone else. Are they just not high-profile enough? That's hard to believe. Isn't this more ignornace masquarading as journalism? Isn't this just more ignorance masquarading as technical knowledge? Four, why do you think Netscape HAS a cut-off date? Because they want to ship a browser! Hello, every company will have a drop-dead date for a particular release, and you act as though this is some crime against humanity, that bug XYZ is not fixed by this release. Don't you know ANYTHING about software release schedules? Don't you know ANYTHING about the conflicts between PR and developers, much less the tech writers who end up having to document it all? No, you DON'T. This is obvious from your doomsday petition (a petition? when you could simply have participated?). But I suppose remaining on the outside to scare up media attention, and to make mountains out of molehills is your trade in hucksterism. Five, the bugs that you mention are not show-stoppers by any means. That's the irresponsibility again. Is it important that table cells be padded properly? Yes, but it's certainly not on the level of "crash on bootup" bugs, which have all been taken care of. Your role as a journalist is to be accurate, but these bugs aren't petition-worthy. There is no real reason why this should prevent the release of a 95% standards-compliant browser. People who live in the real world, Mr. Flanagan, know that there is a difference between goals and implementation. You don't get to be a great boxer in one year, or a great bicyclist, or a great writer. You go through process improvement and development cycles all your own, and even if you're not fully trained, you've got to get out there and fight, cycle, or write. It's the same thing for NS. Instead of swooping down from your judgement seat to peck their eyes out, you should be cheering them on. But the saddest thing of all, is that despite how much people complain about IE, the lack of willingness to support a better competitor shows how addicted people are to the shine and the glitter that Microsoft and its worldview offer people -- a comfortable grave where you don't have to make decisions, and standards requirements don't matter. Slam NS for not being perfect, but by the same logic, you'll have to crucify IE, because they don't EVEN try and have stated that standards compliance is not their goal. Seven, I really have to wonder about O'Reilly's technical prowess, if this kind of malformed, uniformed journalism gets through the gates -- how accurate are your books? All things considered, bad move guys, and the effort will only backfire...





    I'm disappointed that your dreck is on the O'Riley Site. Makes me think about picking up any more of their books, if their screening process is this bad.

    Mike Tulloch


    November 7th, 2000   4:34 AM

    I am completely amazed but what some people are saying here.

    I would appear that people are "fed up" with having to write two versions of their web pages. And they want to only write one that works on IE. Now they seem to think that a non 100% compliant Netscape6 will mean extra work for them.

    But HELLO, a 100% complant Netscape 6 will mean extra work too. I am really starting to wonder if some people out there think that 100% compliant means IE compatible. If so then wake up! IE 5.5 is far from 100% compliant. So netscape 6 100% compliant or not will most likely require a different web page to be written than an IE one, but I'm sure you'll just blame this on Netscape too.

    I think a lot of people out there really need to start doing some research into what 100% standards compliance means and how both IE5.5 and Netscape6/Mozilla fare up. I think you'll be surprised and perhaps may even learn something

    Alex Stansfield


    November 7th, 2000   4:34 AM

    I stopped making pages for netscape a few years ago only due to the fact that netscape have had serious compability-problems with widely used tags that ie-users have gotten used to ever since the 4-browser. It's just a pain to design something for a netscape-browser, to fiddle around with clearpixels and stuff just cause the freakin program cant calculate correctly. I took a glance at ns6beta when a friend used it and i was happy to see that it finally could calculate frames, but that doesnt really matter when its inferior at so many other aspects.........

    Johan Gustavsson


    November 7th, 2000   4:32 AM

    OK, I agree for drunk cups

    Snortagg


    November 7th, 2000   4:31 AM

    We had such high hopes for Netscape 6 after struggling with Navigator 4.x's horrible incompatibilities for so long. And the verdict is.... It's a bit better (but not much).

    The bottom line is that IE now rules the roost and will continue to do so for a long time to come, based on what we've seen of Netscape 6 so far. Unless there's some radical changes in priorities within Netscape, I fear that this is the start of the end for their browser business. Shame.

    Steve Ford


    November 7th, 2000   4:31 AM

    I fully agree with David. Netscape 6.0 Must go out complient with the standards!


    As a web developer and one who has chosen to use Linux over Windows at home and work (where possible), the bigest problem I run across is that Netscape crashes, doesn't handle Javascript well and has other small, but annoying glitches on rendering html.


    I'll give the Internet Explorer team credit for one thing. It may have took them 2 years to work out alot of the kinks, but they did and it looks real good at this point.


    My hope was that after 2 years the Netscape team could have done at least as well.

    Joe Croft


    November 7th, 2000   4:31 AM

    Will Mozilla also be influenced by the Netscape actions, or is the source of Mozilla open so that developers can submit patches and fix the bugs?

    If Netscape can stop bugs from being fixed also in the Mozilla then this is a big step back for the project, and at the same time, a warning for future open-source projects; avoid all corporate interference.

    I think this will make or break Netscape as a browser. If they're serious about the browser-platform they *have* to release a product of high quality or IE will dominate Windowsusers completly. Linux users will get a mediocre, bugridden upgrade to the allready bloated 4.x-serie of Communicators. Of course, if Mozilla is independant of Netscape we got no problem, but ... somebody clarify, please.

    Thomas Weholt


    November 7th, 2000   4:29 AM

    The quality of Netscape 6 is critical to its success.


    If the well-known and understood problems remain, Netscape 6 will
    have a very poor uptake. Netscape should consider it their priority
    to meet standards. Only then should they put a high priority on
    pushing web technology to new limits.


    The way I see it, two things will happen:



    As a software engineer who does a lot of web develpoment, I find it
    deeply frustrating when a browser fails to implement basic features
    correctly.
    The costs that Netscape may be saving by not meeting standards now
    will be multiplied many times over across the world as
    developers attempt to work around the browser's weaknesses.


    Let's draw an analogy: when a rail company lays down tracks,
    it has to meet fundamental quality standards or otherwise, trains will
    be very unsafe and/or derail. The passengers pay when their trains have
    to go slowly to avoid derailing.


    A huge amount of work has already gone in to this product - don't
    screw it up now. Please do something and sort this out!

    Robert Snell


    November 7th, 2000   4:27 AM

    Please don't do this to us Netscape!

    Todd Bossler


    November 7th, 2000   4:26 AM

    Actually the only alternative to make serious web development is IE, and this situation can block linux as an alternative solution in the desktop. Please take your time and put in the market a bug-free, standards compliant Netscape 6

    Bruno A. Crespo


    November 7th, 2000   4:26 AM

    It is time that all developers did something, so the standards will be followed, and users of both browsers will get the same results, faster and more efficient!

    kim johannesen


    November 7th, 2000   4:25 AM

    Come on Mozilla. Go for quality. Listen to your expirenced engineers.
    Include the standards fixes.

    Jack Landers


    November 7th, 2000   4:25 AM

    I agree. Don't send a product out that's only half-baked. Stick it back in the oven till it's ready.

    Kirk Lawson
    Information Technology Administrator
    Heapy Engineering

    Kirk Lawson


    November 7th, 2000   4:21 AM

    Standards compliance and correction of such obviously trivial issues is a definite must for any product release!

    Jeff Lawson


    November 7th, 2000   4:20 AM

    I strongly agree with Davd Flanagan. I don ot want to relive the update chaos that Netscape 4 has given the developer community.



    So I beg Netscape to relly release a product that lives up to it's promesis.



    So it can be the first true browser that supports the standards it has been told to support.



    To get back on the track to become the biggest browser Netscape need to release an almost perfect product.



    Mattias Hedman


    November 7th, 2000   4:19 AM

    OK, here's the simple reality.


    I am a web developer. I - like many others - am sick and tired of having to concurrently develop for two platforms. While I am leery of giving control of the web over to Microsoft, I simply refuse to continue devloping everything twice. We've already created projects that (at the client's request) work only on Internet Explorer. If Netscape 6 continues to be non-standards compliant, we will simply drop it as a target browser.


    If browser makers refuse to comply to standards, that's their problem. I find it outrageous that browser developers expect us to pick up the slack for them. Our company will no longer do so, and I hope that other developers will follow suit. I suspect they will. If that means that Microsoft winds up owning the web, then so be it. I'm sick of having to clean up someone else's mess.

    Israel Alvarez


    November 7th, 2000   4:19 AM

    The promise of Netscape 6 has always been that of a standards-compliant browser. More than anything else, this is what I'd like to see in a browser, and what would set it apart from it's competition.

    Avdi Grimm


    November 7th, 2000   4:18 AM

    It's sad to see that what was once such a vibrant company, has slipped into the marketing void. Netscape 6 needs to be truly exceptional if it is to turn around the mass exodus to IE. Netscape 4.7 is an appalling product by today's standards. Even when it came out, version 4 was pretty uninspiring. They need to cut out the marketing droids and concentrate on making a good product if they are to succeed.

    Bryan Feeney


    November 7th, 2000   4:13 AM

    Oops... hit the 'submit' instead of 'preview'... I meant to say 'separate structure from PRESENTATION in the previous comment.

    Chuck Johnson


    November 7th, 2000   4:13 AM

    There are enough broken and buggy Netscapes already. Releasing NS6 now, with all the bugs, is only going to add another one to that list, and further kill your reputation. You should have learned something by now: never release before your product is finished. Too many companies do that and it only results in bad software and a bad reputation. I thought the idea of NS6 was standards compliance?

    Lourens Veen


    November 7th, 2000   4:09 AM

    I use Mozilla every day for general browsing and site development, upgrading to the latest nightly build every few days. It's the best browser available, but still not ready for an official release. It's too slow and has too many quirks in addition to important standards compliance issues, one of the most important being, in my opinion, the inability to disable CSS. Having the option of disregarding the author's presentation suggestions is one of the main reasons for separating structure from content in the first place.

    Chuck Johnson


    November 7th, 2000   4:07 AM

    Addendum to my previous entry:

    The real problem is that a vast majority of users has given up Netscape until their next generation browser ships and are using IE at the moment.
    Netscape has only one chance: Get it right the first time.

    Even considering shipping a product with critical features like LiveConnect missing speaks for itself.
    If a large group of users adopts Netscape 6.00, the developers are again stuck with workarounds. Judging the description of say the link modification bug, there isn't always a workaround.

    The main reason to develop for Netscape 6 (as opposed to ignore it) should be not to have to do workarounds workarounds and more workarounds for browser bugs and non compliance.

    Even if I as a developer am free to use Mozilla, Konqueror, Galeon or Opera that will not help me if my target audience uses Netscape 6.00 with bugs.

    Sven Neuhaus


    November 7th, 2000   4:05 AM


    This article is basically complaining that Netscape 6 is not 96%
    compliant instead of the 95% compliant that it currently is. Even if
    Netscape engineers fixed the specific bugs that this joker picked
    out of the woodwork, there would still be areas that Netscape 6
    would not be compliant.


    I agree that people should examine this from the correct perspective,
    HOWEVER I also believe that Netscape folks should fix the most annoying
    bugs before they release Netscape 6.

    If it have to fail, at least fail gracefully.

    Nelson Ferraz

    Nelson Ferraz


    November 7th, 2000   4:03 AM

    What's the use of having yet another browser that is almost standard-compliant? We were all promised that NS6 would be the first one, the browser we all wanted. In other words: Netscape, put your money where your mouth is!

    Ruairi Conor Mc Comb


    November 7th, 2000   4:02 AM

    I work at an e-commerce company. I'm the only person (literally) in development or html that uses Netscape. Everytime I bring it up due to someone pushing some code out that works fine in IE but not Netscape, everybody whines and bitches that nothing works in Netscape.



    I was hoping this would finally get fixed (as well as the speed issues drawing complicated pages) with Netscape 6 and perhaps Netscape would regain market share against IE. Alas, if this is released with these kinds of bugs, everyone I work with is simply going to retort "I told you so" and never even give it a second glance.



    Fix the bugs! I'd rather wait!

    Cott Lang


    November 7th, 2000   4:00 AM

    Bye bye Netscape



    ...sad but true.

    Florian Helmberger


    November 7th, 2000   3:57 AM

    I agree with many points. I have always been of the opinion that "if it doesn't live up to the standards try not to use it". I wrote an e-mail program a while ago. It conformed perfectly to the RFC standards. However, Outlook breaks many of them. People complained to me that some mails did not display correctly! If everyone sticks to standards pedantically (my fav gcc flag) people who write non-standard crap would be forced out of the market.

    Just keep patching Mozilla. Release Netscape 6 to the Widows users, if it crashes they'll just think it's windows playing up again. Real users use Mozilla, although it would be nice if they cleaned all the crap out of it. I'm using Konquereor at home and Netscape at works 'cos it supports SOCKS proxies. Now that's something Mozilla is missing.

    Jamie Dainton


    November 7th, 2000   3:56 AM

    Please don't rush to release NS6!

    If we have waited for several years we can wait a few months more. If a buggy browser is released now it will be very bad for netscape.

    Mattias Nyrell


    November 7th, 2000   3:55 AM

    Having developed on both Netscape and IE, IE's model is the way forward. If Netscape does not comply to the level of IE 4.01 in any respect it is dead in the water. Ideally it should do what IE 5 does, and then worry about bells and whistles. Without that I would never ever recommend it, since whats the point in a browser thats not compatible with most of the web? MS did an execellent job in compatibility when they were playing catch up, now its Netscapes turn.

    Alex Powell


    November 7th, 2000   3:54 AM

    If the facts are correct I agree with the conclusion.

    Dirk van Deun


    November 7th, 2000   3:53 AM

    Well, thats a turn-around...



    From 5 years ago, when Netscape was the killer app, and IE was a small slow piece of software, to now, where the roles have reversed.



    This seems to be a symptom of Netscape (the company) bloating out of all proportion, and losing sight of what it was they were created to do...



    A sad day for competition



    Tim Yates

    Tim Yates


    November 7th, 2000   3:52 AM

    The only important part of Netscape 6 is the Gecko rendering engine. Please get it right first time.


    What is the point of a code freeze if you refuse to fix exisitng bugs in the features you choose to include?

    Peter Setchell


    November 7th, 2000   3:50 AM

    PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE Netscape... We can wait a month or two. That won't hurt your reputation the way another crap product release will!!!

    Toby


    November 7th, 2000   3:47 AM

    I hope that the Mozilla team will fix these bugs. It would be a shame
    if they didn't.

    Nelson Ferraz


    November 7th, 2000   3:45 AM

    I think this petition is peevish, petty and counter-productive.
    I mean, Mr. Flanagan is whining about cramming more DOM/CSS fixes into the most standard-compliant browser available, and delaying a release even more.
    There are far more critical features that are delayed so that Netscape can finally ship a public release.
    For example, I've accepted that Netscape won't add bidi language support until the post 6.0 releases (and I'd wish they'd branch already, so the bidi stuff can finally enter the main tree and the nightly builds). For me that feature is far more critical than fiddly DOM/CSS trivia.
    Most of the pages I read still use HTML 3.2 + a little CSS, but they are in Hebrew, and that's the biggest reason I'm using IE currently.
    Netscape has to ship a product, so that Mozilla will be a development based on their *current* browser, not some Sci-Fi future development.
    Get that sucker out the door, and open the bloody tree.

    PS: I mean, what on earth are TL elements anyway? This is critical? This is browser-delaying? Get real.

    Dotan Dimet


    November 7th, 2000   3:40 AM

    Simply put:
    If Netscape 6 is not nearly perfect in regards to standards compliance, it will never gain back market share. No bells and whistles added will change that.

    I use M18 as my default browser and love it, but it still has a ways to go. It is quite acceptable to let the ship date slide as long as visible progress is being made. Not accepting simple and/or important fixes to known bugs is NOT progress.

    Glenn Strauss


    November 7th, 2000   3:28 AM

    As a web developer I ask that you embrace the open standards. It makes for a better web experience.

    Dominic Winsor


    November 7th, 2000   3:18 AM

    Netscape 6 is in a deep code freeze. THIS PETITION IS COUNTER PRODUCTIVE. Netscape should not delay their products because of minor bugs.



    Yes. I said minor. Even if they may cause headaches, they are vastly overstated. No product is perfect. Fixes for those flaws will be introduced in 6.0.1 (or whatever they want to call it).



    Try to have a bug-free product will delay the release by an inifinite amount of time.



    Cheers,



    --fred

    Fred


    November 7th, 2000   3:14 AM

    Netscape, please do not release a non-compliant browser! The entire promise of Mozilla/Netscape 6 was that it would be the first 100% compliant web browser. Netscape has already lost enough market share that only an excellent release will make any difference in adoption. Users and developers have waited long enough for this release, spending another month or two to get it right will make little difference in the scheme of things, but saddling the world with a buggy (and slow) browser will only piss of web developers and turn off users.

    I emplore you to spend a little more time to first make the browser compliant and secondly to make it faster.

    Benjy Thomas


    November 7th, 2000   3:10 AM

    So Netscape will release another piece of crap like NS 4.x onto this world?

    Please have mercy!

    Martin Gisser


    November 7th, 2000   3:10 AM

    Has anyone making these comments actually been using mozilla on a long term basis, or perhaps the netscape 6 betas? Or are you all just blindly following what Mr Flanagan is saying?

    I have had no problem with the Browser side of mozilla, and if the patches are still being applied to mozilla src then where is the problem? If anything Netscape should hold off release of Netscape 6 until the Mail and News is a bit more stable, but on the browser side of things there are no problems.

    Ok it may not be 100% percent complient with all standards, but it will still be the most complient browser there is. But if you all want to wait until Netscape is 100% perfect then you will be waiting a bloody long time as surely you must realise that nothing is perfect.

    Cheers,

    Alex

    Alex Stansfield


    November 7th, 2000   3:10 AM

    My last hope to drop IE ...

    philippe


    November 7th, 2000   3:00 AM

    If a true 'must-fix' bug is one that is required for marketting or legal reasons, surely all standards compliance bugs fall under marketting? After all the hype built up over the last two years surrounding the expected standards compliance of Netscape 6, a release with these bugs will be a PR nightmare. I work as a web developer at a very pro-Microsoft company, and our newest project doesn't support Netscape 4 at all. Netscape's name is mud with all the developers apart from me. The only potential support for Netscape in our newest project will be version 6, if adding support won't require a major rewrite of the application. We are not allowed to get going on that until it is released because it is seen as a moving target. If version 6 comes out with these bugs, it could be the nail in the coffin here.

    Mark Roberts


    November 7th, 2000   3:00 AM

    WITHDRAWL.

    I totally and completely withdraw my earlier post to this petition.

    Since I first posted I've dug around on the issue and believe Mr Flanagan to be nothing more than a noisy trouble maker who hasn't researched the issue. He's clearly glory grabbing.

    Netscape 6 is in a deep code freeze right now meaning new code is difficult to get in, whatever it is.
    It's funny, people complain when Netscape won't accept things into a frozen tree, then the go and complain when Linus Torvalds will accept things into a frozen tree!

    The only ray of sunshine in this is that if you want to have your fully standards compliant browser, just ignore Netscape and grab Mozilla - the patches are being applied there anyway. All you'll lose is Netscape/AOL's lame branding, which, to my mind is a bonus ;)

    Perhaps O'Reilly could take more care the next time they decide to let Mr Flanagan loose on their site.

    Chris Jones


    November 7th, 2000   3:00 AM

    It's not time.

    First you need:


    1. performace (it's not normal 18Mb of ram) it's just a Browser!!!!!
    2. standard compilance
    3. stability

    manel


    November 7th, 2000   2:55 AM

    Stick with the standards PDT, the sad thing is that IE 5.5 mostly does.

    Mark Brady


    November 7th, 2000   2:46 AM

    Listen to the man!



    If you release Netscape6 with all these bugs then the
    developer community, who are your last true bastion of
    support, will turn their back on you faster than you can say "IE6".

    As a developer I have been waiting for Netscape6 for so long,
    mailnly because it was promised to be a "standards-compliant" browser.
    With a standard reference browser there was some hope of keeping
    IE under control and keep it from embracing and extending the web.

    You may just have doomed us to a life of ActiveX


    Matthew Cobby


    November 7th, 2000   2:45 AM

    Please support the standards.

    Ian Cameron


    November 7th, 2000   2:44 AM

    David's excellent Book, "Javascript, The Definite Guide" has had a top spot on my desk for more than a year now.
    I can't count the number of hours that browser bugs have cost me in the past. At one point, we had to give up on an ambitious javascript-heavy project after more than a month of development when we were able to reproduce a fatal netscape bug and there was no workaround in sight. The code up to that point was already more than 40% workarounds but that's something we were used to.

    Our solution in the past was to get rid of as much Javascript as possible and ignore the many potential features that it offers. It just wasn't worth it.
    Netscape 6 was a "promised land" at the horizon that would eventually allow the return of Javascript into the list usable technologies.



    Netscape's next generation browser project has been delayed and delayed even more in the past. One of it's primary goals was (is?) standards compliance. I am very upset by the disgraceful turn of events. I would rather wait another two months and get a standards compliant browser than get it sooner and buggy.


    Stop the marketing insanity. Live up to your promises.

    MAKE THE WEB A DEVELOPER FRIENDLY, MULTI PLATFORM PLACE!


