MozillaZine

Netscape 6 PR1 Released!

Wednesday April 5th, 2000

To get the official Netscape 6 Preview Release, visit the Netscape Download site now!

You all are probably aware of the many features of Netscape 6, due to its Mozilla foundation: Better Standards Support than any browser currently on the market, with XML support that is truly unmatched, providing for a clear and easy path for the creation of the next generation of Internet-based applications and sites. Page Rendering Speed - Compared to 4.72? It's a speed demon. Open Source - Even if Netscape has bugs, we know they know about them, because end users and developers alike all have access to Bugzilla. Localization and Internationalization - Unicode support throughout the app allows pages to be displayed in the language they were created in, and for email to have text and script from different languages in the same message. The app itself is easily customized for new locales. Now that the number of U.S. Internet users has finally been eclipsed by the number of users outside the U.S., this feature takes on an even greater importance. Sidebar - whether you like it or not, it's a great boon for Web site designers. It allows them to have a persistent connection to their readers; before, their connection stopped at the webpage. And sidebar panels are created using existing Web standards - no C++ knowledge required, so you can quickly create cross platform "mini-apps" or summarized content (similar to the RSS content used for MyNetscape) for your site's visitors. Mail - Although rough around the edges, the Mail support will be leaps and bounds above the support in Communicator 4.x. Support for multiple IMAP and POP accounts (and, in PR2, web mail accounts) is a big plus (no more having to create a whole new user profile for each mail account). Customization - very few applications, if any, come close to the customizability of Mozilla (and Netscape 6, by extension). Cookie Management - This allows you to set rules for cookie acceptance on a per-site basis, and manage the cookies currently in your cookie list. I could go on, but I think you get the idea.

To this, Netscape 6 brings an integration with their other products, such as Instant Messenger, as well as branded sidebar content from sites such as CNN and ZDNet. In addition, Netscape 6 has a better installation than Communicator, allowing you to download and install only the components that you want.

More than anything, I think that this Preview Release proves that Netscape is really embracing the goals of Mozilla: a global, cross-platform reach, standards support, customizability, extensibility, and openness.


#1 what's the deal?

by jhewitt <joe@joehewitt.com>

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 8:19 AM

Reply to this message

Hey, what happened to my last couple posts?? Were they deleted for some odd reason?

#2 old build

by jhewitt <joe@joehewitt.com>

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 8:21 AM

Reply to this message

The Netscape beta is using a somewhat old build... several bugs that have recently been fixed in Mozilla are still broken in the beta... looks like the build is from March 31st, according to the build id.

I guess all the weird re-paint bugs in the latest builds couldn't get fixed in time, so they resorted to an older build.

#4 Based on M14, roughlywum

by sab39

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 8:40 AM

Reply to this message

Netscape branched for beta around the time that M14 was released (I forget whether it was just before, just after or at the exact same time). The only fixes to go into the beta after that time were fixes to beta1 PDT+ bugs, so that the beta would remain stable. Beta2 is, I believe, going to be based on M16, so you'll get your up-to-the-minute bugfixes then (except that by the time that beta is released, we'll probably be nearly at M17...)

Understand? ;)

Stuart.

#70 No Posts Were Deleted by Me

by mozineAdmin

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 7:43 PM

Reply to this message

No posts were deleted, unless it was a computer or user error. I was on a plane to SF all day, and I'm the only one who can delete posts.

#3 feature - complete?

by wtmcgee

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 8:27 AM

Reply to this message

i assume this isnt going to be branded a "beta" but a preview release right? because mozilla doesnt have skin switching in yet, which i was looking forward to.. but all in all, this is a great release, whatever you would like to call it. Its my primary browser now for sure =)

#5 Mac Version

by Malte <ubl@schaffhausen.de>

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 8:46 AM

Reply to this message

It doensnt start up on my Mac.

Older G3/300 - 320 Megs System 8.5

Later,

Malte

#8 Re: Mac Version

by BigShu

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 9:06 AM

Reply to this message

Delete your old Mozilla prefs from the prefs folder in the System folder, as well as the Mozilla folder in your documents folder. Thats what I had to do, anyway.

#24 Re: Deleting mozregistry.dat etc.

by Ryouga

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 9:54 AM

Reply to this message

I deleted these files also (sorta like doing a clean install of a new nightly build) and had no problems installing PR1 on my G3/400.

#6 Slow FTP

by locka <adamlock@eircom.net>

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 8:53 AM

Reply to this message

Anyone else have trouble connecting to <ftp://ftp.netscape.com>? It's flat out refusing to respond in anyway to me. The Mozilla FTP site is fine but that's not much good since NC6.0 isn't there.

#37 Re: Slow FTP

by ywwg

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 10:54 AM

Reply to this message

try just using the ftp command at a dos or shell prompt. I also found it slow also until I tried that.

#7 I wish they had made a new skin

by ramion

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 8:54 AM

Reply to this message

The current one is soooo ugly. They gray area is ugly. The buttoms good be alot better. The skin could be much better. I think this skin is going to scare alot of people away. And making some say that the browser is bad and stupid.. I don't know. I think they should have made a new skin for this preview..

But the trobber is cool. I like this new one.

#78 Re: I wish they had made a new skin

by briansmith <briansmith@iname.com>

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 10:34 PM

Reply to this message

* Has anybody thought of using the Java Swing interface as the "Standard" skin for Netscape/Mozilla? I personally think most aspects of Swing look great, and it isn't a radical departure from most native UI's. Besides there's no use in re-creating a cross-platform UI when Sun did it years ago. (Note that I still think they should implement it using XUL, not Java).

* Since Navigator 6 ships with Java 2, I would imagine that a lot more Swing-based applets and browser custimizations written in Java, and it would be nice if those customized components didn't look "even more foreign" than Navigator.

*I also think with seamless integration with Java (including the UI) would be a very powerful selling point for Navigator in corporate intranet environments.

* Finally, Since Netscape has the iPlanet alliance with Sun, I think Netscape could copy Java's UI without any interference from Sun--in fact, I think Sun would be the first to help.

#9 Skins

by eMonk <kmg1@post.com>

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 9:06 AM

Reply to this message

The NS Preview Release looks and feels good here at work, though the real test will come when I try it on my aging P/233 at home.

On the subject of skins, perhaps in the final version of NS6 (and Mozilla if they are going to follow a similar approach to the download/install) could prompt the user in the setup wizard to choose a skin or stick with the default. That way the user selected skin could be rolled into the installation procedure an they wouldn't have to download a skin and apply it seperately.

