MozillaZine

Some Comments on the Leaked 6 Beta

Wednesday March 29th, 2000

If you visit sites other than MozillaZine, you might have gotten wind of an accidentally public version of Netscape 6 Beta. What had happened was that Netscape was doing some staging tests on an ftp server, and some folks got wind of this (and the direct links to the files) and spread the news far and wide. MozillaZine considered posting this news, but we contacted Netscape and they requested that we hold off, and told us that what was on the FTP server isn't necessarily everything that would be in the final Beta release. The links have since been removed. This release wasn't "unofficial", it was "accidental", and it wasn't a "preview release". The Beta itself may very well be branded a "Preview Release", but what people got was not some special "sneak peek", or anything of the sort.

The Netscape 6 Beta is coming, though, and we'll let you know as soon as there is something to report.


#1 Netscape 6 Preview 1 (Windows)

by onyo <efontejr@netscape.net>

Thursday March 30th, 2000 6:43 AM

Reply to this message

I downloaded it, and using it now for almost 2 hours, it stable and has more features than the seamonkey. Built ID is 200003206.

#4 Re: Netscape 6 Preview 1 (Windows)

by onyo <efontejr@netscape.net>

Thursday March 30th, 2000 7:09 AM

Reply to this message

Build ID 2000032306.

#22 screen shots?

by tmg8722

Thursday March 30th, 2000 10:40 AM

Reply to this message

Does anyone have any screen shots or know where I can find the build?

#50 screen shot here

by Flibble

Friday March 31st, 2000 9:14 PM

Reply to this message

<http://www.arcsite.de/hp/flibble>

no build, site quote isn't large enough :)

#14 Re: Netscape 6 Preview 1 (Windows)

by Hendy99 <gbhendy1@bigpond.net.au>

Thursday March 30th, 2000 8:22 AM

Reply to this message

Isn't that to be expected with all the proprietry code in it? How they can add 11MB of bloat to a 5MB seamonkey build is quite beyond me :P

#19 Sun Java 2

by ataferner

Thursday March 30th, 2000 10:07 AM

Reply to this message

i believe that 8MB of the 11 MB bloat is actually for Java 2 someone can correct me if i'm wrong.. not to forget that it also includes the Messenger etc...

#29 Re: Sun Java 2

by basic <_basic@yahoo.com>

Thursday March 30th, 2000 12:50 PM

Reply to this message

Moz ~4MB JRE 1.3.0 RC2 ~5MB (US) JRE 1.3.0 RC2 ~7MB {Int) JRE 1.2 ~8MB {Int)

I'm wondering if JRE could use Moz's widget and ui capabilities? Would that help? Since moz is internationalized...

basic

#2 If you want the address ...

by danielhill <danielhill@hotmail.com>

Thursday March 30th, 2000 6:56 AM

Reply to this message

#3 Re: If you want the address ...

by danielhill <danielhill@hotmail.com>

Thursday March 30th, 2000 7:00 AM

Reply to this message

Oh yeah, I got this from BetaNews, so don't sue me :) At 9:56pm AWST it seemed to work. The file is approx 16 megs.

I must also say I have NOT downloaded this software.

#6 Re: If you want the address ...

by Hendy99 <gbhendy1@bigpond.net.au>

Thursday March 30th, 2000 7:52 AM

Reply to this message

Link still active, slow as hell

#24 still up . .

by cottonlt <cottonlt@earthlink.net>

Thursday March 30th, 2000 11:02 AM

Reply to this message

i'm d'loading from my T1 @ work 64kb/sec . . . 1100am mountain time . .

#27 Re: still up . .

by tmg8722

Thursday March 30th, 2000 11:42 AM

Reply to this message

And where is that?