    Neopoly, offering cool multiplayer web based games

    Sven Neuhaus


    November 7th, 2000   2:43 AM

    Netscape has to think about the HORRIBLE PR it's going to get if it releases a shoddy product after SO long. Many people are quite used to IE now. Netscape is noticably slower than IE, so they're not going to impress there. So - what else is there, apart from COMPLIANCE? Damn it, if my browser doesn't go quite as fast, I at least want it to display the pages and do the right things... Or otherwise, you know what will happen, don't you? That's right ... back to IE. Of course that isn't an option in my case because I use Linux, so I guess the most I can do is stick with Mozilla (which by the way is my browser of choice, for the reasons above). Maybe more time should go into bug-fixing & enhancements, and less into that weird-ass 'My Sidebar'. And that reminds me - for God's sake - Micro$oft is aiming at the idiots, so why not Netscape aim at the people who have a clue and are insulted by these impressive-looking wastes of space?

    Daniel Kasak


    November 7th, 2000   2:42 AM

    Netscape has been late for such a long time that now it's only hope to recover is to have a BRILLIANT 6.0 release.
    Rushing the 6.0 out of the door will do much more harm than good!

    reno


    November 7th, 2000   2:42 AM

    <p align="center">Listen to the man!



    If you release Netscape6 with all these bugs then the
    developer community who are your last true bastion of
    support will turn their back on you faster than you can say "IE6".

    As a developer I have been waiting for Netscape6 for so long
    because it was promised to be a "standards-compliant" browser.
    With a standard reference browser there was some hope of keeping
    IE under control from embracing and extending the web.

    You may just have doomed us to a live of ActiveX


    Matthew Cobby


    November 7th, 2000   2:42 AM

    Netscape has been late for such a long time that now it's only hope to recover is to have a BRILLIANT 6.0 release.
    Rushing the 6.0 out of the door won't do much more harm than good!

    reno


    November 7th, 2000   2:41 AM

    If Netscape is released as something other than a standards-compliant browser, then AOL will seal the fate of Netscape as a has-been. People will simply choose Mozilla instead.

    Standards-compliance should be an utmost priority for the final release of Netscape 6.0.

    Dan Kirkpatrick


    November 7th, 2000   2:41 AM

    Netscape has to think about the HORRIBLE PR it's going to get if it releases a shoddy product after SO long. Many people are quite used to IE now. Netscape is noticably slower than IE, so they're not going to impress there. So - what else is there, apart from COMPLIANCE? Damn it, if my browser doesn't go quite as fast, I at least want it to display the pages and do the right things... Or otherwise, you know what will happen, don't you? That's right ... back to IE. Of course that isn't an option in my case because I use Linux, so I guess the most I can do is stick with Mozilla (which by the way is my browser of choice, for the reasons above). Maybe more time should go into bug-fixing & enhancements, and less into that weird-ass 'My Sidebar'. And that reminds me - for God's sake - Micro$oft is aiming at the idiots, so why not Netscape aim at the people who have a clue and are insulted by these impressive-looking wastes of space?

    Daniel Kasak


    November 7th, 2000   2:27 AM

    Time is not an issue anymore, quality & stability is.

    Comply to standards, that's what sta...

    GA


    November 7th, 2000   2:25 AM

    Lets face it - Netscape 4.01 was a mess. Netscape 6.00 looks set to be a mess. Hey, have they learnt nothing? Obviously not...

    Andrew Bowden


    November 7th, 2000   2:19 AM

    I totally agree with David in this article. The next release of Netscape was supposed to be The Great Hope of the Net Standards, unfortunately it doesn't even do things that NS4.x used to be able to do! So once more we either spend weeks extra developing 2(or more) versions of our DHTML / CSS / DOM / JavaScript pages to ensure they work, or we don't bother with dynamic animated pages and we lament our boring static pages.

    Sound familiar? What's the point of releasing a new codebase browser that isn't complete? All those Families that get those "NEW NAVIGATOR BROWSER" CD are gonna think "Great! Faster more exciting Web" And I can expect that many of them will then see the web slightly duller as loads of pages will have worked in NS4 but not anymore. So they will wait till they get a "NEW NAVIGATOR BROWSER UPDATE!" CD patch, and the story goes on and on and on ....

    It's a crying shame, I looked forward to writing nice DHTML pages when NS6 was out in the world. I could start to get rid of clunky applets as web interfaces, but alas, no!

    So heres hoping that Netscape listens to this plea and shifts the release date for NS6 and allows the already written bugfixes to be applied.

    Murray Steele


    November 7th, 2000   2:16 AM

    And there's me thinking that the whole idea of Netscape 6 was to produce a 100% standards compliant browser environment....

    Martin Hepworth


    November 7th, 2000   2:13 AM

    It is in Netscape's long-term interest to make v6 standards-compliant. Such irregularities wouldn't be tolerated in a traditional development platform.

    Felix Andrews


    November 7th, 2000   2:00 AM

    Please comply to standards. That's what standards are for.

    bert laga


    November 7th, 2000   1:58 AM

    It really is hard to believe that Netscape still act so arrogantly towards users and developers, when will this stop? They make life that little bit harder for all us developers.

    Matthew Bray


    November 7th, 2000   1:53 AM

    Making a webpage that is compatible with both IE and NS is hard enough at the moment. If Netscape releases an even more non-compliant browser then it will no longer be economical to make webpages work with IE and NS. I don't want to put a 'Best viewed with M$ IE' at the bottome of my webpages but in a competitive market I will not be alone in being left no choice.

    Steven Murdoch


    November 7th, 2000   1:46 AM

    Please comply to standards. That's what standards are for.

    Mark Tetrode


    November 7th, 2000   1:45 AM

    Listen to the man!

    Rene Kyllingstad


    November 7th, 2000   1:41 AM

    As a professional Web & Multimedia Designer all I can bluntly say is, that working to make Sites Netscape compatible often really sucks big time.
    I'm not very happy with Mircos~1, since I don't have very much sympathy with their marketing, customer treatment policiy and childisch and unsuperior Windows-is-everything 'behavior' - and their also not HTML 4 compliant IE, BUT:

    Should I have to go through all that 'write-extra-complicated-Javascript-functions-for-NS' again, just to get some simple slicegraphics rollovers for some guy who doesn't care and pays me money to have a simple hompage to show of - I'm gonna tell them to ditch NS (and do that myself) OR pay me extra.

    I mean, where's the dignity?
    I like fiddeling with Linux and semi-open-source stuff, but when it comes do getting this done for the Web I don't give a shit who sets the course, be it IE or NS. So, for heavens sake, straiten yourselfes out and quit this NS workaround crap (div styles, layers and the like) - Webdesigners patience is over!!! You better believe me, I'm not the only one thinking that way - and I'm not talking about the Micros~1 junkies.

    Phillip, Web & Multimedia Designer


    November 7th, 2000   1:41 AM

    I want a browser that supports standards 100%. And skipping ready to use patches is the wrong decission. If you waited 2+ years nothing bad will happen if this takes extra week or two.

    Aidas Kasparas


    November 7th, 2000   1:40 AM

    Pleeze. Don´t give us again a new browser that doesn´t support the standards again...

    'nuff said

    kiWorm


    November 7th, 2000   1:40 AM

    Netscape releasing a browser that is not standards compliant will only
    further decline their browser market share.

    Come on guys, you've taken this long, what's a another month or so?

    Adam Cassar


    November 7th, 2000   1:39 AM

    IE users will not go back to Netscape if it releases a product that is worse than IE or even the same as IE. In order to gain back your market, focus on blowing away IE with 100% standard compliancy and a damn good browser!

    Ben Tyszka


    November 7th, 2000   1:36 AM

    This is outrageous!!

    Common Netscape, if you release the browser in this state you will loose all the little support you still have in the developer community. This will finally deliver the whole browser-developer community to Redmond.

    Óskar Sturluson


    November 7th, 2000   1:36 AM

    Netscape releasing a browser that is not standards compliant will only
    further decline their browser market share.

    Come on guys, you've taken this long, what's a another month or so?

    Adam Cassar


    November 7th, 2000   1:36 AM

    And why don't just apply patches to Mozilla (sources are under GPL aren't they?) and forget some Netscape ?
    (e.g. cell padding bug still remains in Mozilla - at least in build 2000102321)

    PetrH


    November 7th, 2000   1:23 AM

    Don't weasle out of producing a correct browser. You lost the race, now at least release the best open source product you can, and perhaps win the race again.

    Lukas KNutsson


    November 7th, 2000   1:18 AM

    I´m using NS more than 5 years.
    The last Versions (4.xx) are unstable and many users changed to IE.
    If Netscape decide to ship the current NS6 branch, they will lost the last users who are using NS.
    The only hope is, that a few of the users try Mozilla.

    Matthias


    November 7th, 2000   1:18 AM

    Webstandards are most important in a world of different browsers and platforms. Maybe OAL/Netscape wants to stimulate the world-economy by creating a non-complient browser :p.

    As if companies will still care about a browser which loses market faster than IE has won!

    Netscape, listen to the Mozilla guys!

    Bernhard Dobbels


    November 7th, 2000   1:15 AM

    Netscape used to lead the pack, but it has been buried by IE. Comparing IE's standard conformance to Netscape's rapidly forces you to reduce the level of functionality on web pages for Netscape users, and given the choice I would drop Netscape support completely since it is so bad. If Netscape release a new version which persists in being functionally flawed Netscape will probably soon become a non-player in the browser market.

    David Barlow


    November 7th, 2000   1:14 AM

    What is the point in bringing out a browser, if it does not adhere to standards. When I use a browser I want a guarentee that I'm viewing a site as the author intended.

    David Richards


    November 7th, 2000   1:11 AM

    Webstandards are most important in a world of different browsers and platforms. Maybe OAL/Netscape wants to stimulate the world-economy by creating a non-complient browser :p.

    As if companies will still care about a browser which loses market faster than IE has won!

    Netscape, listen to the Mozilla guys!

    Bernhard Dobbels


    November 7th, 2000   12:58 AM

    I want a standard compliant browser nothing else. I hate circumventing bugs.

    Bosch Alain


    November 7th, 2000   12:56 AM

    Netscape are letting bureaucratic corporate marketing bullshit run the ship (the same people that let NSCP die in the first place) rather than the technical people that know best.

    Maybe IE isn't 100% compliant. That's irrelevant. Maybe NSCP6 is more compliant than IE. Irrelevant. That is NOT (IMHO) the point of the article.

    The point is, critical bugs are NOT being fixed, or are being fixed, but the idiot managers won't let the patches into the NSCP product.

    Netscape is fucked. Add them to fuckedcompany.com right now. Mozilla may do better (esp. in the embedded market) as long as every PDT manager is fired on the spot, and the techs take back control.

    Daniel


    November 7th, 2000   12:46 AM

    Damned Netscape!
    I loved you at the university, I got doubts when i start working and now I'm losing my faith in you. Argh!

    Geert
    Pure Linux Developer
    Kemuri Systems

    Geert Vanderkelen


    November 7th, 2000   12:44 AM

    Did you read David's article? Do you think Netscape 6 is less standards-compliant than IE? Think again. Put the browsers through published open-source standards-compliance test suites yourself, side by side, and make an informed choice. Here's how:

    1) Download Netscape 6 PR3 for Windows and IE 5.5 for Windows and and run them through these tests side by side:

    Jiri Znamenacek's DOM1 Reference According to Jiri Mozilla came out best in this comparison.

    Jeremie Miller's DOM Level-1 Test Suite

    W3C CSS1 Test Suite

    2) Download Netscape 6 PR3 for the Mac and IE 5 for the Mac and repeat.

    3) Download Netscape 6 PR3 for Linux and ... oh wait ;-> . Well, compare the standards support to Opera 4.x for Linux instead, since IE doesn't support Linux at all.

    Or, if you're too busy to run the tests yourself, scan the Netscape Standards Challenge, which summarizes the results and links into the tests so you can verify each item yourself.

    The result is clear. Netscape 6 supports more web standards, more deeply, more consistently, across more platforms simultaneously than any other browser available. It's not Netscape 6 that will be holding back the adoption of standards on the web after its release; it is the inferior and inconsistent standards support of IE 5.5 for Windows and IE 5 for the Mac.

    Pulling ten bugs out of the public bug database is not a valid methodology for assessing browser standards compliance. Doing a thorough review of published test suites is.

    Eric


    November 7th, 2000   12:44 AM

    I work for a leading web development company and cannot begin to complain about how much CRAP we go through because of low standards compliance in Netscape.


    I used to be one of those die hard andi-microsoft people but now after having seen the absolute crap that Netscape has released I have begun recommending using IE.


    I thought there was hope with the launch of Netscape 6 but after reading this article and trying the pre-releases (of Netscape), it appears that they still haven’t got it right! I for one am truly disappointed and wished that Netscape simply fixed these bugs and return to its former glory.


    In closing... its easy.. The stats talk for themselves.. if Netscape wants to stay in the browser business they have to FIX their browser and make it compliant. Or else.. well byebye Netscape, and Microsoft will deservedly own the browser market.

    David


    November 7th, 2000   12:42 AM

    I've used both the Netscape 6 betas and Mozilla. If AOL isn't willing to include bug fixes because they want to push their branded Mozilla out the door, so what? Haven't those bug fixes been included in Mozilla? What is the big fuss about? If Netscape 6 has issues that Mozilla doesn't, people will use mozilla instead and the bean counters and suits at AOL will find out the hard way the error of their ways. Expect to see a 6.1 version soon thereafter that includes the fixes.

    Lee

    Lee Reynolds


    November 7th, 2000   12:42 AM

    I agree that some of the bugs are serious enough to need fixing before shipping a final product. I´d be happy with another Pre Release version and see NS6.0 as a browser you can very much depend on regarding working with the standards. Meanwhile, I don´t think MSIE is without bugs either. At some point Netscape will have to release something that they can really market, and I´ve learned to live with getting a .01 or .1 version because the .0 version wasn´t too good after all... The whole job they (NS and Mozilla developers) are doing is hard, but at least I´m happy to see the project is very alive.

    Marco van den Hout


    November 7th, 2000   12:41 AM

    A premature release would have two very serious consequences:
    The further marginalization of the Netscape browser, and a black
    eye for open source development. Please allow Netscape, and
    Mozilla, the chance to succeed. Don't release a final with
    regressive bugs.

    Tony Kimball


    November 7th, 2000   12:40 AM

    A premature release would have two very serious consequences:
    The further marginalization of the Netscape browser, and a black
    eye for open source development. Please allow Netscape, and
    Mozilla, the chance to succeed. Don't release a final with
    regressive bugs.

    Tony Kimball


    November 7th, 2000   12:37 AM

    How much did you get from Microsoft?
    Go to http://www.webstandards.org and read some great stuff.
    msIE 5.5 for win does not support standards either, for mac its better but why that browser is not same for both platforms. So what does 6 do then? More Microsoft standards? Cursors and stuff.
    Netscape is coming and people are using it for sure. It's faster than ie5.5 and better even.
    Yeah, im also tired of waiting my "girlfriend/boyfriend" = nn to come home cause some lameass devil = msie is whispering my ear...
    ...whats he saying then? Lets play monopoly, i wanna win.
    Mozilla will break the windows and shall set you free!

    mayb [froze.net]


    November 7th, 2000   12:36 AM

    In our last project we only **just** decided that supporting netscape (4.7) was worth the effort. In the process we downloaded the beata version 6 and it proved to be another nightmare and another platform to support.
    There won't be anyone arguing for support of Netscape 6 in the light of this project considering at every point it was netscape that proved to be the difficaulty.

    Daniel Burke


    November 7th, 2000   12:32 AM

    I think that releasing Netscape 6 without a perfect compliance to the standards is a suicide.

    I'm a javascript developer, and I'm tired to write separate code for IE and Netscape. If Netscape will fail to meet the standards I will write scripts that work only for IE, and I think that many other people will do so.

    Think about it.

    Maurizio Cottarelli


    November 7th, 2000   12:24 AM

    This is a load of crap.

    This article is basically complaining that Netscape 6 is not 96% compliant instead of the 95% compliant that it currently is. Even if Netscape engineers fixed the specific bugs that this joker picked out of the woodwork, there would still be areas that Netscape 6 would not be compliant. The fact of the matter is that Netscape 6 is still far more compliant than ANY browser on the market.

    What disappoints me even more is the blind sentiment that the posters here have expressed. It's obvious who has tried Mozilla and Netscape betas and who has not. Those who have not are complaining that Netscape 6 is not compliant because they have not actually tried it on existing web sites or standards compliance tests.

    Those who spent the 10 seconds it takes to realize that Netscape 6 leapfrogs IE and Netscape 4.x in CSS, DOM, XML, and HTML4 compliance have thankfully expressed their support for Mozilla, Gecko, and even Netscape, the big bad corporation that gave a million lines of Gecko source to the open-source community.

    For those of you who continue to chide Netscape for not delivering the product you demand on time: get off your ass and fix some bugs. It may be a complex product, but there are pleanty of smart people not working for Netscape who have gotten their hands dirty and fixed the issues they cared about.

    alecf


    November 7th, 2000   12:20 AM

    It's a bitch developing to several browsers. Especially ECMAScript has
    proven to be tricky. If you at least comply to the standards, you
    give the developers a good platform for testing their scripts,
    serverside generated output etc. The release of a buggy product will
    do nothing to promote Netscape 6.0 as a competent browsers, on the
    contrary, lots of people will use it, find it buggy, and ditch it.
    Why would they want to trust Netscape 6.01 when they waited years
    to see 6.0 fail? Please reconsider.

    Morten Primdahl


    November 7th, 2000   12:19 AM

    I'm just a poor sysadmin with lot of UNIX machines around me...
    I have invested my last five years into developing Netscape oriented
    applications for our intranet. But frankly speaking, now I'm a bit tired.
    Guys, don't let me install Windows just because of IE

    Keks


    November 7th, 2000   12:16 AM

    As a web developer, it is already tough to get Netscape browsers to see my webpages as well as MSIE. I often have to delete content or "tone it down" just to make it look decent in Netscape. Please don't introduce more reasons not to support Netscape. Get it right the first time and save all of us the headache!

    Jared Grubb


    November 7th, 2000   12:16 AM

    when you're the underdog, it seems that you succeed by creating a better product.

    shipping a half-baked, buggy browser that doesn't conform to standards is in no way shape or form a "better product".

    tell marketing to get a clue.

    do it right, or not at all.

    Justin Reynolds


    November 7th, 2000   12:04 AM

    Hey guys let up on Netscape,

    This is a dog eat dog world. And alot of us get paid by the hour. If our projects can run on Netscape that means that they can run anywhere. I use Netscape as a worst case for testing my code. Maybe someday they will fix all the failures and Ill have to take out a Morgage on the house because of the reduced work load.

    But seriously please fix the bugs and comply with the standards and try to do it across all the platforms that you support. It is in your own best interest. I am so frustrated when someone gives me a web site that needs a CGI script and I cant look at it on my Linux box......

    Money makes the world go round....

    Robert E. Meuse


    November 7th, 2000   12:01 AM

    I NEED A DECENT BROWSER.

    When I first connected to the internet I downloaded NetScrape 2.1, and I remember saying: "This would be really neat, if it just didn't crash every fifteen minutes." Since then I've been through 3, 4, and up to something like 4.72 and it still crashes hideously. Tonight NetScrape 4.72 managed to lock up my Linux system to the point where I had to cut its power to regain control over it.

    I don't write html any more complicated than the most vanilla-flavored shit, so I can't say much about standards-compliance and the nightmare of supporting both NetScrape and Internet Exploiter(tm)(r)(c). As far as I'm concerned, any features that don't work the same on both browsers just aren't of any use. The only comment I feel safe making (as a general software developer) is that if either one were truly standards-compliant, a lot of web developers would write W3C-compliant html and tell the other browser to _get_ compliant or go to hell. As others have pointed out, this sort of scenario is truly NetScrape's _FINAL_ chance for ever regaining anything resembling "market share".

    I just want to surf the web. I've lost way too much email in Compromiser to ever trust it ever again. I don't have to. There are plenty of perfectly good email agents out there. Not so browsers.

    I NEED A DECENT BROWSER.

    Is this M19? I'll have to try that. M9 sure sucked. M$(tm)(r)(c) has, thankfully, spared me the decision of whether or not to try (on my Linux platform) the abomination which has become the industry's dominant browser. I'm reluctant to _buy_ Opera (commercial software is _so_ worthless), so I'm pretty much locked into the offalings from NetScrape. If they release a 6.0 browser that's buggy, unstable, and (amazingly!) even tougher to write webpages for than the 4.x series, they'll prove that the Evil Empire was successful in killing them off, and long ago. If you chop a chicken's head off neatly & cleanly, the dead body will run like hell. I'm afraid that this is NetScrape's condition.

    I NEED A DECENT BROWSER.

