MozillaZine

Netscape 7.0 Preview Release 1

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002

Netscape today unveiled Netscape 7.0 Preview Release 1, the first beta of its successor to Netscape 6. The preview is based on the recent Mozilla 1.0 RC2 build and features most of the enhancements that have been added to Mozilla since Netscape 6.2 was released, including tabbed browsing, print preview, the ability to save complete web pages, email return receipts, message labels and S/MIME support.

Netscape's proprietary components have also been improved. An enhanced Instant Messenger now supports file transfers, buddy icons and communication with ICQ users (though you cannot be signed on to both AIM and ICQ at the same time). Also new is Radio@Netscape, a streaming audio service powered by Spinner.

Netscape 7.0 Preview Release 1 is available from Netscape's web site or FTP server. Marketing spiel can be found at the Netscape 7.0 Info Center.


#1 Hmm.

by johnlar <johnlar@tfn.net>

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 9:24 AM

Reply to this message

1. Don't open unrequested windows is gone, probably due to marketting reasons, and honestly it has some problems and causes some windows you expect to open not to open. So I can understand this one. 2. On a new profile, first launch of mail launches in a fairly small window with sidebar pushed up high. This is wrong. 3. It uses the same profile directory as mozilla. It really shouldn't 4. It has a p3p config menu. But it's only accessable from a cookie flag. Which appears when a site sets a cookie without having a policy. Problem with that is, if you change the settings so that you don't get te flag, there is no way I can find to get back to that menu.

#3 Re: Hmm.

by AlexBishop <alex@mozillazine.org>

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 9:29 AM

Reply to this message

"Don't open unrequested windows is gone, probably due to marketting reasons, and honestly it has some problems and causes some windows you expect to open not to open."

The hidden pref <http://www.mozillazine.or…p?f=7&i=180&t=123> still works.

"It has a p3p config menu. But it's only accessable from a cookie flag. Which appears when a site sets a cookie without having a policy. Problem with that is, if you change the settings so that you don't get te flag, there is no way I can find to get back to that menu."

Edit > Preferences > Privacy and Security > Cookies > Enable cookies based on provacy settings > View. (Phew!)

Alex

#5 unrequested windows

by zevious

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 9:57 AM

Reply to this message

Wierd, mine has the option under Advanced???

#33 Re: Re: Hmm.

by MozSaysAloha <hoshie@hotpop.com>

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 5:56 PM

Reply to this message

I think Netscape rephrased it "Don't Open New Windows". I haven't ran NS 7 PR1 yet...my main PC is in the ocean!

#6 Re: Hmm.

by bandido

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 10:27 AM

Reply to this message

Pop ups blocking Edit > Preferences > Advanced > Scripts and Windows > uncheck Open a Link in a New Windows

P3P Cookies: Edit > Preferences > Pricacy and Security > Cookies > Enable Cookies based on Privacy Setting > View (In my case I have it set to enable all cookies)

#7 Pop-up Blocking?

by amutch

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 10:43 AM

Reply to this message

How is that blocking pop-ups? The appropriate preference in Mozilla's Scripts and Windows panel was "Open unrequested windows".

#138 Re: Hmm.

by jonadab <jonadab@bright.net>

Wednesday May 29th, 2002 11:14 AM

Reply to this message

> Edit > Preferences > Advanced > Scripts and Windows > uncheck Open a Link in a New Windows

That's not the same. If you disable that one, javascript links won't work either. The pref the other user was talking about was an in-between setting that would allow javascript to open new windows normally, but not during certain kinds of events, such as load and unload. This has the effect of blocking most unwanted popup windows without breaking most wanted ones. However, there are some ostensibly legitimate windows that don't open if you turn it on, as the other poster indicates. Personally I think that's an acceptable tradeoff, but apparently Netscape does not agree. Anyway, the pref still works; only the UI is missing.

This explains why popup blocking was not touted as a major feature of this release. I saw the hype on the Netscape site, and it mentions tabbed browsing (as well it should -- that's an even bigger feature), but it says nothing about blocking popup ads. Guess they're waiting to introduce that to the general public later, after it has some time to become perfected. Or maybe they just wanted to save a killer feature for next release. Or perhaps like someone speculated they fear advertiser retribution.

#2 Interesting...

by Chewey

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 9:28 AM

Reply to this message

I'm kind of surprised that the modern theme is the default. Since the classic theme integrates so well with XP I no longer use it at home (I do use Modern @ work on a NT v4 machine). All of the screenshots are modern.

#4 Re: Interesting...

by sconest

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 9:44 AM

Reply to this message

Modern has always been Netscape's default iirc

#9 Re: Interesting...

by sidesinger

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 10:44 AM

Reply to this message

Classic looks like poo.

#14 Re: Re: Interesting...

by johnlar <johnlar@tfn.net>

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 12:14 PM

Reply to this message

Not nessesarly in XP, it looks like XP IE basically.

#54 Re: Re: Re: Interesting...

by ipottinger

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 11:06 PM

Reply to this message

>> ... it looks like XP IE basically.

Like sidesinger said, "Classic looks like poo."

#64 Re: Re: Re: Interesting...

by pepejeria

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 4:01 AM

Reply to this message

Not really. The tabs look really bad in XP with Classic. No padding and if you compoare with the tabs in XP you will see that there is an incorrect line under them. :-(

#114 Re: Re: Re: Interesting...

by SithMonkey

Friday May 24th, 2002 8:01 PM

Reply to this message

"Not nessesarly in XP, it looks like XP IE basic."

Another reason to not use the classic theme.

#113 Re: Interesting...

by vcs2600 <vcs2600@yahoo.com>

Friday May 24th, 2002 5:14 PM

Reply to this message

I suspect that Netscape will have a new theme for the release version.

It would be seriously silly to have the new "7.0" browser look identical to the old one.

#115 Re: Re: Interesting...

by SithMonkey

Friday May 24th, 2002 8:09 PM

Reply to this message

>I suspect that Netscape will have a new theme for the release version. > >It would be seriously silly to have the new "7.0" browser look identical to the old one.

Hopefully not. The current modern theme looks nice so why change it? The new one could end up being a real dog (like the original modern theme included with 6.0 imho) There's no law that says they have to come up with a new theme for every major release. But if they do, hopefully they will include the current 6.2 skin with 7.0 like they do the classic skin.

#139 Modern is default, as it should be

by jonadab <jonadab@bright.net>

Wednesday May 29th, 2002 11:38 AM

Reply to this message

> I'm kind of surprised that the modern theme is the default.

This is not new. Modern has been the default since the preview release for 6.0 (way back in the days when milestones started with M and you still called them "SeaMonkey", if you remember that; IE was still a load of, erm, stuff, I think, is the polite term, and Netscape 4.x was still the best browser available, unless you wanted to pay for Opera (which still cost money back then). (And before I get snide comments from the old timers, yes, I _do_ remember using Mosaic, but that was another era.)

Modern _should_ be the default, _unless_ the installer detects that the colour depth is lower than 16-bit, in which case the installer should set it to Classic, because Modern just doesn't look right in 256-colour mode. (No decent looking theme would.) (Though, in truth, modern feature-rich browsers are probably all too heavyweight in terms of resource consumption (mainly RAM) to comfortably run on most systems old enough to be running at 256 colours or less, so the theme issue may be moot in such cases.)

And whoever said "Classic looks like poo" was basically right, though I would have phrased it differently. Classic is designed to give the warm fuzzies to people who used to use Netscape 4.x. But Netscape 7.x is aiming to compete with _modern_ browsers, and Modern just looks a whole lot better. People who want the old look can always switch themes. They're more likely to know *how* to switch themes than people who wouldn't like Classic. Which brings forth an important design principle: the defaults should always cater to users who are unlikely to know how to change the defaults. The options in the preferences, however, should always cater toward people who know how to get into the prefs dialogs and change the settings around. Because the experience of end users (who are afraid to change prefs or don't know how) is governed by the defaults, but the experience of power users (who know how to change prefs) is not; they will customise the settings, if you let them, and will be pleased with their ability to do so, which improves their experience.

I would like to see a couple of additional themes ship with NS7, but it's not a big deal, as long as there's a good selection at the theme park. Most of the ones at xulplanet/deskmod will work with NS7 (though xulplanet claims they only work with RC1, they work with subsequent branch builds just fine) except for the proprietary extensions. (So, for example, you can install the Pinball theme, but your Netscape Radio button will have a regular bookmark icon instead of a music note, and similarly for the other extra addons.) So any that Netscape can get the permissions for (or that are GPLed) they should be able to relatively easily fix up with a handful of extra icons for the proprietary extras and put up on the theme park at least. Currently (last time I checked, this morning) there's nothing there yet.

#8 I like it

by wvw

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 10:44 AM

Reply to this message

It installs plugins, icons, and the right (imho) userprefs for the mass.

#22 Re: I like it

by amutch

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 1:41 PM

Reply to this message

I'm sure the masses appreciate that Netscape doesn't allow them to stop pop-up windows and litters their desktop with AOL icons.