#61 Runs great on a P200 w/96MB

by hodeleri <drbrain@segment7.net>

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 6:00 PM

Reply to this message

I'm here posting from a P200 (non-MMX) with 96MB of memory. It starts up fast and runs great so far. (posting from NS6PR1)

As far as the skin goes, I'm going to end up writing my own skin. I want buttons down the side by the scroll bar, and other cool stuff...

#10 Bombs out on Win2k

by hkrause <hkrause@capu.net>

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 9:09 AM

Reply to this message

The new Netscape 6 doesn't run on my edition of Win2k, which is the full retail release. It bombs out, indicates a log file is being create, but doesn't indicate the name of the log file or its location.

Bummer.

#14 Re: Bombs out on Win2k

by wtmcgee

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 9:22 AM

Reply to this message

whenever any program crashes in windows NT a log file is created... not just netscape 6

#17 Re: Re: Bombs out on Win2k

by hkrause <hkrause@capu.net>

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 9:30 AM

Reply to this message

Yes, I know that, but the indication was a special Netscape log file was being created...somewhere.

#19 Re: Re: Re: Bombs out on Win2k

by gregquinn

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 9:40 AM

Reply to this message

Me too, tested it this morning (and posted, but for some reason the post was deleted after about 15 minutes on thsi site... spooky) It just plain crashes on my win2000 server box when the setup program starts.... this is a pretty hopeless

#40 Re: Re: Re: Re: Bombs out on Win2k

by wtmcgee

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 11:39 AM

Reply to this message

try deleteing the whole netscape directory, as well as c:\windows\mozregistry.dat

#42 Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Bombs out on Win2k

by gregquinn

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 12:02 PM

Reply to this message

yeah, I don't think think I feel like doing that for an old mozilla build, but thanks for pointing out the possible source of the bombing.

#47 Re: Re: Re: Bombs out on Win2k

by jesusX <jesus_x@mozillanews.org>

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 1:08 PM

Reply to this message

Do a file search for any file created around the time you tried to install the broswer.

#11 Proxy problems

by bstephan <bstephan@highmark.com>

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 9:10 AM

Reply to this message

It's smart enough to realize I'm going through a proxy. It would be nice if it asked what PORT I need to use.

Can't download it.

Guess I'll wait till they give me a place to download the whole thing or fix the proxy problem.

#13 Re: Proxy problems (hmm..)

by bstephan <bstephan@highmark.com>

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 9:22 AM

Reply to this message

I think I might possible have been at fault. I removed the Proxy for my FTP in Internet Options. It now says it's connecting... But no response.

IE accesses FTP fine through the proxy even though it is not needed.

I hate these active setup programs... Although the shorter download when they actually work is nice.

#25 Re: Proxy problems

by kye

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 9:57 AM

Reply to this message

<ftp://ftp.netscape.com.au…6/english/6_pr1/win32/sea> containsthe full one. I'd advise you go to the root direcorty of that server and find it yourself, becasue this is from memory... :)

Also the layout should be the same on the other ftp servers... choose one in your own country :)

#100 Re: Re: Proxy problems - Full version

by bstephan <bstephan@highmark.com>

Thursday April 6th, 2000 4:46 PM

Reply to this message

Thanks! found it! Close. Actual URL is... <ftp://ftp.netscape.com/pu…/6_PR1/windows/win32/sea/>

Thanks again.

#12 Alladvantage

by tangduc <DucTang@netscape.net>

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 9:17 AM

Reply to this message

The circle on alladvantage doesn't turn green when I surf the Web with Netscape 6 or Mozilla. In short I don't get paid by AllAdvantage when I surf with Netscape 6, only with the older versions. Does anybody know if this will change or anything? Thanks in advance.

#30 Re: Alladvantage

by gerbilpower <gerbil@ucdavis.edu>

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 10:10 AM

Reply to this message

I don't think that this is a Mozilla issue, but one with AllAdvantage since I think the AllAdvantage software detects whether or not you're using a specific browser (NS or IE) and don't think that Mozilla is supported yet. Just send an email to AllAdvantage about this.

<:3)~~

#50 Make Moz/Netscape6 pretend that it's IE

by dave532

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 2:03 PM

Reply to this message

With AllAdvantage for some reason it'll take any Window with 'Microsoft Internet Explorer' in the title bar as being IE however it seems to check for Netscape a different way.

To get round this edit the chrome/navigator/locale/en-US/navigator.dtd file(OK I Windows the slashes will be backslashes but I'm in Linux at the moment). Replacing the occurances of the string Mozilla (or Netscape if you're using the beta release) with Microsoft Internet Explorer. This should then work and alladvantage will show green.

However please email AllAdvantage about this problem so they can fix it properly.

#15 sidebar

by Kohath

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 9:28 AM

Reply to this message

Is there a resource that explains the sidebar?

As a web designer, I want the supposed benefits of the sidebar, but I couldn't find a document on the mozilla site that describe how to get these.

#64 Sidebar resources

by hodeleri <drbrain@segment7.net>

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 6:27 PM

Reply to this message

The sidebar is nothing more than a XUL script (which is a very cool language) try the following:

Fooling with XUL: <http://www.xml.com/pub/2000/03/15/xul/index.html>

XUL category at ODP (dmoz.org) <http://dmoz.org/Computers…ges/XML/Applications/XUL/>

#94 Re: Sidebar resources

by ornduff

Thursday April 6th, 2000 10:53 AM

Reply to this message

The My Sidebar Develeloper's Guide is on <http://developer.netscape…rowser/sidebar/index.html>

#92 Re: sidebar

by LordRuey <atlanta@lcc.net>

Thursday April 6th, 2000 9:26 AM

Reply to this message

Try <http://home.netscape.com/browsers/6/index.html>

There is end user *and* developer information on My Sidebar here.

#16 Installed it on 3 computers

by WillyWonka

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 9:29 AM

Reply to this message

I've installed it on 3 computers now. 98, NT4, Win2k. The only problem I've had was with the Java part of the install in Win2k - it hung. I ended the task and loaded up netscape just fine. Java applets don't load though.

#18 customize button

by WillyWonka

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 9:31 AM

Reply to this message

The customize button on the personal toolbar! gives you a 404 error :)

#20 Some thoughts...

by Silverthorn <shawn.fumo@the-spa.com>

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 9:46 AM

Reply to this message

Well, looks like I managed to beat the server being bogged down. Got it before it was mentioned on the main page.

Downloaded the Mac version...

The installation program looks good, and I could see the files for each module in the directory, but what's up with it being hardwired? There was no option to download only certaim modules. It downloaded everything, including instant messager which I didn't really want...

