MozillaZine

Netscape 6 PR3 Available

Tuesday October 3rd, 2000

Netscape has made PR3 available from their website. PR3 is currently only available in the English version, according to the options given on the site.


#1 So far so good

by bink

Tuesday October 3rd, 2000 11:58 PM

Reply to this message

I'm impressed with the speed and stability of PR3. The new modern skin looks nice, you can now remove the Net2Phone and My Netscape buttons from the Personal Toolbar, and I like have AOLIM built in. Overall, it's a good release.

#2 So fast

by gerbilpower <gerbil@ucdavis.edu>

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 12:41 AM

Reply to this message

It almost seems like PR2 was released just yesterday. I'll guess I'll give it a try ... when I'm not so tired, and then go back to Mozilla nightlies :)

<:3)~~

#3 Yay! It runs on 32MB RAM! Win98 n/t

by basic <_basic@yahoo.com>

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 1:15 AM

Reply to this message

n/t

#5 Re: Yay! It runs on 32MB RAM! Win98 n/t

by gerbilpower <gerbil@ucdavis.edu>

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 1:30 AM

Reply to this message

Can you give me more info on this? I'm updating NewZilla with new info on PR3 and I don't have a computer with only 32MB of RAM to test this out. Does it run every well with only 32MB or a bit sluggish but good enough?

<:3)~~

#37 What is NewZilla???

by ezh <ezh@menelon.ee>

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 4:01 PM

Reply to this message

E-mail me, plaese the answer.

#38 Re: What is NewZilla???

by gerbilpower <gerbil@ucdavis.edu>

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 4:31 PM

Reply to this message

It's my unofficial Netscape 6 and Mozilla FAQ: <http://www.gerbilbox.com/newzilla/>

<:3)~~

#45 Re: Re: Yay! It runs on 32MB RAM! Win98 n/t

by basic <_basic@yahoo.com>

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 7:37 PM

Reply to this message

Starting is almost as fast (slow) as NS4.75. Browsing is fantastic! Haven't had time to test mail yet.

#4 Use proxy with installer?

by roel_v <roel_v@gmx.net>

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 1:25 AM

Reply to this message

Installers are great, but how can I set it up to use a proxy?

#6 Use proxy with installer?

by roel_v <roel_v@gmx.net>

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 1:36 AM

Reply to this message

Installers are great, but how can I set it up to use a proxy?

#7 setup.exe ?

by hfoucher

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 2:05 AM

Reply to this message

Hi!

Where could I find a setup.exe instead of an installer that can't go thought the proxy ?

Thanks.

#16 Re: setup.exe ?

by wtmcgee

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 8:33 AM

Reply to this message

should be a full install on the netscape ftp.. just kinda snoop around and im sure you\'ll find it

#111 The complete installers:

by dykow

Tuesday October 10th, 2000 2:28 PM

Reply to this message

can be found at (Linux kernel 2.2): <ftp://ftp.netscape.com/pu…h/6_PR3/unix/linux22/sea/>

(MacOS): <ftp://ftp.netscape.com/pu…h/6_PR3/mac/macos8.5/sea/>

(Windoze): <ftp://ftp.netscape.com/pu…/6_PR3/windows/win32/sea/>

Now here's a funny thing: If you try to get there by clicking through the directories using PR3, you won't get past /pub... the browser just won't go there. Mozilla M17 does it; so does Communicator 4.7x.

#112 The complete installers:

by dykow

Tuesday October 10th, 2000 2:29 PM

Reply to this message

can be found at (Linux kernel 2.2): <ftp://ftp.netscape.com/pu…h/6_PR3/unix/linux22/sea/>

(MacOS): <ftp://ftp.netscape.com/pu…h/6_PR3/mac/macos8.5/sea/>

(Windoze): <ftp://ftp.netscape.com/pu…/6_PR3/windows/win32/sea/>

Now here's a funny thing: If you try to get there by clicking through the directories using PR3, you won't get past /pub... the browser just won't go there. Mozilla M17 does it; so does Communicator 4.7x.

#8 Installation behind a firewall/proxy?

by PhiSch

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 2:06 AM

Reply to this message

Hi *,

I am sitting behind a firewall and I after I am thru the setupdialog, nothing happens. Probably the installer can\'t get thru the firewall/proxy :(

Is there a way to download an a package where everything is \'in it\'? Not only the installer?

thanx

.phisch

#9 url

by doron

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 2:35 AM

Reply to this message

#10 Congratulations!!!

by cyd

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 2:36 AM

Reply to this message

Congratulations to Netscape for rolling out PR3 at long last. Judging from the quality of the past week\\\'s nightlies, I have no doubt that PR3 will enjoy a favorable response. Of course, the marked contrasts with PR1 and 2 won\\\'t hurt any...!

Mozilla is on the road towards becoming a truly fantastic browser. Sometime last week, it suddenly struck me that I\\\'d been using Mozilla for a whole day without encountering a single bug! The performance is increasing steadily, too; it\\\'s a joy to behold.

Good job, fellas!

#19 Re: Congratulations!!!

by lolajl <lola@his.com>

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 9:22 AM

Reply to this message

What's this with the backslashes?

#21 Re: Congratulations!!!

by thelem

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 10:30 AM

Reply to this message

Looks like a bug in MozillaZine to me.

You only need to use addslashes() once, chris, not three times ;-)

Lemming

#11 Doesn't load

by bpdlr

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 5:10 AM

Reply to this message

I'm using PR3 under Win98, adn ican't get it to load at all - just the splash screen and nothing else. I have been running recent builds with no problems. Are there certain packages that are required to download? (I left out Java as I already have a copy of the Sun plugin) If so why not make these compulsory to download?

#63 Re: Doesn't load

by lwrigh4 <lwrigh4@bellsouth.net>

Thursday October 5th, 2000 6:09 PM

Reply to this message

First go to the start button then programsthen netscape 6.Then open up the profile manager.set up your profile for netscape 6 and you should be good to go!I used my profile from netscape 4.74 that way all your bookmarks will be imported into version 6.

#12 Only In English...

by dannunn <thedannunn@yahoo.com>

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 5:25 AM

Reply to this message

Well, that "Only In English" portion has been corrected, it is now available in English, French, German and Japanese.

#13 French, German, Japanese are PR2 n/t

by mozineAdmin

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 6:20 AM

Reply to this message

.

#22 Japanese is PR3 n/t

by thelem

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 10:32 AM

Reply to this message

There was an ad about it.

#14 Full Download

by SomeGuy

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 7:03 AM

Reply to this message

The Full download of Netscape 6 PR 3 is here (21 megs): <ftp://ftp.netscape.com/pu…ows/win32/sea/N6Setup.exe>

But according to this <http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23679> NTLM still dosn't work so it won't work behind an NTLM-only MS-Proxy.