#30 Re: Hmm.

by bandido

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 3:33 PM

Reply to this message

Give them a break. AOL is a for profit corporation and needs to generate income, otherwise Mozilla funding and Netscape contribution to the project can be jeopardized. deleticng those desktop icons is a no brainer: click the icons once, hit the delete key and asnswer "yes" to the confirmation dialog. Pop up windows is no worse than in IE. ... and you can always use Mozilla or some other solutions.

#55 Give them a break?

by amutch

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 11:07 PM

Reply to this message

Well, it will be Netscape's loss when users go to Mozilla because of the annoyances like AOL icons and the deliberate effort to keep users from blocking pop-up windows. Why should I switch from IE to Netscape if there is no compelling reason to? I think Netscape/AOL needs to realize that these kinds of practices are going to result in a lot of negative reviews and do more damage to their bottom line in the long run.

#116 Re: Give them a break?

by SithMonkey

Friday May 24th, 2002 8:39 PM

Reply to this message

I don't like it either. But imho it is a small price to pay for AOL's support of the mozilla project. Without their support Mozilla 1.0 would have probably taken another 4 years to complete (if it survived at all)

A bigger problem in my mind is that annoying registration/activation screen. I've found it often keeps reappearing if I don't register even though it shouldn't. Thankfully I found a way to turn this off on this site: <http://www.hmetzger.de/net6e.html>

#67 Give them a break ?

by zreo2 <aa@globecom.se>

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 5:16 AM

Reply to this message

When Microsoft do stuff like this everyone starts to complain. But it's ok when AOL does it ??? I live in Sweden and we don't have any use of AOL... We have something called Telia.. that's enough for us :(

I guess the worst part with the "new" netscape are the dialogs about creating a AOL profile. Don't see that in Internet Explorer (for example MSN account), yet :) I haven't tested the new Netscape version but I guess they still have those tricky-to-skip-register-dialogs ?!

#136 Re: Give them a break ?

by jonadab <jonadab@bright.net>

Wednesday May 29th, 2002 9:58 AM

Reply to this message

> I guess the worst part with the "new" netscape are the dialogs > about creating a AOL profile.

I believe that only happens if you install the Mail/News component (which is where AIM is bundled this iteration; odd, since IM and email are basically competing systems; AIM really IMO should be a separate component, but that's quibbling).

> Don't see that in Internet Explorer

MSIE doesn't have a Mail/News account, so it's not really equivalent. (And if you want to talk about OE... well, best not to talk about that.)

#31 well

by wvw

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 3:40 PM

Reply to this message

maybe they should still enable the option, for they (we!) (The World!) (THE UNIVERSE!!) have to get back some marketshare. I use this. user_pref("dom.disable_open_during_load", true); Maybe i'll create my own version with the browser-distribution program, so I can recommend my own version to friends etc.

#10 First impression: installer sucks

by johann_p

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 11:14 AM

Reply to this message

I never use the mozilla installer since I install from the full tar distribution, so I dont know if this is the same problem as for mozilla: the installer window does not repaint for a while - maybe the server is overloaded - this makes it look like it was hanging. After a while it crashed with an "Exit 141". First impressions count, and this first impression was very bad indeed.

#11 Give feedback!

by johann_p

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 11:23 AM

Reply to this message

I like the idea that Netscape provides feedback forms for problems, suggestions and rating a lot. Hopefully people will use this constructively and Netscape will actually listen to it :) I hope they will keep this for the final release too.

#12 30 megs on Windows

by skeeter

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 11:31 AM

Reply to this message

Whoa, what all is in this baby,

File: NSSetupB.exe 30872 KB 13.5.2002 16:52:00

I mean, Mozilla for windows comes in at a little over 10 megs and that with browser, mail%news, composer and ICR.

I'll stay with Mozzy as my daily browser, thank you.

#15 Re: 30 megs on Windows

by garfieldbond

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 12:15 PM

Reply to this message

All of the base Netscape install, plus AIM and ICQ, and then Real Player 8 and Java 1.4 (that's 8 MB right there in java), plus I'm sure the Netscape-specific customizations add a small layer of bloat (nicer looking Help files, edited modern theme, etc.)

#19 Re: 30 megs on Windows

by sleepy

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 1:02 PM

Reply to this message

Every time Netscape makes a release, this type of comment always comes up. If you cared to be less ignorant, you'll notice that Netscape releases contains Java, RealPlayer, etc., all in one package, so you don't need to setup the plug-ins separately after installation.

Of course, Netscape never told you to download all 30MB of it. If you follow the links from Netscape's home page, it'll lead you to the much smaller net installer, just like the one Mozilla provides.

#25 Re: Re: 30 megs on Windows

by skeeter

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 1:48 PM

Reply to this message

"If you cared to be less ignorant::)" now that's a nice way to start up a conversation. Did we get up on the wrong side of the bed this morning sleepy?

Of course there is an installer, ect and who doesn't have Java already installed and a couple of AIMS that are still hanging around from this or that, just found that it would be nice if they offered a smaller download, I don't use browser installers, they tend to get a little pushy and forget that you said, no you are not the default for this and that. Sometimes they don't even asked. I used the 'auto-update' one time on a NS 4.7X and wound up having to reinstall my wife's Office program to get it back into running order. It took out the Mapi from EXCEL, Word and even blew the FAX program out. Since then no bite by bit installers thanks.

#40 Re: Re: 30 megs on Windows

by Willykreim <WillyKreim@netscape.net>

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 7:27 PM

Reply to this message

well said!!!

Exactly my thoughts. But you were more polite than I was in replying to these ignorants.

It never ceases to amaze me how some people who like open source and its business model get fanatic and soon become what I call the "IT Taliban".

They start attacking all commercial products (it would be as idiotic as someone attacking ibm http server which is apache with commercial extensions), when in fact it is a commercial company (like Netscape) which is the main financial contributor to the Mozilla project. The one that puts the software engineers and programmers (on Netscape's payroll) working on mozilla.org code and fixing bugs, the ones that put the servers, pay for the bandwidth, etc.

Yet some idiots insist on biting the hand that feeds them.

Netscape 7.0 rc1 is the best browser ever. I love the aim/icq sidebar tab, the download manager, the spell checker, and the easy single install for all components (java2, Real, etc).

My kudos to the Netscape programmers and management for sticking to their vision at times where it all seemed hopeless (remember the buggy 6.0 release?). It has all finally paid off!!.

My hat's off to them.

#110 Re: Re: Re: 30 megs on Windows

by tny

Friday May 24th, 2002 2:07 PM

Reply to this message

Godwin's Law, Taliban Corollary.

#20 45MB on Linux !!

by rkl

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 1:29 PM

Reply to this message

Never mind Windows, feel the width of the full installer on Linux - a lovely 45MB. Turns out that the Java stuff is 29MB of that (cos it's 1.4) as opposed to 6.X's 14MB (cos it's 1.3).

#59 Re: 45MB on Linux !!

by sconest

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 2:37 AM

Reply to this message

No, it's 1.3.1 but all files are included twice. I think there are both us and international version of the jre.

#39 What a bunch of Morons (Re: 30 megs on Windows)

by Willykreim <WillyKreim@netscape.net>

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 7:21 PM

Reply to this message

What a bunch of anti-Netscape morons. Go back to your gnu prayers, opensource talibans. If there were no Netscape and their paid engineers and programmers, mozilla and netscape 7 wouldn't be what it is today.

The 30meg size is for the stand-alone, offline installer that you can burn to cd, put on a shared lan server, etc. It is 30mb or more because it contains EVERYTHING. The end user can then decide what he wants installed or not, but the ARCHIVE contains all components, including:

-Sun Java2 runtime -Real Player 8 basic -Wiamp 2.80 (windows) -Netscape Net2Phone

So, dumbass, the browser is not 30 mb. The browser is the same size of mozilla 1.0rc2 (in fact it is the same code with the addition of netscape code like the aim/icq sidebar, commercial spell checker, themes.

I see that some people in here carries a hatchet day and night, just in case they run into something from netscape. These mozilla fanatics can kiss my ass.

Regards Willy

#68 Such a lovely level

by skeeter

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 5:17 AM

Reply to this message

Gee, it has been such a long time since I was able to take part in such a high level of exchanging information. Your extended use of such wonderful language inspired me to go out and find the information to the simple question of 'what is in this baby?' Glad that some of you are so helpful and ready to such high level advice to an old newbie that can remember even buying Netscape, did any of you ever pay for it? Any way here is the information that I was asking for. Guess as a regular Mozillian, I just forgot that some of you might still be schell shocked from the browser wars.