#9 Link is not active anymore...N/T

by Quelish

Thursday March 30th, 2000 7:55 AM

Reply to this message

N/T

#37 anyone have this thing?

by tmg8722

Thursday March 30th, 2000 5:31 PM

Reply to this message

if so, please let me know

outpost104 at hotmail

#5 I just need to vent

by johnlar <johnlar@tfn.net>

Thursday March 30th, 2000 7:13 AM

Reply to this message

I know this is slightly off topic, but I just need to vent. A week ago I reported a major bug that would effect the ability of netscape to go beta. The problem was that if you have a pop account setup in 4.7x in MS Win and you install just base from the installer migration will fail completly. Even though I had the permissions to set it to blocker they have yet to even notice the bug or comment on it. I'm worried this won't get fixed. Bug # is 14645 <http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14645>

#12 Re: I just need to vent

by sdm

Thursday March 30th, 2000 8:02 AM

Reply to this message

That's not the correct bug (unless you are really peter trudelle). There were a number of pdt+ bugs concerning installer issues. The bug like the one you mention may be fixed in the commercial tree, but it may not have made it to the mozilla tree yet. I'm sure they wouldn't let something that obvious slip by.

#23 Re: Re: I just need to vent

by johnlar <johnlar@tfn.net>

Thursday March 30th, 2000 10:42 AM

Reply to this message

No if you read on I reoped the bug because it had been marked as worksforme because they couldn't dupilcate it. I stated specifically how to duplicate it, and moved it to blocker. the problem is that if you only install base the profile migration fails on pop I reported this under profile migration, note there is no other major bugs for the profile migration group.

#57 blocker?

by mattdm <mattdm@mattdm.org>

Sunday April 2nd, 2000 11:17 AM

Reply to this message

I'm sorry, but that doens't sound like a beta blocker to me. It sounds like a serious problem that definitely needs to be fixed, but yet which affects only a subset of users and isn't fatal (only inconvenient) even then.

#7 Screenshots? Info??

by Quelish

Thursday March 30th, 2000 7:54 AM

Reply to this message

Anyone have screenshots of it at least? How close is it to the nightly builds? Why was it a 16 Mb download when Mozilla is 5 or 6 Mb? What are they including that is upping the size so much?

Man, if it ends up being 16 Mb then there goes the whole "smaller download" approach...

#11 It's not that big...

by Kovu <Kovu401@netscape.net>

Thursday March 30th, 2000 7:58 AM

Reply to this message

Looks like someone tricked the installer and made it all one download, like 4.x. The original installer version, the one that they ripped down, was a tiny download and you could choose which modules you wanted, and then the installer would go to the ftp site and d/l only what you wanted. You could even choose Navigator only.

The throbber kicks ass. It's a little brief, but it still kicks.

#15 Re: Screenshots? Info??

by locka <adamlock@eircom.net>

Thursday March 30th, 2000 8:22 AM

Reply to this message

The browser on it's own won't be 16mb but if you throw in all the crap that an official Netscape release entails, e.g. AIM, WinAmp, Realplayer etc. then it'll will certainly be 10Mb at least, probably more.

Of course, users now have a choice. If the Netscape release is too big, they can stick with Mozilla. It's pretty much the same thing afterall. If that's still to big for some people with its 5-6Mb download (compared to 30Mb+ for IE) then I'm sure that someone will produce a lean and mean distro without the flashy chrome, the mail & news, the Java support etc. and that could probably be done in 3Mb.

#21 No, they have a choice with Netscape, too

by Kovu <Kovu401@netscape.net>

Thursday March 30th, 2000 10:32 AM

Reply to this message

In case you hadn't used the original installer program, it is pretty small, and lets you select only those features you want to download, then goes and fetches those from the ftp site (when it's functioning, that is). You can download only the Navigator browser, minus everything else, if you want to.

#51 Re: Screenshots? Info??

by Flibble

Friday March 31st, 2000 9:15 PM

Reply to this message

screenshot at

<http://www.arcsite.de/hp/flibble>

it appears to be a M14 build with a few buttons and menus changed round

#8 Beta 6 eh? Maybe rephrase that... n/t

by Kovu <Kovu401@netscape.net>

Thursday March 30th, 2000 7:55 AM

Reply to this message

n/t

#10 I think they made a mistake by announcing the Beta

by sacolcor

Thursday March 30th, 2000 7:58 AM

Reply to this message

By preannouncing the Beta, they've locked themselves into a schedule in which they will be forced to release or risk a severe hit to their image. Unfortunately, software development doesn't work like that...there's too much opportunity for a last minute blocker bug to come along. Far better, IMHO, to hold off on a press fanfare until they have a shipable product in hand. Sadly, marketing departments often feel the need to make promises on behalf of the engineers....