#15 Got it and it works!!

by NikoP

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 8:20 AM

Reply to this message

Hey, the first good PR of Netscape 6, finally the guys at Netscape didn't slow it down :-) It's the first PR, in which the IM works, the UI looks good, all is good ... ok, nearly all: the installer doesn't work with my proxy so I had to download the xpis manually and had to hack the config.ini! But if the works goes on I am very optimistic that Netscape will get market shares back with Netscape 6!

#17 Mac full version

by Ryouga

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 8:46 AM

Reply to this message

Here is a link to the Mac version (about 17 MB)

<ftp://ftp.netscape.com/pu…cNS6FullInstaller.sea.bin>

#18 *sigh* grey everywhere

by mattdm <mattdm@mattdm.org>

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 9:15 AM

Reply to this message

Looks like the fix for bug #53723 didn't make it in on time. Too bad -- makes PR3 really nasty on Linux.

#20 CNet review already online

by sacolcor

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 9:58 AM

Reply to this message

#23 RDF in the PR releases...

by ijx

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 10:36 AM

Reply to this message

Netscape's site trumps up support for RDF in Netscape 6, and I know it worked in previous versions of Mozilla, but is there any way that you can get pr3 to show an RDF sitemap?

#26 Re: RDF in the PR releases...

by waterson

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 11:45 AM

Reply to this message

ijx: what's broken that was working before? file me a bug!

#42 Re: RDF in the PR releases...

by kerz <jason@mozillazine.org>

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 5:20 PM

Reply to this message

AFAIK, there is no sitemaps sidebar anymore. The last time I saw this working was back in MozillaClassic, when it had a sidebar...

#61 Re: RDF in the PR releases...

by ijx

Thursday October 5th, 2000 12:55 PM

Reply to this message

That\'s really the problem. I know RDF support is there, but without the \'sitemap\' sidebar, it\'s useless for a site to provide RDF data to aid in user navigation.

#24 Couple of bugs...

by rgelb <nospam@nospam.com>

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 10:42 AM

Reply to this message

Overall, great release, however, it is marred by some ridiculous CSS1 bugs that worked for the last year or so. For instance, A:Hover style doesn't do anything.

Other than that, great work.

#25 Re: Couple of bugs...

by gerbilpower <gerbil@ucdavis.edu>

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 11:32 AM

Reply to this message

A:Hover was temporarily disabled in the Mozilla builds also, I think it was a performance issue that suddenly popped up last week, sucks that this popular CSS feature didn't quite make it to PR3.

<:3)~~

#27 Re: Re: Couple of bugs...

by knollc <knollc@panasonic.com>

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 11:51 AM

Reply to this message

Yeah, i understand that the hover style is actually a lot more complicated than it seems (which makes me wonder if IE is implementing it properly). It seems that with respect to the DOM, when you have a child element style set to hover, there's a question how this effets parents and child elements. Anyways, I'm sure they'll resolve it by the time it rolls out.

-Chris

#56 Re: Re: Re: Couple of bugs...

by tny

Thursday October 5th, 2000 6:54 AM

Reply to this message

W/R/T a:hover, they've come up with a temporary fix that restores the preexisting partial functionally, t.g. See bug 5693 .

#28 Works great, but search is buggy

by darnell

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 12:03 PM

Reply to this message

Has anyone tried the search feature? It continually reloads its self in an endless loop. Other than that, this version is pretty good.

This should have been beta 2.

#29 Image Manager not present in PR3

by booboorooboo

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 12:54 PM

Reply to this message

But it is in the Mozilla nightlies. I would guess this to be a decision by Netscape/AOL to keep their own ads still viewable :-)

#30 Image Manager not present in PR3

by booboorooboo

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 12:55 PM

Reply to this message

But it is in the Mozilla nightlies. I would guess this to be a decision by Netscape/AOL to keep their own ads still viewable :-)

#31 Image Manager not present in PR3

by booboorooboo

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 12:55 PM

Reply to this message

But it is in the Mozilla nightlies. I would guess this to be a decision by Netscape/AOL to keep their own ads still viewable :-)

#32 PR3 Bugs

by WillyWonka

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 1:30 PM

Reply to this message

My companies www site doesn't render properly in PR2. I guess it's better than PR2 though... it used to crash it.

We have a table with a 100% height and PR3 draws it as expected, and then erases the bottom cell and adds a scrollbar which doesn't scroll. It's really weird.

The good news is, Marketing gave me a <http://www.netscape.com/themes> t-shirt :)

#36 Gimme!

by jelwell

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 3:55 PM

Reply to this message

I want one. Where do I get a themes t-shirt? Joseph Elwell.

#41 Re: Gimme!

by WillyWonka

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 5:11 PM

Reply to this message

I don't know really. Someone at my company had a meeting with Netscape and they brought it back to Canada for me :)

#33 Waiting for the lizard

by damian <daemonc@netscape.net>

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 2:18 PM

Reply to this message

Shouldn't the M18 release be any day now? From the sound of some of these nasty bugs, maybe it's better they wait.

#34 About the sidebar

by nghanoi

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 3:51 PM

Reply to this message

I think it would be a good idea if we can have a button on the Navigation toolbar to make the sidebar appear/disappear. It would be more visible than the current button in the middle of the sidebar

#35 About the sidebar

by nghanoi

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 3:51 PM

Reply to this message

I think it would be a good idea if we can have a button on the Navigation toolbar to make the sidebar appear/disappear. It would be more visible than the current button in the middle of the sidebar

#39 Java

by centove

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 4:40 PM

Reply to this message

Yay.. java and linux with netscape6 pr3 actually works! I was stunned.

#47 Secure pages work for mac too...

by Waldo

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 8:04 PM

Reply to this message

weird. They weren't working in the Mozilla pre-18 builds.

W

#48 Re: Java

by jck2000

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 8:18 PM

Reply to this message

That sounds great! Java's about all I need to use Moz full time. Several quetions: <p> 1. Does Java in Linux work as a plug-in or is it built in? <p> 2. What version is the JRE -- 1.3 beta x? <p> 3. Has it made it to the Mozilla (as opposed to Netscape) M18 nightlies yet? <p> Thanks in advance.

#58 Re: Re: Java

by centove

Thursday October 5th, 2000 11:33 AM

Reply to this message

Its a plugin (libjavaplugin_oji.so) It uses \\\\\\\"Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard Edition, Version 1.3.0 Release Candidate for Linux\\\\\\\" Not to be found on java.sun.com that I could find.

Its not in the mozilla tree, but transplanting the plugin and all its bits to a mozilla dir appears to work.

#67 Re: Re: Re: Java

by cathy03

Friday October 6th, 2000 12:03 AM

Reply to this message

My PR3 hangs while I viewing the java applet web pages. Do you actually do this on linux. I am run on RedHet 6.0. Also, the Flash plugins dosen't work for me. PR3 can't start up after I install the Flash plugins : libflashplayer.so & ShackwaveFlash.class.