FTP directory /pub/netscape7/english/7.0_PR1/windows/win32/xpi/ at <ftp://ftp.netscape.com>

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

05/17/02 10:46AM <DIR> . 05/17/02 10:46AM <DIR> .. 05/13/02 04:52PM 61,689 NSUninst.zip 05/13/02 04:52PM 99,094 aod.xpi 05/13/02 04:52PM 383,785 artext.xpi 05/13/02 04:52PM 6,480,575 browser.xpi 05/13/02 04:52PM 19,227 cdt.xpi 05/13/02 04:52PM 8 custom.end 05/13/02 04:52PM 8 custom.start 05/13/02 04:52PM 25,320 deflenus.xpi 05/13/02 04:52PM 395,879 flash.xpi 05/13/02 04:52PM 8 full.end 05/13/02 04:52PM 8 full.start 05/13/02 04:52PM 31,951 hpprint.xpi 05/13/02 04:53PM 12,123,154 jre140_01i.zip 05/13/02 04:53PM 10,316 jre140p.zip 05/13/02 04:53PM 802,530 langenus.xpi 05/13/02 04:53PM 1,806,607 mail.xpi 05/13/02 04:53PM 778,605 n2p.xpi 05/13/02 04:53PM 646,770 nim.xpi 05/13/02 04:54PM 3,706,746 nsrp8.zip 05/13/02 04:54PM 667,867 psm.xpi 05/13/02 04:54PM 8 recommended.end 05/13/02 04:54PM 8 recommended.start 05/13/02 04:54PM 56,689 regca.xpi 05/13/02 04:54PM 58,002 regus.xpi 05/13/02 04:54PM 381,252 skinclas.xpi 05/13/02 04:54PM 476,825 spellchk.xpi 05/13/02 04:54PM 247,623 talkback.xpi 05/13/02 04:54PM 1,272,898 winamp.zip 05/13/02 04:54PM 874,880 xpcom.xpi

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

#72 Re: Such a lovely level

by tny

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 6:58 AM

Reply to this message

Yes, some of us paid for it. Some of us remember using Mosaic. Some of us still use gopher. A few of us remember telnetting over BITNET on VT100s. Some have even used punch cards. And some of us understand that somebody who isn't aware that the Netscape product comes with Java and Mozilla doesn't won't understand why the sizes are so different. Don't paint everyone who contributes to these fora with the same brush.

#78 Ahh Mosaic

by kmwade

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 8:26 AM

Reply to this message

Those were the days weren't they? No silly advertising. Small downloads (which was a good thing even for those of us fortunate enough to have 14.4 modems.) No pesky javascript, java, css, frames, etc. Just plain text with a few decorations and links and an occasional image.

#88 Aha Punch Cards

by skeeter

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 9:47 AM

Reply to this message

Uss Proteus subtender

Guam 1968

Radio room 72 Degrees to keep the puter cool.

Comm computer: IBM 8X P315S (12.5 meters long.)

Using csub and c-net, single sideband vlf and uvlf to reach the subs on patrol. I guess this is where I learned to use decent language when discussing different point of views.

I'm really happy that folks are getting all excited about the up coming NS7, but that is not a reason to be throwing around such obtuse language.

As to my first post, well why not mention it. Perhaps some folks weren't aware and would have just clicked install full and then found that their RealPlayer Plus was gone, or that Net2Phone 10.2 was gone ect, ect.. this was the intent of my post.

Punch cards, wow- haven't thought of that for awhile and made me also think of direct teletype between Guam-Australia-Virgina and Scotland at 3am on the third shift to the other subtenders for the Polaris Fleet, now that must have been some of the first AIM or IM.

#96 Showing age

by SubtleRebel <mark@ky.net>

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 2:56 PM

Reply to this message

VT100s and BITNET -- I was there too. :)

Personally though I have not used gopher or veronica in the past 4 years.

#111 Showing Age &c.

by tny

Friday May 24th, 2002 2:13 PM

Reply to this message

Thanks, Skeeter.

Subtle Rebel: Whoa - it's been so long, I forgot about Veronica! Gopher I still use, via lynx, for mailing list archives and the like (Moz did have some nice gopher features, but they've died of neglect, I'm afraid).

There are times I still want Mosaic. And there are times I still want (and use) Lynx. And there are times I want the full power of Mozilla . . .

#112 Re: Showing Age &c.

by MXN

Friday May 24th, 2002 4:34 PM

Reply to this message

What features for gopher did Mozilla have? I'm afraid I don't know that much about gopher, so I'm a bit curious about it.

- mxn

#13 Default Profile?

by xkalibur

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 11:46 AM

Reply to this message

I've been using Mozilla and Netscape 6.x for quite some time, so I'm used to the usual install procedure (on RedHat Linux 7.3). I have mozilla in /usr/local/mozilla, Netscape 6.2 in /usr/local/netscape, and now installed Netscape 7 PR1 in /usr/local/netscape7. But for some reason when Netscape 7 starts up, I get a profile window (this does not happen with the other two). The profile "default" will not open (can't find directory, it says), and the "Create Profile" procedure does not work. I can put in a name, but when I try to "Choose folder" for the new profile, all I get is a blank file selector that won't navigate to anywhere and that crashes when I attempt to check "Show hidden files". What gives? I'm real anxious to try out the new AIM functionality and everything else.

#16 Re: Default Profile?

by panix

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 12:21 PM

Reply to this message

I get exactly the same thing. I think it is because Netscape is being foolish and looking in the .mozilla directory instead of the .netscape directory =/ You can't share profile information between different versions of a piece of software without headaches like this occuring.

If anyone finds a fix, post it here =) I would love to try out the AIM client.

#18 Re: Re: Default Profile?

by xkalibur

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 12:59 PM

Reply to this message

The even funnier(?) thing is that I deleted my .mozilla directory, and now the program never starts. Instead it creates a new .mozilla directory with one file (appreg) in it and then exits. I even tried creating a new user account (with no .mozilla directory, of course), same thing happens. ???

#63 tried it as root?

by niner

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 3:49 AM

Reply to this message

Did you start NS7 as root after install? I think Mozilla needs this, too.

#90 Re: tried it as root?

by xkalibur

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 9:55 AM

Reply to this message

Yes. I used the installer, which automatically starts Netscape/Mozilla as root (since you have to be root to install). This is where the problem started. I tried running later as a normal user, even with new account, and no go.

#120 Same problem here..

by Lowgitek <elton.machado@oninet.pt>

Sunday May 26th, 2002 9:33 AM

Reply to this message

I'm having same problem here the more stranger is that I rember to use it before but from one day to another it start with same problem. I tried to rm the ./netscape* and ./mozilla* , ./fullcircle* , /usr/local/netscape/ and delete all files in /tmp and ~/tmp tried to reistall all the stuff again and none it simple don't work or don't let me to create another profile. Mozilla works perfect (Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0rc2) Gecko/20020510, build 2002051009) and yes netscape create all directories again after i delete it and don't run either too after that and was installed as root and as normal user none seems to be working.

if anyone could help I will be great: <lowgitek@europeonline.com>

Elton Machado.

#121 Same problem here..

by Lowgitek <elton.machado@oninet.pt>

Sunday May 26th, 2002 9:33 AM

Reply to this message

I'm having same problem here the more stranger is that I rember to use it before but from one day to another it start with same problem. I tried to rm the ./netscape* and ./mozilla* , ./fullcircle* , /usr/local/netscape/ and delete all files in /tmp and ~/tmp tried to reistall all the stuff again and none it simple don't work or don't let me to create another profile. Mozilla works perfect (Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0rc2) Gecko/20020510, build 2002051009) and yes netscape create all directories again after i delete it and don't run either too after that and was installed as root and as normal user none seems to be working.

if anyone could help I will be great: <lowgitek@europeonline.com>

Elton Machado.

#130 No help at all

by cslarson79

Tuesday May 28th, 2002 11:06 PM

Reply to this message

This is really pissing me off. And I'm not one to ususally get upset. I had the same problem as this guy. I looked at the Known Problems in NS7PR1 Release Notes and all it said was something about changing the locale to en_US. It noted this as a "workaround", but gave no directions as to how to go about doing it! Great work guys. After hearing everyone rave about NS7 I thought I might give it a try... well *#^$, I guess i'll be sticking to Mozilla...unless someone tells me how to work aroung this GLARING bug. ARRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGG. I mean, come on...I expected much more.

#140 Re: Default Profile?

by JKD <JKD@jkdsoft.cjb.net>

Thursday May 30th, 2002 8:00 AM

Reply to this message

First of all, my english is very poor, so may be I'll make some mistakes writing this response... Well, here is the solution. Netscape website says that you just have to change the locale to "en_US". I'm a RedHat user and I'll supose that this problem happens in only this distribution. Just type locale_config (/usr/bin/locale_config) in a console session, type your root password and select "English (USA) en_US" in the list that is shown. Close that window (OK Button) and try to run netscape again. If you want to run netscape from the console, first close the console sesion (if it's opened) and open it again to start session with the new locale, and execute netscape.

One more time, excuse my english.

Bye, JKD

#17 NS7??

by techn9ne

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 12:44 PM

Reply to this message

They flop out with Netscape 4. They skipped Netscape 5, released Netscape 6 a year premature then finally try and get it right with another Netscape called 7?

#23 Re: NS7??

by WillyWonka

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 1:42 PM

Reply to this message

Netscape 7... Netscape 5 done right. :)

Actually I don't know if it's done right. Haven't downloaded it. But seeing as how it's based on RC2 it can't be that bad.