    I've waited five years. Another month or six won't matter. NetScrape has already lost all the market share it can to Internet Exploiter(tm)(r)(c). NetScrape is irrelevant to the mainstream internet luser marketplace, which uses WinBloze(tm)(r)(c) and AOHell, wouldn't recognize a real computer if it bit them on the ass, and doesn't care or even want to know the difference. The real (*NIX) computer world has been stuck with NetScrape for so long that their patience and loyalty has long since been exhausted. It remains in NetScrape's camp for two reasons:
    1) M$(tm)(r)(c) is evil, and the *NIX world wants to sympathize with NetScrape.
    2) NetScrape is the only major, free (if binary-only), multimedia (hah) browser available.

    NetScrape, don't bother releasing _another_ broken browser, unless you _want_ to prove to your remaining audience that you _really_can't_ cut it, and that you won't even _try_ to keep the small mindshare that is still yours to lose.

    battyman


    November 6th, 2000   11:57 PM

    I'd rather go back to Mosaic or lynx then ever using MSIE.
    Right now, on Linux however I use KDE's konquerer, which has about everything I look for in a browser (which is NO SHOPPING MALL).

    KlaasB


    November 6th, 2000   11:53 PM

    As a programmer in a medium size IT shop I can say that shipping a buggy product is just not generally acceptable to either the programmer or the customer. Marketing has of course been hyping the product for the past few months (or in this case years) and the client is expecting the Moon and Stars to fall out of the heavens into their hands when the program is shipped, but... well we gave a date so bugs or no it needs to get shipped... sorry.

    For the past year I've been on the giving and recieving end of this issue. In my job we've developed a product and if that product has a bug that we know of and we know we can fix it, it gets done. Our customers are told about the issue, dates get moved or extra hours put in, but it gets done and we don't ship known problem to our customers. On the receiving end of things we've been dealing with a company that every bug we report we get a boxed answer of "well that's fixed in version (insert version number here)". We started out with 2.0 and the problems would be fixed in 2.01 (some were), then it was 2.5 then 2.53 then 2.54, 3.0 got shipped but was unstable don't upgrade until 3.01, 3.01 was released but it introduced two new bugs, wait for 3.5... 3.5 is out upgrade now.... oh no support for forms in a page?... not a problem that'll be fixed in 3.7. Meanwhile everyone is either sitting idle waiting for the next big advance or spending their time creating work arounds that the next big advance will cause to be rewritten.

    It's a continual hold out, always waiting for that one patch that will add the functionality that the customer/client was originally promised. Don't promise what you can't or don't intend to give. This is the one thing that I can honestly say MS has never done to me. With every release of IE the promise is "better support of standards" and truly with each version their support of the standards gets significantly better. If Netscape had just promised "better support than IE" and created a chart comparison that proved it, that would have been all that most people wanted as a base. But no you had to promise the moon and then settle into a nice little orbit docked to MIR. I knew as soon as the NS/Mozilla team even suggested that they had a 100% standards compliant browser that they were blowing smoke and with each preview release and the bigger push to get it released I can see that I was right. Don't make promises you can't keep. Sometimes it's okay to shoot a little lower, be an underacheiver for once, instead of an overacheiver that is only consistant at failure. Yes I'm saying be the best straight C student you can. At least that way you'd never let anyone down.

    Michael Havard


    November 6th, 2000   11:53 PM

    I have used Netscape for many years until recently when I switched to Internet Explorer because of the increased functionality. Having said that, as a web developer I was going to switch back to a standards based browser - please, please, please Netscape don't let the a self-imposed deadline rule out fixes to the major bugs - people will appreciate that you take a stand rather than undermining confidence with buggy code and v6.01, v6.02 etc

    Keith Speers


    November 6th, 2000   11:51 PM

    It's beta software and should be released as such.

    Chris Kuehn


    November 6th, 2000   11:49 PM

    Netscape,

    We've been pretty damn tolerant of you so far - you've taken *years* to write Mozilla/NS6 and for the most part it's a good product, but if you fuck it up now the last bastion of customers keeping your browser on the desktops of the world will abandon you.
    Of course, you don't care, because you're a division of AOL, so no-one's neck rests on NS6 being a success.
    I always hoped that Jamie Zawinski leaving Mozilla was the result of a childish reaction on his part. I guess I was wrong.

    The software industry will never be capable of true greatness until it wakes up to one thing - YOU DO NOT RELEASE WHILE THERE ARE BUGS YOU KNOW ABOUT. Far too many products are released these days that are full of bugs. That the majority of users have been trained with "save your work every 5 minutes in case it crashes" is the pinnacle of evidence to this effect. It's amazing that people are stupid enough to pay for such medeocrity. At least in the OpenSource world we get crap for free ;)

    Mozilla/NS6 is the final realisation of Netscape's long held desire for an application platform - I wonder if that has somehow become more important than viewing web pages.

    Fix the bugs, or we stop using you. You have no choice, submit to our will.

    Chris Jones


    November 6th, 2000   11:49 PM

    Netscape is only sabotaging itself in the interest of achieving a short term goal.

    Jeremy Brown


    November 6th, 2000   11:46 PM

    I have to Strongly agree with the theme of these responses. Netscape is not spending enought time getting the bugs out and the standards met. This only contributes to the rise to IE. I am Linux bigot, so that puts me in the position of using Netscape for much of my testing of web content.
    It would really be appreciated if all reasonalble effort could be put toward a compilant browser.

    -Patrick J. McGoldrick

    Patrick J. McGoldrick


    November 6th, 2000   11:44 PM

    Netscape 6.0´s big chance is to address the issues that Microsoft chooses to ignore with IE 6.0, among them:
    - good multiple platform support with full cross-platform browser compatibility;
    - Java 2 support shipped with the browser;
    - full ECMAScript compliance.

    If they do not score perfectly in these categories, they will assumably not be a serious competitor to Internet Explorer 6.0 - and the world will have to deal with a single, dominant Internet browser. Maybe we will even see Opera become the far-off number 2 in the browser market within some time, who knows?

    Regards,
    Juergen Hoeller

    Juergen Hoeller


    November 6th, 2000   11:44 PM

    Well, they can do what they want, I'll just look for the best browser, even tho' I don't want MS in my back pocket, you gott'a do what ya' gott'a do. Currently, I use both, as NNavigator often finds ways to quit responding until I restart, which is quite the pain.

    gl to NNavigator in pleasing the computer community, 'cuz it ain't gonn'a happen tho'. :)

    Mark Goshorn


    November 6th, 2000   11:43 PM

    Please do not release Netscape Navigator 6 with significant standards-compliance bugs. Non-Windows users rely on the continued viability of Netscape as their only hope to continue viewing the web without having to change to an inferior operating system just to run MSIE. A further delay in order to rectify bugs would not be significant at this point compared to the damage caused by another buggy release.

    Andrew Pam


    November 6th, 2000   11:41 PM

    I've been a Netscape supporter for many years. I've taken much strain from peers who have since switched to IE. I just laughed at them. Netscape, please don't embarress me.

    e

    Edward van Kuik


    November 6th, 2000   11:37 PM

    I am an avid Linux user, and I am tired of Netscape being such a hideous joke. When will you get a clue? Your browser is horrid on any platform, and Mozilla, while marginally better, is still such a crock of dung. The only thing you can do by shipping this broken browser now is solidify your position as a has-been and perennial web joke. I work for a web company, and your failure to create a working product is embarrasing - I have to have a Windows box to run testing because I can not trust Netscape to keep running, let alone display pages properly.

    If the goal of Netscape 6 and Mozilla is standards support, I will continue to fight for their acceptance, but if it is just to ship shitty code to make money and PR points, then Netscape is really a dinosaur, and should just give up.

    Chris McKinley


    November 6th, 2000   11:37 PM

    I think Netscape is under some major time pressures and is doing the wrong thin by not fixing these (and other problems), so yes I agree with the author on that point.

    But there is one other point I'd like to make and that is. If this wasn't an open source project you wouldn't have any idea about any of these problems until it was too late (i.e. released product). Here you can see the entire process and comment on it. If Netscape doesn't fix the bugs and doesn't change is processes to include user feedback from articles like these, then they are doomed.

    Edwardam


    November 6th, 2000   11:37 PM

    Hey Flanagan, you just instantly lost all respect for your dumb-ass self in the mozilla community. Writing this article has done more harm than good for our project. Those bugs you listed are lame and not worth inflaming the world against Netscape. Think before you publish, oreilly.com.

    Anonymous


    November 6th, 2000   11:34 PM

    Developers want the ability to choose which browser to develop for and recommend to clients and the business world. Today, there is no choice. Since Netscape 4's bug-ridden engine released before standards were hammered out, serious web development was forced to Internet Explorer. Even I, a die-hard Netscape user and proponent since the beginning now have Internet Explorer as my default browser, not by choice, but because it works.

    If you release Netscape 6 without core standard support in the DOM, CSS and ECMA Script you will be making the same mistake again, only your fall from grace won't be as subtle as it has been (80%~ to 14%~). This time it will lead to oblivion (0%!). Please, consider the long-term impact of this decision. Your image is already tarnished, why not wait and let your browser help to enhance your name, instead of continuing to garner only ridicule and disdain.

    Bruce Grant


    November 6th, 2000   11:27 PM

    Just get it fixed. I'm sick and tired of your bullshit.

    Mika


    November 6th, 2000   11:22 PM

    I've been saying it all along...

    While Netscape was the Underdog and bigbad M$ came in, people just din't believe me. Now it's obvious. M$ has put it time and effort and came up with the better tools, Netscape has sold out.

    The only reason why Netscape always complained was that they knew from day one that they wouldn't stand a chance and that IE would end up being the better browser, simply because M$ has larger resources.

    So the milked the underdog thing for what it was worth [to maintain investor's confidence] and then sold out to AOL at a hefty profit.

    Nothing wrong with that - just BAU [business as usual].


    But isn't it time that people started to boycott Netscape's mess-ups?

    For a developer like me, in Asia, where plenty people still use NN because of the original hype, it is frustrating that I can not use all the gadgets and abilities of the standard simply because Netscape choses not to support it

    Worse, they don't support things their own earlier versions supported, basically forcing me to rewrite sites each time they come up with a new browser.


    Netscape has outlived it's usefulness and it's expiry date was somewhere in 98.

    Lets's send the message, flame them and if they don't react, torch AOL.


    Just my 1.14 cents...

    DiviN TroyS


    November 6th, 2000   11:21 PM

    Having experienced how useless CSS is due to poor browser compliance, and the
    hopes developers have placed on the new generation of browsers to finally
    correctly implement various web standards, I have to wholeheartedly agree
    with the author. Please do not release a broken product. The users and developers can and will wait for a properly working browser, instead of being driven away from Netscape forever by a broken one.

    Toivo Voll


    November 6th, 2000   11:19 PM

    Please don't hose our cross-browser dhtml code.

    Alex


    November 6th, 2000   11:19 PM

    Netscape?

    As of reading this I have decided to stop all support for Netscape, entirly and completly. It is outrageous to expect developers to spend countless hours just to make a page properly render in netscape, and now throwing another stick in the spokes with another buggy release, to be followed by buggy upgrades.. No, I will write a nice article explaining why the page you have requested is not available in netscape, with links to articles explaning the same thing, its easy enough to find well written articles by reliable sources on why netscape , to put it blantly, sucks.

    The vast majority of users browsing the web these days uses Internet Explorer. Like it or not. The vast majority of the minority using Netscape, can use Internet Explorer, simply by clicking a diffrent icon on their quicklaunch.. I do not think it is to far fetched to ask users to use software that will properly render my webpage.. There are system requirements for almost every peice of software you buy, and its not uncommon to view wepages with system and software requires.. flash, director, real player..

    Oh course you may say, its diffrent.. Flash is already installed with most browsers these days.. yeah? well internet explorer is installed with every copy of windows 98, windows millenium, and windows 2000.


    Anyway,

    /rant

    Jerrett Taylor


    November 6th, 2000   11:18 PM

    Fortunately the Mozilla project is open source. Unfortunately Netscape appears to have a tight lock on the tree. Hosting all the development resources does a great service to the Mozilla community, but has the potential to cause what we all feared from day 1: de facto control of an Open Source project by a fat corporate bureaucracy. This appears to be happening now.


    It will be a shame when we have to move the Mozilla project to a different
    set of hosts and servers just because Netscape is fucking up Mozilla like they fucked up every other product they've ever touched. However, I want a working browser, and I want a standards-compliant browser. I'll be more than happy to pitch in to relocate all of Mozilla if Netscape continues with this bullshit.

    Rick Bradley


    November 6th, 2000   11:14 PM

    If it doesn't conform, keep it in beta

    James


    November 6th, 2000   11:14 PM

    All I can say is is that I've always used Netscape. But frankly, ever since v4.5, it's starting to become embarassing. Netscape keeps doing weird little things that make me want to go kick the developers ass instead of kicking M$'s ass. Makes me want to puke that I have to goto M$. Netscape, you should be disgusted with yourselves and just make the damn browser work right. Stnad up to those goddamn no-nothing marketer-types who just want to release a pretty product. What's the matter, got no b*lls for it? The marketing department overwhelm you?

    T Ray


    November 6th, 2000   11:13 PM

    Let's stop this whining and give Netscape credit for building the most standards compliant browser in the world. It would be nice to wait until it's "perfect" but can Netscape afford to?

    Flanagan, you really need a haircut.

    Anonymous


    November 6th, 2000   11:13 PM

    I am a Sr. Engineer, working in the fields of Internet security and web applications deployment.


    I strongly agree with the arguments holding Netscape to published ECMA and DOM standards. Considering that the majority of non-compliance bugs are patched in the Mozilla tree, the business decision not to integrate these is unacceptable to the Internet professional community.


    I think that you'll agree that browser inferiority is a poor way to diferentiate a Netscape branded product from the Mozilla technologies.


    Jeremiah Cornelius


    November 6th, 2000   11:12 PM

    Mozilla has the chance to be a really great browser. Please don't screw that up with marketing. You compete with other browsers by providing a better product, not by making sure that you have matching version numbers and early release dates.

    Sean


    November 6th, 2000   11:08 PM

    While I certainly do think Netscape should fix all of the bugs before even CONSIDERING releasing any product, ever (at least to the best of their ability), why are we even bothering to ask them? Netscape is NOT mozilla... Mozilla can continue on it's own, Netscape can't control it anymore... I think Netscape has proven it is an evil company since it died (and especially since AOL took it over). Their only reason for making it open-source in the first place was not for the philosophy, but in a sad attempt to again take market share away from IE. Let's just forget all about Netscape. They are history. We can continue Mozilla development without them, and release a really good, bug-free browser.

    Ryan Hayle


    November 6th, 2000   11:04 PM

    Please wait a few more weeks to bring out the final release. Open the trunk and fix the major outstanding bugs that have been pointed out here.

    Alok Singh


    November 6th, 2000   11:03 PM

    I think you have one real chance to gain back users to netscape. If the browser has patches available (especially simple ones), then when people try the 'new' netscape and find it is buggy they may never try again... Think long and hard about this, another month is not going to lose you that much more market share, a buggy release will.

    Damien


    November 6th, 2000   11:03 PM

    To be blunt, Netscape 6 is so delayed that a delay of several more months in exchange for fixing some more of these obvious and visible bugs is worth it.

    As a professional web developer of 5 years based in Seattle, I can tell you that I would much rather have a delayed product then spend years coping with the imcompatibilities and bugs of a possibly widely deployed Netscape 6.

    Given the realities of work, that "coping" would have to involve a message along the lines of "Download Internet Explorer 6.x for full site functionality." Please, don't make me do this.

    Nick Silberstein


    November 6th, 2000   11:02 PM

    Please adhere to the standards and fix the problems that yourself say aren't worth fixing.

    Jim Salter


    November 6th, 2000   11:02 PM

    Netscape, don't be stupid and release Navigator 6 with lacking standards
    compliance and/or other bugs. If you do this you will never have a comeback.
    You need to wait until you have a rock solid product to release or else
    nobody will trust you anymore.

    Steve Markoff


    November 6th, 2000   11:01 PM

    I work for one of the top 5 e-Integrators, and we are currently considering IGNORING support for Netscape 6 unless our customers explicitly and contractually request it (for a fee).

    We have been following the code tree closely (even contributing on occassion), and we have determined that the QA time and bug work-arounds are not worth the effort, given that the number of users using Netscape 5 (well, the marketing folk call it 6) will not exceed the number using version 4 (see Jakob Nielson --> http://www.useit.com/alertbox/990418.html).

    Given this fact (it may as well be one), throwing extra money and effort (more importantly to our customers -- TIME) to dance the Mozilla bug dance, will not be cost effective to our clients who would rather launch 3 weeks earlier than pay the penalty of the extra development and QA effort.

    Eric Stevens


    November 6th, 2000   11:00 PM

    or maybe release it as 'AOL2000' or something; it might alienate fewer developers ;).

    chump


    November 6th, 2000   10:59 PM

    Fix those damn bugs!

    Gene McKenna


    November 6th, 2000   10:58 PM

    I AM BEGGING, THIS IS A REASONABLE CHANCE TO REGAIN SOME MARKET SHARE AND JUSTIFY THE TIME THAT WE SPEND WRITING CROSS-BROWSER DHTML. DONT POO THE BED AGAIN. THANKS

    anonymous


    November 6th, 2000   10:58 PM

    Day in and day out I see broken HTML on my site (kuro5hin.org), coming from yet another unfixed Mozilla bug. These bugs are still in the current Mozilla snapshots, let alone the version of Mozilla that NS 6 is based on. I have little hope that this petition will change anyone's mind at Netscape, but history will show that we all knew NS 6 would be even more buggy than the 4.x series.

    Is anyone going to start a petition to port IE to Linux? It's a sad, sad day when I'm reduced to begging Microsoft to give us a browser that works. If not that, then is there any open source developer who needs a project? The world cries out for a free browser...

    Rusty Foster


    November 6th, 2000   10:57 PM

    Netscape, you made a promise of full standards compliance. Break it at your own peril. We will not support your stupidity in the browser war any longer. IE-5 works just fine so you have to keep your promise in order to pull us away from it.

    Michael A. Long


    November 6th, 2000   10:54 PM

    imho the "we'll patch the problems after the initial release" approach isn't very realistic. NS6 (what happened to 5?) is highly anticipated by those who care (end users and and web developers who haven't given up and adopted ie) and who have often voluntarily given up useful functionality in the hopes that there would be a viable alternative to a ms-specific solution. If the initial release doesn't live up to expectations, aol/ns loses alot of supporters.

    chump


    November 6th, 2000   10:52 PM

    It seems to me that the least stable application on my linux box
    is Netscape. And judging from the article I better give up
    hope for improvement.
    As soon as Opera reaches production quality, I'll happily
    move over to them, even if that means paying for it.
    (it shows how desperate/fed up I am).

    Willem


    November 6th, 2000   10:52 PM

    My company uses IE 5.0 for internal web apps because all the developers can code for it. Coding for external web apps becomes a hot potato toss because Netscape 4.x is such a nightmare.

    Please don't make external web deployment even more difficult for us, because we may decide it's no longer worth the effort. And if N6 doesn't work for users, they may decide it's not worth the effort either.


    Jack Ribble


    November 6th, 2000   10:50 PM

    There's little for me to add that hasn't been said before, but I should remind
    people that there's still something else you can do:

    VOTE FOR THE BUGS! If enough people voted for it, it _should_ show
    up higher in the buglist.

    Ang Chin Han


    November 6th, 2000   10:49 PM

    You are not going to overlive the browsers war this way ...

    Anonymous


    November 6th, 2000   10:47 PM


    This matters.   This matters a lot.   This will break existing
    websites, and it will further discourage developers from writing to the
    mozilla platform -- if you expect to ever get any respect (see the evangelism
    bugs), then you can't break existing sites, period.   Furthermore, if you
    ship as broken browser, what you break is going to be with us for years
    -- this stuff doesn't go away, because once it's released, people will always
    have to take it into account.   This is our web that you're breaking,
    both mine and yours, and it's worth the time.




    Paul Saitta, Build host for mathml enabled nightlies

    Paul Saitta


    November 6th, 2000   10:45 PM

    If it doesn't comply, I won't be using it. I hate IE, but I will go there if Netscape isn't up to scratch.

    Caitlin Kelly


    November 6th, 2000   10:44 PM

    One "marketing requirement" seems to me to be immune from being labelled buggy!

    Please label this a preview release!!! You will get attention, AND you will get more eyes to further improve the quality AND you will be able to fix the bugs.

    Don't launch too early... you never get a 2nd chance to make a 1st impression right?

    respectfully,

    James Carter
    Cincinnati, Ohio

    James Carter


    November 6th, 2000   10:43 PM

    This is too bad. Bugs and non-compliance, as much as delay, can doom this effort insha`Allah.

    Ali Taddia


    November 6th, 2000   10:41 PM

    I can't believe netscape could be this stupid. There must be a real community of dickheads coordinating netscape these days. I just can't understand how a company in their position, after all the standards wars we've been through, with mozilla so near working and everything else could be so stupid as to piss their last chance up against the wall like this. It's crazy. They need to go out and shoot their project management team.

    Craig Turner


    November 6th, 2000   10:41 PM

    I can't believe netscape could be this stupid. There must be a real community of dickheads coordinating netscape these days. I just can't understand how a company in their position, after all the standards wars we've been through, with mozilla so near working and everything else could be so stupid as to piss their last chance up against the wall like this. It's crazy. They need to go out and shoot their project management team.