As a note, would also be nice to have an option to load modules from the local disc instead of just the internet, so that it could be installed without needing an internet connection...

I like the splash screen, but it takes a looooong time for it to actually get to the browser, even on this G4.

As for the UI, I have no problem with the blue part. I just don't think the gray looks good. Maybe if it was white instead, or the dark blue.

One thing someone mentioned. Is it feasible to create a skin in which part of the ui changes color depending on the background color of the current page? That'd be pretty neat, if a bit odd...

I noticed the sidebar cannot be dragged anymore, but opens and closes by clicking the border. Not sure which design I like better.

That cookie editor is nifty...

I like how the unicode support puts the unicode tags for stuff instead of gibberish. To be a little off-topic, how do I get it to actually display the japanese characters? Do I need a special font, or the japanese version of the browser, or how does that work exactly?

And one other note... seems like apple-q doesn't quit the program?

I think it is looking good. Hopefully people will hold out judgement at least a little in terms of the final version compared to this just being a preview.

I do think skins will become important to get average people interested in it, but it really needs skin switching support without command line stuff before that will happen.

Shawn =)

#28 Re: Quiting... Oops

by Silverthorn <shawn.fumo@the-spa.com>

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 10:05 AM

Reply to this message

Well, Apple-Q seems ok now. Maybe it was just some fluke...

Shawn

#21 Progress! Splash *then* bombs out

by hkrause <hkrause@capu.net>

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 9:49 AM

Reply to this message

Well, instead of just generating an error when I try to start up N6, now I get as far as the N6 Splash screen. Then it bombs out. Again, this is on a Win2k OS. I downloaded the 16 megs, too. Not the piecemeal download.

#93 Re: Progress! Splash *then* bombs out

by Adnan <a.selimovic@qssbh.com>

Thursday April 6th, 2000 10:11 AM

Reply to this message

I had that problem too. It appears when you have too versions of Netscape 6 installed. Mozilla might also have impact on it. Delete your Netscape 6 version and that nsreg.dat file in your Windows directory and install it again.

Cheers,

Adnan

#22 Disappointed in MozillaZine

by Ryouga

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 9:51 AM

Reply to this message

I find it disappointing that the morning that Netscape 6 PR1 hits the sites, MozillaZine had an article posted whereas the the Tasman-based IE 5 for Mac has been totally ignored on this site.

Now this may be because we Mac users at MozillaZine haven't been vocal enough about seeing news that affects us. *shrug* I dunno.

But I guess the reason I'm posting this is that I'm totally impressed by Tasman.

So you can understand where I'm coming from, as a web developer I have no interest in DOM stuff (aside from the occasional JavaScript) so I couldn't care less about Tasman's inability to support the DOM fully. I do, however, care about getting CSS fixed, and Tasman goes a long way towards making web pages using CSS display properly (I checked it against the CSS tests at W3C - and I don't mean just the acid box test).

That's not to say Mozilla isn't more significant. Moz is, after all, targetting bringing CSS-compliance to more than just the Macintosh platform. ;)

#26 Re: Disappointed in MozillaZine

by Silverthorn <shawn.fumo@the-spa.com>

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 10:03 AM

Reply to this message

Well, I remember there was some activity the day that Tasman was released, with several people downloading it, and I had posted a big message being impressed, etc.

But as was also mentioned, unless they actually put Tasman on windows, and soon, in some ways it'll make it worse, because people wanting to implement certain stuff would need to not only code for the browser and version, but also for the OS.

Having one platform version lag behind another before it comes out is somewhat understandable, but having totally different support on the same version with different platforms is really a mess. I definately hope they bring at least Tasman to windows...

But as for coverage, you have to remember this isn't just a general web design forum. This is the Zine for Mozilla. Netscape 6 is a direct extension of Mozilla, so it gets a lot of attention here... IE should get some attention as it is competition, but I think it is fair that it doesn't get so much coverage here...

Shawn

#29 Re: Disappointed in MozillaZine

by kerz <jason@mozillazine.org>

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 10:07 AM

Reply to this message

This is *Mozilla*Zine. We cover MOZILLA. The first commercial product based on MOZILLA came out today, and we are covering it. As soon as IE begins using Mozilla as its base, we will report news on it as well....

#33 Re: MozillaZine only covers Mozilla

by Ryouga

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 10:38 AM

Reply to this message

I would hope that coverage of Mozilla would extend to covering Mozilla's competitors....

Hence my disappointment. ;)

#34 Yes, but Mozilla has NO competitors...

by damian <daemonc@netscape.net>

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 10:43 AM

Reply to this message

;)

#35 Re: Yes, but Mozilla has NO competitors...

by Ryouga

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 10:47 AM

Reply to this message

Hahahahahahaha :D

#48 Re: Disappointed in MozillaZine

by jesusX <jesus_x@mozillanews.org>

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 1:13 PM

Reply to this message

First, unless IE5 was based on Mozilla, why would you expect a news article?

Second, any serious web developer has to deal with DOM issues. I do daily, and IE makes me scream sometimes, and so does NS4.7x. Of course, when I pulled up some of my JS apps in mozilla, and saw them totally broken, I nearly wet myself... =-]

#49 Re: Why would I expect a MozZine article?

by Ryouga

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 1:47 PM

Reply to this message

For the same reason that there is an article (admittedly rather old) about IE 5.5 for Windows titled "IE 5.5: First Look"

<http://www.mozillazine.or…talkback.html?article=990>

#67 Re: Re: Why would I expect a MozZine article?

by jesusX <jesus_x@mozillanews.org>

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 6:32 PM

Reply to this message

Yes, but that's an exception rather than the rule when it comes to this site's content. You have to admit, it's a good guess that we're going to be doing more in relation to Mozilla and Netscape than we are IE products. If it were IEzine.org then I'd expect most articles to be about IE, and if I saw a Mozilla article, then I'd consider it to be a rarity.

#23 Progress! Splash *then* bombs out

by hkrause <hkrause@capu.net>

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 9:53 AM

Reply to this message

Well, instead of just generating an error when I try to start up N6, now I get as far as the N6 Splash screen. Then it bombs out. Again, this is on a Win2k OS. I downloaded the 16 megs, too. Not the piecemeal download.

#27 So report your problems

by Terrigena

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 10:05 AM

Reply to this message

For those of you who are having problems, please report them to bugzilla, I don't think bug reports on this board get much attention :)

#32 Re: So report your problems

by hkrause <hkrause@capu.net>

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 10:17 AM

Reply to this message

Bugzilla is in charge of receiving problem notices for a Netscape release?