#69 Just a thought

by zreo2 <aa@globecom.se>

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 5:27 AM

Reply to this message

How many companys has jumped two versions with a software and got away with it ;) It's pretty funny when you think about it. Even more funny if you compare it with some GPL licensed programs that jumps 0.01 steps after huge improved codebase!

But I'm not complaining!...

#83 MS Word 6.0

by GregV

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 9:10 AM

Reply to this message

Back when Microsoft still used version numbers for everything, they skipped from something like Word 3.x (maybe 4.x) to 6.0 to appear competitive with WordPerfect, which earned its 6.0 version number.

...but it's moot now. Office suites killed off using individual best-of-breed apps, which killed off non-MSO suites for the mainstream, and year-dating made whatever the version number was irrelevant.

#104 RE: MS Word 6

by hitokage

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 3:59 PM

Reply to this message

I beleive the other reason MS did that was to match the DOS version number which was already at 6.

#105 So Netscape did something similar

by baffoni

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 7:06 PM

Reply to this message

So I guess they just called the browser 7.0 to match the AOL client 7.0 ;-)

Actually, not a bad reason in terms of marketing if they lockstep the browser version with the AOL client to keep the versions from confusing the users out there if Gecko becomes the standard for AOL client.

#48 Re: NS7??

by SubtleRebel <mark@ky.net>

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 10:06 PM

Reply to this message

Netscape 5 was not really skipped. If you want it, you can still get it. It is based on the old Netscape 4.x codebase and it has lots of issues. Because of these issues, it was decided to dump it and essentially start over with a new codebase which eventually became Netscape 6.

Do you complain about the naming of Heinz 57 sauce because you never tasted the first 56 versions?

Just because you never used Netscape 5 does not mean it did not exist. So please stop saying it was skipped.

What number do you think Netscape should assign this release? Do you not agree that all the new features justify a full step up from Netscape 6?

Out of curiousity, do you think that Microsoft has numbered their IE releases appropriately? Does IE 6.0 deserve to be a full number higher than IE 5? What features and enhancements justify that change?

#82 Re: Re: NS7??

by WillyWonka

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 8:57 AM

Reply to this message

"Do you complain about the naming of Heinz 57 sauce because you never tasted the first 56 versions?"

Hell yeah!

"Does IE 6.0 deserve to be a full number higher than IE 5? What features and enhancements justify that change?"

That auction pop-up thingy ;)

#107 Re: Re: Re: NS7??

by DavidGerard <fun@thingy.apana.org.au>

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 8:46 PM

Reply to this message

IE 6 has the same interface, but a much-enhanced renderer - basically, they responded to the standards thread of Gecko. It even does the standards-mode and quirks-mode trick :-)

#108 IE 6.0

by SubtleRebel <mark@ky.net>

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 10:19 PM

Reply to this message

Yeah IE 6 for Windows is now almost as standards compliant as IE 5 for Mac OS.

Sounds like good justification for upping the number to 6. :)

#21 Great!

by tl47

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 1:30 PM

Reply to this message

Works good! NS7.0 Beta 1... I've tried Mozilla 1.0RC2 as well. Good job to NS and Mozilla!

#24 Ugh it has that ugly bookmarks bug ...

by johann_p

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 1:45 PM

Reply to this message

I think it is bug 143031 - bookmarks in the toolbar are unusable.

#26 Bleh

by WillyWonka

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 2:22 PM

Reply to this message

I just uninstalled mozilla RC2 on my P100 and installed NS7PR1.

39 icons in the start bar/quick launch/desktop. I think thats a new record.

Oh and when it finally loads there is a huge gap to the left of the back button, the stop button is using a corrupt image and the down arrow on the url bar is weird looking (Also looks corrupt). Exiting quick launch and loading ns7pr1 again doesn't fix the problem. Time to go digging through the profiles again. Fun.

First impressions (Mind you I haven't even gone to a web page yet) are Thumbs down.

#27 Re: Bleh

by WillyWonka

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 2:27 PM

Reply to this message

I went into c:\windows\application data and deleted the *Mozilla* directory and *Netscape* loaded fine.

Why haven't they renamed that directory yet? They made the same mistake with 6.

#28 Argh!

by MXN

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 2:31 PM

Reply to this message

I just installed Netscape 7, and it seems to be pretty broken for me:

- Netscape won't load anything that is embedded into the webpage, such as stylesheets, images, etc.

- I am using the Classic Theme, and on my buddy list tab are buttons that look like they're from Modern.

Apart from that, I'm also horrified by the number of buttons preinstalled on my *Personal* Toolbar:

- Mail

- IM (The icon of which is missing)

- Radio

- [My] Netscape

- Search

- Shop

- Net2Phone (Which I unchecked in the installation process)

And the first time I installed it, I installed it w/o uninstalling Mozilla. Every time it loaded, I got a blank window. Argh!

(I'm using Netscape 7, Classic Skin, M$ Windows 98 SE)

- MXN

#29 Re: Argh!

by MXN

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 2:34 PM

Reply to this message

I should make it clear that the first time around, I installed Netscape w/ Mozilla and Netscape 6 still on my hard drive (although both in a different directory than where I installed Netscape 7). So, I uninstalled Mozilla, Netscape 6, and Netscape 7, and finally, there was something other than a blank window. All those problems I listed earlier were there, though.

#32 Check out the new Netscape Communicator 4.80!

by leet

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 4:25 PM

Reply to this message

I thought it'd not come out. Don't see any difference though, and there's no release note yet. <ftp://ftp.netscape.com/pu…ommunicator/english/4.80/>

#41 What a crybaby!!! N7.0pr1 rules (Re: Argh!)

by Willykreim <WillyKreim@netscape.net>

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 7:35 PM

Reply to this message

Oh, what horror!!!! pre-defined icons in your personal toolbar.

What a bunch of morons and idiots. What do you expect, an EMPTY toolbar? Most users wont even have a clue that they can add their own stuff to that space if you just leave it empty.

And what's so hard about clicking and removing the icons??

Plus, as with all Netscape 6.x releases, I'm sure netscape will soon release their Client Customization Kit (CCK) so you can remove components at will, change splash screen/graphics if you wish so, customize the default toolbar, sidebar etc., and create your own Netscape distributions.

You sound pretty idiotic to me. Down to the Mozilla taliban aka netscape bashers!!!

My hat's off to the hard working netscape programmers and engineers.

#44 Re: What a crybaby!!! N7.0pr1 rules (Re: Argh!)

by bugs4hj <bugs4hj@netscape.net>

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 7:59 PM

Reply to this message

Keep your posts friendly, read the rules first you moron.

#50 ROTFL

by SubtleRebel <mark@ky.net>

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 10:20 PM

Reply to this message

Some might say you were being a bit hypocritical there. :)

#85 Re: Argh

by shin

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 9:23 AM

Reply to this message

In fact, the most annoying things pointed there, are the inconsistencies in the interface: for example if in Classic the buttons for IM look like Modern this is a real problem.

#99 Re: What a crybaby!!! N7.0pr1 rules (Re: Argh!)

by MXN

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 3:12 PM

Reply to this message

Well, I actually like Netscape, as it is Mozilla in a different form. The reasons why I was "horrified" by the amount of icons in my Personal Toolbar (and I should have used a lighter word, sorry) were because:

1. At the time, my resolution was set at 640x480, so the icons left me no room for any of *my* icons. Of course I could've removed them through the Preferences dialog, and I did, but I think that would be a bit intimidating to a first-time user.

2. I also wanted to point out that, with the Classic Theme, the IM icon in the Personal Toolbar was missing, and that Netscape shouldn't place icons to things that weren't even installed in the first place.

But you did bring up a good point. Netscape should have something that will clue first-time users into the fact that they can add icons there. M$IE has a "Customize Links" icon predefined.

- mxn

#89 Re: Better than MSIE? In a few more years, maybe

by unapersson

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 9:49 AM

Reply to this message

I had this problem, but emptying the cache fixed it.

#100 Re: Re: Better than MSIE? In a few more years, may

by MXN

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 3:14 PM

Reply to this message

Thanks for the tip. In the past, this happened to Mozilla when I installed Netscape 6, and I had no way of fixing it. It just eventually went away.

#34 RC2 and 7.0RC1 -- Sharing Profiles?

by TommyBee

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 6:09 PM

Reply to this message

I know that the general advice was to not share profiles between Netscape 6.x and Mozilla, but how about 7.0RC1 and RC2? I'd love to be able to use the same history, bookmarks, and mail in both.

#36 Re: RC2 and 7.0RC1 -- Sharing Profiles?

by garfieldbond

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 6:14 PM

Reply to this message

Don't. It doesn't work well. In my case the chrome or cache didn't cooperate and images wouldn't load anymore, in addition to my proxy settings resetting every single time.

#51 Re: RC2 and 7.0RC1 -- Sharing Profiles?

by SubtleRebel <mark@ky.net>

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 10:24 PM

Reply to this message

Well I am doing it right now with OS X builds of the RC3 branch and Netscape PR1. So far I have not encountered any issues, but it is early yet. :)

The general rule is don't do it. I am only doing it here because this is a test machine; I am not going to do it on my daily machine where I use exclusively Mozilla.

