Why does Netscape suck SO bad?!!

[greengrouper]

I know that this may enflame some of you, but I firmly believe that Nutscrape should banned from use by any user on this side of the solar system.

I'm not saying that Bill Gates is my hero, but it seems that they are the standard, and Nutscrape should follow that standard.

When 80% of Internet users are on Internet Explorer, that makes IE the standard, no matter what the friggin' W3C says.

Nutscrape is like Algore & Lieberman - sore losers! - they don't like the fact that they lost the browser war so they intentionally make their browser scramble up pages that work perfectly in IE.

And version 6 STILL doesn't support nested frames. WHY?!!!

You see, I have to spend twice as much time finding workarounds to make pages look right in Netsuck after they look perfect in IE on the first try. All this labor for the 12% of you jerks who won't let go of the past and wake up to the fact that NETSCAPE SUCKS!

And Mac users don't have an excuse anymore that there is a version of IE for them. But that's a whole 'nother story...

Just had to vent. :@

[sheila]

Well, you won't get any support for your position from me. And I don't care for the choices in your poll, either.

I'm using NS 6.1 as my default browser. I find that it supports the W3C standards better than IE. I guess it may be a bit fussy on tables (in actual use I, personally, haven't noticed it). I suspect that the trouble you're having with your tables is because your code has errors in it. Have you tried running it through the W3C validator and see what it says?

If you write code that conforms to the standards, it should work in all browsers (including iCab, Konquerer, Opera, etc...)

[greengrouper]

It's not just code. It's java applets and javascript also.

And that's an area that they should really capitalize on!

But I guess if there weren't things that suck, then the things that don't suck wouldn't be anything special. :hehe:

And the poll isn't meant to offend, unless you use Netscape or vote democRAT of course. :P

I know - being in the right can be a lonely place in this day and age. :waa:

[jimbo]

Personally, I don't see the parallell between browsers and politics. Unless, of course, you're comparing Microsoft's business practices to those of the George W. Bush campaign.

-jim

[thudfactor]

Boy's party has control of the White House, the House of Representatives, and my state (not to mention most of the US) and he thinks being on the right is "lonely these days.":wowwee:

Seriously, though, I used to love Netscape pre-AOL, but I switched after IE5. It was just closer to a lot of standards (at the time). I haven't used Netscape 6.1 much (about which more later also). Of course, that may change. I've been known to say that Netscape 6 is like a kick in the head, whereas IE 5.5 is merely a punch in the stomach. I may ultimately move on over to Opera because I hate both Microsoft and AOL so much... but AOL is more focused on selling AOL than delivering a decent browser.

Last time I installed Netscape 6 on my computer, I had to remove a "Free AOL" shortcut from my desktop. And my start menu. And a directory in my start menu. And my IE5.5 favorites bar. And my IE5.5 bookmark menu. And my Netscape bookmark menu. Geez. Do they really think we're going to say "ya know, you dumped so much advertising crap on my computer, I just have to go for it?"

[Tibbits]

I always found the 'Dynamic' HTML in Netscape 4.x amusing.. the only thing that could possible count as dymanic was image rollovers, and even then you had to code very carefully. At least Gecko-based browsers, like IE 5.x, follow the W3C DHTML standards and DOM although there are too few people using Mozz or NN6 for it to be important yet.

[zmax]

Personally, I don't see the parallell between browsers and politics.
Unless youre (he is?) talking office politics! Ill bet AOL et all are hotbeds (cesspools?!) of political intrigue. Which means maybe more time and energy is spent there instead of enriching the product.

As for the other stuff thats great flame bait waiting to happen which I would have to switch my avatar to the little gremlin guy to get into however all Ill say is that I use Netscape 4.7 for email at home and MSIE 5 for browsing now. I use Netscape composer for creating web pages and I preview them in Netscape and MSIE. I use MSIE for browsing now mostly because it boots up quicker than Netscape and some things look better in it than Netscape. I used to be a bigger fan of netscape but oh well. I still like it anyway. However I much prefer the Composer over Front Page Express. Maybe Ill have to try these other browsers.

David

[sheila]

Maybe Ill have to try these other browsers.
iCab is only for Mac. And Konqueror is only for Unix-type machines (under a KDE desktop, I believe).

My point is, that there are many browsers out there. You have to at least *try* to design stuff that works in any browser, unless you're willing to just write off everyone who doesn't use MSIE. Even though an overwhelming majority use that browser, it will never be everyone, and blaming it on NS is kind of missing the point.