#41 Please do not report Netscape problems to Bugzilla

by asa <asa@mozilla.org>

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 11:57 AM

Reply to this message

Bugzilla is for problems that you find when testing Mozilla. Please use Netscape's feedback system for Netscape bugs. Thank you.

-Asa (posted with Mozilla. navigator is old tech)

#31 Sluggishness sometimes an illusion...

by Silverthorn <shawn.fumo@the-spa.com>

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 10:11 AM

Reply to this message

I just realized that part of the reason it seems so sluggish is that it needs to go check the page every time you hit the back for forward buttons.

It is very noticible on this board, where it usually takes at least 10 seconds to go from one page to another, that should already be in the cache.

I have the memory cache, and enabled the disc cache (even though the cache directory button doesn't seem to work?)

I even tried setting comparing to server to never, but nothing seems to help.

I think if it actually was loading the cached pages from memory or disk instead of needing to check the server every time, it'd seem much much less sluggish.

So, can anything be done about this? Has it been fixed in one of the recent nightlies? I think this would help a great deal for general browsing...

Shawn

#53 Re: Sluggishness sometimes an illusion...

by wtmcgee

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 2:51 PM

Reply to this message

its my understanding that the netscape 6 branced from mozilla around m14, so my guess is that maybe the nightlies have that problem fixed. no guarntee though =)

#56 Am downloading the latest nightly...

by Silverthorn <shawn.fumo@the-spa.com>

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 3:27 PM

Reply to this message

Ok, I decided to be adventurous... ;)

I d/led the Netscape 6 Preview at school, but am going to leapfrog and go for the latest nightly for at home.

If anyone happens to read this, is the latest nightly a decent one?

Shawn =)

#62 I guess this was the wrong nightly... ;)

by Silverthorn <shawn.fumo@the-spa.com>

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 6:08 PM

Reply to this message

Well, besides some weirdness with the screen re-draw, it seems functionally basically unusable.

After visiting a couple of links, it'll stop going to new links, and become erratic even with typing in urls...

However, I did see some files appear in the cache when I tried enabling that. =)

I guess I'll have to keep trying nightlies until one works..hehe

Shawn...

#69 M15 Should Be Coming Soon!

by Dan6992

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 6:50 PM

Reply to this message

The Mozilla M15 build should be coming out soon! Milestone builds are way more stable then the nightlies so you'll probably have better luck if you wait until it's released.

#117 See bug #21137

by Bradley

Friday April 7th, 2000 10:46 PM

Reply to this message

This is bug 21137, which is marked to be fixed in M16. For someone who pays per meg (like me :), this is an important problem.

I don't pay for cache hits, but a lot of things (search results, etc) are script results, and so aren't cached. This makes doing a search, following a link, and then going back, rather annoying.

#36 Java on Linux?

by damian <daemonc@netscape.net>

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 10:48 AM

Reply to this message

Did Netscape include a working Java plugin for Linux? Anyone? Is there any such thing? Will there ever be?

I ocassionally like to use Java stuff, and that is the only reason I'm still using Netscape 4.x

#82 Re: Java on Linux?

by RvR <mozillazine@mozillazine-fr.org>

Thursday April 6th, 2000 1:17 AM

Reply to this message

if i'm correct, it depends on the availability of an OJI compliant JVM for Linux and there is none for now. don't know who is working on this, maybe IBM ?

my 2 eurocents...

#95 Re: Re: Java on Linux?

by damian <daemonc@netscape.net>

Thursday April 6th, 2000 1:13 PM

Reply to this message

The missing piece is not actually the JVM, which there are a couple that work for Linux (Blackdown and IBM). What has been missing is a Java plugin, which is included in the Java 2 platform from SUN, but the last I heard was incompatible with the new OJI API. <http://www.mozilla.org/oji/> Since Netscape is including a JVM in their download, I assume that they have a working Java plugin with it. I just wonder if it works for Linux too... Has anybody tried it?? So far there has never been a working Java plugin for Linux Mozilla.

#85 Blackdowns plugin for linux

by theforest

Thursday April 6th, 2000 5:35 AM

Reply to this message

Blackdown has a 1.2 linux plugin, you can get to it from their site (blackdown.org), the file name is JavaPlugIn_1.2.2.px.sh. I use it on NS4.x, have never tried it on any mozilla or on NS6.

#90 O/T: Blackdowns plugin for linux

by Salsaman

Thursday April 6th, 2000 8:43 AM

Reply to this message

I know this is off topic, but have you managed to get Blackdown working reasonably well. Perhaps it's my lack of java knowledge, but I have found that when I try to run any java using it: a) I have to be in the same directory as the java class which I'm trying to run, and b) I have to individually compile each class which the main is dependant on first, even when a .class file already exists for these...

#101 set your CLASSPATH?

by theforest

Thursday April 6th, 2000 6:11 PM

Reply to this message

my experience with blackdown and java on linux is limited to applets and servlets only, no applications. i have never encountered any problems with blackdown 1.17 on the servlet side. i have encountered a few crashes and a thread problem on the applet side, but the 1.2 version is not really an offical release yet. your problem sounds like you need to set the CLASSPATH env variable to include the directory that your .class files are in.

#110 Re: classpath was set

by Salsaman

Friday April 7th, 2000 6:31 AM

Reply to this message

I did set classpath from the commandline - as I said, it worked once I had individually compiled each class...oh well, never mind...

#38 Full download

by SomeGuy

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 11:11 AM

Reply to this message

I found the full download: <ftp://ftp.netscape.com/pu…n32/sea/NetscapeSetup.exe>

Netscape should put a link to this on the download page. The "smart" downloader can't talk to the Microsoft Proxy here - nor can anything else non-Microsoft for that matter because they force NTLM Authentication (Only works with IE). They did that because they are of the firm belief that Netscape is dead. Perhaps this preview will change their minds.

#39 Assistance please.

by Mike_S <MikeS@zahadum.com>

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 11:33 AM

Reply to this message

I just downloaded PR 1 and after it installed and converted my Netscape User Profile I got this error.

Netscape -- JS Preferences Warning an error occured reading the start up configuration file. Please contact your administrator . [two square characters] line 732 : illegal character .# Mozilla user preferences [square character]

It just gives me an OK button and quits.

Anyone know how I can fix this?

Mike S.

#43 Duh!

by Mike_S <MikeS@zahadum.com>

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 12:02 PM

Reply to this message

I fixed it, trashed the prefs.js file and it's working now.