#35 MultiZilla for Netscape 7.0 PR1 is out

by bugs4hj <bugs4hj@netscape.net>

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 6:09 PM

Reply to this message

#46 Re: MultiZilla for Netscape 7.0 PR1 is out

by shipdoc1

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 8:03 PM

Reply to this message

I cannot get to install on W2K with Netscape 7.0 PR1

Has anyone had any success?

I get a new directory with

NetscapeNetscape7chromeoverlayinfomultiviewscontentoverlays.rdf

AND a new file

NetscapeNetscape7chromemultiviews.jar

but no chrome://multiviews/content/multiviews-rcx.xul

In drop down menu under Windows Multizilla is listed but clicking on it produces no effect.

Javascript is enable as are Downloads

Is there something I am doing wrong?

All suggestions gratefully received

Thanks

shipdoc

#47 Re: Re: MultiZilla for Netscape 7.0 PR1 is out

by bugs4hj <bugs4hj@netscape.net>

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 9:01 PM

Reply to this message

Please visit the multizilla newsgroup for further information. You can find the newsgroup here:

public.mozdev.multizilla on news.mozdev.org

#37 Very negative impressions

by gregk

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 6:28 PM

Reply to this message

Mac users are posting comments on various Mac sites basically begging Netscape and AOL to stop producing the Netscape-branded browser.

I can't say I blame them.

#38 Re: Very negative impressions

by rkl

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 7:08 PM

Reply to this message

I wonder what reasons they're giving ? Is it dislike of the AOL "extras" that get lumbered in (or, indeed, the stuff that gets removed, like the option to stop pop-ups) or is it a look-and-feel issue ? Or are most of the same gripes aimed at Mozilla too ?

I have no problem with AOL releasing a Netscape that's aimed at Joe Public (it's one of *many* end-user spin-off browsers from Mozilla), although you could argue that if AOL includes Gecko in their next AOL software release, it further lessens the reason to have a Netscape browser (Mozilla and the AOL/Gecko browser covers both bases perfectly well).

My guess is that AOL wants to keep Netscape going as a "brand-enticer" - get non-AOL users using it and they might persaude some of them to switch to AOL because of the additional AOL features in Netscape compared to, well, pretty well any other browser bar AOL's own browser.

I know some people who use Linux who bizarrely refuse to use Mozilla and stick to the trusty Netscape brand (at least they're on the 6.X series now :-) And no, this is without an AOL connection before you ask) - some people will always be like that.

BTW, food for thought - with Mozilla/NS 7.X's XUL and other goodies, could an AOL client browser be written to *totally* replace the current AOL 7.0 browser ? I wonder if bods in AOL are doing exactly that - it would have an interesting side-effect: instant cross-platform code, so Mac OS, Windows, Linux and even commercial UNIXes (unlikely...) would all get the "same" AOL browser release at the same time.

#42 Very negative impressions

by gregk

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 7:45 PM

Reply to this message

I suspect it has to do with Netscape/Mozilla being rather cranky software for actual end users. After all, those of us who've managed to keep Mozilla installations functioning for a long time know how to manage Profiles if we need to, or how to handle switching between Mozilla and Netscape installations.

Both of these things are quirky and unusual for new users.

(I can't for the life of me figure out why Netscape and Mozilla are still using the same profiles. They don't work, and apparently were never designed to do so, so why not diverge them now?)

#56 they have

by thegoldenear

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 1:30 AM

Reply to this message

"so why not diverge them now?" they're in the process of doing so. you can see the code going in over the weeks if you use your QA -> CVS Checkins Today button. or find the bugs on it.

if there are other things in Mozilla that exasperate you then dig around in Bugzilla and I bet others feel the same and are in the process of either planning or making it happen. its all there. Free and Open. with amazing tools to help you

#49 Re: Re: Very negative impressions

by SubtleRebel <mark@ky.net>

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 10:15 PM

Reply to this message

From what I have seen on various Mac boards, the people complaining and suggesting that Netscape stop making a Netscape browser are ignorant morons.

Some have said things like "Netscape has taken years to make a halfway usable browser when Chimera was created in only a few months. Netscape and Mozilla suck. Chimera rocks. Netscape and Mozilla should just give up."

Others are saying it is slow and ugly Netscape 7 is then they admit that they have not even bothered to downloaded it.

Unfortunately it is illegal to kill these people.

#53 Very negative impressions

by gregk

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 10:35 PM

Reply to this message

Hey, you want to kill useless morons, start with yourself.

#60 YHBT n/t

by shin

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 2:40 AM

Reply to this message

.

#73 Re: YHBT n/t

by tny

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 7:02 AM

Reply to this message

Not so sure that Subtle Rebel's trolling. Maybe he just decided not to be so subtle.

#84 Re: Trolling

by shin

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 9:18 AM

Reply to this message

Don't worry, I don't think SubtleRebel was the one trolling. It was gregk's trolling that I wanted to point at ;)

#92 Very negative impressions

by gregk

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 10:14 AM

Reply to this message

You accuse me of trolling? Buzz off, troll.

#97 Huh?

by SubtleRebel <mark@ky.net>

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 3:06 PM

Reply to this message

Have you never wanted to see a useless moron eliminated?

Despite the fact that I have to deal with far too many of them on a regular basis, I have so far refrained from inflicting any bodily harm. If you had seen and heard what I have then you would have to agree that I am practicing great restraint and self control.

Lastly, can you explain why you consider me to be a useless moron?

#117 It is ugly...

by Fireball1244 <fireball1244@mac.com>

Saturday May 25th, 2002 2:27 PM

Reply to this message

And that's the main reason I won't switch to it. And it's huge. I don't want Netscape with its lame mail and news client. I want the browser, but there's no "browser only" module for Mac OS X. And I can't set Netscape to use Apple Mail when I click on a mailto: link. It insists that I use its retarded, ugly mail client.

And it is ugly on Mac OS X. The Modern theme looks like dog vomit everywhere, but it particularly clashes with OS X. And the "classic" look tries to fake an Aqua interface, but fails miserably. Netscape needs to offer a browser only version, and a real Aqua-looking interface before I'll consider it a usable piece of software for this machine.

#118 Mail clients

by SubtleRebel <mark@ky.net>

Saturday May 25th, 2002 2:56 PM

Reply to this message

You think Apple's current Mail program is a better mail client than the one in Mozilla?????

The new version coming this fall (er, late summer) with Jaguar is going to be competitive, but the Apple Mail that comes with 10.1 really leaves A LOT to be desired.

#119 It is ugly...

by Fireball1244 <fireball1244@mac.com>

Sunday May 26th, 2002 1:40 AM

Reply to this message

Why? It integrates with the system Address book. It's quick. It can bounce messages back to the server. And it is beautiful. The Netscape GUI is garbage. Hideous, ugly. Designed by people who think code, not art. It clashes with the rest of the OS. The text is not anti-aliased. It doesn't tie in as well with iTools. It doesn't give me a Dock icon that tells me when I have new messages and how many. It's ugly. It's ugly. It's ugly. I spend a lot of time doing email every day. I don't really use filters aside from color-coding messages from my friends. And I don't want my email program and my browser to be the same damn program -- I like to be able to switch back and forth via the Dock, not some worthless "Tools" menu that's harder to hit.

All I want is a non-integrated browser. I will not use a lumberingly large package that tries to MONOPOLIZE all my Internet time. I want Netscape Navigator... I switched to IE the moment they foisted Communicator on the world.

I've used lots of email programs. By far the worst I've ever used was the integrated mail in any of the versions of Netscape, from 3.0 to 6.2. They're all ugly. They don't tie in to the Mac's system Preferences. They are clearly "geek-friendly," with a UI only a gearhead could love. There's no separate icon for them. I hate them. And I will not use a browser that won't let me choose my mail client.

#122 Re: It is ugly...

by Squire72

Monday May 27th, 2002 3:17 PM

Reply to this message

Netscape 7PR1 added Icons for everything in Windows - not on Mac? We also have the option to install only the browser...

As far as the UI goes, it's skinnable - won't be long before you can make it look more "appropriate" - and just an FYI - the classic theme "trying to" look like Aqua - it uses Aqua's native widgets, it isn't an imitation.

#124 It's not very Aquatic

by Fireball1244 <fireball1244@mac.com>

Monday May 27th, 2002 4:25 PM

Reply to this message

There is no "browser only" install option under Mac OS X. I don't know why, there is one under Mac OS 9. And the Mac versions have never had separate icons for different parts of the same program. I don't think that's actually possible.

And as for the UI, it may draw out the native Aqua widgets, but it doesn't use them right, and the result is ugly. The lower border of the tabs is missing, they use the "window border" thick stripes where the "toolbar" pinstripes should be used (MS-IE does this, too, but MS Office gets it right), the drop down menus from the toolbar are not Aqua menus.

The result is an "Aqua" interface with no class or style. It's disjointed.

#57 You don't _have_ to use it, or what?

by wvw

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 2:02 AM

Reply to this message

Why are people always complaining? You don't _have_ to download/use it? They gave you a (finally) good alternative, let you thinker with the source and do whatever you want to with almost the whole system. Why complain? I don't get it. Use Mozilla if you want to.