    Craig Turner


    November 6th, 2000   10:41 PM

    I can't believe netscape could be this stupid. There must be a real community of dickheads coordinating netscape these days. I just can't understand how a company in their position, after all the standards wars we've been through, with mozilla so near working and everything else could be so stupid as to piss their last chance up against the wall like this. It's crazy. They need to go out and shoot their project management team.

    Craig Turner


    November 6th, 2000   10:40 PM

    Stop the madness. Stop the practice of knowingly shipping flawed
    products and fixing them later. How about a quality release with
    no impending "service packs"? We expect better. I will boycott
    all Netscape products if they do ship 6.0 early, and stick with the
    latest release straight from Mozilla.

    Arthur Corliss


    November 6th, 2000   10:37 PM

    Only a few comments have mentioned the little extensions and seemingly minor non-compliance of IE - Netscape if you blow this there will be a flood tide more and things will become what they always wanted - the MS-Web. Do the right thing, there is a lot more riding on this than the next quarterly report.

    Jonathan Moran


    November 6th, 2000   10:35 PM

    mozilla rocks out really hard and it's a shame that you won't let it mature to where it needs to be before it can be released. imho don't release shit and then update it, wait on the release so when you finaly do it's quality. everyone likes quality esp RMS

    patrick flaherty


    November 6th, 2000   10:34 PM

    For many years, I've used primarily Netscape browsers, but I have to see this as a bad sign... This should boil down to common sense -- if it's broke, fix it. The fixes are there, ready to be put in... why is NS refusing to include them in the code? It's just dumb... Sounds like administration and marketing are telling the coders how to do their job....

    -- Pauley

    Paul Skudlarek


    November 6th, 2000   10:34 PM

    A year ago I used Netscape. It was slow, crashed the poor old PPC I was using then at inconvenient times, and brought the system to its knees when it saw complex tables. Still, I used it because I loathed the standards-subversive influence of the "other browser". Today I use IE5 because it works more reliably and doesn't mangle my webpages.

    I knew that Netscape had gone to ground and I was waiting for the day that Mozilla would bear fruit... and it seems that that day will never come. I don't want to have anything to do with a browser that can crash simply by not understanding a few characters of code, and I'm hardly going to have greater confidence in v6.1 if v6 is so sloppy. I find it ironic that I'm going to avoid using NN6 now for the same reasons that I avoided using IE then.

    At this rate, NN6 is going to be the next IE2, and Netscape simply doesn't have the marketing clout to push a poor product like that.

    Here's my name for the petition.

    Kynnin Scott


    November 6th, 2000   10:33 PM

    Netscape, please don't fall into the trap that so many software companies fall into (including you, in the past). Especially given your rather precarious position in the market right now, I'd think it would be worth it to hold off on the release for a little while longer while you fix what would seem to be serious bugs affecting the browser's performance.

    Mike Edwards


    November 6th, 2000   10:33 PM

    please do not screw this up. Just take the time, get the thing right. We all want to use your product, make it easy for us!

    jmh


    November 6th, 2000   10:33 PM

    Please AOL, do not release Netscape 6 until it is done. I am *not* going to support another non-compliant browser like I did with 4.x.



    If 6.0 does not work correctly, I'm coding to mozilla, IE and lynx (in that order).

    David Waite


    November 6th, 2000   10:29 PM

    if netscape dont clean up their act then they're goin bye-bye. the mozillia will become extinct.



    the dark one and his ie 6 will steamroll them into oblivion quicker than you can say dinosaur shishkabab.

    m yeung


    November 6th, 2000   10:27 PM

    NETSCAPE! As a web developer for a top 10 site I know all about coding around Netscape 4.xx bugs, PLEASE do not release this until it's done. Having to code detects for 6.0 6.1 6.2 etc pages like we had to do with the 4.x releases would be horrid all over again!

    eric draven


    November 6th, 2000   10:27 PM

    if netscape dont clean up their act then they're goin bye-bye. the mozillia will become extinct.



    the dark ones and their ie 6 will steamroll them into oblivion quicker than you can say dinosaur shishkabab.

    matthew yeung


    November 6th, 2000   10:25 PM

    Why rush now? You've already lost much too much name-value. Right now IE is the browser to use and netscape a distant second. We've been waiting for what seems like an enternity for NS 6 (since it was NS 5 even!), another month or two isn't going to hurt anything, releasing a non-compliant browser may be your death.

    Damon McGraw


    November 6th, 2000   10:20 PM

    I wholeheartedly agree. People don't like having to code around the inconsistencies in 4.x and I'd really hate to see 6.0 be the same way.

    Brad Moore


    November 6th, 2000   10:18 PM

    Please do not release Netscape 6.0 until it is ready and all of the known critical bugs like these are worked out. Just because MS is releasing new versions of their browser does not mean you have to rush out yours.

    zack


    November 6th, 2000   10:15 PM

    If you have fixes which cause problems with 'code alignment in another part of the binary' then you have a serious problem, and it doesn't have anything to do with standards compliance. Come on, have we waited two years just so mozilla can turn into the worst-managed open source project in history? If the code is that much of a mess, then what did all that time get us? A refined rats nest?

    Nick Bastin


    November 6th, 2000   10:14 PM

    Buggy browsers are the bane of the web user and and web developer's life. Please, please don't release a (more than neccessarily) buggy browser.

    Whilst we are all clamouring for an alternative to the dreaded MS Internet Explorer, and clearly time is of the essence, quality is even more of the essence.

    In my opinion extra features (email client, news reader, page composer, XML user interface library) have been overemphasized, to the cost of the entire web community. What is needed is a reliable, fast, standards compliant browser as quickly as possible.

    Oliver Crow


    November 6th, 2000   10:12 PM

    I have been pushing to maintain Netscape 4 compatability in all of our web products but if the KNOWN/FIXED bugs of this severity make it into NS6 then we will almost certainly end this support practice.

    So, MS, how's that Linux port of IE coming?

    Rainer Mager


    November 6th, 2000   10:12 PM

    As a web developer I am on the verge of ditching support for Netscape althogether as we simply cannot afford the time it takes to 'force' Netscape to behave itself with common w3c accepted tags.



    If Netscape truly want to once again be a contender in the browser market, they must concentrate not on 'rushing it out the door' but on creating a solid, fast, stable and compliant web browser.



    The preview releases are, to put it mildly, a waste of time.



    At present, it seems Netscape are more worried about marketing than product, if this continues, they will surely fail to capture back the browser market share they've lost.

    matthew


    November 6th, 2000   10:11 PM

    Please!!! I don't want to have keep a windows partition around.

    Russell Strong


    November 6th, 2000   10:10 PM

    Give Netscape developers a break.
    In the final stage of development, nothing gets checked into the tree unless it would cause a recall of the project if released. This is because no such thing as a safe fix. I've code-reviewed fixes that 3 other guys thought were absolutely safe , and they blow up in our faces because it changed code allignment in another part of the binary.


    None of the bugs listed would cause a product recall, therefore they should ship with them in 6.0, and fix them in 6.0.1.


    Netscape has not shipped a new browser in 2 years. Let them ship, and give open source a chance to work. I would bet that within 6 months of the first release, mozilla will be the most stable and standard compilant browser ever shipped.


    Aleks

    aleks


    November 6th, 2000   10:09 PM

    I have been an avid computer user for almost 10 years now. In that time I have only really come up with one major complaint. More and more these days, it seems that software companies are rushing their products to market before they are really suitable for release. The end result is a loss of productivity, but mostly a huge headache for those of us who use these things every day.

    Users must stand up for the right to better written software.

    Would you buy a car from a car company, that after 2 months of owning the car, a 'fix' was FINALLY released for that nasty habit of the car stalling on the highway?

    I think not.

    Shouldnt they have fixed that ON THE DRAWING BOARD?

    Yes.

    Software companies: Get it together. You _OWE_ it to us.

    Paul Knytl


    November 6th, 2000   10:08 PM

    I still support Netscape 4 in most of my web developement but I must admit it is a chore. The versions of Netscape 6 I have played with have been buggy and quite a disappointment.
    Who'd have thunk that in the year 2000, Netscape would have already become a has been. I guess those that burn twice as bright burn half as long.

    Netscape 6 - fix it and I'll support it.

    Dan Cameron


    November 6th, 2000   10:08 PM

    Netscape engineers, please don't destroy the community of developers and users that still believe in you. We want Netscape 6 to be great, so we can proudly use it, so we can proudly say "It's an open source product".

    As a web developer, it's very frustrating and time consuming to write code that works both in IE and NS. But if NS 6 is not standards compliant, then we'll probably end up only writing code for IE. Not to mention the fact that the whole open source community will be finger-pointed for bringing up a bad product after two years of development.

    Just a little more wait will bring huge benefits to you and us.

    Roberto Mello


    November 6th, 2000   10:07 PM

    Netscape 6 should have all the patches that Mozilla has, doing otherwise is just stupid.

    Jeff Blaufuss


    November 6th, 2000   10:05 PM

    I'm amazed by the amount of work the Mozilla team has accomplished since throwing out the old code. However, the browser clearly needs a lot more work before a release can be considered.

    itech


    November 6th, 2000   10:04 PM

    Compliance with standards is a must. Please consider David's requests seriously.

    Tudor Hulubei


    November 6th, 2000   10:02 PM

    This is a make-or-break moment for Netscape/Mozilla. We've waited a long time, and most of us have switched to IE because Netscape 4 crashes frequently. One thing has kept me interested in Netscape as a platform:

    ** the promise of complete standards compliance **

    Rushing to market will be the kiss of death for this project, and not because of end-users. Developers will make the choice.

    The plain and simple truth is that:

    ** if I have to code workarounds between 6.0 and 6.01, I WON'T. **

    I'm a business owner. We develop web applications. It saddens me that I might have to commit to a solid Microsoft position, but I just can't introduce another platform variation into our code-base. We've finally taken the 3.0 browsers off our radar (IE 3.0 being the chief Javascript complaint).

    Netscape is wrong in releasing prematurely. I support any efforts to boycott or otherwise petition them to change their minds before it's too late.

    Timothy Falconer
    Immuexa Corporation

    p.s. I'm also in favor of releasing Netscape 6 with Java 2 in the typical installation (again, another big mistake by Netscape marketing).

    Timothy Falconer


    November 6th, 2000   10:00 PM

    Netscape is still in business? It's hard to tell. They're kinda like the French army. Everyone's beaten them including themselves.

    Bill Haines


    November 6th, 2000   10:00 PM

    Please Netscape, I've been waiting for too long to go back to using your browser. I left because you don't support the standards. I don't want to have to stay with IE, but I will if you don't support the standards.

    gilmae


    November 6th, 2000   9:57 PM

    Jeez, you'd think that Netscape would get their s**t together. NS6 is an important release, perhaps the most important in the companies history. Everybody who hasen't already jumped on the IE bandwagon is waiting to see how this turns out. If they drop the ball early, it seems that their window of opportunity is going to slam in their faces. NS6 _HAS_ to be good right out of the gate. No one is going to care much if it ships one month later than scheduled, however, if it ships buggy (i.e. crashes, doesn't render pages correctly (esp. is IE does), etc) then the defection will pretty much be complete. I don't think people will hang around for a 6.01.

    Take the time to get it right, please. Many of us would like to see NS/Mozilla succeed and provide an alternative, don't make the most classic of software blunders by releasing an under-performing product just a little ahead of it's time.

    Worried in Austin ...

    concernedNerd


    November 6th, 2000   9:56 PM

    Please, let's not have another Netscape 4.x. I have been a web developer for a number of years. One of my greatest frustrations was trying to do everything "right" by reading the W3C docs and making sure that all code was HTML/CSS compliant. IE 4.x (at the time) followed about 85% - 90% of the code I threw at it, but Netscape 4.x was a total travesty. IE was okay in that it mostly only ignored some minor elements, but Netscape utterly destroyed what I threw at it. Netscape 4.x is better than, say, CSS enabled Opera 3.x or IE 3, but let's face it, we NEED a modern, 100% standards compliant browser. Whether it supports ALL of the snazzy new features is unimportant; supporting 100% of what the browser claims is paramount.


    Netscape, please don't make us developers support yet another generation of buggy browsers. This puts a burden on us, which eventually reflects on the users. Several associates of mine have given up Netscape compatibility support completely, for reasons between mindshare and coding difficulty. The point is, releasing a known buggy browser increases this behavior. I realize deadlines are important, but trust the Mozilla bunch. They've developed a very functional piece of software and know it well. In fact, I write this message from it; I've found it useful enough to use it as my primary browser for the past several months. Heed their advice (and their patches). Thank you for listening.

    Robert Kosinski


    November 6th, 2000   9:55 PM

    I was waiting patiently for netscape 6 to come out because, as a web-app developer, I'm tired of having write code that will work correctly on IE and Communicator. But now I think that I must think about that again. Maybe IE6 will be a better choice.

    Vikash Madhow


    November 6th, 2000   9:52 PM

    Once again Microsoft prevails, and not because they did anything particularly well, but because their competitors have bungled worse than they have. Internet Explorer is simply the best broweser out there, and that, in my opinion, is a sad state of affairs. Netscape should, at the very least, make sure it complies with standards better than Microsoft does. If both of them ignore it, the standards might as well not exist.

    Matthew Burns


    November 6th, 2000   9:51 PM

    I (and the web development team who work with me) are sick to death of the quirks in Netscape. We had hoped that the (long!) awaited 6.0 release would change all that - and now it seems we are bound for disappointment once again. I have to say, the name of Netscape is mud amongst web designers and developers these days, and unless they pull their act together very fast, that isn't going to change any time soon.



    I'm anything but a fan of Microsoft - but IE (especially on the Mac) is one of the few things they've ever got really right. So at the same time I recommend to my clients (beg might be a better word) that they host their sites on UNIX rather than Windows NT/2000, I'm suggesting they use IE as their browser of choice.



    Pull your finger out, Netscape.

    Caspar Fairhall


    November 6th, 2000   9:51 PM

    What is the good of standards if their not implemented correctly or at all. Please pretty please fix the bugs and make NetScape a standard compliance browser. Thank you!

    Carlos Benevides


    November 6th, 2000   9:50 PM

    AOL is a far more evil empire than M$.

    Ric Faris


    November 6th, 2000   9:46 PM

    for the sake of the open standards, implement them correctly, plaese. don't give microsoft the chance to kick you out of the market, write a better browser!

    christoph hebeisen


    November 6th, 2000   9:44 PM

    I agree. Mozilla rules --- Netscape sucks. Netscape, release a quality product ... you're capable of it, because Mozilla's capable of it.

    Brad Fitzpatrick


    November 6th, 2000   9:43 PM

    Ever Since Netscape was bought by AOL, the browser is now the shitties I have ever seen. It is Bloated, full of Bugs, and has become less compliant to HTML Standards than Microsoft's IE. In my humble opinion, I say that everyone switch to IE since it IS the browser of Choice today. Atleast MS listens to the people of what they need and add new features, fix most bugs and offer marketing free browsers (not like Netscape's affiliation with the Net marketing company which I forgot the name... but can be found on slashdot, where they gather private information about clients).

    Netscape users... I strongly suggest you to give Internet Explorer another shot... You will not be disapointed.. as for the *Nixes, I hope Microsoft will release IE for *nixes (other than Solaris) so that then we can finally have a unified browser environment.

    X Of UT


    November 6th, 2000   9:42 PM

    Timely product release is nice but in the end it's only a convenience, especially when compared to the inconvenience of a browser that only manages partial compliance with published and accepted standards. Given the choice, I'd take getting it right over getting it on time.

    Mishka Gorodnitzky


    November 6th, 2000   9:42 PM


    The only reason I'm still using Nav4.08 is to avoid all the silly shit that IE has introduced and all the jobs for bad html designers they have created. If there is one thing I hate its going to a page that has "script error" and then asks me if I'd like to debug it... I think that some body elses job. So if Netscape falls into this group I'll start using opera.

    Russ


    November 6th, 2000   9:42 PM

    *Looks @ clock waiting for open source opera ported to Linux*

    gunkaaa (AKA Guy Lowe)


    November 6th, 2000   9:42 PM

    If Netscape won't be compliant then I guess everyone will have to use IE. Netscape has no one to blame but themselves for this. They should fix the issues that keep developers from caring about Netscape.

    Jason Jordan


    November 6th, 2000   9:39 PM

    Sold your souls to AOL ?
    27 millions browsers is not enough to reverse the trend against M$.

    Save the browser as a developpement platform. Comply.

    eric desplanches


    November 6th, 2000   9:39 PM

    This is ill advised. Be late and create a solid product. We can wait a little longer for something good.

    Gene Johannsen


    November 6th, 2000   9:38 PM

    I couldn't have said it better than David.

    The Mozilla project represents more than the development of a new generation of browser. It represents in many minds what is both right and wrong with the Open Source development model.

    The release team should consider the impacts both on adoption and on the perceived viability of their development model before any release. I, as well as many on the Mozilla team no doubt, would like to see this effort as a substantial achievement (as it already has been in many ways) for the development team and the ideals behind Open Source development.

    And I doubt anyone in or out of the Open Source loop would like to start paying for their browsers, as I'm sure would eventually happen were Micro$oft to monopolize the browser market.

    Collin Starkweather


    November 6th, 2000   9:38 PM

    As a web developer who's been downloading the nightly builds of Mozilla once every few weeks, I can say it's been getting much, much better... It's noticeably faster on my Celeron 500 on Win32, and they fixed the transparency support a few days ago! =)


    However, I'm sure that everyone else is just as sick as I am of designing around little quirks in how the '2 major browsers' deal with things. With Netscape's market share as low as it is right now, they can't afford not to make everything compliant. I fear that way too many people are just going to spit out bad code with Frontpage or something similiar designed for IE only, and Netscape just plain isn't going to work. It might not be all Netscape's fault, but the consumers won't know the difference.


    Netscape is going to look very bad if NS6 is shipped with known bugs that have had patches submitted. How can they explain not fixing bugs in the JavaScript support? Did these guys forget they created JavaScript? Remember the good ol' days when IE3 couldn't do image rollovers because they didn't implement the JavaScript IMAGE object properly? Netscape's 'PDT' is about to put them in the same boat... Don't follow Microsoft's business model... Make it work before you ship it.

    Nick Stenz


    November 6th, 2000   9:37 PM

    Aaaaa Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!

    Bill Gates


    November 6th, 2000   9:34 PM

    In the name of all things scriptable, I implore you, Netscape, DON'T DO THIS!!!! Things are a mess as it is! So help me God, if you do this, I WILL CODE ONLY IN VBSCRIPT AND WRITE JAVASCRIPT NO MORE, FOREVER!

    Peter


    November 6th, 2000   9:33 PM

    Netscape Sucks.

    _rant_


    November 6th, 2000   9:32 PM

    I think a standards-compliant Netscape 6 is crucial for an at least more or less usable web. Do not let it get even worse than it already is !!

    Andreas Mohr


    November 6th, 2000   9:32 PM

    I am anxious to see a new browser released but only because I am tired of being held back by the flaws of current browsers. Pushing out this corporate product does not solve any problems. Sure it is late, but the time it takes to fix these bugs will be well deserved.

    As a programmer myself, several of these bugs seem to be trivial. The ones which are not trivial are still critical.

    Brennan Stehling


    November 6th, 2000   9:32 PM

    Netscape,

    How the fuck do you expect us to drive your e-car to the e-store when we can't even see past the e-windshield?

    Get a clue:

    Before you try to get people to shop online you need to render the webpage before the 'buy' button.

    For fuck's sake give the IE team some work to do. All they do now is stick their thumb up their ass, enable print preview (IE v5.5), and after that, all thats left is to make their browser more HTML & CSS compliant (IE 5.5 SP1 anyone?)

    IE3 was the underdog compared to NS3 at the time. You've done it before.

    Fuck the store buttons and shitty default bookmarks -- Worry about more important things like standing up for the competition instead of letting them effortlessly wipe their ass on you.

    -j

    Jeremiah Sypult


    November 6th, 2000   9:31 PM

    As someone who has had to deal with browser incompatibilities for far too long, I hope that Netscape will reconsider and do the right thing. The last thing I need is to work around bugs in another browser.

    Ian Ragsdale


    November 6th, 2000   9:31 PM

    Netscape, please hold back on this release. This is a very important release to Netscape and to the open-souce community. Netscape has been talked of badly due to the latest of the releast. Show the world the delay was worth it as you were able to produce a quality product. If you ignore these key standards compatibility issues, you're going to get more bad press. Think of this: "Netscape developes first completely standard compatible browser." It could happen, so make it so and delay the release to implement these important fixes.

    Steve Wardell


    November 6th, 2000   9:29 PM

    While Netscape 6 needs to be released eventually, basic bugs with standards-compliance which already have patches should be applied before a release.