#44 Please use Netscape's Feedback Center

by asa <asa@mozilla.org>

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 12:07 PM

Reply to this message

Mozilla testers should continue to report bugs to Bugzilla. Netscape 6.0 PR1 testers should not report bugs to Bugzilla. Users of Netscape 6 can at any time open the Help menu and choose Feedback Center to fill out a Feedback form. This form will be submitted to Netscape rather than Mozilla. I repeat, please do not submit bugs you discover in the preview release of the Netscape browser to Bugzilla, use Help -> Feedback Center.

-Asa

(posted with mozilla. Netscape is last month's technology)

#46 Re: Please use Netscape's Feedback Center

by hkrause <hkrause@capu.net>

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 1:04 PM

Reply to this message

Kind of difficult to use Bugzilla when the program won't even start up to give you a coherent crash report.

Bug: Program won't start. Why? Who knows.

And of course, Netscape's bug reporting mechanism in N6 "can't connect to the server."

Interesting splash screen, though. That's all I've seen to date.

#45 Damn thing has a HUGE memory footprint

by lord_gandalf <true_gandalf@yahoo.com>

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 12:40 PM

Reply to this message

The NT4's task manager show that the Navigator was using 16MB of physical memory and 10MB of virtual memory. What the hell, I thought Mozilla was suppose to be small. By comparison, the Navigator 4.08 I'm using use 9MB of physical memory and 4MB of virtual memory

#51 Wherefore art thou Java?

by Hard_Code

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 2:10 PM

Reply to this message

I downloaded the browser but not Java 2 because I already have a Java 2 (well, 1.2.2 and 1.3) jdk installed. Java doesn't work off the bat. How do I set it up to use the JRE I already have?

#84 Re: Wherefore art thou Java?

by theforest

Thursday April 6th, 2000 5:24 AM

Reply to this message

I cant get any java 2 applets to work either; the entire browser crashes as soon as I load the page. NS6 installs an older 1.3 JRE (release candidate 1). You can replace the 3 npjava dll's in NS6's plugin directory with the latest 1.3 dlls and that will get NS6 running the latest JRE (release candidate 2), but this doesnt help any- it still crashes.

#52 PCWeek review

by wwrafter

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 2:41 PM

Reply to this message

This morning the PCWeek web page <http://www.zdnet.com/pcweek/> posted their review of NS6 titled "Netscape browser slims down, opens up" <http://www.zdnet.com/pcwe…ws/0,4153,2510507,00.html>

#59 Re: PCWeek review

by rkl

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 5:03 PM

Reply to this message

Let's see - here were PC Week's "cons":

"Offers less screen real estate than previous versions"

Well, this boils down to a point a lot of us have been hammering here - the Sidebar should be *turned off* by default when you first install Netscape 6.0. Yes, we know about the toggle menu, but PC Week obviously didn't ! When I turn off the sidebar, I have about the same screen estate as NS 4.X and IE 5.X.

"Browser interface cannot be customised"

This is somewhat surprising because PC Week mentioned things that will be added by the final Netscape release and yet dismally failed to mention that a skinning interface will be available for the final release too !

So, if those are the only two "cons" for Netscape 6.0 beta, I think we can say that there aren't any "cons" at all :-)

#63 Sidebar!

by Dan6992

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 6:18 PM

Reply to this message

I think the sidebar is very useful, and will be even more so when sites start developing more content for it. I also think it should be open by default just so users know it's there (it's easy enough to collapse, or turn off). For example I didn't know IE had a side bar until I was told to open it to see an easter egg about Mozilla I saw posted here. Now I don't use IE much or I may have noticed it sooner, but I think by hiding it by default most user won't even look deep enough to see it's available. Maybe they should just add a small x button in the upper right corner so it would be more obvious to users that it can be closed.

#98 What are you talking about ?

by Salsaman

Thursday April 6th, 2000 2:16 PM

Reply to this message

In all the builds I've tried, the sidebar *has* been open by default !

#115 Re: What are you talking about ?

by Dan6992

Friday April 7th, 2000 3:17 PM

Reply to this message

I was simply disagreeing with your statement...

"Well, this boils down to a point a lot of us have been hammering here - the Sidebar should be *turned off* by default when you first install Netscape"

I think it should remain open by default so people will realize it's even there. Like I mentioned before IE has it's sidebar turned off by default, and I didn't even realize it was there until months after I installed IE and even then it was accidental that I found it. So I guess what I'm saying is that it's easier for people who don't like it to turn it off, then it is for them to turn it on if they don't even know it's there! Plus now that Mozilla remembers the sidebars state from session to session it shouldn't be to big of a problem for people who don't like it (not like before where you had to turn it off every time). I also thought that for convienece a small X should be added to the upper right corner of the sidebar so that users like you, who don't like it, can turn it off with out having to use the view menu.

I hope that's clear enough for you!

#54 Awesome IM integration

by jedbro

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 2:53 PM

Reply to this message

Hey.. I love the way AOLIM is integrated to NS6 PR1.. was wondering if anyone know how to set that up for mozilla daily builds?? I'm sure it's feasable?

thanks

NETSCAPE 6.0 is GREAT, and MOZILLA is even BETTER!!!! =)

VIVA EL GECKO!!

#55 Mozilla interference?

by jedbro

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 3:03 PM

Reply to this message

Also Anyone know of a way to install both Mozilla daily builds AND NS6.0??

Seems there are configuration overlaps??

Cheers

#57 That damn skin...

by archen

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 4:19 PM

Reply to this message

wasn't Netscape going to go with a different skin? I think I heard that somewhere. Basically (as said many times before) the skin sucks. Most of it is okay, but the gray really has to go.

And cant we put the damn status bar into the taskbar?

And I really hope that right clicking the back button will give you the history for this window by the time 6.0 is released. I know I'm not the only one who gets stuck on a page because of some redirection.

I'm also not really impressed with the first dialog asking me to register for something. Can't we at least wait until I can see the main N6 window and everything is installed?

On the good side, the mail manager is terrific. And even the AIM integration is pretty cool (and I really hate AIM)

By Netscape 6.1 this is definitely going to be a great browser!

Is the logitech mousewheel problem being addressed? Mine still doesn't work with gfx scrollbars, and i have that weird scrolling problem with pages that have lots of tables. I heard that it wasn't reproducible.

#58 Re: Getting stuck on a page 'cause of redirection

by Ryouga

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 4:42 PM

Reply to this message

Those of us who used the pre-4.0 (or was it pre-2.0?) versions of Netscape should remember using the Go menu to access the browser history.

Well, those bad ol' days are back again.

You're right. Hopefully, they'll bring back right-click on nav button access to the browser history (and I'm sure they will). Until then we have to use the workarounds. :b

#65 IE style!

by Dan6992

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 6:27 PM

Reply to this message

I read in a news group that they are going to use an IE style menu button instead. You know, the one where the back/forard buttons have another skinny button with an arrow next to them that pulls down a menu. I actually prefer the NN4 method, but anything is better then the Go menu!