#43 // anonymous tracking of client usage

by bugs4hj <bugs4hj@netscape.net>

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 7:53 PM

Reply to this message

Yeah, it's true. This line can be found in all-ns.js but don't be scared, they won't tell anybody what websites you visit frequently. So keep surfing pron and other radical God forbidden websites.

#45 // anonymous tracking of client usage

by bugs4hj <bugs4hj@netscape.net>

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 7:59 PM

Reply to this message

Yeah, it's true. This line can be found in all-ns.js but don't be scared, they won't tell anybody what websites you visit frequently. So keep surfing pron and other radical God forbidden websites.

#52 Wow, I just realized something...

by cyfaone

Wednesday May 22nd, 2002 10:30 PM

Reply to this message

Wow, I just realized something, I cant remember the last time mozilla crashed on me. It has been a long time. Mozilla has its squirks, but at least it doesnt crash. Great job on the realability.

#58 Re: Wow, I just realized something...

by Luttappi

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 2:29 AM

Reply to this message

Same here. I also realized that I open more web pages simultaneosly. With IE i would limit it to 10 at most. With tabbed, I usually stop only when the tabs go off screen.

#61 Crashed for me 3 time sin last 2 days!

by chrisc

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 3:19 AM

Reply to this message

Last crash (using nightly 1.0 build - which should eventually be rc3?). I pressed back whilst in the last minute of an ebay auction, mozilla crashed and by the time I got back in the auction had ended! luckily we won the auction anyway!

#66 Re: Crashed for me 3 time sin last 2 days!

by Benman

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 4:33 AM

Reply to this message

OMG! You got Mozilla to crash? The last time Moz crashed on me was when I tried to test that security bug that would enable some to execute a program on your comp. Of course the part of Moz that had the bug was broken at the time so it just crashed Moz. I can't remember the last time Moz crashed for no reason

#80 Re: Crashed for me 3 time sin last 2 days!

by WillyWonka

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 8:41 AM

Reply to this message

A couple of days ago I could get mozilla to crash by clicking on Chatzilla or Mail and News. I filed 25 talkbacks because I was really really bored :)

Open Mozilla. Click IRC Bookmark. Fill out talkback. Repeat.

#98 Poor WillyWonka

by SubtleRebel <mark@ky.net>

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 3:10 PM

Reply to this message

I am sorry, but I just could not help laughing out load when I read your post.

#106 Re: Re: Crashed for me 3 time sin last 2 days!

by DavidGerard <fun@thingy.apana.org.au>

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 8:38 PM

Reply to this message

The XML+XSLT support is still, uh, flaky. I got the draft Mozilla 1.0 User FAQ, XML version <http://velvet.net/~fun/mozilla/faq-1.0rc2.xml> (that link doesn't work in RC2, only in recent branch and trunk nightlies) to induce a topcrash reliably. Great stuff!

And the Composer gave me four crashes in four days, 'cos it's flaky too.

But before these crashes, Mozilla hadn't crashed at random (i.e., not on a test case) for weeks.

#109 Re: Wow, I just realized something...

by marauder

Friday May 24th, 2002 6:39 AM

Reply to this message

Actually I build from CVS and mozilla usually crashes several times a day. What's worse is that it doesn't appear to save bookmarks until you quit, so every crash loses all the bookmarks added during that session. It used to be very stable... why would it turn so flaky during the lead up to 1.0?

#62 The Mozilla Netscape 7 PR1 was based on

by bim

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 3:27 AM

Reply to this message

Can we download the exact version of mozilla that Netscape 7 pas based on? I've read somewhere that you could get the spell checker to work in the versions of Mozilla on which Netscape 6.x's where based and would like to give this a try with this new release.

#76 Re: The Mozilla Netscape 7 PR1 was based on

by mike

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 7:56 AM

Reply to this message

netscape --version gives me

Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0rc2) Gecko/20020513 Netscape/7.0b1, build 2002051300

I tried using the netscape spellchecker with mozilla RC2 and so far, so good.

I installed the spellchecker by: installing netscape7 with option to save xpi file, opening spellchecker.xpi in mozilla, installing, restarting mozilla.

#77 Netscape spell checker for Mozilla

by bim

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 8:09 AM

Reply to this message

Aha, I'm going to give that a try! I guess the file is also available at <ftp://ftp.netscape.com/pu….0_PR1/windows/win32/xpi/>

#79 Re: Netscape spell checker for Mozilla

by bim

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 8:32 AM

Reply to this message

It works! And with some creativity, you can even download extra languages.

#95 Re: The Mozilla Netscape 7 PR1 was based on

by locka <adamlock@eircom.net>

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 1:14 PM

Reply to this message

Going from past history, the Netscape 7.0 release will be tagged in CVS and you can fetch and build the Mozilla version of it. In theory that means people can build extensions to NS 7.0 as well as rip bits out to use in Mozilla - subject to compilers, licences and copyright of course.

#65 User Agent

by erik <erik@eae.net>

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 4:30 AM

Reply to this message

The user agent still says Mozilla/5.0. What is the reason for this? Mozilla 1.0 says Mozilla/5.0 as well.

Nestcape 7: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0rc2) Gecko/20020512 Netscape/7.0b1 Mozilla 1.0: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0rc2) Gecko/20020510

The docs at Mozilla.org does not clearify this... looking at them I think it says that the user agent strings should be "Mozilla/1.0"

#74 Re: User Agent

by johnlar <johnlar@tfn.net>

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 7:11 AM

Reply to this message

IE says Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows 98l en-US; IE 6blahblahblahsomethingorother) Or something very close to that.. don't ask me why, but it just does, anyways the Mozilla/X.0 number represents what generation of browser it is, Both it and IE are considered 5th generation browsers, I'm not quite sure what will be the leap that defines a 6th generation browser, but its definatly going to be something different. BTW No I don't know how this standard of "mozilla" got started, but I believe the early 3.0 and 4.0 versions of netsccape used this, and for some reason the early IE copied it, and it just stuck. I believe its standardized now, I'll look it up.

#75 Re: Re: User Agent

by AlexBishop <alex@mozillazine.org>

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 7:46 AM

Reply to this message

"IE says Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows 98l en-US; IE 6blahblahblahsomethingorother) Or something very close to that."

My copy of IE says 'Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; Q312461; .NET CLR 1.0.3705)'. (Hmm... putting the applied security patches in the user-agent string; are they trying to make holes easy to exploit?)

"No I don't know how this standard of "mozilla" got started, but I believe the early 3.0 and 4.0 versions of netsccape used this, and for some reason the early IE copied it, and it just stuck."

The codename for Netscape Navigator 1.0 was Mozilla. Betas of it were variusly described as 'Mosaic network navigator', 'Mosaic Netscape' and 'Netscape Navigator'. The user-agent string in both the betas and final version began with 'Mozilla' (presumably they didn't want to break compatibility). Netscape Navigator 1.0 used 'Mozilla/1.0' and later versions updated the string to reflect the version number (e.g. 'Mozilla/2.02').

When IE first launched, it was pants and no-one used it. However, it began to support some of Netscape's proprietary extensions. Websites that used these extensions used browser sniffing to serve different content to non-Netscape browsers. Microsoft wanted to join the party so they gave IE a user-agent starting with 'Mozilla' and claimed that it was 'compatible'. This convention stuck and many other browsers began to imitate Netscape.

When IE5 came out in 1999, there was no final Netscape 5.0 release, so IE carried on pretending to be Netscape Communicator 4.0. They didn't update the string for IE6 either so I think they may have decided just to stay with 'Mozilla/4.0' (it makes browser-sniffing easier, as sniffers determine IE by the 'MSIE' bit anyway). Mozilla came after Netscape Communicator 4.x so it uses the 'Mozilla/5.0' string. The Mozilla Organization published a user-agent string spec <http://www.mozilla.org/bu…d-user-agent-strings.html> and Mozilla-based browsers such as Netscape 6.x and Netscape 7.x follow this. As the Mozilla build is contained elsewhere in the string (in the 'rv:' bit), I'm not sure whether the 'Mozilla/5.0' will ever be incremented (I guess we'll find out with Mozilla 1.1: it should logically be 'Mozilla/5.1').

Alex

#70 Netscape 7.0 PR1 Quibbles

by nguyen_alex

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 5:28 AM

Reply to this message

Netscape 7.0 PR1 supports IE's favicon.ico approach for web site icons. I thought Mozilla was trying to evangelize the link rel="icon" and link rel="shortcut icon" approaches (a good idea if different pages need different icons). Netscape.com and even mozillazine use favicon.ico.

In Preferences>Composer>New Page Settings, the colors normally associated with visited (violet) and active (red) links are reversed (also a problem(?) in Mozilla).

I know Netscape imitates the look & feel of its Mozilla-based browsers, but Netscape 7.0 PR1's about: page is a little too similar...

#81 Re: Netscape 7.0 PR1 Quibbles

by garfieldbond

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 8:44 AM

Reply to this message

Wrong. Netscape has had the same basic page design for its about: page for as long as I can remember (and I even downloaded 3.01 gold not too long ago).