#81 Re: Java

by diddyland <mozilla@diddyland.com>

Saturday October 7th, 2000 2:59 PM

Reply to this message

Im stunned too. I cant make it work

What procedure did you go through to get java working.

( i have downloaded jre1.3 from sun if it makes any difference )

please let me throw ie5 away

hehe dids

#40 Still Crap

by guymac <guym@guymcarthur.com>

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 4:45 PM

Reply to this message

Well at least it finally looks decent. I I'm trying the Linux 2.2 build. It locks up on java.sun.com. It crashed halfway through fetching my inbox. It crashed when selected "instant messenger" in the preferences. It wouldn't even run with my .netscape directory present. After crashing once, it'll crash again and again until the .mozilla directory is cleaned out once more. This is the result of nearly 3 years of work??? It's not even beta quality! It goes beyond a joke to the level of the first true open-source DISASTER! It should be renamed "The Titanic."

#43 Re: Still Crap

by centove

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 6:15 PM

Reply to this message

So.. lets see...

<http://coco.comstar.net/java-sun-com.png> Worked here (also note in that picture IM is in the sidebar, logged in and running)

It has crashed a few times on, but netscape choaks on the same pages. Oh and the .netscape dir is there and untouched.

No-where did I see that this was a 'beta' this is a PREVIEW RELEASE. I wouldn't judge the mozilla project on what netscape does and doesn't do. (oh and I haven't clobbered the .mozilla directory since the crash and its still chugging along)

#69 Re: Still Crap

by Martyr

Friday October 6th, 2000 7:09 AM

Reply to this message

Let's rephrase. What is an acceptible development time for you? Can you provide real world examples of a better process? If so, let us all know, just don't tilt with windmills. Now if you don't have any, that speaks for itself. (BTW, how long did Linux take to get to market, and how many developers were working on it? Ok, I thought so.)

#44 Now About:mozilla

by sunose

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 7:36 PM

Reply to this message

Netscape 6 PR3

#46 Now About:mozilla

by sunose

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 7:37 PM

Reply to this message

Netscape 6 PR3

#49 Netscape 6PR3 in Linux

by redpants

Wednesday October 4th, 2000 11:36 PM

Reply to this message

I can't use this preview release as a user in Linux, I'm currently running it as root which isn't a good idea...

Deleting my .mozilla directory accomplishes nothing.

Anyone having a similiar problem

#50 Re: Netscape 6PR3 in Linux

by cyd

Thursday October 5th, 2000 12:01 AM

Reply to this message

I have experienced a similar one. Whever I install a Mozilla nightly, I have to start it *once* as root. It then generates some codepages (?) and puts then in the mozilla directory. Thereafter I can run as non-root without any problem.

#54 Re: Re: Netscape 6PR3 in Linux

by PhiSch

Thursday October 5th, 2000 12:50 AM

Reply to this message

I don't have any trouble running the Nightlies on my SuSE Linux 7.0 Pro as a user.

I download it every day, make an rm -r .mozilla and rm -r mozilla and then I unpack the tarball. works fine for me.

I had no chance yet to test the PR3, as the ftp Server seems to be busy!

phisch

#65 I got it

by redpants

Thursday October 5th, 2000 9:20 PM

Reply to this message

I found if I install somewhere that I have write permission, tis no problem at all.

#51 HR

by kolar

Thursday October 5th, 2000 12:17 AM

Reply to this message

It\\\\\\\'s too bad the CSS { color: #FF00FF;} still doesn\\\\\\\'t effect the HR. You would have thought something like that would have been fixed by the time pr3 came out. I have seen this listed in Bugzilla. And how come the noshade looks like crap?

#52 Improve: Sidebar, Skin installation & Plugins

by alik

Thursday October 5th, 2000 12:22 AM

Reply to this message

Hi,

First of all a wonderful release..

Just a few comments:

1. Sidebar Tabs: Too many.. for some reason I want to add the whole 600 available.. but if you put more than 7.. you can hardly see anything in the window.

Would it not be better if we had a drop down list of some sort to select a tab and only one is displayed at any one time. This way we can add as many tabs as we want. and still see what is in the Tab window.

2. Skin Installation: You know the way SideBad tabs are added? Just click on a link and it is in.. would it not be nice if the same was true for Skins? Just click and it is downloaded and automaticly installed.

3. Plug-ins: There are very few things i like about IE, but one of them is the way it tells you when it needs a plug-in. and all you have to do is just click GET and it automatically installs.

==> Maybe mozilla should have an installer of its own which can be used to download and install updates, patches, add-ins and plug-ins.

Thanx Ali K

#55 Re: Improve: Sidebar, Skin installation & Plug

by akayser

Thursday October 5th, 2000 3:31 AM

Reply to this message

You can install skins very easily. Just go to x.themes.org, select mozilla chromes, and click on the \\\'(Quick)\\\' word after the download link. Mozilla (or Netscape PR3) see that it is a XPI (zippy) file, and automatically loads and installs the contents (which works for skins, applications, etc.). Example: <http://x.themes.org/php/d…rome.966515700=themes.org> would the \\\'Alfred\\\' skin.

#53 Upgrade your Java Plugin

by superyooser

Thursday October 5th, 2000 12:34 AM

Reply to this message

If Java isn't working for you, get the latest JRE1.3 from here <http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.3/> . Don't get the whole IDE or SDK! Just the 5 MB Java Runtime Environment (JRE).

The following may not pertain to Linux or Mac versions... The Java Plugin installed with N6PR3 is a beta and wouldn't work well for me. If you're having problems with it too, here's what I suggest. First, uninstall the JRE through Add/Remove Programs in the Control Panel. Then download and install Sun's final JRE1.3. This installs the Java plugin for Communicator but not for Mozilla or Netscape 6. Therefore, you need to go to Communicator's plugin directory and find the files of form npjava##.dll (I had three files). Copy these files to Netscape 6's/Mozilla's plugin directory. Start up Netscape and it should work great. Also, you have the added benefit of not having that Java icon in the tasktray as with the beta plugin.

#57 Re: Upgrade your Java Plugin

by skeeterow <skeetersrow@netscape.net>

Thursday October 5th, 2000 10:44 AM

Reply to this message

Well for me all it did start the java consule every time that I start the browser.

#59 Netscape's Carbon plans?

by soybomb

Thursday October 5th, 2000 11:48 AM

Reply to this message

I noticed that all carbonization was missing from the Mac build of PR 3 even though the latest builds on Mac Mozilla have been moving towards Carbon APIs (not to mention Fizzilla). Are there no Carbon plans on the Netscape branch? Or will early Mac OS X adopters have only Mozilla 1.0 to choose from? Seeing that Apple has flown IE developers out to show them how to write for the new OS it'd be a shame to see Netscape lag behind again on the Macintosh...