#79 Re: IE style!

by archen

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 10:37 PM

Reply to this message

As long as they do SOMETHING... and probably the worst page for getting stuck because of the lack of a back/hist feature is Netscape's site!

I can see that N6 is doing quite a few things like MSIE... some good some bad... for instance, what in the hell happened to alt+tab for switching between windows? That's one of the reason I don't use Micro$oft's browser.

well there's always N6PR2...

#116 Alt+tab

by Dan6992

Friday April 7th, 2000 3:35 PM

Reply to this message

The Alt+Tab hot key is part of Windows not the individual software package. Also IE5 functions identical to Netscape 4.x when Alt+Tab is pressed on my computer! Now Mozilla & NN6 definitely have window problems (M14 always starts in the back of all other windows) so it may be an order of creation problem causing the erratic behavior. Try holding Alt hitting Tab without letting go of Alt, it should bring up a dialog that shows all open application windows (it goes away when you release Alt). You can switch between these windows by hitting the Tab key again for each space you need to move over in the list. I know this is not as graceful of a solution, but it should hold you over until they fix the windowing problems (hopefully M15).

#120 Re: Alt+tab

by archen

Saturday April 8th, 2000 2:03 AM

Reply to this message

whoops, I meant cntrl+tab! Sorry about that. Window switching is also bound to the F6 key. The difference between cntrl+tab and alt+tab is that alt+tab doesn't flip through the Netscape windows in order. If you have 5 windows open and you use alt+tab you have to be able to figure out which is which, and it basically takes you back through the history instead of progressing through open windows. Since Moz has a button that lets you select a window I imagine that binding F6 or cntrl+tab is possible..

#77 Re: Getting stuck on a page 'cause of redirection

by WillyWonka

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 9:06 PM

Reply to this message

Go - Back - To the future :)

#60 First Impressions

by cybr

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 5:18 PM

Reply to this message

The following was originally posted with the Netscape 6 feedback form, but a server error prevented it from being submitted.

------

The browsing engine is brilliant, but there are some major issues that need to be addressed.

Firstly, there are many interface bugs. The text box I am typing in right now is unbearably buggy (The cursor dissapeared, and it doesn't respond to mouse clicks).

You should definitely consider making a windows-only version that supports standard Windows controls and colour schemes. I see how XUL technology can come in handy for branding and other platforms, but the majority of computer users and Windows users, and will not like learning a new and downright intimidating interface.

The back button doesn't present the useful drop-down menu anymore. I can't re-arrange the buttons on any of the toolbars. I can't reposition the toolbars. There is no drop-down menu on the address bar.

Overall, if I weren't a web developer, I'd uninstall Netscape 6 right now. I *know* many users will feel the same.

#68 Re: First Impressions

by Dan6992

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 6:45 PM

Reply to this message

This is just a preview release, not even technically a beta, so obviously some things are going to be missing or broken. The widgets (text controls, etc...) were never planed to be native OS widgets so I wouldn't get my hopes up there. However they are working on something that could allow people to make them act more like native widgets. The XPFE team is making it so all widget looks and behaviors are defined in an XBL file. Which can be modified with a text editor, a basic understanding of the XBL mark-up and a working knowledge of JavaScript. Now for novice users I suspect someone (maybe even me if I have time) will write a chrome package that makes all the widgets look and behave more like native Windows widgets.

#75 just tried netscape 6

by arielb

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 8:40 PM

Reply to this message

it's not that simple because it has nothing to do with bug fixes. Common sense went out the door here. well at least I don't have to type my name and pass all the time here but that's not a big deal because most sites use cookies anyway

#66 Not totally offtopic: PNG

by basic <_basic@yahoo.com>

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 6:28 PM

Reply to this message

Saw this on Web Standards mailing list today:

Just today I've been testing out the PNG support in IE5/Mac and I'm pleased as punch to say "It works!"

When is PNG going to work properly on Moz!!!!!????

#83 Re: Not totally offtopic: PNG

by leafdigital

Thursday April 6th, 2000 5:11 AM

Reply to this message

According to the bug (3013), it should be supported in M20. Maybe.

(I think this is the most popular voted bug in Bugzilla... it was at one point, anyhow...)

--sam

#86 PNG

by Salsaman

Thursday April 6th, 2000 6:55 AM

Reply to this message

PNG handling should really be done as a plug-in, since the PNG standard allows for new types of data chunks to be defined as time goes on, thus you wouldn't want to limit it by having it built in to the Mozilla code base. Also, making it a plugin would allow it to be platform specific, easing the problems of transparency handling - which from what I read seemed to be the major sticking point.<p> For this to really work, all that Mozilla would need would be:<p>a well defined plugin api, and the ability to display that plugin data in an area of the display. Actually it's probably a little more complicated, because you would have to call the plugin every time the page changed, for example with an animated background image, you'd need to call it every time the background moved.<p>What I'm trying to say though, is that the Mozilla team shouldn't burden themselves with the actual implementation of displaying PNG's within the browser code, just make sure plugin support is there, and let others code it.

#96 PNG problems

by damian <daemonc@netscape.net>

Thursday April 6th, 2000 1:42 PM

Reply to this message

Good point. But what if you want to use a PNG for a background image? How would a plugin handle this? I think complete support for PNG will be great for web standards, will benefit web developers, and should definitely be in Mozilla's code base. From what I've read, there are a lot of things that need to be completely redone. In my opinion (which counts for very little) Mozilla should have had built in PNG support from the ground up.

#99 Re: PNG problems

by kidzi

Thursday April 6th, 2000 2:41 PM

Reply to this message

You are so silly!

Web technologies go so fast, first gif, then jpg/gif, then png -- if mozilla was so forward thinking, they would have said screwit to png and instead gone for SVG. But, to get the advanced topics you need to have developers who want to work on that stuff. And considering the great amount they have gotten done, I am quite impressed.

With screen resolutions on the verge of hitting 300dpi+, the idea to move toward vector graphics is more now than ever.

#106 Re: Re: PNG problems

by basic <_basic@yahoo.com>

Thursday April 6th, 2000 8:56 PM

Reply to this message

> Web technologies go so fast, first gif, then jpg/gif, then png -- if mozilla was so forward thinking, they would have said screwit to png and instead gone for SVG.

there should be a new jpeg standard out soon and png and jpeg will still have to exist side by side with svg. There is still need for raster images. Some svg code has been checked in recently (fyi).