#71 dignity bug

by nguyen_alex

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 5:56 AM

Reply to this message

For years, Netscape has made the web browsing experience comfortable with its very handsome hand-shaped pointer for clicking on links. Mozilla can use whatever gesture its wants to, but Netscape loses its dignity for utilizing IE's less shapely, and some people would say obscene, pointer.

#86 I disagree

by GregV

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 9:30 AM

Reply to this message

I think the Windows pointer looks more like an actual hand, whereas the old Netscape one, if I remember correctly, was more blocky and stylized. I like the Windows one better.

Besides, Mozilla/Netscape should be using system cursors when available instead of rolling their own. Allows them to play nice with themes.

#101 Re: dignity bug

by MXN

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 3:24 PM

Reply to this message

Does anyone know where to find the old-style cursor? I know that you can change the link cursor by setting a preference in Control Panel > Mouse > Pointers, but I just need the file to change the cursor to.

#102 Old-Style Netscape Cursor

by AlexBishop <alex@mozillazine.org>

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 3:29 PM

Reply to this message

"Does anyone know where to find the old-style cursor?"

<http://lxr.mozilla.org/mo…/src/build/res/select.cur>

Alex

#87 A review

by Trucoto

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 9:40 AM

Reply to this message

"If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, then Microsoft Corp. and Opera Software should consider themselves flattered."

<http://www.eweek.com/arti…,s=708&a=27241,00.asp>

#91 Go Netscape......

by jbastoky

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 9:57 AM

Reply to this message

It seems Netscape 7.0 PR1 is partially broken. Moziila nightly builds work great. No matter how broken Netscape 7.0 PR1 seems, it's still 1000 times better than the evil m$ie. Keep the momentum going Mozilla/Netscape.

#93 Strange behavior

by flalvare

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 11:44 AM

Reply to this message

Hi: I installed netscape 7 pr1 under windows xp (already installed mozilla 1.0 rc2). However, when i start navigator, a strange windows pop up "Netscape Screen Name", with a "Retrieving member information" message (?). Then the windows closes and no navigator windows is shown; i have to click again in Navigator icon and just then the windows appears. BUT, i cannot open a new browser window (CTRL + N, or another way). AND, when I try closing the navigator window, and exit the program, there is a task running in task manager (Netscp.exe) and i have to kill the process in order to open again navigator... and the problem starts again, the "Netscape Screen Name"... sigh

Any help?

#134 Re: Strange behavior

by jonadab <jonadab@bright.net>

Wednesday May 29th, 2002 9:41 AM

Reply to this message

I installed NS7.0PR1 on two Win98 systems last night and have this problem on _one_ of them. The only difference in my install procedure was that on the second one (the one with the problem) I remembered to uncheck "make netscape.com my homepage" during install. In both cases I installed into a clean directory, but in both cases there were preextant Mozilla profiles (we were using 1.0 branch milestones, RC1 IIRC; on the system with the problem I've backed out 7.0PR1 and returned to the unbranded release for the time being).

Further description of symptoms: I turned on QuickLaunch, so that starts at system start time. I also have a shortcut to the browser in the Startup folder, but the browser does not open (though quicklaunch does start) when the system starts up. Right-clicking the system tray icon shows the options for the various components (Navigator &c), but they don't work, and the Exit option is disabled. There is no visible window at this time. If I then launch Navigator from a desktop icon or start menu item or quicklaunch icon, the dialog you describe appears, but a Navigator window does not appear. The close button on the dialog (either the "Close" or the X in the titlebar) has no effect. If I let this run, it _eventually_ closes (whether I tried to click a close button or not). If I terminate it via Ctrl-Alt-Del and so forth, trying to start Navigator again will cause the same symtoms, so I have to let it run its course at least once. However, while it is running (or at any time afterward), I _can_ open a navigator window, via desktop shortcut or whatever, but the eerie screen name retrieval continues in background until it finishes. Once it has finished once, I can exit NS (including the quicklaunch, if desired) and restart it, and the symptoms do not recur, _until_ I log out or restart the system, at which point it all happens again next time.

This is really eerie. Not only is it very disruptive of the user experience, but it is somewhat disturbing as well in terms of privacy issues; privacy fanatics might be well advised to stick with a different Mozilla distribution for now, until this is sorted out.

#137 SOLUTION to Strange behavior

by jonadab <jonadab@bright.net>

Wednesday May 29th, 2002 10:54 AM

Reply to this message

I've discovered the solution for this, and it comes from understanding the difference between the two PCs, the one where it didn't happen and the one where it did. The one where it didn't happen had previously had Netscape 6 installed, and so had had the Netscape Activation cancelled. (Having completed it would probably also work, but I'm not interested in testing that.) The PC where the problem manifested itself was newer and so had never had Netscape 6, because by the time we got it 6.2.x was so badly obsolete we were using the unbranded 0.9.9 or so for the features (print preview and so on -- which, BTW, are all now included in NS7.0PR1, which is why we're going back to the branded releases, mainly for the logos and the "Netscape" brand name; the AIM component we don't want).

So the problem is that Netscape 7 doesn't handle activation correctly and complete it, nor does it provide a UI for disabling it.

If you don't want to install Netscape 6 first to turn off activation, there's a workaround, as follows: in the directory where you installed Netscape 7, in the defaults directory, within the prefs directory, find the file all-ns.js and change the line with browser.registration.enable so that it reads false instead of true. Do this while Netscape 7 is not running. Problem goes away.

Hopefully Netscape will come out with a 7.0.1 to repair this minor issue. Activation should only be attempted once, and whether it fails or succeeds it shouldn't be done again. Should be an easy fix, and it would make a big difference. In other respects this is an excellent release; it knocks the socks off of 6.2.x in such a wide variety of ways, and it bundles the plugins and stuff (which the Mozilla releases do not), which is not an issue for powerusers but makes a big difference for a lot of end users.

#141 Re: Strange behavior - same problem with 7.0

by damjanl <damjanl@netscape.net>

Sunday October 6th, 2002 9:50 AM

Reply to this message

Hi - I have the same problem with Netscape 7.0 and XP home edition. I turned browser.registration.enable to false at the all-ns.js, but the problem didn't change. Some other idea of fixing this? Damjan

#94 NS 7 PR 1 - the best browser ever released by NS

by JayeshSh <JayeshSh@netscape.net>

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 12:24 PM

Reply to this message

I downloaded and tried out Netscape 7.0 PR 1 - and boy, was I impressed.

Just the "polish" added to Netscape makes using it so much more fun. A beautiful start-up screen, great icons, and integrated AIM and ICQ. I am happy to be able to use ICQ without the (horribly unwieldly and ad cluttered) standard Windows version of ICQ (which I uninstalled some time ago and never reinstalled).

It also seems faster than Mozilla 1.0 RC 2, even though it is suposed to be based off of the "RC 2 branch".

I do miss ChatZilla a lot, though. I'll try installing it from the XPI on ChatZilla's author's site.

Everything about Netscape 7.0 PR 1 feels right: it is fast, it is beautiful, and all its parts are gorgeously integrated. It feels better than a "preview release". It is ready for prime time, in my opinion.

The only problem I did have was when I tried to use a profile I was using with Mozilla 1.0 RC 2 - which gave me a "Classic+Modern" Theme combination. I got around that problem by shutting down Netscape, restarting it, creating a new Profile, shutting it down again, copying over some files from my old Mozilla profile to the new Netscape Profile folder, and finally restarting Netscape. I think this happens because Netscape has modified Mozilla's "chrome" somewhat. Because I am familiar with Mozilla, this was not a big problem to overcome.

Overall, I've had a five star experience. Now comes the part where all of us come together to make sure that we and others have a six star experience for the upcoming 1.0, 1.1 and other future releases!

I am truly in awe. Netscape rules again. "All praise the company" as Jamie Zawinksi, once wrote - even though it is a different, (yet competent) one now.

- Jay

#128 "Best?" ... Not in my book for sure!

by wmalthou

Tuesday May 28th, 2002 12:39 PM

Reply to this message

Preface: I HATE IE 5.5 -- 6.0, but I'm still running NS 4.77, and probably will be for some time. First, installation defaults are the usual crud. I have to spend an hour or so throwing away the built-in links to NS this and NS that and AOL this and AOL that, fixing the mouse scroll wheel (it still does not seem to support the wheel-click auto-scroll mode), and although print preview is nice, I'd prefer it if printing WORKED (See comments elsewhere about printing anomalies on three-column stuff like my.yahoo.com etc.). I believe the "default" is still at 100% to cut off about 5-10 characters of each line, even if you set margins to zero! You have to check the "shrink to fit page width" box (or go landscape like you used to have to do) (and/or reset the left and right margins to 0. The screen clutter of toolbars in "classic" apparently no longer allows setting the bars to TEXT ONLY to preserve screen real estate, and even though a custom install was told NO NET2PHONE, it still shows up in the WINDOW menu, even after deleting the %$#% icon in the toolbar, etc. I know It's a "nit" but this here is a "nit picker" talking at ya.

