MozillaZine

Netscape Cannot Win

Monday November 6th, 2000

I have recently become convinced that Netscape is fighting a losing battle against third-party micro-managing in their attempt to produce a browser for market.

The first conflict was with the raving loonies of the WSP. The WSP whines and bitches about standards compliance. They create a petition to convince Netscape to switch to development of their "Gecko" rendering engine technology, which promises greater standards compliance. They take credit for the Mozilla project moving to this new technology.

Then, they decide that the WSP is much more concerned about dictating project deadlines than standards compliance, and demand that Netscape release a product before the end of the year 2000, and stop any more work on Netscape 4.x -- including security fixes, apparently. (And read below to see what their fearless leader had to say today).

Now, a guy named Dave Flanagan has determined that Netscape 6 is too non-compliant to be released, although any reasonable, objective assessment of the application would prove that it is much more compliant than any browser currently on the market (yet you don't hear Mr. Flanagan petitioning against the release of iCab or IE6 or Konqueror).

And guess what? Mr. Flanagan has a petition you can sign, telling Netscape to hold off release of Netscape 6! But you can also use his petition to log your dissent.

[Mr. O'Reilly, I'm saddened that you signed an assent to Mr. Flanagan's petition without making an assessment of Netscape 6's standards compliance.

And Mr. Zeldman, I was dismayed, but not surprised, to read your statement in which you backtrack on the WSP's call for product release by the end of the year, when you obviously have not done an honest assessment of Netscape's standards compliance. "Releasing a close-to-perfect standards-compliant browser would be fine. (No software is perfect.) But releasing a browser with seriously buggy, incomplete standards support will not serve Netscape, will not serve developers, and will not serve the cause of web standards."]

I have made it known to a few people that I will no longer be fielding Netscape news on my site. You may see news of product releases, but you will no longer see links to reviews, complaints, rants, or any other information having to do with the Netscape product.

This site is called MozillaZine for a reason. I started it to support the Mozilla Open Source project. Along the way, I tried to be a voice of support for Netscape as it navigated the murky waters of being a commercial contributor to an open project. But what I am confronted with is the fact that if I were to continue posting Netscape news I would be forced to continue posting links to this garbage, giving it more credibility than it deserves. Look what happened when news of Mr. Flanagan's petition hit Slashdot. The petition now overflows with rants against Netscape, and I bet not one of these ravers has done even a modest assessment of Netscape 6's standards compliance. Is that the kind of support you wanted Mr. Flanagan? If you can get lots of people to raise their voices, does the din drown out their ignorance?

In any case, this crap will no longer will find a home in MozillaZine. So, take a good long look. Gaze into Mr. Flanagan's eyes. Because he's the last guy with an axe to grind against Netscape that you will see in these pages. The last armchair-marketer to get a say on this site. You'll have to go elsewhere to get your fix. (However, I allow myself an exception to clobber the hell out of the WSP if they continue to act like pussies.)

Netscape is in the unenviable position of choosing between bug-fixes and product release - the Scylla and Charybdis of software development. They've set their course. Maybe they will stop and reassess. That's up to the Netscape managers and the PDT team. But the waters grow increasingly insipid, and they might just end up deciding that it's not worth the trouble and pack it all up and call it a day. Maybe they can put in the past this peanut-gallery micro-management Hell that they've fallen into.

I'll leave you with a very thoughtful post to the n.p.m.layout newsgroup by Dylan Schiemann.


#61 Microsoft and AOL's Other Deadline

by Mike_Cornall

Wednesday November 8th, 2000 2:27 PM

You are replying to this message

Don't forget that AOL is facing another deadline, which is that AOL dare not renew their license for IE.

The fact that it would cost AOL money is not the point. The real problem is that AOL can't trust Microsoft.

The current upgrade, AOL 6.0, is already running into stability and compatibility problems:

<http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/14525.html>

To what extent are those problems caused by AOL, and to what extent are they caused by incompetence or deliberate sabotage on the part of Microsoft? We'll never know.

But we do know two things:

1) Microsoft can't be trusted.

2) Microsoft does engage in sabotage (e.g. polluting Java).

We also know the following:

3) Microsoft does not want Netscape to succeed.

4) Microsoft has recently started a renewed push for MSN.

5) Microsoft is increasing their tie-ins between Windows and MSN. See "Microsoft IE 6 to cut off some more air supplies":

<http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/14523.html>

Under those conditions, if you were AOL, would you want your next browser to come from Microsoft? Of course not.

It is therefore vital for AOL to have Netscape released before their next renewal of IE.

Microsoft is currently engaged in an astroturf war against Netscape (it's a given). Is Mr. Flanagan part of it? I don't know.

I guess the ultimate point is not to be distracted by this sort of crap. AOL and Mozilla developers should rely on their own best judgement, and concentrate on getting out a good product. Ignore the naysayers.

BTW: Good article, Chris.