> But, to get the advanced topics you need to have developers who want to work on that stuff. And considering the great amount they have gotten done, I am quite impressed.

There were some, but the code was too unstable for them. Hope they are still interested...

> With screen resolutions on the verge of hitting 300dpi+, the idea to move toward vector graphics is more now than ever.

True but raster images will still have their place.

Basic

#107 Re: PNG problems

by basic <_basic@yahoo.com>

Thursday April 6th, 2000 9:02 PM

Reply to this message

Maybe Moz could have a way to allow a plugin to display in the background. But I still prefer it to be in the Moz (XP) code base. If it can be mostly XP code, there would be a better chance for it to be ported to other platforms.

#108 Re: PNG

by basic <_basic@yahoo.com>

Thursday April 6th, 2000 9:13 PM

Reply to this message

> PNG handling should really be done as a plug-in, since the PNG standard allows for new types of data chunks to be defined as time goes on, thus you wouldn't want to limit it by having it built in to the Mozilla code base.

Maybe, not a "plugin" but an extensible component?

> Also, making it a plugin would allow it to be platform specific, easing the problems of transparency handling - which from what I read seemed to be the major sticking point.

Unless it really cannot be fixed XP, I think it is still better to handle it XP.

> For this to really work, all that Mozilla would need would be: a well defined plugin api, and the ability to display that plugin data in an area of the display. Actually it's probably a little more complicated, because you would have to call the plugin every time the page changed, for example with an animated background image, you'd need to call it every time the background moved.

Which is why I say it should be a component rather than a plugin.

> What I'm trying to say though, is that the Mozilla team shouldn't burden themselves with the actual implementation of displaying PNG's within the browser code, just make sure plugin support is there, and let others code it.

I don't think that it should be a plugin, it can be a seperate component that is not implemented by the layout team.

I'm just wondering when will it ever be done though... It is dissapointing to see Moz lag behind MacIE5 in this respect and it is also really dissapointing to try designing skins with PNG only to find support for alpha transparency to be totally unusable.

#119 Please! PNG NOW! Let Mozilla loose!

by jesusX <jesus_x@mozillanews.org>

Saturday April 8th, 2000 12:22 AM

Reply to this message

PNG is one of the best ideas for a good graphical solution for the web. Flat out. It's going to be used VERY extensively within a very short time. With everything else Mozilla has going for it, having 100% PNG suport would be the last nail in the coffin of IE's dominance. (Yes there will always be IE, just not as much!)

An idea would be to just hand off nothing but PNG related code to someone, and have them, or a couple folks, work on that part alone. With only the PNG code to work with, no distractions, it might get cleaned up faster.

I'm sure that several people who are actively developing in Moz want this, while some don't think it's so important. To those of you who think it's important, YOU'RE RIGHT!

#123 Re: Please! PNG NOW! Let Mozilla loose!

by danielhill <danielhill@hotmail.com>

Sunday April 9th, 2000 3:15 AM

Reply to this message

Why is PNG important? Nobody uses it, and I don't think anybody cares about it. I think more resources should be put on speed and memory optimisation, rather than adding a useless file format.

#124 Oi! (Was: Re: Please! PNG NOW! Let Mozilla loose!)

by Hendy99 <gbhendy1@bigpond.net.au>

Sunday April 9th, 2000 9:49 PM

Reply to this message

I dare say that PNG *is* in use, and that whilst not critical it would be a good thing for Mozilla to support it :)

#125 Re: whilst not critical

by basic <_basic@yahoo.com>

Sunday April 9th, 2000 11:07 PM

Reply to this message

I'd say that it is critical if they really want to improve the UI, (esspecially to blend into MacOS X). And it will be one more feature webdev can look forward to (MacIE5 and iCab already support it well).

#111 PNG support for beta 2 !

by Salsaman

Friday April 7th, 2000 6:35 AM

Reply to this message

Just noticed this today, under bug #3013:

<p> <p>

OK, I am adding the skins and beta 2 keywords here to raise visibility asap. Professional level skins/themes/appearances have been made priority number 1 for beta 2. In order to have decent professional level skins we need alpha channels in PNG in order to: - have controls with bitmap shapes other than rectangular blend smoothly onto a background - have the ability to have gradual drop shadows and hilites GIF does have transparency on a pixel level but you can turn only on or off. Gif only supports 256 colors max which is not sufficient to produce a photorealistic appearance JPEG supports more than 256 colors but is a lossy compression scheme such that the images loose quality significantly. Furthermore no transparency or alpha channels is supported here. In a nutshell: If we want professionally looking stunning skins we oughta have alpha channels in PNG.

#126 YESS!!!!

by basic <_basic@yahoo.com>

Sunday April 9th, 2000 11:13 PM

Reply to this message

Cool!! Now we have something to work with to get cool skins...

And when this is done, MNG and SVG.

#71 Bookmark Toolbar

by JCaris <joel_caris@iname.com>

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 7:54 PM

Reply to this message

Ok, I have a slight problem with the bookmark toolbar. There just isn't quite enough room for all my folders because of the extra buttons stuck on it. I have managed to remove the Net2Phone button, but now need to get rid of either the Home or My Netscape button--which are the same for me anyway. Have been looking through the files, but cannot figure out how to take either off. Can anyone help me on this? Thanks.

#73 Re: Bookmark Toolbar

by enigman

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 8:18 PM

Reply to this message

The Net2Phone Personal Toolbar button is in the chrome\navigator\content\overlays.rdf. Just below the Net2Phone commented line, there's a Net2PhoneButton.xul line...comment that out, bye bye Net2Phone... :)

#72 Bloat

by grw

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 7:59 PM

Reply to this message

Why is Netscape 6 so bloated? Gtop shows it using up over 80Mb vs less than 16Mb for 4.72. Needless to say, on my 64Mb P266 it runs like molasses. Am I going to have to buy a new machine to run this thing? (Can't just add memory: TX chipset.)

#81 Re: Bloat

by thrakkerz

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 11:42 PM

Reply to this message

gtop adds the memory from all of the threads together. I think you usually have 5 threads running. A more accurate way of determining memory usage is to:

cat /proc/PIDOFNETSCAPE/status | grep VmData

#74 just tried netscape 6

by arielb

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 8:37 PM

Reply to this message

...and I'm not impressed by it. It's ugly, usability went out the door and the installation procedure was horrible.

#76 Positive CNet Review

by enigman

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 9:01 PM

Reply to this message

is here: <http://www.cnet.com/internet/0-3779-7-1581673.html> They have some complaints, especially with startup speed, but overall very positive.