This thing has some good improvements over 4.77, not the least of which is storing passwords locally etc. since I get stuck with a proxy that wants my name, rank and serial number damn near every time I browse a page, but I have no idea if the local encryption (an OPTION!) of the password store is good enough in any sense if I CARED about my NET passwords. As to the "My Sidebar" thingie, it is one of those things you either Love (IE Heritage?) or Hate (IE Heritage) and I'm in the camp that thinks it SUCKS screen space until turned OFF. My other gripe after 2 minutes of use was that the canned "search" links all go through NETSCAPE as a front end to searching ... If I want GOOGLE I want GOOGLE, not a Netscape encapsulation of Google.

Oh well, first shots across the bow say wait for 7.2 in my book, then they may bring back deleted features (kill popups for example) and maybe even learn how to Print?

#129 "Best?" ... Not in my book for sure!

by wmalthou

Tuesday May 28th, 2002 12:40 PM

Reply to this message

Preface: I HATE IE 5.5 -- 6.0, but I'm still running NS 4.77, and probably will be for some time. First, installation defaults are the usual crud. I have to spend an hour or so throwing away the built-in links to NS this and NS that and AOL this and AOL that, fixing the mouse scroll wheel (it still does not seem to support the wheel-click auto-scroll mode), and although print preview is nice, I'd prefer it if printing WORKED (See comments elsewhere about printing anomalies on three-column stuff like my.yahoo.com etc.). I believe the "default" is still at 100% to cut off about 5-10 characters of each line, even if you set margins to zero! You have to check the "shrink to fit page width" box (or go landscape like you used to have to do) (and/or reset the left and right margins to 0. The screen clutter of toolbars in "classic" apparently no longer allows setting the bars to TEXT ONLY to preserve screen real estate, and even though a custom install was told NO NET2PHONE, it still shows up in the WINDOW menu, even after deleting the %$#% icon in the toolbar, etc. I know It's a "nit" but this here is a "nit picker" talking at ya.

This thing has some good improvements over 4.77, not the least of which is storing passwords locally etc. since I get stuck with a proxy that wants my name, rank and serial number damn near every time I browse a page, but I have no idea if the local encryption (an OPTION!) of the password store is good enough in any sense if I CARED about my NET passwords. As to the "My Sidebar" thingie, it is one of those things you either Love (IE Heritage?) or Hate (IE Heritage) and I'm in the camp that thinks it SUCKS screen space until turned OFF. My other gripe after 2 minutes of use was that the canned "search" links all go through NETSCAPE as a front end to searching ... If I want GOOGLE I want GOOGLE, not a Netscape encapsulation of Google.

Oh well, first shots across the bow say wait for 7.2 in my book, then they may bring back deleted features (kill popups for example) and maybe even learn how to Print?

#103 ICQ GUI crashed

by zreo2 <aa@globecom.se>

Thursday May 23rd, 2002 3:48 PM

Reply to this message

Well it took about 2 minutes before the GUI in the ICQ messenger window crashed :( I tried to change the size between the message history and the textarea for new messeges and the textarea disappeared and never came back :(

Filled in Netscape:s feedback form but does that help at all?. Maybee the mail just goes out in some kind of cyber-black-hole-in-space ? :)

#123 Where does Netscape 7.0 store user files in WinXP?

by j98hudson

Monday May 27th, 2002 4:18 PM

Reply to this message

I can not seem to find the user files, ie, mail, filter rules, address book, etc. I receive some mail, read and discard some, and close out Netscape. Then, I search for changed files in Explorer/Find. No Netscape files have changed except for two rather small files; 'netscp*.pf' file in Windows/Prefetch and 'permdata.box' buried deep in the installed Netscape subdirectory 'Gecho1.0'

Would like to find these to include in my backups.

#125 Re: Where does Netscape 7.0 store user files in Wi

by AlexBishop <alex@mozillazine.org>

Monday May 27th, 2002 5:37 PM

Reply to this message

Your user profiles are located in C:\Document and Settings\[Windows Login Name]\Mozilla on Windows XP.

Alex

#126 Re: Re: Where does Netscape 7.0 store user files i

by AlexBishop <alex@mozillazine.org>

Monday May 27th, 2002 5:38 PM

Reply to this message

"Your user profiles are located in C:\Document and Settings\[Windows Login Name]\Mozilla on Windows XP."

Sorry, that should be C:\Document and Settings\[Windows Login Name]\Application Data\Mozilla.

#144 Thank you

by j98hudson

Sunday December 1st, 2002 7:55 AM

Reply to this message

Sort of slow in the response, but Thank You :)

#127 Printing Craps Out Still/Yet/Until

by wmalthou

Tuesday May 28th, 2002 12:20 PM

Reply to this message

NS 7 seems to have all the old Netscape printing bugs and some. Try to print a 3-column window like say MY.YAHOO with stock portfolios left, news articles center, market charts right ... result is TRASH. Prints entire left column down N pages, then center & right down N pages! This is despite setting "shrink to fit width" or going down to "20% scaling etc. Same crap happens when you browse a Reuters news article on Yahoo etc. The "story" gets its own sequence of pages, while the adds and sidebars get their own sequence. Now, go fiddle with the margins/headers/footers stuff, and watch NS screw up some more. Set margins ZERO and the header/footer disappear! They come back at about 0.2" top/bottom (and wonder of wonders, the page now "fits" on one printed page, unlike with default .5" ... most pages give you TWO pages with 3 lines on second page! Does ANYBODY TEST THIS STUFF?

#131 View Source & Save as File Bug

by fletchsod

Wednesday May 29th, 2002 8:42 AM

Reply to this message

What give? I wrote the program for the web pages. I tested it for browser compactibility with Mozilla & Netscape. Then I found a bug and it doesn't look too good. I don't know if anyone have reported a bug or not because I never done this. The Bug database is too large. The bug is that when I use the view source (right mouse click (menu)) and it show me the source code in pop-up window and I found that the code on screen does not match the one on the web page. It is a completely a different code and a code of a webpage I haven't visited. I can tell the difference because I wrote those web pages. So, what give? Have anyone file a bug report. This is going to be embarrasing for Mozilla and Netscape.

FletchSOD

#132 Anyone else having PRINT troubles?

by wmalthou

Wednesday May 29th, 2002 8:48 AM

Reply to this message

Netscape going to an HP5 target printer seems to want to "move" page features around. Sometimes it's an advertising block or stock quote sidebar moved from upper right to top left, sometimes it is bizzare behavior on Reuters News stories out of Yahoo etc. I have not tried printing sophisticated stuff with tables and forms and frames, but given what I've seen, I don't even want to think about it! Any comments on your own experiences?

#133 Anyone else having PRINT troubles?

by wmalthou

Wednesday May 29th, 2002 8:49 AM

Reply to this message

Netscape going to an HP5 target printer seems to want to "move" page features around. Sometimes it's an advertising block or stock quote sidebar moved from upper right to top left, sometimes it is bizzare behavior on Reuters News stories out of Yahoo etc. I have not tried printing sophisticated stuff with tables and forms and frames, but given what I've seen, I don't even want to think about it! Any comments on your own experiences?

#135 Exchange mail server

by theSAiNT <csl56@wincoll.ac.uk>

Wednesday May 29th, 2002 9:46 AM

Reply to this message

I used to be able to use the Microsoft exchange mail server through 'mail' and 'relay' with Netscape 6.2. Now with Netscape 7.0 I just get an error message: Could not connect to server mail; the connnection was refused.

Can anybody help me out?

#142 Cannot Install Mozilla/Netscape

by amiltz

Friday October 11th, 2002 11:21 PM

Reply to this message

Hi I am using WinXP and went to install Netscape 7.0 and the installation will not start I get the error setup has encountered a problem and has to close, I get the same message when trying to install Mozilla 1.1 and 1.2a, I have been usng Mozilla since .92 and have never had any problems let me know if anyone has any suggestions.

#143 Re: Cannot Install Mozilla/Netscape

by MaxByte

Tuesday October 22nd, 2002 7:43 AM

Reply to this message

If this is not related to any McAfee issues (like WebScanx) the following worked out for me:

Before starting the setup, right-click the Netscape setup file. Choose properties. On the Compatibility tab select the "Run this program in compatibility mode for:" and in the drop down list choose windows 2000. Click OK.

Now strat the intallation and it should finish without any problems. Restart your machine after the install finishes. Enjoy. I hope that this one comes to you in time, as I lost all my nerves trying to find a solution to this problem on the Net. Finally in clicked to me to try this way... and it worked. Greetz..

#145 Netscape 6.2.3 ACTIVATION screen

by alanbrigham

Friday July 30th, 2004 1:31 AM

Reply to this message

Anyone !!!!!!!!!!!!!

I recently had problems and had to do re-installs of all software including Netscape 6.2.3 on the Apple Macintosh. Now, this Blue activation screen comes up when before it never did. I have fixed it on my PC but how to do this on my Macintosh? Does anyone know, anyone can advise? It pops up again and again and again.

Thanks anyone

Alan