#60 Re: Netscape's Carbon plans?

by gerbilpower <gerbil@ucdavis.edu>

Thursday October 5th, 2000 12:18 PM

Reply to this message

Carbon development for Mozilla is still too early, let alone make it as a Netscape 6 Preview Release. But since MacOS X final isn't due til early 2001, they are not too behind.

<:3)~~

#62 Linux Classic Patch

by slm

Thursday October 5th, 2000 5:27 PM

Reply to this message

#64 Need Debug mode in PR3?

by dannunn <thedannunn@yahoo.com>

Thursday October 5th, 2000 6:47 PM

Reply to this message

Need debug mode in PR3? Simple, click on the last Advanced menu (Desktop Integration if expanded and on win32), click Down with the arrow keys, and viola, there's the debug menu :)

I was hoping this would work with image blocking, but the closest I see to anything good is clicking the Advanced "Images" category and watching the frame appear quickly large, then resize to fit the two options, "block all" or "allow all" :)

#66 Java and Plugins on Linux

by pjc1

Thursday October 5th, 2000 10:54 PM

Reply to this message

PR3 works except for plugins and Java. When I view the about:plugins page it shows that I have no plugins installed. Plugins have not worked for me on any Mozilla build either.

#76 Re: Java and Plugins on Linux

by phitaly <linuxman@inficad.com>

Saturday October 7th, 2000 12:48 AM

Reply to this message

I am amazed at the people who constantly bitch about the software when they do not read the documentation. For all of you lazy people I will spell it out for you:

Go to your c:\\Program Files\\JavaSoft\\JRE\\1.3\\bin directory and copy the three files: npjava11.dll, npjava12.dll, and npjava32.dll into your mozilla plugins directory

After you copy these files ... restart the browser and POOF!! JAVA works!! Even the monkey on the mozillazine page! hehe

#93 Re: Re: Java and Plugins on Linux

by damian <daemonc@netscape.net>

Sunday October 8th, 2000 5:57 PM

Reply to this message

And I'm amazed at people who reply without reading posts. There's this operating system called Linux, it doesn't HAVE a C:, or .dll's ... never mind.

#68 Java does work but...

by hfoucher

Friday October 6th, 2000 12:31 AM

Reply to this message

I was glad to see that Java JRE 1.3 was included but lots of applets that use to work with NS4.75 don't with PR3. In Mozillazine for example, the advertising applet doesn't blocks at the top of the page. -- (posted with PR3)

#70 auto install

by Sparkster

Friday October 6th, 2000 7:33 AM

Reply to this message

hello, maybe this is not PR3 related, but i have a question.. i\\\\\\\'m using the latest nightly build (20000100521) and i\\\\\\\'m just using auto install for java support. but the progressbar isn\\\\\\\'t doing anything. xisdnload says it would receive data. so is it downloading right now? why can\\\\\\\'t i see how much is done? the progress bar shouldn\\\\\\\'t only be there to show the progress of the install, i want to know when my download is ready! i have to pay for my onlinetime :) and i can\\\\\\\'t even know, if it\\\\\\\'s doing anything...

#71 the root of the problem

by NSMichib <michib@inwind.it>

Friday October 6th, 2000 11:08 AM

Reply to this message

The PR3 looks great under Linux too... But it sounds like it doesn't work unless you lounch it as root. Am I wrong? I'm trying to run it on my RedHat 6.1 enviroment...

#79 Re: the root of the problem

by RvR <mozillazine@mozillazine-fr.org>

Saturday October 7th, 2000 2:48 AM

Reply to this message

huh ! you don't need to be root and if i may give you a piece of advice... don't do this ! a normal user never should work as root on any Unix machine. it's dangerous for many reasons. root must be used only for administration tasks.

#72 the root of the problem

by NSMichib <michib@inwind.it>

Friday October 6th, 2000 11:09 AM

Reply to this message

The PR3 looks great under Linux too... But it sounds like it doesn't work unless you lounch it as root. Am I wrong? I'm trying to run it on my RedHat 6.1 enviroment...

#82 Re: the root of the problem

by ronin

Saturday October 7th, 2000 4:19 PM

Reply to this message

I assume you installed it in /usr/local? Normal users do not have write permissions in those directories (and they shouldn't). For some reason, when Mozilla is first launched it has to write files to the base install directory. If you run it as a normal user it can't do that. I think if you run it once as root though, you ought to be able to run it as a regular user after that . . .

This is still a bug I think. :)

#96 Re: Re: the root of the problem

by rkl

Monday October 9th, 2000 9:23 AM

Reply to this message

Yes, it's actually two bugs - #42184 <http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42184> and #41057 <http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41057>

It was mainly the creation of "component.reg" in the MOZILLA_FIVE_HOME tree that hit me. It's particularly annoying because it makes it hard to put that tree on an NFS disk and serve it up to multiple users.

One bizarre point - one of the above bugs has a target of M18 and the other a target of M20 and yet I feel both are intrinsically linked and should be fixed for M18 (Linux admins who are managing an intranet and want to install Mozilla via NFS are bitten badly by these two bugs).

#73 Too slow on my machine

by avisdurgan

Friday October 6th, 2000 2:02 PM

Reply to this message

I tried to run it on my ol\\\' Pentium 90 Mhz with 32 MB RAM. And it\\\'s actually *slower* than Netscape 4.x! Even navigating the \\\"File, Edit, ...\\\" menus takes ages!

The browser has to become *faster* than NS4.x to make it IMO - I always thought it would be. Oh, well, we can probably expect that when NS6 final is released. I also hope that scrolling the window of mail messages becomes much faster. I mean, it looks like the browser updates a web page for each time I scroll this window! It really doesn\\\'t make sense to me.

#74 Re: Too slow on my machine

by FrodoB

Friday October 6th, 2000 5:31 PM

Reply to this message

Actually, that's precisely what it's doing. The entire interface is rendered by Gecko (and is in essence a souped-up Web page).

#75 Re: Too slow on my machine

by Ben_Goodger

Friday October 6th, 2000 8:42 PM

Reply to this message

How often have new software releases been faster than their predecessors ;) Netscape 4.x was much slower than Netscape 3 on contemporary (1997) hardware...

#77 Re: Re: Too slow on my machine

by Tanyel <tanyel@straightblack.com>

Saturday October 7th, 2000 12:53 AM

Reply to this message

Netscape was not competing with Internet Explorer 5.5 then.

#78 Netscape 6 PR3

by Tanyel <tanyel@straightblack.com>

Saturday October 7th, 2000 1:00 AM

Reply to this message

I would probably enjoy this browser if I had 128 megabytes of RAM at home. The features look good but the browser is slow enough for me to draw screen shots of it with a pencil. I cannot wait 30 seconds for each page to load.