#80 Netscape 6 pr1 SUCKED...

by ttielkes <t.r.tiekes@zap.a2000.nl>

Wednesday April 5th, 2000 10:46 PM

Reply to this message

..until I got rid of the default skin and installed the "Sullivan" chrome. ;-)

Man, what a difference!

I even eats up less memory now, probably because of the sidebars that are gone.

Although "Sillivan" chrome has some way to go, the browser is actually useable now.

Now just speed it up, add kick-ass clientside XML support, a DHTML Editing component, and it's ready to go!

#105 Re: Netscape 6 pr1 SUCKED...

by arielb

Thursday April 6th, 2000 8:23 PM

Reply to this message

yes-that's a very nice skin. So is aphrodite. Too bad Netscape was foolish not to adopt one of them and is instead showing off that ugly white and grey look

#87 It sucks.

by mrpalomar

Thursday April 6th, 2000 7:06 AM

Reply to this message

From a user standpoint, this thing is horrible--bug ridden and with an interface, nevermind any aesthetic flaws, that is difficult if not impossible to customize , with everything in the wrong damned place; chrome or skin switching needs to be as easy as it is with NeoPlanet; anything less and you can forget gaining users, rant and rave about XUL till the sky falls. I'm astonished that anyone at AOL would be dumb enough to try to draw attention to this thing--though it may win them a few short term points; continuuing in a like manner will only turn people off. (And the term "My Sidebar" is still an insulting-to-anyone-with-a-mature-brain Microsoftism.) I'm still holding out the hope that Mozilla will be the browser of the future, but . . . .

#91 Re: It sucks.

by unapersson

Thursday April 6th, 2000 9:22 AM

Reply to this message

Chrome Switching isn't done yet... I think it's due for Beta 2.

#88 Firewall blocking N6!

by hkrause <hkrause@capu.net>

Thursday April 6th, 2000 7:15 AM

Reply to this message

Resolved my computer's inability to start up N6. Seems N6 program module NETSCP6.EXE *wants* an INBOUND TCP connection or it will NOT allow the program to operate. My firewall rules only allow specified INBOUND TCP, and, of course, there was no rule for N6. Now there is.

Netscape 4.72 did not require such a rule...I did have one set up for my 4.72 SMTP service...but the program would have run without such a permission.

So, the question is...why does N6 want an inboard TCP?

#89 Firewall blocking N6!

by hkrause <hkrause@capu.net>

Thursday April 6th, 2000 7:34 AM

Reply to this message

Resolved my computer's inability to start up N6. Seems N6 program module NETSCP6.EXE *wants* an INBOUND TCP connection or it will NOT allow the program to operate. My firewall rules only allow specified INBOUND TCP, and, of course, there was no rule for N6. Now there is.

Netscape 4.72 did not require such a rule...I did have one set up for my 4.72 SMTP service...but the program would have run without such a permission.

So, the question is...why does N6 want an inboard TCP?

#97 How do I add another search engine to search list?

by Salsaman

Thursday April 6th, 2000 2:06 PM

Reply to this message

Is this possible under Linux ?

#112 Re: How do I add another search engine to search l

by WillyWonka

Friday April 7th, 2000 7:12 AM

Reply to this message

The search engine in mozilla uses Sherlock files. Lookup information on sherlock (for the Mac) and you should come across some .src files which you can copy into one of the mozilla directories and it will be picked up by the browser.

#102 My aplogies...

by fish62858

Thursday April 6th, 2000 6:32 PM

Reply to this message

Please forgive my ignorance, but due to the press on the N6 release, I'm new to Mozilla (and probably not alone.) What is the difference between M14 (or Mozilla browser in generl)and N6? So far I'm not very impressed with N6 and wonder if I'd like M14 better? Some insight for this newbie would be appreciated.

#103 My aplogies...

by fish62858

Thursday April 6th, 2000 6:33 PM

Reply to this message

Please forgive my ignorance, but due to the press on the N6 release, I'm new to Mozilla (and probably not alone.) What is the difference between M14 (or Mozilla browser in generl)and N6? So far I'm not very impressed with N6 and wonder if I'd like M14 better? Some insight for this newbie would be appreciated.

#104 My aplogies...

by fish62858

Thursday April 6th, 2000 6:36 PM

Reply to this message

Please forgive my ignorance, but due to the press on the N6 release, I'm new to Mozilla (and probably not alone.) What is the difference between M14 (or Mozilla browser in generl)and N6? So far I'm not very impressed with N6 and wonder if I'd like M14 better? Some insight for this newbie would be appreciated.

#109 Re: My aplogies...

by Ben_Goodger

Friday April 7th, 2000 2:26 AM

Reply to this message

M15 will be out soon...

#113 Re: My aplogies...

by damian <daemonc@netscape.net>

Friday April 7th, 2000 10:52 AM

Reply to this message

Netscape just took a build from shortly after M14, stabalized it, took out some debugging stuff, added their Instant messenger and Java, and maybe some other Netscape specific things. I haven't actually tried it yet. If you feel really daring you could do as I do, and try some recent nightly builds. However not much has changed since M14 in the way of new features. (some new bugs maybe)

#114 Clue 1

by damian <daemonc@netscape.net>

Friday April 7th, 2000 10:55 AM

Reply to this message

oh yeah, and posting the same thing 3 times is not considered polite.

#121 sorry x 3

by fish62858

Saturday April 8th, 2000 10:09 AM

Reply to this message

i wasn't aware i had posted three times. not sure how i did it. what i'm really wanting to know is M14 considerably better than N6? i understand that neither are quite ready for default browser status.. but N6 was so bad for me, is M14 way better? again, i aplogize for repitition.

#122 Re: sorry x 3

by FrodoB

Saturday April 8th, 2000 11:52 AM

Reply to this message

They're essentially the same.... NS6PR1 is M14 with stability fixes and Netscape's proprietary features.

M15 will be branched for release in a few days, with features beyond M14 and NS6PR1 (other than the proprietary features, of course :) ).

#118 Nightlies?

by danielhill <danielhill@hotmail.com>

Friday April 7th, 2000 11:48 PM

Reply to this message

Can I run this and nightlies at the same time? I like the stability of this, but would like to give the nightlies a go once in a while.

#127 User denied! Developers wanted!

by IndpdntMind

Friday April 14th, 2000 5:12 PM

Reply to this message

It seems that the mozilla.org project has so far served the developer community and denied what the common users need in a modern BROWSER. What USER needs something that was supposed to be a browser but is now primarily called an OS by the people who created it? I would have served the USER first and then the DEVELOPER, but mozilla.org did it all backwards. Why?