    Justin Bradford


    November 6th, 2000   9:29 PM

    let's face the facts. everyone knows that netscape is going down. even netscape supporters know that it's a tough battle with ie being flogged by microsoft.

    so why are we here? because a release with integrity will rise above the browser wars. we're all just spectators, waiting to see if netscape will really do it.

    i don't like ie but i can get used to it. at least if we all have to use the same browser, we wont have to worry about standards compliance anymore. even if the standards have been dictated by microsoft.

    david


    November 6th, 2000   9:28 PM

    Almost laughable, but instead very depressing. I *used* to be a Netscape user, back when they still had a chance against Microsoft's Internet Explorer. It became obvious then, and is even more obvious now, that my choice to finally move to IE was the right one. I just hope the uninstall for this new 6.0 incarnation works correctly, since there'll be one hell of a lot of people wanting to dump this turkey if they don't fix these problems before release!

    Tim Gary


    November 6th, 2000   9:26 PM

    If Netscape wants to compete with IE, it will need to fix all these errors (and more). If not, it simply can't and won't compete with IE. Either way I don't care, but it seems to me that your business model relies on someone using your product, doesn't it?

    Jason


    November 6th, 2000   9:26 PM

    Either pass the standards, or release it as *beta* software.

    Dave Lugo


    November 6th, 2000   9:23 PM

    As a long-term Mozilla user (I've been tracking the nightly builds on and off since about M11), I have to say that the one and only thing Netscape 6 has going for it on the Windows platform is its standards-compliance. Release a NS6 which isn't standards compliant, and you're going to make a smaller dent in the browser war than Opera.

    Please, Netscape, don't shoot yourself in the foot again

    Charles Miller

    Charles Miller


    November 6th, 2000   9:23 PM

    As a long-term Mozilla user (I've been tracking the nightly builds on and off since about M11), I have to say that the one and only thing Netscape 6 has going for it on the Windows platform is its standards-compliance. Release a NS6 which isn't standards compliant, and you're going to make a smaller dent in the browser war than Opera.

    Please, Netscape, don't shoot yourself in the foot again

    Charles Miller

    Charles Miller


    November 6th, 2000   9:23 PM

    If its not standards compliant, then what basis do developers have to build on? Hunh Netscape?

    Graham TerMarsch


    November 6th, 2000   9:23 PM


    Well I felt a little uncomfortable wading through all the PR hype about standards compliance (i.e. "NN6 is, IE5 is not"), but, I thought the wait would be worth it. However it appears that the hardwork of the developers will be lost.
    Having gone through rushed releases and seen the anger on one's customers' faces when things don't work, I know from personal experience that rushing a product which is not ready is not worth one's trouble. It takes 10 successes to wipe out the memory of just one failure. Netscape is not even halfway to that success rate from the last failures. Is it willing to bear the cost of failure again? Can it survive?

    Netscape has already lost the mindshare of most. Failure to do "Netscape 6" right the first time will sentence it to oblivion.

    <p lang="ja"> <= test your browser :-)
    仕方ăŚăŞă„ă­ă€‚問題ă‚ă‚‹ă‘ă©ă€IE5を使ăŠă†

    Murray G


    November 6th, 2000   9:18 PM

    My company depends on the browser as a application environment. A buggy/nonstandard browser at this point is useless to us and to our customers. Our customers cannot use Netscape 6, nor will they at this point.

    sean levin


    November 6th, 2000   9:17 PM

    What is the point of rushing out NS 6.0 just to get it out?? You're shooting yourselves in the foot. Mozilla is *almost* excellent. If you're only *almost* there, why not wait until you *are* there! An excellent product will sell itself.

    Will Dormann


    November 6th, 2000   9:17 PM

    Amen.

    Travis Whitton


    November 6th, 2000   9:16 PM

    Please do the right thing Netscape. We can wait a little longer.

    Jack Daniels


    November 6th, 2000   9:16 PM

    Hello,

    Netscape has been a hoax for several years. If you are really concerned, take the tree (it is GPL) and fix it. Release it. Heck you could even release it before Netscape and show them up.

    Joshua Drake
    Linux Documentation Project
    WebMaster

    Joshua Drake


    November 6th, 2000   9:16 PM

    make the right decisions for the right reasons. give the marketing department the backseat while the development team drives it to the highway.

    michael


    November 6th, 2000   9:13 PM

    Netscape, you have been developing 6.0 for a couple years now, don't push a buggy browser, get rid of ALL of the bugs, then release 6.0 Final. Is another month going to kill you? PLEASE, Netscape, this is your last chance, do it right.

    Dan Yeaw


    November 6th, 2000   9:13 PM

    Um, err.. can you guys get a clue?


    make sure netscape works properly before you release it, make sure it conforms to standards..


    Also, can you get rid of those stupid "shopping" etc tabs, or atleast make them optoinal!!


    David

    David Hammerton


    November 6th, 2000   9:12 PM

    When you're this far behind on the release date is another month really going to kill you? It seems like most people would prefer waiting another preview cycle to recieve something solid, stable, and STANDARD.
    The world will be watching closly at this 6.0 release. Its success or failure could impact much more than Netscape perhaps even including the general acceptance of the open source movement.
    IMHO, in the last year open source fanatics do not seem as excited about linking Netscape 6.0 with its ideas. It seems that this is partly due to bad judgement calls like this one.
    Do us all a favor and wait until the browser is more than half baked.

    Eric Hackathorn


    November 6th, 2000   9:11 PM

    All these years and you're still not going to get it right? What's the point?

    Matthew Beauregard


    November 6th, 2000   9:10 PM

    I completely agree with David's point of view. I've been looking at the latest Netscape 6 PR3 release and wondering when is this going to look closer to a release product - it still appears very much in the early stages of a beta. It is becoming painfully apparent that this browser is being rushed out the door, and possibly why Netscape browsers have been buggy in the past.


    Software engineering principles are important, but not taken to the extreme of refusing critical fixes. If it is too late to accept more RTM bugs in this phase, then it only makes sense to rename this phase and open the tree to more bug fixes and get it right.


    Please Netscape, don't undercut the advantages of going open-source by turning a blind-eye to quality. If you do, you'll have sacrificed many of the advantages that open-source gave you in the first place. I think most people would gladly wait another 3 months to get the highest quality browser. The mozilla releases have stuck fairly close to their timeline IMO. At this point, the browser is so close to fulfilling it's promise, another few months focused on quality and speed would make the difference.

    Jamie ffolliott


    November 6th, 2000   9:10 PM

    Netscape has been my prefreed browser for a while now.. even though it has a nasty habit of locking my computer when the e-mail server goes down..

    Netscape used to be the better of the two big browsers, and I was hopeing it would be again with netscape 6, but if you not even supporting the current web standerts with your netscape 6 why bother..

    why is it when ever big corperation get involved quality seems to take a nose dive?

    Do it Right or don't do it at all!

    Tannah


    November 6th, 2000   9:10 PM

    When you're this far behind on the release date is another month really going to kill you? It seems like most people would prefer waiting another preview cycle to recieve something solid, stable, and STANDARD.
    The world will be watching closly at this 6.0 release. Its success or failure could impact much more than Netscape perhaps even including the general acceptance of the open source movement.
    IMHO, in the last year open source fanatics do not seem as excited about linking Netscape 6.0 with its ideas. It seems that this is partly due to bad judgement calls like this one.
    Do us all a favor and wait until the browser is more than half baked.

    Eric Hackathorn


    November 6th, 2000   9:07 PM

    One of the great promises of Netscape 6 has always been its conformance to standards. This should NOT be lost.

    Keep it in Beta

    Robert Dawson


    November 6th, 2000   9:05 PM

    Do it right, do it quick, known bugs are unacceptable, no standards compliant are prohibited. These are the rules for a successfull web browser.

    Jorge Vieyra


    November 6th, 2000   9:04 PM

    Agreed there has been a considerable delay in the release of Netscape 6. But we view this relase as a landmark..the browser that would humble IE's dominanace. The Netscape release 6.0 is very important not 6.1 or 6.2 . The dot 'oh' version should not be dissapointing in terms of standards compliance because this is the version that has a lot of eyes fixed on it, benchmarks will be done with respect to this release and compliance tests will be carried based on this release. We would love to have a stable and standards compliant 6.0 browser rather than a faster one. Linus has not pushed his 2.4 kernel earlier as he does not want to compromise stability and all the others have supported him. So do we for your case. We want a superior Netscape out there and there should be no compromise

    Aravind Sadagopan


    November 6th, 2000   9:04 PM

    We will gain nothing in the quest for strong standards if such a important project can flaunt those standards.

    David S. L. Robinson


    November 6th, 2000   9:04 PM

    One of the great promises of Netscape 6 was its conformance to standards. This should NOT be lost.


    Keep it in Beta

    Robert Dawson


    November 6th, 2000   9:03 PM

    One of the great promises of Netscape 6 was its conformance to standards. This should NOT be lost.


    Keep it in Beta

    Robert Dawson


    November 6th, 2000   9:03 PM

    I simply can't understand why Netscape engineers are willing to release a product with known, fixable bugs. I can understand a feature freeze, but bug fixes are still necessary to ensure Netscape 6 isn't panned as bugware by everyone and their mother. I don't know if it's arrogance, or just pressure from an impending release date, but if an important fix requires the release to be pushed back a week, push back the release date. End the cycle of companies releasing buggy products to be patched later just because it's possible. Set a standard for quality releases. Bugs will still exist, for sure, but if working fixes exist, it's nothing less than a slap to the face of the current and future users for these fixes to not be included because some "release date" had to be met.

    It's been 2.5 years. We can wait a couple weeks, or even a couple months, longer for a working, standards-compliant, feature-filled browser.

    Mark Bialkowski


    November 6th, 2000   8:59 PM

    The primary issue here is browser bugs, not a lack of support for standards... Mozilla is far more compliant with standards than IE.

    Dylan Schiemann


    November 6th, 2000   8:57 PM

    Do it properly - or don't do it at all

    Brian Grinter


    November 6th, 2000   8:57 PM

    I agree. Compliance is the thing I most look forward to in the project.

    Mark Fellows


    November 6th, 2000   8:57 PM

    Standards over marketing. If Netscape puts out a non standard browser of which they already have patches to fix then they will kill their userbase. Netscape has taken so long to complete their next gen browser that they need something big to trump IE. Without standards they kill any reason for people to switch.

    -Quinticent

    Quinticent


    November 6th, 2000   8:55 PM

    Netscape: For the love of God, please comply to standards so that you won't loose more market share! Isn't an 80% market share loss enough already?

    Cosmin


    November 6th, 2000   8:53 PM

    As much as I would like to be able to use Netscape 6.0 soon, one of my biggest reasons to switch is the compliance issue. If I wanted a non-compliant browser, I could get one now from Microsoft. Please don't disappoint your users now that you are so close to having a premium quality browser.

    Nate Diller


    November 6th, 2000   8:52 PM

    Jason and zeldman,

    My earlier comments were mostly directed to those who read this article and posted their frustrations here, but have not contributed to the project. A large number of the comments here fail to understand what level of support is in the current builds and what the situation is... they are reading that Mozilla isn't 100% compliant and screaming, without realizing that Mozilla is closer to compliance than any browser on the market.

    I agree, PDT is pretty screwed up... someone has to be the bad guy and draw the line, and it certainly seems that the line was drawn in the unreasonable range. This doesn't change my belief that Netscape 6 is far superior to Netscape 4.x and should be released now as a replacement. If it isn't released very, very soon, sites are no longer going to be built for anything but IE, and won't even work in a fully compliant browser.

    A month ago I started using Mozilla exclusively to see if it was up to snuff... it is not as stable as 5.5, but it is better than 4.x, which is why I feel they need to put 4.x out of its misery and replace it with 6.0...if they want to call it beta or trial or strongly note that people should upgrade next month or to turn on smartupdate or whatever, fine... but it needs to replace 4.x as the default download on their site.

    They are ready to launch it at Comdex... I predicted this when they release pr1 at Internet World in May... their marketing is very obvious.

    Dylan Schiemann


    November 6th, 2000   8:50 PM

    For too long, Netscape has failed to comply with the basic HTML and JavaScript standards. That is why Web developers are increasingly writing exclusively for IE. You will do yourselves a disservice if you rush another nonstandard release. Please reconsider. All things being equal, I would rather run and write for Netscape, but as it is, things are not equal. A premature release of Navigator 6.0 won't improve the situation.

    David M. Anderson


    November 6th, 2000   8:50 PM

    As a web application developer, my ability to do my job depends upon the integrity and reliability of standards like DHTML, JavaScript, and DOM. When browsers don't comply with the standards, ASPs and web developers are forced to choose ONE browser to support for the sake of time and money. Microsoft wins. Everybody else loses.


    Netscape, please stop the balkanization of the web!!! You're killing your most loyal supporters! Since the product is already very late to market, PLEASE for the love of God, do it RIGHT! You want to make a browser that is late AND broken?!?!?


    Compliance with web standards has always been Mozilla's #1 selling point. Now you are going to flub it? It must be done right the first time.


    Few people are giving Netscape a second chance. Nobody will give it a third.

    Daniel Lagrange


    November 6th, 2000   8:47 PM

    If Netscape 6 isn't compliant, I'll be using the Mozilla version.

    Brendan Dowling


    November 6th, 2000   8:47 PM

    I hate developing for netscape, and I hope they dont' comply so more people will move toward IE....

    nicholas amaral


    November 6th, 2000   8:47 PM

    This is rather amusing now:
    http://home.netscape.com/browsers/future/standards.html

    Andrew


    November 6th, 2000   8:46 PM

    I was delighted when I first heard of the open-sourcing of the mozilla codebase, and overcome with respect and appreciation for the foresight of your company.
    But to do this, and then reject the hard work of toiling developers, who are working at no cost to you, stands to not only alienate your developer base, but to damage your reputation in the marketplace; shipping an inferior product with known errors that could readily be fixed makes no sense. It confounds me.
    I strongly agree with the notion that, if you are to release 6, release it as a beta, and immediately begin to roll in the fixes from the main mozilla tree.

    David Brooks


    November 6th, 2000   8:46 PM

    You've delayed the release of Netscape 6.0 for so long that another few months won't matter at all. You've also delayed the release for so long that it better be perfect when it does come out. Spend the extra time to make it perfect.

    Brad Behm


    November 6th, 2000   8:46 PM

    I feel so let down. All my development is released after being tested under Netscape. It was the only thing that held to the standards. So long as it worked there it would work everywhere. Now I am dreading what future developing will be like.
    -Mr.Dildonics

    mrdildonics


    November 6th, 2000   8:45 PM

    I agree wholeheartedly with your petition! Netscape needs to focus on the things that matter or it will just be a toy!
    Bill Baker

    Bill Baker


    November 6th, 2000   8:43 PM

    I'm pretty much a diehard at avoiding Microsoft products, which explains why I'm typing this on Netscape 4.72 on the Mac. But if you're going to release a buggy, non-compliant browser just to meet an arbitrary ship date, why should I continue holding against to the Internet Explorer flood? This is your last chance to get it right. Release a great, stable, competative browser and you're back in the game. On the other hand, if you screw this one up, the browser wars are officially over.

    Lawrence Person


    November 6th, 2000   8:43 PM

    I have been doing web development almost since it all started -- my first browser was Netscape 2.0.

    Over the years, I have become less and less a fan of Microsoft, but it's certainly not because Netscape had a better browser. I have (and continue to have) incredibly frustrating standard-compliance problems with Netscape's browsers.

    Please, for once, do the right thing! By waiting and releasing a stable, standards-compliant browser, Netscape can:


    For the good of the web, but more importantly to save your own hides, please heed Mr. Flanagan's advice!

    Jonathan Cobb


    November 6th, 2000   8:42 PM

    Perhaps the lesson to be learned from the browser war with Microsoft would be the enemy's policy of "embrace and extend;" I see you're devoting a great deal of effort to the "extend" portion of the tactic (marketroid rubbish), but it is apparent that more attention needs to be paid the "embrace" constituent (implementing more of the fixes from the Mozilla team) before continuing.

    In case there is any confusion as to the order: *embrace* now, *extend* later.

    Aaron Benoy


    November 6th, 2000   8:38 PM

    I have spent a large amount of time over the course of the last year actively debugging the mozilla browser. I love the fact that we will soon have a next generation browser on Linux. However, having worked in Web Development I am already aware that Developer Sentiment is currently in many ways against Netscape for failing to comply with standards and causing support headaches. Please fix the problems, and don't make developers further hate Netscape for creating another special set of conditions that must be handled for Netscape 6.0. I realize that release cannot be interminably delayed but at least make it the standards compliant browser that developers have been holding their breath for. The result will be that many will ultimately thank Netscape rather than curse it.

    We've waited this long, another month will hardly be noticed. Failure to meet the promised goals definately will be.

    Igor Shaterin

    Igor Shaterin


    November 6th, 2000   8:36 PM

    Senior Designer and 6-year web developer. Please don't continue to hobble the progress of the web for short-sighted, short-term marketing goals. Standards, please, standards!

    Gavin Kistner


    November 6th, 2000   8:36 PM

    and I thought that netscape might be the saving grace of the browser wars. A major commercial product that everyone could use that would adhere to standards. Ahh well, I guess that I am going to stay with mozilla.

    Chris Heady


    November 6th, 2000   8:35 PM


    C'mon guys! _Please_ don't suck. You know what - never mind.
    Keep on being lame, and we'll find an alternative. Sound like
    a good business model to you? Sounds good to me. The Internet
    also interprets bullshit as damage, and routes around that,
    too.

    Martin Loeffler


    November 6th, 2000   8:35 PM

    All I want is a solid, open source, standards compatible browser. Right now, much as I love to hate microsoft, netscape blows chunks, and I would rather use IE if it was available for linux. DIRFT = Do It Right First Time. And BTW, give users an easy way to take that stupid shop button off the menu bar, like you can with IE.

    Gary C


    November 6th, 2000   8:35 PM

    It's a shame that web development continues to be handicapped with standards issues such as these. These problems unnecessarily drive the cost of web content through the roof. It's bad enough that we have to develop multiple versions of sites to comfortably support WAP/WML, WebTv, AOL and etc. While some latitude can be allowed since these formats are heavily dependant (sans AOL) on the hardware platform and specifics, why are we still burdened with dealing with Netscape vs. IE HTML issues? I'm not a 100% Microsoft fan but at least the browser performs consistantly without continually crashing and other misc. issues. As both a web and application developer I certainly appreciate the ability to use the IE core inside of traditional apps and knowing how it will interpret HTML code with no surprises. Everyone preaches that Netscape is good to have around to keep progress moving forward in IE. So what? How much more progress do we actually need in a web browser? I for one would gladly give up fluffy new features in exchange for some standards that would allow a single version of a site to look, perform and function the same way on both Netscape and IE. IE may be far from perfect but at least it looks the same on a PC, Mac, PocketPC and soon Linux. That covers over 90% of the main stream market with consistant browser results. The death of the Netscape browser would be far less painful if all web developers were not unwillingly made to suffer through each final gasp for air. Let it die already.

    Todd Mathews


    November 6th, 2000   8:35 PM

    Personally I'm getting tired of Netscape. I was true blue netscape, never even thought of using IE. But after time and time of crashing and incompatabilities ive slowly moved over to IE. I long for the days when Netscape was the premier browser, but the way things are going I just don't see it happening.

    Come on, buck up, put out a quality product, take my loyalities back from IE.

    ps. Meantime, sure would be nice if there was an IE for linux. <--- can't belive i just said that, but hey......

    Steven Taylor


    November 6th, 2000   8:35 PM

    Now Netscape will truley be dead. I can't believe how brain dead and short sighted the Netscape team must be. What motivation will a user have to use Netscape 6? What motivation will designers have to target or even allow for Netscape 6?

    How very very sad..... No really! It's depressing! I used to be a Netscape believer until I couldn't stand the crashes and lack of standards support any longer and switched to IE 5 for better or worse. At least the damn thing worked.

    I guess the brain dead way Netscape incorporated AIM into their installer should have alerted me to their way of thinking.

    Andrew


    November 6th, 2000   8:33 PM

    I, as well as much of the web development community, have waited for the new day to finally dawn, a day of a strong competitor to Microsoft, a day when users across the globe could see our content as intended, regardless of platform, and finally a day when the open standards were embraced. AOL/Time-Warner/Sun/Netscape, those of us who have developed for the last three years have seen an odd era, a lone browser, from a company many of us do not like, was the target environment for our content. Even though it played fast and loose with the standards, we still supported it because of its prevalance and its closer compliance with the standards. Do not pass up this opourtunity to release a better suite of internet tools, we have been patient for nearly three years, and can wait a little longer if you are giving the community what was promised when the source was released, the best browser ever.

    John Darin Holloway


    November 6th, 2000   8:26 PM

    I cannot accept a browser that doesn't even support the baseline. I have waited four years for a real revision of Netscape, and I can wait longer. Give me a browser that is fully standards compliant and quit cutting corners - you will not win the game that way. I'm tired of IE being superior, but I want to code my sites to something that reaches the vast majority of my audience...give me a bone. If 6.0 is released without full standards compliance, I will shake my head and forget about Netscape forever...I don't want to do that.