As for javascript, I can see that being annoying. I don't use any JS on my site (at least not currently). I messed around with it a bit a while back, and did see that there are a lot of compatibility issues. However, blaming this on NS is kind of silly, as a lot of the compatibility problems were created by MS. Ah, well...

[thudfactor]

Well, fortuntately Futurequest lets us use PHP. So I have little use for JavaScript now... I even got one of the web servers at work set up with PHP so I could do an end-run around client-side scripting.

Once you move to server-side scripting, it's much easier to make interactive sites that work well on anyone's browser. :-)

[bturner]

I will agree and say that all versions of Netscape before 6.0 should be promptly destroyed, but 6.0/6.1 is okay. It's still not perfect though. If you're sick of Netscape, try Mozilla. For me it works many times better than Netscape 6, and actually crashes less!

I also agree with Sheila, and suggest you do your best to validate your code. You can do that here: http://validator.w3.org/

But, you can just ignore the users of that browser, and favor another. With around 85-90% of web users using some version of IE (v4.0 or better), you probably won't make too many people mad.

Some suggested reading:

To Hell with Bad Browsers: http://www.alistapart.com/stories/tohell/

Web Standards Project: http://www.webstandards.org/

Overall, Netscape themselves have work to do, but they're catching up.

Bill

[Deb]

I have edited the poll a tad to make it more relevant to this thread.

Deb
- And that's all I got to say about that. (said in best Forest Gump voice)

[0degree]

I don't think Netscape is bad. However, I do think that they lost a lot of their customers because they were slow in updating their browser. They are known for being slow when releasing updates and the last one released, from 4.x to 6.x, took way too long. People were getting tired of using an old browser (myself included) so their best alternative at the time was IE.

I think both Netscape 6.x and Opera are very cool browsers with cool features (although limited in some aspects). But it will take more than that to make me switch again.

Tony.

[Tatu]

I used Netscape religiously until I downloaded 6.0.

MSIE has definitely won. No doubt about it. I think the figure of surfers using NS 6.x for a couple sites hovered around 1.5%-3%.

I think the current NS6 users who don't use it out of personal preference are little bit stubborn. I mean, before the 5.0 v. 6.0 wars there really was no significant reason for a use to switch to either side. I think that's changed.

Actually, I don't really care. Hablabla.... Whatever floats your boat. To each his own.

[sumengen]

Netscape 6.1 is good. If you design your pages properly, both IE 6.0 and and Netscape 6.1 wil display them properly.
- Don't forget NS 6.1 is not compatible with NS 4.x. So if some website check for browser version netscape 4.x or greater, they are assuming NS6.1 is backwards compatible with NS4.x. Then when they put some non-standard NS4.x code, it screws up the display.

- Java: NS6.1 uses Sun's latest java. There is nothing to compalain. IT is the lates and the fastest java. If your code doesn't run, then check your code or it is a bug with Sun. I know that Java is always backwards compatible so it shouldn't be a problem.

- I don't think NS6.1 is the fastest or the best browser suite yet (but good enough), but i think it is beautiful visually and I admire that it works the same way on both windows and linux.
It is good enough so that it is my primary browser/email client.

[Teacher]

From June 13 to Aug 5th these are the visitors browsers to my teachers site on another [soon former] provider. Admittedly, teachers may not be high tech, but I found these statistics interesting. Sorry that they take up so much room..
Leif.

*MSIE 5
*5876
70.21%
*Netscape 4
*1573
*18.79%
*MSIE 4
*444
*5.30%
*AOL 4
*180
*2.15%
*Netscape 3
*142
*1.69%
*MSIE 6
*57
*0.68%
*Netscape 6
*55
*0.65%
*WebTV 1
*15
*0.17%
*MSIE 3
*13
*0.15%
*AOL 3
*5
*0.05%
*Netscape 2
*4
*0.04%
*Other
*3
*0.03%
*MSIE 2
*1
*0.01%

[sheila]

Sometimes NS3 or NS2 or MSIE3 and so on, are actually search engines, which announce themselves as
Netscape 3 ;(compatible - some search bot)

Also, Opera and Konqueror (and maybe iCab, too) announce themselves as Netscape 4.

[teach1st]

It does appear that educators as a group use Netscape in greater percentages than the regular cyber-public, especially from their workplaces, judging by hits to my educational sites from EDU domains. This seems especially true for Mac users, though I've seen many more Macs armed with IE in the past year.

[Bruce]

OK, I just had to post since my site is so totally wacky with regards to agents. Here are my top few user agents:

31.02% MSIE 5
26.44% Wget 1
13.27% Mozilla 4
7.47% Mozilla 5
4.67% Mozilla 3
3.25% Lynx 2

The #2 spot above goes to a command-line bulk downloader. Lynx is a text-mode browser as well. Needless to say the people that my site attracts are not even close to representative of the web at large.