#80 Memory problems & Mozilla

by davebo

Saturday October 7th, 2000 1:52 PM

Reply to this message

I wish more people would read the above message and recognize that Mozilla has a problem. There are still lots of machines out there without piles of memory (think of all the 1st & 2nd gen iMacs, for starters) which grind to a screeching halt when trying to use Mozilla. And they'll run IE 5+ great - which, at least on the Mac, is a great and pretty standard compliant browser. In fact, since web pages code for it AND will continue to do so for the forseeable future - it's standard compliant enough.

I've heard all the lines. Sure, mozilla may be fully standards compliant. Sure, mozilla may power the next generation of web appliances (not that there are any available now, except WebTV, and that's never going to use Mozilla, and not that there's a guarantee that there's going to be a big market for these EVEN AFTER more get released). Sure, mozilla may be a cross-platform base for other applications, yadda, yadda, yadda. Sure, it's still beta, and 'if you tried the latest nightly you'd be blown away with how fast it's gotten/how much less memory it takes/how infrequently it crashes.' I've heard it (and it's still not fully s.c.), I'm aware of it, I know it's cross platform, and I pull source every week and build it on my machine with full optimizations. It's still not useable.

The market NOW is for Mac/Win machines. And Mozilla's not going to be useable on a huge chunk of these machines, while its major competitor (IE) is. And the folks here that keep ignoring this fact are going to be sorely disappointed when 1.0, 1.1, 1.2 . . . . come out but don't recapture or gain market share.

#83 Of course, but....

by FrodoB

Saturday October 7th, 2000 5:54 PM

Reply to this message

What exactly do you intend for Mozilla developers to do about it? Sure, it's all well and good to say that it's unusable, but the developers know that better than anybody (that's why Mozilla 1.0 is coming significantly after Netscape 6). Abstract complaints about high memory usage do nothing to help. Filing bugs about problem spots of high memory usage (or even actually coding to help with it) is much more useful than even the most well-intentioned talk.

#84 Re: Of course, but....

by Tanyel <tanyel@straightblack.com>

Saturday October 7th, 2000 8:57 PM

Reply to this message

Scapegoating will not solve the problems either.

#87 Re: Of course, but....

by davebo

Sunday October 8th, 2000 10:54 AM

Reply to this message

Since you've been nice enough to respond without screaming obscenities or "get off this board, you Micro$oft shill", I'll reply to your message.

First: do the developers really know how slow it is on low memory machines? How many of them have a 32 MB machine sitting on their desk? My guess is not many. And when I've seen other people mention this, the responses are usually "buy more memory" or "it's not THAT slow."

Second: it seems like a lot of the memory problems result from front end design. Yes, mozilla can render its own UI, which makes it very easy to port from platform to platform. It also makes it a pig. This seems like a fundamental design flaw. When this gets mentioned, the developers say "screw off - that's the way we're doing it, and if we didn't do it this way it'd be a Windows-only browser." As a result, you've got a mediocre browser on many platforms, rather than a great one on one platform. And, IMHO, mac/linux/solaris/irix/etc open source developers would be more willing to dump effort into coding a platform-native front end for a great windows browser that had been designed, in advance, with a clean split between front & back ends, such that it was relatively straightforward to drop a new platform specific front end on. Yes, I know, there hasn't been many mac developers on the project up to now, and there's no guarantee a different design would have changed things.

Third: submit bugs or code if you've got a problem. Yes, I could download the code and make fixes. But I'm not a programmer. Yes, I could download the browser, let it run, and submit bugs. Well, I download the browser, let it run, it's unusably slow, and then what? Do I submit a bug "takes up too much memory?" There's already 50 bugs saying the same thing. I've seen people mention things like 'profiling browser, found NSStringSomethingOrOther wasn't flushing correctly, saved 8 kb' but I have no idea how to do that, nor do I think I have the tools to do so - at least under MacOS.

Here's what I know - if this was a closed source product, and customers bought it and said "gee, it's incredibly slow on my machine, which is only a year old, so can't be that out of date" the developers would try to respond. Not say "well, if you're not going to submit any patches, piss off." Or even better, "well, if you're not going to redesign our code, piss off." I don't think open sourcing mozilla makes it OK for these sorts of end-user complaints to be ignored. Feel free to disagree.

#89 Re: Re: Of course, but....

by gerbilpower <gerbil@ucdavis.edu>

Sunday October 8th, 2000 11:40 AM

Reply to this message

If you ever monitor some of the newsgroups, they're keeping track of memory usage numbers quite regularly.

The problem is not developers are blind to the memory problems, especially since they cannot wave around some magic wand and POOF memory problems suddenly disappear.

The problem is that it takes time to work these problems out, at the same time they have other priorities with other bugs that others also wanted fixed ASAP.

With the progress I've seen, using real numbers I'm getting thanx to a software program I've been using, there have been some very noticeable progress on the memory/performance front. I just hope that it continues and we'll have a browser that works decently under lower memory conditions.

We have bugs dealing with Moz making its own UI, but I think we have to also focus on fixing these bugs instead of declaring that the whole concept is flawed. With the uneven number of developers for each platform, I can't really see enough developers working on other platforms outside of Windows and Linux if the UI went completely native.

You can actually monitor memory use on the MacOS, or any OS, and report bugs on it. Using About Computer from the Apple Menu, you get a window showing what programs are running and how much memory they are using. If you do something in Moz that suddenly causes an unusually large amount of memory to be used, then you can report what you did in a bug report. You don't have to report the specific back-end command that Moz used or anything.

<:3)~~

#91 Re: Re: Of course, but....

by marcenuc

Sunday October 8th, 2000 12:16 PM

Reply to this message

> Yes, I could download the code and make > fixes. But I\'m not a programmer.

you need not to be a programmer, and you need not much time. A very simple way to help a LOT, is to download a talkback build and try to REPRODUCE a catched crash and explain how to do it.

This way, I have found 6 bugs and had them fixed in a week without filling a bug report.

Another simple way to help, is to browse bugzilla confirming uncomfirmed bugs. It\'s easy: read the bug report, try to reproduce the bug and add a comment to say your results.

#94 Re: Re: Of course, but....

by FrodoB

Sunday October 8th, 2000 6:43 PM

Reply to this message

>Since you've been nice enough to respond without screaming obscenities or "get off this board, you Micro$oft shill", I'll reply to your message.

We're nothing if we don't maintain civility. I find that people who resort to such things are generally unable to conduct decent conversations (beyond their initial offensiveness). And my original message came off a bit harsher than my intentions (posting after midnight is generally not recommended).

>First: do the developers really know how slow it is on low memory machines? How many of them have a 32 MB machine sitting on their desk? My guess is not many. And when I've seen other people mention this, the responses are usually "buy more memory" or "it's not THAT slow."