#13 It's Still NOT GOOD ENOUGH

by Terrigena

Thursday March 30th, 2000 8:04 AM

Reply to this message

I realize this is an unofficial pre-beta release, but it still isn't good enough in my opinion. I've been reading comments on several messages boards regarding the quality of this pre-release, the consensus seems to be that so far there is no reason to upgrade. Mozilla still has page layout problems, it still is lacking in DHTML support, the installation doesn't allow for as much customization as IE 5 does...I could go on and on. We're still about a month away from Beta and I'm hoping many of these issues are resolved by then. I don't know if this is possible, but I'd like to see an installation program like that found in MSIE, one which allows the user to customize their browser features and then download them. This would be great for people who don't want to download an 18 meg file on a dial up connection or when they just want the very base installation.

The one thing I *did* like about this version was the "N" icon in the top right corner. 'Twas very flashy :)

#16 Got Screenshots? N/T

by Quelish

Thursday March 30th, 2000 8:39 AM

Reply to this message

N/T

#17 So? It's BETA ONE! n/t

by Kovu <Kovu401@netscape.net>

Thursday March 30th, 2000 8:50 AM

Reply to this message

n/t

#30 Re: It's Still NOT GOOD ENOUGH

by basic <_basic@yahoo.com>

Thursday March 30th, 2000 12:52 PM

Reply to this message

> I realize this is an unofficial pre-beta release, but it still isn't good enough in my opinion. I've been reading comments on several messages boards regarding the quality of this pre-release, the consensus seems to be that so far there is no reason to upgrade.

Well, I doubt Mozilla developers and Moz fans here would really want typical web users to start upgrading yet! Testing? yes, upgrading? No! Moz is not ready!!!! True!! Beta is for upgrade! NOT!!!!

> Mozilla still has page layout problems, it still is lacking in DHTML support, the installation doesn't allow for as much customization as IE 5 does...I could go on and on.

What customization? If you are talking about a pref ui for all the customizations that moz can do (that IE can do and more), no sweat, it will be fixed. Again I must repeat. This is BETA1. There will be a BETA2 from netscape I heard. (Maybe that will be the real Mozilla beta?)

> We're still about a month away from Beta and I'm hoping many of these issues are resolved by then. I don't know if this is possible, but I'd like to see an installation program like that found in MSIE, one which allows the user to customize their browser features and then download them.

Make that BETA2 (or later), but that is also up to netscape. There was some effort to saperate the mail-news component from the browser component, but I haven't heard anything about that in a while.

> This would be great for people who don't want to download an 18 meg file on a dial up connection or when they just want the very base installation.

It would be great, but this is beta. If people feel that downloading 18 meg is a pain, then don't! Beta is not for everybody.

> The one thing I *did* like about this version was the "N" icon in the top right corner. 'Twas very flashy :)

Speaking of the throbber, could all the throbbers that were in the throbber contests be made available in chromezone... (with author's permission of course!)

Basic

#32 Re: Re: It's Still NOT GOOD ENOUGH

by basic <_basic@yahoo.com>

Thursday March 30th, 2000 1:16 PM

Reply to this message

> allows the user to customize their browser features and then download them.

Check this comment:

<http://www.mozillazine.or…le=1278&message=21#21>

#39 DHTML problems

by superyooser

Friday March 31st, 2000 12:52 AM

Reply to this message

I had thought there was a lack of DHTML support too, but I knew that Mozilla was supposed to already support HTML 4.01, JavaScript 1.5, and CSS1. Then it hit me. The problems I have are probably caused by the new document object model, DOM1. (*You* may have encountered true DHTML bugs/lack of support.)

The W3C's DOM1 is different from both Netscape's and IE's DOMs. I haven't looked into the specifics yet, but apparently the common JS object detection that webmasters use now (document.layers for NS and document.all for IE) does not take into account whatever the object is for DOM1. (Anybody know?) If you are lumping "Netscape 4+" browsers together in a JS if statement, that will probably give you "DHTML problems" too.

#58 Re: DHTML problems- yeah

by dhickey <f43@hotmail.com>

Monday April 3rd, 2000 9:36 AM

Reply to this message

didya see how many broken sites there are out there!

#60 Re: DHTML problems

by jhewitt <joe@joehewitt.com>

Tuesday April 4th, 2000 3:55 PM

Reply to this message

The DHTML you are referring to is the hacked-up, non-standards compliant DHTML that everybody uses today.