    Jason Carpenter


    November 6th, 2000   8:26 PM

    I've been an avid Netscape supporter for almost ten years, since a
    time when Netscape Navigator was little more then a Mosaic hack and
    Netscape the company was so high and mighty that they never would
    have dreamed of embracing Linux or Open Source or many other of the
    things they did while in their death bed. I've stood by them and
    supported them and pretty much looked the other way through
    countless screwups -- over engineering, under engineering, SSL
    exploits, browser crashes, browser lockups, machine lockups, etc.
    And you know, maybe its time to just give in and admit that this
    dog ain't gonna hunt ever again and embrace IE. Mozilla the
    software was supposed to be three things 1) small 2) fast and 3)
    the most standard browser ever conceived -- and end the end it is
    none of those things. Netscape, Mozilla, or whoever you are these
    days, if you rush Navigator 6 to market then know that it will
    probably be the last thing you do that anyone takes notice of.

    Arnold


    November 6th, 2000   8:25 PM

    Netscape, via the Mozilla project, has made it very clear that it is capable of producing a high-quality, community developed web browsing platform. For Netscape to take this excellent codebase and then diminish its worth is a waste of the company's time. Not to say users won't get their hands on something better - be it Mozilla or Internet Explorer or Opera or NetPositive - but Netscape will quickly see a drop in market share, and those less savvy, especially on alternative platforms, will be stuck with a shoddy web client.

    Benjamin Stiglitz


    November 6th, 2000   8:25 PM

    I've been trying to get Netscape (and other browsers) to comply
    with the HTML 4 standard of content-type-controlled file upload
    for almost four years now (bug 46135.)

    I've even offered $1000 bribes to Netscape engineers to work on
    the project on their own time. No luck yet, but I guess all of us
    who care should keep trying. Thanks, David!

    Cheers,
    James

    James Salsman


    November 6th, 2000   8:23 PM

    We've waited this long for a 6.0 release from Netscape...whats a little more time if the end product is better? The respect that Netscape once had is slowling slipping down the drain as bad choice after bad choice is made. The Mozilla organization has worked too hard on this project for their name to be tarnished by a worthless release from Netscape. Too bad Mozilla wasn't given full control of the release.

    Derick Phillips


    November 6th, 2000   8:21 PM

    I very much admire the work the Mozilla/Netscape team has done to make this Open Source platform a reality. It has been remarkable effort.

    Since April, I've been working with the sources every day on another Open Source Mozilla-based application that uses everything from XPCOM to JavaScript to XBL and CSS2. It *is* cool stuff.

    The source tree is tightening up. One by one, bugs are getting eliminated. Netscape could be a great browser and a nice platform.

    However, I must say I am really worried about this RTM plan. The browser is just becoming stable. Crashes are still common on Windows and especially on Unix. What's so frustrating is this is a solid body of code which just has some loose ends that need attention.

    Standards compliance is one important facet of the overall maturity of Netscape 6. It's definitely getting there, but I believe it is damaging to release the work in its current form. Please [AOL] give it a couple more months to snap the last few things into place. Just not quite there...

    Marcus Daniels


    November 6th, 2000   8:20 PM

    Simply stated if Netscape does not resolve the issue. I think it would be best to boycott the "Commercial" release and use mozilla. Its nice to see that at Netscape/AOL/Timewarner Marketing is making the developer decisions.

    Eric Molitor


    November 6th, 2000   8:20 PM

    what strikes me as odd, is there are apperant fixes which netscape refuses to incorporate into the official release, before the branch is set to split. Does netscape have a splintering stratedgy?


    while i'm certain netscape has every intention on fixing these bugs which make their browser non-standards compliant, i do question why they are going to do this after the branch has already split, do they not want mozilla and netscape to be compatible?


    I for one would like to see netscape allow these fixes to be applied, as to not give open source a bad name, by releasing wine before it's time.

    robert


    November 6th, 2000   8:19 PM

    Support the standards! Have a little foresight beyond the next financial quarter! DO THE RIGHT THING!

    Scott Rainaldo


    November 6th, 2000   8:18 PM

    The need for a fully standards compliant browser is essential to the health of the internet in the next few years. Microsoft has shown with IE5 Mac that it is a feasible goal and that, when done properly, users and developers are both happy. What Microsoft has also shown, though, is that they are willing to abandon standards, as with IE5.5 Win. The rest of the industry will not be forgiving towards a buggy product that has been in developement for years when there is an alternative which works now, albeit for a limited target audience. I use Linux and thus have no way of using IE. I need Netscape 6 for myself. I develope web sites. Thus, I need Netscape 6 for my users. Please do the right thing. You are headed in the right direction supporting Mozilla. Don't stumble now.

    Joshua Pearson


    November 6th, 2000   8:17 PM

    I have been developing websites in DHtml and Javascript for a while now. I didn't realize now non-standard complaint Netscape 6.0 and for that fact previous versions of Netscape 4.x were. With as little respect that I have for microsoft(c) and my love for open source projects I still make the decision to go with a program that more closely conforms to industry standards.
    If Netscape continues to have a lack of support for DHtml and CSS standards people will stop using it and its market share will slip further to IE.

    Timothy Powers


    November 6th, 2000   8:16 PM

    I have been developing websites in DHtml and Javascript for a while now. I didn't realize now non-standard complaint netscape 6.0 and for that fact previous versions of netscape 4.x were. With as little respect that I have for microsoft(c) and my love for open source projects I still make the decision to go with a program that more closely conforms to industry standards. If netscape continues to have a lack of support for DHtml and CSS standards people will stop using it and its market share will slip further to IE.

    Timothy Powers


    November 6th, 2000   8:15 PM

    I think you should ask yourself an important question: What is more important to you? A browser that is full of marketing and features with a speedy release, or a browser that people will actually use and develop web pages for. You are falling behind IE and you must prove that you are still in the game.

    Vince Smith


    November 6th, 2000   8:14 PM

    Isn't this ironic: I just came home from my favorite computer store, tonight, after buying a copy of David's excellent book on JavaScript.

    Then I surfed over to Slashdot and found out that the language I'm trying to learn won't really work on the next version of Netscape, and I'll have to switch to Internet Exploiter.

    I agree with what EVERYONE else has said: this is the end of Netscape's credibility.

    Tim Fairbank


    November 6th, 2000   8:14 PM

    I would just like to say two things:

    1. I agree that Netscape 6 should not be released until all of these standards are met, and met well with stability.

    2. To the posts of 'Why does anyone use Netscape 4.x anyway, IE is much better?' Am I missing something? It is the ONLY real browser for Unix. Sure IE 4.0 was released for a few flavors, but it wasn't much good. I depend on Netscape and I would hope to see improvements in version 6. Although if it proves rushed, I can just use the mozilla releases; unfortunatly many home users won't have the option (or the time to kill downloading).

    Nick Webb


    November 6th, 2000   8:13 PM

    As a web developer, Netscape 4 has long annoyed me with it's failure to comply with basic standards, so I'm certainly not going to go out of my way to support something even *worse*.

    I've already switched to IE on Windows. I just wish it was available on Linux so I don't have to deal with the crashes and incompatibilities of NS4.

    Andrew


    November 6th, 2000   8:13 PM

    As a web developer, Netscape 4 has long annoyed me with it's failure to comply with basic standards, so I'm certainly not going to go out of my way to support something even *worse*.

    I've already switched to IE on Windows. I just wish it was available on Linux so I don't have to deal with the crashes and incompatibilities of NS4.

    Andrew


    November 6th, 2000   8:12 PM

    Netscape is going to lose one of the greatest benefits of an open-source development model -- that of speedy bug fixes if they don't redefine their priorities in terms of accepting 3rd party patches.

    Alex Gottschalk


    November 6th, 2000   8:11 PM

    Browser users and developers of Web content aren't looking for a browser with some whiz-bang cutesy interface; they're looking for a stable, robust tool that adheres to today's WWW standards.

    We do need a new Netscape; please consider rescheduling the release and taking another look at your product to make certain it's the right Netscape to release.

    Joel Sona


    November 6th, 2000   8:10 PM

    Please support web compliance.
    What may be the worst part of this whole deal is the bad reputation that Mozilla may get from Netscape rushing the release. Where Mozilla is becoming more compliant every day, Netscape 6 is slipping behind. Forget Netscape. Support Mozilla!

    Jarrod Gray


    November 6th, 2000   8:10 PM

    Of the approximately 150,000 unique users my sites serve every month only approximately 8% are on Netscape browsers anymore.

    I have continued to maintain hope that Netscape might see that percentage grow after a standards compliant browser is finally released.

    I no longer spend much time concerning myself with the niceties of maintaining equivalencies between MSIE and NS. As it is, I now shunt pre 4.0 browsers into a very simple manilla version of my sites. If NS is unable to live up to their promises and they are unable to grow that 8% then in the future all NS browsers will be shunted into the pre 4.0 pages and I will spend even less time concerning myself with the NS browser.


    christopher l. filkins


    November 6th, 2000   8:10 PM

    For Mozilla/Navigator to work as a free software project, Netscape's marketers and release engineers must put more faith in the judgement of the developers, both inside and outside Netscape. If developers feel they aren't trusted to help decide what makes the release, they will not contribute.

    As Jamie Zawinski said before leaving Mozilla, open development helps you make better decisions. Listen to the community: standards compliance is the right decision.

    Andrew Pimlott


    November 6th, 2000   8:09 PM

    The only real thing going for Netscape is standards-compliance. Without that, it has nothing. Galeon and Konqueror might see much greater adoption on Linux if Netscape drops the ball, and non-free (neither speech nor beer!) opera might even be the choice for most standards-compliant windows browser! Supposedly, Opera might emerge as a standards-compliant browser for embedded systems. I'm sure many (not the least of whom would be AOL) would rather see an open-source browser/rendering engine fill this role.

    It seems that mastering CD-ROMS in this day and age is almost ridiculous anyways, no reason to rush to do so!

    -Dan

    Daniel Freedman


    November 6th, 2000   8:08 PM

    With all that heart-felt anguish; with much of which I whole-heartedly agree, I can't help but wonder if it is time for a fork? Anybody able to provide the infrastructure?

    Christopher


    November 6th, 2000   8:08 PM

    I am extremely disappoint by the short-sightedness of AOL. To push for standard compliance for so long only to turn its head away from it because of trying to make some kind of an artificial deadline. I will only use Mozilla and IE6 thank you.

    We all know that the value of the netscape portal is evoporating by the day, as will Netscape 6 if it is not standard compliant

    Ming-Lun Tung


    November 6th, 2000   8:08 PM

    Releasing beta quality code to make dates is what gives software companies of today such a bad name for bugs and patches. I thought that having an open-source team working on Netscape 6 would mean that finally, the mozilla codebase would get both the reworking, and the testing it badly needed.

    Unfortunately, by the sounds of the bugs cited here, that's not what has happened. It appears that major functional patches are being omitted in order to meet a "gold" date. This is the same ridiculous crap that drives for-profit products. It's a free product, you might as well make it a good one, and at the very least, include the functionality of the current revision.

    A w e l l - t e s t e d p r o d u c t = a h a p p y u s e r

    Ryan Matthews


    November 6th, 2000   8:07 PM

    Ship late or ship beta.

    Trent


    November 6th, 2000   8:06 PM

    After all the time and effort put into this release of Netscape so far, it would be a sad thing indead to release and promote what is essentially an unfinished beta. Netscape, please, close just doesn't cut it...

    Joshua Heyer


    November 6th, 2000   8:05 PM

    It is important to create and adhere to open standards so that everyone can
    communicate to each other.

    Michael Bowen


    November 6th, 2000   8:05 PM

    Please support web standards. Our jobs as web developers are hard enough already.

    Luke Francl


    November 6th, 2000   8:04 PM

    Keep it in Beta. We need standards, not marketing.

    August C. Bourre


    November 6th, 2000   8:04 PM

    As a web developer, I've been the only one in my whole company saying that Netscape 6.0 is going to be a good browser to code for. Everyone else gave up after the 4.xx series. I assumed you would learn from your mistakes and take the time to craft a good product this time out. If Netscape 6.0 comes out in a final release form with serious standards compliance issues, my whole company will remove Netscape from it's list of target browsers to develop sites for.

    Adam Kintner


    November 6th, 2000   8:03 PM

    The biggest gripe I have with NS4.x is that it's too OLD to follow any of the current standards. Please don't make the biggest gripe I have with your new browser that you rushed it out too EARLY to support the current standards... The first release is too important to let these bugs slip.

    Brent Blood


    November 6th, 2000   8:03 PM

    I don't know why they are even bothering to release Netscape 6 with all the bugs. I think that is such poor service to the public. They should definitely postpone the release date if it means that the finished product will be worth using. Otherwise, I think I'll just stick to what I'm using now.

    Chelsea Rivera


    November 6th, 2000   8:03 PM

    netscape is rushing this release!

    John McCutchan


    November 6th, 2000   8:01 PM

    Standards compliance is the only hope for what little sanity is left in the development community. By releasing a half-baked product you will effectively sabotage developers and stunt the growth of those learning to develop sites with standards-based code. Intentionally shipping a browser full of bugs is unwise and irresponsible. Please don't make the die-hard netscape users look like fools.

    Keep it beta, and keep our respect.

    suzi arnold


    November 6th, 2000   8:00 PM

    As a web application developer, I must protest any release of Netscape based on the Mozilla project that contains such critical bugs in standards compliance.

    Make it compliant, or don't make it at all.

    -JF

    Jon Frisby


    November 6th, 2000   8:00 PM

    I thought 100% standards compliance was supposed to be the big selling point of Netscape's next browser, since lack of compliance is the greatest weakness of V4 when compared to IE.

    Netscape has lost practially all browser market share to Microsoft. Why is anyone going to bother to download or install a different browser if it's well known to be LESS standards compliant? What has Netscape been wasting its time on for the last three years if they're just going to introduce another browser that has the exact same fundamental flaw of their previous product? What advantage does the user get? None. Netscape thinks they'll have the advantage by the revenue-generating bloat they're spending all their resources on, but if noone downloads V6, they're not going to make money from it anyway. It just doesn't make any sense.

    Please, Netscape, pretty pretty please, HOOK US IN with a 100% standards compliant web application platform, and then later make your profits on the bloatware addons.

    Jeff Messner


    November 6th, 2000   7:58 PM

    If Netscape 6.0 does not have full standards compliance, it really won't be much of an improvement from the line of 4.0 browsers, will it? I agree with the points made in the article; I don't see why Netscape should settle for less than perfect standards compliance.

    Isaac Feitler


    November 6th, 2000   7:57 PM

    Netscape has had a history of being behind the times when it comes to web standards.


    Come on! Take advantage of the Mozilla project. Regain from IE... I want to browse the web the way it's support to look under Linux...


    Blah, I don't feel like saying anything. Netscape are deaf.

    Michael Ahlers


    November 6th, 2000   7:56 PM

    I have done a lot of work on Mozilla, but I stopped most of my work about a week ago because I was so fed up with Netscape PDT. I do Open Source work for love, not money, and I can't stand having patches rejected because some fuckup marketdroid didn't approve my CVS commit.

    PDT: you are lame.

    Jeffrey Baker


    November 6th, 2000   7:53 PM

    I am already using Opera 95% of the time and it appears there is no reason to get Netscape at all (or at least until the bugs are fixed).

    Aside from that, do YOURSELF a favor and fix the bugs, delay the release, but ship a GOOD browser.

    Never give up, never surrender!

    K.D.


    November 6th, 2000   7:51 PM

    Consider briefly the number of JavaScript scripts that check for the browser name, then platform, then version number. Consider the number that will simply check for "version > 4" for CSS2 and DOM features. This won't work, and will sadly be marked with "&& browser != netscape".

    Michael T. Babcock


    November 6th, 2000   7:51 PM

    You have the fixes and you're not implementing them? Look, Netscape needs to, at every stage, release Mozilla+, not Mozilla-. The only features that should be under Netscape, as compared to Mozilla, management are those that add the silly commercial dohinguses. There are still a few of us out here who use Netscape as our primary target for Web design - but do you want to see us putting "You are using Netscape 6.0 - please upgrade to Mozilla x.x or above to see this site to best advantage, or use IE 6.x or above" on our sites?!

    Whit Blauvelt


    November 6th, 2000   7:50 PM

    With a less than 20% market share, what's the point of releasing NS 6 with those bugs.


    Kam Cheung


    November 6th, 2000   7:50 PM

    Releasing NS 6 with known compliance deviations will only cause those features of the appropriate standard to be effectively voided. After all, what sane developer would use a feature that is known not to work on a major browser? They will just learn to do without if they care about their clients at all. Consequently, the features that you do not support will attrify and die away.

    Jim Patterson


    November 6th, 2000   7:49 PM

    I've been using Mozilla since the M13 release. I would also say that I've been using it primarily since M16. It's grown into a very powerful browser, but I do not know why a major company would essentially ruin their already tarnished reputation by releasing the savior of standards compliancy with major compliancy issues. Most of the posts on this board are not really from people who are going to miss out on updates and such, but the average user doesn't stay on top of the software industry. What I'm saying is...there needs to be a browser that people are going to be willing to go out and DL because it is so much better than the browser that is already on their system...and frankly...with these bugs...NS6 isn't there.

    Mark Drago


    November 6th, 2000   7:49 PM

    Please, support the standards and use the bug fixes from the open source community. Do not let Microsoft deal the death blow in the browser war.


    Follow the credo that id software laid down when it comes to releasing new software: "when it's done."

    Jared Klett


    November 6th, 2000   7:49 PM

    I've been using Mozilla since the M13 release. I would also say that I've been using it primarily since M16. It's grown into a very powerful browser, but I do not know why a major company would essentially ruin their already tarnished reputation by releasing the savior of standards compliancy with major compliancy issues. Most of the posts on this board are not really from people who are going to miss out on updates and such, but the average user doesn't stay on top of the software industry. What I'm saying is...there needs to be a browser that people are going to be willing to go out and DL because it is so much better than the browser that is already on their system...and frankly...with these bugs...NS6 isn't there.

    Mark Drago


    November 6th, 2000   7:46 PM

    With Mozilla 18-3 loading in less than a second and interfaces popping up faster than you can say Internet Explorer I think it's a case of derivative products failing to live up to the glory of their ancestors.

    Port Konqueror to Windows, scrap Netscape for Mozilla. Let's move on. I can only expect 1E6's standards support is temporary until the gates close behind us after entering the castle.



    Rares Marian


    November 6th, 2000   7:46 PM


    Releasing a close-to-perfect standards-compliant browser would be fine. (No software is perfect.) But releasing a browser with seriously buggy, incomplete standards support will not serve Netscape, will not serve developers, and will not serve the cause of web standards.



    I understand some folks think the WaSP's July editorial meant "release Nav6 whether it's ready or not." I'm sorry our comments were misunderstood. We hoped to induce Netscape to stop "upgrading" Nav4 (because it sent the message that that browser was still viable) and to focus all its energies on delivering a standards-compliant browser while key parts of the market were still receptive to it.



    At the time, some of us believed that the browser's delay was due to the expenditure of energy on the larger Mozilla platform, as well as on tangential items like skins, add-ons, etc. We may have been wrong about that. We hoped to persuade Netscape to focus exclusively on the browser, which we felt was desperately needed in the marketplace. (A standards-compliant browser still is desperately needed.) If we had not subsequently lost control of our domain and mailing lists for over three months, we might have been able to foster discussion and clarification on these points.



    In any case, what matters is not what we said or how it was perceived; what matters is that a lot of great work has been done, and the browser's developers deserve the right to release the best possible product, rather than one that is seriously compromised.

    zeldman


    November 6th, 2000   7:45 PM

    As a BSD user, I'm basically stuck using Netscape. 4.75 isnt all that bad a browser, for 1996 or whenever it was made. Please, for the love of all that is holy and sacred in the world. SUPPORT THE STANDARDS!!!!!! If you fail to do this, you're not gonna be popular with the Linux/Unix/BSD community!

    Jordan Block


    November 6th, 2000   7:44 PM

    You'll only make things worse if you release NS6 before it's compliant. The tech websites won't be full of 'Try the great new Netscape v6 browser'. they'll be full of 'Netscape v6 still not compliant'. It'll just be one big Netscape roast. FINISH IT FIRST!

    Sean Capstick


    November 6th, 2000   7:43 PM

    Basically... I add a 'ditto' to the other comments made. Netscape/AOL's only hope of success outside of the AOL user population is to make this browser 100% standards compliant. Known showstopper bugs should be resolved BEFORE the release.. regardless of slipping a ship date!

    John


    November 6th, 2000   7:43 PM

    (Since this forum is "most recent first", you're going to need to
    scroll down to see the comment I am replying to.)

    This most definately IS a management issue. Lots of the bugs there are
    FIXED. The open source community did their job. But now the management
    won't take the fixes. The open source response to that is to fork
    the project, which we have tried to do a little of..there's a different
    mentality on the trunk compared to the branch. However, Netscape has
    all the name recognition, and what they release is going to reflect
    on the mozilla project as a whole.

    And if you have to deal with screwed up management, you are less willing
    (and inclined) to work on the project at all. Recently, the PDT was
    going to refuse to fix a spelling error in a contributor's name. This
    caused a big uprising, and eventually they changed the code so it now
    navigates to the Mozilla.org contributor page. So instead of taking
    the simple text fix that they claimed was too much risk, they made
    a code change.