I'm not really sure. I think I remember some @netscape.com employee who tested it regularly on a 32 MB machine.... In any case, absolute numbers of RAM usage as reported by Windows 2000 on a machine with a quarter GB of RAM generally give a decent idea of how well it'd run on a slower machine. That it doesn't seem slower on the devel machines doesn't necessarily mean they don't know that it *is* slow on lower memory configurations.

>Second: it seems like a lot of the memory problems result from front end design. Yes, mozilla can render its own UI, which makes it very easy to port from platform to platform. It also makes it a pig. This seems like a fundamental design flaw. When this gets mentioned, the developers say "screw off - that's the way we're doing it, and if we didn't do it this way it'd be a Windows-only browser." As a result, you've got a mediocre browser on many platforms, rather than a great one on one platform. And, IMHO, mac/linux/solaris/irix/etc open source developers would be more willing to dump effort into coding a platform-native front end for a great windows browser that had been designed, in advance, with a clean split between front & back ends, such that it was relatively straightforward to drop a new platform specific front end on. Yes, I know, there hasn't been many mac developers on the project up to now, and there's no guarantee a different design would have changed things.

This is something I contend is simply not the case. Sure, it's great to say that people out of general benevolence would hop on the bandwagon to help out Mozilla. But practically, if it was developed with native front ends (and thus became a great browser for Windows-only), I suspect that the codebase would not be even close to cross-platform. (Heck, there were lots of problems early on with Win32 favoritisms in the code when they *were* trying to support three platforms. Imagine if they only had to support one!) Beyond that, Mozilla wouldn't be given the time of day. There's absolutely no one in the world who needs another good browser for only Windows; IE already provides that. Ditto on the MacOS. But a good browser that will run anywhere is something that can be useful to a large number of people.

>Here's what I know - if this was a closed source product, and customers bought it and said "gee, it's incredibly slow on my machine, which is only a year old, so can't be that out of date" the developers would try to respond. Not say "well, if you're not going to submit any patches, piss off." Or even better, "well, if you're not going to redesign our code, piss off." I don't think open sourcing mozilla makes it OK for these sorts of end-user complaints to be ignored. Feel free to disagree.

That's not what I meant, and if I came off that way, I apologize. I didn't say that comments such as yours should be ignored; I simply said that they might not be helping at this point, because it's been said by hundreds of people. Something of a broken record effect. I'd rather hear one comment about Mozilla 1000 times than lose even one useful comment due to someone feeling put off by elitist OSS bigots. :)

#95 Re: Re: Of course, but....

by Martyr

Monday October 9th, 2000 1:31 AM

Reply to this message

Your arguments are flawed on several fronts. 1) If customers bought it and it ran slow, the official word would be (as you stereotype developer response now) "buy more memory", or they would simply state that it requires a certain amount of memory. As somebody who works in a development company, those requests are called ENHANCEMENTS, which means they are put on the back burner, and usually reserved for future upgrades, IF dealt with at all. Catching memory leaks is not a high priority among any developers. Be glad you have such a direct route to them now, rather than going to the help desk (which may bury it) which feeds it to customer support (which may bury it) which feeds it to the developers (who may bury it), and of course the adminisphere could always axe any user request whatsoever. 2) You've already admitted your own ignorance and lack of motivation as concerned to fixing the problem. Again, I'm sorry -- people who complain and then admit they haven't exerted any effort to fix the problems WHEN they have the ability to do so don't merit much sympathy. People who don't bother to look for answers to solutions don't merit much sympathy either. It's so easy to complain, but it takes motivation to actually do something. So my point is this: we don't have the layers of administration you have in a real company. You have the chance to get involved, but you refuse. Your choice, just don't complain later....you won't get much sympathy then, either. (Reminds me of the people who complain about local government but never lift a finger to effect its change. The parallels are striking).

#97 one last go at it

by davebo

Monday October 9th, 2000 11:32 AM

Reply to this message

I'll answer your 2 points, in a roundabout manner.

1) the "buy more memory" problem. If you work at a company which is the only one in town (or in the world) selling a program, or a program with a very specialized userbase, and a user complains that the program runs too slow on a low memory machine, then you're completely justified in saying "buy more memory" and moving on to more interesting things. If the customer doesn't like it, well, they don't have a choice. I've worked around a product like that - and big oil companies don't even flinch when you say "you'll need 256 MB RAM to run this application," because it's that or nothing.

With Mozilla, though, that's not the case. There is another browser available (well, more than one, but we'll just worry about IE for now) which DOES work on low memory machines, AND works quite well, AND for the same low price (again, I'll ignore the loss of your soul.) If Mozilla doesn't work on low memory machines (and there are a lot out there), their owners will use IE and it will work well. And when, 5 years down the line, they buy another machine, they'll use IE on it, too, 'cause that's what they're used to.

2) "my own ignorance & lack of motivation with fixing the problem." So, you're right - I don't know how to code, so I'm not going to fix bugs. And guess what? I don't care enough about Mozilla to drop everything else that I'm doing, stop hanging out with friends/family/gardening/reading/working on my dissertation, learn good C++ coding techniques & plunge in to the code.

As far as filing bugs - a number of people have given me constructive suggestions on how to file bugs beyond "it takes too much memory." They were helpful, and I'll give them a whirl the next time I start Mozilla up.

You, on the other hand, spew forth the classic "you just complain and don't do anything to fix them and won't get involved so piss off." If I didn't want to get involved at all, I wouldn't have even bothered to post my initial message.

I was going to write a longer reponse - but some friends have come by & we're going to lunch. I'll just say that your attitude makes me want to be LESS involved and makes me care LESS about what happens to Mozilla. And later, I won't complain when Mozilla doesn't run on my machine - I'll just use IE.

#101 Re: Re: Re: Of course, but....

by socbyset <socbyset@hotmail.com>

Monday October 9th, 2000 3:39 PM

Reply to this message

The issue here is not any specific bug but some basic architectural decisions made early on. Saying that we won\'t help report or fix bugs or help code so then we have no right to criticize doesn\'t make sense. It seems like one would contribute to the effort only if they thought that the basic direction of the project was sound. If not then it is appropriate to discuss their concerns in a forum such as this.

The problem cited was not a lack of people around who will report bugs and fix memory leaks, it was a criticism of the basic design of the thing, that having a platform independent front end will make Mozilla a pig, no matter how many people are helping out. Why would someone commit their free time to Mozilla if they feel that it is so fundamentally flawed?

And anyway, I think the Mozilla project should be totally open to criticism from anyone who wants to criticize it. Sure, it\'s open source but you can\'t shut someone out of this discussion just becuase they don\'t contribute. Mozilla has plenty of resources, including a fully staffed full-time development team at Netscape and has had plenty of time. The fact that it is open-source means that it has even more resources available and thus should be even more open to criticism. If it is doing badly then the blame lies not in all the lazybones like me who failed to file bug reports but with strategic decisions and management. The people who ultimately decide the fate of Mozilla will be end-users. They will have the exact same complaints that you are hearing here and they will probably ignore Mozilla/Netscape because of it. You can continue to turn a deaf ear to the complaints because those millions have never filed a bug report. Meanwhile Mozilla will lie dead as a beached whale in the marketplace.