[sheila]

Originally posted by Bruce:

3.25% Lynx 2
Needless to say the people that my site attracts are not even close to representative of the web at large.
Lynx at over 1%

That says it all.

[electro-nik]

At the risk of repeating what other have mentioned, I'll point out that Mozilla is a better, more stable version of Netscape 6.

Don't like the commercials?
Mozilla doesn't have any.
Want access to more recent versions?
Mozilla provides nightly builds.

I would like to know why AOL/Netscape/Time Warner/Mirabilis et al don't support more of the development of Mozilla. I think it could be a major player with a bit more backing. Or something. :(

[Pontist]

I have to agree. :agree: NETSCAPE SUCKS! While I have no love for Microsoft's heavyhanded business practices, their browser is far superior. And as you say 80% of users use it.

What I do is design and validate for IE and just screw with it enough to get it to at least render in Netscape 4 and 6. (And yes Sheila, I do use the W3C validator.) ;)

I also agree fully with your political analogy.

Electro-nik makes a good point about Mozilla, but the point still stands: We are forced to either design for the few Netscape hold-outs or write them off.

[electro-nik]

Netscape 4.x did have many standards compliance issues, I will admit that. But I firmly believe that if you write code to pass the W3C Validator, as mentioned above, you should have no trouble with Mozilla (translate: Netscape).

I think that one of the reasons the Mozilla project is off to such a slow start is because of the sheer amount of stuff they are trying to make it do. Chatzilla, for example. Who expects an IRC client in their web browser package?

Personally, I am grateful for a viable alternative to that domineering MS product.

electro-nik

<edit>extirpate the typos!</edit>

[thudfactor]

Well, I just noticed this -- and it's very annoying. On the "standard code should work in both Netscape and IE" tip, javascript on a page I manage professionally breaks in Netscape 6.1 (and Mozilla), but works just fine in Netscape 4 and IE. The javascript breaks without so much as a javascript error, too. Grr.

That's what really burns me about netscape 6: things dont work in the new version that work in the older versions, and the "official" position is "well, you should have written your code better." :@

Probably a good reason why Netscape 6.1 is having difficulty getting market share from Netscape 4.7....

Other than that, I like Mozilla. I might use it for my more casual browsing. I especially like the fact that there are very few "Free AOL 6.0!" shortcuts involved....

[PaulKroll]

I've been waiting on this one. Let's see:

Netscape: I've said it before, but that won't stop me from repeating. AOL/Netscape made a mistake releasing the still-beta Mozilla as a "finished, released" NS 6. Exactly why they did it is debatable.

AOL/Netscape also includes all those wonderful bits of software to make your life revolve around AOL. Also not exactly a bright idea, at least not if you make it hard for people to NOT use those "extras."

Mozilla and MS IE are both far more standards compliant than the miserable NS 4.7x series. I'll give MS credit where it's due.

One problem I've run into in the limited amount of JavaScript that I have to contend with is that Mozilla JavaScript works a LOT more like IE's than like Netscapes. This is a combination of NS 4.x's JavaScript being a bit off, and NS itself having nonstandard tags and ways of rendering things. Often, premade scripts check for "IE" and "Netscape" and if they use the code meant for Netscape 4, they're gonna die. But the code for IE stands a good chance of working in Mozilla. That's only a good chance: this is a beta browser still. No matter what AOL/Netscape wants to claim...

Opera still has a following: still has people PAYING for it, of all things, or using the ad-filled version. I don't know how long they've been doing this, but last I checked Opera by default, sent a user-agent that looked like MS IEs. Of course, other browsers can do that, as can any proxies between you and them. It's a good bet that some of the 80% you're seeing is actually Opera, faking the UserAgent. Not a high percentage, for sure, but some.

This MS apologizing, this "give up against the machine" is slightly odd. Folks, what are you: are you all the major players in your business? If not, why haven't you given up yet? How isn't that the same attitude?

Last...

The day AOL decides it wants to, it can change to make NS 6.x the default browser for millions of users. This would cause some grief for their users, but that wouldn't be the first time they've caused such trouble: ask Terra about their e-mail server policies. By the time Mozilla is at 1.0.0, it and IE will both be more standards compliant. That doesn't mean the pain will go away: what, you expect this to be EASY? But it does mean you'll have a fighting chance of making code that works well in both.

Unless you use Frontpage. Then all bets are off. :)