    Also, Netscape has not communicated well to the outside contributors
    about their deadlines. There was suddenly a "front-end" freeze on
    9/13 (or was it 9/16), and many of us didn't know about it until 3
    days (or less) away from the deadline (and only from picking up hints
    about it), so we worked like HELL to fix all of the front-end bugs
    we could think of, and then the day of the deadline, the build
    turned red, and then everyone was forced to check in EVERYTHING
    they had in an hour and a half (which broke the build again). As a result,
    some of the hard-fought front end changes never made it in. And after
    nsbeta3, it would be SO hard for an outside contributor to get a change
    into the branch, with a PDT that basically didn't want to take ANY changes,
    that it wasn't worth the effort to become totally frustrated. The first we found out about the CD build was when the PDT just started rtm-'ing EVERYTHING, come hell or high water. We basically don't get told anything.

    So what do you suggest that outside contributors do? I tried helping
    getting bugs through triage and getting reviews and super reviews,
    and getting starved bugs off the rtm radar, and all I got was
    complaints about me "spamming" everyone. I created an [InLimbo-OOH]
    tag to denote bugs that were in "canidate limbo", and according
    to the PDT, I just "confused" everybody. (Umm, it isn't apparant
    what that tag means when I added it to all the bugs that had
    "This bug is in canidate limbo" as their latest comment?). Lately,
    almost any negative comment, no matter how specific or constructive
    is being seen as "whining". None of our feedback seems to be
    getting through. Some of OUR CODE, OUR LIFEBLOOD is in the product.
    We thought we would be appreciated more than this.

    We realize the potential of Mozilla, and that's why we DON'T want
    Netscape to release a horribly buggy version of it as a release version.
    People are STUPID when it comes to understanding development processes.
    We still have people on Slashdot thinking that Mozilla is exactly like
    it was when M6 or M7 was released. Normal people don't understand "potential"
    in software. They see what they have in front of them, and that's it. If they
    saw it and it sucked in version 6.0, they don't have the concept that it might suck less in version 6.1, since they're used to Microsoft, who NEVER fixes their bugs, or introduces new bugs when they fix the old ones.

    Jason Eager


    November 6th, 2000   7:43 PM

    I'm tossing my name into the hat of users that are requesting that Netscape fix these major problem in version 6.0 before releasing it. Don't get me wrong. I'm a die-hard Netscape user. I've used it forever. Just because I and many others are die-hard Netscape loyalists, doesn't mean you can post abuse that loyalty and post sub-par software. Fix the bugs. It's not a bad thing to delay the release if you are doing legitimate work to make the browser a better product. Don't force Microsoft quality software on your loyal users.

    Justin Shore


    November 6th, 2000   7:42 PM

    Please, Netscape, consider the impact that releasing a non-production release of your browser will have on your good will with clients and developers. Already, many customers are balking at using Netscape 4.7, so if you ship a browser that provides less compliance to standards, you will lose even more support from your customers.

    Greg Boehnlein


    November 6th, 2000   7:41 PM

    I would prefer to use the Netscape browser for many reasons, mostly those related to support of the W3C standards, support for alternative operating systems, and system security.

    I have found that I cannot trust Microsoft to follow any of the W3C standards, and I would like to see a well-known browser follow the rules. I do not like to see pages that fail to be viewable in specific browsers, and the W3C standards form a basis from which browsers should build. I have traditionally found NS to be closer to the official standards, if a little behind.

    I use Linux in addition to Windows, so I have Netscape installed in both. It is sad that I do not want to install NS 6 PR3 on Linux because NS 4.75 works better...

    It seems that Microsoft is often posting fixes to a security of some sort in IE (often Java). While I am happy that they are posting, I wish that they did not need to do so (I have also seen the lists of security holes they did not feel the need to fix). I have always trusted NS to be more secure, but I cannot use a defunct browser, no matter how secure.

    Joe Ratterman


    November 6th, 2000   7:41 PM

    Please, make Netscape 6 the first fully standards compliant browser, like you promised. Please, do what you said you would.

    Kent Perrier


    November 6th, 2000   7:41 PM


    As someone, who actually had a chance to work on the project I have to express my dismay at AOL's halfharted funding for Mozilla.org, the Netscape's unwillingness to take a more hands-off approach and PDT's pitiful micromanagement, which is putting a strangling hold not only on external, but also on internal contributions.

    I'd advise anyone to join the Mozilla project as a contibutor, but also *demand* that the the corporate entities providing funding for it, release the project fully into the public domain. (They already prepared ground for it by GPLing Mozilla)

    Juraj Betak


    November 6th, 2000   7:38 PM

    serious software companies don't even consider Netscape support anymore because they have fallen so helplessly behind in performance, quality and standards support.

    Netscape's only hope is to announce their new browser with a huge "100% standards compliant" banner. i think this is the nail in the coffin. they haven't been able to ship for how long now? i guess with free help, you get what you pay for...

    ian ward


    November 6th, 2000   7:37 PM

    When a company cares more about shipping a product then fixing the bugs and meeting standards, that is when the products fail. That is the reason I've stayed away from IE in the past whenever possible ... now might I have to avoid NS as well?

    S.W.

    Steven Wilcoxon


    November 6th, 2000   7:37 PM

    I gotta agree. RTM is *NOT* ready for prime-time. There will be a major backlash. Think long-term, Netscape. It's not a matter of time any more, the "race" aspect of this is over.

    It's all about coming in strong with a quality product...and RTM is not ready!

    W

    Waldo ?


    November 6th, 2000   7:37 PM


    As a web developer specializing in web apps and a dyed-in-the-wool linux
    user, I've been eagerly looking forward to a Mozilla release. Standards-compliant and cross platform, it looked like a silver bullet, but as it stands,
    Netscape 6 is looking more and more like a previous Netscape product, with permanent bugs causing instability, and rendering and scripting errors.




    When we build websites, we target two platforms: DOM/CSS capable browsers, and table/form capable browsers. Right now, it's looking like Netscape 6 may get classified as the latter.

    Aaron Hope


    November 6th, 2000   7:37 PM

    Having spent serious time developing in the Netscape DOM and IE DOM with JavaScript, I can attest that there is nothing more insulting to users and developers than not adhering to clearly specified standards that enable dynamic, exciting, and stable web-content. As an avid user of Mac, Linux, and Windows, I appreciate Netscape's cross platform capabilities and platform reliability. I would hate to see Netscape shoot itself in the foot just because MicroSoft is doing point-releases more quickly than Netscape. Building a weaker product will only make things worse. -Will

    Will Koffel


    November 6th, 2000   7:36 PM

    Just how gullible do they think we are? :)

    Jamie Manley


    November 6th, 2000   7:36 PM

    Since IE has already taken the lion's share of the browser turf, I have already stopped making any effort to get sites to look the same in NS 4.x and IE 5.x. If NS 6.x also fails to make the grade, then there's no reason to bother with it, either. Once lusers download NS 6 and see that their pages are being rendered incorrectly in it, they'll give up on it, too.

    T Davis


    November 6th, 2000   7:35 PM

    Netscape: your browser is close to becoming irrelevant, and waiting another month or two will not make much difference. You need a solid hit.

    If you release a bug-ridden browser, word will get around: users will heed the common wisdom and not adopt; site authors will ignore it, waiting for the upgrade.

    Navigator may not get a second chance. If this is the intent of your upper management, they will force this release out anyway.

    Were I in your position with this product, I'd go over the head of my boss to insist on a proper level of quality (and no weaseling about what that means).

    Your alternative? Do you really want to go looking for your next job ashamed of having worked on the "infamous Netscape 6"? And it will obviously be a race for the exits as the more alert people look to land good jobs before it's too late.

    Larry West


    November 6th, 2000   7:35 PM

    Why rush out the browser now? It has been forever in the making, what would hurt to delay a few days or weeks? Oh well this is a pretty big test of whether I will continue using Netscape.

    Jason Thomas


    November 6th, 2000   7:35 PM

    If Netscape can't be bothered to stick to their promise to release a standards compliant browser, then I can't be bothered to keep wasting half my time writing code around their stupid inconsistencies. It's that simple. And when people start seeing

    'This page best viewed in IE, because Netscape is DUMB'

    it probably won't help Netscape at all.

    Brian Reischl


    November 6th, 2000   7:33 PM

    PDT: Let me put it simply. If market share is your concern, how much do you think you're going to lose with a browser whose standards support is this inadequate?

    Brian Teague


    November 6th, 2000   7:32 PM

    AOL, if you're going to be the one to save Netscape (via buy-out) try to do it some justice. That is the responsibility that comes with your action. You owe that to the community.

    I long ago came to the realization that companies should NOT control multiple aspects of business. Either make the browser, or make the content, but doing both leads to the temptations of cookie tricks, SHOP buttons, snoopware, and other evils.

    And you better not hard code the startup page as you did in AOL 6!

    Other cases include:


    My guess is that Opera and Konqueror (KDE2) are going to be the only fully standards-compliant browsers for no other reason than they're not distracted by shop buttons, ads, keyword searches and other tripe associated with content.


    http://linuxtampa.com

    Timothy Jones


    November 6th, 2000   7:31 PM

    Yet another disappointing browser in a long line of disappointing browsers released by Netscape. It's unbelievable that Netscape would even think about releasing another noncompliant browser after the joke that Netscape 4.x has become.



    I've been dealing with authoring HTML around Netscape idiocies on my website for long enough, and thought they'd finally have made a good browser. Yet again, buggy crap. What are these people thinking?



    Internet Explorer 5.0 for Macintosh is nearly 100% compliant. Netscape should either try to catch up ...or just give up.

    Jeremy J. Olson (J'raxis 270145)


    November 6th, 2000   7:31 PM

    This is pathetic. I will not recommend, or use, NS until it is standards compliant.


    Nick Main


    November 6th, 2000   7:30 PM


    I'm amazed that, after all this time, after all this effort, Netscape is willing to stumble at the finish line. We're so close to having the Net's first truly standards-compliant browser. It sure would be cool if we could get all the way there.

    David Hand


    November 6th, 2000   7:29 PM

    The possibility of keeping any marketshare via a quick release is already long, long gone; the majority of Netscape users have already migrated over to IE. If Netscape 6 wants to compete, it not only needs to support non-windows platforms and gain the AOL audience, but it alse needs a "selling point" that can convince users to switch. Since the beginning, this selling point has supposedly been the benefits that we're supposed to see from the open-source development. It needs every last ounce of performance and standards compliance it can get, and without these, there's no chance of ever regaining marketable competitor status. Implement everything and do it right this time, and there should be no need to worry about later versions and competition; otherwise, there won't be any chance of ever regaining a foothold in the market.

    Scott Noveck


    November 6th, 2000   7:28 PM

    This will be another addition to a long list of mistakes Netscape has made if they do not take this suggestion and run with it.

    Eric Murphy


    November 6th, 2000   7:27 PM

    Standards compliance is the ONLY salvation for Netscape's wayward browser and if bugs such as there are tolerable to the product development managers then they haven't a chance - Web developers will make or break this release and no one will commit to a platform considered incomplete from inception.

    Roger Howard


    November 6th, 2000   7:26 PM

    Come on Netscape what are you thinking. As a web developer I am disgusted that you wont bother to comply to standards. I spend most of my time trying to make things look the same in Netscape as they do in IE and it is a pain in the butt.

    I do hope that you get your act together and start to figure out that making your customers happy is more important then making a few bucks on ads or something.

    ~Josh

    Josh Knowles


    November 6th, 2000   7:26 PM

    I'm not going to waste time and bandwidth typing the same thing everyone else is saying. I'll just echo their sentiments.

    Do the right thing, Netscape. You owe us.

    Keith Gaddis


    November 6th, 2000   7:23 PM

    Originally, as I understood it, Mozilla was to be the best, and only, fully standard-compliant web browser in existence.

    They also decided that not only was Mozilla to be a web browser, but also a viable platform which developers could code for.

    I think both of those goals are admirable, and attainable. I am not going to complain that they havn't added feature x to the browser, nor am I going to complain that they spent time implementing featyre y, which I don't use.

    What I am going to complain about, though, is that they're dropping the ball. Mozilla is *not* totally standards-compliant. In fact, I have troubles displaying even rudimentary pages.

    As it stands, Internet Explorer is a better browser. It's faster, it's leaner, it's meaner, and it's more popular. Unless AOL/Netscape put EVERY effort into releasing a quality browser, it's going to sink like a rock. AOL has resources coming out of its wazoo - they were talking about BUYING Time-Warner. If they can't stand to wait another six months to produce a quality product that will succeed, we're all done for.

    David B. Harris


    November 6th, 2000   7:22 PM

    I have been running Netscape on my Linux workstation for ages.. and always longed for a stable version

    Please reconsider your decision to release Netscape 6 in its current state. As a web developer.. I NEED standards compliance.. otherwise my code will only work in one browser.. your opponent's.

    Thank You,

    Chris Carlson


    November 6th, 2000   7:22 PM

    As a dedicated Netscape user and professional web developer, I will be most disappointed if Netscape releases 6.0 without proper standards support.

    James Howard


    November 6th, 2000   7:20 PM

    Releasing a browser that won't let me view web pages as they are meant to be viewed will never convince me to abandon the browser I currently use (IE 5.0). I used netscape for many years. My first version was Netscape 1.22, then up on to 2, then to 3. 3.04 was the last version I ever used as my primary browser, since by that time you code was bloated and messy and you had pretty much as crappy a browser as IE. Get a not-crappy browser. Get compliant. Then release.

    Michal Bryc


    November 6th, 2000   7:19 PM


    But the world needs a decent browser!


    You're this close, and you're giving up?

    beth skwarecki


    November 6th, 2000   7:19 PM

    But the world needs a decent browser!
    You're this close, and you're giving up?

    beth skwarecki


    November 6th, 2000   7:18 PM

    Just wanted to add my name to the petition. Why are they called web standards, if they're not standard?

    dan webb


    November 6th, 2000   7:15 PM

    Guys, the one thing Mozilla had going for it was STANDARDS. If you dont have
    that then you dont have squat in comparison to Internet Exploder.

    Personally if Netscape 6 is fully standards compliant, Ill use it, if I have to suffer with non standards compliance Im just going to use IE. Or better yet, maybe just switch to Opera.

    --John C

    John Cavanaugh


    November 6th, 2000   7:14 PM

    I was a hardcore Netscape user until release 4 came out. I could never understand their need to breakaway from W3C's standards.
    Netscape if you want to seriously recapture the market you would have to do better than using the justice system for this.
    Microsoft didn't really have to do a thing ... you practically gave your share away.

    Huong Chia Hiang


    November 6th, 2000   7:12 PM

    I think all browsers need to be standard compliant and i belive that netscape will get there being based off of an opensource browser!

    Ben Kuryk


    November 6th, 2000   7:06 PM

    Not supporting standards is a typical AOL practice. I expected this from am AOL owned entity. I can no longer use another perfectly good browser for it does not display pages as standards intend. I don't need another skrewed up platform to develop weird fake java and the like for.


    This is hell.

    Thomas Shanks


    November 6th, 2000   7:06 PM

    Not supporting standards is a typical AOL practice. I expected this from am AOL owned entity. I can no longer use another perfectly good browser for it does not display pages as standards intend. I don't need another skrewed up platform to develop weird fake java and the like for.

    This is hell.

    Thomas Shanks


    November 6th, 2000   7:06 PM

    Not supporting standards is a typical AOL practice. I expected this from am AOL owned entity. I can no longer use another perfectly good browser for it does not display pages as standards intend. I don't need another skrewed up platform to develop weird fake java and the like for.

    This is hell.

    Thomas Shanks


    November 6th, 2000   6:19 PM

    It seems to me that Netscape is not getting credit for the job they have done. Their current builds are more compliant by far than IE in HTML, DOM, XML, CSS, and JavaScript.

    Netscape began its quest to build a "standards-compliant" browser after much criticism from the WebStandards Organization. Netscape agreed and made this the main focus of building Mozilla. This past July, the WebStandard Organization criticized Netscape for their delays and asked them to take 4.x off the market and to just get a browser released, even with its bugs. Apparently Netscape listened, which is why they are just trying to get a version out there.

    Having written a decent amount of client-side code using and testing Mozilla's support, my opinion is that it is such a huge improvement over Netscape 4.x and IE 5.x that I'd rather work around the few existing bugs (and yes, there are relatively few compared to the limitations in IE and the huge number of new features supported in Netscape) than have anyone else download another version of 4.x. There has to eventually be a cut-off date, and while this may not be the best one, we need to have people begin using Netscape 6 now or else IE will have all of the market share when all of these bugs are fixed in six months. There are a lot of fixes waiting, but there will always be a lot of fixes waiting... there has to be a deadline.

    The main problem here comes from the lack of sufficient support and assistance from the development community. If you really care about having a browser to compete with IE, then you need to help in whatever way possible. You need to be asking yourselves what you can do to help the project. This is open-source ... if you want it to kick butt, you need to help. I've been actively writing bug reports and testcases and participating in discussions on the newsgroups for a year and a half. Bugs that were important to my projects have mostly been fixed because I brought up those issues many months ago. I recognize many of the names on the petition as active participants... unfortunately, I don't recognize enough of them. Where have you been the past year? Why do you choose to spend more time yelling at Netscape at the time of release then actually following hte progress of the project and helping, even if only a few minutes a week, writing testcases, testing your code, etc.? The project is delayed and buggy because there is not enough help outside of Netscape, not because Netscape is screwed up. Yes, their marketing is probably a little overzealous, but this browser needs to ship to as many people as possible. The latest nightly builds are very stable (I've left it open for several days withouth crashes or memory leaks), and very powerful. This is an extremely feature-rich browser that supports a wealth of new features. It supports virtually all of html 4.0, xhtml 1.0, xml 1.0, dom level 0,1, 2 (except Traversal and parts of Range), CSS 1, most of 2, parts of 3, minimal SVG, xml extras such as loading and saving files, get and post requests from generated xml files, and JavaScript 1.5, as well as their xul project, which is revolutionary. Yes there are bugs, but the power that is there is huge.

    Let's stop picking on Netscape. Let's help Mozilla as much as we can. Educate your friends and family... help them upgrade their browsers to 6.1 if they don't know how... or turn on SmartUpdate. If you care about having a great browser, do what you can to help build it.

    Dylan Schiemann


    November 6th, 2000   4:33 PM

    Netscape! Please mark currently RTM as Netscape 6 PreFinal... We want a good, relieble browser, not a beta released as final release.

    We'll wait another month.

    Eugene Savitsky


    November 6th, 2000   4:25 PM

    Netscape has already bet the farm on the notion that standards compliance is more important than time-to-market. If they stay the course, they'll either turn out right, or turn out wrong. I think they'll turn out right, but the point is at least this path gives them some opportunity to get back into the game.

    Meanwhile, if they flinch, if they blink, if they don't stay the course and try to split the difference, they end up with neither: a browser that is hopelessly out of the "time to market" race and disappointing from a standards compliance standpoint as well. In other words, pushing out a buggy 6.0 closes off what I see as the last shot at a future for Netscape.

    This should be a no-brainer, Nescape. Make sure the one that goes on CD out to all the end-users is so good that if their next upgrade comes only with their next computer, web developers aren't cursing it as another albatross like 4.x to code around.

    Jim Hebert


    November 6th, 2000   4:17 PM

    The new layout engine already IS available. It's called
    "Mozilla Nightly Builds". The people who want to run the
    new code CAN run the new code.

    However, by marking the current code "Netscape 6.0", you
    are saying that ANYONE should be able to run the new
    code. And that is false.

    Jason Eager


    November 6th, 2000   4:08 PM

    I suggest that before lambasting Netscape over NS6's lack of standards compliance, to be fair you should also do a similar analysis of IE's bug database.

    Oh, you can't? Well then, I guess Netscape were suckers for generously giving you access to the entire Mozilla development process.

    And BTW, the choice is between "ship buggy NS6.0 now, and ship much better NS6.1 in six months" and "ship nothing now, and ship much better NS6.1 in six months". Given that NS6.0's standards support is WAY better than NS4's (and better than IE's, but I know you all don't care about that because you're already committed to work around IE's bugs), doesn't it make sense to make it available to people?

    If you don't feel that it's worthwhile to support NS6.0 in your Web sites, then don't. Just ignore it and wait until Netscape/Mozilla produces something that's worth supporting.

    Robert O'Callahan


    November 6th, 2000   3:44 PM

    I agree with all that has been said. As I continue to develop for the web, I am increasingly dismayed with Navigator's sad performance. What is even more frustrating are all of the lofty promises that Netscape has made in referring to their new browser, and yet, with even the most cursory inspection, most of these claims are shown, by personal experience, to be false.

    Please, take a step back, take the long-term perspective, and build a better mouse trap before trying to sell it.

    Jim Richins


    November 6th, 2000   3:42 PM

    I don't know about you guys, but I still have to see the Java plugin in action...

    I agree, I am ready to wait instead of puting with another buggy browser that will need some extra-varied workarounds, my web pages are already too much of spaguetti code, I can't take it any more.