#102 Amen.

by davebo

Monday October 9th, 2000 4:23 PM

Reply to this message

This guy has hit the nail right on the head. Read this quote over and over until fully grokked.

************************************* The people who ultimately decide the fate of Mozilla will be end-users. They will have the exact same complaints that you are hearing here and they will probably ignore Mozilla/Netscape because of it. You can continue to turn a deaf ear to the complaints because those millions have never filed a bug report. Meanwhile Mozilla will lie dead as a beached whale in the marketplace.

#86 Low Memory

by tny

Sunday October 8th, 2000 7:39 AM

Reply to this message

I find it bearable, if slow, on RedHat 6.2 with a 133 P and 64 MB EDO, except when I load Unicode pages, which take 5 times as long. And that's well below the recommended hardware requirements.

#85 mail agent yes, browser no

by skeeterow <skeetersrow@netscape.net>

Sunday October 8th, 2000 4:10 AM

Reply to this message

Hi I've been using build id2000092608 MathML-SVG for my daily browsing and I don't find build build up slow at all. CPU 200 RAM 96 older edo. However with the Mozilla, not NS PR 3, there are some options in pref + debug+ events + paint dumping that are not present in the NS clones. These options do seem to speed things up. May be they should be added back into the NS.

#88 Browser Yes, Preferences No

by Tanyel <tanyel@straightblack.com>

Sunday October 8th, 2000 11:11 AM

Reply to this message

My computer has 32 megabytes of RAM. The last time I used a Mozilla nightly build, it had a terrible start time. After that, it was pleasant. I even found it to be fun.

The Netscape PR3 release is absolutely horrible. I was expecting it to load pages as the nightly builds did. Instead it was so terrible, I shut it down so it would not cause GoBack to stop working due to massive disk activity.

Anyway, I think if Netscape is having this much trouble then they should release Mozilla directly as Netscape 6 and remove whatever they added to turn it into absolute trash. I also think their worthless beta version of Java should not be a part of a separate install process. Now I have to do two uninstalls to get rid of this trash.

What good is Net2Phone? Is that an imitation of Dialpad.com? The only thing I liked was the integrated Instant Messenger. Why does this thing place copies of dynamic link libraries in its own folders when these files already exist in the Windows system folder? That is like America Online. Why is this Net2Phone link on the browser while I chose not to install Net2Phone? Is this "What's Related" thing sending information about my page visits to some flunkies at Alexa? Mozilla cancels downloads if I visit a new website address before the file is completely transferred. Does Netscape PR6 do that?

I did not use Netscape PR6 long enough to see if it could download a file. I used it for more than a half hour though. I think I was able to see three pages and send an "instant" message. I was distracted by a crazy, sexually deprived man though, so maybe it only takes 20 minutes to view 3 webpages and type a message. I found that I was able to type things, get kool-Aid, and return to the computer before the letters appeared on the screen.

What preferences do I have to change to make the letters appear on the screen in less time than it takes for me to walk through my home? What preferences do I have to change to make the startup time less than 10 minutes? What preferences do I have to change to make my webpages show before my free ISP kicks me offline due to inactivity?

#90 Re: Browser Yes, Preferences No

by gerbilpower <gerbil@ucdavis.edu>

Sunday October 8th, 2000 11:49 AM

Reply to this message

The download bug, where Mozilla will cancel a download if you try to navigate to another page, is fixed.

<:3)~~

#92 too (2) SLOW

by daddydago <fredjudi@mediaone.net>

Sunday October 8th, 2000 2:56 PM

Reply to this message

Way to go Netscape you really blew it this time. I still love ya dough!!! Try Again PLEASE.... this time puul the finger out and use both hands

#98 It's always nice...

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

Monday October 9th, 2000 1:12 PM

Reply to this message

It's always nice to notice how a Netscape Preview Release raises up so many thoughts and brings life to MozillaZine. It's so quiet these days... But maybe there simply aren't any great news to inform people... I love the lizards forthgoing steps!

#99 Re: It's always nice...

by gerbilpower <gerbil@ucdavis.edu>

Monday October 9th, 2000 1:59 PM

Reply to this message

Well news has been slow lately, we need a good "motivational" kick occasionally to get the ball rolling.

Posted with Moz, of course :)

<:3)~~

#100 Why is everybody soo happy with PR3

by sanana2

Monday October 9th, 2000 2:19 PM

Reply to this message

I do not understand why erverybody is so happy with this new PR3 release???

A couple of things that irritate me: Main: -It is still a lot slower then IE 5.0. -It is still a lot slower then NS 4.7x -Where the hell have the Cascading stylsheets level 2 went to?? In PR2 there was and now there isn\\\\\\\'t. It doesnt matter if this is a W3C standard, halve the world is using mouseovers etc. What the hell is wrong at Netscape Inc? Do they need a good project leader? I volunteer!

Visual bugz: -The netscape starting window is resizable??? Where the hell is that for. It also looks very cheap! -The interface is a bit slow when interacting with other windows (and yes i have 400MB in this machine). -Is this the winning Theme of the interface CONTEST! What a CRAP... Sliderbars that are dissapearing when moving up and down, when clicking on My side bar and clicing on a purple folder the folder dissapears. -The preferences menus and pulldown menus are slow.. why? Because of this the application interface doesn\\\\\\\'t feel ROBUUT!!.. I think these guys can learn a lot from \\\\\\\"Fundamentals of software engineering, Ghezzi\\\\\\\". -Why are all the popup windows located at the top of the screen???

Good things: -The DOM render engine (seems to render correct). -MySite bar. -Tiny Personal toolbar. -Customizable interface. -Storage of forms, great! But also a point of discussion about security.

At last: we probably need a PR4, up to PR20 to have a final version in my opinion. Meanwhile i keep working with NS4.7x and sometimes when sites need more I.E. 5.x.

I hope my English was understandable.

Paul Koster

#103 Re: Why is everybody soo happy with PR3

by gerbilpower <gerbil@ucdavis.edu>

Monday October 9th, 2000 4:33 PM

Reply to this message

First of all, calm down! The more angry you sound, the more likely people think you might be a troll.

Second of all, some of the things you're seeing I haven't seen at all.

Thirdly, I can address a few of these things: 1. The CSS hover was disabled due to a performance issue popped up in the last minute. It can be manually re-enabled, I have some info on my site: <http://www.gerbilbox.com/…a/netscape6/general18.php>

Regressions, old bugs that were fixed long ago that suddenly pop up again, do happen every now and then.

2. The new Modern theme, the blue one you're seeing, was introduced at least a month ago in Mozilla. It is not from Netscape's themes contest, which winners haven't been announced yet.

