Reader Comments -- Netscape Navigator 6.0 to Fail Standards Compliance

Listen Print

Reader Comments -- Netscape Navigator 6.0 to Fail Standards Compliance
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

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...

You wouldn't be able to call you family back home in (insert country here).
You woulnd't be able to watch television broadcasts.
You woulnd't be able to listen to the radio.
Mobiles wouldn't work
You wouldn't be reading this (no Internet)

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.

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

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

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

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

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...

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

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

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.

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.

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

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

David Chan

November 7th, 2000 12:31 PM

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.

Seperate the mail, news and web browser. It's unnecessary bloat and impairs freedom of choice.
Bring back the roaming access feature.
Get rid of your JVM and use external JVMs
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

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).

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)

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

Brendan Lough

Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Browse Books & Videos