Don't complain if you ugly-hack-DHTML doesn't work in Mozilla, because it's not Mozilla's fault. You are going to have to go to W3C.org and learn the right way to do things (learn the DOM) and then fix your code.

#18 Java is 1 of the big sinners

by ramion

Thursday March 30th, 2000 9:40 AM

Reply to this message

Here is the reason why Netscape 6 (also know as preview 1) (build 6.0.15-nb1b.2000032306) is so much bigger then mozilla: Sun Java 2 7498 K Mail & News 1052 K Netscape Instant Messenger 430 K Quality Feedback Agent 243 K Spell Checker 462 K Net2Phone 854 K Shockwave Flash Plug-in 132 K 10671 K The total size of the istaller is around: 16847 K So the last 6176 most be the "normal" mozilla (+ maybe some other small things...) So JAVA is the big sinner here. Its fills ALOT.

Hope this answers some of the question about it fills so much.

And about how it looks like. It looks like the nightly builds you can download from mozilla.org. Only new thing is a VERY cool new icon in the upper right corner. It looks really flashy....

#20 Correct me if I'm wrong...

by Kovu <Kovu401@netscape.net>

Thursday March 30th, 2000 10:28 AM

Reply to this message

Since Java2 is new, and Mozilla evidently uses it as a standard (does it?), isn't the Java2 addition there specifically to set itself up on the host computer just the once? In other words, isn't Java2 a one-time only upgrade that you wouldn't need to download and set up twice? Hence, when 6.1 comes out, you wouldn't have to download Java2 again?

#28 Re: Java is 1 of the big sinners

by beastie

Thursday March 30th, 2000 12:49 PM

Reply to this message

"Only new thing is a VERY cool new icon in the upper right corner. It looks really flashy...."

Almost too flashy. I found it to be a little distracting.

#34 Nah, it rules. :) 'sides, you'll tune it out n/t

by Kovu <Kovu401@netscape.net>

Thursday March 30th, 2000 2:25 PM

Reply to this message

n/t

#25 Java fixed?

by damian <daemonc@netscape.net>

Thursday March 30th, 2000 11:30 AM

Reply to this message

I've been hearing a lot of talk about Sun's Java 2 being included with the Netscape builds. Could it be that the Java plugin system, which was broken since M12, is now fixed? Will we be able to load applets? And dare I ask it: Will java work on Linux?

Way back in M12 or whenever, they said that Java was unsupported on Linux because they were still waiting for someone to make a Java plugin for Linux. Does the Java 2 package from Sun/Blackdown include such a plugin? Do I ask too many questions?

#26 The link is alive and well (n/t)

by Hendy99 <gbhendy1@bigpond.net.au>

Thursday March 30th, 2000 11:33 AM

Reply to this message

.

#31 The link is not alive nor well anymore.

by jonde <joona.nuutinen@pp.inet.fi>

Thursday March 30th, 2000 1:02 PM

Reply to this message

But I don't care. I don't want to take sneak peek, because I just want to feel a BIG BANG when the beta comes out, and feel like: Whoa! Allright! Yea! It would spoil all this waiting. But still I'd like to see a screenshot...

#33 Why no alt+arrow for back and forward?

by bink

Thursday March 30th, 2000 1:17 PM

Reply to this message

The beta is really smooth, SSL works, java works, and not at all buggy, very nice. However, I wish they'd hurry up and put in alt+left arrow (back) and alt+right arror (forward) for navigation. Otherwise, based at what I'm looking at here, the first beta should be a success.

#35 Java works? News to me...

by Kovu <Kovu401@netscape.net>

Thursday March 30th, 2000 2:27 PM

Reply to this message

I managed to get it to crash my system twice last night <http://www.naboo.com> but other than that, no, Java has yet to work for me.

#36 Java worked for me..

by ramion

Thursday March 30th, 2000 2:39 PM

Reply to this message

All java I have tried so far has worked...It havent crashed on my system yet...

I sure looks nice. I just wish that they would get another skin for the browser.. And get some of all the shortcut keys back in...

#38 Java

by Hendy99 <gbhendy1@bigpond.net.au>

Friday March 31st, 2000 12:22 AM

Reply to this message

After I installed this monster (took me 3 hours to download!) I noticed one little thing - Java is now working with the Seamonkey build I had previously installed - WOOHOO!