3. This is still beta, always assume bugs. PR3 is a significant improvement over PR2 and PR1, that's what people have been so happy about. However, thereare still a lot of problems and bugs that need to be dealt with.

<:3)~~

#108 Re: Re: Why is everybody soo happy with PR3

by tny

Tuesday October 10th, 2000 11:47 AM

Reply to this message

And the key (on the :hover bug) is "temporarily" - the folks working on this bug (5693) have been very responsive.

#109 Re: Re: Re: Why is everybody soo happy with PR3

by pwinthrop

Tuesday October 10th, 2000 12:02 PM

Reply to this message

What about the fact that you can't add new Themes. I've tried on two very different machines one Win95 and another Win98SE to add new themes, but they never show up. Am I the only one to have this problem?

#113 Themes

by Brendon <forbiddentears@crosswinds.net>

Tuesday October 10th, 2000 6:14 PM

Reply to this message

I didnt bother checking the preview release for very long, as i knew that it was only going to have things i dont use. So, instead, I use the much better, Mozilla Seamonkey -heh, never liked the name- which is simply Netscape 6 without the commercial rubbish.

Now, your problem I cant solve, but if you download a Nightly build from <http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla/nightly/latest/> then it is bound to work.

Themes can be downloaded from <http://x.themes.org>

Sometimes a skin doesnt work due to the fact that Mozilla -the base of Netscape 6- is a moving target, its still in heavy development. So, skins which were made a while ago and were not updated to the newer builds will most likely not work.

Also, skins like Aphrodite are still hard to get running, because they re not just a skin -well, just not like the common skins you can find at the moment- but its a modification. I believe they refer to it as a 'package'.

#115 Why?

by Martyr

Wednesday October 11th, 2000 8:56 AM

Reply to this message

Reasons: 1. It's acceptably fast to render (NT and Win 98, 128 Mb) 2. JAVA. 3. Standards support. 4. Cut and paste in the URL bar. 5. Print. 6. New classic skin makes the app look slick. 7. Mail works. 8. It renders Delphi correctly, and I can sometimes reply to messages there.

Basically, because this is the first incarnation that looks and feels like a real browser that NS has put forth. Not everything is there. Not everything that is there works all the time. But it's starting to feel like a real product (it also kicks PR 2's butt!). It's tantilizingly close to real, and it's functional more than 75% of the time. I'm stoked.

#116 Re: Why?

by Lynggaard <Lynggaard@netscape.net>

Thursday October 12th, 2000 6:23 AM

Reply to this message

Renders Delphi ???

#110 Re: Re: Re: Why is everybody soo happy with PR3

by pwinthrop

Tuesday October 10th, 2000 12:09 PM

Reply to this message

What about the fact that you can't add new Themes. I've tried on two very different machines one Win95 and another Win98SE to add new themes, but they never show up. Am I the only one to have this problem?

#117 I'll tell you why I'm soo happy with PR3

by joshua1_9

Friday October 13th, 2000 1:35 PM

Reply to this message

1. NS now crashes less often on my computer than IE. 2. The performance is good, even using only 32MB. Startup still takes a bit, but it doesn't bother me much. 3. The UI looks good, both modern and classic. Mozilla is now my primary browser. Congratulations to all of the Mozilla team! You've created truly great and innovative software.

John N

#104 Never hurts to mention it again.

by gerbilpower <gerbil@ucdavis.edu>

Monday October 9th, 2000 4:36 PM

Reply to this message

I'm noticing that I still get a good number of people referred to my site from MozillaZine posts, so to those who still don't know, I maintain an unofficial Netscape 6 and Mozilla FAQ called NewZilla:

<http://www.gerbilbox.com/newzilla/>

Any feedback is appreciated.

<:3)~~

#105 Help!! I can't get it to work at all.

by jimgurd <jimgurd@netscape.net>

Monday October 9th, 2000 9:23 PM

Reply to this message

I have been unable to get Netscape 6 or Mozilla to work. I keep getting the GPF's listed below:

********************************************************************** Date 10/09/2000 Time 22:52 NETSCP6 caused an invalid page fault in module PLC4.DLL at 015f:60c71419. Registers: EAX=00000001 CS=015f EIP=60c71419 EFLGS=00010202 EBX=00000001 SS=0167 ESP=0068f310 EBP=0068f328 ECX=023e394c DS=0167 ESI=00000000 FS=3c1f EDX=023e3500 ES=0167 EDI=023e3650 GS=0000 Bytes at CS:EIP: 8a 08 8a 54 24 08 84 c9 74 0c 3a ca 74 12 8a 48 Stack dump: 603bb177 00000001 0000007c 01d2d268 0068f3d0 023e3a50 0068f390 603bb0a9 00000001 023e3630 00000000 023e37b0 00000000 023e3900 023e3a50 01d2d268 ********************************************************************** Date 10/09/2000 Time 23:10 MOZILLA caused an invalid page fault in module PLC4.DLL at 015f:60cb1419. Registers: EAX=00000001 CS=015f EIP=60cb1419 EFLGS=00010202 EBX=00000001 SS=0167 ESP=0068f890 EBP=0068f8a8 ECX=0084a80c DS=0167 ESI=00000000 FS=1a27 EDX=0084a400 ES=0167 EDI=0084a510 GS=0000 Bytes at CS:EIP: 8a 08 8a 54 24 08 84 c9 74 0c 3a ca 74 12 8a 48 Stack dump: 603bb312 00000001 0000007c 01c2f00c 0068f950 0084a910 0068f910 603bb244 00000001 0084a4f0 00000000 0084a670 00000000 0084a7c0 0084a910 01c2f00c

I am running Win 98 (first edition) with IE5 and all windows critical updates installed. I have 128MB of RAM and a 650 Mhz machine. My windows installation is only about one month old so it is unlikely to be corrupted and passes the system file checker test. What is wrong?

#106 Re: Help!! I can't get it to work at all.

by mitabrev

Tuesday October 10th, 2000 2:19 AM

Reply to this message

The same thing was happening to me, but when I uninstalled the Crescendo plugin, both Mozilla and Netscape began working properly. The plugin I had was for netscape, version 5. I did see in the netscape newsgroups that upgrading to the latest version of Crescendo, version 5.1 was supposed to fix it too. I am not certain if this includes IE5...as I was using Netscape 4.08. But it worked for me. I hope this helps.

#107 Re: Re: Help!! I can't get it to work at all.

by FrodoB

Tuesday October 10th, 2000 7:20 AM

Reply to this message

Yes, indeed. The relevant bug is 48110 <http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=48110>

It's too bad it wasn't put in the release notes....

#114 It works now

by jimgurd <jimgurd@netscape.net>

Tuesday October 10th, 2000 7:08 PM

Reply to this message

Thanks to both of you for your help. I upgraded to Crescendo 5.1 and the problem disappeared. This post is made with PR3.