|
|
|||
Reader Comments -- Netscape Navigator 6.0 to Fail Standards ComplianceYour 1,307 Responses...07/01/2000
s. Books on various programming languages, web
technologies and operating systems. 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. Colin Kershaw November 14th, 2000 9:31 PM As someone who has preferred Netscape for years, now I feel they 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
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! 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. 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 ... 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? 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. 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. 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. 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?? 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 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 !!!. 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 !!!. 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 ! 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. DI MERCURIO Sébastien November 14th, 2000 3:51 AM DHTML doesn't work in netscape 6. 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.
Rob Cottingham November 13th, 2000 5:49 PM
Rob L November 13th, 2000 1:22 PM If netscape doesn't become compliant, any dreamed of market share will be
lost. 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 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... 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! CRC November 13th, 2000 2:30 AM Flanagan, 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. 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!
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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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: Jackson Dunstan November 10th, 2000 6:27 PM Hey, Netscape 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. 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. 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. 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
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. 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. 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.
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. 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 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. J. Baltz November 10th, 2000 5:48 AM Standards compliance is of the utmost importance to me in a
browser.
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.
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. 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. Don Crowley November 9th, 2000 11:31 PM hey, open standards is "interesting". 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. 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! Kevin Silver November 9th, 2000 10:24 PM THINK STANDARDS!!! 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. 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. 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. 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 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. 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. 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... 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. Ibra Bordsen November 9th, 2000 12:44 PM To the PDT- You should know better! 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. 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
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. 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. 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. 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 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. Sam Spicer November 9th, 2000 8:12 AM PLEASE NOT AGAIN! Ben Caesar November 9th, 2000 8:09 AM I'm a long-time Netscape user (now on 4.75) and would definitely 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,... 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. 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. 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' David Grant November 9th, 2000 5:52 AM If the software does not work, it does not matter how soon it gets shipped.
Jeff Lumley November 9th, 2000 5:05 AM I agree with the article version 2 of Flanagan. 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. Andrew Barnes November 9th, 2000 3:35 AM Greetings, 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. 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. 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 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. 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. 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
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. 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: 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. 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. Jerry Read November 8th, 2000 5:08 PM As a professional developer I expect, and need standards in order to develop
good, robust applications. 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. Marcus Daniels November 8th, 2000 4:38 PM I have been doing web design for 5 years, and development for 3.. 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! 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
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, 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. Jeff Wilkinson November 8th, 2000 2:01 PM Arg. 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!
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?" Trent Navillus November 8th, 2000 1:25 PM I strongly urge Netscape to follow Mr. Flanangan's recommendations.
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
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. 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. Sarud Jamal November 8th, 2000 12:16 PM I agree that for me this is Netscape's last chance to make a good 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"... 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. Ryan Baldwin November 8th, 2000 11:18 AM As a "Web Developer" the MOST important thing to me is Christopher Holmok November 8th, 2000 11:15 AM Netscape, -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. 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. Michael Kane November 8th, 2000 10:57 AM MOZ deserves better than this. 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. Ira Miller November 8th, 2000 10:48 AM As a web developer, I am very aware of the diversity of web browsers.
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 November 8th, 2000 10:44 AM I'm a webdeveloper. 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). 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. 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. 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. Gregory T. Loker November 8th, 2000 8:58 AM Ship it NOW! Aleph Dev November 8th, 2000 8:54 AM Dear Netscape, 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. 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. 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... 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... 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. 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. 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 Timothy Stone November 8th, 2000 7:38 AM MAKE A BETTER BROWSER THAN MS/IE, NOTHING ELSE MATTERS. James E. Owens November 8th, 2000 7:37 AM To whom it may concern, Casey Gum November 8th, 2000 7:36 AM
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. Orrin November 8th, 2000 6:26 AM
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. 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. 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. Anonymous November 8th, 2000 5:56 AM Eat shit Netscape! You suck! 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. Nathan Droft November 8th, 2000 5:33 AM Dear Netscape, Michael Roy Ames November 8th, 2000 5:21 AM ok, The Admiral November 8th, 2000 5:06 AM Dave...GO FUCK YOURSELF 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... Lanson November 8th, 2000 4:30 AM Finally a standards compliant browser! I thought... 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.. 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) 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. 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. 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. 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.
A browser thats coming from a company that worries more about deadlines
Im very saddened by this, as although my work has always been cross browser
It seems that this can no longer be the case. I wonder just what Netscape
will
Please Netscape - if you must roll out 6.0 roll it out as beta, then go back
As another thought, how much time and energy has been poured into the extra
-- Christopher J Williams November 8th, 2000 1:26 AM *sigh*
Tom Knight November 8th, 2000 1:21 AM *sigh*
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). 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 ????? David Bourget November 8th, 2000 12:17 AM Hi, 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. 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. <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 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 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 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. 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
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  |
|||
© 2013, O’Reilly Media, Inc. (707) 827-7019 (800) 889-8969 All trademarks and registered trademarks appearing on oreilly.com are the property of their respective owners. |