#40 this thing is great!

by jazzman45

Friday March 31st, 2000 12:53 AM

Reply to this message

this build really shows promise, but i have to bring up the UI, along with everyone else.

Is this really what they're going to use? I mean, it isn't bad, but then you look at some of the stuff that isn't there on the front page and some of those images look like crap! Do you think that this was purposely leaked before the 'official' release...i only wish netscape had some trick up their sleeve ;) -=jimbo

#41 Netscape 6?

by arielb

Friday March 31st, 2000 1:01 AM

Reply to this message

whatever happened to Netscape 5? I'm using 4.7 and I can't believe I completely missed the entire 5.x series

#42 Re: Netscape 6?

by danielhill <danielhill@hotmail.com>

Friday March 31st, 2000 5:39 AM

Reply to this message

I don't think there was a 5.x. I'm guessing this is what the old MozillaClassic codebase would have been called.

Since 6 is built from the ground up, with no legacy code, they decided to call it 6.0

#49 NS5 was MozClassic. Canned. Now it's NS6 (n/t)

by jesusX <jesus_x@mozillanews.org>

Friday March 31st, 2000 7:09 PM

Reply to this message

.

#43 Put it on another Server?

by NikoP

Friday March 31st, 2000 6:17 AM

Reply to this message

Hi, why somebody who got it downloaded can't put it on another Server? I tried to download it from the Netscape Server but it is too slow and often it finishes before the download is complete!

#44 Re: Another Server

by Hendy99 <gbhendy1@bigpond.net.au>

Friday March 31st, 2000 6:33 AM

Reply to this message

You give me a server to put it on and i'll upload it :)

#45 Use a virtual drive

by cralize

Friday March 31st, 2000 9:31 AM

Reply to this message

You can set up an account in some free virtual drive like <http://www.idrive.com>

#47 Re: Re: Another Server

by AintNoThang <thayne@inlandnet.com>

Friday March 31st, 2000 12:28 PM

Reply to this message

Hendy, e-mail it to me and I'll upload it to my server & post the link.

#48 Re: Re: Re: Another Server

by AintNoThang <thayne@inlandnet.com>

Friday March 31st, 2000 12:38 PM

Reply to this message

Nevermind, I got it. =o)

#46 Download here

by dhickey <f43@hotmail.com>

Friday March 31st, 2000 9:53 AM

Reply to this message

#61 This link will die once the browser is available

by dhickey <f43@hotmail.com>

Tuesday April 4th, 2000 4:31 PM

Reply to this message

This link will die once the browser is available

#52 Screen Shot

by Flibble

Friday March 31st, 2000 9:17 PM

Reply to this message

at <http://www.arcsite.de/hp/flibble>

No build, as quota is not large enough

#54 See www.fileclicks.com too...

by wolfseyn

Friday March 31st, 2000 10:16 PM

Reply to this message

#53 Screen Shot

by Flibble

Friday March 31st, 2000 9:40 PM

Reply to this message

at <http://www.arcsite.de/hp/flibble>

No build, as quota is not large enough

#55 Possible Netscape Beta Release Date

by danielhill <danielhill@hotmail.com>

Sunday April 2nd, 2000 4:33 AM

Reply to this message

According to PC World <http://www.pcworld.com/pc…icle/0,1510,15969,00.html> the first Netscape 6 beta will be released April 5.

#56 The NS 6 GUI!

by alik

Sunday April 2nd, 2000 10:19 AM

Reply to this message

Hi,

Is this the GUI that will be used by Netscape?? or they are still keeping thier GUI under covers??

No disrespects.. but it is not sexy enough for the spoilt people who have shadows under thier mouse pointers.

Ali K

#59 What about the skins

by tmg8722

Monday April 3rd, 2000 9:52 AM

Reply to this message

I have the older mozilla, does anyone know anything about the skins?

#62 netscape 6 NOT big

by tssr

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 4:44 AM

Reply to this message

netscape 6 is 16 mb as it is currently a FULL FEATURED preview. the final will be 5 mb, and then the components will be added on, much like IE, which has a base install of 15MB, which is WAY bigger than netscape.

the only thing i dont like is that the interface is not platform specific, forcing Windows users to mac ways, and mac users to windows ways, etc...