    Please, Netscape, make sure we, web developers, stop calling you Netscrap ...

    Amaury Jacquot


    November 6th, 2000   3:27 PM

    As well as compliance problems PR3 is still very buggy. On NT, where I just use it as a browser, it crashes once or twice a day, on Win98 make that once or twice an hour; thankfully it doesn't seem to corrupt the mail database.

    These reliability bugs have to be fixed otherwise the average punter is going to drop Netscape 6 within half an hour of using it. If those bugs have to be fixed might as well get the already fixed complience patches as well.

    If Netscape 6 is not compliant then the wait and frustration have all being for naught, it won't grab the attention of the developers who'll see it as yet another buggy implementation that they will have to figure out workarounds for in their HTML. And it won't gain any kudos in the press for being "almost standards compliant".

    Paul Gittings


    November 6th, 2000   3:21 PM

    Hey Netscape,

    Why don't you try to produce a product that interprets the standards more completely than IE? Why not do it right the first time? If a good percentage of the population didn't have an inherent dislike for Microsoft, your sad excuse of a company/product would be long dead and forgotten.

    Does anyone at Netscape even care about the standards and the overwhelming frustration experienced by web developers who embrace the capabilties of W3C only to find out that Netscape doesn't support them?

    I hope the product gets released across all markets, including with AOL. Users will become so frustrated that they'll finally switch to something else and then us developers can stop worrying about writing half-ass code to make sure it looks okay in Netscape.

    Tod Meinke


    November 6th, 2000   3:09 PM

    I posted on one of the bugs that David wrote about. I understand Netscape's need to ship a product. They have come under a HUGE amount of criticism in recent years because of the 4.x legacy. There was a lite at the end of the Tunnel in mozilla. And mozilla still may be the solution. However, no one is going to use Mozilla.

    People are going to use 6.0. And David is again right, that will be the browser the critics and users evaluate. And they will speak their mind. NO ONE WILL CARE WHAT A PATCH HAS TO OFFER. Developers will be STUCK developing for 6.0 LONG AFTER 6.01 is released.

    David's list of bugs are but a glimpse of the problems in the browser which will shock you. I'm already branching my code three times: mozilla, netscape 4.x, and IE. That will not go away until 7.0 is released, because as developers we can't develop for minor patches/bug fixes. It's just too hard.

    There are severe performance issues which need to be tracked down. Severe regressions also. However, if nothing else, why is Netscape so unwilling to fix major issues which mozilla (read: Netscape) engineers already have patches for?

    Please Netscape, delay the release and allow these fixes into the tree.

    Bug 40828 is my nemesis. It is a shining example of what RTM needs to have fixed. That functionality you could even perform in Netscape 4.x. DOM support was added, yet it breaks HTML 3.2 cellpadding? Now we're going backwards instead of forwards.

    Thanks PDT.

    rob


    November 6th, 2000   3:06 PM

    I honestly had no idea Netscape was planning on releasing a "finished" version of NN6 any time soon. I'm currently running Mozilla M18/MacOS and while certain aspects are extremely impressive - it has a long way to go before its release quality.

    I would almost go so far as to say early-beta quality.

    So, the idea that they've closed many parts of the tree to bug fixes is simply ludicrous. If this is truly the case (and I have no reason to doubt the article) then I share another poster's opinion that this is triumph of process over results.

    As a web-developer I have one thing to say - I will not code for a new broken browser. There are enough existing ones. If NN6 is not significantly better than Explorer it is doomed to irrelevancy. Hey - life's tough and Explorer has a large lead by this point. NN6 has to be that much better to gain any mindshare.

    David Weingart


    November 6th, 2000   3:05 PM

    On the other side of the coin, the Web Standards Project were clamouring not very long ago at all for Netscape 6 to be released ASAP. And www.richinstyle.com already has Gecko as the most standards-compliant CSS engine by a fair distance.

    I'm sure a lot of the patches will go into version 6.01. We will get there.

    Gervase Markham


    November 6th, 2000   3:00 PM

    NETSCAPE -- Allow your developers to seal the cracks in the struggle for compliance before release. If we have waited this long, we can wait until the 'BETA' is stripped away from your releases. I and many other developers have stuck by your product. Please don't take us for granted.

    NorthEast Front-End Developer


    November 6th, 2000   2:54 PM


    You guys have already made my life hell. Please learn your lesson and adopt open standards.

    I would think that the only way you can make a comeback in the browser war is by making one that is equivalent to IE from a developer's perspective. Nobody I know of is dying to develop for the new Netscape. We're just hoping that you dont screw it up so that it's a headace for people trying to make quality DHTML user experiences that work on both major browsers.

    What's the big rush to ship? Netscape has such a bad reputation in the developer community, I'd be surprised that a specific release date is more important than standards compliance.

    Adam Platti


    November 6th, 2000   2:53 PM

    Maybe this gets somewhat repetitive. But even though everyone expects Netscape 6 to ship soon, shipping soon with so many bugs is a nonsense! I'd rather wait a month or 2 more and hear no longer "Netscape 6 is crap like Netscape 4.x" than to have it shipped in such a desastrous shape.

    Ricky


    November 6th, 2000   2:45 PM

    The old adage, "There is never enough time to do it right the first time, but there is always time to do it over" seems appropriate. Netscape will spend more time fixing the product after it is released than they would by doing the job right the first time.

    Launching a defective product and presumably fixing it afterwards, will put two or more flavors of the Netscape product (6.0, 6.01, 4.7x) in general circulation, and web developers will have to deal with all three if they want to support Netscape browsers. This is no way for Netscape to treat it supporters.

    John


    November 6th, 2000   2:40 PM

    Gary: (and everyone else who cares about LiveConnect),

    Bug# 53849 has been marked rtm++, which means that LiveConnect
    will work in Netscape 6.

    Jason Eager


    November 6th, 2000   2:27 PM

    Netscape 6, despite having the glitz and glamour of being "skinned", has its internal problems. Just as I previously read, even a misspelling of a word in a dialog box is construed as a bug, I feel that Netscape's browser should be meticulously proofed before publishing. Speaking from a "perfectionist" point of view, sloppy code is understood as the amount a company cares about its product as well as how much its willing to back that product. After seeing many releases of Navigator and Communicator, I feel the world is overdue for a quality browser. Internet Explorer is rapidly gaining ground because Netscape has fallen so far behind over the years.

    - - Josh Lomas


    November 6th, 2000   2:22 PM

    Please don't do this to us again Netscape. It's bad enough that you've eliminated backward compatibility of the 4.0 DOM.
    Releasing another buggy browser could be the breaking point for developers that have stuck with you this far. Make it work solid…. We can wait.

    Mark Kuhn


    November 6th, 2000   2:14 PM

    Hey, we *need* a new Netscape but it *must* be the right Netscape.
    Releasing a buggy browser will push us towards using IE as a corporate standard
    and that we'll be stuck with it. Forever.

    Don't do. You can't claim to release on schedule if it doesn't work - or do
    you want to see my 10 byte Oracle clone?

    Steve.

    Steve Burton


    November 6th, 2000   2:13 PM

    The PDT's tendancy to lock out outside input is astounding :-( The more people try to give feedback, the more determined they are to ignore the feedback.
    At least now we can understand how 4.x arrived in such a state. Process over quality. Some of this has rubbed off on the developers to a point where anybody giving negative feedback is "whining".

    It's really sad. The developers are GOOD, but the organization is SICK (and misdirected, and sometimes just plain stupid)! That's probably why
    a lot of developers have left Netscape.
    And that's also why a lot of outside contributors are waiting until AFTER rtm to continue contributing patches to the Trunk ("mozilla").

    I already posted my own message about this on netscape.public.mozilla.seamonkey.

    My frustration about all of this became so much that I
    Filed a bug on myself to try to calm down about all of these issues, so I didn't piss people off enough that they wouldn't listen to me at all anymore. But it is very hard to watch something that you love get completely trashed by an idiotic process. So I probably have pissed off many people.

    Please, Netscape, you obviously have NO idea how bad your reputation is with the people that count. You opened up your development process to the public in an effort to make your product better. Now it's time to take that idea seriously, and listen to your outside contributors. Releasing Netscape 6 RTM in a horribly buggy state WILL NOT HELP YOU. It will KILL your reputation.

    At LEAST take the fixes that are already in hand. The users will find it rather hard to understand why you DIDN'T take a fix in hand for a bug that is now blocking what they need to do.

    Jason Eager


    November 6th, 2000   2:11 PM

    Much as I would love to agree with you on this, and much as I have
    pushed the same viewpoint in the past, I really can't. Don't get me
    wrong, I think that Netscape 6.00 is going to suck and I will definitely
    not be using it (I'll stick with M18 and later Moz0.9). In fact to some
    extent I pity the people who will be.

    But consider the alternative. The abomination that is Netscape 4.x has
    been the scourge of web developers everywhere for far too long already.
    There are major websites that I simply can't read because of it's
    inability to gracefully handle a missing </table> tag. And as a website
    developer, I'm completely fed up with having to write all my code twice
    and knowing that what I come up with is *still* horrible, nonstandard
    code because standards-compliant code simply won't work on Netscape 4.x.

    I certainly hope that Netscape will be quick with 6.01, 6.02, 6.1,
    6.5... releases and will promote them to hell and back. I hope that
    reviewers won't be too harsh - or at least will note that this is a
    product that was released too early, rather than one that shouldn't have
    been released at all. I hope that this won't push people away from
    Netscape, and I hope most of all that AOL don't pull funding from the
    project just as it's getting good.

    But I just can't stand the thought of another 3 months with 4.x as the
    second most popular browser on the internet. Buggy standards support is
    SO much better than the standards-destroying ugly mess that is 4.x. Let
    it die now. Please.

    PS Ironically, M18 crashed trying to post an earlier version of this... but I still find it more stable than 4.x ever was.

    Stuart Ballard


    November 6th, 2000   2:09 PM

    Once again, the conflict of getting out a product quickly versus the desire to catch all the bugs rears its head. As a user of the Linux preview version of Netscape Navigator 6, I can tell you that I have run into many frustrating bugs in the latest edition.

    I believe that Netscape's desire to rush to market is ill conceived. Although "rush" for a product that's been in development for what two years now might be a misnomer. Netscape must accept that it no longer has the "clout" that it once had in the browser arena and that its primary focus should therefore be on quality. The thing that makes most users angry is when a software company does not care about the quality of the product, but shoves it down the throat of users anyway. It sometimes works if you have a virtual monopoly in a certain area, but that is certainly not the case for Netscape. If Netscape does not feel that browsers represent a "profitable" area anymore, then that's fair. But in that case they should fully open Mozilla and let the open source community go at it.

    Arthur Barlow


    November 6th, 2000   2:03 PM


    It's a darn shame that I have been forced to use IE as my standard now instead of NN which was my designing standard not too long ago. Navigator's handling of Cascading Style Sheets (CSS)--or should I say lack of handling--is my No.1 beef; a close second is Navigator's tendency to mess up tables which look find in IE and Opera. Plugin support isn't that good anymore as well.

    Considering the way the AOL people design their software, I highly doubt that the Netscape situation will get any better. But I'm gonna' keep my fingers crossed.

    Pande Wapenyi


    November 6th, 2000   1:57 PM

    Hi
    I am in line with not to release it untill all bugs of concern fixed.

    Alex Mesfin


    November 6th, 2000   1:56 PM

    I am a principal engineer in charge of getting our new HTML version of Developer 2000/Oracle*Forms working under Netscape 6. It already functions quite well under MSIE 5. Because of the lack of DOM functionality in Netscape 4, we have had to wait for Netscape 6, which purports to support most of DOM level 2. Another feature, present in Netscape 4, that is critical to our product is liveconnect -- being able to communicate both ways between JavaScript and Java.
    Oracle products have long held to a tradition of open standards and being able to run on all major platforms. Along these lines, we hope to be able to run on the Netscape 6 browser. At this point, without the liveconnect functionality, we will not be able to progress any further in our NS 6 implementation.

    I too would not like to see MSIE further subverting open standards. However, Netscape choosing not to provide a fully functional, production product in their initial release of Netscape 6 will most certainly help further Microsoft's destruction of open standards.

    I strongly favor Netscape labeling this version Beta, re-examining and re-scheduling the production release to a time when they can provide the functionality we are all asking for. And they should do it ASAP.

    Gary Kind


    November 6th, 2000   1:54 PM

    fuck a buggy browser ...been there, done that, downloaded the *update*

    so, don't release until it's ready -- and rocks!!!

    zillazilla


    November 6th, 2000   1:52 PM

    It's Nutscrape dimwit, not Netscrape. ;)

    Seriously, I've put up with this Netscape inability crap for the last 6 years. Give all us developers/designers a damned break and impress us once by doing something right instead of half-assed.

    Ben Prater


    November 6th, 2000   1:52 PM

    Netscape needs to learn that the key to a good release is not how fast they can get their browser out, but how well it supports standards. You would think that they had learned this by now. The holy grail of the web is a fully standards compliant browser. This is the superweapon in the browser wars. Once they have a browser that supports the standards, then and only then would it be appropriate to develop proprietary features. If they want to survive to 9.x or beyond, they better heed this petition.

    Samuel Cormier


    November 6th, 2000   1:49 PM

    Don't do it, or I will never stop calling it Netscrape!

    Anonymous Hero


    November 6th, 2000   1:43 PM

    Bug #40828 alone will break my code. I have a web application that currently requires IE, and bugs like this prevent us from allowing our users to use Netscape. I understand Netscape's desire to get it out the door but in our case, if it doesn't work right we can't use it.

    dennis


    November 6th, 2000   1:42 PM

    Why is Netscape so determined to get it released sooner rather than later (and better)? The browser is already late. I'd wait an extra year if Netscape would put out a solid, complient product. If they want us to be loyal to them, then they need to be loyal to us.

    Mark Ross


    November 6th, 2000   1:42 PM

    I remember back in 1994 or so when my mother first got her computer and an Internet account. I remember downloading Netscape for her (2.0?) and explaining all the browsing stuff to her. Netscape enjoyed over 80% market share then. I was proud to evangelize for Netscape. With the release of NN4 we saw what horrific things a marketing department with too much influence can do to a good product. NN4 has been an utter failure and continues to be the scurge of Web developers everywhere. Now, instead of evangelizing Netscape because of its superiority, I find myself defending Netscape only as the only viable alternative to Microsoft's attempt to subvert standards. I find myself telling people to hold on for Netscape 6 to see a *real* browser. Then Netscape back tracks on its promise to deliver a standards compliant browser and begins the process of locking out fixes for very important bugs.

    Please Netscape wait. I know you won't, and you'll wonder why the Web community ridicules your product, but at least we can say we tried to tell you.

    Jerry Baker


    November 6th, 2000   1:41 PM

    I'm in on the petition.

    Jonathan Turner


    November 6th, 2000   1:37 PM

    The release of anything other than a rock-solid
    standards-compliant product will be a near-final death-blow to a Netscape-branded browser.

    Don't they get it ???

    (I know, I know, that's a rhetorical question, they don't, but maybe they can wake up in time ....)

    Stan Krute


    November 6th, 2000   1:34 PM

    First of all, I just want to say that Netscape 6.0 is really shitty. After downloading and trying out the beta version of Netscape 6.0 I decided not to go back with netscape. they try to incorporate the "cute" look of AOL into their browser and it just isn't working. people like the old browser where they have a lot more option to choose from rather that being stuck with the preset functions that netscape puts in there and there isn;t a easy way to get around it. all inall, I think they should really think about what they're doing

    Peter


    November 6th, 2000   1:23 PM

    I'm sure Netscape is feeling the pressure to release something soon. However, may I point out that people regard the latest release as the current version. Once something else is released, the 4.7x versions will be regarded as out-of-date. People will then download NS 6 -- which has big performance deficiencies on anything but the absolutely fastest machines, plus the bugs that David mentions -- and promptly write off Netscape as a viable option in the browser world. Currently, I would think that Netscape would want to have the 4.7x versions continue to represent them rather than NS6 as currently planned.

    -- Shane

    Shane Iseminger


    November 6th, 2000   1:02 PM

    I downloaded Netscape 6 so I could have both browsers available to see how my pages displayed on both of the major ones. To my dismay, what appeared as I planned on IE 5.5 looked horrible on NS6. So I downloaded 4.7 and while the pages weren't perfect they looked a whole lot better than 6.0. Shouldn't the newest version be the best?? I'm extremely disappointed with NS6 and know I won't be using it unless they fix it up a lot. Also, there seem to be some problems with Composer... I had some trouble trying to get it to do some of the things I wanted. Maybe that's due to user error, but I'm pretty sure I was using it right and it just wasn't cooperating.

    Michael


    November 6th, 2000   1:01 PM

    I agree with David's comments. Reconsideration of the release would be
    advisable. I also worry that releasing such a buggy version of the browser
    will drive some developers to build sites that are not just "best viewed with"
    Internet Explorer--but rather "only viewed with". These standards are out
    there to help prevent just such an outcome--please embrace them!

    Marc Loy


    November 6th, 2000   12:49 PM

    (I wrote the following before reading your petition, so please consider
    it's redundancy as an endorsement of your views)


    Personally, the way I see it, things would be more appropriately named
    if they called 6.0 "public preview" or something like that. I think
    there is going to be a lot of broken stuff in it, and 53849 is just one
    of them.

    (See also 56430, where an example of where the reverse situation,
    Javascript access to Java, fails whenever CODEBASE is set on the java
    applet).

    I may not have the weight of oracle behing my product, but I do have a
    coupld of thousand users who won't be able to use Netscape 6 because
    it's incompatible with NS4 and IE, etc.

    It might turn out to be a perfectly suitable browser for "everyday
    browsing", but from what I've seen, anyone that needs any kind of
    advanced functionality will just need to wait for 6.1 or whatever.



    Steve Kann


    November 6th, 2000   12:37 PM

    I, too, am alarmed at the number and severity of bugs that remain in Netscape 6, and these are not just problems with support for W3C standards. I consider even Netscape 6 Preview Release 3 too buggy to be usable, although I beta test most programs that I can. Many bugs that are currently being marked [rtm-] need to be fixed before this browser is widely used. I agree that the version currently referred to as RTM should be considered a beta version, and that Netscape should not be "released to manufacturing" until the major standards-conformance and most other major functionality bugs are fixed. I urge anyone who feels the same to go to http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/ and vote to have the worst bugs fixed.

    Steve Chapel


    November 6th, 2000   12:36 PM

    Netscape has more than a few problems, and these go way back to the first releases of v4.

    I definitely think they should fix ALL of the known bugs affecting standards compliance. The most frustrating thing about programming for web technologies are the various "takes" on standards. "I don't like that, so I'll do it my way...." Netscape has been one of the most frustrating technologies to program for (the virtual machine SUCKS!). I sincerely hope they will take this recommendation seriously.

    P.S.

    It's funny that they think it's a smart marketing decision to release the software quickly rather than to provide better software. I think they're in for more trouble in the long run if they don't do it right the first time. The worst thing you can do as a software provider is piss off the people writing the software for your platform/product. You would think people had learned this lesson by now....

    Matt Dubord


    November 6th, 2000   12:17 PM

    The web is built on standards. Professional developers have already suffered mightily as a result of the lack of standards compliance in previous browsers. When will the pain end? Incidentally, I think this release should be called 5.0, whenever it happens.

    Jim McNulty


    November 6th, 2000   12:08 PM

    I agree very strongly with David. Adherence to standards is the one trump card that will keep Netscape a viable alternative to Microsoft on the browser front. Now, I'm not saying that because I have anything against Microsoft, but because independent implementations of standards are a key element of what has made the Internet a success. It should be Netscape's highest priority to fix standards-related bugs. This will be good for Netscape and good for the internet.

    Tim O'Reilly


    November 6th, 2000   11:56 AM

    The Netscape 4.x series has been so buggy that I haven't bothered touching them. They crash constantly and don't render HTML like they're supposed to.

    Netscape 6.0 was supposed to be the cure.

    C'mon Netscape, learn from your mistakes. Do it right the first time and save the patches.

    Andrew


    November 6th, 2000   11:47 AM

    I agree whole-heartedly with David's comments. Please reconsider putting
    this product out until these bugs are fixed.

    Robert Eckstein


    November 6th, 2000   11:15 AM

    As an open source Web developer I strongly agree with David Flanagan. Netscape, this is your last best chance to remain viable to the community. We want you to succeed, but developers like me can only hang on for so long. Please, take David's advice and fix the bugs!

    Steve Able


    November 6th, 2000   10:34 AM

    After writing this article, I've realized that one of the big reasons for
    Netscape's rush to release Navigator 6.0 without bug fixes is that they
    need to send the code out to be burned onto CDs. Given the buggy state of
    6.0, the fact that it will be aggresively distributed to end-users through CDs
    is even more dismaying, since it will undoubted reduce the distribution of
    6.01 and later bug-fix releases!

    Once again, a plea to Netscape: please be considerate of your developer
    community and don't release a final version of Netscape until it has better standards support.

    David Flanagan

    Copyright © 2009 O'Reilly Media, Inc.